3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

 

Is that a member of Hanson, back left, white tank top and ball cap backwards?

1 hour ago, mikemack8 said:

Says the guy who called a woman a C*nt on here and then threatened to beat up her husband over midget porn  

I miss all the good ones.

4 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

How was that process?

I'm taking lil man to the Bahamas in January and apparently need to get the passport stuff going soon. 

I also heard I have to get the Ex Wife's signature/she has to be there

We both had to sign so yeah you may need her in there. Not sure if it has to be in person though, we filled out a lot before we got there. Worth checking. Process itself was easy at the post office but it takes months to get the passport itself back. Ours came in about 8 weeks but I think that's on the quicker end. You can get it expedited for a cost.  

@vikas83

In regards to the crack/cocaine sentencing guidelines, I feel like we've retroactively assigned racial malice to the sentencing disparities when that might not be the case. I'm not going to pretend to know what was in the heart's of lawmakers at the time, but there are other explanations besides "muh systemic racism" that could be at play. 

there's no denying that sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine have disproportionately affected blacks in the criminal justice system, but there are legitimate reasons besides racism the sentences are/were different.

• Crack cocaine use and distribution were disproportionately ravaging black communities when the guidelines were made in a way powder cocaine never ravaged white or black communities.
• Crack is far more dangerous and addictive
• Here's the wiki on the effect in black communities:

Quote

Effect on African American communities
Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for Black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for Black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the Black community also experienced a 20–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[8] The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[9][10]

A 2018 study found that the crack epidemic had long-run consequences for crime, contributing to the doubling of the murder rate of young Black males soon after the start of the epidemic, and that the murder rate was still 70 percent higher 17 years after crack's arrival.[11] The paper estimated that eight percent of the murders in 2000 are due to the long-run effects of the emergence of crack markets, and that the elevated murder rates for young Black males can explain a significant part of the gap in life expectancy between black and white males.[11]

Crack cocaine use and distribution became popular in cities that were in a state of social and economic chaos such as New York, Los Angeles and Atlanta, and particularly in their low-income inner city neighborhoods with high African American concentrations.[12] "As a result of the low-skill levels and minimal initial resource outlay required to sell crack, systemic violence flourished as a growing army of young, enthusiastic inner-city crack sellers attempt to defend their economic investment."[13] Once the drug became embedded in the particular communities, the economic environment that was best suited for its survival caused further social disintegration within that city.

Another article on the subject:

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/28/us/crack-and-punishment-is-race-the-issue.html
 

Given the catastrophic impact crack had specifically black communities, many black politicians and leaders in the 70s and 80s actually lobbied for harsher penalties for drugs. Interesting article on the subject:

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/08/16/212620886/the-shift-in-black-views-of-the-war-on-drugs

Quote

Voting records show that many black lawmakers supported some of the most punitive drug-war-era laws in America. But even some people who have long opposed harsh sentencing laws understand where supporters were coming from. The Rev. Herbert Daughtry, a longtime pastor in New York, once was addicted to heroin and served time. He's convinced that black leaders who embraced the drug war did serious harm to the community, but says a lot of African-Americans were desperate for ways to make their neighborhoods safe again. "If you're the victim, then you don't want to hear anything about treatment, just, 'Get this guy off the street.' "

But eventually, even some of the staunchest supporters of mandatory minimums saw that these policies had badly backfired, in part because they lumped addicts and small-time dealers with drug kingpins and violent gang leaders. And they also consigned countless African-American men to prisons across the country.

Anyway, I think the subject is a little more complex than immediately dismissing it as "systemic racism" even if it does fit into your preferred ideology better that way.

Found another fun stat:

Quote

Crack cocaine causes weight loss, high blood pressure, hallucinations, seizures, and paranoia. Emergency room visits due to cocaine incidents such as overdoses, unexpected reactions, suicide attempts, chronic effects, and detoxification increased fourfold between 1984 and 1987.

So we also saw a 4X increase in ER visits following the introduction of crack cocaine. 

3 minutes ago, Kz! said:

In regards to the crack/cocaine sentencing guidelines, I feel like we've retroactively assigned racial malice to the sentencing disparities when that might not be the case. I'm not going to pretend to know what was in the heart's of lawmakers at the time, but there are other explanations besides "muh systemic racism" that could be at play. 

there's no denying that sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine have disproportionately affected blacks in the criminal justice system, but there are legitimate reasons besides racism the sentences are/were different.

• Crack cocaine use and distribution were disproportionately ravaging black communities when the guidelines were made in a way powder cocaine never ravaged white or black communities.
• Crack is far more dangerous and addictive
• Here's the wiki on the effect in black communities:

Another article on the subject:

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/28/us/crack-and-punishment-is-race-the-issue.html
 

Given the catastrophic impact crack had specifically black communities, many black politicians and leaders in the 70s and 80s actually lobbied for harsher penalties for drugs. Interesting article on the subject:

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/08/16/212620886/the-shift-in-black-views-of-the-war-on-drugs

"....but let me go ahead and try anyway"

1 minute ago, Paul852 said:

"....but let me go ahead and try anyway"

You'd concede that there are legitimate reasons besides racism that sentencing guidelines would be different, though, right?

14 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I have to say.  I applaud your dedication to being a moron.  That should stand for something.  

I notice you run away from answering questions. It could be why you are so terrified.

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

You'd concede that there are legitimate reasons besides racism that sentencing guidelines would be different, though, right?

I really don't care. Lock all the drug addicts up.

Just now, Paul852 said:

I really don't care. Lock all the drug addicts up.

Oh, gotcha. But if addicts are disproportionately black, then you'd be doing a systemic racism according to arguments recently made in here.

2 minutes ago, Kz! said:

Oh, gotcha. But if addicts are disproportionately black, then you'd be doing a systemic racism according to arguments recently made in here.

They're not.

4 minutes ago, Paul852 said:

They're not.

According to statistics at the time the mandatory sentencing guidelines were put into place, they were. 

8 minutes ago, Kz! said:

According to statistics at the time the mandatory sentencing guidelines were put into place, they were. 

For all drugs?

22 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Questions?   Yeah.  I’m soooo scared.  I told you.  I called it terrorism because it was so obvious that it was.  Just not your anti Muslim idea of what terrorism is.  
 

So now that you have your answer.  Answer mine, that I asked 4 hours ago.   Who are you worried about offending?  The shooter or other terrorists?   Or are you going to run away from that question?   
 

Have enough yet?  

I'm not worried about offending anyone. I answered the question 4 hours ago, but you are too dumb to have noticed.

You still haven't answered diddly.

Now run away again and be all terrified.

2 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

It's still religiously inspired.

I know the end game of the conversation is going to end up with NDSAP's co-opting religious symbols from the worlds most peaceful religion, so I'm going to drop it

 

3 minutes ago, paco said:

I know the end game of the conversation is going to end up with NDSAP's co-opting religious symbols from the worlds most peaceful religion, so I'm going to drop it

 

I mean, why dig that deep?

 

Quote

In a speech in the early years of his rule, Hitler declared himself "Not a Catholic, but a German Christian”.^{[16][17][18][19][20]} The German Christians were a Protestant group that supported NSDAP Ideology.^[21] Hitler and the NSDAP party also promoted "nondenominational”^[22] Positive Christianity,^[23] a movement which rejected most traditional Christian doctrines such as the divinity of Jesus, as well as Jewish elements such as the Old Testament.^[24][25] In one widely quoted remark, he described Jesus as an "Aryan fighter" who struggled against "the power and pretensions of the corrupt Pharisees"^[26] and Jewish materialism.^[27] Hitler demonstrated preference for Protestantism^[28] and Lutheranism^[29] as he stated "Through me the Evangelical Protestant Church could become the established church, as in England"^[30] and "The great reformer”^[31] "Luther has the merit of rising against the Pope and the Catholic Church.”^[32]

 

20 minutes ago, Paul852 said:

For all drugs?

No, I think the article focused specifically on crack cocaine and powder cocaine. 

9 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

No you are/were worried about offending people.  Why else would you post "words matter"?  Multiple times. That's a question.   

 

Now that you have been proven wrong....over and over again, I am sure you want me to go run off.  Trust me....that's not gonna happen.  Especially not now.  That's not a question.  

 

Still won't call it terrorism because MSNBC and a liberal Governor haven't told you what to think yet?  That's a question.   

Since you are happy to ignore what I say and then make up dopey crap to argue, you can do that by yourself.

Just say no guys.

1 hour ago, VanHammersly said:

 

JFC, I am\was in a meeting on camera when I saw this  

1 minute ago, paco said:

JFC, I'm in a meeting on camera when I saw this  

i cant stop laughing at it and i can't stop looking at it. 

20 minutes ago, Kz! said:

No, I think the article focused specifically on crack cocaine and powder cocaine. 

Yeah, my statement is a catch all. Best way to go about it.

The fact that you can set your watch to how/when CVON discourse will devolve is one of my absolute favorite things about in life to witness. It's truly a guilty pleasure.

33 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

Since you are happy to ignore what I say and then make up dopey crap to argue, you can do that by yourself.

Sounds like a white flag. You bacarty'd the hell out of yourself in here.

1 hour ago, Kz! said:

Oh, gotcha. But if addicts are disproportionately black, then you'd be doing a systemic racism according to arguments recently made in here.

https://sunrisehouse.com/addiction-demographics/different-races/