Transgenered

Why No Transgender in the Military?

Trey Gowdy just said a few things about the military in response to a stupid question from a CNN reporter about the ban of transgender. He nails it!

Nobody has a “right” to serve in the Military. Nobody. What makes people think the Military is an equal opportunity employer? Very far from it.

The Military uses prejudice regularly and consistently to deny citizens from joining for being too old or too young, too fat or too skinny, too stupid, too tall or too short. Citizens are denied for having flat feet, or for missing or additional fingers. Poor eyesight will disqualify you, as well as bad teeth. Malnourished? Drug addiction? Bad back? Criminal history? Low IQ? Anxiety? Phobias? Hearing damage? Six arms? Hear voices in your head? Self-identify as a Unicorn?

Need a special access ramp for your wheelchair? Can’t run the required course in the required time? Can’t do the required number of pushups? Not really a “morning person” and refuse to get out of bed before noon? All can be reasons for denial.

The Military has one job. War! The Military has one job. Anything else is a distraction and a liability. Did someone just scream “That isn’t Fair”? War is VERY unfair, there are no exceptions made for being special or challenged or socially wonderful.

YOU change yourself to meet Military standards. Not the other way around. I say again: You don’t change the Military…you must change yourself. The Military doesn’t need to accommodate anyone with special issues. The Military prides itself on WINNING WARS.

If any of your personal issues are a liability that detract from readiness or lethality… Thank you for applying and good luck in future endeavors.

OK. Who’s next in line?

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Facebook and unfair advantage at the last election.

To reporting today it looks as if Facebook allow the Democrat Party to mine all of its subscribers and contact them in order to influence their voting toward Hillary.

This Advantage was denied to the Republican or conservative groups.

Zuckerberg took a 5 billion dollar loss and Facebook took a 24 billion dollar loss.

Zuckerberg is being called in front of Congress to discuss this and answer questions on to the possible tampering of the election.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Historical killers

In 1865, a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.

In 1881, a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States – who later died from the wound.

In 1963, a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

In 1975, a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

In 1984, James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonald’s restaurant.

In 1986, Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.

In 1990, James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.

In 1991, George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, TX.

In 1995, James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.

In 1999, Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.

In 2001, a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.

In 2003, Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.

In 2007, a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.

In 2010, a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.

In 2011, a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.

In 2012, Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.

In 2013, a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school in Newtown, CT.

As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.

Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns.

Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservative was involved in any of these shootings and murders.

SOLUTION:

It should be illegal for Democrats to own guns.

We don’t need gun control, we need Democrat control.
Guns don’t kill people, Democrats do!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

No collusion with Russians

The Senate is shutting down the clusion accusation tour the Trump campaign as finding no clusion at all in Trump’s campaign and also Hillary’s campaign. Even though Hillary’s campaign paid for a fake Russian dossier to use against Donald Trump.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Assault Weapon’ Banners Assert False Distinctions Because the Real Ones Are Silly

‘Assault Weapon’ Banners Assert False Distinctions Because the Real Ones Are Silly
This arbitrary category of firearms is not distinguished by rate of fire or muzzle velocity.
Jacob Sullum|Mar. 5, 2018 1:00 pm

C-SPAN
The New York Times explains why the Florida Senate rejected a “two-year moratorium on sales of AR-15 semiautomatic rifles” on Saturday: “The votes just aren’t there.” While that is tautologically true whenever a bill fails to gain majority support, the point in this case is that the votes really should be there, given that 62 percent of Florida voters “favored an assault weapons ban” in a recent poll. The implication is that Republican legislators, blinded by ideology and fear of the NRA, are defying the will of the people.

That is one possible explanation. Alternatively, it could be that Republican legislators oppose an “assault weapon” ban because they think it is not worth supporting. The latter interpretation gains credibility when you notice that supporters of such legislation, rather than offering a logical argument in its favor, tend to treat it as self-evidently dictated by “common sense.” When they try to do more that, the best they can offer is misdirection and obfuscation.

Last week, for instance, an article in the Times said AR-15-style rifles are particularly deadly because they are “fed with box magazines” that “can be swapped out quickly, allowing a gunman to fire more than a hundred rounds in minutes.” But that is true of any gun that accepts detachable magazines, including many models that do not qualify as “assault weapons.”

Yesterday the Times reported that “military-style rifles” fire “lightweight, high-speed bullets that can cause grievous bone and soft tissue wounds,” injuries worse than those typically caused by handguns. As one trauma surgeon explains, “the energy imparted to a human body by a high-velocity weapon is exponentially greater” than the energy imparted by a handgun. But that observation is true of rifles in general; it is not unique to so-called assault weapons.

While the .223-caliber round typically fired by AR-15-style rifles does have a relatively high muzzle velocity, other cartridges, fired by guns that are not considered “assault weapons,” equal or surpass it. Furthermore, muzzle velocity is not the only factor in a bullet’s lethality; size also matters, and so-called assault weapons fire smaller rounds than many hunting rifles. Both velocity and mass figure into muzzle energy, a measure of a bullet’s destructive power. As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh notes, “the .223 rifles that are often labeled ‘assault weapons’ have a much lower muzzle energy than familiar hunting rifles such as the .30-06.”

Iver Johnson

Ruger
More to the point, neither muzzle velocity nor muzzle energy has anything to do with the definition of “assault weapons,” which hinges on military-style features such as folding stocks, pistol grips, and barrel shrouds. And while all so-called assault weapons accept detachable magazines, many guns that accept detachabale magazines do not fall into this arbitrary category because they lack the features that offend politicians like Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who sponsored the federal “assault weapon” ban that expired in 2004 and has been pushing a revised version since the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, last month.

To give you a sense of how silly Feinstein’s distinctions are, her bill specifically exempts the Iver Johnson M–1 Carbine (above right, top) and the Ruger Mini-14 (above right, bottom), but only when they have fixed stocks. Adding a folding or adjustable stock to these rifles transforms them from legitimate firearms into proscribed “assault weapons,” even though that change does not make them any more lethal or suitable for mass murder. That’s the sort of nonsensical line drawing that must be defended by any honest and well-informed advocate of a renewed “assault weapon” ban, assuming such a person exists.

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason magazine and a nationally syndicated columnist.

Follow Jacob Sullum on Twitter

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Obama scandalous presidency

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1511282288994657&id=475549362567960

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Mayors breaking the law openly.

Mayor of Oakland CA compromised a legitimate law enforcement operation putting both LEO & private citizen lives at risk. DOJ says they’ll investigate obstruction of justice charges. This reckless politician needs to be charged & held accountable.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment