5 people injured, 1 killed in shooting

I am not attributing anything, I am asking you a simple question, and you DID toss the RACIST into your claim.

For the 4th time, why is the US the only country where one thing led to another and even then only within one group of people?

 

yeah I believe LBJ was a racist and his pandering to blacks was a cynical ploy for political power than actually wanting to help. And what the GS bullshit did was to create a dependent underclass that was almost permanently attached to the public teats and that underclass had lots of blacks in it. I will also note (dispute it if you can) that single parent households in public housing is the single greatest determinative of whether a child ended up under the control of the court system-either as a prisoner or parolee. I also believe-though I haven't checked lately-that the number of black males who have a felony record greatly increased during and after the great society nonsense. It would be hard to conceive of a program that even the Klan or the National Alliance could come up with that was more harmful to black society than what LBJ concocted

 

Trying to get an answer is like pulling ducks teeth........

I wont ask for the 5th time only to see another dodge.

 

Maybe these other welfare programs are designed to support the traditional husband/wife family units.

 

Um, no. Welfare is what it is, not marriage counselling. As a matter of fact, marriage is becoming rare in Europe.

 

Don't forget it incentivizes single parent homes as they receive more aid. Strange coincidence that circa the GS the single parent household rate for eligible demographics ****ing skyrocketed.

"I'll have those N****RS voting democrat for the next 150 years"
- Apocryphal statement attributed to LBJ upon signing the GS.

 

Yes. They don’t do anything, and they’re not law enforcement.

 

No it isn't. The support can change if a working husband is part of the picture. A single woman with children is going to get more from the system. That has been a driving force behind families with no live in father.

 

No, its not the driving force. Women are not kicking working husbands/fathers out of the house for benefits. That's an absurd claim. Men leave because they don't give a rip about their kids. A working husband would being in far more money than a welfare check.

 

Whatever floats your boat but you're wrong.

 

I don't think you put your claim through the common sense test, because if you did, you'd see it doesn't make much sense.

 

Of course it does.

 

No, because a working father/husband brings in way more money than the single mother would get from welfare.

Do you have proof women are kicking out their husbands and fathers of their kids so they can collect welfare"? Is that what you did? If not, why not?

 

Do you have proof they don't? How do you explain all the absentee fathers? Who said they were husbands? One can be a father and not be a husband.

 

I heard he said it after he signed the Civil rights act-over the objections of most southern democrats but he was a seething racist

 

I'm afraid the burden of proof is on you since you made the claim

The guys walk away, and many women don't even know who the father is. I know you know this. If it was a money issue as you suggest, they women would much prefer to keep the working man around because they bring in more money then the welfare check.

There is no proof he said it in any context.

 

Oh yes, sorry I won't answer the "when did you stop beating your wife" style questions. There was nothing racist in anything I posted.

 

So it's slutty women then? You really don't get out much do you?

 

Let me tell you how child support works: She gets welfare, and 20% of his income, and doesn't have to suck his dick for it or keep house etc. Doesn't matter if he's a piece of **** or not either, the court sees to collection if he's actually being paid you can garnish his ****ing check.

 

Yeah, only some categories of security in Australia can carry guns, and the requirements are onerous (mostly armed guards for armoured trucks)
But if you feel that citizens can be armed - WITHOUT TRAINING OR LICENSING LIKE POLICE, then you have this 2,500 children killed with guns
and a rise of 50% in three years. You must accept these figures as a result of gun policy - no argument. Gun deaths among U.S. kids rose 50% from 2019 to 2021 | Pew Research Center

 

Oh if you are black you are allowed ot have guns due to racism, oppression and historical slavery.
That's different - ha ha.

 

Uh that’s too silly. There’s no need for additional laws, and no need for acting like 1-12 year olds are getting shot all the time. Teens and 18-19 year olds are a different picture. That picture includes thugs and gang idiots killing each other.
This isn’t about gun policy it’s about people who are criminals murdering people. Blowing up the threat by acting like thugs get lumped in with proper victims doesn’t help that flimsy case.

oh and Australia is completely silly, they call guys with guns when bad guys come a knockin. That’s 10 ply.

 

In Australia we have gangs too. But they aint armed.
Frankly I don't recall ever hearing of a child being killed with a gun in years. Could have happened, just didn't hear about it.
And if someone wants to have a handgun here they need to undergo training like police do - that's fair enough, handguns are killing machines.

 

Without guns, it wouldn't have happened at all.