Geez, what a pussy this Kavanaugh is.

Obviously the NRA is lining his pockets.

If he is seated and overturns the semi-automatic weapons ban, he will have much blood on his hands, like the current administration and the gop and the NRA.  

Dear Friend Tessylo: This is a valid question to ask.

Which as a society to we value more.

Second amendment rights to bear arms in a non regulated militia, or the universal right of students to go to school and not fear getting shot?

Guns or kids?

Fair game for a discussion in this as other contexts.

Peace and Abundant Blessings.

Enoch.

Which as a society to we value more.

Can we not value both? 

Is the dramatic increase in school shootings since Columbine directly related to gun regulations?

Our children need to be valued, not weapons of mass destruction.

Not them being slaughtered and murdered along with their teachers.  

Children shouldn't fear going to school and not knowing if they'll get mowed down in their classrooms by someone with a semi-automatic weapon.  

I think the person in your avatar values education and children over guns.

As you know she was shot in the head for trying to get an education.  

and when the guns are banned and the slaughters continue...what will be your solution then?  

No one is talking about banning guns dear.  Just semi-automatic weapons and doing background checks.  So psychos cannot slaughter children and their teachers in their classrooms.  

First of all she was shot in the head for being a woman and she was always gang raped.  Shall we ban dicks too?  How about fist and stones?

Just semi-automatic weapons and doing background checks.  So psychos cannot slaughter children and their teachers in their classrooms.  

It will still happen, most of the guns used where legally purchased...again what is your solution besides some myth about why the school shootings continue despite gun regulation?

Those two issues have nothing to do with each other. 

Of course they do.  

Second amendment rights to bear arms in a non regulated militia, or the universal right of students to go to school and not fear getting shot?

Good morning Enoch..

Is the right to bear arms actually what is getting students shot? 

'Our' schools and children can be protected through some rather easy steps - publics schools are already designed for safety, with one main entrance and multiple exit only doors in case of fire etc .. my grade school in the 70's had an intercom system in place, no one entered the building after school had started without being buzzed in by the office … with modern technology … one can have a camera and a buzz in system.

Just my thoughts Enoch - have a sweet day...

Dear Friend Color Me Free: Good points all.

I am very supportive of using state of the art technology to prevent tragedy in any and every context imaginable.

That said, at about 4% of the planet's population retail gun ownership in the USA is between 50-67%, depending on which survey one reads.

Do we really need that many ordinance discharging weaponry in often untrained, and occasionally unstable hands?

Is it really making us any safer as a society? 

Gun control laws are a complex series of issues.

My point is prioritization and how how it reflects societal values.

I like your thoughtful inquiry.

It is an important point you raise.

Thanks.

Peace and Abundant Blessings Always.

Enoch.

Legally purchased I do not think is what people have an issue with, it is the weapons - specifically semi auto weapons that twist panties .. did you notice that the Santa Fe TX shooting is seldom mentioned - that shooter had a shotgun and a revolver, and did nearly the same damage as one wielding an AR-15 rifle .. but Santa Fe does not fit the narrative of what weapons need to be regulated or banned all together? 

Do we really need that many ordinance discharging weaponry in often untrained, and occasionally unstable hands? Is it really making us any safer as a society? 

No argument from me .. I do believe that training is part of being a gun owner - I shot practical pistol for years in competitions, have extensive training .. my sons at age 9 for Christmas received a shot gun and then began training on shooting trap and skeet.  My youngest son hunts and went through hunter safety training .. when my sons got pistols - I taught them to field strip and know their weapon before ever shooting their weapon at a gun range  ..

Guns are not toys - and my sons never had plastic ones to play with .. mean mom I know .. my belief process may be wrong, but I do not think 'all' young people understand the damage that a gun can do, nor understand that death is for real, it is not a video game nor a movie..

My point is prioritization and how how it reflects societal values.

Understood .. yet in a place like the United States, societal values reflect differently in different areas - does it not … once again becoming complicated and complex - just as regulated or controlling guns is … 

Thank you for expanding your thoughts for me .. much appreciated

Hi Colour - I do believe the issue with many is gun control to the point of banning.

The false narrative that gun regulation would prevent mass shootings of children is consistently pushed.  Why would they even bring it into the conversation then?

Nope no banning except semi-automatics.  Stronger regulations and thorough background checks.  

The false narrative that gun regulation would prevent mass shootings of children is consistently pushed.

The nations children being shot, while in school, is an emotional trigger for most of us … thus is used to further the gun control agenda.  As long as guns regulation and banning of various types of weapons is the goal, sadly more children will probably die - I feel protecting our children from being sitting ducks for an individual hell bent on killing is more of a priority - work on stopping an individuals access to schools when they have no business being there...

Wow .. I have gone way off topic...

Just need semi-automatics to be banned and stronger regulations.  Not an agenda.  Parents are tired of their children being slaughtered along with their teachers.  

Parents are tired of their children being slaughtered along with their teachers.

Apparently not, or they would be fighting for securing schools before a shooting happens, not after!

Apparently so

Dear Friend Color Me Free: Your comments are at once illuminating and appreciated.

If our good friend Tessylo allows, let me add some grist for the mill.

Part of the complexity of gun control laws is indeed geographic and cultural in nature.

Firearms in urban areas with high density populations is a very different breed than suburban and rural areas.

The use and need for Second Amendment protected firearms varies with a lot of factors. 

Let me present a few.

Single women living alone in high crime areas may need a firearm to protect themselves from physical harm by those, for example with mental hygiene challenges, and/or drub abuse addictions who are capable of overpowering them. Our daughter found herself in that situation in college in a major city neighborhood near the university where she studied.

Another need for firearms would be hunting, camping, hiking, etc. Even if no hunting is to take placed, camping out in the woods leaves people exposed to very large carnivorous predators. Black Bears are the case around here. One needs a good high power rifle for protection just in case.

Those who are registered and licensed to carry ordinance discharging firearms in certain circumstances need them.

In my case, I hold five life time certifications from a Federal Agency three of which deal with mass casualty situations.

I may be called for command and control, national incident management system mass casualty matters to run large groups of people to deal with such a crisis.

As well, I may be deputized, given combat, police, first response, and security training at the Federal, State, County and Municipal levels. 

Some situations may require I be armed, and not our armed by nefarious forces who pose a clear and present danger to society.

Do drug and narco-terrorists, gang members, street thugs, terrorists etc. need weaponry (and often more sophisticated combat weapons than local law enforcement have at their disposal) need or should have a right to acquire and use for such purposes? I think most would agree that they do not.

Often the purpose of laws, gun control included is not to enforcement them proactively unless there is sufficient reason for so doing. It is to have such regulations as legal tools to take off the streets people who abuse the privilege of having them.

Regarding training, we are peas in a pod.

In my youth, in the basement of the local Town Hall there were merit badges to be earned in gun care, safety, and marksmanship in various scouting and other youth programs. These activities were run by the local police department. Supervised education, including when to and when not to use weapons is something I support. 

Finally, a look at the numbers on gun violence is instructive.

Most who die by guns shot wounds are trying, and too often succeeding in suicide attempts.    

Domestic violence cases also produce more casualties then muggings.

Disabling and fatal wounds from knife wounds far outnumber gunshot wounds. 

Both are dwarfed by automotive crashes and drug overdoses.

These matters are very complicated.

Sound bytes will not due in creation and implementation of public policy.

Pro Bono Publico, for the general good should be the appropriate standard.

My thanks to you for  your time, consideration and wise council.

A shout out to our good friend Tessylo for giving me space in this discussion thread as well.

Peace and Abundant Blessings to You Both; as to Us All.

Enoch.

Thank you once again Enoch, you always give me food for thought .. you are an individual that seems to wear many hats with the knowledge to go with each one..

Thank you for your thoughts...

Guns are going to be an on going battle, with no resolution that I can see, at least not in my lifetime … but I am hopeful and keep pushing in my state to protect children within the schools they attend NOW .. not after an incident has occurred...

Do drug and narco-terrorists, gang members, street thugs, terrorists etc. need weaponry (and often more sophisticated combat weapons than local law enforcement have at their disposal) need or should have a right to acquire and use for such purposes? I think most would agree that they do not.

Agreed, yet that also opens up a whole new topic on illegal weapons, the black market .. gun running, strawman purchases ………….. and the list goes on.  Any conversation regarding guns is many faceted .. usually leaving the legal responsible gun owner defending their ownership of said guns and just how many do they really need to have ...etc... 

Peace ...

Apparently not, or they would be fighting for securing schools before a shooting happens, not after!

Hi Color,

That is not true. NYC is seriously looking at metal detectors at all NYC schools. We have had them for a long time at specific schools in troubled areas, but now they are looking into it systemwide. And may I point out, that NYC schools have never had a mass shooting. 

You are always welcome Enoch for your kind, thoughtful, civil, informed and gracious comments.  

Our' schools and children can be protected through some rather easy steps

And yet, quite obviously, they haven't been.

So the logical conclusion must be that either:

1. We really don't care all that much about protecting our children-- or at least it's not all that important and takes backseat to other issues

Or

2. Those steps really aren't all that "easy" ...or we would have taken them decades ago!

?????

I have mis-spoken and I want to correct my mistake.  A wise and learned lady told me that semi-automatic weapons can only fire one shot at a time.  I said that semi-automatics should be banned.

I honestly don't know a lot about guns (obviously) but I am willing to admit my mistake.  

I stand corrected.  I do not think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

I have mis-spoken and I want to correct my mistake.  A wise and learned lady told me that semi-automatic weapons can only fire one shot at a time.  I said that semi-automatics should be banned.

I honestly don't know a lot about guns (obviously) but I am willing to admit my mistake.  

I stand corrected.  I do not think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

I have mis-spoken and I want to correct my mistake.  A wise and learned lady told me that semi-automatic weapons can only fire one shot at a time.  I said that semi-automatics should be banned.

I honestly don't know a lot about guns (obviously) but I am willing to admit my mistake.  

I stand corrected.  I do not think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

That is not true. NYC is seriously looking at metal detectors at all NYC schools. We have had them for a long time at specific schools in troubled areas, but now they are looking into it systemwide. And may I point out, that NYC schools have never had a mass shooting. 

Which is great and I applaud NYC .. more cities and communities need to get off there collective rears and step up to the plate .. I have been pushing in Montana for a buzz in program - it is a simple and inexpensive place to start - my sons high school stepped up to the plate after Parkland, I just do not understand what has taken so long to have steps taken … a school can be secured before anything happens, a preemptive strike if you will, by disabling the enemy...

Sorry I missed this the other day .. I was not tracking the article - a friend sent an email asking why I had not responded to a couple of comments .. my bad, had no clue what I was missing

then you will be pleased to know that the sale of automatic firearms are actually highly regulated and pretty much already have many bans on them for sale to the civilian population , and have been so for years .

 the actual process for a person to purchase and possess is rather extensive, and it all started way back in the 1930s.

 Currently if one wishes to purchase one , they have to go through an extensive governmental background check , get local LE approval in many places ( more background checks), they then have to find one actually for sale legally that is already registered with the government  that was made prior to 1985 legally, they then have to pay a tax for a lic/ permit of the firearm itself , and then the  cost of the lic/permit for themselves .

 The real ban per say is the availability of the type of firearms in that class that are actually available on the market, and the market dictates prices, and a legal one if available costs more than some people will pay for their cars.

To the average individual , though they may be nice to take to a range and shoot ( insert cave man adereniline grunts) , they are just NOT economically feasible, and actually are outside the average persons economic means , 

The real problem I see? the illegal ones , meaning those that do not follow the already prescribed laws and procedures for acquisition and possession. the people that will illegally try to make or aquire one.

1. We really don't care all that much about protecting our children-- or at least it's not all that important and takes backseat to other issues
Or
2. Those steps really aren't all that "easy" ...or we would have taken them decades ago!

What part of public school buildings are already designed for safety is so hard to understand?  There is a main entrance (usually passing by the office) with multiple exit only doors … My grade school in the dreaded backwards red State of Montana in the 70's had a buzz in policy, which is still used to this day … one pushes a button, the office will respond, verify that you are an individual that has actual business being at the school and then let them in...

My personal security system cost me 500 bucks and I am alerted on my phone and computer when someone enters my property - individuals need to wake up .. predators do not have to be let onto school property, can definitely be blocked from entering the building, by locking the 'main entrance' once school starts..

It does not solve the problem of a student bringing a weapon to school - that is a more costly .. needing equipment such as metal detectors or xray … but when one does the math, most attacks have come from an outside source, not from within - why not take the steps to avoid at least one scenario and block the intruder from getting in   ……….  ???????????????

I have mis-spoken and I want to correct my mistake.  A wise and learned lady told me that semi-automatic weapons can only fire one shot at a time.  I said that semi-automatics should be banned.

I honestly don't know a lot about guns (obviously) but I am willing to admit my mistake.  

I stand corrected.  I do not think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Automatic weapons are banned. 

This is a ridiculous story. First the left acts like uncages wild animals where they have to be dragged from the courtroom and then some guy Kavanaugh may not even recognize wants to pop up and make bodily contact with him?? You can't have it both ways, liberals.

Not so; the man identified himself and extended his hand in a gesture that is universally recognized as an expression of accord; I posted the video and will do so again if the misrepresentations continue.

The man’s daughter was murdered in the Parkland shootings; have a modicum of compassion for a grieving father trying to find some hope that no similar tragedies will befall other fathers. Show as much reverence for human life and compassion as you do for gun ownership!

The guy was out of place, and his outstretched hand might have contained a knife. Glad to see security was doing their job. I previously had voluntarily said I might not comment on this seeder's threads, but I have changed my mind...if that's OK

It's also universally recognized to meet with somebody you are about to vote on- especially if you think the candidate isn't being transparent. Where was the civility from the Dems who refuses to meet with Kavanaugh?

'The guy was out of place, and his outstretched hand might have contained a knife. Glad to see security was doing their job. I previously had voluntarily said I might not comment on this seeder's threads, but I have changed my mind...if that's OK'  

You don't need to ask AMac - you can ask me - you are welcome not to participate.  But I know that wouldn't stop you.

You can keep posting your nonsense.  

The guy was out of place, and his outstretched hand might have contained a knife.

Is there no limit to what the "Trumpian mind" will concoct in order to try and validate an inane, biased premise?

The guy was out of place, and his outstretched hand might have contained a knife.

Yea, because I am sure security would just allow someone to get in there carrying a weapon. /sarc

How is holding your hand out to be shaken - 'like an uncaged wild animal that has to be dragged from the courtroom' For heavens sake?  

Did you not hear all the protests that delayed the hearings or hear about the 70 people arrested? They are an out of control hostile crowd and tight security exists for a reason.

Did you not hear all the protests that delayed the hearings or hear about the 70 people arrested? They are an out of control hostile crowd and tight security exists for a reason.

Might want to let Greg know, he thinks people can just walk right in with weapons. 

"This is a ridiculous story."

Too true. This was staged. At least this guy is a real crisis actor now.

I have watched the clip several times, from 2 different angles.. it was an awkward moment and an inopportune time to try and introduce oneself.  Should Kavanaugh have stopped, shook the man's hand and conducted a conversation with him after he had just spent his day on the controversial hot seat .. perhaps, yet if it had not been a Parkland father - no one would have expected Kavanaugh to do so …

If one does not like Kavanaugh's Second Amendment rights stand .. so be it.  But to act like he snubbed this guy intentionally because of being a 'Parkland parent' … is a wee bit of disingenuous outrage....

Finally someone got back to the topic at hand......SMH. Anyway, like you said, it depends on the angle and not having sound to go along with the video, one needs to pay attention to the security guys and their motions at the time. Seems a "whoa" could have been uttered at the time as they may have had no idea who this guy was and I agree with one of the previous posts, with the bullshlt going on at the beginning, why would the judge stop and talk to someone he didn't know. And as you say, after what he was going through, I would want to go pee and have a smoke too. 

There were people everywhere .. I did see a clip last night with sound, but all that could really be heard was random voice and people milling around - from the video it is easy to tell that Kavanaugh was a bit distracted, if not some what disoriented .. people were all around him .. it was a sea of suits..

This is interesting Jim..

Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter was killed in the Parkland shooting, said he was "certain" that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh asked security to remove him from the confirmation hearing after Guttenberg tried to speak with him.

Guttenberg said earlier Tuesday that he approached Kavanaugh during the lunch break to introduce himself, and Kavanaugh “pulled his hand back, turned his back to me and walked away.

“As soon as I said [my daughter was] ‘murdered in Parkland,’ he just did an immediate turn and went away,” Guttenberg told CNN in an interview Tuesday night. “All he had to do was extend his hand back and say, I’m sorry for your loss, tell me about your daughter.’”

thehill

Here is the video from 2 angles, but there is a 3rd that I have seen, but cannot find at the moment … I did not see the angle that showed Guttenberg swiping his hand on Kavanaugh's jacket.. that appears to be what Kavanaugh's bewildered look is about - I never saw Kavanaugh extend his hand to be able to pull it back did you?  

“As soon as I said [my daughter was] ‘murdered in Parkland,’ he just did an immediate turn and went away,” Guttenberg told CNN in an interview Tuesday night. “All he had to do was extend his hand back and say, I’m sorry for your loss, tell me about your daughter.’”

thehill

Here is the video from 2 angles, but there is a 3rd that I have seen, but cannot find at the moment … I did not see the angle that showed Guttenberg swiping his hand on Kavanaugh's jacket.. that appears to be what Kavanaugh's bewildered look is about - I never saw Kavanaugh extend his hand to be able to pull it back did you? '

It was never said by anyone except maybe you that Kavanaugh extended his hand - he didn't.  He turned his back on him and then later asked that he be removed.  Mr. Guttenberg said - all he had to do was extend his hand and say . . . . 

Guttenberg said earlier Tuesday that he approached Kavanaugh during the lunch break to introduce himself, and Kavanaugh “pulled his hand back, turned his back to me and walked away.

Then what is this?

I don't know.  You never showed a quote where he said that did you?

I don't know. You never showed a quote where he said that did you?

Yes, read my post 3.2.2 … it is the middle paragraph ……….. did you seriously send a response to my post without actually reading what I copy/pasted? and then rebut me without reading the same post?   …….. Guess there is no need to ask if you read the link provided....

Carry on.. and have a good evening

“As soon as I said [my daughter was] ‘murdered in Parkland,’ he just did an immediate turn and went away,” Guttenberg told CNN in an interview Tuesday night. “All he had to do was extend his hand back and say, I’m sorry for your loss, tell me about your daughter.’”

And what is this?

I seriously actually did read what you copy/pasted and I dared to ask you - where did he say this?  In your quoted text above?

I did everything except go to your link.  Sounds like Kavanaugh had an opportunity to redeem himself, but did not.  Asked to have him removed.  What a little bitch he is - Kavanaugh that is.  

Carry on dear

'did you seriously send a response to my post without actually reading what I copy/pasted? and then rebut me without reading the same post?' 

I seriously sent a response to your post WITH actually reading what you copied/pasted? and then rebutted you WITH reading the same post . . . and no where in your post did you quote what was said in the link.  

I did see it in the link you provided but not in your quoted text above.  

So there's that.  

I never saw Kavanaugh extend his hand to be able to pull it back did you?

No...............probably because it didn't happen..........

Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter was killed in the Parkland shooting, said he was "certain" that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh asked security to remove him from the confirmation hearing after Guttenberg tried to speak with him.

Guttenberg said earlier Tuesday that he approached Kavanaugh during the lunch break to introduce himself, and Kavanaugh “pulled his hand back, turned his back to me and walked away.

“As soon as I said [my daughter was] ‘murdered in Parkland,’ he just did an immediate turn and went away,” Guttenberg told CNN in an interview Tuesday night. “All he had to do was extend his hand back and say, I’m sorry for your loss, tell me about your daughter.’”

This is the copy/paste I provided from the link - please explain to me where I did not include the "quote" perhaps even blatant lie from Guttenberg regarding Judge Kavanaugh's supposedly "pulled back his hand" - if you read the third paragraph in context Guttenberg is even going as far as to say that Kavanaugh "pulled" his hand back when he [Guttenberg] said his daughter was "murdered in Parkland"

Do not IM me again - you have an issue with me posting on your threads, take it up with a moderator - Thank you!

You didn't provide that quote anywhere except when questioned about it. 

Whatever dear.  Move along now, move along.  Let it go okay?  

You need to move on.  

You seem to have a problem letting go because I questioned you.  

Not my problem dear.  

'is a wee bit of disingenuous outrage....'

What do you know about it?

I'll take the word of the father of a murdered child over yours, thanks.  

[Removed]

[Removed]

I'll take the word of the father of a murdered child over yours, thanks. 

Even though the father tweeted this?

Fred Guttenberg

✔ @fred_guttenberg

and I hope to play a role in ensuring that this man does not become the next Supreme Court Justice.

That could be taken as a threat. People like this nut are better ignored.

How is that a threat?  Nope, it's not.  Don't see it.  Not at all.  

How is that a threat?  Nope, it's not.  Don't see it.  Not at all.  

Perhaps you can show everyone, including me, where I have mentioned the word "threat" except when quoting your words. 

People when you hit reply, please be mindful to who you are replying to. 

Oh my mistake I meant to reply to Greg. Don't expect an apology from me though. Greg is the one who considers this man a threat and I never said threat anywhere. Please be so kind and show me and everyone else where I said threat anywhere except in response to Greg?

Here are comments from AMacarthur and another poster regarding this little bitch, this pussy, Kavanaugh:

A random poster on another thread:

'Look, I can sympathize with the father. It was a horrible tragedy that any of those kids were shot and killed.

But that doesn't give him some inherent right to demand to be recognized by a potential SC justice because he wants to make some point.'

AMacArthur's commentary:

'He made no "demand" -- he extended his hand in a universally accepted gesture of civility and accord -- he was invited to the hearings … read down …

NO SC Justice decides any case by himself.

Kavanaugh would be the "5" in a 5-4 SCOTUS vote protecting the NRA and gun advocates against any reforms.

Why hasn't the father done the same with every sitting SC Justice?

Maybe he has … not the point … he is active in meeting as many officials as he can … how many such grieving parent get to meet with SCOTUS justices?

EXPAND

Fred Guttenberg and his daughter Jaime

Courtesy of Fred Guttenberg

Fred Guttenberg Pushes For "Common-Sense" Gun Reform After His Daughter's Murder At Parkland

BRITTANY SHAMMAS   |   APRIL 30, 2018   |   8:00AM

Every year for the past eight or nine years, Fred Guttenberg took the stage at his daughter Jaime's dance recital for a routine called "Dancing Dads." The number featured all of the dance dads doing their best to follow choreography and ended with all of the girls joining their fathers onstage.

Guttenberg, who calls himself the "world's worst dancer," hasn't decided if he's up for it again this year. Though the dance studio has asked him to participate, he would have to dance without his daughter. Jaime was killed by the gunman who tore through Marjory Stoneman Douglas High this past Valentine's Day. She was 14, a Best Buddies volunteer, and a lifelong dancer who hoped to one day become a physical therapist.

miaminewtimes

Forget for a moment about the Brett Kavanaugh documents  Republicans are trying to bury  and take a moment to pay attention to the overt disdain Kavanaugh showed Tuesday to the grieving father of a girl who died in the Parkland shooting massacre earlier this year. Not only did Kavanaugh, Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee,  literally turn his back  on Fred Guttenberg as Guttenberg  tried to introduce himself  at the nomination hearing, Kavanaugh went a step further and tried to have Guttenberg removed from the Senate hearing room, according to  his account on CNN . 

Guttenberg, who wears two wristbands to commemorate his daughter, Jaime, said security approached him following the lunch break and "pulled me out of the room." Judge Kavanaugh, Guttenberg explained, "thought that I may have crossed a boundary. ... and I'm certain he was the one who told them to take me out because he described these bracelets that I wear on my wrists which commemorate my daughter.”

Wow. This is a colossal mistake on Kavanaugh’s part. Snubbing Guttenberg  was bad enough  for a nominee whose approval ratings  are already sucking wind . But asking security to remove Guttenberg, especially when he likely had a grasp of who Guttenberg was, is truly a moment of someone  showing you who they are . 

Guttenberg had been invited to the hearings by ranking Senate Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein.

dailykos

this little bitch, this pussy, Kavanaugh

I'm genuinely curious: for what reason do you hate him so much? Most people know very little about appellate court justices.

Many left-wing sites ignore the fact that Fred Guttenberg was invited by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to Monday's Kavanaugh hearing. He is a left-wing political activist (read his anti-gun comments) and seems to partially deal with grief by selling T-shirts, ribbons, and hats online:

 legalinsurrection

Here's Fred's Twitter page:

twitter

Funny how having your kid murdered will make you, "anti-gun". What next? You going to call him a "snowflake"? Pussy? Coward? 

Until we send our kid off to school and they are murdered, I guess we cannot know what he has gone through. But I do know this, it cannot be pleasant, and while I do not follow with all of his views, I do understand why he has the views he has. 

Running him into the ground because his daughter was murdered??? Not cool. 

Yes, truly.  The nerve of the man for being anti-gun because his precious daughter was murdered.  

Oh and did you see?  Someone claimed this man is a crisis actor . . .

Many left-wing sites ignore the fact that Fred Guttenberg was invited by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to Monday's Kavanaugh hearing. He is a left-wing political activist (read his anti-gun comments) and seems to partially deal with grief by selling T-shirts, ribbons, and hats online:

HIS DAUGHTER WAS MURDERED BY A LOSER WITH A GUN!

Does that give you an idea as to why he's an activist?

Thank you for posting the facts of the matter as always.  

[Removed]

[Removed]

WTF is wrong with Trumpian gun-lovers?

What did Democrats and Obama do when they had the votes?

And if you could just move out of the neighborhood where complicated thoughts go to die ... and take your neighbor a few doors down along with you.

Take heart, there are places in America where the residents don’t tear off the covers of books and try to eat the pages.

Why don’t you tells us?

My bad in not explaining the font thing; 

The different sizes and styles are to assist the willingly blind to see reality, not that I believe they’ll acknowledge it, rather, so that they can never legitimately say ... they hadn’t seen it!

Some people worry they could lose a child forever just by sending that child to school one morning; such a worry enters the minds of many parents in a nation with an ever-increasing chance that some asshole-loser-lunatic with a big firearm, might also be "attending" the same school as their child on that morning.

OTHER PEOPLE WORRY THAT AFTER SUCH A SHOOTING …

… they might lose their guns.

FUCK THEM!

Judges are threatened all the time. Could the stakes be higher than the Supreme Court? Multiple people had to be dragged out of that room because of their disrespectful and disruptive behavior. Many of them gave police quite a struggle. At some point in the morning, in response to this, it was decided Kavanaugh's children should be escorted from the room. At the end of the session, a security person was escorting Kavanaugh out for his safety. Under those circumstances, I probably wouldn't grab the hand of a person I didn't know either. 

Proof and citations?  

Proof and citations?

Not sure what which point you are doubting, but I'll indulge and try to guess at what you want links for.

Judges get death threats :

Life Under Death Threats: Dangers Faced By Judges, Prosecutors

‘You’re On A Kill List’: At Least 5 Judges Receive Death Threats

Manafort judge getting threats, won’t release jurors’ names

Judge’s move to grant bail in New Mexico compound case draws a Twitter mob — and death threats

Protestors :

Three Texas Doctors: We Saw Protesters Paid In Cash To Disrupt Brett Kavanaugh Hearing On Line To Enter

While waiting on line, they say they witnessed protesters being paid in cash to cause trouble in the hearing and in the public line to get in, Tuesday on Capitol Hill.

Judge Kavanaugh's daughters had to leave the hearing :

Kavanaugh’s daughters rushed out of chaotic, ‘hot’ hearing

And if you don't like that story, click on this link from the New York Times:

Takeaways From Day 1 of Brett Kavanaugh’s Confirmation Hearings

Scroll down, and you'll see a picture of his two daughters sitting behind and to his right at the beginning of the hearing. Then look at the first frames of the video above and you'll see they are gone.

I will not look at your sources.  No Thanks.

I'm sure judges and prosecutors get death threats all the time - they deal with a lot of scum bags - drug traffickers, the mob, etc., etc, they deal with a lot of whackjobs and nutsos too.  

But the Supreme Court?  Give me a freaking break.  

I take it with a grain of salt that these 'three Texas doctors' saw people getting paid to protest.

I'm sure the Manafort judge threats are coming from Donald Rump supporters - no surprise there.  

I will not look at your sources.  No Thanks.

After you demanded them?

Ok, fine.

From now on, since you don't respect the effort, you get no links or sources from me. I am always very good about linking to evidence for the things I say. You asked for links and got them, even though they were points that were not controversial and were appearing in yesterday's news. [Removed]

What kind of slime bag politicizes the death of his own kid?  

-Fred Guttenberg

Not good enough Jeremy.  Actual citation required for proof.

No source, not true.  

Actual citation required for proof.

Don't bother Jeremy. She won't look at them anyway.

He didn't bother and he won't because he has no proof.

He didn't even make a claim that would require evidence to support. He just expressed his own opinion about the nature of someone else's behavior. That's not something a person would even try to support with an outside link.

All right then.  You can shut up about it now.  

I have mis-spoken and I want to correct my mistake.  A wise and learned lady told me that semi-automatic weapons can only fire one shot at a time.  I said that semi-automatics should be banned.

I honestly don't know a lot about guns (obviously) but I am willing to admit my mistake.  

I stand corrected.  I do not think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

AUTOMATIC WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

[deleted]

[deleted]