Guns’ controls. Is Poverty a case of disability. Is dangerosity a problem of poverty or social sufferance ?

After finishing this reading by Eurasianews :

On Social Security ? Obama wants your gun!

I cleared my throat looking for air and breath. According to the US administraton, people with financial problems are potentially dangerous. Conclusion : POVERTY SHOULD BE TREATED AS A NEW DISEASE. JUST SHOUT HERE AND APPLAUDE HYSTERICALLY OF PLEASURE.

Cynicism in politics can not be that greater or ridicule!

Considering those cases of dismissal :

– first of all, America is a society where inequalities are the highest in the World. Considering that poverty is an illness equates to say half of the American people are disqualified for gun’s possession.

– On the other side, this automatically implies the other part fits the posession. Wealth is health of mind and spirit. Come on, how to characterize industrial espionnage and intellectual property stealings among many institutional-power cover up’s thefts, threats and use of strenght to grab others belongings?

– But, let move even further: of the people going into rampage those years, how many of them were poor ? Were the Tzarnaïev brothers poor ? What about G. Zimmerman and the Police Eric Garnier or Michael Brown and Baltimore excruciating deaths ? Were Roof poor or suffering from money-shortage or disabilty ?

– Selective democracy with some deserving the rights to vote or not ; to posess a gun or not, etc..

– That is probably why gay marriage came in emergency while poor black people mass jailing and social difficulties were not.

When you want to get rid of your dog – meaning to scrap people’s rights – you accuse the dog of having ‘rage’.

NY city has brought up the appropriate response : treat poverty instead of accusing it of all the sins, diseases and criminality of the World. Look at Daesh, are they poor ? Not at all. They used to be as so many politicians used to also.

Look at the age of their Kamikaze ‘young boys’ or men, some of them have been paid a lot of money they left to their loves ones to commit those murders. Did they accept, because of poverty ? I doubt this strongly.

Roof and the Tunisian killer of the same age provided us with a path of research for a  better understanding of the motives behind mass shootings. How aged are those men turning murderers ?

Dangerosity is a slippery notion to handle with extreme precaution.

I suggest here – after Jeb Bush – that ex Senators or House Representants using the Revolving Door to go to either Wall Street or to enter any Lobbying House pose a more dangerous problem to Democracy and Freedom and Public Security than the poor.

Jeb Bush has nailed it. Locking 6 years of non-lobbying activities for those former Senators and HR is a good starting point to clean up Political Thinking. Too many analysis are driven by ideology or lobbyist militancy.

How can we make public space free of guns ? What about our cars ? Some limitations should be set for guns possessions, eventhough you were qualified to have one. When do you need a gun and why ? To protect yourself from aggressions or harm.

The notion that a wealthy man is less incline to shoot at somebody  than a poor one is a way to say that rich people are sane and poor are not. This is unacceptable for it stems from social, human and racial categorisation.

Once upon the time, only rich people or working men could vote and only them. Those people were declared apt to, because they could pay a ‘cens’ = a right to vote (1). The poor couldn’t and went excluded from the vote. Incapacited by poverty. Eugenism also came that way : it is said that Hitler regime experienced some medicines on poor people used as guinea pigs. Some of them turned mad and rogue, because of the drugs and arbitrary captivity they underwent under non-humane treatment.

Poverty can’t be a case of disability or of disqualification. This is dangerous determinism. Knowing that some rich people today used to be poor, in an ideal world, being poor can also be a temporary moment or a transitional period. So, when you got wealthier, would you – the former poor man – submit another application for a gun?

Now for the checkbook, this is our past ; there will be less and less use of it.


Have we asked those people out there why they need a gun for ? Did we check out the neighborhood problems and how they conflicted with the feeling of Togetherness or Security ? I’m sure that action as « downing the confederate flag » would do more on guns killings reductions than policing the poor and criminalising social security – Medicare and Medicaid. Is it how Obamacare would end ? Trapping people ? Sorry, can’t buy this nor believe it.


From CNN. ‘Ohio Gov. John Kasich announced his 2016 presidential bid today, the 16th contender to join the field of GOP candidates.

The 63-year-old Republican has a resume tailor-made for presidential politics: Elected twice statewide in battleground Ohio, he worked in the private sector and served nearly two decades in Congress, including a six-year run as chairman of the House Budget Committee’.

(1) According to the DSCC. ‘Republicans in states like North Carolina, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Nevada are pushing laws to make voting harder — especially for likely Democratic voters. These laws could easily decide key Senate seats (AND the White House) or fall agonizingly short.

Unlike the GOP, Democrats don’t change the rules to win elections.

This isn’t the first time Republicans have tried to suppress the vote. But if they succeed now, likely Democratic voters in MUST-WIN states could find themselves unable to cast ballots’.


How many people have died from the 2008 financial crisis, alone committing suicide after bankruptcy ? Much more than guns shootings. This is for sure.

In 2008, we saw the damage that Wall Street’s big banks can do when we let their risky practices go unchecked. Their outrageous bets went south, leaving taxpayers on the hook to clean up the mess — and they nearly took the U.S. economy down with them.

That’s why, 5 years ago today, Congress passed the Wall Street Reform bill — to stop a crisis like that from happening again. And so far, it’s worked.

But some Republicans in Congress want to dismantle Wall Street Reform completely, and put the big banks back in the driver’s seat. And we already know where that road leads — right off an economic cliff.

I refuse to allow the GOP to dismantle Wall Street Reform. And today, I need your help to let them know they won’t get away with it. Tell Republicans in Congress: We CANNOT put Wall Street back in charge. Sign the petition.

Wall Street Reform wasn’t perfect. Main Street banks shouldn’t suffer under regulations that were intended to rein in Wall Street’s bad practices. And adjustments can be made to fix that.

But here’s what we can’t do: We can’t weaken the protections that keep huge banks from destroying our economy. We can’t weaken the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — which was created with the sole purpose of protecting American consumers.

And we can’t put taxpayers and hardworking families back on the hook.

Repealing Wall Street Reform is more about politics than best practices — and that is simply unacceptable. The Republicans trying to repeal the law are standing in the way of  honest-to-goodness bipartisan compromise to fix Wall Street Reform in a way that benefits everyone.

I will continue to stand up for reform and for protecting American families. And today, I want Republicans to know that I’m not standing alone. Sign the petition to join me.

Thank you.