Republicans Block Bill to Monitor Their Violent Allies
INTELLIGENCER, May 27 -
"Yesterday, Senate Republicans voted down a bill to strengthen the federal government’s ability to monitor domestic extremism. This is another indicator of the Republican Party’s unwillingness to dislodge the faction of violent extremists that has gained a foothold on its right flank.
In its substance, it would have established a new office to monitor and prosecute domestic terrorism in each of the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. It would have required regular reporting on domestic terror threats as well as a focus on “white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services.”
It DID NOT create new federal powers, define new crimes, or define additional groups as terrorist. In response to concerns from civil libertarians, it made clear it would conform “with applicable civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations.”
The bill was defeated by nearly unanimous Republican opposition. What’s more revealing than the fact of the Republican opposition was its nature. Conservatives did not raise practical objections, but instead treated the very idea of cracking down on far-right extremists as an attack on their political allies."
4
Republicans Block Bill to Monitor Their Violent Allies
INTELLIGENCER, May 27 -
"Yesterday, Senate Republicans voted down a bill to strengthen the federal government’s ability to monitor domestic extremism. This is another indicator of the Republican Party’s unwillingness to dislodge the faction of violent extremists that has gained a foothold on its right flank.
In its substance, it would have established a new office to monitor and prosecute domestic terrorism in each of the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. It would have required regular reporting on domestic terror threats as well as a focus on “white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services.”
It DID NOT create new federal powers, define new crimes, or define additional groups as terrorist. In response to concerns from civil libertarians, it made clear it would conform “with applicable civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations.”
The bill was defeated by nearly unanimous Republican opposition. What’s more revealing than the fact of the Republican opposition was its nature. Conservatives did not raise practical objections, but instead treated the very idea of cracking down on far-right extremists as an attack on their political allies."
I would like to know what’s happening to the millions of rifles currently on the streets before giving up my right to buy one.
Nothing is happening
I would also like to know what the plan is for getting guns out of criminals hands before giving up my rights. Stop and Frisk in every inner city across America would be a good start since historically it’s been so effective.
There is no plan. Even though this is 99% of the problem.
I would also like to see more people guilty of violent crimes put in prison before giving up my rights. Too many far left DA’s are fighting for the criminals instead of fighting for innocent children and tax payers.
Progressives will continue to fight for criminals
I would also like to see the government workers giving up what type of guns they can possess and carry. If the population has to give up certain arms they should have to as well.
The government will continue to govern with military style tactics against taxpayers. The government will get stronger and the taxpayers will get weaker.
The left won’t solve anything. Murders will continue to skyrocket in their cities. Children will continue to be killed in their cities. The only difference will be that law abiding citizens won’t be able to buy AR-15 type guns.
Fact.
If this kid had 4 handguns with 18 rounds in each gun he still would have killed a ton of kids.
Fact.
20,000 gun homicides per year and everyone’s attention and resources will go towards solving 1% of the problem.
Fact.
0
I would like to know what’s happening to the millions of rifles currently on the streets before giving up my right to buy one.
Nothing is happening
I would also like to know what the plan is for getting guns out of criminals hands before giving up my rights. Stop and Frisk in every inner city across America would be a good start since historically it’s been so effective.
There is no plan. Even though this is 99% of the problem.
I would also like to see more people guilty of violent crimes put in prison before giving up my rights. Too many far left DA’s are fighting for the criminals instead of fighting for innocent children and tax payers.
Progressives will continue to fight for criminals
I would also like to see the government workers giving up what type of guns they can possess and carry. If the population has to give up certain arms they should have to as well.
The government will continue to govern with military style tactics against taxpayers. The government will get stronger and the taxpayers will get weaker.
The left won’t solve anything. Murders will continue to skyrocket in their cities. Children will continue to be killed in their cities. The only difference will be that law abiding citizens won’t be able to buy AR-15 type guns.
Fact.
If this kid had 4 handguns with 18 rounds in each gun he still would have killed a ton of kids.
Fact.
20,000 gun homicides per year and everyone’s attention and resources will go towards solving 1% of the problem.
Republicans Block Bill to Monitor Their Violent Allies INTELLIGENCER, May 27 - "Yesterday, Senate Republicans voted down a bill to strengthen the federal government’s ability to monitor domestic extremism. This is another indicator of the Republican Party’s unwillingness to dislodge the faction of violent extremists that has gained a foothold on its right flank. In its substance, it would have established a new office to monitor and prosecute domestic terrorism in each of the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. It would have required regular reporting on domestic terror threats as well as a focus on “white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services.” It DID NOT create new federal powers, define new crimes, or define additional groups as terrorist. In response to concerns from civil libertarians, it made clear it would conform “with applicable civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations.” The bill was defeated by nearly unanimous Republican opposition. What’s more revealing than the fact of the Republican opposition was its nature. Conservatives did not raise practical objections, but instead treated the very idea of cracking down on far-right extremists as an attack on their political allies."
During the Trump regime, several right-wing extremist organizations either formed, or expanded their reach in response to a president who articulated recognizable conspiratorial white-nationalist themes, and used wink-and-nod gestures to indicate their activity was welcome.
4
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Republicans Block Bill to Monitor Their Violent Allies INTELLIGENCER, May 27 - "Yesterday, Senate Republicans voted down a bill to strengthen the federal government’s ability to monitor domestic extremism. This is another indicator of the Republican Party’s unwillingness to dislodge the faction of violent extremists that has gained a foothold on its right flank. In its substance, it would have established a new office to monitor and prosecute domestic terrorism in each of the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. It would have required regular reporting on domestic terror threats as well as a focus on “white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services.” It DID NOT create new federal powers, define new crimes, or define additional groups as terrorist. In response to concerns from civil libertarians, it made clear it would conform “with applicable civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations.” The bill was defeated by nearly unanimous Republican opposition. What’s more revealing than the fact of the Republican opposition was its nature. Conservatives did not raise practical objections, but instead treated the very idea of cracking down on far-right extremists as an attack on their political allies."
During the Trump regime, several right-wing extremist organizations either formed, or expanded their reach in response to a president who articulated recognizable conspiratorial white-nationalist themes, and used wink-and-nod gestures to indicate their activity was welcome.
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Republicans Block Bill to Monitor Their Violent Allies INTELLIGENCER, May 27 - "Yesterday, Senate Republicans voted down a bill to strengthen the federal government’s ability to monitor domestic extremism. This is another indicator of the Republican Party’s unwillingness to dislodge the faction of violent extremists that has gained a foothold on its right flank. In its substance, it would have established a new office to monitor and prosecute domestic terrorism in each of the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. It would have required regular reporting on domestic terror threats as well as a focus on “white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services.” It DID NOT create new federal powers, define new crimes, or define additional groups as terrorist. In response to concerns from civil libertarians, it made clear it would conform “with applicable civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations.” The bill was defeated by nearly unanimous Republican opposition. What’s more revealing than the fact of the Republican opposition was its nature. Conservatives did not raise practical objections, but instead treated the very idea of cracking down on far-right extremists as an attack on their political allies."
During the Trump regime, several right-wing extremist organizations either formed, or expanded their reach in response to a president who articulated recognizable conspiratorial white-nationalist themes, and used wink-and-nod gestures to indicate their activity was welcome.
The most influential of these groups is the Oath Keepers.
Stuart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers’ founder, helped plan for violent action on January 6, 2021, and dozens of the group’s members were arrested in conjunction with the attack.
4
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Republicans Block Bill to Monitor Their Violent Allies INTELLIGENCER, May 27 - "Yesterday, Senate Republicans voted down a bill to strengthen the federal government’s ability to monitor domestic extremism. This is another indicator of the Republican Party’s unwillingness to dislodge the faction of violent extremists that has gained a foothold on its right flank. In its substance, it would have established a new office to monitor and prosecute domestic terrorism in each of the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. It would have required regular reporting on domestic terror threats as well as a focus on “white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services.” It DID NOT create new federal powers, define new crimes, or define additional groups as terrorist. In response to concerns from civil libertarians, it made clear it would conform “with applicable civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations.” The bill was defeated by nearly unanimous Republican opposition. What’s more revealing than the fact of the Republican opposition was its nature. Conservatives did not raise practical objections, but instead treated the very idea of cracking down on far-right extremists as an attack on their political allies."
During the Trump regime, several right-wing extremist organizations either formed, or expanded their reach in response to a president who articulated recognizable conspiratorial white-nationalist themes, and used wink-and-nod gestures to indicate their activity was welcome.
The most influential of these groups is the Oath Keepers.
Stuart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers’ founder, helped plan for violent action on January 6, 2021, and dozens of the group’s members were arrested in conjunction with the attack.
I'm not posting this cause I think these situations in schools are in anyway a laughing matter,it's just very telling what certain people and political party's in this country deem to be important.I saw this satirical cartoon drawing that someone posted online somewhere.It's a bunch of kids hiding under their desks at school while there is an active shooter,and the one kid say's to another"and my parents were worried about the psychological effects of having to wear a mask in school".Republicans will complain about kids having to wear masks in schools,but their perfectly fine with kids having to duck bullets in schools.
4
I'm not posting this cause I think these situations in schools are in anyway a laughing matter,it's just very telling what certain people and political party's in this country deem to be important.I saw this satirical cartoon drawing that someone posted online somewhere.It's a bunch of kids hiding under their desks at school while there is an active shooter,and the one kid say's to another"and my parents were worried about the psychological effects of having to wear a mask in school".Republicans will complain about kids having to wear masks in schools,but their perfectly fine with kids having to duck bullets in schools.
I would also like to see the government workers giving up what type of guns they can possess and carry. If the population has to give up certain arms they should have to as well.
Why should police and military be without guns? To protect society, they need proper equipment. However this is not the business of ordinary civilians. Allowing civilian access to assault weapons has been a disaster. US is the only rich country that has mass shootings every year. Most countries wisely ban civilian access to assault weapons and think US loose gun laws are stupid.
4
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:
I would also like to see the government workers giving up what type of guns they can possess and carry. If the population has to give up certain arms they should have to as well.
Why should police and military be without guns? To protect society, they need proper equipment. However this is not the business of ordinary civilians. Allowing civilian access to assault weapons has been a disaster. US is the only rich country that has mass shootings every year. Most countries wisely ban civilian access to assault weapons and think US loose gun laws are stupid.
This thread is about something horrible . I send my thoughts ,prayers and condolences to the families and friends involved. Just making a valid point here... to buy these type of guns , it's harder to do then to vote. You need proper ID to obtain a weapon like the one used (legally)..background check,, fingerprinted... while to vote... nothing...
The core of this problem starts with the home... the final is the gun...
0
This thread is about something horrible . I send my thoughts ,prayers and condolences to the families and friends involved. Just making a valid point here... to buy these type of guns , it's harder to do then to vote. You need proper ID to obtain a weapon like the one used (legally)..background check,, fingerprinted... while to vote... nothing...
The core of this problem starts with the home... the final is the gun...
Husband of teacher killed in Texas dies of Broken Heart Syndrome
By Chelsea Donovan, WRAL reporter. May 28
Uvalde, Texas — The husband of one of the teachers killed in Texas, died just hours after he attended a memorial service for the victims. His family believes he died of a broken heart.
Experts believe Joe Garcia abruptly died from Broken Heart Syndrome after his wife Irma was among the 21 shot and killed this week.
Stress can be triggered by illness, surgery, accidents – or like in Texas this week – the unexpected death of a loved one, and that intense emotional and physical experience can actually lead to a broken heart. "When someone experiences a severe stress on their body - emotional or physical - it's been theorized the high level of adrenaline in blood can cause dysfunction in blood vessels and heart muscle," says Kelly.
3
One more adult death from Uvalde incident
Husband of teacher killed in Texas dies of Broken Heart Syndrome
By Chelsea Donovan, WRAL reporter. May 28
Uvalde, Texas — The husband of one of the teachers killed in Texas, died just hours after he attended a memorial service for the victims. His family believes he died of a broken heart.
Experts believe Joe Garcia abruptly died from Broken Heart Syndrome after his wife Irma was among the 21 shot and killed this week.
Stress can be triggered by illness, surgery, accidents – or like in Texas this week – the unexpected death of a loved one, and that intense emotional and physical experience can actually lead to a broken heart. "When someone experiences a severe stress on their body - emotional or physical - it's been theorized the high level of adrenaline in blood can cause dysfunction in blood vessels and heart muscle," says Kelly.
One more adult death from Uvalde incident Husband of teacher killed in Texas dies of Broken Heart Syndrome By Chelsea Donovan, WRAL reporter. May 28 Uvalde, Texas — The husband of one of the teachers killed in Texas, died just hours after he attended a memorial service for the victims. His family believes he died of a broken heart. Experts believe Joe Garcia abruptly died from Broken Heart Syndrome after his wife Irma was among the 21 shot and killed this week. Stress can be triggered by illness, surgery, accidents – or like in Texas this week – the unexpected death of a loved one, and that intense emotional and physical experience can actually lead to a broken heart."When someone experiences a severe stress on their body - emotional or physical - it's been theorized the high level of adrenaline in blood can cause dysfunction in blood vessels and heart muscle," says Kelly.
RIP
3
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
One more adult death from Uvalde incident Husband of teacher killed in Texas dies of Broken Heart Syndrome By Chelsea Donovan, WRAL reporter. May 28 Uvalde, Texas — The husband of one of the teachers killed in Texas, died just hours after he attended a memorial service for the victims. His family believes he died of a broken heart. Experts believe Joe Garcia abruptly died from Broken Heart Syndrome after his wife Irma was among the 21 shot and killed this week. Stress can be triggered by illness, surgery, accidents – or like in Texas this week – the unexpected death of a loved one, and that intense emotional and physical experience can actually lead to a broken heart."When someone experiences a severe stress on their body - emotional or physical - it's been theorized the high level of adrenaline in blood can cause dysfunction in blood vessels and heart muscle," says Kelly.
Republicans don't trust teachers in schools discussing basic U.S. history topics like slavery, Native American genocide, Jim Crow and injustice because it might hurt their children.
These same Republicans trust teachers to arm themselves in schools with no training or law enforcement experience to take out active school shooters to protect their children when the police won't even do so. What could go wrong??
Conservative logic
3
Republicans don't trust teachers in schools discussing basic U.S. history topics like slavery, Native American genocide, Jim Crow and injustice because it might hurt their children.
These same Republicans trust teachers to arm themselves in schools with no training or law enforcement experience to take out active school shooters to protect their children when the police won't even do so. What could go wrong??
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: I would also like to see the government workers giving up what type of guns they can possess and carry. If the population has to give up certain arms they should have to as well. Why should police and military be without guns? To protect society, they need proper equipment. However this is not the business of ordinary civilians. Allowing civilian access to assault weapons has been a disaster. US is the only rich country that has mass shootings every year. Most countries wisely ban civilian access to assault weapons and think US loose gun laws are stupid.
So you believe that in order to “protect society” the government needs the guns?
But you believe I shouldn’t be allowed to own the guns to protect myself and my family?
Please explain.
1
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: I would also like to see the government workers giving up what type of guns they can possess and carry. If the population has to give up certain arms they should have to as well. Why should police and military be without guns? To protect society, they need proper equipment. However this is not the business of ordinary civilians. Allowing civilian access to assault weapons has been a disaster. US is the only rich country that has mass shootings every year. Most countries wisely ban civilian access to assault weapons and think US loose gun laws are stupid.
So you believe that in order to “protect society” the government needs the guns?
But you believe I shouldn’t be allowed to own the guns to protect myself and my family?
Republicans don't trust teachers in schools discussing basic U.S. history topics like slavery, Native American genocide, Jim Crow and injustice because it might hurt their children. These same Republicans trust teachers to arm themselves in schools with no training or law enforcement experience to take out active school shooters to protect their children when the police won't even do so.
What could go wrong?? Conservative logic
2
Quote Originally Posted by DeezyAZ81:
Republicans don't trust teachers in schools discussing basic U.S. history topics like slavery, Native American genocide, Jim Crow and injustice because it might hurt their children. These same Republicans trust teachers to arm themselves in schools with no training or law enforcement experience to take out active school shooters to protect their children when the police won't even do so.
So you believe that in order to “protect society” the government needs the guns? But you believe I shouldn’t be allowed to own the guns to protect myself and my family?
Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
5
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:
So you believe that in order to “protect society” the government needs the guns? But you believe I shouldn’t be allowed to own the guns to protect myself and my family?
Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
States with the most gun violence share one trait
(CNN) The indisputable fact is: where there are more guns, there are more gun deaths.
There are indeed a horrific number of gun deaths in Chicago each year. But there are more gun deaths in Texas, by far, than in any other state, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Texas suffered 4,164 gun deaths in 2020, the most recent year for which the CDC has published data. That's a rate of 14.2 deaths per 100,000 Texans.
California, by comparison, saw 3,449 deaths, a gun death rate of 8.5
But even Texas does not have the highest gun death rate. Far from it. The top states by worst gun death rates are:
Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
States with the most gun violence share one trait
(CNN) The indisputable fact is: where there are more guns, there are more gun deaths.
There are indeed a horrific number of gun deaths in Chicago each year. But there are more gun deaths in Texas, by far, than in any other state, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Texas suffered 4,164 gun deaths in 2020, the most recent year for which the CDC has published data. That's a rate of 14.2 deaths per 100,000 Texans.
California, by comparison, saw 3,449 deaths, a gun death rate of 8.5
But even Texas does not have the highest gun death rate. Far from it. The top states by worst gun death rates are:
Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
Can anyone here who is on the left or center explain why Trump supporters don't understand these relevent facts?
Is it because they are unwilling to acknowledge the facts and their practical application?
Or is it because Fox news refuses to inform them of the relevent facts and continue to "fear monger" instead?
5
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
Can anyone here who is on the left or center explain why Trump supporters don't understand these relevent facts?
Is it because they are unwilling to acknowledge the facts and their practical application?
Or is it because Fox news refuses to inform them of the relevent facts and continue to "fear monger" instead?
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost every major study on defensive gun use has found that Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year.
“Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,” says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama.
1
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost every major study on defensive gun use has found that Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year.
“Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,” says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama.
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson: Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
Can anyone here who is on the left or center explain why Trump supporters don't understand these relevent facts? Is it because they are unwilling to acknowledge the facts and their practical application? Or is it because Fox news refuses to inform them of the relevent facts and continue to "fear monger" instead?
I think Fox just ignores it all. Which leaves their devout viewers ignorant of the facts
4
Quote Originally Posted by baish2012:
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson: Gun lobby promotes the myth that guns are a common and effective tool for self defense. Actually, use of guns in self defense by citizens is extremely rare. Under 1% of people defend themselves with guns in violent crimes according to Violence policy center. No proof of millions of self defense gun uses each year. Far greater chance of accidental shooting, suicide, assault or homicide in homes with guns. More guns don't mean Americans are safer.
Can anyone here who is on the left or center explain why Trump supporters don't understand these relevent facts? Is it because they are unwilling to acknowledge the facts and their practical application? Or is it because Fox news refuses to inform them of the relevent facts and continue to "fear monger" instead?
I think Fox just ignores it all. Which leaves their devout viewers ignorant of the facts
States with the most gun violence share one trait (CNN)The indisputable fact is: where there are more guns, there are more gun deaths. There are indeed a horrific number of gun deaths in Chicago each year. But there are more gun deaths in Texas, by far, than in any other state, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Texas suffered 4,164 gun deaths in 2020, the most recent year for which the CDC has published data.That's a rate of 14.2 deaths per 100,000 Texans. California, by comparison, saw 3,449 deaths, a gun death rate of 8.5 But even Texas does not have the highest gun death rate. Far from it.The top states by worst gun death rates are: (all red states which voted for trump TWICE) Mississippi -- 28.6 Louisiana -- 26.3 Wyoming -- 25.9 Missouri -- 23.9 Alabama -- 23.6 Alaska -- 23.5
All you have to do is look at a map like this. Where it’s blue, there is more likely to be more gun violence. Where it’s red, there will be less.
Why are you always pointing to 98% white countries like Switzerland and saying what they do is the solution and then point to states with a high black population and say that they are the problem?
1
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
States with the most gun violence share one trait (CNN)The indisputable fact is: where there are more guns, there are more gun deaths. There are indeed a horrific number of gun deaths in Chicago each year. But there are more gun deaths in Texas, by far, than in any other state, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Texas suffered 4,164 gun deaths in 2020, the most recent year for which the CDC has published data.That's a rate of 14.2 deaths per 100,000 Texans. California, by comparison, saw 3,449 deaths, a gun death rate of 8.5 But even Texas does not have the highest gun death rate. Far from it.The top states by worst gun death rates are: (all red states which voted for trump TWICE) Mississippi -- 28.6 Louisiana -- 26.3 Wyoming -- 25.9 Missouri -- 23.9 Alabama -- 23.6 Alaska -- 23.5
All you have to do is look at a map like this. Where it’s blue, there is more likely to be more gun violence. Where it’s red, there will be less.
Why are you always pointing to 98% white countries like Switzerland and saying what they do is the solution and then point to states with a high black population and say that they are the problem?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.