Monthly Archives: January 2023

We mocked preppers and survivalists until the pandemic hit

Posted: January 25, 2023 at 8:56 am

Youve heard of preppers, right? Survivalists? If youve watched TV shows like Doomsday Preppers, you know about their strange, apocalyptic beliefs: that a disaster could strike at any time, overwhelming first responders and the social safety net; that this crisis could disrupt supply chains, causing scarcity and panic and social breakdown; that authorities might invoke emergency powers and impose police curfews. Crazy theories like that.

In fact, many perfectly reputable organizations including the US federal government and the Red Cross recommend Americans maintain extra food and emergency supplies. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) advises keeping a two-week supply of food, as well as water, batteries, medical masks, first-aid supplies and a battery- or hand-powered radio, among other things.

In mainstream society, however, interest in prepping usually invites ridicule about bunkers and tin-foil hats. Preppers have spent years as the objects of our collective derision.

Until now. Today, were all preppers or rather, wish we had been. Non-preppers have been caught in a rain shower without an umbrella. I dont know if preppers are laughing right now, but perhaps theyre entitled to some vindication.

Now, Im not a prepper. I am an effete quasi-intellectual with no practical skills of any kind. My current emergency supplies are some Hungry-Man Dinners and a liter of bourbon. If things get really bad I will finish the bourbon, lie down and wait to be eaten by stray cats.

But Ive come to respect the preppers ethos of survival and preparedness. One of my friends is one, or at least on the spectrum. When coronavirus hit, he wasnt one of the millions of people scrambling for surgical masks; he already had them in his survival kit. He kept a few and gave the rest to elderly people.

It has become fashionable to argue not entirely accurately that there are no libertarians in a pandemic. Certainly, this crisis has been a stark reminder of the importance of collective action. Were all on this ship together; Covid-19 has laid bare the pathetic inadequacy of the US social safety net, our lack of investment in the common good, and our governments short attention span for preparing for crises that dont involve terrorism or war.

But collective action also requires some level of individual responsibility and preparedness, too, at least for those with the ability and the means. You cant aid your elderly, immunocompromised or poorer neighbors if you havent taken the bare minimum of preparations. Theres a reason that airplane safety demonstrations warn passengers to put on their own air-masks before assisting others.

Were right to be angry at the people stripping supermarkets bare and hoarding desperately needed supplies. Those people arent preppers, however. Preppers dont engage in panic-buying. Thats the whole point. Thats why it is called prepping.

Prepping is a choice that occurs before a panic, not during, a prepper recently complained on Reddit. If you didnt stock up over time, you are a hoarder or, perhaps worse, an opportunist. In times like these we need to come together and support one another. That doesnt mean giving away your supplies, but it does mean living in a society.

Another added, We arent the reason that elderly or immunocompromised people cant find hand sanitizer, masks or toilet paper. We bought things in small increments when it made zero impact on the supply.

Yes, some preppers are individualistic to the point of being antisocial. Rightwing survivalists, in particular, are often motivated by paranoid, apocalyptic, and racist or conspiratorial beliefs. A massive doomsday industry caters to their fantasies with expensive survival supplies of questionable utility.

The preppers we encounter in popular culture are invariably the worst examples - religious or political zealots, eccentrics, middle-aged men suffering crises of masculinity, and, in the case of shows such as Doomsday Preppers, caricatures selected for entertainment value.

But not all are gun and gear fetishists with delusions of grandeur; many are apolitical or even leftwing. Global warming, environmental degradation and anxiety about the Trump administration have spurred liberals and leftists into the fold. Websites such as ThePrepared offer useful, non-alarmist advice on disaster preparedness.

The more sophisticated practitioners have always understood that prepping is a matter of both individual and collective wellbeing. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, better known as the Mormon church, operates a massive network of grain silos and food depots. People undergoing hardship receive food and household goods, for free or in exchange for volunteer service, at the churchs Costco-style warehouses. The system is vertically integrated, with food supplied by church-owned farms. All Mormons are also encouraged to maintain emergency stockpiles in their home not only for their own sake, but to assist neighbors when a hurricane or flood strikes.

When disaster strikes, not if. The problem is that disasters always look like remote possibilities before they occur, and historical abstractions afterward. Even the coronavirus, as insurmountable as it seems, will eventually pass; we will return to normalcy, and then complacency, and maybe even go back to ridiculing preppers.

Yet global warming probably means more and more of these kinds of crises natural disasters, but also economic instability and possibly more pandemics, as thawing ice releases long-dormant pathogens.

I suspect the real reason many people instinctively recoil from prepping is psychological. Prepping comes across as pessimistic or even cynical. But perhaps it is better to think of it as pragmatism. We should prepare for disasters for the same reason we buy life insurance or back up computer files: hope for the best, plan for the worst.

Recently, while doing some quarantine cleaning, I found several books I acquired during younger less lazy, and more idealistic days: The Boy Scout Fieldbook; The US Army Survival Manual; Living Off the Country. It seems unlikely theyll prove too relevant here in Brooklyn, New York, but Ive decided to brush up anyway. I also found a book called Home Brewing Without Failures, by the unimprovably named HE Bravery. The utility of that one should speak for itself.

See original here:

We mocked preppers and survivalists until the pandemic hit

Posted in Republican | Comments Off on We mocked preppers and survivalists until the pandemic hit

How The Survivalism Movement Started – Survivopedia

Posted: at 8:54 am

What unites us is that we actively prepare for emergencies. But how did survivalism begin?

When and why did the term prepper come about and whats the difference between a prepper and a survivalist?

There are many reasons why understanding our own history is of value to us. It is important to know yourself, but to us, perhaps the most relevant is that it helps us to adapt to future disasters and volatility by learning from the past.

While theroots of the modern survivalism movement grew from financial instability in thelate 1800s, the Second Boer War, the Spanish flu, the great depression, andtwo world wars followed by the specter of global thermonuclear war, they are inturn rooted in traditions of agriculture which required farmers to store foodthroughout winter and spring to the next harvest and also to protect againstlean years.

These are inturn predated by still earlier traditions of preparedness that can arguably betraced back for thousands of years. When tzi the Iceman was foundpreserved in the tztal Alps between Austria and Italy, he was carrying abow, a knife, a copper axe and iron pyrite and tinder fungus which where usedwith his flint blade as the copper age predecessor of flint and steel,preserved by the cold, dry environment since 3100-3400BC. If you carry thisequipment today, youre a survivalist, but carrying it before the 1900s didntmake you a survivalist. It made you normal.

By the year1900, people living in the rural American West were the descendants of pioneers,miners and trappers and it was their grandparents who settled the West. Gunownership, gardening, canning and hunting were simply their way of life.However, urbanization had people moving to cities in record numbers and withina couple of generations, camping, hunting and gardening became recreationalactivities instead of a way of life.

The earlyinfluences noted above resulted in the establishment of the National ParksService, Scouting and the implementation of food storage practice by the LDSchurch, all of which influenced the early survivalist movement.

The 1960ssaw the first writers of the modern survivalism movement such as Harry Browneand Don Stephens. The nuclear threat and the civil defense program developed inresponse to it now had Americans building fallout shelters in addition toarming themselves and storing food.

The late1960s and early 1970s also saw the birth of the primitive survival movementwith the establishment of the Boulder Outdoor Survival School in Boulder UT.Originally established as program of BYU, led by Larry Dean Olsen, theuniversity ran into problems insuring such a program and cut it loose. BOSSchanged hands over years and resulted in the establishment of primitive skillsgatherings such as Rabbit Stick and Winter Count by David Wescott, an earlyowner of the school. Olsen, Wescott and BOSS chief instructor David Holladaybecame some of the grandfathers of the modern primitive skills movement. Manyof the instructors who would later star in survival TV shows trained at BOSS orwith former BOSS instructors, such as Cody Lundin, Matt Graham of Dual Survivaland Les Stroud of Survivorman. According to Holladay, instructors trained byTom Brown Jr. or his schools can also trace their lineage back to the BOSScrowd as Brown Jr. first learned primitive skills with them. Brown Jr. maintainsthat he was trained by an Apache named Stalking Wolf who relocated from Arizonaor New Mexico to New York, however, the author is inclined to believe Mr.Holladays version of these events.

In the1970s, a number of survival writers who would influence the modern survivalistmovement came onto the scene such as Bruce D. Clayton, C.J. Cobb, Jeff Cooper, KarlHess, Dan Ing, Howard Ruff, Kurt Saxon, Joel Skousen, Mel Tappan and others. Soldierof Fortune Magazine was founded in 1975 and while it was not specifically asurvivalist magazine, it did cater to them and was one of few choices. In 1976,the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) was established and JeffCooper founded the American Pistol Institute in Paulden, AZ, which would laterbecome Gunsite Academy. Massad Ayoob published his first book in 1979.

The 1980ssaw more publications by the same writers from the 70s, with Bruce D. Claytonpublishing Life After Doomsday in 1980, plus new writers like RagnarBenson. Lofty Wiseman published the SAS Survival Guide in 1986. I alsorecall seeing and reading American Survival Guide Magazine around this time.Backwoods Home Magazine was also first published in 1989. Massad and Dorothy Ayoobestablished the Lethal Force Institute in 1981. The Urban Firearms Institutewas established in Mesa, AZ in 1988.

In the early 90s I read a copy of a shareware screenplay called Triple Ought by James Wesley, Rawles which would later become the book: Patriots: A Novel of Survival in the Coming Collapse. This book was widely read and came to strongly influence the commonly held perception of what a survival group should be. The late 90s saw additional growth in firearms training schools with Clint and Heidi Smith founded Thunder Ranch in 1993. Front Sight Was Established in 1996.

During the 1990s, the Clinton administration launched a massive propaganda campaign that vilified the survivalist movement, attempting to brand us as racists, white supremacists, and domestic terrorists. Under the direction of the Clinton Administration, the FBI and ATF paid informants to infiltrate survivalist and militia groups, befriend lone survivalists and attempt to get them to break the law. Several such cases were dismissed as entrapment. Other informants successfully entrapped militia members. Survivalists have paraded around in handcuffs and their preparations were displayed on their front lawns. Their gun collections were deemed arsenals and owning food storage, waterproof primers, or purchasing army surplus gear were determined to be sound reasons to report neighbors to the FBI.

The attack on the survivalist movement resulted in atrocities at Ruby Ridge and Waco and provoked the tragic Oklahoma City bombing. The result of the Clintons massive propaganda campaign for the survivalism movement was that militia members were driven underground and that the term survivalist was turned into a pejorative. In the aftermath, although dedicated survivalists still prepared, most ceased to advertise the fact. Most militias disbanded or broke down into independent rifle cells. They were largely driven underground, melting into a leaderless resistance.

2000-2010

By the early 2000s nobody wanted to be called a survivalist but with 9-11, the Indian Ocean Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, earthquakes in Haiti, Kashmir, and Sichuan, and multiple hurricanes and tornadoes and the 2008 financial crisis, people were flooding into the survivalism movement in hordes and droves. They need something to call themselves that distanced them from being a survivalist, because now the world believed that all survivalists were racist, child-molesting, domestic terrorist and the label prepper came into usage. Those formerly known as survivalists now identified as preppers.

Midway through this decade, survival TV shows and survival blogs came about, and the survival/preparedness industry began a growth phase. In the 70s, 80s, and 90s, a market that could barely support a magazine or two now had more than one TV show and was growing fast. SurvivalBlog.com by James Wesley, Rawles came online in 2005, and Survivorman by Les Stroud also first aired in 2005.

During thefirst half of this decade, both the survivalism movement and the market itdrives kept growing. It seemed there was a new survival TV show every couple ofmonths, the number of survival-related internet content ballooned, the numberand quality of survival expositions grew, and preparedness-related volunteerismreached levels not seen since the height of the Cold War. Disasters kepthappening and the disasters of the previous decade were too recent to forget.

The continued growth of social media and connectivity brought survivalists together as never before and the popularity of survival TV shows brought survivalism into the mainstream. On the upside, this meant an infusion of new blood that brought new talents and innovation. The influx of people into the movement also means that today, 70-80% of survivalists identify as newbies.

With survival gone mainstream, it became cool to be a survivalist for a while. Many of the new folks hadnt lived through the 90s and some who had forgotten, so some militias once again began to operate openly. Sometimes even brazenly. The 2013 revelations that resulted from the Snowden leaks did little to dissuade them to operate underground as a leaderless resistance as so many learned so painfully in the 1990s.

In 2011, Hollywood did its level best to poke fun of the survivalist movement with the Doomsday Preppers reality TV series. The model of the program was that each prepper was preparing for some singular threat to the exclusion of all others the more ridiculous the better. Preppers who appeared on the show reported that production staff bribed them to say things that they were unwilling to say because they were untrue and cast them in an unfavorable light. In the end, enough people saw past the producers motives that the show eventually changed strategy, and instead of convincing the public that preppers were all crazy and paranoid, it ended up swelling the ranks of the survivalist movement.

However, theshows initial negative portrayal of preppers now turned the term prepperinto the pejorative and now many of us once again began to identify assurvivalists instead of preppers. Eventually, writers began to attempt todifferentiate between the definition of the two labels and although the OGsurvivalists who were the same people they had been for decades, they tried toseparate the definition of survivalists from that of preppers. Bloggers andYoutubers also attempted to segment bushcrafters from primitive skillspractitioners, although I can assure you that many of these are one and thesame and have been doing what they do long before the Mors Kochanski fistpublished the term in 1986. Before then, it was fieldcraft, but I can appreciatethe need for a writer to differentiate their work from that of others.

Sheeple being who they are, poor coverage of emergencies and the election of President Trump combined to devastating effect for both the Survivalist Movement and the survival/preparedness market. Politically oriented websites that had received users covering the threat posed by President Obama and Hillary Clinton saw up to an 80% reduction in traffic. Personally, I fail to see how the POTUS can prevent pandemics, solar flares, or even financial meltdown. After all, the government has as little to do with the generation of wealth as it does with solar cycles and pathogens. Unfortunately, with the infusion of all this new blood, theres now no shortage of sheeple in the survivalist movement.

We cantpredict the future and our world is steadily growing more complicated andtherefore more fragile. By looking to our roots and understanding our past tothe end of becoming more self-reliant, we can become more resilient and even moreantifragile meaning that we can grow stronger in some way in response to thevolatility and change we face instead of letting it damage us.

Ourancestors stored food and carried weapons and the tools they needed to makeshelter and fire for sound reasons. They knew where their food came from andhow to get more. I think most folks could use a little more of that these days.After all, our food doesnt really come from the grocery store.

Go here to see the original:

How The Survivalism Movement Started - Survivopedia

Posted in Survivalism | Comments Off on How The Survivalism Movement Started – Survivopedia

What is the freedom of speech? – Alliance Defending Freedom

Posted: at 8:44 am

Free speech is a term that gets thrown around quite often these days. But what is it? And why is it important?

The freedom of speech is simply the ability to say, write, or otherwise express what you truly believe without fear of punishment or retaliation from the government.

This freedom is protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that Congress shall make no lawabridging the freedom of speech. The authors of our Constitution believed it was very important to protect this freedom.

And for good reason.

Speaking is how you express your thoughts. So if government officials can force you to say things you dont believe, you no longer control the content of your speech and thus lose the freedom to live consistently with the principles you treasure most.

Government officials who seek to control your speech are trying to control what you think and what you do. And thats contrary to the very idea of freedom. Not only that, but its contrary to the dignity of the human person. Our thoughts not only cause our actions, they are the most personal possession we have.

While upholding human dignity is the most important reason to protect this freedom, it certainly isnt the only reason.

If you want good ideas to have influence, youll support protections for the freedom of speech. The best ideas often come from the robust discussion and debate of many different ideas.

And this cannot exist without free speech.

Some might argue that the freedom of speech is just a piece of rhetoric used by those who want to say hateful things. But this is false.

Free speech is a right that every individual possesses as a human being created by God.

And this right isnt just for those with certain beliefs. In fact, thats the whole point. There are as many unique perspectives as there are people. Our ability to share our perspective with others is what free speech is all about.

As the Declaration of Independence says, all men are created equal. But this doesnt mean that all ideas are equal. There will always be bad or even false ideas that we must address.

But the answer isnt to shut down debate or silence the people sharing those ideas. The answer is more speech.

We can use our own speech to answer hateful statements with good and truthful ones. We can debate ideas we consider bad with those we believe are good.

No matter what, we need those with whom we disagree to be involved in the conversation.

Debate with our ideological opponents sharpens our ideas and may even allow us to see the truth in a new and unexpected way. Not only that, but our opponents right to free speech should be protected because they are human beings with dignity just like us. And if their right is taken away, then ours can easily be taken away too.

It has been said that I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

When we think of the First Amendment right to free speech, we often think of how it protects us from being censored by the government because of what we say.

But what about what we do not say?

The Constitution also protects us from being forced to say or express messages with which we disagree. While this may seem like a far-fetched scenario, it is becoming increasingly common. Take for example artists and other creative professionals.

Artists express their thoughts and beliefs through custom creations. Painters, calligraphers, graphic designers, photographers , and, yes, cake artists, all express their beliefs through their various mediums. But what happens when the government tries to dictate what these artists can and cannot express with their work?

Well, a clear violation of the First Amendment.

Unfortunately, this has been happening more and more with the spread of so-called Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity laws. These laws often seek to force creative professionals to create messages through their art with which they disagree.

Abolishing the freedom of speech and trying to control what people say are the tools of tyrants.

Our Founders valued free speech because they knew the consequences when it was taken away. Many of the first settlers who came to America in the 17th century were escaping England, where the King tried to force them to profess religious beliefs with which they disagreed.

This isnt just something that happened in the past. Today, in many countries around the world, people are arrested, imprisoned, and even sentenced to death for expressing views with which the government disagrees.

We are truly blessed to live in the United States where we can share our views, regardless of what those views are. We must keep it this way.

Right now, the First Amendment is under threat.

Free speech is being attacked on college campuses

Universities are supposed to be marketplaces of ideas where students can learn from many different perspectives. Unfortunately, today, there is a culture of silencing certain viewpoints on many college campuses.

Students who want to say anything contrary to a far-left worldview are often shut down or told they can only speak in so-called speech zones on campus.

And its not just students. Professors have been denied promotions and even fired for expressing their views. Speakers invited to college campuses by right-leaning student groups have been protested and even canceled by college administrators.

Free speech is under threat in corporate board rooms

Anti-free speech culture is spreading from university campuses into corporate board rooms. Employees and shareholders at many large corporations fear sharing their true opinions. They face backlash from left-leaning leadership and co-workers that could lead to being reprimanded or even fired.

Corporations even rely on discredited sources like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to prevent right-leaning organizations from using their products or resources. This happened to Alliance Defending Freedom. Amazon continues to rely on the SPLCs false label to prevent ADF from using their charity program, AmazonSmile.

Unfortunately, at the end of the day, this affects thousands of Americans who use the products and services of huge corporations like Amazon.

Free speech is under attack on social media platforms

You may have heard of cancel culture. It often references scenarios like this: a person posts something on social media that expresses a certain viewpoint. Those against that viewpoint mob the post, calling for the poster to be humiliated, silenced, and in some cases, even fired from their job. Every once in a while, the posters personal informationsuch as their personal addresswill be shared online in an attempt to intimidate that person.

Whats worse is that these mobs frequently get their wish. And in many instances, tech companies that run social media platforms censor posts or even suspend users for expressing certain views.

People should not have to fear for their job or personal safety simply because they shared their opinions online. Cancel culture is antithetical to a culture of free speech and debate.

Do you have an opinion on an important cultural or political topic that you want to share? Our Constitution protects your right to do so. But we need to be vigilant to make sure this protection is not taken away. That is why ADF is committed to protecting the freedom of speechnot just for somebut for every American.

To stay up to date on cases and issues affecting your freedom of speech, sign up for our emails below.

Continue reading here:
What is the freedom of speech? - Alliance Defending Freedom

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on What is the freedom of speech? – Alliance Defending Freedom

freedom of speech | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Posted: at 8:44 am

Freedom of speech is the right to speak, write, and share ideas and opinions without facing punishment from the government. The First Amendment protects this right by prohibiting Congress from making laws that would curtail freedom of speech.

Even though freedom of speech is protected from infringement by the government, the government is still free to restrict speech in certain circumstances. Some of these circumstances include:

While the public has a right to freedom of speech when it comes to the U.S. government, the public does not have this right when it comes to private entities. Companies and private employers are able to regulate speech on their platforms and within their workplace since the First Amendment only applies to the government. This right allowed Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter to ban President Donald Trump from their sites in 2021 without legal repercussion. Companies like Facebook and YouTube were also able to ban misleading information on Covid-19 during the 2020 pandemic.

The Supreme Court recently affirmed that private entities are not restricted by the First Amendment in the case Manhattan Community Access Corporation v. Halleck. Manhattan Neighborhood Network is a nonprofit that was given the authority by New York City to operate public access channels in Manhattan. The organization decided to suspend two of their employees after they received complaints about a film the employees produced. The employees argued that this was a violation of their First Amendment freedom of speech rights because they were being punished due to the content of their film. The Supreme Court held that Manhattan Neighborhood Network was not a government entity or a state actor, so the nonprofit couldnt be subjected to the First Amendment.

In another case, Nyabwa v. Facebook, the Southern District of Texas also affirmed that private entities are not subject to the First Amendment. There, the plaintiff had a Facebook account, which spoke on President Donald Trumps business conflicts of interest. Facebook decided to lock the account, so the plaintiff was no longer able to access it. The plaintiff decided to sue Facebook because he believed the company was violating his First Amendment rights. The court dismissed the lawsuit stating that the First Amendment prevents Congress and other government entities from restricting freedom of speech, not private entities.

[Last updated in June of 2021 by the Wex Definitions Team]

See original here:
freedom of speech | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on freedom of speech | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

First Amendment: Freedom of Speech | LII / Legal Information Institute

Posted: at 8:44 am

The First Amendments Free Speech Clause affords special protection to certain places traditionally open for speech activities, such as sidewalks and public ways, placing a heavy burden on any government attempt to restrict speech in what the Court has identified as traditional public fora. But even in a public forum, the government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, or manner of protected speechso-called time-place-manner restrictionsprovided those restrictions are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech, that they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and that they leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.

This term, the Court struck down a particular, highly controversial time-place-manner restriction in Massachusetts, ruling 90 in McCullen v. Coakley that a state abortion-clinic buffer-zone law was not narrowly tailored. That buffer-zone law, codified as part of the Massachusetts Reproductive Health Care Facilities Act, made it a crime to knowingly stand on a public way or sidewalk within 35 feet of an entrance or driveway to any reproductive health care facility, which the Act defined as a place, other than within or upon the grounds of a hospital, where abortions are offered or performed. Petitioners, individuals who attempt to engage women approaching Massachusetts abortion clinics in sidewalk counseling (which involves offering information about alternatives to abortion and help pursuing those options), claimed that the 35-foot buffer zones displaced them from their previous positions outside the clinics, considerably hampering their counseling efforts. The district court and the First Circuit both ruled the Act to be a reasonable time-place-manner restriction.

Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Roberts explained that although the act is not content based and is viewpoint neutral, it is not narrowly tailored because it burdens substantially more speech than is necessary to further the governments legitimate interests, which he identified as maintaining public safety on streets and sidewalks and . . . preserving access to adjacent reproductive healthcare facilities. The majority identified several other less restrictive means of achieving those goals, such as prohibiting deliberate obstruction of clinic entrances or enforcing existing traffic regulations. Justice Roberts concluded that because of the importance of the First Amendment issues at stake, Massachusetts must show that such alternative measures that burden substantially less speech would fail to achieve the governments interests, not simply that the chosen route is easier.

Justice Scalia, joined by Justices Kennedy and Thomas, and Justice Alito concurred only in the judgment. Those Justices disputed the majoritys claim that the act is viewpoint neutral and would have instead subjected it to strict scrutiny, which it would fail. Justice Scalia noted that just this term in McCutcheon v. FEC the Court found it unnecessary to parse the differences between two available standards where a statute challenged on First Amendment grounds fails even under the less demanding test. Thus, he claims that the Courts digression about viewpoint neutrality is pure dicta that subjects anti-abortion speech to a less rigorous constitutional standard, allowing the Court to strike down the law while maintaining a double standard on anti-abortion speech.

But because Justice Roberts found the restriction to be content and viewpoint neutral (and thus not subject to strict scrutiny), Massachusetts and other states will be able to experiment with more narrowly tailored statutes in order to maintain patients access to abortion providers.

Follow this link:
First Amendment: Freedom of Speech | LII / Legal Information Institute

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on First Amendment: Freedom of Speech | LII / Legal Information Institute

Freedom of speech online: What are the Florida and Texas laws the US top court could hear a challenge to – The Indian Express

Posted: at 8:43 am

Freedom of speech online: What are the Florida and Texas laws the US top court could hear a challenge to  The Indian Express

See the article here:
Freedom of speech online: What are the Florida and Texas laws the US top court could hear a challenge to - The Indian Express

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on Freedom of speech online: What are the Florida and Texas laws the US top court could hear a challenge to – The Indian Express

NY Casinos 2023 Best Online Gambling in New York

Posted: at 8:33 am

Sign-up bonuses

Your casino gaming should begin with a generous welcomeoffer to set you up with some play money on top of any deposits you make. This can come in a variety of forms, so choose the one that looks most appealing to you and suits the way you play.

Some operators will get your wagering off to an extremelyenjoyable start by placing money in your new account simply in return for you registering as a customer. These no-deposit bonuses tend not to be large often they are part of a wider offer but its the very definition of money for nothing.

This is an excellent way to increase your wagering powerwhen you open an account with an online casino in New York. However much you deposit, the operator will increase it by a certain percentage. In the best possible case, that percentage is 100%, effectively doubling your initial balance.

Look out for any casino that offers you the chance to wager without risk when you start gambling there. Any losses you incur on the day in question will be returned to you sometimes as much as $1,000.

If you are enjoying wagering at an online so much that youtell a buddy, and they then sign up too, you could be in line for a bonus. As soon as they place their first wager, you could both stand to collect a boost to your account, maybe by as much as $100.

Read more:

NY Casinos 2023 Best Online Gambling in New York

Posted in Casino | Comments Off on NY Casinos 2023 Best Online Gambling in New York

Following the opening of Rivers Casino Portsmouth, we’re clearing the air on Virginia’s smoking policies for casinos – 13newsnow.com WVEC

Posted: at 8:33 am

Following the opening of Rivers Casino Portsmouth, we're clearing the air on Virginia's smoking policies for casinos  13newsnow.com WVEC

See original here:

Following the opening of Rivers Casino Portsmouth, we're clearing the air on Virginia's smoking policies for casinos - 13newsnow.com WVEC

Posted in Casino | Comments Off on Following the opening of Rivers Casino Portsmouth, we’re clearing the air on Virginia’s smoking policies for casinos – 13newsnow.com WVEC

How Does Sports Betting Work? Forbes Betting

Posted: at 8:31 am

Sports betting has never been more accessible, but theres a learning curve for those who dont quite understand how all the different bet types work. Below we provide detailed explanations on the most popular bet types, including real-world examples.

A straight bet is the most common type of sports wager. Sometimes referred to as a single bet, a straight bet is simply wagering on the result of a single game or event.

The best way to think of spread bets is theyre related to margins of victory. A spread bet involves either giving away or taking a certain number of points/goals/runs. That number is determined by the sportsbook and reflects the expected victory margin.

Bettors choose whether theyre going to take the spread (which means betting the underdog) or give the spread (which means betting the favorite).

All point spreads have odds attached to them, and more often than not, those odds are -110 for both teams. As we explained above in the How do the odds work section, that means if you want to bet either the Cowboys -5.5 points or Eagles +5.5 points, you would have to wager $110 for a chance to win $100 (or $11 to win $10).

A parlay is a combination of two or more straight wagers into one bet. Parlays are popular because they open up the door to win bigger payouts while risking less money. (Think of it as sports bettings version of a lottery.)

The number of legs (bets) in a parlay, as well as the odds attached to each of those legs, determines how much a bettor can win. The bigger the parlayand the bigger the betthe bigger the potential payoff.

However, its important to note that parlays of any size are difficult to hitand the more legs you add, that degree of difficulty increases exponentially. All it takes is for one leg to miss and your parlay is dead. In fact, if you go 6-1 on a seven-team parlay, you might as well have gone 0-7.

Here are the two main types of parlays:

A third parlay type is called a teaser, which is most popular in football (particularly the NFL). Like a parlay, a teaser is constructed with two or more teams. The main differences: Only point spread bets can be included in teasers, and bettors are allowed to shift the point spread by a certain number of points in any direction they desire.

Heres an example of a four-team, 6-point NFL teaser:

If you put the Steelers, Dolphins, Cardinals and Raiders in your teaser, you would be able to move the point spread 6 points in your favor. So teaser point spreads would be:

Because bettors get to move the point spreads, the payouts on teasers are much lower than parlays.

Totals bets are quite similar to point spreads. Also referred to as Over/Under betting, totals bets focus on the final score of a given game rather than who wins the game.

When betting a total, youre just predicting if the two involved sides will combine for more (Over) or fewer (Under) runs/goals/points than the total amount posted by the sportsbook.

If youre interested in diving into Over/Under betting, remember this popular saying as it relates to wagering on totals: Its never Under until its Over! Meaning, as long as a game is ongoing, its always possible to win your Over bet (or lose your Under bet).

On the flip side, if you bet on Seahawks-Rams Over 42.5 points and the score is 24-21 at halftime, youve got a winner and dont have to sweat out the second half.

Futures bets are another fun way to get involved in sports betting. Rather than wagering on a game taking place today or this week, futures bets are just that: bets that will be decided in the future.

Examples include betting on a team to win the World Series; betting on a country to win soccers World Cup; betting on a golfer to win next years Masters tournament; and betting on a player to win NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year.

Futures bets tend to offer greater oddsand thus larger potential payoutsthan straight bets. The reasoning is simple: Its tougher to predict, say, the Stanley Cup winner at the start of an NHL campaign than it is to choose which team will win a random regular-season game.

An important thing to remember about futures bets: The odds are constantly changing. For instance, just because the Los Angeles Lakers have +1500 odds to win the NBA title on Day 1 of a season doesnt mean those odds will hold firm for the next seven months (in fact, they most certainly will not).

Injuries, trades and performing below (or above) expectations can affect how a futures market unfolds. That said, the odds you get when you place your wager will never changein other words, if you bet the Lakers at +1500, those are your odds all season. If the betting market drops the Lakers to +400 because theyre playing well, you made a great bet. But if the Lakers struggle and their odds fall to +5000, well your bet is in big trouble.

Serious bettors who get involved in the futures market are always look for the best value. You should, too. Thats why its important to do your research before putting your money down. After all, why would you bet the Lakers at +1500 at one sportsbook when another is offering odds at +1800?

While other markets focus on the final outcome of a game or event, prop bets relate to an individual athletes performanceor even something that doesnt show up in the boxscore.

One example of a player prop would be betting on Tom Bradys total touchdown passes in a game (Over or Under 1.5 TD passes).

One example of a prop bet that has absolutely nothing to do with the actual action on the field or court would be predicting the color of Gatorade that douses the coach of the Super Bowl-winning team.

Here are some of the more popular forms of prop bets:

Originally posted here:

How Does Sports Betting Work? Forbes Betting

Posted in Sports Betting | Comments Off on How Does Sports Betting Work? Forbes Betting

Sports betting battle pitting casino owner against tribes could go all the way to Supreme Court – Fox News

Posted: at 8:31 am

Sports betting battle pitting casino owner against tribes could go all the way to Supreme Court  Fox News

The rest is here:

Sports betting battle pitting casino owner against tribes could go all the way to Supreme Court - Fox News

Posted in Sports Betting | Comments Off on Sports betting battle pitting casino owner against tribes could go all the way to Supreme Court – Fox News