Active shooter situation at school in Parkland, FL; reports of victims

[indiucky]

Is that like salty but sweet?

Yeah....Yeah it is....

 

[Birds Away]

Yeah....Yeah it is....

You really are incorrigible.

 

[indiucky]

I never thought you were being condescending.... that means to talk down to.

I love you smart guy's posts from up around Indy....

Ya'll dun teached me awkinds a noo werds withn thar meenin's en sech...

 

[indiucky]

You really are incorrigible.

 

[wtburnette]

Your continued belief in the existence of our better angels is charming, but perhaps undeserved

The "name-calling, labeling and general marginalizing" for me began with seeing these kids on TV claiming that any supporter of the NRA or anyone who doesn't want to see all "assault rifles" banned is complicit in the murders of the unlucky 17 and has blood on their hands

They are not seeking to engage with the opposite viewpoint on any factual basis, they are appealing almost purely to emotion. That they've been through an emotional event can help understand their willingness to be useful idiots but not excuse it. How close was the shooter to Hogg, actually? There were 3000 kids on that campus, if the shooter was half a campus away from Hogg I fail to see it as a potentially life changing, existential experience for him. How many of their acquaintances are likely to have been killed or injured - or injured others - texting while driving? But somehow I doubt they would be calling for cell phones to be made illegal and confiscated. Where is the acknowledgement that attempting to outlaw a class of firearms ex post facto would without doubt require confiscation, and how dangerous that attempt would likely be for civil society. Where is the acknowledgement that if you really, truly want to end drunken driving forever you would have to outlaw alcohol and actively police that decision because merely having a law that says you can't do it doesn't stop people intent on the behavior. Where is the acknowledgement that the same is true for this type of mass murder, that laws against certain weapons will not stop them from happening, that only the removal of almost all weapons and the active policing of a prohibition will have any chance of acheiving the results they say they want

If you want to play on the big boy stage, you should not rely on the empathy people have for your situation to be a shield you can hide behind for long and you should engage people in the arena of ideas and not emotion

Well said sir.

 

[SMiller]

The Dems are not going to be happy...

https://www.google.com/amp/www.orla...uns-workplace-allowed-20180227-story,amp.html

 

[Route 45]

Why is that a problem?

Is it no different than the oft-repeated charge on INGO that all of Islam is complicit in terrorism for not denouncing it strongly enough?

People should not take offense at being hoisted on their own petards.

Since they don't have a holy book that exhorts their members to slay anyone who doesn't believe like they do, I had to dig deep into NRA publications to see if I could find something similar.

I came up empty.

Didn't find any petards, either.

 

[BugI02]

Why is that a problem?

Is it no different than the oft-repeated charge on INGO that all of Islam is complicit in terrorism for not denouncing it strongly enough?

People should not take offense at being hoisted on their own petards.

[It's a problem because; as the one who often takes us to task for judging all musselmen by the actions of a few and has no sympathy for the emotions that yet another random mass murder for faux religious reasons gives rise to; you are not condemning the same behavior when exhibited by these kids and are in fact arguing that broad generalizations based on the emotions du jour are understandable. It seems inconsistent]



Says who? You?

[So are you arguing that it would be allowable (even understandable) for Jim Steinle to want to see all illegal immigrants summarily deported, because he has been through an emotional event (the random murder of his daughter by one). Somehow I don't think so. So why countenance Mr Hoggs characterization of everyone who doesn't want to ban all (or to be charitable, most) guns as having the blood of the 17 on their hands?]

Great.

Unfortunately, that's not how the court of public opinion works. They ARE victims. Right now, they ARE the arbiters of the debate.

I'm cautioning against the equal-and-opposite knee jerk reaction of name calling/labeling/marginalizing.

[Speaking only for myself, this smacks of the "tactics" of the last at least 40 to 50 years, where the left is free to demonize but we cannot meet them on the field with similar weaponry because people might think ill of us. It is manifestly a losing strategy. I can clearly remember that honorable soldiers returning from Viet Nam were demonized as "baby killers". I can't really remember any of the genteel appeals to reason made to refute that characterization. William F Buckley is dead and the enlightened arena of discourse he thought he lived in existed mostly in his own mind, any Ivy League version of "the good old days" I would rather engage such ideas at whatever level the assault comes from and go for the win]




Let's leave Trump's election for a different thread, eh?

Trump isn't the disease, he's the cure

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You can't take this away!

Lets just say when they cut out your appendix, the plumbers go on strike. The 6 day strike has been lifted, much to my relief.

The pain killers will cause that too. A nurse friend warned me to takes lots of....ehh...."pipe unclogging" medicine.

 

[Kutnupe14]

[video=youtube_share;SNVj59B_sLE]http://youtu.be/SNVj59B_sLE[/video]

Anybody else, want to tell me how much they agree with Dana Loesch's statement?

 

[MCgrease08]

Anybody else, want to tell me how much they agree with Dana Loesch's statement?

I don't even hear or read the statement. I only caught the tail end of the discussion and thought the clip fit.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't even hear or read the statement. I only caught the tail end of the discussion and thought the clip fit.

Oh, sorry then, Loesch made the comment about how it's rating gold, to have White mothers crying one TV about their children, saying the media "loves it." I said earlier that I didn't believe it, others disagreed. Why would the media love the pain of white mothers?

 

[Route 45]

Oh, sorry then, Loesch made the comment about how it's rating gold, to have White mothers crying one TV about their children, saying the media "loves it." I said earlier that I didn't believe it, others disagreed. Why would the media love the pain of white mothers?

If you listen to Dana, she goes on to say that it's not the tragedy that they love, but the ratings. I don't know if that's technically accurate, but the Family Guy clip that was posted sure rings true to me.

 

[Woobie]

Oh, sorry then, Loesch made the comment about how it's rating gold, to have White mothers crying one TV about their children, saying the media "loves it." I said earlier that I didn't believe it, others disagreed. Why would the media love the pain of white mothers?

"There's a bobble headed bleach blonde, comes on at 5. She can talk about a plane crash with a gleam in her eye...."

 

[churchmouse]

"There's a bobble headed bleach blonde, comes on at 5. She can talk about a plane crash with a gleam in her eye...."

This has been rolling through my head for a few days now and just not used it......well played sir.

 

[T.Lex]

[It's a problem because; as the one who often takes us to task for judging all musselmen by the actions of a few and has no sympathy for the emotions that yet another random mass murder for faux religious reasons gives rise to; you are not condemning the same behavior when exhibited by these kids and are in fact arguing that broad generalizations based on the emotions du jour are understandable. It seems inconsistent]

I'm not sure I follow.

I haven't had an opportunity to on INGO to correct anyone brushing gun owners with a "blood on your hands" brush. In real life, I certainly have.

But, I will readily concede that I use my mental ignore button on a bunch of threads lately. Not just related to the Florida shooting.

I trust that you've been able to come out of your shell long enough to correct anyone painting with such a broad brush.

[So are you arguing that it would be allowable (even understandable) for Jim Steinle to want to see all illegal immigrants summarily deported, because he has been through an emotional event (the random murder of his daughter by one). Somehow I don't think so. So why countenance Mr Hoggs characterization of everyone who doesn't want to ban all (or to be charitable, most) guns as having the blood of the 17 on their hands?]

I'm the guy that's defended Ed Delaney on gun issues because of the attack on him.

So, yeah, people who have been victimized by illegal immigrants get a pass from me on almost all vitriol.

I just don't see any of them here on INGO.

[Speaking only for myself, this smacks of the "tactics" of the last at least 40 to 50 years, where the left is free to demonize but we cannot meet them on the field with similar weaponry because people might think ill of us. It is manifestly a losing strategy. I can clearly remember that honorable soldiers returning from Viet Nam were demonized as "baby killers". I can't really remember any of the genteel appeals to reason made to refute that characterization. William F Buckley is dead and the enlightened arena of discourse he thought he lived in existed mostly in his own mind, any Ivy League version of "the good old days" I would rather engage such ideas at whatever level the assault comes from and go for the win]

My point is that I don't see that working. What I see working is STFUing and let this blow over.

You know, like we did after Sandy Hook. Back when Obama was president and we could trust that we knew where POTUS was on this issue.

Trump isn't the disease, he's the cure

Yeah, the kind of cure that kills the patient a little at a time.

 

[indiucky]

Anybody else, want to tell me how much they agree with Dana Loesch's statement?

She would if she could....

RIP....One of my favorite newscasters.....

 

[bwframe]

If one didn't know better, they would think that those who make it their daily mission to antagonize INGOers were actually playing for the other side???

 

[chipbennett]

I'll just single out one assertion (divorced from the author, whom I respect GREATLY): the kid survived a shooting but that doesn't make him an expert on gun violence.

Ok.

Let's play that dismissive attitude out. What makes INGOers gun violence experts? Proficiency with firearms? Well, that may make us collectively better at dishing out gun violence, but it is an awkward qualifier to have an opinion on the topic.

At worst? Nothing at all. At a minimum, He and the typical INGOer are on an even playing field with respect to expertise regarding gun violence. And that alone is a problem - and the problem to which most are reacting - because HE is unjustifiably being given a national platform and conferred moral high ground.

But let's compare the two:

Person A: typical teenager
Person B: typical OFWG

What are the meaningful differences, that might cause Person B to have more expertise regarding gun violence? For one: life experience, and the logical, intellectual, and emotional maturity that comes through age and experience.

For another, Person B is more likely to have engaged in intentional research on the subject of gun violence, and can back up his position with significant empirical data and historical reference. Person A knows that gun control laws neither compel nor constrain the lawless, and only serve to inhibit the law-abiding. Person B knows that "gun violence" is on a multi-decade downward trend. Person B knows that the incidence of school shootings is not increasing. Person B knows that long guns are used to kill fewer people annually than either knives, hammers, or bare hands and feet. Person B knows that an AR15 is not an assault rifle, and that assault rifles have been more or less banned for years. Person B knows that the differences between an AR15 and a Ruger Mini 14 are purely cosmetic. Person B knows that a bolt-action hunting rifle may be high-powered, but that an AR15 is not. Person B knows that a violent criminal is, by an order of magnitude or more, more likely to use a handgun than a long gun to commit crimes and to take life. Person B knows that up to 98% of mass shootings take place in Gun Free Zones. Person B knows the historical implications of registering firearms and firearm owners, and of the government disarming the law-abiding.

And not least: Person B has the temperament and experience of owning and using firearms in a lawful manner - including gaining the requisite knowledge required to own, carry, and use a firearm responsibly and lawfully. Person B quite possibly may have even used a firearm in a DGU against an unlawful person. It has nothing to do with marksmanship, and everything to do with the moral, lawful attitude and temperament that accompany being a law-abiding gun owner.

 

[chipbennett]

Really, violent thugs? That is a strong accusation. Please post links or retract that statement.

I would say that all who push the BoycottTheNRA slactivism, and promote the "NRA is a terrorist organization" slander view us as such, and imply that we are such. All who cave to that agenda imply that they agree with such a position.