David Hogg evading Debate challenge from fellow Parkland student

Fellow Parkland student Kyle Kashuv has challenged David Hogg to debate the merits of his statements surrounding the Second Amendment. Kashuv has repeatedly extended the debate challenge to Hogg several times in recent weeks, to which Hogg has responded only with brief deflection and delay.

Frankly, it appears Hogg is running scared from intelligent opposition and any voice outside his echo chamber. This isn't the first time he's ducked and dodged a debate, either. Several weeks after the Parkland incident, Hogg also cowered away from debating the merits of his campaign with Alex Jones, a pro-2A journalist.

I find this particularly odd, since Hogg spent so much hot-air droning on about how his "debate program" prepared him for his campaign. I find it amusing because he's avoided any actual debate whatsoever, instead taking talking points from CNN and openly accepting help from far-left anti-gun organizations like "Moms demand action" and "Everytown for gun safety" among other unpopular far-left causes.

www.miamiherald.com... - The MSM story where Hogg drones on about his "debate experience"

Again, I find Hogg's claim of debate experience highly dubious. If not because he's taken to the Hitler-esque style of dictat vs. a true scholarly debate of the issues. If anything, it really puts Hogg's dishonesty on display for all to see.

a reply to: JBurns

Correct me if i'm wrong but hasn't the right been avoiding talking about guns for years?

Taste of their own medicine I'd say.


Don't forget when you comment that I am a supporter of the 2ed and don't want the government taking anything from us.

I gotta say, I find the fear and hatred a bunch of high school students can engender among adults on the right by merely expressing their opinions to be pretty sad.

I mean Jesus, just ignore them if they're causing you so much mental anguish — it's not like they hold office. They're not passing legislation, they're not setting policy, they're just saying things that you don't like. Give it a couple months without a school shooting and they'll be forgotten.

Hogg is a tool. I'm willing to bet he doesn't care about the second amendment at all but is just using it to get himself on camera. If anyone thinks using a tragedy to promote yourself or a certain political ideology is wrong then this kid is basically the antichrist (not literally obviously). I don't like him and he gives off a weird manchurian candidate kind of vibe.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Actually in my experience, when some one does want to "debate" it, it usually ends with them name calling and the like. I have found that if you can contradict their feelings with facts, destroys their normalcy bias. They do not want discussion they only want their view to be confirmed.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I gotta say, I find the fear and hatred a bunch of high school students can engender among adults on the right with their opinions to be pretty sad.

My thoughts as well.
David does not make policy.
David does not sign bills into law.
David is not a part of our government.

David is exercising his freedoms while trump signs away our rights.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

I have no problem talking about guns. But that conversations needs to be had from the standpoint that its an enshrined Constitutional right. You can't expect the population to support giving up any right (including 2A, including "bits and pieces") nor can you express anger toward said population from defending their rights.

Discuss it all you want, but the real problem isn't guns or access to guns. We have at least a million times more firearms than the UK. Our murder rate is not 1,000,000 times greater than theirs. The problem is gangs, a degenerate and amoral culture and a host of other things. Guns being the very far last item. Simply because there are plenty of other weapons (including ad hoc weapons) available to criminals. They have no problem stealing, building, smuggling or otherwise illegally acquiring them. The law hasn't stopped them yet, nor will it in the future.

So what part of that last paragraph tells you I'd be willing to consider giving up any firearm/gun right? Why give something up that is enshrined? Especially when it won't solve diddly squat.

a reply to: Grimmley

ATS in a nutshell these days.

a reply to: theantediluvian

It isn't fear, that is for certain. My second amendment has survived attacks on it by the socialists for centuries

The problem is that Hogg is a corporate/MSM/socialist tool, who is acting like a tool by running scared from every single debate challenge thrown his way.

He's going to advocate for the infringement of a Constitutional right yet doesn't even have the guts to face an opponent on the debate stage. That tells you something about his character, and about the fortitude of those standing with him. A lot of hot air, with nothing on the inside.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

the right hasnt been avoiding it...

they have been waiting for the left to be educated about guns and current gun laws and maybe try to find a solution, instead of them reeeeing about ARs everyday

a reply to: JBurns

Im not going to get the broad brush out here...but there is something to be said about the primary mental differences between the 2 political beliefs we have in the US. One side tends to think rationally, succeeds in STEM programs, and approaches the world is a convservative social and fiscal manner. The other side thinks more with the gut (truthyness) and emotion, succeeds more in the arts than sciences, and approaches the world with a more liberal viewpoint.

Debating is not typically the bailiwick of the liberally minded, although (as referenced by my prologue about not wanting to bring out a broad brush), we can see among our own members here that the above generalizations are only generalizations and not rules. Antediluvian can debate among the best I've seen.

Anyway...i hope Hogg steps up. I don't expect him to. The bald chick, however...i could see her having the moxy to do it.

a reply to: JBurns

David hogg does not have the power to take away anything from anyone.
But trump does.

So who should you be directing your anger toward.
A kid with no real power or the guy that took away your right to own a bump stock?

Trump is the ONLY person that has taken anything from you .

a reply to: theantediluvian

Its hard to ignore them when they inundate media. although we can simply avoid said media. not to defend the assholes of the world...but we used to employ the same tactics against the skin heads and nazi's....we'd just ignore their ignorance rather than get riled up over it. For the same reason (media inundating us) it is difficult today. For a tertiary point, the same can be said for school shootings...the media sees dollar signs on each corpse.

a reply to: JBurns

stop the presses!! high school kid won't debate!!!??!

a reply to: JBurns

At this point in time, a debate would be an absolute waste of time.

No-one is going to change their mind any time soon - on any political stance pertaining to The United States of America that is currently held.

These are your opinions for change - breed like rabbits or import more humans.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: JBurns

Im not going to get the broad brush out here...but there is something to be said about the primary mental differences between the 2 political beliefs we have in the US. One side tends to think rationally, succeeds in STEM programs, and approaches the world is a convservative social and fiscal manner. The other side thinks more with the gut (truthyness) and emotion, succeeds more in the arts than sciences, and approaches the world with a more liberal viewpoint.

Debating is not typically the bailiwick of the liberally minded, although (as referenced by my prologue about not wanting to bring out a broad brush), we can see among our own members here that the above generalizations are only generalizations and not rules. Antediluvian can debate among the best I've seen.

Anyway...i hope Hogg steps up. I don't expect him to. The bald chick, however...i could see her having the moxy to do it.

Most scientists identify as liberal.

Conservatives thinking they are more rational is not the same as conservatives being more rational.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I wouldn't vote for him for any office but he has a right to express himself.

If I were him I wouldn't debate the other guy either. We've had these debates and everyone has pretty much made up their minds.

What I WOULD DO is VOTE!

Boss Hogg is a tool of Soros and the elites. I am sure he is going to be set up with cushy jobs for life thanks to his willingness to sell his soul to the liberal narrative. I hope he rots in hell along with his puppet masters.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: scraedtosleep

I have no problem talking about guns. But that conversations needs to be had from the standpoint that its an enshrined Constitutional right. You can't expect the population to support giving up any right (including 2A, including "bits and pieces") nor can you express anger toward said population from defending their rights.

Discuss it all you want, but the real problem isn't guns or access to guns. We have at least a million times more firearms than the UK. Our murder rate is not 1,000,000 times greater than theirs. The problem is gangs, a degenerate and amoral culture and a host of other things. Guns being the very far last item. Simply because there are plenty of other weapons (including ad hoc weapons) available to criminals. They have no problem stealing, building, smuggling or otherwise illegally acquiring them. The law hasn't stopped them yet, nor will it in the future.

So what part of that last paragraph tells you I'd be willing to consider giving up any firearm/gun right? Why give something up that is enshrined? Especially when it won't solve diddly squat.

The US does not have anything like a million times more guns than the UK. It does have about 3x the homicide rate.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: JBurns

Correct me if i'm wrong but hasn't the right been avoiding talking about guns for years?

Taste of their own medicine I'd say.


Don't forget when you comment that I am a supporter of the 2ed and don't want the government taking anything from us.

No. They make sensible arguments like "can you even define what it is you want to ban?" Meanwhile the typical liberal response is "um... guns are bad and taking them from people who follow laws is the easiest solution."