about as useful as "real Gremlin Owner reacts to Gremlins 2: The New Batch".

And a stereotypical pitbull owner.

You don't get to complain about a frightened person breaking shit when you don't even attempt to control your animal. No sympathy for door owner.

Your video, Playful Kitty Unleashes Fury on Owner's Foot, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

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.

I would go hunting for the videos, but Biden has already stated that he fully plans to empower Beto to be his gun control 'czar'. Beto has already said that he absolutely is coming for "our" guns. He plans a forced turn in or buyback of all assault style weapons, presumably those also covered by laws that allow them under federal tax stamps (full auto).

In addition, Biden lists the following on his website as his plans:

1. Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection. (Only this is misleading. Do shoe manufacturers get sued if you kick someone in the face? Do knife manufacturers get sued if you stab someone? Do car manufacturers get sued when you get into an accident? No and neither do most other manufacturers. Putting this in place means that any time a gun is used in a crime, they can try to sue the manufacturer of that gun into non-existence. It doesn't even have to be an 'assault' weapon, any gun manufacturer is at risk. The only thing that wouldn't count is blackpowder guns since they aren't classed as firearms.)

2. Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons. (So this would be a perma ban on assault weapons and would also anticipate changes to circumvent the law. This would be the assault ban of 1994 on steroids.)

3. Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. (So even if he doesn't get Beto to push through a buy back, he can force owners of assault rifles to be subject to the EXTREMELY restrictive NFA. Not only that, but it's expensive and would be a tax on gun owners yearly.)

4. Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act. (Covered this already. But if this does go through, you likely won't be seeing me on here anymore as it will be a cold day in hell before I surrender my guns or pay the government to be allowed to own them.)

5. Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one. (Once you get this through, it is far easier to get legislation passed to cap how many guns a person can own total. Fuck that.)

6. Require background checks for all gun sales. Today, an estimated 1 in 5 firearms are sold or transferred without a background check. Biden will enact universal background check legislation, requiring a background check for all gun sales with very limited exceptions, such as gifts between close family members. This will close the so-called “gun show and online sales loophole” that the Obama-Biden Administration narrowed, but which cannot be fully closed by executive action alone. (I can deal with this, just means you need to go through an FFL.)

7. Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. (Not 100% on this one, but it isn't a deal breaker)

8. Enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm. (Felony yes, but that already exists. Misdemeanor, fuck no.)

9. Close the “Charleston loophole.” (yeah, no problem with this one)

10. End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. (So if I want to build another AR15 I can't? Fuck that. You still have to get the primary receiver through or shipped to an FFL. Which means a background check every single time.)

11. Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons. (I would be for this if it wasn't for the fact that it is one step away from the government outlawing guns. Once this mechanism is in place at a federal level, all that means is you are one vote away from having your guns seized.)

12. Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. (Sounds good, but nobody is willing to state the guidelines that the family or LEO will have to follow. That means that it is completely up to family members and LEO's to decide what constitutes a 'crisis'. Bet you a lot of LEO's in protest states would red flag most protesters immediately if this law existed now in all states.)

13. Give states incentives to set up gun licensing programs. (This is above and beyond the federal checks. This would mean any gun owner or potential owner would have to maintain and pay for a separate gun license. Also, it allows states and locales to decide what constitutes the requirements for the gun license. There are already some states doing this and you have to get permission to even own a gun from the sheriff or other official. Fuck that.)

14. Put America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns. (Are you fucking kidding me? What if the battery runs out, what if it gets hacked, or what if the government decides to flip a switch and shut them all down? I'll never agree to this.)

15. Require gun owners to safely store their weapons. Biden will pass legislation requiring firearm owners to store weapons safely in their homes. (IE, locked in a safe or partially disassembled, possibly a combination of both. Why bother having a gun for home defense if it can't be used without spending 5-10 minutes to make it available/functional?)

16. Stop “ghost guns.” (This is just stupid. 3d printed guns might be able to fire a few shots before reaching a critical failure. You can't 3d print a lower or upper receiver that matches a stock one. Yes, they made lowers for the original m-16s, but they swapped from those because they were shit. They broke constantly. And those weren't printed, they were molded from a tougher plastic. A 3d printed one is not nearly as strong. Either way, I don't care too much about this because it is a buzzword for non-gun people. Just like bumpstocks. You can still bump-fire a regular ar-15, the bumpstocks were just training wheels for idiots.)

Now he has a shitload more laws he wants to pass, but most of them I don't care too much about. I won't bother covering all of them. In any case, he is going to go after guns on a scale unseen to this point. If the dems get control of both houses, he will get these laws passed. Then the only hope is that SCOTUS votes them down as unconstitutional.

I won't vote for Trump, but I will be doing my part to maintain a split congress. Which means straight republican ticket other than Trump.

This one had me legitimately frightened, that club owner is... something else. The whole series is a masterpiece, and Taji has perfected the art of awkward naivety.

Russia is making campaign adds and slogans for Trump. This time you just don't care since he got away with it last time.

Remember, the recent republican created report says clearly Trump's campaign colluded, coordinated, and worked in tandem with Russia, who committed hundreds of crimes in America to help Trump get elected because he's their man, a total pussy and pushover who can't stand up to Putin even when he puts bounties on our military, knowingly and with intent invited foreign powers to interfere in our elections, even publicly on camera, then outright lied in the impeachment hearings.

No they aren't, because it's not slipping. You admitted as much under two weeks ago, said he was articulate and "with it", then forgot what bobski #4 said and went back to " he's lost it, is unstable, can't speak without major gaffes...." while ignoring Trump's disjointed, rambling, inarticulate, unstable speeches illegally using public property for campaign functions.

They are PRETENDING it is, so for suckers who believe constant liars, they are making it slip in your mind, the only place it's true.

Slowing down videos to make people look out of it is a well known Republican ploy, so is editing videos to make speakers appear confused or rambling. Trump looks deranged and unstable live, constantly, no cuts and editing needed. You can find more flubs, lies, misunderstandings, and rambling in any Trump speech than any Russian compilation of all 40 years of Biden's public service, and he stutters, Trump doesn't.

I won't underestimate the stupidity of the American voter again, but without functional absentee voting (the same as mail in) and with Trumpanzees following his instructions to vote twice and just hope you don't go to prison for him, he's already invalidated the election. He might win, but only by multiple forms of cheating and massive suppression. It's possible, he's degraded the country enough to make it possible.

Btw, how did you like Trump's crisis actor at his event in Kenosha. When the owner of a burned camera shop refused to be photographed with Trump or used as part of his divisive political ploy, Trump just got another person to pretend to be him and went ahead with his photo op. You knew he would the instant the words "crisis actor" left his lips, he always does the thing he rails against.
The man holding the Rhodes camera book is not the owner of the shop. He sold it nearly a decade ago and has no connection, knowing this, Trump repeats "your store" and "we're going to help you" to the guy he hired to be a crisis actor. I bet you suddenly love crisis actors and see nothing at all wrong there, despite ranting against them in the past as disgustingly dishonest tricks only liberals play.

Please, another red tsunami. I'm begging you, give us another red tsunami. Landslides are miniscule by comparison, go big.

It's not at all bad faith, since it's what he came for and what he did. He crossed state lines armed looking for trouble he might stop using his gun. He went armed to play cop with zero training and illegally carrying a weapon he was too young to have. He might have Intended to only shoot at arsonists, but what he did was randomly shoot into crowds and down the streets, killing two non arsonists, allegedly while blind due to being pepper sprayed.

I can't decipher your good guilty easy innocent hard targets. What?

He has no right to deputize himself, no matter what property crimes he assumed were forthcoming.

Yeah, try to equate property crime to violent murder, it only shows you aren't arguing in good faith yourself.

He was blocks from the parking lot he came, uninvited, to "protect". Was his beat the whole city now?

Big difference between crossing state lines to guard someone else's business and guarding your own home, more bad faith arguments. You can use force to protect your home and family from threats of serious harm, you can't shoot your neighbor for trespassing and cutting some tree branches you didn't want cut.

Do you know who owned the property he murdered the first guy on? Maybe he stands with the crowd and militia boy was trespassing, brandishing a rifle, and eventually murdering someone there before running and gunning his way back home without reporting the shootings, ensuring that property will be torched within a week.
Great job protecting them. For all he knew he was shooting the owner, he wasn't protecting property when he shot.
That is the innocent property owner here, not the owner of the owner of the original parking lot he was guarding, not the kid or his parents, and this gung ho kid's actions ensured their properties destruction and exacerbated the unrest, triggering more property damage. Good job, fucknuts...enjoy big boy prison.

I'm not OK with armed kids shooting up any neighborhood.

If you're presenting Rittenhouse as such a kid, that's a bad faith argument. There is no evidence that 'shooting up the neighborhood' was in any way his motivation when he positioned himself in that neighborhood.

All public information points to him being there to discourage destructive elements (such as armed looters) from taking action in that neighborhood.

The ostensibly guilty parties being a hard target doesn't transform innocent easy targets into valid targets.

Most damage is done to private businesses and of vehicles (with the odd unfortunate being beaten to a pulp on the street).
Minneapolis had homes and churches damaged. I can't speak to homes in other locations because I haven't read up on them.




Property wise:
Property takes money to acquire.
Money takes time to acquire.
Time requires life.

(Not all insurance covers 'angry mob')

If it takes you 3 months to work to purchase something, and someone destroys it, they are taking 3 months of working life away from you. Unless they can refund you that life time, that's life time lost forever.

Reality is : Property is only 'just property' when it's not your own property.
If you can't defend property with force, then people are simply free to show up and take everything you have, and you just have to accept it. I don't know anyone who is ok with that (I doubt you are ok with it happening to you, but maybe I'm wrong).

Generally, I empathize with innocent people. So I lean towards the property owners in these cases.

-scheherazade

In case you live under a rock, "We Build the Wall" is a fraudulent charity who's administrators have been charged with embezzlement, and who's only construction was illegally built so poorly that it was in danger of falling into the Rio Grande within months of completion....their builder, Fisher, now has billions in government construction contracts after Trump personally approved them over objections, despite hundreds of criminal complaints against the company and it's owner, thousands of civil complaints, and a complete inability to build even a tiny section of wall.
Then there's the sexual discrimination they admitted, and massive tax fraud they admitted, and the child pornography convictions (now I know why Trump loves them, birds of a feather and all).

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Border-Wall-II-Last-Week-Tonight-with-John-Oliver-HBO

In my personal experience suicides are higher than homicides. Most suicides are by gun owners and 2nd are hangings. Jumpers in 3rd place. Near the bottom of the list are the ones who stab themselves in the heart. Only had 2 suicides by helium.

Your video, Small Dog Eats Lipstick: Dog eats her owner’s lipstick., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Yes, he planned to commit suicide on stage, the event owner found out he was serious and cancelled the show, he went home and did it alone.
His stage shows usually ended with him naked, bleeding, and sometimes covered in shit.

As for the translation, I just pulled apart and recombined what you wrote. Come on. Bleeding hearts and artists....and bleeding artists. ;-)