User not logged in - login - register
Home Calendar Books School Tool Photo Gallery Message Boards Users Statistics Advertise Site Info
go to bottom | |
 Message Boards » » NC GOP Credibility Thread Page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 28, Prev Next  
Johnny Swank
All American
1889 Posts
user info
edit post

2014/16 can't come soon enough. I say this as an ex-republican, but this bunch of dumbass cracker assholes needs to go.

4/17/2013 9:06:32 AM

Bullet
All American
22641 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/04/16/2830003/nc-bill-would-eliminate-class.html

Quote :
"The bill would formalize changes made in 2009 that dropped class-size limits in grades four through 12 and gave school districts more flexibility to transfer funds. But for the first time, the bill also would drop restrictions that limit class sizes in kindergarten through third grade to 24 students in individual classes.

The state provides funding for one teacher for every 18 students in kindergarten through third grade. That funding covers all teachers, including instructors of art, music and physical education. That means actual class sizes are larger."

4/17/2013 9:53:52 AM

synapse
play so hard
53008 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.wral.com/dog-breed-restriction-bill-filed-in-house-/12351841/

Quote :
"RALEIGH, N.C. — A bill filed Tuesday in the North Carolina House would restrict ownership of six dog breeds and mixes deemed "aggressive."

House Bill 956 would create a new "aggressive dog" classification for pit bulls, Rottweilers, mastiffs, chows, Presa Canarios and wolf hybrids, as well as any mixed-breed dogs "that are predominantly of" those breeds.

Asked why he chose those breeds, sponsor Rep. Rodney Moore, D-Mecklenburg, answered, "I don’t want to say those were the ones with the most incidents, but they were the most prevalent by the feedback that I’ve gotten."

Moore said the idea was brought to him by a concerned constituent.

"You know, (there are cases of) owners being irresponsible with the dogs, not training the dogs, and having no accountability or little accountability after an incident would occur," he said.

Under the bill, prospective "aggressive breed" owners would have to undergo a criminal background check, apply and pay for a special state permit, notify the property insurer and take a four-hour education course before adopting, buying or "otherwise taking possession of" one of the dogs.

"There needs to be some kind of accountability," Moore said. "A lot of people breed them the wrong way. You have very harsh incidents of these dogs maiming children, maiming older folks and sometimes even turning on their owner."

The criminal background check would be run by the county sheriff and sent to the Department of Insurance, which would be instructed under the proposal to deny a permit to anyone whose background check "is not suitable for the ownership of a dog belonging to an aggressive dog breed."

"If you have a person who has acted irresponsibly in the past, and they have this type of animal, they – it’s a pattern that they would probably replicate," Moore explained. "Then, the dog could be harmed or put someone else in a dangerous situation."

The "aggressive dog permit" could cost as much as $25. The Department of Insurance could also add rules requiring additional risk insurance for the dogs.

The restrictions would take effect in January. Beginning in 2015, violators would be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.

Moore says he's already getting "beaten up" over the proposal but hopes it will start a conversation.

"Some dogs have aggressive natures," he said. "I’ve gotten a lot of feedback about it, saying I’m trying to blacklist these dogs, and that’s not the intent. It’s just to let people take responsibility for owning those breeds because they’re good dogs – all of them – but they have the potential.""

4/18/2013 10:43:08 AM

thegoodlife3
All American
32636 Posts
user info
edit post

as much as I can't stand the NC GOP, they aren't the ones behind this

4/18/2013 11:44:36 AM

TerdFerguson
All American
5039 Posts
user info
edit post



Map on the left is Wake School board districts that were redrawn in 2011, supposedly to the benefit of republicans. They still ended up being a minority on the board so now the two maps on the right represent the new districts they want..... sigh

4/18/2013 12:12:21 PM

1337 b4k4
All American
10032 Posts
user info
edit post

Are school board districts different from the school districts themselves, or are we now trying to suggest that bussing kids from south Raleigh to north Raleigh is a "nieghborbood" school?

4/18/2013 1:27:37 PM

synapse
play so hard
53008 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"as much as I can't stand the NC GOP, they aren't the ones behind this"


Ahh good point, I just assumed

4/18/2013 1:49:37 PM

disco_stu
All American
7436 Posts
user info
edit post

Yay, Up on MSNBC has been spending the better part of an hour talking about how retarded NC is.

4/28/2013 9:09:18 AM

ScubaSteve
All American
5485 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"Under the bill, prospective "aggressive breed" owners would have to undergo a criminal background check, apply and pay for a special state permit, notify the property insurer and take a four-hour education course before adopting, buying or "otherwise taking possession of" one of the dogs."


That sounds like a slippery slope to confiscating all dogs...

We should try to improve the dog training because dogs aren't aggressive, they are trained to be.

I could add something about life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and dogs are happiness.. And founding fathers bullshit and this post would be the cookie cutter pro gun argument against any bill that includes the word gun in it.

FYI I live in eastern nc now and the way they treat dogs here, I can see this bill helping give animal control or the cops a way to keep the dipshits with tons of Rottweilers and the like from dogfighting as much.

[Edited on April 28, 2013 at 10:28 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2013 10:22:53 AM

moron
All American
30112 Posts
user info
edit post

They just need to work with the NRA to get dogs classified as arms, then they'd be untouchable.

4/28/2013 3:45:45 PM

sarijoul
All American
14207 Posts
user info
edit post

i have a dog that looks a lot like a pitbull. in fact she is PART pitbull. but mostly coonhound. so am i to expect some police officer to adequately assess that if i'm walking down the street with my dog?

4/28/2013 3:48:44 PM

1337 b4k4
All American
10032 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"FYI I live in eastern nc now and the way they treat dogs here, I can see this bill helping give animal control or the cops a way to keep the dipshits with tons of Rottweilers and the like from dogfighting as much."


Doesn't this suffer from the same problem that gun control (and other similar laws) have? The sorts of people who dog fight aren't likely to go get a license for their dog.

4/28/2013 11:16:48 PM

IMStoned420
All American
15485 Posts
user info
edit post

...which makes it a crime to have whatever they don't have a permit for.

4/28/2013 11:25:21 PM

1337 b4k4
All American
10032 Posts
user info
edit post

And? They're already breaking the law by fighting dogs. So what now you've tacked on a misdemeanor license violation? Oh joy and rapture, they might stay in jail for a whole extra month. And then they'll be back, fighting dogs again.

4/29/2013 12:53:19 AM

IMStoned420
All American
15485 Posts
user info
edit post

People will still do it, so that means it's not worth trying at all? By that logic, we should just legalize murder.

4/29/2013 1:43:11 AM

1337 b4k4
All American
10032 Posts
user info
edit post

Murder is illegal because we view the act of murder as an offense against the rights of another human being, and the law is mostly there to proscribe the punishment we as a society set forth for that offense. Notably, we didn't make a law against murder to make it easier for cops to arrest people who were breaking other laws already.

What offense against another persons rights are you committing by owning a dog and not getting permission from the government first?

4/29/2013 3:24:09 AM

dtownral
All American
19894 Posts
user info
edit post

you are required by law to have liability insurance for other things, why can't this be similar?

(I think it would be a terrible law, but this murder analogy reasoning against it doesn't make sense)

4/29/2013 8:43:08 AM

ScubaSteve
All American
5485 Posts
user info
edit post

Not having a liscense is easier to prove/convict than dog fighting I would assume. End result easier to reduce the amount of dog fighting.

The same way that mob boss that got caught for tax evasion... not murder, extortion, and the other long list of things he did.

4/29/2013 9:05:27 AM

Smath74
All American
93048 Posts
user info
edit post

hopefully this dog thing gets buried like the majority of the wack job legislation that has been coming out in the past few months.

4/29/2013 9:32:42 AM

1337 b4k4
All American
10032 Posts
user info
edit post

^^ Yeah, you might not be surprised to find that I've got issues with the "It's too hard to convict you of a real crime (or we're too incompetent to do so), so we're just going to make more and more things illegal until you screw up" form of legislating.

[Edited on April 29, 2013 at 2:04 PM. Reason : sdfg]

4/29/2013 2:03:30 PM

IMStoned420
All American
15485 Posts
user info
edit post

I don't actually care about this issue that much. I was responding to the gun argument.

4/29/2013 2:05:21 PM

y0willy0
All American
7863 Posts
user info
edit post

two birds one stone:

kill the dog trying to kill you with your gun.

4/29/2013 3:14:09 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
5039 Posts
user info
edit post

Video of Larry Pittman ripping Thom Tillis on not being conservative enough, lol nuts

http://blog.wataugawatch.net/2013/04/thom-tillis-not-popular-with-tea-party.html

5/1/2013 9:34:02 AM

adultswim
All American
7058 Posts
user info
edit post

they're goin for it!

http://www.wral.com/gender-based-abortion-limit-considered-by-nc-house/12397837/

Gender-based abortion limit considered by NC House

Quote :
" Republicans at the North Carolina legislature are resuming efforts to limit abortions with a bill that seeks to punish doctors when the child's sex is the primary factor in having the procedure.

A House judiciary committee scheduled debate Wednesday on the measure, which would place civil penalties on doctors who knowingly perform what the bill calls sex-selection abortion.

A bill sponsor has said the legislation helps discourage gender bias, but its opponents argue the measure will only restrict access further to lawful abortions.

The GOP-led General Assembly two years ago successfully passed a law mandating wait periods, counseling and ultrasounds for women considering abortions. A federal judge struck down some of the law.

Abortion rights advocates say North Carolina citizens trust women to make reproductive decisions"

5/1/2013 4:46:22 PM

Bullet
All American
22641 Posts
user info
edit post

This one will surely create jobs and boost the economy, just like they promised!

5/1/2013 5:25:41 PM

y0willy0
All American
7863 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/members/reports/room-phone.pl?Chamber=Senate&viewType=normal

5/6/2013 3:44:39 PM

ncstateccc
All American
2856 Posts
user info
edit post

they have to clean up the Perdue mess first

5/6/2013 5:59:39 PM

Gonzo18
All American
2228 Posts
user info
edit post

Anyone listening to this gun debate?

5/6/2013 9:42:53 PM

moron
All American
30112 Posts
user info
edit post

That's not a bad bill, but is that even a problem? Seems more like a chest thumping thing...

5/6/2013 10:22:44 PM

Nighthawk
All American
18748 Posts
user info
edit post

Here is a story about two bills that I actually do like:

http://www.wral.com/beer-bills-advance-in-house/12417823/

5/7/2013 9:29:28 AM

Dammit100
All American
17605 Posts
user info
edit post

growlers are already for sale in wine shops

5/7/2013 10:37:56 AM

Nighthawk
All American
18748 Posts
user info
edit post

Apparently it would allow them to be filled in the grocery store, restaurant, etc. I know that Carolina Brewery sells some locally in HT and Total Wine, but I think they are filled offsite and delivered as is.

Also the beer in the stands is a great plus for anybody who attends a Canes, Bulls, or Mudcats game. That would be a definite advantage, even if its not that big of an inconvenience to go to the concessions area, at least you can skip the damn lines.

5/7/2013 10:56:26 AM

Str8Foolish
All American
4852 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"Gender-based abortion limit considered by NC House"


Funny thing is the people I most expect to be inclined to sex-select a child are the people who I'd also expect to bomb an abortion clinic.

5/7/2013 11:04:13 AM

Dammit100
All American
17605 Posts
user info
edit post

^^gotcha. Also, I'm torn on selling beer in the stands; while it adds a convenience primarily for those who sit further from concessions, it will add a visual distraction to the event I'm paying $$ to see.

5/7/2013 11:06:29 AM

dtownral
All American
19894 Posts
user info
edit post

you currently have an issue with all the other vendors in the stand? it's never been a problem for me.

5/7/2013 11:26:32 AM

Dammit100
All American
17605 Posts
user info
edit post

there's no vendors walking around the arena at Canes games (which are all I go to locally)

5/7/2013 11:36:19 AM

dtownral
All American
19894 Posts
user info
edit post

hockey games have different rules about walking in the stands, they stop you during play, so i doubt you will see widespread vendors in the stand. allowing something doesn't mean that it will happen everywhere, with hockey there are other concerns.

(if you are in the seats where you can order food though, you would probably be allowed to also order a beer now though)

5/7/2013 11:49:00 AM

HCH
All American
3039 Posts
user info
edit post

Greedy republicans proposing to give our money back:
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2013/05/07/nc-senate-republicans-to-unveil.html

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 12:37 PM. Reason : Gross, I got TSB on me.]

5/7/2013 12:36:51 PM

dtownral
All American
19894 Posts
user info
edit post

they will replace reduced corporate and income tax with increased sales tax

so, for most of us, they ain't giving shit back since it just shifts the burden down

5/7/2013 12:41:11 PM

HCH
All American
3039 Posts
user info
edit post

Corporate and Income tax is less elastic than sales tax.

5/7/2013 12:43:15 PM

1337 b4k4
All American
10032 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"That's not a bad bill, but is that even a problem? Seems more like a chest thumping thing..."


I can't imagine it is a problem. I suspect like the opponents say, it's a way for them to squeeze down abortions. The problem is, it really is a bad bill. If elective abortions are legal, then the government has no business whatsoever in why you elect to have the abortion. Whether it's because you don't like boys or girls, you aren't ready for kids, you find children inconvenient, you found out the child might have a genetic defect or you simply enjoy having abortions, if it's legal, they have no business in your choice.

Quote :
"Funny thing is the people I most expect to be inclined to sex-select a child are the people who I'd also expect to bomb an abortion clinic."


Say what now? The people you think are most inclined to abort a child on one of the most shallow of reasons are the same people you expect to be violently opposed to abortion in the first place? How does that work?

5/7/2013 1:12:34 PM

moron
All American
30112 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"
I can't imagine it is a problem. I suspect like the opponents say, it's a way for them to squeeze down abortions. The problem is, it really is a bad bill. If elective abortions are legal, then the government has no business whatsoever in why you elect to have the abortion. Whether it's because you don't like boys or girls, you aren't ready for kids, you find children inconvenient, you found out the child might have a genetic defect or you simply enjoy having abortions, if it's legal, they have no business in your choice.
"


I disagree.

It's a major public health and societal issue if we have an imbalance of males/females. This is causing problems in China, and if it became a problem here, it's the responsibility of a functional society to correct for it.

5/7/2013 1:42:22 PM

Supplanter
supple anteater
21831 Posts
user info
edit post

^ that reminds me of something I read yesterday about someone expressing a concern:

http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2013/05/06/north-carolina-politicians-push-abortion-bill-that-will-target-asian-americans/

Quote :
"If this bill passes, women like me will be held under a microscope and faced with intense scrutiny about a deeply personal and private decision simply because we are Asian."

5/7/2013 1:50:34 PM

disco_stu
All American
7436 Posts
user info
edit post

I'm curious about that; I see people predicting that China's imbalance may result in future problems but what problems is it causing in China right now exactly?

5/7/2013 1:51:05 PM

HCH
All American
3039 Posts
user info
edit post

Instead of killing all babies, they can only kill babies of a certain gender. It really limits their civil rights.

5/7/2013 2:13:10 PM

Supplanter
supple anteater
21831 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2013/05/07/the-tea-party-crazy-train-speeds-up-in-raleigh/

Quote :
"A calculation using tools provided by the same Tax Foundation shows that it’s likely the Senate plan would mean a single mom with two children earning $20,000 a year would pay $1,000 more in state taxes over the next three years while a millionaire would pay $55,000 less."


Quote :
"The Senate plan is not reform at all. It’s Robin Hood in reverse, forcing low and moderate income families to pay more to give the wealthy a huge break, while slashing more funding from education"


Quote :
"House Speaker Thom Tillis, ALEC’s legislator of the year in 2011, skipped the House session last Thursday to attend an ALEC meeting in Oklahoma City."

5/7/2013 2:30:19 PM

cain
All American
7450 Posts
user info
edit post

Jesus, playing with the calculator on that site makes you wonder if they know what their own math looks like.

Single, no kids, $165,000 a year. Save $4000
Married, no kids, $165,000 a year. Save $2800
Married, 2 kids, $165,000 a year. Save $2200
Single, no kids, $75,000 a year. Save $1500
Married, 2 kids, $75,000 a year. Save $450
Single, 2 kids, $30,000 a year. Cost $560
Married, 2 kids, $30,000 a year. Cost $995

I guess the lesson here is don't get married or have kids.

5/7/2013 2:58:13 PM

y0willy0
All American
7863 Posts
user info
edit post

That's not a bad lesson.

5/8/2013 12:05:05 PM

dtownral
All American
19894 Posts
user info
edit post

that's not a good conclusion to make

5/8/2013 12:07:36 PM

ScubaSteve
All American
5485 Posts
user info
edit post

^ for y0willy it might be a good lesson to learn...

[Edited on May 8, 2013 at 12:31 PM. Reason : people only get married and have kids for financial benefit.. you didnt know?]

5/8/2013 12:30:32 PM

 Message Boards » The Soap Box » NC GOP Credibility Thread Page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 28, Prev Next  
go to top | |
Admin Options : move topic | lock topic

© 2017 by The Wolf Web - All Rights Reserved.
The material located at this site is not endorsed, sponsored or provided by or on behalf of North Carolina State University.
Powered by CrazyWeb v2.37 - our disclaimer.