Slashdot Mirror
Reason Suggests DoJ Closing Porn Stars' Bank Accounts
MouseTheLuckyDog (2752443) writes "In a recent story on reason.com it was reported that the DoJ is closing down the bank accounts of porn stars. Not knowing the site I googled around and found another site, the Guardian. The story does not end there. It turns out that this is part of a larger scheme (ironically) called Operation Choke Point. Also reported in a Washington Post article that downplays the practice. According to Cryptocoin news. There are thirty industries the DoJ is now targeteting: Ammunition Sales; Cable Box De-scramblers; Coin Dealers; Credit Card Schemes; Credit Repair Services; Dating Services; Debt Consolidation Scams; Drug Paraphernalia; Escort Services; Firearms Sales; Fireworks Sales; Get Rich Products; Government Grants; Home-Based Charities; Life-Time Guarantees; Life-Time Memberships; Lottery Sales; Mailing Lists/Personal Info; Money Transfer Networks; On-line Gambling; PayDay Loans; Pharmaceutical Sales; Ponzi Schemes; Pornography; Pyramid-Type Sales; Racist Materials; Surveillance Equipment; Telemarketing; Tobacco Sales; and Travel Clubs. But more can be added. (I notice alcohol sales is not on the list)." The Reason article stops short of saying that Choke Point is proven to be the reason for the account closures, but it seems very plausible.
Are all of those industries popper names or something?
I'm probably wrong. I skipped journalism school, but man, oh man, holy capital letters Batman.
There are thirty industries the DoJ is now targeteting: Ammunition Sales; Cable Box De-scramblers; Coin Dealers; Credit Card Schemes; Credit Repair Services; Dating Services; Debt Consolidation Scams; Drug Paraphernalia; Escort Services; Firearms Sales; Fireworks Sales; Get Rich Products; Government Grants; Home-Based Charities; Life-Time Guarantees; Life-Time Memberships; Lottery Sales; Mailing Lists/Personal Info; Money Transfer Networks; On-line Gambling; PayDay Loans; Pharmaceutical Sales; Ponzi Schemes; Pornography; Pyramid-Type Sales; Racist Materials; Surveillance Equipment; Telemarketing; Tobacco Sales; and Travel Clubs.
Because these industires are a definite threat to National Security... Fail!!!
Nowhere in the Constitution are you guaranteed a bank account.
That the Constitution has zero mention of the power of the federal government to forbid you a bank account will be lost on the anti-drug "goddamn piece of paper" Republicans and liberals.
The Soviets cracked down on all these too, except the ones they ran themselves. Ammo sales were a particular no no. Credit cards? Absolutely not.
You won't find a right to a bank account in the Constitution.
That you won't find the power to stop you from having a Bank Account in the Constitution is a fact that will be lost on the anti-drug "Goddamned Piece of Paper" Republicans and liberals.
Using DoJ resources to force the closure of accounts belonging to "legal but subjectively undesirable business ventures"? There's no way in hell that can be legal. This is a slippery slope situation and should get folks on both sides of the aisle riled up
I'm not making any claims, I'm just making an observation:
Some of the things on DoJ's "Laundry List" of so-called "high financial risk" businesses are historically not high-risk AT ALL.
Like ammunition and firearms. Far from being "high-risk": manufacturers and retailers have historically been both large and long-lived. There is an ammunition manufacturer not all that far from here and they have been in business for 60 years. And the vast majority of ammunition is sold through major sporting-goods franchises, not mom-and-pop shops. Same with firearms.
Further, where people DO engage in small-scale ammunition or firearms sales or manufacturing, it is often a perfectly legitimate, specialty product. I know somebody who made and sold custom cartridges, and I have also met a guy who makes firearms. All perfectly legit and legal.
So pardon me for saying so, and I don't want to be misunderstood as being some kind of right-wing nut or anything, but it kind of looks like some things on this list are in fact Obama agenda items. Which is illegal.
Pepper the list with plenty of "industries" that the vast majority of people would dearly love to see destroyed, such as pyramid schemes, racist trash and payday loans, but shut down plenty of useful-but-intimidating-to-those-in-power businesses as well.
[End Of Line]
Not sure why merely doing business in the Ammunition Sales; Coin Dealers; Credit Repair Services; Dating Services; Firearms Sales; Fireworks Sales; Home-Based Charities; Life-Time Guarantees; Life-Time Memberships; Mailing Lists/Personal Info; Money Transfer Networks; On-line Gambling; PayDay Loans; Pharmaceutical Sales; Pornography; Racist Materials; Surveillance Equipment; Telemarketing; Tobacco Sales and Travel Clubs industries or combination thereof should automatically flag ones activies as "questionable". What happened to innocent until proven guilty??
...but I can't stand the thought of government deciding that some people (who aren't doing anything illegal) shouldn't be able to have a bank account.
I reject the excuse that it's all optional on the part of the banks. Having Big Brother breathing down your neck and Strongly Suggesting that you do something is absolutely inappropriate, and I'd love to see Washington, DC held accountable for this in some way.
For all the Ponzi-this, tulips-that that gets posted every time Bitcoin makes the news, this is one of the problems they're trying to solve. A prude at Chase or the DoJ can't close your bank accounts if you have no need of a bank in the first place.
DATABASE WOW WOW
Oh wait... Harper's in power
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
I reject the excuse that it's all optional on the part of the banks. Having Big Brother breathing down your neck and Strongly Suggesting that you do something is absolutely inappropriate, and I'd love to see Washington, DC held accountable for this in some way.
It seems to me, too, that even though many banks are "local" institutions, if they accept FDIC regulation I think they are supposed to play by Federal anti-discrimination and fair business rules. Which would prohibit Government from shutting down legal businesses just because they are "unwanted" by somebody in said government..
Come on guys.
Given Wells Fargo is currently accepting these people as customers, I think you need to produce a higher standard of proof before this conspiracy becomes believable.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Wait, so they want more of these industries to be cash based and perhaps un/under-report income tax??? I know plenty of people who have been moving more toward cash in the past several years, but it seems counter-intuitive the government would want to track less.
But seriously, how will this decrease fraud?
Operation Choke Point, starring Keifer Burns as "Point"
This is feminism in action. Pornstars are the living embodiment of their imaginary patriarchy.
Ammo sales were a particular no no.
Private gun ownership was fairly common in the Soviet Union, at about 10 guns per 100 people, and is still common in Russia today. Private citizens were limited to long guns (rifles and shotguns), and they had to register them. But they were generally available to almost anyone that wanted one. The idea that all dictatorships ban private weapons, or conversely, that an armed citizenry always prevents tyranny, is clearly false.
Drive porn to the black market... That will probably work as well as the war against drugs...
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
To do a few more money shots
Considering that investment firms cost the government HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in bailouts, can they really argue that porn stars are "risky"?
Maybe that's part of it. I think this is Big Government nanny state in action. They want to control everything they see, whether or not there's a law authorizing them to do so. It's this kind of arrogance that makes the IRS audit political opponents of the Obama administration for no other reason than to intimidate them and "make them go away". Making people go away in one form or another is a common theme with dysfunctional governments.
I had no idea that this was the case in the soviet era. Can you cite your sources please?
BINGO!
Do you WANT to create a shadow banking system? Because this is how you do it.
Agreed, it is clearly not optional on the part of the banks. This has a very chilling effect on activities where the regs can't actually prosecute for wrongdoing. If they could, they would, and they wouldn't be going this route. This sort of tactic is contrary to the principles of a free society. Banks will "choose" to decline to do business with certain people and companies if they feel they will get sued or have to spend a fortune on a governmental investigation. If there is truly evidence of illegal activities, authorities should go after the people allegedly engaged in those activities, not the banks. But in these cases, often times the activities are not really illegal, even if they are activities not loved by everyone in society. Because the government can't prosecute, should it be allowed to strong-arm banks into doing the dirty work? What does that sort of logic lead to, especially when things like banking are akin to breathing in modern society.
There are plenty of nefarious behaviors going on at banks that regulators would be wise to oversee, but this is a case of overstepping IMO. Regulators are forcing discrimination. Is it okay for banks to be choosy based on certain parameters (I don't like your business because it's porn and I think porn is ruining our society) and not others (I don't like your business because it supports, say, charter schools, and I the bank president happen to think charter schools are ruining our society)? That's discrimination. At the very same time, regulators would bring proceedings against these very same banks for refusing to do business with certain people/organizations just because they choose to.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
"PNC Financial Services Group Inc. (PNC) received a subpoena regarding the return rate for its payment-processor clients from the U.S. Department of Justice. The department’s consumer protection unit is seeking information “for certain merchant and payment processor customers with whom PNC has a depository relationship,” the Pittsburgh-based bank said today in a regulatory filing. “We believe that the subpoena is intended to determine whether, and to what extent, PNC may have facilitated fraud committed by third-parties against consumers.” "
Private citizens were limited to long guns (rifles and shotguns), and they had to register them. But they were generally available to almost anyone that wanted one. The idea that all dictatorships ban private weapons, or conversely, that an armed citizenry always prevents tyranny, is clearly false.
You don't need total confiscation. When you need to crack down on citizens, all you need is [A] that they don't own handguns (because those are primarily defensive weapons), and [B] that all other weapons are registered.
Then you're home free. When you know who has the weapons and who doesn't, you pretty much control them.
While I agree that "not all dictatorships ban private weapons", they don't have to. All they have to do is control who has them and who doesn't. Example: while it has often been denied, the Nazis did in fact grab guns... from the Jews. I recently read an article that had a picture of the original Nazi decree that Jews could not have guns or bank accounts. (!!!)
Sound familiar?
What they've done is pornographic in financial circles...
Kill the beta.
washington held accountable? it's an interesting concept but no one on government are for the people more than they are for their own asses.
No shit. The majority of the left wing nutters in the US are extremely pro-police state, pro-totalitarianism.
FTFY
If you want more confirmation, see any of the message boards dedicated to the affected industries. There you'll find the victims discussing what to do.
In some of these industries, like porn, one closure affects many, many people. All those free porn sites are financed by the ads they run for a comparatively small number of large pay site networks. Many of them don't expect to get paid this month because their sponsor's account has been shut down in the last few days. The affect is similar to, but not as big, as shutting down PayPal's accounts - it affects not only PayPal, but anyone who relies on PayPal for their business. There are also hosting companies and other service providers who make their living providing services to all the smaller sites. When the sponsor can't pay the small sites, the small sites can't pay their hosting bill. Anything that affects a couple of the large sponsors ripples through the industry.
No, this is feminism. FTSU.
Porn, lottery tickets, credit repair services, payday lenders.
Here is how the day for a typical poor person works:
1) Wake up, watch some porn
2) Go get a PayDay loan
3) Go buy some lottery tickets
4) Go to the credit repair service after not winning lottery
5)Sign up for some pyramid schemes
6) Watch some descrambled cable TV from neighbors cable connection
7) Party by doing some fireworks while smoking some tobacco and a bit of shooting some guns
These businesses really do prey on poor people. On one hand, you might think targeting these industries might be ineffective because people with really bad common sense are hard to stop from self-destructive activities.
Why aren't they just scanning driver's licenses as a requirement of buying lottery tickets and then compiling a list of super-habitual "blow all their money types".
These industries are organized crime, engaging in fraud/deceit and wrecking lives and run by criminals, and are run by the mafia types.
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
Yes, Obama clearly was pro-cable box descramblers and pro-fireworks when he ran for office.
Just one more way he didn't keep his promises!
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
I personally know people who got audited because of contributions to the IRS watch list. And they love to claim that it was a coordinated political attack against the right wing.
It wasn't.
When "non profit" groups form that are closely aligned with or have explicit anti-government agendas (particularly against the IRS, tax code, and the claimed illegality of personal income tax) then it's a no brainer place to look for those skirting the law.
No one was intimidated, their tax reporting was just flagged for the extra-scrutiny pile.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Would be nice if all of the folks so ostensibly concerned with the direction this takes us, had actually bothered to read the article. Sort of gives the lie to your moral crusading when you cant even be bothered to get informed on the issue.
It's not socialism, dipshit. It's outright fascist capitalism.
Removing high risk activities? They should close banks!
No shit. A majority of the second amendment nutters in the US are extremely pro-police state, pro-totalitarianism.
Really? Odd that reality doesn't seem to fit with your narrative. From everything that I've seen in the US, police are generally disliked by both sides of the isle. But between the two sides, especially 2nd amendment folks you'll find them being the ones who don't actually take to the militarization of police. While many left wing people do, and left wing groups. Going as far as pushing police depts. to get surplus military vehicles. So you were saying?
Om, nomnomnom...
It is effect, this is to banks what the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comics_Code_Authority&oldid=604210348 Comics Code Authority] was to comic-book stores.
Then: "If you don't want trouble, only sell pre-approved comic books"
Now: "If you don't want trouble, only deal with businesses in pre-approved lines of business."
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Of course I meant to say Comics Code Authority.
Memo to self: Preview THEN post.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
As if our weekly fun news didn't have enough material for its "US SPECIAL" corner...
What is it with the US and Porn? I've never seen a country so obsessed about it, and quite frankly any time some sort of report about some sort of sexual freak show or paraphilia, you may rest assured it's about the US.
Kinda reinforces my theory that the road to sexual perversion is repressing it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You're mixing up your terms. The USA are going for fascism, not socialism. If you look at Obama's policies from over here in Europe, he's still way on the right side of the axis, while socialism and marxism should be to the left. You guys are going way fascism scale though.
Frank Keating, former governor of Oklahoma and FBI agent who is now head of the American Banker's Association came out against Choke Point in a WSJ op-ed a week ago.
http://online.wsj.com/news/art...
When you become a banker, no one issues you a badge, nor are you fitted for a judicial robe. So why is the Justice Department telling bankers to behave like policemen and judges? Justice's new probe, known as "Operation Choke Point," is asking banks to identify customers who may be breaking the law or simply doing something government officials don't like. Banks must then "choke off" those customers' access to financial services, shutting down their accounts.
Justice launched the effort in early 2013 as a policy initiative of the president's Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, which includes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other regulatory agencies. Though details are scant—much of the investigation has been conducted in secret—the probe aims to crack down on fraud in the payments system by focusing on banks that service online payday lenders and other services deemed suspicious by the government....
^^ Haha funney post of the week!
Cash based in a web/phone/email world. What scammer wants the local person-to-person limitations of cash.
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
Except that you only see and hear what certain people say and what the REAL outcome is, not the smoke and mirrors.
Obama went to Columbia when Cloward and Pivens wrote their report on how to convert the USA to socialism. Sure looks like Obama is doing this.
^^ Haha funney post of week #2
Ah, yes. Will drive everything to the black market.
Just like those guys on the corner that sell ripped CDs and DVDs for cheap. Oh wait, that was the 1990s!
So I guess the common Joe that wants porn will be forced off the internet to find porn and will have to turn to dark alleys and buy illegal copies of Hustler!!
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
You heard it here first: Sex workers not being able to keep their money in a bank is worse than the Holocaust.
This fucking website, man.
Congress and the wealthy class would never do this. Frankly they own these types of businesses and it would be like punishing themselves. I don't think people are very aware of the giant corruption machine we call society.
First they came for the Porn Stars, and I did nothing...
Then they came for the Tobacconists, and I did nothing...
Etc...
Eventually, they'll take your savings and they'll find some kind of spin to justify it. But in the end, it's about Obey or have your money "privileges" revoked.
What to do? Well, don't buy gold or silver. You can't eat those.
But where are the investigations and prosecutions for those that played a large part in the destruction of the world's economy with the sub-prime mortgage loans? The people who are generating legitimate incomes, even if they are not the best moral activities, and reporting them as such should not have to be worried about the government actively attacking their economic existence.
For those that are acting illegally then go after them. But do not attack whole industries just because you have a few acting illegally and the industry may be morally or politically undesirable to some people. If the industry is really wrong then make the very real, ad very open, effort to make it illegal. Don't like guns, make gun manufacturing, sales, and ownership illegal. But that would have to be done openly and there would be a real effort to prevent that. The same with any of the other legal industries targeted in this effort. And where the industry is wrong use the proper means to close down those that are engaged in the undesired activities.
Not sure why ObamaCare is illegal. It seems to be merely a matter of jurisdiction.
Here in Australia, health care is a state-provided service. However, medical services have been funded by the federal government since the 1970s.
I had no idea you could still get cable descramblers that work worth a damn. Anyone know if they're legit? Anyone wanna point me toward a good source?
I used to get hacked DirectTV access cards back in the day and they were awesome...but I thought those days were over for good.
I've sworn to never pay for cable again, but I would sign up for a basic package if I could get everything else for free like back in the day.
Thank you DOJ; without your stupid initiative I woulda never known.
It's a bit regional I think, and mostly aligns with opinions on other issues. I've spent some time living in the southwest, and there is generally strong pro-police sentiment among conservative gun-owners in states like Arizona (and parts of Texas), largely due to their views on illegal immigration. If anything the prevailing sentiment in those areas is that the cops should be more militarized, fleets of drones with missiles and everything, and should be given more police-state-style powers to stop anyone at any time and ask for their documents.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
"Nice bank you have there. Wouldn't it be a shame if we had to shut you down and audit you and your best customers for the next six months?"
"Now, here is a list of people we think you better not do business with. Any questions?"
I found two non-fringe or slightly suspect news links: EFF.org. The article completes the circle back to sites like reason.com and The Guardian. The other is CNBC.com. It links to entertainment sites like Perez Hilton. Not the sort of thing you expect to find when a secret government operation like this is uncovered.
What I don't see, is anything linking directly to information about the DOJ's Operation Chokepoint. The list of targets is a bit broad and the tactics are a little suspect. You wouldn't think of a far left liberal like Obama as someone who is anti-porn. We'll have to watch this and see how things develop. Maybe someone will find a few hard government generated facts and write up a 2600 article?
Only the dead have seen the end of War. - Plato
Government agencies no longer have to prove your guilt before making and enforcing judgement. Due mostly to the war on drugs/terror/piracy, they are despotic fiefdoms.
While I'm sure there is a lot of room for abuse, I kind of applaud this action.
I think far too long the government has let banks and payment processors off the hook when it comes to enabling fraud.
A lot of fraud wouldn't exist in our modern world if it didn't have access to financial services. In some ways its the air supply of fraud.
Nice troll. How are ammunition or porn sales "fraudster industries"? People do get what they pay for, it's just that the government (yes, the nanny state) doesn't approve. Back in your troll hole now. Scoot!
Explain Ben Carson's audit. It's one of many.
> Obama went to Columbia when Cloward and Pivens wrote their report on how to convert the USA to socialism. Sure looks like Obama is doing this.
Yep, since Socialism is government owning the means of production. Under Obama, the government has nationalized the following industries:
1.)
While I agree that "not all dictatorships ban private weapons", they don't have to. All they have to do is control who has them and who doesn't. Example: while it has often been denied, the Nazis did in fact grab guns... from the Jews. I recently read an article that had a picture of the original Nazi decree that Jews could not have guns or bank accounts. Sound familiar?
The Nazis allowed Germans civilian to have long guns too. I recall reading an account by a former US officer who had accepted the surrender of a German unit. He told the German commander to collect all weapons and deposit them at the town hall. Among the weapons collected were numerous civilian rifles and shotguns collected from the town residents. The US commander told the German commander he only meant the military weapons and that the civilian weapons should be set aside so that their owners could come to the town hall to claim their property and have it returned to them.
I'm not saying I'd agree with taking those bank accounts. But worse than Nazi Germany is pushing it a bit too far, no? It's not as if they are attempt to rid the world of an ethnic race.
Private citizens were limited to long guns (rifles and shotguns), and they had to register them. But they were generally available to almost anyone that wanted one. The idea that all dictatorships ban private weapons, or conversely, that an armed citizenry always prevents tyranny, is clearly false.
You don't need total confiscation. When you need to crack down on citizens, all you need is [A] that they don't own handguns (because those are primarily defensive weapons), and [B] that all other weapons are registered. Then you're home free. When you know who has the weapons and who doesn't, you pretty much control them. While I agree that "not all dictatorships ban private weapons", they don't have to. All they have to do is control who has them and who doesn't. Example: while it has often been denied, the Nazis did in fact grab guns... from the Jews. I recently read an article that had a picture of the original Nazi decree that Jews could not have guns or bank accounts. (!!!) Sound familiar?
Um, no, it doesn't sound familiar. What in the world are you talking about? (Unless you have one of those Obama as Hitler posters in your basement. Then it all makes sense.)
Explain Ben Carson's audit.
Easy: lots of people get audited, many of them at random. Somewhere around 1% of returns are selected each year. Recent trends show that approximately 245 million returns (PDF!) are filed each year, that's almost 2.5 million people who will be on the receiving end of that damned envelope.
My father was hit with an audit this year concerning his 2012 return. He hasn't voted in 40 years, isn't even registered in this state, and he sure isn't making political contributions or starting up a charity. There's no history of tax troubles, he didn't file or claim anything new or unusual that year. He just "won" the audit lottery. Sometimes famous people like Dr. Carson win it, too.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
Baloney. This is nothing more than the latest darrell issa witch hunt. Benghazi, the IRS, and the post office aren't getting enough traction anymore, so he needs a new rallying cry, and the faux news wannabes are more than happy to oblige.
The object of Cloward & Pivens is to cause a total financial collapse. That will be done by Marxism.
Once the collapse is done, the new "Elite Party" (my name) will rise to properly own and control and dispense everything to the populace (slaves.)
Not sure why ObamaCare is illegal. It seems to be merely a matter of jurisdiction. Here in Australia ...
The construction of the US government was based on competing centers of power. That power would be split between the federal government and the various state governments, and that within the federal government the power would be split between executive, legislative and judicial branches. The basic idea was to have checks and balances between the federal and the state and within the federal itself.
The constitution does this by enumerating the powers and authorities of the various components of the federal government and then it explicitly states that all other powers and authorities are the domain of the state governments.
The argument against Obamacare goes that since the constitution does not enumerate compelling a person to purchase a service as a power of the federal government it is a power that falls into the domain of the states.
In other words the power of the federal government is limited by an enumerated list of power and authority granted to the federal government and the power of the state governments is limited, plus the power of the federal government is further limited, by an enumerated list of rights and privileges granted to individual citizens.
Russia today may be better in this regard, but when I lived in USSR, I did not know a single person, who owned a weapon — even martial arts were frowned upon by the officials and what studios existed, were underground. Today in the US quite a few of my acquaintances have firearms — and my five year-old attends a karate class twice a week.
So, as they say, Citation needed...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
thousands? are all of their accounts being closed?
there are probably hundreds of porn stars at any time being that they go through girls like baseballs at a game. plus all the people behind the scenes.
is there suddenly a stop to all porn production? because that's what would happen if people can't get paid or companies lose access to banking
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land (Article VI), and federal judges have power to interpret law (Article III). This includes power to interpret laws limiting the power of Congress, or in other words, to declare that Congress broke the law when enacting a particular statute.
google it
chase closed a few accounts
the porn people went on twitter and a lot of their friends closed their chase accounts in protest
in reality it was a few accounts
When it comes to dictatorship, WHO has the guns is important, and 'military/police' isn't the only criteria.
With a 10% private ownership rate, that could be something like 'the rich/mid-high level party members'.
In a society that's tribally fixated like much of the middle east, I'd work to ensure that my tribe has the firearms, nobody else.
I don't read AC A human right
Woah, please cite an instance where left wing groups are pushing police depts. to get surplus military vehicles. It's generally the left that is always marching around protesting police brutality with things like the Oct. 22nd marches/rallies that have been going on. It's the left that protests US military interventions. The left that bitches about the police state. It's the left that the right calls peacenicks and makes fun of for not wanting to arm themselves in the name of pacifism. Police states don't fit into that equation.
You can get them now, although you need a valid CableCARD to make them work.
Unless you have one of those Obama as Hitler posters in your basement.
Obama could never be mistaken for Adolf Hitler. Hitler could rally crowds and command respect/fear on the global stage. Poor Mr. Hapless no longer seems able to do the former and was never able to do the latter.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
When it comes to dictatorship, WHO has the guns is important, and 'military/police' isn't the only criteria.
I think you will find that the WHO is more concerned with health issues than with guns.
p.s. learn how to use proper emphasis in your postings.
That's the claim from some on the democrats. Probably some of the same democrats who filibustered the civil rights act. In fact, over the last 20 years, there have been three major anti-porn laws, all eventually struck down by the Supreme Court. All three were signed by Bill Clinton.
Not only do the liberals pander to to the extremist feminists by going after porn, they keep at it, never giving up when the Supreme Court tells them over and over again "no, you can't do that. You're violating the first amendment". That's the fact. For more information, Google "CDA", "CDA II", etc.
This is looking like it will be a PR nightmare for the DoJ. It's going to look like an effort to impose morality and in a way that discriminates against the poor. There's all kinds of juicy hooks in a story like this to make sure it gets plenty of prime time news coverage.
My first question is: is the fundie element going to cheer because the gov't is cracking down on sinners? or freak because they are cracking down on god, guns and country?
my second question is : Can we get televangelists added to the list?
I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
Did you not agree to the terms and conditions? Be glad you don't have your lips sewn onto a chinaman's asshole. They can do that if you agreed to let them.
Why is it that we have so many nutcase conspiracy theory adherents in this country? Did the average IQ around here drop dramatically in the past few years? Jesus people, science is about evidence, not lame brained mentally deranged faith.... yet that's what more and more people who apparently won't take their medication keep putting up around here.
Yes, it looks like the DoJ is trying to crack down on scammers and frauds... who wouldn't applaud that? Seems to be quite a few people, especially ones that like living in their own fantasy land hating the government.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
This is bullshit, in case you didn't guess. Follow the Guardian link. One bank, Chase, is closing porn-related bank accounts, including "at least one" personal account. Chase is operating in the USA and making a calculation that it has more prudes than porn businesses among its customer base. This has nothing to do with the US government.
From everything that I've seen in the US, police are generally disliked by both sides of the isle.
aisle*
DoJ is encouraging banks to close bank accounts of risky actors.
How are porn stars "risky" in any way? They make a fair amount of money, what they do is legal beyond all doubt.
What the DOJ is doing, is helping re-define what "risky" means according to some victorian moral code.
Strangely enough none of them are big names. Its almost like someones trying to create a story where there is none.
Because it's easier to attack the weaker members of the flock first before you take out the last few remaining. The presumption would be by the time anyone noticed, it would be too late - and it would in theory provide a chilling effect on new people entering the adjust industry, killing off the industry by shutting down supply.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Oh, wait, they already did that with the Saturn dealers.
Operate a Cheque Cashing/ Payday Lending Business?
Operate, lease or maintain a White Label Banking Machine?
Operate a Casino, Bingo, or Gambling/ Gaming service (including internet gambling)?
Sell used cars, boats or planes?
Operate as an Arms Manufacture Dealer or Intermediary?
Create or trade in Digital Currencies (Bitcoin)?
Operate a Telemarketing / Direct Marketing business (sell goods/services via telephone or the internet)?
Operate a Pawn broker service?
Operate an account for a Foreign Government?
Operate a Correspondent Bank?
Operate a Shell Bank?
I would really like a citation for this, or at least a point to continue some research. I have an amateur interest in history, and have been attempting for a long time now to figure out how the Russian experiment in Communism went so badly wrong. Marx was an adamant supporter of individual ownership of firearms, but somehow that didn't make it into practice in any Communist experiment.
So if you have some information regarding civilian firearms ownership in Soviet Russia, I would love to know.
Reason, Guardian, Washington Post...
Cite a source that doesn't just make stuff up.
I read the letter that the senators wrote, and it doesn't mention anything even close to what this submitter is claiming.
Why is slashdot approving tinfoil-hatter submissions now? That's the bigger story.
hmm, since affirmative action is inherently hypocritical for pushing discriminatory privilege along attributes it claims shouldn't matter, I'd say that hypocrisy is not limited to the wealthy private sector.
Take your 'soviet' newspeak and shove it up your ass.
You don't need total confiscation. When you need to crack down on citizens, all you need is [A] that they don't own handguns (because those are primarily defensive weapons), and [B] that all other weapons are registered.
Then you're home free. When you know who has the weapons and who doesn't, you pretty much control them.
You want to say that again? The US has long controlled it citizens. As has Russia, and if people are motivated and in large enough numbers they will acquire various weapons and start a rebellion. You look at any regime that is a dictatorship and you see no matter what type of controlled system they put in place people will rise up and fight it. It comes down to numbers of course that is military power, that out numbers any rebellion.
Gun control isn't going to do anything to control citizens, or disarm them from a possible up-rise. In Russia you live in a country and most know their fucked when it comes to freedom, in this country they've done a great job at getting the majority to buy into their bullshit. There is no difference between the two countries, both use propaganda to suck citizens into a false sense.
But they were generally available to almost anyone that wanted one.
I don't think that's true. Certainly there were ways to get a gun in the USSR if you needed one, but based on how happy my Russian coworker was to buy a gun in America, it wasn't easy for anyone to get one.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Why would they want to shut down porn? The people in the DOJ would have nothing to do all day...
If you read in Russian, you should google , and 1960. In short, being a civilian in the USSR, you could get strictly a hunting rifle. There was no Castle doctrine, so you couldn't realistically use it for own protection. Such action would make yourself a criminal almost automatically. The registering process and regular checks were quite strict, and you were bound to sell or abandon weapons if you have failed to renew your license in term. Hunters were watched over quite carefully, and a case of bad behavior could make their license revoked (there was a kind of civil watch program in the USSR). The '10 in 100' number posted above seems not very realistic for me. In my own town of birth (with plenty of forests with sporting game around) there were less than a thousand of registered hunters out of the 130,000-strong population. Disclosure: my father was a hunter for a few years in 1970s, even before my birth, then get rid of his rifle.
Oh good, slashdot is quite harsh with the cyrillic. I mean voluntary hunting society, okhotnichiy bilet and law on hunting of 1960.
It's easier to just convince gun owners that whoever is the target of tyranny is their enemy too. This is how the US government got away rounding up US citizens and putting them in internment camps.
Oh, also convince them that "we" respect your rights (as we're collecting all your phone calls) and "they" are trying to take your guns away (even though they're not). That shit always works.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
So where are all of those NRA protests against wholesale warrantless wiretapping?
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
when you've weakened their access to food/shelter/healthcare you pretty much control them.
Maybe 100 years ago you were right, but these days the tech available to a modern army is so much better than what Joe Blow can afford it's not even a contest. To say nothing of the training a soldier gets.
Dictatorships are much more concerned with controlling who gets to eat and sleep in a warm house. If you too busy worrying about food and shelter you're not worrying about oppression...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
at least not a material one. So it's not surprising people look on at the current administration doing a lot of the same things as the last one and conclude their all the same.
To be fair, I think the current Administration (e.g. Obama's) is doing the best he can. I doubt I could do any better. But given the current state of America there's no chance in hell you'll see a real left...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Sound familiar?
Yes, it reminds me of how the Black Panthers tried to exercise their Second Amendment rights, by marching into the statehouse in Sacramento in 1967.
That was unacceptable. California couldn't let negroes go around with guns. The legislature passed a gun-control law, and Governor Ronald Reagan signed it.
Reagan went on to become president in 1980, and appointed his own justices to the Supreme Court.
And that's how America lost its freedom.
Right, fucking Democrats, always pushing the police into buying surplus military vehicles...god damn it I have family in Berkeley and they're always going on about the police needing to buy like a diesel submarine or maybe an Apache helicopter.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
Hunter clubs members were allowed to have rifles. You needed (actually still need) to pass same medical test as for drivers license. Cannot be mentally ill, cannot be alcoholic.
Without hunter clubs it want possible to contro animal population. Rabbits, wolves, foxes are pretty devastating to farms. This apply to country.
In cities (cities in Ex/Ussr are smaller but densly populated) citizens didnt own firearms.
If you dont aim to be in some executive role / tv star / some very VVVVIP then dont dream about USSR kind of communism.
Humans are born to live free. It is impossible to be creative if you are totally controlled. In USSR you couldnt just decide to change work type. You could not decide easily, ok Ill be a an artist now. You had to learn before - in Academy Of Arts. And its rather hard if you have reached some age. And all your work would need to pass censorship.
Most tasks had very tight time schedules. Many couldnt cope with that and started to drink heavily. Why do you think russians drank/ still drink so much? Because of good life?
Medicine was better then (for poor people). Every one was "fixed" when needed. Now it is very expensive.
Communism does not work without brainwash, censorship and good wall between free world and communists. Cause when you see what you are not allowed to and you want this very bad. Then leaders have to give you that or have to keep saying that all other world is wicked.
Just like Putin is doing right now.
I may be confused, but it appears that banks are willingly and proactively closing these accounts to cover themselves.
Truly a terrible act, and overreach from the government, but it's just an example of people and large economic actors being cowardly and selfish. Companies - but also individuals - don't care about the rights of others. It is a very sad fact, but basically no one holds morality or "rights" (as an ideal) above their own self interest. A bank won't risk itself to support freedom/free speech/self determination.
There's a Godwin here as well... though they would have forcibly done the deed if "necessary," whereas this is entirely due to capitalism and lack of principles.
No what they did was illegal and unconstitutional at the IRS. Basically, people who had donated to these 501Cs where outed to the democratic party after the 501Cs where illegally asked to provide donor lists. While some left leaning groups where given additional scrutiny most the majority where simply waved through. But most damning is that fact The Democratic Party and aligned 501Cs begun personal attacks against anonymous tea party and rightwing donors. Yes, the proof will be hard if not impossible to find but the circumstantial evidence is pretty damning. Search around for donors attacked by democrats. They ether hacked some datebases or they got the names from someone??? and now we know who was asking for the names.
At the end of the day this just shows us why we need to simplify the government. Just get rid of 501Cs and all other tax free organizations there all political to some degree anyway.... Or should be free to be as political as they want to be.
For the lazy..
Estimated 8.9/100 in guns per 100 ppl privately owned so about 1/11th of the amount in the US
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firea...
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firea...
"Guns may be acquired for self-defense, hunting or sports activities only. Russian citizens can buy smooth-bore long-barreled firearms and pneumatic weapons with a muzzle energy of up to 25 joules. An individual cannot possess more than ten guns unless part of a registered gun collection, guns that shoot in bursts and having more than a ten-cartridge capacity are prohibited."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O...
http://www.gunlab.com.ru/
Honestly in today's age, there is no excuse for lazy assed ppl to cry 'citation needed', this is not an encyclopedia, its a debate, take the effort to research rather then cry for others to do it for you. I remember the horrid old days of the internet when searching for data was a task, its not, grow up or shutup.
You have 5 Moderator Points!
Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
Meaning - any attempt by white people to inform other white people of the ongoing genocide against us, through undemocratic, unwanted mass immigration of non-whites into white countries.
Why aren't millions of white people moving in Africa or India every year? Hmm...
No shit. A majority of the second amendment nutters in the US are extremely pro-police state, pro-totalitarianism.
Really? Odd that reality doesn't seem to fit with your narrative. From everything that I've seen in the US, police are generally disliked by both sides of the isle.
Depends on the area. Individuals tend to want the public to share their values and behavior, so gun nutters tend to want the public to share their values. In places where the gun nutter values coincide with local law, this means they like when the state uses strong enforcement of law, say to win the war on drugs. In places where the gun nutter values differ from local law, they tend to see their guns as a defense against government over-reach, say to defend free grazing rights.
Big surprise, they're only "totalitarian gun nutters" if they disagree with you.
Then of course there are the ways they inadvertently (or perhaps deliberately) prevent action against the current acts of tyranny by the oligarchs, discussed just a few days ago.
You don't need total confiscation. When you need to crack down on citizens, all you need is [A] that they don't own handguns (because those are primarily defensive weapons), and [B] that all other weapons are registered.
[A] is complete bullshit. Handguns were created as weapons for riders, because you can shot them single-handedly, while with a long gun, you have to stop your horse and then shot both-handedly. Handguns are primarily attack weapons.
Obama is pissed that he has not gotten any tail or even a blow job.
Give big O some tail and a blow job and the DoJ will "cease and desist" faster than a bother finishing a bucket of KFC.
Ha ha
The Nazis allowed Germans civilian to have long guns too.
That should read "German civilians who were members in good standing in the Nazi Party, or the family member or friend of someone with authority in the Nazi Party. If that Party member happened to fall into political disfavor, or the citizen's personal enemy(s) reported him for some betrayal or politically-forbidden speech etc, those individuals were suddenly instantaneously prohibited from possessing a firearm.
This status-change was often announced by way of a Luger or MP40 discharged into the unlucky formerly-legal-gun-owner for the offense of illegally possessing a firearm.
Every single person ever born or who will ever be born has the natural right to self defense. How much any particular government recognizes this natural individual right varies greatly, however. Until basic human nature deeply and fundamentally changes, people will always need an effective means of self defense against other humans attempting to do them great harm, and therefor have the natural right to that defense.
Every tyranny and authoritarian state down through history where individual freedom was severely restricted also severely restricted and onerously-regulated, or prohibited outright, common people from possessing effective personal weapons for self defense.
Failing to learn such important lessons from history leads people into de-facto slavery if not actual, outright slavery. That is, if they are lucky enough that the powers-that-be haven't included good old genocide of "*those* people" (whoever is politically-inconvenient or convenient, as the case may be) as part of their goals.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Hi! As a card-carrying NRA member, I'm one of those "Second Amendment folks" you're talking about here. A couple of points:
It's "the Second Amendment," not "the Second Amendments." There's only one Second Amendment.
Overthrowing the government by force is the right of the people, yes. It's also unbelievably stupid in the overwhelming majority of cases. Civil war is horrific and something best avoided. The Framers did intend the armed populace to be a bulwark against governmental infringements on liberty, yes, but mostly by means of making the government afraid to violently oppress the people for fear of the armed resistance they would face.
In this, the Framers have been overwhelmingly successful: where in past eras a government would've just bludgeoned people into believing the law was what they said it was, nowadays our politicians have learned to couch things in terms of "counterterrorism" and "protecting the children" and we'll quite amicably assent to whatever they say the law is.
The Framers had the right idea, they just weren't quite clever enough: they thought the risk would be a government that used force against the people, whereas the real risk is from public relations and focus groups.
Anyway -- short version: although I am one of those "Second Amendment folks," I, and all of the other "Second Amendment folks" I know, am absolutely against civil war. Horrible, terrible idea. I've seen enough gunshot wounds already in my life, thank you very much: I feel no need to be the cause of them.
This would amount to "terroristic threats", and would be considered grossly illegal in all 50 states. I, and all of the other "Second Amendment folks" I know, think this behavior is reprehensible.
The constitution gives the interpretation to the supreme court.
it's funny that no one thought that until the supreme court decided it was so.
To prevent such random risks to people earning money in the eu there will be laws to protect the common people.
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health...
However i think this is about personal accounts. If you want a bank account for a porn business you might have to shop arround.
Taking away a person's assets without a trial seem unconstitutional to me.
Can you explain how a handgun is a defensive weapon? Does it prevent you from being shot like bullet proof vest??
In my opinion (and I guess I agree with at least some others), guns are offensive weapons: http://www.theblaze.com/storie...
From a practical perspective, I don't thiink a handgun or a rifle will do you very much good against the KGB. Oppressive regimes tend to have military dominance and unless private citizens own tanks and missile launchers (a recipe for disaster), nonviolent social change will have to be the avenue of reform at a citizen level.
There should be a law against punishment of that type carried out without a trial.
"left wing groups. Going as far as pushing police depts. to get surplus military vehicles"
Uh.... citation needed. Yeah. Left wing groups push police militarization? By.... marching against police brutality all the time? Name me ONE left wing group that's for police militarization. Just ONE. So full of shit.....
Or even one gun per 10 people.
Wow, that's one hell of a log of delusional shit. You do know about the gun control laws around Chicago, the place where King Barry hails from, don't you?
How many accounts does it take? How is it legal to even close one?
If the government can get away with this, where does it stop? Close the bank of accounts of political rivals? Close the bank accounts of those who write unflattering articles about Obama?
Seems to me that this action sets a dangerous precedent.
There can be only one reason to deny the stunning Nazi-esque politics of the left - being of them.
You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
LOL, WTF are you smoking? Oh yeah, Glenn Beck.
Financial collapse isn't going to happen due to Marxism, it's going to happen because of 1) Medicare, Social Security, and military spending bankrupting the Treasury, and 2) eroded tax base due to a shrinking labor force, offshoring of industry, consolidation of agriculture, and Wall Street destroying the middle class by robbing them of all their disposable cash through usurious lending.
All debt is a bet on a rosier future, and thanks to the crappy policies and education of the last 40-odd years, we have set ourselves up to fail. Good luck supporting the retirees on a country full of service sector trying to give haircuts to people whose purse strings are getting endlessly tighter.
Typical right wing conspiracy theory thrown out for all the knuckledraggers to get all hysterical about.
This is actually the second time this happened. The first attempt failed, code named Operation "Deep throat."
Reason suggests...
An organization named "The Reason" has determined...
Some random media outlet, no one has ever heard of, is alleging... ...and then the inflamtory link baity part.
Closing accounts is one thing but there are a lot more insidious things going on. For example, my Chase Business account was recently changed without my approval such that I could not make outgoing international wire transfers unless I kept $50,000 in the account. That means that I have to tie up more cash that doesn't earn any interest in order to be able to purchase components from outside the country. That was the first straw. The next one was when my business banking rep called me to try to convince me to close out some of my credit cards that I keep on hand for times when I need to purchase a lot of inventory to handle a big order. Intentionally closing a credit card has negative impact on your credit rating. Why was the rep trying to get me to fall on my own sword? They said they were concerned about my exposure. WTF? I always pay the cards off every month. What exposure?
But there are other cases where some bureaucrat functionary decides to take "social justice" into their own hands. The firearms business has recently been targeted even though everything they are doing is perfectly legal and above board. In one instance, the bank rep told the company "We don't think you should be in this business." In another, a manufacturer went into a meeting with the bank they had been doing business with for years. The bank rep told them that they were going to take away their lines of credit. To the manufacturer's credit, they said "Fine. We're closing all our accounts now. Today. This minute."
Thank you very much. I don't read Russian well (yet). I appreciate you taking the time to explain.
With people like you voting I'm not surprised your country is turning into the toilet bowl of the earth.
Luckily for the rest of us you'll all get flushed sooner or later.
You know, that's like your opinion man. The President was elected twice by the American people despite the derision and hatred implied by your comment.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
Credit Unions?
F$%^& the big banks I haven't put money in a -bank- in 20+ years. I have been using credit unions EXCLUSIVELY. The banks are always having this kind of cr@p played with them and the big banks can get away with this stuff. Try it with a local credit union. The MEMBERS own the thing.
no its not, Just because I dont like the IRS does not mean the IRS should put me under more scrutiny. If anything it just shows that the admin are bullies. I thought we were against bullies??? isnt that one of the things they are pushing these days?
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Never overlook the obvious answer. Perhaps the cash deposits made by the porn stars were causing complaints from other customers that they were somewhat slippery and had an unusual odor.
Perhaps a few of us could undertake to have a whiff the next time we're in the WF bank.
If your only tool is a hammer, you'll approach every problem as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
A lot of the ones on the list are absoluely legitimate enterprises. It seems to me that there's something else going on here. Wish I knew what...
do you support racism? Hmm, xOra? Supporting white supremacist garbage in 2014 with some pointy-headed legalism that ignores human suffering, human rights and the need for human dignity is pretty odious. I think your employer would like to know about it.
DemocRATS are crony currupt...
Of course, one needs facts not in evidence here and a dash of paranoia in order to fall into that category. Thanks for being the voice of reason.
Sorry for the headline, but this stuff just infuriates me. As a former journalist, I really hate this kind of inferential reporting. And even worse is the way that Americans have been trained by decades of political talkshow entertainers and by the tendency of online communications to isolate us into like-thinking groups. When presented with an outrageous assertion like this, why are the reactions of people here -- most of whom, I assume, consider themselves to be of above-average intelligence -- to simply accept conclusory statements and start shaking their heads about the chilling effects of government? The rational response, IMO, if you're too lazy or too swamped to RTFA is to maintain a healthy skepticism: "That's a pretty extreme accusation. If it's true, it's a real problem. But I don't have any information to confirm its truth and, to be honest, it's outrageous enough to require significant corroboration before I get too worried about it."
So often, when a correct response would be, "That's a grave accusation. Unfortunately, I don't have enough information to have an educated opinion on the matter one way or the other," we instead respond with, "That's chilling!", "That's just one more example of why , , , , , , , are evil!."
If you want to have an opinion that means something, I believe that you need to constantly be questioning it. Otherwise, you get into circular logic that must makes you stupid: i) Obamacare is bad; ii) I know this because it caused skyrocketing healthcare costs; iii) I know it caused skyrocketing healthcare costs because Rush Limbaugh told me so; iv) I know Rush Limbaugh is correct because Obamacare is bad; v) etc. (For the record, check factcheck.org -- despite the viral nature of the incessant pounding of the "skyrocketing healthcare costs" mantra, factcheck looked up the real numbers and found that the ACA did not result in a significant rise in premiums -- and that the guests that the talkshow guys parade on their shows who claim otherwise aren't telling the whole story. But I digress.)
Here, if you follow the link and the links from the links, you find that: i) reputable sources like the Washington Post & WSJ cite abuses related to a DoJ "Operation Choke Hold (sic)"; ii) these abuses relate to using banks to squeeze payday-lending organizations, which have been known to violate lending laws or take unfair advantage of clients; iii) the bank accounts of some porn star and her husband were closed by a bank; iv) the porn star claims that a bank employee told her in private that the accounts were closed because of pressure related to this heavily reported "Operation Choke Hold."
Really?? That's the story? From that the author extrapolates a concerted effort by the Federal government to suppress dozens of classes of politically unpopular business. Worse, the author deliberately misrepresents other sources, apparently (correctly) believing that most readers will not click the links. See, for example, the link in the last paragraph, which misrepresents a Republican Congressman's remarks about the payday lending assertions (themselves likely exaggerated in order to make Democrats look bad) by making it appear that the Congressman is referring to the porn star's unsupported claims.
If only there was a way to close my Slashdot account. I'm so tired of this stupid shit.
A new award-winning documentary, "Risky Business: A Look Inside America's Adult Film Industry," examines many of the current issues surrounding the adult film industry, including many of the discriminatory items addressed in this article. The film's website is RiskyBusinessTheMovie dot c0m
Um, no, it doesn't sound familiar.
Then you haven't been paying attention. The whole theory being discussed here is that DoJ may be forcing banks to shut down bank accounts that belong to people who engage in the businesses of (among other things) firearms and ammunition sales.
[A] is complete bullshit. Handguns were created as weapons for riders, because you can shot them single-handedly, while with a long gun, you have to stop your horse and then shot both-handedly. Handguns are primarily attack weapons.
You are hundreds of years out-of-date. Handguns WERE primarily attack weapons. Today, in the United States, they are used vastly more often defensively. I mean in a ratio of something like 1000 to 1. So yes, they are primarily defensive weapons. Today. In the United States.
(Note: "used" defensively does not necessarily mean "fired". Statistics suggest that they stop crime many times more often just by showing them than they do by shooting. And even when they are shot in defense, often they don't hit anything, yet they still deter the crime.)
Sorry, the timing of Dr. Carson's audit was not a coincidence. He was targeted because of his political speech immediately after embarrassing President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast.
In my opinion, there should be a clear paper trail at the IRS establishing exactly how all audit decisions are made, and where/why they originated. If it originated from the Oval Office, that information should be available on demand by the auditee, and it should be a felony to conceal it. Obama's IRS has really been going to town with auditing his political opponents, and Bill Clinton's IRS allegedly actually admitted at one point that an audit was being done for payback against a person suing the president.
When the IRS is used as a political tool (or really, weapon), people's confidence in our country's freedoms is justifiably eroded. I'd like to see laws, harsh penalties and (again) paper trails brought to bear on this problem.
Your tinfoil hat is too tight. But I think you like it that way.
Obama has some serious flaws, but he did in fact save the world economy from being dragged into a depression caused by deregulation of the parasites on Wall Street. It must be easier for you to think about the world when you wear glasses that render everything in black and white.
And that crack about being unable to "command fear/respect on the global stage" is a regurgitated Fox talking point. You probably missed the fact that Obama threatened force, and was able to avoid using it, to get Assad to agree to relinquish his chemical weapons. Much cheaper, in both American lives and treasure. But don't let that get in the way of your narrative.
In my opinion (and I guess I agree with at least some others), guns are offensive weapons
80+ years of official Unites States Government statistics disagree with you.
For early years those statistics can be obtained from the Department of Justice. For more recent years, the Bureau of Crime Statistics.
I am rather amused that someone is using, as a supporting argument, the testimony of a sole person in the farthest Left and most pro-gun-control state of all 50.
Most police and sheriff's departments, and even police unions and organizations, say that handguns are the defensive weapon of choice, and support private ownership of handguns.
By the way: major crimes in this country are DOWN a full 50% from 20 years ago, and even more compared to 30 years ago. During that entire time, per-capita gun ownership (including handguns) has gone steadily up, and "concealed carry" has virtually exploded over that same period. Watch that chart for a moment. (Note: blue in that chart very much does NOT mean "blue state".)
If concealed handguns aren't being used "defensively", then what are they all being used for? Whatever it is, it sure isn't crime.
If you think this WHOLE DISCUSSION is "tinfoil hat", then what the hell are you doing here?
I remind you: these ideas are speculative only. But the fact that you (and maybe even me) think they're crazy is not reason to not talk about them.
That link did not come through for some reason.
Here is the chart to which I was referring.
The Nazis allowed Germans civilian to have long guns too.
That should read "German civilians who were members in good standing in the Nazi Party ...
Which could have been nearly anyone. Many joined the party because it was an economic or social necessity, not because they were true believers. Even the Allied military recognized this as they went about de-Nazifying the country.
Seems like any moron can manage to get elected President, even twice.
Wow. Trouble with links today.
.gif, so watch for a moment.
Third try: U.S. "right to carry" since 1986
It's an animated
Totally illegal, totally unsupported by any laws.
Time to arrest all staff of the DoJ, throw them in prison, throw away the keys - prison? I say Gitmo for traitorous scum like these ass wipes.
Back when this document was written, healthcare consisted of a bottle of rum and a hacksaw for a simple scratch to the leg which got infected. I don't think any other country in the world is so ignorant to think that laws created back then aren't up for rediscussion if it's for the common good.
There is absolutely *nothing* in the US Constitution that prevents government backed and mandated healthcare. Hence the people who argue that Obamacare is unconstitutional simultaneously admit that Romneycare in the state of Massachusetts is perfectly constitutional. The dispute is over the federal government running things rather than the states.
The NRA magazines like America's First Freedom regularly carry articles about the abuses of the government, although Fast & Furious and Operation Fearless (being gun-related) do tend to overshadow more generally political issues like Benghazi and the NSA/CIA wiretaps.
"If you look at Obama's policies from over here in Europe, he's still way on the right side of the axis, while socialism and marxism should be to the left."
Yes, you are right from a warped European perspective
where your ENTIRE political spectrum is:
[LEFT]Communist .... Socal Democrat ... National Socialist[RIGHT]
But that's a VERY narrow political range. In the US, the spectrum is more like:
[LEFT]Communist .... Socal Democrat ... National Socialist ... Liberal Democrat ... moderate Democrat ... moderate Republican ... Conservative Rep ... TEA Party ... Nation's Founders ... anarchy[RIGHT]
Admittedly imprecise and sloppy, but the point is that your European political scale is remarkably narrow and way over on the left. In the U.S. our scale starts way over on the actual "right" with the minimal, VERY small Constitutional government with no social safety net, no taxes on income, etc (and there are even libertarians / anarchists who think THAT's still too far left...) and then stretches way over to the extreme whacko and dangerous left where you guys all live in the belief that government should run most of your lives. Oh, and by "anarchy" on the "right" of our spectrum, I do NOT mean "hoards of drug-addled satanists running through the streets starting fires and raping and murdering", rather I mean zero laws and regulations (i.e. nobody in charge at all) which could mean anything from lawless packs of criminals running wild to, peaceful self-regulating religious people (think idealized Amish) who simply do not need laws, or anything between.
Americans have never been governed by anything "left" of Liberal Democrat, just as most Europeans cannot fathom anything to the "right" of National Socialist - Americans threw-off a royal monarchy and went straight to our Nation's Founders, but you guys in Europe went from royal monarchy to Social Democrat, and then dipped your toes into the Commie and NAZI "extremes" on either side of THAT.
I bank with a small credit union. Hell, I even WORK for a mid-cap bank, and I'm reluctant to do business with them, and they're below the Chase/BoA radar.
EVERY political actor who reaches for more power starts by going after "unpopular" people and things.
Wanna grow government regulations? If you start by telling people what size dinner plate they may have, they'll get upset and think you're "crimping their style", but if you tell them you are going after terrorists, criminals, porn stars, drug dealers, cigarette makers, etc most people will happily vote to give you more power and authority to do it. Later-on, when nobody's looking, you can then use the new power to go after your political enemies (who will squeal a bit, but if your base supporters are happy you will "get away with it"). Eventually, you'll even be able to go after any of your own supporters if they "get out of line" and start giving you trouble...
In Obama world, laws do not matter and the Constitution does not matter; Mr Obama has a pen and a phone and can just re-write any laws he wants (who needs Congress?) as he has done with the health care law (what he can do to one law he can do to any other law - it's the principle he is establishing that matters). Of course, his Atty General, Eric Holder, has followed his boss and asserts that he can choose which laws to ignore and which to enforce (never mind that both of these men took an oath that specifically requires them to uphold the Constitution and to see that the laws are faithfully enforced). ANYBODY who claims to be shocked by ANY level of lawlessness by this duo is either dishonest or supremely ignorant of history, politics, and government. Mr. Obama campaigned on a pledge to "fundamentally transform" the U.S. and he has done just that - ANY future president can use Obama as the precedent to do ALL these things, and more, to any groups he/she chooses...
wow.. the revolution i'm sure is coming, and will be televised
a treasonous scumbag who should be tried for his crimes against America
If you think this WHOLE DISCUSSION is "tinfoil hat", then what the hell are you doing here? I remind you: these ideas are speculative only. But the fact that you (and maybe even me) think they're crazy is not reason to not talk about them.
Okay, if it's that unclear to you; the comparison of the concerted policies of Nazis to advance a policy of GENOCIDE to some assholery by US government agencies that need some reining in is beyond stupid.
I find it worrisome that it needs to be said, because it seems nearly everyone is focusing on the distractions, while the real crimes, which literally steal peoples' futures, are ignored.
If the law can't get rid of them, perhaps governmental power abuse will. We can only hope. Hold off the revolution a little longer, please.
10% per capita gun numbers meant the guns were in the hands of maybe 5-7% of the population. Common my ass.
The NRA specifically notes in it's charter that it is a gun rights organization. VERY single focus for the simple reason that allowing the focus to widen decreases efficacy. Thus, while they will note other abuses, they will not lobby against them. That's the specific purview of organizations like the EFF and FIRE. Also state level ACLU orgs. The national level org can go fuck itself.
Because there are so many right-wing politicos in LA, New York, Detroit, and Chicago pushing for police militarization.
"Poor Mr. Hapless"
You mis-spelled Harper...
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
I was really just going for being a wiseass, but if you want to take it seriously......
but he did in fact save the world economy from being dragged into a depression caused by deregulation of the parasites on Wall Street
By continuing policies instituted by George W. Bush and Hank Paulson. GWB took the political hit on several unpopular decisions (bailouts) rather than leave them to his successor. BHO can't even bring himself to make a decision on Keystone, nor enforce the politically unpopular parts of his sole major legislative achievement. Oh, and guess what? A lot of the aforementioned deregulation was bipartisan. Who was the President who signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall into law?
You probably missed the fact that Obama threatened force, and was able to avoid using it, to get Assad to agree to relinquish his chemical weapons.
Want a list? Here's three of the top of my head: Chicago's first round exit from Olympics voting, Russia's behavior in Ukraine and Assad walking across the "red line" in the first place. BHO neither respected by our friends nor feared by our enemies. The global community laughs at him. BHO's decision to embrace any issue, no matter how seemingly insignificant (Chicago's Olympic bid) is usually the kiss of death. GWB was at least feared, if not respected. His Dad was both feared and respected. So was Bill Clinton. BHO is an embarrassment on the global stage. So is the current Secretary of State, while we're on the subject.
I really wish the Democratic Primary electorate had given us Hillary instead of BHO. It was their turn, the GOP was going to lose no matter what, the least they could have done was found someone that the rest of the world would have respected. Love her or hate her, Hillary would have been taken seriously overseas.
P.S., I don't really like the Republican Party either, so best of luck with your forthcoming attempt to dismiss me as a Teabagger, Right-winger, Rethuglican, or any other straw men you're cooking up.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
OK. I may be biased, but I just brought £200 worth of coins from the Royal Mint. What's illegal or unethical about that?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Thank you for your input, rjh. I appreciate your perspective. However, I think you may be preaching to the choir in this venue. Perhaps you might be better suited to express your views to your fellow NRA members, many of whom seem (to my eye) to be a bit belligerent in expressing their right to bear arms. Just my opinion, of course.
Its porn. Not gun laws. One shoots bullets, one shots its load come. ok guys
Interesting chart-slideshow, but I don't see how it's relevant. I don't mean any disrespect, but that is completely unrelated to my question. What I was asking is more specific, "how are handguns primarily defensive weapons?". There seems to be an attempt to classify rifles as offensive and handguns as defensive.
Clearly bulletproof vests/bulletproof glass/etc are defensive technologies. Firearms are offensive techologies.
If concealed handguns aren't being used "defensively", then what are they all being used for? Whatever it is, it sure isn't crime.
I actually don't understand this at all. Concealed handguns are not used. If they are used, they are no longer concealed handguns (or else your clothes and body would likely be damaged.
By the way: major crimes in this country are DOWN a full 50% from 20 years ago, and even more compared to 30 years ago. During that entire time, per-capita gun ownership (including handguns) has gone steadily up, [postimg.org]and "concealed carry" has virtually exploded over that same period. Watch that chart for a moment. (Note: blue in that chart very much does NOT mean "blue state".)
I don't really have bandwidth to fact-check this. There are a lot of trends and correlation is not necessarily causation. Mass shootings are defintiely on the rise in this country as are metal detectors in high schools. Also a lot of professional criminals are moving from physical to virtual crimes which may involve less gun violence.
The DOJ is doing nothing to enforce the laws concerning illegal immigration (Didn't work for the Romans, Didn't work for the native Americans, Didn't work for the do-do bird, probably won't work for the USA). Meanwhile nothing is being done about the drug trade, and is encouraged under the table by the powers that be (It is a billion dollar industry after all and the finest example of capitalism at work.) Profits would be down if there were not a so called war going on against it. Meanwhile the DOJ is shipping guns to Mexico under fast and furious ( i guess to protect the poor drug dealers against the crazy white people that live in Arizona). My guess is that Eric Holders boss's at Prison Industries were upset about the dip in stock holder value, so you have to go after someone. You have to make money somehow.
In the USA the rulling class openly takes bribes from foreign powers, and the media will only focus on blow jobs that may have occurred in the oval office. We will fight a war against our own citizens (uggh I mean suspected domestic terrorists) meanwhile ignoring foreign incursions by Russia into nations that we have sworn to protect. We will only go after those that are perceived as being weak, such as those religious conservatives who believe in family values living in the middle east, or Nevada.
This one is exaggerated troll-bait.
Why are coin dealers on that list? What am I missing?
I don't really have bandwidth to fact-check this. There are a lot of trends and correlation is not necessarily causation. Mass shootings are defintiely on the rise in this country as are metal detectors in high schools. Also a lot of professional criminals are moving from physical to virtual crimes which may involve less gun violence.
Everyone of those mass shooters were involved with supervised psychotropic drugs.
Another Mass Shooting, Another Psychiatric Drug? Federal Investigation Long Overdue
One Thing in Common... and It's Not Guns
Or
Mass+Shooter+Psychotrpic+Drugs
Given that the first thing off the top of your head was Chicago's losing Olympic bid, how can I take you seriously? But if you want to throw Ukraine at Obama's feet, then remember Putin's little war on Georgia, while a U.S. president supposedly feared by the world was in charge.
Again, it's dumb to want a president who is feared by anyone. Fear is not the reaction you want to provoke, even among rivals. It doesn't end well.
For what it's worth, I voted for Hillary in 2008, and expect to vote for her in 2016. However, if you think I couldn't pull a one-side list of "failures" out of my ass for Hillary if she had won in 2008, then you're not living in the real world.
Working in porn is not against the law... at least in many states. so why?
The figures you offered apply to today's Russia. I asked for stats regarding the Soviet Union times — when the country really was a tyranny.
Right. Nothing, in other words, that could pose much of a challenge to the military or police.
And in a debate — whatever age — one should offer supporting evidence with the argument.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Again, it's dumb to want a president who is feared by anyone.
No, it's perfectly logical to want someone that people think has the stones to back up their words. It's telling though that you choose to focus on the lack of fear as a good thing, rather than trying to dispute the fact that nobody (friend or foe) respects him. The Olympic Bid was perfect evidence of that, BHO put the power and prestige of the Presidency behind that bid, and Chicago got bounced in the first round. That may not mean anything to you, but it's hugely symbolic, and was the diplomatic equivalent of a slap in the face.
It's also evidence of BHO's utter failure to properly husband his influence and political capital. A domestic example of this failing would be the flushing away of all the political capital earned from re-election on an effort at gun control that was doomed from the get-go. BHO is supposed to be this cool political operator from Chicago but he's got nobody on staff that could do a whip count? Immigration reform was a casualty of that decision, as were other important issues that got short shrift.
In short, he's a loser, and the least effective President we've had in my lifetime. And I say that as someone that drank the kool aid and went so far as campaigning for him during the primaries against HRC. Boy, I screwed that one up big time....
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
The problem is that in a free society as long as you pay your taxes it is legal to have an explicitly anti-tax agenda. It is not legal to penalize groups with an anti-tax agenda. It is also not legal to claim that such people are skirting the law without proof.
If you don't think that unwarranted extra scrutiny is intimidating then you're wrong.
Also being anti-tax is not being anti-government. The legality of the personal income tax is, unfortunately, pretty uncontestable. There was some question at one time whether the constitutional amendment which allowed the income tax was legally passed, but a court put that to rest some years ago. The question of whether such a constitutional amendment should have been passed is a separate question. The progressives pulled a fast one and got it through. You can't protect people from their own stupidity.
The sex workers aren't blowing the right cocks. Blow the VERY small penises in DC adn there would be NO problem.
Its not who you know
but who you blow.
How the hell are you people still not realizing you're living in a situation worse than Nazi Germany?
You are correct sir and some of do realize it.
We've been screwed and tattooed by the Obama administration. So why not go after the monies of the people they don't like... Soon it will be the Republicans bank account...WAIT They are already doing it....IMPEACH OBAmA
Okay, if it's that unclear to you; the comparison of the concerted policies of Nazis to advance a policy of GENOCIDE to some assholery by US government agencies that need some reining in is beyond stupid.
If you don't see the obvious similarity in policies, then I'm not the one being stupid.
I don't mean any disrespect, but that is completely unrelated to my question.
No, it's not unrelated to your question.
If crime is way down, but handgun ownership and concealed carry are way up, then those guns are not being used for offense. Also, concealed carry is not primarily a sporting purpose.
So what are those handguns being used for? The obvious answer is defense.
Okay, if it's that unclear to you; the comparison of the concerted policies of Nazis to advance a policy of GENOCIDE to some assholery by US government agencies that need some reining in is beyond stupid.
If you don't see the obvious similarity in policies, then I'm not the one being stupid.
You're not being stupid, you're beyond retarded.
But hey, at least you excelled at it.
Again, it's dumb to want a president who is feared by anyone.
No, it's perfectly logical to want someone that people think has the stones to back up their words.
There it is. Right there. There's your trouble - "has the stones". The only thing I'm not certain of is whether you were born 100 or 3000 years too late.
Oh, and I never said it's a *good* thing that other world leaders don't fear our president, but apparently you use "the stones" for reading comprehension.
Another person who doesn't realize correlation != causation.
Also why target the stars rather than the company that created it?
P2P Anonymous Distributed Web Search: http://www.yacy.net/