The reason for calling Beto ‘Robert Francis’ is to, well, mock him. It’s like how people called Mitt Romney “Willard” during the 2012 election. Trying to take his more obscure name.
No, I am not.
Respectfully, that’s a you problem.
I don’t know about Kroger’s, but I’m aware of a bunch of Wal-Mart shoppers that needed one a few weeks ago.
Is opening with mocking the best way to comport oneself in a debate? If your goal in the debate you are starting is to influence the opinions of others is that the most productive way to do so? If the goal is not to influence opinions, then what is the goal of this thread?
So you think the solution to mass shootings is to create shoot out at the OK corrall type scenarios at Walmart? Just have everyone open fire and hope they are shooting at the actual bad guy with the gun and not one of the other good guys with guns? Why do so many people think life is an action movie and they are the hero?
Francis is always going to sound funny for me now, since Deadpool came out.
I want to see cites that “the media”, after these mass shootings, praised these shooters as REAL AMERICAN HEROES.
It’s not guns. It’s the irresponsible fuckwads who can’t be trusted to own guns, and the spineless enablers who hide behind 200-year-old ink on paper who would rather see schoolchildren be gunned down in the classroom than actually do something besides Thinking and Praying.
Freedom comes with responsibility. Can’t handle the responsibility, can’t have the freedom. Welcome to adulthood, cupcake.
Well you’re in for another good chuckle if you watch Stripes.
Seems to me, the biggest setback for gun control is electing politicians who have whored themselves out to the NRA and gun manufacturer lobby.
Another setback is the completely ineffective way that Democrats talk about gun control. Saying, “Nobody is coming for your guns”, is a bullshit denial and no pro-gun voter buys it. They ought to come up with a concise and honest platform about what roles they believe guns ought to play in modern american society. Above all, they ought to make it clear that reduction in guns will be done by policy and laws with generational long term impact; not by government storm troopers knocking down doors in the middle of the night. Develop the talking points playbook and make sure every Democratic candidate knows the fucking chorus by heart. None of this all over the map namby-pamby bullshit that Republicans cherry pick and use against them.
There is a bit of a tension between claiming that you knew all along that Democrats all secretly want to take your guns and claiming that Beto saying he wants confiscation is a game-changer on the politics of guns.
I cannot prove it, but I suspect that the truth of the matter is that most voters who intensely prioritize gun ownership already believe that most Democrats favor confiscation of semi-automatic rifles with large magazines, and also that Democratic politicians as an aggregate do not secretly favor such confiscation, and nothing Beto says changes that.
Except that I havent seen a word of this. Maybe it’s in Texas? Only smear machine I read and hear is vs Biden.
Banning the AR15 wont do anything about "the problem. " If it’s violent crime you are talking about as “the problem” AR15s (or any rifle) are used extremely rarely in crime/murders. If it’s mass shootings- not only are there plenty of other weapons that would do just as well, but sociologists have shown it’s the media as the media glorifies the shooters. It’s not guns.
Indeed “some guns” can. But Heller seemed to make it clear that guns in common use can’t be. Fully auto weapons, sawed off shotguns and other guns which have been banned for a while can continue to be banned under Heller.
There has been almost no crimes committed by citizens with CCW permits. You know the permits that require the kind of background checks , training and etc that the Gun grabbers have been wanted for all gun owners? CCW holders are about the safest gun owners you could have.
People get robbed on the way to the store, women get raped coming out of stores and etc all the time.
OFFS, give this one trick pony a rest, will ya.
It’s not a great term but “assault weapon” is what you want.
Ignorance is awesome! I mean, if you or kirkrapine want to make sweeping and erroneous, ignorant, and foolish assertions that’s your call. I could tell you what the generally accepted nomenclature is for that type of firearm, what the characteristics are that determine that nomenclature, but I’m not sure you actually want to know. The article you linked quotes a former special agent of BATFE calling it a weapon of mass destruction which is about on par with the rhetorical accuracy being displayed here.
*The second dose came as I held my breath, hoping and praying the media wouldn’t amplify the violence.
But they did.
They did exactly what was needed to influence the next perpetrator to lock and load.
-
They named the shooter. -
They described his characteristics. -
They detailed the crime. -
They numbered the victims. -
They ranked him against other “successful” attackers.
School shootings are a contagion. And the media are consistent accomplices in most every one of them.
There’s really no useful debate on the point. The consensus of social scientists since David Phillips’ groundbreaking work in 1974 is that highly publicized stories of deviant and dangerous behavior influences copycat incidents. *
*This study suggests that there is a pattern
between the spread of mass shooting news on social media platforms and the increase in these crimes. Over
time, as social media has increased in usage, so has the coverage of news concerning mass shootings. This
also further reflects shooters’ desire for fame and their tendency to copy a crime.
Evidence from this study reveals a large increase in the number of mass shootings after 2011’s social
media milestones, and one can conclude that social media most likely has some effect on these crimes,
although the degree of this relationship is beyond the scope of this study. *
*Shooters get enormous attention: their name, photo, motivations, and story are often shared for days following the event. The American Psychological Association points out that this “fame” is something that most mass shooters desire.[2] This sometime inspires a copycat shooting, where the potential shooter typically tries to kill more people than their predecessor.
The number of mass shootings in the U.S. has increased exponentially since the early 2000s*
Its’ that “200 year old ink” that allows the media to get away with causing these shootings and allows you to post here.
:rolleyes:
I know, science and facts often get in the way of emotions.
Too bad.
I thought it was them video games that was to blame.
Many ignorant people would rather listen to trump than actual scientists and experts.
What would you call that weapon then? Just as a broad term?