Anti American left

MD Dems Seek to Decriminalize Murder

That’s not a typo. Read what they are trying to do: (pdf alert)

(B) A PERSON WHO WAS UNDER THE AGE OF 25 YEARS AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE MAY NOT BE FOUND TO HAVE COMMITTED MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE UNDER SUBSECTION (A)(4) OF THIS SECTION.

OK, so what does subsection (A)(4) say?

(4) SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (B) OF THIS SECTION, committed in the perpetration of or an attempt to perpetrate:
(i) arson in the first degree;
(ii) burning a barn, stable, tobacco house, warehouse, or other outbuilding that:
1. is not parcel to a dwelling; and
2. contains cattle, goods, wares, merchandise, horses, grain, hay, or tobacco;
(iii) burglary in the first, second, or third degree;
(iv) carjacking or armed carjacking;
(v) escape in the first degree from a State correctional facility or a local correctional facility;
(vi) kidnapping under § 3–502 or § 3–503(a)(2) of this article;
(vii) mayhem;
(viii) rape;
(ix) robbery under § 3–402 or § 3–403 of this article;
(x) sexual offense in the first or second degree;
(xi) sodomy as that crime existed before October 1, 2020; or
(xii) a violation of § 4–503 of this article concerning destructive devices.

If this passes, I am going to have to add Maryland to the “no go” zones list.

By Divemedic, ago

NHL Players’ Pushback Against Woke Nonsense

Several NHL teams are catching static because their players are refusing to wear rainbow themed uniforms during pregame warmups. The league declared an annual ‘Pride’ month to honor faggotry, and now some of the players are refusing to drop to their knees. (see what I did there?) The left is trying to cancel them, calling them names like “coward” because they won’t honor this woke garbage.

I thought that sports teams were supposed to support the political statements of their players, or does that only apply when they are kneeling during the national anthem?

By Divemedic, ago

Garbage, Not Science

I saw this a week or so ago, and wanted to comment, but hey, lots of things going on. There is this study being talked about that claims resumes with they/them listed as pronouns are more likely to be overlooked than other resumes. It’s a garbage study. Let me explain:

The flaw lies in the methods of the researchers. They sent two sets of identical resumes in to prospective employers in an effort to test “whether or not the inclusion of gender-neutral pronouns impacts how employers perceive resumes.” Both featured a gender-ambiguous name, ‘Taylor Williams.’ The only difference between the test and control resumes was the presence of gender pronouns on the test version. The test resume included “they/them” pronouns under the name in the header.

The flaw here is obvious. In order for a study to be valid, you should conduct the test with the control having only one difference from the test. That difference is called the dependent variable. In this case the dependent variable is the presence or absence of preferred pronouns, NOT the presence or absence of “they/them” as opposed to “he/him” or even “she/her.”

So all they have proven is that people who put preferred pronouns in their resumes are less likely to get hired. They set out to prove that nonbinary applicants were being discriminated against, but all they managed to provide was evidence that employers don’t want the drama of assholes who insist that everyone use their preferred pronouns. It’s my guess that, should the study be repeated with the other pronouns, the results would be similar. The last thing that a company needs is some woke gender pronoun warrior running around, creating drama and potentially suing because they were misgendered.

Companies don’t like drama, they don’t like getting sued. Companies are funny like that.

By Divemedic, ago

Safes

Some interesting facts about securing firearms.

[Researchers at Rutgers University] found that 58.3 percent of firearm owners store at least one firearm unlocked and hidden and 17.9 percent store at least one firearm unlocked and unhidden. Among those who store at least one firearm locked, gun safes are the most frequently used type of option both for devices opened by key, PIN code or dial lock (32.4 percent) and biometric devices (15.6 percent).

I don’t have any biometric devices. I frequently have at least one firearm that is not secured in the house, but there are no children in my house, which brings us to the next quote:

First, to address motivation we need to address disproportionate fears regarding the likelihood of armed home invasions. Similarly, we need to help the public better understand the risks associated with having firearms in the home – above and beyond the risk of unauthorized access by children.

Let me guess, this is the point where they trot out the old bull about guns being more likely to be used on a family member than a home invader. The problem with that “fact” is that guns are highly unlikely to be used against you or a family member if you are not a criminal. Gun safes don’t prevent suicide if the owner is the one committing suicide.

By Divemedic, ago

SPLC= Domestic Terror Organization

It seems that the Southern Poverty Law Center needs to list itself as a Domestic Terror Organization, seeing as how one of the attorneys on staff there has been charged with Domestic Terrorism, with authorities alleging that the attorney participated in a mostly peaceful protest by throwing deadly missiles at police. The left continues to gaslight everyone with this:

“Music is not a crime, protest is not a crime. The first amendment doesn’t go away when a single person sets a fire,” the Atlanta Solidarity Fund tweeted following the events of the day.

That’s bullshit and they know it. If one person robs a bank, the getaway driver is still guilty of bank robbery, even if he never enters the bank. They continued with their bullshit by making this claim:

Destruction of material is fundamentally different from violence.

Again, that is total and complete bullshit. This is how the left defines “mostly peaceful.” Under the SPLC’s own definition, they are an anti-government hate group.

By Divemedic, ago

From an Away Game

Liberal Moron: The person that owns the gun is responsible for making sure anyone that touches, or buys it, is not a criminal, and can be trusted with it, no excuses. If you supply to criminals, you get a really long time locked up getting to know lots of criminals.

I’m not absolutely for banning guns; yet am very much for making sure guns are only allowed in the hands of fit and proper people that can demonstrate they can be trusted with them. If we can’t have this then sure ban guns, though I have no hope that would ever happen

ME: If a person can’t be trusted to own a gun, they can’t be trusted to own baseball bats, knives, or gasoline and matches. If a person is so large a threat to the public that they can’t own tools that can be used to kill, then they should be locked up like animals.

LM: All those other things exist for purposes other than killing, a gun does not have any other purpose. It is an extra step for someone to take what is for one everyday purpose and turn it to another, that extra step can be enough to make many untrustworthy person to pause and not do this. (I consider knives that are purpose made to be used as weapons to be killing weapons.)

Yet as guns have only one purpose and are owned and carried with the intent of that purpose, then there is already an established decision to use it to kill with. For those that are untrustworthy the pausing and considering has already been done and has been set aside, the decision to kill has already been made, they only thing needed is what or who, to kill and when to kill.

Trustworthy people have not made up their mind about this, that is the first reason why they are trustworthy.

ME: Funny. I have owned multiple guns for decades and I have never used them to kill anyone. I have used them to target shoot, for recreation, and in competition. For the same reason that I can be trusted to own bats, knives, and gasoline, I can be trusted to own firearms.

Still, how about this-
Every person who has not been convicted of anything that would prohibit firearm ownership has an emblem placed on his state ID. drivers license. Say, a picture of a thumbs up in the corner. That way, anyone who wants to sell them a gun can simply look at their license. Now you know they are good to go.

By Divemedic, ago

Hahaha

It probably isn’t constitutional and most likely won’t pass, but Republicans in the Florida Senate have proposed a bill that would outlaw any political party that actively had a platform supporting slavery. The only party in Florida that supported slavery is the Democrat party.

It’s obvious that this is nothing more than a ploy to make sure people know that the Democratic party is the party of slavery and the KKK. It’s also pretty damned funny.

By Divemedic, ago