Media Hooker

Media Hooker This is Facebook access to my News / Info blog called MediaHo**er. [originally called InfoServesMe] Alternate news feed

broke in Amerika
03/11/2020

broke in Amerika

08/08/2019
American Underground Journalistic FORUM

American Underground Journalistic FORUM

Dan Wilson

RED FLAG
A LAW THAT IS ILLEGAL AND
CAN NEVER BE USED!

If a person is considered to be so dangerous that they cannot own a firearm, confiscating their guns is not the solution. If a person is this dangerous, then they should be removed from society. There are countless ways a person can kill a number of people. Guns are merely one such method.
If we ever decide to use denying a civil right from one of our citizens, then we are not solving the cause, only violating the constitution. Our Civil rights are God given and are not open to debate.
Our Judicial system relies heavily on prior case rulings, therefore if a ruling is allowed to take away any civil liberty, it can be used to set precedent for violating other constitutional rights. In 1787 we ratified the constitution of the United States of America. It is a document that defines how our federal government shall be ran and the civil liberties of our citizens that can never be violated.
If a person is declared to be so mentally deficient that owning a firearm poses a danger to society. Removing their gun only defines how they will carry out their heinous acts. IED’s have killed more American warriors than fi****ms in the war on terror. The reason is IED’s are not only easy to make but they are far more efficient when it comes to killing a large number of people.
Any citizen who poses this much of a danger to society, then they need to be locked up in a psychiatric hospital or sentenced to prison. Red flag not only undermines the constitution, but it also endangers the rest of our civil liberties.
Of all the Bill of Rights, the 2nd Amendment is the easiest to understand. “The right to Bear Arms, shall not be infringed” can be understood by a person with a third-grade education. There is absolutely no way the 2nd amendment can be mis-understood, and our forefathers intended it that way.
The 2nd Amendment, not only assures that no one can take away our right to bear arms but it is the only failsafe we have to rise up against a tyrannical government. Citizen Militias can be created to defend ourselves from a government that has become unmanageable. For it is “We the People” who rule over the government, not the other way around. No God given right shall ever be taken away from a citizen of the United States of American and that is not a suggestion but rather it is an absolute!
There are far more effective ways than instituting Red Flag. The Baker act was created for this very reason. If a person is considered to be a danger to themselves or others, they can be held for 72 hours. This time is used to determine whether or not they are a danger to Society.
If a person is deemed to be a danger to society, they can be taken to court and sentenced to a mental health facility until they are no longer a threat. The key is whether or not a person is a danger to society, not the way in which they choose to harm others.
The person with their finger on the trigger is the danger, not the gun itself. I along with millions of others have owned fi****ms for fifty years without a single incident. Long guns and hand guns are very safe and statistics prove this.
Over the past fifty years I have fired tens of thousands of rounds without harming a single human. I have used them to put food on the table, and for recreation as well. Others take it a bit further by engaging in competitive shooting events
As an historian and person who admires Antique guns, the only reason I do not have a large collection of fi****ms is my ability to afford them. Yet I enjoy going to museums or seeing private collection and how fi****ms have evolved over the years.
My Co-Host on Saturday Symposium is one such person who has a large collection of antique and unique fi****ms, all of which are capable of firing. I look forward to a day when I can shoot one of these weapons to see and feel how it was to shoot a weapon a hundred years old.
As a collector Gary has many fi****ms, while I can only afford three, my 30.06 is for medium to large game. My Re*****on 1100 is a shotgun that I use for birds and small game hunting. While my C**t .45 is used for personal protection. Yet I use all three for recreation as well.
If we wish to stop mass killings, then we need to address the problem, not what is used to commit the act. While growing up during the 1960’s every city had a psychiatric hospital for those who were mentally ill. Back then we had facilities to handle those who were a danger to society.
Today a person who is a threat to others are often released to roam amongst the general public, because we have no place to send them. If we truly wish to prevent mass killings, then we need to invest in more psychiatric care facilities.
No part of our constitution can ever be violated for any reason. Yes we have a clear and present danger. Violent crimes have risen by a factor of ten over the past ten years and we to do something to address violence in society. There for we need to address the cause and not the means of carrying out a violent act.
There are many ways of harming people, fi****ms are not the only method. The most violent gang in the world is MS-13. There weapon of choice is a machete and not a gun. Most domestic violence cases do not involve fi****ms. Usually a person kills with their own hands or whatever is the most accessible at the time. A gun is nothing but one method that can be used to kill, not the only means! Let’s be proactive and look for a solution not just a band aide that will not work. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

02/18/2019

Hi Y'all.

Address

Frederick, MD

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Media Hooker posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Media Hooker:

Nearby media companies


Other Media/News Companies in Frederick

Show All

Comments

5pm your need to listen to the next move new at 5p,m https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xn2USleTng&t=3224s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xn2USleTng&t=3224s Now playing TreatiesandConstitution v BritishBankruptcyAcof1933and itle28USC 3002Title28USC3002 Section15(A(B)C) oregon trackers • 104 views Streamed 6 days ago 2020 Saturday 5pm oregontime Education Knowledge public v private v Home schooling ; Talking about lawful and legal money v ... New CC China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power. At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty—and their privacy—to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth. Across the developing world, however, the story was different—and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high￾emitting vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases. But more authoritarian leadership worked less well—and in some cases tragically—in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens. There were other downsides, as the rise of virulent nationalism created new hazards: spectators at the 2018 World Cup, for example, 19Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development Scenario Narratives LOCK STEP “IT IS POSSIBLE TO DISCIPLINE AND CONTROL SOME SOCIETIES FOR SOME TIME, BUT NOT THE WHOLE WORLD ALL THE TIME.” – GK Bhat, TARU Leading Edge, India wore bulletproof vests that sported a patch of their national flag. Strong technology regulations stifled innovation, kept costs high, and curbed adoption. In the developing world, access to “approved” technologies increased but beyond that remained limited: the locus of technology innovation was largely in the developed world, leaving many developing countries on the receiving end of technologies that others consider “best” for them. Some governments found this patronizing and refused to distribute computers and other technologies that they scoffed at as “second hand.” Meanwhile, developing countries with more resources and better capacity began to innovate internally to fill these gaps on their own. Meanwhile, in the developed world, the presence of so many top-down rules and norms greatly inhibited entrepreneurial activity. Scientists and innovators were often told by governments what research lines to pursue and were guided mostly toward projects that would make money (e.g., market-driven product development) or were “sure bets” (e.g., fundamental research), leaving more risky or innovative research areas largely untapped. Well-off countries and monopolistic companies with big research and development budgets still made significant advances, but the IP behind their breakthroughs remained locked behind strict national or corporate protection. Russia and India imposed stringent domestic standards for supervising and certifying encryption-related products and their suppliers—a category that in reality meant all IT innovations. The U.S. and EU struck back with retaliatory national standards, throwing a wrench in the development and diffusion of technology globally. Especially in the developing world, acting in one’s national self-interest often meant seeking practical alliances that fit with those 20Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development Scenario Narratives LOCK STEP interests—whether it was gaining access to needed resources or banding together in order to achieve economic growth. In South America and Africa, regional and sub-regional alliances became more structured. Kenya doubled its trade with southern and eastern Africa, as new partnerships grew within the continent. China’s investment in Africa expanded as the bargain of new jobs and infrastructure in exchange for access to key minerals or food exports proved agreeable to many governments. Cross-border ties proliferated in the form of official security aid. While the deployment of foreign security teams was welcomed in some of the most dire failed states, one-size-fits-all solutions yielded few positive results. By 2025, people seemed to be growing weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make choices for them. Wherever national interests clashed with individual interests, there was conflict. Sporadic pushback became increasingly organized and coordinated, as disaffected youth and people who had seen their status and opportunities slip away—largely in developing countries—incited civil unrest. In 2026, protestors in Nigeria brought down the government, fed up with the entrenched cronyism and corruption. Even those who liked the greater stability and predictability of this world began to grow uncomfortable and constrained by so many tight rules and by the strictness of national boundaries. The feeling lingered that sooner or later, something would inevitably upset the neat order that the world’s governments had worked so hard to establish. • 21Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development Scenario Narratives LOCK STEP Philanthropic organizations will face hard choices in this world. Given the strong role of governments, doing philanthropy will require heightened diplomacy skills and the ability to operate effectively in extremely divergent environments. Philanthropy grantee and civil society relationships will be strongly moderated by government, and some foundations might choose to align themselves more closely with national official development assistance (ODA) strategies and government objectives. Larger philanthropies will retain an outsized share of influence, and many smaller philanthropies may find value in merging financial, human, and operational resources. Philanthropic organizations interested in promoting universal rights and freedoms will get blocked at many nations’ borders. Developing smart, flexible, and wide-ranging relationships in this world will be key; some philanthropies may choose to work only in places where their skills and services don’t meet resistance. Many governments will place severe restrictions on the program areas and geographies that international philanthropies can work in, leading to a narrower and stronger geographic focus or grant-making in their home country only. ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN LOCK STEP 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Quarantine Restricts In-Person Contact; Cellular Networks Overloaded (2013) Italy Addresses 'Immigrant Caregiver' Gap with Robots (2017) Vietnam to Require ‘A Solar Panel on Every Home’ (2022) African Leaders Fear Repeat of Nigeria's 2026 Government Collapse (2028) Intercontinental Trade Hit by Strict Pathogen Controls (2015) Will Africa’s Embrace of Authoritarian Capitalism a la China Continue? (2018) Proliferating Trade Networks in Eastern and Southern Africa Strengthen Regional Ties (2023) HEADLINES IN LOCK STEP 22Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development Scenario Narratives LOCK STEP While there is no way of accurately predicting what the important technological advancements will be in the future, the scenario narratives point to areas where conditions may enable or accelerate the development of certain kinds of technologies. Thus for each scenario we offer a sense of the context for technological innovation, taking into consideration the pace, geography, and key creators. We also suggest a few technology trends and applications that could flourish in each scenario. Technological innovation in “Lock Step” is largely driven by government and is focused on issues of national security and health and safety. Most technological improvements are created by and for developed countries, shaped by governments’ dual desire to control and to monitor their citizens. In states with poor governance, large-scale projects that fail to progress abound. Technology trends and applications we might see: • Scanners using advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology become the norm at airports and other public areas to detect abnormal behavior that may indicate “antisocial intent.” • In the aftermath of pandemic scares, smarter packaging for food and beverages is applied first by big companies and producers in a business-to-business environment, and then adopted for individual products and consumers. • New diagnostics are developed to detect communicable diseases. The application of health screening also changes; screening becomes a prerequisite for release from a hospital or prison, successfully slowing the spread of many diseases. • Tele-presence technologies respond to the demand for less expensive, lower￾bandwidth, sophisticated communications systems for populations whose travel is restricted. • Driven by protectionism and national security concerns, nations create their own independent, regionally defined IT networks, mimicking China’s firewalls. Governments have varying degrees of success in policing internet traffic, but these efforts nevertheless fracture the “World Wide” Web. TECHNOLOGY IN LOCK STEP 23Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development Scenario Narratives LOCK STEP Manisha gazed out on the Ganges River, mesmerized by what she saw. Back in 2010, when she was 12 years old, her parents had brought her to this river so that she could bathe in its holy waters. But standing at the edge, Manisha had been afraid. It wasn’t the depth of the river or its currents that had scared her, but the water itself: it was murky and brown and smelled pungently of trash and dead things. Manisha had balked, but her mother had pushed her forward, shouting that this river flowed from the lotus feet of Vishnu and she should be honored to enter it. Along with millions of Hindus, her mother believed the Ganges’s water could cleanse a person’s soul of all sins and even cure the sick. So Manisha had grudgingly dunked herself in the river, accidentally swallowing water in the process and receiving a bad case of giardia, and months of diarrhea, as a result. Remembering that experience is what made today so remarkable. It was now 2025. Manisha was 27 years old and a manager for the Indian government’s Ganges Purification Initiative (GPI). Until recently, the Ganges was still one of the most polluted rivers in the world, its coliform bacteria levels astronomical due to the frequent disposal of human and animal corpses and of sewage (back in 2010, 89 million liters per day) directly into the river. Dozens of organized attempts to clean the Ganges over the years had failed. In 2009, the World Bank even loaned India $1 billion to support the government’s multi-billion dollar cleanup initiative. But then the pandemic hit, and that funding dried up. But what didn’t dry up was the government’s commitment to cleaning the Ganges—now not just an issue of public health but increasingly one of national pride. Manisha had joined the GPI in 2020, in part because she was so impressed by the government’s strong stance on restoring the ecological health of India’s most treasured resource. Many lives in her home city of Jaipur had been saved by the government’s quarantines during the pandemic, and that experience, thought Manisha, had given the government the confidence to be so strict about river usage