![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
pervert butch feminist woman Preferred Pronoun?:
see above Relationship Status:
independent entity Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oakland
Posts: 1,826
Thanks: 4,068
Thanked 7,653 Times in 1,522 Posts
Rep Power: 21474853 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
The vote and running for political office are the only ways citizens can effect a change in or keep our legislators on a city/county/state/federal level. Term limits are entirely up to citizens.
I have said over and over and over again that a Constitutional Convention should be forced by the individual state legislators. Yes, I know it opens a big ole can o worms around a woman's control of her own body, however it is necessary to change our political system. 1. Speech is not money at all ever. Corporations are not people...ever. 2. Public financing of all (I will settle for federal elections...the house, the senate and the president) elections. No private money can be used for political ads ever never again. No more lies in campaigns. The individual running for office is the only one allowed to put up a political ad. No more 'swift boat' crap. 3. Every citizen of this country (over age 18) has a right to vote,. You don't lose voting rights because of felonies, lack of documentation for an ID card or any other bullshit that might get thrown at you. In case you did not know....there is not a 'right to vote' clause in the Constitution. That is why poll taxes could exist until Congress overturned poll taxes. Way back when I was a Republican (yes I was), I believed that real power is in local government and the federal government should be small....ya know....that state's right crap.... I am no longer a Republican, not because I no longer believe power is most effectively used at the city/county/state level, but because Republicans lost sight of individual rights and became enamored with corporate rights and money. They also lost sight of what a government is actually for....the people (ok my brain just went to the people united will never be divided) is what government is about. I vehemently oppose ANY movement that suggests citizens abdicate our right to vote. I would suggest that part of the Constitutional Convention also contain an amendment granting the right to vote to every fucking citizen over the age of 18 (yes Perry it is 18) in this country. No losing your voting rights for felony convictions. No losing your voting rights because you cannot produce proof of citizenship (not the same as ID cards). Citizen gets to vote period. This is what the Occupy movement is about. Fair play, economic and social justice for all....
__________________
We are everywhere We are different I do not care if resistance is futile I will not assimilate |
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Toughy For This Useful Post: |
![]() |
#2 | |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
FTM Preferred Pronoun?:
guy ones Relationship Status:
... Join Date: May 2011
Location: chillin' in FL
Posts: 3,690
Thanks: 21,951
Thanked 9,679 Times in 2,875 Posts
Rep Power: 21474854 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() Quote:
I do not feel someone that is a criminal should have the same rights as a law abiding citizen. Voting should be a privilege to citizens who love their country and follow the basic rules. I am not okay with a sexual child predator voting on perhaps a bill about these types of criminals getting out of prison early for good behavior or being able to live in a neighborhood where there is a school. I also don't feel I would be comfortable with serial killers having a vote and say on anything. I am for the death penalty and feel if you want to save money on taxes on people in jail then use that for those that deserve it. Why wouldn't a citizen be able to produce a document or ID that shows his/her citizenship status? Are you saying a foreigner should be able to vote in the U.S. elections and on U.S. and state bills just because they happen to be in the U.S. but have not received citizenship for whatever reason? What would be reasons for this and why is that okay? Thank you. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
FTM Preferred Pronoun?:
guy ones Relationship Status:
... Join Date: May 2011
Location: chillin' in FL
Posts: 3,690
Thanks: 21,951
Thanked 9,679 Times in 2,875 Posts
Rep Power: 21474854 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
December 5, 2011
http://www.alternet.org/ Pepper Spray, Tasers, and LRADs — What's Behind the Explosion of 'Less Lethal' Weapons for Crowd Control? From the battlefield of Afghanistan to your local Occupation, the government has invested big bucks in weapons that don't cause permanent damage. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in the research and development of more "media-friendly" weapons for everyday policing and crowd control, and as uprisings around the world spread, the demand for nonlethal weapons is increasing. According to an October report by the Homeland Security Research Corporation, the global market for "less lethal" weapons is predicted to triple by 2020, with more than half of the current market devoted to crowd dispersal weapons like those being used against protesters at Occupy Wall Street. Americans have a rich history of taking to the streets to demand social justice. From the labor strikes of the progressive era to the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 60s and 70s, the reaction by the powers-that-be has been the same: send in the riot police. As the Occupy Wall Street movement advances this tradition, the powerful have again reacted with overwhelming force. But the riot police of yesterday were armed much differently than they are today. Today’s arsenal includes a broad array of weapons that are meant, not to kill, but to force compliance by inflicting pain without leaving permanent injury. The Pentagon's approved term for these weapons is "non-lethal" or "less-lethal" and they are designed to disperse crowds, empty streets, and incapacitate defiant individuals. As rapid advancements in media and telecommunications technologies allowed people to record and publicize images and video of undue force more than ever before, a 1997 joint report from the Pentagon and the Justice Department hinted at the purpose of nonlethal weapons: A further consideration that affects how the military and law enforcement apply force is the greater presence of members of the media or other civilians who are observing, if not recording, the situation. Even the lawful application of force can be misrepresented to or misunderstood by the public. More than ever, the police and the military must be highly discreet when applying force. As journalist Ando Arike wrote in a 2010 article in Harpers Magazine, "The result is what appears to be the first arms race in which the opponent is the general population.” The Whole World Is Watching The demand for non-lethal weapons is rooted in the rise of television, a medium that, in the ‘60s and ‘70s, let everyday Americans witness the violent tactics used to suppress the civil rights and anti-war movements of the era. This new dynamic popularized the slogan, “the whole world is watching”, chanted by antiwar protesters outside the Democratic National Convention in 1968 as TV cameras captured a police riot against peaceful demonstrators. When Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) used nonviolent direct action to challenge segregation in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963, they captured unprecedented media attention as a thousand high school students took to the streets in defiance of a court injunction. On orders from Public Safety Commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, officers attacked demonstrators with high-pressure fire hoses and police dogs. Scenes of the ensuing mayhem caused an international outcry, leading to federal intervention by the Kennedy administration. Years later, King and the SCLC employed similar tactics in Selma, Alabama, where the police violently repressed civil rights activists. In what became known as “Bloody Sunday." |
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to ruffryder For This Useful Post: |
![]() |
#4 | |
Infamous Member
How Do You Identify?:
Human Preferred Pronoun?:
He Relationship Status:
Very Married Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Where I want to be
Posts: 8,155
Thanks: 47,491
Thanked 29,270 Times in 6,637 Posts
Rep Power: 21474859 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() Quote:
__________________
"Many proposals have been made to us to adopt your laws, your religion, your manners and your customs. We would be better pleased with beholding the good effects of these doctrines in your own practices, than with hearing you talk about them".
~Old Tassel, Chief of the Tsalagi (Cherokee) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Corkey For This Useful Post: |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
pervert butch feminist woman Preferred Pronoun?:
see above Relationship Status:
independent entity Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oakland
Posts: 1,826
Thanks: 4,068
Thanked 7,653 Times in 1,522 Posts
Rep Power: 21474853 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
I'm gonna do this point by point because it is necessary and in this color.
Quote:
__________________
We are everywhere We are different I do not care if resistance is futile I will not assimilate |
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Toughy For This Useful Post: |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
FTM Preferred Pronoun?:
guy ones Relationship Status:
... Join Date: May 2011
Location: chillin' in FL
Posts: 3,690
Thanks: 21,951
Thanked 9,679 Times in 2,875 Posts
Rep Power: 21474854 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
Thanks for the responses.
I said a "CHILD" sexual predator nothing about sexual consent. Whether a consent of sex or a rape being questioned is consented to is a matter of she said, he said. A child is totally different than what you are refering to and what I said. As for a what constitutes a criminal, you tell me? You are the one that stated no voting rights should be lost to those that have felonies. Are you saying any one that has felonies, no matter what they are or how many they have should be ok to vote on any thing if they are serving a sentence even if it refers to justice and them being held accountable for their criminal acts? I also did not say those that do not believe in the death penalty should not vote? I said I believe in the death penalty and I believe in it if found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and if someone said, "oh yeah I killed those 100 people." I do not think the death penalty should be given to innocent people. Yes, there have been cases where it was administered and there were questions if it should have been and if it was justified. We may not be able to pick and choose but there is a case if we make amendments to include evidence and without a reasonable doubt that someone that is a criminal may be able to vote for to allow this if we look at the way you would like criminals to be able to vote. In regards to the OWS movement I stated I believe in the death penalty as a way to lower taxes and diminish the prison population. As for not having a birth certificate or no record of it, I think the laws have changed for that over the years and people started receiving birth certificates at one point. I know refugees currently coming over from Africa and they had no clue when they were born and were given resident cards based on what they thought was correct. Oh I'm sure some may have been older or younger than what they thought. So, I'm sure nowadays there is no question to determine if someone is a citizen or not. People come from other countries all the time and gain citizenship status. For your definition of citizenship as born here or naturalized there should be no reason now why their wouldn't be a record of it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
pervert butch feminist woman Preferred Pronoun?:
see above Relationship Status:
independent entity Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oakland
Posts: 1,826
Thanks: 4,068
Thanked 7,653 Times in 1,522 Posts
Rep Power: 21474853 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
[Cagain me in this colorOLOR="DarkOliveGreen"][/COLOR]
Quote:
I ask every single veteran who did swear to uphold the Constitution to re-affirm that oath and Occupy the Constitution............. I am so fuckin done with this stupid crap...............
__________________
We are everywhere We are different I do not care if resistance is futile I will not assimilate Last edited by Toughy; 12-06-2011 at 05:48 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Toughy For This Useful Post: |
![]() |
#8 | |
Mentally Delicious
How Do You Identify?:
Queer High Femme, thank you very much Preferred Pronoun?:
Mme. Relationship Status:
Married to JD. Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 10,446
Thanks: 5,995
Thanked 42,691 Times in 7,831 Posts
Rep Power: 10000025 ![]() |
![]() Quote:
Toughy- Your post was reported for ugly name-calling. I get that you are pissed off but it is not ok to call people names anywhere on this forum. You are now on a two week time-out. During that time-out you are not to access this site, our Facebook page, or make a second screen name in order to circumvent the system. Thanks, Medusa
__________________
. . . |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|