Do you ever get tired of, or feel bad for, grandstanding on top of graves?
Then you are going to need to breed a different sort of human. We always deal with the problem in front of us. I'm not going to apologize for our nature.I'm not "anti-gun" but I think the gun laws make very little sense.
It drives me crazy that this even comes up after a mass shooting. It is so counter-productive because you end up arguing if better gun laws could have prevented said tragedy. Then You have to defend yourself for politicizing it.
The truth is one random act shouldn't drive policy. its either a good idea of its not.
Then you are going to need to breed a different sort of human. We always deal with the problem in front of us. I'm not going to apologize for our nature.
Just turn it around on Soup. The opposition are all about using the dead.
Sure there is. I just have to point to the NRA and I got you dead to rights. Don't you feel bad now? The conversation is completely turned.You'll never see me up here grandstanding, about how everyone needs to carry for defense, in a thread like this. There's really nothing to turn around.
Thats a good use for cold bones don't you think?The Panderer in Chief will use the not yet cold bodies in Oregon simply for his political agenda, he could careless about them in any other scenario but as pawns for his leftist agenda.
If we grandstand on top of graves maybe in the future there will be fewer graves.
We always deal with the problem in front of us.
Are we dealing with the problem in front of us?
In front of us the problem with we are dealing?
In front of us the problem with we are dealing?
Are you positive that all liberals are anti-gun?Question for all the liberals here. Do you realize that not liking guns is racist? Why you ask? Because by taking away all the guns, you are making it easier for white cops to attack and kill more black people like you say is already a problem.
So there is that.
So the ends justify the means then?
Fewer graves....maybe? So you disrespect our past and try to restrict our future for maybe fewer graves? Tell us more.
The majority and core of the party is.Are you positive that all liberals are anti-gun?
Do you ever get tired of, or feel bad for, grandstanding on top of graves?
The majority and core of the party is.
Half are trying while the other half screams it's not polite.Are we dealing with the problem in front of us?
That's why I said 'majority', silly billy.I'm not anti-gun. I believe the 2nd is an individual right. I own guns. Am I not liberal?
Here we go again. . . See out of politeness we are suppose to wait to talk about the mass shooting problem after Oregon right?
Well again there is another attempted one in Arizona. So I guess out of politeness we can't talk about the mass shooting problem for a while now out of respect to Arizona.
I respect hunters. I understand people who think they need guns to protect themselves (even though most of them would probably shit in their pants if they were ever in a situation where they needed a gun). I have a hard time liking people who think we need an armed population to protect ourselves from a tyranny of the government. If those people feel marginalized, good. They should be marginalized.
I haven't seen anyone calling for a repeal of the 2nd amendment, at least anyone with any reasonable power. I'm sure there are some nuts out there calling for a complete ban on guns, but nobody that has any real say on the topic.And you just proved why we need the 2nd amendment. I find it strange that people believe they can trust any government.
Are you positive that all liberals are anti-gun?
Sure there is. I just have to point to the NRA and I got you dead to rights. Don't you feel bad now? The conversation is completely turned.
The fact is people should talk about things when they are timely and people are paying attention. Peoplevshould feel good about confronting problems. You are simply trying to censor the discussion with an appeal to politeness. Not at all libertarian of you.
I beg to differ.Liberal and pro gun at the same time, that would not make sense.
Is there some subtlety I'm missing here? Who's dancing on graves?
Responding to the [Northern Arizona University] shooting, Arizona Congressman Trent Franks was asked on CNN about arming students. “I understand that on this campus in certain circumstances that is not allowed,” he said, adding: “These shooters deliberately choose a place where they know no one can defend themselves, where they know no one is armed. I think that’s a tragedy.”
He said that last week’s shooting in Roseburg, Oregon, “that wasn’t stopped until the police came, who were armed”.
Damned anti-gun people grandstanding on top of graves. Well...dancing on top of a slowly cooling body, anyway, as quick as he was to respond.
What do you consider mass shooting? 9 people dead of a day in a month or 45 dead of a weekend, every weekend of every month?I'm not "anti-gun" but I think the gun laws make very little sense.
It drives me crazy that this even comes up after a mass shooting. It is so counter-productive because you end up arguing if better gun laws could have prevented said tragedy. Then You have to defend yourself for politicizing it.
The truth is one random act shouldn't drive policy. its either a good idea of its not.
It's been 16 years since Columbine. Are we too soon to talk about gun control in the wake of Columbine or is that dancing on their graves as well?
Mass shootings refer to shootings in essentially a single location, as opposed to '45' instances of shootings across a large city over a couple of days.What do you consider mass shooting? 9 people dead of a day in a month or 45 dead of a weekend, every weekend of every month?
Gun control is gun control. Or do you propose different gun control for city vs rural?Mass shootings refer to shootings in essentially a single location, as opposed to '45' instances of shootings across a large city over a couple of days.
Both are tragic, but not the same.
Half are trying while the other half screams it's not polite.