"Hi, I hate guns and think the numerous restrictions on them are not enough; also, can I borrow one of yours so I can go around all these numerous restrictions, an action I would find morally reprehensible, 'dangerous,' and legally prosecutable if anyone else did it?"
This sounds really interesting. Do you happen to remember where the studies were from? Or remember anything in particular about them that could point me in the right direction?
Thanks for sharing this (and thanks for CovfefeAnon for mentioning it). Reading right now and very interesting.
I agree. My point was just that we can do so factually, and to alert people of the inaccuracy here as I've seen it repeated several times recently (because truthfully, while I said "misinformation," I think misinformation is more purposeful, and I don't believe people who are saying it are doing so to purposefully mislead people; simply, we should just make sure to do our due diligence in researching claims).
I also strongly believe it will never make it out of committee, like all the other times. But if it ever does, we will be ready.
I don't either. I've read through the current iteration of the bill and it is way too vague, especially to be of any use to anyone. It's a joke bill that will never make it out of committee, like all the other times.
It is just so crazy that I've seen variations of this inaccurate claim several times on here (including one sticky). I know NY is generally a hellhole, lol, but beyond NYC, people are not happy with the shit politicians we have here. Hell, if anything, 2020 has shown me that chances are there was fuckery afoot in our past elections and those we have now in office do not represent the will of the people. If we can end up with a fraudulent resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, then you damn well know there are already fraudulent holders of office on the state and local levels.
Powerful juxtaposition.
I guess I hurt people's feelings with my comment. Don't act like libs, y'all: facts over feelings.
And despite the inaccuracy within the image, she is still right that many people in our great country gotta WAKE UP before it is too late!!
This is inaccurate. New York has not passed that bill. It is in committee, which is a really long way from even being considered for a vote. The same sort of bill was introduced three times in the past six years, and has never once made it out of committee.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/a416
But this is the fourth time recently I've seen this same line again in some way, that NYS passed this bill. It's not true. We gotta leave the misinformation to the Marxists; we don't need that because the facts are on our side.
Nice car with awesome decals; I really love the Twatter one. Clearly you hurt someone's fee-fees (including whoever reviewed the suspension).
And man, video game graphics are crazy now; that looks like a photo of a real car.
Excellent, concise letter. Powerful wording. Got me hot & bothered and excited to keep fighting against the establishment scum. 11/10.
At least one state is protecting children against the abuse of transgender sickness. It's an important start.
That's the real "systemic" privilege.
Thank you, exactly. You got it right. This is the second time in a week I've seen a post about this bill with a title that is misinformation (last one said it was passed by the NYS senate).
And I just find it suspect that the user just joined and this is the only post they made... sometimes I question how some posts become stickies here.
Well, regardless, this is a horrible, unconstitutional bill. But we do not need to resort to misinformation to highlight the issues with it.
LMAO I totally hear it.
This is one of those things where you stare forever, inspecting every little detail, until you realize it is just the same picture twice and you've wasted a bunch of time. Nope, not gonna fall for that one!
I searched but find no info that it has been passed by the NYS senate. Even if you click the link, it says it is "in committee."
Yeah, curious if they even respond. I imagine if they do, it'll be a non-answer.
"Non-answer" sounds misleading in this context, as that message looks like a generic form response when you submit a message to a website. It even states "we're working hard to ensure you receive an appropriate response."
Not that I expect the actual response, if any at all, to provide any value to the concerns written about. But this seems like a silly image...
I mean, just about everything they say is retarded.
But here is a gem. I was doing "equity" training at work, you know, in the vein of usual woke Critical Race Theory religion stuff, just not as terrible as some of the stuff that has come out in recent months from corporate whistleblowers. Anyways, we were talking about racial bias, and this woke white guy was explaining how he lived across the street from a project and sometimes he'll see black people throw litter on the floor.
So, he says that he thinks is wrong to throw litter on the floor and has a lower opinion when someone does it. But, in the context of our equity training, he sees that his thoughts are wrong and racist. Because, get this, these black people may not have been taught about throwing litter away in a garbage can based on how they were raised and littering may be culturally acceptable and he shouldn't judge.
I'm just thinking, like, dude, sounds a lot more racist to view black people as just people who will litter and that these people have no personal agency in the matter. Lol wat.
Just typing it out makes it sound like some master troll, but no, this dude was some woke white guy. He actually was the co-planner of the training. Dumb shit. And I was wondering what the black people in the room were thinking at that moment. Of course all the other white liberals were rapidly shaking their heads in agreement as part of the ideological masturbation I was unfortunate enough to behold.
I know I shared it above with you, but in case someone didn't see it there:
I also feel like there is a way to put "context" on a post... which is just a link to it, I've seen it before, but not sure how to. Any ideas?
My bad; I agree it is important to include the sources with these things. You can find it here:
But the video is not a video of the guy. It is just the small newscast about it. They only have a photo of him.
EDIT: Also, if I am putting so much effort into it... then is it truly low-effort garbage? (I kid, just poking fun.)
Goodness, there truly are no redeeming qualities for Sleepy Joe's crackhead son; he even texts people long-ass novels. I hate when people do that.
Exactly. This is a non-story. Most homeless individuals roaming the streets of NYC are mentally unstable, and will yell at anyone with vitriol and just utter insanity.
The implication this pathetic excuse of a story is trying to portray is "another anti-Asian attack, PURPOSEFUL in nature, what an EPIDEMIC!" rather than the factual "mentally-unstable individual does random mentally-unstable thing," which happens many times every day.
Point being, the media is 1000% complicit, as usual, in warping reality for an ideological narrative and, thus, fanning the flames of hatred.
FYI, this pathetic embarrassment of a story is from WABC (Channel 7).
I'd imagine that they would ask if she had any other vaccines before injecting her, as the CDC already instructs not to mix the vaccines. Of course, she could always just lie.
Or maybe they won't even ask.
Regardless, you can't fix stupid.