|
Torpor posted:You cannot read! Well the fact that "you your guns" isn't grammatically correct might have made your post hard to read. But I get that you were clarifying the point. But it seemed like you think it's a bad idea to restrict access to lethal weapons by those convicted of domestic violence. Is that wrong? I think someone who say, throws something at their domestic partner but misses, and then is convicted of domestic violence, they shouldn't be allowed to own lethal weapons. Even if they didn't physically hurt anyone yet.
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
SquadronROE posted:Too bad it's not anyone suspected of domestic violence, that'd be a real time saver.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:Too bad it's not anyone suspected of domestic violence, that'd be a real time saver. That is usually a term of bond while a charge is pending.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Torpor posted:That is usually a term of bond while a charge is pending. Someone should get the ACLU and NRA on that, sounds like a violation of 2nd amendment rights.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:Too bad it's not anyone suspected of domestic violence, that'd be a real time saver. A Domestic Violence No-Fly list, perhaps
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Well the fact that "you your guns" isn't grammatically correct might have made your post hard to read. That last example isn't really reckless. Reckless injury would be like swinging a hammer without making sure it was safe to do so and hitting a household member. There was a lesser charge to avoid the gun thing but then scotus did the castleman decision.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Amergin posted:Or use a condom and/or the pill. Fund a massive free-birth control campaign focused around long acting reversible birth control like IUDs. Start it high schools.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Torpor posted:That last example isn't really reckless. Reckless injury would be like swinging a hammer without making sure it was safe to do so and hitting a household member. I don't think your definition of reckless matches the legal one. One of the SCOTUS causes was a man who "recklessly" slapped his wife. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_56cf6822e4b0871f60eaa82b quote:Both men were convicted of domestic violence under Maine statutes that include “reckless” conduct. Their lawyers argue that the men acted in the heat of the moment and their impulsive, reckless acts of domestic violence are not serious enough to qualify under the federal gun ban. Sometimes recklessly can just mean "really really angrily."
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Fund a massive free-birth control campaign focused around long acting reversible birth control like IUDs. Start it high schools.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:A Domestic Violence No-Fly list, perhaps The difference here would be those convicted of domestic violence crimes have been convicted. for Civil Protective orders in Iowa they take people's guns too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Torpor posted:That last example isn't really reckless. Reckless injury would be like swinging a hammer without making sure it was safe to do so and hitting a household member. Because I'm sure there's so many cases where someone accidentally gets whacked during home repair and then spend months to bring it to trial for a conviction.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Fund a massive free-birth control campaign focused around long acting reversible birth control like IUDs. Start it high schools. look you filthy librul my baby girl don't have no sex. you got that? she go to church. she a good girl.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
Noam Chomsky posted:look you filthy librul my baby girl don't have no sex. you got that? she go to church. she a good girl. It's really quite amazing how many virginal pregnancies happen in the US. Truly, the land is blessed by
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Because I'm sure there's so many cases where someone accidentally gets whacked during home repair and then spend months to bring it to trial for a conviction. Prosecutors have deliberately hidden evidence of innocence in order to secure a death penalty conviction though, which also doesn't make much sense. Also domestic relations get real stupid real fast so it would not exactly surprise me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Don't want to ruin it, but here's some paraphrased quotes I heard this live and don't remember some of those lines. My brain must be protecting me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Gyges posted:It's really quite amazing how many virginal pregnancies happen in the US. Truly, the land is blessed by Depends on class really Either, it's amazing how many poor women get pregnant in high school, or it's amazing how many rich girls miss a semester to mono/visit their "grandma" out of state (in a state with less draconian abortion laws) on short notice
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Gyges posted:It's really quite amazing how many virginal pregnancies happen in the US. Truly, the land is blessed by white good. brown bad. need more white than brown. yes. praise jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I don't think your definition of reckless matches the legal one. One of the SCOTUS causes was a man who "recklessly" slapped his wife. Legal recklessness requires you consciously disregard a substantial risk of harm. Anger is usually present in DV cases but is not a requirement. Edit: although I don't think harm is required either if you equate that word with some type of injury. Torpor fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Depends on class really The only moral abortion was MY daughter's abortion!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Torpor posted:Prosecutors have deliberately hidden evidence of innocence in order to secure a death penalty conviction though, which also doesn't make much sense. What does that have to do with your ludicrous complaint that someone doing home repair is going to get convicted of a misdemeanor without having done anything else horrible against their family, again? You gonna tell me that child protective services just breaks up good families next? Because you're using the same rhetoric right here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Torpor posted:Legal recklessness requires you consciously disregard a substantial risk of harm. Anger is usually present in DV cases but is not a requirement. Did you beat your wife or girlfriend or something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:Did you beat your wife or girlfriend or something? No, there was just a terrible misunderstanding during a kitchen remodel
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
You know I had always heard that Warren would probably stay in the Senate primarily because she hates campaigning, but against Trump she really seems to be enjoying herself out there. I know it isn't traditional campaigning for her own seat or anything but it's pretty close to the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Thomas goes into detail on this topic in his dissent, and I think he does have a point; though it is very much overridden by the reality that a domestic violence conviction due to "recklessly unleashing force that recklessly causes injury" lies somewhere between exceptionally rare and never, which is why the majority holds based in part on the intent of the laws.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:You know I had always heard that Warren would probably stay in the Senate primarily because she hates campaigning, but against Trump she really seems to be enjoying herself out there. I know it isn't traditional campaigning for her own seat or anything but it's pretty close to the same thing. It's all of the good part of campaigning (people cheering you at rallies) and none of the bad (doing actual work)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's all of the good part of campaigning (people cheering you at rallies) and none of the bad (doing actual work) So, much like Trump's entire campaign. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:So, much like Trump's entire campaign. which would be a huge problem were she the candidate herself
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
This thread has been pretty poo poo for the past few days so let's repost an article from last week that didn't get enough love and should be mandatory reading for the USPOL thread. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Federal Judge in Mississippi has ruled clerks cannot deny marriage licenses based on personal religion
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:If there are things that are incorrectly/nonsensically coming under the legal definition of 'domestic violence' when they'd be better served by a separate, less serious charge, then that's something that should be addressed separately. It's not a reason to throw up our hands on the issue of keeping guns out of abusers' hands. WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Just straight up consider "buying a gun" to be the same thing as "passing a background check" WhiskeyJuvenile posted:whoops, meant security clearance Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Federal Judge in Mississippi has ruled clerks cannot deny marriage licenses based on personal religion lol that this was a thing that had to be ruled on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Boon posted:This thread has been pretty poo poo for the past few days so let's repost an article from last week that didn't get enough love and should be mandatory reading for the USPOL thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:lol that this was a thing that had to be ruled on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Yeah and if you look at that guy's other articles...well it ain't great
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:I actually thought this was mealymouthed Very Serious Person centrism and didn't really like it. The people don't respect the political class etc. Yeah, the current dysfunction is almost entirely due to the Republicans, as a result of deliberate decisions made 40+ years ago. The Democrats have their issues, but they're normal ones that are always present. There's no sign that the they're going the Republican way. It's a rather bad attempt at declaring both sides to be equally bad, which is simply not true.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:I actually thought this was mealymouthed Very Serious Person centrism and didn't really like it. The people don't respect the political class etc. Me too. He brings up decent points, but then goes and equivocates the Sanders campaign to the Cruz and Trump campaigns. The similarities there are far outweighed by the vast differences, namely the fact that Cruz and Trump are not at all rooted in anything resembling reality. The author largely ignores the fact that many of the issues we face today come from a right wing that has whipped very angry people into shape by feeding them misinformation, bigotry, and lies for thirty years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Boon posted:This thread has been pretty poo poo for the past few days so let's repost an article from last week that didn't get enough love and should be mandatory reading for the USPOL thread. This is good except for this part near the end: quote:“We know who Donald Trump is, and we’re going to use Donald Trump to either take over the G.O.P. or blow it up.” That kind of anti-establishment nihilism deserves no respect or accommodation in American public life. Maybe so but the R's had it coming. vvvvv Pretty much vvvvv Moxie fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
Boon posted:This thread has been pretty poo poo for the past few days so let's repost an article from last week that didn't get enough love and should be mandatory reading for the USPOL thread. Hey, do you know what isn't mentioned in the piece at all? Racism! The reason that Trump has destroyed the Republicans is that the racism inherent in the american electorate was never dealt with or acknowledged since the Civil Rights Act was signed. Other people have touched on how idiotic equating Sanders with Trump is, but if you're going to look at the Republicans right now and tell me that that problem is not enough respect for the establishment (that has been stoking these fires and endangering people for 60 years) you can go gently caress yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
People have no reason to respect the establishment. I wouldn't equate Trump with Sanders by a long shot, but there's no question that most of his votes did not come from a previously untapped pool of latent leftism, but just a lot of people who are tired of getting hosed who consider the Democrats corrupt. While Republicans are obviously to blame for the gridlock, Democrats trying to play the adults in the room let populism to take hold on their side as well. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out after the election.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:Hey, do you know what isn't mentioned in the piece at all? Racism! The reason that Trump has destroyed the Republicans is that the racism inherent in the american electorate was never dealt with or acknowledged since the Civil Rights Act was signed. Other people have touched on how idiotic equating Sanders with Trump is, but if you're going to look at the Republicans right now and tell me that that problem is not enough respect for the establishment (that has been stoking these fires and endangering people for 60 years) you can go gently caress yourself. The platform of George Wallace's American Independent Party from 1968 should sound rather familiar. There's a reason for that. The Republicans made a deliberate choice to court the racists by co-opting Wallace's platform.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:47
|
|