Trump mostly caused those issues though. He talks about these things constantly. Then argues the trial cannot start because there’s too much attention.
Further, there is a pre selection. The judge rejected loads of people beforehand.
Trump mostly caused those issues though. He talks about these things constantly. Then argues the trial cannot start because there’s too much attention.
Hmm. That might actually be a valid legal strategy. I’m not sure that the fact that the defendant caused the problem actually takes away their protections.
Honestly, Trump is so globally visible that I don’t know how you’d remedy that, though. A change of venue isn’t going to change anything.
Eh, I used to be all in favor of Right To Death laws, but when Canada passed theirs they started pushing the disabled and impoverished onto it, not just the terminally ill. Which is basically ethnic cleansing.
So while I understand the Slippery Slope argument is not a good one, I’m going to need to see some common sense restrictions before I could support this as fervently as I did before
how about just prosecute the crime that is already happening? I mean murder is a crime. The most used murder weapon is a screwdriver. Should we also ban those?
Prosecution isn’t a preventative measure. It’s reactionary. A society should have some degree of foresight.
There’s nothing indicating we can’t design a less lethal screwdriver. I have the sneaking suspicion that screwdriver murders aren’t happening in public spaces as frequently as private ones, so there’s room for discussion on how we ought to reduce someone’s capacity for murder with one. I’m concerned that you think this is a ridiculous notion, as though a society has no choice but to allow murderers free reign over others. It’s a limited frame of mind, and nothing would ever be done about anything. I understand that that’s essentially what the idea is with gun control, but I disagree with it for many reasons.
In 2014 there was this guy in Taiwan that started mass knifing people in the MRT Train station. The MOST he was able to stab was 22 people and killed 4.
He actually had to sit down to rest before continuing to stab people because he was tired. In a documentary, he trained for months to have the stamina to maximize kills. It would be different if he had a handgun let alone a AR-15.
And a Uyghur in mainland China got 26, including killing four officers armed with automatic rifles (and this incident immediately preceded China throwing that part of their population into camps and ramping up their oppression against minority groups).
Exactly, 25 is actually impressive. Imagine having to chase down 25 people. I would have given up after a couple. With an AR-15, they wouldn’t even need to look at the faces of the people they are killing, like that Vegas shooter in the hotel. Fucking cowards.
“Thanks for meeting, guys… Let’s see. We have all these free U.S. weapons, vehicles and delivery systems we can use. Pretty much an endless supply. So, which toys do we want to play with first?”
The selling of water rights is common in the Western United States and has been done for decades. If anything, it is the best way to get farmers to stop farming and preserve the water.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.