Gun Control and Climate Change

Inner cities are being devastated by high energy prices and gangs with illegal guns, so white liberals want to help them by raising energy prices further and confiscating guns from law-abiding gun owners in the rest of the country.

“Guns and fossil fuels disproportionately hurt children and communities of color.”

Gun Control and Climate Change: Is It Really “Too Late”? | Psychology Today

Chicago Crime, Murder & Mayhem | Criminal Infographics | HeyJackass! | Illustrating Chicago Values

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Gun Control and Climate Change

  1. Robert L Gipson says:

    The following video is obliquely relevant to “guns and climate change.” An actual scientist who dutifully (erroneously) believed that “man-made climate change” was real … nonetheless found an incredibly simple, inexpensive solution to (supposed) man-made climate change. What did the government do? Did they reward him? No. They sent swat teams with **guns** to destroy all his work:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4Hnv_ZJSQY

    No inexpensive solutions allowed, when $$ trillions are at stake.

    • Mark Stevens says:

      He is no scientist and most definitely should not have been dumping that material in the ocean. He tried to cleverly word his intents but he actually was trying to make money off the process as that was not the only so-called dubious ‘carbon sink’ experiment he has undertaken for the purpose of business profits. It’s not that simple as you stated either. The science behind dumping acidic fertilizer into the oceans is still young and the research and controlled experiments along with the lasting effects requires decades to determine any benefits. Some areas it does create a specific type of plankton but in others the created plankton destroys other types already in the area and that alone can create an ecosystem disaster. The oceanic area’s natural acidity may completely negate any carbon sink effects too.
      The ‘scientist’ to which you refer had no scientific understanding of the area, no understanding of any possible deleterious effects of his actions (nutrient and oxygen depletion as a start), conned the local native gov’t (who had no authoritative control to ocean dumping in the area) into dumping iron fertilizer along their fishing routes, and then considered it successful because of a banner fishing season that year. He was appropriately removed from the corporation for his actions. The actual scientific statement behind the experiment shows there was little to no effect from the fertilization and that there was nothing to show any carbon sink effects because nothing was implemented for that purpose. That’s because he was implicitly trying to make money off of it.

      • Steve Cooksey says:

        And why would anyone want to remove the life-giving CO2 from the atmosphere? We’re still in a CO2 drought. I’m glad he was stopped.

      • Robert L Gipson says:

        I don’t support or condone his thesis. What was interesting to me was the swat team raid.

  2. Lynne Balzer says:

    Gun homicides are done by criminals. But they want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens, so they can’t defend themselves from these criminals. That’s as stupid as saying that men can get pregnant. (The only thing that will reduce crime is better law enforcement.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.