Immigrants caught at border believe families can stay in US and collect benefits

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hundreds of immigrant families caught illegally crossing the Mexican border told U.S. immigration agents they made the dangerous journey in part because they believed they would be permitted to stay in the United States and collect public benefits, according to internal intelligence files from the Homeland Security Department.

The interviews with immigrants by federal agents were intended to help the Obama administration understand what might be driving a puzzling surge in the numbers of border crossings that started over the summer. The explanations suggest the U.S. government's efforts to discourage illegal crossings may have been unsuccessful. Its efforts have included public service campaigns in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala to highlight the dangers and consequences of making the trek across Mexico to cross illegally into the United States.

The Associated Press obtained copies of the interview summaries, which were compiled in reports by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Office of Intelligence. They said hundreds of people traveling as part of families consistently cited opportunities to obtain permission to stay in the U.S., claim asylum and receive unspecified benefits. Immigrants spoke of "permisos," or a pass to come into the United States.

Clinton on Confiscation: ‘It’s Worth Considering’

If elected president, Hillary Clinton would consider a federal initiative to confiscate firearms from law-abiding citizens. Yes, it’s true. Clinton would seriously contemplate confiscation were she to become the next president of the U.S.
Yes, those of us with at least half a brain could read between the lines of her anti-gun rhetoric, voting record, and political history and come to that conclusion ourselves, but it becomes a whole different animal when we hear it directly from the horse’s mouth.
Last week, at a Town Hall meeting in New Hampshire, a voter asked Mrs. Clinton, “Recently, Australia managed to get away, or take away tens of thousands, millions, of handguns. In one year, they were all gone. Can we do that? If we can’t, why can’t we?”
Clinton responded by saying, “I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level, if that could be arranged.”
The National Rifle Association was quick to slam Clinton for her remarks, essentially calling a spade, a spade, a gun grabber, a gun grabber.
“This validates what the NRA has said all along. The real goal of gun control supporters is gun confiscation,” said Chris Cox, executive director of The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, in a statement. “Hillary Clinton, echoing President Obama’s recent remarks on the same issue, made that very clear.”
Clinton also made controversial comments about the landmark Supreme Court ruling that held that the Second Amendment is an individual right, not contingent upon militia participation or government approval. Clinton said last month at a private event that the, “Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.”
Cox also addressed that remark, saying, “Hillary Clinton just doesn’t get it. The NRA’s strength lies in our five million members and the tens of millions of voters who support the Second Amendment.”
“A majority of Americans support this freedom, and the Supreme Court was absolutely right to hold that the Second Amendment guarantees the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms,” he added. “Hillary Clinton’s extreme views are completely out of touch with the American people.”
Are they though? I’d like to believe that she’s the radical and I’m the average Joe but I can’t help but to see a change in sentiment. I mean, it used to be that talks of draconian gun laws, let alone confiscation, was political suicide in presidential politics (remember Al Gore?) but the Democrats running now seem very open to the idea of putting the Second Amendment on the chopping block. That was evident at the debate last week.  Perhaps the times are a changing. What’s more, is gun-control organizations are certainly taking note — and the credit for this apparent shift.
“Gun violence prevention has been front and center on the campaign trail this season and again in the Democratic debate tonight, and that’s a reflection of how far the gun safety movement has come in the last few years,” said John Feinblatt, President of Everytown for Gun Safety, in a statement that followed last week’s debate.
“This is a marked change from 2008, when gun safety was largely avoided during the presidential campaign,” he continued. “The political calculus has changed — candidates are now running on gun safety.”
“Less than three years ago moms across the country came together to confront the gun violence in our country that kills 88 Americans and injures hundreds more every day, and tonight we’ve seen the power of our movement,” said Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America Founder Shannon Watts, in a statement.
“The myth that addressing gun violence is a political third rail is now in the past,” said Watts. “As tonight’s debate shows, candidates can talk about solutions to reduce gun violence because there is a growing movement of Americans demanding their leadership on this issue.”
At the risk of sounding like a bit of an alarmist, I’m scared by the normalization of gun-grabbing. I know the political realities are such that enacting gun-control at the federal level is still an uphill battle for gun grabbers, but it is also apparent that they are making real headway, real progress on their mission to Europeanize U.S. gun laws.
Gun owners really need to come together in 2016 because if we don’t show up at the polls to keep a Hillary administration from taking over the White House, Clinton won’t just talk about taking our guns — she’ll actually attempt to do it.

Big City Sheriff Says Black Lives Matter ‘Will Join Forces With ISIS’ To Take Down America

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke is not shy about his conservative views. He once described men and women protesting police violence in Ferguson, Missouri as “vultures on a roadside carcass.” He’s accused Democratic governors, senators and Attorney General Eric Holder of acting as cat’s paws for the “New Black Panther Party.” And he told a National Rifle Association gathering that open insurrection may be the appropriate response to gun laws he opposes. Similarly, on Tuesday night, Clarke offered a unique take on the Black Lives Matter movement:

Clarke has long straddled the border between mainstream Republicans and the conservative movement’s paranoid extremes. During his aborted presidential campaign, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) described Clarke as a “friend of mine” who has “talked to me about [policing] many times in the past.” Yet Clarke was also named “sheriff of the year” by the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), a group whose leader backed anti-government rancher Cliven Bundy during an armed standoff between Bundy’s supporters and federal officials.
In a 2013 speech to the CSPOA, Clarke labeled the federal government a “common enemy” and compared the federal government’s current actions to the outrages that triggered the American Revolution.
Despite his views, however, Clarke remains a high-ranking law enforcement officer with a badge, a gun, and a bevy of deputies at his command.

Pro Shooter Turns A Pumpkin Into A Jack-O'-Lantern... With A Gun

"Remember, pumpkins are volatile creatures."

Posted: 10/27/2015 12:38 AM EDT

If carving a pumpkin with a bunch of sharp knives isn't quite dangerous enough for you, here's another option for making a jack-o'-lantern: shoot the thing.
Pro shooter Kirsten Joy Weiss, who performs trick shots such as shooting the lead tip off a pencil,  shows how to use a rifle to make a jack-o'-lantern.
Or, as she calls it, a "gun-o-lantern." 

"Now remember, pumpkins are volatile creatures (really, they are! You’ll see why once you shoot one)," she writes on her website. "They don’t cooperate perfectly, but if you set perfection aside and simply shoot, you’ll love your results."
Check it out in the clip above.
No matter how you carve your pumpkin, keep basic safety tips in mind. The Consumer Products Safety Agency says more than half of the 4,400 Halloween-related injuries every year come from attempts at making jack-o'-lanterns.

Oklahoma Homecoming killer/school shooters/theater shooters

I really just do not understand why these people are still alive, when there is a crime like this,murder for no reason, and your positive of the killer, justice should be fast and an effective deterrent for others who are thinking of the insanity plea, take them out in front of the courthouse and HANG them by the neck until DEAD. Let it be public, after the copycat wanna be's see some one's eyes bulge out,face turn brownish purple feet kicking pissing and shitting themselves I promise you this shit will slow way the hell down. Crazy? Damn right they are but doesn't mean they should be excused,hell all the more reason to hang em high. All you hear about is them, name,parents,lawyers, it's bullshit. Lets hear about the victims while the degenerated fuckers are kicken and shittin, no reason these fucks should still be breathing.

Another Government Agency Spending Millions on Military-Type Weapons

The Obama Administration has declared Climate Change our greatest security threat.
The EPA is cracking down on environmental violations.
And the EPA is heavily armed.
Yes, the EPA has spent millions on guns, body armor, drones, assault ships and more:

The Environmental Protection Agency has spent millions of dollars over the last decade on military-style weapons to arm its 200 “special agents” to fight environmental crime.
Among the weapons purchased are guns, body armor, camouflage equipment, unmanned aircraft, amphibious assault ships, radar and night-vision gear and other military-style weaponry and surveillance activities, according to a new report by the watchdog group Open the Books.

The message is clear:
Don’t mess with the EPA.
They’ll send an army after you.
What’s more, with over 1000 attorneys, they’re armed with one of the largest law firms in the country.

MSNBC host: White males can’t be described as ‘hard workers’ because of privilege

During a discussion about Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) chances of gaining control of the speakers’ gavel, executive director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles Alfonso Aguilar called the lawmaker a “hard worker.” MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry immediately berated the guest for using the term to describe a white male.
Here’s a partial transcript of the unbelievable exchange:

AGUILAR: But let’s be fair. If there’s somebody who is a hard worker when he goes to Washington is Paul Ryan. Not only works with the Republicans but Democrats. You know very well that I work on immigration issue, trying to get Republicans to support immigration reform. Paul Ryan is somebody who has reported immigration reform, has worked with somebody like Luis Gutierrez. Luis Gutierrez is very respectful, speaks highly of Paul Ryan. This is somebody who’s trying to govern.
HARRIS-PERRY: Alfonso, I feel you. I just want to pause on one thing. Because I don’t disagree with you that I actually think Mr. Ryan is a great choice for this role. I want us to be super careful when we use the language “hard worker” because I actually keep an image of folks working in cotton fields on my office wall. Because it is a reminder about what hard work looks like. So, I feel you that he’s a hard worker. I do. But in the context of relative privilege, and I just want to point out, when you talk about work life balance and being a hard worker, the moms who don’t have health care who are working —
AGUILAR: I understand that —
HARRIS-PERRY: But we don’t call them hard workers. Call them failures, people who are sucking off the system —
AGUILAR: No, no, no —
HARRIS-PERRY: That’s true.