NY GRAND JURY VOTES TO INDICT TRUMP

[Sadre Spinegnawer]

Nowness is so freakin over.

"Your Mindful Toddler" is currently on the NYT bestseller list. First of all, none of this is magic or new. Ever practice breathing exercises? Welcome to the Now.

Jesus Christ people are boring. And predictable. They all think they are running, and they kind of are, but not in the sense they think they are. They are running against time.

Perhaps I am being over harsh. The young start families and adult lives and dream and hope and wish, because that is what the young always do.

So I guess the fact "Your Intentional Poop" tops the "Spiritual and Religious" bestseller list in Belgium is not really "bad" per se. Just, good lord, you know?

[Sadre Spinegnawer]

Do not the Vedas speak of the dung from an animal, and then of the Godhead, of our deepest selves, and say "Tat Tvam Asi"?

Yes. Yes they do.

[Landroval]

Have more, want less
Have less, want more

........
Want more, have less
......
Want less, have more

[aussenseiter]

Originally Posted by Sadre Spinegnawer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nowness is so freakin over.

"Your Mindful Toddler" is currently on the NYT bestseller list. First of all, none of this is magic or new. Ever practice breathing exercises? Welcome to the Now.

Jesus Christ people are boring. And predictable. They all think they are running, and they kind of are, but not in the sense they think they are. They are running against time.

Perhaps I am being over harsh. The young start families and adult lives and dream and hope and wish, because that is what the young always do.

So I guess the fact "Your Intentional Poop" tops the "Spiritual and Religious" bestseller list in Belgium is not really "bad" per se. Just, good lord, you know?

Why do you run? Will you not fight? Or will you perish like a dog?

[arvidez]

Originally Posted by Sadre Spinegnawer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Do not the Vedas speak of the dung from an animal, and then of the Godhead, of our deepest selves, and say "Tat Tvam Asi"?

Yes. Yes they do.

the rise in narcissism the researchers are claiming.

no one is gonna recognize they are mostly dung.

someone 100+ yrs ago said people dont ask for signs anymore, they ask for signs to be explained to them.

we have grown less aware and more distracted. whats more distracting than a black white supremist and a man giving birth.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

True, we don’t know the number of truly responsible, model citizen type of gun owners out there

But there’s what I perceive to be a dangerously large amount of irresponsible ones too. Leaving their shit out. Being just a dumb person in general, who isn’t even good at shooting a gun or gun safety, getting hammered and then carrying their gun ready to “defend themselves”. We hear about these scenarios that end in disaster, but just like the hidden responsible number, there’s an unknown amount of people this shitty/irresponsible existing not happening to kill someone (yet)

Very true. I think that's just a matter of gun safety education. I would have no problem strengthening the requirements to buy a gun in the first place, like passing rigorous safety courses. Although libs are under the impression you can just waltz into a walmart and buy a gun which is not remotely true, there are quite a few checks in place already.

The question I think is what effect would just simply banning guns have? Dems love to claim they don't want to ban guns, but then they talk about how great Australia is who... banned guns. And they talk about AR15's all the time even though they are responsible for exponentially fewer deaths than hand guns. TLDR: they're fundamentally ignorant of how guns work, but they really want to impose gun policy.

Taking that Nice, France truck attack example again: Let's say all guns were banned in the US (other than for police and military use). A mass shooter, by definition, has the psychology of somebody who wants to kill as many people as possible. I don't think that desire will just go away if he or she can't acquire a gun. They might instead just use a truck, which in France killed more people than any mass shooting that has ever occurred in the US. So banning guns might simply have the effect of making mass killings *more* deadly if they start just plowing into people with cars instead. We just won't call them "shootings" anymore, as if that is somehow better.

"Sure, 100 people just got murdered by a psycho driving a truck, but at least it wasn't a mass shooting!" is something many libs would probably really think.

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Concealed carry permit holders are more law abiding than actual police, statistically. Of course people should be responsible with their guns, but you're not going to hear a news story about responsible gun owners being responsible. "John Doe continued to have his gun safely secured today" isn't a news story, you're only made aware of the times where shit goes sideways which skews the perception of safety.

You really do just fall for the consulting echo chamber dribble you are fed by your grifting right podcast entertainment.


MYTH: Concealed handgun permit holders commit virtually no crimes

"In Lott’s book Gun Control Myths, he writes “Permit holders are convicted of firearms-related violations at about 1/6th of the rate that police officers are.

Lott’s analysis of permit revocation data is fatally flawed. Lott’s data suffers from incomplete data, missing data, lack of access to public data on permit holders, improperly completed background checks on permits, the failure of some states to require a background check on permit holder applicants, and states that rely on an honor system for permit revocation.

In addition to relying on unreliable data, Lott’s choice to compare permit holders with police officers is not persuasive because law enforcement frequently encounters situations where the opportunity for criminal conduct by officers, such as the misuse of force and corruption, is a potential, whereas permit holders as a group will almost never face similar situations."

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Botten thinks guns are uniquely capable of killing people, which just isn't true. A car can take out far more people far more quickly than any semi-automatic gun. The Nice, France truck attack for instance. Dude killed 86 people by just running them over, which is a higher body count than any mass shooting that has ever occurred in the US. And that guy was stopped by.... a gun.

Wanting to ban guns is mostly just an emotional, irrational response to tragedies that get plastered all over TV for months.

A gun is a tool to makes it easier to hurt or kill people.
A van, truck or car is meant for transport.

The guy was stopped by cops. I have no problem with cops having guns.

I want guns out the hands of citizens.

This needs to stop:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ngs-in-the-us/

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You really do just fall for the consulting echo chamber dribble you are fed by your grifting right podcast entertainment.


MYTH: Concealed handgun permit holders commit virtually no crimes

"In Lott’s book Gun Control Myths, he writes “Permit holders are convicted of firearms-related violations at about 1/6th of the rate that police officers are.

Lott’s analysis of permit revocation data is fatally flawed. Lott’s data suffers from incomplete data, missing data, lack of access to public data on permit holders, improperly completed background checks on permits, the failure of some states to require a background check on permit holder applicants, and states that rely on an honor system for permit revocation.

In addition to relying on unreliable data, Lott’s choice to compare permit holders with police officers is not persuasive because law enforcement frequently encounters situations where the opportunity for criminal conduct by officers, such as the misuse of force and corruption, is a potential, whereas permit holders as a group will almost never face similar situations."



A gun is a tool to makes it easier to hurt or kill people.
A van, truck or car is meant for transport.

The guy was stopped by cops. I have no problem with cops having guns.

I want guns out the hands of citizens.

This needs to stop:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ngs-in-the-us/

That's fine, even if the "concealed-carry-less-criminal" stat is wrong I don't even really care, because it's mostly irrelevant to the point.

Please see the point I just made regarding the truck attack. Yes trucks have other uses than mass murder. But if a lunatic can't get a gun, it doesn't mean their desire to mass-murder goes away. They might now use some other means, which might be WORSE than if they had just used a gun. The Nice, France truck attack killed more people than any US mass shooting ever has. And mass shootings are always the thrust of dems' desire to restrict guns, so answering that conundrum matters. I'm not arguing that if you want to ban guns you should want to ban trucks first; I'm arguing that banning guns could actually make mass-killings *more deadly* when they happen, because guns are actually not the most efficient way to kill people.

And on the "legitimate use" argument: Guns ALSO have a legitimate use other than mass murder, which is called self defense. And you once again don't seem to care that banning guns from citizens will guarantee tons of people die who wouldn't have died if they had a gun. You're once again just swapping out one bodycount for a different one, and you always ignore this point.

If your goal is "fewer innocent people dying", banning guns is not the magic solution you think it is.

[Landroval]

Originally Posted by aussenseiter [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

do the terrorism

Nice try, mossad.

[Elizondo]

Gun Grabbers just endlessly whine and should be ignored