The problem with the term 'gun rights' and banning them is that 'gun rights' is an umbrella term for many things. When a person owns a firearm for self-defense or hunting, and it is used responsibly, it is considered an exercise of 'gun rights.' There are also situations where the use of firearms is necessary for self-defense and protection.

Another example is target shooting or competitive shooting, which is a legitimate and responsible use of firearms. These activities are all grouped under the term 'gun rights.'

While I personally may not agree with unrestricted access to firearms (in the context of avoiding unnecessary risks and violence), I would never shame or coerce someone from exercising their Second Amendment rights. It's not my decision, and it doesn't involve me. I'm not part of the equation.

And despite my disagreement, I think restrictive gun control laws are not only wrong but also harmful.

Just like with abortion, the debate over gun rights is multifaceted and involves differing perspectives on individual rights, public safety, and the balance between regulation and personal freedom.

Can Governors create Laws?

You somehow missed the fact that this isn’t a law. No elected member of the New Mexico Legislature voted on this. This is one person in the Executive Branch deciding they can write and impose law at their will. And you support this?

You are arguing the point but missing the context.

The Governor decided to do this unilaterally using a “Public Health Emergency”. This is not in regards to a bill passed by both chambers of New Mexicos Legislative Branch. This was the sole decision of a single person. The Executive Branch is detailed with carrying out the orders of the Legislature. They do not create Laws. That is what she is trying to do.

Neither are abortion rates. You’d support a governors ability to end all abortion in a state under a public health emergency?

The people cheering this on would be LIVID if a Republican Governor unilaterally suspended all abortions in a state by declaring abortion a “public health” emergency.

These people have no idea what they’re cheering on.

This is going to court. Let’s see who understands the constitution more.

To be clear- you’re saying this will 100% hold up in court?

The problem is that “Public Safety” is an arbitrary metric. A Governor can’t strip citizens of Constitutional rights under the guise of some perceived “Public Safety” concern. It’s a complete violation of the Constitution.

Put simply: this is a horrible look for Democrats. Especially for a party that compared Trump to Hitler 24/7. This is what actual tyranny looks like. A single leader unilaterally stripping away rights from their citizens due to a self-declared “emergency”.

Wait, so are you saying we should be advocating for billionaires to use their wealth and infrastructure to privately support war efforts?

Isn’t the whole point of Starlink to help civilians in war torn countries have internet access? Why should the Russian or Ukrainian states be allowed to use it to further their war efforts?

This is the 2016 election strategy all over again. “If we blast negative Trump coverage 24/7 people will finally wake up to how evil/racist/dumb/etc. he is!”

This is going to be bigger than the OJ trial. He’s raised close to 10 million off of the mug shot alone. If he’s making that much off the “movie poster”, how much do you think he’s going to profit from the full-length “feature film”?

And pretty smart to be the first to do it. You’re right- it was going to be printed by both sides. But now it’ll likely just be Conservatives. Anyone seen out wearing a mugshot shirt is going to be assumed to be a Trump supporter.

I mean there is this:

“ The land bought by the firm encircles Travis air force base in Fairfield, a city of about 120,000 residents and home to the Anheuser-Busch Co brewery and the Jelly Belly jelly bean factory.”

Don’t feel great about this. Releasing that mugshot is going to do nothing other than make Trump seem like a martyr to thousands of Americans who already feel that the Justice system is unfair.

He’s already selling t-shirts with the mugshot on them. My lord.

Are you suggesting that any crime that causes loss of life must require a life sentence in prison?

Another interesting tidbit: one of the questions on the USA Naturalization Test is “What are the two political parties in the USA?”

That should be apportant to every American. Not the fact that the question is included (it’s viral knowledge to know if you want to live here), but the fact that we’ve allowed ourselves to be trapped in this hellish system where we’re being held hostage by two overly powerful political parties. In what “free” country are we only (realistically) allowed to choose between two options?

I imagine we’ll continue on this death-spiral until one party finally manages to “defeat” the other and we unofficially become a one-party state.

The history of the Electoral College is a lot more complex than just slavery. Slavery became involved later during the 3/5th compromise which was used to determine census counts of the slave states (which determined the numbers the of representatives they were appointed).

The electors were supposed to be elected by the people and serve as an independent committee whose sole purpose was to choose the President/VP. They were to make an independent decision using the best information possible to vote for the candidate that would most faithfully be able to carry out the administration of the laws passed by Congress. The Presidency was supposed to be a boring, somewhat administrative role.

What the Founders failed to account for is the rise of political parties. The Presidency was never meant to be an office you ran for. It was supposed to be an appointment. That concept basically fell apart after Washington when the role political parties began to rise and coordinated campaigning truly started.

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned that the rise of political parties would lead to absolute chaos as the elected officials would be less focused on their jobs and become more interested in gaining power over their rivals or enacting revenge. He was right.

Exactly. The condescending narrative surrounding Rogan is so predictable and boring at this point. I swear some people get off by dunking on him just so they can feel superior (which is pretty funny).

“Don’t listen to those crazy people like Joe Rogan! Listen to smart people like me instead so I can explain to you how stupid and dumb he is.”

post about the Taliban

“Yeah fuck the Christians!”

Lol what?

Rosemary Kennedy had her lobotomy in 1941. In 1949 the doctor who popularized the practice of lobotomization won the Nobel Prize for his work. One very much could argue that J. Kennedy was simply following the established medical advice of the day. He “trusted the science” if you will.

Lobotomies rapidly fell out of favor in the 1950s when advancements in psychiatric medications were made.

No no you’ve got that all wrong. It’s not a crime if it’s to support “democracy.” /s