RACISM CREATED GUN CONTROL

The first law to prevent the carrying of concealed weapons appeared in Kentucky in 1813. Very few people owned handguns back then, but many had knives. And the large Bowie knife was becoming quite popular at that time. Whites in the South feared blacks, so they outlawed the concealed carrying of any weapon, including knives.

The Democrat Party, which owned the south for generations, were afraid of slaves, freed blacks and abolitionists (i.e. Republicans) carrying Bowie knives. To maintain power over these Americans, Democrat politicians, state by state, outlawed concealed-carry. By 1850 every Southern state had made it illegal to carry any kind of concealed weapon.

Today, Democrats are still afraid of the masses. They cannot gain complete power over us so long as we own weapons. Should Harris/Walz somehow cheat their way into power, Americans can expect them to accelerate the war on the Second Amendment that Democrats have waged for decades now.

Intel® Core™ i5-13500
incl. Hyper-Threading Technology
RAM: 64 GB DDR4
optional max. 128 GB DDR4 (for additional charge)
Disk: 2 x 512 GB NVMe SSD (Gen4)
(Software-RAID 1)
Connection: 1 GBit/s-Port
Bandwidth guaranteed: 1 GBit/s
Backup Space: 100 GB
Traffic: Unlimited *
Available Locations
from € 39.00
monthly + € 39.00 once-off setup fee

As jury selection was beginning in Hunter Biden's federal tax evasion trial in downtown Los Angeles Thursday, Hunter's defense attorney, Abbe Lowell, announced in court that Hunter intends to change his plea from not guilty to guilty. //

At a pre-trial motions hearing on August 21, it became clear that as the evidence was presented, it would be quite embarrassing for the First Family, as prosecutors would be forced to call witnesses and introduce documentation to prove that millions of dollars in expenses were business expenses and not personal. That meant that women Hunter had allegedly paid for sex would testify, and receipts from an online dating site would be brought before the jury and the American public. //

anon-vxao
an hour ago
Confirmation for sure that he's expecting a full pardon at the end of 2024. //

CarlFromCanton
an hour ago
If my dad were going to pardon me before he resigns, why would I sit through all that bummer crap first?

DKnight CarlFromCanton
an hour ago
Bingo. This also speeds up the court case so that it is finished before Biden leaves office, so his pardon can include everything instead of just the cases that have finished and sentencing started. //

Laocoön of Troy
an hour ago
This is likely a prelude to the issuance of Presidential pardons for the players in the Biden Junta. Get ready...they're cleaning up loose ends. And after being dumped by the Dem brain trust in favor of Harris, 'ol Joe ain't in a mood to do much to help Obama in the 2024 end-game. He's gonna take care of the family and his ill-gotten gains instead of the Democrat Party.

The Swiss are renowned for crafting the finest watches in the world, such as the Patek Philippe. The Swiss are now credited with inventing the most effective fiscal rules in the world, the Swiss debt brake.

The debt brake was enacted as a constitutional fiscal rule through referendum in 2001, with support from 85 percent of Swiss citizens. Like many countries, the Swiss have encountered recessions accompanied by unsustainable growth in debt. The debt brake was enacted to impose more effective constraints on federal spending and restore sustainable levels of debt. Over the past two decades, the Swiss cut debt as a share of national income roughly in half. //

Like a Swiss watch, the debt brake has several parts that are synchronized to constrain fiscal policies. The most important part is a rule that constrains the growth in federal spending to the rate of growth in potential output. This means that in the long term the federal government cannot grow more rapidly than the private sector.

Another rule is designed to stabilize spending over the business cycle. The federal government can incur deficits in periods of recession but must offset those deficits with surplus revenue in periods of economic growth. The rules cap deficit spending. If the deficits exceed 6 percent of expenditures, the excess must be eliminated within the next three annual budgets by lowering the expenditure ceiling. A compensation account is used to track deficits and surpluses over time. //

The debt brake has fostered fundamental reforms in the budget process in Switzerland. Before the debt brake was enacted, the Swiss relied on a bottom-up approach to budgeting. Each ministry proposed its own budget, and these were then aggregated into a total budget. Bottom-up budgeting is biased toward deficit spending, as each ministry lobbies for its own programs. The debt brake requires top-down budgeting. The finance minister is now required to draft a budget that conforms to debt brake rules, and that budget is then broken down into separate budgets for each ministry. //

The Swiss debt brake has proven to be the most effective of the new generation of fiscal rules enacted in developed countries. The reason is that it replaces discretionary fiscal policies with rules-based policies. ///

It only works for a moral people who have s conscience.

Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Harris often speaks of free speech as it if it is privilege bestowed by the government like a license and that you can be taken off the road if you are viewed as a reckless driver...
jonathanturley.org
“That Has to Stop”: Harris Denounces Unfettered Free Speech in 2019 CNN Interview
6:04 AM · Sep 4, 2024 //

In my book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss how the Biden-Harris Administration has proven to be the most anti-free speech administration since John Adams. That includes a massive censorship system described by one federal judge as perfectly “Orwellian.”

In the CNN interview, Harris displays many of the anti-free speech inclinations discussed earlier. She strongly suggests that X should be shut down if it does not yield to demands for speech regulation.

What is most chilling is how censorship and closure are Harris’s default positions when faced with unfettered speech. She declares to CNN that such unregulated free speech “has to stop” and that there is a danger to the country when people are allowed to “directly speak to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight and regulation.” //

The “joy” being sold by Harris includes the promise of the removal of viewpoints that many on the left feel are intolerable or triggering on social media. Where Biden was viewed as an opportunist in embracing censorship, Harris is a true believer. Like Walz, she has long espoused a shockingly narrow view of free speech that is reflective of the wider anti-free speech movement in higher education. //

Elon Musk

@elonmusk
·
Follow
This is what she actually believes.

Free speech is the bedrock of democracy and the Democratic Party (Kamala is just a puppet) wants to destroy it.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr

@RobertKennedyJr
Kamala Harris: "He [Musk] has lost his privileges."
Can someone please explain to her that freedom of speech is a RIGHT, not a "privilege"?

Kamala Harris: "There has to be a responsibility placed on these social media sites to understand their power."
Translation: "If they…
12:37 AM · Sep 3, 2024

Mike Ford
8 hours ago edited
I'm tired of hearing outright or by implication/assumption, that Putin prefers Trump to be POTUS. That is flat out BS

Anyone who believes that to be true, is either stupid, ill-informed and/or flat out lying.

Putin is a cold warrior. the one thing the former USSR (now Russia) craves in a U.S. President...is predictability.

With Trump, they are terrified because they do not know which way he will jump....That's why they referred to Ronaldo's Magnus as a "cowboy" during his election.

They would much rather have to face the unintelligent, weak willed Harris across the negotiating table than Trump

I would remind all and sundry...that of the last 4 presidents...only Trump did not cede ground to Putin.

Southwest Asi was not on fire and the Chinese were not impeding freedom of navigation.

The first full account of how the Cold War arms race finally came to a close, this riveting narrative history sheds new light on the people who struggled to end this era of massive overkill, and examines the legacy of the nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that remain a threat today.

Drawing on memoirs, interviews in both Russia and the US, and classified documents from deep inside the Kremlin, David E. Hoffman examines the inner motives and secret decisions of each side and details the deadly stockpiles that remained unsecured as the Soviet Union collapsed. This is the fascinating story of how Reagan, Gorbachev, and a previously unheralded collection of scientists, soldiers, diplomats, and spies changed the course of history.

Buchanan documents, as have others before him, that both the First and Second World Wars are primarily the product of wretchedly incompetent management of international relations on the part of Britain, France, Germany, and others. //

Most readers, myself included, will not buy all of Buchanan's arguments. Regarding the fecklessness of European diplomacy, and the causes of the First World War, I think that Buchanan is on solid ground. Other researchers before Buchanan have found the First World War to have been an avoidable tragedy that the European states should have been able to avoid. Buchanan's Second World War arguments are somewhat more problematic. //

Buchanan makes a pretty good case that Hitler was an opportunist, and that he was not without justification in seeking return of the Sudetenland and of Bohemia. Had he stopped there, and negotiated return of Danzig without war (which Buchanan says would have happened absent the British guaranty) we might be living in a very different world. Who can say?

Personally, I still think that Hitler was determined to fight a bloody war against Russia and persecute the Jews and other nationalities and ethnicities that he hated. Ultimately, it seems that Hitler was bound to fight such a war, but Buchanan makes some case that the world might have been better had Germany and Russia fought their war without the Western Allies being involved. Each reader must decide for him or her self. I don't accept this thesis. //

Mr. Buchanan's most insightful analysis is at the very end of this piece. He argues, as discussed above, that inept European diplomacy in which Great Powers went to war for non-vital reasons, was the cause of the World Wars. He then contrasts this with US diplomacy from World War I to the end of the Cold War. During this time American leaders refused to be easily drawn into conflicts and joined the World Wars only in their latter stages (particularly the First) thereby avoiding in significant degree, the horrendous casualties that many others suffered. Even more significantly, once America became the leading world power, American diplomacy repeatedly avoided war-starting confrontations by refusing, not without anguish, to fight wars for non-vital interests to America. Hence America's refusal to fight wars over Soviet interventions in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, or even the Cuban Missile Crisis. The contrast between the success of America in winning the Cold War without a World War (albeit with some sizable errors such as Vietnam) and European fecklessness in managing to start two world wars in 25 years, is stark. This is a truly fascinating insight which in my opinion is the major contribution of this book.

On Wednesday, Cheney proved just how false that claim about being conservative was when she endorsed Kamala Harris during a speaking engagement at Duke University in the battleground state of North Carolina. //

Republicans rejected Cheney, they're not being influenced by her. Plus, it's funny that the Democrats who called her father a war monger are now embracing her just because she says bad things about Trump. But it shows you where the Democrats are now. They would of course throw her under the bus in a red hot minute if it helped them. //

Liz Cheney @Liz_Cheney
·
Kamala Harris is a radical liberal who would raise taxes, take away guns & health insurance, and explode the size and power of the federal gov’t. She wants to recreate America in the image of what’s happening on the streets of Portland & Seattle. We won’t give her the chance.
6:17 PM · Aug 11, 2020

MJ Lee
@mj_lee
·
Follow
In their letter to ABC News, Harris campaign wrote in part:

"Vice President Harris, a former prosecutor, will be fundamentally disadvantaged by this format, which will serve to shield Donald Trump from direct exchanges with the Vice President."
5:10 PM · Sep 4, 2024 //

How will Harris be "fundamentally disadvantaged" by having complete control of the floor when she's asked a question? That makes no sense on its face. There is no disadvantage in not being interrupted during a debate.

Clearly, Harris wanted a food fight because she felt that would play into her hands. Part of it was no doubt about having another "I'm speaking" moment, a line she dropped on Mike Pence during the 2020 vice presidential debate. //

Putting that all together, Harris' demand for unmuted mics was not just about hoping Trump would interrupt her. It was about her wanting to interrupt him. Harris wanted to get into a back-and-forth with Trump in which she could cosplay as a good prosecutor, prodding him with yes and no questions to loaded accusations. With the mics staying muted, Harris can't set that up, and she's ticked off about it, as evidenced by her campaign's continued whining in the letter.

houdini1984
2 hours ago
Frankly, I have no reason to believe anything that this government says about anything. Period.

With that said, let's assume that it's true. Let's assume that everything the DOJ alleges is 100% accurate. Who the hell cares? Why should I be concerned about a media company taking Russian funding and having a pro-Russian slant in their coverage? Is that more damaging to my way of life than the entirety of our media complex colluding with their Democrat counterparts? Seriously... if we're concerned about media interfering in American affairs, disrupting elections, or promoting hostile entities' interests, then indict CNN, MSNBC, and the other mainstream media outlets that routinely smear conservatives, run defense for Democrats, and rewrite history and reality every day. //

John Q. Public
an hour ago
I think there isn’t much lower than fluffing for the Russians, but what exactly is illegal about getting paid by them to do it? Any lawyers present?

Secondly, it’s almost certain this does not end with Tenet media. Some of the Pro Russia stupidity I’ve read on other prominent blogs is far too potent to be organic.

streiff John Q. Public
an hour ago
FARA and money laundering as the funds came from sanctioned sources.

Every bit of the shameless coverage of this is based on accepting the premise that Trump and the Gold Star families broke the rules. What's the actual evidence for that, though? Because while we keep hearing about the cemetery employee who tried to intervene, that person (or the U.S. Army) has yet to provide any details that would show the above-cited rule was broken.

How did the employee know the picture with the Gold Star families was "campaign-related?" Did that person just assume that? Contrary to a lot of the framing, it is not against the rules to take a picture in Arlington National Cemetery. How do I know that? Because Democrats, including Joe Biden and Barack Obama, have done so numerous times without any pushback. //

Gutfeld also pointed out how the press is obsessed with Trump's bitter relatives and other irrelevant figures, but when the Gold Star families actually involved want airtime to tell their stories, suddenly they aren't newsworthy. //

Press bias is not just affecting Republican politicians anymore. It's now painting Gold Star families as villains so Kamala Harris can preen about respecting the very people her incompetence got killed. Think about how perverse that is. //

BJW#IStandWithTX
7 hours ago edited
Harris using her X account to POLITICALIZE what she said Trump did, was POLITICALIZING the Arlington private ceremony attended by Trump and gold star families.

As usual the left DOES EXACTLY WHAT THEY ACCUSE others of doing. The only person using this visit for political points WAS THE HARRIS WALZ GANG!

A new study has found that a vast majority of climate policies enacted since 1998 across 41 countries have been utterly ineffective. //

The study, published in the Journal of Science, evaluated about 1,500 climate policies implemented between 1998 and 2022 by 41 OECD countries (The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). The study found only 63 policies (about 4 percent) that, combined, had successfully “reduced total emissions between 0.6 and 1.8 Gt CO2.” Due to the low success rate, researchers estimate the CO2 emissions from the 41 nations they studied will exceed the Paris Climate Agreement target by 23 billion metric tons by 2030.

More importantly, the study found that two popular tools most governments’ climate policies rely on — subsidies and regulations — rarely reduce emissions. Researchers found some form of carbon tax approach was more effective at reducing emissions. //

Following the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) that pledged over $110 billion in climate and energy funding, the administration introduced its Green New Deal with a grossly misleading label, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), in 2022, with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the deciding vote in the Senate. The IRA purported to allocate $369 billion for climate change and energy over the next decade. However, the latest Congressional Budget Office’s projection of the IRA’s climate tax credit through year 2033 has already jumped to a staggering $428 billion, a rapid 16 percent increase than the IRA originally planned. //

The Harris-Walz campaign, as pointed out by The Wall Street Journal editorial board, has shamefully used the word “freedom” to “disguise that Democratic policies seek to restrict liberty across American society.” Voters who want to be free from the government’s wasteful spending and infringement on individual rights should not fall for the Democrat’s and Harris’ deception in the upcoming election.

Expanding funds from the Center for Tech and Civic Life and other leftist groups to rural areas only expands election insecurity. //

Nonprofit election grants were so concerning in 2020 that 28 states enacted legislation limiting or banning the use of private funds to run elections, but even states that have banned private funds are not necessarily safe from undue influence from similar organizations. Rural and nonmetro areas in other states are certainly still vulnerable to other forms of nonprofit pressures and should still be alert to the Democrats’ overarching strategy to claw at rural, nonmetro areas that have traditionally run red.

The Harris-Walz campaign and abortion apologists continue to deceive Americans, both about Trump’s pro-life positions and the consequence of abortion initiatives. //

The video of Trump stating his opposition to Amendment 4 made that point, but as Harris and the propaganda press quickly showed, they will nonetheless continue to deceive Americans, here, by pretending Amendment 4 is a ballot initiative about Florida’s six-week abortion ban. It is not.

To the contrary, the ballot initiative would add Amendment 4, entitled, “[l]imiting government interference with abortion,” to the Florida constitution. That provision states that other than parental notification laws, “no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

If Amendment 4 passes, Florida’s constitution would prohibit the state legislature from passing any laws that “delay” or “restrict” abortions before 22 weeks of pregnancy, including informed consent laws or waiting periods. Further, even after the baby can survive on her own outside the womb, the Florida constitution will prohibit any ban on abortion.

Prolifers need to make this point, but only after first explaining the nonsense of the idea that a post-viability abortion is ever needed. Post-viability, the proper standard of care to treat a serious medical condition is the prompt delivery of the baby—not the prolonged late-term abortion procedure. The only purpose a post-viability abortion serves is to ensure you have a dead baby, instead of delivering a live one. //

the World Health Organization advises that “countries permitting abortion on health grounds should interpret ‘health’ to mean ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.’” Thus, even economic strain or the desire to keep a partner happy provide a supposedly “health”-related justification for a post-viability abortion. //

In fact, the overwhelming majority of countries ban abortion on demand in the second trimester, with the United States “one of only 15 countries in the United Nations that permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks of gestation. . .” Polls also show that 65 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be banned at 20 weeks or before.

Republicans, you’re not going to best the anchor on the facts, because the anchors aren’t conceding any facts. The best you can do is beat them into submission. //

A conversation of “Yes, she was,” “No, she wasn’t” is useless and a wasted opportunity. Instead, there are two options for taking advantage of these little shows:

One is to force the trifling anchor to fully expose himself as a Democrat surrogate by demanding he explain and defend his counterpoint.

Senator Tom Cotton did this expertly in a recent interview with ABC’s Jonathan “Milhouse” Karl. When Karl attempted to run interference for Kamala by insisting Kamala no longer supports every godawful policy she professed to support and even aided in implementing as vice president, Cotton challenged Karl to show his math. “How do you know that’s not her position?” said Cotton in a way that kind of turns me on. “How do you know that’s not her position? She has not said that. She has not said that. She has not said that.” //

Karl went on to say on behalf of the Kamala campaign that the vice president is “clearly making an effort to move to the middle,” revealing whom he supports in this race and whom he believes needs help across the finish line.

At that point, Republicans, you can proceed to acknowledge that the anchor is here to assist Kamala, nothing more, and you can continue to make the points you want.

The second option is to aggressively confront every rebuttal sputtered by the anchor because the media collectively and individually have proven themselves to be irredeemable liars and fiends. Say so. They deserve it. The voters are on your side when you do. //

Why are you defending her?

Why are you speaking for her?

Why are you letting Kamala and the Democrats dictate your coverage?

Why are you trying to debate on their behalf?

If you want a debate, host one and demand that she be here to answer for herself, rather than you answering for her.

Why are you repeating her campaign’s lies, which you know are false, and which you refuse to “fact-check”?

Why do you apologize for her campaigners’ lies when they’re not here and then get snippy with me for rebutting them, even though I did you the courtesy of showing up while they refuse to answer your calls?

The CDC, FBI, and legacy media are conspiring to “debunk” the truth that armed, law-abiding citizens prevent crime and stop mass shootings. //

The Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), which I run, has found many more missed cases and is keeping an updated list.

Overall, the CPRC estimates that law-abiding citizens with guns have stopped over 35 percent of active shootings over the last decade and 39.6 percent in the last five years. This figure is eight times higher than the four percent estimate made by the FBI. //

In places where law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry firearms, we estimate that armed civilians stopped 51 percent of active shootings over the past decade. Over the last five years, that figure was 53.1 percent.

A Pennsylvania court Friday sided with left-wing special interests, blocking the state from enforcing part of a law that required mail ballots to be properly dated in order to be counted. //

The majority opinion, however, while citing “prior litigation,” stated that “the date on the outer mail-in ballot envelopes is not used to determine the timeliness of a ballot, a voter’s qualifications/eligibility to vote, or fraud. Therefore, the dating provisions serve no compelling government interest.” //

The RNC plans to appeal the decision, according to a statement from Election Integrity Communications Director Claire Zunk reportedly obtained by Votebeat Pennsylvania reporter Carter Walker, which notes how both “[t]he Pennsylvania Supreme Court and US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit have both upheld Pennsulvania’s dated ballot requirement.”

Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri appeared on Fox News’ "Jesse Watters Primetime" and delivered some bombshell news: whistleblowers have told him that the Secret Service is “woefully unprepared” to protect candidates, and they’re taught by 2hr webinar on “Microsoft Teams”—and most of the law enforcement personnel at the Butler, Pennsylvania rally in July where Donald Trump narrowly escaped death from a sniper’s bullet weren’t even Secret Service. They were DHS officers: //

"The site agent, the lead agent, was known to the Trump campaign to be inexperienced, to be ineffectual, to be, frankly, incompetent at their job," Hawley previously said in an interview on "Jesse Watters Primetime." "I'm also told by whistleblowers that on that day, she was not enforcing the normal security protocols."

"She was not checking people's IDs. She did not use Secret Service agents," Hawley added. "Most of the agents there that day were not Secret Service agents. They were Homeland Security agents."

Thursday 2nd April 2020 15:11 GMT
BJC
Millisecond roll-over?
So, what is the probability that the timing for these events is stored as milliseconds in a 32 bit structure?

Reply Icon
Re: Millisecond roll-over?
My first thought too, but that rolls over after 49.7 days.

Still, they could have it wrong again.

Re: Millisecond roll-over?
I suspect that it is a millisecond roll over and someone at the FAA picked 51 days instead of 49.7 because they don't understand software any better than Boeing.

Thursday 2nd April 2020 17:05 GMT
the spectacularly refined chap
Reply Icon
Re: Millisecond roll-over?
Could well be something like that, the earlier 248 day issue is exactly the same duration that older Unix hands will recognise as the 'lbolt issue': a variable holding the number of clock ticks since boot overflows a signed 32 bit int after 248 days assuming clock ticks are at 100Hz as was usual back then and is still quite common.

See e.g. here. The issue has been known about and the mitigation well documented for at least 30 years. Makes you wonder about the monkeys they have coding this stuff. //

bombastic bobSilver badge
Reply Icon
Devil
Re: Millisecond roll-over?
I've run into that problem (32-bit millisecond timer rollover issues) with microcontrollers, solved by doing the math correctly

capturing the tick count

if((uint32_t)(Ticker() - last_time) >= some_interval)

and

last_time=Ticker(); // for when it crosses the threshold

[ alternately last_time += some_interval when you want it to be more accurate ]

using a rollover time

if((int32_t)(Ticker() - schedule_time) >= 0)

and

schedule_time += schedule_interval (for when it crosses the threshold)

(this is how Linux kernel does its scheduled events, internally, as I recall, except it compares to jiffies which are 1/100 of a second if I remember correctly)

(examples in C of course, the programming lingo of choice the gods!)

do the math like this, should work as long as you use uint32_t data types for the 'Ticker()' function and for the 'scheduld_time'; or 'last_time' vars.

If you are an IDIOT and don't do unsigned comparisons "similar to what I just demonstrated", you can predict uptime-related problems at about... 49.71 days [assuming milliseconds].

I think i remember a 'millis()' or similarly named function in VxWorks. It's been over a decade since I've worked with it though. VxWorks itself was pretty robust back then, used in a lot of routers and other devices that "stay on all the time". So its track record is pretty good.

So the most likely scenario is what you suggested - a millisecond timer rolling over (with a 32-bit var storing info) and causing bogus data to accumulate after 49.71 days, which doesn't (for some reason) TRULY manifest itself until about 51 days...

Anyway, good catch.