So like you would accept the term of being labeled a racist right? Like I know some people who just flat out admit and say they are realists. Would you be offended if I called you racist? And no I don't care if you are a black person saying this also.
more lies from tradertexxx. it wasnt 1 million...it was 650,000. and it was a buy-back program where they gave owners fair market value for their guns. and that 650,000 was 20% of total guns, not 1/3rd as texxx claims. https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback
Believing humans will get pregnant and have children for some welfare money is absurd and a sign the person who holds that opinion is a narcissist because a common trait of a narcissist is someone who lacks empathy. In fact that probably is the core trait of someone diagnosed with NPD. It shows a lack of empathy the same way some people think some dudes go Jawanaman on purpose to get some women trophies. You are showing you can't put yourself through someone's shoes. Who the **** would rather rear a child than just work 40 hours a week at Krogers? What lifestyle do you think these people are living with this welfare cash? If it's so cost effective why don't you punp out some babies and quite your job? You'll be more well off right? The concept of welfare babies results in dehumanization. It allows people to think these kids are raised by moms who see them as a paycheck rather than a son or daughter. It allows them to think these people have concepts of parenthood that are subhuman. Also the concept of a "alpha male" being the type of male that is more attractive to females has no racial boundaries. The way that alphaness is expressed varies from class to class. But at the end of the day the trope of girls falling for assholes knows no racial boundaries.
Also the concept of "feelings over facts" is a false dichotomy. Empathy is a concept that is tactically useful. The problem with your type of rhetoric and conservative reactionary rhetoric and theories, especially conspiracy theories is they don't make sense when you analyze concepts like "intent" or "opportunity cost". When you apply empathy you better understand motivations and then you can analyze narratives and whether those narratives go against the grain of basic human instinct, motivations and opportunity cost. You need to understand "feelings" or human behavior and analyze "facts".
Nearly every police department in the nation is undermanned. Where are these armed guards going to come from? Also, would you support a tax increase to pay for these guards? Or is this only a solution for private schools?
The letter alone makes them radical. **** that shooter. No one should shed a single thought of remorse for them.
Feelings before facts. Okayyy The bolded happens everyday and has been some people's way of life for decades. I've seen it with my own eyes. It's not a lack of empathy, it's reality The government helps women more ways than just welfare too when it comes to having babies
Whether your anecdotes of you witnessing what you claim is true or not, what you witness is your perspective and if you do have NPD you very well might attribute false motivations and intents to a family you view from a third party lense.
There were shortages of police officers prior to that. But not shocking that you know nothing about… anything. Other than trolling.
I saw ranges of 650,000 to 1 million -- no one really knows with certainty. Ironically I chose the more favorable number from the pro-confiscation crowd's perspective. Had I chosen your number (650k), it actually makes my point stronger because there was even less compliance with the mandate. By the way, it wasn't a voluntary buy-back -- it was mandatory. My points just got even stronger.
where exactly did you see the million number? everything i see says b/t 650-700k. and i never claimed it was voluntary. you just cant stop lying in this thread. even after i pointed out your lies regarding CNN and MSNBC refusing to say the shooter was transgender you kept saying it. very dishonest of you texxx.
Weapon confiscation is unrealistic, that ship has sailed a long time ago. I personally think lax background checks is the real issue that can actually have a tangible result on stopping these type of random acts of violence with guns. I know it will be longer processing time for law abiding gun owners, but why would anyone be in a rush to get a gun for recreational use.
Entering airports was much easier before Osama happened. It's more difficult nowadays and most sane people would agree it is worth the extra hassle
I have said it before. Eventually there will be a group of 3-4 men with gear and enough arms to like 200-300 people or more. What happens then? Still nothing??
