Yet another school shooting in the US

[outrageouscloud]

I think that the UK made the best decision about guns

[tinpeeba]

GUNS: “Both Sides Now” / Mrs. Betty Bowers, America’s Best Christian:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... R9NHjDi4EA

[Lone Star]

A recent poll conducted by The Washington Post shows that 20% of Americans want to repeal the 2nd Amendment. That percentage just so happens to mirror the number of Americans who consider themselves to be Democrats/Liberals. No surprise. That percentage, on both counts, has been the same for quite a long time -- maybe more than a decade. It's not nearly enough to do what is necessary to repeal. Thirty-six states would have to ratify any such repeal. Not gonna happen.

On another note, teens involved in the anti-gun march in DC had participating numbers that were exceedingly low. It is estimated that only about 10% of the participants in the march were teens. Lots of paid LIB adult protesters -- as usual. Not really a surprise that teens didn't show up. This is also a reflection of past voting habits of young voters. Many don't show up at the polls come election time, but bitch and whine about the outcome. Politics is threaded throughout society, and many young voters just don't get it until they are over 25 or 30 years of age -- when it is more clear to them that it affects their paychecks.

And further, in the wake of all this anti-gun talk in the US, the NRA is reporting that their donations are nearly tripled and membership is soaring -- even from many non-gun owners who want gun rights preserved.

So there's been a lot of backfire and recoil (pun intended) from all of this anti-gun talk in the US.

The same ones who say that they don't care about this thread keep coming back to say they don't care. That's hilarious. There are a lot of threads in this forum that I don't care about or even open to read, but I don't go in each one to announce that I don't care. 55555

As usual, there are still some isolated instances of severe disparities in reading comprehension by certain kommandos.

At no time did I state that the US had to fear any invasion from Vietnam or Iraq, and I didn't say in my most recent posts that communism or a tyrant is an immediate threat and needs to be addressed through the 2nd Amendment.

Let's review:

Vietnam and Iraq are perfect examples of why the 2nd Amendment is necessary. No American wants their country to be steamrolled by communism or tyrants.

It was Vietnam that was steamrolled by communism and Iraq that was steamrolled by a tyrant. Hence my reference to those EXAMPLES of why the 2nd Amendment was originally included in the Bill of Rights by the Framers -- as a deterrent to any attack on America from within or outside its borders. If some readers aren't cognizant of history and have a lack of reasoning/comprehension skills, I can see where they would be confused about what I was stating. I can see that I will have to provide quite a bit more information to better qualify my statements in the future. Of course, it's nearly impossible due to the fact that kommandos aren't here to have any meaningful dialogue. They're here to scan for those "openings".

Then there's some chart from somewhere (no reference source) claiming 56 of 97 mass shootings were done by Whitey. That leaves 41 done by non-whites. Since Whitey makes up approximately 65-75% of the US population (that 10% range is due to the fact that many Latinos self-report as WHITE on the census forms), the percentage of Whitey mass shootings (57%) is far below the US population demographic. Since 43% of the mass shootings are done by non-whites, their participation in mass shootings is much higher than the percentages of non-whites populating the US (25-35%). So the chart -- whether true or not -- is a big yawn and doesn't provide anything to back up the idea that mass shootings are "a white past time."

It's a typical LIB knee-jerk response to want to eliminate a RIGHT from over 300 million Americans for the actions of 97 loons -- regardless of the skin pigment of the loons.

I think the kommando meant "pastime" and not "past time", but I have no way of knowing. Of course, some of the Gaggle will think it is arrogant for me to help and to teach.

These poor examples provided by an anti-gun poster are just two of the many reasons why the haters lose their argument when it comes to guns in America. They read things that aren't there and use information that they dig up "from somewhere" that doesn't help their argument. Then there's the wild-eyed, hair-on-fire claims by some that gun owners don't care about life. Law-abiding gun owners have guns in order to protect life. That's a fact. The vast majority of gun owners have firearms for DEFENSE, not offensive rampages. Gun ownership numbers vs shooting statistics prove it.

And by the way, the civilizations that did themselves in were the ones that allowed their leaders to deprive them of their firearms. Do your own research regarding those instances. You can start with Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin.

Facts and the Law always outweigh opinions and hate-driven drivel when it comes to any discussion regarding guns in America -- and it continues to be true in this thread.

[Doodoo]

YAWN

[tamada]

... And by the way, the civilizations that did themselves in were the ones that allowed their leaders to deprive them of their firearms. Do your own research regarding those instances. You can start with Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin. ...

When one conflates 'civilizations' with ideologies, what is there to debate?

3 out of 10

[BobHelm]

Oh dear, not the Hitler thing again..
To be clear, to say that Hitler removed arms from German citizens is a lie.
It is difficult to remove something that was already removed nearly 20 years earlier by the victorious countries of the 1st. World War.
The facts are clear. Under 2 Act of Government the Hitler regime actually increased the ability of German citizens to own arms.
Not to let facts get in the way of a good bit of rhetoric though...

p.s. if dictators find citizen owning firearms so threatening then why did both Saddam & Gaddafi actively encourage it, to the point of it being compulsory in Iraq ??

[Lone Star]

Oh dear, not the Hitler thing again..
To be clear, to say that Hitler removed arms from German citizens is a lie.
It is difficult to remove something that was already removed nearly 20 years earlier by the victorious countries of the 1st. World War.
The facts are clear. Under 2 Act of Government the Hitler regime actually increased the ability of German citizens to own arms.
Not to let facts get in the way of a good bit of rhetoric though...

p.s. if dictators find citizen owning firearms so threatening then why did both Saddam & Gaddafi actively encourage it, to the point of it being compulsory in Iraq ??

I never said that Hitler removed arms from German citizens.

And by the way, the civilizations that did themselves in were the ones that allowed their leaders to deprive them of their firearms. Do your own research regarding those instances. You can start with Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin.

You did your research, Bob. Very good.

[Lone Star]

...
p.s. if dictators find citizen owning firearms so threatening then why did both Saddam & Gaddafi actively encourage it, to the point of it being compulsory in Iraq ??

I have never made this claim.

What I HAVE said is that American citizens want to retain their right to bear arms to prevent tyranny from their government.

[tamada]

Awesome backpedaling there Lonely Star.

We can tell you were brought up in the circus.

[papafarang]

" It was Vietnam that was steamrolled by communism and Iraq that was steamrolled by a tyrant"

you got some twisted view of the world, the Vietnamese wanted to be communists, it was the tyrannical American government that invaded Vietnam to stop them, and luckily failed . but not until they caused the deaths of an estimated 3,300,000 people
.
as for saddam , who called him a tyrant...oh yeh the American government.

"US intelligence helped Saddam's Ba`ath Party seize power for the first time in 1963. Evidence suggests that Saddam was on the CIA payroll as early as 1959, when he participated in a failed assassination attempt against Iraqi strongman Abd al-Karim Qassem. In the 1980s, the US and Britain backed Saddam in the war against Iran, giving Iraq arms, money, satellite intelligence, and even chemical & bio-weapon precursors. As many as 90 US military advisors supported Iraqi forces and helped pick targets for Iraqi air and missile attacks."
yeh right blaming saddam

[vlad]

The White house officials are at it again poking there nose into another country's business and causing trouble. and stirring up more trouble with Putin over the Poison Attack in England. Its our problem which we can sort out without the troublesome yanks poking there nose in to something that is not there business.

[Giggle]

not there business

You might want to start with third-grade grammar before lecturing others on anything.

[Stantheman]

The White house officials are at it again poking there nose into another country's business and causing trouble. and stirring up more trouble with Putin over the Poison Attack in England. Its our problem which we can sort out without the troublesome yanks poking there nose in to something that is not there business.

Don't think us yanks did the expelling without first coordinating with your Brits government as well as with the other 19 counties that expelled russians diplomats

[fatbob]

not there business

You might want to start with third-grade grammar before lecturing others on anything.

So long as I understand what he is getting at I don't care, what are you getting at? A misguided ex teacher....

[fatbob]

" It was Vietnam that was steamrolled by communism and Iraq that was steamrolled by a tyrant"

you got some twisted view of the world, the Vietnamese wanted to be communists, it was the tyrannical American government that invaded Vietnam to stop them, and luckily failed . but not until they caused the deaths of an estimated 3,300,000 people
.
as for saddam , who called him a tyrant...oh yeh the American government.

"US intelligence helped Saddam's Ba`ath Party seize power for the first time in 1963. Evidence suggests that Saddam was on the CIA payroll as early as 1959, when he participated in a failed assassination attempt against Iraqi strongman Abd al-Karim Qassem. In the 1980s, the US and Britain backed Saddam in the war against Iran, giving Iraq arms, money, satellite intelligence, and even chemical & bio-weapon precursors. As many as 90 US military advisors supported Iraqi forces and helped pick targets for Iraqi air and missile attacks."
yeh right blaming saddam

An excellent post.

[Lone Star]

I can always count on the Gaggle of kommandos to make my point about their blind hate for America. Just scroll through the thread and read for yourself. They attack everything they can find in the history of the country in every thread that has anything remotely to do with America -- even though, as in this thread, it has nothing to do with school shootings.

Even the wild-eyed, hair-on-fire hater of them all is here trying to blame the US for meddling in the UK when they were assisting and backing up the UK in their recent spy attack. Two countries working together (and several others in the world community) against a common enemy -- and that's bad because one of them is the US. Again, in a thread about a school shooting. The same guy who said the thread was dead and that he wasn't interested. Well, he's back for the 3rd or 4th time after announcing the thread's demise and speaking for everyone as being not interested. And of course, it's with some comment totally unrelated to the school shooting -- but certainly fits his hate-America narrative. He is always welcome to return and continue to prove me correct, but he keeps telling us he's leaving.

And then all of the Vietnam and Iraq stuff -- in a thread about a school shooting.

And why do the the haters do this? Besides their hate for America and their glee in trolling any thread about America? Because they can't win an argument in favor of gun control in the US. All of their opinions, and hate-filled rants, supplemented with stuff pulled out of the air from somewhere, don't even support their claims. In many cases, their data-mining efforts have no positive effect on their argument.

Americans who live and vote in the US and want more gun control -- even confiscation -- can't even win the gun control argument. The fact that the Amendment has not been repealed is proof that the argument is far from being won and that Americans want their guns and their RIGHT preserved. (See link below for more evidence of this.)

One of the kommandos is so filled with hate for America and so intent upon trolling in this thread that he would dare to stand on the mass graves of Iraqis and Vietnamese and give Saddam and the Vietcong a pass for all of their mass killings and genocidal efforts. I'm sure that all of those Iraqis and Vietnamese fleeing their two countries in droves -- with many dying trying to leave -- was just the world's imagination. And where did most of them attempt to flee? AMERICA. He is proving yet again that he is way outside of his sphere of knowledge, and he lacks the integrity to be believable about anything outside of what he is paid to do. He is certainly entitled to his opinion, but it means increasingly less as this thread continues.

That same kommando can't even be honest about the number of Vietnamese civilians who died. Next, he will be giving Hitler and Stalin a pass and blaming America for doing things that created the Soviet Union and starting World War II.

Yeah, America interferred in the Vietnam Civil War vs Communism, and they deposed the dictator and tyrant Saddam Hussein. So start another hate-America thread and get to your hating.

=====

Now back to the school shooting issue.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/28874/su ... es-barrett
Survey Blows Up Media Narrative About 'March For Our Lives' Participants

The demographics of the "March For Our Lives" was NOT what the media would have you believe.

Less than half were there to protest guns, less than a third were new protesters, 89% voted for Hillary.

Who conducted that poll? The Washington Post.

For the last week, the media has presented a consistent narrative about the "March For Our Lives" rally in D.C., which we've been told is one of the most significant demonstrations of its kind in American history: it was a student-led, mostly young people-attended rally for a unified cause: gun control. But an extensive survey of the marchers highlighted by The Washington Post found that, in fact, "it wasn't mostly young people" and less than half were actually there to protest guns. As for the notion that the marchers were a cross-section of the American public, almost all of them voted for Hillary Clinton.

This march was not representative of Americans. It was representative of old LIBs who hate Trump. Just another reason why the country as a whole reject this stuff.

=====

And now for a little from that Sewer of Hypocrisy from which LIBs draw repeatedly and often.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/dear- ... e-the-nra/

If you’ve admitted, as Emma has, that you ostracized the shooter as early as middle school, you’ve admitted a person, not the tool used, is responsible for the shooting. Specifically a person you made to feel excluded (more on this later).

If a person is responsible for his actions, as the shooter is, then a group of opportunistic anti-gun shills actively campaigning against a group which had no involvement in the shooting (the NRA), is irresponsible at best, malicious at worse. Some might say you’re engaging in bullying tactics.

Seems to me if anyone played a role in the shooter’s motive, if anyone contributed to the shooter’s actions, neither Marco Rubio or the NRA is to blame.

Am I blaming you for what the shooter did? No. Even if someone is bullied into a spiraling depression that may lead to suicide, a person’s actions are ultimately their own. See, unlike you, I believe people are responsible for themselves.

You are responsible for your actions. The shooter is responsible for his.

What I do find impressive is the gall you have to, while knowing you may have tormented what would one day become a mass school shooter, you’re actively blaming the National Rifle Association. A group made up of legal American gun owners who didn’t know the shooter. Who didn’t actively bully or ostracize a young man as early as 12 or 13-years-old.

And it gets better.

It’s easier to blame THE GUN, or any group which supports the right to keep and bear guns, than to examine an entire system of government failures, or the messy subject of human culpability. Including how the students who knew and influenced the eventual shooter may have played a role in his eventual break.

It’s called a “motive.” And if we were to talk with the Parkland Shooter, I’d have to guess the motive behind his shooting was not “The NRA didn’t let me sit with them.” If I had to guess the motive behind his shooting, it wasn’t that students rallied in a group to march against bullying, to march for kindness. No, it’s that he hated you, the students. The same students who made him feel less. For years.

You haven’t changed. You’re actively trying to bully guns out of the hands of law-abiding gun-owners.

According to U.S. Secret Service statistics, 2/3 of the 37 school shootings reviewed had bullying as a factor. 160,000 students stay home from school everyday due to bullying. 20% of high school students say they've seriously considered suicide within the last 12 month's due to bullying. Kids who are bullied are more than twice as likely to consider suicide.

So actually, the bullies from Parkland School System are more culpable than the NRA or any of its members -- who had nothing to do with the shooting.

Which brings me back to one of my previous statements. It's immoral to remove the RIGHT to bear arms from over 300 million citizens -- the vast majority of whom are legal and law-abiding gun owners -- for the loon and hateful actions of 97 (someone else's date from somewhere) crazed shooters.

[vlad]

There is a simple reason we dont bother mentioning gun control on this thread and its people like you LS that keeps banging on about it were not interested, im only interested in the mire you and your country will drag us into like you always do. yes we may have asked for help from other country's but America is pushing for more Sanctions and looking to incite Putin further, no other country is coming out with the same rhetoric.

[bigsnake]

Sad but so True. My Humble opinion Gun Control is not the Answer, just take a good look at places that have strict guns control laws, i.e., start with our Host Country. Nuff said.

[Nigglyb]

Not a big fan of Piers Morgan but quite like this interview with an NRA pro gun advocate

[Stantheman]

Sad but so True. My Humble opinion Gun Control is not the Answer, just take a good look at places that have strict guns control laws, i.e., start with our Host Country. Nuff said.

Yep, endless mass shootings in schools throughout the host country. NOT!!