#outlaw the marketing of firearms to children

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

U.S. Sen. Ed Markey on Thursday introduced legislation to outlaw the marketing of firearms to children amid growing outrage from federal lawmakers, gun violence prevention advocates, and parents over a weapon for kids inspired by the AR-15.

The Massachusetts Democrat's Protecting Kids From Gun Marketing Act would direct the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to create rules to "prohibit any manufacturer, dealer, or importer, or agent thereof, from marketing or advertising a firearm or any firearm-related product to a minor in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to a minor."

The bill would also empower state attorneys general and private individuals to take legal action for violations of the rules.

The proposal follows recently renewed criticism of Illinois-based WEE1 Tactical for its JR-15. After coming under fire last year for branding that featured pacifier-sucking baby skulls with gun sights for eye sockets, the gunmaker scrapped the images and now says the firearm represents "a great American tradition," a "small piece of American freedom," and "American family values."

Markey led a May 2022 letter calling on the FTC to investigate WEE1 Tactical for unfair or deceptive marketing tactics and last week, in the wake of a series of mass shootings, he joined a press conference during which Senators repeated that demand.

"I am once again calling on the FTC to step up and use its authority to crack down on gunmakers who market their deadly weapons to America's youth," he said last week. "The deceptive and deadly marketing behind the 'JR-15' is grotesque and reflects the depth of the gun industry's moral depravity."

Markey also took aim at WEE1 Tactical's gun on Thursday, declaring that "a junior version of the AR-15 has no place in a kid's toy box."

"America's gun violence epidemic is claiming tens of thousands of lives each year as gunmakers, dealers, and vendors alike continue to put sales over safety by targeting kids with advertising of a deadly weapon," he said. "It's shameful, irresponsible, and dangerous. The FTC must act immediately to prohibit the marketing of these weapons to children, a step that could save lives."

The legislation is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

The bill is also supported by the organizations Brady, Everytown, Giffords, March For Our Lives, and the Violence Policy Center—whose executive director, Josh Sugarmann, said that "few Americans are aware that there is an ongoing, coordinated effort by the gun lobby and firearms industry targeting America's children and teens. Imagine the public outcry if the alcohol or tobacco industries introduced child-friendly versions of their adult products."

Giffords federal affairs director Adzi Vokhiwa stressed that "the gun industry's deceptive and reckless marketing practices have real consequences: Our nation's gun violence epidemic is worsening while the gun industry's profits soar. Promoting weapons to young people is especially heinous considering that guns are now the number one cause of death for children."

Just over a month into 2023, at least 154 children across the United States have been killed by gun violence and another 364 have been injured so far, according to the Gun Violence Archive. Last year, the totals were 1,675 and 4,479, respectively.

"There's no world in which deadly firearms manufacturers should advertise guns to children," said Zeenat Yahya, policy director for March for Our Lives, which was formed by students after the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

"Unsecured access to guns has killed far too many children and young people over the years," Yahya continued. "The very idea that gun manufacturers want to take advantage of young people by targeting young people who aren't even old enough to drive with ads that sell deadly weapons is sickening."

"It's time for Congress to take a stand and defend young peoples' lives against an immoral industry practice," she added, "and we're pleased to stand with Sen. Markey and our congressional partners in the introduction of this bill."

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

September 9, 2021

Heather Cox Richardson

After weeks of pleading with Americans to get vaccinated as Republican governors opposed mask mandates, ICUs filled up, and people died, today President Joe Biden went on the offensive.

Saying, “My job as President is to protect all Americans,” he announced that he was imposing new vaccination or testing requirements on the unvaccinated. The U.S. government will require all federal employees, as well as any federal contractors, to be vaccinated. The government already requires that all nursing home workers who treat patients on Medicare and Medicaid have to be vaccinated; Biden is expanding that to cover hospital workers, home healthcare aides, and those who work in other medical facilities. “If you’re seeking care at a health facility, you should be able to know that the people treating you are vaccinated.”

Using the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Biden will also make employers with 100 or more employees require that their employees either be vaccinated or show a negative coronavirus test at least once a week. He pointed out that big companies already are doing this, including United Airlines, Disney… and the Fox News Channel.

Together, the new vaccine requirements will affect about 100 million Americans, making up two thirds of all U.S. workers.

Biden also urged those who run large entertainment venues to require vaccines or show a recent negative test for entry. He has already required teachers at the schools run by the Defense Department to get vaccinated, and today he announced that the government will require teachers in the Head Start program, which is federally funded, to be vaccinated. He called on governors to require that all teachers and staff be vaccinated for coronavirus, as their states already require a wide range of vaccinations for other diseases.

Calling out those like Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who has taken a stand against mask mandates and is threatening to withhold the salaries of school officials who defy him, Biden said that “if these governors won’t help us beat the pandemic, I’ll use my power as President to get them out of the way.”

He is using the Defense Production Act to increase production of rapid tests and has worked with major retailers to sell those tests at cost for the next three months. The government has also expanded free testing at 10,000 pharmacies and will spend $2 billion to distribute nearly 300 million rapid tests to community health centers, food banks, and schools. He has ordered the Transportation Safety Administration to double the fines on travelers that refuse to mask.

After deploying nearly 1000 healthcare workers to address this summer’s surges in 18 states, the president is now sending in military health teams from the Defense Department. Meanwhile, he said, the U.S. continues to donate vaccines to the rest of the world, “nearly 140 million vaccines over 90 countries so far, more than all other countries combined, including Europe, China, and Russia.... That’s American leadership on a global stage, and that’s just the beginning.” The U.S. is now shipping 500 million more Pfizer vaccines to 100 lower-income countries.

“Many of us are frustrated with the nearly 80 million Americans who are still not vaccinated, even though the vaccine is safe, effective, and free,” Biden said. More than 175 million Americans are fully vaccinated, and for the past three months we have created 700,000 new jobs a month. But while nearly three quarters of those eligible have gotten at least one shot, the highly contagious Delta variant has ripped through the unvaccinated, who are overcrowding our hospitals, threatening the health of our children, and weakening our economic recovery.

“[D]espite America having an unprecedented and successful vaccination program, despite the fact that for almost five months free vaccines have been available in 80,000 different locations, we still have nearly 80 million Americans who have failed to get the shot…. And to make matters worse, there are elected officials actively working to undermine the fight against COVID-19,” Biden said. “Instead of encouraging people to get vaccinated and mask up, they’re ordering mobile morgues for the unvaccinated dying from COVID in their communities. This is totally unacceptable.”

“[W]e have the tools to combat COVID-19, and a distinct minority of Americans—supported by a distinct minority of elected officials—are keeping us from turning the corner…. We cannot allow these actions to stand in the way of protecting the large majority of Americans who have done their part and want to get back to life as normal.”

“We’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin. And your refusal has cost all of us,” he said. “So, please, do the right thing.”

The Biden administration is pushing back, too, on Texas’s Senate Bill 8, which prohibits abortion after 6 weeks and thus outlaws 85% of abortions in the state. Today, the United States of America sued the state of Texas for acting “in open defiance of the Constitution” when it passed S. B. 8 and deprived “individuals of their constitutional rights.” The United States has a “profound sovereign interest” in making sure that individuals’ constitutional rights can be protected by the federal government, the lawsuit declares. "The act is clearly unconstitutional under longstanding Supreme Court precedent,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said.

What is at stake in this case is the ability of the federal government to defend Americans’ constitutional rights against local vigilantes, a power Americans gave to the federal government in 1868 by ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution after white former Confederates in southern states refused to accept the idea that their Black neighbors should have rights.

Since the 1950s, the Supreme Court has used federal power to protect the rights of minorities and women when state laws discriminated against them. S. B. 8 would strip the government of that power, leaving individuals at the mercy of their neighbors’ prejudices. The government has asked the U.S. district court for the western district of Texas to declare the law “invalid, null, and void,” and to stop the state from enforcing it.

This issue of federal supremacy is not limited to Texas. Glenn Thrush of the New York Times today called out that in June, Missouri governor Mike Parson signed the Second Amendment Preservation Act, which declares federal laws—including taxes—that govern the use of firearms “invalid in this state.” Like the Texas abortion law, the Second Amendment Preservation Act allows individuals to sue state officials who work with federal officials to deprive Missourians of what they consider to be their Second Amendment rights. “Obviously, it’s about far more than simply gun rights,” one of the chief proponents of the bill, far-right activist Aaron Dorr, said to Thrush about his involvement.

There were other wins today for the Biden administration. Today was the deadline for federal agencies to produce a wide range of records surrounding the events of January 6 to the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, and according to the committee’s Twitter feed, those records have, in fact, been forthcoming.

And Taliban officials did allow a plane carrying about 115 Americans and other nationals to leave Afghanistan.

Biden’s new approach to the pandemic is, as Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo points out, good politics as well as good for public health. About 65% of the voting age population is already vaccinated, and older people are both more likely to be vaccinated and more likely to vote. With most Americans vaccinated and increasingly frustrated with those who refuse, there is little political risk to requiring vaccines, while Republicans standing in the way of public health measures are increasingly unpopular. Florida, where deaths from coronavirus soared to more than 300 a day in late August, has begun to limit the information about deaths it releases.

If Biden’s new vaccine requirements slow or halt the spread of the coronavirus, the economic recovery that had been taking off before the Delta variant hit will resume its speed, strengthening his popularity. Those Republican lawmakers furious at the new vaccine requirements are possibly less worried that they won’t work than that they will.

Notes:

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/lawsuit-doj.pdf

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/09/09/remarks-by-president-biden-on-fighting-the-covid-19-pandemic-3/

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/09/politics/biden-administration-texas-abortion-law/index.html

https://january6th.house.gov/news/press-releases/select-committee-issues-sweeping-demand-executive-branch-records

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/09/09/business/economy-stock-market-news

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b3CD2rFn105IQ7ziTfcTT5m8bzv1gBXE5-RXEV0phMM/edit

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/09/us/politics/missouri-gun-law.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/afghanistan-news-taliban-to-let-americans-evacuate-flights-from-kabul-airport/

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/as-covid-deaths-soar-florida-curtails-public-records-on-which-counties-hit-hardest/2547538/

Josh Marshall @joshtpmThe vax mandate is good public health. It’s also good politics. A big majority of the voting age population is already vaxed. About 65%. Propensity to vote and likelihood of being vaxed both rise with age. The vaxed are losing patience w the voluntarily unvaxed who …

288 Retweets1,742 Likes

September 10th 2021

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[personal-blog243]

Sharing...not my list

I have heard from people that they want a reason to vote FOR Biden beyond that he's not Trump. Okay, I respect that, so I went on his website, poured through his policies, and came up with 100 reasons to vote for Biden that don't mention Trump.

1.) $15.00 federal minimum wage

2.) Reinstate DACA – allowing new applicants to apply

3.) 12 Weeks federal paid family leave

4.) Universal Pre-Kindergarten/Childcare for ages 3 and 4

5.) Tuition free college for those with household income less than $125,000.00

6.) Allow student loans to be relieved in bankruptcy

7.) LGBTQ+ Equality Act in the first 100 days in office

8.) Rejoin the Paris Climate Accords

9.) Decriminalize cannabis use and expunge convictions

10.) Eliminate cash bail system

11.) Eliminate mandatory minimum sentences

12.) Outlaw all online firearm and munition sales

13.) Restore the voting rights act

14.) Create a new $20 billion competitive grant program to spur states to shift from incarceration to prevention.

15.) He’ll triple funding for Title I Programs

16.) Appoint the first Black Woman to the Supreme Court of the United States

17.) Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)

18.) Ensure the US achieves a 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions no later than 2050

19.) Protecting Biodiversity, slowing extinction rates and helping leverage natural climate solutions

20.) Develop a plan to ensure that America has the cleanest, safest and fastest rail system in the world, for both passengers and freight

21.) Expand the safety net for survivors

22.) Confront online harassment, abuse and stalking

23.) End the rape kit backlog

24.) Address the deadly combination of guns and domestic violence

25.) Change the culture that enables domestic violence

26.) Support the diverse needs of survivors of violence against women

27.) Protect and empower immigrant women

28.) Lead the global effort to end gender-based violence

29.) End capital punishment

30.) End federal private prisons

31.) End all incarceration for drug use alone and divert individuals to drug courts and treatment

32.) Invest in public defenders’ offices to ensure defendants’ access to quality counsel

33.) Expand and use the power of the US Justice Department to address systemic misconduct in police departments and prosecutors’ offices

34.) Reform qualified immunity for officers

35.) Ban choke-holds/neck restraints by police

36.) Launch a national police oversight commission

37.) Stop transferring weapons of war to police force

38.) Free access to testing for all with national testing board

39.) Double drive through testing sites

40.) 100,000 contact tracing workforce

41.) Guarantee first responders have priority access to PPE

42.) Emergency paid leave for anyone who gets COVID or needs to take care of a loved one

43.) Free housing for health care workers to quarantine

44.) Ramp up large scale manufacturing of as many vaccine candidates as necessary

45.) Nationwide vaccination campaign to guarantee fair distribution

46.) Ask every American to wear a mask

47.) End the mismanagement of the asylum system, which fuels violence and chaos at the border

48.) Surge humanitarian resources to the border and foster public-private initiatives

49.) End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program

50.) Rescind the un-American travel and refugee bans, also referred to as “Muslim bans.”

51.) Order an immediate review of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for vulnerable populations who cannot find safety in their countries ripped apart by violence or disaster

52.) Ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel abide by professional standards and are held accountable for inhumane treatment.

53.) Revitalize the Task Force on New Americans and boost our economy by prioritizing integration, promoting immigrant entrepreneurship, increasing access to language instruction, and promoting civil engagement.

54.) Convene a regional meeting of leaders, including from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Canada, to address the factors driving migration and to propose a regional resettlement solution

55.) Raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent.

56.) Requiring a true minimum tax on ALL foreign earnings of United States companies located overseas so that we do our part to put an end to the global race to the bottom that rewards global tax havens. This will be 21% — TWICE the rate of the Trump offshoring tax rate and will apply to all income.

57.) Imposing a tax penalty on corporations that ship jobs overseas in order to sell products back to America.

58.) Imposing a 15% minimum tax on book income so that no corporation gets away with paying no taxes.

59.) Raising the top individual income rate back to 39.6 percent.

60.) Asking those making more than $1 million to pay the same rate on investment income that they do on their wages.

61.) Tackle the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

62.) Ensure tribal nations will have a strong voice and role in the federal government

63.) Restore Tribal lands and safeguard natural and cultural resources

64.) Joe will dramatically increase funding for both public schools and Bureau of Indian Education schools.

65.) Invest $70 billion in Tribal Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions.

66.) Ensure full inclusion of people with disabilities in policy development and aggressively enforce the civil rights of people with disabilities.

67.) Guarantee access to high-quality, affordable health care, including mental health care, and expand access to home and community-based services and long-term services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to each person’s needs and based on self-determination.

68.) Expand competitive, integrated employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

69.) Protect and strengthen economic security for people with disabilities.

70.) Ensure that students with disabilities have access to educational programs and support they need to succeed, from early interventions to post-secondary education.

71.) Expand access to accessible, integrated, and affordable housing, transportation, and assistive technologies and protect people with disabilities in emergencies.

72.) Advance global disability rights

73.) Double the number of psychologists, guidance counselors, nurses, social workers, and other health professionals in our schools so our kids get the mental health care they need

74.) Invest in our schools to eliminate the funding gap between white and non-white districts, and rich and poor districts

75.) Improve teacher diversity

76.) Support our educators by giving them the pay and dignity they deserve.

77.) Invest in resources for our schools so students grow into physically and emotionally healthy adults, and educators can focus on teaching.

78.) Ensure that no child’s future is determined by their zip code, parents’ income, race, or disability.

79.) Provide every middle and high school student a path to a successful career.

80.) Start investing in our children at birth.

81.) Double funding for the State Small Business Credit Initiative.

82.) Expand the New Markets Tax Credit, make the program permanent, and double Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) funding

83.) Improve and expand the Small Business Administration programs that most effectively support African American-owned businesses.

84.) Increase funding for the Minority Business Development Agency budget.

85.) Make sure economic relief because of COVID-19 reaches the African American businesses that need it most

86.) Reserve half of all the new PPP funds for small businesses with 50 employees or less

87.) Help families buy their first homes and build wealth by creating a new refundable, advanceable tax credit of up to $15,000

88.) Protect homeowners and renters from abusive lenders and landlords through a new Homeowner and Renter Bill of Rights.

89.) Establishing a $100 billion Affordable Housing Fund to construct and upgrade affordable housing

90.) Fully implement Congressman Clyburn’s 10-20-30 Plan to help all individuals living in persistently impoverished communities

91.) Expand access to $100 billion in low-interest business loans by funding state, local, tribal, and non-profit lending programs in Latino communities and other communities of color and strengthening Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs

92.) Expand broadband access to every American.

93.) Protect and build on the Affordable Care Act to improve access to quality health care in rural communities.

94.) Expand access to high-quality education in rural schools.

95.) Transform our crumbling transportation infrastructure – including roads and bridges, rail, aviation, ports, and inland waterways.

96.) Expand bio-based manufacturing to bring cutting-edge manufacturing jobs back to rural America.

97.) Strengthen antitrust enforcement

98.) Introduce a constitutional amendment to entirely eliminate private dollars from our federal elections

99.) End dark money groups

100.) Ban corporate PAC contributions to candidates, and prohibit lobbyist contributions to those who they lobby

[queernerdywitch]

100 reasons to vote for #JoeBiden that don't mention Trump. I didn’t compile the list, and I think there’s LOTS more on climate science, but anyway, what are your favorites? 13, 18, oh geez, all the 50s and 70s... not that he can DO all this....

1.) $15.00 federal minimum wage

2.) Reinstate DACA – allowing new applicants to apply

3.) 12 Weeks federal paid family leave

4.) Universal Pre-Kindergarten/Childcare for ages 3 and 4

5.) Tuition free college for those with household income less than $125,000.00

6.) Allow student loans to be relieved in bankruptcy

7.) LGBTQ+ Equality Act in the first 100 days in office

8.) Rejoin the Paris Climate Accords

9.) Decriminalize cannabis use and expunge convictions

10.) Eliminate cash bail system

11.) Eliminate mandatory inimum sentences

12.) Outlaw all online firearm and munition sales

13.) Restore the voting rights act

14.) Create a new $20 billion competitive grant program to spur states to shift from incarceration to prevention.

15.) He’ll triple funding for Title I Programs

16.) Appoint the first Black Woman to the Supreme Court of the United States

17.) Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)

18.) Ensure the US achieves a 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions no later than 2050

19.) Protecting Biodiversity, slowing extinction rates and helping leverage natural climate solutions

20.) Develop a plan to ensure that America has the cleanest, safest and fastest rail system in the world, for both passengers and freight

21.) Expand the safety net for survivors

22.) Confront online harassment, abuse and stalking

23.) End the rape kit backlog

24.) Address the deadly combination of guns and domestic violence

25.) Change the culture that enables domestic violence

26.) Support the diverse needs of survivors of violence against women

27.) Protect and empower immigrant women

28.) Lead the global effort to end gender-based violence

29.) End capital punishment

30.) End federal private prisons

31.) End all incarceration for drug use alone and divert individuals to drug courts and treatment

32.) Invest in public defenders’ offices to ensure defendants’ access to quality counsel

33.) Expand and use the power of the US Justice Department to address systemic misconduct in police departments and prosecutors’ offices

34.) Reform qualified immunity for officers

35.) Ban choke-holds/neck restraints by police

36.) Launch a national police oversight commission

37.) Stop transferring weapons of war to police force

38.) Free access to testing for all with national testing board

39.) Double drive through testing sites

40.) 100,000 contact tracing workforce

41.) Guarantee first responders have priority access to PPE

42.) Emergency paid leave for anyone who gets COVID or needs to take care of a loved one

43.) Free housing for health care workers to quarantine

44.) Ramp up large scale manufacturing of as many vaccine candidates as necessary

45.) Nationwide vaccination campaign to guarantee fair distribution

46.) Ask every American to wear a mask

47.) End the mismanagement of the asylum system, which fuels violence and chaos at the border

48.) Surge humanitarian resources to the border and foster public-private initiatives

49.) End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program

50.) Rescind the un-American travel and refugee bans, also referred to as “Muslim bans.”

51.) Order an immediate review of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for vulnerable populations who cannot find safety in their countries ripped apart by violence or disaster

52.) Ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel abide by professional standards and are held accountable for inhumane treatment.

53.) Revitalize the Task Force on New Americans and boost our economy by prioritizing integration, promoting immigrant entrepreneurship, increasing access to language instruction, and promoting civil engagement.

54.) Convene a regional meeting of leaders, including from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Canada, to address the factors driving migration and to propose a regional resettlement solution

55.) Raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent.

56.) Requiring a true minimum tax on ALL foreign earnings of United States companies located overseas so that we do our part to put an end to the global race to the bottom that rewards global tax havens. This will be 21% — TWICE the rate of the Trump offshoring tax rate and will apply to all income.

57.) Imposing a tax penalty on corporations that ship jobs overseas in order to sell products back to America.

58.) Imposing a 15% minimum tax on book income so that no corporation gets away with paying no taxes.

59.) Raising the top individual income rate back to 39.6 percent.

60.) Asking those making more than $1 million to pay the same rate on investment income that they do on their wages.

61.) Tackle the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

62.) Ensure tribal nations will have a strong voice and role in the federal government

63.) Restore Tribal lands and safeguard natural and cultural resources

64.) Joe will dramatically increase funding for both public schools and Bureau of Indian Education schools.

65.) Invest $70 billion in Tribal Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions.

66.) Ensure full inclusion of people with disabilities in policy development and aggressively enforce the civil rights of people with disabilities.

67.) Guarantee access to high-quality, affordable health care, including mental health care, and expand access to home and community-based services and long-term services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to each person’s needs and based on self-determination.

68.) Expand competitive, integrated employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

69.) Protect and strengthen economic security for people with disabilities.

70.) Ensure that students with disabilities have access to educational programs and support they need to succeed, from early interventions to post-secondary education.

71.) Expand access to accessible, integrated, and affordable housing, transportation, and assistive technologies and protect people with disabilities in emergencies.

72.) Advance global disability rights

73.) Double the number of psychologists, guidance counselors, nurses, social workers, and other health professionals in our schools so our kids get the mental health care they need

74.) Invest in our schools to eliminate the funding gap between white and non-white districts, and rich and poor districts

75.) Improve teacher diversity

76.) Support our educators by giving them the pay and dignity they deserve.

77.) Invest in resources for our schools so students grow into physically and emotionally healthy adults, and educators can focus on teaching.

78.) Ensure that no child’s future is determined by their zip code, parents’ income, race, or disability.

79.) Provide every middle and high school student a path to a successful career.

80.) Start investing in our children at birth.

81.) Double funding for the State Small Business Credit Initiative.

82.) Expand the New Markets Tax Credit, make the program permanent, and double Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) funding

83.) Improve and expand the Small Business Administration programs that most effectively support African American-owned businesses.

84.) Increase funding for the Minority Business Development Agency budget.

85.) Make sure economic relief because of COVID-19 reaches the African American businesses that need it most

86.) Reserve half of all the new PPP funds for small businesses with 50 employees or less

87.) Help families buy their first homes and build wealth by creating a new refundable, advanceable tax credit of up to $15,000

88.) Protect homeowners and renters from abusive lenders and landlords through a new Homeowner and Renter Bill of Rights.

89.) Establishing a $100 billion Affordable Housing Fund to construct and upgrade affordable housing

90.) Fully implement Congressman Clyburn’s 10-20-30 Plan to help all individuals living in persistently impoverished communities

91.) Expand access to $100 billion in low-interest business loans by funding state, local, tribal, and non-profit lending programs in Latino communities and other communities of color and strengthening Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs

92.) Expand broadband access to every American.

93.) Protect and build on the Affordable Care Act to improve access to quality health care in rural communities.

94.) Expand access to high-quality education in rural schools.

95.) Transform our crumbling transportation infrastructure – including roads and bridges, rail, aviation, ports, and inland waterways.

96.) Expand bio-based manufacturing to bring cutting-edge manufacturing jobs back to rural America.

97.) Strengthen antitrust enforcement

98.) Introduce a constitutional amendment to entirely eliminate private dollars from our federal elections

99.) End dark money groups

100.) Ban corporate PAC contributions to candidates, and prohibit lobbyist contributions to those who they lobby

Compiled by David Frree

***EDIT*** thisis all from his website. I, David, literally copy pasted the bullet points from his website. If you go on his website, click Joe’s Vision, he has different themes. “Criminal justice reform, helping America’s farmers, etc.” I clicked through a bunch of those, and tried to get the quickest bullet points from his website.

[snarksandkisses]

David Ferree, September 22

I have heard from people that they want a reason to vote FOR Biden beyond that he's not Trump. Okay, I respect that, so I went on his website, poured through his policies, and came up with 100 reasons to vote for #JoeBiden that don't mention Trump. 

1.) $15.00 federal minimum wage

2.) Reinstate DACA – allowing new applicants to apply

3.) 12 Weeks federal paid family leave4

.) Universal Pre-Kindergarten/Childcare for ages 3 and 4

5.) Tuition free college for those with household income less than $125,000.00

6.) Allow student loans to be relieved in bankruptcy

7.) LGBTQ+ Equality Act in the first 100 days in office

8.) Rejoin the Paris Climate Accords

9.) Decriminalize cannabis use and expunge convictions

10.) Eliminate cash bail system

11.) Eliminate mandatory minimum sentences

12.) Outlaw all online firearm and munition sales

13.) Restore the voting rights act

14.) Create a new $20 billion competitive grant program to spur states to shift from incarceration to prevention.

15.) He’ll triple funding for Title I Programs

16.)  Appoint the first Black Woman to the Supreme Court of the United States

17.)  Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)

18.) Ensure the US achieves a 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions no later than 2050

19.) Protecting Biodiversity, slowing extinction rates and helping leverage natural climate solutions

20.) Develop a plan to ensure that America has the cleanest, safest and fastest rail system in the world, for both passengers and freight

21.)  Expand the safety net for survivors

22.) Confront online harassment, abuse and stalking

23.) End the rape kit backlog

24.) Address the deadly combination of guns and domestic violence

25.) Change the culture that enables domestic violence

26.) Support the diverse needs of survivors of violence against women

27.) Protect and empower immigrant women

28.) Lead the global effort to end gender-based violence

29.) End capital punishment

30.) End federal private prisons

31.) End all incarceration for drug use alone and divert individuals to drug courts and treatment

32.) Invest in public defenders’ offices to ensure defendants’ access to quality counsel

33.) Expand and use the power of the US Justice Department to address systemic misconduct in police departments and prosecutors’ offices

34.) Reform qualified immunity for officers

35.) Ban choke-holds/neck restraints by police

36.) Launch a national police oversight commission

37.) Stop transferring weapons of war to police force

38.) Free access to testing for all with national testing board

39.) Double drive through testing sites

40.) 100,000 contact tracing workforce

41.) Guarantee first responders have priority access to PPE

42.) Emergency paid leave for anyone who gets COVID or needs to take care of a loved one

43.) Free housing for health care workers to quarantine

44.) Ramp up large scale manufacturing of as many vaccine candidates as necessary

45.) Nationwide vaccination campaign to guarantee fair distribution

46.) Ask every American to wear a mask

47.) End the mismanagement of the asylum system, which fuels violence and chaos at the border

48.) Surge humanitarian resources to the border and foster public-private initiatives

49.) End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program

50.) Rescind the un-American travel and refugee bans, also referred to as “Muslim bans.”

51.) Order an immediate review of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for vulnerable populations who cannot find safety in their countries ripped apart by violence or disaster

52.) Ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel abide by professional standards and are held accountable for inhumane treatment.

53.) Revitalize the Task Force on New Americans and boost our economy by prioritizing integration, promoting immigrant entrepreneurship, increasing access to language instruction, and promoting civil engagement.

54.) Convene a regional meeting of leaders, including from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Canada, to address the factors driving migration and to propose a regional resettlement solution

55.) Raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent.

56.) Requiring a true minimum tax on ALL foreign earnings of United States companies located overseas so that we do our part to put an end to the global race to the bottom that rewards global tax havens. This will be 21% — TWICE the rate of the Trump offshoring tax rate and will apply to all income.

57.) Imposing a tax penalty on corporations that ship jobs overseas in order to sell products back to America.

58.) Imposing a 15% minimum tax on book income so that no corporation gets away with paying no taxes.

59.) Raising the top individual income rate back to 39.6 percent.

60.) Asking those making more than $1 million to pay the same rate on investment income that they do on their wages.

61.) Tackle the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

62.) Ensure tribal nations will have a strong voice and role in the federal government

63.) Restore Tribal lands and safeguard natural and cultural resources

64.) Joe will dramatically increase funding for both public schools and Bureau of Indian Education schools.

65.)  Invest $70 billion in Tribal Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions.

66.) Ensure full inclusion of people with disabilities in policy development and aggressively enforce the civil rights of people with disabilities.

67.) Guarantee access to high-quality, affordable health care, including mental health care, and expand access to home and community-based services and long-term services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to each person’s needs and based on self-determination.

68.) Expand competitive, integrated employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

69.) Protect and strengthen economic security for people with disabilities.

70.) Ensure that students with disabilities have access to educational programs and support they need to succeed, from early interventions to post-secondary education.

71.) Expand access to accessible, integrated, and affordable housing, transportation, and assistive technologies and protect people with disabilities in emergencies.

72.) Advance global disability rights

73.)  Double the number of psychologists, guidance counselors, nurses, social workers, and other health professionals in our schools so our kids get the mental health care they need

74.) Invest in our schools to eliminate the funding gap between white and non-white districts, and rich and poor districts

75.) Improve teacher diversity

76.) Support our educators by giving them the pay and dignity they deserve.

77.) Invest in resources for our schools so students grow into physically and emotionally healthy adults, and educators can focus on teaching.

78.) Ensure that no child’s future is determined by their zip code, parents’ income, race, or disability.

79.) Provide every middle and high school student a path to a successful career.8

80.) Start investing in our children at birth.

81.) Double funding for the State Small Business Credit Initiative.

2.) Expand the New Markets Tax Credit, make the program permanent, and double Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) funding

83.) Improve and expand the Small Business Administration programs that most effectively support African American-owned businesses.

84.) Increase funding for the Minority Business Development Agency budget.

85.) Make sure economic relief because of COVID-19 reaches the African American businesses that need it most

86.) Reserve half of all the new PPP funds for small businesses with 50 employees or less

87.) Help families buy their first homes and build wealth by creating a new refundable, advanceable tax credit of up to $15,000

88.) Protect homeowners and renters from abusive lenders and landlords through a new Homeowner and Renter Bill of Rights.

89.) Establishing a $100 billion Affordable Housing Fund to construct and upgrade affordable housing

90.) Fully implement Congressman Clyburn’s 10-20-30 Plan to help all individuals living in persistently impoverished communities

91.) Expand access to $100 billion in low-interest business loans by funding state, local, tribal, and non-profit lending programs in Latino communities and other communities of color and strengthening Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs

92.) Expand broadband access to every American.

93.) Protect and build on the Affordable Care Act to improve access to quality health care in rural communities.

94.) Expand access to high-quality education in rural schools.

95.) Transform our crumbling transportation infrastructure – including roads and bridges, rail, aviation, ports, and inland waterways.

96.) Expand bio-based manufacturing to bring cutting-edge manufacturing jobs back to rural America.

97.) Strengthen antitrust enforcement

98.) Introduce a constitutional amendment to entirely eliminate private dollars from our federal elections

99.) End dark money groups

100.) Ban corporate PAC contributions to candidates, and prohibit lobbyist contributions to those who they lobby

***EDIT*** this again is all from his website. I literally copy pasted the bullet points from his website. If you go on his website, click Joe’s Vision, he has different themes. “Criminal justice reform, helping America’s farmers, etc.” I clicked through a bunch of those, and tried to get the quickest bullet points from his website.

[mikkeneko]

Copied this post from Facebook, original source here.

I want to share, particularly because of the way he explains things. As a veteran and a gun owner, he knows much more about guns than I do. Hopefully his arguments and information can help any of my friends trying to sway people on gun control laws.

“Completely agree with the sentiment here, Mom. However, in order to make educated arguments for gun control, it's important to actually know what you're proposing and use the right language. Otherwise, you'll just get completely shut down as "not knowing anything about guns" to people you're trying to convince. And if you don't know anything about guns, you can't really advocate for responsible gun policy.

AR15s are not the problem alone. Yes, it's the most popular military-style rifle, and it is designed to kill people effectively. But banning one model of weapon will just make people switch to other, equally effective killing machines. If you banned the Toyota Camry, would people stop buying midsize sedans? No, you'd just end up with more Honda Accords on the road. If you want to fix the problem, you have to ban all semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic means the weapon is loaded with a magazine (or belt in some cases) with multiple rounds; and for every trigger squeeze, one bullet is discharged. There is no real need for these weapons in civilian use. They aren't necessary for hunting, where the point is to kill the animal with one shot. It is only useful for killing a lot of things in a short amount of time or having fun at a gun range. I think our children's lives are more important than a fraction of the population's fun shooting a bunch of rounds quickly at a range. They'll cope.

Handguns are far more responsible for gun deaths in America than semi-auto rifles. You mentioned the kid who brought a gun to school as only having a "handgun, not a semi-automatic." Well, almost all handguns are semi-automatic. They have magazines and one bullet per trigger squeeze. Though most handgun rounds aren't as deadly as rifle rounds, it's inconsequential at short range. And handguns are far easier to conceal than a rifle. With the exception of maybe revolvers (which have 5-6 round max before reloading), I believe handguns should be outlawed. The Virginia Tech massacre, the most deadly school shooting in American history, was accomplished with handguns only. Don't underestimate their lethality. I think military style rifles only account for about 2% of gun deaths each year. If you want to solve the problem, semi-auto handguns have to go, as well.

If we really want to make a difference in gun deaths, we need to do WAY more than universal background checks and better mental health screening. Banning all semi-automatic weapons would make that difference. Keeping shotguns, revolvers, and bolt-action rifles legal accomplish all the typical, common uses of guns. (Bolt-action rifles are typical hunting rifles that you have to reload between shots.) With these types of firearms legal, you can still hunt, defend your home, and compete in sport shooting.

Combine the following with the semi-auto ban.

Government buy-back program of all semi-automatic weapons. Once a grace period for turn-ins ends, possession will be a felony without a special (and rare) license for Federally approved dealers and collectors.

Gun licenses for all who want to continue to own approved firearms. Licenses will be granted by completing a comprehensive background check, psych evaluation, safety training, marksmanship training, and meeting strict storage requirements. Storage requirements would include safes, weapons unloaded, with ammo stored separately. Licenses expire after a certain number of years and all the requirements must be completed again for license renewal. 

Registration of all firearms.

Insurance for all firearms. If your gun is used in a crime or if there's a accident with your gun, your insurance company is liable for damages. Let the insurance market set rates based on their analysis of risk. Then, people can decide if it's financially worth it to own a gun. 

Finally, here's your counterarguments for the most common pro-gun arguments:

Pro-gun argument - assault weapons aren't an actual thing. Banning them won't make a difference.

Counterargument - none. This is true. Classifying a gun as an "assault weapon" is something people who know nothing about guns do. Having a bayonet stud (a place to mount a bayonet) used to be one way to classify a gun as an assault weapon. Last I checked, we don't have a bayonet problem in this country. Talk about banning semi-auto guns instead of made-up things like "assault weapons."

Pro-gun argument - 2nd Amendment guarantees my right to bear arms!

Counterargument - sure, it does, but there can be limitations. And in case anyone needs a history lesson, the individual right to bear arms has only existed since 2008. From the adoption of the Constitution until the DC v. Heller decision in 2008, the 2nd Amendment had never been interpreted to mean private citizens have a right to own guns. (Thanks, Scalia.) But that decision is now the law of the land and precedent for future court decisions. Nevertheless, even in Scalia's majority opinion, he asserts that there are limitations to the 2nd Amendment. Weapons allowed should be those in common use at the time. And limitations should be made on "dangerous and unusual" weapons, per previous precedent in United States v. Miller. I argue that semi-auto firearms should now be considered "dangerous and unusual," given their lethality. 

Pro-gun argument - if law-abiding citizens get rid of their guns, criminals won't follow the law, and we'll be in more danger. 

Counterargument - this is an argument against having laws. Since criminals don't follow the law, there should be no limits on anything. Also, when we do outlaw things, it can work. Purchases of large quantities of ammonium nitrate fertilizer was restricted after the Oklahoma City bombing, and there hasn't been a similar bombing since. We outlawed fully automatic weapons, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. in the 20th century, and what has happened? We don't see violence with those types of weapons. Most weapons used to commit crimes are purchased lawfully. If we change the laws, it will work to reduce gun deaths.

Pro-gun argument - if we ban guns, people will just use knives or baseball bats

Counterargument - there are plenty of incidents around the world of mass stabbings or clubbings, etc. Show me one that is as lethal as a mass shooting. 

Pro-gun argument - we need armed security guards in every school

Counterargument - do you trust the security guard won't become a mass shooter? The Texas church shooter was an Air Force veteran. The Pulse nightclub shooter was a security guard. Further, it's relatively easy to get the drop on a security guard. Shoot him first when he's not expecting, then keep going. That's what the Pulse nightclub shooter did. It's not difficult if you draw first. Columbine had armed security, too. Adding more guns to schools adds more risk, it doesn't reduce it. 

Pro-gun argument - it's a mental health issue, not a gun issue *or* guns don't kill people, people kill people

Counterargument - The United States has the same rates of mental illness as other developed Western countries, but we're the only ones with this type of violence. The mentally ill are actually less likely to commit crime than those who aren't mentally ill, which many find surprising. Also, those who are mentally ill are more likely to become the victim of a crime than those who don't have mental illness. It's a common refrain to hear "anyone who would do that must be crazy." That's not true. Being a murderer doesn't actually mean you are mentally ill, which is why you hardly ever see successful insanity defenses in trials. And if "people kill people," then we really should stop giving all these people guns, right? We don't allow private F-22s or nuclear weapons, do we? Why? Because people would use them to kill other people. People use people-killing machines to kill people. Go figure. 

Pro-gun argument - We, as a society, have turned our backs on God. This is why crime is getting worse. We need God/Jesus to heal people's hearts, not get rid of law-abiding citizens' guns.

Counterargument - Crime has actually decreased overall in recent decades. Things are getting better, not worse. Murder rates and violent crime overall have trended down as we've advanced as a society. Mass shootings have remained steady, though, because angry people have easy access to guns. 

Pro-gun argument - we need guns to fight against the government in case it becomes tyrannical. 

Counterargument - I doubt semi-automatic weapons will defeat a tyrannical government with fighter jets, bombers, tanks, artillery, drones, advanced cyber capabilities, and nuclear weapons. 

Pro-gun argument - gun registrations will make it easier for the government to disarm us

Counterargument - The registration is necessary to keep track of deadly weapons in case they are used in a crime, or in case a law-abiding citizen commits a crime that revokes their right to guns. There's over 300 million privately owned guns in America. If the government wanted to take everyone's guns, they'd do it the same way they would if there wasn't a registry: by going door to door and searching everyone. 

I truly believe we need to do far more than anything advocated by most mainstream gun control organizations like Everytown and Moms Demand Action. We need to follow the lead of countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada. They've figured it out. Why can't we?”

[quakerjoe]

Facebook post made by Callista Kline on February 16, 2018 at 6:05 pm

My brother’s response to my mom’s email about the recent shooting. I want to share, particularly because of the way he explains things. As a veteran and a gun owner, he knows much more about guns than I do. Hopefully his arguments and information can help any of my friends trying to sway people on gun control laws.

“Completely agree with the sentiment here, Mom. However, in order to make educated arguments for gun control, it’s important to actually know what you’re proposing and use the right language. Otherwise, you’ll just get completely shut down as “not knowing anything about guns” to people you’re trying to convince. And if you don’t know anything about guns, you can’t really advocate for responsible gun policy.

AR15s are not the problem alone. Yes, it’s the most popular military-style rifle, and it is designed to kill people effectively. But banning one model of weapon will just make people switch to other, equally effective killing machines. If you banned the Toyota Camry, would people stop buying midsize sedans? No, you’d just end up with more Honda Accords on the road. If you want to fix the problem, you have to ban all semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic means the weapon is loaded with a magazine (or belt in some cases) with multiple rounds; and for every trigger squeeze, one bullet is discharged. There is no real need for these weapons in civilian use. They aren’t necessary for hunting, where the point is to kill the animal with one shot. It is only useful for killing a lot of things in a short amount of time or having fun at a gun range. I think our children’s lives are more important than a fraction of the population’s fun shooting a bunch of rounds quickly at a range. They’ll cope.

Handguns are far more responsible for gun deaths in America than semi-auto rifles. You mentioned the kid who brought a gun to school as only having a “handgun, not a semi-automatic.” Well, almost all handguns are semi-automatic. They have magazines and one bullet per trigger squeeze. Though most handgun rounds aren’t as deadly as rifle rounds, it’s inconsequential at short range. And handguns are far easier to conceal than a rifle. With the exception of maybe revolvers (which have 5-6 rounds max before reloading), I believe handguns should be outlawed. The Virginia Tech massacre, the most deadly school shooting in American history, was accomplished with handguns only. Don’t underestimate their lethality. I think military-style rifles only account for about 2% of gun deaths each year. If you want to solve the problem, semi-auto handguns have to go, as well.

If we really want to make a difference in gun deaths, we have to do WAY more than universal background checks and better mental health screening. Banning all semi-automatic weapons would make that difference. Keeping shotguns, revolvers, and bolt-action rifles legal accomplish all the typical, common uses of guns. (Bolt-action rifles are typical hunting rifles that you have to reload between shots.) With these types of firearms legal, you can still hunt, defend your home, and compete in sport shooting.

Combine the following with the semi-auto ban.

1.       Government buy back program of all semi-automatic weapons. Once a grace period for turn-ins ends, possession will be a felony without a special (and rare) license for Federally approved dealers and collectors.

2.       Gun licenses for all who want to continue to own approved firearms. Licenses will be granted by completing a comprehensive background check, psych evaluation, safety training, marksmanship training, and meeting strict storage requirements.

3.       Storage requirements would include safes, weapons unloaded, with ammo stored separately. Licenses expire after a certain number of years and all the requirements must be completed again for license renewal.

4.       Registration of all firearms.

5.       Insurance for all firearms. If your gun is used in a crime or if there’s a accident with your gun, your insurance company is liable for damages. Let the insurance market set rates based on their analysis of risk. Then, people can decide if it’s financially worth it to own a gun.

Finally, here’s your counterarguments for the most common pro-gun arguments:

A.      Pro-gun argument – assault weapons aren’t an actual thing. Banning them won’t make a difference. Counterargument – none. This is true. Classifying a gun as an “assault weapon” is something people who know nothing about guns do. Having a bayonet stud (a place to mount a bayonet) used to be one way to classify a gun as an assault weapon. Last I checked, we don’t have a bayonet problem in this country. Talk about banning semi-auto guns instead of made up things like “assault weapons.”

B.      Pro-gun argument – 2nd Amendment guarantees my right to bear arms! Counterargument – sure, it does, but there can be limitations. And in case anyone needs a history lesson, the individual right to bear arms has only existed since 2008. From the adoption of the Constitution until the DC v. Heller decision in 2008, the 2nd Amendment had never been interpreted to mean private citizens have a right to own guns. (Thanks, Scalia.) But that decision is now the law of the land and precedent for future court decisions. Nevertheless, even in Scalia’s majority opinion, he asserts that there are limits to the 2nd Amendment. Weapons allowed should be those in common use at the time. And limitations should be made on “dangerous and unusual” weapons, per previous precedent in United States v. Miller. I argue that semi-auto firearms should now be considered “dangerous and unusual,” given their lethality.

C.      Pro-gun argument – if law-abiding citizens get rid of their guns, criminals won’t follow the law, and we’ll be in more danger. Counterargument – this is an argument against having laws. Since criminals don’t follow the law, there should be no limits on anything. Also, when we do outlaw things, it can work. Purchases of large quantities of ammonium nitrate fertilizer was restricted after the Oklahoma City bombing, and there hasn’t been a similar bombing since. We outlawed fully automatic weapons, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. in the 20th century, and what has happened? We don’t see violence with those types of weapons. Most weapons used to commit crimes are purchased lawfully. If we change the laws, it will work to reduce gun deaths.

D.      Pro-gun argument – if we ban guns, people will just use knives or baseball bats Counterargument – there are plenty of incidents around the world of mass stabbings or clubbings, etc. Show me one that is as lethal as a mass shooting.

E.       Pro-gun argument – we need armed security guards in every school Counterargument – do you trust the security guard won’t become a mass shooter? The Texas church shooter was an Air Force veteran. The Pulse nightclub shooter was a security guard. Further, it’s relatively easy to get the drop on a security guard. Shoot him first when he’s not expecting, then keep going. That’s what the Pulse nightclub shooter did. It’s not difficult if you draw first. Columbine had armed security, too. Adding more guns to schools adds more risk, it doesn’t reduce it.

F.       Pro-gun argument – it’s a mental health issue, not a gun issue *or* guns don’t kill people, people kill people Counterargument – The United States has the same rates of mental illness as other developed Western countries, but we’re the only ones with this type of violence. The mentally ill are actually less likely to commit crime than those who aren’t mentally ill, which many find surprising. Also, those who are mentally ill are more likely to become the victim of a crime than those who don’t have mental illness. It’s a common refrain to hear “anyone who would do that must be crazy.” That’s not true. Being a murderer doesn’t actually mean you are mentally ill, which is why you hardly ever see successful insanity defenses in trials. And if “people kill people,” then we really should stop giving all these people guns, right? We don’t allow private F-22s or nuclear weapons, do we? Why? Because people would use them to kill other people. People use people-killing machines to kill people. Go figure.

G.      Pro-gun argument – We, as a society, have turned our backs on God. This is why crime is getting worse. We need God/Jesus to heal people’s hearts, not get rid of law-abiding citizens’ guns. Counterargument – Crime has actually decreased overall in recent decades. Things are getting better, not worse. Murder rates and violent crime overall have trended down as we’ve advanced as a society. Mass shootings have remained steady, though, because angry people have easy access to guns.

H.      Pro-gun argument – we need guns to fight against the government in case it becomes tyrannical. Counterargument – I doubt semi-automatic weapons will defeat a tyrannical government with fighter jets, bombers, tanks, artillery, drones, advanced cyber capabilities, and nuclear weapons.

I.         Pro-gun argument – gun registrations will make it easier for the government to disarm us Counterargument – The registration is necessary to keep track of deadly weapons in case they are used in a crime, or in case a law-abiding citizen commits a crime that revokes their right to guns. There’s over 300 million privately owned guns in America. If the government wanted to take everyone’s guns, they’d do it the same way they would if there wasn’t a registry: by going door to door and searching everyone.

I truly believe we need to do far more than anything advocated by most mainstream gun control organizations like Everytown and Moms Demand Action. We need to follow the lead of countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada. They’ve figured it out. Why can’t we?

[chameleonsoulparadise]

“I have heard from people that they want a reason to vote FOR Biden beyond that he's not Trump. Okay, I respect that, so I went on his website, poured through his policies, and came up with 100 reasons to vote for #JoeBiden that don't mention Trump.

1.) $15.00 federal minimum wage

2.) Reinstate DACA – allowing new applicants to apply

3.) 12 Weeks federal paid family leave

4.) Universal Pre-Kindergarten/Childcare for ages 3 and 4

5.) Tuition free college for those with household income less than $125,000.00

6.) Allow student loans to be relieved in bankruptcy

7.) LGBTQ+ Equality Act in the first 100 days in office

8.) Rejoin the Paris Climate Accords

9.) Decriminalize cannabis use and expunge convictions

10.) Eliminate cash bail system

11.) Eliminate mandatory inimum sentences

12.) Outlaw all online firearm and munition sales

13.) Restore the voting rights act

14.) Create a new $20 billion competitive grant program to spur states to shift from incarceration to prevention.

15.) He’ll triple funding for Title I Programs

16.) Appoint the first Black Woman to the Supreme Court of the United States

17.) Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)

18.) Ensure the US achieves a 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions no later than 2050

19.) Protecting Biodiversity, slowing extinction rates and helping leverage natural climate solutions

20.) Develop a plan to ensure that America has the cleanest, safest and fastest rail system in the world, for both passengers and freight

21.) Expand the safety net for survivors

22.) Confront online harassment, abuse and stalking

23.) End the rape kit backlog

24.) Address the deadly combination of guns and domestic violence

25.) Change the culture that enables domestic violence

26.) Support the diverse needs of survivors of violence against women

27.) Protect and empower immigrant women

28.) Lead the global effort to end gender-based violence

29.) End capital punishment

30.) End federal private prisons

31.) End all incarceration for drug use alone and divert individuals to drug courts and treatment

32.) Invest in public defenders’ offices to ensure defendants’ access to quality counsel

33.) Expand and use the power of the US Justice Department to address systemic misconduct in police departments and prosecutors’ offices

34.) Reform qualified immunity for officers

35.) Ban choke-holds/neck restraints by police

36.) Launch a national police oversight commission

37.) Stop transferring weapons of war to police force

38.) Free access to testing for all with national testing board

39.) Double drive through testing sites

40.) 100,000 contact tracing workforce

41.) Guarantee first responders have priority access to PPE

42.) Emergency paid leave for anyone who gets COVID or needs to take care of a loved one

43.) Free housing for health care workers to quarantine

44.) Ramp up large scale manufacturing of as many vaccine candidates as necessary

45.) Nationwide vaccination campaign to guarantee fair distribution

46.) Ask every American to wear a mask

47.) End the mismanagement of the asylum system, which fuels violence and chaos at the border

48.) Surge humanitarian resources to the border and foster public-private initiatives

49.) End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program

50.) Rescind the un-American travel and refugee bans, also referred to as “Muslim bans.”

51.) Order an immediate review of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for vulnerable populations who cannot find safety in their countries ripped apart by violence or disaster

52.) Ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel abide by professional standards and are held accountable for inhumane treatment.

53.) Revitalize the Task Force on New Americans and boost our economy by prioritizing integration, promoting immigrant entrepreneurship, increasing access to language instruction, and promoting civil engagement.

54.) Convene a regional meeting of leaders, including from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Canada, to address the factors driving migration and to propose a regional resettlement solution

55.) Raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent.

56.) Requiring a true minimum tax on ALL foreign earnings of United States companies located overseas so that we do our part to put an end to the global race to the bottom that rewards global tax havens. This will be 21% — TWICE the rate of the Trump offshoring tax rate and will apply to all income.

57.) Imposing a tax penalty on corporations that ship jobs overseas in order to sell products back to America.

58.) Imposing a 15% minimum tax on book income so that no corporation gets away with paying no taxes.

59.) Raising the top individual income rate back to 39.6 percent.

60.) Asking those making more than $1 million to pay the same rate on investment income that they do on their wages.

61.) Tackle the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

62.) Ensure tribal nations will have a strong voice and role in the federal government

63.) Restore Tribal lands and safeguard natural and cultural resources

64.) Joe will dramatically increase funding for both public schools and Bureau of Indian Education schools.

65.) Invest $70 billion in Tribal Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions.

66.) Ensure full inclusion of people with disabilities in policy development and aggressively enforce the civil rights of people with disabilities.

67.) Guarantee access to high-quality, affordable health care, including mental health care, and expand access to home and community-based services and long-term services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to each person’s needs and based on self-determination.

68.) Expand competitive, integrated employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

69.) Protect and strengthen economic security for people with disabilities.

70.) Ensure that students with disabilities have access to educational programs and support they need to succeed, from early interventions to post-secondary education.

71.) Expand access to accessible, integrated, and affordable housing, transportation, and assistive technologies and protect people with disabilities in emergencies.

72.) Advance global disability rights

73.) Double the number of psychologists, guidance counselors, nurses, social workers, and other health professionals in our schools so our kids get the mental health care they need

74.) Invest in our schools to eliminate the funding gap between white and non-white districts, and rich and poor districts

75.) Improve teacher diversity

76.) Support our educators by giving them the pay and dignity they deserve.

77.) Invest in resources for our schools so students grow into physically and emotionally healthy adults, and educators can focus on teaching.

78.) Ensure that no child’s future is determined by their zip code, parents’ income, race, or disability.

79.) Provide every middle and high school student a path to a successful career.

80.) Start investing in our children at birth.

81.) Double funding for the State Small Business Credit Initiative.

82.) Expand the New Markets Tax Credit, make the program permanent, and double Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) funding

83.) Improve and expand the Small Business Administration programs that most effectively support African American-owned businesses.

84.) Increase funding for the Minority Business Development Agency budget.

85.) Make sure economic relief because of COVID-19 reaches the African American businesses that need it most

86.) Reserve half of all the new PPP funds for small businesses with 50 employees or less

87.) Help families buy their first homes and build wealth by creating a new refundable, advanceable tax credit of up to $15,000

88.) Protect homeowners and renters from abusive lenders and landlords through a new Homeowner and Renter Bill of Rights.

89.) Establishing a $100 billion Affordable Housing Fund to construct and upgrade affordable housing

90.) Fully implement Congressman Clyburn’s 10-20-30 Plan to help all individuals living in persistently impoverished communities

91.) Expand access to $100 billion in low-interest business loans by funding state, local, tribal, and non-profit lending programs in Latino communities and other communities of color and strengthening Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs

92.) Expand broadband access to every American.

93.) Protect and build on the Affordable Care Act to improve access to quality health care in rural communities.

94.) Expand access to high-quality education in rural schools.

95.) Transform our crumbling transportation infrastructure – including roads and bridges, rail, aviation, ports, and inland waterways.

96.) Expand bio-based manufacturing to bring cutting-edge manufacturing jobs back to rural America.

97.) Strengthen antitrust enforcement

98.) Introduce a constitutional amendment to entirely eliminate private dollars from our federal elections

99.) End dark money groups

100.) Ban corporate PAC contributions to candidates, and prohibit lobbyist contributions to those who they lobby

***EDIT*** this again is all from his website. I literally copy pasted the bullet points from his website. If you go on his website, click Joe’s Vision, he has different themes. “Criminal justice reform, helping America’s farmers, etc.” I clicked through a bunch of those, and tried to get the quickest bullet points from his website.”

[skepticraven]

GOP vs Chicago

I know this is a long post but stick with me. I think you’ll find it informative. 

Turns out Chicago doesn't have the highest murder rate in the country. Anyone who says that is manipulating the facts. Chicago has the 3rd largest population. Everybody dies so more people equals more deaths by cancer, heart disease, car accidents, and yes, murder. However, you have to factor in the population with the number of gun deaths to determine whether dying there by the bullet is more likely than anywhere else.  On a per capita basis, Chicago’s shooting epidemic is not nearly as severe as the violence in many other American cities. In the words of Trevor Noah, “Would you rather be in a big city with 5 Pennywise the Clowns running around. Or in an Uber carpool with just one?” (See chart below before reading on).

Gun deaths anywhere are a problem. A big one. But gun deaths in Chicago aren't so common that it warrants Trump and other Republicans talking about that city and only that city. So why are they talking about Chicago all the fucking time? There are 3 main carefully calculated reasons:

1) Illinois is a blue state which is a more comfortable point of criticism for Republicans than is cities like St. Louis or New Orleans, which are in Red states. There is no way Republican politicians would publicly draw a line between red states with lax gun laws and high per capita rates of gun violence. That is the reality they are trying to distract you from.

2) Also, Republicans want you to believe that Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country (which isn't true but we'll get to that). Republicans believe they can use the lie about Chicago having the strictest gun laws, combined with the lie about Chicago having the highest rate of gun deaths, in order to discredit any suggestion of regulating firearms. The problem is that Chicago doesn't have the most gun deaths, nor do they have the toughest gun laws in the country. People can own handguns in Chicago. You can get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Chicago if you take an extremely short class. Their supposedly strict gun laws boil down to a few things: requiring a state-issued "Firearm Owners Identification" card to purchase a weapon. (That said, Chicago residents can just drive a couple hours away to skirt that regulation). Stolen weapons must be reported within 72 hours. There is an assault weapons ban only in Cook County, Illinois. New York and Los Angeles have stricter gun laws and both have a lower per capita firearm-related death tolls. 

Now would nationwide stricter gun laws eliminate ALL gun violence? No. Of course not, but when has a complete ceasing of criminal behavior been the point of any law? The idea has always been a reduction of a negative behavior. There will always the black market but nationwide regulation would stop some people. I mean, there are people on the terrorist watch list who can buy a gun because we regulate so little. Any rational person can see the problem with that. We know for a fact that gun regulation can and does reduce the number of gun-related deaths when said regulation is implemented nationwide. We know this by looking at the levels of firearm-related fatalities in other countries. (See graph below). The countries who regulate have less violence. The number of gun deaths in Germany, for example, is about on par with how many Americans die from being hit with a falling object. A Japanese person is as likely to be shot and killed, as an American is to be struck by lightning.

3) The third reason the GOP targets Chicago with misinformation is that Obama is from Chicago. The Trump Administration is systematically dismantling or trying to dismantle everything Obama or his administration ever did: The Paris Climate Agreement, The Iran Deal, ObamaCare, the ban on oil and gas drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, allowing transgender people to serve military, the standards that were set to ensure livestock deemed “USDA Organic” is treated more humanely than those in conventional farming, etc. etc. etc. Be it big or small, Trump wants to end it all. So, going after Chicago is a way for Trump and the Republicans to say Obama failed. In fact, there is footage in that Trevor Noah clip I posted above of them blaming the gun violence in Chicago on Obama. Trump went so far as to say that Chicago is worse than Afghanistan. That seems to awfully disrespectful to the soldiers serving in Afghanistan but then again, the military was only ever a political chess piece to Trump.

                                         SUGGESTIONS

We do a lot of arguing in this country about guns but rarely do we get into the specifics of what people mean when they say we need stricter gun control legislation. So I thought it was important to clarify that. Republicans frequently fear monger about the Liberals wanting to take all guns but that just is not true for the overwhelming majority of us. Obviously, there are differences of opinion between liberal-to-liberal but this is my thoughts as to what needs to be implemented: 

-Mandatory background checks for firearm purchases (even for private sales and gun shows) are necessary to stop mentally ill folks, felons, people on the terrorist watch list, etc. from getting guns.

-We need to allow mental health professionals to report people to the police who could be a threat to the public or themselves, without fear of being sued for a HIPPA violation. For example, if they have expressed suicidal/homicidal ideations in the last year or they are unable to tell reality from hallucinations/delusions. Depending on the situation maybe their access to firearms is only temporarily cut off and any weapons they owned are stored in a secure location. Other patients may need to be indefinitely restricted.

-We need to increase communication between gun stores and police. For example, if someone is buying enough weapons and ammunition to create their own little Waco, its worth making the cops aware. Doesn’t mean the cops need to automatically take the guns from whoever purchased them but they should at least be able to check out the purchaser.

-Assault weapons should be banned. Those are not weapons used for hunting nor are they practical, easily mobile weapons for self-defense. Nobody is coming to rob your house with a small army that you need to be able to fire off 90-120 rounds per minute. And public safety supersedes your temporary entertainment at a gun range. Get a different gun. Perhaps there can be some kind of program where people get money for surrendering assault weapons voluntarily and illegal gun owners would not be penalized for handing the gun or guns over voluntarily. The financial incentive would obviously only be a fraction of the original purchase price (like a pawn store) but if the firearms could be repurposed for military use, it would save tax dollars in the long run. 

-Report your firearm if stolen. Do so within 12 hours of when you become aware that it is missing so perhaps the thief can be apprehended before he uses it.

-If you're a parent or guardian, keep your weapon securely away from unsupervised children, in a gun safe or similar secure storage container.

-Outlaw silencers. Why give people the opportunity to conceal their crime? If you are concerned about your hearing, wear earplugs or protective silencing ear muffs when you are at the gun range. 

-Trump recently undid yet another program supported by Obama when he pulled funding from Life After Hate, an organization that helped White Nationalists and Neo-Nazis get out of violent extremist groups. That absolutely needs to be reinstated. In fact, I would give extra funds to this group and similar organizations that focus on getting people out of gangs, cartels, and other forms of criminal organizations. Some people could be persuaded away from committing violent crimes if they felt like they had another choice. Time to give them one.

[thisdaynews]

I Was an NRA Lobbyist. Here’s My Road Map for Gun Reform.

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/i-was-an-nra-lobbyist-heres-my-road-map-for-gun-reform/

I Was an NRA Lobbyist. Here’s My Road Map for Gun Reform.

I’m a long-time gun rights proponent with pretty solid credentials. I lobbied for the NRA. I am the president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association and I even gave Ronald Reagan his first shooting lesson with a customized AR-15 when I ran the Firearm Industry’s Trade Association in 1992. I am also someone who has worked successfully on bipartisan gun control measures, specifically a child safety lock agreement supported by Bill Clinton, which explains in part why I am also aformerNRA lobbyist.

Even at this highly charged moment, when emotions are at their peak after the shootings in California, Texas and Ohio, I believe there is a way to achieve meaningful gun law reforms without alienating millions of responsible gun owners who don’t believe that criminals, unsupervised children or mentally ill people should have access to any kind of weapon.

Story Continued Below

When I began my career as a lobbyist for the gun rights community back in 1984, it was not uncommon to hear prominent Democrats champion gun rights as vocally as their Republican colleagues. House Commerce Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.), House Judiciary Chairman Jack Brooks (D-Texas) and Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho) all argued that our identity as Americans was encapsulated in the rights enshrined by the Second Amendment. But those moderate Democratic voices have all but disappeared, lost to redistricting and changing demographics, and in their place the pro-gun and anti-gun rights groups have filled the void with inflammatory culture war rhetoric—all to the detriment of average gunowners.

Democrats, the presidential field in particular, aren’t exactly helping things. Democratic candidates desperately need to realize that tens of millions of us gun folk view our participation in this democracy of ours through the lens of the gun issue. We wonder why we ought to trust politicians who want to limit our rights and our implied freedoms because some demented lunatic, or terrorist or common criminal misused a gun we wish he had never been able to access in the first place. If we continue to demonize legitimate gun owners we will fight tooth and nail to protect our property and our rights, preventing all of us from reforming what we can and bringing collective attention to issues that desperately need fixing.

Instead of bumper sticker sloganeering, why not approach this issue not as enemies but as compatriots? Let’s focus on our common goal to disarm (in advance) individuals we all agree ought not have the guns, and concurrently and forthrightly protect the ability for the rest of us to own them for any lawful activity. Here’s how to approach some of these issues in a way that is going to appeal to independents and blue-collar gun owners.

1. Stop saying ‘universal background checks.’

Today’s current gun control mantra is “universal background checks.” The Brady law passed in 1993 mandated background checks for gun purchasers at retail gun shops. These transactions are commercial in nature and generally between strangers—the firearms dealer and the buyer. Twenty years ago, the firearms industry (and even the NRA) supported these checks at gun shows as well as retail gun shops,but the original legislation extended only to federally licensed dealers, with no attempt made to extend that jurisdiction to nondealers.Today, you’ll find gun owners support background checks for all commercial transactions. That includes gun shows, flea markets and internet sales purchases.Strangers can’t possibly know the backgrounds of the buyer and these checks can prevent the unintentional transfer of a gun to a disqualified individual.

But when the word “universal” is used, gun owners rebel. Why? They don’t want to be turned into criminals for giving a firearm to their wife, their kids or their parents without a background check—which is exactly what they fear could happen if a law mandates background checks for all gun sales in the U.S.

So why not extend the Brady background check to all commercial sales, including gun shows, internet sales and flea markets, while carefully and responsibly crafting exemptions for relatives, friends and co-workers whom the seller has personally known for more than a year? And in cases where there is some doubt about the relationship, let’s encourage people to get the checks by giving them the same liability protection when crimes are committed with those guns that retail dealers have now. Compromise, that dirty word, means we both get something in the transaction that’s useful to us.

With these exemptions in place, opposition would be diminished, and legislation based on sound policy not “gotcha politics” will more easily be enacted. Most importantly, disqualified individuals would find it harder (though admittedly not impossible) to obtain guns. Isn’t that what we seek?

2. Help stop illegal gun sales.

Rampant trafficking of stolen weapons is another area of potential common ground. If we seriously desired (and why wouldn’t we?) to curtail the 700,000-plus annual gun thefts in this country, we could do it without too much controversy. Home thieves sell their stolen guns (and jewelry and everything else) to fences. Fences take those stolen guns over state lines and sell them back to dealers who have no simple means of knowing that they are in fact purchasing stolen merchandise. When a retailer buys a firearm he must record it in an “A & D” (acquisition and disposition) book. Even if the gun was reported stolen by make and serial number, the dealer wouldn’t know it. But if every dealer purchase were automatically run through NCIC (the National Crime Information Center run by the FBI),then local police, informed about the pending purchase of stolen property, could question the seller, leading to immediate arrests. Why steal what you can’t sell? Would a program like this end the theft of firearms? No. Would it cut down dramatically on those thefts? You bet it would.

Why have you never heard anyone talking about this before? It’s simple; there is no political advantage to solving this (or any) gun related problem if we can’t make political hay from the controversy. Issues are only useful when they are “us or them,” “black or white” with little to no nuanced middle ground. Isn’t that a large part of our problem in this country? We really are a rather centrist nation, but the enthusiasm of purists seems to dominate the debate. Perhaps we need enthusiastic moderates now and again to represent those of us who aren’t purists.

3. Remember: Not every gun owner is crazy.

“Red Flag Laws” are getting a lot of attention, but I prefer the term Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs). Something about the words “red flag” reminds me of “red herring.” But there’s a good reason for them. The theory behind this initiative is that people sometimes give us useful signals that they intend to commit violence—whether it’s against themselves or others—and if we act upon those signals by removing their guns we might sometimes prevent tragedies. But gun owners have legitimate fears that the system can be abused to their detriment. In order to amplify the good and minimize the bad, we need to build safeguards against a surveillance state that, in the wake of 9/11, has proved susceptible to overreach.If the process becomes punitive, not salutary, faith in the stated objective is defeated and people loss more respect for the laws and any changes are seen as new retributions to be opposed from the get go.A detailed description of a workable and fair policy can be found in David French’s article “A Gun-Policy Measure Conservatives Should Consider” from National Review of February of last year.

4. Learn what “assault weapon” really means.

Now let’s address the hottest hot button issue of gun politics, the dreaded “assault weapon” controversy. This is semantic doublespeak at its finest. Talk about two handy pejoratives— “assault” and “weapon.” Any gun can be an assault weapon if that’s your intent. This is just misleading labeling. These firearms are simply autoloading guns that fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled. They have been around since the late 1800s and more than a third of the 400 million-plus guns in the hands of American citizens are semi-automatic. Fully automatic firearms (machine guns) are heavily regulated and rarely seen by police or used in crimes. I even gave Ronald Reagan an AR-15 in 1992, and, while he fired it, I don’t believe it turned him into a mass murderer.

The AR-15 rifle, the semi-automatic version of the military M-16—with their black polymer frames, and folding stock—may look scary to uninformed or misinformed pundits, but they function identically to grandpa’s old hunting rifle. Outlawing the sale of AR-15-type rifles might (over time) lower the number of incidents involving AR-15 rifles. But what would be the value if criminals and crazies alike merely substitute a far more powerful hunting rifle in a .308 or .30-06 caliber for the relatively underpowered .223 caliber common to the AR-15?

All guns bear certain common features that make them firearms. They are all capable of firing a bullet in the direction the barrel is pointed and they do so only when the operator of the device pulls the trigger. Any loaded firearm pointed at me is an “assault weapon,” and any loaded firearm in my hands is a defensive device that I can and will use to protect myself, my family and my community. In short, the issue is never the gun per se, but always, “in whose hands is the gun”? If we start asking the right questions in this conversation, we stand a chance at coming up with answers that have the support of gun owners—and that is key to any solution. We can then do something useful. But if we continue to engage in polemics over real policy, the center will not hold and nothing that benefits our nation will occur.

Read More

[benrleeusa]

[David Kopel] Textual analysis of HR8, bill to "To require a background check for every firearm sale"

Bill about gun "sale" turns ordinary gun loans into felonies, bans handguns for young adults, and authorizes unlimited fees.

This week, U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) introduced HR8. According to the title, the bill is "To require a background check for every firearm sale." The bill does that--and a great deal more.

Summary

HR8 requires that loans, gifts, and sales of firearms be processed by a gun store. The same fees, paperwork, and permanent record-keeping apply as to buying a new gun from the store. If you loan a gun to a friend without going to the gun store, the penalty is the same as for knowingly selling a gun to a convicted violent felon. Likewise, when the friend returns the gun, another trip to the gun store is necessary, upon pain of felony.

A clever trick in HR8 effectively bans handguns for persons 18-to20.

The bill has some narrow exemptions. The exemptions do not cover stalking victims. Also excluded are farming and ranching, sharing guns on almost all public and private lands, NS storing guns with friends while on vacation. The limited exemption for family excludes first cousins and in-laws. The minuscule exemption for self-defense excludes stalking victims.

The bill authorizes unlimited fees to be imposed by regulation.

Self-defense

There is a partial exemption for immediate self-defense: "(D) a temporary transfer that is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm, if the possession by the transferee lasts only as long as immediately necessary to prevent the imminent death or great bodily harm".

The narrowness of the self-defense exemption endangers domestic violence victims. For example, a former domestic partner threatens a woman and her children. An attack might come in the next hour, or the next month, or never. The victim and her children cannot know. Because the attack is uncertain—and is certainly not "immediate"—the woman cannot borrow a handgun from a neighbor for her defense. Many domestic violence victims do not have several hundred spare dollars so that they can buy their own gun.

Handgun ban for young adults

Since 1968, federal law has said that gun stores may not sell handguns to persons under 21. 18 U.S.C. § 922(c)(1). Congress has not chosen to prohibit persons aged 18-20 from acquiring handguns elsewhere. The large majority of states allow handgun possession by persons 18-20.

Some legislators have forthrightly introduced bills to impose a ban on young adults. HR8 prohibits young adults from acquiring handguns, but does so with a clever subterfuge.

HR8 requires almost all firearms sales and loans to be conducted by a federally-licensed dealer. Because federal law prohibits licensed dealers from transferring handguns to persons under 21 years, HR8 prevents young adults from acquiring handguns. This is a clever way to enact a handgun ban indirectly.

HR8 would prohibit a 20-year-old woman who lives on her own from acquiring a handgun for self-defense in her home, such as by buying it from a relative or borrowing it from a friend.

Although HR8 allows young adults to acquire handguns by parental gift, not all young adults who are living on their own receive parental largesse.

Exorbitant fees may be imposed by regulation

''(3)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this sub-section with regulations."

''(D) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision placing a cap on the fee licensees may charge to facilitate transfers in accordance with paragraph (1)."

Regulators may set a minimum fee, but not "a cap on a fee." The Attorney General is allowed to require that every gun store charge a fee of $30, $50, $150, or more. Even a $20 fee can be a hard burden to a poor person.

Farming and Ranching

HR8 has a limited exemption for "hunting, trapping, or fishing"—but not for ranching or farming.

Firearms transfers at farms and ranches are part of routine operations. Some transfers might last a few hours, while others last for several weeks—as when a ranch hand takes a gun to guard a flock night and day during calving season. Under HR8, the transfer is allowed only when the farmer or rancher stays in the hand's "presence." This is impractical; often the hand needs to do work in one location, and the farmer or rancher in another.

Under HR8, for a farmer or rancher to lend a firearm to an employee, they both must travel to a gun store to process the transfer. When the employee returns the firearm, everyone must return again to the gun store.

Because few farms and ranches are located near gun stores, the process typically requires hours of travel for the loan, and hours more for the return. This takes the farmer, the rancher, and their hands away from the farm or ranch during what may be the busiest period of the year, when everyone needs to work from sunup to sundown.

Family members

You can make a "a loan or bona fide gift" to some family members. In-laws and cousins are excluded.

The family exemption vanishes if one family member pays the other in any way. If a brother trades an extra shotgun to his sister in exchange for her extra television, both of them have to go to a gun store. Their exchange will have all the fees and paperwork as if she were buying a gun from the store.

Outlawing gun sharing on public and private property

There is an exemption for sharing guns "(i) at a shooting range or in a shooting gallery or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting".

Not everyone has access to a "designated" target range. In rural areas with low population density, the nearest designated range may be far away. In urban areas, the waiting lists for membership in a gun club may stretch out for years. Designated public ranges exist, but in many areas, there are few or none. Those that do exist may be a long ways away, or may be crowded, with long waiting times.

Accordingly, Americans have always engage in target practice at informal ranges on public lands. Today, many of these lands are owned by the U.S. National Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, or a state or local equivalent.

Private property may be also used, with the owner's consent. The general legal rule is that shooting is lawful anywhere in rural areas, except for specified sites, such near public roads. Of course one must always obey all safety rules, which includes ensuring that there is a safe backstop to the target, such as a mound of dirt.

HR8 prohibits firearms sharing on public or private lands that have not been "designated for the purpose of target shooting."

For example: you own a 120 acre farm. Your cousins and brother-in-law come for a visit, and they want to camp outside. You want to loan them your handgun for protection. This is forbidden by HR8. Under the bill, the family must travel to a gun store to process the loan and collect the fees. Later, when your relatives want to return your handgun, there must be another trip to gun store, with the same paperwork and fees.

Under HR8, the returned of a loaned gun is treated the same as the purchase of a new gun.

Museums

There is no exemption for loaning firearms to a museum. After Washington State enacted a law similar to HR8, the law immediately caused problems for the Lynden Pioneer Museum, in Bellingham, which had a "WWII Pacific Theater" exhibit that included rifles.

Safe storage discouraged

Consider a person who will be away from home for an extended period: a member of the armed services being deployed overseas, a person going away to school, a person going on a long vacation, or a person evacuating her home due to a natural disaster. Such persons might wish to store firearms with a trusted neighbor or friend. This type of storage should be encouraged. Guns are less likely to be stolen by burglars, and then sold into the black market, if they are kept in an occupied home rather than left in a house that will be unoccupied.

But under HR8, neighbor A can only store neighbor B's guns if both persons go to a gun store, fill out extensive paperwork for each and every gun to be stored, pay per-gun fees to the government and the gun store, and then repeat the process when the firearms are returned. As a result, many fewer people will go through all the trouble. So more guns will be left in unoccupied dwellings; they will be at greater risk of being stolen and thus of being supplied to the criminal black market. Discouraging safe storage is among the ways HR8 harms public safety.

Note: This post is based in part on my article Background Checks for Firearms Sales and Loans: Law, History, and Policy, 53 Harvard Journal on Legislation 303 (2016).

[sexyrawvegan]

Guns, man.

What a lady posted from her brother.

My brother’s response to my mom’s email about the recent shooting. I want to share, particularly because of the way he explains things. As a veteran and a gun owner, he knows much more about guns than I do. Hopefully his arguments and information can help any of my friends trying to sway people on gun control laws.

“Completely agree with the sentiment here, Mom. However, in order to make educated arguments for gun control, it's important to actually know what you're proposing and use the right language. Otherwise, you'll just get completely shut down as "not knowing anything about guns" to people you're trying to convince. And if you don't know anything about guns, you can't really advocate for responsible gun policy.

AR15s are not the problem alone. Yes, it's the most popular military-style rifle, and it is designed to kill people effectively. But banning one model of weapon will just make people switch to other, equally effective killing machines. If you banned the Toyota Camry, would people stop buying midsize sedans? No, you'd just end up with more Honda Accords on the road. If you want to fix the problem, you have to ban all semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic means the weapon is loaded with a magazine (or belt in some cases) with multiple rounds; and for every trigger squeeze, one bullet is discharged. There is no real need for these weapons in civilian use. They aren't necessary for hunting, where the point is to kill the animal with one shot. It is only useful for killing a lot of things in a short amount of time or having fun at a gun range. I think our children's lives are more important than a fraction of the population's fun shooting a bunch of rounds quickly at a range. They'll cope.

Handguns are far more responsible for gun deaths in America than semi-auto rifles. You mentioned the kid who brought a gun to school as only having a "handgun, not a semi-automatic." Well, almost all handguns are semi-automatic. They have magazines and one bullet per trigger squeeze. Though most handgun rounds aren't as deadly as rifle rounds, it's inconsequential at short range. And handguns are far easier to conceal than a rifle. With the exception of maybe revolvers (which have 5-6 round max before reloading), I believe handguns should be outlawed. The Virginia Tech massacre, the most deadly school shooting in American history, was accomplished with handguns only. Don't underestimate their lethality. I think military style rifles only account for about 2% of gun deaths each year. If you want to solve the problem, semi-auto handguns have to go, as well.

If we really want to make a difference in gun deaths, we need to do WAY more than universal background checks and better mental health screening. Banning all semi-automatic weapons would make that difference. Keeping shotguns, revolvers, and bolt-action rifles legal accomplish all the typical, common uses of guns. (Bolt-action rifles are typical hunting rifles that you have to reload between shots.) With these types of firearms legal, you can still hunt, defend your home, and compete in sport shooting.

Combine the following with the semi-auto ban.

Government buy-back program of all semi-automatic weapons. Once a grace period for turn-ins ends, possession will be a felony without a special (and rare) license for Federally approved dealers and collectors.

Gun licenses for all who want to continue to own approved firearms. Licenses will be granted by completing a comprehensive background check, psych evaluation, safety training, marksmanship training, and meeting strict storage requirements. Storage requirements would include safes, weapons unloaded, with ammo stored separately. Licenses expire after a certain number of years and all the requirements must be completed again for license renewal.

Registration of all firearms.

Insurance for all firearms. If your gun is used in a crime or if there's a accident with your gun, your insurance company is liable for damages. Let the insurance market set rates based on their analysis of risk. Then, people can decide if it's financially worth it to own a gun.

Finally, here's your counterarguments for the most common pro-gun arguments:

Pro-gun argument - assault weapons aren't an actual thing. Banning them won't make a difference.

Counterargument - none. This is true. Classifying a gun as an "assault weapon" is something people who know nothing about guns do. Having a bayonet stud (a place to mount a bayonet) used to be one way to classify a gun as an assault weapon. Last I checked, we don't have a bayonet problem in this country. Talk about banning semi-auto guns instead of made-up things like "assault weapons."

Pro-gun argument - 2nd Amendment guarantees my right to bear arms!

Counterargument - sure, it does, but there can be limitations. And in case anyone needs a history lesson, the individual right to bear arms has only existed since 2008. From the adoption of the Constitution until the DC v. Heller decision in 2008, the 2nd Amendment had never been interpreted to mean private citizens have a right to own guns. (Thanks, Scalia.) But that decision is now the law of the land and precedent for future court decisions. Nevertheless, even in Scalia's majority opinion, he asserts that there are limitations to the 2nd Amendment. Weapons allowed should be those in common use at the time. And limitations should be made on "dangerous and unusual" weapons, per previous precedent in United States v. Miller. I argue that semi-auto firearms should now be considered "dangerous and unusual," given their lethality.

Pro-gun argument - if law-abiding citizens get rid of their guns, criminals won't follow the law, and we'll be in more danger.

Counterargument - this is an argument against having laws. Since criminals don't follow the law, there should be no limits on anything. Also, when we do outlaw things, it can work. Purchases of large quantities of ammonium nitrate fertilizer was restricted after the Oklahoma City bombing, and there hasn't been a similar bombing since. We outlawed fully automatic weapons, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. in the 20th century, and what has happened? We don't see violence with those types of weapons. Most weapons used to commit crimes are purchased lawfully. If we change the laws, it will work to reduce gun deaths.

Pro-gun argument - if we ban guns, people will just use knives or baseball bats

Counterargument - there are plenty of incidents around the world of mass stabbings or clubbings, etc. Show me one that is as lethal as a mass shooting.

Pro-gun argument - we need armed security guards in every school

Counterargument - do you trust the security guard won't become a mass shooter? The Texas church shooter was an Air Force veteran. The Pulse nightclub shooter was a security guard. Further, it's relatively easy to get the drop on a security guard. Shoot him first when he's not expecting, then keep going. That's what the Pulse nightclub shooter did. It's not difficult if you draw first. Columbine had armed security, too. Adding more guns to schools adds more risk, it doesn't reduce it.

Pro-gun argument - it's a mental health issue, not a gun issue *or* guns don't kill people, people kill people

Counterargument - The United States has the same rates of mental illness as other developed Western countries, but we're the only ones with this type of violence. The mentally ill are actually less likely to commit crime than those who aren't mentally ill, which many find surprising. Also, those who are mentally ill are more likely to become the victim of a crime than those who don't have mental illness. It's a common refrain to hear "anyone who would do that must be crazy." That's not true. Being a murderer doesn't actually mean you are mentally ill, which is why you hardly ever see successful insanity defenses in trials. And if "people kill people," then we really should stop giving all these people guns, right? We don't allow private F-22s or nuclear weapons, do we? Why? Because people would use them to kill other people. People use people-killing machines to kill people. Go figure.

Pro-gun argument - We, as a society, have turned our backs on God. This is why crime is getting worse. We need God/Jesus to heal people's hearts, not get rid of law-abiding citizens' guns.

Counterargument - Crime has actually decreased overall in recent decades. Things are getting better, not worse. Murder rates and violent crime overall have trended down as we've advanced as a society. Mass shootings have remained steady, though, because angry people have easy access to guns.

Pro-gun argument - we need guns to fight against the government in case it becomes tyrannical.

Counterargument - I doubt semi-automatic weapons will defeat a tyrannical government with fighter jets, bombers, tanks, artillery, drones, advanced cyber capabilities, and nuclear weapons.

Pro-gun argument - gun registrations will make it easier for the government to disarm us

Counterargument - The registration is necessary to keep track of deadly weapons in case they are used in a crime, or in case a law-abiding citizen commits a crime that revokes their right to guns. There's over 300 million privately owned guns in America. If the government wanted to take everyone's guns, they'd do it the same way they would if there wasn't a registry: by going door to door and searching everyone.

I truly believe we need to do far more than anything advocated by most mainstream gun control organizations like Everytown and Moms Demand Action. We need to follow the lead of countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada. They've figured it out. Why can't we?”

[tristes-topiques]

gunz

Callista Kline

February 16 at 6:05pm

·

My brother’s response to my mom’s email about the recent shooting.  I want to share, particularly because of the way he explains things.  As a veteran and a gun owner, he knows much more about guns than I do.  Hopefully his arguments and information can help any of my friends trying to sway people on gun control laws.

“Completely agree with the sentiment here, Mom. However, in order to make educated arguments for gun control, it's important to actually know what you're proposing and use the right language. Otherwise, you'll just get completely shut down as "not knowing anything about guns" to people you're trying to convince. And if you don't know anything about guns, you can't really advocate for responsible gun policy.

AR15s are not the problem alone. Yes, it's the most popular military-style rifle, and it is designed to kill people effectively. But banning one model of weapon will just make people switch to other, equally effective killing machines. If you banned the Toyota Camry, would people stop buying midsize sedans? No, you'd just end up with more Honda Accords on the road. If you want to fix the problem, you have to ban all semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic means the weapon is loaded with a magazine (or belt in some cases) with multiple rounds; and for every trigger squeeze, one bullet is discharged. There is no real need for these weapons in civilian use. They aren't necessary for hunting, where the point is to kill the animal with one shot. It is only useful for killing a lot of things in a short amount of time or having fun at a gun range. I think our children's lives are more important than a fraction of the population's fun shooting a bunch of rounds quickly at a range. They'll cope.

Handguns are far more responsible for gun deaths in America than semi-auto rifles. You mentioned the kid who brought a gun to school as only having a "handgun, not a semi-automatic." Well, almost all handguns are semi-automatic. They have magazines and one bullet per trigger squeeze. Though most handgun rounds aren't as deadly as rifle rounds, it's inconsequential at short range. And handguns are far easier to conceal than a rifle. With the exception of maybe revolvers (which have 5-6 round max before reloading), I believe handguns should be outlawed. The Virginia Tech massacre, the most deadly school shooting in American history, was accomplished with handguns only. Don't underestimate their lethality. I think military style rifles only account for about 2% of gun deaths each year. If you want to solve the problem, semi-auto handguns have to go, as well.

If we really want to make a difference in gun deaths, we need to do WAY more than universal background checks and better mental health screening. Banning all semi-automatic weapons would make that difference. Keeping shotguns, revolvers, and bolt-action rifles legal accomplish all the typical, common uses of guns. (Bolt-action rifles are typical hunting rifles that you have to reload between shots.) With these types of firearms legal, you can still hunt, defend your home, and compete in sport shooting.

Combine the following with the semi-auto ban. Government buy-back program of all semi-automatic weapons. Once a grace period for turn-ins ends, possession will be a felony without a special (and rare) license for Federally approved dealers and collectors. Gun licenses for all who want to continue to own approved firearms. Licenses will be granted by completing a comprehensive background check, psych evaluation, safety training, marksmanship training, and meeting strict storage requirements. Storage requirements would include safes, weapons unloaded, with ammo stored separately. Licenses expire after a certain number of years and all the requirements must be completed again for license renewal. Registration of all firearms. Insurance for all firearms. If your gun is used in a crime or if there's a accident with your gun, your insurance company is liable for damages. Let the insurance market set rates based on their analysis of risk. Then, people can decide if it's financially worth it to own a gun. Finally, here's your counterarguments for the most common pro-gun arguments: Pro-gun argument - assault weapons aren't an actual thing. Banning them won't make a difference. Counterargument - none. This is true. Classifying a gun as an "assault weapon" is something people who know nothing about guns do. Having a bayonet stud (a place to mount a bayonet) used to be one way to classify a gun as an assault weapon. Last I checked, we don't have a bayonet problem in this country. Talk about banning semi-auto guns instead of made-up things like "assault weapons." Pro-gun argument - 2nd Amendment guarantees my right to bear arms! Counterargument - sure, it does, but there can be limitations. And in case anyone needs a history lesson, the individual right to bear arms has only existed since 2008. From the adoption of the Constitution until the DC v. Heller decision in 2008, the 2nd Amendment had never been interpreted to mean private citizens have a right to own guns. (Thanks, Scalia.) But that decision is now the law of the land and precedent for future court decisions. Nevertheless, even in Scalia's majority opinion, he asserts that there are limitations to the 2nd Amendment. Weapons allowed should be those in common use at the time. And limitations should be made on "dangerous and unusual" weapons, per previous precedent in United States v. Miller. I argue that semi-auto firearms should now be considered "dangerous and unusual," given their lethality. Pro-gun argument - if law-abiding citizens get rid of their guns, criminals won't follow the law, and we'll be in more danger.  Counterargument - this is an argument against having laws. Since criminals don't follow the law, there should be no limits on anything. Also, when we do outlaw things, it can work. Purchases of large quantities of ammonium nitrate fertilizer was restricted after the Oklahoma City bombing, and there hasn't been a similar bombing since. We outlawed fully automatic weapons, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. in the 20th century, and what has happened? We don't see violence with those types of weapons. Most weapons used to commit crimes are purchased lawfully. If we change the laws, it will work to reduce gun deaths. Pro-gun argument - if we ban guns, people will just use knives or baseball bats Counterargument - there are plenty of incidents around the world of mass stabbings or clubbings, etc. Show me one that is as lethal as a mass shooting. Pro-gun argument - we need armed security guards in every school Counterargument - do you trust the security guard won't become a mass shooter? The Texas church shooter was an Air Force veteran. The Pulse nightclub shooter was a security guard. Further, it's relatively easy to get the drop on a security guard. Shoot him first when he's not expecting, then keep going. That's what the Pulse nightclub shooter did. It's not difficult if you draw first. Columbine had armed security, too. Adding more guns to schools adds more risk, it doesn't reduce it. Pro-gun argument - it's a mental health issue, not a gun issue *or* guns don't kill people, people kill people Counterargument - The United States has the same rates of mental illness as other developed Western countries, but we're the only ones with this type of violence. The mentally ill are actually less likely to commit crime than those who aren't mentally ill, which many find surprising. Also, those who are mentally ill are more likely to become the victim of a crime than those who don't have mental illness. It's a common refrain to hear "anyone who would do that must be crazy." That's not true. Being a murderer doesn't actually mean you are mentally ill, which is why you hardly ever see successful insanity defenses in trials. And if "people kill people," then we really should stop giving all these people guns, right? We don't allow private F-22s or nuclear weapons, do we? Why? Because people would use them to kill other people. People use people-killing machines to kill people. Go figure. Pro-gun argument - We, as a society, have turned our backs on God. This is why crime is getting worse. We need God/Jesus to heal people's hearts, not get rid of law-abiding citizens' guns. Counterargument - Crime has actually decreased overall in recent decades. Things are getting better, not worse. Murder rates and violent crime overall have trended down as we've advanced as a society. Mass shootings have remained steady, though, because angry people have easy access to guns. Pro-gun argument - we need guns to fight against the government in case it becomes tyrannical. Counterargument - I doubt semi-automatic weapons will defeat a tyrannical government with fighter jets, bombers, tanks, artillery, drones, advanced cyber capabilities, and nuclear weapons. Pro-gun argument - gun registrations will make it easier for the government to disarm us Counterargument - The registration is necessary to keep track of deadly weapons in case they are used in a crime, or in case a law-abiding citizen commits a crime that revokes their right to guns. There's over 300 million privately owned guns in America. If the government wanted to take everyone's guns, they'd do it the same way they would if there wasn't a registry: by going door to door and searching everyone. I truly believe we need to do far more than anything advocated by most mainstream gun control organizations like Everytown and Moms Demand Action. We need to follow the lead of countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada. They've figured it out. Why can't we?”

[allineednow]

<p>Cold's 5 Types Weapons For Urban Survival</p>

There are literally millions of weapons that exist in urban settings, as well as the best ones are those that don't look like firearms at first glance, and can be easily concealed.

Here are five basic kinds of cold weapons .

Think if you can wield the weapon how are you going to train your skills and stay that you decide to carry before choosing one for your defense.

A chilly weapon could be defined as any apparatus used for self-defense or killing that doesn't use fire or explosives to propel a projectile.

1. Edged weapons

These weapons are extremely common, and have been used throughout history for hunting or fight. They are the best to use for slashing, hacking, cutting, or stabbing in close combat. Others also have points which are used for thrusting rather than slashing, while some edged weapons concentrate on edges.

Weapons are acceptable for adults and teenagers, but they may also be used by children in an emergency. There are many edged weapons which you can buy or make from metal or plastic.

Combat knives

This is a heavy duty fighting knife designed to close or hand combat fighting.

A fantastic example of the kind of knife is the USMC KA-BAR. They are publicly available on the market, when these knives are designed with personnel in mind.

Homemade metal shanks or shivs

These are easy to make cover knives and primitive. Metal shanks are easy to make from virtually any piece of metal which measures 6 inches long (with three inches to the blade and three for the grip).

The design sharpened with a file and can be cut out using a hacksaw. The handle could be wrapped with cloth or tape to protect the user. This shank can do great harm and may be used to stab the victim multiple times without breaking.

Glass shanks

Are made about a half of an inch about 6 to 8 inches long and thick from a piece of glass. The blade may be. The handle should be wrapped in tape or cloth to protect your hands and approximately 3 inches long.

1 use will be usually only withstood by A glass shank before weakening and falling apart. It will break and shatter into tiny pieces that could make to fatal wound, after the victim is stabbed with this weapon.

Obsidian stone knives

These are extremely sharp stone knives that man used for hunting, fighting, game dressing, and utilities. The blades were made by a procedure called knapping; where slivers of obsidian were broken off to make a blade sharp and to sharpen the edge. The knife blade was then fastened into a handle by wrapping thin wet leather strips around the blade and handle.

Plastic non-metallic knives

They are extremely tough to detect by metal detectors or X-rays, since these knives use no metal in there construction. These knives can be made into any design and length and are made from polymers or plastics.

The knife's strength and durability, however, will depend largely. In the case of polymers or other resins that are non-metallic, the curing or hardening process may also play a large part in how well the knife stands up to various kinds of usage.

Daggers

Double edged blade designs are useful for slipping between ribs to kill, or to do great bodily harm.

Bowie knives

A long knife (8 -- 12 inch blades) with a blade double-edged at the point. These knives can do a considerable amount of damage, and can kill if wielded for that purpose.

Spears with metal, obsidian points, or flame hardened tips

A spear could be thrown to stop an individual at a distance, or can be utilised as a weapon in close quarters. Spears should have a 6 to 8 foot shaft made from hard wood that's as straight as you can. The spearhead can be made from metal, obsidian, rock, or have a fire tip.

As walking sticks, it is also possible to disguise spears. The spear point can be concealed beneath a tight fitting cover made from the same substance as the shaft, to do so. Just remove the spearhead cover when a spear is needed.

2. Blunt force injury weapons

These are weapons designed to deliver blunt injury force to inflict damage. Most of these weapons are club-like in the sense that they depend on the weight of the weapon as well as the strength of the user to inflict damage.

These weapons should be used by powerful adults or teenagers. The weight apparatus that are lighter can be also used by children .

Baseball and T-ball bats

Made from wood or aluminum. In countries where baseball is not commonly played, baseball bats are thought of as weapons and are not legal to carry or have. T-ball bats are also utilised in this manner. Since they are lighter and smaller, they could be easier for individuals and children to wield.

Flashlights

A very effective club can be made by A large metal flashlight, like a Maglite. Though not specifically classified as a weapon, it is often carried bouncers by security guards and civilians, especially in nations where carrying weapons is restricted.

Black Jacks

A hand weapon featuring a flexible shaft or strap; and a leather-covered bludgeon filled with shot that is small. It knock you out cold may break a bone, or kill. Since the 1980's, however that does not change the fact that they are extremely easy to make and hide these weapons have been outlawed in the US.

Shillelagh (Irish walking stick)

This is a wooden bar cut as a stick. Shillelaghs usually have a large knob on one end, and a slight point on the other end.

Monkey's fist

This is a small weapon which resembles a monkey's small bunched fist or paw. While another holds a metal weight within a winding of rope, 1 end of the monkey fist is a rope. The rope is designed to be extended or shortened to fit your requirements.

Video first seen on EveryDay Knife Guy.

A monkey fist can easily fit on your key chain, and can also be used to store paracord for emergency requirements. Small and as innocent because these weapons look, they could inflict injuries that are lethal.

3. Object throwing weapons

These weapons may be used by all age groups and are simple to make and use.

Rope slings

The sling is inexpensive and easy to construct (see my post about how best to build and use one). It has been used for hunting game and in combat. They are used to throw projectiles like clay balls, rock, or pieces of metal.

Sling shots

Have a Y-shaped handle made with an elastic strip from wood or metal or rubber tubing between the prongs. Sling shots are used for launching stones and projectiles that were small. Rubber tubing that is surgical and contemporary metal are powerful enough to kill small game in addition to seriously injure, or kill an individual.

Bolas

This is a kind of throwing weapon made from metal, stone or wooden weights at the ends of three cords that are interconnected. One cord is longer than the other two so that the heavier weights hit either side of the targets legs and fly at the front parallel to each other. The lighter weighted cord wraps around the target's legs. Bolas are utilized for capturing animals, however they can injure, or kill an individual depending on how they are aimed.

Archery equipment

As can the arrows longbows can be made readily enough from organic materials. Crossbows are harder to construct they may be every bit as deadly, if not more so than a handgun. Aside from the fact that crossbows can launch their projectiles across great distances, they are extremely quiet and are extremely tough to regulate.

You can build a crossbow with a minimal amount of skill in wood and metalworking.

4. Farming, gardening, and hand tools

Many tools have been used as warfare in addition to weapons for self and land defense. In medieval times, only their farming tools were carried by farmers pressed into service. These tools can be used as weapons by all age groups.

Sickles -- A hand-held agricultural tool designed with curved blades for harvesting. It is a fantastic weapon for stabbing and slashing.

Hoe -- One of the most practical weapons among farmers as it can be utilised as a staff for striking and blocking, or as an edged weapon.

Pickaxe handles -- Pickaxes are common tools in america, thus replacement handles are still widely available. These handles have a good weight to them may be utilised as a club or staff.

Machete -- A machete is a broad blade tool which could function as a knife or an ax. Themacheteblade is used for cutting, while the weighted top blade offers force for chopping. Because the machete is common in many tropical countries, it is often the weapon of choice for uprising or insurrections. Like a short sword the machete is used in combat.

Axes -- An ax is a tool typically used for chopping, shaping, or splitting wood. Axes are either a bit larger or smaller than utility axes. While the ones need two hands, the lighter weight ones could be wielded with one hand. Combat axes also have more narrow blades made to make wounds.

Wire or rope -- Use rope or cable to make a garrote. These weapons can be disguised as belts to hold up your pants. If you make a garrote, make sure to install safety handles on it to prevent you. Garrotes are outlawed in most states, however they are easy disguise, to make, and carry, it is not possible to say if these laws have any impact.

Hand tool kits -- These are the multipurpose tool kits you usually keep around the house or in your vehicle. Screwdrivers can make excellent weapons, as hammers and can wrenches. Razor blade utility knives may also make weapons. Considering that box cutter knives were used by the perpetrators of 9/11 against citizens, it is plain to see precisely how dangerous various components of hand tool kits could be.

5. Improvised weapons

Weapons are common everyday objects which can be used as defensive weapons. These objects are not physically altered in any way to make them into weapons that are more usable. They are generally utilized in their state.

You will have to figure out how to take and wield it for self defense, as soon as you find the weapon potential of an item. The reality is that almost anything can be used as an improvised weapon and oftentimes can be carried on the normal person's body.

These weapons may be used by individuals of all age classes. Since all of these items are plain everyday items, you won't need permits to carry them around. Some may be banned from carrying on other areas or airplanes.

Nail clippers

An excellent slashing weapon can be made by metal pocket nail clippers with a metal file/nail cleaner. Just grip the file/ nail cleaner in your hand so that it extends past first finger and the thumb. Aim for the attacker's face, eyes, hands, or any area that's vulnerable and sensitive to pain.

Pens and Pencils

When held in your hands pens and pencils make good weapons. Your target areas will be the face, arms, and torso. The wounds made by these weapons can seriously injure or cause death. You could even buy tactical pens which include other weaponized choices such as blades and bright flashlights. Just make sure they are legal to carry in your area.

House or car keys

A excellent defensive weapon is made by key chains holding more or 3 keys. Just set the keys the bottoms stick out between the fingers of the hand and make a fist. You will be aiming for chest, the arms, or face. If the attacker is not wearing clothes that are heavy, you can try a blow.

Pant belts

Use the leather portion and A fantastic way to use a belt is to hold it by the buckle. The target areas will be the face, neck, back, or another place that would cause a whole lot of pain.

Insect sprays

These sprays can be just as, if not more effective than mace or pepper spray. Make certain to aim for eyes and the face of your attacker. While these sprays won't kill, an attacker can be distracted by them long enough so that you can escape.

Contrary to the belief of some, the absence of guns won't make times safer. If anything, relying only on cold weapons can easily increase stress levels and lead to much more violence because of reduction in the feeling of security and safety.

Nevertheless, having a weapon on hand or being able to turn a thing to one, is a lifesaving skill! Can you master it?

This Report has been written by Fred Tyrell for Survivopedia.

[thecoroutfitters]

As could be expected, the recent shooting in Las Vegas has brought the gun grabbers out of the woodwork (or wherever they hide) to moan and bewail the NRA preventing them from enacting what they call “common sense gun laws,” while accusing anyone and everyone who isn’t in their camp of condoning murder.

This is nothing new, as they follow the leftist philosophy of “never letting a good crisis go to waste”.

The target of the gun grabbers this time is the bump fire stocks that the killer used in murdering 59 people and wounding over 500 more.

Targeting the Wrong Enemy

This device, which the ATF classifies as an “accessory” not a modification, is legal for sale over the counter to pretty much anyone. Probably even to people who can’t legally buy a firearm. It’s not a gun and it’s not a gun modification, so the ATF has seen no reason to control it.

It’s easy to make a strong argument in support of the ATF decision, because you can do the same thing other ways, without having to spend the money on a bump fire stock.

I’ve seen people accomplish the same thing using a rubber band and a belt loop. I suppose if we really put our minds to it, we could come up with a dozen such ways, none of which require spending $150 on this accessory.

On the other hand, the left has a very graphic argument in favor of making bump fire stocks illegal. Had the killer not had access to such a device, he probably couldn’t have killed as many people. Being able to mimic machine gun fire, shooting 400 to 800 rounds per minute (the rate that a bump fire allows) isn’t up to the 750 to 950 rate of a M-4, cut it’s pretty close. Close enough for the shooter’s purposes.

Granted, a trained shooter can learn to shoot the AR-15 about that fast, while being much more accurate, but by all reports, the shooter was not an experienced shooter. He apparently had no military training and he was not known to be a shooter or gun collector. He kept that part of his life secret.

  This is Why Conventional Preparedness Wisdom is Deadly!

  I need to say here that I’m not a fan of bump fire. But then, I was never a fan of full-auto fire, even when I was in the military. A lot of guys really enjoyed going “rock and roll” with their M-16s, burning up ammo, but I didn’t. I wanted my shots to go where I aimed and full-auto really doesn’t allow that.

As far as I’m concerned, full-auto fire is only useful for two things:

1 – suppressive fire; when you need to get the enemy to keep their heads down, so that they don’t shoot you.

2 – mass fire; if you’ve got a mob of zombies bearing down on your position  and you need to take out as many as you can as fast as  you can. Real soldiers don’t bunch up like that, knowing it makes them too good a target, but zombies aren’t supposed to be that smart.

But for the Las Vegas shooter, bump fire was apparently a good choice, He wasn’t trying to hit individual targets, just to hit as many as he can, like shooting that mob of zombies. And like the zombies, they were all bunched up, so that he could be pretty much assured that his shots would hit somebody.

So it appears that the existence and ease of purchase of the bump fire stocks did in fact have a part in generating a high body count in this case.

But does that mean they should be outlawed? Should we give up any part of our Second Amendment rights because of a crazed madman who wanted to go out in a blaze of glory, killing as many people as he could?

Leftist politicians and commentators would want us to think so. They have introduced legislation to that effect, claiming that eliminating the bump fire stock would make us all “safer” in some intangible way.

I say that’s intangible, simply because this is the only crime on record, where the bump fire stock has been used. It’s even extremely rare to find the AR-15 used in a crime, let alone fitted with a bump fire stock.

So how is eliminating the bump fire stock going to make anyone safer? Yeah, if there were a rash of crimes being committed with this accessory mounted to AR-15s, I could see that as a possibility, but not for one single crime, no matter how horrific.

But then, the left has never truly been interested in making the streets any safer for law-abiding citizens, that’s just the camouflage they use to push their anti-gun agenda. They need something to sell their ideology to the low-information voters and public safety at least sounds good.

Of course, if they were truly interested in public safety, they’d be much more interested in getting criminals off the streets, instead of lauding them as some sort of folk heroes.

Tell me how Obama talking about the “valuable work that Black Lives Matter,” (BLM) a domestic terrorist organization which uses physical violence as a means of “expression” makes anyone’s life safer. It doesn’t. If Obama or anyone else on the left was truly concerned about public safety, they would condemn BLMs methods, even if they agreed with their goals.

What They Say We Should Do…

I don’t think there is anyone who would argue the statement that “guns are dangerous.” If anything, gun owners and shooters would be the first to say that. We know how dangerous they are, which is why the first thing that any of us teach a new shooter is the four rules of gun safety.

But guns alone aren’t any more dangerous than a rock. It’s the mind behind the gun that turns it into a weapon of murder, just like the mind of the person who kills with a hammer or baseball bat. That’s the issue and the left needs to get on board with dealing with that issue.

Apparently, the Las Vegas killer was mentally unstable, as pretty much all mass shooters are. As in many other such cases, his mental instability had not been diagnosed, so there was no warning of what he was planning. Had there been, he could have been stopped, before doing any damage.

For that matter, existing laws on the books would have prevented him from being able to buy the firearms that he used in the attack. That would have made a real difference.

Eliminating bump fire stocks won’t make anyone any safer. Even Dianne Feinstein admits that, and she’s the loudest voice pushing to eliminate them.

As she has before, she has introduced legislation into the Senate to follow the pattern of California and restrict our Second Amendment rights.

Video first seen on ABC News.

Yes, let’s punish honest, hard-working, law-abiding Americans for what a criminally psychotic person has done! What rubbish.

While it wouldn’t bother me personally to see bump fire stocks taken off the market, I don’t think there should be a law passed to do so.

Such a law would be impossible to enforce anyway, as it requires people who currently have them to turn them in. Without going door to door and searching people’s houses, there is no way of knowing whether everyone turned theirs in.

That’s not only absurd, it’s illegal, breaking our Fourth Amendment rights. Of course, Feinstein isn’t concerned about that.

But then, leftists never really worry about whether a law is enforceable or not anyway. Nevada passed a law requiring universal background checks for gun sales. This means that background checks have to be done in private sales, as well as when a FFL gun dealer sells one. This includes when a person dies and leaves their guns to their children.

The FBI’s NICS has already stated that they cannot and will not perform background checks for private gun sales. States do not have any right to mandate that the federal government provide services. So there is no way for gun owners in Nevada to get the background check that the law requires.

Of course, that doesn’t matter to those on the left, who are suing the governor for not implementing that law. They are claiming that he is breaking the Constitution, by not using his powers to enforce laws that the state legislature passed.

Even so, that might just backfire on them, as the courts could throw the law out, as not being enforceable. As things stand right now, it is impossible for the governor to enforce that law, so it should be thrown out.

…And What They’re Actually Aiming For

The only way that it would be possible to enforce universal background checks would be to vastly increase the size of the NICS, so that they could deal with those individual sales, or to implement universal gun registration. But the law does not allow for registration. So that can’t be done, without changing federal law.

Even if they did, it wouldn’t stop the criminals, who buy stolen guns on the black market anyway. Once again, punish the law-abiding, hard-working Americans, for what criminals do.

While Feinstein’s proposed bill doesn’t address universal background checks, it does go much farther than just eliminating bump fire stocks. As one conservative commentator put it, “This doesn’t put us closer to the slippery slope, it is the slippery slope.”

Feinstein’s bill is a perfectly crafted piece of liberal legislation. I say that because it is sufficiently vague enough to allow leftist politicians and bureaucrats to use it as a means of creating all sorts of legislation to outlaw all sorts of firearm accessories and modifications. Specifically, it outlaws any device that can increase the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm.

That’s actually a very broad term, able to be redefined repeatedly over time, in order to make it mean whatever bureaucrats, who are mostly Democrats, want it to.

To start with, what’s a “normal rate of fire” for a semi-automatic firearm? Even the manufacturers can’t agree on that; and does that mean for an experienced shooter or a novice? I’ve seen video of experienced shooters who can pull an AR-15’s trigger as fast as a bump fire stock can, and a whole lot more accurately.

Upgraded triggers can be said to increase the rate of fire, as they make it easier to fire faster; so can spring kits to lighten the trigger pull. Magazines holding more than one round make it easy to fire faster as well.

So do telescopic gunsights for that matter. I have an extended slide release and magazine release installed on my Glock, those both make it so that I can shoot faster, or at least reload faster, which makes it possible for me to shoot faster. I also have a laser sight and tritium night sights, both of which can be considered aids in shooting faster.

My AR-15 has a piston instead of a gas tube, another modification that makes it easy to shoot faster. I’ve also got a foregrip handle, which helps get back on target quicker, another aid in shooting faster. Then there’s the red dot sight, which is definitely faster to use than iron sights are.

I could go on and on. The point is, anything that anyone would do to modify a firearm, improving it from the original, can be considered a means of making the gun shoot faster.

So about the only thing that Feinstein’s law doesn’t make illegal are the guns themselves, holsters and slings. That’s apparently the next step in her nefarious plan.

The point is this; if we allow the left to take away any of our gun rights or to pass a law which restricts the guns we are allowed to have and the modifications we can make to them, they will just keep going.

Their goal is to take all guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens; and nothing short of that will satisfy them.

Are you going to let them do it?

This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.

from Survivopedia Don't forget to visit the store and pick up some gear at The COR Outfitters. How prepared are you for emergencies? #SurvivalFirestarter #SurvivalBugOutBackpack #PrepperSurvivalPack #SHTFGear #SHTFBag

[makeupartistinmumbai-blog]

NGO Website Development

NGO  Website Development

BRAC, an international development organisation based in Bangladesh, is the largest non-governmental development organisation in the world, in terms of number of employees as of September 2016.[3][4][5] Established by Sir Fazle Hasan Abed in 1972 after the independence of Bangladesh, BRAC is present in all 64 districts of Bangladesh as well as 13 other countries in Asia, Africa, and the Americas.

BRAC employs over 100,000 people, roughly 70 percent of whom are women, reaching more than 126 million people.[6][7] The organisation is 70–80% self-funded through a number of social enterprises that include a dairy and food project, a chain of retail handicraft stores called Aarong, seed and Agro, and chicken. BRAC has operations in 14 countries of the world.[6][non-primary source needed]

Sir Fazlé Hasan Abed, founder of BRAC

Known formerly as the Bangladesh Rehabilitation Assistance Committee and then as the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee and now Building Resources Across Communities,[8] BRAC was initiated in 1972 by Sir Fazlé Hasan Abed at Shallah Upazillah in the district of Sunamganj as a small-scale relief and rehabilitation project to help returning war refugees after the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971.[9] In nine months, 14 thousand homes were rebuilt as part of the relief effort and several hundred boats were built for the fishermen. Medical centres were opened and other essential services were ensured.[10][non-primary source needed]

By 1974, BRAC had started providing micro credit and had started analysing the usefulness of credit inputs in the lives of the poor. Until the mid-1970s, BRAC concentrated on community development through village development programmes that included agriculture, fisheries, cooperatives, rural crafts, adult literacy, health and family planning, vocational training for women and construction of community centres. A Research and Evaluation Division (RED) was set up by Mushtaque Chowdhury in 1975 to analyse and evaluate its activities and provide direction for the organisation to evolve. In 1977, BRAC shifted from community development towards a more targeted approach by organising village groups called Village Organisations (VO). This approach targeted the poorest of the poor – the landless, small farmers, artisans, and vulnerable women. Those who own less than half an acre of land and survive by selling manual labor were regarded as BRAC's target group. That same year BRAC set up a commercial printing press to help finance its activities. The handicraft retail chain called Aarong, was established the following year.[11]

In 1979, BRAC entered the health field by establishing a nationwide Oral Therapy Extension Programme (OTEP), a campaign to combat diarrhoea, the leading cause of the high child mortality rate in Bangladesh.[12][page needed]Non Formal Primary Education was started by BRAC in 1985.[13]

In 1986, BRAC started its Rural Development Programme that incorporated four major activities – institution building including functional education and training, credit operation, income and employment generation and support service programmes.[citation needed]

In 1991, the Women's Health Development program commenced. The following year BRAC established a Centre for Development Management (CDM) in Rajendrapur.[citation needed]

Its Social Development, Human Rights and Legal Services programme was launched in 1996.[citation needed]

In 1998, BRAC's Dairy and Food project was commissioned.[citation needed] BRAC launched an Information Technology Institute the following year.[citation needed]

In 2001, BRAC established a university called BRAC University.[14]

BRAC has done what few others have – they have achieved success on a massive scale, bringing life-saving health programs to millions of the world's poorest people. They remind us that even the most intractable health problems are solvable, and inspire us to match their success throughout the developing world. Bill Gates, Co-chair, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Global Health Award, 2004

Microfinance, introduced in 1974, is BRAC's oldest programme. It spans all districts of Bangladesh.[15][16] It provides collateral-free loans to mostly poor, landless, rural women, enabling them to generate income and improve their standards of living.[15][16] BRAC's microcredit program has funded over $1.9 billion in loans in its first 40 years.[citation needed] 95% of BRACs microloan customers are women.[1] According to BRAC, the repayment rate is over 98%.[17]

BRAC founded its retail outlet, Aarong (Bengali for "village fair") in 1978 to market and distribute products made by indigenous peoples. Aarong services about 65,000 artisans, and sells gold and silver jewelry, hand loom, leather crafts, etc.[11]

BRAC is one of the largest NGOs involved in primary education in Bangladesh.[18] As of the end of 2012, it had more than 22,700 non-formal primary schools with a combined enrolment of 670,000 children.[17][non-primary source needed] Its schools constitute three-quarters of all NGO non-formal primary schools in the country.[18]

NGO  Website Development

BRAC's education programme provides non-formal primary education to those left out of the formal education system, especially poor, rural, or disadvantaged children, and drop-outs.[1] Its schools are typically one room with one teacher and no more than 33 students. Core subjects include mathematics, social studies and English. The schools also offer extracurricular activities.[18] They incentivise schooling by providing food, allowing flexible learning hours, and conferring scholarships contingent on academic performance.[19]

Bangladesh has reduced the gap between male and female attendance in schools.[19] The improvement in female enrolment, which has largely been at the primary level, is in part attributable to BRAC.[18] Roughly 60% of the students in their schools are girls.[1]

BRAC started providing public healthcare in 1972 with an initial focus on curative care through paramedics and a self-financing health insurance scheme. The programme went on to offer integrated health care services.[citation needed]

A BRAC community health worker conducting a survey in the Korail slum, Bangladesh

BRAC's 2007 impact assessment of its North West Microfinance Expansion Project testified to increased awareness of legal issues, including those of marriage and divorce, among women participants in BRAC programs. Furthermore, women participants' self-confidence was boosted and incidence of domestic violence were found to have declined.[20] One of the most prominent forms of violence against women, acid throwing, has been decreasing by 15-20% annually since the enactment in 2002 of legislation specifically targeting acid violence.[21]

BRAC conducted one of the largest NGO responses to Cyclone Sidr which hit vast areas of the south-western coast in Bangladesh in mid-November 2007.[citation needed] BRAC distributed emergency relief materials, including food and clothing, to over 900,000 survivors, provided medical care to over 60,000 victims and secured safe supplies of drinking water. BRAC is now focusing on long-term rehabilitation, which will include agriculture support, infrastructure reconstruction and livelihood regeneration.[22][non-primary source needed]

BRAC has a collaboration with Nike's Girl Effect campaign to launch a new program to reach out to teenagers in Uganda and Tanzania.[23][non-primary source needed]

Not to be confused with the outlawed German association Internationale Humanitäre Hilfsorganisation e.V. or the Netherlands-based Internationale Humanitaire Hulporganisatie Nederland.

IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation[2] (Turkish: İHH İnsani Yardım Vakfı; full Turkish name: İnsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri ve İnsani Yardım Vakfı,[3] in English: The Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief) or İHH is a conservative Turkish NGO, whose members are predominantly Turkish Muslims, active in more than 100 countries.[4]

Established in 1992 and officially registered in Istanbul in 1995, İHH provides humanitarian relief in areas of war, earthquake, hunger, and conflict.[5] The İHH holds Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council since 2004[6][7] Current president of the İHH is Fehmi Bülent Yıldırım.

The İHH was owner and operator of three flotilla ships involved in the convoy intended to breach the blockade of Gaza in 2010. These ships included the MV Mavi Marmara, a passenger vessel that served as the flagship of the convoy.[8][9] As Israeli naval forces boarded the ship in order to prevent breach of the blockade, passengers attacked the boarding forces with clubs, knives and firearms. Nine passengers aboard the Mavi Marmara, many of them members of the İHH,[10] were killed [11][12][13][14]

The Istanbul-based Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (İHH) is an Islamic charity group that was formed to provide aid to Bosnian Muslims in the mid-1990s. It has been involved in aid missions in Pakistan, Ethiopia, Lebanon, Indonesia, Iraq, Palestine, Sudan, Somalia, Ghana, Mongolia, China, Brazil, Argentina and other places.[15]

The organization is active in Turkey, the Middle East, Europe, Africa, South America, Central Asia, South Asia, and the Caucasus.[16] İHH has held Special Consultative status as an NGO (non-governmental organization) in the United Nations Economic and Social Council since 2004.[6][7] İHH is the organizer of Africa Cataract Project which aims to fight against blindness in Africa.

The IHH aims to reach every region hit by wars, disasters, poverty and human rights abuses, and believes that civilian initiatives play a complementary role beside intervention by states and international organizations in resolving humanitarian problems. It is also their goal to deliver humanitarian aid to all people and take necessary steps to prevent any violations against their basic rights and liberties.[17]

These goals are achieved through the delivering of foodstuffs, clothes and tents to crisis regions hit by wars, conflicts, and natural disaster to meet urgent needs of victims. The foundation further provides health services in drought and aridity-stricken regions where poverty and deprivation have become chronic, and carries out long-term projects that aim at enabling local peoples stand on their own feet.[17] For those wanting to work with the organization, some emphasized activities include take active part in their activities, making donations or fund-raising, organizing seminars, and distributing posters.[18]

Trustees of the organization include:[19]

The Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief belongs to a number or organizations, including the UN's Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in the special consultative status, the Organization of Islamic Conference's (OIC) Humanitarian Forum, the Council of International Organizations for Relief in Iraq, the Union of Non-governmental Organizations of the Islamic World (UNIW), and the Turkish Foundation for Volunteer Organizations (TGTV). The group has also received the following recognitions:

The İHH provides social aid, Muslim cultural aid, educational aid, sanitary aid, emergency aid programs in 120 countries.[22] It provides health care and water wells in Africa and runs the Africa Cataract Project, begun in 2007, in ten African countries. İHH has made it possible for thousands of people who are suffering from cataracts but who do not have the economic means to be treated to see again. İHH built 1174 water wells in Africa.[23] İHH sent two cargo planes to Haiti with 33 tons of humanitarian aid supplies after the 2010 Haiti earthquake.[16]

In December 2007, Today's Zaman wrote that "various civil society organizations such as Kimse Yok Mu? (Is Anybody There?), Deniz Feneri (Lighthouse), the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (İHH) and Can Suyu assisted thousands of charitable donors in reaching out to poverty-stricken residents of the Kurdish-dominated eastern and southeastern regions of Turkey."[24]

World Bulletin wrote in August 2009 that hundreds of water wells were dug and fountains were built in an aid effort under the leadership of Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (İHH) across African countries.[25] Several Turkish nongovernmental organizations, such as Kimse Yok Mu? (Is anybody there?), the Humanitarian Aid Foundation (İHH) and Deniz Feneri (lighthouse), also provided aid to storm survivors in Bangladesh.[26]

İHH previously sent packages containing flour, legumes, oil and sugar to 350 families residing in Zewaya Dugda, one of the poorest regions in the Ethiopia. The UN announced that around 6 million children in Ethiopia faced risk of acute under-nutrition and urged countries to send aid.[27]

After the earthquake in Indonesia, Doctors Worldwide and The Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) sent volunteers and aid to Indonesia.[28] İHH opened mosques, dug waterwells, distributed Qur'ans, organized iftars, aiding orphans and refugees in Darfur.[29]

In Gaza, the İHH is renovating the port, funding a Turkish-Palestinian school and plans to build a hospital and apartments for Gazans made homeless during the Gaza War.[30]

IHH has been involved with the United Nations in a number of ways. For example, the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief attended the 44th Session of the Commission for Social Development and contributed to the panel discussion for the eradication of poverty. The group has attended other meetings, including:[17]

Refugees (UNHCR)

The project aims at performing 100.000 free cataract surgery operations in ten African countries: Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Chad, Niger, Togo, Benin, Gana, Mali, and Burkina Faso. Volunteer Turkish surgeons and nurses take part in the project and travel to African countries for surgery. One of the objectives of the program is to offer free eye care for needy people. The Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency and Turkey's and Sudan's Ministries of Health are supporting the project. All surgeries are broadcast live on the project website and the IHH website.[31][32]

In 2011, IHH worked with Turkish aid groups like Kimse Yok Mu, the Turkish Red Crescent (Kızılay) and Doctors Worldwide in Somalia. IHH aid reached a total of 376,777 people. Relief efforts, totaling TL 2,420,612, included food and medicine distributions, digging 70 water wells, health screenings, fitr (alms) donations and iftars (fast-breaking meals). With regards to its work in Somalia, one worker said that "the İHH already has been working in Somalia for the last 15 years in the fields of education and social and medical care. As for the food crisis, the activities will continue for at least another three years because the drought has spread and it sounds like it's not over. But as for other fields, the İHH is there and the activities will continue." He continued that "in order to help families of orphans to make a living and stand on their own two feet, we gave the families of 40 orphans sewing machines and cows, while we gave another 20 families sesame and flour milling machines. In addition, the İHH offered medical examinations to 400 orphans and treated 137 children with various diseases."[33]

In 2010, the ship Gazze set sail for Pakistan to deliver humanitarian aid to the people affected by floods in the country. The ship carried 3,000 tons of humanitarian supplies including, medicine, food, generators, clothes and tents.[34][35]

In 2011, IHH worked with the Khubaib Foundation to distribute relief goods amongst 500 flood stricken families in Lakki Marwat, a southern district of Pakistan. Some of the items included 270 containers which contained both food and non-food items. This was among clothes, shawls, footwear, and food items including rice, beans, canned food, power milk and children's cereal that were also distributed.[36]

In response to the humanitarian situation during 2011 Libyan civil war, IHH sent a cargo ship carrying nine containers, 141 tons of humanitarian aid including medication, food packages, infant formula, milk powder, hygiene kits and clothing.[37][38] The ship set sail from Turkey and dropped anchor in Malta.

The IHH worked with the Istanbul Peace Platform to host a conference focused on China's traditionally Turkic Muslim region of Xinjiang and which aimed to highlight the remote region's problems in the wake of July 2009 communal clashes. Official government sources said nearly 200 people were killed and 1,600 wounded in July 2009 riots in Xinjiang's capital, Ürümqi, in the worst ethnic unrest in China in decades. Beijing claimed the riots were orchestrated by overseas activists for the rights of Uighurs, historically Xinjiang's largest ethnic group. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has called the violence in Xinjiang “a kind of genocide.”[39]

Further information: Reactions to the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami

The IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation sent a rescue team of 5 to the Japan. IHH deputy chairman Yaşar Kutluay said "we sent our team to Japan which also went to Haiti due to the earthquake and to Pakistan due to the floods and lastly went to Tunisia and Libya due to the recent developments. Our team will contact with Japanese authorities to organize relief works. Our team will bring sonar system and search and rescue equipments."[40]

NGO  Website Development

The IHH aid team conducted relief efforts in Sendai which was most heavily devastated by the earthquake and took relief to around 5.000 people. Güzel said Sendai has turned into a ghost city in the aftermath of the quake disaster and ensuing tsunami and it may take long years for Japan to recover from the aftereffects of the disaster. Güzel noted that the humanitarian crisis in Japan may deteriorate if international aid is not provided to the country.[41]

As reported on March 28, 2015, the IHH secured the release of two Czech tourists, Antonie Chrástecká and Hana Humpálová, following two months of intense negotiations. They were kidnapped near Taftan, Pakistan, by an al Qaeda-linked armed group on March 13, 2013, while travelling overland from Europe to India.[42]

Mavi Marmara with Turkish and Palestinian flags, campaign banner, and the text "This is a humanitarian aid ship" in Turkish, English, Arabic, and Hebrew. Main article: Gaza flotilla raid

In January 2010, the Free Gaza Movement and İHH announced a joint venture to send ten vessels to the Gaza strip in the spring of 2010, a flotilla to be further joined by organizations from Greece, Ireland and Sweden.[43]

On 30 May 2010, a flotilla of six ships carrying 663 activists from 37 nations rendezvoused near Cyprus and set sail for Gaza.[44][45] The stated intention of the Gaza flotilla, like for earlier flotillas organized by the Free Gaza Movement, was to break through Israel's blockade of the Gaza strip and to deliver humanitarian supplies.[46][47] The İHH spent more than $2 million on the ships.[48] İHH activists were set apart from other activists involved in the mission by a willingness to resist Israeli forces.[10]

On 31 May 2010, after the IHH refused that the Israel Defense Forces will check the ship's cargo in Ashdod port, Israeli forces intercepted the fleet in the international waters. On the MV Mavi Marmara, one of the ships owned and operated by the İHH, boarding Israeli forces came under coordinated armed attack. In the clashes, nine activists were killed (Eight Turkish nationals and a Turkish-American), and dozens of activists and seven Israeli commandos were wounded. On three other ships, activists showed passive resistance, which was suppressed by Israeli forces without deaths or injuries, and two others were taken without incident. The activists were subsequently arrested and detained in Israel before being deported. Widespread international condemnation of the raid followed, Israel-Turkey relations were strained, Israel subsequently eased its blockade of the Gaza strip, and Egypt lifted its blockade, opening its Rafah Border Crossing with the Gaza Strip.[49]

On 18 June 2010, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs released video footage of a rally on board the Mavi Marmara the day before the raid in which the İHH President Fehmi Bülent Yıldırım declared to dozens of activists: "And we say: 'If you [Israel] send the commandos, we will throw you down from here to the sea and you will be humiliated in front of the whole world'", as participating passengers chant "millions of martyrs marching to Gaza!"[50]

In September 2011, a United Nations report, after analysis of both Turkey and Israeli national investigations, concluded that the Israeli blockade was legal, but that Israel army used excessive force in this incident. The report also mentioned "serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH."[UN Palmer Report 2011, p. 4.]

İHH abstained from the 2011 flotilla, citing outstanding damage to the Mavi Marmara.

In September 2011, Istanbul Deputy Public Prosecutor Ates Shasan Sozen told the Turkish daily Today's Zaman that the IHH identified and submitted a list of 174 IDF soldiers to the Prosecutor's Office.[51][52]

Main article: Reactions to the Gaza flotilla raid

The flotilla event generated mixed perceptions of IHH. The group was described as a humanitarian[53][54][55] group and as a charity following the flotilla event;[56][57] however, the group was also challenged for alleged affiliations with organizations such as Hamas.[58] Critics charged the allegations arose after the raid simply because of the scale of the political fallout from the raid.[59] IHH maintained that the best way to judge it was its behavior and responded that "we collected US$1 million (Dh3.7m) for victims of the Haiti earthquake, and we delivered our aid in a church there." Other IHH officials said the organisation is opposed to violence and relies on donations from the Turkish public, up to 80 per cent of which come from poor families.[59]

Some of the allegations included that IHH has been banned in Germany, that IHH has raised funds for jihadi fighters in Bosnia, Chechnya, and Afghanistan, that French intelligence has documented calls between the group and an Al Qaeda boarding house in Milan, Italy, as well as Algerian militants in Europe, and that IHH reportedly played an "important role" in the Millennium bomb plot against LAX airport, Los Angeles.[60]

That IHH was banned in Germany later turned out to be a mixup between the Turkish İnsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri and the banned German Internationale Humanitäre Hilfsorganisation e.V.. The U.S. government said it "cannot validate" any relationship or connection between İHH and al-Qaida.[61] Turkish authorities made no further efforts after the raid regarding support for Bosnian, Chechen and Afghan fighters[59] and IHH replied that there was an acquittal in the court case and nothing ever came of the charges.[62] Testimony regarding IHH and the Millennium bomb plot was thrown out in court by a judge because it would "necessarily be based upon hearsay".[63]

An IHH board member responded in the Los Angeles Times that IHH provides charity in more than 100 countries. He stated there was no proof that IHH has any connections to Al Qaeda or its affiliates, and also said that its involvement with Bosnia and Chechnya amounted to food, clothes and medicine. Those who "accuse us of terrorism are the very people who kill innocent victims," said Ali Cihangir, an IHH board member, referring to the Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmara that left nine Turkish activists dead. "There are political reasons countries are saying this about us."[72]

According to The Times, a Free Syrian Army commander said that a boat carrying weapons docked in Syria in September 2012 and "was registered to members of the IHH, which has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood". Samar Srewel, an FSA activist who had helped to organize the consignment, told The Times: “It was clear from that second what was happening. The Muslim Brotherhood, through its ties in Turkey, was seizing control of this ship and the cargo. This is what they do. They buy influence with their money and guns.”[73][74]

On 18 March 2016, Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin sent a letter to the UN Security Council saying that three Turkish humanitarian organizations (NGOs) sent weapons and supplies to extremists in Syria on behalf of Turkey's MIT intelligence agency during the Syrian Civil War. The three NGOs were the Besar Foundation, the Iyilikder Foundation and the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms (IHH).[75]

Anadolu Agency reported that two employees of IHH, were detained for alleged links to al-Qaida, in a Turkish anti-terrorism police raids on 13 January 2014. IHH spokesman said that police searched its office in Kilis, near the border with Syria, and detained one of its employees. Another IHH employee was detained in Kayseri after a police raid at his home.[76]

The IHH has repeatedly supported the (re-)conversion of the Hagia Sophia, a former Christian Cathedral which was converted into a Mosque after the Ottoman conquest of Istanbul and is now a Museum and a UNESCO World Heritage Site, into a Mosque, and in 2015 IHH organised and led political rallies in Istanbul, in an effort to support its cause.[77]

Another alternative was of Harry ending up with Ginny Weasley, Ron's younger sister, whose obvious crush on him served as a plot-line starting in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. In Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Hermione informs Harry that Ginny has "given up" on him. In the subsequent Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, however, Harry develops a crush on Ginny, convinced that he has missed his opportunity with her. In the end Ginny turns out to never have given up on Harry after all, but merely taken Hermione's advice to try to date other boys to boost her self-confidence. Though their romantic relationship becomes one of the few sources of comfort in Harry's difficult life, he makes a decision to end it for fear that Voldemort would learn of it and target Ginny. Rowling later commented that she had planned Ginny as Harry's "ideal girl" from the very beginning.

An interview with J.K. Rowling conducted by fansite webmasters Emerson Spartz (MuggleNet) and Melissa Anelli (The Leaky Cauldron) shortly after the release of Half-Blood Prince caused significant controversy within the fandom. In the interview, Spartz stated that Harry/Hermione fans were delusional, to which Rowling responded that they were "still valued members of her readership", but that there had been "anvil-sized hints" for future Ron/Hermione and Harry/Ginny relationships, and that Harry/Hermione shippers needed to re-read the books. This incident resulted in an uproar among Harry/Hermione shippers, some of whom announced that they would return their copies of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince and boycott future Harry Potter books, leveling criticism at Spartz, Anelli, and Rowling herself. Many of them complained that both sites had a Ron/Hermione bias and criticized Rowling for not including a representative of their community. The uproar was the subject of an article in the San Francisco Chronicle.[19]

Rowling's attitude towards the shipping phenomenon has varied between amused and bewildered to frustrated. In that same interview, she stated:[20]

The release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in July 2007 saw an epilogue, nineteen years after the events at the focus of the series, where Harry and Ginny are married and have three kids, Lily, James, and Albus, and Ron and Hermione are also married and have two, Rose and Hugo. This has been received negatively by some fans, especially those who ship non-canon pairings. A result has been the "EWE" tag added to the summaries of fan-fiction, meaning "Epilogue, What Epilogue?"[citation needed]

Harry/Hermione shippers were somewhat vindicated in an interview with Rowling in February 2014 in Wonderland Magazine in which she stated that she thought that realistically "in some ways Harry and Hermione are a better fit [in comparison to Ron and Hermione]" and that Hermione and Ron had "too much fundamental incompatibility." She stated that Hermione and Ron were written together "as a form of wish fulfillment" as way to reconcile a relationship she herself was once in. She went on to say that perhaps with marriage counseling Ron and Hermione would have been all right.[21] She also went on to say in a talk at Exeter University that Harry's love for Ginny is true,[22] thereby denying any canon relationship between Harry and Hermione.

The 1995–2001 action/fantasy TV series Xena: Warrior Princess often saw "shipping wars" that turned especially intense due to spillover from real-life debates about homosexuality and gay rights.

Shortly after the series' debut, fans started discussing the possibility of a relationship between Xena and her sidekick and best friend Gabrielle. Toward the end of the first season, the show's producers began to play to this perception by deliberately inserting usually humorous lesbian innuendo into some episodes. The show acquired a cult following in the lesbian community. However, Xena had a number of male love interests as well, and from the first season she had an adversarial but sexually charged dynamic with Ares, the God of War, who frequently tried to win her over as his "Warrior Queen." Gabrielle herself had once had a male husband, and his death deeply affected her.

According to journalist Cathy Young, the quarrel between online fans of the show about whether there should be a relationship between Xena and Gabrielle had a sociopolitical angle, in which some on the anti-relationship side were "undoubtedly driven by bona fide bigotry", while some on the pro-relationship side were lesbians who "approached the argument as a real-life gay rights struggle" in which "denying a sexual relationship between Xena and Gabrielle was tantamount to denying the reality of their own lives".[23] She added:

In 2000, during the airing of the fifth season, the intensity and sometimes nastiness of the "shipping wars" in the Xena fandom was chronicled (from a non-subtexter's point of view) by Australian artist Nancy Lorenz in an article titled "The Discrimination in the Xenaverse" in the online Xena fan magazine Whoosh!,[24] and also in numerous letters in response.[25]

The wars did not abate after the series came to an end in 2001. With no new material from the show itself, the debates were further fueled by various statements from the cast and crew. In January 2003, Lucy Lawless, the show's star, told Lesbian News magazine that after watching the series finale (in which Gabrielle revived Xena with a mouth-to-mouth water transfer filmed to look like a full kiss) she had come to believe that Xena and Gabrielle's relationship was "definitely gay."[26] However, in the interviews and commentaries on the DVD sets released in 2003–2005, the actors, writers and producers continued to stress the ambiguity of the relationship, and in several interviews both Lawless and Renee O'Connor, who played Gabrielle, spoke of Ares as a principal love interest for Xena. In the interview for the Season 6 episode "Coming Home", O'Connor commented, "If there was ever going to be one man in Xena's life, it would be Ares."

In March 2005, one-time Xena screenwriter Katherine Fugate, an outspoken supporter of the Xena/Gabrielle pairing, posted a statement on her website appealing for tolerance in the fandom:

China Shipping Development (SEHK: 1138, SSE: 600026) is a Chinese shipping company with its headquarters in Shanghai. The company is listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

The company produces, pursues and sells as a shipping company ships worldwide. China Shipping Group Company, founded on the 1 July 1997, is the holding company of China Shipping Development. Among the rest, the companies China Shipping Container Lines und China Shipping Haisheng also belong to the Parent company. The main business focus of the company involves coastal, ocean and Yangtze River cargo transportation, ship leasing, cargo forwarding and cargo transport agency, purchase and sale of ships, repair and development of containers, ship spare parts purchase and sale agency, consultancy and transfer of shipping technology.[1]

Best Website Desinging Companies in India are as follows:-

     1.       http://troikatech.co/ 2.       http://brandlocking.in/ 3.       http://leadscart.in/ 4.       http://godwinpintoandcompany.com/ 5.       http://webdesignmumbai.review/ 6.       http://webdevelopmentmumbai.trade/ 7.       http://wordpresswebsites.co.in 8.       http://seoservicesindia.net.in/ 9.       http://priusmedia.in 10.   http://godwinpintoandcompany.com/ 11.   http://clearperceptionscounselling.com/ 12.   http://gmatcoachingclasses.online/ 13.   http://troikatechbusinesses.com/ 14.   http://troikaconsultants.com/ 15.   http://webdesignmumbai.trade/ 16.   http://webdesignmumbai.trade/ 17.   http://troikatechservices.in/ 18.   http://brandlocking.com/wp-admin 19.   http://kubber.in/ 20.   http://silveroakvilla.com/ 21.   http://igcsecoachingclasses.online/ 22.   http://priusmedia.in/ 23.   http://troikatechbusinesses.com/ 2.       http://brandlocking.in/ 3.       http://leadscart.in/ 4.       http://godwinpintoandcompany.com/ 5.       http://webdesignmumbai.review/ 6.       http://webdevelopmentmumbai.trade/ 7.       http://wordpresswebsites.co.in 8.       http://seoservicesindia.net.in/ 9.       http://priusmedia.in 10.   http://godwinpintoandcompany.com/ 11.   http://clearperceptionscounselling.com/ 12.   http://gmatcoachingclasses.online/ 13.   http://troikatechbusinesses.com/ 14.   http://troikaconsultants.com/ 15.   http://webdesignmumbai.trade/ 16.   http://webdesignmumbai.trade/ 17.   http://troikatechservices.in/ 18.   http://brandlocking.com/wp-admin 19.   http://kubber.in/ 20.   http://silveroakvilla.com/ 21.   http://igcsecoachingclasses.online/ 22.   http://priusmedia.in/ 23.   http://troikatechbusinesses.com/

Call them for Best offers India and International.

Read More

Contact Details

404, B-70, Nitin Shanti Nagar Building,

Sector-1, Near Mira Road Station, 

Opp. TMT Bus Stop, 

Thane – 401107

NGO Website Designing 

Troika Tech Services

WordPress Development Company in Mumbai