Media gun control darling Hogg embarasses himself by being uninformed

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: face23785
I shall try this but getting her away from CNN may prove to be troublesome. I haven’t been to a gun show since I lived in Oklahoma. I miss the excitement. It’s like being 12 and going to toys-r-us. Gonna miss that place

Try taping a CNN logo to the corner of her TV and putting Fox on for a while.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: face23785 I believe that a REALLY big thing to consider is if the students do not get gun control they WILL determine the next POTUS. I don’t have kids but I do know that if I did the best thing would be to teach and not place blame.

Nothing like demanding the government strip your rights from you.

a reply to: face23785 Bwaaahhahah If I do that I will record it and share that one lol

a reply to: face23785

Did Hogg embarrass himself?

Or...

Did he embarrass his scriptwriter?

Wouldn't it be ironic if Hogg was the real shooter and pinned it on Cruz? Several posts have mentioned the videos he took didn't match the timeline.

Everything seems so convenient pertaining to the shooting...

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: face23785

If you can't even OWN a firearm until the age of 21, then why in the purple-f#ck does a god-damned 18 year old get to f#cking decide if I can?????

That is a perfect reply to this thread....

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: face23785

Did Hogg embarrass himself?

Or...

Did he embarrass his scriptwriter?

I believe if I ever required a "scriptwriter" I would do a little bit of proofreading before I embarrassed myself on television potentially seen by 10s of millions (if not way more) of folks around the world
I would say the former....
BTW - I need no one to tell me how to think or what to say as becomes more evident of the Liberal Left.
I left that farce and the Liberal Left behind me years ago...

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Allaroundyou

pfft!

My family thinks I'm a leftist because I think same-sex marriage is no big deal and I think pot should be legal everywhere.

I have the same problem. The contents of of gun safe make me a child killing lunatic to my more liberal friends and the fact that I could not care any less if two men want to marry each other or make out in public like all of my straight friends. At the end of the day I just want my gay friends to have the same right to know the horrors of marriage as all if my straight friends and to be able to protect their marijuana gardens with the firearm of their choosing.

What I can’t stand for though is having my constitutional rights infringed upon or removed because of someone else’s crimes when I’ve not committed a crime myself. The part I have trouble with is that I don’t want to be a hypocrite and shut down someone else’s first amendment rights to voice their opinions regardless of how misinformed and willfully ignorant they and their opinions are.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Your Mom must be related to half a dozen people I know.

Absolutely no breaking through. No debate. No discussion. No facts. No consensus.

Just "Burn the Witch!!!"

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: face23785 I believe that a REALLY big thing to consider is if the students do not get gun control they WILL determine the next POTUS. I don’t have kids but I do know that if I did the best thing would be to teach and not place blame.

Do you think children should dictate legislation? I do not. At least if it's in a future election they have had time to mature some and with any luck develop critical thinking skills.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: face23785

Did Hogg embarrass himself?

Or...

Did he embarrass his scriptwriter?

Yeah I should have reworded the thread title. #fakenews!

originally posted by: NightFlight
Wouldn't it be ironic if Hogg was the real shooter and pinned it on Cruz? Several posts have mentioned the videos he took didn't match the timeline.

Everything seems so convenient pertaining to the shooting...

I don't think so. I will say he's an asshole though. While they were still hiding he's "interviewing" other students, potentially giving away their location if the shooter was nearby. What a scumbag.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: face23785

If you can't even OWN a firearm until the age of 21, then why in the purple-f#ck does a god-damned 18 year old get to f#cking decide if I can?????

Das write!

# the kids.

Most of them are not even 18 and can buy cigs or beer.

That's what you meant, i think.

Who's running the show? Them or the adults?

Don't want to get shot up? Stop bullying the weird kid.

Tell someone the kid with the offset forehead is talking about murder.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: face23785
I shall try this but getting her away from CNN may prove to be troublesome. I haven’t been to a gun show since I lived in Oklahoma. I miss the excitement. It’s like being 12 and going to toys-r-us. Gonna miss that place

Try taping a CNN logo to the corner of her TV and putting Fox on for a while.

LOL!!

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: face23785 I believe that a REALLY big thing to consider is if the students do not get gun control they WILL determine the next POTUS. I don’t have kids but I do know that if I did the best thing would be to teach and not place blame.

No.

The "kids" didn't even know what they were protesting. They just wanted to get out of school and be part of the "herd".

Nice try, though, friend.

From a post I saw on Facebook:

Rachel is feeling thoughtful.
14 March at 07:09 ·
My son asked if he could walk out in protest today...here's how the conversation went...
Son: is it ok if I protest on Wednesday?
Me: protest what? Why would you do that?
Son: protests initiate change; they bring awareness to the issue
Me: yes, like what...
Son: like civil rights; people had to protest for the right to vote, etc (he went on)
Me: that's true! Protests can be a great catalyst. So what are you protesting?
Son: gun laws
Me: and what are the current gun laws?
Son: I don't know, but they need to change
Me: how do you know that if you don't know what they are? Who makes the gun laws? Whose attention are you trying to get? State, federal, local...?
Son: I don't know
Me: then no, you may not protest in ignorance. You don't protest something just bc everyone else is doing it. What is happening in our schools is wrong, and scary, and sad, and yes, some things need to change. But you must educate yourself before you can be an agent of change.
...I'm all about protesting for change, for justice, and being passionate about a cause; I'm not about blindly following the crowd in ignorance...

I disagree that hogg isn't using all of this for his own fame. I saw an interview with him and he outright stated that he thanks the right for singling him out, because now his followers on twitter has exploded.

He's just a wannabe reporter brat who has not lived in the real world for one day, yet thinks he knows the world.

Yeah it's been politicized at this point. Lamb won because he wasn't a typical democrat. Thought I'd include his campaign ad showing him firing an SR 15.

so a high-school kid is now conservative enemy number one.

good to see what fear does to the dying Neanderthals, metaphorically.

after the old farts are long and gone, its those 'kids' who will be deciding what massacres their children when they go to school.
in 100 years, it won't be 'ARs'...

good to see generation Z, not just playing video games and checking their facebook status or new topics on ats.
good on them.

a reply to: face23785

Heres the thing...

Both the young people who are currently screaming at congress to force some kind of change, to keep people safe from lunatics who have access to firearms, and those saying that the second amendment must not be infringed are correct. It does not matter a damn how the editing works out, or indeed how underinformed about the facts some people may be, or indeed how close they are to the fallout of desperately tragic events. Nor does it matter how seriously others take the rights enshrined in the constitution.

The kids who have been protesting, Hogg included, are absolutely right to be angry with congress, and with their local governments too. But they are wrong to be angry that there is not tighter restriction on gun possession, with regard to what can be owned, how big a magazine is, or any of that malarkey. The second amendment advocates are absolutely right that the ownership of firearms, in order to be effective in the role it was designed for, must not be heavily regulated, and must permit people who are capable of responsible ownership, to possess whatever weaponry and sundry attachments are desired in that role. But they are wrong that no legislation ought to be changed at the federal or state levels, in order to make gun possession a viable option for the population.

Both groups largely fail to engage in any seriousness with the notion that while the greater population, regardless of financial status or social standing otherwise measured should be able to possess arms for their defense without greater justification than the fact they have a right to do so, there ARE people in the US who should NOT be permitted to even walk out of the house on their own, leave alone walk about armed, or keep arms in their homes. There are people in the US, who, if prevented from putting their hands on a rifle or a pistol, would build a bomb, or several of them, from components which are unregulated by any law, and difficult to track to a source. There are people in the United States who would, if forced to do so, adopt slower, quieter means of killing, become blitz attackers, rather than noisy, suicide by cop types such as we see these days. There are those who could do in a few hours, without being detected, using a pair of framing hammers, what would take five minutes and cause such a panic that the police would be on them in minutes.

The people who would just as happily beat, stab people to death slowly, or blow them up, are the very same people, not different ones, to those who want to use guns to slay soft, civilian targets who have done them no harm. There is no difference at all between a crazy person with a knife, and a crazy person with a gun. Both are dangerous, neither can be reasoned with. The ONLY difference, is that a crazy person with a gun will kill rooms full of people, all at once, in the blink of an eye, rather than being forced to act more slowly and deliberately, with a quieter, necessarily stealthier approach, using a less potent machine to do their work with.

The answer therefore, is not to remove the guns. If you do that, all you get is a pile of bodies which grows more slowly, not a pile which is smaller in total. You merely force people to adopt slower tactics, use different tools to achieve the same terror, over a more prolonged period. That is the ONLY effect of removing the firearm from the equation.

The ACTUAL problem is not that guns exist on the streets of America. Even if it WERE the problem, that problem is unsolvable anyway, because the guns that are known to the authorities outnumber the actual population by orders of magnitude, AND do not take into account guns which have been created outside of an actual firearms manufacturing plant, by dedicated enthusiasts all over the country, nor does it take into account the number of mass produced guns that are present in the country, but not in any system anywhere. Even if it were the issue, guns are too prevalent and numerous to be controlled in number effectively by any legislation, nor can their possession by individual people be prevented, if the people in question are permitted to be part of wider society.

HOWEVER...

You CAN expect a significant decline in mass shootings, by removing people who are dangerously unwell mentally, from regular society for as long as they pose a threat. I am sure many members here remember the shooting of Gabby Giffords, in 2011. Six people died, eighteen including Giffords were shot, when Jared Lee Loughner opened fire with a pistol, on a gathering in Tuscon Arizona. It was only after this individual had been assessed with regard to their readiness to stand trial, that they were found upon first time of asking, to be mentally unfit to stand trial. Forced medication was applied while he was in custody, with the intention of MAKING him fit to stand trial...

If a person is not fit to stand trial for an act they might commit with a weapon, then they are not fit to possess it. It stands to reason, I think. If this is the case, and any logical examination of the statement as it stands will attest to as much, then surely it is necessary to ensure that the psychological state of a person intending to purchase and possess a firearm, be examined in depth, before they receive their weapons? Jared Lee Loughner was not of sound mind for YEARS before he enacted the crimes which saw him incarcerated, put Gabby Giffords and others in hospital, caused the deaths of six people including a federal judge. An effective and properly maintained, properly funded and equipped mental health system would have identified him before the fact, without question, and removed him to a safe place, for his sake and others. Its not that seriously disturbed people should not be permitted gun ownership. Thats beyond doubt at this point... but they should not be wandering about in the regular community AT ALL, armed or not, and as long as they are, you will continue to see these aberrant behaviours and their consequences.