Why the hell are people wanting to blame Trump for the shooting going on in the country?
He didn't raise your damn children! That's your job!
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Bean17 · 46-50, F
Anyone who takes millions of dollars from the NRA is fair game to be blamed. Especially when they’re still refusing common sense change to prevent this terrible, tragic occurrence from happening again. And there have been many adults who have been the ones committing the mass shootings, too. It’s not just young people and it’s not just in schools.
Sicarium · 46-50, M
@Bean17 The NRA is a civil rights organization whose money comes from members, US citizens, not the boogeyman leftist try to make it out to be.
Also, just saying "common sense change" doesn't actually mean it's common sense change, it's just change you're in favor of. And most of the "common sense" changes I've seen wouldn't actually change a thing when it comes to preventing mass shootings. It's just gun control packaged up to sell to the latest tragedy.
If all you're interested in is placing blame and holding onto some pretend moral highground, then, by all means, keep doing what you're doing.
Also, just saying "common sense change" doesn't actually mean it's common sense change, it's just change you're in favor of. And most of the "common sense" changes I've seen wouldn't actually change a thing when it comes to preventing mass shootings. It's just gun control packaged up to sell to the latest tragedy.
If all you're interested in is placing blame and holding onto some pretend moral highground, then, by all means, keep doing what you're doing.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@Sicarium The bulk of the NRA's money now comes in the form of contributions, grants, royalty income, and advertising, much of it originating from gun industry sources. Mostly gun industry, if you're looking at the numbers closely. So yeah, they have a vested interest in putting as many firearms as possible out there.
Common sense is common sense. You say "gun control." I say "sensible regulation." If I fought for the right to hand out matches during forest fires, you'd think I was lacking in all...common sense.
Common sense is common sense. You say "gun control." I say "sensible regulation." If I fought for the right to hand out matches during forest fires, you'd think I was lacking in all...common sense.
Sicarium · 46-50, M
@Graylight That is simply false, it's a lie told by leftists to push yet another fake narrative. And if the majority of the NRA's money came from the gun industry, you wouldn't have to look that closely to see it.
Straw man, nobody is arguing to hand out matches during a forest fire. And it's an inane example. Matches during an on going forest fire wouldn't have any impact, the forest fire is already going.
You're not defining what your version of "common sense" is. That is telling. There's a reason people hide behind slogans and platitudes. They don't want to speak the truth.
Straw man, nobody is arguing to hand out matches during a forest fire. And it's an inane example. Matches during an on going forest fire wouldn't have any impact, the forest fire is already going.
You're not defining what your version of "common sense" is. That is telling. There's a reason people hide behind slogans and platitudes. They don't want to speak the truth.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Graylight · 51-55, F
@Sicarium You're right. You don't have to look closely [i]at all[/i] to see it. Simply check their annual earnings report or consider LaPierre's 5.1 million in annual salary and bonuses.
You may not be talking about a forest fire, but when guns are killings people in this country unnecessarily, more guns aren't going to solve the problem. Common sense. There is no imaginary conservative's map of good guy/bad guy, right side/wrong side. It's much, much more complex than that and firearms are caught up in the argument. You would think the least we could do is halt the gunfire while we sort it out.
But if your God-given right to carry a gun to keep that precious testosterone going is more important than collective safety and sanity, by all means. What are a few thousand innocent victims a year against your desires?
http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-industry-funds-nra-2013-1
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082
http://fortune.com/2016/01/05/nra-gun-owners-obama/
http://www.businessinsider.com/nra-lobbying-money-national-rifle-association-washington-2012-12
You may not be talking about a forest fire, but when guns are killings people in this country unnecessarily, more guns aren't going to solve the problem. Common sense. There is no imaginary conservative's map of good guy/bad guy, right side/wrong side. It's much, much more complex than that and firearms are caught up in the argument. You would think the least we could do is halt the gunfire while we sort it out.
But if your God-given right to carry a gun to keep that precious testosterone going is more important than collective safety and sanity, by all means. What are a few thousand innocent victims a year against your desires?
http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-industry-funds-nra-2013-1
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082
http://fortune.com/2016/01/05/nra-gun-owners-obama/
http://www.businessinsider.com/nra-lobbying-money-national-rifle-association-washington-2012-12
NewBecky · 51-55, F
@Graylight Guns are only the tool used to kill. You said guns kill people but that is simply not true. If someone USES a gun then the gun is not put on trial... the murderer is. If the tool were a car do we ban cars? Of course not! But guns would be useful tools for defense as well and cars are nice. :)
Graylight · 51-55, F
@NewBecky No, but we also don't say, "Cars don't crash, people do." Yes, it's technically true. A human must power any inanimate object in order for it to become a deadly force.
As an argument for regulation on the one single product we don't regulate in this country for reasons of safety and wellbeing, it's seriously lacking. In fact, it means nothing.
A car is built for transport of people and things. It can be deadly, but that's an anomalous occurrence given its intended use. Guns are built to destroy. They were designed for killing. That is their singular intended use. Right now, they're being use more effectively in their purpose than ever before. Yes, defense is good, yes, shooting can be a hobby, yes, there are a select, [i]select[/i] few who rely on it for food.
But in this country right now, more innocents are killed by firepower than criminals. 35% of annual gun deaths are attributable to homicide. That leaves another 75% margin for error. In any other industry or undertaking, that's a serious failure rate. Much of it is suicide, which detractors will say is a foregone conclusion for the person involved anyway, but that's simply not true and statistics bear that out.
But this is all a nice conversation to have over drinks. Meanwhile, the facts are people continue to die, children continue to die, the national psyche becomes more fragile and we start fearing every shadow. Until we know what to do about the gun issue in this country, it's not a lot to ask for a moratorium in the form of at least temporary regulation. And not bump stocks, mental checks, style of gun, hoodie worn or any other little 'niche' crowd. It's about removing firepower from the hands of the roughly 60% of "responsible, trained gun owners" who account for too many deaths.
As an argument for regulation on the one single product we don't regulate in this country for reasons of safety and wellbeing, it's seriously lacking. In fact, it means nothing.
A car is built for transport of people and things. It can be deadly, but that's an anomalous occurrence given its intended use. Guns are built to destroy. They were designed for killing. That is their singular intended use. Right now, they're being use more effectively in their purpose than ever before. Yes, defense is good, yes, shooting can be a hobby, yes, there are a select, [i]select[/i] few who rely on it for food.
But in this country right now, more innocents are killed by firepower than criminals. 35% of annual gun deaths are attributable to homicide. That leaves another 75% margin for error. In any other industry or undertaking, that's a serious failure rate. Much of it is suicide, which detractors will say is a foregone conclusion for the person involved anyway, but that's simply not true and statistics bear that out.
But this is all a nice conversation to have over drinks. Meanwhile, the facts are people continue to die, children continue to die, the national psyche becomes more fragile and we start fearing every shadow. Until we know what to do about the gun issue in this country, it's not a lot to ask for a moratorium in the form of at least temporary regulation. And not bump stocks, mental checks, style of gun, hoodie worn or any other little 'niche' crowd. It's about removing firepower from the hands of the roughly 60% of "responsible, trained gun owners" who account for too many deaths.
NewBecky · 51-55, F