# Did Rand Paul say political involvement of parents of gunned down kids is inappropriate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 18, 2013, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003 "2013-04-18T03:03:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/161 "2013-04-23T19:17:42Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Republican anger at Boston and calls for immigration reform to be delays is bullshit because it would do nothing to prevent these attacks in the future, and has no connection. I’m going to ignore the rest of your unsubstantiated rant and ask you: Do you realize that the older brother, and most likely ring leader of the two, was in the process of becoming a naturalized citizen? That somehow our immigration system was a giant FAILURE in this instance? The details are only sketchy now, but as they become clearer I think it’s very reasonable to assume that some changes in our immigration procedures need to be fixed. Seriously, our immigration procedures have “no connection” to this event? None? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/162 "2013-04-23T21:48:24Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Who says the families are acting improperly? Not Rand Paul, and no one here (that I recall). > > No one is criticizing the families, **NotfooledbyW**. You seem to want to make things out like they are, so you can paint your political opponents as being cold, heartless monsters, but the facts don’t support that wish. You are criticizing the emotional political actions of these families when you claim their actions are ‘producing outcomes that are irrational’. Perhaps you expect that we believe that you appreciate the actions that these families have taken that help to produce irrational outcomes. Are you in favor of irrational outcomes and are you pleased with people who contribute to irrational political outcomes by their actions? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/163 "2013-04-24T01:46:17Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You are criticizing the emotional political actions of these families when you claim their actions are ‘producing outcomes that are irrational’. No, I’m not. The irrational outcomes were internment of Japanese-Americans, the PATRIOT Act, and the Iraq War. The actions of the Newtown families may or may not produce an outcome that is irrational in retrospect. No law has been passed yet, anything that gets passed may or may not be a rational response to Newtown, whether or not the Newtown families support it. The mere fact that some Newtown families are in favor of this or that bill doesn’t make the law irrational. Also, there’s no way to isolate the effect of this group of people (again, they are not Congressmen or the President) on the process. As private citizens, they can engage in any (legal) political activity they want. It’s up to our elected officials to do their job and pass sensible laws. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Perhaps you expect that we believe that you appreciate the actions that these families have taken that help to produce irrational outcomes. What? > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Are you in favor of irrational outcomes and are you pleased with people who contribute to irrational political outcomes by their actions? No, I’m not in favor of irrational outcomes. Good thing our laws are in the hands of 535 Congressmen and the President, who are accountable for those outcomes. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/164 "2013-04-24T16:06:12Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I’m merely suggesting that your anger is too narrowly focused. What would you prefer I focus on? > [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m going to ignore the rest of your unsubstantiated rant and ask you: Do you realize that the older brother, and most likely ring leader of the two, was in the process of becoming a naturalized citizen? That somehow our immigration system was a giant FAILURE in this instance? The details are only sketchy now, but as they become clearer I think it’s very reasonable to assume that some changes in our immigration procedures need to be fixed. > > Seriously, our immigration procedures have “no connection” to this event? None? Absolutely positively fucking NONE. These guys immigrated here 10 years ago. Whatever path they chose afterwards did not start with immigration. Immigration was not the cause of their radicalism. Any person in the US could have gone through what they did in the last few years, long after they immigrated, and resulted in the bombers we see now. Playing up immigration just because they weren’t citizens by birth is a red herring and completely irrelevant. It would be as pointless as saying McVeigh was white and we need to profile white people because they might be a danger. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/165 "2013-04-24T16:25:13Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > What would you prefer I focus on? Whatever you like. I’d suggest widening the scope of your righteous fury to include the people on the gun-control side who prevent meaningful progress from being made; people like Diane Feinstein. But, this is a thread about some remarks made by Rand Paul, and I don’t wish to hijack it, so I’ll leave it at that. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/166 "2013-04-24T16:48:23Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > What would you prefer I focus on? > > Absolutely positively fucking NONE. > > These guys immigrated here 10 years ago. Whatever path they chose afterwards did not start with immigration. Immigration was not the cause of their radicalism. Any person in the US could have gone through what they did in the last few years, long after they immigrated, and resulted in the bombers we see now. Playing up immigration just because they weren’t citizens by birth is a red herring and completely irrelevant. It would be as pointless as saying McVeigh was white and we need to profile white people because they might be a danger. You’re absolutely, positively fucking WRONG. The older brother was still in the immigration process. This has nothing to do with profiling, and everything to do with screening people who are trying to enter the US and/or become citizens. Just because we have our own home-grown domestic terrorism nut-jobs doesn’t mean we should ignore the foreign ones that want to come here and become citizens. And who says immigration was the cause of the radicalism? The process should screen out those who are on that path. The younger brother probably wasn’t when he became a citizen (although he may have been, we don’t know), but the older brother absolutely was. You do the progressive cause no favors by hand-waving this away. You just play into the stereotypes of conservatives and re-inforce their beliefs that those stereotypes are correct. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/167 "2013-04-24T18:12:52Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The older brother was still in the immigration process. The guy came to the US in 2002. Immigration processes may take a while, but they’ve been here physically for a decade. The length of the process has shit all to do with their radicalization and holding it up for other people would benefit no one except the GOP. Whether or not they would have been naturalized then, or now, or 10 years from now obviously had no hand in what they decided to do. Saying that immigrants who have stayed in the US for 10 years could have their radicalization affected by a process where they were still physically in the US and free to travel around has abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with the attacks. I want you to close your eyes and think of how, if immigration reform was passed, they could have revealed some aspect of the brothers 10 years ago when they first came to the US, or when the FBI questioned them in 2011, that could have gotten them deported. Read that again: the FBI questioned Tamerlan in 2011 and he wasn’t on the first plane back to Russia. There is no indication that his immigration status had anything to do with the bombings. It is completely a conservative tactic of fearmongering foreigners. Immigration reform should not and will not be stopped by this because there is zero connection ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/168 "2013-04-24T18:20:10Z")
Immigration is a process, not an event. It doesn’t end when you get off the plane at JFK. The older brother was “in the system” and it didn’t detect him. Claiming this event has no relation to immigration is to ignore the facts that the older brother was still in the process. Of course the system is not set up, nor should it be, to monitor people once they become citizens. But one of these guys was not yet a citizen. And we still don’t know if the younger one had started his path towards becoming radicalized when he became a citizen-- that was only 2 1/2 years ago. Focusing on their physical arrival in the US 10 years ago is to see only a piece of the puzzle. That’s where the process begins, not where it ends. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/169 "2013-04-24T18:31:12Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m going to ignore the rest of your unsubstantiated rant and ask you: Do you realize that the older brother, and most likely ring leader of the two, was in the process of becoming a naturalized citizen? That somehow our immigration system was a giant FAILURE in this instance? The details are only sketchy now, but as they become clearer I think it’s very reasonable to assume that some changes in our immigration procedures need to be fixed. > > Seriously, our immigration procedures have “no connection” to this event? None? This is what small government advocates are all about. This is what deregulation is all about: deregulated economies blow up, deregulated industrial facilities blow up, because it’s cheaper not to address safety concerns, or to limit profits in the name of fiscal sanity. You CANNOT trust businesses and corporations to do the right thing absent tough oversight. Self-reporting is just another name for lying. And the end result is KABOOM!!! Remember that when next you hear conservatives and libertarians defaming government oversight. We have a kaboom therefore it must be deregulation. And oddly enough, the immigration process has a lot of self-reporting. For example, one of the questions from the [Green Card application](http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf) is: _4. Have you EVER engaged in, conspired to engage in, or do you intend to engage in, or have you ever solicited membership or funds for, or have you through any means ever assisted or provided any type of material support to any person or organization that has ever engaged or conspired to engage in sabotage, kidnapping, political assassination, hijacking or any other form of terrorist activity? Yes or No_ More proof that self-reporting = kaboom. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/170 "2013-04-24T20:34:16Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Immigration is a process, not an event. It doesn’t end when you get off the plane at JFK. The older brother was “in the system” and it didn’t detect him. Claiming this event has no relation to immigration is to ignore the facts that the older brother was still in the process. Of course the system is not set up, nor should it be, to monitor people once they become citizens. But one of these guys was not yet a citizen. And we still don’t know if the younger one had started his path towards becoming radicalized when he became a citizen-- that was only 2 1/2 years ago. > > Focusing on their physical arrival in the US 10 years ago is to see only a piece of the puzzle. That’s where the process begins, not where it ends. You’re wrong. The purpose of this conversation is whether immigration reform would have had an impact on the bombings by pointing these guys out to the proper authorities. You are trying to say that if somehow the process were altered through immigration reform, that it would hurt the US, which is the conservative talking point they’re using right now to try and stop immigration reform. You even pointed it out yourself, they missed the one who was already a naturalized citizen. Do you think that anything would have been uncovered in Tamerlan’s investigation that could have been stopped them when they already let the younger one achieve citizenship? Of course the answer is no. If we wanted to stop them, we would have had to find something in 2002 when they first came to the US. Failing that, they were treated as normal immigrants, just like the millions who come to this country every year. There is no way to predict who’s going to be a radical that takes up arms against the US or the American people from that process. None at all. This immigration issue is just one more thing for the right to point to and get people’s fears riled up. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/171 "2013-04-24T20:44:08Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > You’re wrong. The purpose of this conversation is whether immigration reform would have had an impact on the bombings by pointing these guys out to the proper authorities. You are trying to say that if somehow the process were altered through immigration reform, that it would hurt the US, which is the conservative talking point they’re using right now to try and stop immigration reform. You even pointed it out yourself, they missed the one who was already a naturalized citizen. Do you think that anything would have been uncovered in Tamerlan’s investigation that could have been stopped them when they already let the younger one achieve citizenship? Of course the answer is no. > > If we wanted to stop them, we would have had to find something in 2002 when they first came to the US. Failing that, they were treated as normal immigrants, just like the millions who come to this country every year. There is no way to predict who’s going to be a radical that takes up arms against the US or the American people from that process. None at all. This immigration issue is just one more thing for the right to point to and get people’s fears riled up. No, I am not saying any of those things. I’m saying that claiming it has “nothing” to do with immigration is to put your fingers in your ears and shout LALALALALALA because you want immigration reform and you want it NOW. You can bet your bottom dollar that Congresscritters on both sides of the aisle are going to be asking questions of the INS about why their process let these slip through the cracks. Whether this should slow down the current reform process is debatable. Whether this event had something, as opposed to “nothing”, to do with immigration is not. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2013, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/172 "2013-04-24T22:32:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No, I am not saying any of those things. I’m saying that claiming it has “nothing” to do with immigration is to put your fingers in your ears and shout LALALALALALA because you want immigration reform and you want it NOW. You can bet your bottom dollar that Congresscritters on both sides of the aisle are going to be asking questions of the INS about why their process let these slip through the cracks. Whether this should slow down the current reform process is debatable. Whether this event had something, as opposed to “nothing”, to do with immigration is not. The fact that the incidents happened 10 years later shows that nothing substantive can be traced to the immigration process. Its simple cause and effect, really. If, for example, the brothers were recently denied citizenship and THAT lead to their anger, then I could see where immigration played a part. If they recently immigrated and INS missed obvious radical connections, then immigration played a part. Hell, if an INS driver got into a car accident with their car, that could have set them off. But these were US residents of 10 years. Anything can happen in 10 years. Hell, one of them got married. Tracing it back to immigration is just an easy way to blame immigrants. I’d like you to answer a few questions. Tamerlan went to Cambridge Rindge and Latin High School. Why do you think that wasn’t the cause of his radicalism? He attended Bunker Hill Community College. What makes you rule that out as a possible cause? He dropped out of college to become a boxer. Why not trace his radicalism there? He married Katherine Russell. Maybe she was the cause? You have this guy with a whole 20+ year history of things you could look at but you and the GOP trace it directly to his status as an immigrant and blame it on that. Why? What proof do you have that it was THE cause or even A cause? You don’t know. But what you guys do know is that you don’t want immigration reform and you’re using something absolutely 100% unrelated to that bill to demonize it simply because of the fact that the bomber was an immigrant. You may as well blame it on his Russian roots, his taste in music, or the clothes he buys. There is NO connection. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/173 "2013-04-25T02:49:44Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > The fact that the incidents happened 10 years later shows that nothing substantive can be traced to the immigration process. Its simple cause and effect, really. If, for example, the brothers were recently denied citizenship and THAT lead to their anger, then I could see where immigration played a part. If they recently immigrated and INS missed obvious radical connections, then immigration played a part. Hell, if an INS driver got into a car accident with their car, that could have set them off. > > But these were US residents of 10 years. Anything can happen in 10 years. Hell, one of them got married. Tracing it back to immigration is just an easy way to blame immigrants. > > I’d like you to answer a few questions. Tamerlan went to Cambridge Rindge and Latin High School. Why do you think that wasn’t the cause of his radicalism? > > He attended Bunker Hill Community College. What makes you rule that out as a possible cause? > > He dropped out of college to become a boxer. Why not trace his radicalism there? > > He married Katherine Russell. Maybe she was the cause? > > You have this guy with a whole 20+ year history of things you could look at but you and the GOP trace it directly to his status as an immigrant and blame it on that. Why? What proof do you have that it was THE cause or even A cause? You don’t know. But what you guys do know is that you don’t want immigration reform and you’re using something absolutely 100% unrelated to that bill to demonize it simply because of the fact that the bomber was an immigrant. You may as well blame it on his Russian roots, his taste in music, or the clothes he buys. There is NO connection. You don’t even have the facts straight, so I don’t really see much value in debating this with you. Tamerlane was the older brother. The younger brother went to Cambridge Rindge and Latin HS (not that that even matters, though). You are myopically focused on events 10 years ago when both brothers were still in the immigration system just 2 1/2 years ago, and Tamerlan was still in the system the day he died. To say this has nothing to do with immigration is to ignore the facts. The ring leader and instigator of the bombing was a wannabe citizen still being screened by INS. This has “nothing” to do with immigration? Nothing? You are conflating the idea that this is primarily an immigration problem with the idea that is at least somewhat of an immigration problem. This is a complex problem, of which immigration is a factor. How much of a factor remains to be seen. But fortunately the folks how matter are not idealogues and will take a comprehensive approach to the investigation and not one filtered through a biased political perspective. ETA: As Bill Maher would say, your post is liberal bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/174 "2013-04-25T03:06:53Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yes to all. Did you think there was always something bad about being a prop? > > Props can be used to convey useful information or they can be used to tug at one’s heartstrings. Now you’re just being disingenuous. Why would Paul be upset about people being used as props unless he meant the usual negative connotation of the word? If emotional arguments are so freaking bad, why in the world are you guys defending Ryan for making an emotional argument? His entire statement is about how he feels bad about people being used. It’s entirely created in order to sway people by emotion, trying to get them to feel like he does. If he were sticking to just the facts, then maybe you’d have a point. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/175 "2013-04-25T05:43:30Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Whatever you like. I’d suggest widening the scope of your righteous fury to include the people on the gun-control side who prevent meaningful progress from being made; people like Diane Feinstein. > > But, this is a thread about some remarks made by Rand Paul, and I don’t wish to hijack it, so I’ll leave it at that. -04-24-2013 12:25 PM Your dislike of Diane Feinstein is not a hijack of this thread because you have defended Rand Paul’s emotional and unreasonable anti-gun control position as the reasonable and sensible position while you attack Diane Feinstein’s position as harmful and opposed to meaningful progress. Feinstein and Obama and the families of the victims have the majority on their side even in Kentucky. Just imagine what a similar poll would say in California. First, Kentucky: > [@](#): > > {Many of President Barack Obama’s gun-control measures supported in Courier-Journal Bluegrass Poll Jan 30, 2013 > > A majority of Kentuckians support gun-control measures proposed by President Barack Obama — even though they believe the right to own firearms is more important than the need to control them, according to the Courier-Journal Bluegrass Poll. > > The poll of 700 Kentucky residents, conducted by SurveyUSA, found that 56 percent favor stricter gun-control laws, but 65 percent said they believe guns protect law-abiding citizens more than they make society more dangerous. > Poll respondents also said they favor several specific gun-control measures, including background checks, registration and limits on the amount of ammunition that can be purchased at one time. –Cited by Ntfldbw 04-20-2013 01:32 AM 110a0132} And what about Senator Kelly Ayotte? New Hampshirites are reasonale and knowledgeable and independent thinking people aren’t they? > [@](#): > > April 24, 2013 Ayotte faces backlash over gun vote > > Gun show background checks are pretty universally popular in New Hampshire…and Kelly Ayotte is facing some serious backlash from voters in the state for voting against them last week. > > Ayotte now has a negative approval rating with 44% of voters giving her good marks and 46% disapproving. That’s down a net 15 points from the last time we polled on her, in October, when she had a 48% approval with 35% disapproving. 75% of New Hampshire voters- including 95% of Democrats, 74% of independents, and 56% of Republicans- say they support background checks. And 50% of voters in the state say Ayotte’s ‘no’ vote will make them less likely to support her in a future election, compared to just 23% who consider it to be a positive. > > [http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/](http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/) Rand Paul operating in a Red State does not make him right about opposing gun regulations that most of the country would support. Compared to Diane Fienstien he is the emotional and irrational one bucking the sane constituents of all of America. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/176 "2013-04-25T07:31:26Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > No, I’m not. The irrational outcomes were internment of Japanese-Americans, the PATRIOT Act, and the Iraq War. You have irrationally cited the above ‘irrational outcomes’ as some kind of indicator that the Newtown Families with all their emotion right after a tragedy could cause another irrational outcome which would equal something as disastrous as the Iraq invasion. Maybe maybe not.. but you are surely concerned about it. But the Invasion of Iraq was not emotionally driven by ‘victims’ of the 9/11 attacks who were then petitioning the a reluctanct Federal Governemnt to invade Iraq… The Bush Administration drove fear into the hearts of non-victiim to get his war. The Gun Control Debate is much differenent… It is does not arise out of a foreign threat either real or perceived or fabricated. The Gun Victims loss is real… not imagined like Iraq’s WMD. The opponents of the Gun violence victims are an organized lobby group that have had their way for setting policy of several decades. I believe the current gun laws in effect are irrational and were enacted due to emotion more than anything else. So what you are saying is the current victims rights activisits are wrong and you link that emotion to the kind of emotion that produced the Iraq War, but the gun lobby side are all reasonable clear thinking folks and the laws on the books are reasonable ones and we should not let emotions of parents who had their children gunned down in Kindergarten change them. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/177 "2013-04-25T12:57:01Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Your dislike of Diane Feinstein is not a hijack of this thread because you have defended Rand Paul’s emotional and unreasonable anti-gun control position as the reasonable and sensible position while you attack Diane Feinstein’s position as harmful and opposed to meaningful progress. Yes, it is a hijack, this thread is about Rand Paul’s remarks, not the gun debate in general, or politicians in general. I haven’t defended Rand Paul’s position on guns, either, I defended his specific remarks that this thread is supposedly about. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Feinstein and Obama and the families of the victims have the majority on their side even in Kentucky. Just imagine what a similar poll would say in California. > > First, Kentucky: Wow, 56%! It’s a sea change! Seriously, that poll isn’t nearly as conclusive as you seem to think it is. What random constituents say on a telephone poll isn’t all that impactful to the political process. It’s the constituents that organize, that deliver a message to their representatives (vote our way, or we won’t vote for you!) that get results. If you’re right, and Rand Paul isn’t representing what his constituents want, he’ll be out of office in what, 2016? > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > And what about Senator Kelly Ayotte? New Hampshirites are reasonale and knowledgeable and independent thinking people aren’t they? There’s 1.3 million of them, I’m sure they run a gamet. Looks like her constituents are unhappy with her on this issue, and it could cost her her seat, or prompt her to change her views. This is how the system is supposed to work. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Rand Paul operating in a Red State does not make him right about opposing gun regulations that most of the country would support. > > Compared to Diane Fienstien he is the emotional and irrational one bucking the sane constituents of all of America. Rand Paul operating in Kentucky means he represents and serves Kentuckians. “Most of the country” didn’t elect him, nor do they have the choice to re-elect him, or send him home, so he’s not accountable to them. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/178 "2013-04-25T13:26:10Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You have irrationally cited the above ‘irrational outcomes’ as some kind of indicator that the Newtown Families with all their emotion right after a tragedy could cause another irrational outcome which would equal something as disastrous as the Iraq invasion. Maybe maybe not.. but you are surely concerned about it. It’s “irrational” to point out that past legislative actions done in a time of heightened emotion have produced poor outcomes? That’s just history, I’m afraid. Of course they _could_ contribute, in their small way, to an irrational outcome. It sure isn’t looking likely at this time, of course. No, it needn’t be as disasterous as the Iraq War to be an irrational outcome, that’s a ridiculous thing to say. I was a lot more concerned about it back in December than I am now, as it happens. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > But the Invasion of Iraq was not emotionally driven by ‘victims’ of the 9/11 attacks who were then petitioning the a reluctanct Federal Governemnt to invade Iraq… The Bush Administration drove fear into the hearts of non-victiim to get his war. And? I was writing about irrational outcomes from choices made in times of heightened emotion, such as after a tragedy. The Iraq War is an example of such. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > The Gun Control Debate is much differenent… It is does not arise out of a foreign threat either real or perceived or fabricated. The Gun Victims loss is real… not imagined like Iraq’s WMD. The opponents of the Gun violence victims are an organized lobby group that have had their way for setting policy of several decades. “Opponents of gun violence victims?” :smack: Pro-gun-rights lobby groups would beg to differ that they’ve had their way for setting policy, I’m sure. Unless your position is that any law restricting firearms is automatically a good one, then you should see the need to carefully and dispassionately write and pass such laws. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I believe the current gun laws in effect are irrational and were enacted due to emotion more than anything else. Are you aware that there were _no_ federal gun laws until 1934? The default was _no_ laws, and of the 8 major laws since 1934, six restricted firearms, one protected gun manufacturers from certain lawsuits, and the other had some restrictions and some protections for gun owners. So, you’re tarnishing gun-control laws as irrational, and enacted due to emotion. I happen to disagree with your radical, anti-gun-control position. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > So what you are saying is the current victims rights activisits are wrong and you link that emotion to the kind of emotion that produced the Iraq War, but the gun lobby side are all reasonable clear thinking folks and the laws on the books are reasonable ones and we should not let emotions of parents who had their children gunned down in Kindergarten change them. No, what I said was that acting hastily in the aftermath of a tragedy can produce irrational outcomes. **You** invented everything in the above paragraph, out of whole cloth. No, we shouldn’t let the emotions of _anyone_ change _any_ laws about _anything_, because laws need to be grounded in reason and common sense, not emotions. **That doesn’t preclude changing gun laws!** Because there are reasonable changes that can and should be made. Manchin-Toomey, for one, with its badly-needed overhaul of NICS. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/179 "2013-04-25T17:06:59Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > You don’t even have the facts straight, so I don’t really see much value in debating this with you. Tamerlane was the older brother. The younger brother went to Cambridge Rindge and Latin HS (not that that even matters, though). You must have mistaken me for somebody who said he thought Tamerlan was the younger brother :dubious: Also, you apparently forgot there were 2 brothers and they could have BOTH went to Cambridge Rindge: [Cite](http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1148865564/Slain-bombing-suspect-had-arrest-record-in-Cambridge#axzz2R2U9zJQQ). According to that link: > [@](#): > > Tamerlan Tsarnaev was Suspect 1 in the Boston Marathon bombings on Monday, April 15. A native of the Chechnya region in Russia and part-time enginnering student at Bunker Hill Community College, Tsarnaev had attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin High School, where during his sophomore year he developed an interest in boxing. . Though from another source, it only mentioned the younger went there (and didn’t say the older didn’t go). Chalk it up to early reports before the info got sorted out I guess. I got the info from wiki and checked the link, which is probably what you did, so its pretty irrelevant who thought who went to what high school. However: > [@John\_Mace](#): > > You are myopically focused on events 10 years ago when both brothers were still in the immigration system just 2 1/2 years ago, and Tamerlan was still in the system the day he died. No, you are myopically focused on immigration because it falls into your beliefs that immigrants are bad. Most recently, the older was a boxer and the younger was a student at Dartmouth. Why don’t you think that has something to do with the bombing? > [@John\_Mace](#): > > To say this has nothing to do with immigration is to ignore the facts. The ring leader and instigator of the bombing was a wannabe citizen still being screened by INS. The facts are that this has nothing to do with immigration. I await your reasoning why it didn’t originate from the older’s boxing career and/or the younger’s current student status at Dartmouth > [@John\_Mace](#): > > This has “nothing” to do with immigration? Nothing? You are conflating the idea that this is primarily an immigration problem with the idea that is at least somewhat of an immigration problem. This is a complex problem, of which immigration is a factor. How much of a factor remains to be seen. But fortunately the folks how matter are not idealogues and will take a comprehensive approach to the investigation and not one filtered through a biased political perspective. Walking back the goalposts eh? First it was all about fixing immigration to prevent this, calling it a giant failure (as if a 10 year old case could reveal much about the participants, both of whom were children at the time), then it was “we must stop immigration reform and investigate it!”, now you seem to have walked back to simply that it was part of the problem. Again, the immigration reform bill has ZERO to do with this case. You still haven’t explained how you simply ruled out the high school, Bunker Hill college, boxing, or his wife as factors. Your posts make little sense until you establish your reasoning for ignoring those possible motivations > [@John\_Mace](#): > > ETA: As Bill Maher would say, your post is liberal bullshit. So far you have not shown any indication at all in which immigration was a factor, a cause, a motivation, complicit, or even in the ball park with regards to the bombing. Your name-calling is appropriate, then, to show just how little you know of the subject ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2013, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003/180 "2013-04-25T18:26:28Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > No, you are myopically focused on immigration because it falls into your beliefs that immigrants are bad. I haven’t seen anywhere where **John Mace** said that immigrants are bad. Could you please provide a cite where he did? Unless you got it from where I suspect you did, in which case keep your pants on. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-rand-paul-say-political-involvement-of-parents-of-gunned-down-kids-is-inappropriate/656003.md?page=10)