James “Hollywood” Macecari Motorcycle clubs have long been a part of American culture, embodying freedom, rebellion, and brotherhood. However, the perception of motorcycle clubs is often tainted by stereotypes and misconceptions, leading to a controversial issue: motorcycle club profiling. This article delves into the various aspects of motorcycle club profiling, its impact, and the ongoing efforts to combat this bias. Historical Context Motorcycle clubs date back to the early 20th century, with the formation of the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) and the rise of groups like the Boozefighters Motorcycle Club, established in 1946. Over the years, clubs like the Hells Angels, Outlaws, and Bandidos gained notoriety, sometimes due to criminal activities by a few members. These incidents have contributed to the negative image and subsequent profiling of motorcycle clubs. What is Motorcycle Club Profiling? Motorcycle club profiling refers to the discriminatory practice where law enforcement or other entities target individuals based on their association with motorcycle clubs. This often involves unwarranted traffic stops, searches, and surveillance, simply because the person is wearing club colors or patches. Profiling extends beyond law enforcement, affecting how members are perceived in public spaces, workplaces, and even by insurance companies. The Impact of Profiling The effects of motorcycle club profiling are far-reaching and can have significant consequences for members. Some of the key impacts include: Legal Issues: Members are often subject to increased scrutiny, leading to frequent traffic stops and searches. This can result in legal battles and fines, even when no crime has been committed. Social Stigma: Profiling contributes to the negative stereotypes surrounding motorcycle clubs, leading to social ostracism and discrimination. Members may face prejudice in their communities, workplaces, and even among friends and family. Insurance Discrimination: Some insurance companies may refuse coverage or charge higher premiums to individuals associated with motorcycle clubs, based on the perceived risk. Mental Health: Constant profiling and harassment can take a toll on the mental health of motorcycle club members, leading to stress, anxiety, and a sense of injustice. Efforts to Combat Profiling Despite the challenges, there are ongoing efforts to address and combat motorcycle club profiling. Some of the key initiatives include: Legislative Actions: Various states have introduced legislation to prevent motorcycle club profiling. For example, Washington State passed a law in 2011 prohibiting law enforcement from stopping motorcyclists based solely on their appearance or club affiliation. Advocacy Groups: Organizations like the Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) and the National Council of Clubs (NCOC) work tirelessly to raise awareness about motorcycle club profiling and advocate for the rights of riders. Public Awareness Campaigns: Efforts to change public perception through awareness campaigns and media outreach are crucial in combating stereotypes. Educating the public about the positive aspects of motorcycle clubs and their contributions to society can help shift the narrative. Legal Challenges: Some motorcycle clubs and members have taken legal action against instances of profiling, seeking justice and accountability for discriminatory practices. These legal battles can set precedents and deter future profiling. Case Studies and Examples Several high profile cases and examples highlight the issue of motorcycle club profiling: Rebel Rousers Motorcycle Club v. Pennsylvania State Police: In 2018, members of the Rebel Rousers Motorcycle Club filed a lawsuit against the Pennsylvania State Police, alleging unconstitutional profiling and harassment during a charity event. The case drew significant attention and sparked discussions about the need for policy changes. Australia’s Anti-Associations Laws: In Australia, anti-association laws, also known as “anti-bikie” laws, have been implemented in various states to combat organized crime. However, these laws have been criticized for targeting motorcycle clubs indiscriminately, affecting law-abiding members and infringing on civil liberties. The controversy surrounding these laws highlights the complexities of balancing public safety with individual rights. The Road Ahead Addressing motorcycle club profiling requires a multifaceted approach involving legislative actions, advocacy, and public awareness. Collaboration between motorcycle clubs, advocacy groups, and law enforcement is essential to find common ground and develop fair and just policies. Motorcycle clubs are an integral part of American culture, contributing to charitable causes, fostering camaraderie, and promoting the love of riding. By challenging stereotypes and addressing profiling, we can work towards a more inclusive society that respects the rights and freedoms of all its members. Motorcycle Club Profiling: A Controversial Issue Harris Recycling the OUTDATED Trump Hitler Comparison The Second Amendment Comes Into Play If They Try To Lock Trump Up : Biden Says They Should Lock him Up Could clubs for vintage motorcycles soon die out? HELLS ANGELS TAKE ON PAGANS IN BRUTAL BIKER WARFARE?

The full Joe Rogan interview with Donald Trump reached 24 million views in 24 hours. Joe Rogan revealed why he decided to have Donald Trump on his podcast after years of turning the opportunity down. Rogan explained why during Friday’s highly anticipated interview on “The Joe Rogan Experience,” which saw Trump call the presidency a “very […] The post Joe Rogan’s Full Interview of Donald Trump appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

With the Nov. 5 election approaching, much attention is focused on the presidential contest—but at least as significant are the contests that will determine who controls Congress.  That is because Congress controls federal taxing and spending.  “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” says the Constitution.  “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law,” it says.  In his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, published in 1833 and quoted on The Founders’ Constitution website, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story did an excellent job explaining the purpose of this provision.  “The object is apparent upon the slightest examination,” wrote Story. “As all the taxes raised from the people, as well as the revenues arising from other sources, are to be applied to the discharge of the expenses, and debts, and other engagements of the government, it is highly proper, that Congress should possess the power to decide, how and when any money should be applied for these purposes.” “If it were otherwise, the executive would possess an unbounded power over the public purse of the nation; and might apply all its moneyed resources at his pleasure,” he wrote.  “In arbitrary governments, the prince levies what money he pleases from his subjects, disposes of it, as he thinks proper, and is beyond responsibility or reproof,” Story wrote. “It is wise to interpose, in a republic, every restraint, by which the public treasure, the common fund of all, should be applied, with unshrinking honesty to such objects, as legitimately belong to the common defense, and the general welfare.”  How has Congress handled this responsibility in recent decades?  In 1994, when Congress faced the midterm election in President Bill Clinton’s first term, Republicans were competing with a Democratic Party that had won control of the House in every election since 1954. In late September 1994, then-House Minority Whip Newt Gingrich led fellow Republican House members and candidates in making what they called their “Contract With America.”  “The contract is a list of tried-and-true GOP agenda items, including welfare reform, tax cuts, term limits and a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution—a list calculated to have maximum voter appeal,” reported The Associated Press.  It did. Republicans won control of both the House and Senate that year.  On Jan. 26, 1995, House Republicans brought up the proposed constitutional amendment that would require a balanced budget.  This proposed amendment said its official summary: “Prohibits total outlays from exceeding total receipts for a fiscal year, unless three-fifths of the members of each house of Congress provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a roll-call vote.”  It also: “Sets a permanent limit on the amount of the public debt. Prohibits an increase in such amount unless approved by a three-fifths majority in each house by roll call vote.”  And: “Directs the president to submit a balanced budget.”  Then-House Majority Leader Dick Armey, a Texas Republican, gave a floor speech explaining why this amendment was needed.  “Each and every one of our children today is endowed with $18,300 of federal national debt,” said Armey.  “This moment,” he said, “stands at a time where, if we do nothing, we must face the even more frightening possibility that by the time of their young adulthood, they will have even worse of that indebtedness, and their children, too, will share it.”  Armey was right—and large majorities in both houses of Congress agreed with him.  The House voted 300-132 that day to approve the Balanced Budget Amendment. The 228 Republicans who voted for it were joined by 72 Democrats—giving it the necessary two-thirds vote to move forward.  So, the bill went to the Senate—where on March 2, 1995, one Republican defector stopped it from being sent to the states for ratification. That was Sen. Mark Hatfield of Oregon, who, according to his biography on the Senate website, “cast the lone Republican ‘nay’ vote on a GOP-supported Balanced Budget Amendment, which ultimately fell one vote short of passage.”  On that day when Hatfield blocked the Balanced Budget Amendment, the federal debt was $4,851,006,718,917.40, according to the Treasury Department’s “Debt to the Penny” webpage. As of Oct. 18 of this year, the debt was $35,769,732,147,503.35.  That is an increase of over sevenfold in less than 30 years.  According to the 2020 census, there were 73,106,000 individuals in the United States under age 18. The $35,769,732,147,503.35 in federal debt equals approximately $489,286 per each one of these young Americans.  Under the Biden-Harris administration—working with a Congress in which Republicans controlled the House and Democrats the Senate—the federal government spent $6,751,552,000,000 in fiscal year 2024, according to the Monthly Treasury Statement for September. At the same time, it collected $4,918,736,000,000 in taxes and ran a deficit of $1,832,816,000,000.  The $6,751,552,000,000 the federal government spent in fiscal 2024 was up $2,304,941,000,000—or 51.8%—from the $4,446,611,000,000 it spent in the pre-COVID-19 year of fiscal 2019.  What comes next? “For the 2025-2034 period, CBO now projects that if current laws generally remained unchanged, the cumulative deficit would be $22.1 trillion,” said a Congressional Budget Office report released in June.  America needs a Congress that will stop this.  COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM  We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post We Need a Congress That Will Stop Borrowing Money appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Secular Keep Me Religious

Appearing as a guest with MSNBC host Jose Diaz Balart to promote his book, MSNBC contributor Jonathan Alter declared that Donald Trump is "evil" and a "sick F" as he hoped that his book, Day of Reckoning, would convince some voters not to vote for the former President. After Diaz-Balart asked where Trump's character fits in with other politicians, Alter complained: "Well, he has the worst character of any man who has held the office of the presidency, full stop. Nobody else is even close. Richard Nixon isn't even close. And so he's just a despicable, cruel, lying person." He soon hoped that people will discover how "evil" Trump is by reading his book and not vote for him: ... if you read my book ... you can't not do something to keep this man from coming back to office. He's that evil, and I use that word very intentionally. If you take the totality of the record, it's an evil record and, you know, I think Joe Biden, you know, understood when Paul Pelosi -- not just Nancy Pelosi -- but he's making fun of Paul Pelosi, whose skull was fractured -- and when he's still in the hospital near death, Donald Trump is making fun of him. And then, just in the last few days, when he was talking about the "enemy within," he said he would use the military against the Pelosi's, including Paul Pelosi. As, you know, Biden said, "That's a sick F thing." This guy is a sick F, and we really have to think hard about putting him back in office. A week earlier when Alter appeared with MSNBC's Katy Tur, also to promote his book, he further trashed Trump and also suggested those who support him lack common sense: I sat every day in the courtroom just a few feet away from the most dangerous man in the history of our republic, and he was called to account. It's kind of a happy story, my book, in some ways. He can be brought to account. So that was his reckoning. My reckoning is what you just mentioned: How can this be? And, you know, I've covered politics for a long time. I grew up in a political family, and it's kind of shaken my faith in the common sense of about half of the American people. And, on Monday's CNN This Morning, Alter compared the election of 2024 to that of 1864 when slavery might have survived if Abraham Lincoln had lost. Transcripts follow: MSNBC Reports October 25, 2024 12:50 p.m. JOSE DIAZ-BALART, FILL-IN HOST: When you reflect on characters and character in American politics over the decades, where do you think Trump fits in? JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Well, he has the worst character of any man who has held the office of the presidency, full stop. Nobody else is even close. Richard Nixon isn't even close. And so he's just a despicable, cruel, lying person. And this is what is so -- the reason I call it, you know, "Inside Trump's Trial and My Own," is that I'm having my own American reckoning in trying to come to terms with how this country, which was founded on the idea of not just freedom and democracy, but basic decency -- how we could be in this place where we have this man who lacks all of the most elemental qualities of character that the founders knew were important if we were going to have a successful republic. So this is a stunning historical departure. I'm hoping -- I do a lot more than covering the trial in the book, Jose. I've got a lot else about what's wrong with Donald Trump, and I'm hoping to fight some of the numbness that people are feeling. They can, you know, send their Uncle Bob or, you know, Cousin Susie -- maybe they're not Trump voters, but they're thinking about not voting, and -- if you read my book, you can't do something -- you can't not do something to keep this man from coming back to office. He's that evil, and I use that word very intentionally. If you take the totality of the record, it's an evil record and, you know, I think Joe Biden, you know, understood when Paul Pelosi -- not just Nancy Pelosi -- but he's making fun of Paul Pelosi, whose skull was fractured -- and when he's still in the hospital near death, Donald Trump is making fun of him. And then, just in the last few days, when he was talking about the "enemy within," he said he would use the military against the Pelosi's, including Paul Pelosi. As, you know, Biden said, "That's a sick F thing." This guy is a sick F, and we really have to think hard about putting him back in office. (...) CNN This Morning October 23, 2024 6:05 a.m. Eastern JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: We're at a moment of national truth. This is the most significant election since 1864 when, if Abraham Lincoln had lost, there would have been a separate peace with the South -- as Trump said last week he'd favor. We would have had a confederacy -- no abolition. So this election is as big as that. We now have the former chief of staff of Donald Trump, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, top military officer, they both used the F word -- fascist. This is not a drill. And when he talks about, you know, enemies from within. He's not just talking about political rivals. He said "the Pelosi's" -- plural. This poor 82-year-old man -- a husband of Nancy Pelosi -- who had his skull fractured. Trump is joking about it when he's still in the hospital. Now, he's saying that because of Paul Pelosi's connection to Nancy Pelosi, he's an enemy from within, too. Anybody who is in any way connected to his rivals is subject to the full force of his government if he is returned to the Oval Office. This is dead serious, Kasie. People have to wake up and understand our whole system is at stake in this election. (...) MSNBC's Katy Tur Reports October 18, 2024 3:10 p.m. Eastern KATY TUR: A lot of the book also deals with the public consciousness and what we accept as truth any longer and what we allow -- the reckoning of what's happened since Donald Trump came on the scene. And when you look at the polling right now, it has been remarkably stable, and there are folks out there questioning why Kamala Harris, given that -- all that Donald Trump did when he was President, all he tried to do after he was President to stay in office, what he continues to do, how it could possibly be so close? People have some theories. I wonder if you have yours? JONATHAN ALTER: So I think that historians will be talking about this for a long time. But the reason I call it "American Reckoning" is there's the reckoning that Donald Trump faced. I sat every day in the courtroom just a few feet away from the most dangerous man in the history of our republic, and he was called to account. It's kind of a happy story, my book, in some ways. He can be brought to account. So that was his reckoning. My reckoning is what you just mentioned: How can this be? And, you know, I've covered politics for a long time. I grew up in a political family, and it's kind of shaken my faith in the common sense of about half of the American people.

With the Warhammer Vermintide 2 Versus mode just around the corner, developer Fatshark details a major update that will make the game more fun for all players, old and new, whether they’re playing the PvP mode or not. We’ve seen a lot of love for the 40k side of the coin in 2024, but now one of the best Warhammer games on PC is taking after its futuristic counterpart as Fatshark follows up a full Darktide overhaul with this comprehensive Vermintide 2 progression rework. Continue reading Warhammer Vermintide 2 is trimming the grind with a big progression redesign MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best Warhammer games, Best Warhammer 40k games, Best sword games

Satisfactory 1.0 has been a huge success. The sandbox and factory automation game is hitting new heights on Steam, and there are plenty more updates on the way. As I write this the game is still averaging around 50,000 concurrent players on Valve's platform alone. Hotfixes have been coming in thick and fast since 1.0 dropped, but that's changing for a little while. Community manager Snutt Treptow says developer Coffee Stain Studios is dropping update 1.0.0.5 soon, and then holding off until Ficsmas, where even more changes will come. Continue reading The next Satisfactory update will be its last for a while, Coffee Stain warns MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best building games, Best sandbox games, Satisfactory mods

YIKES! Kamala Harris's Latest Speech Has People Wondering if She Was GOING for the Hitler Look and Feel

As more games are incorporating a Photo Mode into their controls, it's got some players itching for more opportunities for photography. Capturing a moment in time, even in a video game, is still something special and sentimental.