National School Walkout

[Mountain Man]

as for David Hogg, I think he is a typical know-it-all teenager who thinks he has all the answers.

The difference between him and the average teenager is he has been given a platform while being shielded from criticism and open debate. The liberal media has been especially reluctant to call him out for some of his off-the-rails conspiracy theories, and I'm pretty sure he'd be hard-pressed to defend his position if anybody was allowed to ask him tough question and challenge his answers.

[rogue06]

as for David Hogg, I think he is a typical know-it-all teenager who thinks he has all the answers.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27107[/ATTACH]

Hogg, speaking of his and his buddy's parents and why he became an activist



But don't dare criticize the little lamb.

[Sparko]

The difference between him and the average teenager is he has been given a platform while being shielded from criticism and open debate. The liberal media has been reluctant to call him out for some of his off-the-rails conspiracy theories. I bet he'd be hard-pressed to defend his position if anybody was allowed to ask him tough question and challenge his answers.

Oh definitely. He is in the spotlight right now. The press is feeding his ego. But, ultimately he is just a kid who thinks he knows everything but doesn't really have a clue. He has no life experience. Like his dumb comments about how 'Our Parents Don't Know How To Use a ____ Democracy So We Have To'

He hasn't a clue about our government.

[Juvenal]

Source

That sounds like an editorial but apparently is a news story.

Check the top of the page.

News News Columnists John Kass

Dude, that's John Kass. He's the columnist who took over Royko's space in the Trib. Yeah, that Royko. Excellent source for anything Chicago.

[Juvenal]

I was responding to your comment about "hordes" of people misusing guns.

99.99% don't misuse guns. 1/100th of 1% is not a horde. (or 4/100ths of 1% if you include suicides and accidents)

We can call tens of thousands of people a horde.

Why should the vast majority be penalized for way less than 1% who misuse guns?

No one said anything about penalizing them.

Repealing the second amendment won't take away anyone's guns, and probably isn't necessary. Even without repealing it, we can still take action to ensure lethal weapons are used responsibly in our society. And that's to everyone's benefit.

And here's something else. That used to be the NRA's mission.

[Mountain Man]

We can call tens of thousands of people a horde.

It all depends on if you're looking at raw number or percentages. In this case, percentages seem to be the more relevant statistic.

[Sparko]

We can call tens of thousands of people a horde.

not when they are .04% of a group and are spread all over the country.

No one said anything about penalizing them.

Repealing the second amendment won't take away anyone's guns, and probably isn't necessary. Even without repealing it, we can still take action to ensure lethal weapons are used responsibly in our society. And that's to everyone's benefit.

And here's something else. That used to be the NRA's mission.

Nobody is against keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But if you do that by taking them away from everyone just to get them out of the hands of .04% of gun owners, then that is WAY, WAY overreacting. You don't blow up a city to get rid of some ants in a person's back yard. So by claiming such a small relative number is a "horde" you are just exaggerating. A LOT.

[Sparko]

How come it is OK to punish 99.99% of gun owners for the crimes of the 0.01% but when Conservatives want to limit immigration because a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, they are called bigots?

[rogue06]

This particular messenger has revealed himself to be a particularly nasty piece of work, freely hurling disgusting invectives at anyone who has the temerity to disagree with his foul-mouthed, usually fact-free rants^[1]. And then he goes all snowflake over someone repeating what he told TMZ -- that he has been turned down by a bunch of colleges. Oh, what a horrible thing to say. And then he childishly^[2] refuses to accept an apology.








1. Apparently even targeting other shooting survivors who don't share his political stance with vulgar insults. I guess to the left those survivors are fair game whereas Hogg is sacred.

2 While many on the left seek to shield him from all responsibility for his words by proclaiming he's just a kid (while simultaneously presenting him as some Solomon-like sage, wise beyond his years), the fact is he is an adult who has choose to put himself into the public arena.

Dan Abrams, former NBC Chief Legal Correspondent, current Chief Legal Affairs anchor for ABC News, and founder of Mediate^[1] was on CNN where he said that Hogg and other Parkland, Florida students who keep taking public stands "have to be treated as advocates"







1. which those on the extreme left like Rachel Maddow and Media Mutters, try to characterize as conservative yet various studies, including one by AllSides, reveal that it leans left.

[Juvenal]

not when they are .04% of a group and are spread all over the country.

Tens of thousands constitutes a horde.

Nobody is against keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But if you do that by taking them away from everyone ...

That's a myth.

How come it is OK to punish 99.99% of gun owners for the crimes of the 0.01% but when Conservatives want to limit immigration because a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, they are called bigots?

No one here is talking about taking guns away from all gun owners or punishing them in some other fashion. Nor is this the first time I've said exactly that. Nor is it the first time I've mentioned this to you, directly, including in the last post of mine you quoted. It will be the last time, however, because endless repetitions are tedious.

This "they're going to take all our guns" theme shows up regularly in conspiracy media.

[Starlight]

No one here is talking about taking guns away from all gun owners

~cough~
That's an outcome I'd be perfectly happy with, though I acknowledge it's an impractical policy to advocate for in the US because of the gun-crazies.

But even here in NZ where firearms are reasonably well regulated we have a hunter getting killed in a gun accident about once a year, so banning guns completely except for specific types of guns for use only on farms to be used as a necessary part of farming (shooting pests like rabbits, or putting sick cows down) would be a policy I'd support.

or punishing them in some other fashion.

A smack on the bottom daily with a wooden spoon?

This "they're going to take all our guns" theme shows up regularly in conspiracy media.

Insofar as it is connected with "it's part of a government plot to establish a dictatorship by removing the people's power to resist" I would consider it a sign of mental illness on their part.

[Starlight]

How come it is OK to punish 99.99% of gun owners for the crimes of the 0.01% but when Conservatives want to limit immigration because a small percentage of Muslims are terrorists, they are called bigots?

If you turn the sentences around, how come you guys think it's reasonable to limit Muslim immigration based on what a tiny percentage of Muslims do but you don't think it's reasonable to limit guns based on what a tiny percentage of guns do?

[Starlight]

This particular messenger has revealed himself to be a particularly nasty piece of work, freely hurling disgusting invectives at anyone who has the temerity to disagree with his foul-mouthed, usually fact-free rants. And then he goes all snowflake over someone repeating what he told TMZ -- that he has been turned down by a bunch of colleges. Oh, what a horrible thing to say. And then he childishly refuses to accept an apology.

So he's approximately half as nasty as the average religious conservative in this forum?

Btw it really makes me laugh at how much you guys get worked up over 'bad language'. I guess an analogy would be seeing you guys complain "he wears hats!" It makes me laugh at you for you taking such arbitrary offence at his style. It makes it hard to take any of the rest of your post seriously.

[Juvenal]

~cough~
That's an outcome I'd be perfectly happy with, though I acknowledge it's an impractical policy to advocate for in the US because of the gun-crazies.

We're not going to eliminate our intelligence agencies, either, because ... well, that's my other thread.

But even here in NZ where firearms are reasonably well regulated we have a hunter getting killed in a gun accident about once a year, so banning guns completely except for specific types of guns for use only on farms to be used as a necessary part of farming (shooting pests like rabbits, or putting sick cows down) would be a policy I'd support.

Pests ...

A smack on the bottom daily with a wooden spoon?

... should be given a chance to hunt with our former VP.

Insofar as it is connected with "it's part of a government plot to establish a dictatorship by removing the people's power to resist" I would consider it a sign of mental illness on their part.

It's a facilitated illness. Just yesterday, the marine posted up another meme on FB about how Hitler called for disarming the population.

Weapons-Act.jpg

There was no German Weapons Act in 1935.

[Juvenal]

So he's approximately half as nasty as the average religious conservative in this forum?

Btw it really makes me laugh at how much you guys get worked up over 'bad language'. I guess an analogy would be seeing you guys complain "he wears hats!" It makes me laugh at you for you taking such arbitrary offence at his style. It makes it hard to take any of the rest of your post seriously.

This is a lao tzu thread. It's for serious posting only. Don't engage in personal attacks, or goad other posters into personal attacks, please.