A Texas bill, known as the FURRIES Act, would ban non-human behaviors in public schools, including the use of litter boxes and wearing animal accessories.
Rep. Stan Gerdes, the bill’s author, claimed schools were providing litter boxes for students acting as “furries.”
When pressed, Gerdes could not find an example. The bill was left pending in committee.
The U.S. needs stricter gun laws, imo. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/school-shootings-by-country
Best we can do is take away hypothetical litter boxes in school.
Where is the class cat supposed to piss, if you do that?
Removed by mod
but then how will they overthrow a tyrannical government?!?!
… wait
Removed by mod
Blasphemy!
Well yeah, I doubt you’ll find many disagreements here. The biggest disagreements are probably going to be the “if you go far enough left, you get your guns back” crowd. AKA the “Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary” version. Conservatives aren’t exactly popular around these parts.
We have a scenario where 8 blue states have effectively banned concealed carry, 27 red states have said concealed carry is legal without a license, and 15 (former) swing states need licenses to carry concealed weapons.
Over 30 million Americans have obtained such licenses since the early 2000’s. Those 30 million Americans now hold pro-gun opinions. They have each invested thousands of dollars on expensive firearms, ammunition, range time, classes, targets, gun safes/lockers, holsters, belts, clothing compatible with concealment.
Democrats have consistently pushed for “stricter gun laws” like you are talking about. Those gun laws were never popular among the people in 27 red states, and once 30 million people in the (former) swing states started picking up licenses, those laws stopped being popular there as well.
“Stricter gun laws” being popular in only 8 states, yet being a central plank in the Democratic party, is how several swing states have turned reliably red over the past 25 years.
Stricter gun laws gave us Trump. Twice.
Us? There has only been 9 school shootings, since 1975. I voted recently for NDP for my MP, my riding voted for a Conservative MP. Liberals won as a minority government, with Conservatives and Bloc Québécois coming in 2nd and 3rd.
Australia used to be full of guns, until the government peacefully bought back guns.
I still think U.S. citizens have too many guns.
The number of guns we have is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. The relevant issue is the opinions of the people who would actually be affected by the law.
Gun control is one of the major reasons why people in 42 of our 50 states are dissatisfied with the Democrats. Gun control is one of the major reasons why Trump is now in office.
Democratic leadership should have learned this lesson two decades ago, when our Federal Assault Weapons Ban sunsetted, Democrats couldn’t get it renewed, and the US went from generally banning concealed carry to generally licensing it. Failing to recognize that fact in 2004, Democratic leadership should have picked up on it from pro-gun legislation passing in 42 states. But no, they were hell bent on pushing 1980’s gun control efforts, and ignoring any pushback against that position.
Democratic leadership refusing to follow the will of the people is how the US got itself in this disaster.
Removed by mod
The assault weapons ban the US had from 1994 to 2004 didn’t force the retirement of the entire set of politicians who voted for it. It simply drove the majority position across party lines, and left everyone wondering how the hell the Democrats become so out of touch with their own constituents.
Removed by mod
Dropping gun control, we would have had the political capital to enact universal health care, which would save several hundred thousand lives a year, and improve the quality of life of millions more.
Trying to force gun control got us Trump and UnitedHealth, without actually achieving gun control: no federal measures have passed since 1994, and 42 States have enacted pro-gun laws since 2004.
Was it worth it?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I pointed out the cost to demonstrate the depth of their concern. You aren’t likely to cast a vote to ban your own hobbies. You aren’t going to vote to make your collections worthless.
20-some years ago, I took my first concealed carry class. 30 people in the room, and only 6 of us (including me and two of my brothers) had ever fired a gun before.
Democratic leadership never bothered to consider how gun ownership would affect the political opinions of all those new gun owners in swing states. It just shunned them as Republican baby killers, and wondered why they were losing votes.
Removed by mod
This is the attitude I’m talking about. “Poor people are punks, who will walk up behind you with a .38spl. Guns should be more expensive to keep those filthy poors from getting them.”
Centrist, corporatist, elitist crap.
Removed by mod
That wasn’t an assumption. That was your own words:
Your argument doesn’t apply to middle class and rich “punks”. They’ll still be able to afford their guns. Your “real problem with gun ownership” argument only applies to the poor.
Removed by mod
Yes, what the Democrats need to do is to keep shifting to the right.
/s
Gun control in the US is a centrist position, not a leftist position. Both the left wing and the right wing are pro-gun, and largely for the same reasons.
Its the centrist, corporatist, CEO-owned Democratic leadership who doesn’t want guns.