Infidel Dog

" The Biden administration has approved a Trump-era project finishing a section of the southern border wall in the western-most point of the U.S. along the border with Mexico in California. Completion of this project will lead to the permanent closure of the U.S. side of Friendship Park, which is a binational spot between San Diego and Tijuana where separated families could meet and touch without a wall between them. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas approved the designs, which were initially authorized by the Trump administration in the budget for Fiscal Year 2018..." https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10991231/Biden-FINISH-section-Trumps-border-wall-Calif-close-park-separated-families-meet.html

My thought is this is starting to look like a bad time to be a Russian oligarch.

Mulroney, sure. Why? Are you saying he wasn't? Because that would sound like something a Progressive Socialist wanting to bluff us out as having some special knowledge of our ideology to push it further Proggy might say. Mulroney was the GST guy, right?

I believe Ben would ask you if you're saying it would be OK to kill somebody in a temporary coma who was penniless and alone. Would you require the coma or are those your criteria for legal murder in general? Possessions and connections to others. I don't like the chances for happiness of the penniless, solitary individual when he comes out of his temporary coma either but I'd still call it murder if somebody killed him. As to previous awareness of the organism's existence, at what point after birth would you call a murder legal or for that matter moral? As soon as he can express awareness of his being? When would that be?

Norway against America, you mean? Gun homicides, per capita? I believe that's what you were offering up with a planted reference to 2015. Very well, but I don't understand why your asking. I already gave you the year to replace your attempted 2015 deception with. 2011. Go.

I picked 2011 to illustrate the sneaky stupidity of you trying pass off a single year's stat as significant of something. I gave somebody a link to a reference showing them exactly why Australia's gun payback scheme didn't actually work. I imagine that's what you're talking about but obviously didn't read the reference. If you choose not to read it and remain ignorant that's your problem. The reasoning has nothing to do with a single year though. Here it is again: https://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/08/some-notes-on-claims-about-australias.html?m=1 Educate yourself this time. If that's all you've got you've got nothing. We're still talking about Highland Park, right? Didn't work there. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/highland-park-shooting-gun-legally-obtained-crimo-mayor-rcna36646 Or did you mean you want to confiscate the millions of American AR style rifles. How did you plan on doing that? BTW you did know most gun homicides in America are done with handguns, right? Did you know Crimo had 4 other weapons than the one he chose for highland park.

Against Norway you mean? Gun Homicides per capita, you mean? I already gave you a year for that. 2011. Nice try on trying to sneak in 2015 through Wiki though. Oh wait...are you trying to sneak in American suicides in 2021, now? You guys...you never get tired of the same old tricks. No matter how many times you get caught at them. Now as to guns being brought in from other cities...be realistic. You'll never get all the guns from all the gun owners in America. Not unless you want a totalitarian federal government kicking down doors at 3 in the morning, and such. Is that what you're hoping for? Even if you succeed you'll still have problems more problems. I still wouldn't be optimistic of your succcess. So where are you with your stricter gun laws then? What do you want that you think would have stopped the Highland Park shooting in Chicaqo?

I don't mind this, so much, myself... Patrick Brown disqualified from Conservative leadership race The guy was a weasel.

There's good argument as to why that shouldn't matter. Shapiro does a pretty good job of laying it out, so if you're interested here it is:

That's the 2015 stat. I wonder how much digging the Wiki editor had to do to find it. Now give us the 2011 stat when Brevik was doing his thing. Was it you who said "Numbers don't lie?" Thanks for proving yourself wrong. Actually the last pages of this thread are rife with evidence of that. For example somebody was posting how low the stats have been in Australia since their gun control measures. Dig into the stats and its more, 'kind of, but not really...' https://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/08/some-notes-on-claims-about-australias.html?m=1 Somebody else was strutting around using last week's Highland Park shootings as evidence of the effectiveness of gun control. He forgot to mention how Highland Park is in Chicago which has among the most stringent gun regulations in America. He was also trying to blame Republicans but forgot to tell you Chicago and for that matter Illinois are Democrat strongholds. Also, best evidence says the Highland Park shooter was a raging lefty.

" Yuri Voronov, 61, found dead at his mansion in the suburbs of St Petersburg He ran transport company which had contracts with Russian gas giant Gazprom Voronov was found floating in the pool of his mansion with bullet in his head He is the sixth wealthy Russian to die - and the third in the same St Petersburg suburb - in mysterious circumstances since the start of the year " https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10983437/Russian-executive-linked-energy-giant-Gazprom-shot-dead.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490

Did you hear about the recent one in Chicago? Highland Park Attack Occurred Despite Red Flag Law, Other Stringent Gun Controls

Might depend on how you define "person." If you're seeing it as a fully developed organism, maybe not. As a human life the experts seem to agree it is what it is though. A human life: Someone was saying earlier a fertilized egg is not a child. He said it a few times. Technically he may be correct - just as a child is not a man (or woman, for that matter. ) but left to the genetic plan embedded within the fertilized egg it will become a baby which will develop into the definition of child which will become man. The guy with the definition has decided he knows when that human life can be ended along that chain. I disagree. I don't think he does. (And he's wrong so much the odds say I'm probably right. .) I voted for the third option in the above poll but I've been moving up the options for some time now. I'll be at choice # 1 soon, I think.

Wasn't that over the right NOT to be enslaved. And it's federal. As I understand it how it works comes under the purview of the 10th amendment. "The Tenth Amendment says that the Federal Government only has those powers delegated in the Constitution. If it isn’t listed, it belongs to the states or to the people." With slavery it seems like there were those not considering some populations to be human so they just ignored their rights under the constitution. If it's not a human life the constitution didn't apply seemed to be the thinking. That was backward thinking then so how backward is it now? It's kind of the way some think today on the abortion issue. A baby in the womb isn't a human life. So the constitution doesn't apply. Except it is and it does.

Some are looked after federally, some by the state. That's the way they set it up. If you don't like it that's your problem.

Are you asking me why the Supreme Court put the issue under the purview of the States or why I like the idea? As I understand it the legal argument is awful complex. It may even challenge a "university trained professional" like yourself. But the Federal Supreme Court did send the issue to the States. And that's pretty much all they did. Now as to why I like the decision to move the abortion issue to the states, basically the federal hand is too heavy for a subject that so many disagree on, on so many levels. As to "whatabout" guns, I don't care at the moment. I'm not interested in being distracted. Ask me on a gun thread.

I could have sworn I heard you tell someone one time you were a barista. Could be wrong, I guess but it's always fit so well with everything else I've seen you serve up it's just become part of the Beave story for me. Even this more recent claim of you being what you call a "university educated professional"...I don't see anything there that challenges my original vision.

And for another good laugh ask the lovers of the polls that say what they want how they feel about this one: On This July 4th, Trump Is America’s Most Popular Politician

Anyway, all the Supreme Court did was return decision the matter to the States. If that's 18th century. Go 18th century. The states have a better fix on what their region wants and if they're wrong it's easier to replace them.

Show him this one if he wants to push that nonsense. Undercover Footage: Women Drugged With Xanax Before Speaking to Abortionist

Nope. I'm fine with The Donald as Speaker of the House until 2024. Then if I get my way he's VP under Ron DeSantis. Ron would be unstoppable as President with Trump covering his back as VP.

Trump needs to become Speaker of the House to give these whack-a-doodles something to worry about. Let's face it he could have the Speaker position by just saying he wants it and if you like a good smile here's what he could do with Speaker of the house if that's what he was: The Top 10 Reasons Trump Should Be Speaker of the House

And as long as you're explaining things, August, can you do this one of yours: "Woodrow Wilson destroyed any hope of Central European peace - while accepting racism within America" I don't have a problem with it in principal. For me, the first Progressive president, Woodrow Wilson was a dick among dicks - probably the 3rd worse president in American history behind progressive Carter and Prog puppet Biden. I've just never heard that one about him destroying any hope of Central European peace. How'd he do that? He didn't start the first world war. I have heard the one about him being a raging racist though.

I know. I had to laugh...or at least snicker. His whole thread here is a troll. And then he wants to whine and whimper because he gets counter-trolled. "What happens if Trump get charged for Treason" he trolls. And I can't help noticing the midterms are coming up with the Dems looking to lose the House so "What happens if it's Biden that gets impeached?' I ask. To which he responds with the well-known Prog response once caught in their own BS of "Wahhhh!" And I can only chuckle.

Not exactly. I think you're making the same mistake others on this thread have made. You're confusing Climate Change fantasized climate catastrophism with "environmentalism." One pre-dates the religion of Woke. The other is a major section of intersectional Wokism. Watch... I'll give you an example of how the Woke, intersectional, fantasy farce works: