Trump is an asshole, but......

[Blind groper]

Police feeling afraid is just an indication that the police in question are either cowards or superstitious.

Here is an example to illustrate. As a very experienced scuba diver, I have dived with literally thousands of sharks at various times, and never been threatened. Yet there are millions of people world wide who will never enter the sea for fear of sharks. Their fear is based on ridiculous superstition, and a massive overrating of a very minor risk.

Terrorists in London suburbs are another almost non existent risk. But I am not surprised that some police are frightened. It is very common for less than rational people to totally fail to understand degree of risk.

Seth is one of them. He considers that not having a gun in his back pocket is an unacceptable risk. Idiotic view.

I am not suggesting zero risk. Just a risk too low to permit to influence your behaviour. The recent San Bernadino killings took as many American lives as smoking does every ten minutes. So should you be afraid it will happen to you? Only if you are totally irrational.

[pErvinalia]

From Google+

Easy.

On the left is a law-abiding American peaceably (and safely, using proper trigger-finger discipline) exercising her right to keep and bear arms in order to protect the Constitution and the liberty and safety of all other law-abiding people in the United States, regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof who happens to be a person of faith who demands nothing of others by way of obedience to her chosen religion.

Unlike the Christian nutbag who shot up the abortion clinic the other day.

On the right is a Muslim terrorist illegally possessing a firearm (unsafely, with her finger on the trigger) with the intent to force her political ideals and religious dictates on others or kill them for refusing to convert.

How do you know that? She could be part of the free Syrian army?

Any other questions?

You've got a man-crush on Trump, haven't you?

[pErvinalia]

and who has support from US Muslims for his plan.

[pErvinalia]

In your OP you asked 'what rights would it [his "ban muslims from coming" thing] contravene'. I pointed out one such right.

What "right" was that again? I can't seem to find any reference by you to a "right" Trump proposes to contravene. Can you clarify?

He original proposed banning US citizens (who happened to be Muslims) from returning home. That would seem to contravene the Constitution I (and a host of lawyers) would have thought.

[pErvinalia]

He's onto a winner with the "ban muslims from coming" thing.

Firstly, why not?

Because it's fascist nonsense?

Who needs em? And what rights does it actually contravene?

You obviously haven't swatted up on this issue very well. He wants to ban American muslims from returning as well. That would seem to pretty seriously contravene the Constitution.

Actually, in Merka, any law involving discrimination on a religious basis is in direct contradiction to the First Amendment, ergo, invalid.

I'm not sure if that's true. The first amendment only applies to Mercan citizens. So they could ban foreign muslims ok, I think. The more pertinent points would be if it violates any international treaties, and more definitively firm treaties with other countries about allowing reasonably free access to each other's countries.

And have we signed any such treaties with anyone? I don't think so. We're not like the EU because we're not stupid enough to give up our national sovereignty in the interests of Marxist solidarity. We do have some agreements with other nations, but those agreements are not treaties and therefore we are free to change them whenever it is necessary to do so. The worst sanction we face from not allowing "free access" is that the other country starts doing the same thing to our citizens, which is fine by me.

You don't have a treaty with Canada regarding simple access to your country? I would have thought it was a simple matter of flashing a driver's license or maybe passport being held up for no more than a couple of seconds. If that. I'd be surprised if there weren't open access points between Merca and Canada. What about Detroit and the Canadian city just across the river? Is there a border checking post on that bridge?

[pErvinalia]

You need to review your reading comprehension skills. It says without a shadow of a doubt that his original proposal was to ban ALL muslims from entering the US, INCLUDING US muslim citizens. dig dig dig. It's the same old story. "Arguments" or "Opinions"? What are we calling them these days?

And he amended that right away, so you're presenting an argument that is now a non-sequitur. Why do you persist?

Because MM can't even grant the simple point that that was the original proposal. I'm trying to make a simple evidentially backed point to him, but as usual he's impervious to logic and pretty much everything else.

[pErvinalia]

She's his spokeswoman. Do you understand plain English?? She quoted him directly!

“Mr. Trump says, ‘everyone.’ ”

I made it bigger for you to help you out.

She's mistaken.

How the fuck would you know? She quoted him directly. What's likely happened is that Trump has woken up to the utter stupidity of his thought bubble and realised he had to change it as factors he hadn't even thought about came to light. It's the exact same thing we experienced with our idiot-in-chief here, Tony Abbott. Thought bubbles, without any deeper thought.

[Seth]

Police feeling afraid is just an indication that the police in question are either cowards or superstitious.

Or, they would like to make it home to their families alive and don't really give a fuck if Muslims want to abuse other Muslims in Muslim communities.

Here is an example to illustrate. As a very experienced scuba diver, I have dived with literally thousands of sharks at various times, and never been threatened. Yet there are millions of people world wide who will never enter the sea for fear of sharks. Their fear is based on ridiculous superstition, and a massive overrating of a very minor risk.

Which appears to be growing in frequency and expanding in range rather dramatically, as we are seeing shark attacks in places where they were largely unknown before, so prudence is called for.

Terrorists in London suburbs are another almost non existent risk. But I am not surprised that some police are frightened. It is very common for less than rational people to totally fail to understand degree of risk.

It ain't necessarily about terrorists, and that's the problem. It's most likely about neighborhood social exclusion by the majority. In Dearborn, MI some months ago a group of Christians marched on a public street and were abused, threatened and pelted with everything from rotten food to rocks while the police stood idly by. As it happens, Dearborn, MI has become a majority Muslim enclave, by deliberate Muslim action, which includes intimidating and driving non-Muslims and non-Muslim businesses out of particular districts. It's exactly the same thing as was practiced by racists regarding blacks prior to the Civil Rights era, but it's receiving no press and no moral outrage at all and went uncommented upon by most lamestream media.

Seth is one of them. He considers that not having a gun in his back pocket is an unacceptable risk. Idiotic view.

Until it isn't. And it's up to me to decide what my risks are and how much personal sacrifice I'm willing to make to be prepared to deal with them, not you and not anybody else.

I am not suggesting zero risk. Just a risk too low to permit to influence your behaviour. The recent San Bernadino killings took as many American lives as smoking does every ten minutes. So should you be afraid it will happen to you? Only if you are totally irrational.

Smoking kills the smoker after many decades of smoking and is therefore an exercise in individual liberty that harms no one else. Terrorists and armed criminals kill others randomly and without warning, which makes it prudent to be prepared to defend against them at all times.

You evidently are simply incapable of understanding these sorts of nuances.

[Seth]

In your OP you asked 'what rights would it [his "ban muslims from coming" thing] contravene'. I pointed out one such right.

What "right" was that again? I can't seem to find any reference by you to a "right" Trump proposes to contravene. Can you clarify?

He original proposed banning US citizens (who happened to be Muslims) from returning home. That would seem to contravene the Constitution I (and a host of lawyers) would have thought.

And therefore he expanded on his statement to clarify that he did not intend to refer to US citizens who happen to be Muslims traveling outside the country. His spokesperson misstated Trump's intent rather ham-handedly, and that too was quickly corrected. Nothing he is actually proposing is the least bit unconstitutional and it's not only been done before, but in point of fact the President has the power to ban ALL immigration at any time if he deems it necessary to national security, and always has.

That you wish to ignore this fact doesn't support your argument, it merely makes you look like a fool.

[Seth]

You don't have a treaty with Canada regarding simple access to your country?

Nope, most assuredly not, as I personally can attest to as the result of a recent trip to Canada and back.

I would have thought it was a simple matter of flashing a driver's license or maybe passport being held up for no more than a couple of seconds. If that.

It can be, if the Canadian and American authorities choose to do so, but they are empowered to put ANYONE entering either country under a microscope if they choose.

I'd be surprised if there weren't open access points between Merca and Canada. What about Detroit and the Canadian city just across the river? Is there a border checking post on that bridge?

Yes, there is. Both a Canadian one and a US one.

Here's my experience that proves this.

I've been wanting to go to see Banff and Jasper National Parks in Canada for decades, but because each time I've been in the area of northern Montana I've been carrying items that are prohibited or restricted in Canada, or in their National Parks, specifically firearms, some of which are banned in Canada and ALL of which are banned in ALL of Canada's National Parks, I've never crossed the border, having no place at the border to secure those items while I visited Canada. In Canada you cannot even transport an otherwise Canadian-legal firearm THROUGH a National Park, much less into it, much less carry it for personal protection while hiking.

So this time, having business in Kalispell, Montana, I decided that I was going to take the opportunity to finally visit Canada and its beautiful National Parks, so I deliberately left ALL of my firearms and other banned items (like my pepper spray, which was illegal because despite being identical to Canada-legal bear spray, was not MARKED as bear spray) at home. Or so I thought.

Upon completing my business I went to the border crossing north of Kalispell thinking that I would indeed be waved through as several other US vehicles were. But no!

Having arrived at the booth and presenting my passport card, driver's license, registration and proof of insurance and being asked if I had anything to declare (you can declare and register Canada-legal firearms and import them if you do the paperwork) and saying "no," I was told I had been "selected for examination" by the Canadian border personnel, and they directed me to a parking stall.

I was told to sit on a bench while they began searching the car. At one point one officer found a single round of .45 ammunition that had somehow gotten under the carpet of my car, which he seized. Then the real fun began. They emptied my car of everything movable and began a search in earnest, probing every possible hiding place, including the air intake for the engine.

While searching my survival backpack, which I thought I had carefully rid of anything illegal, they found a magazine for one of my pistols containing 8 rounds of ammunition hiding in a deep pocket of the pack, where I had missed it when preparing for the trip.

At that point I thought I was going to jail.

When they completed the search, not finding anything else, they told me that they were going to make me take the magazine back across the border into the US, but they warned me that I was lucky because Canada has a maximum magazine capacity limit of 10 rounds and fortunately mine only carried 8. This was extremely lucky for me because it was a mag for my regular-carry HK USP Compact and not the customary pistol that I carry with that pack, which is an HK USP Tactical, which uses 12-round magazines. Had the magazine carried more than 10 rounds, they advised me, they would have arrested me and prosecuted me and could have seized my Mercedes and everything in it for smuggling contraband. As it was they required me to take the mag back to the US only because I had not declared it when asked, because I didn't know I had it.

I was able to park the mag at a border bar and duty-free liquor store right next to the border on the US side, and it was the very friendly US Customs officer on the American side who told me that the bar would do this. He said this is not at all unusual. So, for 10 bucks I was able to park the mag for the two weeks I was gone and I was allowed to enter Canada, where you can't get a fucking cheeseburger that is anything other than a carbonized hockey-puck because of their stupid national law that all burgers must be "well done." Never try to eat a burger in Canada, it's not worth it.

Otherwise I heartily enjoyed my trip, even though I had to spend 20 bucks to buy "bear spray" in Canada...with the stern warning that if I used it on a human being, for any reason whatsoever, it would be a crime, even if I was using it in self-defense.

So no, there is no free passage into Canada, nor is there free passage from Canada into the US.

Oh, and I asked why I had been "selected" and suggested that it was because I have Colorado plates on my car and they were looking for pot, at which they sniggered and said "Oh, no, we would never do that."

Yeah, right. Hell, they do that to Colorado residents in fucking Kansas these days.

[pErvinalia]

You're making unevidenced claims. You keep claiming his spokeswoman misspoke. She directly quoted him. You two remind me why I hated this place so much. A simple non-contentious evidenced statement and people just can't admit simple facts and spend all day arguing that black is white and white is black. Ridiculous.

[pErvinalia]

That you wish to ignore this fact doesn't support your argument, it merely makes you look like a fool.

I specifically made all these points. How the hell can i be missing them?? I see absolutely nothing has changed here. This site is still a total waste of electrons.

[Seth]

You're making unevidenced claims. You keep claiming his spokeswoman misspoke. She directly quoted him.

Yes, she directly quoted him but failed to understand that by "all of them" he did not mean US citizens, he meant all of "them," as in foreign Muslims attempting to immigrate to the US, who were the subject of discussion at the time. You're just engaging in sound-bite propagandizing and mendacious misinterpretation. Whatever you or his spokeswoman thought he meant, he made it clear that you and his spokeswoman were simply mistaken in his intent. Did he misspeak in a way that could lead to such an interpretation? Yes, he did, and that was clumsy of him, but there is NO evidence that he intended that US citizens were included in that statement and he quickly corrected the misinterpretation. But of course you are pouncing on this because you want to have some basis for condemning him, but you refuse to acknowledge that he corrected the misunderstanding as quickly as possible.

At this point that's just reprehensible bigotry and bias.

[pErvinalia]

What orifice are you pulling all this from?? The question asked of Trump was specifically US CITIZENS.

[Seth]

What orifice are you pulling all this from?? The question asked of Trump was specifically US CITIZENS.

I don't think so. But even if true he still corrected the issue, which is what counts.