March For Our Lives - Parkland Students Demanding Action

Bentleyspop

Halifax2TheMax said:

You really seem to be afraid of the Parkland students. For exercising their first amendment rights. Ironic.

Many regressives yell and scream about supporting and defending the constitution until it involves someone utilizing  their 1st amendment rights or separating church and state.

#Hypocrites

unsung

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

rgambs

mcgruff10 said:

oftenreading said:

mcgruff10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

oftenreading said:

Pretty mind-blowing to see what lengths the internet tough guys will go to try to defend the indefensible.

So now it's hypocritical to be in favour of gun law reform and also in favour of licensed professionals carrying weapons in the course of their jobs? I must have missed where David Hogg and the other Parkland students said they were against police, the military and professional security carrying weapons. I guess I also missed where they said that no private citizens should be armed, but since the pro-2A folks are saying it, it must be true.

If we're talking hypocrisy, how about the hypocrisy of the "it's all about the Constitution, dummy" pro-second amendment folks threatening to kill Hogg for exercising his first amendment rights?

For those calling out Hogg for having security, I am guessing you've never had the misfortune to have a stalker or receive death threats. You've probably never had to wonder if this is the day the guy is going to be waiting for you when you leave your house, or work or school, or whether this is the day he's done something to your car, or if he knows which school your kid goes to. I'm guessing you've never had to spend hours giving statements to police about exactly what the person said, and exactly when he said it, and exactly where he said it, and what you understood that to mean, and did you think he was serious, and how exactly did you react? If you've never had to do that, and yet you find David Hogg's use of security to be amusing, then perhaps you should think a little more deeply about the situation until you get a fucking clue. 

@mcgruff10 be all:

I still stand by my opinion, I think it is hypocritical and I do think he's definitely anti-gun.  I don't recall saying anything bad about the guy at all or his beliefs so I"m not really getting all the backlash.  But whatever it is cool, I'm used to not having the majority opinion on these forums.
Enjoy your Sunday!  I'm poolside watching my kids push each other in the pool lol.

It’s good to back up an opinion with facts. It’s not so good to double down; actually, triple down, on an opinion once the basis for it has been demolished. Right now your only argument is “I know better than David Hogg what David Hogg thinks and feels”. 

Well, he wants assault weapons banned: anti-gun.  

David wants to ban everything over ten rounds: anti-gun.  

"common sense gun laws" are anti-gun.  This reminds me of my own governor who says he is for the 2nd amendment but will sign any gun control law that comes his way.

Publix to donate double the money they gave to Putman [sic] to the Stoneman Douglas Victims fund, $1,000,000. And never support an A rated NRA politician again,”: anti-gun.

I will be spray painting my cap for graduation orange to show my support of common sense gun laws, feel free me to join if you want. #OrangeCaps

— David Hogg (@davidhogg111)May 18, 2018
Common sense gun laws like banning assault weapons and anything over ten rounds are anti-gun.

David Hogg is postponing college to push gun control

https://nypost.com/2018/05/07/david-hogg-is-postponing-college-to-push-gun-control/

PARKLAND, Fla. — Marjory Stoneman Douglas student David Hogg says he wants voters to know which lawmakers are backed by the National Rifle Association before the mid-term elections.

The #NeverAgain leader and high school senior says he’s postponing college for a year to engage in gun-reform activism, focusing mostly on getting students and others registered to vote for the elections and raising awareness about gun lobbies.

Parkland Students to Announce Nation-Wide Gun-Control Tour

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/parkland-students-to-announce-20-state-gun-control-tour/

The student gun control activists of Parkland will announce an extensive bus tour Monday featuring 70 stops in 20 states, where the students will advocate stricter gun control legislation and register voters to that end.

The tour, “March for Our Lives: Road to Change,” will be led by David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez, both of whom have established themselves as de facto spokespeople for the youth gun control movement that erupted following the mass shooting at their high school in March.

“I’m glad I’m getting my diploma and not my death certificate,” Hogg, who graduated Sunday with Gonzalez and their fellow Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School seniors, told Axios in an interview to promote the tour.

Gonzalez, who plans to attend the New College of Florida in the fall, believes the tour will help increase support for the youth gun control movement among lawmakers who are concerned about the political implications of publicly opposing a coalition of young people.

"Common sense gun laws are anti-gun" is an extremist position.
Seriously.
Extremist.

unsung

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

rgambs

unsung said:

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

Thats true to an equal or lesser degree than the fast that common sense gun laws are opposed by people with no integrity, who use their superior firearm knowledge to straight up lie knowing they won't often be caught.
Like when y'all claim an AR15 isn't a military rifle, knowing full well and failing to mention it was designed from the M16 military rifle.
Or when y'all point out caliber and claim there's no difference in a hunting and assault rifle knowing full well and failing to mention muzzle velocity and the impact it has on lethality.
Or like when y'all claim the tactical appointments don't make an assault rifle more deadly...until you need one to go boar hunting and suddenly those appointments and mods make all the difference in the world.

I'll take ignorance over dishonesty.

mcgruff10

Halifax2TheMax said:

You really seem to be afraid of the Parkland students. For exercising their first amendment rights. Ironic.

You meaning me?  I have no problem with them exercising their 1st amendment rights, in fact I applaud it.  However it doesn't mean I have to agree with their message.

oftenreading

Quadrupling down - nice. 

Redefining terms to mean what you want them to mean is somewhat Orwellian. Not a good look. 

PJPOWER

rgambs said:

unsung said:

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

Thats true to an equal or lesser degree than the fast that common sense gun laws are opposed by people with no integrity, who use their superior firearm knowledge to straight up lie knowing they won't often be caught.
Like when y'all claim an AR15 isn't a military rifle, knowing full well and failing to mention it was designed from the M16 military rifle.
Or when y'all point out caliber and claim there's no difference in a hunting and assault rifle knowing full well and failing to mention muzzle velocity and the impact it has on lethality.
Or like when y'all claim the tactical appointments don't make an assault rifle more deadly...until you need one to go boar hunting and suddenly those appointments and mods make all the difference in the world.

I'll take ignorance over dishonesty.

I’m a bit confused on what you mean in regards to muzzle velocities of hunting rifles vs “assault rifles”.  The muzzle velocity of the same caliber is the same in a hunting rifle as it is in any other rifle of the same caliber.  Many of the most used hunting rounds have a much higher muzzle than the most widely used ar-15 round (5.56 or .223).  But there are a wide variety of calibers used in the ar-15 platform these days...so again, what are you talking about?
When politicians try pushing gun control bills, they are often dishonest about their ignorance.  Should I pull up the video of the CO lawmaker lying about the abilities of an AR-15 for the thousandth time?
And I do not think Hogg is being dishonest, but he does come across as a bit ignorant when it comes to firearms and laws...
I fully support him exercising his 1st Amendment rights, and also support those same rights from the people with views apposed to his.

rgambs

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

Thats true to an equal or lesser degree than the fast that common sense gun laws are opposed by people with no integrity, who use their superior firearm knowledge to straight up lie knowing they won't often be caught.
Like when y'all claim an AR15 isn't a military rifle, knowing full well and failing to mention it was designed from the M16 military rifle.
Or when y'all point out caliber and claim there's no difference in a hunting and assault rifle knowing full well and failing to mention muzzle velocity and the impact it has on lethality.
Or like when y'all claim the tactical appointments don't make an assault rifle more deadly...until you need one to go boar hunting and suddenly those appointments and mods make all the difference in the world.

I'll take ignorance over dishonesty.

I’m a bit confused on what you mean in regards to muzzle velocities of hunting rifles vs “assault rifles”.  The muzzle velocity of the same caliber is the same in a hunting rifle as it is in any other rifle of the same caliber.  Many of the most used hunting rounds have a much higher muzzle than the most widely used ar-15 round (5.56 or .223).  But there are a wide variety of calibers used in the ar-15 platform these days...so again, what are you talking about?
When politicians try pushing gun control bills, they are often dishonest about their ignorance.  Should I pull up the video of the CO lawmaker lying about the abilities of an AR-15 for the thousandth time?

I misspoke, "hunting" is supposed to read "handgun".  Nice catch.

PJPOWER

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

Thats true to an equal or lesser degree than the fast that common sense gun laws are opposed by people with no integrity, who use their superior firearm knowledge to straight up lie knowing they won't often be caught.
Like when y'all claim an AR15 isn't a military rifle, knowing full well and failing to mention it was designed from the M16 military rifle.
Or when y'all point out caliber and claim there's no difference in a hunting and assault rifle knowing full well and failing to mention muzzle velocity and the impact it has on lethality.
Or like when y'all claim the tactical appointments don't make an assault rifle more deadly...until you need one to go boar hunting and suddenly those appointments and mods make all the difference in the world.

I'll take ignorance over dishonesty.

I’m a bit confused on what you mean in regards to muzzle velocities of hunting rifles vs “assault rifles”.  The muzzle velocity of the same caliber is the same in a hunting rifle as it is in any other rifle of the same caliber.  Many of the most used hunting rounds have a much higher muzzle than the most widely used ar-15 round (5.56 or .223).  But there are a wide variety of calibers used in the ar-15 platform these days...so again, what are you talking about?
When politicians try pushing gun control bills, they are often dishonest about their ignorance.  Should I pull up the video of the CO lawmaker lying about the abilities of an AR-15 for the thousandth time?

I misspoke, "hunting" is supposed to read "handgun".  Nice catch.

Did you know that handgun calibers are also used in the ar-15 platform?  Also, there are some slow muzzle velocity rounds that can do WAY more damage than the fast ones depending on distance.  .458 SOCOM for example.
I guess that my point is that there are a ton of distinctions when it comes to pushing for new laws that the general public know nothing about and will be asking “Why didn’t this work” when a new law gets passed and nothing changes.  I do not support “feel good” laws.

rgambs

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

Thats true to an equal or lesser degree than the fast that common sense gun laws are opposed by people with no integrity, who use their superior firearm knowledge to straight up lie knowing they won't often be caught.
Like when y'all claim an AR15 isn't a military rifle, knowing full well and failing to mention it was designed from the M16 military rifle.
Or when y'all point out caliber and claim there's no difference in a hunting and assault rifle knowing full well and failing to mention muzzle velocity and the impact it has on lethality.
Or like when y'all claim the tactical appointments don't make an assault rifle more deadly...until you need one to go boar hunting and suddenly those appointments and mods make all the difference in the world.

I'll take ignorance over dishonesty.

I’m a bit confused on what you mean in regards to muzzle velocities of hunting rifles vs “assault rifles”.  The muzzle velocity of the same caliber is the same in a hunting rifle as it is in any other rifle of the same caliber.  Many of the most used hunting rounds have a much higher muzzle than the most widely used ar-15 round (5.56 or .223).  But there are a wide variety of calibers used in the ar-15 platform these days...so again, what are you talking about?
When politicians try pushing gun control bills, they are often dishonest about their ignorance.  Should I pull up the video of the CO lawmaker lying about the abilities of an AR-15 for the thousandth time?

I misspoke, "hunting" is supposed to read "handgun".  Nice catch.

Did you know that handgun calibers are also used in the ar-15 platform?  Also, there are some slow muzzle velocity rounds that can do WAY more damage than the fast ones depending on distance.  .458 SOCOM for example.

Muddy the waters as much as you want, you only prove my point.

PJPOWER

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

Common sense gun laws are pushed by people with no sense.  Most often they don't even know what they are speaking of.

Thats true to an equal or lesser degree than the fast that common sense gun laws are opposed by people with no integrity, who use their superior firearm knowledge to straight up lie knowing they won't often be caught.
Like when y'all claim an AR15 isn't a military rifle, knowing full well and failing to mention it was designed from the M16 military rifle.
Or when y'all point out caliber and claim there's no difference in a hunting and assault rifle knowing full well and failing to mention muzzle velocity and the impact it has on lethality.
Or like when y'all claim the tactical appointments don't make an assault rifle more deadly...until you need one to go boar hunting and suddenly those appointments and mods make all the difference in the world.

I'll take ignorance over dishonesty.

I’m a bit confused on what you mean in regards to muzzle velocities of hunting rifles vs “assault rifles”.  The muzzle velocity of the same caliber is the same in a hunting rifle as it is in any other rifle of the same caliber.  Many of the most used hunting rounds have a much higher muzzle than the most widely used ar-15 round (5.56 or .223).  But there are a wide variety of calibers used in the ar-15 platform these days...so again, what are you talking about?
When politicians try pushing gun control bills, they are often dishonest about their ignorance.  Should I pull up the video of the CO lawmaker lying about the abilities of an AR-15 for the thousandth time?

I misspoke, "hunting" is supposed to read "handgun".  Nice catch.

Did you know that handgun calibers are also used in the ar-15 platform?  Also, there are some slow muzzle velocity rounds that can do WAY more damage than the fast ones depending on distance.  .458 SOCOM for example.

Muddy the waters as much as you want, you only prove my point.

The waters are as muddy as they can be and ignoring that is ignorant.  It is what will leave people with bald heads when no productive laws are passed...should be quite familiar with that.  It is why so many pocket pistols and deadlier bullets that create hydrostatic shock were created when Bill Clinton banned high capacity magazines last go around.  I think that the amped up training requirements, background checks, and stiffer legal ramifications for negligence are going to be the most productive changes.

HughFreakingDillon

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

PJPOWER

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

They should, and they do.  People that exercise their  2nd Amendment rights neglectfully should be held accountable for doing so, same as with someone yelling “fire” in a movie theater.  You do not restrict everyone’s 1st Amendment rights or impose penalties on every citizen because someone yells “fire”, though, just on the individual themselves, right?

HughFreakingDillon

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

They should, and they do.  People that exercise their  2nd Amendment rights neglectfully should be held accountable for doing so.

I believe I have seen unsung disagree with that. 

PJPOWER

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

They should, and they do.  People that exercise their  2nd Amendment rights neglectfully should be held accountable for doing so.

I believe I have seen unsung disagree with that. 

Interesting, I thought everyone was on board with negative actions resulting in negative consequences (civil and/or legal), but, if so, unsung would have to clarify on what he meant.

unsung

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

They should, and they do.  People that exercise their  2nd Amendment rights neglectfully should be held accountable for doing so.

I believe I have seen unsung disagree with that. 

Yeah, explain in detail please.  I don't condone aggression upon anyone except in defense.

rgambs

My guess is that Hugh was speaking to the millions of people who leave loaded weapons lying around neglectfully and the millions of guns sold without background checks neglectfully.

HughFreakingDillon

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

They should, and they do.  People that exercise their  2nd Amendment rights neglectfully should be held accountable for doing so.

I believe I have seen unsung disagree with that. 

Yeah, explain in detail please.  I don't condone aggression upon anyone except in defense.

have you not stated previously that your right to carry trumps another's right to life/safety?

PJPOWER

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

unsung said:

Their first Amendment rights end where the rights of others suffer.

Remember the whole can't yell fire in a theatre thing?

so shouldn't that apply to 2A as well?

They should, and they do.  People that exercise their  2nd Amendment rights neglectfully should be held accountable for doing so.

I believe I have seen unsung disagree with that. 

Yeah, explain in detail please.  I don't condone aggression upon anyone except in defense.

have you not stated previously that your right to carry trumps another's right to life/safety?

Now you are talking about two different things.  I, not speaking for unsung, would say that my *individual* right to carry has no relevance to another’s right to life/safety.  Now, if I *individually exercise that right in a neglectful manner that results in someone else’s safety or life being at risk, then I should be held accountable in the same way that a person yelling “fire” in a movie theater would be held responsible for any injuries that neglectful behavior resulted in.  There was a recent story about an FBI agent causing a firearm to discharge while he was doing a flip...now he is being held accountable for the negligence, which is exactly what should happen.  I would be fine with amping up the legal ramifications of said actions if that would deter negligence.