Also, that Epoch times site guy... and the company


I'm not wasting more time on your nonsense than I have to

BUT LET ME BE CLEAR I WILL MAKE THE BET - THROW DOWN IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT Ya' FUCKING SELL-YOUR-OWN-COUNTRY-OUT-FASCIST-WANNABE
+buuuurp+ ooo sorry about that, just came out, anyway.

im not wasting my time digging because idk it's like at what point do you tell a person who is suffering from a mental illness that you're not taking them seriously anymore?


+pats your head+




nevertheless, from a glancing of the sources cited on the wiki, there's an...odd? story behind this site?

-------------\
Introducing|>>>>>>>>>>>> The Epoch Times! The news source that is so honest we have no fucking clue where they get their money from...except probably china...probably.
-------------/

"The Epoch Times was founded in 2000 by John Tang and other Chinese Americans affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement.[26] Tang was a graduate student in Georgia at the time; he began the newspaper in his basement.[21] The founders said they were responding to censorship inside China and a lack of international understanding about the Chinese government's repression of Falun Gong.[27][28] In May 2000, the paper was first published in the Chinese language in New York, with the web launch in August 2000.[29]

According to NBC News, "little is publicly known about the precise ownership, origins or influences of The Epoch Times," and it is loosely organized into several regional tax free non-profits, under the umbrella of the Epoch Media Group, together with New Tang Dynasty Television.[18][21]

The newspaper's revenue has increased rapidly in recent years, from $3.8 million in 2016 to $8.1 million in 2017 (with spending of $7.2 million) and $12.4 million in 2018.[36] Tax documents of the Epoch Media Group indicated that between 2012 and 2016, the group received $900,000 from a principal at Renaissance Technologies, a hedge fund led by the conservative political donor Robert Mercer.[37] Chris Kitze, a former NBC executive and creator of the fake news website Before It's News who also manages a cryptocurrency hedge fund, joined the paper's board as vice president in 2017.[36]

A 2020 report in The New York Times called The Epoch Times' recent wealth "something of a mystery." Steve Bannon, the former executive chairman of Breitbart News who produced a documentary with NTD, said "I’d give them a number" on a project budget and "they'd come back and say, 'We’re good for that number.'" Former employees say they were told The Epoch Times is financed by subscriptions, ads and donations from wealthy Falun Gong practitioners.[21]

Oh yes, I remember last times, 2001 and 2008-9. They've used 96% of cash flow to buy back stock, now they want another. Oddly enough, it's the free market believers that insist they should get more free money instead of letting the market decide, and that's why our airline industry is one of the worst, most despised industries where customer service is non existent. Why waste time serving customers when the government will give you more money for nothing? Not for stocks, cash, promises to keep employees, promises to upgrade aging fleets, just free money. It was a near guarantee they wouldn't improve anything, but CEO compensation would skyrocket....and that's what happened.

I would be ok with bailouts if there were stipulations freezing ANY buybacks or bonuses, requiring improvements in service and planes, and ownership of the companies equal to the bailout amount accepted as collateral that transfers permanently if they don't meet all the stipulations or miss any payments on the loan, no handout. Not going to happen, so neither should a third bailout in under 20 years. Let them fail, service will improve.

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

What anti gun legislation do you mean? All I know of is closing a few loopholes that allow people legally banned from gun ownership to obtain them anyway without background checks. I disagree that that is anti gun legislation, and across the board background checks are something a vast majority think is proper.

There's plenty of misinformation on this topic floating about. Is there other actual legislation in the works, or just rumors of other legislation the left will enact....and only according to the right?

Tesla is a good buy today even at 52 week highs. There is a growth path forward in which new factories are coming on line
Giga
Shanghai
Berlin
Texas

+ Giga Nevada battery factory adding lines.

Limiting factor is battery. Battery day should lay out the path forward.


Tesla is profitable , last 4 quarters, and believe this will continue.

I am looking long term. Min 5 years to 10 years.
I am looking for production to double approx every year.

600k this year goal
1.2mil min goal next year
2.4mil + in 3 rd year.

I've posted the 2020 NC transportation outlook on the Sift. It is really worth a look.



Also any one interested should look at Kathy Wood of ARC investment. Just look for her on you tube.
This is ARC investment link
https://ark-invest.com/analyst-research/tesla-price-target/

Sandy Monroe ( you tube) tore down a 2012 and a 2020 model and was astonished at not only in improvements but absolutely astonished in the technology lead of the produce. His group does this and sell reports to all. Evey Asian and Europe atuo manufacture has bought his report. Not 1 American Auto maker has.

Ford, GM are far behind.

Every ICE maker ( ICE Internal Combustion Engine) will have to not only continue that investment and also invest in EV. Dont think they have enough Research investment dollars on hand to do both.



Musk is a visionary Just look at what he is doing besides cars.

Space X . Few step into the space race and succeed like Musk.

Boring company . Fed up with traffic jams he look for solutions. Looked at boring machines and found then to be 15 times slower than a snail. Got a team together and designed a boring machine 15 times faster.

Supplemental storage energy for peak energy demands.

Solar panels. Redesigned and lower cost of ownership.

Musk salary /bonus ties to achievement goals, not just a set amount.


This a BUY time.
This is like buying Apple when Steve Jobs came back to Apple.


Over valuation is what people see Tesla to be worth.
Market forces, Technological improvements and Government regulations will push EV market to forefront over the next decade. There is no stopping this.

Turns out DeJoy and his wife have between $30-75.8 million in stocks of companies that directly compete with the USPS, companies that have already benefited from the slowdowns he's causing. Seems like a clear conflict of interest.

"Louis DeJoy and his wife Aldona Wos reported between at least $30 million to just over $75.8 million in assets from XPO Logistics, J.B. Hunt and UPS. All are competitors with U.S. Postal Service operations. While government records confirm their ownership of the assets, the exact value of the holdings is not clear from the records. "

Also, delaying the mail is illegal, with up to 5 years in prison per letter, +1 year for every newspaper delayed.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1703

Really? I thought the outrage was about denying the black man Golf ownership and sending him to a "little colony" (the name of the store he's flicked into)....
....but no, it's about the tag line fading in and for one instant as the tag line fades in the letters "erneg" are on screen, which people have rearranged to spell "neger"...a bit of a stretch. Also the hand pre-flick is said to be the white power sign, but not every thumb touching an index finger is a sign of racial hatred.

If you look for and expect racism in everything, you'll find it in everything....often including where it isn't. That's a self reinforcing circle that eventually paints the entire world as racist.

Edit : Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity (or incompetence). - Hanlon's razor

...and who is surprised that large numbers of Trumpsters were foolish enough to listen to him and drank bleach?

Drink the bleach, then flush your nose with ammonia. Don't let the liberal fake media tell you it's dangerous, they just want you to be sick so it makes Daddy Trump look bad. If you don't believe me, you can at least wash your skin with a mixture of the two....just ignore the clouds of chlorine gas, they're also a liberal hoax.

Only fools on team Trump.

Care to explain why Trump gave a no bid $55 MILLION contract for distributing n95 masks to Pantera, a subsidiary of a bankrupt defense contractor company with zero employees?...a contract that lets the company owner use the power of the federal government to buy the masks at as low as $.63, then sell them to the government for $5.50 each? Pantera provides no service for that near 1000% markup, the Fed finds/orders the masks (and probably pays for them and transfers ownership to Pantera for free), then buys them back for nearly 10 times what they cost. Care to explain how that's NOT just Trump handing millions of taxpayer dollars to a rich supporter?

1) unless that trade is privately controlled, then it is.
2) you said MADE. They make them. ;-)
3) Capitalism isn't technological industry, or civil rights...it's trade and ownership. If an individual can own a business (edit :and profit from freely selling it's products) that's capitalism. Farms count.
Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
4) well, that's one thing we agree on then, but it's hardly a selling point for capitalism to most people.
5) If public funds are used for any public purposes, that's socialism imo. I certainly think basic research where the results are free to the public counts.

Thank you for your reply Harlequinn.

I beg to differ: The rate of gun deaths in the USA is only low when compared to countries that are either active (civil-) war zones or basically run by drug cartels. When compared to other, similar developed countries, it is at least 4 times as high (when excluding suicides/accidents) .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
I would call that a significant deviation from the norm and stand by my use of "staggering".

You compare gun deaths to deaths from car crashes. Others have already pointed out that one of the main differences is that cars are not tools for killing that are put into public hands and furthermore, since I asked you the question (that you did not answer): "Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?", my follow up question would be: I can show you the (financial, societal, etc.) benefits of cars (i.e. individual travel by car) for the society, what exactly are the benefits of private gun ownership?
(Whether cars are really worth it, is a whole other discussion.)

Regarding suicide rates, this seems to be a compelling argument until you notice that suicide rates in some, equally developed countries and some lesser developed countries are higher than in the USA and that the number of gun killings that are not suicide is still way higher than in comparable countries (see above).

I do not think that gun violence in the USA can be blamed on mental health issues though <irony>unless you count gun/power fetishism among mental illnesses </irony>.
Edit: Saying that whoever commits an act of gun violence must be mentally ill is tantamount of saying that any criminal must be mentally ill and thus not responsible for his/her actions.

<aside>
One nice observation about this gun fetish (not by me, I think it was Bill Burr): Another common argument pro guns is that people are in it only for home security, if that were the case you would have tons of photos of people with their new door locks or magazine-covers with girls in bikinis in front of security doors.
</aside>

I applaud your stand on public (mental-) health policies though.

Now to your main question:
Have I ever encountered interpersonal violence against me or others?
Yes, but not on a level that bringing lethal force to the situation ever seemed warranted. Thankfully. One obvious reason for that is that I live in a country where I don't need to expect everyone else to carry a gun.
Would it be possible that I would think otherwise, if it would have been the case? Yes.
Would I be correct in thinking that way? No.

To explain: I am not a friend of passive aggressive "stand you ground" thinking. The sane response chain is: 1. Try not to let yourself be provoked, 2. try to de-escalate, 3. try to evade/flee, 4. try to defend yourself.....And of course: CALL THE COPS!

Does that harm my male ego? Yes.
Does that matter enough to me for me to risk killing another human being? No.

@harlequinn:

Putting the legal concerns (It is in the constitution, so we have to heed it) aside, what do you think about the Second Amendment?

Was it meant to enable the people to
a) defend against foreign incursion (in lieu of a standing army)?
b) defend against an oppressive government (as a militia)?
c) assume police duties?
d) defend themselves (in absence of police)?
e) none of the above? (Please state what you think its intended meaning was.)

For your selected reason/s given above, does it/do they still apply today?

What do you think is the reason for the staggering amount of gun violence/deaths in the USA when compared with other countries?

Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?


Full disclosure:
I am genuinely interested in your answers since you seem to have given this some thought (an impression I frankly do not have about bobknight33) .
I am not from the USA and against any form of private gun ownership except under some very rare circumstances.

I believe your typical American, no matter their political persuasion, cares about his fellow American. I'm sure you agree that trying to paint either side as demons who don't care is nonsense.

People shouldn't care about what type of guns or the number of guns - there seems to be no correlation between gun ownership rates and homicide rates in the USA:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state#/media/File:Gun_Ownership_Related_to_Gun_Violence_by_State_(United_States).sv
g

(the line of best fit would have a positive slope if there was a correlation)

There is a correlation between weapon type and firearm murder - pistols (of all sorts) account for approximately 89% of all firearm murders (where a firearm type is specified in the police report). Rifles (of all sorts) are about 5%. Shotguns (of all sorts) are about 3%.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

This wiki has better data than you presented - you can isolate gun violence from other violence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

"Odd, you seem to be saying you're afraid of the violent, gun toting democrats who are 99% more ready and better armed for violent political civil war than Republicans....but you also claim Republicans have all the guns and are better shots and ready to go.....which is it?"

The data says that Republican voters (or those that lean that way) have a firearm ownership rate of double that of Democrats.

If the majority of terrorist attacks in the USA are by right wing terrorists as you suggest, then it seems odd you'd say in the same breath that the left are ready for violent political civil war. If they have less arms and less willingness to engage in violence (which I actually believe is a good thing) then they are hardly "99% more ready and better armed".

The military voted Republican at about twice the rate of voting Democrat at the last election. So the left doesn't have that going for them either.

My dad was a historian and a big Edison fan. He had this phonograph and after his death my sister took ownership of it. Also has boxes of cylinder records.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ECGYbuUExQ

Exactly. Meeting Kim is the one thing that Trump has done that on the surface looks good. There is no conclusive evidence about any real results, AFAIK Kim did not promise anything new while Trump made concessions, but Trump fans are happy because their star appears to have scored.

I say good for you, I for one hope that pronounced achievements really get accomplished, that peace will be made and US gets to invest in NK, private ownership and human rights get established, people there get to eat, and everyone will live happily ever after.

However I am not sure that China, NK, SK, Japan and Russia consider this meeting anything more than a fleeting episode in a long struggle over bits and pieces of the far east. Trumps come and go and say things.

So now he is friends with two dictators, one has personally pledged not to interfere with US elections and another has promised not to nuke the US. That would be better if those same dictators had a history of keeping their promises.