@ISIDEWITHQuestionsForeign policyStarted 11mos agoActive 2wks ago

Should there be restrictions on government arms sales to countries accused of committing human rights violations?

The United Nations defines human rights violations as deprivation of life; torture, cruel or degrading treatment or punishment; slavery and forced labor; arbitrary arrest or detention; arbitrary interference with privacy; war propaganda; discrimination; and advocacy of racial or religious hatred. In 1997 the U.S. Congress passed the “Leahy Laws” which cutoff security aid to specific units of foreign militaries if the Pentagon and the State Department determine a country has committed a gross violation of human rights, such as shooting civilians or summarily executing prison…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings x  New York (New York)

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 150 New York voters.

86%
Yes
14%
No
83%
Yes
8%
No
2%
Yes, and ban all sales to countries with human rights violations
6%
No, this could prevent our allies from defending themselves against our mutual enemies
1%
Yes, but I would prefer a ban on all military aid to any foreign countries

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 150 New York voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 150 New York voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from New York voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9MLFTSW from Tennessee  answered…7mos7MO

Country should be vetted to make sure the weapons are not used against American interests or being funneled to adversaries.

 @9ZXWCGF from New Jersey  answered…2wks2W

I think it should be done like how Germany has: In 2022 Germany revised its rules on arms exports to “make it easier to arm democracies like Ukraine” and “harder to sell weapons to autocracies.”

 @9ZCM2FJ from Guam  answered…1mo1MO

no if it serves Washington's (or her allies) interests, just like the case in Israel which is accused of commiting genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza when it is a mere military action in reality.

 @9L5QKJQ  from Texas  answered…9mos9MO

Yes, but restrictions don't mean banning or refusing to aid allies even in the face of difficult situations.

 @9KX7X9C from West Virginia  answered…9mos9MO

I do not feel the government should be in any business, profitable or not. So, I do not believe the government should be selling guns to any one.

 @9KLLSFB  from Florida  answered…9mos9MO

No, this should only be done to organizations that have committed human rights violations and if the whole country has committed such crimes, then that country should be prohibited from purchasing arms.

 @9KFMTQ3 from Georgia  answered…10mos10MO

Almost every country in existence has committed SOME human rights violation, so I think no, but if they have been know to repeatedly commit these violations, especially recently (I.e within the last 10-15 years) then yes.

 @9K4BDY5 from Illinois  answered…10mos10MO

I believe we shouldn’t use all are tax dollars on funding wars, genocides but beside that I don’t think it should be ban

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

Billion-Dollar Bust: Kamala’s Campaign Drowns in Debt After Star-Studded Spending Spree

Kamala Harris's campaign ended with at least $20 million in debt, per two sources familiar. Harris raised over $1 billion and had $118 million in the bank as of Oct. 16.Rob Flaherty, this staffer said, is currently shopping around the Kamala fundraising email list to anyone who wants it to try to raise the money back. This includes other campaigns and outside groups.Flaherty is the deputy campaign manager and reports to Jen O’Malley Dillon.“Jen blew through a billion dollars in a few months and it was all Jen’s idea to do all the concerts.” — Kamala campaign adviser told meThis source added that O’Malley Dillon did these “concerts,” like Katy Perry, Lizzo, Eminem, Bruce Springsteen et cetera at the expense of “prioritizing and spending money on social media and other campaign priorities.”Apparently a group in Georgia had to lay off 100 people because they couldn’t pay them. It’s unclear at this time if the campaign PAID the talent to perform but the cost of production for the events was “immense.”What’s more, this Kamala campaign staffer said several people who were working for the Kamala Harris for President campaign are still awaiting several overdue payments they were promised for their work. IE, they didn’t pay the staff.“People didn’t like working with her. Many people on the campaign felt like we lost because Kamala wasn’t allowed to run her campaign. They were running Joe Biden’s campaign instead of a Kamala campaign. Obnoxious and very much a gate keeper and interfering with the vice president’s people who were trying to do their job.”

▲  2611 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Donald Trump nominates Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General

Former President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General of the United States, should he reclaim the presidency in the upcoming election.Bondi, a prominent figure in Republican politics, served as Florida's Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. She gained national attention for her legal battles on issues such as health care reform, consumer protection, and opioid abuse litigation. Known for her steadfast support of Trump during his presidency, Bondi also served as a key adviser during his first impeachment trial, where she defended his administration against accusations of abuse of power.In a statement released by his campaign, Trump praised Bondi’s “unwavering commitment to justice” and her “track record of standing up for everyday Americans against the abuses of Washington’s elites.”“Pam Bondi has been a fearless advocate for the people, and she embodies the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law that are sorely needed to restore trust in our justice system,” Trump said. “She is the right person to lead the Department of Justice into a new era of integrity and excellence.”While Bondi’s nomination has been met with applause from conservative circles, it has also reignited criticism from Democrats and ethics watchdogs. Her acceptance of a $25,000 donation from the Trump Foundation in 2013, which coincided with her decision not to pursue an investigation into Trump University, has drawn scrutiny in the past and resurfaced following the announcement.Democratic leaders have already voiced opposition, questioning Bondi’s ability to lead the Department of Justice independently. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called the nomination “a political power play” and urged a focus on “restoring integrity, not entrenching partisanship.”

▲  2317 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1023 replies