The Random Video Thread

[serpro69]

Fun KB for not so fun price. And probably not very comfortable to type on if you can't touch-type (although it would be strange if it didn't support a simple backlight or smth like that) 

[Mr. Fox]

Comments:
“The vaccine was not brought in for COVID. COVID was brought in for the vaccine. Once you realize that, everything else makes sense.”

~ Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

Not only that, the African countries with the lowest vaccination rate had the least Covid!  related video

[Etern4l]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

Comments:
“The vaccine was not brought in for COVID. COVID was brought in for the vaccine. Once you realize that, everything else makes sense.”

~ Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

Not only that, the African countries with the lowest vaccination rate had the least Covid!  related video

 

Just a planning exercise, although the YTer doesn't seem to understand that (unless it's some sort of covertly satirical channel). Well, covid is no joke, and given we are pretty sure where it came from, it's reasonable to expect more, and better pathogens to follow (e.g. I imagine they would be looking a DNA targeting capability, as this one kind of misfired at home lol). How do we prepare for that? I am not sure. Almost went bankrupt last time. There is no testing in Africa, therefore no covid (apart from the SA where two major variants originated from).

[serpro69]

6 hours ago, Etern4l said:

There is no testing in Africa, therefore no covid (apart from the SA where two major variants originated from).

 

Looks like China is trying to solve their covid-related problems the same way now - https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/25/asia/china-covid-cases-publishing-nhc-intl/index.html

[Etern4l]

7 minutes ago, serpro69 said:

 

Looks like China is trying to solve their covid-related problems the same way now - https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/25/asia/china-covid-cases-publishing-nhc-intl/index.html

 

That's standard commie playbook, they have been suppressing real numbers from the beginning. BTW Highly recommend watching "Chernobyl" miniseries.

[ryan]

 

[Mr. Fox]

 

[Mr. Fox]

4 hours ago, ryan said:

 

Ed Bassmaster is hilarious.

[Etern4l]

6 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

 

 

This time I watched for a few minutes and left with noticeable aftertaste of fake news. 

 

There is a snippet of a Telegraph article which states that the Dutch government is planning to buy up land (mostly farms) around nature preservation areas and in order to reduce nitrogen pollution. OK, fine, then the commentary includes statements such as:

* Unelected officials are closing up farms - it's the Dutch government, very much elected, the dude doesn't understand how the EU works

* This is WEF agenda - sounds like a reach, even if someone does something which WEF also sees as desirable, it does not automatically make them WEF minions, you would need to provide concrete evidence of how the WEF directly affected the policy (I'm not a fan of WEF BTW, but let's be reasonable)

* Europe will run out of food because of this - the no. 1 reason of potential food issues in Europe would be the Russian invasion and devastation of Ukraine, which is mostly farmlands. Europe actually has pretty strong agriculture thanks to EU subsidies aimed at securing food independence.

 

Disappointing stuff. To be fair, there was a good point or two: Europe did get caught out by its reckless dependency on Russian gas, and indeed the closures of nuclear power plants in Germany (a knee-jerk reaction to the Fukushima disaster) don't look like great policy at the moment. 

[Mr. Fox]

The thing I figured out about "fake news" is that it is only fake to those that do not want to believe it. That is why hardly anyone on the left or right watches liberal or conservative "news" anymore. We all get fed a nonstop load of crap and twisted information in a manner that spins the agenda the direction the presenters of lies want it to go. The only way to handle it is to decide which agenda is closer to the truth as one sees it, take the bits and pieces from the source deemed less dishonest, pick the pieces that align with what one suspects is true, and dismiss the rest as nonsense with the understanding that 98% of anything the talking heads that pretend to be journalists say is utter bullshit. The trick is identifying the 2% that is factual. But, I do find it useful to know what makes my adversaries tick and what kind of phoney baloney is floating in their sick little heads.

[Etern4l]

The problem here is confirmation bias, a massive human flaw that was fine in the simpler environment we enjoyed 50 000 years ago, but - like many artifacts of our evolution - is becoming more a problem these days. People watch the YTer above, because what he purveys confirms their beliefs. If they watched some alternative source of information, they would just reject anything to do contrary. No (to very limited) fact checking - "ah yes, saw the same on Fox" (no pun intended) is not fact checking - is typically conducted. If it were, and to be fair this often is a fairly laborious process requiring mental discipline to get past primitive biased reactions, people might have been more cautious when it comes to social media "truths".

 

Very happy to believe anything that's not blatantly contrary to evidence and facts, and obviously it is always good to discuss those. However, if people don't engage on specific points, there is no sensible debate and the exchange becomes fairly pointless.  Hopefully there are no genuine adversaries here, however in general, looking at the Capitol events, the propensity to find adversaries where there are none (if anywhere, they are more likely to be found on the other side of the globe) can get real.

[ryan]

i dont watch ed bassmaster because he confirms my beliefs of stereotypes. i watch him because hes a great actor and a comic genius poking fun of commonly held stereotypes

[Mr. Fox]

9 hours ago, Etern4l said:

The problem here is confirmation bias, a massive human flaw that was fine in the simpler environment we enjoyed 50 000 years ago, but - like many artifacts of our evolution - is becoming more a problem these days. People watch the YTer above, because what he purveys confirms their beliefs. If they watched some alternative source of information, they would just reject anything to do contrary. No (to very limited) fact checking - "ah yes, saw the same on Fox" (no pun intended) is not fact checking - is typically conducted. If it were, and to be fair this often is a fairly laborious process requiring mental discipline to get past primitive biased reactions, people might have been more cautious when it comes to social media "truths".

 

Very happy to believe anything that's not blatantly contrary to evidence and facts, and obviously it is always good to discuss those. However, if people don't engage on specific points, there is no sensible debate and the exchange becomes fairly pointless.  Hopefully there are no genuine adversaries here, however in general, looking at the Capitol events, the propensity to find adversaries where there are none (if anywhere, they are more likely to be found on the other side of the globe) can get real.

The problem with fact-checking is identifying a reliable source of "facts" that is unbiased and agenda-free. Almost everything, with extremely rare exceptions, is a sliver of fact, taken out of context, misrepresented and spun in a way that supports the agenda of the self-anointed providers of "proof" who are actually spin-doctors and liars. You can rely on them, and your friendly local, state and federal governments, to feed you an endless line of crap. Nobody that claims to have a line on truth or facts actually does. They merely have a source that they agree with. The only real "proof" comes in the form of unedited data, unredacted documents, video and audio recordings that captures every detail of information and and presents every spoken word to the audience for digestion without being cut-down or combined with or repackaged with biased editorial about "what they really meant" or speculation about what was implied.

[Etern4l]

2 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

The problem with fact-checking is identifying a reliable source of "facts" that is unbiased and agenda-free. Almost everything, with extremely rare exceptions, is a sliver of fact, taken out of context, misrepresented and spun in a way that supports the agenda of the self-anointed providers of "proof" who are actually spin-doctors and liars. You can rely on them, and your friendly local, state and federal governments, to feed you an endless line of crap. Nobody that claims to have a line on truth or facts actually does. They merely have a source that they agree with. The only real "proof" comes in the form of unedited data, unredacted documents, video and audio recordings that captures every detail of information and and presents every spoken word to the audience for digestion without being cut-down or combined with or repackaged with biased editorial about "what they really meant" or speculation about what was implied.

 

Clearly there is some truth to what you are saying, probably more so in the context of the unregulated US media, but the overall view is too extreme and also defeatist and thus impractical in my view. I mean we can't just blindly watch random YT channels and take the information received as gospel. I would suggest the following, hopefully fairly uncontroversial news filtering heuristics:

 

1. If a source is obviously biased one way or another (most outlets in the US unless a diverse majority are saying the same thing, plus the YT channel above), then the information needs to be treated as suspicious and verified

1a. A corollary, which actually applies to most news reported (minus the commentary): if multiple disparate sources are saying the same thing, it's likely true even though some fringe outlets claim otherwise (e.g. all media outlets reported that a shooting occurred in Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec 14, 2022 -  the core reported event was not a piece of crap, spin etc., although obviously the commentary certainly varied - and thus became less reliable)

1b. Information from a suspect source or even similar group of sources just needs to be verified, period. In the example above, all I needed to do is google the headlines that were flashed in the video and have a quick read to notice significant discrepancies.

 

As for YT sources, I would be extra careful. All those guys are small fries that have to make a living, and it takes much less resources to corrupt them. The majority make money as influencers which implies bias, there are no points for or dollars in impartiality.

[Mr. Fox]

36 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Clearly there is some truth to what you are saying, probably more so in the context of the unregulated US media, but the overall view is too extreme and also defeatist and thus impractical in my view. I mean we can't just blindly watch random YT channels and take the information received as gospel. I would suggest the following, hopefully fairly uncontroversial news filtering heuristics:

 

1. If a source is obviously biased one way or another (most outlets in the US unless a diverse majority are saying the same thing, plus the YT channel above), then the information needs to be treated as suspicious and verified

1a. A corollary, which actually applies to most news reported (minus the commentary): if multiple disparate sources are saying the same thing, it's likely true even though some fringe outlets claim otherwise (e.g. all media outlets reported that a shooting occurred in Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec 14, 2022 -  the core reported event was not a piece of crap, spin etc., although obviously the commentary certainly varied - and thus became less reliable)

1b. Information from a suspect source or even similar group of sources just needs to be verified, period. In the example above, all I needed to do is google the headlines that were flashed in the video and have a quick read to notice significant discrepancies.

 

As for YT sources, I would be extra careful. All those guys are small fries that have to make a living, and it takes much less resources to corrupt them. The majority make money as influencers which implies bias, there are no points for or dollars in impartiality.

The US is polarized. It's about an even split, extreme left Marxist nutjobs or extreme right zealots with a small group in the middle that doesn't stand for anything. The extreme left is very militant, intolerant, hateful and deceptive about everything and want to silence or outlaw everything that doesn't fit their agenda. They accuse those on the right of being everything their leftist views exemplify. So, your option #1 depends on which idealogy more closely resembles your point of view. You're going to find a diverse majority that is almost a 50/50 split on most things, or a 33/33/33 split on other things. The only thing you can find a 2/3+ majority view about is the current President and his cabinet being horrible and ineffective. A lot of the people that helped elect him hate him now and wish they had not, and the other 50% of the country voted for his competitor because they knew he was a loser before he joined the presidential race.

---

Here is a common sense conversation that somewhat illustrates the level of stupidity that is normal in some venues.

 

[Etern4l]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

The extreme left is very militant

 

Not as militant as the extreme right - have yet to storm the Capitol :)

 

8 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

with a small group in the middle that doesn't stand for anything

 

I am not sure who you are referring to specifically, but given your description of the left and right, I am not surprised there are people who are fed up with both. Hopefully they are trying to find a middle way, as opposed to not giving a damn anymore.

 

11 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

So, your option #1 depends on which idealogy more closely resembles your point of view.

 

My heuristics is simply to try to be open to diverse viewpoints, but proceed with caution if one side says one thing and the other says the other. Obviously this is more applicable to reported facts rather than opinions.

 

13 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Here is a common sense conversation that somewhat illustrates the level of stupidity that is normal in some venues.

 

Fortunately, US folks can benefit from the existence of different states. Fed up with California taxes? Move to Texas, Florida etc.

 

I know someone who got moved to Boston for work. An OK kindergarten costs $3k/mo lol. They are already looking to move out.

[Mr. Fox]

57 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

Not as militant as the extreme right - have yet to storm the Capitol :)

Another lie that the media-driven left have convinced their constituents and the rest of the world that do not know any better, or have any way of knowing different, due to hardcore censoring of information. It is absolutely overblown hype and driven by an irrational hatred of Trump. You'll probably continue to believe it only because it is what you have been conditioned to believe and have no other information to work with. And, that's by design. They only show the little snippets here and there that they want the public to see and hear. They don't show the abuse of the people present that were causing no trouble. The entire thing was a setup orchestrated by the left.

 

What happened at the nation's capital was like an elementary school puppet show compared to the heinously violent riots and protests that frequently occurred across the nation that were entirely composed of extreme left woke lunatics gone wild. There were no murdered politicians, no blown up cars, no molotov cocktails, no buildings set on fire, during the so-called "insurrection" in Washington DC. The lunatic rioters were temporarily detained and set free to cause more mayhem, yet many that were merely present and breaking no laws at the capitol remain incarcerated with no legal basis for it, no explanation of charges against them, and no trial date for their cases to be heard. Why? Probably because if they get released and their story is heard publicly, there could be a real insurrection and a good reason for a real insurrection.

 

The so-called "extreme right" are about 90% composed of ordinary people that are patriotic Americans that represent a traditional family, and adhere to Judeo-Christian values that this nation was built on. A large chunk of those on the left represent the exact opposite and they have the support of big tech and big media behind them. They seek to "fundamentally transform the nation" that doesn't want or need transformation. The people on the right have been unjustly stereotyped as militant hateful extremists in the same way that all Muslims were sterotyped as terrorists. Both are myths that are totally untrue, but believed by many because of the liars with "journalist" in their job title.

57 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

I am not sure who you are referring to specifically, but given your description of the left and right, I am not surprised there are people who are fed up with both. Hopefully they are trying to find a middle way, as opposed to not giving a damn anymore.

Some in the middle are moving hard left or hard right, depending on what is more natural to their inclination. The middle is shrinking.

57 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

My heuristics is simply to try to be open to diverse viewpoints, but proceed with caution if one side says one thing and the other says the other. Obviously this is more applicable to reported facts rather than opinions.

Most of what gets reported as "news" is opinion and disinformation, or misrepresented information, not facts or real news. That gets pushed out to other nations as "US News" so the lies become global misinformation. What is exceptionally bad about this is the fact that people that live in other countries only know what their media present to them. While, here in the US, there is growing distrust and rejection of the lies pushed by the media. So, what the outside world assumes to be accurate and trustworthy is not accurate, and not believed or trusted by a very high percentage (and growing percentage) of the people that live here.

 

The good part about all of this is Americans citizens have placed too much confidence in the government for way too long. I can see a possibiity of that confidence further disintegrating (and I hope it does) because the government in its current state has become more powerful and controlling than it was ever intended to be. When you cannot trust Homeland Security, NSA, CIA, FBI, even our own military, to do what is right and they become agencies used as weapons against our own people, it's a good sign that it is time to dismantle that government and replace it with something that better resembles what it was intended to be, and used to be until about 25-30 years ago. It has been in decline for a while and have progressively moved toward a "Deep State" monarchy with a token President. Love him or hate him, Trump was a serious threat to the liberal establishment (composed of both Republicans and Democrats) and that freaked out the lefty libs real bad. He treatened to unravel the corrupt web it had taken them more than a couple of decades to weave.

57 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

Fortunately, US folks can benefit from the existence of different states. Fed up with California taxes? Move to Texas, Florida etc.

 

I know someone who got moved to Boston for work. An OK kindergarten costs $3k/mo lol. They are already looking to move out.

100%. But, some (many) choose to stay and put up with it. It's amazing to me how many do. Yet, they complain about the mess instead of either provoking change and voting idiots out of office, or by voting with their shoes (i.e. leaving the stupidity behind and moving to a better place). 

[ryan]

this might bother some USA pro people. but russia called it out. they talked about attacking USA by corrupting the people and causing a division through brainwashing, not in the common sense but rather like cutting the head off the fish. hard to swim that way.

[Mr. Fox]

25 minutes ago, ryan said:

this might bother some USA pro people. but russia called it out. they talked about attacking USA by corrupting the people and causing a division through brainwashing, not in the common sense but rather like cutting the head off the fish. hard to swim that way.

That is a good way of putting it. Another way of putting it is blinding people to the truth with a relentless barrage of lies and disinformation, similar to a DoS attack. Everyone is passionate about what they believe, even when it is irrational and they have no solid basis for it, and that creates division  and vitriol. It is a form of brainwashing and the resulting outcome behaves like a virus. The people that recognize the lies and call them out are dismissed and accused of being deplorable extremists wearing tin foil hats, whose voices need to be silenced. They are often falsely accused of violence when, in fact, they are often victims of violence from their accusers. Those that believe the lies anoint themselves with a fake mantle of enlightenment and self-validate their woke foolishness with virtue-signaling nonsense. And, nothing good gets done. "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand."

[ryan]

very true, I hate to say it but back when my brain worked I was a hacker. or cracker depending how you see it. Brute force always works and I honestly think russia is involved. was there an end to the cold war or was it just in hiatus. im guessing by the fact america is divided 50/50 im thinking or tend to think the russians won. am I pro russian? No absolutely not! did they out smart us? ask gary kasparov that question. did he sacrifice his queen for no reason

[Mr. Fox]

11 minutes ago, ryan said:

very true, I hate to say it but back when my brain worked I was a hacker. or cracker depending how you see it. Brute force always works and I honestly think russia is involved. was there an end to the cold war or was it just in hiatus. im guessing by the fact america is divided 50/50 im thinking or tend to think the russians won. am I pro russian? No absolutely not! did they out smart us? ask gary kasparov that question. did he sacrifice his queen for no reason

I suspect they probably have been to some degree. They needed feckless leadership to be put back in charge because they were terrified by what was happening under leadership with gonads. What is interesting is how all of that got twisted and deflected though. The party accused of being in cahoots with the Russians was the one that wouldn't be, and the one that the Russians (and Chinese) feared the most. It is so obvious, especially considering the Russian and Chinese business deals that the media have tried to cover up and suppress. It is diabolical that so much information was suppressed, skewed and concealed to manipulate public opinion and influence election outcomes. The outcome has been damaging to this nation by every measurement. Not one identifiable good thing has come from it.

[ryan]

I still have some info. I heard china is using russia as a proxy. kinda like hey this is russia doing this but in reality its china. thats it from anon. out.

 

aslo I'd like to add USA basically controlls the world if if like it or not. its just a fact I hate to admit being a proud canadian. when USA falls so will the world. this is a pretty big deal when USA is in a 50 50 split politically. or is it china? theres a reason usa is worried about china, the cia are no slouch

[Mr. Fox]

This is not "fake news" no matter how you slice it. It is a live recording of direct conversation. If you don't watch the whole thing, at least listen to the first 2:48 and pay attention to what Rand is describing. It really outlines the degree to which government has become overreaching and abusive of power as it relates to the mistreatment its own citizens.

 

 

[raptorddd]

On 12/24/2022 at 4:30 PM, Mr. Fox said:

Previously redacted emails are now released unredacted. 

 

  

 

Personalizing this seems kind of silly, bro. My family is composed of marriages from a wide variety of ethnic origins, including people from Mexico.  Most of my best friends are not white. In all cases those family and friends that I love dearly are American... US Americans to be crystal clear. They are committed to the success and security of the United States first and foremost, and then US allies. They haven't forgotten their roots, but they are US citizens and that is their culture now, and they renounce the idiotic woke left "culture" that seeks to replace traditional values, degrade the traditional family, and erode patriotism and replace that with an unconventional and nefarious "globalist" agenda that values everything that is anti-US Americanism. They do not claim to be "entitled" and they do not believe that lawlessness is acceptable, or that lawbreakers are entitled to anything. They have no right to be here. They are criminals and should be treated as such. Some are decent people, but their entry being illegal makes them lawbreakers, and punishment and deportation are appropriate.

 

Assuming you are an adult now, what happened when you were a kid isn't the same as what is happening now and to pretend it is the same shows both a lack of understanding and support for continuance of the problem. The influx of terrorist and cartels, human trafficing and drug trade were not status quo at the time unless you are still in high school. I don't think anything bad about you and if your entry as a child wasn't kosher or legal, and your family did the right thing after their arrival, the past is in the past now.  There are a lot of good, hard-working, honest and kind people entering the US illegally. There are just as many, or more, that are not. It was a different world back then. It wasn't right then and it is not right now, but the wave needs to stop and if the use of force is necessary, so be it. We cannot, and should not, financially, physically or morally support the uncontrolled influx of millions of illegal migrants.

 

When you actually look at the numbers and stop paying attention to the rhetoric from the media, it is staggering and absolutely cause for alarm and drastic measures unless a person is brain-dead. The year before last was already bad, and illegal migration at the southern border doubled in 2021... shameful and unacceptable... yet, Mr. Mayorkas has the audacity to tell us the border is secure... both absurd and dishonest.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/09/whats-happening-at-the-u-s-mexico-border-in-7-charts/ft_21-11-01_mexicoborder_2/

But, but 2022 is off the charts and 2023 will be even more devastating unless swift and decisive action occurs. Notice how few are family units and unaccompanied minors versus single adult individuals. The deniers of truth only want to talk about the fringe outliers like the "children in cages" that was never talked about when Obama was allowing it, nor do they talk about how minuscule that number is in the grand scheme of things because the facts are a distracting narrative that do not incite the kind of irrational emotion that works well for advancing their open-border agenda. 

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-encounters

 

We need to do whatever is necessary to seal our borders (north and south) and block illegal immigration. It should be extremely difficult to enter without authority and there should be punishment for those that do so given our current state of health, social and economic conditions. We should all support legal immigration. I know I do. If those coming here bring value and offer something useful to citizens, I am all for it if they do it legally. Otherwise, they don't belong here and should be stopped, processed as a felon, and swiftly deported to whatever their nation of origin is. If they are claiming political asylum, it needs to be proven by fact and circumstance rather than allowed to stand as an illegitimate excuse.

personalizing kind of silly.? i am curious what your answer would be if you were that person holding a rifle and there was a law to use lethal force.  thats what you said you are all up for lethal foce. and thats ok thats is you we all think and see different ways.

yes i am an adult now. and also know what is wrong and right. and yes doing wrong must have punishment. am all for an eye for an eye example someone kills get him killed someone rapes have him be raped. just so they feel and live the same fate as other inoocent people suffer.

but on a border to use lethal force thats too much.

am not racist either my brother married white girl. i dont care about skin color or ethnicy the only way to me disklike is how they are or if i am beign attacked.

 

when you say criminals i beleive you mean cartel people. but to me both sides do not want that to end.

i also thnk that way i wasnt entitled to anything i play by the rules and thanks to that i still play by the rules. living in the usa made me a better person. i learned to follow the rules and obey the laws. 

 

i dont have alot of  knowledge but i do see a big change as you said. and there are millions of people migrating i watched the news a big flow of people walking the roads they were trying to reach the USA. i did heard that they were beign financed as there was pwoplw giving up money to them. not sure but a name pop SOROS. 

our president started watching our south border because there was no border patrol. i thnk trump ask him for help or he was forced because they wated mexico to take care of all of them so he send troops to the south border.

 our president also said to biden to give out work visas.  that way it could be more controlled and also less people die crossing.

he told him that china its growing and that it could be dangerous as they could try to invade later on.

i found out biden is coming to mexico as well as trudoe.

 

now terrorist thats a big NO.  definitively need them out. thats the people you must use lethal force no need to place them in prison.

 

yes ive seen the media about people beign put in cages dont know the reason why. as long as it was because there were packed or had to use other measures.

what the media shows you need to know all details not just  what they show.

for example that black guy floid they only showed the cops on top of him. but i saw the whole video and he brought that up to him all he had to do was cooperate. 

 

[Mr. Fox]

2 hours ago, raptorddd said:

personalizing kind of silly.? i am curious what your answer would be if you were that person holding a rifle and there was a law to use lethal force.  thats what you said you are all up for lethal foce. and thats ok thats is you we all think and see different ways.

yes i am an adult now. and also know what is wrong and right. and yes doing wrong must have punishment. am all for an eye for an eye example someone kills get him killed someone rapes have him be raped. just so they feel and live the same fate as other inoocent people suffer.

but on a border to use lethal force thats too much.

am not racist either my brother married white girl. i dont care about skin color or ethnicy the only way to me disklike is how they are or if i am beign attacked.

I think we are on the same page for the most part and you read more into my comments than I intended them to convey. I can understand the sensitivity due to your heritage.  If you militarize the border and make illegal crossing nearly impossible and block it through any means necessary, including lethal force, people will stop crossing illegally because they do not want to be shot. They value their life and are not willing to risk losing it if chances are slim their illegal entry would be successful. In other words, the imminent threat and probability of it become the deterrent unless they are criminals with a death wish.

 

I think legal entry with approved work visas after a through background check and consent to monitoring/tracking while temporarily here for work, and those pursuing legal citizenship should be an easier process than it is. If the people are willing to work, support themselves, become literate in English, and have something to offer all who are already citizen, yes... 100%. But, not illegally.

 

To me it is just common sense. Gun control freaks want to outlaw firearms, and the states that are the most torn up by guns are those that have banned or restricted them. I live in an open carry state. It does not end all violence, but when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. If someone enters a home without permission, tries to rob a store, or anything else, it is good and just when an armed law-abiding citizen can take the life of the transgressor to preserve their own. They are heroes and should be treated as such. In many liberal states, if you defend yourself or your property using anything (sticks, rocks, knives, bats, guns, martial arts skills, etc.) and cause injury or death, you are subject to prosecution the same as if you are the instigator or perpetrator. In states that do not have such unconstitutional restrictions of personal freedom, you can legally defend yourself and stand your ground. This is a deterrent and it shows in the crime statistics. Criminals that are not stupid sometimes stop to think what might happen to them. Some are not willing to risk having their brains blown out. The stupid ones that have nothing to live for don't stop and think about anything.