Comments by "girl from the bronx by way of el barrio" (@girlfromthebronxbywayofelb7288) on "Face the Nation"
channel.
-
142
-
76
-
30
-
Adams, worst mayor ever. I voted for the guy, but he has been a gigantic disappointment. Can't handle housing, no plan for affordable housing for NYers, no plan for immigration resettlement, although NYC has been handling immigration for over one hundred years. Cannot wait to vote him out. He's only interested in kissing up to real estate interests so they will fund his next campaign. There are thousands of empty warehoused housing units, Adams, and you know it. Supervise your real estate buddies, and find another city. NYC is so done with this guy. You, sir, are the crisis. π½
22
-
18
-
15
-
15
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Don't get ahead of yourself, NYC laws are not unconstitutional yet, SCOTUS decision not yet released. Test case came out of western NYS, not NYC, so it is very likely that SCOTUS will allow for different needs in urban centers. If your family members are shooting guns on the Grand Concourse, they are part of the problem. First of all, ILLEGAL , and likely an illegal gun trafficked from another state. If all of that makes you happy, you don't sound like a law abiding responsible gun owner to me. Good luck to your family, but I might suggest that they attend their next community council meeting and work towards making the neighborhood safer. That works. Firing off guns on Moshulu Parkway, nope.
2
-
Dear udontneedtoknow, Your cousin's story doesn't sound like self defense, sounds like stray gun fire on a city street. I am sure the innocent bystanders are loving it. Your cousins might not be the most popular neighbors on the block.
Carrying a gun without a permit will get you arrested in NYC, so they could be getting in over their head any day now. You might want to counsel them on that rather than enabling them. Concealed carry permits are for special security, off duty police, some officers of the court. AR 15, not even, therefore NYC is working on street crime, reducing gang activity, not mass shootings. Be safe, stay calm, don't forget to breathe.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Β @dennisg4053Β Yes, NYS concealed carry permit regulations are currently under review by SCOTUS, decision due at the close of this term. I am truly worried about this. Because that's what NYC needs, more people walking around with guns!!! What are they thinking? What happened to states rights? And spare me the "good guys" with bad aim want to live in their own movie by engaging in gun battles on Broadway or in the subway. Truly horrifying.
Has the California law reached SCOTUS yet? Perhaps still hope that ruling can be overturned? One of the worst rulings is Heller, from 2008?, opinion written by Scalia, almost anything I have seen says this was a flawed opinion that departed dramatically from precedent. I hope these cases can be reviewed; maybe some cases from Buffalo or Uvalde can make their way through the courts. Sandy Hook families had a successful civil case, don't know if that could be reviewed further. If Plessy v Ferguson can fall, any case can be reviewed. Be well, be safe. Vote in November, our lives literally depend on it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
willmont82: wow. Huge gulf in logic. Let's review. Police officers and law enforcement need to be armed, because they have a difficult role to play in society. They must use those arms responsibly when interacting with all civilians and possible offenders. They are not judge, jury or executioner, and if they understand that on a visceral level, then they can be trusted with those arms and be accountable for misusing those arms.
Schools are places of teaching and learning and positive socialization for students. It's where children learn to make friends and get along with people and learn math and science and reading and especially history. It's a place for teachers and counselors and assistant principals and deans and principals and school nurses. Armed law enforcement, not so much, unless those police officers want to lock up their guns for safety, learn class management and educational psychology, maybe go in depth on a particular subject so that they have knowledge of value to share with students.
Hope this is helpful. Children want to go to school, and comprehensive federal gun safety legislation will help them stay alive while they do that. Fewer guns, not more guns. States with flimsy gun laws have not been helping in making that happen, so comprehensive federal legislation is needed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think we were spoiled as a nation that we enjoyed so many decades of solid SCOTUS interpretation and opinions. Because of this current SCOTUS reliance on so-called textualism, however, now the honeymoon is over.
They simply seem to say, "Well, this concept was not written into the Constitution by the framers in the 1700s, so we strike it down.". Strangely, textualism didn't seem to apply when they were reviewing the 14th amendment and its provisions for keeping insurrectionists off the ballot. And when they needed to completely fabricate a king-like immunity for presidents that can be found nowhere in our founding documents, again the lack of textualism was not a problem for the majority. So I guess they are textualists until they are not?
So if everything has to be written into the Constitution, amendments are the way to survive this SCOTUS until some retirements or some reform creates some shifts. The amendment to make it clear that presidents are not immune is the first order of business. If the SCOTUS is confused about how to apply the right to privacy to the modern realities of marriage equality and reproductive healthcare, then we will have to spell it out for them in an amendment. We could probably use most of the ERA, but explicitly add the right to privacy in medical decisions, and mention contraception, miscarriage treatment, followup care for incest and rape, and abortion. The marriage equality piece could be a separate amendment, again connected to the right to privacy as in the current controlling opinions, but this time adding explicit language about marriage equality, mixed race marriage, and same sex marriage.
Then we need to move on to drafting a new amendment to protect public safety, by being explicit about what national gun safety regulations need to look like. Misinterpretations of the second amendment are multiplying, and it's clear that we cannot continue this carnage of daily gun violence. The second amendment can remain, but a new amendment needs to provide balance to protect innocent school children, shoppers, worshippers, etc. "Shall not be infringed" is not solving anything. Guns cannot continue to have more rights than innocent people.
We have a lot of work to do. Let's get busy. ππβοΈππ
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dear Mr skull, your last comment did not post on the thread. Maybe you didn't want others to read it? You sound very stressed, maybe all those guns are increasing your anxiety. Stay calm, don't forget to breathe. If fox news told you that half of the NYPD was fired for lack of compliance on COVID vaccination, then you have been deceived. I am glad that virtually all NYPD came to their senses and continued to serve the public by supporting COVID control measures. New York paid a tragic tragic price for the early ineptitude of t****p on infection control, so I cannot turn COVID into a joke. It is ghoulish. Gun violence is ghoulish. Street crime vs mass shootings are very different concepts with very different solutions. Making fun of NYC doesn't reduce these grotesque school shootings, especially since NYC doesn't have them. Restricting or eliminating AR 15 would be helpful, because AR 15 was used in more than 12 of these horrific events:. Buffalo, Uvalde, El Paso, Aurora, Las Vegas, Parkland, Sandy Hook, etc etc etc. It is ghoulish and grotesque.
1
-
First, let's focus. This is about Sandra Day O'Connor. She deserves her day.
Having said that, President Biden has signed an impressive amount of legislation. That's the job. So you're angry at him for doing his job? Inflation down to 3%, no additional interest rate increases from the Fed, interest cuts predicted soon, gasoline down to $3, green energy on the march to make gasoline obsolete. Presidents getting stuff done, I'm for it! Maybe he's old, but FDR and LBJ were old and ugly too. Presidents getting things done, I'm for it. π½πππ½
Thank you, Justice O'Connor, for meeting your moment in stupendous fashion. Enjoy your rest well earned, enjoy your roses gathered in winter. βοΈπΉβοΈ
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yes, she did. She said it clearly in a loud voice. Sign the existing bipartisan immigration bill.
That provides the power of the purse to get the technology that screens vehicles crossing the border, because that's how fentanyl is entering, not in migrants' backpacks. Cannot upgrade that screening equipment with executive orders. The power of the purse to hire additional border patrol and hearing officers and likely administrative staff to clear up the YEARS of paperwork that the pumpkin head left behind. That includes paperwork that would have gotten our Afghan allies out in a timely fashion, so that thousands were not waiting literally for years, and now they are stuck in desperation waving paperwork over their heads in the hope that a member of the military will spot them in the crowd.
Many people who apply "the right way" from many countries wait several years, sometimes more than ten years, to get their paperwork processed. A nurse from the Philippines reported waiting more than ten years, and that's a shortage area for us. That's dysfunctional.
Executive orders will never fix immigration. Using old immigration legislation from the 1980s will never fix immigration. Congress must do its job, the pumpkin head must step back, and the president can sign updated immigration legislation. That's the way a bill becomes a law. π½
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Β @billbillerton6122Β I need some grammar. "They" did what and have what for a long time? Please be clear if you want a response. Having said that, I'm fairly certain you want to repeat some team talking points rather than discuss meaningful immigration legislation. We are all immigrants unless you are a full blooded member of an indigenous nation. Period. Walls will not help us to get along. The Monroe Doctrine indicates that we take an interest in the Western hemisphere. So let's do that, rather than destabilizing governments and supporting creepy dictators, then thinking that we will never pay the price for that empty headed "foreign policy". All the stakeholders in an auditorium, lots of coffee and bagels, lock the doors, no one gets out without a draft of serious legislation. Canada, Latin America, Caribbean, South America, unions, business interests, ATF, state department, Homeland Security, NGOs. Lots of coffee, lots of ideas. Let's get to work. Contact your representatives ASAP. π½
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Absolutely true. A handgun for protection in the home, I understand. I don't want it, but if you feel you need that, okay.
Get training, a permit, a mandated gun safe, a mental health screening just in case, be older than 21 or 25 for that good brain development and judgement that just is not there at age 18, a waiting period because if someone needs a gun in a hurry that's a huge red flag right there. A gun is a dangerous thing, so the decision to get one should have some steps and take some time.
A true hunting rifle, absolutely. I totally understand that rural areas and urban areas have different needs. The AR 15 is not a hunting rifle. It is too destructive and leaves no useable meat. Recent reporting in the Atlantic describes the AR 15 as the man's Barbie doll. There was an effective hunting rifle that was used prior to 1990 approximately. Let's use that. Because AR 15 was a very unpopular gun when it was first "modified" for sale to civilians. Sales spiked when the irresponsible gun industry targeted underage males for their advertising, calling the AR 15 "your man card".
So let's go back to something that was a more responsible hunting rifle. The AR 15 should never have been available to civilians. Even the original inventor of the gun says so. No new sales of AR 15, mandated gun safes to keep the old AR 15 safely locked away from thieves, children, and the public.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Absolutely agree on the suicidal aspects of this problem. Even if you just look at the horrific numbers on gun owner suicides, gun owners who never became mass shooters, but the NRA helped them to have the means to complete suicide attempts, right in their hands. It's beyond tragic, and gun control laws can control this. Even PBS did an interview about the correlation between mass shootings and suicidal behavior. (Sorry, I'm a huge PBS geek.)
In addition, many gun fanatics talk about mental health services merely as a deflection away from gun safety legislation, then refuse to fund mental health services in their states. What? After Uvalde, I believe I learned that Texas doesn't seem to have guidance counselors in their schools, so no wonder the Uvalde shooter was never identified and flagged while he was a student, even though acquaintances later reported that he had been abusing animals when they knew him, a well known red flag for law enforcement when looking for patterns of violence. Is the armed school safety officer supposed to be a guidance counselor? Oh wait, Uvalde schools had a full police department dedicated just to schools, and look how that worked out.
Approximately ten states have already banned AR 15. What are the other states waiting for? Finally, repeal PLCAA (2005) to restore liability to gun manufacturers, and their own lawyers will insist on robust gun safety protocols at point of sale to demonstrate due diligence in court proceedings. (Sorry this was so long. This topic is so important. Thanks.) π¦π½π¦
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1