The shadows behind March for our Lives.

[piezoe]

When Trump put a halt to immigration from 6 countries prone to terrorism, your side said this was a muslim ban.

Guess what? Some dumbass liberal judge agreed and halted the ban.

So your arguments on this are shot to hell.

With all due respect , fhl, I'm not able to follow your logic. (fhl, which hockey league is that?)
If I had to guess a reason, i'd guess it's because you are misstating the Judges ruling, or omitting some key feature or qualification.

 

[Poindexter]

There are two types of posts here. One type appeals to bias and emotion ; the other to logic and deliberation. Yours is of the first type. You can't support your statement with pertinent evidence or logical argument; you rely on emotion and bias. These "children", as you put it, and young adults, are making the same argument that has been advanced by adults for decades now. It is an argument that has fallen on deaf ears despite its innate logic. The argument is essentially that uniform laws restricting the ownership and purchase of certain types of guns or gun modification in conjunction with universal background checks and waiting periods would, over time, reduce the probability of these types of guns and modifications being used to commit crimes, and in particular mass shootings. That's, prima facie, a sound argument, so long as there is reason to believe probability of an instrument being used is related to its abundance and ease of availability.

What these "children" are doing now that is different from past efforts, is to directly confront politicians who persist in ignoring sound arguments in exchange for campaign contributions from the gun lobby. They have made it their goal to see that these politicians who have remained unresponsive to the majority public will shall not be re-elected . I think they will succeed, and I applaud them for taking an effective and practical approach to the severe problem of gun violence in the United States.

Those who continue to harp on Second Amendment rights have not read D.C. v Heller, or if they have, they are dumb to its most germane opinion* which begins on page 58 of the Scalia text. The Second amendment does not grant the right to own and bear any firearm of one's choosing. That was made clear by Heller and a long history of restricting access to certain types of firearms. These "children" are going to succeed where adults have failed!
_____________________
*Heller's personal victory here, viz., that the District of Columbia's gun laws were too restrictive in that they effectively denied Heller any access at all to a readily operable firearm in is home and thus constituted a violation of his second amendment right, is of secondary importance. What is most germane here is the Court's reaffirmation in Heller that the government my impose restrictions on the types of firearms that may be owned.

GTFO with your disingenuous bullshit. You had your ass handed to you in this thread:

Civil discourse on gun control
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/civil-discourse-on-gun-control.318312/

And now you're shamelessly defending the disgraceful abuse of naive children to push your anti-2A agenda -- children who you leftists claim aren't old enough to own a gun but are somehow wise enough to advise us to surrender our Constitutional rights.

Just because something bad happens, it doesn’t mean our rights go away.

Don't pretend that that "march" demonizing guns, gun owners and the NRA was about safety. Virtually no attention has been paid to the massive law enforcement failures and everything else that conflicts with the leftist gun grabbing agenda.

This is what's really going on and we can't give you an inch because you'll take a mile:

Surprise: Democrats’ New Gun Control Bill Virtually Imposes A Firearm Ban https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2018/02/27/house-introduces-gun-ban-legislation-n2454670

This ain't going to happen. I'll tell you something else. I wasn't an NRA member but am joining today. And giving them a large contribution. Screw you and your gun grabbing ilk.

 

[piezoe]

Virtually no attention has been paid to the massive law enforcement failures

My impression is that the marchers are not focusing on that. They seem to be focusing on gun laws. Perhaps you should organize and try to reform law enforcement. It's sorely needed in my opinion. I'll send you 5 bucks if you do.

 

[Tsing Tao]

My impression is that the marchers are not focusing on that.

Of course they aren't. They focus on whatever the media tells them to.

 

[futurecurrents]

Of course they aren't. They focus on whatever the media tells them to.

Yes the media told them that a girl injured during the shooting just died.

Idiot.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Yes the media told them that a girl injured during the shooting just died.

Idiot.

That's not what I said, my incestuous friend. A march about gun violence, triggered by law enforcement failures, is going after gun control when the violent event that triggered it would have been avoided altogether if the FBI and local law enforcement had taken proper action.

But that's an inconvenient truth, much like your global warming...*ahem* climate change narrative.

 

[futurecurrents]

Guns haven't changed, people have.

 

[Tsing Tao]

 

[Arnie]

ArmaLite first developed the AR-15 in the late 1950s as a military rifle, but had limited success in selling it. In 1959 the company sold the design to Colt...
AR-15-style rifles were around for more than 40 years before one was used in a mass killing, at an apartment in Crandon, Wis., in 2007. The shooter killed six people and then took his own life.

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/28/588861820/a-brief-history-of-the-ar-15

 

[Poindexter]

My impression is that the marchers are not focusing on that. They seem to be focusing on gun laws.

Of course they are... why would leftists focus on what actually went wrong when they can dishonestly exploit deaths that occurred due to nothing related to gun laws for one of their most sacred agendas (confiscation)?