anon6789

Legally they do take people’s guns, and they only hate when people try to take away their guns.

The NRA Supported Gun Control When the Black Panthers Had the Weapons History.com

Throughout the late 1960s, the militant Black nationalist group used their understanding of the finer details of California’s gun laws to underscore their political statements about the subjugation of African-Americans. In 1967, 30 members of the Black Panthers protested on the steps of the California statehouse armed with .357 Magnums, 12-gauge shotguns and .45-caliber pistols and announced, “The time has come for Black people to arm themselves.”

The display so frightened politicians—including California governor Ronald Reagan—that it helped to pass the Mulford Act, a state bill prohibiting the open carry of loaded firearms, along with an addendum prohibiting loaded firearms in the state Capitol. The 1967 bill took California down the path to having some of the strictest gun laws in America and helped jumpstart a surge of national gun control restrictions.

“The law was part of a wave of laws that were passed in the late 1960s regulating guns, especially to target African-Americans,” says Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms. “Including the Gun Control Act of 1968, which adopted new laws prohibiting certain people from owning guns, providing for beefed up licensing and inspections of gun dealers and restricting the importation of cheap Saturday night specials [pocket pistols] that were popular in some urban communities.”

The Black Panthers were “innovators” in the way they viewed the Second Amendment at the time, says Winkler. Rather than focus on the idea of self-defense in the home, the Black Panthers brazenly took their weapons to the streets, where they felt the public—particularly African-Americans—needed protection from a corrupt government.

“These ideas eventually infiltrated into the NRA to shape the modern gun debate,” explains Winker. As gun control laws swept the nation, the organization adopted a similar stance to that of the activist group they once fought to regulate, with support for open-carry laws and concealed weapon laws high on their agenda.

Ironically, it was the gun control laws that were put into effect against African-Americans and the Black Panthers that led “rural white conservatives” across the country to fear any restriction of their own guns, Winkler says. In less than a decade, the NRA would go from backing gun control regulations to inhibit groups they felt threatened by to refusing to support any gun control legislation at all.

Nice article, and worth it to read the whole thing. Double standards aren’t a new part of the game plan.

Your comment is the one most in line with my thought process.

I thought he did just fine in the debate other than having the cold. I’ve defended him since then both here, and to people in my real life. I still think he may be the best president in my life (since first term Reagan), and I was hoping he had a great time at NATO and was going to crush this press conference.

But while I was waiting for it to start, I saw the Putin flub. Then he comes out, sounds tired, sounds hoarse and keeps coughing, keeps pausing, keeps getting names wrong. We got creepy Whispery Joe again. It was so awkward and I felt so bad for him. He’s done a great job, but it looks time to throw in the towel on this campaign.

I’m in an important state for presidential elections. If they keep him upright through November, he’s my guy. If they put in another Dem, I’m with them. But I’m disappointed now it seems too late for him to leave with dignity. He deserves a good legacy, but now he’s going to be Sleepy Joe, especially if he drags this out.

What happened with RBG was a tragedy for me and the country, but this could be apocalyptic for our democracy. I’m so mad that a felon is the solid choice for near half the country. I can’t trust Biden to be our champion in this fight.

To anyone that didn’t watch the conference, watch it. I don’t know how anyone in good conscience can say pressing him to continue is for the best.

To try and be helpful to you and others not as aware, here is some light reading.

AP: A conservative leading the pro-Trump Project 2025 suggests there will be a new American Revolution

Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts made the comments Tuesday on Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, adding that Republicans are “in the process of taking this country back.”

“And so I come full circle on this response and just want to encourage you with some substance that we are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”

Roberts’ remarks shed light on how a group that promises to have significant influence over a possible second term for former President Donald Trump is thinking about this moment in American politics. The Heritage Foundation is spearheading Project 2025, a sweeping road map for a new GOP administration that includes plans for dismantling aspects of the federal government and ousting thousands of civil servants in favor of Trump loyalists who will carry out a hard-right agenda without complaint.

And here is some background of the past cooperation between Trump and the Heritage Foundation, as of their review of their shared agenda as of 2018. I selected something from back in his time as president to show actual cooperation with their agenda.

Heritage.org: Trump Administration Embraces Heritage Foundation Policy Recommendations

Over the past several months, Heritage’s executive branch relations staff reviewed the 334 policy recommendations and met with senior administration officials in the several agencies. Heritage analysts briefed administration officials on the recommendations, provided additional insight and information, and advocated for reform.

Examples of some of the most notable policy recommendations and their adoption or implementation by the Trump administration include:

• Leaving the Paris Climate Accord: In August 2017, Trump announced the U.S. was ending its funding and membership in the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
• Repealing Net Neutrality: In December 2017, Trump’s Federal Communications Commission chairman proposed ending the 2015 network neutrality rules.
• Reshaping National Monuments: Heritage’s recommendation to prohibit Land Acquisition (Cap and Reduce the Size of the Federal Estate) was adopted by Trump when he issued two executive orders effectively shrinking the size of national monuments in Utah.
• Reinstating the Mexico City Policy: This executive order prevents taxpayer money from funding international groups involved in abortion and ending funding to the United Nations Population fund. On Jan. 23, 2017, in his first pro-life action, Trump signed an executive order today reinstating the Mexico City Policy.
• Increasing Military Spending: Trump’s budget calls for a $54 billion increase in military spending to improve capacity, capability, and readiness of America’s armed forces.
• Reforming Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program (TANF): The Trump administration adopted and is in favor of strengthening existing work requirements in order to receive benefits.
• Allowing Development of Natural Resources: The Trump administration opened off-shore drilling and on federal lands. Executive Order 13783 directed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to commence federal land coal leasing activities.
• Reforming Government Agencies: Trump tasked each of his Cabinet secretaries to prepare detailed plans on how they propose to reduce the scope and size of their respective departments while streamlining services and ensuring each department runs more efficiently and handles tax dollars appropriately.
• Withdrawing from UNESCO: In October 2017, Trump announced he was putting an end to U.S. membership in the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

I recommend reading both those full short articles and using that as a jumping off point for further reading into points most relevant to you and your ideological goals. I hope that is helpful to you and anyone else.

Exactly, I posted this article in a comment above:

Guardian, 2008: Fatigue and racism threaten to knock Obama bandwagon off the road

Barack Obama was showing signs of campaign fatigue. Sitting on a picnic bench in a park on Pagoda Street, Indianapolis, in discussion with a group of 30 supporters, he told a story about the “modest” background of himself and his wife, Michelle. And 10 minutes later, seemingly having forgotten, he told them it all again.

It is hardly surprising, given that he has been on the road almost non-stop since Christmas, battling Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. In recent weeks, he has often seemed absent-minded, forgetting the names of the towns he is in.

Tiredness is the least of Obama’s problems. After a relatively smooth and well-planned march towards the Oval Office, his campaign is facing its greatest crisis. “He is in the middle of a shit storm,” one of the journalists travelling with him said.

Obama handled his 2 terms fine after that. He was as beat down by the campaign as Biden and he was almost 40 years younger!

Thank you! It drives me nuts that this isn’t the key takeaway in every post and article I see. On one hand we an amped up old man who would sell out his family for a dollar, let alone the rest of us who is friends with dictators and thinks they’re really sharp people with good ideas, and is also a convicted felon who surrounds himself with other current or future convicted felons, and has been saying for years he wants to imprison or hurt his critics. On the other hand, we have a barely older, regular old man who at least has good intentions, hires competent people, and who makes mistakes but admits to them and learns from it, who happens to be very stereotypically old man. How people are making this an apples to apples comparison is insane.

This behavior with Joe didn’t start at the debate. It’s the same Joe we’ve had for years. And this isn’t new, even for people younger than Biden is.

Guardian, 2008: Fatigue and racism threaten to knock Obama bandwagon off the road

Barack Obama was showing signs of campaign fatigue. Sitting on a picnic bench in a park on Pagoda Street, Indianapolis, in discussion with a group of 30 supporters, he told a story about the “modest” background of himself and his wife, Michelle. And 10 minutes later, seemingly having forgotten, he told them it all again.

It is hardly surprising, given that he has been on the road almost non-stop since Christmas, battling Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. In recent weeks, he has often seemed absent-minded, forgetting the names of the towns he is in.

Tiredness is the least of Obama’s problems. After a relatively smooth and well-planned march towards the Oval Office, his campaign is facing its greatest crisis. “He is in the middle of a shit storm,” one of the journalists travelling with him said.

There’s absolutely a good number of duplicates among the list they shared.

The bigger implication is of the 4 publishers in this lawsuit, 3 of them are in The Big Five publishers, who hold rights to the vast majority of books (60-80-ish % of English language books) from this century and probably a good chunk of the last one. If they win, this is the tip of the iceberg.

Internet Archive post about it

Google Doc List of the books from the IA

I think many may now be too young to remember, but in the 70s and 80s, this was a big issue.

NY Times, 11 June, 1983 - DEMAND INCREASES FOR FIRE-SAFE CLOTHING

Clothing that can erupt into flames is coming under increasing scrutiny of consumer and fire safety organizations. They say Federal regulations governing the safety of fabrics used in clothing are too weak to protect the people who are most vulnerable: the elderly.

Those who most often suffer serious injury or death from clothing fires, safety experts say, are retired people who spend many hours of the day in such loose-fitting garments as bathrobes or housecoats. With the exception of children’s sleepwear, for which special regulations were decreed in the 1970’s, Federal standards allow clothing manufacturers to use all but the most extremely flammable fabrics.

Plastic fibers can melt to your skin, which isn’t great considering you’re in contact with the seats and carpets of the car. In an emergency, you’re not prepared to deal with additional complications like that.

The article I linked here is pretty good, so I recommend reading it if you aren’t familiar with this issue from back then. It will really help give you the other side of the issue to see why these chemicals are there to begin with.

Not sure exactly why you’re getting downvoted as that was essentially the point of the article:

Flame retardant chemicals off-gas or leach from the seat and interior fabrics into the air, — especially in hot weather, when car interiors can reach 150 degrees Fahrenheit.

Advocates argue that the risks of these chemicals outweigh the benefits.

But health researchers have found that the average U.S. child has lost up to 5 IQ points from exposure to flame retardants in cars and furniture. And adults with the highest levels of flame retardants in their blood face a risk of death by cancer that is four times greater than those with the lowest levels, according to the Journal of the American Medical Association.