I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Yet it is Republicans who are weakening child labor laws. It's almost like that quoted opinion is disconnected from evidence.
I see you have a comprehension problem. You don't seem to be able to answer a basic question about why Democrats didn't protect kids at the federal level.
I see you have a comprehension problem. You don't seem to be able to answer a basic question about why Democrats didn't protect kids at the federal level.
So, who says they didn't? You made the assertion, what's the rationale?
It's a meaningless question when you don't bother to specify what kind of protections you are talking about. Pretty much par for the course for you.
Much of the legislation in the last 2 years benefits children. The Covid relief bill and the inflation relief act come immediately to mind.
Nice deflection but it really is a simple question. Obviously Democrats have done nothing about Child labor or kids wouldn't been getting injured in meat packing plants. Money from democrat donors over kids welfare.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
MaybeeRN said:
I see you have a comprehension problem. You don't seem to be able to answer a basic question about why Democrats didn't protect kids at the federal level.
You have yet to specify how you believe they should have protected them and didn't. Your question is meaningless based upon only your vague opinion.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
MaybeeRN said:
Nice deflection but it really is a simple question. Obviously Democrats have done nothing about Child labor or kids wouldn't been getting injured in meat packing plants. Money from democrat donors over kids welfare.
Oh that's it... your personal notion that Democrats are responsible for child labor in Republican controlled states... like Nebraska or Iowa.
At least it's now clear that gaslighting was the intention of your comment.
You have yet to specify how you believe they should have protected them and didn't. Your question is meaningless based upon your vague opinion.
It's her Tucker Carlson impression, with more non-sequiturs. It's the old when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife gotcha question. Silly me for trying to address it.
It's called the complex question fallacy, which depends on assuming "facts not in evidence".
It looks like California is going to get slammed again. Although our Winter has been a bit gloomy, and more snow than usual, at least we've avoided flooding.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
MaybeeRN said:
Libs love Federalization so why didn't Democrats put in laws that would supersede the Iowa laws if they are so bad?
Again... the question is based in magical thinking. You seem to suggest that Democrats should try to imagine which irresponsible laws Republicans are going to write at the state level so that liberals can pre-emptively protect the children from the conservative policy, at the federal level.
Specifically, the Justice Department finds that LMPD:
Uses excessive force, including unjustified neck restraints and the unreasonable use of police dogs and tasers;
Conducts searches based on invalid warrants;
Unlawfully executes search warrants without knocking and announcing;
Unlawfully stops, searches, detains, and arrests people during street enforcement activities, including traffic and pedestrian stops;
Unlawfully discriminates against Black people in its enforcement activities;
Violates the rights of people engaged in protected free speech critical of policing; and
Along with Louisville Metro, discriminates against people with behavioral health disabilities when responding to them in crisis.
Quote
"The Justice Department has concluded that there is reasonable cause to believe that Louisville Metro and LMPD engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the constitutional rights of the residents of Louisville — including by using excessive force, unlawfully discriminating against Black people, conducting searches based on invalid warrants, and violating the rights of those engaged in protected speech critical of policing,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. "This unacceptable and unconstitutional conduct erodes the community trust necessary for effective policing. It is also an affront to the vast majority of officers who put their lives on the line to serve Louisville with honor. And it is an affront to the people of Louisville who deserve better. The Justice Department will work closely with Louisville Metro and LMPD to negotiate toward a consent decree and durable reforms that protect both the safety and civil rights of Louisville's residents.”
Again... the question is based in magical thinking. You seem to suggest that Democrats should try to imagine which irresponsible laws Republicans are going to write at the state level so that liberals can pre-emptively protect the children from the conservative policy, at the federal level.
Nothing magical about it. If these laws in Iowa are so bad like you libs claim. There should already be laws on the books against. So either the laws being proposed in Iowa are not that bad or Democrats don't seem to concerned about draconian child labor like Libs try to make it out to be. Either way you can't answer a simple question.
heron, ASN, RN
4,710 Posts
It's a meaningless question when you don't bother to specify what kind of protections you are talking about. Pretty much par for the course for you.
Much of the legislation in the last 2 years benefits children. The Covid relief bill and the inflation relief act come immediately to mind.