It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Using Tragedy to Push a Political Agenda

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:06 PM
link   
The shooting in Oregon is still fresh on our minds and I'm already seeing people arguing over what Obama said and using this event as a way to # on the opposite side and push their ideology. Does anyone see the problem with this? This shooting isn't political, it has nothing to do with the left or right or the president, so why are we acting like it does?

Of course, instead of coming together as one people after this tragedy, we automatically start throwing blame on others and start turning it political. I'm sick of it. How about we focus on healing instead of keeping the wounds open through bickering and throwing blame on others.




posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

It happens every time a tragedy occurs. People are more concerned about blaming others and making political points than trying to figure out what happened and why.

Some get outraged when the president doesn't publicly say what they think he should say.

Childish, in my opinion.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:21 PM
link   


Does anyone see the problem with this?


Yes. Obama should have left his politics out of his speech.

Obama is the one that used this issue to further a political agenda. Other people are simply pointing this out and trying to preserve their Constitutional rights. I am against ALL Authoritarian agendas.
edit on 2015/10/1 by Metallicus because: ETA



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Why buy into it though? He says stuff that is polarizing for a reason, to get people to argue about it and thus divide themselves.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Metallicus

Why buy into it though? He says stuff that is polarizing for a reason, to get people to argue about it and thus divide themselves.


He REALLY DOES want to ban guns. He is dangerous and my gun rights are a non-negotiable Constitutional right.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Gun sales have done nothing but increase under him, what moves has he personally made to ban them?



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   
It's not all bad intentioned and propaganda, this was a gun free Zone. So are many zones in which Mass shootings occur.

Fact: more shootings occur in gun free zones
Fact: this was a gun free Zone
Majorly supported supposition: this may not have happened, or the outcome not as drastic had this been a zone in which people carried

We can talk about more gun control this, or ban that, but short of ripping up the Constitution, these arguments won't take people far.

It's somewhat of a jerk move, but this is definitely where the pro-gun group has good reason to say "I told you so" - this event may have been avoided, or outcome less worse had the right to bear arms been honored.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:42 PM
link   
This is why Obama says what he did today:
Since Sandy Hook, there have been:
-at least 986 mass shootings
-killing at least 1,234
-wounding at least 3,565



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Metallicus

Gun sales have done nothing but increase under him, what moves has he personally made to ban them?


Allowing him unchallenged political rhetoric is dangerous. My rights are NOT negotiable and any politician that plans to restrict or eliminate them will be a target of my push back.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus


Does anyone see the problem with this?


Yes. Obama should have left his politics out of his speech.

Obama is the one that used this issue to further a political agenda. Other people are simply pointing this out and trying to preserve their Constitutional rights. I am against ALL Authoritarian agendas.


Yeah guys

We should wait until all of the mass shootings stop, then we can talk about the problem we have with mentally ill people easily acquiring guns.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
I think you need a gun ban



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: blargo
This is why Obama says what he did today:
Since Sandy Hook, there have been:
-at least 986 mass shootings
-killing at least 1,234
-wounding at least 3,565


And I, as a legal gun owner, who is being targeted, participated in ZERO.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: muse7

originally posted by: Metallicus


Does anyone see the problem with this?


Yes. Obama should have left his politics out of his speech.

Obama is the one that used this issue to further a political agenda. Other people are simply pointing this out and trying to preserve their Constitutional rights. I am against ALL Authoritarian agendas.


Yeah guys

We should wait until all of the mass shootings stop, then we can talk about the problem we have with mentally ill people easily acquiring guns.


I have no intention of 'talking about a gun ban'...ever. It isn't negotiable.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Except it is very, very challenged.

He has a right to get up there and speak too.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
It's not all bad intentioned and propaganda, this was a gun free Zone. So are many zones in which Mass shootings occur.

Fact: more shootings occur in gun free zones
Fact: this was a gun free Zone
Majorly supported supposition: this may not have happened, or the outcome not as drastic had this been a zone in which people carried

We can talk about more gun control this, or ban that, but short of ripping up the Constitution, these arguments won't take people far.

It's somewhat of a jerk move, but this is definitely where the pro-gun group has good reason to say "I told you so" - this event may have been avoided, or outcome less worse had the right to bear arms been honored.


Sorry it was NOT a gun free zone because Community Colleges cannot ban guns. Not a Gun Free Zone



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Hey Metallicus. While I am all about our second amendment rights, and dislike any moves against it - I do have the question, where has Obama himself actually taken away guns, or rights? - this is an honest question and not a challenge, I would like to know if he's actually signed anything that specifically denies us these rights. I have read articles where certain people say he's doing it, but no executive orders, laws, or otherwise to back it up.

Peace

-deadlyhope



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I was waiting for a thread on Obama's speech to come forward, yes I heard his view on the tragedy, but as usual the anti gun agenda came out to take over of what should have been a speech of grieving and sympathy for the families of the victims.

Why let a tragedy go to waste, that is how politicians in elections near election year work.

I think Obama next legacy after Obama crap is going to be to push gun agenda by executive order.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: blargo
This is why Obama says what he did today:
Since Sandy Hook, there have been:
-at least 986 mass shootings
-killing at least 1,234
-wounding at least 3,565


And I, as a legal gun owner, who is being targeted, participated in ZERO.

Targeted how? Really? Background check?



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The shooting in Oregon is still fresh on our minds and I'm already seeing people arguing over what Obama said and using this event as a way to # on the opposite side and push their ideology. Does anyone see the problem with this? This shooting isn't political, it has nothing to do with the left or right or the president, so why are we acting like it does?

Of course, instead of coming together as one people after this tragedy, we automatically start throwing blame on others and start turning it political. I'm sick of it. How about we focus on healing instead of keeping the wounds open through bickering and throwing blame on others.


Send a letter to the president and convince him of all this. I don't think he would read it or want to confront any of your good points though. He has made it quite clear that using tragedy to push political agendas is his only way of succeeding in his goals, since doing it honestly doesn't work for him. He needs leverage to get anywhere since his agendas go against traditional American goals and values.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: blargo

Thank you for the link. I'll have to look more into that, as what I've read so far says differently.




top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join