What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[GoBills808]

14 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

not to this extent of gun ownership views.... that's a 100% unique US argument for all the free world

 

this isn't a matter of liking a different ice cream flavour

 

from the sidelines, it's like the deficit, it keeps growing and getting worse and political parties argue but they don't bother doing anything about it... ho hum...

I might be reticent, if I were a person living outside the US, to opine so freely about these uniquely US arguments without the proverbial skin in the game.

[B-Man]

Classic media move, find “fault” in something unexpected & positive Pres @realDonaldTrump does to undermine the moment.

Yes he had notes for points/questions he wanted to make.

 

Media Slam Trump Over Handwritten Notes at Student Listening Session

President gathered survivors of tragedy to discuss solutions, but liberal outlets focused on what he held — and missed the good

President Donald Trump hosted a “listening session” on Wednesday in the State Dining Room at the White House — an extraordinary and riveting event.

It was both authentic and moving. Attendees included survivors of the tragic massacres at Parkland, Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, and Columbine.

 

The survivors articulately and poignantly shared their stories, ideas, comments — and pain.

 

President Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, and other concerned leaders listened closely and prayed with the gathered survivors, many of whom were in tears at various points during the event.

 

President Trump’s tweets following the session referenced some of the ideas and goals the survivors put forward during that meeting, as well as some of his own.

 

Inexplicably — if you still are laboring under the impression that mainstream media outlets strive for neutrality in their reporting — news sources such as The Washington Post, The Guardian, and the Chicago Tribune chose to cover the inferred meaning of handwritten notes for the session that President Trump was seen holding at one point.

 

https://www.lifezette.com/popzette/media-slam-trump-handwritten-notes-student-listening-session/

 

 

 

ADDED:

In a curious twist, CNN actually demonstrated a modicum of reason in the ensuing scrum to denigrate a man who was comforting the survivors of shootings.

 

In CNN's story on the matter, the outlet noted that Trump "didn't appear to use the card," that he didn't use a teleprompter, and that he "did cast a tender tone during the event."

 

 

.

[Buddy Hix]

2 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

You aren't asking for a compromise.  You're asking for gun owners for abrogate their rights with nothing being given up by the other side.  This is the very definition of a slippery slope.  It's the reason Second Amendment groups make the slippery slope argument.  You're stating the end goal of gun grabbers is a ban, and then asking to take steps towards that ban, while gun owners know full well what the end goal is, and as such are not willing to negotiate the restriction of their rights with a dishonest bargaining partner.  They know any concession established "the new normal" which will then be pushed to represent the "extreme position" with new demands made, further eroding natural rights.  This is a fact, and as much as you might dislike the argument, it's a valid argument.

 

Further, there will never be a full ban.  Not so long as rights advocates refuse to come to the table, stating their rights are non-negotiable.  The nature of guns and a uniquely American culture placing a high priority on liberty prevents it.

You can call you ideas ( although I suspect you copied them from another source) fact but that doesn't make them so.

 

The notion that implementing reasonable controls will lead to the push fur an all out ban may have merit, but it is pure speculation, not fact.

 

And when one considers the pushback to implement simple controls that are reasonable, how can you not foresee the chaos that would ensue if a full ban were considered?

2 hours ago, LeviF91 said:

 

And I'll counter with the notion that it's not a compromise if all you do is take and all I do is give.

 

I would say the discussion pertains to firearms, and they have taken plenty.

[TakeYouToTasker]

2 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

You can call you ideas ( although I suspect you copied them from another source) fact but that doesn't make them so.

 

The notion that implementing reasonable controls will lead to the push fur an all out ban may have merit, but it is pure speculation, not fact.

 

And when one considers the pushback to implement simple controls that are reasonable, how can you not foresee the chaos that would ensue if a full ban were considered?

Your lead is to insult me and accuse me of plagiarism?  !@#$ you.

 

And as if that wasn't bad enough, you've strawmanned my argument as well.  My argument, which is constantly born out by gun grabbers who admit they want to see gun bans as implemented in the UK and Australia, is that concessions by rights advocates are nothing more than the slow drip of incrementalism towards those ends. 

 

Further, your introduction of the phrase "reasonable controls" is nothing more than the introduction of prejudicial language by fiat.  Nothing about the infringements of rights is "reasonable".  In fact, it's the absolute lack of reason for anyone seeking to live in a free society.

 

Finally, I am not obligated to allow you and others to infringe on my rights to what you consider a small degree (I don't find it small at all) in order to see if you take the proverbial mile when given an inch.  My rights are mine to exercise as I see fit, and you have no say in the matter. 

[IDBillzFan]

45 minutes ago, Justice said:

Isn’t everyone like that? Are there actually people out there that 100% agree with everything their side stands for? Sounds like you’re describing a robot. lol 

 

See gaterman/tiberius/baskin. 

 

Hook, line and sinker, he sticks with every single talking point that comes from the left. Every. Single. One.

[Deranged Rhino]

21 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

You can call you ideas ( although I suspect you copied them from another source) fact but that doesn't make them so.

 

The notion that implementing reasonable controls will lead to the push fur an all out ban may have merit, but it is pure speculation, not fact.

 

And when one considers the pushback to implement simple controls that are reasonable, how can you not foresee the chaos that would ensue if a full ban were considered?

 

 

History, reality, and the constitution makes Tasker's thoughts factual. Sorry. 

 

The bill of rights were not granted to us by government, they were granted to us by the creator. Arguing otherwise is to miss the entire point of them in the first place and grossly miss the entire point of the Declaration of Independence. The second amendment is inalienable and necessary because it SECURES all the other 9 in the Bill of Rights. 

 

And if you don't understand why people are sensitive to it being rolled back then you should rethink the last decade and a half of American history where we have seen an unprecedented assault on our fundamental civil liberties by an increasingly authoritarian federal government. This assault has happened across multiple administrations, R and D. The unifying commonality between all these recent assaults on civil liberties? We're told we NEED to give them up to guarantee our safety:

 

*The right to privacy (IV) and due process (V) were both rolled back in the name of fighting the "war on terror". A nameless, faceless, and nebulous "enemy" (which isn't really an enemy but a tactic) was used to SCARE people into thinking that the ONLY way to assure our safety is to give ground on these two fundamental principles. 

 

*The right to free speech is being threatened by those pushing the "Russia collusion delusion" who believe we need more censorship online to protect people who are too dumb to discern fact from fiction. This is not only outrageous, it's insulting to anyone who understands their history or the importance of the first amendment. 

 

*And the 2nd is under threat - and has been for years - by overly emotional reactions to tragedy. Again we're told changing this right is the ONLY WAY to assure our safety. 

 

But the reality is all the arguments for curtailing these rights have all been hogwash. Bullshite. Nonsense. If we allow those rights to be stripped back, we no longer have a democratic republic. We have an authoritarian oligarchy where the people have no voice, no influence, and no means to defend themselves. 

 

That might sound like paradise to some - but to any thinking person who understands history knows those are the ingredients for a dictatorship and unspeakable evil.

 

So, spare me the emotional outrage which is devoid of perspective, rationality, and a knowledge of history. There are reasonable things that can and should be discussed and done to help keep people safe - but NONE of those reasonable things involve amending the Bill of Rights. Opening that door does not make any of us safer, it just puts us one step closer to slavery. 

 

Edited February 22, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[B-Man]

JOURNALISM: CNN’s Tapper sits back as student equates Rubio to school shooter. That’s the standard lefty line: If you don’t support my policy preferences, you’re literally a murderer! ...........................................Which, conveniently, also serves to justify actual violence against people who don’t support your policy preferences.

 

 

Related: Bernie Bro James T. Hodgkinson, Attempted Assassin Of Steve Scalise, Already Being Erased From History.

 

 

Plus: Shooting Survivor: CNN Gave Me “Scripted Question” After Denying Question About Armed Guards. Fake news.

 

 

.

[keepthefaith]

If people want schools to be secured then we need to better secure them.  Our local district has armed real police in every middle school and high school.  I'm not sure about the elementary schools.  Not only do we have no shootings, we also have drug arrests and others that occasionally take place as a result of the police being on-site.  Interestingly in other areas of the Chicago burbs there are schools that probably need police on the premises to a greater degree than ours and they have none. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

2 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

band aids are often very helpful

 

 

Not on a wound that needs 100 stitches 

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

Where did Rubio get booed? I am not asking this out of ignorance but to sorta set the background as to who the audience was.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article201486604.html

 

 

South Florida post shooting rally 

 

 

President Trump calls active shooter drills ‘a very negative thing’

"We have to harden our schools, not soften them up," Trump said. “You come into our schools - you’re gonna be dead. And it’s gonna be fast,” he added later.

Donald Trump Proposes Pay Bonus For Armed Teachers

 

First and foremost you have to find enough qualified teachers to volunteer to take on the role of a law enforcement / Security Agent.  

 

[3rdnlng]

51 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Not on a wound that needs 100 stitches 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article201486604.html

 

 

South Florida post shooting rally 

 

 

President Trump calls active shooter drills ‘a very negative thing’

"We have to harden our schools, not soften them up," Trump said. “You come into our schools - you’re gonna be dead. And it’s gonna be fast,” he added later.

Donald Trump Proposes Pay Bonus For Armed Teachers

 

First and foremost you have to find enough qualified teachers to volunteer to take on the role of a law enforcement / Security Agent.  

 

I'm well aware of where and when this CNN townhall meeting happened. Rubio walked into the lions den and knew it beforehand.

[DC Tom]

58 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Not on a wound that needs 100 stitches 

 

Again...350 people died of opioid overdoses the last 72 hours.  How many died of gun violence?

 

59 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

 

President Trump calls active shooter drills ‘a very negative thing’

"We have to harden our schools, not soften them up," Trump said. “You come into our schools - you’re gonna be dead. And it’s gonna be fast,” he added later.

Donald Trump Proposes Pay Bonus For Armed Teachers

 

First and foremost you have to find enough qualified teachers to volunteer to take on the role of a law enforcement / Security Agent.  

 

 

The man is blindingly stupid.  And yet, still makes more sense than gatorman.

[B-Man]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

The man is blindingly stupid.  And yet, still makes more sense than gatorman.

 

 

[Doc Brown]

8 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I'm well aware of where and when this CNN townhall meeting happened. Rubio walked into the lions den and knew it beforehand.

I give him credit for showing up.  You had a lot of emotional parents of dead kids and friends of dead kids viewing him as their scapegoat.  It got really nasty when Rubio refused to answer whether he would refuse NRA money in the future.

[Tiberius]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again...350 people died of opioid overdoses the last 72 hours.  How many died of gun violence?

 

 

The man is blindingly stupid.  And yet, still makes more sense than gatorman.

Well, to you, B-Man's propaganda makes sense, so...

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Not on a wound that needs 100 stitches 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article201486604.html

 

 

South Florida post shooting rally 

 

 

President Trump calls active shooter drills ‘a very negative thing’

"We have to harden our schools, not soften them up," Trump said. “You come into our schools - you’re gonna be dead. And it’s gonna be fast,” he added later.

Donald Trump Proposes Pay Bonus For Armed Teachers

 

First and foremost you have to find enough qualified teachers to volunteer to take on the role of a law enforcement / Security Agent.  

 

I have no clue what the heck he's talking about here.  Is he against fire drills as well?

[3rdnlng]

19 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I have no clue what the heck he's talking about here.  Is he against fire drills as well?

No, Trump wasn't against active shooter drills but wanted them referred to as "safety drills" for the sake of kids.

[LA Grant]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again...350 people died of opioid overdoses the last 72 hours.  How many died of gun violence?

 

 

The man is blindingly stupid.  And yet, still makes more sense than gatorman.

 

Hey Tom! Long time listener, first time caller. Big fan of your "sniping retards from balcony with Muppet avatar" schtick.  Question for you — are you aware of what a False Equivalency is?

 

You seem to use 'em a lot!

5 hours ago, LABillzFan said:

 

So you have no guns, you don't know anything about guns, but are certain that absolutely no person anywhere should ever have an AR-15 in their home.

 

Are you one of those people who thinks white film critics should not be allowed to write a review for "Black Panther"?

 

Do you have a defense for owning an AR-15 that isn't "well it's already available, therefore, it should always be available" ? 

 

Are you one of those people who thinks "white film critics should not be allowed to write a review for Black Panther" is an actual thing in reality, and not some made-up conservative radio talk point to push your buttons? 

[DC Tom]

7 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

 

Hey Tom! Long time listener, first time caller. Big fan of your "sniping retards from balcony with Muppet avatar" schtick.  Question for you — are you aware of what a False Equivalency is?

 

You seem to use 'em a lot!

 

Both are decried as public health crises needing immediate attention.  That's not a false equivalency.

 

But one generates a LOT more screaming.  Why is that?  

[LA Grant]

15 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Both are decried as public health crises needing immediate attention.  That's not a false equivalency.

 

But one generates a LOT more screaming.  Why is that?  

 

Well, gee Tom, it could be that one involves murder. Do you think that might be why? 

 

Also, opioids get PLENTY of attention and screaming. Especially from the right. Especially when they don't want to talk about gun reform!

http://www.newsweek.com/pennsylvania-opioid-crisis-guns-rights-groups-780081

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=opioid&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiwweXCwbrZAhXn5oMKHWr4D9kQ_AUICigB&biw=1200&bih=781

 

"If we're going to ban gun manufacturers, shouldn't we also ban Vicodin"?

 

The reason it's a false equivalency, Tom, is because as dangerous & addictive as opioids are, you cannot go into a school and murder 20 people with painkillers.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, LA Grant said:

 

Well, gee Tom, it could be that one involves murder. Do you think that might be why? 

 

Also, opioids get PLENTY of attention and screaming. Especially from the right. Especially when they don't want to talk about gun reform!

http://www.newsweek.com/pennsylvania-opioid-crisis-guns-rights-groups-780081

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=opioid&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiwweXCwbrZAhXn5oMKHWr4D9kQ_AUICigB&biw=1200&bih=781

 

"If we're going to ban gun manufacturers, shouldn't we also ban Vicodin"?

 

The reason it's a false equivalency, Tom, is because as dangerous & addictive as opioids are, you cannot go into a school and murder 20 people with painkillers.

 

 

Now you're just embarrassing yourself - proving you don't understand what a false equivalency is, or anything about history, this country, or the documents which founded it. 

 

You might be my new favorite poster down here. The comedy is non stop.