Hollow point bullets!?! Oh, my goodness! You mean those things that don't pass through a person and hit some innocent behind the intended target? How awful!
It's not helping that characters like Tucker Carlson, Rand Paul, and Donald Trump are acting like Russian assets. It makes one worry how often today's conservatives are cheering for the wrong team.
You don't even need to remind me that there are quite a few on the left who seem to be parroting Russian talking points as well.
Except when they are just sizing us up to take us down, like Russia is doing a pretty good job of.
I'd say they have already sized us up in one aspect, and its a huge hurdle, but they are still trying. Japan figured it out during WWII, the American people are well armed, not only would you have to fight the military, but you would have to fight the citizens as well, men, women, and even 8 year old girls, its a battle the US enemies won't win unless they can come up with a way to disarm the citizenry like, for instance, claiming that the rest of the world is laughing at us as a way to shame people into giving up their arms, I'm sure you could come up with many ways also. Shaming may be effective for some, but there are many more that are shameless "deplorables".
They are Russian assets. trumpturd is their biggest asset. I believe that the majority of today's republicans/alleged conservatives/gqp are Russian assets.
"You don't even need to remind me that there are quite a few on the left who seem to be parroting Russian talking points as well."
Nope. There's no confusion about it. When you've got institutions of higher learning and idiots in congress trying to convince us men can have babies, no one has to wonder.
He just might think so. Remember most liberals when asked can't give a definition of what a woman is so they obviously don't know the difference between men and women.
It's not the state. It's the blithering idiot that is afraid of an inanimate object because it looks like something it's not.
The term "assault weapon" is generally used by the uneducated to describe a weapon. The AR-15 is NOT an "assault weapon". Calling it such indicates that it has a military purpose. Not a single military in the world uses it. My entire military career, not once did we refer to our weapons as "assault rifles". We called them what they were:
M4
M16
M249 or SAW
M240B
M2
M9
M777
M198
M109 or Paladin
You need special permits to purchase those. You don't need one for an AR-15.
After 26 years in the military, it's all about the nomenclature. There is a very big difference between an M4 and an M9.
Other than gun lovers, no one gives a fuck about the difference between an M4 and an M9. Its that simple. What they give a fuck about is the number of rounds that can be squeezed off in a short period of time and what type of impact those bullets have on the human body.
I would guess that not one out of 100 people, who are not NRA members or the like , cares about your belief that AR-15's are being mis named.
Well, if you got a bunch of people together calling for bans on "assault rifles", sure. They want something banned they can't even define, which is the very height of stupidity.
Is the NRA always going to be the liberal go-to boogeyman?
I would guess that not one out of 100 people, who are not NRA members or the like , cares about your belief that AR-15's are being mis named.
I'm not an NRA member. No one I know is a member. Not one of us would call an AR15 style gun an assault weapon. This would be because there are other guns that have the same capability but look more like traditional firearms. Mini 14 for example.
As useless as it will be, let me attempt to educate you on what makes an assault weapon. It's a little tricky so you'll have to carefully pay attention.
An assault weapon is designed for assault. For instance, every single weapon, from the Sig Saure M17 pistol to an ICBM and everything in between is an assault weapon. That is, they are intended for one purpose only. To kill other human beings. There are some military weapons not intended for assault, such as mines, but for the most part, everything else is for assaulting the enemy.
Guns produced for civilian use are not assault weapons because that is not their intended use. Can an AR15 be used for assault? Of course. So can a kitchen knife. So can a semi trailer truck. So can a jet liner (twin towers). So can ammonium nitrate (fertilizer).
But, Drakk! Assault weapons have high capacity mags. Yes they do. They also have barrels. So, by that logic, anything with a barrel is an assault weapon. But, Drakk! If the Uvaldi shooter didn't have an "assault weapon" he couldn't have killed so many people. BS. I can tell you that I could have gone in there and killed just as many people with handguns. And they wouldn't have to be high capacity mags, either. And all I have is standard military training and a very little practice at changing mags.
Anything can be an assault weapon. What makes it an assault weapon is what you intend to do with it. I have a Winchester 7mm Mag that only holds four rounds. Five if I have one in the chamber. For those who know the lingo, this thing is a tack driver. That means it's very accurate. If I were to set up right, I could take out a lot of people. Just like that guy in Texas in that clock tower. That's all he had. A hunting rifle, a scope and skill.
There are millions of what you call assault weapons out there. The number of people they kill isn't a patch on how many people are killed by hand guns, knives, cars and other implements. Yet because they look "scary" to those who don't bother to think about it you latch on to it and distort it into something it isn't.
Worse, you delude yourself into thinking that most people think just as you do.
No one cares man, other than those who want to defend every single type of gun. No one cares.
People care how many bullets come out of the gun in a hurry, and what the force is behind the bullet.
The idea that you can win this argument with nomenclature is ridiculous, because the people criticizing the AR-15 type weapons dont care about the nomenclature. And why should they?
The little girl in the video babbles on and on about what type of bullets she's using. No one cares other than the ones who want to buy them.
People who look at that video and are appalled dont care what her ammo is, they see her with an "assault" rifle type gun and wonder what the hell is wrong with our country.
The little girl in the video babbles on and on about what type of bullets she's using.
Babble???
I understood her perfectly, didn't you?
No one cares other than the ones who want to buy them.
That is simply untrue.
Some folks who call for banning such ammo care deeply, or so I have been told.
People who look at that video and are appalled dont care what her ammo is, they see her with an "assault" rifle type gun and wonder what the hell is wrong with our country.
I see a young girl who has been taught gun safety and knows how to handle one safely. I don't see anything wrong in teaching kids on how to be safe around guns. Do you?
The idea that you can win this argument with nomenclature is ridiculous, because the people criticizing the AR-15 type weapons dont care about the nomenclature. And why should they?
Because they seemingly want to ban things they don't understand and can't define.
Senseless babbling about bans but a complete and utter failure to properly identify what exactly what they want to ban.
Other than gun lovers, no one gives a fuck about the difference between an M4 and an M9
And that is where the ignorance comes is. Do you know the difference John? Or are you just checking off talking points just to make some noise?
What they give a fuck about is the number of rounds that can be squeezed off in a short period of time and what type of impact those bullets have on the human body.
LMAO. I, and many others can squeeze off just as many from a .22 caliber pistol as I can with your so feared AR15. I know what the damage is on a human body. Or did you forget that I'm living proof your ideology on weapons and bullets wrong?
I saw where one airhead believed that most republicans are Russian assets. Do you have anything chipped in stone - sketched in the sand even - to argue gun control with?
What they give a fuck about is the number of rounds that can be squeezed off in a short period of time and what type of impact those bullets have on the human body.
Any semi automatic can shoot as many rounds as the person squeezing the trigger can pull the trigger. It is not gun dependent. Any bullet having impact on a human body will damage the human body. How much damage is acceptable? Or are you just proposing all semi automatic guns that shoot something other than rubber bullets should be banned?
Bottom line is because the weak minded have been spoon fed by their lilly livered leftist liberal politicians in DC. The fact is that AR style weapons are not military grade no matter how much the left wants to believe. Military grade assault rifles are fully automatic fire capable and are illegal for civilians to own without the proper permit. I know you do not care, but those are still the facts.
The question was where does the picture place on the list. Since very few people will see the picture it would not show up on any list. By contrast more foreigners are probably aware of our fixation with pronouns so that is most likely high on the list of things they are laughing at us about.
Yea. I have to wonder is any such list exists for any country. It seems the only people concerned about such a list are people that don't like the country they are in.
You're right - Americans have a list of reasons why they should be concerned. Which is the point I was making. But fret not. I doubt that there is any country in the world that is such a utopia that it doesn't have something to be ashamed or embarrassed about.
If that girl's only eight years old she's one sharp kid. Speaking skills are great and she handled her rifle better than most people do. Definitely not anyone's fool, even at eight.
Why the hell do so many illegal immigrants come banging at our door to be let in? I mean if we are the laughing stock of the planet, and things here are so damn dangerous; then they would be better off staying where the hell they are!
Whatever. They seek what they believe to be opportunity, certainly much more than they are leaving, a place where they believe they will be safer (???), where there is less government corruption, where they have heard the streets are paved with gold.
We invite them to come in legally through the system not just pour in as they see fit. We invite them in to give them an opportunity to contribute to society, not to take care of them.
You do realize the immigrants had to come through the ports and document what their trade was don't you? Also try to remember that is a poem, try not to make it seem like it is an official immigration policy.
So, your question has been eating at me. I decided to answer it more fully. The world laughs at us, if you want to call it that, because...
Nearly every last person in this country is better off than most of the inhabitants of the planet, yet we complain the most about the unfairness of the "rich" people while watching propaganda about them on our big screen TV's.
If there is a country on the planet where women have more freedom to do what they want I'd like to know which one it is. Yet we're led to believe that The Handmaiden's Tale is the reality of the American woman.
There are people being persecuted all over the planet for real things but we have people losing their shit if their preferred pronouns aren't used.
It's estimated that only 17% of the people on the planet own a car and we lose our minds over the price of gas.
The vast majority of people killed in this country are killed by people of their own race, yet we act as if the opposite is true. More, no one seems to give a damn about the cases where a black person kills someone of another race.
We have a small, small minority of people of a certain persuasion claiming oppression because they aren't being allowed to indoctrinate children in kindergarten about how wonderful something they have not the slightest chance of understanding is.
We have a machine called CRT in which you can literally place anything into it and out comes racism. It should be understood that this machine doesn't detect racism, it manufactures it.
We're actually talking about a thing called "reparations" concerning things every civilization that could, did to other civilizations, including the one's demanding reparations. One wonders how far back we're supposed to take this. Cain and Able?
Politicization of just about every single issue. We no longer give a damn about what is true. We only care about whether it fits our ideology.
The gun issue. This is a biggie. Either you believe in self accountability or you believe it's someone else's problem, like the government's. We have people who think that if we just do what Australia does, we'd solve the gun violence problem. Seriously. They really think that. The fact that not one single criminal is going to turn in their guns completely escapes them. It doesn't even enter their mind. Nothing can be allowed to interfere with the "idea!" Further, it completely escapes them that we can't even prevent drugs or illegal aliens from crossing the border but, hey, that's okay. It's the thought that counts, right? Also, it completely escapes them that Australia isn't bordered by Mexico, so they don't have to worry about what crosses their border. Just sayin.
Abortion. This has to be one of the stupidest. The cry is, "I have the right over my own body!" Apparently, they aren't responsible for their own body, however. For the love of not being a complete moron, how hard is it to frigging use protection? You frigging have the right to not get pregnant in the first friggin place so don't friggin get pregnant! How hard can it be? And all you imbecilic male pro choice supporters, how about you do the responsible thing and not friggin have sex unless you use protection or are sure she is? How stupid do you have to be to figure this out?
I could go on, but I know I'm already wasting my time. However, if anyone else wants to add to the list, please feel free.
Kirk Cameron: Public schools grooming kids with critical race theory, 'sexual chaos,' and 'racial confusion'
5-6 minutes Invalid Date
A ward-winning actor Kirk Cameron blasted America's public schools for becoming breeding grounds for far-left progressive agendas, including critical race theory, Nikole Hannah-Jones' 1619 Project, and gender ideology.
"The problem is that public school systems have become so bad. It's sad to say they're doing more for grooming, for sexual chaos and the progressive left than any real educating about the things that most of us want to teach our kids," he told Fox News Digital. The solution to the problem, he said, was for parents to take the lead on their children's education and teach them at home. To make the case, the award-winning actor referenced his upcoming movie, "The Homeschool Awakening."
The movie follows the journey of about 17 homeschooling families who respond to misconceptions and stereotypes. In the film, Cameron also discusses his journey to homeschool his six children with his wife, Chelsea.
Cameron's father, grandmother, and grandfather were teachers. He stressed that there are many excellent teachers in the U.S., but the school system is holding them back from being a "light in the darkness, [and] to pass on the kinds of values and virtues that made this the freest, strongest, most prosperous nation in the whole world."
Cameron takes issue with the perspective that a child's education should be left solely to the so-called experts, without parents' input . "And that's just a fundamental difference in the way that we look at. Who has been entrusted with the sacred responsibility of raising our children? Is it the parents or is it the government?"
He went on to strongly criticize "those who are rotting out the minds and souls of America's children" and said they were "spreading a terminal disease, not education."
"And you can take your pick. Just go down the list. The things that are destroying the family, destroying the church, destroying love for our great country: critical race theory, teaching kids to pick their pronouns and decide whether they want to be a boy or a girl, The 1619 Project ," he said.
Cameron said the "genesis" of creating, what would become a project that spanned over two years, was the novel coronavirus pandemic . At that time, he said, parents were finally starting to see the things schools were teaching their kids.
"If we send our children to Rome to be educated … we shouldn't be surprised if they come back Romans," Cameron said. "If we want them … to love God and love their neighbor and feel gratitude and thankful that they live in the United States of America, the freest country on earth, then you've got to teach them those things … I realized that there was no better way for our family to do that … then to bring them home and join in with this rich, robust community, with tons of curriculum to to to be able to have the flexibility and freedom to raise our kids the way we wanted them to be raised."
"Homeschool was not on our radar screen because we had these misconceptions and stereotypes like so many people do. Like, you know, that's for like Quakers and the Amish, and how could you possibly teach your kids enough so that they get into college? What about socialization?" Cameron said. However, after going through the process, Cameron learned that his children were able to socialize with people of all ages, and that the world was his kids' classroom.
"When you're together as a family … you're able to travel , … [and] you're not locked into a schedule that everyone else is locked into, … you can discover your own individuality and uniqueness … And it really lends itself to a healthy, flourishing community in your home," he said.
"Yes, there are hard days. Yes, there are times when you just feel like pulling your hair out. But it's nothing compared to wanting to go back and do it all over again. If you see that your children went down a road and you can't pull them back, [asking] how did they lose their faith? How did they get pulled into an ideology that undermines everything that is going to lead to their success?"
"They learn to reject a God, … they learn to reject our country. And how did that happen? Well, that's the kind of regret that we don't want as parents. And so if we're willing to put in some extra effort and time now, we will be so glad that we did and will lift our hands in gratitude and say, ‘Thank you that I woke up and I saw the light.’ And millions of parents are."
Microsoft may earn an Affiliate Commission if you purchase something through recommended links in this article.
"If we want them … to love God and love their neighbor and feel gratitude and thankful that they live in the United States of America, the freest country on earth, then you've got to teach them those things …
This is Cameron's bottom line.
If children are taught to love God the way he loves God they will be acting against Jesus teachings in many cases.
He thinks CRT and the 1619 Project are destroying the country. On what basis? Because white Christians dont approve of them and this is a white Christian country? That seems to be his only argument.
e thinks CRT and the 1619 Project are destroying the country.
That is their goal. What do you think, in the words of Professor Mahoney, indoctrinating kids to "identify the American story unilaterally with irredeemable racism, systematic oppression, unprecedented violence, and Hitlerian malignity" is going to do, create American patriots? Teahcing kids to despise their country will do more damage to America than a thousand Putins could ever do.
CRT is opposed to classically liberal, democratic government. It's inventors don't hide their contempt for American and democracy. . Why not be honest about it?
CRT is not taught in Americas elementary or high schools. It is a law school subject.
What white people dont like about grammar school and high school is that kids are being taught that America has been historically a racist country.
Would you rather that that uncomfortable truth be entirely ignored? There is no doubt whatsoever that America is historically a racist country. We have been a nation for almost 250 years and you would be hard pressed to find a single decade during that time when the US was not a racist country.
We have to get over this nonsense, admit the past , in whole, and plan for a better future with diversity.
CRT is not taught in Americas elementary or high schools. It is a law school subject.
Can we please stop with the BS? When people say CRT is being taught in schools, they don't mean CRT, specifically. They mean what derives from CRT. "Facts" that CRT produces but aren't really facts.
When people say CRT is being taught in schools, they don't mean CRT, specifically.
And why is that? Because the far right grifter Rufo invented the outrage and was given a platform in right wing media to spread it.
Many white people do not want their kids hearing that America is a historically racist country, because they are either in denial about it or because they know it but dont want it to change.
THIS is what the objection to so called "critical race theory" is all about.
Many white people do not want their kids hearing that America is a historically racist country, because they are either in denial about it or because they know it but dont want it to change.
Bullshit. Have you ever heard the fact that racism isn't born it is taught? Why bring it up. At that point you are pointing it out and bringing it out in the open. As long as they don't learn it at home or "on the street", eventually it will change.
Bullshit. Have you ever heard the fact that racism isn't born it is taught? Why bring it up. At that point you are pointing it out and bringing it out in the open. As long as they don't learn it at home or "on the street", eventually it will change.
I am at a loss for words as to how to respond to that garbage.
ould you rather that that uncomfortable truth be entirely ignored? Th
Your whole argument is premised on a falsehood.
For decades, American students have been immersed in a diet of slavery, Jim Crow and the secular religion of diversity. To pretend they aren't defies reality. As I've brought up before, even 16 years ago a survey of highs school students lists Harriet Tubman, Rosa Park and MLK as the students' choice as the greatest American heroes.
How could that possibly be the case if they weren't being taught about slavery and civil rights? They don't know what century the Revolution occurred, but they know who refused to give up a seat on a bus.
At that point you are pointing it out and bringing it out in the open.
The reality that racism exists cannot be ignored .. but the true ugliness that is racism is being overrode by the current 'everything' is racist mentality. I read an article recently regarding a Boston University professor that says "property is racist" thus Black Lives Matter destruction of property is / was justified due to the fact that blacks were once considered property.
It is unrealistic to think that white supremacy lurks around every corner .. and that somehow being a 'nationalist' is racist [and the list goes on] This mentality is a recruitment tool for supremist organizations - they do not have to have a sign up table to recruit .. the media does it for them! Young people feeling guilty for being white, does it for them... vicious cycle Jim, one that cannot be legislated away..
"There is no doubt whatsoever that America is historically a racist country. We have been a nation for almost 250 years and you would be hard pressed to find a single decade during that time when the US was not a racist country."
And yet you can never define what a "racist country" is. Or give credible evidence of such.
Historically yes, currently systemic no. In addition your arguments on racism in this country have been almost exclusively to African Americans. You have consistently failed or refused to mention the rampant past racism and slavery against other racial and ethnic groups like Mexican Americans, Native Americans, Asians, and other that were victims of racism for hundreds of years in North America. Some, a hundred years or more before Blacks were even brought here. I am of Mexican American and Native American Heritage on my mother's side and grew up in a small (population 10,000 or so) town on the AZ/Mexico border. The town was about 80 to 90% Hispanic in population with a small minority of whites that were Morman's that ran the town and owned the majority of businesses in town and were notorious for their racial prejudices, treating the Hispanic employees as beneath them and paying significantly less in wages than their white counterparts. I grew up with racial prejudice first hand and got beat up many times by white guys because I was part Mexican and beat up Mexicans because I was part white. Many times I gave as good as I got though. My maternal grandmother who raised me told me one thing I have always remembered and repeated to my children and grandchildren, "Never hate people for being ignorant. Save it for people who are stupid.".
I believe you are on record for suggesting that America needs a God (Christian) oriented society.
Other than the fact that you believe it goes against scripture, why do you care what other people call themselves? I am neither gay nor trans but I just dont spend any time worrying about it because I dont base my hopes for society on adherence to the Bible.
As far as racism goes, there are millions upon millions of white racists in this country. If the topic is not addressed what will change?
How many people on NT, or anywhere, have read the 1619 Project material? I cant say I read all of it because in total it is very long, but I did look through all of it. The 1619 Project is not riddled with falsehoods, it is riddled with uncomfortable truths about America's past. White people are afraid of those truths.
"Critical race theory" ,as a harm to society , was invented by a right wing grifter named Christopher Rufo. Critical race theory is a legal study related to institutional racism in the nation's justice system.
I believe you are on record for suggesting that America needs a God (Christian) oriented society.
True.
Other than the fact that you believe it goes against scripture, why do you care what other people call themselves? I am neither gay nor trans but I just dont spend any time worrying about it because I dont base my hopes for society on adherence to the Bible.
Why do you care about racism, reparations and all the rest of the woke crap that you do? Because you don't spend your time worried about the things I'm concerned about isn't really relevant. You do care about what you care about. Why do you think it would be different for anyone else?
As far as racism goes, there are millions upon millions of white racists in this country. If the topic is not addressed what will change?
The problem is how people such as yourself define racism. All your side seems to do is declare some particular thing as racist and, therefore, it's racist. Quite a few of us have a higher standard than that.
How many people on NT, or anywhere, have read the 1619 Project material? I cant say I read all of it because in total it is very long, but I did look through all of it. The 1619 Project is not riddled with falsehoods, it is riddled with uncomfortable truths about America's past. White people are afraid of those truths.
The 1619 project is a point of view of historical events. Nothing more. That doesn't mean it doesn't contain factual, historical events. Still, it's a point of view concerning those events.
As far as white people being afraid of those truths, that's crap. I completely accept the fact that people who, incidentally, were white, enslaved and horribly mistreated other people who happened to be some other color. I know most white people, along with every other color, feel the same way. Just like I'm sure that people, regardless of their color, feel that Africans selling other Africans into slavery was just as horrible. Just as people, regardless of their skin color, felt it was horrible that Native Americans practiced slavery, human sacrifice and cannibalism.
What most thinking, rational and critically thinking people reject is that this is a white issue. For the love of truth, man, just look at history!!! All of it!! Or forget history. Just look at the present. The biggest enemy of the black person is other black people. You don't even have to look at America. Just look at Africa. Just look at Russia. Just look at half the countries on this planet!
"Critical race theory" ,as a harm to society , was invented by a right wing grifter named Christopher Rufo. Critical race theory is a legal study related to institutional racism in the nation's justice system.
Spare me the propaganda and assume I can make up my own mind about it. All you have done is provide a definition anyone can look up on the internet. That doesn't make it fact or true.
Are you on the same page with Kirk Cameron?
Based on what you posted, I don't disagree with him. That good enough for you?
As far as white people being afraid of those truths, that's crap. I completely accept the fact that people who, incidentally, were white, enslaved and horribly mistreated other people who happened to be some other color. I know most white people, along with every other color, feel the same way. Just like I'm sure that people, regardless of their color, feel that Africans selling other Africans into slavery was just as horrible. Just as people, regardless of their skin color, felt it was horrible that Native Americans practiced slavery, human sacrifice and cannibalism. What most thinking, rational and critically thinking people reject is that this is a white issue. For the love of truth, man, just look at history!!! All of it!! Or forget history. Just look at the present. The biggest enemy of the black person is other black people. You don't even have to look at America. Just look at Africa. Just look at Russia. Just look at half the countries on this planet!
Yikes !
Whatever social dysfunction exists in inner city blacks was created by white racism. This is what you seemingly utterly fail to understand.
Maybe if after emancipation the African slaves would have received complete social equality, under the law, with whites, a lot of the next 150 years could have been avoided, but we will never know.
Whatever social dysfunction exists in inner city blacks was created by white racism.
Exactly, and that racisms continues in our deeply blue, urban environments. Just look at Baltimore, a Dem city in a very wealthy, Dem state.
From 2011 to 2020, nearly 3,000 Baltimoreans have been murdered, one of every 200 city residents. The annual homicide rate is ten times the national rate. And 93% of the homicide victims were black.
Whatever social dysfunction exists in inner city blacks was created by white racism. This is what you seemingly utterly fail to understand.
Actually, I don't fail to understand it. I think it's a product of Democratic effort. Black people could lift themselves out of their own situation as evidenced by the many black people who have done so. But instead, they listen to the very people who are keeping them down. Democrats. Democrats convince them that they should just sit there on their ass and wait for someone else to make things better for them because, well, they're black. Someone they never knew had it a hell of a lot harder than any black person today and, somehow, they're owed for that. I know a lot of black people who see that view as a load of horse shit.
Maybe if after emancipation the African slaves would have received complete social equality, under the law, with whites, a lot of the next 150 years could have been avoided, but we will never know.
And maybe if most of the horror of human history never happened we'd all be in a much better place.
Let me ask you something. Why are you only concerned with black people, or other minorities in this country? Why do you limit your concern to only the last four hundred years or so? What about the rest of history? You know, that whole pageantry of human activity where anyone who could do unto others for profit and before it was done to them?
Here's my view. I don't care if every single one of my ancestors kept people of whatever color in their basement and did unspeakable things to them, in the sense that it doesn't reflect on me. I'm not accountable for what they did. I am accountable for what I do.
Here's what I think you don't get. Because a bunch of people who thought a certain way strung up other people not of their color in no way makes me obligated to that color for anything at all unless I was one of those people. This is because, for anyone capable of critical thinking, the color of my skin doesn't dictate the way I think. Therefore, the color of my skin doesn't imbue me with obligations to anyone else based on the color of their skin. My obligation to another human being begins and ends at the same expectations I have about myself as a human being and how I expect others to treat me because of that, period. That is equality.
Whatever social dysfunction exists in inner city blacks was created by white racism. This is what you seemingly utterly fail to understand.
I disagree. It was created by an ideology. Specifically, the racist Democratic idea that black people aren't capable to take care of themselves and need special care, as if they were like special needs children or something.
Here's my view. I don't care if every single one of my ancestors kept people of whatever color in their basement and did unspeakable things to them, in the sense that it doesn't reflect on me. I'm not accountable for what they did. I am accountable for what I do.
I think you should quit while you're behind. You are already teetering on the cusp of racism.
It was the "My obligation to another human being begins and ends at the same expectations I have about myself as a human being and how I expect others to treat me because of that, period. That is equality " Wasn't it?
Caring about ongoing racism is "woke crap"? Well at least you put your cards on the table.
Oh, man. That is so you. You speak as if your view of what "ongoing racism" consists of is an established and accepted fact by most people. It demonstrably isn't. You only believe it is because you only listen to people who echo what you already believe. Your side goes on and on about having a "conversation" about racism but that isn't what you mean. What you really mean is you want to indoctrinate us ignorant people into your way of thinking. This is evidenced by the fact that you're supremely uninterested in actually having a "conversation" about what racism is. As if you've decided Brussel Sprouts are bad because you don't like them so the only acceptable discussion is why everyone else is wrong for disagreeing.
Not so incidentally, that's probably the worst part of the Left. They somehow think they have the right to tell everyone else how to live, what to think and what they can and can't do. The right isn't perfect but at least they mostly just want everyone to leave each other alone.
I don't care if every single one of my ancestors kept people of whatever color in their basement and did unspeakable things to them, in the sense that it doesn't reflect on me. I'm not accountable for what they did.
Personally , no. Collectively, yes.
We have the same government we had in 1850. There is only one US government throughout our history. We havent changed governments, so yes, we are responsible for what our government did. Same with the state governments.
So tell us all John, how is he or anyone else for that matter, accountable for what their ancestors did? Were we alive to take part in what their ancestors did; or to stop it?
Only in far out leftist land is anyone responsible for something they had nothing to do with; and had not control over.
Democrats are the party of perpetual victimhood. Without victims they cease to exist.
So collectively no one that was alive and anything to do with slavery and what occurred after it is responsible? Hell; their ancestors might not have even been in this country at the time.
You need to stop digging soon as you will never reach China; but the hole you are putting yourself in will be impossible to get out of.
Oh my fucking GOD!!!!! you are a fine one talk about that shit. You wear your politics and your fucking faith like a shield & tell us we can't "pick" on you because then you are offended and there is a war on your fucking religion - well get this - YOU ARE AS BAD AS EVERYONE ELSE WHEN IT COME TO SIDES.
you are a fine one talk about that shit. You wear your politics and your fucking faith like a shield & tell us we can't "pick" on you because then you are offended and there is a war on your fucking religion - well get this - YOU ARE AS BAD AS EVERYONE ELSE WHEN IT COME TO SIDES.
I think you may have me mistaken for someone else. Jefferson, perhaps? I don't recall ever complaining about anyone picking on me, for one. Second, I don't talk about my faith very often in here. That verse about not sharing what's important to those who won't appreciate it? As far as politics, um, yeah, we all do that. Didn't say otherwise. Have a nice day.
Did you know that for quite a lot of American history, world history, in fact, children were expected to help the family make ends meet? There used to be this thing called "chores." They'd have to do things like get up early before school and help momma make breakfast or go out to the chicken coop and collect eggs for eating or selling in the market. Daylight savings time was created so that kids could help bring in the crops.
So, perhaps the girl is helping her family make money. Is there a problem?
I cant believe some of the things these people say. I didnt see one "conservative" that responded to this seed take any issue at all with an 8 or 9 year old girl playing with an "assault" style rifle, saying she was trying to play Jingle Bells with the sound of the bullets pinging into metal , and bragging about what type of ammo she was using. They actually think this shit is normal.
That's the thing, Ender. I don't think it's exploiting children. Somehow, though, you get to come in here and make the comment you did and, apparently, expect no pushback if someone thinks you're wrong.
I pretty much figured the child labor angle is what you were referring to, which given the vid, seems pretty ridiculous to me. It's pretty obvious the child isn't being abused in any way and, in fact, obviously enjoys what she is doing. And, given the obvious intelligence of the child, I'm fairly certain she understands that, should this vid actually bring in money in some way, it will likely benefit her. More, the parent was obviously quite attentive to the child's safety and the training the child received in gun safety was obvious to anyone who knows guns. This was one impressive kid.
Just odd to me that you all praise and almost worship what this child has been taught yet scream about how children are being indoctrinated if they espouse views that don't align with yours.
I cant believe some of the things these people say. I didnt see one "conservative" that responded to this seed take any issue at all with an 8 or 9 year old girl playing with an "assault" style rifle, saying she was trying to play Jingle Bells with the sound of the bullets pinging into metal , and bragging about what type of ammo she was using. They actually think this shit is normal.
What, exactly, is wrong with it? Seriously. Please explain what you found so objectionable about it. Because to me, you sound as silly as if you were complaining about an eight year old in a vid about riding a bike and explaining all the aspects of it's various components. Maybe the vid you saw was different than the one I saw. I watched the whole thing and I didn't see where she talked about how she's going to someday go out and shoot someone because they were (whatever). Seems to me about the only objection you can come up with is that she was shooting a gun without explaining a single thing about why that's bad. You complain about none of the conservatives taking issue with her "playing" with her gun but don't say a damned thing about what the issue could possibly be. I expect that all you'll say is that "If I have to explain it you wouldn't understand it." That about it?
Just odd to me that you all praise and almost worship what this child has been taught yet scream about how children are being indoctrinated if they espouse views that don't align with yours.
While you ignorantly sit there and focus on her screaming, the rest of us are observing how she conducts herself with the weapon in her hand.
One needs only open their eyes.
And many of us did. I guess you were too busy looking for something wrong you missed what she was doing absolutely perfectly.
Note that despite the liberal / antigun narrative, the gun NEVER points anywhere but toward the target. Even as she reloaded the weapon, it's pointed toward the target and away from people. The gun doesn't do that on it's own. That's done by the person holding it.
Note that despite the liberal / antigun narrative, when she puts the weapon down, it doesn't jump up and start shooting. That's because, despite the liberal narrative, it's an INAMATE OBJECT.
If you cannot see that some people groom their kids into a gun culture then maybe you cannot see indoctrination in other forms.
What you so ignorantly call "grooming" is actually teaching. This is the job of a parent. How many kids are killed because of the negligence of a parent leaving a firearm easily accessible? Now looking at this kid, I have a good feeling that she WILL NOT be one of those who do that.
Stop acting like because someone never picked a gun up, it was never designed with a purpose. That is ridiculous.
and as I suspected, you are afraid of an inanimate object that won't do a goddamn thing without somebody controlling it. And you think that because YOU are scared everybody else should be to.
Just because she wasnt acting unsafely does not mean she wasnt using the gun as a plaything. She shot at targets one of which she says was a cartoon figure and another was evidently some sort of grotesque drawing of a puppy. She says she was playing music with the sound of the bullets hitting the targets. That is PLAYING, regardless of what you think.
If you cannot see that some people groom their kids into a gun culture then maybe you cannot see indoctrination in other forms.
While what constitutes a "gun culture" won't be agreed upon between us, what, exactly is the difference between that and 'grooming' a child into a gymnastics culture? A STEM culture? A sports culture? Any damned thing you want to imagine culture?
So, since you still haven't explained what's so objectionable about her shooting a gun, you can add explaining what you think a "gun culture" to things you aren't going to explain as well.
Just because she wasnt acting unsafely does not men she wasnt playing with the gun. She shot at targets one of which she says was a cartoon figure and another was evidently some sort of grotesque drawing of a puppy. She says she was playing music with the sound of the bullets hitting the targets. That is PLAYING, regardless of what you think.
And? So what? Was she supposed to be miserable? Maybe it would have been more acceptable to you if she were sobbing pitifully and saying "Daddy, I don't want to shoot the bad gu gu gunnnn!" What the hell is so bad about her having fun for crying out loud?
Ohhhhhhh. That's it, isn't it? She was having fun! That's what you find so horrible! You object to the fact that she was having fun and was enjoying it.
Point being, she was taught. In five or ten years we will see where she is. Though I will have forgotten about her. I bet she is either trying to keep monetizing and making money or becomes a right wing political voice.
I am sure this video was made before the Texas shootings, but certainly it doesnt escape notice that this little girl isnt much older than the kids that were shot and killed at Sandy Hook. If you want to think it is perfectly ok and normal to have an 8 year old girl demonstrate an "assault" style rifle, and sell the ammo, no one on earth can stop you. I consider it a symptom of our diseased gun love culture.
I am sure this video was made before the Texas shootings, but certainly it doesnt escape notice that this little girl isnt much older than the kids that were shot and killed at Sandy Hook. If you want to think it is perfectly ok and normal to have an 8 year old girl demonstrate an "assault" style rifle, and sell the ammo, no one on earth can stop you. I consider it a symptom of our diseased gun love culture.
Great! More power to you! Where we're going to have a problem is when you try to impose your views on the rest of us. You don't see us trying to force guns on you, do you?
I think she will either kind of back off of it or totally embrace it.
I know one man that tried to teach his girls about guns. At first they were fine and leaned to shoot. Then when they hit the teenage years, they had better things to do...
I was being sarcastic. Comment made tongue in cheek. Mainly because I was taught how to use a gun at a very young age & now have no interest in them. Hubby has a rifle and a shotgun - both my kids learned about them at a young age - neither of them are interested in firearms. Just not our thing.
She says that she is trying to play Jingle Bells with the sound of the bullets hitting the target, and you say that is not "playing" , rofl.
So the hell what? You think shooters don't show off on gun ranges? Then you have never been to a gun range. She is displaying her marksmanship and control of the gun.
I only wish they had social and digital recording devices around back when my friend was teaching me to shoot. We could have started a whole new shooting game trend. We would set up plastic army men; along with tanks, jeeps, trucks, etc. in earthen fortifications (that usually took us about 3 to 4 hours. We were both overly competitive asses)- draw a circle 20 free in radius around them- and then use his 9mm beretta pistols; 30 aut 6; or Winchester 30/30 to destroy everything. Points were awarded for fewest shots needed; most assets completely destroyed; and most assets remaining. We each had 1 shot with the 30 aut 6 or Winchester 30/30 to destroy the most hardened of the fortifications. The game ended when we ran out of ammunition or got bored. It took skill, tactics, and good referee that was able to stay sober long enough to keep score (another thing that ended the games early).
Leftists would call that a waste of time and money. It was cheaper than the movies since we salvaged most of the casings and he had a very good reloader. Since he lived on a farm he made his own black powder, (most of it was used as stump remover; but he made and kept extra for ammo). It also taught me gun safety, control, and not to try and fire into the sun or any intense light.
She is displaying her marksmanship and control of the gun.
According to the You Tube comment section for the video, the girl is 8 fucking years old, roughly the same age as the kids massacred by "assault" rifles at Sandy Hook and now Uvalde.
Body Armor does not require any special paperwork or background checks. It is YOUR responsibility to determine if YOU are LEGALLY able to purchase and use body armor in your state.
Who Cannot Buy Body Armor Legally?
Convicted felons surrender their right to own body armor legally pursuant to (18 U.S.C. 931). However, felons can purchase bulletproof vests if their employer requires it and they get written permission to do so. It is the responsibility of the felon to refrain from buying body armor. They can be prosecuted if they make an illegal purchase. Retailers are not liable for what happens to body armor after it is sold.
So please tell us all why you are against law abiding citizens owning what is considered a safety device?
I wish someone would have taught me to shoot at that age. I didn't learn until I was in college. It took me a couple of years to get comfortable around guns so that I could take them apart and clean them. I didn't even own one until my friend gave me his Desert Eagle as repayment for a loan. I never fired that gun because it scared the hell out of me. I sold it for a large profit a few years later. Now that he is gone I wish I would have kept it.
Hell, I wish someone would have taught me how to fight dirty at that age. Learned that in high school from the same friend that taught me to shoot. Would have saved me from a lot of bullying growing up. Maybe kept some others from being bullied as well.
You have a personal bias against guns; and anyone that owns and uses them.
The girl was properly taught, and used the gun safely. She enjoys shooting. Many do. She isn't doing anything illegal. The big scary gun she is using can't and won't hurt you.
So, in your opinion, the little girl in the video is marketing body armor to store owners in high crime areas. Ok. Somehow I doubt that would be her explanation.
Oh, I'm sorry, I was answering your question "What are you doing if you need body armor?"
So what if this girl was marketing body armor, she can't pick and choose who watches the video or who buys the items, but if I was looking for body armor for self protection, I may just look into what she was marketing as well as the .22 ammo she was using, my .22 1911 has been having problems with "stove piping" and her video will be helpful in that.
Besides that Ronin2 showed that there is a law regarding body armor and "who" can't purchase it.
So that means children should not have chores, what about children in commercials, acting in movies .. are they being exploited, or only this specific girl? I think the argument becomes moot if / when a bigger picture comes into focus.
So called grooming is a rather weak argument as well ... do you take offense to the exploiting of young girls in beauty pageants - slapping on the makeup and sexualized costumes? What exactly are those girls being groomed to be?
Simply because it does not fit their hard core leftist liberal ideology and believe all that do not share said ideology are the enemy. There is no room for compromise.
I think you forgot to answer his questions. Interesting that you are the one accusing him of dismissing something while you dismiss his comment and questions.
Over 50 million people from outside Chicago visit the city every year in recent years. It is the major destination in the midwest and always has been. It needs neither your help nor your concern.
Chicago, with less than 1/3 of NYC's population and far more stringent gun laws, had significantly MORE murders by guns than NYC, and significantly more murders by gun than Los Angeles, despite having well over ONE MILLION less inhabitants.
Tell me some more tall tales how safe Chicago is again!
SMH at people who can ignore facts that prove them wrong, again.
I've taken my family to Chicago for two vacations. We went without a car and enjoyed the downtown attractions and baseball games and theater relying on public transportation, Uber and walking. I never felt unsafe.
But we are white and were downtown and the North side. It is dangerous if your walking around black in West Garfield Park, Washington Park and some other areas on the South and West side.
But we are white and were downtown and the North side. It is dangerous if your walking around black in West Garfield Park, Washington Park and some other areas on the South and West side.
Yeah, probably because we are such a racist country and whites are murdering blacks in droves in Chicago.
Tourists eat deep dish in Chicago. Locals tavern-style. I like the cracker thin crust, square-cut pie with fennel flavored sausage. Unlike New York-style pizza, Chicago’s thin crust is crispy and cannot be folded. Ordered Chicago-style is a "tavern cut" pie cut into various-sized squares for sharing and meant to be eaten with cheap beer.
Tourists eat deep dish in Chicago. Locals tavern-style. I like the cracker thin crust, square-cut pie with fennel flavored sausage. Unlike New York-style pizza, Chicago’s thin crust is crispy and cannot be folded. Ordered Chicago-style is a "tavern cut" pie cut into various-sized squares for sharing and meant to be eaten with cheap beer.
As well known as deep dish is now, you are right. Most people that I know here dont eat deep dish, at least not regularly. There are hundreds of pizza restaurants in Chicago, and most of them feature thin crust over deep dish.
Better. Do you think the girl in the video was breaking any rules or laws? It seems it is the subject matter you object to, not the actual use of a kid. Are you familiar with hudsons playground? It is another youtube channel that highlights a couple kids. I understand their dad makes alot of money but I have a feeling there is very little outrage about it.
To answer your question no I would not use my daughter for hawking gun supplies. I don't know enough about guns to make that work. Maybe a cooking show highlighting my daughters would be more my speed. I still don't understand all the ins and outs of making money on YouTube though and my kids are in their 30s so I think that ship had sailed.
You can't respond to RDTC because he issued an Impasse. I thought however that once you issue an impasse you should not be posting in that thread anymore.
And before i get a ticket for Meta, I'm just asking a question about what I thought the rules were..
Out here, you can get pizza toppings bowls. I haven't tried one yet but plan to. On the rare occasion I do order a pizza, I will eat two slices and scrape off the toppings to eat separately.
Child actors have a limited amount of on camera time per day, the amount depending on their age. Infants whose roles are integral to the show is why twins are used (ie - Full House). If they are on sets all day, they are provided tutors. Don't even get me started of child beauty pageants.
Based on the ignorance displayed in his previous posts despite numerous posts attempting to prove otherwise to him, it seems to me the answer to your question is that he connects being law abiding citizens able to purchase and legally body armor as a integral and inseparable part of his vehement anti gun views.
I fired a Desert Eagle once. It belonged to a fellow Navy FMF Corpsman who was with Marine Force Recon. I fired one round and promptly handed it back as I was totally unprepared for the recoil. My wrist was sore for a week after that. Have never fired one again since then.
People that are hard core anti gun have been so indoctrinated they just cannot and will not accept the fact that it is the person holding the gun that is dangerous and not the inanimate gun itself.
I know that is a tempting argument but its just not a good one. The same sick person could have a different inanimate object, lets say a shoe, in his hand instead of a gun and he would be a threat to virtually no one.
It does matter what the inanimate object is. Objects like guns are a threat and objects like shoes are not.
To argue that an inanimate object that can kill dozens of people in a couple minutes is not a danger to society is blind thinking.
To argue that an inanimate object that can kill dozens of people in a couple minutes is not a danger to society is blind thinking.
Except in the hands of one person that inanimate object won't harm any single person but in the hands of another it can kill people. Isn't it past time that we start to look at the person himself to identify those who should not have access to guns and prevent them from getting them in the first place? There are common signs that these people have exhibited, but nobody ever bothers to step forward before the fact.
If these inanimate objects are that dangerous in the hands of ANY person then we would have daily death counts in the thousands due to the vast number of guns in private hands.
I refer you back to post #7.1.104 above. We are never going to agree on this so better to just agree to disagree and let it go here and now. You have a good day.
There is no reason to believe that the constitution was designed to let individuals have any weapon they wanted. High speed, high velocity bullet, guns should not be in private hands.
High speed, high velocity bullet, guns should not be in private hands.
This is your opinion, not fact. The fact of the matter is in the hands of a sane legal law-abiding rational gun owner these items hold no more danger to the public than your coffee cup.
There is no reason to believe that the constitution was designed to let individuals have any weapon they wanted.
This has never been the argument. Government (both federal and state) have already limited the type of weapons that a private person can legally possess.
And if the feds re-enact the 1994 assault weapons ban, so be it. The problem that I have pointed out is that the ban in 94 had a rather limited impact on gun violence so if they just re-enact it again what do you expect the difference to be? You appear to be assuming that such a ban might prevent these types of shootings but I don't believe it will make that much difference just like it didn't make a huge difference in 94.
You have never, to my knowledge, answered a simple question however. If as I suspect an assault weapons ban has little impact on reducing these types of shootings, what's next?
To me, reenacting the assault weapons ban is related to Einstein's definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting the same results.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
According to You Tube, the girl in the video is 8 years old.
And?
Not gender appropriate? Where is Barbie?
Oh, wait. I see it now. It was the Christmas ornaments, wasn't it?
This little girl is hawking hollow point bullets.
What the hell is wrong with you?
Hollow point bullets!?! Oh, my goodness! You mean those things that don't pass through a person and hit some innocent behind the intended target? How awful!
Is laughing what they are doing?
I think feeling sad for us and concerned about our outsized impact on the world.
Except when they are just sizing us up to take us down, like Russia is doing a pretty good job of.
Exactly, they are awesome.
Russia has been sending trouble makers to the USA for around a century now.
Why would you want them to succeed?
Why would you think that I do?
Read that way to me.
I’m sorry that my sarcasm wasn’t self evident to you.
It's not helping that characters like Tucker Carlson, Rand Paul, and Donald Trump are acting like Russian assets. It makes one worry how often today's conservatives are cheering for the wrong team.
You don't even need to remind me that there are quite a few on the left who seem to be parroting Russian talking points as well.
[Deleted]
They are Russian assets. trumpturd is their biggest asset. I believe that the majority of today's republicans/alleged conservatives/gqp are Russian assets.
"You don't even need to remind me that there are quite a few on the left who seem to be parroting Russian talking points as well."
Why don't you fill us in?
Inbreeding at its' best.
Nope. There's no confusion about it. When you've got institutions of higher learning and idiots in congress trying to convince us men can have babies, no one has to wonder.
You're right
Are you saying that's a man in the photo?
He just might think so. Remember most liberals when asked can't give a definition of what a woman is so they obviously don't know the difference between men and women.
Just like they can't define what an "assault weapon" is. Their eyes go cross, the start mumbling and try to change the subject (deflect).
LOL, you mean like the Congresswoman who said an AR15 is as heavy as ten boxes you might be moving and that it fired 50. cal bullets?
That was hilarious.
A "heat seeking device" on the tip of a bullet.
These people can't really be that stupid.
Different States have different definitions.
It's not the state. It's the blithering idiot that is afraid of an inanimate object because it looks like something it's not.
The term "assault weapon" is generally used by the uneducated to describe a weapon. The AR-15 is NOT an "assault weapon". Calling it such indicates that it has a military purpose. Not a single military in the world uses it. My entire military career, not once did we refer to our weapons as "assault rifles". We called them what they were:
You need special permits to purchase those. You don't need one for an AR-15.
Your obsession with the nomenclature is beyond bizarre.
I would guess that not one out of 100 people, who are not NRA members or the like , cares about your belief that AR-15's are being mis named.
After 26 years in the military, it's all about the nomenclature. There is a very big difference between an M4 and an M9.
You ignorance about the nomenclature really shows you don't know what you're talking about.
Other than gun lovers, no one gives a fuck about the difference between an M4 and an M9. Its that simple. What they give a fuck about is the number of rounds that can be squeezed off in a short period of time and what type of impact those bullets have on the human body.
Well, if you got a bunch of people together calling for bans on "assault rifles", sure. They want something banned they can't even define, which is the very height of stupidity.
Is the NRA always going to be the liberal go-to boogeyman?
When your "critical thinking" is really just emotional reaction, yes, they can really be that stupid.
I'm not an NRA member. No one I know is a member. Not one of us would call an AR15 style gun an assault weapon. This would be because there are other guns that have the same capability but look more like traditional firearms. Mini 14 for example.
As useless as it will be, let me attempt to educate you on what makes an assault weapon. It's a little tricky so you'll have to carefully pay attention.
An assault weapon is designed for assault. For instance, every single weapon, from the Sig Saure M17 pistol to an ICBM and everything in between is an assault weapon. That is, they are intended for one purpose only. To kill other human beings. There are some military weapons not intended for assault, such as mines, but for the most part, everything else is for assaulting the enemy.
Guns produced for civilian use are not assault weapons because that is not their intended use. Can an AR15 be used for assault? Of course. So can a kitchen knife. So can a semi trailer truck. So can a jet liner (twin towers). So can ammonium nitrate (fertilizer).
But, Drakk! Assault weapons have high capacity mags. Yes they do. They also have barrels. So, by that logic, anything with a barrel is an assault weapon. But, Drakk! If the Uvaldi shooter didn't have an "assault weapon" he couldn't have killed so many people. BS. I can tell you that I could have gone in there and killed just as many people with handguns. And they wouldn't have to be high capacity mags, either. And all I have is standard military training and a very little practice at changing mags.
Anything can be an assault weapon. What makes it an assault weapon is what you intend to do with it. I have a Winchester 7mm Mag that only holds four rounds. Five if I have one in the chamber. For those who know the lingo, this thing is a tack driver. That means it's very accurate. If I were to set up right, I could take out a lot of people. Just like that guy in Texas in that clock tower. That's all he had. A hunting rifle, a scope and skill.
There are millions of what you call assault weapons out there. The number of people they kill isn't a patch on how many people are killed by hand guns, knives, cars and other implements. Yet because they look "scary" to those who don't bother to think about it you latch on to it and distort it into something it isn't.
Worse, you delude yourself into thinking that most people think just as you do.
No one cares man, other than those who want to defend every single type of gun. No one cares.
People care how many bullets come out of the gun in a hurry, and what the force is behind the bullet.
The idea that you can win this argument with nomenclature is ridiculous, because the people criticizing the AR-15 type weapons dont care about the nomenclature. And why should they?
The little girl in the video babbles on and on about what type of bullets she's using. No one cares other than the ones who want to buy them.
People who look at that video and are appalled dont care what her ammo is, they see her with an "assault" rifle type gun and wonder what the hell is wrong with our country.
Babble???
I understood her perfectly, didn't you?
That is simply untrue.
Some folks who call for banning such ammo care deeply, or so I have been told.
I see a young girl who has been taught gun safety and knows how to handle one safely. I don't see anything wrong in teaching kids on how to be safe around guns. Do you?
I dont think we need 8 or 9 year old girls in videos selling guns and ammo. Period. That is what I think.
Well, that is certainly your opinion.
KIds are used to hawk all sorts of products today.
Because they seemingly want to ban things they don't understand and can't define.
Senseless babbling about bans but a complete and utter failure to properly identify what exactly what they want to ban.
Those are the ignorant and uneducated I refer to. If you are going to discuss something you should at least know what you are talking about.
And that is where the ignorance comes is. Do you know the difference John? Or are you just checking off talking points just to make some noise?
LMAO. I, and many others can squeeze off just as many from a .22 caliber pistol as I can with your so feared AR15. I know what the damage is on a human body. Or did you forget that I'm living proof your ideology on weapons and bullets wrong?
Their "critical thinking" is nonexistent. Look at the comments. They've let fear and ignorance overtake their whole mindset.
This.
It's moronic. Who gives a fuck about it except the gun humpers?
[deleted]
[deleted]
[Yes, you should.]
”I would guess that not one out of 100…”
I saw where one airhead believed that most republicans are Russian assets. Do you have anything chipped in stone - sketched in the sand even - to argue gun control with?
What they give a fuck about is the number of rounds that can be squeezed off in a short period of time and what type of impact those bullets have on the human body.
Any semi automatic can shoot as many rounds as the person squeezing the trigger can pull the trigger. It is not gun dependent. Any bullet having impact on a human body will damage the human body. How much damage is acceptable? Or are you just proposing all semi automatic guns that shoot something other than rubber bullets should be banned?
So what,exactly, are you proposing they ban?
Obviously, yes they can.
Bottom line is because the weak minded have been spoon fed by their lilly livered leftist liberal politicians in DC. The fact is that AR style weapons are not military grade no matter how much the left wants to believe. Military grade assault rifles are fully automatic fire capable and are illegal for civilians to own without the proper permit. I know you do not care, but those are still the facts.
They don't know.
Absolutely anything that conservatives believe in.
Do we have any evidence to suggest the woman in that photo has ever shot anyone with any of those firearms?
Your ignorance of the nomenclature is.....well....expected.
It's easier to spread the fear.
How dare you inject logic and common sense into the discussion. You know some people cannot handle that.
Slow down there Jack. You know the left doesn't deal with things like evidence. That destroys the narrative.
A tried and true tactic sure to confound some fine folks.
My apologies. I'll try to do better in future.
Lol.
John doesn't want to the police to use rubber bullets against BLM and Antifa rioters, they might leave a bruise.
On This I have to agree with John (A first), we don't need children selling guns and ammo. [REMOVED]
[REMOVED]
Where and when?
Never seen it.
Unless it comes from you and/or your personal tag team, of course you wouldn't.
I didn't know I had a personal tag team!
No need - you've never provided logic, common sense, or facts.
A great number of folks on NT certainly know it, and so do you
It would be nice if [deleted]
Don't look at me. I am a hop scotch kinda gal.
Now that was funny.
Where does the article image place on the list?
You mean for all the 10s of people from different countries that might actually see it? Does it really matter what they think?
The point is not the image, the point is the list.
The counter point is undoubtedly the intentional and probably appropriate apathy about any such list.
The question was where does the picture place on the list. Since very few people will see the picture it would not show up on any list. By contrast more foreigners are probably aware of our fixation with pronouns so that is most likely high on the list of things they are laughing at us about.
Yea. I have to wonder is any such list exists for any country. It seems the only people concerned about such a list are people that don't like the country they are in.
You're right - Americans have a list of reasons why they should be concerned. Which is the point I was making. But fret not. I doubt that there is any country in the world that is such a utopia that it doesn't have something to be ashamed or embarrassed about.
If that girl's only eight years old she's one sharp kid. Speaking skills are great and she handled her rifle better than most people do. Definitely not anyone's fool, even at eight.
Wonder why the rest of the world comes banging at the door when they get in trouble?
Why the hell do so many illegal immigrants come banging at our door to be let in? I mean if we are the laughing stock of the planet, and things here are so damn dangerous; then they would be better off staying where the hell they are!
Beats me. The countries they are abandoning have to be living hell.
You mean they live in shit holes?
Whatever. They seek what they believe to be opportunity, certainly much more than they are leaving, a place where they believe they will be safer (???), where there is less government corruption, where they have heard the streets are paved with gold.
Maybe we should send them pictures of San Francisco so they can see what some of the liberals sanctuary cities streets are paved with.
So it's only liberal cities then that have gun and drug issues?
I am talking about streets paved with shit. WTF are you talking about?
Baltimore?
Possible but Baltimore might have more blood on the streets than shit.
I think when you mix shit with blood, it really is hard to tell what is what.
Wrong choice, RDtC. What about the "Golden Gate". LOL
Or maybe the golden arches.
Maybe someone needs to rewrite this....
We invite them to come in legally through the system not just pour in as they see fit. We invite them in to give them an opportunity to contribute to society, not to take care of them.
Sorry, I couldn't find your caveat in the poem, maybe somebody should add your words to it.
You do realize the immigrants had to come through the ports and document what their trade was don't you? Also try to remember that is a poem, try not to make it seem like it is an official immigration policy.
You're perfectly Right (Down the Center). I'm not being serious.
Sounds like a good ad for a scrapyard or recycling center, but terrible immigration policy
Do poems pass as national policies in any of the countries you have lived in?
I try very hard not to take people who equate poems with national immigration policies very seriously.
And I succeed.
And I try very hard not to take people who troll me very seriously.
Unfortunately I DON'T succeed.
Yeah, I'm pretty lucky, my parents taught me to never give up!
Again, as with any large city, you have drug have problems, problems with poverty, JUST LIKE ANY LARGE CITY. This is not reserved to Baltimore.
What you say is true, but some are much worse than others.
No, but the liberal cities are making it an art form.
That is kinda funny. I never take trolls seriously. I also don't take people that take themselves seriously very seriously.
No shit sherlock.
That's why I never take you or your buddies here seriously.
Nothing constructive to add so you insult and deflect, real classy there. I did not say anything untoward or insulting to you above.
Perhaps she wasn't shown enough love as a child.
Right back at you
Or obviously as an adult.
definitely a bottle baby
LMAO!
So, your question has been eating at me. I decided to answer it more fully. The world laughs at us, if you want to call it that, because...
I could go on, but I know I'm already wasting my time. However, if anyone else wants to add to the list, please feel free.
Well said!
Not at all.
www.msn.com /en-us/news/world/kirk-cameron-public-schools-grooming-kids-with-critical-race-theory-sexual-chaos-and-racial-confusion/ar-AAXUqs9
Kirk Cameron: Public schools grooming kids with critical race theory, 'sexual chaos,' and 'racial confusion'
5-6 minutes Invalid Date
A ward-winning actor Kirk Cameron blasted America's public schools for becoming breeding grounds for far-left progressive agendas, including critical race theory, Nikole Hannah-Jones' 1619 Project, and gender ideology.
"The problem is that public school systems have become so bad. It's sad to say they're doing more for grooming, for sexual chaos and the progressive left than any real educating about the things that most of us want to teach our kids," he told Fox News Digital. The solution to the problem, he said, was for parents to take the lead on their children's education and teach them at home. To make the case, the award-winning actor referenced his upcoming movie, "The Homeschool Awakening."
The movie follows the journey of about 17 homeschooling families who respond to misconceptions and stereotypes. In the film, Cameron also discusses his journey to homeschool his six children with his wife, Chelsea.
Cameron's father, grandmother, and grandfather were teachers. He stressed that there are many excellent teachers in the U.S., but the school system is holding them back from being a "light in the darkness, [and] to pass on the kinds of values and virtues that made this the freest, strongest, most prosperous nation in the whole world."
HOMESCHOOLING SURGE CONTINUES DESPITE SCHOOLS REOPENING
Cameron takes issue with the perspective that a child's education should be left solely to the so-called experts, without parents' input . "And that's just a fundamental difference in the way that we look at. Who has been entrusted with the sacred responsibility of raising our children? Is it the parents or is it the government?"
He went on to strongly criticize "those who are rotting out the minds and souls of America's children" and said they were "spreading a terminal disease, not education."
"And you can take your pick. Just go down the list. The things that are destroying the family, destroying the church, destroying love for our great country: critical race theory, teaching kids to pick their pronouns and decide whether they want to be a boy or a girl, The 1619 Project ," he said.
Cameron said the "genesis" of creating, what would become a project that spanned over two years, was the novel coronavirus pandemic . At that time, he said, parents were finally starting to see the things schools were teaching their kids.
"If we send our children to Rome to be educated … we shouldn't be surprised if they come back Romans," Cameron said. "If we want them … to love God and love their neighbor and feel gratitude and thankful that they live in the United States of America, the freest country on earth, then you've got to teach them those things … I realized that there was no better way for our family to do that … then to bring them home and join in with this rich, robust community, with tons of curriculum to to to be able to have the flexibility and freedom to raise our kids the way we wanted them to be raised."
"Homeschool was not on our radar screen because we had these misconceptions and stereotypes like so many people do. Like, you know, that's for like Quakers and the Amish, and how could you possibly teach your kids enough so that they get into college? What about socialization?" Cameron said. However, after going through the process, Cameron learned that his children were able to socialize with people of all ages, and that the world was his kids' classroom.
"When you're together as a family … you're able to travel , … [and] you're not locked into a schedule that everyone else is locked into, … you can discover your own individuality and uniqueness … And it really lends itself to a healthy, flourishing community in your home," he said.
"Yes, there are hard days. Yes, there are times when you just feel like pulling your hair out. But it's nothing compared to wanting to go back and do it all over again. If you see that your children went down a road and you can't pull them back, [asking] how did they lose their faith? How did they get pulled into an ideology that undermines everything that is going to lead to their success?"
"They learn to reject a God, … they learn to reject our country. And how did that happen? Well, that's the kind of regret that we don't want as parents. And so if we're willing to put in some extra effort and time now, we will be so glad that we did and will lift our hands in gratitude and say, ‘Thank you that I woke up and I saw the light.’ And millions of parents are."
Microsoft may earn an Affiliate Commission if you purchase something through recommended links in this article.
Gosh, John, thanks for helping prove my point. I didn't realize you were on my side.
You actually think Kirk Cameron proves points? lol.
This is Cameron's bottom line.
If children are taught to love God the way he loves God they will be acting against Jesus teachings in many cases.
He thinks CRT and the 1619 Project are destroying the country. On what basis? Because white Christians dont approve of them and this is a white Christian country? That seems to be his only argument.
That is their goal. What do you think, in the words of Professor Mahoney, indoctrinating kids to "identify the American story unilaterally with irredeemable racism, systematic oppression, unprecedented violence, and Hitlerian malignity" is going to do, create American patriots? Teahcing kids to despise their country will do more damage to America than a thousand Putins could ever do.
CRT is opposed to classically liberal, democratic government. It's inventors don't hide their contempt for American and democracy. . Why not be honest about it?
CRT is not taught in Americas elementary or high schools. It is a law school subject.
What white people dont like about grammar school and high school is that kids are being taught that America has been historically a racist country.
Would you rather that that uncomfortable truth be entirely ignored? There is no doubt whatsoever that America is historically a racist country. We have been a nation for almost 250 years and you would be hard pressed to find a single decade during that time when the US was not a racist country.
We have to get over this nonsense, admit the past , in whole, and plan for a better future with diversity.
For example?
Can we please stop with the BS? When people say CRT is being taught in schools, they don't mean CRT, specifically. They mean what derives from CRT. "Facts" that CRT produces but aren't really facts.
And why is that? Because the far right grifter Rufo invented the outrage and was given a platform in right wing media to spread it.
Many white people do not want their kids hearing that America is a historically racist country, because they are either in denial about it or because they know it but dont want it to change.
THIS is what the objection to so called "critical race theory" is all about.
Bullshit. Have you ever heard the fact that racism isn't born it is taught? Why bring it up. At that point you are pointing it out and bringing it out in the open. As long as they don't learn it at home or "on the street", eventually it will change.
I am at a loss for words as to how to respond to that garbage.
Your whole argument is premised on a falsehood.
For decades, American students have been immersed in a diet of slavery, Jim Crow and the secular religion of diversity. To pretend they aren't defies reality. As I've brought up before, even 16 years ago a survey of highs school students lists Harriet Tubman, Rosa Park and MLK as the students' choice as the greatest American heroes.
How could that possibly be the case if they weren't being taught about slavery and civil rights? They don't know what century the Revolution occurred, but they know who refused to give up a seat on a bus.
The reality that racism exists cannot be ignored .. but the true ugliness that is racism is being overrode by the current 'everything' is racist mentality. I read an article recently regarding a Boston University professor that says "property is racist" thus Black Lives Matter destruction of property is / was justified due to the fact that blacks were once considered property.
It is unrealistic to think that white supremacy lurks around every corner .. and that somehow being a 'nationalist' is racist [and the list goes on] This mentality is a recruitment tool for supremist organizations - they do not have to have a sign up table to recruit .. the media does it for them! Young people feeling guilty for being white, does it for them... vicious cycle Jim, one that cannot be legislated away..
Peace
And yet you can never define what a "racist country" is. Or give credible evidence of such.
That's like blaming one drop of water during a rainstorm.
Excellent.
Then it's no problem at all if we formalize that.
Kind of weird so many go apoplectic over banning something in schools they keep insisting isn't there.
Why would they give two cents about it?
That is completely senseless!
The only ward he should win is one in a psych unit.
Historically yes, currently systemic no. In addition your arguments on racism in this country have been almost exclusively to African Americans. You have consistently failed or refused to mention the rampant past racism and slavery against other racial and ethnic groups like Mexican Americans, Native Americans, Asians, and other that were victims of racism for hundreds of years in North America. Some, a hundred years or more before Blacks were even brought here. I am of Mexican American and Native American Heritage on my mother's side and grew up in a small (population 10,000 or so) town on the AZ/Mexico border. The town was about 80 to 90% Hispanic in population with a small minority of whites that were Morman's that ran the town and owned the majority of businesses in town and were notorious for their racial prejudices, treating the Hispanic employees as beneath them and paying significantly less in wages than their white counterparts. I grew up with racial prejudice first hand and got beat up many times by white guys because I was part Mexican and beat up Mexicans because I was part white. Many times I gave as good as I got though. My maternal grandmother who raised me told me one thing I have always remembered and repeated to my children and grandchildren, "Never hate people for being ignorant. Save it for people who are stupid.".
Racism is not systemic. It is a learned behavior.
I believe you are on record for suggesting that America needs a God (Christian) oriented society.
Other than the fact that you believe it goes against scripture, why do you care what other people call themselves? I am neither gay nor trans but I just dont spend any time worrying about it because I dont base my hopes for society on adherence to the Bible.
As far as racism goes, there are millions upon millions of white racists in this country. If the topic is not addressed what will change?
How many people on NT, or anywhere, have read the 1619 Project material? I cant say I read all of it because in total it is very long, but I did look through all of it. The 1619 Project is not riddled with falsehoods, it is riddled with uncomfortable truths about America's past. White people are afraid of those truths.
"Critical race theory" ,as a harm to society , was invented by a right wing grifter named Christopher Rufo. Critical race theory is a legal study related to institutional racism in the nation's justice system.
Are you on the same page with Kirk Cameron?
True.
Why do you care about racism, reparations and all the rest of the woke crap that you do? Because you don't spend your time worried about the things I'm concerned about isn't really relevant. You do care about what you care about. Why do you think it would be different for anyone else?
The problem is how people such as yourself define racism. All your side seems to do is declare some particular thing as racist and, therefore, it's racist. Quite a few of us have a higher standard than that.
The 1619 project is a point of view of historical events. Nothing more. That doesn't mean it doesn't contain factual, historical events. Still, it's a point of view concerning those events.
As far as white people being afraid of those truths, that's crap. I completely accept the fact that people who, incidentally, were white, enslaved and horribly mistreated other people who happened to be some other color. I know most white people, along with every other color, feel the same way. Just like I'm sure that people, regardless of their color, feel that Africans selling other Africans into slavery was just as horrible. Just as people, regardless of their skin color, felt it was horrible that Native Americans practiced slavery, human sacrifice and cannibalism.
What most thinking, rational and critically thinking people reject is that this is a white issue. For the love of truth, man, just look at history!!! All of it!! Or forget history. Just look at the present. The biggest enemy of the black person is other black people. You don't even have to look at America. Just look at Africa. Just look at Russia. Just look at half the countries on this planet!
Spare me the propaganda and assume I can make up my own mind about it. All you have done is provide a definition anyone can look up on the internet. That doesn't make it fact or true.
Based on what you posted, I don't disagree with him. That good enough for you?
Caring about ongoing racism is "woke crap"? Well at least you put your cards on the table.
Yikes !
Whatever social dysfunction exists in inner city blacks was created by white racism. This is what you seemingly utterly fail to understand.
Maybe if after emancipation the African slaves would have received complete social equality, under the law, with whites, a lot of the next 150 years could have been avoided, but we will never know.
Exactly, and that racisms continues in our deeply blue, urban environments. Just look at Baltimore, a Dem city in a very wealthy, Dem state.
From 2011 to 2020, nearly 3,000 Baltimoreans have been murdered, one of every 200 city residents. The annual homicide rate is ten times the national rate. And 93% of the homicide victims were black.
Sixty-three percent of middle and high school students are failing at least one class according to Baltimore City Public Schools – that’s nearly 25,000 students out of the nearly 40,000 sixth through twelfth graders in the district.
Even more worrying, 51% of students in grades 2-5 and 37% of Kindergarten and first-graders failed at least one course during this school year.
Fewer than 10% of Marylanders live below the poverty line, but in Baltimore, the ratio is much higher, with one in five people living in poverty
Actually, I don't fail to understand it. I think it's a product of Democratic effort. Black people could lift themselves out of their own situation as evidenced by the many black people who have done so. But instead, they listen to the very people who are keeping them down. Democrats. Democrats convince them that they should just sit there on their ass and wait for someone else to make things better for them because, well, they're black. Someone they never knew had it a hell of a lot harder than any black person today and, somehow, they're owed for that. I know a lot of black people who see that view as a load of horse shit.
And maybe if most of the horror of human history never happened we'd all be in a much better place.
Let me ask you something. Why are you only concerned with black people, or other minorities in this country? Why do you limit your concern to only the last four hundred years or so? What about the rest of history? You know, that whole pageantry of human activity where anyone who could do unto others for profit and before it was done to them?
Here's my view. I don't care if every single one of my ancestors kept people of whatever color in their basement and did unspeakable things to them, in the sense that it doesn't reflect on me. I'm not accountable for what they did. I am accountable for what I do.
Here's what I think you don't get. Because a bunch of people who thought a certain way strung up other people not of their color in no way makes me obligated to that color for anything at all unless I was one of those people. This is because, for anyone capable of critical thinking, the color of my skin doesn't dictate the way I think. Therefore, the color of my skin doesn't imbue me with obligations to anyone else based on the color of their skin. My obligation to another human being begins and ends at the same expectations I have about myself as a human being and how I expect others to treat me because of that, period. That is equality.
I disagree. It was created by an ideology. Specifically, the racist Democratic idea that black people aren't capable to take care of themselves and need special care, as if they were like special needs children or something.
Oh, for goodness sakes, Drinker, you're going to confuse the poor man!
I think you should quit while you're behind. You are already teetering on the cusp of racism.
How so?
Isn't it obvious? I disagree with him. That's racism.
Keep going. We need your clarity.
It was the "My obligation to another human being begins and ends at the same expectations I have about myself as a human being and how I expect others to treat me because of that, period. That is equality " Wasn't it?
Um, excuse me. Your identity politics is showing. Just sayin.
That is probably correct.
If only everyone could come together and say "America is racist and always has been", why, it would magically change...............nothing.
Oh, man. That is so you. You speak as if your view of what "ongoing racism" consists of is an established and accepted fact by most people. It demonstrably isn't. You only believe it is because you only listen to people who echo what you already believe. Your side goes on and on about having a "conversation" about racism but that isn't what you mean. What you really mean is you want to indoctrinate us ignorant people into your way of thinking. This is evidenced by the fact that you're supremely uninterested in actually having a "conversation" about what racism is. As if you've decided Brussel Sprouts are bad because you don't like them so the only acceptable discussion is why everyone else is wrong for disagreeing.
Not so incidentally, that's probably the worst part of the Left. They somehow think they have the right to tell everyone else how to live, what to think and what they can and can't do. The right isn't perfect but at least they mostly just want everyone to leave each other alone.
Personally , no. Collectively, yes.
We have the same government we had in 1850. There is only one US government throughout our history. We havent changed governments, so yes, we are responsible for what our government did. Same with the state governments.
So tell us all John, how is he or anyone else for that matter, accountable for what their ancestors did? Were we alive to take part in what their ancestors did; or to stop it?
Only in far out leftist land is anyone responsible for something they had nothing to do with; and had not control over.
Democrats are the party of perpetual victimhood. Without victims they cease to exist.
So collectively no one that was alive and anything to do with slavery and what occurred after it is responsible? Hell; their ancestors might not have even been in this country at the time.
You need to stop digging soon as you will never reach China; but the hole you are putting yourself in will be impossible to get out of.
Same old bullshit.
What a shocker that you post stats that are true for any big city.
What's that whistle I hear?
Too late.
Oh my fucking GOD!!!!! you are a fine one talk about that shit. You wear your politics and your fucking faith like a shield & tell us we can't "pick" on you because then you are offended and there is a war on your fucking religion - well get this - YOU ARE AS BAD AS EVERYONE ELSE WHEN IT COME TO SIDES.
Yea, that Blue racism is still there.
No, for similar sized cities:
Can you see the difference between 12 per 100,000 and 58?
Too late.
And the majority of them lean far left.
Just ask any minority how they are treated by white liberals when they escape from the democratic plantation.
Why, then they are "Uncle Toms"--like THAT isn't racist at all.
Dripping with hypocrisy!
Notice you got no answer?
Yeah, seems to be a recurring problem when people randomly shout racism and get called on it.
Not to white liberals it isn't.
To them, perfectly acceptable and self righteous.
As far as racism goes, there are millions upon millions of white racists in this country.
Where on earth do you get that ridiculous figure? Or do you you just assume anyone that voted for trump must be a racist?
John, you are the one who should quit. You're not behind, you've already lost. You just cannot or will not realize it.
I think you may have me mistaken for someone else. Jefferson, perhaps? I don't recall ever complaining about anyone picking on me, for one. Second, I don't talk about my faith very often in here. That verse about not sharing what's important to those who won't appreciate it? As far as politics, um, yeah, we all do that. Didn't say otherwise. Have a nice day.
I think you nailed the high points!
Shit. I read the list and find myself laughing at us too.
Bravo!
All ignorance and bullshit.
Your unbridled and rabid hatred of anything on the conservative right seriously clouds your judgement.
So, they don't get monetized and are telling people to use their codes and buy things.
Basically they are using this young girl to make money.
And?
Did you know that for quite a lot of American history, world history, in fact, children were expected to help the family make ends meet? There used to be this thing called "chores." They'd have to do things like get up early before school and help momma make breakfast or go out to the chicken coop and collect eggs for eating or selling in the market. Daylight savings time was created so that kids could help bring in the crops.
So, perhaps the girl is helping her family make money. Is there a problem?
And, then child labor laws were enacted...
I swear, everything is a fight with you all isn't it. I make a simple statement and some of you have a fit.
If you think this isn't an example of exploiting children, there is nothing more I can say.
I cant believe some of the things these people say. I didnt see one "conservative" that responded to this seed take any issue at all with an 8 or 9 year old girl playing with an "assault" style rifle, saying she was trying to play Jingle Bells with the sound of the bullets pinging into metal , and bragging about what type of ammo she was using. They actually think this shit is normal.
Talk about 'grooming' children...
That's the thing, Ender. I don't think it's exploiting children. Somehow, though, you get to come in here and make the comment you did and, apparently, expect no pushback if someone thinks you're wrong.
I pretty much figured the child labor angle is what you were referring to, which given the vid, seems pretty ridiculous to me. It's pretty obvious the child isn't being abused in any way and, in fact, obviously enjoys what she is doing. And, given the obvious intelligence of the child, I'm fairly certain she understands that, should this vid actually bring in money in some way, it will likely benefit her. More, the parent was obviously quite attentive to the child's safety and the training the child received in gun safety was obvious to anyone who knows guns. This was one impressive kid.
Just odd to me that you all praise and almost worship what this child has been taught yet scream about how children are being indoctrinated if they espouse views that don't align with yours.
One needs only open their eyes.
Perhaps because conservatives could clearly see she wasn't "playing".
She was handling the gun safely.
She has undoubtedly been taught that guns are not toys.
All that bullshit about something that isn't being taught.
What, exactly, is wrong with it? Seriously. Please explain what you found so objectionable about it. Because to me, you sound as silly as if you were complaining about an eight year old in a vid about riding a bike and explaining all the aspects of it's various components. Maybe the vid you saw was different than the one I saw. I watched the whole thing and I didn't see where she talked about how she's going to someday go out and shoot someone because they were (whatever). Seems to me about the only objection you can come up with is that she was shooting a gun without explaining a single thing about why that's bad. You complain about none of the conservatives taking issue with her "playing" with her gun but don't say a damned thing about what the issue could possibly be. I expect that all you'll say is that "If I have to explain it you wouldn't understand it." That about it?
Maybe that would be easier to do if you or JR would at least explain what the hell you find so objectionable about the girl shooting a gun.
Did I say what she was doing was objectionable? Well, I guess I kinda did. Yet my objections surrounded 'grooming' and exploitation.
If you cannot see that some people groom their kids into a gun culture then maybe you cannot see indoctrination in other forms.
While you ignorantly sit there and focus on her screaming, the rest of us are observing how she conducts herself with the weapon in her hand.
And many of us did. I guess you were too busy looking for something wrong you missed what she was doing absolutely perfectly.
Note that despite the liberal / antigun narrative, the gun NEVER points anywhere but toward the target. Even as she reloaded the weapon, it's pointed toward the target and away from people. The gun doesn't do that on it's own. That's done by the person holding it.
Note that despite the liberal / antigun narrative, when she puts the weapon down, it doesn't jump up and start shooting. That's because, despite the liberal narrative, it's an INAMATE OBJECT.
She says that she is trying to play Jingle Bells with the sound of the bullets hitting the target, and you say that is not "playing" , rofl.
Your comment actually had nothing to do with what I was talking about.
By the way, no matter what you say, guns were made for one purpose.
What you so ignorantly call "grooming" is actually teaching. This is the job of a parent. How many kids are killed because of the negligence of a parent leaving a firearm easily accessible? Now looking at this kid, I have a good feeling that she WILL NOT be one of those who do that.
The video is ridiculous, not unlike the Christmas cards seen above.
Then show me where a firearm got out, ran down the street and shot somebody with nobody in control of it.
There is a difference between teaching and going to extremes.
I am sure you know that though...
Please DO point out ONE damn thing she did that was unsafe.
JUST ONE.
That wasn't playing, FFS.
Stop acting like because someone never picked a gun up, it was never designed with a purpose. That is ridiculous.
So because that scares YOU, we should all be in fear? That's funny.
And she was taught.
and as I suspected, you are afraid of an inanimate object that won't do a goddamn thing without somebody controlling it. And you think that because YOU are scared everybody else should be to.
I'm not going to humor your ignorance.
Just because she wasnt acting unsafely does not mean she wasnt using the gun as a plaything. She shot at targets one of which she says was a cartoon figure and another was evidently some sort of grotesque drawing of a puppy. She says she was playing music with the sound of the bullets hitting the targets. That is PLAYING, regardless of what you think.
While what constitutes a "gun culture" won't be agreed upon between us, what, exactly is the difference between that and 'grooming' a child into a gymnastics culture? A STEM culture? A sports culture? Any damned thing you want to imagine culture?
So, since you still haven't explained what's so objectionable about her shooting a gun, you can add explaining what you think a "gun culture" to things you aren't going to explain as well.
She doesnt scare me. Dont say stupid things to me.
And I am glad she was. More people need to do that with their children if they have guns around.
My Niece and Nephew were taught at a young age. Went hunting and were taught, one incident and no more.
Difference sems to me, they were never obsessed with it nor tried to monetize it and make themselves some kind of hero to the alter of weapons.
Who said I was scared? Seems you are trying to pigeonhole everyone that you think is against you.
And? So what? Was she supposed to be miserable? Maybe it would have been more acceptable to you if she were sobbing pitifully and saying "Daddy, I don't want to shoot the bad gu gu gunnnn!" What the hell is so bad about her having fun for crying out loud?
Ohhhhhhh. That's it, isn't it? She was having fun! That's what you find so horrible! You object to the fact that she was having fun and was enjoying it.
So you do know what grooming is yet going to say it is no different than pushing a kid into gymnastics.
Progress I guess.
I see it the same as the end of world doomsday people. Spend their lives prepping instead of living....
Point being, she was taught. In five or ten years we will see where she is. Though I will have forgotten about her. I bet she is either trying to keep monetizing and making money or becomes a right wing political voice.
Or a family annihilator.
I am sure this video was made before the Texas shootings, but certainly it doesnt escape notice that this little girl isnt much older than the kids that were shot and killed at Sandy Hook. If you want to think it is perfectly ok and normal to have an 8 year old girl demonstrate an "assault" style rifle, and sell the ammo, no one on earth can stop you. I consider it a symptom of our diseased gun love culture.
Apparently you missed the fact that I put 'grooming' in quotes. Why would I do that, do you think?
That's what you got from the vid? Alrighty then.
Too busy displaying your own?
Great! More power to you! Where we're going to have a problem is when you try to impose your views on the rest of us. You don't see us trying to force guns on you, do you?
Oh and let's not forget that in the video she is also selling body armor, and even talks about what type of bullets her body armor will stop.
What does an 8 or 9 year old girl have to do with body armor? What does any law abiding citizen have to do with body armor?
Your and John's freak out over this video. You both went spastic over an 8 year old handling a firearm better than most adults.
I think she will either kind of back off of it or totally embrace it.
I know one man that tried to teach his girls about guns. At first they were fine and leaned to shoot. Then when they hit the teenage years, they had better things to do...
Okay. This is just getting ridiculous.
I told everyone exactly what I thought of the vid. They are using it as a way to make money off of gullible people.
You're comments say otherwise.
Where did I freak out? Again you are trying to project things onto me that are not there.
They do huh? Or do you just want them to.
Fine. If that works for you, have at it.
I was being sarcastic. Comment made tongue in cheek. Mainly because I was taught how to use a gun at a very young age & now have no interest in them. Hubby has a rifle and a shotgun - both my kids learned about them at a young age - neither of them are interested in firearms. Just not our thing.
It was MEANT TO BE.
I know. I said the same thing about my friends girls. Even my Nephew barely gives them a second thought these days.
He would rather go 4 wheelin'. Mud riding... Haha
I groomed my kids to be sex workers....
Watch the outrage about that
[deleted]
Do they have to give you a percentage?
When the N & N were little they like to kind of emulate you. They would try to sweep the floor and dust.
That didn't last long.
So the hell what? You think shooters don't show off on gun ranges? Then you have never been to a gun range. She is displaying her marksmanship and control of the gun.
I only wish they had social and digital recording devices around back when my friend was teaching me to shoot. We could have started a whole new shooting game trend. We would set up plastic army men; along with tanks, jeeps, trucks, etc. in earthen fortifications (that usually took us about 3 to 4 hours. We were both overly competitive asses)- draw a circle 20 free in radius around them- and then use his 9mm beretta pistols; 30 aut 6; or Winchester 30/30 to destroy everything. Points were awarded for fewest shots needed; most assets completely destroyed; and most assets remaining. We each had 1 shot with the 30 aut 6 or Winchester 30/30 to destroy the most hardened of the fortifications. The game ended when we ran out of ammunition or got bored. It took skill, tactics, and good referee that was able to stay sober long enough to keep score (another thing that ended the games early).
Leftists would call that a waste of time and money. It was cheaper than the movies since we salvaged most of the casings and he had a very good reloader. Since he lived on a farm he made his own black powder, (most of it was used as stump remover; but he made and kept extra for ammo). It also taught me gun safety, control, and not to try and fire into the sun or any intense light.
According to the You Tube comment section for the video, the girl is 8 fucking years old, roughly the same age as the kids massacred by "assault" rifles at Sandy Hook and now Uvalde.
So now you are afraid of body armor? What can body armor do to hurt you? Please tell us.
It is also legal to own body armor for all law abiding citizens in the US.
So please tell us all why you are against law abiding citizens owning what is considered a safety device?
So the hell what?
I wish someone would have taught me to shoot at that age. I didn't learn until I was in college. It took me a couple of years to get comfortable around guns so that I could take them apart and clean them. I didn't even own one until my friend gave me his Desert Eagle as repayment for a loan. I never fired that gun because it scared the hell out of me. I sold it for a large profit a few years later. Now that he is gone I wish I would have kept it.
Hell, I wish someone would have taught me how to fight dirty at that age. Learned that in high school from the same friend that taught me to shoot. Would have saved me from a lot of bullying growing up. Maybe kept some others from being bullied as well.
You have a personal bias against guns; and anyone that owns and uses them.
The girl was properly taught, and used the gun safely. She enjoys shooting. Many do. She isn't doing anything illegal. The big scary gun she is using can't and won't hurt you.
What are you doing if you need body armor?
Is this a trick question?
Self protection, store owner in a high crime area, security work.
So, in your opinion, the little girl in the video is marketing body armor to store owners in high crime areas. Ok. Somehow I doubt that would be her explanation.
Oh, I'm sorry, I was answering your question "What are you doing if you need body armor?"
So what if this girl was marketing body armor, she can't pick and choose who watches the video or who buys the items, but if I was looking for body armor for self protection, I may just look into what she was marketing as well as the .22 ammo she was using, my .22 1911 has been having problems with "stove piping" and her video will be helpful in that.
Besides that Ronin2 showed that there is a law regarding body armor and "who" can't purchase it.
the girl is 8 fucking years old
How old would she have to be in order for your head not to explode like it seems to be?
Lets see
[deleted]
Rubber/Glue? SMH
I don't and I have proof. Why do you ignore proof and continue the big lie, trying to emulate a hero that has been known to do the same?
So that means children should not have chores, what about children in commercials, acting in movies .. are they being exploited, or only this specific girl? I think the argument becomes moot if / when a bigger picture comes into focus.
So called grooming is a rather weak argument as well ... do you take offense to the exploiting of young girls in beauty pageants - slapping on the makeup and sexualized costumes? What exactly are those girls being groomed to be?
Good for you, they will always have a job to fall back on when times get tough!
Simply because it does not fit their hard core leftist liberal ideology and believe all that do not share said ideology are the enemy. There is no room for compromise.
Visiting Chicago on a typical weekend?
I mean, if you want to improve your chances of survival, of course.
Why do YOU care if someone has body armor?
You can dismiss it all you want. Fact is they are exploiting their child in order to fleece the gullible idiots out of money.
I am sure you would do the same with your daughter?
I think you forgot to answer his questions. Interesting that you are the one accusing him of dismissing something while you dismiss his comment and questions.
Over 50 million people from outside Chicago visit the city every year in recent years. It is the major destination in the midwest and always has been. It needs neither your help nor your concern.
Of course!
Well, JR, it certainly needs SOMEONE'S concern.
Chicago, with less than 1/3 of NYC's population and far more stringent gun laws, had significantly MORE murders by guns than NYC, and significantly more murders by gun than Los Angeles, despite having well over ONE MILLION less inhabitants.
Tell me some more tall tales how safe Chicago is again!
SMH at people who can ignore facts that prove them wrong, again.
I've taken my family to Chicago for two vacations. We went without a car and enjoyed the downtown attractions and baseball games and theater relying on public transportation, Uber and walking. I never felt unsafe.
But we are white and were downtown and the North side. It is dangerous if your walking around black in West Garfield Park, Washington Park and some other areas on the South and West side.
I love Chicago. Haven't been there in many years now but it's a great City. Gino's East is the best pizza!
Yeah, probably because we are such a racist country and whites are murdering blacks in droves in Chicago.
I'm not the liar here.
You've never provided proof of anything
You are doing it again
At least I know that she is a she....
What questions? Rambling on about pageant people?
I will ask you the same, would you do this with your daughter?
Tourists eat deep dish in Chicago. Locals tavern-style. I like the cracker thin crust, square-cut pie with fennel flavored sausage. Unlike New York-style pizza, Chicago’s thin crust is crispy and cannot be folded. Ordered Chicago-style is a "tavern cut" pie cut into various-sized squares for sharing and meant to be eaten with cheap beer.
Tourists eat deep dish in Chicago. Locals tavern-style. I like the cracker thin crust, square-cut pie with fennel flavored sausage. Unlike New York-style pizza, Chicago’s thin crust is crispy and cannot be folded. Ordered Chicago-style is a "tavern cut" pie cut into various-sized squares for sharing and meant to be eaten with cheap beer.
Ok, kids in acting have to abide by specific rules and laws.
I don't know about 'pageants' as I never pay attention to them.
Good enough?
I loved the pizza at Gino's East - it's been a while - there was a sausage pizza - a real thin sausage that just about covered the entire pizza.
As well known as deep dish is now, you are right. Most people that I know here dont eat deep dish, at least not regularly. There are hundreds of pizza restaurants in Chicago, and most of them feature thin crust over deep dish.
Better. Do you think the girl in the video was breaking any rules or laws? It seems it is the subject matter you object to, not the actual use of a kid. Are you familiar with hudsons playground? It is another youtube channel that highlights a couple kids. I understand their dad makes alot of money but I have a feeling there is very little outrage about it.
To answer your question no I would not use my daughter for hawking gun supplies. I don't know enough about guns to make that work. Maybe a cooking show highlighting my daughters would be more my speed. I still don't understand all the ins and outs of making money on YouTube though and my kids are in their 30s so I think that ship had sailed.
For some reason I am not allowed to respond to RDTC.
So whatever you say now, it will not let me respond.
You can't respond to RDTC because he issued an Impasse. I thought however that once you issue an impasse you should not be posting in that thread anymore.
And before i get a ticket for Meta, I'm just asking a question about what I thought the rules were..
He issued an impasses to Tess. I don't see one to me. For some reason it dragged me into it.
The rules do seem a little fuzzy on what can or cannot continue.
I issued the impasse against tess, I didn't realize that shut everyone down. Sorry
I didn't know it did that either.
Out here, you can get pizza toppings bowls. I haven't tried one yet but plan to. On the rare occasion I do order a pizza, I will eat two slices and scrape off the toppings to eat separately.
Child actors have a limited amount of on camera time per day, the amount depending on their age. Infants whose roles are integral to the show is why twins are used (ie - Full House). If they are on sets all day, they are provided tutors. Don't even get me started of child beauty pageants.
Based on the ignorance displayed in his previous posts despite numerous posts attempting to prove otherwise to him, it seems to me the answer to your question is that he connects being law abiding citizens able to purchase and legally body armor as a integral and inseparable part of his vehement anti gun views.
Pizza delivery driver in West Garfield Park area in Chicago.
Those guys deserve combat pay.
Most assuredly.
[Deleted]
I fired a Desert Eagle once. It belonged to a fellow Navy FMF Corpsman who was with Marine Force Recon. I fired one round and promptly handed it back as I was totally unprepared for the recoil. My wrist was sore for a week after that. Have never fired one again since then.
People that are hard core anti gun have been so indoctrinated they just cannot and will not accept the fact that it is the person holding the gun that is dangerous and not the inanimate gun itself.
I know that is a tempting argument but its just not a good one. The same sick person could have a different inanimate object, lets say a shoe, in his hand instead of a gun and he would be a threat to virtually no one.
It does matter what the inanimate object is. Objects like guns are a threat and objects like shoes are not.
To argue that an inanimate object that can kill dozens of people in a couple minutes is not a danger to society is blind thinking.
Except in the hands of one person that inanimate object won't harm any single person but in the hands of another it can kill people. Isn't it past time that we start to look at the person himself to identify those who should not have access to guns and prevent them from getting them in the first place? There are common signs that these people have exhibited, but nobody ever bothers to step forward before the fact.
If these inanimate objects are that dangerous in the hands of ANY person then we would have daily death counts in the thousands due to the vast number of guns in private hands.
I refer you back to post #7.1.104 above. We are never going to agree on this so better to just agree to disagree and let it go here and now. You have a good day.
There is no reason to believe that the constitution was designed to let individuals have any weapon they wanted. High speed, high velocity bullet, guns should not be in private hands.
This is your opinion, not fact. The fact of the matter is in the hands of a sane legal law-abiding rational gun owner these items hold no more danger to the public than your coffee cup.
This has never been the argument. Government (both federal and state) have already limited the type of weapons that a private person can legally possess.
And if the feds re-enact the 1994 assault weapons ban, so be it. The problem that I have pointed out is that the ban in 94 had a rather limited impact on gun violence so if they just re-enact it again what do you expect the difference to be? You appear to be assuming that such a ban might prevent these types of shootings but I don't believe it will make that much difference just like it didn't make a huge difference in 94.
You have never, to my knowledge, answered a simple question however. If as I suspect an assault weapons ban has little impact on reducing these types of shootings, what's next?
To me, reenacting the assault weapons ban is related to Einstein's definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting the same results.
I'll bet you think Lori Lightfoot is doing a bang up job as Chicago's mayor.
And they, high speed, high velocity bullet, guns, were not there when the Constitution was written.
Probably why they weren't addressed, ya think?
Why the redundancy?