Wow, Oberlin is way more disgusting than I thought. I was under the impression that it was a few misguided influential people at the college but if that piece is accurate it was way more wide spread and malicious.

They're like villains out of a book or movie.

The Gibsons ought to sell their story

https://abc13.com/politics/israel-bans-entry-to-tlaib-omar-over-boycott-activities/5469893/

Aren't they advocating boycotting the country? Like wouldn't people understand Cuba not allowing entry to someone advocating boycotting them?

i wouldn't want to let anyone into my country if they openly advocate for its destruction either

So that means we can bar them from coming back? 🙃

i guess i should have specified that they be foreigners and not citizens

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/netanyahu-considers-blocking-omar-tlaib-from-entering-israel-ahead-of-a-planned-weekend-visit/2019/08/15/d69983ce-d15b-4074-8590-c6f69bd4a084_story.html?noredirect=on
I just saw the same thing

I wish we could bar them from coming back

https://apnews.com/6bd16a2216664ca1bf8eabbfebc72c7c

`Jack Donson, a retired treatment specialist who worked for the Bureau of Prisons for more than two decades, disputed any notion that Epstein was removed from suicide watch prematurely.`

Well, the fact that Epstein is dead kind of disproves his opinion on how long he should have been on suicide watch.

`Getting on suicide watch requires a determination by the institution’s suicide prevention coordinator, usually its chief psychologist, that a person may be in imminent danger of suicide.`

So.... trying to commit suicide doesn't automatically get you put on the list

This article is propaganda, or the article is making the case that suicide watch is completely worthless.

To be fair, we can't really say that it was wrong to take him off of suicide watch, because it is becoming increasingly obvious that he didn't commit suicide in the first place.

Yeah, he should have been on Clinton murder watch

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1161670584352350210

"Nearly 200 House Democrats don't understand what a semi-automatic firearm is"

i mean the house has 235 democrats and 197 republicans so that's almost half, do they need a majority or a super majority to pass this bill?

I've heard conflicting information.

Some says it's a "semi-automatic firearm ban."

Others say it's purely to restrict them at a National level to 10 rounds magazines, and in order to swap a magazine you need a pin or some special doohickey.

Not sure to be honest.

Also, I like how "assault weapon" and "assault rifle" are commonly conflated.

I posted a link to the actual bill a few days ago, seems like they drafted it back in February and have been sitting on it for a while. I'm sure the shootings have brought attention back to it

Here it is again
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1296/text

being reasonable and not getting all RWDS, congress can't *literally* ban guns right?

I think theoretically they *could* and then start a months or years-long political conflict until the courts sort it out

They could do it in a roundabout manner

That's effectively what AWB was trying to do

Yeah, they can go fuck themselves.

*How many citizens can we turn into felons today?!*

make so that no such "assault weapon" existed with the necessary restrictions they created/imposed?

They'll try to ban as many guns as possible without "infringing" on the right to arms. Seems like in their mind, being able to own any guns at all counts as having your rights fulfilled

We'll be back to lever guns and SA revolvers in no time

what would that do to private weapons businesses?

That's a good question.

and how would this stop illegally trafficked weapons?

That moment when half of the U.S starts dealing on the black market