So a complete non sequitur retort? Okay then, tells me all I need to know; that you know I'm correct.
On your angle: Fact is 17 people were gunned down; several of them children. It won't be the last and your biggest concern is pushing some "gun violence really isn't that bad." narrative. Have fun with that I guess.
Originally posted by RobtardAt least we're getting rid of the surplus population. They were just white trash, nothing lost 🙂 .
So a complete non sequitur retort? Okay then, tells me all I need to know; that you know I'm correct.On your angle: Fact is 17 people were gunned down; several of them children. It won't be the last and your biggest concern is pushing some "gun violence really isn't that bad." narrative. Have fun with that I guess.
Originally posted by Robtard
So a complete non sequitur retort? Okay then, tells me all I need to know; that you know I'm correct.On your angle: Fact is 17 people were gunned down; several of them children. It won't be the last and your biggest concern is pushing some "gun violence really isn't that bad." narrative. Have fun with that I guess.
Lol, you aren't correct Rob. You're either slow, triggered, or trolling. You whine, misrepresent what people say, and then play the game you're playing now when called out.
russian bots are currently spamming pro-gun propaganda. shocking. 🙄
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/16/us/russian-bots-florida-shooting-intl/index.html
Originally posted by Robtard
Um, you literally did your 'hundreds of millions of guns and so few deaths by comparison' skit soon after this story was posted. It's what you do when there's a shooter and his skin color and religion do not fit your bias. Have you forgotten already?
This is true. It doesn't minimize these deaths, it just means people shouldn't get utterly hysterical about it and make it out to be worse than it is.
And like I said: you misrepresent shit. I never actually said you were blaming Trump for this. I asked if that is why you were posting that, and told you if it was to imply Trump is to blame it wasn't gonna fly, cuz then it means it validates what I said about the Scalise shooting.
And let us remember: facts are triggering you now. There is to be zero whining then from you whenever any conservative gets facts wrong.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
No more easy than to see which party gets the million dollar bribes from the abortion lobby. 👆
Yeah, how many abortions per year vs gun deaths? Lets be generous and let them count suicides too. So that jumps the number from around 10,000 a year to 30,000.
I wonder how many abortions PP performs each year...
Originally posted by Surtur
Yeah, how many abortions per year vs gun deaths? Lets be generous and let them count suicides too. So that jumps the number from around 10,000 a year to 30,000.I wonder how many abortions PP performs each year...
No I'm simply pointing out that it's interesting how only certain types of lobbying get bitched about based on political agenda.
You often hear about the evils of the NRA lobbying or corporate lobbying, yet strangely the same people who complain about those lobbies are silent when it comes to the abortion lobby or worker's unions lobbies.
Originally posted by Surtur
This is true. It doesn't minimize these deaths, it just means people shouldn't get utterly hysterical about it and make it out to be worse than it is.And like I said: you misrepresent shit. I never actually said you were blaming Trump for this. I asked if that is why you were posting that, and told you if it was to imply Trump is to blame it wasn't gonna fly, cuz then it means it validates what I said about the Scalise shooting.
And let us remember: facts are triggering you now. There is to be zero whining then from you whenever any conservative gets facts wrong.
Why would you bring up the Scalise shooting?
Originally posted by Emperordmb
To be even more accurate in the comparison, the NRA doesn't go out and commit these mass shootings, PP certainly performs the abortions... and PP gets government funding while the NRA doesn't.
We've just entered bizarro world though. It's essentially being implied I don't care or think this is a big deal for pointing out several media outlets lied and said this was the 18th school s hooting this year. This is apparently wrong. It can't be pointed out. Just like it's basically heresy to point out the very small percentage of people that are killed by this. We have had 8 school shootings, not 18.
It boggles the mind, why is 8 not enough to work with and be outraged over? I don't get it. And why is it okay to pounce on Trump for exaggerating a crowd size, but pointing out actual lies from the media is verboten?
This shows these people are running on pure emotion and zero logic.
Originally posted by jaden101
Why would you bring up the Scalise shooting?
He posted an article that was about how this kid had a MAGA hat on. I said if he was doing so to imply Trump and others like him inspired this...well, you can't very well then say "but no, leftist rhetoric didn't inspire the Scalise shooting!".
It's all or nothing. And do not come at me about it being off topic, I don't care.
EDIT: Actually wait, the topic is mass shootings. I dunno, seems Scalise would be on topic then.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
No I'm simply pointing out that it's interesting how only certain types of lobbying get bitched about based on political agenda.You often hear about the evils of the NRA lobbying or corporate lobbying, yet strangely the same people who complain about those lobbies are silent when it comes to the abortion lobby or worker's unions lobbies.
I've stated many times that you need to get money out of politics. It doesn't matter who's paying.
Originally posted by Nephthys
I've stated many times that you need to get money out of politics. It doesn't matter who's paying.
Indeed, like when PP spent hundreds of thousands of dollars supporting the guy from that Georgia election.
Why is this organization making political donations? When someone gives money to PP, do you think it's meant for the organization or they just wanna give their money to them so they can give it to some politician?
Again, the only four proposals I could see that could've potentially prevented this tragedy are:
1. A blanket ban of AR-15s or semi-automatic rifles in general... which even then is sketchy at best in regards to whether or not it would actually prevent this (he could always have gotten... a different gun, or illegally obtained it), it would not be remotely feasible to implement, I doubt the government would even be able to confiscate 50% of those guns, and really just ethically a serious infringement on people's second amendment rights
2. A blanket ban of guns... which is completely against the second amendment and people's right to protect their lives and property and a curtailment of their liberty, would be horribly ineffective at implementing, etc.
3. A change in the way mental illness is classified... the dude did pass the background check after all.
4. Heightened security at schools.
The first of these two options are unpalatable due to both the inefficacy of implementing them and the ethical dilemma with curtailing people's liberty and property rights, and the last two of these four options are not changes to gun policy.
Originally posted by Surtur
He posted an article that was about how this kid had a MAGA hat on. I said if he was doing so to imply Trump and others like him inspired this...well, you can't very well then say "but no, leftist rhetoric didn't inspire the Scalise shooting!".It's all or nothing. And do not come at me about it being off topic, I don't care.
EDIT: Actually wait, the topic is mass shootings. I dunno, seems Scalise would be on topic then.
So he mentions a fact about the perpetrator involved in the shooting being discussed and you mention a completely unrelated shooting? You had plenty of other shootings to choose from but chose that particular one. Why not Sutherland Springs? Why not Virginia tech? Why not Sandy Hook or Northern Illinois University or Las Vegas or Fort Hood or San Bernadino?