No, The Parkland Survivors Are Not 'Actors.' But They Are Winning.
Despite the far-right's attempts to smear the teenagers, they continue to prevail
You know you have a good argument when the only response the opposition can muster is to smear you.
In the last week, survivors of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, displayed incredible bravery, intelligence and camaraderie after watching their classmates' murders. In return, they were not treated with respect. A threatened, angry mob was so desperate to take back the conversation that they opted for the lowest common denominator. Lying.
In the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 children and faculty, survivors of the unthinkable act became unified — against guns, against violence, and against adults who wouldn't listen. Together, they began pleading with legislators to change something.
Unlike previous tragedies, where politicians and activists drove the narrative, it was the survivors who took the mic and stole the show. Not just any survivors, either. Teenagers. [cont'd]
(Hat tip: Skrekk)
Tags
Who is online
71 visitors
All across cable news and the internet, high school students who lost friends and classmates began speaking out about the need to limit access to guns. And they weren't naive. They weren't disorganized. They were tactful, intelligent, well-informed and emotionally invested in what they were doing. And they proved every adult who doubted them wrong.
You know damn well that some of these kids are being coached and encouraged by the leftist fringe. Democrats are well known for taking any tragedy and exploiting it to their advantage. Doesn't Rahm's Rule state that the Democrats should "never let a serious crisis go to waste"? Anything that can help the liberal agenda move along is fair game for them, including traumatized kids. If liberals were serious about stopping mass shootings they might come up with practical and intelligent solutions....instead of going the hysterical emotional route.
Carlson opened with Haab by asking him if it was correct that CNN asked him what he wanted to ask on the stage and then rewrote his question.
“Yes, sir. So what had happened was four days ago I had gotten contacted by a lady named Carrie Stevenson from CNN. She had asked me originally to just write a speech. It was going to be at the town hall, the BB&T Center. So I agreed. I felt like it would be the right thing to do, be able to go speak my part as well as open eyes to a few things that I thought can make this situation a little better.”
Haab then said he got an email back from Stevenson and she asked for more questions instead of a speech.
“So I gave her my questions and then … I made contact with her. And she had asked if I had just asked her one question. So what they had actually done was wrote out a question for me because in my interview with CNN , I had talked about arming the teachers, if they were willing to arm themselves in the school to carry on campus.”
Haab said his question was rewritten.
“So, I have that question here if you would like me to ask it for you,” Haab, who then decided not to attend the town hall, told Carlson.
Carlson told Haab that CNN’s actions seem dishonest.
“It definitely did. That’s kind of why I didn’t go,” Haab said. “Originally, I had thought that it was going to be more of my own question and my own say and then it turned out to be more of just a script. And, she had actually said that over the phone that I needed to stick to the script.”
That is simply CNNs story because they got called out. How do we know CNN did not doctor their own emails to make it look like the kid's emails were doctored? CNN is not exactly a bastion of truth.
BTW, I see that you were heavily handed your ass on your past seed so you decided to lock it because of that. Just couldn't handle the truth of your own bs, huh?
Bummer for right wingers that the dad admitted he "accidentally" fabricated the email, eh?
In fact, their message was so well-crafted, so moving and so unified that — almost immediately — far-right media outlets began accusing the children of being "coached" by the Democratic party.
But as the days went on and the students dug their heels in, refusing to allow this tragedy to be just another headline, the smears got uglier. First, well-known conservative commentators spoke dismissively about the survivors. Disgraced former Fox News host Bill O'Reilly asked if "the media" should be "promoting opinions by teenagers" who are "facing extreme peer pressure." Dinesh D'Souza, well-known for his mud-throwing, mocked student protesters in a tweet, saying an unsuccessful bid to change gun laws was "the worst thing that happened to them" just days after their friends were murdered in school.
Yep, just like it was being scripted for them. Do you think this would be happening if Hillary were president? Of course not.
And no, I don't currently own a gun nor belong to the NRA. But that might change before long.
Both Dana Loesch and David Hogg were interviewed today on ABC's This Week......Hogg blew Loesch out of the water. Loesch came across as irrational and frantic to keep assault weapons readily available, while Hogg was calm but very well spoken in his assessment of the NRA's role in protecting these weapons of war and the big companies which profit from them.
So this kid doesn't get that we live in a democracy but a republic, that somehow an organization can have 99.9% good people but bad leaders and regurgitates standard left wing talking points. Somebody should talk to his civics teacher.
I suspect that Hogg understood the topic was gun regulation and school safety, not a completely irrelevant distinction between a democracy and a republic. If anything he clearly understood what you do not - that Floriduh's GOP-controlled government was refusing to take any action to prevent these massacres and that it was NRA lobbying money which was driving that aspect of the problem.
Actually it was a total failure of law enforcement from the local law all the way to the FBI. If they couldn't do their jobs stopping this shooter when he announced to the ENTIRE world (that's online and reads English anyway) what he was going to do, how do you expect them to stop criminals from getting guns? I wouldn't put my life in the hands of a bunch of Barney Fife deputies. The NRA is just a red herring.
Our government and it's officials are protected by Guns. Why not Children ?
I agree - it would be much more efficient just to arm the children. Why should they have to depend on cops or teachers for their own protection?
Al you need to take out a bad child with a gun is a good child with a gun.
If that's what you "Feel".....
Now how can anyone have a discussion with that response? That is not what was said. Reminds me of some of those fact check sites who take a situation or comment and fact check it by addressing something else and of course leaving no comment section allowing others correct them. Quite often, we find those sites to to left leaning and deceptive, somewhat like the response at the top of this comment.
These kids are a massive force of nature that even Katrina would be jealous of.
The only kids getting smeared by the media is Colton Haab, who is being called a liar by CNN for not asking a scripted question. Here's what he did during the shooting:
Haab originally came into public view after he and a fellow Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) saved lives during the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School by shielding students from gunfire with Kevlar curtains.
Either Colton or his father is lying since CNN showed the emails the Haab's had doctored. In any event CNN has no obligation whatsoever to give anyone a platform for a lengthy speech which is apparently what Colton wanted to do.
And regardless of Colton's admirable actions during this shooting, the authorities might want to pay close attention to him since he seems to be a budding white supremacist much like the shooter. Mostly it sounds like Colton has been adversely influenced by a far right-wing father, which would explain the "Nobama" messages and Dixie Swastika's he proudly displays on his Facebook page.
CNN has no qualms about holding a so called Town Hall that was really a barely contained mob and kangaroo court. And I see that the left has resorted to character assassination of a teenager no less for daring to disagree with them. That's really not surprising anymore.
Colton gave up his chance to get his point across when he refused to stick by the question he had submitted.
But I guess he can still do that on his Facebook page where he proudly displays the Dixie Swastika. Maybe Breitbart will publish his pro-gun rant or even make him an editor.
What exactly is a "Dixie Swastika"? Is that some sort of liberal code for the Confederate flag? And I think Haab has done more to have a say in this than anybody else who hasn't been in that type of situation.
I'm surprised you were able to figure it out.
.
Too bad he blew his chance, eh?
Reading liberal code talk isn't that hard. Y'all tend to be pretty predictable. And I'd say CNN blew it's chance to try to be a respectable news network for about the millionth time.
Skirting the CoC [ph]
I wouldn't know anything about that since I don't follow white supremacist news.
Bummer for right wingers that the dad admitted he "accidentally" fabricated the email, eh?
I know I am probably going to get crucified by some but here but here goes. These kids most certainly are not actors and anyone who thinks is a idiot. They are young people who have been severely traumatized by a horrific experience no one their age should have to go through. That being said, I have no doubt that the hard core anti-gun lobby is salivating at the mouth using this tragedy and these poor young people to the fullest extent they are able to further their agenda. I am glad to see these teens trying to change things as change is certainly long overdue. I am a responsible law abiding gun owner and believe in stricter background checks and much more thorough mental health background checks for prospective buyers as well as raising the mandatory minimum purchase age to 21. A good friend of mine posted something of Facebook today that needs to be considered also. The U.S. does not have nearly enough mental heath professionals in this country that are needed. A good day to all.
The U.S. does not have nearly enough mental heath professionals in this country that are needed.
Sure thing, let’s blame it on a lack of mental health professionals. Anything to protect the freedom to buy and sell weapons capable of the highest body counts.
If 100,000 more mental health professionals graduate from college and enter the work force, who is going to hire them? How will they be paid? By forcing a million questionably unstable people into their offices for regular office visits that may or may not even have an impact? Do you think they all have the means for health insurance and copays? Ideas aren’t worth a shit until they are taken to their logical conclusions.
"Anything to protect the freedom to buy and sell weapons capable of the highest body counts."
The far left won't be happy until any private ownership of guns is prohibited. Ask how that's working in Mexico where the drug cartels have all the guns they want and the federal police are outgunned.
So say we ban the manufacture, import, and sale of these kind of weapons...what then? The problem just magically disappears?
What about the millions of such guns already out there, not to mention the ones in the arsenals of criminals of all types?
Try thinking for once instead of spewing liberal hysteria.
It’s the first a step in the right direction.
It would certainly create a lucrative black market and deter mentally ill people from seeking help if they are threatened with losing their right to protect themselves.
And the right direction, in the view of anti gun zealots, is the confiscation of all firearms from civilian hands.
How to accomplish that? Simple really, have the question of whether a person is mentally stable enough to possess firearms decided by using entirely subjective criteria applied by "mental health professionals" who owe the retention of their license (and, therefore, their income) to political leaders with agendas.
How to stop that? Also simple. Totally objective criteria (previously demonstrated behavior) applied, based on the rules of criminal evidence, by judges, after arguments by attorneys from both sides. That's what the law is now. HIPPA laws, regarding the privacy of doctor/patient relationships do need to be modified, so that problems get reported to NICS, but otherwise, the law doesn't need to be changed.
That's not how I read his email. Maybe I'm misinterpreting his meaning but my impression was that he was making a point about the lack of mental health care available to citizens after he cited the changes he could supports as a gun owner. Truth be told, I'd rather discuss solutions with him then some others on this site. They won't entertain anything less than anyone should be able to buy a rocket launcher if they want.
Unfortunately, Cruz was seeing a therapist, and was current on his meds and appointments according to what I have read about him. Therapy isn’t a magic bullet, pardon the phrase, nor is psychotic mental health a condition that is even something that can be diagnosed in everyone who suffers from it. Look at the Las Vegas shooting.
It’s a rare person who comes out in favor of mentally ill peoples’ rights to arm themselves. You are special, Dean.
And the right direction, in the view of anti gun zealots, is the confiscation of all firearms from civilian hands.
Comment removed for skirting the CoC. jwc2blue
Where do you draw the line? Are you in favor of stripping anyone with a prescription for antidepressants of their rights? Would a person diagnosed with bipolar lose the right to protect themselves? There are many different types of mental illnesses and degrees of those conditions. A diagnosis of a mental illness is not that same as insanity.
My entire focus is on certain guns that should not be available to anyone but LE and the military. Perceived failings in the mental health industry was brought up here by someone else, as a feeble excuse for this madness. Stephen Paddock had no indications of being mentally ill when he committed the largest culling if innocent people in this country’s history.
But to your point, no - I don’t think it is wise for people with severe depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, psychosis, etc. to have a gun in the home, period. Just weigh the pros and cons, as in the number of these folks who have committed suicide, murder-suicide, murder out of anger or confusion, and gun accidents, with the number of them who have actually stopped a real threat with a gun. The answer is obvious. I’ve lived my entire life without the need or desire for a gun, and I’ve lived through depression and at times have not lived in the safest neighborhoods.
That's certainly good advice for people with those conditions, but a good first step for society would be to restrict access to guns for anyone taking certain classes of drugs like SSRIs during the habituation period. However you don't want to discourage anyone from seeking mental health treatment so even that little bit of regulation could have adverse consequences.
.
Just based on what I've heard about him I think there were lots of behavioral indicators that he had an underlying mental illness, possibly familial, but apparently it went undiagnosed and untreated. He also had a habit of sleep cycle inversion which can itself cause mental illness even if the inversion isn't related to an underlying disorder. While some mentally ill people will always fall through the cracks the larger issue is that there's lots of untreated mental illness which is at the root of our large prison population - and thus it remains untreated. Plus our health care system pretty much sucks in that area especially if one is poor. The very least we can do is improve access to treatment and reduce stigma.
Just based on what I've heard about him I think there were lots of behavioral indicators that he had an underlying mental illness, possibly familial, but apparently it went undiagnosed and untreated.
Consider how broad of a social category he is a part of. There is simply no way to root out that kind of future psycho from his peers. I know plenty of people who can be total assholes at times, unreasonable and irrational in their thinking (just look around here) - and they aren’t self made millionaires without alcohol and drug addictions.
And in fact we know Paddock was on valium and had a drinking problem, a very nasty combination which likely contributed to my father's suicide (which happened before that risk was understood).
I never heard about the drinking problem. However, the subset of individuals who have a prescription for valium and a drinking problem doesn’t exactly narrow the field.
Paddock only claimed not to drink "when he gambled" but that's not what other gamblers say:
But you're right that there's no easy way to narrow the field of persons whom law enforcement (or psychiatrists) needs to look at.
Millions of Americans have the same ease of access to guns ... millions of Americans with mental illness have the same ease of access to the same guns - yet do not go out and kill as many people as possible..
So perhaps there is a need to find something new to blame? Perhaps there is a test to determine who the 'evil bastards' are, in order to deny them the right to bear arms?
Less than 1 percent of mass shootings annually are committed by individuals with serious mental illness ... roughly 3 percent of violent crimes are committed by mentally ill individuals - but those same mentally ill individuals are 10 time more likely to be the victims of violent crime.
If guns and the mentally ill are not causing the violence - what's next in line?
Colour,
I don't think it matters to them. Nothing else fits the real agenda.
The actual solution to the problem of mass shootings, including those in schools, isn't really that hard to understand or implement. If you can't keep potential shooters, either those who are mentally ill or who are simply evil, away from firearms (and you can't), then put your time, effort and resources into keeping them away from masses of people gathered together. In short, don't waste resources denying shooters the means, deny them their desired targets. HARDEN THE TARGETS. It works for airports, why won't it work for schools?
I’m not so sure it works at airports since it can and still does happen.
When was the last time you saw a mass shooting at an airport in this country?
Sorry, my above post should have read."...since Fort Lauderdale or before that?
Preaching to the converted TTGA ...
I have been calling for a buzz in policy in our public school (a camera outside, a monitor in the office) if one has no business being in the building, deny them access by not letting them in - seems like a NO brain'r to me ... public schools are designed with one main entrance, usually running past the school office, with multiple exit only doors.
Seems as though if something makes sense, it cannot work? The argument I hear against securing school is "We shouldn't have to" - thus telling me children's trauma is not the driving motivator behind stopping mass shootings.
Just my opinion of course..........................
Sure it happens Dean. You can never get rid of all of it. When it does happen, though, it happens not as a result of the failure of the law, but as a result of the failure to properly execute the required security measures allowed under the law. In other words, failure by individual human guards (or security systems) will always happen. However, if the basic system is in place, failure by a guard means that the guard must be retrained or replaced and system failure means modification of methods used. Neither requires that you go back and replace everything all over again. You just improve upon or fix what's already there without having to run through the whole legislative process again.
I know Colour. It wasn't really aimed at you. It was aimed at those who haven't seemed to realize that their focus is on the wrong thing. Don't focus on keeping the guns away from the shooter, focus on keeping the targets away from the shooter. Much easier, much cheaper and a lot more effective.
Looks like where I live, within a dreaded 'red' state, got the message and has decided to place children's safety first.. Beginning tomorrow students at all the high schools in the area will only be allowed to enter through the main entrance of the high school - doors will not be allowed to be propped open - staff must enter through a keyed entrance or main entrance only.
(asked the neighbor about the grade school.. unbeknownst to me, all three buildings since the beginning of the year have been using the buzz in policy, they have had the ability since I went there as a kid)
Wow our petition did not have enough signatures to be heard in Helena yet ............. but the proposals within it are being acted on locally!
I love living in such a backwards sucky State like Montana!!! : )
When was the last time you saw a mass shooting at an airport in this country?
November 1, 2013 - LAX
Paul Ciancia entered Terminal 3 of LAX. He was carrying a bag filled with a semiautomatic, .223 cal S&W M&P-15 rifle, five 30-round magazines, and hundreds of additional rounds of ammunition contained in boxes. He pulled the rifle out of the bag and opened fire, shooting TSA Officer Gerardo Hernandez in the chest at point-blank range. He then went up an escalator, but returned to the checkpoint and shot Hernandez again after seeing him move.
He continued firing, wounding two TSA agents and a passenger.
My thanks. I had forgotten about that event.
Paula, was that before or after he had to go through security. If it was after, the security system needs to be revamped. If it was before, the security checkpoint was in the wrong place. Checkpoint must be placed so that you can't even enter the building without passing through it.
Modern society?
Good to see you Greg .. good point!
Good to read you too Colour, doesn't seem to be any FR's left around?
Nope .. occasionally during the week loki and Just Jim will wander in, but that is about it - there are still a few from F-R posting on MSN
White supremacist views are definitely a common factor in a number of these shootings, but easy access to guns and lots of bullets seems to be the primary factor. Why not regulate the sale, distribution and ownership of bullets since they're what most directly does the killing?
Doesn't work that way. The Supreme Court ruled some time back that ammunition is an integral part of a firearm and gets the same Constitutional protection.
All that means is that you can't ban bullets. But states and localities are free to regulate them just like they're free to regulate guns.
You really want to run the risk that one of us backwoods Southern states wouldn't decide that say, explosive bullets were just fine?
Some calibers are getting harder to come by - especially the .22 long rifle, which has caused more individuals to purchase .223 rifles...
Regulating ammo could prove to be more difficult than regulating what guns can be purchased - as there is nothing stopping individuals from buying in bulk, nor identification required to do so (that I am aware of) but each state may vary. Not on my computer at the moment to check - but I think a store can regulate their sales of ammo by requiring ID .. seems Walmart may now require that.
True enough, but that doesn't stop states from regulating how many are sold, where and when. There is nothing stopping any state from limiting WHEN and WHERE ammunition or guns for that matter, are sold.
Example? Is abortion legal? Yes. How many Planned Parenthood's are there in the state of Kentucky? 1, (ONE). There is nothing stopping a state from taking the EXACT same stance with regards to guns/bullets. Hell, they could say that there can only be ONE store in the state, (operated BY the state), that is open ONE day a month, for 6 hours between midnight and noon and they would not be in violation of the 2nd amendment.
Cannot stop one from buying ammo on the internet Mr Frost .. can one get an abortion via internet?
True but if in the next state over they decide to stay open 24/7 then what?
And just how would you suggest that they do that? Bullets are nothing more than small pieces of metal that fly through the air very fast. They are very easy to make, I make and use hundreds of them every year. The cartridge that they come from is nothing more than a simple method of propulsion (gas expansion). Neither can be effectively regulated since everything but the (reusable) cartridge case is simple to make. The State or Locality could pass all the laws they wished (as long as such regulations do not materially infringe upon the Second Amendment) and the people who use them would quite easily avoid the regulations. The people would simply laugh at the authority of the State or Locality.
The people running those entities are smart enough to know better than to make such regulations, since they violate the first rule of government leadership; DON'T EVER MAKE A LAW THAT YOU KNOW WILL BE WIDELY DISOBEYED. The reason for that rule is widely known and accepted by leaders in all fields. If you make such a law, and it is widely disobeyed, you then bring into question your ability to enforce all the other laws and rules you may make. Any politician who has reached a level as high as the mayor of a town or city will tell you that breaking that rule is always a really bad idea.
How did Switzerland accomplish it?
Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]
Am I right or wrong? I am right. Not a delusion. Sorry.
Come over and find out.
You watch kids dying by the dozens in school shootings and don't bat an eye...and you call others insane? Sick.
Probably a Nerf gunnner ..... qualified expert.
Switzerland has a strong gun culture but very few mass shootings per capita and very little gun violence overall because ammo is so tightly regulated. However I'm not surprised that you want to deflect the issue from mass shootings to general crime rates given that Switzerland's gun & ammo regulations are very effective.
Skirting the CoC [ph]
Hmm, I dunno, most gun enthusiasts [Calling them nuts is name calling and not allowed here at Newsnowflakes) aren't gay, they're small-dicked straight guys!
True, but could be all three too, just saying... LOL
Ah, so you admit that you ARE gay.. Good to know.
I see.....the Swiss are simply more evolved than Americans who are too immature and too lazy to fix national problems.
If they can stop people from online gambling in certain states, they can stop the sale of ammo as well.
Just have the ammo sent to a different state ... we all have relatives that send 'Christmas' presents.
If someone posted to you, what you did today regarding abortion in a conversation regarding ammo ... they would be deflecting and trying to derail the topic - which I see as simply grasping at anything that will cause negative attention from specific individuals. Am I wrong?
What articles have you read regarding gun regulations and the regulated militia in Switzerland. The Swiss have rather strict gun laws and gun owners are part of the 'well regulated militia' but they do not have a Constitutional right to bear arms..
This is an interesting read.
So let's see.....they have a well-regulated civilian militia (like we supposedly have but don't) and the ammo for that militia is generally not allowed to be kept at home but in an armory. The roughly two thousand militia members who can keep ammo at home are subject to frequent inspections and their bullets are counted. They also have universal licensing and universal background checks for all gun sales, public or private. You also need a license just to buy ammo. Loaded guns can't be carried in public, and concealed carry is banned.
But while the per capita rate of gun violence is very low compared to the US, it's much higher than other EU countries which have lower rates of gun ownership. So clearly the number of guns per capita does matter.
I did not flag this comment nor did I want it removed. 9mil and I would like the freedom to insult each other like we used to. If the person being attacked does not flag the comment, it shouldn't be pulled. LL
I'm game if anyone else is.
Thank-you, green rocks. Mods use purple to talk to us as mods, so I'm going to use green to talk to them when they're on as mods!
What’s even worse is they are now deleting comments based on their perception of the intent of the comment which can be something completely different than the writer intended. I had a comment deleted for asking a question out of concern for the safety of another member and the mods misinterpreted it to be a personal attack.
I'm surprised my 'Newsnowflakes' comment wasn't pulled. The term was deemed a violation and pulled by another mod on this site. No shit!
I was not trying to argue with you Skrekk .. you bring up a country roughly the population of the Dallas Metro area, and sing the praises of 'their' gun ownership success.
And.... Switzerland does not have the second amendment, their laws would not fly here. Canada has similar successful gun laws to Switzerland and actually has a population larger than that of a US cities metro area - so what is the fascination with Switzerland? A country that citizens have a duty to State/country with their gun ownership - where a "well regulated militia" is government controlled.
If the citizens of the US were to organize a "well regulated militia" the US federal government would flip its lid. If the US denied immigrants the right to bear arms the ACLU would flip their lids. Perhaps I have completely misunderstood the second amendment all these years - but I do not believe that the right to bear arms and have a regulated militia is designed for the federal government to control.
Have a great Monday - snowing here!
Both Canada and Switzerland are used as countries with a similar gun culture to the US but with lower per-capita gun crimes and lower rate of mass shootings. While Canada's culture is closer to ours, Switzerland is interesting because they do regulate bullets to a limited extent (ie militia ammo is tightly controlled and shooting ranges count your shells so you're not leaving with live ammo).
Here (CA) you can no longer buy ammo off of the net and shipped to your home. You have to send it to an authorized dealer.
Far as guns go, at least in non Blue States, I really don't think that the legislators want to go back to chasing ambulances for a living. Not too many RINO's at the State level, at least in Red States. The legislators do what they're told or they go out the door very quickly. Ammunition is even easier. Nothing at all stopping the customers from driving across a State line and buying all they want.
Besides which, sales of both guns and ammo provide significant amounts of tax revenue to the States. States don't want to lose that revenue since, unlike the Federal Government, States can't print their own money.
I just find it sad that after all these kids have been through, the right wing is running a smear campaign against them. Pretty sad..
I think it indicates that the right wing gun nuts and the NRA & GOP are getting desperate because they realize they're losing a generation of voters, to say nothing about the economic losses the NRA and gun manufacturers are facing.
Gun control will turn out to be a losing issue for the left wing.
Unfortunately I have to disagree. Until the corpses of kids and other civilians = $, nothing is going to change.
The spaz out here by some eclipses your Trump spaz out in 2016. By a large margin.
Sad that you’re so weak of character that you feel the need to play your BS partisan games on the backs of dead children.
Sad and sick, very sick!
You can have the gun debate, but first you need to 'Protect the Children'. You can replace that old galvanized pipe in you old house, but today you have to stop the leak.
If it wasn't just an agenda to totally remove guns from our society, I would go along more easily with suggestions made by the left. Anyone who doesn't realize these children have been manipulated by that agenda is missing the boat, because if anyone sat down with them and showed them how passing laws was not going to protect them tomorrow, next week or next month and beyond and explained why with examples how they could be protected tomorrow and beyond right now, I'm sure that is what we would be hearing on the news first. Ideas and solutions are things young people can get excited about, but manipulation by those with an agenda aren't opening that avenue to them, only controlling the conversation so their agenda is front and center.
They're being manipulated and the whole agenda is to remove guns from our society. It would really be wonderful if we didn't need guns for protection because there were no sick or evil people in this world, but that is not the way it is. What are they doing to 'Protect the Children'.
Well here's one student who has made a positive step in this direction. It's not the total solution, but it is one step in the right direction, which is to 'Protect the Children'.