HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Ohioboy » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Mon Jan 9, 2017, 05:35 PM
Number of posts: 1,179

Journal Archives

Sorry, not all semi-automatics are the same, regardless of what your gun nut neighbor says

Semi-automatic means you don't have to cock the gun or chamber a round every time you want to shoot a bullet. Such guns chamber a round and cock themselves with each pull of the trigger, making them ready to shoot again and again with just the pull of the trigger. But you do have to keep pulling the trigger. In contrast, automatic weapons keep firing with just one pull of the trigger, as in a machine gun. Many non-military firearms are designed as semi-automatics, and this is where gun nuts like to seize on a favorite argument.

Extreme gun nuts will howl that restrictions on AR style weapons are not justified because they are just common semi- automatics like your father's hunting rifle or pistol, that they are not actually "military weapons", they just look that way. That is not entirely true. AR style semi-automatics are designed more in line with carbines, which are rifles designed to be lighter with shorter barrels making them easier to handle in combat. According to Wikipedia "The vast majority of AR barrels fall between the 14.5″ military M4 type and the 20″ M16 size, with 16″ being currently the most popular for civilians." This is why we call them military style weapons, so don't let your gun nut twitter tweeters tell you differently.

If killing quickly is the goal, I would argue that AR style weapons are certainly easier to use than semi-automatic handguns, and much easier than using a semi-automatic longer hunting style rifle as well.

This might be a dumb question, but why is there an open enrollment period that closes for ACA?

I have some really crappy insurance right now and would like to see what I could get under ACA, but open enrollment always seems to be closed. Plus, I hate even shopping for insurance anymore since any inquiry seems to lead to unending sales calls and spam. Any suggestions out there?

I need something explained

At the Mueller hearing yesterday Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas made a big deal about the report claiming that it could not exonerate Trump.

From the Mueller report:
“The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred,” Mueller wrote. “While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Ratcliffe then said:
“Respectfully, director, it was not the special counsel’s job to conclusively determine Donald Trump’s innocence or to exonerate him because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence,” Ratcliffe said, raising his voice. “It exists for everyone. Everyone is entitled to it — including sitting presidents.”

My question is this:
Does an investigation, which is what the Mueller report is documentation of, necessarily have to presume innocence? An investigation is not a trial. In a trial the presumption of innocence is, and always should be an important principle. But, an investigation is merely the collecting of evidence. In fact, I would contend that suspicion of guilt is the starting point of every criminal investigation. Investigations involve suspects, intent, motives, evidence and such. If every investigation into a possible crime started with the idea that a person was innocent until proven guilty, then there would never be an investigation of any crime, ever. Just asking.

Just like his report, Muller's appearance before Congress is being misrepresented

That's what I'm seeing and hearing. I watched a lot of the hearings yesterday and heard a lot of things that should shock every American. Yet, a good portion of the country are being fed lies and are being encouraged to ignore important things said and exposed during the hearings. Who cares what Mueller looked like, it's the information that was important. WTF!

Hey no problem, Dershowitz kept his underwear on

This video has Dershowitz admitting he got a massage at Epstein's place, but it's not what you might think. Apparently with all the young girls around, Epstein kept an old woman around to massage Dershowitz. Yeah right...

What's this "equal outcome" narrative that Jordan Peterson always tries to stick on the "Left"?

Every now and then I'll run across a Jordan Peterson video on line and give it a listen. He's always talking about how the "left" expects "equal outcome", as in everyone's success will be equal. Such a narrative of course implies that the "left" expects something for nothing, that they are lazy and unrealistic. He claims this as a highly educated clinical psychologist and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. But, I'm thinking for all his knowledge, Peterson is totally wrong when he claims the "left" is pushing for "equal outcome".

I know it's anecdotal, but I've never heard anyone, or any group on the so-called "left" call for "equal outcome". "Equal opportunity" yes, I've heard calls for "equal opportunity". I've also heard calls for things such as "equal justice" and "equal rights". But, I have never heard any group or gender call for, or expect "equal outcome". I think Peterson is distorting protests for "equal opportunity" and applying a false narrative to the "left".

What's your take on this guy? He's got credentials and a fabulous vocabulary and I'm just a lowly hourly wage type guy with little education, but I honestly think Peterson is full of crap on this.

The American people deserve better

Listen to the so-called leadership of this country. This an interview with the second highest official in this land. It shows a nervous Mike Pence trying to bullshit his countrymen. If you can't hear the outright gaslighting and bullshitting going on in this interview you're not listening.

I watched some of the Mueller report hearing today

From what I saw one side was bringing up facts contained in the report, and the other side was bringing up conspiracy theories about report. What the hell is wrong with this country?

I would like to see a new law in this country.

A new law that limits a president's pardon ability to only cases that don't involve the president. And, that the pardon power can never be used to manipulate a person's testimony, whether that testimony involves the president or not. I think after Trump we need this.

Here is the catch 22

Mueller can't indict because of the OLC, but Barr can clear Trump because of the OLC not allowing Mueller to indict.

Notice the double speak in William Barr's response to Mueller's televised statement yesterday.

"I personally felt he could have reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity...the opinion says you can't indict...but he had his reasons for not doing it which he explained...but when he didn't make a decision the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I felt it necessary as the heads of the department to make a decision."

This is total double speak. It starts with Barr saying he "personally felt he (Mueller) could have reached a decision". Then he contradicts himself by giving the reason Mueller didn't make the decision, then goes on to say because the decision wasn't made he (Barr) and Rosenstein did it as heads of the department.

Yeah, like he had no choice but to misrepresent the report.

This is the kind of slick bullshit Orwell warned about! Think about it.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »