Actually, Walmart. Isn’t removing the games or the movies, just the advertising. So, they don’t want to show violent images, but they have no problems selling it to you.
I didn't say "violent" protest is effective. I only mentioned "spontaneous and populous" protest in my post. State can suppress "spontaneous aspect of protests with a bunch of "for public safety and convenience" excuses (1st ammendment bends just like the 2nd one..) thereby making the protests either ineffective; State can use these official requests for systemic repressions (with profiling and the facial recognition tech among others); or it can use force when legal excuses cease to work (see Tienanmen square or ). When there is a high percentage of guns in the population, I think state will have to think twice before escalating anything - if they do escalate, the public will tend to side with the underdog, if the protest complaints are more or less legit (see recent Ukranian "Orange" revolution, or the Civil right movements you mention). And the public will definitely start listening if people start dying thus rendering State propaganda/distraction less powerful. The key here is guns in population can serve as a deterrent to escalating of violence and suppression on the State's part. As can be seen in China currently, the government entities these days have endless technological, propaganda and military tools for suppressing the population and political opposition. So, to me personally, every bit of deterrent against our own government encroaching on our rights helps. Maybe it's the environment where POTUS systematically undermines our trust in the US government institutions that has me sounding paranoid here. I'm in a public spaces all day long, 7 days a week. For the record, I'm ok with banning machine guns and high capacity magazines and some common sense mental health background check but I think it is just as important to have check on people with large followings in government to watch what they say and not incite hate in the population. Minorities these days are living in a state of fear because they are afraid of White Supremacy El Paso type of violence. And legal immigrants are afraid because Trump keeps calling them out and sporadically releasing executive orders effecting their livelihood for no apparent reason but his "America First" deranged perception of things. With all the news lately (Epstein conspiracies now), we no longer feel like a country of laws. After we fought a huge war on terror, it seems like not that much to ask to fight a little war on fear and a little war for morals. Let's have political correctness back! Just musing here anyway.
You just said killing is wrong "regardless of ideology" and then proposed to kill somebody right after it (based on certain ideology I would presume)... Also, is the cleric who encouraged and absolved the 9/11 suicide terrorists liable? If so, I could just as well argue that Potus is also liable. A whole bunch of American people were supporting Bush to some ridiculous levels for going into Afghanistan to fight war on terror (to stop a whole country from breeding more terrorists) and yet you don't care if it's a "terrorist" that kills a bunch of folks or some random dude with no ideology. Great logic as usual.
You’re right really great logic. Trying to compare Trump to a terrorist is so damn stupid I can’t even respond. TDS is real.
Only if it’s not one of their own, if it is one of their own they will take it and ask may I please have another. Biden puts Trump to shame and then you have this. Cameron is running to be Kentucky's next attorney general. Dawn Elliott, a local political talk radio host and attorney, slammed Cameron for his support for President Trump and told the black Republican to "stop eating the 'Coon Flakes' the White House is serving." (Give us more please).
I googled it since my lamestream media bubble didn't allow me to hear about it. Aside from the local Kentucky paper (paywalled) it looks like only the right-wing partisan papers are talking about it (Daily Caller, Washington Examiner). Anyway, it's a pretty terrible thing to say. Dawn Elliott is also black. Society generally allows a little more latitude within these racial distinctions -- blacks calling other blacks Uncle Toms or whites accusing whites of being mass shooters. In this case I still think Elliott is out of line. Criticize if you must if you think Cameron is foolish to support Trump while his skin is pigmented like it is, but 'Coon Flakes' is really low and vulgar and belligerent. She's not only leveraging racial stereotypes and racial allegiance, she's using a racial slur to tear him down. I don't think it's too cool. But, it's really not the same thing as assuming a mass shooter is going to turn out to be white (or turn out to be Muslim, before 2016) -- that's just playing the numbers.
What next? Do you want to cry about the fact that black people can call each other the N word, but they get seem to get unreasonably upset when you try it? Common sense. And as 99.3% European according to 23andme, its known as self-depreciating humor.
Sadly, like I stated before, the same cycle as always. Debate gun control Thoughts and prayers Democrats speaking out that we need to do something. Republicans stating that guns aren't the problem, people are. Both sides are full of ****. People care more about their toys that they can handle a few thousand lives being sacrificed every year (talking about all gun murders). Criminals will be criminals. I say we abolish the 2nd amendment, or at least make it so damn tough to get a gun that our supply of guns in this country will drop. Either way, nothing will happen, some will make their usual political points and try to get some pats in the back from the public and the rest will just give up arguing because nothing will ever change.