Rapid City Stevens students staged a walkout Friday to call for reforming our gun laws. For our neighbors who extend thoughts and prayers to shooting victims, Ryan Hermens of the Rapid City Journal captures this apt photograph of a response from Stevens senior Eda Uzunlar:
It’s like the old joke about the man in the flood who ignores the rowboat, the motorboat, and the helicopter that come to save him and just keeps praying until he drowns.
…the man stood before God and asked, “I put all of my faith in You. Why didn’t You come and save me?”
And God said, “Son, I sent you a warning. I sent you a car. I sent you a canoe. I sent you a motorboat. I sent you a helicopter. What more were you looking for?”
The kids at Rapid City Stevens are ready to vote and make change happen. Maybe they are the answer to all those thoughts and prayers.
Nobody cares. The media’s news circus has moved on.
In your dreams, OldSnooze. Towns are banning assault rifles, high capacity magazines and requiring extensive background checks at a higher rate than ever.
“Nobody cares”.
The Parkland kids have made voter registration a cornerstone of their movement. On the day of March for Our Lives, they registered over 5,000 new young voters. As the mid-terms approach the kids from around the country will be organizing ‘get out the vote’ campaigns.
Emma Gonzalez and David Hogg each have more Twitter followers than the NRA, that is a big megaphone to reach voters.
Even today, the kids are lobbying Putin/NRA sponsors and are forcing more to drop the Putin/NRA.
The kids are still going after the Laura Ingraham sponsors and the sponsors have responded by dropping Putin’s NRA.
The crux of the kids campaign is to reveal which political candidates are receiving Putin/NRA donations.
The kids are putting up giant billboards in districts showing the dollar amount candidates are receiving from the Putin/NRA.
These kids care and their numbers are growing, political candidates had better pay attention.
The mass murder in Nashville over the weekend has added fuel to the fire that the kids at Parkland lit.
I like kids but “The kids” don’t vote, don’t pay taxes, don’t own real estate, don’t own cars, don’t serve and don’t count for anything more than a “tool” for leftist. Keep trying. . .
Leftist Tools Bury Rightist Fools
Seriously, OldSarge? That seems like a pretty callas dismissal of children’s lives lost – or as it has become on the right, the acceptable cost of the Second Amendment. How can a “pro-life” conservative wing be so dismissive?
I really am trying to understand the difference in national identity between Australia and the US that explains the absolute distinction between each’s reaction to national tragedies from gun violence.
OldSarg, you try very hard to be that character you are playing, don’t you?
You understand that a decent number of high school “kids” are over 18, right? And that 12 months pass every year, so the ones that aren’t 18 yet will be 18 before you know it, right?
Are you upset because you think people who don’t own real estate shouldn’t have opinions?
Are you upset because you think gun laws are somehow sacred and are the only laws that should never be reviewed?
Are you just a cliche old person who doesn’t like anything young people do?
Or do you just like to be disagreeable because you don’t get much positive attention?
Random aside: I feel awful for David Hogg and what he went through, and I think there is room for discussion about regulations surrounding firearms. That being said, I think it is poor form for people to act as though Mr. Hogg has been granted some sort of sainthood that makes disagreeing with him tantamount to supporting the murder of children (Hogg’s words, not mine). I don’t like the removal of nuance from a debate. This is one of the most polarizing topics in an incredibly polarized nation, and it’s disappointing to watch people trash each other.
That being said: Old sarg is either a troll or a sociopath. Good lord, dude, empathy isn’t a weakness.
Dicta,
I hadn’t paid close attention to any of the individuals on either side of the conversation who have been running their mouths since the florida shooting, but you got me curious so I looked up the Hogg fella. He does seem like he is trying to make the most of his 15 minutes, and there does appear to be an attitude of childish entitlement.
I can’t say I’m surprised, really – there appears to be an attitude of childish entitlement running rampant in this country. There are many days I wish Canada was to our south rather than our north so the potential for immigration wasn’t such a cold idea.
Dicta you don’t know the difference between empathy and pity. That is a big part of your problem. You pity the kids because of the horrible event but you and your ilk refuse to do anything about it. This is because you can’t understand what happened in an objective way and put forth acts that would reduce the threat. Instead you blame lawful Americans who had nothing to do with it by trying to strip them of their rights.
Restrictions on gun ownership have been the law for a hundred years. Adjusting the restrictions to keep pace with new technology is nothing new. Calling it “stripping” is an emotional exaggeration.
Thanks for reaching back out, Mr. Edgelord. You are wrong about a lot there, but a lot of it seems wrapped up in the fact that you think you know what I believe. I believe “assault weapon” bans are kinda tough to implement because I still haven’t heard a solid definition of what constitutes an assault weapon other than the fact that the weapon must appear vaguely military. I also think it’s weird that you think I pity kids while in the same breath calling out people like Mr. Hogg. However, I don’t get your stance either, which seems to be celebrating being a callous ass and internet tough guy. So, if disagreeing with Hogg makes me a child murderer, I guess I am one. If disagreeing with you makes me a leftist, also guilty.
Or, you could stop looking at the world as black and white and learn to use your noodle a bit more.
“I like kids ‘but’, kids don’t vote, don’t pay taxes, don’t own real estate, don’t own cars, don’t serve and don’t count for anything more than a “tool” for the leftist”.
Let’s see how much ‘kid” loving Beatle Bailey gets wrong.
Kids don’t vote. Yes they do, and this year it is estimated there will be 4 million new 18 year old voters. I refer you to my comment above about the voter registration and get out the vote that the Parkland kids and kids around the country are working on. Washington, D.C. is considering lowering the voting age to 16.
“kids don’t pay taxes”, they may not pay real estate taxes, but they soon will be. And, like everyone else they pay sales taxes on every purchase they make, South Dakota must love kids paying sales tax to support state government.
“kids don’t own cars”. Yes they do, drive by any school parking lot and see for yourself the number of cars. Granted some cars are likely owned by parents, but just as many are owned by students.
Kids “don’t serve”, at one least one of the students murdered at Parkland was taking military courses and was planning on enlisting, he was granted a full military service. Kids serve.
Kids “don’t count for anything more than a “tool” for the leftist. That is pure Putin/NRA propaganda. If there is something wrong with liberals wanting to help kids live another day, let me know what it is.
Kids count for our future, at least mine, and I endorse their efforts to make a better and safer world for me and themselves.
Roger nails it as usual. Well said!
Thanks, bear.
David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez have been at the center of the Parkland massacre from day one and from day one they have been castigated and their lives threatened by the Putin/NRA and the cultist Trumptards.
Those that claim David Hogg has spent his 15 minutes of fame are not following closely enough.
Laura Ingraham bashed Hogg for not being accepted by any colleges, she paid the price when Hogg called for a boycott of her sponsors. Many of her sponsors complied. In the end Hogg did win a college scholarship, but has decided to take the year off to promote voter registration and campaign for candidates that don’t take Putin/NRA donations.
What some may call “childish entitlements, I call children that are entitled to live their lives without gun violence.
Assault weapons DON’T need further regulation. In my opinion, someone who needs to own a dumbed down replica of a fully automatic assault rifle has some addressable neurotic tendencies but the Second Amendment gives us all the right to own legal firearms. As a kid in the 60’s the cool rifle was the Winchester 30-30. Made you feel like a cowboy. I suppose an AR-15 makes you feel like a protector of the weaker members of our society and some need that legal boost to their self confidence.
What absolutely does needs further regulation is the capacity of ammo magazines, the type of ammunition available for assault weapons and the rules that allow purchase of an assault weapon.
If you need more than 15 bullets at a time or you need a bullet that can shred inside a human upon impact or you need to buy a gun without an extensive background and medical check, Tango Sierra.
What Laura Ingraham did was classless and had nothing to do with anything. She was rightfully shamed. And death threats are bad. That doesn’t mean Hogg is immune from criticism.
I disagree with Porter; it is time to look at putting the genie back in the bottle. The VALUE (not the mere existence) of the Second Amendment deserves discussion. Take out the noise machines and profiteers, and the social value of gun ownership is negative. Guns in the hands of the general citizenship do more harm than good. The federal government actively blocks collection of that information, undermining the whole discussion.
David Hogg is not immune from criticism, in fact he has received more than his fair share.
Petty insults about him by adults have strengthened him. If it is necessary to criticize the young man, criticize the content of his message.
I think we agree, then.
Mass Murder By Speeding Vehicle? e.g. Toronto, yesterday?
Install kill switches that trip upon an impact strong enough to run down a human. The driver must then exit the vehicle, lift the hood or trunk lid and reset the kill switch manually, giving pedestrians time to scatter. It’s the same theory as small ammo magazines. If the shooter has to stop and reload there’s a chance he’ll screw up or get jumped.
@O – I didn’t say the Second Amendment was a worthy law. I said it’s currently the law of the land. Your suggestions have high merit, IMHO. Until a repeal happens regulations of magazines, ammo and purchase are necessary.
This nation has had more thoughtful discussion about banning laundry pods (because they are dangerous when misused) than about guns. The government (CDC) shares information about poisoning from detergent pods.
A few days ago YetiCoolers dumped their Putin/NRA sponsorship, the adult Trumptard response was to shoot the $300 coolers dead.
To clarify, I support people who want to have a conversation about school safety and regulating dangerous weapons. People exercising their rights to speak freely and assemble peaceably are not examples of “childish entitlement.”
What I meant by “childish entitlement” is that people shouldn’t expect that because they were the victim of a particular crime that their personal opinions about related issues should carry more weight than any other voter.
Porter
The van driver in the Toronta massacre was an alt-right supporter, no surprise there. There were those actually hoping that he would be a Muslim.
If the driver lived in the U.S. he would be a Trumptard.
Clearly, victims of gun violence should always be entitled to speak freely and suggest effective changes.
What many don’t know, and Cory did a post on this, is that many of the vocal kids at Parkland are members of the school’s debate team.
As it happens, the debate teams were making the very arguments about school safety in the weeks prior to the massacre.
Absolutely the kids have a right to discuss the mitigating circumstances of what they experienced.
I don’t understand what “child entitlements” have to do with the discussion the kids have ignited.
Eda is also a brilliant girl and amazing debater who qualified for the National Tournament the past two years. She is now in the enviable position of having to decide between Yale, Columbia, and Georgetown for college next fall. Those aren’t just empty words on that sign. She is going to be a world shaker, for sure.
Ryan, “What I meant by “childish entitlement” is that people shouldn’t expect that because they were the victim of a particular crime that their personal opinions about related issues should carry more weight than any other voter.”
Why not? Why shouldn’t traumatic first-hand experience count for more than the philosophical musings of those who have no first-hand experience in the issue? One problem with the whole gun violence debate is the absence of the real quantitive and qualitative weight of gun violence. Maybe these are not “acceptable losses.”
“I didn’t say the Second Amendment was a worthy law. I said it’s currently the law of the land.” the 2nd Amendment is not a “law”.
It’s a “right”. A right not given my any government or man to the people. It is a “natural right”. It is a part of our cultural philosophy and beliefs as part of protecting the individual.
OldSarg, everything you just said about the second amendment is wrong.
You and all sorts of other people act like because something is a “constitutional right,” nobody can challenge it. You understand the word “amendment,” don’t you? You realize our constitution has changed dozens of times, don’t you?
Also, you may have missed this day in school, but the constitution was indeed written by people. By a government. By man. God doesn’t exist, and if it did, I doubt it would be concerned with tangible personal property like guns. Further, if god exists but only chose to give this “right” to people who live in america, does god have different “natural” rights for people born in other countries?
If Beadle Bailey is right in his interpretation of the 2nd Amendment the amendment should be easy to abolish because it isn’t needed.
Beadle Bailey’s thinking is that he has a “natural right” to own weapons of mass destruction, to hell with the Constitution.
Heads up, Roger. https://www.theinertia.com/news/yeti-responds-to-nra-facts-directly-contradict-inaccurate-statement/
You are correct many stoopid gun owners shot up their coolers, but it was apparently all for naught.
From Ryan – What I meant by “childish entitlement” is that people shouldn’t expect that because they were the victim of a particular crime that their personal opinions about related issues should carry more weight than any other voter.
Tell school shooting survivors that a wingnut with an ingrown nail deserves as much attention and sympathy/support as a school child nearly killed because of irresponsible politicians won’t fix the rules.
Thanks mike
Do you suppose that the Yeti cooler killers are now getting out their duct tape in hopes of salvaging their coolers?
No, it isn’t a natural right. Natural rights can’t be repealed. E.G. Life – Liberty- Pursuit of Happiness (and pheasants)
Ryan, “everything you just said about the second amendment is wrong” Why?
“because something is a “constitutional right,” nobody can challenge it.” correct
“You understand the word “amendment,” don’t you? correct
“You realize our constitution has changed dozens of times, don’t you?” correct
“ you may have missed this day in school, but the constitution was indeed written by people.” I know that, so correct again
“God doesn’t exist” wrong Kemosabe (I mean that in an endearing way)
“Further, if god exists but only chose to give this “right” to people who live in america, does god have different “natural” rights for people born in other countries?” Who mentioned God and who said “Natural Rights” only exist for Americans? I said it was a “Natural Right”. I was referencing John Locke. Locke said that all individuals, regardless of the country, are equal in that we are all born with certain “inalienable” natural rights. Locke says “Natural Rights” are rights that are God-given and can never be taken or even given away. But you wouldn’t like John Locke because he believes in a Higher Power, “God”, and based upon your great wisdom he must be an idiot because the world knows from your writings you are much smarter than some dead guy named Locke. Good luck on your GED finals.
mfi – I’m glad to see you’re still reading my comments. I still read yours, too.
I wasn’t talking about sympathy or the vague idea of support you mention. School shooting victims deserve both (and so do victims of all sorts of violence). I simply meant being unlucky enough to be near a crime when it occurs is happenstance. Policy should not be made by happenstance.
Please tell me you don’t actually believe that politicians are to blame for school shootings. If you do, you have to believe that politicians are to blame for nearly every crime and are likewise responsible for all successes in this country, too. I’ll assume you were just using hyperbole to make your point.
Nitwits will probably lie and tell Yeti their coolers sprung leaks and ask for replacements.
Russia/NRA members fly off the handle with monotonous frequency.
OS was correct that the 2nd Amendment was not the source of the right to bear arms, but incorrect about any metaphysical “natural right” to bear arms for self defense.
Ryan wins that argument with the support of Justice Scalia’s opinion in Heller (holding that the militia language of the 2nd amendment was no longer operative to restrict a city from outlawing weapons). Here is Scalia’s explanation of the origins of the 2nd Amendment’s right to bear arms:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html
No “natural right,” just the right the government granted in the Declaration of Right (which was codified as the English Bill of Rights). I encourage 2nd Amendment lovers to read Scalia’s opinion in Heller, as it is the source of any right you might currently have to bear arms. Understanding the origins and extent of that right might help focus your arguments.
You know the more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that I, am in fact, a Classical Liberal. I have to add the classical on there because of what you all have done in redefining the meaning of being a liberal or you really don’t understand what a liberal is. . . yep, that’s more likely it. You guys are fascist but don’t know what the is so you call yourselves liberals because you don’t know what a liberal is but you think it’s cool to be a liberal so you claim it hoping someone thinks you’re cool. Kind of like eating Tide Pods. Now I understand that as well. . . Have a good dinner.
Ryan, I believe if I were an attorney representing kids whose lives have been shattered by needless violence with weapons made for that very purpose, I would subpoena every politician I could find that voted to keep assault weapons available and eliminate any grandfather clause that allows earlier owners to keep their weapons if they had been purchased before a certain time.
I would put them under oath and shame them them until the only honorable route for them to take would be resigning from office and not being allowed to lobby for gun makers or sit on BOD or anything else.
Of course, to shame pols they have to have a conscience and wingnuts and several Dems have sold their conscience’s for campaign cash.
OldSarg, so how are those “natural rights” holding up for those billions of people who don’t have unlimited access to firearms? Where is John Locke and his god to defend those inalieble rights of the masses?
When you say something is a “right,” that means there is an authority of some sort who has allowed that thing to exist. I do not believe in any “natural” or “inalienable” authority. If your natural rights weren’t given to you by any man, or government, where did they come from?
I couldn’t quite follow whether or not you understood my constitutional conversation, but the constitution is indeed a set of laws, and they can indeed be challenged, so your oddly-phrased “correct” answers just make me think you aren’t following along very well.
People who brag about their intelligence, or academic successes, or college degrees – and people who belittle GED-holders – are self-conscious turds. That being said, I would happily share my substantial academic credentials with you if you go first, OldSarg.
Ryna, you can believe as you wish. It doesn’t matter to me. As far as how those Natural Rights holding up goes it’s a matter of belief. I believe in the Natural Rights for the individual. Why do I need an “authority” to give me something that is already mine? Do you believe it is your right to breath, walk, sleep? What about the right to life, liberty, and the right to own property?
Tide pods – worn out and overused and abused phrase, it lacks creativity.
Liberals are not fascist, all that is required is too pick up a dictionary and find out what the word means, Trumptards are fond of tossing around words like fascist, socialist, and communist without knowing the meaning of the words.
In my life time the closest I have come to witnessing a fascist is watching Trump on daily basis.
OldSarg, what’s funny is I agree with you on a certain level. I believe people should be free to do as they wish as long as they don’t hurt anyone else. I think responsible adults should be allowed to own guns. Huge guns. Fully automatic, bad ass, sexy guns. Same for drugs. Same for whatever else. I don’t think those are natural rights, tho, because natural rights don’t exist. We, as a society, grant rights. Tell the people in prison that freedom is a natural right. Tell death penalty victim’s that breathing is a natural right.
You can think that those things are precious, or that they should be inalienable, but every single society and government on the planet disagrees with you.
Moving away from the 2nd Amendment’s origins (at the risk of being urged to voluntarily self-deport), I too am going to support OS’s “natural right” claim. That is because it really isn’t a question of a “right,” it is a question of what behaviors a group or society may require or prohibit. So I agree that we all have a natural right to do anything we want, even including a natural right to slaughter children for whatever reason we think justifies the slaughter – indeed, there is Biblical support for the morality of slaughtering and sexually assaulting innocent children. Numbers 31:18.
But we also have the natural right (or power) to decide as an individual vigilante parent, or as members of a community, to prohibit and punish the exercise of natural rights, especially when the exercise of such rights endangers or harms others.
Ryan says, “What I meant by ‘childish entitlement’ is that people shouldn’t expect that because they were the victim of a particular crime that their personal opinions about related issues should carry more weight than any other voter.”
Boy, I wish more people would have brought that up in response to Henry T. Nicholas and Kelsey Grammer during the 2016 campaign for Marsy’s Law.
Still, O, Roger, and Mike rightly respond to Ryan’s comment by pointing out that maybe direct experience with an event does grant an individual some greater authority to speak about the issues related to that event. A rancher who has worked to save his cattle from a blizzard and then had to deal with unresponsive bureaucracy has some more authority to discuss Farm Bill reforms than a blogger like me, whose most direct interaction with the Farm Bill comes in the form of eating.
OldSarg, how can we have a “natural right” to an artificial object?
“Natural right” is a phrase bandied about by folks who want to end the debate by saying, “God says so, so I win.”
A Natural Right exist whether you believe in God or not Cory. Locke had the view it was a God-given right. If you choose to not believe in a higher entity you still have Natural Rights. Call them “Nature Rights” or “Rights I was Born Into” if you wish but they are the same thing.
As far as “artificial object” goes are you referring to life liberty and control of your own property? A home is an object as is a gun. Both of these you have a right to own. Those are properties. One is where you live, one is a tool you use to protect all of your rights.
I’m still not settled on you not believing in a higher power. . . Is it something you claim for others but, when you are alone and pondering your future, do you think about what is next? I guess I just find it irrational to consider oneself enlightened but not willing to remain open to opportunities.
Please tell me you don’t actually believe that politicians are to blame for school shootings.
There ain’t no one else in position to change the laws of this country and protect the public from being needlessly gunned down.
So, how does this ‘natural right’ work?
Does the ‘natural right” to carry own or carry a gun usurp the 2nd Amendment?
If stopped by law enforcement and you have a concealed handgun, do you explain you don’t need a permit because you have a ‘natural right’ to own and carry a gun?
While John Locke is interesting reading, his observations don’t translate into law.
Exactly, Roger. Saying you have a “right” to anything, outside the realm of authority, is paradoxical. You can think you ought to be able to do some things because it feels good to think that, but “rights” existing at all requires an adversary against whom the rights are enforceable. I learnt that in my GED study group.
Excellent, Ryan.
It continues to befuddle me that some people use “my right” to justify their behaviors and actions.
Assumption of rights that don’t exist are usually a way to justify bad behavior.
i don’t care what others say ,i’m on the side of the kids of this nation, to hell with the nra & their wannabe supporters. i have weapons & have never needed the nra to guarantee my rights.most of the nra members now days are being used by a criminal outfit whose main business is to aid & abet the manufactures of weapons that end up in the hands of people who don’t give a damn about united states but only about their profit line. it is time fir you boneheads to wake up!
Honestly! Are all of you so bent you haven’t enough respect for yourselves that you would even have an inkling that you, as an individual, have any rights other than those others have graciously given to you?
Diagram that sentence. WOW!!
Porter,
Oddly, I thought the same thing.
For Beatle Bailey to diagram that sentence would require him to stay up all night.
The Second Amendment is not a natural right.
The beginning of the Amendment (that too often is ignored) “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, . . . ” shows that this was not a natural right, but a pragmatic look at the situation the early US was facing. We needed a militia, but were not at the point of providing weapons to such a militia; therefore, to have a well-armed militia our fighting men had to provide their own arms. Not until the Civil War did the US officially provide arms. My argument then is that the Second Amendment became irrelevant once the US government provided arms to its militia. Any other interpretation is a modern perversion of a property right – not based on the history of the necessity of this provision.
Only 1/5 of the gun owners in the US are identified as “hunters.” Even hunting justifies only 1/5 of gun ownership. Ownership is a public safety menace – guns in homes are far more likely to harm those in the home (or be stolen) than to protect from an intruder.
Fair argument, but one that was explicitly rejected in Heller’s weird breakdown of prefatory and operative clause opinion.
Dicta, Heller’s expansion to an individual right is a problem. The right so badly wanted a Constitutional issue to have passion for (as the left did the First), that they embraced the Second.
My point is: look where that got us. I understand the law, but I want a real discussion of the value of that law and interpretation of rights. The way to get a review of an Amendment (yes, even the second) is to have a law that challenges it. Let us stop the tail wagging the dog – stop the Second Amendment dictating right and wrong.
I’ve always been a fan of Akhil Amar’s thoughtful analysis:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2008/03/putting_the_second_amendment_second.single.html
Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck conducted the most thorough previously known survey data on the question in the 1990s. His study, which has been harshly disputed in pro-gun-control quarters, indicated that there were more than 2.2 million such defensive uses of guns (DGUs) in America a year.
https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o
Why didn’t the CDC publish it?
O,
Did you know that “well regulated’ means to keep in good working condition?
I bet you didn’t.
The “right” loves the First amendment as much as the left.
O,
Why aren’t we talking about the UK stabbings? People are dying and there.
very strong gun laws.
Cory,
I bet your readers didn’t know a kid died in Texas from a school sponsored walk out.
Because it’s an invalid study.
A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation found that defensive gun uses occur an average of 67,740 times per year. Bye, Felicia!!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use
Excellent find, Porter.
Porter,
I believe the CDC over some center I have never heard of.
You lose again Porter.
You are free to prove them wrong like I have the Nasa and NOAA temps with credible evidence.
Porter,
Let’s get into this.
Let’s discuss the studies in depth. You game for that?
YAWN!!!!!!!
Poor Roger,
He can’t refute the facts so he has to post nothing that has to do with the topic.
Poor boring Jason, he can’t say anything beyond “refute”.
Roger,
I have to use that word a lot around people who can’t prove me wrong.
You are towards the top of the list.
Kudos to you.
Jason
And you think I give a damn what you think?
You remain at the bottom of the list of the dumbest people I know.
Roger,
I don’t care what you think.
I have proved you wrong 99% of the time.
Cory wants you here, Jason. That’s why I’m not sending you home crying again … like I did Sunday.
Jason
The only thing that you have proven here is that you are an ignorant little pest crying out for attention.
Porter,
I have no clue what you are talking about.
Let’s debate these studies. I bet you will chicken out.
Porter,
I also want to discuss the Temp data and the lying by NASA and the NOAA.
You game for that?
Jason lies. The El Paso 11-year-old did not die from a school sponsored walkout. The boy joined a group of kids who skipped school separately from the student protest. Superintendend Xavier de la Torre says his district and the middle school did not endorse, sponsor or promote the walkout.” Neither the protest nor the school killed this child.
I do not lie Cory, If the school wouldn’t have sponsored a walkout, the kid would have been in school.
The school allowed the walkout, hence supported it. Xavier De La Torre denied it because the school is going to get sued.
Word games. Lie.
Cory,
Let’s start from the beginning.
Did the school allow the walkout?
Ryan, do you approach Drumpf’s lamentations he should have had a Purple Heart because he navigated his way from one bed to another w/o getting venereal disease with the kids who faced live fire from a deranged maniac trying to actually kill them?
Some moron actually gave Drumpf his own Purple Heart. Howz that for stoopid?
Jason, your boy in the WH admitted (finally) that he spent at least one night in Moscow (see Steele Dossier). He has been denying it and since he claims to have the best memory, I found it amazing he had to rely on social media folks to remind him he didn’t spend the night in Moscow.
The worm turns- Drumpf finally admitted he did spend a night in Moscow and blames Comey for making up memo story saying Drumpf claimed he never spent a night in Moscow. Golden showers, anyone?
I love the infinite regress argument this guy is using to attribute fault to the school. Yo, IF THE TAXPAYERS HAD NOT FUNDED THE SCHOOL, THERE WOULD BE NO SCHOOL, HENCE NO WALKOUT, ERGO TAXPAYERS KILLED THIS LAD.
*eats paste*
MY LOGIC IS UNASSAILABLE
Jason, asked and answered.
As usual, the main thesis of this post stands, and Jason resorts to distracting. Young people protesting gun violence have an opportunity to effect political change. Young people protesting for that change could well be the answer to the “thoughts and prayers” of political leaders who have otherwise sat on their hands on this issue. No truants or pedestrian fatalities change the validity of those statements.
These “woke” kids have a grand opportunity. One of the top three political events of my life happened at this same age. Taking to the streets and successfully stopping the Vietnam war with protests. Who can count the number of lives and limbs that were saved? Our protest movement persuaded political leaders to get off their hands and address the lies we’d been told by Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon for seven years.
This seems topical. If not delete, por favor. 😉
WORD OF THE DAY from Urban Dictionary
Gundamentalism
The worship of guns; a modern religion based on buying, owning, carrying and shooting large numbers of firearms in situations where they are not really necessary.
Gundamentalism promises to free you from the meaninglessness of everyday life by letting you stroke long hard objects and make loud noises while fantasizing about killing your enemies.
Jason (this is one-and-done):
Yes, I know what “well-regulated” means. My WHOLE post was to that point: the Second Amendment in a historical context was needed to have a well-regulated – i.e. armed – militia because the US government did not issue arms until the Civil War. We agree what well-regulated means. It has become anarchistic since the government now supplies weapons to its militias. BTW, you managed to miss the big picture here (again) that the Second Amendment is no longer needed to do what it was assigned to do.
We are also not talking about the War in Afghanistan, the children becoming sick from lack of vaccines, nor deaths from global warming and pollution. Know that is not an exhaustive list of deaths we are not addressing, so let’s stick to the gun debate shall we?
oops, anachronistic (is there such thing as a Freudian auto-correct?)
republicans do not believe in prayer. Paul Ryan proved that by firing the Catholic Chaplain for praying this before Comrade NOem’s tax scam vote. So you can see how “thoughts and prayers” really work in the party of Comrade NOem and her fellow comrades. When you see her in a cap, think of Lenin in his Party work cap. Look familiar https://www.google.es/search?q=Lenin+in+his+party+work+cap+photo&rlz=1C1AVSK_enUS663US669&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=KtX5P6CvM0tBDM%253A%252Cot5m28TuTGZNjM%252C_&usg=__eOVCkVbJP5PfjqhjLYqALx36ZkY%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjetoqEhd_aAhUJuBQKHepHC9cQ9QEIOzAJ#imgrc=KtX5P6CvM0tBDM:
“”May all members be mindful that the institutions and structures of our great nation guarantee the opportunities that have allowed some to achieve great success, while others continue to struggle,” he prayed. “May their efforts these days guarantee that there are not winners and losers under new tax laws, but benefits balanced and shared by all Americans.” Father Pat Conroy…now unemployed.
These kinds of prayers by clergy, are anarchy for the republican/Putin party, as it would show or could even hint empathy. Can’t have that in the party of Putin.
At least eight people are dead in a school shooting in Santa Fe, Texas, several local news outlets reported this (5/18/18) morning.
Vice President Mike Pence said he and President Donald Trump were briefed on the shooting. Pence said the students, families, teachers and all those affected should know: “‘We’re with you. You’re in our prayers and I know you are in the prayers of the American people.”
But our hearts and bank accounts belong to Russia/NRA and our deepest apologies to Ollie North who is the new president of Russia/NRA.
mfi
Did you see the video of the clown wearing an MAGA cap, waving the American flag, and packing a gun at his side.
Another brilliant Texan carrying a gun into an active shooting at a school.
Thoughts and prayers? Every single one of Chile’s Catholic Bishops resigned due to church sex scandal.
How do you tell it is bedtime in the Rectory? When the big hand is on the little hand. Apparently much truth to this.
No I didn’t, Roger. Been out working in the garden trying to get caught up from all the rain we had recently.