A man staying with the family stabbed the entire family – 4 kids 7 years old and younger, both parents, and another person. Only the father seems to have survived. What a tragedy it is for him.
Is this LGBT discrimination? Of course it is. OTOH, does every interest group get a pass? Serious question. I want my liberal gun owners flag flown on government property. I’m 100% certain NONE of you will take issue.
Yep, sure is. You’re a much-maligned and misunderstood minority who wishes to have a voice. Very different. (Well, maybe a tiny difference or three. When liberals come into our space with questions and arguments, we engage in good faith. If I come into LGBT spaces with questions and arguments: BAN HAMMER.
When they start loading trains, I’ll do what I can for you, but it’ll be hell defending my family. I’ll try.
The sister of Giulia Cecchettin, the 22-year-old whose murder at the hands of her ex-boyfriend Filippo Turetta shocked Italy, published a letter in which she talks about the femicides and of the patriarchal culture leading to the systemic spread of male violence against women.
In the letter published by Il Corriere del Veneto, Elena, 24, asked that Turetta not be defined as a “monster,” because “A monster is an exception, a person outside of society, a person for whom society should not be responsible. Instead, [la sociedad] must be held responsible. The ‘monsters’ are not sick, they are healthy children of patriarchy, of rape culture.”
“It is often said ‘not all men.’ “They are not all men, but they are always men.”, (she) wrote. “No man is good if he does nothing to dismantle the society that privileges him so much. It is the responsibility of men in this patriarchal society, given their privileges and power, to educate and call out friends and colleagues as soon as they hear the slightest hint of sexist violence. Tell it to that friend who controls his girlfriend, tell it to that colleague who engages in street harassment, harass those behaviors accepted by society, which are nothing more than the prelude to femicide.” Source
About half of those killed were either innocent bystanders or passengers in the vehicles pursued. The overwhelming majority of those pursuits stemmed from traffic stops, car thefts and other nonviolent offenses. Less than one quarter of the deadly police chases were initiated over a suspected violent crime.
I don’t like the fact that passengers in the vehicle were lumped in with “innocent bystanders”. I would assume there are cases in which, say a stolen car, the passengers are just fine with running from the police to avoid arrest.
The article also didn’t break down why people ran. Did the traffic stop involve someone with drugs, an illegal firearm, or an outstanding warrant that didn’t want to be caught? DUI? I think there needs to be more information on why people ran, it certainly can’t all be someone trying to avoid fixing a taillight or a 10 over the limit ticket.
Low income housing areas are notoriously dangerous. Why should anyone be forced to rent their own private property out to someone on government assistance?
Why should you be allowed to buy up low income neighborhood properties and hold them hostage? Your private property is guaranteed by state protection and it can be taken away by the state!
That would be awful! Luckily, no one is forced to rent to anyone, and you can live there yourself, thereby bringing up the income levels (you do have a job, right?) and therefore the safety.
The article didn’t have a lot of detail on specifically what exactly want going to be allowed. I realize it would have prevented discrimination but specially in what way.
What do you mean? It’s: landlords cannot discriminate against renters using housing vouchers. As in: landlords cannot deny renters just because of they’re paying rent with vouchers.
I lived nextdoor to a massive section 8 apartment and never had any problems fwiw. Sucks that you had a hard time but it’s definitely a ymmv thing.
Just because someone is using a voucher doesn’t mean they’re going to attract crime. Where I lived, it was mostly immigrants that were new to the country.
In most states a landlord can choose if they want to accept a certain form of payment. Mainly my question was., did a landlord have to accept the renter who was on assistance or could they just say no not going to going to accept those on assistance.
What?!? No. This isn’t “Stop and Frisk”! They are just going to halt and search people.
Hochul is ordering a force of nearly 1,000 people, comprised of 750 National Guard members, state police and MTA officers, to conduct bag checks at some of the busiest stations.
Shirley, this won’t end up being done in a biased way. No way, not ever…
Bias is not the point - not that I doubt it will happen. The 4th amendment protects from any search by the government or those acting on their behalf, without a warrant or a qualifying exemption (e.g. probable cause, consent). Simply possessing a bag is not enough cause to justify a search without consent.
I am very serious about wanting to give people the benefit of the doubt. When I read a newspaper article that say person x accused of crime y. I read the article and try to figure out the rest of the story, what isn’t printed.
With mitch… I can’t even give him the benefit of the doubt. He’s a freaking moron.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.