Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernardino

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Post Reply
User avatar
Uprising
Posts: 4875
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:44 pm
Alma Mater: VT
Party: etc

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by Uprising »

USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VisorBoy wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
VisorBoy wrote: There are studies out there linking the availability of guns to suicide rates.

In short, people that survive a suicide attempt are highly likely to rebound and not commit suicide. Reducing the ways one can commit suicide (and the effectiveness of them) is a positive for those interested in protecting human life.
Can you link one? I can't find anything that correlates guns to suicide. I'm going to assume this is a made up point.
http://www.vox.com/cards/gun-violence-f ... pt-control
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8721267/gun ... un-control
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazine-fe ... dden-toll/
http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426

From the last link: "Conclusion: Access to firearms is associated with risk for completed suicide and being the victim of homicide."
This is a hilarious angle of attack coming from the party which endorses assisted suicide. Better yet, Vox has been leading the charge to tell us how great assisted suicide is:

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/7/9470537/as ... here-legal
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/11/9313693/ca ... egislature
http://www.vox.com/2015/2/6/7993315/can ... ed-suicide

You guys need to decide whether suicide is good or not.
Is this another one of your attempts at an adult conversation? By clearly misrepresenting the views of others? As if any person that is taken seriously is advocating assisted suicide for those suffering from depression.
LOL, read what you wrote one more time and just let the stupid sink in for a moment. Do you think there is anyone who wants to commit suicide who is happy?
Stop being stupid. Assisted suicide is for the terminally ill.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

nolanvt wrote:Prayers are meaningless and unproductive, but I wouldn't coordinate an attack on people choosing to do so.
Let's not take this out of context. Prayers are not meaningless. Every time someone has offered me prayers I sincerely thank them for their concern and am generally touched by the sentiment. This whole conversation is NOT an attack on prayers, nor is it an attack on people who pray.

What the folks on the left are saying is that prayers are not enough. These mass shootings occur far too often in this country and it's long since time to do something about it.

I understand most people on here do not like the solutions the left has to offer... and I myself doubt their effectiveness. But I think what is frustrating people is the attitude on the right is perceived to be... "Oh, we're so sorry... but don't you dare discuss gun policy... but we care... so let's pray for the victims. Oh, you really want to fix something this time... how about more guns?" :mrgreen:
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
LOL. You know you're FOS when even factcheck.org says you are.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/do-ass ... -salaries/
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

USN_Hokie wrote: You have a better chance of dying in a head-on collision on your way to work this morning than dying in a "mass shooting." Again, if you want 100% (really, more like 99%) assurance of not dying in a shooting, put yourself in a maximum security prison (of course, your chances of being shiv'd with a sharpened toothbrush will increase considerably :) )
So it's your opinion that mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by awesome guy »

USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
LOL. You know you're FOS when even factcheck.org says you are.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/do-ass ... -salaries/
Seeing the author is VOR is proof enough that horse manure is in the body.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VisorBoy wrote:
awesome guy wrote: Can you link one? I can't find anything that correlates guns to suicide. I'm going to assume this is a made up point.
http://www.vox.com/cards/gun-violence-f ... pt-control
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8721267/gun ... un-control
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazine-fe ... dden-toll/
http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426

From the last link: "Conclusion: Access to firearms is associated with risk for completed suicide and being the victim of homicide."
This is a hilarious angle of attack coming from the party which endorses assisted suicide. Better yet, Vox has been leading the charge to tell us how great assisted suicide is:

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/7/9470537/as ... here-legal
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/11/9313693/ca ... egislature
http://www.vox.com/2015/2/6/7993315/can ... ed-suicide

You guys need to decide whether suicide is good or not.
Is this another one of your attempts at an adult conversation? By clearly misrepresenting the views of others? As if any person that is taken seriously is advocating assisted suicide for those suffering from depression.
LOL, read what you wrote one more time and just let the stupid sink in for a moment. Do you think there is anyone who wants to commit suicide who is happy?
Stop being stupid. Assisted suicide is for the terminally ill.
Wait, so terminally ill people should be allowed to commit suicide with a gun? That distinction wasn't made before. How many gun suicides are committed by people with terminal illness? Remember - assisted suicide is only legal in a handful of states.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by awesome guy »

USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VisorBoy wrote: http://www.vox.com/cards/gun-violence-f ... pt-control
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8721267/gun ... un-control
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazine-fe ... dden-toll/
http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426

From the last link: "Conclusion: Access to firearms is associated with risk for completed suicide and being the victim of homicide."
This is a hilarious angle of attack coming from the party which endorses assisted suicide. Better yet, Vox has been leading the charge to tell us how great assisted suicide is:

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/7/9470537/as ... here-legal
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/11/9313693/ca ... egislature
http://www.vox.com/2015/2/6/7993315/can ... ed-suicide

You guys need to decide whether suicide is good or not.
Is this another one of your attempts at an adult conversation? By clearly misrepresenting the views of others? As if any person that is taken seriously is advocating assisted suicide for those suffering from depression.
LOL, read what you wrote one more time and just let the stupid sink in for a moment. Do you think there is anyone who wants to commit suicide who is happy?
Stop being stupid. Assisted suicide is for the terminally ill.
Wait, so terminally ill people should be allowed to commit suicide with a gun? That distinction wasn't made before. How many gun suicides are committed by people with terminal illness? Remember - assisted suicide is only legal in a handful of states.
Apparently they should off themselves with guns they can't purchase [emoji12]

How about Muslims and their assisted suicide? Guns and bomb vests for them too? [emoji60]
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: You have a better chance of dying in a head-on collision on your way to work this morning than dying in a "mass shooting." Again, if you want 100% (really, more like 99%) assurance of not dying in a shooting, put yourself in a maximum security prison (of course, your chances of being shiv'd with a sharpened toothbrush will increase considerably :) )
So it's your opinion that mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?
We already do lots of things to prevent violence. Overloading resources to focus on a statistically insignificant portion of the violence in this country is irrational.

I will give you bonus points for creating a strawman that even Ted *hiccup* Kennedy would be proud of, though.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
LOL. You know you're FOS when even factcheck.org says you are.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/do-ass ... -salaries/
Do you know how to have a discussion? I never said, nor did I imply, that NRA employees get paid (or get kickbacks) from gun manufacturers. I suppose some Connecticut Dem said that... but I am not him nor am I responsible for his words. Nothing in your linked article refutes or even address my statements. To use your own terminology... you're FOS. :mrgreen:
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by cwtcr hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
actually one of their biggest purposes is hunting issues. Gun mfg don't need the NRA, they got Obama
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by cwtcr hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: You have a better chance of dying in a head-on collision on your way to work this morning than dying in a "mass shooting." Again, if you want 100% (really, more like 99%) assurance of not dying in a shooting, put yourself in a maximum security prison (of course, your chances of being shiv'd with a sharpened toothbrush will increase considerably :) )
So it's your opinion that mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?
Since our FBI could not stop a terrorist attack 14 years ago (they used planes, not guns, the planes were much more effective tho) and could not stop the attack in Kali this week what exactly are you going to propose to stop a terrorist attack?

As for the nutjobs that lose their stuff and go off on other humans, again, how are you ever going to know when they are going to go off and how exactly do you make sure that never in their lifetime they ever have access or buy a firearm? The point the "right" is making is trying to predict when someone will go nuts is impossible, do you disagree? So defend yourself if it occurs instead of the fantasy that humans can tell what another human will do at any point in any day
User avatar
Uprising
Posts: 4875
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:44 pm
Alma Mater: VT
Party: etc

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by Uprising »

nolanvt wrote:
Uprising wrote:It's probably time we provide a safe space for prayers. Amirite?
Jesus, you all are bigger babies than any of the people you bitch and moan about on a daily basis.
Religious conservatives can be just as politically correct/sensitive as the liberals they accuse of the same behavior.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's hilarious watching conservatives trip over each other to show who is the most politically incorrect. Which, of course, is the politically correct thing for them to do. Herb Silverman wrote an article skewering the whole idea (trigger warning, it's on PuffHo): http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8293266
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: You have a better chance of dying in a head-on collision on your way to work this morning than dying in a "mass shooting." Again, if you want 100% (really, more like 99%) assurance of not dying in a shooting, put yourself in a maximum security prison (of course, your chances of being shiv'd with a sharpened toothbrush will increase considerably :) )
So it's your opinion that mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?
We already do lots of things to prevent violence. Overloading resources to focus on a statistically insignificant portion of the violence in this country is irrational.

I will give you bonus points for creating a strawman that even Ted *hiccup* Kennedy would be proud of, though.
What strawman are you talking about? I think you stated your opinion clearly. In your opinion, terrorist actions and mass shootings do not occur frequently enough to warrant changes to our current system providing defense for our citizens. To a degree... I get what you are saying. An expensive or intrusive response to these horrible events is worse than doing nothing. Point taken.

I think we can still have a national discussion about our options while also respecting that opinion. I believe there are things that can be done, that can have a positive effect, without a large change in resources or freedoms. And, no, before you make assumptions, I am not trying to "repackage" anything from the left. Conservatives talk all the time about their "values"... so what are the conservative solutions? You solution is do nothing... I heard you. What about the other conservatives on this board?
User avatar
HooFighter
Posts: 4290
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:16 pm
Party: all the time

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by HooFighter »

cwtcr hokie wrote:Since our FBI could not stop a terrorist attack 14 years ago (they used planes, not guns, the planes were much more effective tho) and could not stop the attack in Kali this week what exactly are you going to propose to stop a terrorist attack?
Yep, we're 0 for 2 when it comes to stopping terrorists.
Image

Donald Trump is a stupid man's idea of a smart man, a poor man's idea of a rich man, and a weak man's idea of a strong man.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: You have a better chance of dying in a head-on collision on your way to work this morning than dying in a "mass shooting." Again, if you want 100% (really, more like 99%) assurance of not dying in a shooting, put yourself in a maximum security prison (of course, your chances of being shiv'd with a sharpened toothbrush will increase considerably :) )
So it's your opinion that mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?
Since our FBI could not stop a terrorist attack 14 years ago (they used planes, not guns, the planes were much more effective tho) and could not stop the attack in Kali this week what exactly are you going to propose to stop a terrorist attack?

As for the nutjobs that lose their stuff and go off on other humans, again, how are you ever going to know when they are going to go off and how exactly do you make sure that never in their lifetime they ever have access or buy a firearm? The point the "right" is making is trying to predict when someone will go nuts is impossible, do you disagree? So defend yourself if it occurs instead of the fantasy that humans can tell what another human will do at any point in any day
Go ahead and defend yourself. I don't think anybody is trying to stop you from doing so. Unless your mentally ill (which on this board... eh... I digress).

What about Obama's big statement on the topic? There are guys on our no-fly list who we prevent from traveling by plane... that can go into a gun shop today and legally buy weapons and there is nothing we can do to stop them?

I don't suggest that making this one change would solve every problem. But would you support making this change? Why or why not?
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
LOL. You know you're FOS when even factcheck.org says you are.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/do-ass ... -salaries/
Do you know how to have a discussion? I never said, nor did I imply, that NRA employees get paid (or get kickbacks) from gun manufacturers. I suppose some Connecticut Dem said that... but I am not him nor am I responsible for his words. Nothing in your linked article refutes or even address my statements. To use your own terminology... you're FOS. :mrgreen:
The opening sentences of the quote they refute is "The fact is that the NRA does not represent gun owners anymore. This is not your father’s NRA. It represents gun manufacturers." The article then goes on to explain how the NRA round up program works, which has been falsely attributed as industry donations.
Last edited by USN_Hokie on Fri Dec 04, 2015 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: You have a better chance of dying in a head-on collision on your way to work this morning than dying in a "mass shooting." Again, if you want 100% (really, more like 99%) assurance of not dying in a shooting, put yourself in a maximum security prison (of course, your chances of being shiv'd with a sharpened toothbrush will increase considerably :) )
So it's your opinion that mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?
We already do lots of things to prevent violence. Overloading resources to focus on a statistically insignificant portion of the violence in this country is irrational.

I will give you bonus points for creating a strawman that even Ted *hiccup* Kennedy would be proud of, though.
What strawman are you talking about? I think you stated your opinion clearly. In your opinion, terrorist actions and mass shootings do not occur frequently enough to warrant changes to our current system providing defense for our citizens. To a degree... I get what you are saying. An expensive or intrusive response to these horrible events is worse than doing nothing. Point taken.

I think we can still have a national discussion about our options while also respecting that opinion. I believe there are things that can be done, that can have a positive effect, without a large change in resources or freedoms. And, no, before you make assumptions, I am not trying to "repackage" anything from the left. Conservatives talk all the time about their "values"... so what are the conservative solutions? You solution is do nothing... I heard you. What about the other conservatives on this board?
Let's just call it awkward wording. You said my opinion was "mass shootings do not happen often enough for the US to do anything about it?" [emphasis added]. I agree with your elaboration above.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
LOL. You know you're FOS when even factcheck.org says you are.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/do-ass ... -salaries/
Do you know how to have a discussion? I never said, nor did I imply, that NRA employees get paid (or get kickbacks) from gun manufacturers. I suppose some Connecticut Dem said that... but I am not him nor am I responsible for his words. Nothing in your linked article refutes or even address my statements. To use your own terminology... you're FOS. :mrgreen:
Try reading it again, only slower this time. The opening sentences of the quote they refute is "The fact is that the NRA does not represent gun owners anymore. This is not your father’s NRA. It represents gun manufacturers." The article then goes on to explain how the NRA round up program works, which has been falsely attributed as industry donations.
I read it nice and slow. Even with my finger moving along for pace. It discusses funding sources for the NRA. I don't care how they are funded, or did I even comment on that. Nowhere in the article does it discuss whether NRA actions favor gun manufacturers or go against their best interests. Thus, the article is irrelevant to my points.

That's the thing about fact checking. You have to understand the actual fact that's being checked. Now you should go back and read it, nice and slow... move your lips as you read the words if it helps. :mrgreen:
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
LOL. You know you're FOS when even factcheck.org says you are.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/do-ass ... -salaries/
Do you know how to have a discussion? I never said, nor did I imply, that NRA employees get paid (or get kickbacks) from gun manufacturers. I suppose some Connecticut Dem said that... but I am not him nor am I responsible for his words. Nothing in your linked article refutes or even address my statements. To use your own terminology... you're FOS. :mrgreen:
Try reading it again, only slower this time. The opening sentences of the quote they refute is "The fact is that the NRA does not represent gun owners anymore. This is not your father’s NRA. It represents gun manufacturers." The article then goes on to explain how the NRA round up program works, which has been falsely attributed as industry donations.
I read it nice and slow. Even with my finger moving along for pace. It discusses funding sources for the NRA. I don't care how they are funded, or did I even comment on that. Nowhere in the article does it discuss whether NRA actions favor gun manufacturers or go against their best interests. Thus, the article is irrelevant to my points.

That's the thing about fact checking. You have to understand the actual fact that's being checked. Now you should go back and read it, nice and slow... move your lips as you read the words if it helps. :mrgreen:
Umm, that's the entire impetus for the argument that the NRA represents gun manufacturers. Good job moving the goalposts on your standard, though. By the way, most actions which support gun owners are also going to help the gun industry, so good luck with your unsubstantiated witch hunt.
User avatar
burgrugby
Posts: 310
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:15 pm
Alma Mater: Hokie through and through
Party: Indy - leaning pub
Location: Naples, Italy

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by burgrugby »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I understand most people on here do not like the solutions the left has to offer... and I myself doubt their effectiveness. But I think what is frustrating people is the attitude on the right is perceived to be... "Oh, we're so sorry... but don't you dare discuss gun policy... but we care... so let's pray for the victims. Oh, you really want to fix something this time... how about more guns?" :mrgreen:
I think it's due to several things. The ONLY solution the left ever offers to curb mass shootings is more gun control. I think the right gets frustrated with the left's ideology. As a very simple analogy, let's look at this: It's illegal to murder someone. If someone wants to commit a mass shooting (and they are willing to break the no murder law), what makes anyone think they will obey the law when it comes to buying guns? It's illegal to sell, possess, use drugs in most states, yet there are drugs everywhere. Simply put, more gun control is NOT the issue. I don't think the left will support what would really have to happen to stop shootings (as those solutions tend to violate civil rights).

Radical Islam related attacks aside, ALL mass shootings have one thing in common: someone with mental issues. Due to the ACLU, it's darned near impossible to forcibly commit someone for mental evaluations anymore. Unless the person commits a crime and a judge orders them for mental evaluation, people can no longer be forcibly committed. A patient has to voluntarily commit themselves. Look at the school shootings. Every time, after the fact, people say looking back they could see signs the person was troubled/mentally ill. Because of HIPPA, people who do have mental records, have those records sealed for privacy purposes. Those records don't make it into the database used for background checks. The VT shooter legally bought weapons because his mental records were not tied into the database and didn't show up in his background check. Mental health needs to be addresses if we want to try to stop these.

Gang violence is another big contributor. Stop and frisk was working in New York and getting a LOT of illegal guns off the street. Unfortunately, it also violated gang members civil rights and the left was up in arms. It can't turn into a race issue of stopping someone just because of their skin color, but I think stop and frisk should be implemented in more inner cities under some conditions: If someone has gang tattoos, is seen flashing gang signs, is wearing gang related clothing... then I think their affiliation with known gangs should be probably cause for police to stop and frisk. That could help curb gang related shootings, but I don't think that's an issue the left will agree with.

The new phenomenon in America of Islamic related terrorism is another issue. I'm not sure how to address this. Stopping immigration/muslim refugees from known terrorist countries is a first step. Even if only a portion is radicalized, I think you need to stop them all to keep the radicals out. I think citizens that travel to terrorist countries need to be tracked to see what they are up to.

The no fly list for purchasing weapons is an idea with some flaws. I think there are a lot of folks who inadvertently get their names on the list (sometimes due to spelling errors, clerical errors, etc). I had a neighbor whose name was close to someone's and he got on the no fly list. It was a nightmare for him to travel and try to go though months of hoops and hurdles to get his name off the list. Banning him from getting a weapon due to no wrongdoing on his part is what gun supporters are afraid of. You do something to tick off a government official and your name "accidentally" appears on the no fly list is what some folks are afraid of. The IRS targeting conservatives makes people believe it could happen.

As for the NRA, yes, they are funded by gun and ammo companies. They are also funded by 4-5 million Americans. I am a member and completely agree with what they are lobbying for... so they aren't ONLY lobbying for gun and ammo corporations. I'm a believer of you give an inch and the govt takes a mile. They've proven that. I'm not willing to give up a single smidgeon of my gun rights until the government starts looking/implementing non-gun related solutions AND enforcing the laws they have. Until then, I think the government's only agenda is to take away my gun rights. Think about it. There are laws on the books now that aren't being enforced. Look at how many people have lied on gun applications, were denied the sale, and then prosecuted for trying to illegally buy a gun and falsifying the application. The answer is almost none. I can't think of a single mass shooting where more gun laws would have stopped the shooting.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by RiverguyVT »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: The NRA exists for one purpose - to protect the interests of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
...and.....
VoiceOfReason wrote: WADR River... if you think the NRA's lobbying influence into gun policy in this country is not a HUGE part of why there is so much polarization on this issue... I think that's a very naive viewpoint.
WADR VOR, one is not the other. Yes, they influence gun policy. I made no comment on their effectiveness nor influence. No, the NRA's existence is not solely for the purpose of gun manufacturer interests. Your "one purpose" comment, I say again, is nonsensical and a complete nonstarter.
LOL... okay... replace "one purpose" with "primary purpose". Yes, I am quite aware of their other services they offer... but when it comes down to it, the NRA sides with gun/ammo manufacturers over citizens and even gun owners every time.

Would you like to continue nitpicking? Or address the main point of my messages? :mrgreen:
That was no small 'nitpick'. Your main point was a non-starter.
And in this, your follow-up... again, I'll say "No" I'd suggest the NRA siding with "manufacturers" is not in conflict with "citizens" at all, but rather, that by siding with the citizens, first and foremost, siding with the manufacturers is a tertiary side matter. Siding with the citizenry as a protection against left wing power grabbing anti-constitutionalist loons.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

WTF? Apparently MSNBC reporters somehow got into the couple's apartment and were rummaging through their stuff...including pictures.

Image
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

Image
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by USN_Hokie »

This MSNBC news crew might end up going to jail...or worse, contaminating an investigation.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: Left wing coordinated attack on "prayers" for San Bernar

Post by VoiceOfReason »

USN_Hokie wrote: Umm, that's the entire impetus for the argument that the NRA represents gun manufacturers. Good job moving the goalposts on your standard, though. By the way, most actions which support gun owners are also going to help the gun industry, so good luck with your unsubstantiated witch hunt.
See... that's the thing you fail to comprehend. I never moved the goalpost. All along you thought I was saying something I didn't say.

Yes, many times the rights of gun owners and gun manufacturers seem to be the same. However, when they are not... you can bet your bottom dollar that the NRA will side with the gun industry. When you can find an example where an NRA action hurt the gun industry... then you will have cause to refute my point.

I have many friends who are responsible gun owners - some of them proud NRA members as well. But they don't feel the NRA really represents their interests. Some of them feel their 2A rights will be strengthened by supporting measure that keep guns out of the hands of those who have demonstrated actions that warrant it. That's why I say the Left, the Right and the NRA should pipe down... and lets the interests of the real citizens be heard.
Post Reply