They want to seize the guns of law-abiding citizens so they can seize even more power and let criminals run wild. Since the shooter was not white, the Sacramento tragedy was barely mentioned in the national news. Same thing happened with San Bernardino, Boulder, etc.
Equity is the most important consideration for any Corrections system. Until racial equity has been achieved, there is no racial justice.
Releasing African-American inmates to restore equity is the primary objective of any Corrections system.
Focus on reoffending blames the victim (the inmate) instead of society. Before we can achieve equity, we must ascribe the blame for all crime on society… and, in particular, on white privilege.
Californians understood that former Chief Justice Rose Bird’s primary focus was what would now be called restoring equity. Since she didn’t believe that criminals were responsible for their own behavior, the prison doors must be thrown open so that the victims of inequity… inmates of color… may be freed.
This makes you no different than any other garden variety progressive. Why do you support strong controls? How about strong rules allowing regular people / non criminals to carry a concealed pistol? Do you want to win? Be different.
"I worked for George Soros’ foundation in the 1990s, and believe he means well..."
Your 'belief' and his 'meaning well' are irrelevant. He's some eastern european non-american who has been on record as wanting an "open society", and has advocated unamerican policies his entire life. I thought "rich white old men" were the problem. Why does he get a pass, and since when did we start ignoring actions and results?
This is one of the most naive statements I've ever heard from someone of your caliber. If you want to win, you have to be different. Dancing around the edges will get you nowhere.
What Yuri Bezmenov said. I'll add that it sounds like, "Smiley" Martin was a hero in the mold of St. George Floyd in his taste for violence against women. Another noble victim of "White Supremacy", and "Institutional Racism", whose depravity and identity is conveniently buried while The Great Replacement we see on TV and the Internet shows a different reality. Then, the depravity's tragedy is used to whip up support for disarming the law abiding citizenry.
Mr. Schellenberger I appreciate the work you have done with Apocalypse Never. I find your tap dancing around issues without taking a strong stand or sometimes taking a stand and then taking the other side in your rhetoric frustrating. Here you admit that gun control and the obscenely tyrannical notion of suing someone who sold another person a gun would not have prevented the crime then go on to say that you are for strong gun control.
I get it. You are running for election. I ignore your messages for support in a Campaign for Governor of California because this type of political messaging and equivocation is what got California and our nation into this spot. "The Left" has long since abandoned acting in good faith and the "The Right" is starting to wake up to the fact that the old rules were burned and buried long ago. Equivocation just isn't going to get it done. The Left takes ten miles for every inch given. Their safety-at-any-cost brigades are the gravest of dangers to us all.
As for Soros, and his good intentions, I don't buy it. If he funds these organizations, then he is responsible. His intentions are irrelevant, if not highly suspect given given how many decades he has been funding the destruction of our nation and the people who are bent on it. Consequences matter. May there be consequences proportional to the hell that the purported best of intentions is leading to.
You’re using right-wing trigger words – –eg “Soros” “crime agenda”… Labels! That never helps to engage the better part of my liberal-centrist mind. And you don't parse the issue fully. Because this guy should’ve been monitored, are you saying we don't incarcerate too many people, and need to find alternatives? Because this guy found a gun that was already outlawed, does that mean we don’t need gun reform? These are not arguments but zero-sum thinking that undermines seriousness. Justlook at the wacko comments you stir up – – like the one that begins “They want to”…
So, Michael, Cali has some of the strictest gun laws in the Nation. When you write that you "support strong gun controls" What does that mean? huh? Or is it just pandering and meaningless rhetoric. What do you actually propose and why should it work when none of Cali's law seem to work now?
Are there any articles that track policy with populations/releases/crime? I see a ton of anecdotes (which all seem incredibly cut and dry) but I never see a macro picture tying it all together. Anywhere in press even in conservative places even though it seems like the biggest policy slam dunk you could ever have because the picture seems so clear. Genuinely curious.
They want to seize the guns of law-abiding citizens so they can seize even more power and let criminals run wild. Since the shooter was not white, the Sacramento tragedy was barely mentioned in the national news. Same thing happened with San Bernardino, Boulder, etc.
Newsom Administration Lies:
People don’t kill people… guns kill people.
Equity is the most important consideration for any Corrections system. Until racial equity has been achieved, there is no racial justice.
Releasing African-American inmates to restore equity is the primary objective of any Corrections system.
Focus on reoffending blames the victim (the inmate) instead of society. Before we can achieve equity, we must ascribe the blame for all crime on society… and, in particular, on white privilege.
Californians understood that former Chief Justice Rose Bird’s primary focus was what would now be called restoring equity. Since she didn’t believe that criminals were responsible for their own behavior, the prison doors must be thrown open so that the victims of inequity… inmates of color… may be freed.
The majority of violent crime is done by a minority of the criminals. Lock up violent felons and do not let them out.
You lost me at Soros ...
Michael you said "I support strong gun controls". Such as? What "gun controls" does CA not have that you would like to see implemented?
Why do you support "strong gun controls"? Do you think that criminals obey them or do you want more controls on law-abiding citizens?
This is really idiotic thinking, IMO.
"I support strong gun controls..."
This makes you no different than any other garden variety progressive. Why do you support strong controls? How about strong rules allowing regular people / non criminals to carry a concealed pistol? Do you want to win? Be different.
"I worked for George Soros’ foundation in the 1990s, and believe he means well..."
Your 'belief' and his 'meaning well' are irrelevant. He's some eastern european non-american who has been on record as wanting an "open society", and has advocated unamerican policies his entire life. I thought "rich white old men" were the problem. Why does he get a pass, and since when did we start ignoring actions and results?
This is one of the most naive statements I've ever heard from someone of your caliber. If you want to win, you have to be different. Dancing around the edges will get you nowhere.
They still think they can create gun laws that criminals will obey.
They really will just use anything to crack down on law abiding citizens bring armed.
They refuse to admit that the way they’ve handled things drives gun sales more than anything else.
They have a clear agenda.
What Yuri Bezmenov said. I'll add that it sounds like, "Smiley" Martin was a hero in the mold of St. George Floyd in his taste for violence against women. Another noble victim of "White Supremacy", and "Institutional Racism", whose depravity and identity is conveniently buried while The Great Replacement we see on TV and the Internet shows a different reality. Then, the depravity's tragedy is used to whip up support for disarming the law abiding citizenry.
Mr. Schellenberger I appreciate the work you have done with Apocalypse Never. I find your tap dancing around issues without taking a strong stand or sometimes taking a stand and then taking the other side in your rhetoric frustrating. Here you admit that gun control and the obscenely tyrannical notion of suing someone who sold another person a gun would not have prevented the crime then go on to say that you are for strong gun control.
I get it. You are running for election. I ignore your messages for support in a Campaign for Governor of California because this type of political messaging and equivocation is what got California and our nation into this spot. "The Left" has long since abandoned acting in good faith and the "The Right" is starting to wake up to the fact that the old rules were burned and buried long ago. Equivocation just isn't going to get it done. The Left takes ten miles for every inch given. Their safety-at-any-cost brigades are the gravest of dangers to us all.
As for Soros, and his good intentions, I don't buy it. If he funds these organizations, then he is responsible. His intentions are irrelevant, if not highly suspect given given how many decades he has been funding the destruction of our nation and the people who are bent on it. Consequences matter. May there be consequences proportional to the hell that the purported best of intentions is leading to.
You’re using right-wing trigger words – –eg “Soros” “crime agenda”… Labels! That never helps to engage the better part of my liberal-centrist mind. And you don't parse the issue fully. Because this guy should’ve been monitored, are you saying we don't incarcerate too many people, and need to find alternatives? Because this guy found a gun that was already outlawed, does that mean we don’t need gun reform? These are not arguments but zero-sum thinking that undermines seriousness. Justlook at the wacko comments you stir up – – like the one that begins “They want to”…
So, Michael, Cali has some of the strictest gun laws in the Nation. When you write that you "support strong gun controls" What does that mean? huh? Or is it just pandering and meaningless rhetoric. What do you actually propose and why should it work when none of Cali's law seem to work now?
Very sad to hear this is going on.
Are there any articles that track policy with populations/releases/crime? I see a ton of anecdotes (which all seem incredibly cut and dry) but I never see a macro picture tying it all together. Anywhere in press even in conservative places even though it seems like the biggest policy slam dunk you could ever have because the picture seems so clear. Genuinely curious.
Huge fan of yours, but you lost me at “Soros funded.” Sounds Qanon-y