Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know what you are talking about but Tulsi Gabbard notes she is pro 2nd amendment.
Nope, she's another one promoting a regressive attack on civil rights. Which is sad-I actually find her more sensible than most of the rest on some issues.
Tulsi has a consistent record of advocating for...gun control. She has long called for reinstating a federal ban on military-style assault weapons and high capacity magazines, requiring comprehensive pre-purchase background checks, closing the gun-show loophole, and making sure that terrorists are not allowed to buy guns. Tulsi has an F-rating from the NRA, a 0% rating by the Hawaii Rifle Association, and a 100% rating by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
It's not 50 years ago. Most Republicans have become far more progressive in the recognition of civil rights in regard to the 2nd. We now have concealed carry legal in some form in all states. Most have "shall issue" laws. And 14 (IIRC) now are "constitutional carry". While Dems have become more regressive and draconian.
Historically, reparations have only been made to direct victims, never to families or descendants.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ordered the state to pay reparations to the surviving victims 'way back in the early 2000s, but the legislature has been dragging its heels waiting for them all to die. The woman you mentioned died last November, but there is at least one man still alive, Hal Singer, who was 18 months old at the time.
Hell, I was a victim of Jim Crow. Most of the Freedom Riders are still alive. Of course, some of them were white--should James Zwerg get reparations?
But the concept of reparations would have to make the distinction between reparation for slavery--not at all likely-- and reparation for Jim Crow, which is a possibility.
OK, as for next of kin, how about the estate? The notion that someone who lost her mother at age 12 because of discrimination by the state/Government can't get any compensation.....!
And the fact that a legislative body deliberately drags out a court order, putting itself in contempt of court; and the fact that the court doesn't enforce it.....very telling! Here in New York, the judge enforced a desegregation order against the city of Yonkers. He put city officials in jail and fined the city until compliance. The city decided to keep fighting....and almost went bankrupt! Once again, very telling.....!
Any civil rights worker who was physically harmed during that period; surviving victims, plus the estates of Goodman, Schwerner and Cheney....!
tl;dr version: Ta-nehisi Coates and Danny Glover testify in front of congress in support of reparations, and a whole bunch of Democrats reiterated their support for the idea.
Legislation introduced by Corey Booker would waste taxpayer money by studying the possibility of reparations, how they would be distributed, how they would be funded, etc.
Just so we’re clear here, we’re talking about forcing white people — who didn’t own slaves or participate in slavery — to pay trillions of dollars into a fund that will be split along African American beneficiaries, who were not slaves.
Everyone involved in the American slave trade is long dead.
My parents both went to segregated schools and were not afforded the same opportunities as the white kids on the other side of the railroad tracks.
you talk about Slavery as if its repercussions didnt exist well into the 1970s and 80's and residual affects arent still there today.
well, I think we should all stop posting our ancestor's resume. Where they came from and when is irrelevant. We are all suckers who have to pay if such a law passed. (AA pays too, )
I just don't believe this law will pass. So I don't worry about it,
Doubt it will pass either but true, if it does, we are all paying.
I've seen some web sites showing the Dems positions on various issues-taxpayer funded healthcare, taxpayer funded college, reparations, changing the Supreme Court, etc. One thing I haven't seen is a summary of all their positions on gun control. Are there any that have NOT come out in favor of more restrictive, regressive laws restricting the civil rights of law abiding people? I don't recall any coming out specifically in support of the 2nd-but hope I'm wrong. Would be nice to see one of the bus load with a brain on this issue.
It doesn't look like you're wrong, Toyman. Apparently everyone in the democrat party clown car is against the second amendment.
Quote:
Case in point: Not a single Democratic candidate running for their party’s 2020 nomination supports loosening current gun control laws. Every one of them supports tighter restrictions, bans of certain firearms, and, truth be told, a full repeal of the Second Amendment if they could find a way to get it done.
“As one scrolls down through” the list of candidates recognized by The Washington Post as ‘frontrunners,’ notes Ammoland, “a solitary fact immediately jumps out: Every single one is venomously anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment.”
My parents were upper middle class in their home country, but they had to leave everything behind because of the American involvement in Vietnam War
LOLOL...my parents were poor in their home country so nope. We came from nothing and achieved the American Dream.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
