I thought he made a good point. One of the reasons nothing will ever get done.
I would also suggest the left get rid of the signs ban all guns when they are marching, would probably also help with conversation.
Anyone else sick of the kids and their gun law crap?
- Thread starter CelticHawk
- Start date
I thought he made a good point. One of the reasons nothing will ever get done.
I would also suggest the left get rid of the signs ban all guns when they are marching, would probably also help with conversation.
I don't need a gun to feel like a man.
Sounds like a you problem. Good luck with that.
There has to be a better way to achieve an erection.
There could be myriad reasons why you "shouldn't own a gun". A history of domestic abuse. A history of mental illness that includes threats of harming yourself or others. A criminal background.
Are you suggesting that violent felons or the mentally ill have a "need" for a gun because some think they "shouldn't own a gun"? Seems kind of extreme to me.
Absolutely not. What I referring to is these acts of violence or mass shootings. I have no problems with background checks and other regulations, and restrictions. I just understand that they won't go very far to prevent these things.
I understand there's lots of idiots that already own guns that shouldn't that is why I feel the need to.
But more importantly I really enjoy shooting.
To answer the original question... Yes, the NRA, its brainwashed minions and the politicians the NRA has paid substantially... They are all sick of the kids who were shot at.
I'm not sure why so many of you feel the need to take the low road in these discussions. Lack of brain wave activity maybe, just outright stupidity?
Guns have been around for the entire existence of our country. The AR-15 has been around and for sale to civilians since the '50s. When scientists run an experiment they use a control group and an experimental group. I ask, what has changed since the 1950's? What happened during the 1990's, then the 2000's, and on into the 2010's that could possibly be different then all other points in the history of this country?
Oh yeah, computers and by extension cell phones then smart phones. Starting in the 1990's and exploding in the 2000's and 2010's computers, smart phones, and the advent of "social media" have changed our society and the way kids interact. Cause and effect.
Cause: a detachment from the real world by delving into the cyber world, a lack of human interaction, a lack of human relationships and working through problems and conflict resolution, access to a non-stop barrage of influence and content, cyber bullying that never ceases.
Effect: kids who become young adults who have mental issues and problems in dealing with the society. Result, mental illness, disengagement, violence, shooting up schools, their tormentors.
Solution: why are we focusing on guns? Guns have been around the entire time and are not the root cause of our issues. Why do we not address the real issue, a detachment from society, a breakdown in human interaction? Time to put limits on smart phones, tablets, computers, etc. for minors. Maybe put time limits or data limits on these devices for those under the age of 18. Instead we tech up our classrooms and put iPads into the hands of our first graders. Just plug the kids in and let the device babysit them. What could go wrong?
Can't.
Cons are against regulation and violation of personal freedoms. Sorry bro.
Good idea otherwise.
Nobody needs a lot of things. I thought he was pretty spot on. It's called rights and not sure why some are wanting to give up on them.
No one here is wanting to give them up.
Simply some want additional and tighter restrictions. Just like a driver's license.
Disagree to a point as far as these kids being criticized... not the media, but you've seen on this forum the story about Steve King and his remarks. So there has been rebuke of these kids and the far right has made no effort to rebuff King. In a way... it's similar to the cons who have criticized the sexual harassment accusers and have attempted to belittle them in the Trump and Roy Moore cases.
The partisan hacks will have no trouble tearing them down. Fox has spent parts of the last three evenings doing that very thing. As despicable as that sounds...lil Tuck and Hannity are doing it.
And you also refused to condemn Roy Moore after repeated invitations. Your position is of no surprise to anyone. Go get help.
If you're looking for a control pretty much all of Europe, Australia, Japan, Canada many of these places all have cell phones, social media, video games etc. Why do they have siginificantly less gun violence?
None of the conservatives here rebuff Steve King because he's basically a right wing version of Louis Farrakahn,.... He's an idiot and nobody want's to acknowledge his existence....
You feel threatened? They may be overly dramatic on a few points, but the message is not "gun grabbing". It's reform and background checks.
Well he is an elected official who the people voted for ...
Which is not what Farrakahn is ...
Just pointing out the problem with your analogy. He was voted into office by Iowa republicans and represents Iowans. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect Iowa cons to distance themselves from him if they disagree. He literally represents them.
If you wanted to act like an adult here, I'd help you understand why this statement is incorrect. But you don't.
Last edited:
I love these little micro distractions/distinctions/obfuscations.
Your proposition was that people shouldn't expect the cons on this board to distance themselves from King because he is just a fringe person. The response is that he literally represents Iowa conservatives in Congress. That is his job.
That is reality.
You should not find it surprising, or particularly illogical, that people on an Iowa message board would expect Iowa cons to express disdain for his idiocy or be presumed to be in agreement. It isn't always right, but it is a logical heuristic.
No, my proposition is that I am so far distanced from Steve King, that I refuse to acknowledge his existence...
Nice utopian idea, but getting the big money (i.e. lobbyists) out of politics will happen after a unicorn wins the Kentucky Derby and you know it!
If you don't fund your candidate, your candidate never makes it out of the primary.
Speaking of a driver's license, there are additional processes in order to get different classes of licenses. Part of the reason for this, of course, is safety. Driving a bus full of kids should require additional training and testing, including a background check. Driving an 18-wheeler, same deal.
Why not the same for guns? Could we separate guns into classes?
Yes I vaguely recall this now that you mention it. As to cons, who knows. The problem isn't cons so much as it is the NRA does such a wonderful job influencing cons.
It's all about $.
Farrakhan serves in the US Congress? When was the last time Farrakhan was relevant? In the news, even? He's not even close to being King's left-wing doppleganger.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Missouri State Transfer WR Raylen Sharpe Visiting Iowa on Tuesday- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
