The NY Post is not a credible news source. It is a far right propaganda factory run by none other than Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News.
The fact that you continuously read and link extreme far right propaganda discredits everything that you ever say:-
Since Murdoch took over the paper, The Post has been known for its over-the-top sensational headlines.
Editorially, The Post has endorsed the Republican Presidential Candidate in every race since 1980.
According to an LA Times article, the New York Post is reported to be U.S. President Donald Trump’s preferred newspaper.
The Post, According to a survey conducted by Pace University in 2004, was rated the least-credible major news outlet in New York.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/
You are a truly comical person Amarel. You are corrupt, dishonest and disingenuous down to your very last fibre of being. You are more like a cartoon villain than a real human being.
Yur mad because I pointed out your stupid comment, but not someone else's?
Not mad. I'm puzzled that you don't/can't comprehend sarcasm, assume all language to be literal and that you purposefully ignore all relevant context which negates the need to make sneering remarks.
I am afraid the simple fact of the matter is that you are a stupid, racist, partisan idiot with absolutely raging double standards and a mirthless contempt for factual reality.
Nice going implying that all guns do is kill people and that there's no other application of guns. No hunting
Guns kill things you jaw-dropping idiot. That's literally the only reason they exist. Cars were invented to transport things. Guns were invented to kill things.
Car accidents and the deliberate striking of pedestrians wouldn't be possible without cars.
Neither would it be possible for the entire country's workforce to get to their jobs in the morning. You predictably left that part out. If all cars did was kill people they might be comparable to guns.
Ah, the Eurocentrist circlejerk has arrived. I don't expect either of you to understand why trying to disarm 72 million Americans
Oh Jesus Christ you're just so goddamned stupid. Nobody has any intention of "trying to disarm 72 million Americans" you literal idiot. That isn't how it works. Banning guns makes gun ownership illegal. If you own a gun after that date and you get caught you'll go to jail, exactly like you would for any other crime.
What you stupid clowns love to do is throw out objections based entirely on your own false reasoning.
A cop caught doing that would not only lose his job, but would lose his career in law enforcement.
Good one, halfwit. Any person caught raping another would not only lose his job, but would also lose his freedom. Therefore rape doesn't happen. More faultless logic from our resident fruitcake. 😂👌
It's unacceptable for police to make personal visits to "check their thinking", enforce hate speech laws, or enforce lockdowns; they violate fundamental human rights.
Protecting your life from a dangerous pathogen is not a violation of your "fundamental human rights" you child.
I suppose I should ask all the voting right wingers if their votes actually reflect their preferences...oh wait, that would be very stupid.
You are talking about reds who are already living in blue states!!! If they are perfectly happy to live in a blue state now, then why would they suddenly become unhappy if the blue state becomes a blue country? They'd be free to move just like they are free to move right now. Nothing would change for them.
Please get it through your goddamned head that making up somebody else's mind for them without asking them is ALWAYS stupid.
In democracy the unintelligent (the majority) make laws that the brilliant (minority) must live by.
I have to admit this is true in theory. But at the same time, fascism isn't to be confused with meritocracy. It isn't the brilliant who make the decisions in a fascist society. Furthermore, democracy isn't to be confused with the systems in place in the west. These are representative democracies, which themselves are arguably closer to fascism than actual democracy.
I couldn't care less if you want to pretend I'm an American Nazi.
Nobody is pretending. You are using speech which makes it very clear that you are on the extreme far right.
I'm a classical liberal/libertarian Brit.
😂 So you're using American political terminology while you simultaneously pretend to be British? 🤦♂️ You are so stupid I don't even know how to begin explaining it to you.
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.
Deliberately taking CS Lewis quotes out of context is not a good reason to let millions of people die. What is actually wrong with you? Did your mother drop you on the head as a baby? Where is this "tyranny" you speak of?
The mortality rate in the UK has been as high as it was in 2020 for every single year before 2003.
False. Just like everything else you ever claim.
The UK experienced unprecedented levels of excess mortality during the spring of 2020 and again in the autumn and winter of 2020 and 2021, reflecting the two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK so far.
And covid has a 0.128% mortality rate
Also false. As the graph below shows, the Covid mortality rate (i.e. I presume you actually mean fatality rate) has risen as high as 15 percent in Italy, 12 percent in Sweden and Spain, and over the entire globe to 7 percent:-
https://ourworldindata.org/
You literally don't have the first idea what you are talking about. You are an extreme far right white nationalist retard with a big mouth and a political agenda.
He’s the same cock sucker who several years ago on here claimed he co-authored a scientific paper on red shift
😂🤦♂️
Amarel is very plainly a delusional person who lacks the intellectual depth to get past his own feelings of self-importance. He could keep a psychiatrist in work for at least two years.
Here we love free markets and free enterprise.
😂👌
Sure you do buddy.
The failure rate gives you an idea of how and when businesses tend to fail. 50 percent fail within the first five years.
Nom you literally confused "except" and "expect".
No I didn't. You are just so narcissistic, so dishonest, so pointless and so stupid. This is what you wrote:-
Any cop would happily except more training
https://www.createdebate.
You literally confused accept and except. All the sneering in the world won't stop you from being a fucking idiot.
No one in left leadership is willing to separate the phrase "black lives matter" from BLM intent lest they be called a white supremacist.
You are so hilarious. The way you try to set up a false narrative for BLM's "intent" right before you mock the idea that you are a white supremacist.
You said Trump filed 63 cases, then quoted a sentence that contradicts your comment.
Completely false. Your bizarre fallacy is that you are trying desperately to disconnect Trump from 63 cases which were all filed on the basis of his own lies. Trump was the one who told the lies and all of the cases were either developed by Trump personally or with his express authorisation.
You are just pathetic, Bronto. As per usual you are trying to have an argument about literally nothing. About the fact that Pence was the one who filed some of the litigation on Trump's behalf.
I'm not American, nor a white nationalist
I don't believe either claim because your language is that of an American white nationalist.
Like I said, that's not the government's choice to make.
Then that's another thing you are wrong about. A government has every right to protect its citizens from idiots like you and your conspiracy theories that Covid is a hoax. The last time there was a pandemic of this scale, a third of the population of Europe died.
I see the problem here.
So do I. You've been banned several times for hording accounts and spamming the site with insane far right political propaganda, but you keep coming back Bronto. The problem is quite obviously that you are insane.
You are too stupid to discern that "Trump lost 63 cases" and "60 cases not filed by Trump" are antithetical statements.
There's nothing antithetical about it you pointlessly stupid, fallacious little imbecile. Trump was the leader of the party which filed the suits and he was the one who lied about fraud in the first place. Just because Pence filed some of the suits on behalf on Trump doesn't make Trump any less culpable. Christ, you're just so pathetic and desperate. Trump, and the Republicans who backed his fake claims about election fraud (Republicans like YOU!!!!), lost 63 cases in a row.
Deal with it. You're a goddamned embarrassment to humanity.
It seems Trump was right about covid though.
About which part? The part where he claimed it was all under control, the part where he blamed the CDC, or the part where he suggested you can cure it by injecting disinfectant?
I just honestly find your delusional rubbish about Trump to be tiresome. I understand he is a hero to you white nationalist halfwits, but then again so is Hitler.
Frankly it has been insane to see the hysteria surrounding covid, and the extent to which people were willing to be tyrannised
No, the insane thing is your use of the word "tyrannised", to describe actions taken to reduce a world death count which is already over three million, even WITH the "tyranny". That's some lunatic reasoning right there. You yell about "tyranny" when the government is trying to save lives, but cheer and clap when it proposes building a giant wall across Mexico.
That's Americans for you. Programmed to be idiots.
Given the evidence presented in the trial. The amount of contact between the two, was nowhere near as prolonged as the media kept trying to tell us. It kind of makes the day all of those democrats knelt for 9 minutes, as a symbol, though weak as it was. Especially given what kind of colors they were wearing at the time.
Awww, are we salty that Chauvin was found guilty? That must have come as quite a blow to you white nationalists.
Hahaha ok. People sue each other over anything.
63 times? Hahahahaha! OK. 😂🤦♂️
Maybe a year of everyone justifying political violence
Or maybe a couple of Tweets from a despot?
You are laughably pathetic Amarel. A real weasel if ever I met one. 😂
Your own link says almost all of these cases were filed by someone other than Donald Trump.
Oh, the Democrats filed them did they? Ahahahahahaha!!!! 😂🤦♂️
Here's what my own link says you fanatical fascist fool:-
Trump, his attorneys, and his supporters falsely[10] asserted widespread election fraud in public statements
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
And you are continuing to make the exact same false statements 6 months later!!!!! Fuck off Bronto. Your wife and kids left you for one good reason: you're a natural born loser.
If you want video of Multiple Republicans calling for him to give up, just say the word.
Save it Bronto, you truly insane fanatic:-
More Than Half Of Republicans Believe Voter Fraud Claims
There are multiple, blatant evidences of voter fraud.
😂🤦♂️
After the 2020 United States presidential election, the campaign for incumbent President Donald Trump and others filed and lost at least 63 lawsuits[1] contesting election processes, vote counting, and the vote certification process in multiple states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.[2]
Nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped due to lack of evidence;[3] judges, lawyers, and other observers described the suits as "frivolous"[4] and "without merit".[5][6] In one instance, the Trump campaign and other groups seeking his reelection collectively lost multiple cases in six states on a single day.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Trump lost 63 consecutive cases. Bronto claims "multiple, blatant evidences of voter fraud". It would almost be funny if you weren't actually insane. 😂
Hi nomshit, Hitler was indeed voted into power, but you conveniently failed to continue with the full and concluding chapter of the chronical which was that he wasn't voted out of power.
And if the Republicans had gotten their way, neither would Trump. You are quick to forget that most of the party supported his absolutely baseless claims of election fraud, in a gambit for ultimate authority and power, which eventually -- thank goodness -- failed.
That's not what Trump did though.
That's exactly what he did.
He literally utilized the legal process within our standard institutions of law
😂🤦♂️ The 60 or so defeats he had in court evidence precisely that he DID NOT have any legal basis for overturning the election results. The legal system is there for people who have genuine legal arguments. It is not there to be abused by narcissistic fanatics who want to twist it into a tool of their own dictatorship.
Then some rabble who liked Trump went into the Capital building and broke stuff.
Why ever would they go to the Capitol building and break stuff? 🤷♂️
Oh, that's right.... 😁 Your fuhrer ran out of options after being stonewalled by the criminal justice system, and so he tried to organise an armed insurrection instead.
But let me guess. You've got a different version of events, isn't that right you boring Nazi prick?
Ah yes, the fascist that was voted into and out of power.
You have no reason to be using the definite article. Hitler himself was voted into power just like Donald Trump, and just like Donald Trump he tried to unravel the democratic apparatus once he was in power.
Shut your mouth and learn some history you ignorant American.
Kamala Harris locked up more than anybody. You voted for her.
The alternative was a fascist who literally tried to overthrow the democratic system and replace it with his own dictatorship. Since you left that part out I thought I'd better include it.
I don't know the context, but I'm assuming he means that the idea of fascism will survive its hosts?
It isn't a real quote you fool. I'm saying the exception doesn't disprove the rule. If one billionaire loses all his money that doesn't mean wealth isn't horded by the top echelon of society and it certainly doesn't mean his money is ever going to reach the poor. Even when well-known businesses fail they are usually bought out by other well-known businesses.
Look... Discussing capitalism with a communist
Any of course anybody who criticises capitalism must therefore be a communist!!! Good one 😂👌
Look, the fact is that you're an idiot. You can accuse me of name-calling all you like but your idiocy is a fact buddy.
by voluntary exchange with the poor
There is no "voluntary exchange" with the poor you narcissistic retard. The poor are exploited for labour. That's how capitalism works. If they weren't poor they wouldn't be selling their labour. They'd be spending their days in the sun just like the people exploiting them, not making stuff in factories.
By the exact same fallacious reasoning, slaveowners have a "voluntary exchange" with slaves. Otherwise the slaves would just refuse to work, right?
You are purposefully conflating coercion with volunteering. Nobody works because they want to work. They work because if they don't work they are likely going to starve. Your description of that as a "voluntary" arrangement is so offensive and backwards that one must wonder how you even manage to tie your shoelaces without assistance.
Every time I spend my money, I vote for capitalism
The things you write are just so stupid, buddy. There is no connection between these two variables anywhere outside of your own imagination. If I spent money in the Soviet Union, would that be a vote for Communism? If I spent it in Hitler's Germany, would that be a vote for fascism?
You are literally an idiot, excon. You are a typical American. Lots to say but no computing power.
But you know what? Even the largest businesses fail
"Even the largest empires fall, so therefore fascism is great", reasoned Hitler.
half of the top 500 businesses from 20 years ago aren't at the top anymore.
Those businesses merge into other businesses, the owners sell and reinvest etc... Your apparent theory that half of the ultra wealthy people from 20 years ago are no longer ultra wealthy, simply because the businesses they were previously associated with have renamed or been bought out, is RIDICULOUS. Private ownership is being consolidated, not diluted, and that can be evidenced in a great variety of different ways. For example, 40 years ago there were fifty different media companies responsible for the total sum of information in America. Today it is six companies. See:-
Wealth does not get diluted and spread around to the poor in capitalism. That is an absolute fantasy with no relationship to the facts. It gets hoarded by the ultra wealthy.
Trading an item that has worth for another item that has worth is capitalism personified
No it isn't you irritating dolt. Trade predates capitalism by tens if not hundreds of thousands of years. Capitalism is a system of creating economic prosperity by exploiting the labour of the individual. You literally take time away from people so that you can better enjoy your own time. That's capitalism.
I'm not a utopian idealist and I recognise that all systems tend towards corruption. What capitalism has over communism is the inherent dissolution of economic power over each and every business.
But factual reality shows that is indeed a Utopian belief which in no way reflects the real world. We KNOW that the largest companies can and do manipulate the market in their favour, and we KNOW that new businesses have a 50 percent failure rate within the first five years. Power is not diluted; it is concentrated into the hands of a few ultra wealthy oligarchs.
They already do. Have you ever went through the current process of purchasing a fireram?
Hi Bronto.
Are you aware that a background check can't list crimes you haven't committed yet?
Just so you understand, a background check doesn't stop me having a nervous breakdown and shooting all my work colleagues.
It would reduce gun crime, but that only gets rid of the gun aspect
Gun crime is exactly what a gun ban is supposed to reduce.
Not to mention the fact that it would be quite literally impossible to disarm the cartel and other crime syndicates.
The cartels are getting their guns BECAUSE of the slack nature of American gun laws, not in SPITE of them. For God's sake, the circular reasoning you morons use is absolutely shocking:-
94,000 weapons were recovered from Mexican drug cartels in the five years between 2006 and 2011, of which 64,000 -- 70 percent, according to Jim Moran -- come from the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SmugglingoffirearmsintoMexico
Guns are illegal in Mexico, and so they are smuggled in from the United States because they are not illegal in the United States. It's pretty simple to understand if you have an IQ over 90.
I can tell that all you know how to do is constantly refresh this site and wait for your next chance to write some troll comments.
I can tell that you don't have any legitimate refutation to the points I made. I know that because instead of addressing them, you immediately label them "troll comments" as if that somehow absolves you of all responsibility to hold your own ground.
The fact of the matter is that you can't pre-emptively guess who is going to commit crime. Legalising guns puts them straight into the hands of people with bad intentions.
When I think about how simple it is for someone to get their hands on a firearm that means for me that a mentally unstable person could potentially abuse the power that is held, with this much power to obtain there must be a restriction, strong background checks, long process, etc. I do like the feeling of proctection and I understand how obtaning a firearm can make someone feel safe when needed. I am not COMPLETLY against the idea of guns, there just needs to be enforcement to insurance it is in the right hands.
I think you've made some fair comments.
The fact is that you can't separate one group of people from the other. If you legalise guns for people who just want to feel safe, then you also legalise them for people looking to make threats and/or commit violence. Guns are always going to be more useful for the second group.
Banning drugs sure did work now we'll ban guns
Banning guns DID work though, in all the developed countries it was tried. Which begs the question: why are you comparing a gun ban to a drugs ban, instead of the many successful gun bans?
Let me answer that one for you. It's because you are a ridiculous fucking idiot who is not intelligent enough to think or reason for himself. Your arguments are confined to repeating the things you hear on right wing talk shows.
Also, I guess if you don't want to be nuked by another country you should just ban the use of nuclear weaponry right?
Oh God, why are you so stupid? Didn't we literally begin this conversation with you making accusations about "false equivalencies"?
Explain to me, please, how banning nuclear weapons in one country but not another, is equivalent to banning the personal use of firearms ubiquitously among the private citizens in one country?
You are literally a fucking idiot. You don't have an argument so shut your mouth. You are starting from a place of extreme personal bias, and trying to distort all the facts around that personal bias. I see it every day in all the people of this world who are narcissistic and stupid.
This is yet another red herring.
This is another false statement.
White nationalism is a problem, but that doesn't mean immigration isn't also a problem.
It doesn't mean illegal immigration is a problem either, so you are back at square one.
I don't know if you actually read my response
I read enough to realise that you lack sufficient knowledge of history to understand that everybody in America is an illegal immigrant. From there I quickly realised that you are a wingnut.
I don't understand why that makes you so hostile. I wasn't even talking about the problem being them killing American citizens, I was talking about the killing and trafficking of immigrants being the problem.
You said illegal immigration was the problem. That's what I replied to. Let me remind you that you stole the land you are standing on after slaughtering all of the prior inhabitants. That doesn't give you much moral high ground to complain about illegal immigrants.
Aren't blue lives matter & want my gun come and take it contradictory positions?
I've been watching a lot of YT recently, so I've probably seen over 40 or so examples of what happens when, "You want my gun come and take it." The cops come and take it. Usually they pry it from your cold, dead hands.
The supremacists opinions were not based on pigmentation as most white people disagree with them.
How can you create entire arguments grounded in your own personal distortions of other people's language? You're just simply mad.
Most black people don't protest, but that didn't stop you from concluding the OP meant all black people.
No, illegal immigration is a real and serious problem.
No, white nationalism is the real and serious problem. White nationalists have been responsible for the overwhelming majority of terrorist deaths in the United States and when you create alt after alt after alt to come on here and parrot their talking points it simply makes sane people want to punch you in the face.
False equivalencies.
Common sense. If you don't want people to get shot you ban guns. Not difficult to understand for those of us who aren't literally stupid.
People use Benzos, otherwise known as roofies, as a recreational drug.
Roofies are short for Rohypnol, the most commonly used date rape drug. Benzos are the much wider group of drugs to which Rohypnol belongs. Rohypnol is already banned in the United States. See:-
https://www.isp.state.il.us/crime/
You are very literally stupid as fuck.
Laws don't just work outright, and we can't assume any prohibitionist policy regulating or banning guns would make the number of gun owners shrink or simply disappear.
God this is impossible when you have to deal with people who are this insane.
You won't assume banning guns will reduce gun crime, but you WILL assume banning guns is a "fool's errand"?? Just what the fuck is anybody supposed to say in response to that? Your entire post is an exercise in personal bias.
Obviously, regulation on guns is a necessity, but trying to control the domestic procurement of firearms is a fool's errand.
Oh God, here we go again. Same ignorant comments.
"No, I won't try because it won't work."
"But it already has worked in a variety of different countries".
"Don't care. Fool's errand. Won't try."
I referenced police oaths in general
No, I was the one who did that you utterly pointless, lying Jew. You claimed that police officers would not uphold or enforce the law if the law banned guns. I referenced the fact that all police officers swear an oath to uphold the law.
Your black is white bullshit is just fucking ridiculous Amarel. Shut your fucking mouth for once in your waste of a life. You are a sociopath who has no grounding in factual reality.
Jesus Christ I'm not talking about the federal government you dumb shit.
1) Not being able to read your mind doesn't make me a dumb shit, you dumb shit.
2) You literally just claimed the oath is part of the civil service. The civil service is part of the federal government.
I truly don't understand how you can be so utterly devoid of anything even vaguely resembling intelligence, while at the same time apparently believe the problem lies with anybody who points it out.
I'll quote myself again here: "Most such oaths are first and foremost to the Constitution of the US and of the State in which the officer is certified"
Is there any reason why you have added emphasis not present in the original text around the word "certified", instead of around "oaths"? I mean, given that you have been talking about oaths for the past hour -- not certifications -- I am wondering again what is actually wrong with you?
It's the Civil Service oath smart one. Cops take it too. Keep going.
Ahahahaha!!! 😂🤦♂️
In the United States, the federal civil service was established in 1871. The Federal Civil Service is defined as "all appointive positions in the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the Government of the United States, except positions in the uniformed services."
Police officers are certified...By their State. Soldiers aren't fucking certified genius.
You are just simply mentally ill. We were having a conversation about oaths, not certification. Why don't you understand English? What is actually wrong with you?
Oath of Enlistment
I wish I knew your specific mental affliction
I wish you could read English. I've told you plenty of times that my "mental affliction" is a distaste for people who are dishonest and stupid.
Again, I said "Most such oaths are first and foremost to the Constitution of the US and of the State in which the officer is certified"
In which the police officer is certified. We were talking about police officers, not the military. You literally need psychiatric help Amarel.
Look.. Here's the answer.. The police need to be taken apart, and put back together again - MINUS Qualified Immunity and MINUS the police unions
I'm not sure I agree because unions are the only layer of protection most employees get from unfair treatment by those in power.
The President can't remove the 2nd Amendment.
Oh, you STUPID, STUPID idiot. I did not say that the President can remove the second amendment. Your straw man argumentation is absurd. It is a waste of everybody's time.
The second amendment is an AMENDMENT. That means someone amended the constitution and can do so again. Funny how that makes sense when you aren't a fucking idiot.
I'll go ahead and quote my original statement
Doing anything other than going to school is a waste of your time and my time. You are quite frankly one of the most stupid individuals presently alive on Earth, and have so far -- in less than half an hour -- confused the police oath with both the military service oath and the oath taken by university faculty members.
You are literally dumber than a bag of rocks. 😂
Hi again Amarel, you ridiculously stupid, sneering Jewish halfwit. I read your first oath, then Googled it:-
https://www.suny.edu/sunypp/
This is the oath taken by university employees not police officers.
How is it possible that you are JUST SO FUCKING STUPID?
"Armed police units are simply a countermeasure"
And you want to get rid of their arms "period"? Nah haha
Yes, I want to prevent the hardcore element of criminals they are a counter-measure against from acquiring guns.
Since you clearly have problems interpreting plain English, I don't understand why you are trying to have a conversation in English. Perhaps you should stick to Hebrew, you sneering Jewish halfwit.
the Democrats share the Socialist ideology
The "socialist ideology" which the Russians abandoned in 1991?
I don't know how it is even possible for people like you to exist, Bronto. You are so thoroughly ignorant, stupid and dishonest that it is like having a conversation with a cartoon character, not a human being.
Most such oaths are first and foremost to the Constitution of the US and of the State in which the officer is certified.
😂🤦♂️ So if the 2nd amendment is taken out of the constitution and state laws reflect that change then police officers are sworn to uphold the law, yes?
You stupid, insane little weasel. As per usual you are on the wrong Wikipedia page. This:-
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UnitedStatesUniformedServicesOathofOffice
Is the oath taken by the United States armed forces, not the police. Stop talking you fucking retard.
A significant percentage of police are pro-2A. If there were some kind of gun-grab executive order, many cops would not enforce it.
The cops literally swore an oath to uphold the law you stupid bastard. You're a retarded idiot, Amarel. You live in a fantasy universe.
The whole point of bringing up Switzerland
The whole point of you bringing up Switzerland is so that you can purposefully deflect the argument to the only country on Earth where there isn't a strong relationship between gun ownership and violence. It's pathetic. The Swiss are obviously mature and stable enough to resist the urge to shoot each other. Americans are obviously not.
I think they should close the loophole that one does not need to have a background check if buying a gun at a gunshow.
That isn't how criminals are getting guns. They get them through through straw purchases, corrupt gun dealerships and theft.
