Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Sancho
Sancho's Journal
Sancho's Journal
February 28, 2017
Yet another case where someone with a history, previous arrest, etc. had easy access to guns.
People Control, Not Gun Control
This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.
1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.
Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.
Everyday there's another preventable shooting...
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/counselors-memorial-greet-students-and-staff-at-lakeland-school-rocked-by/2314638Yet another case where someone with a history, previous arrest, etc. had easy access to guns.
People Control, Not Gun Control
This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.
1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.
Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.
February 16, 2017
Ruth: All protesters want is for Sen. Marco Rubio to listen
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/ruth-all-protesters-want-is-for-sen-marco-rubio-to-listen/2313060This is such a fool's errand. All those lovely, naive people schlepping around in front of Sen. Marco Rubio's Tampa office, deluded in the charming notion that a public servant might actually have an interest in communing with his constituents.
What these very frustrated citizens need to know is that they will likely never get any face time with the Sammy Glick of Florida politics. Think of it this way. Rubio, R-Boo! is Joseph Heller's real-life incarnation of his Catch-22 Major Major of the U.S. Senate. You can only see him when he's not in the office.
For the past couple of weeks, groups of citizens have been assembling on the sidewalk of Rubio's West Kennedy Boulevard office fruitlessly attempting to arrange a meeting with their senator to petition their government for redress of grievances. It's a cornerstone of American democracy, and lately has become all the rage.
They have been met with locked doors, unanswered phones, unreturned emails and threats of arrest for trespassing in an effort to communicate with their elected senator. For the most part, the demonstrators have wanted to voice their opposition to Rubio's votes to confirm billionaire Betsy DeVos, a woman with zero experience in public education, to become education secretary, and former Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson to become secretary of state. Seems fair enough — unless you're Rubio.
What these very frustrated citizens need to know is that they will likely never get any face time with the Sammy Glick of Florida politics. Think of it this way. Rubio, R-Boo! is Joseph Heller's real-life incarnation of his Catch-22 Major Major of the U.S. Senate. You can only see him when he's not in the office.
For the past couple of weeks, groups of citizens have been assembling on the sidewalk of Rubio's West Kennedy Boulevard office fruitlessly attempting to arrange a meeting with their senator to petition their government for redress of grievances. It's a cornerstone of American democracy, and lately has become all the rage.
They have been met with locked doors, unanswered phones, unreturned emails and threats of arrest for trespassing in an effort to communicate with their elected senator. For the most part, the demonstrators have wanted to voice their opposition to Rubio's votes to confirm billionaire Betsy DeVos, a woman with zero experience in public education, to become education secretary, and former Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson to become secretary of state. Seems fair enough — unless you're Rubio.
February 15, 2017
Eight years. 533 campaign promises. Tracking the record of President Barack Obama.
http://www.tampabay.com/projects/2017/politifact/obameter/home/As his presidency concludes, PolitiFact’s Obameter shows 48 percent of his promises rated Promise Kept, while another 28 percent were part of a Compromise. He broke 24 percent of them.
When he had Democratic majorities in the House and Senate in 2009, Obama got a lot done. He signed into law three major pieces of legislation: a massive economic stimulus package called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the financial regulations known as Dodd-Frank and the health care law formally known as the Affordable Care Act, more often called Obamacare. When Obama lost unified government in the 2010 election, bills on immigration and climate change were left undone. The Democrats never regained power, and Obama had trouble pushing through his agenda. His decision to use executive power infuriated Republicans in Congress and prompted challenges in court. But it also helped him follow through on a number of things he promised voters.
When he had Democratic majorities in the House and Senate in 2009, Obama got a lot done. He signed into law three major pieces of legislation: a massive economic stimulus package called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the financial regulations known as Dodd-Frank and the health care law formally known as the Affordable Care Act, more often called Obamacare. When Obama lost unified government in the 2010 election, bills on immigration and climate change were left undone. The Democrats never regained power, and Obama had trouble pushing through his agenda. His decision to use executive power infuriated Republicans in Congress and prompted challenges in court. But it also helped him follow through on a number of things he promised voters.
February 5, 2017
CNN this morning at 6am Eastern: 100% show about the travel ban, and court refusing to reinstate...
You might say that CNN is striking back!
Sunday shows will be fun today...maybe they should throw Kellyann and Sean out there - just to see what stupid things they will say next time.
January 29, 2017
Read the whole article at the link...
Floridians pay big for environmental messes
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opinion/os-florida-georgia-lawsuit-scott-maxwell-20170127-column.htmlFor $72 million, we ought to be able to buy Georgia.
Then, when people started demanding answers about the costs of this environmental lawsuit, Gov. Rick Scott's environmental chief announced he was resigning to go work for … wait for it … one of the firms that had been billing taxpayers for the suit.
Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Jon Steverson will join Scott's previous DEP secretary who already works at … wait again … the same firm.
That's enough to buy every man, woman and child in this state a Dell laptop … which residents could use to send emails to their elected officials asking: "What is wrong with you people?"
Then, when people started demanding answers about the costs of this environmental lawsuit, Gov. Rick Scott's environmental chief announced he was resigning to go work for … wait for it … one of the firms that had been billing taxpayers for the suit.
Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Jon Steverson will join Scott's previous DEP secretary who already works at … wait again … the same firm.
That's enough to buy every man, woman and child in this state a Dell laptop … which residents could use to send emails to their elected officials asking: "What is wrong with you people?"
Read the whole article at the link...
January 28, 2017
Johns Hopkins Top Psychotherapist Releases Terrifying Diagnosis Of President Trump
http://bipartisanreport.com/2017/01/27/johns-hopkins-top-psychotherapist-releases-terrifying-diagnosis-of-president-trump/However, John D. Gartner, a registered psychotherapist from the renowned Johns Hopkins University Medical School seems to think Trump may, in fact, be the one with the problem. Gartner, who teaches psychiatric residents at Hopkins, decided to break the ethical code known as the “Goldwater Rule” in order to warn the American public about the dangerousness of our new commander-in-chief’s mental state.
Gartner, who is also the author of In Search of Bill Clinton: A Psychological Biography, says “Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being president.”
So there you have it. The leader of the United States of America is more than likely a malignant narcissist who has the fate of the free world in his two tiny hands. Not to mention, he now has access to the United States government’s nuclear codes. If that’s not terrifying, we don’t know what is.
Gartner, who is also the author of In Search of Bill Clinton: A Psychological Biography, says “Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being president.”
So there you have it. The leader of the United States of America is more than likely a malignant narcissist who has the fate of the free world in his two tiny hands. Not to mention, he now has access to the United States government’s nuclear codes. If that’s not terrifying, we don’t know what is.
January 25, 2017
Jonathan Simon is Executive Director of Election Defense Alliance, a nonprofit organization dedicated to restoring observable vote counting and electoral integrity. He’s also the author of “CODE RED: Computerized Election Theft and The New American Century.” His related blog can be found at www.CodeRed2016.com/blog.
Donald Trump Warned Of A Rigged Election, Was He Right?
http://www.mintpressnews.com/donald-trump-warned-of-a-rigged-election-was-he-right/224326/Since votes are counted unobservably in the pitch-dark of cyberspace and our voting equipment and programming (unlike our footballs) are essentially off-limits to inspection, election forensics comes down perforce to indirect measures of patterns and anomalies, from which red flags may emerge to suggest “problems” with the vote counting process. Baselines commonly used for this verification process range from exit polls and pre-election polls, to hand counts (in the very few places where they still exist), to parallel contests too noncompetitive to be likely targets for malfeasance, to vote count patterns correlated with type or brand of counting equipment (e.g., paperless touchscreen vs. optical scanner or Dominion Voting vs. ES&S). In the 2016 primaries, it was primarily the exit polls that waved the red flags, although there were other strongly corroborating indicators.
Unlike previous eras, exit polls — or at least those in competitive elections bearing national significance — in the era of computerized voting have been so habitually “off” in the same direction (to the “left” of the vote counts) that many, having first presumed the accuracy of the vote counts, have come to dismiss the polls as faulty, the pollsters as biased or incompetent. This jaundiced view prevails despite the existence of studies confirming the demographic validity of exit poll samples.
But the pattern of exit poll and vote count results in the 2016 primaries was strange enough that it should have given pause to even the most hardened skeptics. While the exit poll results were consistently accurate throughout nearly all of the Republican primaries, they were wildly and broadly inaccurate in the Democratic primaries, exhibiting a pervasive intra-party shift to the detriment of Sanders (i.e., Hillary Clinton’s vote count percentages consistently exceeded her exit poll percentages, the disparity often far beyond the poll margin of error). It seems highly unlikely that the same pollsters employing the same methodological techniques and polling voters at the same precincts on the same days, would be competent and consistently successful with Republicans but somehow incompetent and consistently unsuccessful with Democrats. This second-order comparison of one set of exit polls and vote counts against another greatly strengthens the probative value of the exit poll/vote count evidence by providing in effect a baseline that testifies to the overall competence and accuracy of the exit polls as a secondary measure of collective voter intent.
This evidence was further bolstered by the curious outlier case of Oklahoma, where the exit poll to vote count shift was reversed, favoring Sanders in the vote count. Oklahoma was one of only three states to display this reverse shift, and it was by far the largest shift of the three. In considering what made Oklahoma such an outlier, it is worth noting that the Oklahoma state government prides itself for having taken over from the private vendors most of the tasks and duties related to the programming of the voting equipment. Thus, the method of and control over programming appear to correlate with the forensic outcome. It is an open question whether the difference in access to the programming process was responsible for the egregious reversal of the exit poll to vote count shift direction relative to the pattern in virtually all of the other states.
Unlike previous eras, exit polls — or at least those in competitive elections bearing national significance — in the era of computerized voting have been so habitually “off” in the same direction (to the “left” of the vote counts) that many, having first presumed the accuracy of the vote counts, have come to dismiss the polls as faulty, the pollsters as biased or incompetent. This jaundiced view prevails despite the existence of studies confirming the demographic validity of exit poll samples.
But the pattern of exit poll and vote count results in the 2016 primaries was strange enough that it should have given pause to even the most hardened skeptics. While the exit poll results were consistently accurate throughout nearly all of the Republican primaries, they were wildly and broadly inaccurate in the Democratic primaries, exhibiting a pervasive intra-party shift to the detriment of Sanders (i.e., Hillary Clinton’s vote count percentages consistently exceeded her exit poll percentages, the disparity often far beyond the poll margin of error). It seems highly unlikely that the same pollsters employing the same methodological techniques and polling voters at the same precincts on the same days, would be competent and consistently successful with Republicans but somehow incompetent and consistently unsuccessful with Democrats. This second-order comparison of one set of exit polls and vote counts against another greatly strengthens the probative value of the exit poll/vote count evidence by providing in effect a baseline that testifies to the overall competence and accuracy of the exit polls as a secondary measure of collective voter intent.
This evidence was further bolstered by the curious outlier case of Oklahoma, where the exit poll to vote count shift was reversed, favoring Sanders in the vote count. Oklahoma was one of only three states to display this reverse shift, and it was by far the largest shift of the three. In considering what made Oklahoma such an outlier, it is worth noting that the Oklahoma state government prides itself for having taken over from the private vendors most of the tasks and duties related to the programming of the voting equipment. Thus, the method of and control over programming appear to correlate with the forensic outcome. It is an open question whether the difference in access to the programming process was responsible for the egregious reversal of the exit poll to vote count shift direction relative to the pattern in virtually all of the other states.
Jonathan Simon is Executive Director of Election Defense Alliance, a nonprofit organization dedicated to restoring observable vote counting and electoral integrity. He’s also the author of “CODE RED: Computerized Election Theft and The New American Century.” His related blog can be found at www.CodeRed2016.com/blog.
January 21, 2017
In 25 years, biggest crowd I've seen here (St. Petersburg, FL)...
and there are LOTS of big events here. I think a bunch of local repubs and wealthy were surprised. Marched right in front of Romney's party location (when the GOP had there convention in Tampa).
I heard one officer estimate 25,000.
Watching TV really doesn't capture the energy. Amazing.
January 19, 2017
From Headline to Photograph, a Fake News Masterpiece
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/us/fake-news-hillary-clinton-cameron-harris.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-newsMr. Harris started by crafting the headline: “BREAKING: ‘Tens of thousands’ of fraudulent Clinton votes found in Ohio warehouse.” It made sense, he figured, to locate this shocking discovery in the very city and state where Mr. Trump had highlighted his “rigged” meme.
“I had a theory when I sat down to write it,” recalled Mr. Harris, a 23-year-old former college quarterback and fraternity leader. “Given the severe distrust of the media among Trump supporters, anything that parroted Trump’s talking points people would click. Trump was saying ‘rigged election, rigged election.’ People were predisposed to believe Hillary Clinton could not win except by cheating.”
Contacted by a reporter who had discovered an electronic clue that revealed his secret authorship of ChristianTimesNewspaper.com, he was wary at first, chagrined to be unmasked.
“This topic is rather sensitive,” Mr. Harris said, noting that he was trying to build a political consulting business and needed to protect his reputation. But eventually he agreed to tell the story of his foray into fake news, a very part-time gig that he calculated paid him about $1,000 an hour in web advertising revenue. He seemed to regard his experience with a combination of guilt about having spread falsehoods and pride at doing it so skillfully.
“I had a theory when I sat down to write it,” recalled Mr. Harris, a 23-year-old former college quarterback and fraternity leader. “Given the severe distrust of the media among Trump supporters, anything that parroted Trump’s talking points people would click. Trump was saying ‘rigged election, rigged election.’ People were predisposed to believe Hillary Clinton could not win except by cheating.”
Contacted by a reporter who had discovered an electronic clue that revealed his secret authorship of ChristianTimesNewspaper.com, he was wary at first, chagrined to be unmasked.
“This topic is rather sensitive,” Mr. Harris said, noting that he was trying to build a political consulting business and needed to protect his reputation. But eventually he agreed to tell the story of his foray into fake news, a very part-time gig that he calculated paid him about $1,000 an hour in web advertising revenue. He seemed to regard his experience with a combination of guilt about having spread falsehoods and pride at doing it so skillfully.
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Aug 17, 2004, 07:11 AMNumber of posts: 9,067
