╌>

The Transgender Killer

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  11 months ago  •  330 comments

The Transgender Killer
“We have a manifesto, we have some writings that we’re going over that pertain to this day,” Nashville Metropolitan police chief John Drake said about the discovery.

Link to Quote: Nashville school shooter Audrey Hale identified as transgender and had detailed manifesto to attack Christian academy (nypost.com)


Yesterday there was another horrific school shooting. There were no stories about it here, but at a Presbyterian school in Tennessee, 3 young children, no older than 9 years old and 3 school administrators, incuding the woman who ran the school, were killed by a lone killer. They were identified as : Evelyn Dieckhaus, 9, Hallie Scruggs, 9, William Kinney, 9, Cynthia Peak, 61, Katherine Koonce, 60, and Mike Hill, 61. The police were quick to the scene and the killer was shot dead within 15 minutes of their arrival. The two officers who took this monster out deserve special mention:




FsRkRkfWIAYaXgx?format=jpg&name=360x360 FsRkRkhWwAESvMW?format=jpg&name=360x360
They are Officer Rex Englebert and Officer Michael Collazo



As police officials. began to give interviews it was revealed that the killer was a woman. Many experts thought it odd since it defied the usual profile for such acts. A little later in the day police were asked point blank by a reporter if the woman was a transgender person. The answer was yes.



th?id=OVFT.BxUZ-zFlG-dVPWwPzGU6wC&pid=News&w=234&h=132&c=14&rs=2&qlt=90
Ashley Hale AKA "his/him"

The killer was identified as Ashley Hale a 28-year-old transgender person. Police say the murders were well planned and the murderer left behind maps drawn of the school in detail, as well as a manifesto. This really isn't that surprising since left wing news has been slamming the state of Tennessee for making a law preventing young children from doing permanent damage to their bodies. The left will most likely either ignore this story or try to make the killer the victim. I'm fairly sure of one thing: we won't be hearing much about that manifesto. Biden's DOJ will see to that.


Speaking of Biden, he was quick to demagogue the tragedy as usual.



OIP.uh7-PljrvwP2ldiDLfv03wHaE8?w=263&h=180&c=7&r=0&o=5&pid=1.7
Dumb Ass

After talking about how much he liked Chocolate Chip ice cream, Biden blamed it on "assault weapons." You know the weapons that are so hard to get. Ms. Hale had no problem getting hers and she legally owned them. Three weapons: an AR-style rifle, an AR-style pistol and a handgun. Biden's ignorant press secretary blamed Republicans for dragging their feet on Biden's assault weapon bill. 


The murders took place just days before the planned "Trans Day of Vengeance:"


"A group of transgender activists is planning a “Day of Vengeance” in Washington, D.C., for March 31-April 2 while raising money for firearms training this week, according to its online materials.

The Trans Radical Activist Network (TRAN) said on Twitter that “The time is now, enough is enough,” and uploaded posters to  TikTok  that said, “We want more than visibility. Trans Day of Vengeance. Stop trans genocide. Save the date: April 1st – 11:00 AM / March 31st – TBA.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/trans-radicals-plan-day-of-vengeance-in-d-c-alongside-firearms-training




I am going to put the blame where it belongs: the left. Over the past few weeks we have heard a lot about the new law in Tennessee. They have incentivized these people whom they have convinced that they are victims and now they want to use this to play politics.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    11 months ago

Nashville police recently released the film footage of the killer entering the school.

5Q--At_c?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    11 months ago

... thoughts and prayers.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.1.1  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @1.1    11 months ago

None for mighty mental midget Democrats and leftists that incited this act. 

If we had a real AG, instead of the partisan POS Garland, charges would be filed against those on the left promoting this violence.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.1    11 months ago

yeah well, until your future dream scenarios actually happen, I'd get used to it. it was only a matter of time, and that clock is still running...

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @1.1.2    11 months ago

So is the clock when our two tier justice system just won't matter anymore; and people will take the law into their own hands.

Works both ways.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.4  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.3    11 months ago

If and when we have individuals taking the law into their own hands. . . how many "tiers" of a justice system will we have? Go!

Incidentally, this young woman shooter, took the law into her own hands.  And today, she is as dead as Ashli Babbitt!  No disrespect to Babbitt intended.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.5  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.3    11 months ago

I'm not worried, I don't belong to the party that's trying to take individual freedoms away from the majority of americans.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.1.6  bugsy  replied to  devangelical @1.1.5    11 months ago

Oh yes you are. You are a far, far leftist.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.7  devangelical  replied to  bugsy @1.1.6    11 months ago

pfffft, almost everybody is far left of you...

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @1.1.6    11 months ago

What, in your mind, are the defining characteristics of a "far, far leftist"?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.1.9  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.8    11 months ago

Well, a few to start...

Someone who asks the same question over and over well after everyone has answered that question. That is actually known as a trolling, harassing far, far leftist.

Someone who proclaims Trump guilty of "wrongdoing" by reason of feelings.

Someone who uses the term xtian thumpers do describe anyone that does not think like them

Someone who believes that guns kill people, and not the people using the gun to support a crime

Someone who thinks it is OK to kill a fetus in the womb up to the minute of birth.

Someone who voted for Biden and thinks he is doing a good job.

That is just a few.

What do you think are the defining characteristics of a far, far leftist.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @1.1.9    11 months ago

You (and Texan and MonsterMash) clearly have no clue about left ideology.

Someone who asks the same question over and over well after everyone has answered that question. That is actually known as a trolling, harassing far, far leftist.

Leftest = someone who asks a question repeatedly??    Right off the bat your comment is foolish.

Someone who proclaims Trump guilty of "wrongdoing" by reason of feelings.

Leftist = someone who recognizes Trump's wrongdoing??      Anyone who recognizes Trump's wrongdoing is NOT ipso facto a "far far leftist"

Someone who uses the term xtian thumpers do describe anyone that does not think like them

Leftist = use of the phrase "xtian thumpers"??   Clearly you have not received any formal education in ideology / politics

Someone who believes that guns kill people, and not the people using the gun to support a crime

Leftist = someone who believes a gun on its own kills people??   You actually think there are people who think that?

Someone who thinks it is OK to kill a fetus in the womb up to the minute of birth.

Leftist = someone who approves of partial birth abortion.    Okay, this one actually has merit.  I would expect that only a "far, far leftist" would actually support partial birth abortion.

Someone who voted for Biden and thinks he is doing a good job.

Leftist = someone who voted for and still supports Biden??   I think you just named a defining characteristic of a D voter.   You apparently cannot see that Biden is not "far,far left" and is actually a left-leaning moderate D.   His policies have been a bit more left than his history would suggest and that is probably due to the pressures from the more radical side of the D party.   Claiming Biden is "far far left" is a perfect way to look foolish.


What do you think are the defining characteristics of a far, far leftist.

Very good for you to ask since clearly you have no clue.   First, let's dispense with your emotional "far far" and just go with "left ideology":

  • Focus on society over individual.   To wit:  what is good for society is good for the individual.   The right's ideological view is the exact opposite.
  • Use of government to better society (belief).   This basically means public programs such as universal healthcare, free education (to a degree), heavily taxed / regulated capitalism, etc.
  • Individual freedom of choice over traditional customs / beliefs.   This includes freedom of religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, individual expression (e.g. tattoos, piercings, clothing, hairstyle, ...), use of alcohol / drugs, etc.  
  • No discrimination by race, gender or other factors
  • Favor of working class over aristocracy / ruling class
  • Acceptance and promotion of change (societal evolution) rather than clinging to traditions / customs

That should suffice as defining characteristics for left ideology.


But note that political ideology is not synonymous with party affiliation.   While party affiliation depends heavily on ideology, the two are still distinct concepts.

At the basic level there are three tranches of party affiliation.    D partisans, Independents, R partisans.    (Other parties such as libertarian are ignored in this comment due to their insignificance.)     D partisans and R partisans always vote for their party and always follow/defend the party positions.   Independents are distinguished in their lack of concern over what a party 'wishes' and rather are influenced by the individual candidates.

Adding a bit more: of the partisans, there are factions based on ideology.   There will be the hard left of the D and the hard right of the R.   Then moderates of the D and R party.   (Note that there is even a minority of hard right Ds and hard left Rs.)

Independents can be purely independent (have no concern for any party) but most independents favor one of the major political parties and I would expect are even registered in a particular party;  they also can ideologically lean left or right.    And, of course, there is a minority of far left and far right independents.


In short, no a "far, far leftist" is not simply someone (in effect) with whom you disagree politically or dislike personally.   Abusing language like you have simply makes you look foolish.   I do not see how it accomplishes anything of value.   So you might ask yourself why you make foolish comments like this.   What, exactly, do you hope to gain by them?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.10    11 months ago

Please leave me out of your next novel.

Thanks in advance.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.11    11 months ago

Nope, when you vote up a ridiculous comment, that implies agreement with it.

If you do not agree with a comment, you should think twice about voting up.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.12    11 months ago

Either address me personally or leave me out of your novels in the future.

I don't think that is asking too much.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.14  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.13    11 months ago

Okay, Texan, I will address you personally.   Since you voted up these "defining characteristics" of the "far far" left @1.1.9 and thus implicitly agree, I am taking the time to personally disagree with you.

Someone who asks the same question over and over well after everyone has answered that question. That is actually known as a trolling, harassing far, far leftist.

Leftest = someone who asks a question repeatedly??    Right off the bat this is foolish.

Someone who proclaims Trump guilty of "wrongdoing" by reason of feelings.

Leftist = someone who recognizes Trump's wrongdoing??      Anyone who recognizes Trump's wrongdoing is NOT ipso facto a "far far leftist"

Someone who uses the term xtian thumpers do describe anyone that does not think like them

Leftist = use of the phrase "xtian thumpers"??   Clearly you have not received any formal education in ideology / politics

Someone who believes that guns kill people, and not the people using the gun to support a crime

Leftist = someone who believes a gun on its own kills people??   You actually think there are people who think that?

Someone who thinks it is OK to kill a fetus in the womb up to the minute of birth.

Leftist = someone who approves of partial birth abortion.    Okay, this one actually has merit.  I would expect that only a "far, far leftist" would actually support partial birth abortion.

Someone who voted for Biden and thinks he is doing a good job.

Leftist = someone who voted for and still supports Biden??   I think you just named a defining characteristic of a D voter.   You apparently cannot see that Biden is not "far,far left" and is actually a left-leaning moderate D.   His policies have been a bit more left than his history would suggest and that is probably due to the pressures from the more radical side of the D party.   Claiming Biden is "far far left" is a perfect way to look foolish.


If you would like my opinion on the defining characteristics of "the left", I have provided a representative (albeit not necessarily complete) list @1.1.10

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.14    11 months ago

Helpful hint for you in the future:

If YOU have a problem with what someone ELSE says, take it up with them.

I don't ask YOU to explain another poster's comments to me, so why in the hell are you asking me to defend or explain another's comments to YOU?
That is illogical and displays a lack of thinking.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.14    11 months ago
If you would like my opinion on the defining characteristics of "the left", I have provided a representative (albeit not necessarily complete) list

When I desire your opinion, I will directly ask you for it.

Until then, not necessary for me to know or care about your opinion.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.17  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.16    11 months ago
When I desire your opinion, I will directly ask you for it.

You requested I directly address you and I have.

Clearly you cannot defend your agreement of bugsy's "far far left" defining characteristics. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.17    11 months ago
You requested I directly address you and I have.

I have told you that if YOU have a problem with someone else's post take it up with THEM.

Is your need to argue for the sheer sake of arguing greater than using logic and reason to address the people who wrote what you don't like?

And why do you think his comments need defending? Defending from whom?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.19  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.18    11 months ago

I have taken it up with the poster.   And I am also dealing with your agreement.

If you cannot handle the scrutiny, go elsewhere.   Continuing with meta is NOT the way to operate.

Focus on the content and comment.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.19    11 months ago
I have taken it up with the poster.

That is just wonderful!

And I am also dealing with your agreement.

Okay, so?

If you cannot handle the scrutiny, go elsewhere.   Continuing with meta is NOT the way to operate.

I can handle it fine. What I may have trouble with is handling your trolling.

Focus on the content and comment

I have, and once again, your inability to recognize that isn't MY problem, it is YOURS alone. Deal with it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.21  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.20    11 months ago

Again, instead of dealing with the content (which you obviously cannot handle) you engage in meta.

What are the defining characteristics of the "far far left"?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.22  devangelical  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.21    11 months ago

heh, 6 comments to avoid answering 1 question...

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.23  CB  replied to  devangelical @1.1.22    11 months ago

00climate-fti-articleLarge.png?quality=90&auto=webp

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.24  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.21    11 months ago

please stop trolling.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.1.22    11 months ago

questions which have previously been asked and answered aren't high on my priority list.

some just keep on asking, hoping for an answer they deem acceptable. 

not my problem

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2  Jeremy Retired in NC    11 months ago
Biden blamed it on "assault weapons." You know the weapons that are so hard to get. Ms. Hale had no problem getting hers and she legally owned them.

Ah, the mythical "assault weapons."  That weapon that the left cannot define but seems to turn up everywhere.  And again, the shooter had no problem in acquiring this mythical "assault weapon" LEGALLY.  So another failure of the government with their "tougher legislation".  

People in the United States have had weapons for centuries.  When I was in high school, it wasn't uncommon to see weapons in in cars in the school parking lot.  We had no school shootings, those were unheard of.  So, the problem ISN'T the weapon.  The only other factor the left refuses to acknowledge - the mental deficient fool holding the weapon. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    11 months ago
People in the United States have had weapons for centuries.

Society is much more complex today. By magnitudes one could say. When the second amendment was written there was no such thing as a big city by modern standards

1790

New York New York 33,131   (includes rural areas of Manhattan) New York has ranked as the city with the highest population in every census count. [a]
2 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 28,522   (excludes urban neighborhoods outside city proper) Prior to 1854, the City of Philadelphia only governed the oldest parts of the city, now referred to as   Center City .
3 Boston Massachusetts 18,320 Listed as a town in the 1790 census; now a city since 1822 and is the capital of Massachusetts since 1632.
4 Charleston South Carolina 16,359
5 Baltimore Maryland 13,503 Existed as a town during the time; now an   independent city .

The five largest cities in the country were, combined, smaller in population than a single suburb of Chicago, Naperville, is today. 

-

149.54K
-
Los Angeles today is 100 times larger, in population,  than New York City was in 1790 when the second amendment was written.
-
People who think this is a meaningless fact are delusional. 
 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    11 months ago

What the hell does big city/population have to do with it????? And I think the people who believe it relevant are delusional..........and desperate to prove some kind of irrelevant point has merit.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    11 months ago

when everyone lives in rural areas the psychology of the population is far different from when hundreds of thousands or millions of people are in close proximity.  To claim that back in the old days people all had guns and didnt shoot each other simply ignores the reality of modern life. There is much more stress now and stress causes people to have mental and emotional breakdowns. 

In 1790 the vast number of Americans lived in small towns and farm areas where there was a sense of community and interpersonal relationships that we dont see en masse in large cities today. 

If you cant see the connection between an alienated society like we have today and increasing random violence you arent looking. 

What does this have to do with gun ownership?  Simple, the states with the most guns have the most gun violence and the most gun deaths. This is a statistical fact.

No one needs an AR-15, they want them. "Freedom" baby. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    11 months ago
the connection between an alienated society

So you think NOW is the only time in history we had alienation of "others"?? Salem ring a bell? Jim Crow? Japanese internment camps? WAP's, Irish?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.3    11 months ago

you are confusing alienation with discrimination

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    11 months ago
There is much more stress now and stress causes people to have mental and emotional breakdowns. 

And I though things had become much easier. These days people can even work from home.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.6  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    11 months ago
There is much more stress now and stress causes people to have mental and emotional breakdowns. 

So rather than address the issue with the people that have the breakdowns the answer is to take away everyone's guns so the people that are mentally ill and getting guns illegally can shoot more people without worrying about being shot.  Yea, another liberal solution where nothing can possibly go wrong.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.7  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    11 months ago
No one needs an AR-15, they want them.

No one needs a 75 inch TV, going after them next?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    11 months ago

I notice he goes by overall population of the cities instead of his usual racial injection into a conversation.  I wonder why?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
2.1.9  charger 383  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.7    11 months ago

Because some do not want pepole to have things is a good reason to have them

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.10  Right Down the Center  replied to  charger 383 @2.1.9    11 months ago
Because some do not want pepole to have things is a good reason to have them

Exactly why I bought a confederate flag.

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
2.1.11  George  replied to  charger 383 @2.1.9    11 months ago

It is always amazing that they want to take away the things they don't want, but never complain about the ability to post stupid shit on the internet, Maybe because they will be affected if that is removed. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.1.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    11 months ago
When the second amendment was written there was no such thing as a big city by modern standards

And exactly what does that have to do with my comment?  The ONE thing that has changed is the people.  The ONE thing everybody is refusing to acknowledge as the problem.  

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
2.1.13  charger 383  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    11 months ago

Another example of why overpopulation is a big problem

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.1.14  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    11 months ago
To claim that back in the old days people all had guns and didnt shoot each other simply ignores the reality of modern life.

That's a moronic way to look at it.  I never said WHERE I went to high school (BTW it was IN Pittsburgh.  Not the rural areas).  The difference is how we dealt with people.  

There is much more stress now and stress causes people to have mental and emotional breakdowns. 

Maybe babying your children a good choice.  They needed to be taught how to deal with stress.  Instead you gave them participation trophies and "everybody's a winner".  Now they are offended by the most petty shit.

If you cant see the connection between an alienated society like we have today and increasing random violence you arent looking.  What does this have to do with gun ownership? 

So you are making excuses for the shooter now.  

No one needs an AR-15, they want them.

I wanted mine and I purchased them.  Why I wanted them is really none of yours or anybody else's business.  BTW, when did an AR-15 become an "assault weapon".  There isn't a single function of it that makes it remotely usable in combat.  There isn't a single military in the world using it.  But I guess because it looks like an M-4 / M-16 that scares the shit out of you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.15  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.14    11 months ago
That's a moronic way to look at it.  I never said WHERE I went to high school (BTW it was IN Pittsburgh.  Not the rural areas).

Why should I give a shit where you went to high school? What are you talking about? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.16  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.14    11 months ago
There isn't a single function of it that makes it remotely usable in combat.  There isn't a single military in the world using it.

Nobody cares about this. They care that these guns are being used to kill people. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.1.17  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.15    11 months ago
What are you talking about? 

Pay attention to your own statements and I'm sure you'll figure it out.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.18  JohnRussell  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.7    11 months ago
No one needs a 75 inch TV, going after them next?

You arent going to drop a 75 in. television out the third floor window on to someones head , are you?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.19  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    11 months ago
When the second amendment was written there was no such thing as a big city by modern standards

Looks like you are trying to prove people are the problem.  Good to see you are finally seeing the truth.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.20  JohnRussell  replied to  charger 383 @2.1.9    11 months ago

Most people dont want others to have herpes. Is that a good reason to have it? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.21  JohnRussell  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.19    11 months ago

People are the problem and guns are the problem. Gee, that was easy. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.22  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.16    11 months ago
Nobody cares about this. They care that these guns are being used to kill people. 

Exactly.  They should stop saying assault weapons (it makes them look ignorant anyway)and say what they really mean, "all weapons".

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.23  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.21    11 months ago
People are the problem and guns are the problem. Gee, that was easy. 

Actually mentally ill people with guns are the problem.  So all someone has to do is find a place to live without people (all people to be on the safe side) or guns.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.25  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.18    11 months ago
You arent going to drop a 75 in. television out the third floor window on to someones head , are you?

Me personally, probably not but It is possible for someone to do it.  What about a second car?  No one needs a second car and they can kill people.  Maybe we should make sure no one can buy a second car.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.26  JohnRussell  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.22    11 months ago

Ar-15's seem to be a favorite of some of those who want to kill a lot of people. 

What is the counter argument to banning them? 

"I want my AR-15 because I want it."

That is not a good enough reason.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.27  JohnRussell  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.25    11 months ago
No one needs a second car and they can kill people.  Maybe we should make sure no one can buy a second car.

There is no reasonable dispute over whether or not there is a "right" to own a second car. There is reasonable dispute over whether or not people have the right to own 'assault' rifles. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.1.28  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.26    11 months ago
What is the counter argument to banning them? 

Take on the REAL PROBLEM.  

"I want my AR-15 because I want it." That is not a good enough reason.  

Then don't buy one.  What about that is so hard for you anti-gun cowards to grasp?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.29  Tessylo  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.22    11 months ago

No one is saying 'all weapons' except y'all.

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
2.1.30  George  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.21    11 months ago
People are the problem and guns are the problem. Gee, that was easy.

As usual, your comment is half right. i bolded the part where you are correct.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.31  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.8    11 months ago

No need to wonder..................

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.32  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.26    11 months ago

Nah, the counter argument is that right now, people in the US are still legally allowed to own them and most do so responsibly.

Trying to ban the evil black gun is the left, once again, throwing out the baby with the bath water.   It doesn’t solve anything but if it did.  It would solve a politically visible part of the problem but only a small part of it.

A very small part of it ....

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
2.1.33  George  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.26    11 months ago
That is not a good enough reason. 

Holy shit, i don't want you to continuously have the ability to post stupid shit like this on the internet, But rights are funny like that. What people want, or what they think don't supersede other people's rights. so i fully recognize your RIGHT to continuously post stupid crap.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
2.1.34  charger 383  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.20    11 months ago

herpes is not an asset and or something that is wanted  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.35  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    11 months ago

What does working remotely have to do with this?

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
2.1.36  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    11 months ago
What the hell does big city/population have to do with it?????

Big cities, more people, more crime. This isn't rocket science. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.1.37  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  MrFrost @2.1.36    11 months ago
more people, more crime.

(hehehehehehe) so its a population problem ? maybe thats why i like living somewhere that only has 6 people per square mile , you can look up how many live in other places if you please .

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.38  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.26    11 months ago
"I want my AR-15 because I want it." That is not a good enough reason.  

Actually it is a good enough reason.  Why people want something is none of your, or anyone else's business

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.39  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.27    11 months ago

Who determines what is reasonable?  You?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.40  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.29    11 months ago
No one is saying 'all weapons' except y'all.

So when someone says "They care that these guns are being used to kill people. "  what  does gun does that exclude?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
2.1.41  charger 383  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.38    11 months ago

If I can't buy legal things that I want. why should I work and save money to get them?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.42  Sparty On  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.39    11 months ago

The answer to that isn’t just no.    

It’s thank God no.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.43  CB  replied to  charger 383 @2.1.41    11 months ago

When we start losing people we know personally (including extended family and distant friends) then we will know mass murder has found 'you.' Is all of this worth the remainder of sorrow to be endured.  Ashley Hale is proof of something, namely,  smart human 'powder kegs' are disbursed throughout our society and they have weapons of mass destruction and know how to use them.  Now then, do we fix the gun issue or do we wait for the 'evolution' of the smart human mass bombers? For we know nature abhors a vacuum. We ignore gun violence at all our peril.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    11 months ago

Good luck with ending mental illness, conservatives.  As you certainly know getting rid of gun SATURATION is hard, just try getting rid of mental illnesses! Which do you think will happen first!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.2.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @2.2    11 months ago
Good luck with ending mental illness, conservatives

It is a problem.  Just look at the left.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.2.2  devangelical  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.1    11 months ago
Just look at the left.

... out numbered and dwarfed by collective trumpster/maga mental deficiency.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  devangelical @2.2.2    11 months ago

I'd ask you to back up your claim but we all know how that has resulted in the past.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    11 months ago

The common accepted textbook book definition of a "assault weapon" is any military grade firearm capable of selective fire between semi automatic and fully automatic fire. You cannot just walk into any gun shop and buy one. All you will get is semi automatic only. If one wants a fully automatic weapon, they have to prove why, fill out a mass of paperwork, undergo very stringent background checks, and expect to pay a hefty sum for the permit. Any who continue to equate a semi automatic weapon for a assault weapon are just displaying their own ignorance.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.3.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3    11 months ago

You’re right.  If I was considering new legal resolution, I might focus on bullet velocity.  High velocity rounds do terrible things to bodies, especially children bodies. That might be a reasonable right to give up for improved security in mass killings.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.3.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3    11 months ago

that would be an "assault RIFLE" the military has used that definition for decades , assault weapon  was a term contrived by politicians to describe weapons tht did not fit that definition they wished to ban back in 93-94 , for legislative purposes they needed not only a legal term , but a definition , if one looks at the definition used back then , it was rather "ambiguous" , and easily circumvented . 

All one had to do was eliminate some cosmetic features or limit them so the firearm no longer fit the definition .

the claim that ARs were banned for that 10 year period is a lie , existing ones were grandfathered , and future ones during the ban simply didnt offer some cosmetic features thus making them legal for sale and "ban compliant "

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2.3.2    11 months ago

You correct. Got my terminology confused. My thanks for the correction. I own a semi automatic Mossberg M702 Tactical Pinkster that is .22LR caliber that is black and externally resembles a AR style assault rifle. The only real giveaway up close is the magazine size. I have had people threaten me with calling the police on me for having a illegal "assault rifle" in the back of my SUV. I told them to go right ahead and I would wait right there for them to arrive. Never had any show up. Of course the individual was a middle aged tourist from out of town with Obama and Biden stickers all over the back of her car as well as banning guns. Laughed my head off on that one.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.3.4  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.3.1    11 months ago

well your going to have to come up with some agreeable limit as to what is considered high velocity .

there are cartridges that have a velocity as low as 700 fps , on up to over 4000 fps , getting everyone to agree will be like herding chickens and cats at the same time 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.3.5  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3.3    11 months ago

thought you might have . i have a similar story that happened here in Wyoming during the time that the AWB was in effect . son and i were plinking in an accepted area for shooting , and had a touron from out of state spy my AR and started screatching , all the while on the phone to the cops ,  cops show up , ask me where i got it , told them its home built , they looked it over and of course karen van touron is gloating like she just won the lottery .  cop hands it back to me and turns and tells her , there is nothing illegal about that firearm , it is completely ban compliant , i think i saw her hips spread ......at least her spanks got noticeably larger , and there was a foul odor on the wind .

kicker was i had the conversion kit installed and was shooting 22 LR which the cop noticed and just grinned . after she left he asked if he could give it a try .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3    11 months ago
Any who continue to equate a semi automatic weapon for a assault weapon are just displaying their own ignorance.

This can't be emphasized enough.   

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.7  Tessylo  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2.3.5    11 months ago

Ain't you something?jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3  Sean Treacy    11 months ago

This is one of those days that drives home how toxic the online world is  and how it increases radicalization.  Posts claim trans people are the real victims of the shooting, or mocking the victims because prayer didn’t save them.  Real sick stuff.

this trans person summarized what the online trans community is like:

Trans posters in trans forums, and trans accounts
on Twitter, regularly promote violence against
"Nazis" and "TERFs" and "fascists." They mean it.
They want violence. They talk about punching,
shooting, stabbing, beating with baseball bats,
and they put images of rifles on trans flags. When
you look at the targets of the rhetoric, most of the
targets aren't actually Nazis, TERFs, or fascists.
They're dissident voices: conservative Christians
and feminists and everyday people who don't hold
the fringe beliefs about sex that many trans
people hold

Last week, I saw video of a 72 year old butch
woman being punched, full force, closed fist, by a
bearded trans-rights protester in New Zealand.
saw trans people commenting to minimize or
justify it. I see a lot of that. I've been seeing it for
years. So has everyone else on social media.

The community tells trans youth that they're under
attack, under threat of genocide, tells them "death
before detransition." The community says trans
kids are being killed by legislation. Two trans
people have now taken guns into schools and
literally killed children- as revenge.

The murderous and suicidal rhetoric, the violence
against women and children, should've stopped
years ago. Another good time to discontinue it
would be now.

I go into the trans subs to see that almost every
reaction to the murder of young children is self
concern: I'm the victim here! I'm in more danger
than ever before! This is genocide against us,
every time this murderer's identity and motives are
mentioned! We are being killed!

There is a problem. You can't fix it alone. It's
horrific, it's immense and intense, and it's
overwhelming. There would have to be a
consensus that things need to change. I don't
know what it would take. Maybe it's too late, and
this is what the trans movement

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @3    11 months ago

Sounds like a companion piece and parallel to the "replacement" theory that has inspired mass shootings in the US and around the world. In the US, the El Paso shooting at a Walmart store that killed 23 people was inspired by the shooters belief that white people were being 'replaced' by Mexicans and that predicament required violence. Dylan Roof, of course, had much the same motive when he killed 9 people at a Charleston , South Carolina church. And there are other race related mass shootings. 

The trans are following previous modeling to express 'grievance' through violence. 

Anyone who feels that have a right or duty to enter a location and kill people they dont know is disturbed by definition. Your attempt to make it sound like trans who express violence are unique falls totally flat. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    11 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    11 months ago
the "replacement" theory

Oh that's the theory that is only a theory when normal citizens complain about it. It's reality for the left who have opened our borders.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    11 months ago

Except for replacement theory, (when not being cheered for by democrats) is universally attacked by our cultural gatekeepers.

the trans people are under attack narrative is constantly pushed by those same people.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.1    11 months ago

Just because this person was obviously mentally disturbed doesn't make all trans people mentally disturbed.

It is the writer of this op/ed who and you who is painting all trans people as mentally disturbed.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.5  CB  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.1    11 months ago

Where did you ever get that notion? And now that "we" all can see, this kind of sickness is deep in the bowels of 'anybody' - remember, recently we had a black man on a college campus heedlessly, needlessly, and recklessly harming and destroying innocent people in the name of a mass killing.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
3.1.6  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.4    11 months ago
Just because this person was obviously mentally disturbed doesn't make all trans people mentally disturbed.

Funny coming from a person that paints all Republicans with the same brush based on a few far right wing nuts.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Right Down the Center @3.1.6    11 months ago

No, that brush applies -- there are nothing but rwnjs amongst the 'right'.  Those who aren't are too spinless to speak up so they're also rwnjs.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
3.1.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.7    11 months ago

Thank you for proving my point. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.2    11 months ago
Oh that's the theory that is only a theory when normal citizens complain about it. It's reality for the left who have opened our borders.

While I agree our borders should be secured, calling latinos "replacements" is really not nice. There was a time when Italians, Irish, and Jews were not wanted here and were viewed as "replacements".

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.9    11 months ago
There was a time when Italians, Irish, and Jews were not wanted here and were viewed as "replacements".

Those were the great waves of immigrants. There was discrimination directed at each of them, but they were never viewed or used as replacement voters.

That is what replacement theory means.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.11  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.10    11 months ago

me thinks you forget tamany hall and that era .

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.12  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.11    11 months ago

I haven't.  Corruption for profit is bad. Corruption for ideology is worse.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.13  CB  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.9    11 months ago

And Native Americans had first 'dibs' and oops: Replaced!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
3.1.14  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.10    11 months ago

Vic,

The assumption is that Latinos all vote the same. They don't. The same could be said for the Italians, Irish, and Jews. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
3.1.15  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.14    11 months ago

Correct, you can see the same urban/rural divide in most groups.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.16  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.14    11 months ago
The assumption is that Latinos all vote the same.

You are right. That was the hope of the democratic party. It hasn't turned out that way.

Are we talking specifically about Hispanics in general or the people, right now, entering illegally?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.2  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @3    11 months ago

What the *blank* are we supposed to glean from this? Remember this: One transperson or would be transperson going off the deep end/spiraling out of control, does not a "set" or "pattern" or "trend" make.  Furthermore, if is highly likely that if someone is scouring social media looking for a 'twisted' transperson (or twisted 'anybody' type for that matter) - they are out there.

This person dubbed 'Trans,' if the name holds up just clarifies the point that anybody can 'nut' up and do stupid and death and we still don't know why it happens nor can we catch 'em all. But, guns don't think. Controlling guns is a lot easier to accomplish, but that's not going to happen.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4  JBB    11 months ago

Did I accidentally wander onto a radical hate site?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @4    11 months ago

You never accidently do that. You know where they are.

Have a good day.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
4.2  Thomas  replied to  JBB @4    11 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @4.2    11 months ago

Same difference?

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
5  Thomas    11 months ago

Vic, if there were no guns, there would be no shooting. 

I like how you turned the story against the media for reporting on the removal of parental rights by state governments. Though flawed at the very base of its conception, your "readers" will no doubt lap it up and repeat it as God-given gospel. Really, it can be seen to be just a way of saying, "Think and do as I think and do, or something bad will happen to you." 

In Florida, the Parental Rights Act is effectively taking away the rights of some of the parents.  In Florida, the political establishment has said, " All Animals are created Equal, but some Animals are more Equal than others, and we will pass laws that enshrine that." Now, Tennessee has followed suit, enacting laws to enshrine some parents' rights as dominant over other parents and their offspring, though the former have no right or compelling interest to do so. 

There can be no other reason for your highlighting the fact that the individual who committed these heinous acts was a biological woman who identified as his/him. And, since you have posted absolutely no proof that the person in question was motivated by the recent press coverage, this sudden leap to lay blame on some exterior force remains a non-sequitur and therefore invalid.

There are several descriptors for the type of governance that you are espousing, but I will just say that it is discriminatory at the heart and let it go at that.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Thomas @5    11 months ago
Vic, if there were no guns, there would be no shooting.

What would have happened if this maniac didn't have a gun?


In Florida, the Parental Rights Act is effectively taking away the rights of some of the parents.  In Florida, the political establishment has said, " All Animals are created Equal, but some Animals are more Equal than others, and we will pass laws that enshrine that." Now, Tennessee has followed suit, enacting laws to enshrine some parents' rights as dominant over other parents and their offspring, though the former have no right or compelling interest to do so. 

You are projecting. The law protects young children from indoctrination.


There can be no other reason for your highlighting the fact that the individual who committed these heinous acts was a biological woman who identified as his/him. And, since you have posted absolutely no proof that the person in question was motivated by the recent press coverage, this sudden leap to lay blame on some exterior force remains a non-sequitur and therefore invalid.

Did you read what I said?  She left a manifesto and I told you that Biden's DOJ will never let the public know what she wrote.


There are several descriptors for the type of governance that you are espousing, but I will just say that it is discriminatory at the heart and let it go at that.

There is only one type of governance we are now living under: It is called authoritarianism. That is what you seem to be fine with.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
5.1.1  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1    11 months ago

I am a l-i-b-e-r-t-e-r-i-a-n

Chew on that.

You are projecting.

No, I leave that up to you. It is what the laws do, and by design. 

The law protects young children from indoctrination.

Vic, the Florida law does no such thing. It removes the ability to have an open discussion. Just because you wish that it protected children from indoctrination does not make it so. In fact, the mere presence of the law means that the children will receive de-facto indoctrination in the cis-gendered way of viewing the world. Which was the whole point of the law in the first place. It gives certain ("straight") parents more rights than other (non-cis-gendered) parents. There is no other way to view the law if one looks at it critically. None.  

Did you read what I said?  She left a manifesto and I told you that Biden's DOJ will never let the public know what she wrote.

Of course, I read your whole column. I enjoy laughing at feeble attempts to justify fascism. As for that particular cluster of sentences, you can make claims all day, but that does not mean they are true or correct.  File a FoIA request. 

There is only one type of governance we are now living under: It is called authoritarianism. That is what you seem to be fine with.

ROFLMAO

I am not the one who goes around trying to disenfranchise people and I do not think that the current administration is either. So we have another baseless claim. And once again with the non-sequitur. Just because you put things next to each other in a sentence does not make the sentence true. You need to establish a connection between the ideas. 

  • Did you vote in the last election?
  • Do you feel your vote was counted?
  • You are not living in an authoritarian country. 

What I really cannot for the life of me understand is why these people who say they are for freedom and justice for all turn around and slap down certain segments of the population just because they want to live in a way that is not statistically "normal" but doesn't harm anyone. Quite a bit of hypocrisy there, IMO.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.2  Sparty On  replied to  Thomas @5.1.1    11 months ago
I am a l-i-b-e-r-t-e-r-i-a-n

So you are pro 2nd amendment.

Right?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.2    11 months ago

He's not that type of liberterian.

He also doesn't seem to be the type that cherishes a small unintrusive federal government that only does what the Constitution specifically lays out. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.4  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.3    11 months ago
a small unintrusive federal government that only does what the Constitution specifically lays out

... like legislate bodily autonomy away from women, restrict 1st amendment rights of the lgbtq community, and revise american history to custom fit a rwnj/xtian agenda. that small?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @5.1.4    11 months ago
like legislate bodily autonomy away from women, restrict 1st amendment rights of the lgbtq community, and revise american history to custom fit a rwnj/xtian agenda. that small?

nice fantasies.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @5.1.4    11 months ago

Small enough to fit into a woman's uterus

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @5.1.4    11 months ago

It seems that they're trying to restrict the LGBTQ community from existing PERIOD

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1.8  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @5.1.4    11 months ago
like legislate bodily autonomy away from women

Turning abortion over to the states is not legislating bodily autonomy away from women- it was the Supreme Court overturning a previous ruling in which the court created laws. If you don't like the laws in one state move to another. California and New York have laws that pretty much guarantee abortion on demand up until the time of birth. Other leftist bastions of stupidity are following suit. 

restrict 1st amendment rights of the lgbtq community,

Just like religious first amendment rights are restricted. Find a different soap box to preach from. The one you are on has collapsed.

and revise american history to custom fit a rwnj/xtian agenda. that small?

Because leftist revisionist history is actually what happened. jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
5.1.9  evilone  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.8    11 months ago
Turning abortion over to the states is not legislating bodily autonomy away from women

Correct, but the result is Red States legislating bodily autonomy away from women. 

...it was the Supreme Court overturning a previous ruling in which the court created laws.

A lie. Roe did NOT create a law it overturned state laws. 

If you don't like the laws in one state move to another.

So you're all in favor of a state like New York or Cali working out a near total gun ban? I mean if you don't like the law in one state move to another? It's so simple, right? 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1.10  Ronin2  replied to  evilone @5.1.9    11 months ago
Correct, but the result is Red States legislating bodily autonomy away from women. 

And leftist bastions of stupidity legislating abortion on demand up until time of birth. But that is OK; so long as you are a leftist.

A lie. Roe did NOT create a law it overturned state laws. 

Have you read the Roe decision. WTF else did it do besides create a law out of nothing?

.

A person may choose to have an abortion until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Viability means the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception.

What do you call setting the definition of "viability". 

The majority found that strict scrutiny was appropriate when reviewing restrictions on abortion, since it is part of the fundamental right of privacy. Blackmun was uninterested in identifying the exact part of the Constitution where the right of privacy can be found, although he noted that the Court had previously located it in the Fourteenth rather than the Ninth Amendment. The opinion applied a controversial trimester framework to guide judges and lawmakers in balancing the mother's health against the viability of the fetus in any given situation. In the first trimester, the woman has the exclusive right to pursue an abortion, not subject to any state intervention. In the second trimester, the state cannot intervene unless her health is at risk. If the fetus becomes viable, once the pregnancy has progressed into the third trimester, the state may restrict the right to an abortion but must always include an exception to any regulation that protects the health of the mother. The Court, which included no female Justices at the time, appears to have been confused about the differences between the trimester framework and viability, which are not necessarily interchangeable. It is interesting to note that Blackmun was particularly invested in this case and the opinion, since he had worked at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota during the 1950s and researched the history of abortions there. This may explain why he framed the opinion largely in terms of protecting the right of physicians to practice medicine without state interference (e.g., by counseling women on whether to pursue abortions) rather than the right of women to bodily autonomy.

That is a law, period. No amount of spinning will change the fact that the court legislated from the bench.

So you're all in favor of a state like New York or Cali working out a near total gun ban? I mean if you don't like the law in one state move to another? It's so simple, right? 

Show me where abortions are listed as a right in the Constitution. We can all wait. I even gave you the link to the Roe V Wade ruling. You are arguing apples as compared to hand grenades. Sorry Democrats; not everyone is willing to be sheep to your chosen criminals and federal government goons.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  evilone @5.1.9    11 months ago
I mean if you don't like the law in one state move to another? It's so simple, right? 

Yes, it is.

I choose to live in a state that doesn't impose a state income tax.  So do millions of others.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1.12  Ronin2  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.11    11 months ago

A state I plan on moving to- hopefully before I retire.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
5.1.13  evilone  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.10    11 months ago
And leftist bastions of stupidity legislating abortion on demand up until time of birth.

It really doesn't happen but don't let that stop you from your fucked up propaganda. It's okay as long as your an alt+right populist.

Have you read the Roe decision. WTF else did it do besides create a law out of nothing?

I've read many things. The argument was that it created a right in the Constitution that wasn't explicitly enumerated. I disagree and this will have an unintended legal consequences in the years to come. HIPPA laws were created under the same logic as Roe and since Roe didn't stand neither will HIPPA. 

Show me where abortions are listed as a right in the Constitution.

Roe was decided on the right to PRIVACY! Privacy is indeed in the Constitution. In fact its in many places and a factor in many decisions including PARENTAL RIGHTS the ignorant populists are so high on in the merry chase to outlaw trans people. Willing to lose that right too?

Sorry asshats; not everyone is willing to be a victim to of your chosen propaganda masters and state government goons.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.12    11 months ago

I also choose to live in a state that supports laws and won't become a sanctuary state.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.1.15  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1.10    11 months ago

Technically the Supreme Court, can not make law, Ronin2. I thought you knew. The court makes rulings about the constitutionality of an action. Thus, Blackmun ruled that women had a constitutional right to privacy (between herself and her physician). That 'right' in the hands of another era of the court has fallen out of favor through an opinion. These opinions on the constitutionality of laws established by states and branches of government have the effect of removing law or making room for an  expansion of law.

As to the rest of that crappy patty you wrote, yeah-no!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.16  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Thomas @5.1.1    11 months ago
I am a l-i-b-e-r-t-e-r-i-a-n

With that avatar?  We have a few people here who identfy as moderate or independent or non-affiliated who are always taking an extreme leftist position. Isn't that odd?


Vic, the Florida law does no such thing. It removes the ability to have an open discussion.

A discussion?  Between whom?   An activist and a five year old?


In fact, the mere presence of the law means that the children will receive de-facto indoctrination in the cis-gendered way of viewing the world.

Otherwise known as a normal childhood.


It gives certain ("straight") parents more rights than other (non-cis-gendered) parents. 

That's absolutely not true. Parents are free to do what they want with their kids. The school is not allowed to come between parent & child.


Of course, I read your whole column. I enjoy laughing at feeble attempts to justify fascism. As for that particular cluster of sentences, you can make claims all day, but that does not mean they are true or correct.  File a FoIA request. 

We shouldn't have to do that. We have a government trying to protect a narrative. They are fascist. You know, that word you keep tossing around against those who have no power, That's why it is the epitome of projection.


What I really cannot for the life of me understand is why these people who say they are for freedom and justice for all turn around and slap down certain segments of the population just because they want to live in a way that is not statistically "normal" but doesn't harm anyone. 

A few days ago it took the lives of six human beings.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.17  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.16    11 months ago
A few days ago it took the lives of six human beings.

with the unwanted and unconstitutional imposition of unpopular religious dogma upon americans thru legislation by xtian nationalists, I'd expect to see a lot more of these incidents in the future. you really don't think that there would be no push back on attempts of theocracy, did you? get used to it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.18  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @5.1.17    11 months ago

There is only one group holding a "Days of Rage" event. Where are the trans people to condemn that?

What is this now, the third mass shooting by such a person?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
5.1.19  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.16    11 months ago
With that avatar?  We have a few people here who identfy as moderate or independent or non-affiliated who are always taking an extreme leftist position. Isn't that odd?

Or anything left of absolute right is still left?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.20  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.19    11 months ago

Well Perrie, I wasn't including you in that. 

Why are you taking issue with that?

Btw I don't consider myself on the right. Had it not been for the left, I'd have no interest in politics.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.21  devangelical  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.19    11 months ago

far, far, left according to some here...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.22  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @5.1.21    11 months ago

You just stick to what you call "push back,"  which left 6 dead.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.23  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.22    11 months ago

it happened in a thumper madrasa. I guess geezus wanted to meet them ahead of schedule.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.24  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @5.1.23    11 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.25  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.24    11 months ago

you're the only one here threatening people...

so dial or stfu...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.26  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @5.1.25    11 months ago

You've death wished and you have advocated violence....among other things.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.27  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.26    11 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.28  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.27    11 months ago

You never know what is on the other side of the screen.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.29  Sparty On  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.27    11 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.30  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.26    11 months ago

I'm merely speculating on statistical probability...

funny how thumpers are so ignorant of their own dogma. does that reap/sow thingy ring any bells?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.1.31  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.16    11 months ago
A few days ago it took the lives of six human beings.

Some people in this country are dehumanizing bastards.  But not here, of  course.  /s

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5.1.32  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  devangelical @5.1.23    11 months ago
it happened in a thumper madrasa

Muslim school? Strange take. Completely wrong but strange nonetheless.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
5.1.34  Sean Treacy  replied to  devangelical @5.1.30    11 months ago
'm merely speculating on statistical probability...

Very true. [Deleted]

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
5.1.35  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.16    11 months ago
With that avatar?

Didn't your momma tell you not to judge a book by its cover? 

We have a few people here who identfy as moderate or independent or non-affiliated who are always taking an extreme leftist position. Isn't that odd?

Not at all. Besides, in another post (5.1.20) you said you weren't "right", but from the quality of your posts, that either means that right starts about where Kevin McCarthy is or that you don't even know what you are talking about. 

I am a libertarian. Not the type that tries to get away with not paying their taxes because I realize that government does have a role: Protecting the rights of all from those who would remove them from any they don't agree with.  

A discussion?  Between whom?   An activist and a five year old?

How about a wondering child and someone who cares to take the time to answer, not just say, "We don't talk about them." 

Otherwise known as a normal childhood.

Define "normal". Don't bother, you already have. And you have already condemned all LGBTQ people to the status of sick, degenerate, and perverted.  It comes through quite clearly from the tone and tenor of your writing. 

That's absolutely not true. Parents are free to do what they want with their kids. The school is not allowed to come between parent & child.

Bullshit. See Above. You stand for the marginalization of LGBTQ people because they are LGBTQ and not like you. You don't want children exposed to LGBTQ people because they might get the idea that it is ok when you feel that it is not. If that were the extent of it, that would be fine, because we could point to you and feel sorry for your children and hope that your hate towards people did not rub off. 

We shouldn't have to do that. We have a government trying to protect a narrative. They are fascist. You know, that word you keep tossing around against those who have no power, That's why it is the epitome of projection.

It is really too bad that that is what you think because, in addition to being factually incorrect, it turns reality on its head. It is projection exemplified. Just who am I using the word against? Who are these powerless individuals whom I am oppressing? Children? Hardly. There is a part of the world that does no harm to be a part of, yet we cannot mention it except to say, "We can't talk about that." So the children who may feel that they are different can't talk about it. That is what you are saying to do. If there were no children who were different, there would not be a problem, but there are so what do you do with them? Ignore them? 

What I really cannot for the life of me understand is why these people who say they are for freedom and justice for all turn around and slap down certain segments of the population just because they want to live in a way that is not statistically "normal" but doesn't harm anyone.
A few days ago it took the lives of six human beings.

Did everybody see that? Vic just took the whole of the LGBTQ community and called them killers. 

Nice one, Vic. /s

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.36  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @5.1.21    11 months ago

Yeah, you and TiG are 'far far lefty's' according to some here , , .

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.37  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @5.1.35    11 months ago

See you get from some members here?  Nothing but PD&D, insults, and baffling bullshit.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.1.38  CB  replied to  Thomas @5.1.35    11 months ago

That 'skit' was very well song and acted.  Bravo! The comment is 'ACES'!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2  CB  replied to  Thomas @5    11 months ago

Emphatically.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6  author  Vic Eldred    11 months ago

The left wing reaction:

image-37-725x1024.png

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
6.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Vic Eldred @6    11 months ago

When are you going to seed an article that draws a connection between the murderer and country music?  It is Nashville after all.  Isn’t that connection as equally logical to murderer and transgender?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @6.1    11 months ago

you have a point. I know that hearing goober tunes makes me want to commit a mass shooting... /s

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @6.1    11 months ago
Isn’t that connection as equally logical to murderer and transgender?

did the killer leave a manifesto tying the murder of children to country music?

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
6.1.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.2    11 months ago

Have you read said manifesto to justify connecting this mass murder to some kind of transgender rage?  Funny, since no one else in the public has had that access. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @6.1.3    11 months ago

Do you think the Police chief was lying? 

You must have some grand conspiracy all cooked up to justify your claim that there's as much a connection between the murderer and country music as her transgenderism  despite the police chief's statements, so let it rip. 

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
6.1.5  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.4    11 months ago

The police chief said “we’re looking at all possibilities”, he did not read out the manifesto. If you have evidence otherwise then post it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7  author  Vic Eldred    11 months ago

"Nashville police release surveillance video of school attack"

FsT2M8XWYAI0ICm?format=jpg&name=small


 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8  Sparty On    11 months ago

One more shooting.    The same tired old reasoning of why it happened and how to fix it.    It’s pretty simple really.    

This isn’t about race or gender.    It isn’t about population density.   It’s not about the weapon used or being straight, gay, trans, him, her, he, she, they, etc, etc.

Its about mental illness.    

Period.    

The level of crazy it takes to do something like this is exponential.   Your not going to fix that by blaming the weapon used or the assailants race, gender or personal choices.    It gets fixed by trying to deal with the crazy and let’s face it.    Sometimes that just isn’t going to happen.    That is the human nature component of this equation.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Participates
8.1  pat wilson  replied to  Sparty On @8    11 months ago

I agree with your post but surely you can see that the mass proliferation of guns amplifies the death tolls from the mentally ill acting out.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  pat wilson @8.1    11 months ago
I agree with your post but surely you can see that the mass proliferation of guns amplifies the death tolls from the mentally ill acting out.

Mentally ill people hell-bent on destruction would simply find another way if there were no guns at all.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1.1    11 months ago
Mentally ill people hell-bent on destruction would simply find another way if there were no guns at all.

That would mean the firearm isn't the problem.  That destroys the narrative.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.3  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.1.2    11 months ago

The fire arm is the problem. That sick woman shot through glass in two locked doors, she 'shot' (duh) with her firearm. And then she shot and killed six person with her gun. And then she fired shots at police officers with her weapon (of choice).  Venting her frustrations on glass and people, or 'insanity' by use of her fists, or hitting citizens with any other tool would not have the same (desired) effect!

Mentally ill people with access to guns is a deadly combination. And we know people can advance to 'nutting up' at any time for any duration.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.1.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.1.3    11 months ago

What legislation do you want to see to address “the problem”?

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
8.1.5  George  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.1.2    11 months ago

There will always be a group of low functioning morons who will blame the inanimate object, food makes people fat and alcohol creates drunks. There is no combating that level of ignorance.

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
8.1.6  George  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.4    11 months ago

Do you know what would solve it? We should make it illegal to shoot people. Obviously if there was a law the criminals won’t dare violate it,

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.1.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  George @8.1.6    11 months ago

This is probably Hate Crime as well.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.8  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.4    11 months ago

I am past caring at this stage. I have already concluded that I and mine are in on the national 'lottery' to randomly 'receive' a gun related death like everybody/every place in this land we love.

There are too many 'forces' aligned against change (I voted up your comment in part because you wrote this:

Major change would need a revised 2nd Amendment.

In this present political climate-guns are an accessory as well as tool (of defense and destruction). I expect no legislation, though it would be useful and proper.  I await 'further direction' before I will waste my time and energy on thinking about congressional legislation that so far is not forthcoming or even being 'humored.'

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.9  CB  replied to  George @8.1.5    11 months ago

Well George, it strikes me that mentally ill individuals have the gun culture in our country right where they want us ! jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif Now, an emotional person has options! 1. Kill themselves with a gun.  2. Take out a bunch of innocent, not mentally ill folks with a gun and live to tell about it.  3. Kill innocent people and shoot cops 'down and dirty' until its 'tits' or 'balls' up and have it DUBBED: "Suicide by Cop"!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
8.1.10  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @8.1.8    11 months ago
re in on the national 'lottery' to randomly 'receive' a gun related death like everybody/every place in this land we love.

But its really not a lottery, or at least its an incredibly weighted one. Unless you live in a few neighborhoods of certain cities, your chances of being murdered by someone shooting you are very small.  Gun violence overwhelmingly occurs in very geographically condensed areas of cities. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.11  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.1.10    11 months ago

Take it from me—your, our, chances of winning the lottery are very small too. And yet, inevitably somebody does win the lottery, and like mass shootings. . .the 'chain' of events start forming all over again. jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif Just ask that little out of the way church school in Nashville with 200 children plus staff within it how it feels to 'win' on this occasion. Random killing is not a place it is innocent people who are "randomly" injured or killed for nothing they have caused a killer to suffer.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.1.12  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.1.8    11 months ago
I am past caring at this stage.

So you’ve made it to stage 7 on Dr Kübler-Ross scale, Acceptance.  I never much liked that scale since it suggests that we move heel-to-toe in a linear fashion and I don’t feel that many humans operate that way.  

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.1.13  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.1.11    11 months ago
Random killing is not a place it is innocent people who are "randomly" injured or killed for nothing they have caused a killer to suffer.

How do you think those 9 year olds, or the Substitute Teacher or Janitor caused the killer to suffer! 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.14  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.12    11 months ago

Well, I am a pragmatist, in the end. jrSmiley_123_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.15  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.13    11 months ago

Reread my comment, please.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.1.16  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.1.15    11 months ago

I did and still don’t understand your point.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.17  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.16    11 months ago
Random killing is not a place it is innocent people who are "randomly" injured or killed for nothing they have caused a killer to suffer.

Listen! Read 'it' again, please.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.1.18  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.1.17    11 months ago

Yes, agree:  This was a very disturbed individual.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.1.19  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.13    11 months ago

about the only "random " thing was who was gunned down , 3 children and 3 senior citizens . its who the shooter happened to run into .

the rest of it is being shown to have been planned  with forethought and premeditation , as far down as to marking entrances and cameras on a map  and to have more than one location picked out , the other location it has been reported  was declined due to being  more secure and security , so they picked , the "softer " target to do what they chose to do .

 i just saw reported on ABC , the individual reached out to a former classmate to say goodbye , the classmate thought it was going to be a suicide , so she called that hotline and not the cops .

without knowing the contents of what is being called the individuals "manifesto", which some trans groups have come out as being AGAINST its public release , we are only left for now to guess and suppose as to the WHY this happened with this specific individual .

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.1.20  Sparty On  replied to  pat wilson @8.1    11 months ago

I believe that the mass proliferation of violent behavior is the major problem.    Be it with a rifle, a handgun, a knife, a hatchet, a motor vehicle, a etc, etc but mental health is still the main concern.    From the fact that over half of gun deaths in the US are suicides, to folks disturbed enough to act out like this latest school shooting.

It all boils down to mental health.    And if folks on the left really wanted to make a dent in gun deaths they would be talking about handgun controls and gang violence which causes significantly more death that AR platform weapons.    Not just trying to make political points by banning the evil black gun every time someone actually manages to use one to kill.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.1.21  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.1.3    11 months ago
The fire arm is the problem.

I would agree with you but then you would be wrong.  Blaming the firearm is a cowards excuse for doing nothing.

That sick woman shot through glass in two locked doors, she 'shot' (duh) with her firearm.

You're correct.  That SICK woman.  Why are you ignoring that?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.1.22  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.4    11 months ago
That sick woman shot through glass in two locked doors, she 'shot' (duh) with her firearm.

Maybe they should try the same legislation that keeps drugs out of schools and prisons.  That seems to have worked. /s

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
8.1.23  George  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.1.22    11 months ago

We just need more laws infringing on the rights of others. Maybe we could start by in forcing the ones we already have?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
8.1.24  Right Down the Center  replied to  George @8.1.6    11 months ago

Maybe more gun free zone signs would help.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
8.1.25  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1.1    11 months ago

Sure. They would run around stabbing people? Come on... Just be honest. The carnage by guns is far greater than any other instrument of death within the confines of a building.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.1.26  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @8.1.9    11 months ago

hadnt thought of that 3rd one but after you mentioned it i started seeing some other articles last night from those that knew and talked to the individual , that that option , if some other claims being made hold water , might actually be closer to the truth than some may like .

I do have reasons to think that , but it is simply supposition on my part. might be best if i keep that to myself for now until something is proven .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.27  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.1.21    11 months ago
The fire arm is the problem. That sick woman shot through glass in two locked doors, she 'shot' (duh) with her firearm. And then she shot and killed six person with her gun. And then she fired shots at police officers with her weapon (of choice).  Venting her frustrations on glass and people, or 'insanity' by use of her fists, or hitting citizens with any other tool would not have the same (desired) effect! Mentally ill people with access to guns is a deadly combination. And we know people can advance to 'nutting up' at any time for any duration.

That is what I took time to write and its rather clear. So why parse my comment just to be aggressive against it. I pretty much called Ashley Hale 'sick' throughout the above comment at every 'turn.'  And still, you try to label me as ignoring her SICKNESS. That is not right, Jeremy.

More to the point, Ashley Hale, it is being revealed, lied to her parents about having additional guns they did not know about. . .that makes her deliberate, calculating, and an evil person. She wronged her parents too.

Ashley Hale (deceased.) was sick (like a 'fox). And yet she deliberately chose her weapon, 'the Spot,' and her victims with a type of 'smarts.'

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.28  CB  replied to  George @8.1.23    11 months ago

What law do we have that would have stopped a sick woman loaded to the teeth from walking up to the doors of a church school and shooting through two sets of panes?  Ashley Hale has raised the bar. And we can count on some other crazy person adapting this 'method.'  Just shoot your way in, or blow your way in and then start blasting and handing out death 'certs.' It's a 'battlefield' mentality.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.29  CB  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.1.26    11 months ago

 Thank you to the Nashville Law Enforcement for taking down Ashley Hale.

Snuffy, I will preface this one by acknowledging we don't agree on much politically which should keep us apart, but a video came out last night (CNN: Anderson Cooper 360) which showed the speed, efficiency, and determination by those officers to get the shooter in 'record' time. As law enforcement body-cam audio-ed and pictured - you could hear the gun shots echoing through the upstairs area successively and the officers took the shooter on directly.  Likely, saving other law enforcement officers pinned down outside. (Law enforcement and nobody else deserves to die for this mentally ill woman's wish to do mass harm.)

So: Thank you to the Nashville Law Enforcement Department for killing this shooter - Ashley Hale.

Why can't these people who want to kill themselves just:

1.  Kill themselves individually.

2.  Ask the government to pay for their ticket to any of the world's military conflict and war zones.

3.  Buy their own ticket and 'move' to a warzone.

4.  Join the military services where just maybe they can hold it together enough to turn their 'illness' into an asset?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.1.30  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.1.27    11 months ago

All that to say identify what you were initially ignoring.  

Ashley Hale (deceased.) was sick
 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.1.31  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @8.1.29    11 months ago

I ask myself that sometimes , as for that last one , the military wont take them . they actually weed those types out if they suspect or find them .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.32  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.1.30    11 months ago

You simply can't 'stop' with the undeserved putdowns can you? A member on NT accused me falsely of never changing my mind-even when the facts call for it. Well Jeremy that seems to be the case now for you. I have done my best to display where you were wrong and could get back in 'alignment' with the truth and still you insult my intelligence. There is no reasoning with you, eh?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.33  CB  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.1.31    11 months ago

What you are informing me is there is policy and law against allowing infiltration of the services by mentally ill people. Now to the next level, the time has come to screen 'smart' but mentally ill people out of their common places. I am sorry to say it, but it is time to accept that if we can't place guns under control-we have no choice but to control the mentally ill!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.1.34  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.1.32    11 months ago
You simply can't 'stop' with the undeserved putdowns can you?

You call them "putdowns".  So your offended that I pointed out what you were ignoring, then suddenly acknowledge.  Not my problem.  

I have done my best to display where you were wrong and could get back in 'alignment' with the truth and still you insult my intelligence. There is no reasoning with you, eh?

I don't see where that happened. I see where you made excuses and tried to gaslight me.  But not what you are claiming.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.35  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.1.34    11 months ago

I guess we might as well end here, Jeremy.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
8.1.36  Thomas  replied to  George @8.1.23    11 months ago

More laws infringing on the rights of others? Tennessee senate just assured another

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
8.2  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Sparty On @8    11 months ago

How do you explain why the US has so much more murderous mental illness than other countries where guns are legal?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
8.2.1  charger 383  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.2    11 months ago

perhaps US has too many unwanted children born to parents who can't or will not raise them properly, also the US allows too many mentally ill people to be on the loose. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.2.2  Sparty On  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.2    11 months ago

We don’t.    The USA is 60th as a country in intentional homicide.  

 

But saying otherwise makes for a great talking point for partisans trying  to push this narrative or that.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
8.2.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sparty On @8.2.2    11 months ago

Ummm. the rest are mostly third word or basically lawless nations. We are at the bottom of Western nations.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.2.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.2.3    11 months ago
We are at the bottom of Western nations.

We no longer institutionalize the insane

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.2.5  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.2.3    11 months ago

Irrelevant to the comment I was responding to.    Their was no clarification as to country type or size.    It was simply a purposefully charged comment that just isn’t true.

59 countries have higher intentional homicide rates than the USA.    

59.    

That doesn’t track with “much more muderous intent than other countries” does it?    Not even close.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.2.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.2.4    11 months ago
We no longer institutionalize the insane

Instead we celebrate them and support their delusions.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8.2.7  devangelical  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.2.6    11 months ago

...at least some of them have the courtesy to forewarn us by wearing maga hats.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.2.8  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @8.2.7    11 months ago

I’ll bet that triggers you,

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.2.9  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  devangelical @8.2.7    11 months ago

Funny.  I don't see any of them supporting the mental illness that brought on this hate crime.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.2.10  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.2.8    11 months ago

Triggers them to the point they are blathering masses of snot and tears.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.11  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.2.9    11 months ago

Now you're spreading talking points. Hate crimes have criteria to decide them. And are not just called/given like stocking stuffers! What Ashley Hale did was wrong on its face, it is 'sicker' to try to exploit her even more than she has done to herself!

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.2.12  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.2.11    11 months ago
Hate crimes have criteria to decide them.

Exactly, a hate crime must include both “hate” and a "crime."

Criminal hate  means bias against people or groups with specific characteristics that are defined by the law.  Typically  base on the basis of the victim’s perceived or actual race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability.

The crime is typically a violent crime, such as assault, murder, arson, or threats to commit such crimes. 

We don't know enough yet to understand her motivation in picking this target, but it could be a hatred of people associated with this school.  As for the crime part, there is no doubt that it is murder.

What explotation do you see?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.2.13  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.2.12    11 months ago

What exploitation? Getting out ahead of the authorities in calling this a (federal) hate crime is PROPAGANDA: Loaded word/s. That's exploitative, as it seeks an emotional response whether it can be justified or not!

And it get even worse as we have here people using loading words to gin up controversy and emotions, while decrying feelings in others. BUSTED!

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.2.14  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.2.13    11 months ago

I'm sure we would see nothing of the sort on these pages if the shooter was a looser white male from the rural South.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.2.15  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.2.11    11 months ago

Explain how it's NOT a hate crime.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8    11 months ago

Fatalism.  And yet let you tell/complain ad nauseam you are a big proponent/supporter of people getting off their asses and doing something constructive about the problems of the nation. You capitulate to gun 'power' and mental illness without any saving recourse, nevertheless.  Word to the wise: Before an issue can be fixed, one has to acknowledge that it is.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.3    11 months ago
Before an issue can be fixed, one has to acknowledge that it is.

I think there are legal tweaks to current gun laws that might be achievable, but nothing major will get past this SCOTUS.

Major change would need a revised 2nd Amendment. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.2  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3    11 months ago
Fatalism

Wrong ism.

Realism is the right one.   

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
8.3.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.3.1    11 months ago

We had a ban on assault weapons, and it worked. And back then the Republicans were in agreement.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.3.3    11 months ago


The Federal Government’s Own Study Concluded Its Ban on 'Assault Weapons' Didn't Reduce Gun Violence




 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.5  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.4    11 months ago

That’s because most gun violence doesn’t come from rifles like the AR platform.    It comes from handguns but every time an evil black gun is used by one of these nuts.    

All the uninformed hop up on their high horse to pontificate about the evils of the black rifle.

SOSDD

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.5    11 months ago
All the uninformed hop up on their high horse to pontificate about the evils of the black rifle.

I keep getting the impression that they don't even know what the AR is. Especially the one who spent the morning after the shooting telling people how much he likes Jeni's ice cream, which half the country can't afford. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.7  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.6    11 months ago

I think they know what it is but programming from the hive mind won’t allow them to think critically about it.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.8  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.3.3    11 months ago

Im going to have to disagree and call that there was a ban or that it worked  not true .

 the only thing that ban did ban were new firearms that fit the definition that it contained , any that were owned before the ban , were grandfathered and could be sold , any new ones simply had to omit features contained within the definition of "assault weapon " and it was legal to be sold even while the legislation was in effect . proponents of the legislation had a caniption fit when that happened and claimed doing so was skirting the "spirit " of the law , while all the while  gun makers and those buying them  were following the "letter " of the law .

 As for republicans voting for the legislation , the only reason the needed number of GOP votes was attained was because the sunset provision 10 yrs  was inserted , without it it would not have gotten the needed votes to pass.

10 years later , as has been pointed out congress assessed the effects and found it didnt do as thought and they let the law lapse .

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.9  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.7    11 months ago

There is no thinking involved. We had a hate-crime committed in Nashville and they claim the gun did it, even though it was obtained legally.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.10  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.9    11 months ago

It’s emotion vs logic.

I get it.    

Shootings like this are abhorrent but thought that banning a weapon is somehow going to solve the root cause of that problem, is irrational.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.10    11 months ago

It has always been a battle the dems can't win. Gun owners are single issue voters

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.12  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.5    11 months ago

Are AR-15's more accurate at distance than handguns? How does that work?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.13  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.9    11 months ago

What is your justification for calling this a hate crime? Have you any idea how 'hateful' your mocking of this topic is?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.14  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.10    11 months ago

Bad products are taken off the market all the time. Hell, we even have politicians pervasive across the country who selectively ban books- just because!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.15  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.9    11 months ago

Im starting to think it WASNT a hate crime , if what i read holds true , i think we may find it was more of a premeditated suicide , the individual simply couldnt do it themselves to themselves . so they insured , that the acts they committed were bad enough others would do the deed .

 wouldnt be the first time thats been done .

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.16  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.4    11 months ago

What's FEE?  Some random blog?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.3.17  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.3.12    11 months ago
Are AR-15's more accurate at distance than handguns? How does that work?

There are a lot of weapons more accurate at distance than hand guns.  So why the freak out over a .22 caliber?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.3.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.3.13    11 months ago
What is your justification for calling this a hate crime?

Trans Activists Pushed Aggressive Rhetoric Before Shooting at Christian School

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.19  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.12    11 months ago

How does what work?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.20  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.14    11 months ago

News to me.    Show us what books were banned by politicians in the US.    That is to say, no longer legally available for anyone read.

Be specific please.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
8.3.21  Thomas  replied to  CB @8.3.12    11 months ago

The barrel has rifling which puts a spin on the bullet, making it fly straighter (because of physics). The longer the barrel, the more spin, so generally speaking, the longer the barrel the more accurate it is. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.22  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.3.17    11 months ago

Look Jeremy, you could lower the 'temperature' around here if you just cool it! I am not 'freaking out' over anything. If anything, it seems you want me to freak out so as to point it out. I am asking good questions seeking good answers. That is my 'agenda.'

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.23  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.3.18    11 months ago

Sorry, I can't validate anything by Info Wars, as Alex Jones is a known provocateur who eats off the outrage he generates-in my opinion.  Calling people 'trannies" and just being cruel and dehumanizing does not help this move this discussion forward. I will never agree with Jones or other provocateurs against anybody, because Jones has questionable credibility or none at all. That said, transpeople terrorizing innocent people is never proper or agreeable with me. That is not the right form of "acting out" that changes hearts and minds.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.24  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.19    11 months ago

Jeremy indirectly answered the question. Thanks. See 8.1.17

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.25  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.20    11 months ago

Please, try to engage the spirit of discussion and stop throwing 'wrenches' into its gears. Surely, you know the 'state of affairs' on governor 'boards' controversial book bans occurring in Texas, Florida and 'parts unknown.' BTW, it was a passing remark and not the heart of this discussion.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.26  CB  replied to  Thomas @8.3.21    11 months ago

Thank you for 'advancing' the discussion. It is a small detail, but a powerful detail which helps inform us all to growth where needed.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.27  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Thomas @8.3.21    11 months ago
The longer the barrel, the more spin, so generally speaking, the longer the barrel the more accurate it is. 

in theory . in addition to barrel length , one has to consider the rate of twist ( amount of spin as you say ) as well as the over all propellant charge weight  and the weight of the projectile , not to forget the type and design of said projectile itself .

 In actual practice , anything longer than it takes for the powder charge to be completely consumed , and turned to a gas , one usually finds accuracy decline .

After a certain point , a barrel can be too long and adversely affect accuracy ,  but that is details long range competitive shooters get into .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.3.28  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.3.23    11 months ago
Sorry, I can't validate anything by Info Wars

Sounds like you can't dispute the information so you cry about the source.  Not surprised.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.29  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.3.26    11 months ago

Much:

  • Longer barrel 
  • Very high velocity rounds
  • Easier to hold steady while firing
 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.30  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.3.28    11 months ago

Think whatever you wish. Info Wars and Alex Jones had their day in court and certain way so looking at the pair was unfavorable.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.31  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.3.29    11 months ago

Thank you. :)

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.32  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.3.31    11 months ago

Your welcome.  

They are also more deadly.  The bullet is traveling so fast that when it hits a someone, it creates a blast wave destroying more tissue than a similar caliber, slower bullet would destroy.  The velocity also causes the bullet to tumble end over end as it is passing thru which creates more damage than a larger caliber will make.  The exit wound is much bigger than the entry wound.  All of this is magnified in a child’s smaller body.  Hit anywhere in the torso and the victim can easily bleed out,  Of course, head shots are almost always fatal.

For those wounded, surgical is much more extensive than from a 9MM pistol.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
8.3.33  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.4    11 months ago

We had been on a steady decline since that bill (and after). My point was, back then there was bipartisan agreement when they saw something that was a problem and worked together to try and solve it. What happened and changed was the pandemic, and since then we have seen a 2 year jump. We need to get to the core issues that have caused this, and one of things I have noticed is that anyone can get a gun, even the mentally ill. That is a problem.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.34  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.3.32    11 months ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 im looking at my reloading book that gives me what the muzzle velocity is for the 5.56 nato round ( how fast it is at the muzzle is actually the fastest the round is going to go ).

 The fastest i can find in the data for a comparable military weighted round of 62 grains ( thats whats commonly issued now i believe ) is ..... a whopping 3025 feet per second . thats a compressed powder charge , meaning the case is filled to total capacity, not going to say you cant get it to go faster , but that entails playing some games with powders and primers .

 ok similar sized rounds  common hunting round , 22-250, same diameter bullet and weight .... 3663 FPS , only has a slightly larger case to hold powder .

 ok another similar and common deer /antelope round, .243 winchester  pretty much same sized brass case , just alittle fatter , takes a 6mm bullet instead of a 5.56/.223, comparable bullet weight  of 70 grains , 3457 FPS.

ok the tried and true .270 winchester , lightest bullet listed is 90 grains , but the fastest listed MV is 3450 FPS for that bullet weight  but for common hunting rounds normally used ( i decided 150 grn is common enough ) 2907 fps ( finally a MV slower than an 5.56 even though its using a bigger case and powder charge and pushing almost more than double the bullet weight .) oh and its a 6.8 mm sized bullet

 Ok , drum roll please ......

the venerable and celebrated work horse of the military through 2 world wars ....

the 30.06 springfield 

smallest bullet loading a 100 grain  bullet , that one tops out at 3448 fps , going with what was issued during it use in war and what most hunters rely on today , 150 grn bullet ....2847 fps .

 so looking at this , the 5.56 isnt all that much faster than common rounds , and are even slower than some common rounds , the data shows me its actually in the middle or slower when using the same bullet weight and style . at its fastest loading .

All that horse shit about "kinetic wave " and damage the round causes or that the bullet tumbles on impact is exactly that , any of the rounds i mentioned will do the same thing( except the keyhole tumbling , none of them will unless its at a very great distance ( like between 7-800 yards ) with a very light powder charge .

oh.... the 9mm lung killer was mentioned as a comparison , mv 1001 fps for a 147 grn bullet  which is common , more common and bumping the number a little faster is the 115 grn bullet, a streaking 1258 fps . 

 The other thing that was failed to be mentioned , if the use of geneva convention allowable bullet design is used , all these would be using full metal jacketed (FMJ) bullets , no expanding bullets allowed .

 using that criteria , and the situation posited , each and every one of these rounds would get the same results as the 5.56 used in the AR, simply because the round is fired from an AR does not  somehow magically change the amount of damage or speed .

funny part i noticed about the post ? a head wound is ALMOST always fatal with a 5.56 , with those comparable rounds i mentioned there isnt any almost , its usually . good experiment would be to try it with a 30-06 vs a 5.56 , any volunteers to stand down range  ?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.35  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.3.33    11 months ago
What happened and changed was the pandemic, and since then we have seen a 2 year jump.

If that is the case, why didn't Biden get his bill passed when he had control of congress, during his first two years?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
8.3.36  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @8.3.30    11 months ago
Sounds like you can't dispute the information so you cry about the source. 

Still crying about the source and not the information.  Get back to me when you can dispute the information.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.37  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.3.34    11 months ago

Thanks Mark.  I've apparently been misinformed since my early Army days when someone I trusted gave me that information.   I appreciate you looking up the velocities of different rounds and setting me and other readers here straight.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.38  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.3.3    11 months ago
We had a ban on assault weapons, and it worked.

It seems to have had little impact on the overall homicide rate by year and: 

Summary: Evidence for the effect of assault weapon bans on mass shootin gs is inconclusive. Evidence that high-capacity magazine bans may decrease mass shootings is limited.
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.39  Tessylo  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.3.34    11 months ago

I'm not impressed with all your gun and ammo knowledge.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.40  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.39    11 months ago

How about Joe Biden's total ignorance of what an AR is?

Would that impress you?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
8.3.41  afrayedknot  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.39    11 months ago

It is the default position. Argue the caliber, capacity, character of a weapon while ignoring the casualties. We all know…and yet too many muddle the conversation with semantics and avoid addressing the consequences. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.42  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @8.3.41    11 months ago
We all know…and yet too many muddle the conversation with semantics

Then let us be unmuddled:

Was this a hate crime or was this individual insane?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
8.3.43  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.42    11 months ago

This was an individual who had no business having access to any firearm. Admitted by the parents. Another tragic example that stringent red flag laws are necessary. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.44  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @8.3.43    11 months ago
This was an individual who had no business having access to any firearm.

She had no business walking among us.


Admitted by the parents.

I think they were enablers.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
8.3.45  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.44    11 months ago

“She had no business walking among us.”

Well that is simply ridiculous.

You once again ignore the whole point. Muddle away, vic

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.46  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @8.3.45    11 months ago

It is the point. People are just as dead whether they are shot or pushed off a subway platform.

Get them off the street!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.47  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.46    11 months ago

How about her manifesto?

Why haven't we got any info on that???

Could that be our corrupt DOJ at work again?

How about our Chocolate Chip ice cream loving president, who was brought up by Puerto Ricans?  Where is he?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.48  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.3.36    11 months ago

I don't have any tears to shed over this. If you are so sure of yourself/information then you should be able to find a valid source to render it to this group—not an invalid one known for questionable materials. Who wants to read something by disqualified/questionable sources? Not me. BTW, you're digressing. We need to grow beyond this.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.49  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.44    11 months ago
She had no business walking among us.

What does that even mean? What kind of 'judgement' is that? Humans walk amongst humans-even in prisons. So why would you write this ambiguous statement?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.50  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.42    11 months ago

Hate crimes have criteria. Did she 'meet' the threshold for a hate crime? We can't say just yet as there is not enough put out to conclude it.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.51  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.47    11 months ago

Wow. Overtopping and dripping down the sides. . . . Just get out ahead of 'everything' and ask superfluous questions prematurely, eh?

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.52  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.3.37    11 months ago

I wouldnt say you were mis informed , more like misled  or certain things were omitted in the information ., i think of the ones i chose to illustrate that there really wasnt anything magical different or more dangerous from one to the other , the fact i have personally used every round though either at a range or in my hunting pursuits told me different that was presented . 

 just as the claims that any one is more damaging or dangerous in any given situation . there are just some laws and rules  of physics and science  that pertain that will always have an effect that cant be changed .

now one also has to look at the criteria used in the formulation of what they are presenting , someone posted an article about the effects of gunshots on children  and everything in that article i agree with , it pretty much stands on its own merits .  all gunshots regardless of cal , round or chambering i has the potential to be  devastating and lethal on children , that doesnt mean some wont survive ..

 but whats the difference if its a rifle , handgun or a shotgun ? each will all be lethal , and the wounds likely devastating with a lot of damage 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.53  CB  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.3.52    11 months ago
Doesnt mean some wont survive ..

What would such a AR-style survival 'look' like, please?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.54  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  CB @8.3.50    11 months ago

Her manifesto would answer that. Why won't they release it?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.55  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.54    11 months ago

Do you have confidence in our law enforcement authorities or not?

I don't know why it is not released. But, I have confidence that this manifesto will be released 'sufficiently.' Of course, I have no way of knowing what is in it.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.56  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.39    11 months ago

Exactly, why would any knowledge impress you as you have no use for it.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
8.3.57  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.35    11 months ago

Non-sequitur

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.58  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @8.3.53    11 months ago

that I cant tell, you  too many variable to affect the outcome 

What i can tell you is the outcomes would be the same be an AR style was used or not . bullets fired from one type of firearm or another dont change characteristics  or what they do down range after being fired .

Could always go volunteer at a V.A. hospital, could get a good look at what some survivors look like , but make sure to remember to only look at those with gun shots , not IEDs grenades , missile attacks , only "Assault RIFLE" wounds . 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.59  CB  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.3.58    11 months ago

I need to share this, because it 'came up' in another discussion with Trout Giggles:

For image context see here :

original

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.60  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @8.3.59    11 months ago

you are aware , that whats said there is true for any  projectile ( bullet ) it is not unique to just .223/5.56 ar platform firearms  or the common rounds they use .

 A 12 ga shot gun slug to the chest does the same thing , from any shotgun .

It appears what you are trying to convince people of , is that simply firing this bullet from this gun , it somehow becomes more dangerous and deadly  when in fact , its not the gun that fires it but the characteristic of the round itself ,  you can take any round , run them through different guns of different actions , semi , bolt , pump , and single shot , and the terminal end result of how the BULLET behaves and reacts at the hitting end  , wont change . 

 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.61  CB  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.3.60    11 months ago
its not the gun that fires it but the characteristic of the round itself

Well-put. And no, I am asking questions in my own manner of curiosity. I don't have any gun knowledge to share with anyone. I am a 'babe' about such devices. Several years ago, on NT, I remember 'threatening' to visit a gun range. . . and I even went inside the business and heard guns firing in the training facility/area. But, I just could not get myself to go all-in then. . . and now either. That is, I still have not put my money on the line to take the course. It could be that I really don't want to fire a gun. . . unless I have to do it!  It could mean that the day I do fire a gun. . . I become a different person: possibly someone I don't know.

Just keeping it real!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.62  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @8.3.61    11 months ago
It could be that I really don't want to fire a gun. . . unless I have to do it! 

I have heard that a lot over the years  from non gun owners that ask questions . my standard response is , then dont , eventually you will decide whats right for you and you alone , and what fits that particular part of your life at that time  .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.63  CB  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.3.62    11 months ago

I sometimes wonder how guns 'escaped' being a part of my life, and I could only come up with my hard exterior but gentle nature. It could be that I have never lived in 'seedy' under-bellied sides of the towns I dwell. I have been robbed, burglarized, assaulted, even at gunpoint, nevertheless! Still, my attitude today, is taking up a gun seems not to be necessary for me.  I will confide that a few years ago, I was 'moved' to get trained on a gun. . . wisdom tells me I still should. . . I just am apprehensive of taking the "practice" up and the maintenance factor will change me.

Guns give people power in many situations, that is a given. Gun culture is a lifestyle. Honestly, I don't know how it is that I have gotten well on in years without every being faced with holding a gun, firing a gun, or owning a gun. I 'marvel' about that actually, but then I question the wisdom of not having done any of the aforementioned.

Another curiosity question: Can you ever see your way clear to not possessing firearms? It's a tricky question I'll admit, because I am not asking if you would give up a gun for defense purposes (especially considering your way of life). . . it is more an ask about the mindset one develops from having such power close-by.

Do guns become a part of one's 'make-up'?

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.3.64  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @8.3.63    11 months ago
Can you ever see your way clear to not possessing firearms?

Im watching someone go through having to make those choices right now  for the past couple months , so it isnt something i havent thought of as it would pertain to myself .

 the short answer is yes , i can see myself deciding , that at some point in my aging , i will eventually have to say , i shouldnt own a firearm. i just hope when the time comes i have the wisdom to realize and know  it will be something i cannot change .

But today , is not that day .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.65  CB  replied to  CB @8.3.59    11 months ago

Trout G', Snuffy, and All Others, I need to revisit this comment because I am not sure that everyone realizes/realized at the Washington Post

This is an AMAZING visual display of what these weapons do to the human body (including a child's). Scroll through the link if you have not all the way to the bottom! It will enlighten. (If you have not done so already.)

I repeat. All the way down to the bottom of the page the animation will continue to render information.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.66  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.65    11 months ago

Want to really effect change?    

Over 100,000 people a year die from OD’s each year.     Over 40,000 people a year die in auto related accidents.      Over 25,000 people a year die from self inflicted firearm wounds, suicide.    Etc, etc ....

Weep and wail about the significantly worse damage those are causing in the US.    I know it’s not what the hive is asking libs to weep and wail over right now but there you go.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.67  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.66    11 months ago

I am not part of any "hive," but I do associate myself with critical thinking people who can tell truth from error. That isn't what you mean, but I need to drop that into your 'spirit' whether it helps understanding or not!

As far as all the deaths that occur in this country in a year: So WHAT? It is the human thing to do to not just sat on our butts clutching and reciting data! Get up; go save some lives that exist in the real world! 

The living, injured, dying, and 'near dead' from gun violence don't want to become a STUPID/ROTTING/STINKING STATISTIC!  Save "A" life wherever/whenever you-we can!

BTW, living with the damages from an AR-15 "ain't" looking like anything I and other liberals would like to do! I don't know about you or other conservatives!

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
8.3.68  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @8.3.67    11 months ago
I am not part of any "hive”

Of course not, you aren’t the Queen or a drone trying to impregnate the queen.  Nor are you a worker taking care of the hive.

So WHAT? It is the human thing to do to not just sat on our butts clutching and reciting data! Get up; go save some lives that exist in the real world! 


Exactly, like we’ve all been doing with Fentanyl deaths.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.69  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.67    11 months ago
I am not part of any "hive," but I do associate myself with critical thinking people who can tell truth from error.

Lol, said every worker bee ever ... I know you really believe that but understand.

Opinions do vary.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.70  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.69    11 months ago

Well, you know, Sparty On, I will say the same about you. Since you went there. You want to think you are free, but unless you live in the wild you follow somebody else community standards to get along and associate in public.  But, carry on, with assertions which mean little to nothing in the larger scheme of things. "H" even when you come here we are the "bees" that are told/required/must obey posted community standards!

This line of discussion is meaningless and a waste of time and mind.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.71  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.70    11 months ago

As I said above.

Opinions do vary but I do agree that this discussion is a waste of time.

See?   Common ground.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.72  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.71    10 months ago

Yes. And to be exact: This line of discussion is a waste of time and mind.  That is what I wrote and it is what I meant.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.73  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.72    10 months ago

Yes and for clarification, this is exactly what I said.    And meant it.

this discussion is a waste of time.”

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.74  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.73    10 months ago

Then why 'break my balls'? Use your valuable time more constructively elsewhere, please.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.75  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.74    10 months ago

I use my time as I see fit.    I know that concept is problematic for some here but there you go.

And if you consider what I’m doing “breaking your balls” perhaps you are the one who needs to find a more constructive use of your time.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.76  CB  replied to  Sparty On @8.3.75    10 months ago

That is rich coming from you who called out: ”this discussion is a waste of time.”  Yet here you are still carrying on this waste of time! Decide already to move on stop vexing me. If you are one of those individuals who craves the last word, just tell me and I will let you indulge yourself. That is, I will practice message discipline.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
8.3.77  Sparty On  replied to  CB @8.3.76    10 months ago

Lol .... nothing rich about it.   See 8.3.75.

You are vexing yourself.     If you want that to stop.

Stop.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
9  Nerm_L    11 months ago

14 minutes to respond and deescalate.  The cops performed well.  But we can't talk about that.

An attack on a private Christian school.  A potential hate crime.  But we can't talk about that.

The attacker doesn't fit the political narrative.  But we can't talk about that.

The only thing we are allowed to talk about is guns.  The tired old argument is that if guns were banned, the attack couldn't have happened.  Of course, the cops used guns to stop the the attack but that's easily glossed over.  So, nonsense is all we're allowed to talk about.

Biden isn't talking about banning guns from society.  Biden wants to ban civilian ownership and access to guns.  Biden's proposed bans aren't even about guns; they're really about the authority of government over the civilian population.  Guns are only an excuse.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
9.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Nerm_L @9    11 months ago
4 minutes to respond and deescalate.  The cops performed well.  But we can't talk about that.

The contrast between these heroes and the response at Uvalde could not be greater. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.2  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @9    11 months ago

Who says we can't talk about it?

Who says President Biden wants to ban civilian ownership and access to guns?

That's what y'all said about President Obama so when has this actually happened?  

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
9.2.1  Thomas  replied to  Tessylo @9.2    11 months ago

256

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @9.2.1    11 months ago

I can't read what is on the photo and what is the significance of the photo?

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
9.2.3  Thomas  replied to  Tessylo @9.2.2    11 months ago

It says "What intolerance looks like..." and it is outside of where a drag queen story hour was occurring. The shot did not occur concurrently with the story hour.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @9.2.3    11 months ago

And the 'left' are labeled the intolerant ones. . .

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

Thanks for the clarification.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @9    11 months ago
Of course, the cops used guns to stop the the attack but that's easily glossed over.

Do you seriously believe that is some sort of argument in favor of guns?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
9.3.1  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @9.3    11 months ago
Do you seriously believe that is some sort of argument in favor of guns?

Guns are the only thing we're allowed to talk about.  And the nonsensical arguments aren't even about guns.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
9.3.2  afrayedknot  replied to  Nerm_L @9.3.1    11 months ago

“And the nonsensical arguments aren't even about guns.”

And yet some nonsensical arguments ignore the common denominator in the all too common tragedies…and that is the all too common access to killing machines. 

It is past time to institute broad red flag laws, federal waiting periods, and federal buyer training and seller registration requirements.

True law abiding citizens should have no problem in trying to curb the carnage. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
9.3.3  Nerm_L  replied to  afrayedknot @9.3.2    11 months ago
And yet some nonsensical arguments ignore the common denominator in the all too common tragedies…and that is the all too common access to killing machines. 

It is past time to institute broad red flag laws, federal waiting periods, and federal buyer training and seller registration requirements.

True law abiding citizens should have no problem in trying to curb the carnage. 

Isn't the common denominator is all these instances 'hate'?  Violence isn't an act of 'love'.  

How can we hold elections if we outlaw 'hate'?  Biden wouldn't be President without 'hate'.  Biden can blame someone like Trump all he wants.  But Biden chose to run on 'hate'.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
9.3.4  afrayedknot  replied to  Nerm_L @9.3.3    11 months ago

“How can we hold elections if we outlaw 'hate'?  Biden…”

Totally missing the point, nerm…

Unless, of course, that is your intent. Fire, aim, ready..,too many people firing first with no aim and only so ready. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
9.3.5  Sparty On  replied to  afrayedknot @9.3.2    11 months ago
True law abiding citizens should have no problem in trying to curb the carnage. 

You mean like Veterans who served, got diagnosed with PTSD and will no longer be allowed to own weapons according to some proposed  “red flag” laws?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
9.3.6  afrayedknot  replied to  Sparty On @9.3.5    11 months ago

“…You mean like…”

…anyone who has demonstrably violent behavior. Convicted of a violent crime? Have a restraining order? Wages being garnished? No guns, no way.

Clean up your act, go before a judge, have mental health evaluations and clearance, then and only then are your rights restored. 

Such a simple step, but such an affront to those who offer no solution, much less acknowledge the reality. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
9.3.7  Sparty On  replied to  afrayedknot @9.3.6    11 months ago

It’s a fantasy to assume the people doing these “red flag” evaluations for Vets would do them fairly and honestly.

Pure fantasy from the looner left.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
9.3.8  CB  replied to  afrayedknot @9.3.6    11 months ago

Has the time come to impress upon mentally ill people that society will insist they take help from medical and mental health authorities? In an environment where the 2nd amendment is 'sacrosanct' and legislatures are stalled out, and guns saturate the country it may be little left to do but to 'go after' any potential shooters 'type' themselves, right?

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
10  Thomas    11 months ago

Why can we not talk about the fact that the shooter was transgendered?

Why can we not talk about the evidence that they left behind as to why they felt compelled to perform such an awful act?

The truth is we can and should talk about both because they have immediate societal underpinnings. But that wouldn't fit with Vic's narrative that all will be held hush-hush because of some dreamed-up, nefarious, authoritarian scheme that undergirds the government. 

Why would we want to discuss it? To get out in front of all of the lies that the right is going to promulgate to justify their hatred (or at least mistreatment) of people who are not like them. So far, there is not much to talk about. We know that the individual apparently obtained the guns legally and had no criminal record. The perp has left indications of why the crimes were committed in the form of a written document or manifesto. Undoubtedly the right-wing-nuts are going to use the logical fallacy of argumentation "from the one to the many" to make sweeping generalizations about all people who do not fit the mold of "straight" such as "all transgendered people are unstable" or some such hooey to prejudice susceptible others. They are already blaming the "media" for highlighting the robbing of the right to self-determination and the parental rights to treat their own children as they wish, saying that it is "for the good of the children". Who better knows that child than the parent? 

The political right is practically slavering to say "Transgender bad, Cisgender good" and use that as a justification to further impress their norms on people who do not want them. And that will bring peace? Not likely. If they are allowed to, they will just double down and repress those people more. Such is the way of hate, dressed in the clothes of respectability and pretend caring. "You are not like us. You are bad," is the unspoken mantra on both sides of the divide thus created. Sounds like the perfect receipt for division, not uniting. 

So why don't ch'all take your overly long proboscis out of what others are doing, mind your own business, and leave others be? 

 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
11  Greg Jones    11 months ago

"So why don't ch'all take your overly long proboscis out of what others are doing, mind your own business, and leave others be?"

We try to do so, but the "others", with the help and support of the leftist media, insist on telling us who they, what they do, and how they feel about.....and how we should feel about them.

The problem is, is that we didn't give a damn about them to begin with. Now the biggest thing going in our schools today, is talking about trans people, sexual identity, and sexual orientation, to kids too young to be concerned about such things.

 .

 

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
11.1  evilone  replied to  Greg Jones @11    11 months ago
The problem is, is that we didn't give a damn about them to begin with.

A lie or the populist right wouldn't be trying to legislate a whole class of people out of society as if they were ALL criminals.

The problem is these people are bullied and excluded and made to feel bad about themselves, long before the populist right started to outlaw them. They were already feeling bad about themselves because they don't fit in. Now that the right has tripled down on legislating their status as outcast there will be even less hope of acceptance. Acceptance isn't having to like them it's acknowledging their right to live, work and participate as everyone else is. 

Now the biggest thing going in our schools today, is talking about trans people, sexual identity, and sexual orientation, to kids too young to be concerned about such things.

A lie. The biggest thing going in our schools today is the same things going on in our schools forever - reading, math and social studies. Kids learn about moms/dads and boys/girls as soon as they are able to process words. Those are sexual identities and sexual orientations. Learning about a kid with 2 moms or a guy that used to look like a girl isn't nefarious. It's just life.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
11.1.1  Ronin2  replied to  evilone @11.1    11 months ago
A lie or the populist right wouldn't be trying to legislate a whole class of people out of society as if they were ALL criminals.

Nice hyperbole. It is that very type of talk that incites violence.

The problem is these people are bullied and excluded and made to feel bad about themselves, long before the populist right started to outlaw them. They were already feeling bad about themselves because they don't fit in. Now that the right has tripled down on legislating their status as outcast there will be even less hope of acceptance. Acceptance isn't having to like them it's acknowledging their right to live, work and participate as everyone else is. 

More BS. You just ticked off every leftist talking head mindless utterance. Have you read the laws that have been passed? How is preventing children from being mutilated making them into a criminal? How is preventing drag show queens from performing adult dances/acts in front of children making them criminals? Would you be as tolerant if the various religions were allowed free reign at public schools and libraries to actively recruit children? If teachers tried to recruit children to their religion? Funny how the left had no problem removing religion from public places; no cries of turning the religious into criminals.  

A lie. The biggest thing going in our schools today is the same things going on in our schools forever - reading, math and social studies. Kids learn about moms/dads and boys/girls as soon as they are able to process words. Those are sexual identities and sexual orientations. Learning about a kid with 2 moms or a guy that used to look like a girl isn't nefarious. It's just life.

Which is the reason kids are failing in record numbers in Math, English, History, and Science. Mostly in large leftist bastion of stupidity cities run by Democrats. If only public schools really concentrated on the basics.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
11.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  evilone @11.1    11 months ago

So true so true - and folks piss all over these folks continuously and wonder why some wind up with mental issues.

You are not being overly dramatic by saying they are trying to legislate these folks out of society, they want to legislate them out of existence.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
11.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @11.1.1    11 months ago

Sheer ignorance as usual from you and what a shocker who voted you up.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
11.2  Thomas  replied to  Greg Jones @11    11 months ago
We try to do so, but the "others", with the help and support of the leftist media, insist on telling us who they, what they do, and how they feel about.....and how we should feel about them.

You poor dear soul. Bless your heart for trying. The big, bad leftist media, forcing you to support legislation against treating people (who incidentally do you no harm) as they wish. To use the pronouns he/him instead of she/her. Oh, my god! It burns! It burns! I know you were never afforded the luxury of being addressed as you wished./s Only your whole life. 

The problem is, is that we didn't give a damn about them to begin with.

I would have never guessed. So, when you see something new, you piss on it and try to make it go away? 

... Now the biggest thing going in our schools today, is talking about trans people, sexual identity, and sexual orientation, to kids too young to be concerned about such things.

Prove (that is, bring some evidence to the table) that " the biggest thing going in our schools " (presumably, that means the greatest amount of time is being spent) is " talking about trans people, sexual identity, and sexual orientation ". Also, prove your assertion that the " ... kids (who are) too young to be concerned about such things. " is actually a factual statement. 

I doubt that you will even try, but hope springs eternal.  Here is a starting place.

Gender identity typically develops in stages: Around age two : Children become conscious of the physical differences between boys and girls. Before their third birthday: Most children can easily label themselves as either a boy or a girl. By age four: Most children have a stable sense of their gender identity. May 11, 2022

The source of some of the problem, IMO (the problem being the current war of and about words where all sides seem to be dug in), is the weird way in which we deal with the word "sex" in this culture and its conflation with gender. This is not directly about sex (The verb) at all. It is about gender.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
11.2.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Thomas @11.2    11 months ago

"By age four: Most children have a stable sense of their gender identity. May 11, 2022"

Especially if they are coached and indoctrinated by ignorant activist teachers

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
11.2.2  Thomas  replied to  Greg Jones @11.2.1    11 months ago

Confirmation: You didn't try. Just more of, "I don't like it, so I will deny anything that goes against my narrative." 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
12  Snuffy    11 months ago

Shooter was being treated for an "emotional disorder," police chief says

From CNN's Michael Hayes

The shooter was under care for an "emotional disorder," Metro Nashville Police Chief John Drake said Tuesday.

"Law enforcement knew nothing about the treatment" 28-year-old Aubrey Halewas receiving, he added.

Hale's parents "felt that (Hale) should not own weapons" and were under the impression Hale had sold one weapon and "did not own any more," Drake said.

"As it turned out, (Hale) had been hiding several weapons within the house," Drake said.

So her parents knew she was under medical care for an emotional disorder and felt she should not have guns.  They "thought" she had sold the only gun she owned but they didn't check.

IMO this is what red flag laws are for (and Tennessee does need to pass the law).  But as we've seen so many times, the people in the immediate orbit of the shooter seldom look fully at the situation.  Perhaps they don't wish to make things rougher for themselves, perhaps they are just lazy.  But this song and dance plays out so many times to such horrendous outcomes.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
13  Thomas    11 months ago

Another part of the problem is how Vic directly, but more the right in general, dehumanizes the individual (ie. "monster") who perpetrated this horrible crime.  Something made that person wish to commit this atrocity. Could this have been prevented? That we will never know. Can the future occurrence of this type of incident be prevented? Maybe, if we take the time to truly look at the evidence and learn from it.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
13.1  Ronin2  replied to  Thomas @13    11 months ago

Monster would be the politest thing the shooter would have been called had they been a far right loon. 

Also, every last pro gun advocate, Republican, and conservative would have been held responsible by the left.  

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
13.1.1  Thomas  replied to  Ronin2 @13.1    11 months ago

All of your comment I find to be completely beside the point.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @13.1.1    11 months ago

All he has Thomas is projection, deflection, and denial, that's it.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
13.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  Thomas @13.1.1    11 months ago

Of course you do. The left can never be held accountable for anything.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
13.1.4  Thomas  replied to  Ronin2 @13.1.3    11 months ago

Do you have something pertinent to add?

If you had said, "But the person's actions were monstrous, therefore calling the person a monster is reasonable." I would freely agree that the person's actions were monstrous.

However, you didn't do that. You were off in right field, looking in the other direction. Most of your commentary can be reduced to the statement, "Everthing the left does is wrong by definition." 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
13.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Thomas @13    11 months ago
Could this have been prevented? That we will never know

Perhaps it could have if someone(s) had opened their mouths..........Never should have been able to purchase 7 guns.

The 28-year-old shooter who killed three children and three adults at a Christian elementary school in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday had been under the care of a doctor for an “emotional disorder,” police said.  Nashville Metro Chief John Drake told reporters on Tuesday that Audrey Elizabeth Hale “was under care — doctor’s care — for an emotional disorder,” but did not disclose further details about the nature of that disorder. Hale was killed by police on scene. 

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
13.2.1  Thomas  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @13.2    11 months ago

Ahh! New information. Thank you. 

It would be interesting to know why they did it, not just the logistics and logistical failings that allowed it to happen.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3  Texan1211  replied to  Thomas @13    11 months ago
Another part of the problem is how Vic directly, but more the right in general, dehumanizes the individual (ie. "monster") who perpetrated this horrible crime. 

I'll talk to Vic and see if I can get him to start using the term "nice friendly person" instead.

Will that help?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14