Just wanted to chime in as a native Texan (and might be moving back soon) that not everyone in TX is a gun nut. I have never even held a gun. I grew up with friends that would go hunting all the time and I was often invited. I'd go, but would stay back and play guitar while the others went hunting. I know some very responsible gun owners (& collectors) and don't really associate myself with irresponsible gun owners.
Regarding the crime rate....I grew up in Houston and have lived there, in Dallas and in Waco. That being said, much like what someone said about Chicago/NYC is true in pretty much every place I've lived. There are places in each city with significantly higher crime rates than others. We now live in Kansas City and the crime here is insane....it was also insane in Portland, OR before we moved to KC.
Regarding the city of Cut and Shoot, I've never been there. But, I have been to Gun Barrel City (yes, that's the name) in Texas and it is about as small town as they come. I also know that there are many other states with cities names after guns (someone pointed out Rifle, CO for instance).
I'm not a fan of guns at all. There needs to be some real change (and soon) regarding gun laws & reform. I just simply wanted to say that if someone lives in Texas, they aren't locked and loaded. Stereotypes can be bad for everyone involved.
Just wanted to chime in as a native Texan (and might be moving back soon) that not everyone in TX is a gun nut. I have never even held a gun. I grew up with friends that would go hunting all the time and I was often invited. I'd go, but would stay back and play guitar while the others went hunting. I know some very responsible gun owners (& collectors) and don't really associate myself with irresponsible gun owners.
Regarding the crime rate....I grew up in Houston and have lived there, in Dallas and in Waco. That being said, much like what someone said about Chicago/NYC is true in pretty much every place I've lived. There are places in each city with significantly higher crime rates than others. We now live in Kansas City and the crime here is insane....it was also insane in Portland, OR before we moved to KC.
Regarding the city of Cut and Shoot, I've never been there. But, I have been to Gun Barrel City (yes, that's the name) in Texas and it is about as small town as they come. I also know that there are many other states with cities names after guns (someone pointed out Rifle, CO for instance).
I'm not a fan of guns at all. There needs to be some real change (and soon) regarding gun laws & reform. I just simply wanted to say that if someone lives in Texas, they aren't locked and loaded. Stereotypes can be bad for everyone involved.
Just wanted to chime in as a native Texan (and might be moving back soon) that not everyone in TX is a gun nut. I have never even held a gun. I grew up with friends that would go hunting all the time and I was often invited. I'd go, but would stay back and play guitar while the others went hunting. I know some very responsible gun owners (& collectors) and don't really associate myself with irresponsible gun owners.
Regarding the crime rate....I grew up in Houston and have lived there, in Dallas and in Waco. That being said, much like what someone said about Chicago/NYC is true in pretty much every place I've lived. There are places in each city with significantly higher crime rates than others. We now live in Kansas City and the crime here is insane....it was also insane in Portland, OR before we moved to KC.
Regarding the city of Cut and Shoot, I've never been there. But, I have been to Gun Barrel City (yes, that's the name) in Texas and it is about as small town as they come. I also know that there are many other states with cities names after guns (someone pointed out Rifle, CO for instance).
I'm not a fan of guns at all. There needs to be some real change (and soon) regarding gun laws & reform. I just simply wanted to say that if someone lives in Texas, they aren't locked and loaded. Stereotypes can be bad for everyone involved.
Well said. Sadly, stereotypes are why most people feel the way they do about the people/places they haven't experienced. There is cool shit to see and great people all over this country, the opposite is also true, but should not stop people from experiencing new things. Never understood the state hate that so many harbor, but then again, It seems there are lots of people who only focus on the negative.
I too live in Texas. Dallas area. In the 7 years I’ve been here, I have never seen anyone carrying a gun except law enforcement. I do not own one either.
My wife was driving her mother to an appointment on I295 NB in Maine a few weeks ago and drove past the police as they were responding to an active shooter on the SB side who had opened fire randomly on cars just minutes before they got on the road.
Point being, it can happen anywhere in the good ol' US of A.
Last night’s Letter From an American, by Heather Cox Richardson
“May 6, 2023 (Saturday)
For years now, after one massacre or another, I have written some version of the same article, explaining that the nation’s current gun free-for-all is not traditional but, rather, is a symptom of the takeover of our nation by a radical extremist minority. The idea that massacres are “the price of freedom,” as right-wing personality Bill O’Reilly said in 2017 after the Mandalay Bay massacre in Las Vegas, in which a gunman killed 60 people and wounded 411 others, is new, and it is about politics, not our history.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution, on which modern-day arguments for widespread gun ownership rest, is one simple sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” There’s not a lot to go on about what the Framers meant, although in their day, to “bear arms” meant to be part of an organized militia.
As the Tennessee Supreme Court wrote in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”
Today’s insistence that the Second Amendment gives individuals a broad right to own guns comes from two places.
One is the establishment of the National Rifle Association in New York in 1871, in part to improve the marksmanship skills of American citizens who might be called on to fight in another war, and in part to promote in America the British sport of elite shooting, complete with hefty cash prizes in newly organized tournaments. Just a decade after the Civil War, veterans jumped at the chance to hone their former skills. Rifle clubs sprang up across the nation.
By the 1920s, rifle shooting was a popular American sport. “Riflemen” competed in the Olympics, in colleges, and in local, state, and national tournaments organized by the NRA. Being a good marksman was a source of pride, mentioned in public biographies, like being a good golfer. In 1925, when the secretary of the NRA apparently took money from ammunition and arms manufacturers, the organization tossed him out and sued him.
NRA officers insisted on the right of citizens to own rifles and handguns but worked hard to distinguish between law-abiding citizens who should have access to guns for hunting and target shooting and protection, and criminals and mentally ill people, who should not. In 1931, amid fears of bootlegger gangs, the NRA backed federal legislation to limit concealed weapons; prevent possession by criminals, the mentally ill and children; to require all dealers to be licensed; and to require background checks before delivery. It backed the 1934 National Firearms Act, and parts of the 1968 Gun Control Act, designed to stop what seemed to be America’s hurtle toward violence in that turbulent decade.
But in the mid-1970s a faction in the NRA forced the organization away from sports and toward opposing “gun control.” It formed a political action committee (PAC) in 1975, and two years later it elected an organization president who abandoned sporting culture and focused instead on “gun rights.”
This was the second thing that led us to where we are today: leaders of the NRA embraced the politics of Movement Conservatism, the political movement that rose to combat the business regulations and social welfare programs that both Democrats and Republicans embraced after World War II.
Movement Conservatives embraced the myth of the American cowboy as a white man standing against the “socialism” of the federal government as it sought to level the economic playing field between Black Americans and their white neighbors.
Leaders like Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater personified the American cowboy, with his cowboy hat and opposition to government regulation, while television Westerns showed good guys putting down bad guys without the interference of the government.
In 1972 the Republican platform had called for gun control to restrict the sale of “cheap handguns,” but in 1975, as he geared up to challenge President Gerald R. Ford for the 1976 presidential nomination, Movement Conservative hero Ronald Reagan took a stand against gun control. In 1980, the Republican platform opposed the federal registration of firearms, and the NRA endorsed a presidential candidate—Reagan—for the first time.
When President Reagan took office, a new American era, dominated by Movement Conservatives, began. And the power of the NRA over American politics grew.
In 1981 a gunman trying to kill Reagan shot and paralyzed his press secretary, James Brady, and wounded Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy and police officer Thomas Delahanty. After the shooting, then-representative Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation that became known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, or the Brady Bill, to require background checks before gun purchases. Reagan, who was a member of the NRA, endorsed the bill, but the NRA spent millions of dollars to defeat it.
After the Brady Bill passed in 1993, the NRA paid for lawsuits in nine states to strike it down. Until 1959, every single legal article on the Second Amendment concluded that it was not intended to guarantee individuals the right to own a gun. But in the 1970s, legal scholars funded by the NRA had begun to argue that the Second Amendment did exactly that.
In 1997, when the Brady Bill cases came before the Supreme Court as Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court declared parts of the measure unconstitutional.
Now a player in national politics, the NRA was awash in money from gun and ammunition manufacturers. By 2000 it was one of the three most powerful lobbies in Washington. It spent more than $40 million on the 2008 election. In that year, the landmark Supreme Court decision of District of Columbia v. Heller struck down gun regulations and declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.
Increasingly, NRA money backed Republican candidates. In 2012 the NRA spent $9 million in the presidential election, and in 2014 it spent $13 million. Then, in 2016, it spent over $50 million on Republican candidates, including more than $30 million on Trump’s effort to win the White House. This money was vital to Trump, since many other Republican super PACs refused to back him. The NRA spent more money on Trump than any other outside group, including the leading Trump super PAC, which spent $20.3 million.
The unfettered right to own and carry weapons has come to symbolize the Republican Party’s ideology of individual liberty. Lawmakers and activists have not been able to overcome Republican insistence on gun rights despite the mass shootings that have risen since their new emphasis on guns.
Tonight, I am, once again, posting yet another version of this article”
Oh yes, prayers are very important after mass shootings...
From the WAPO article: Abbott said in a statement Saturday that the Allen shooting was an “unspeakable tragedy,” while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said he and his wife were “praying for the families of the victims of the horrific mall shooting.”
Self, the local congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
Oh yes, prayers are very important after mass shootings...
From the WAPO article: Abbott said in a statement Saturday that the Allen shooting was an “unspeakable tragedy,” while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said he and his wife were “praying for the families of the victims of the horrific mall shooting.”
Self, the local congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
Thoughts do not work Prayers definitely do not work they never did Un-permitted open carry doesn't work Selling guns to whomever wants them does not work
How about stricter gun control laws with enhanced stricter background checks?
How about an assault rifle ban?
How about common sense gun laws?
How about red flag laws that are followed and implemented?
Oh yes, prayers are very important after mass shootings...
From the WAPO article: Abbott said in a statement Saturday that the Allen shooting was an “unspeakable tragedy,” while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said he and his wife were “praying for the families of the victims of the horrific mall shooting.”
Self, the local congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
Thoughts do not work Prayers definitely do not work they never did Un-permitted open carry doesn't work Selling guns to whomever wants them does not work
How about stricter gun control laws with enhanced stricter background checks?
How about an assault rifle ban?
How about common sense gun laws?
How about red flag laws that are followed and implemented?
How about electing representatives that believe in those things...
Oh yes, prayers are very important after mass shootings...
From the WAPO article: Abbott said in a statement Saturday that the Allen shooting was an “unspeakable tragedy,” while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said he and his wife were “praying for the families of the victims of the horrific mall shooting.”
Self, the local congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
Thoughts do not work Prayers definitely do not work they never did Un-permitted open carry doesn't work Selling guns to whomever wants them does not work
How about stricter gun control laws with enhanced stricter background checks?
How about an assault rifle ban?
How about common sense gun laws?
How about red flag laws that are followed and implemented?
How about electing representatives that believe in those things...
Just wanted to chime in as a native Texan (and might be moving back soon) that not everyone in TX is a gun nut. I have never even held a gun. I grew up with friends that would go hunting all the time and I was often invited. I'd go, but would stay back and play guitar while the others went hunting. I know some very responsible gun owners (& collectors) and don't really associate myself with irresponsible gun owners.
Regarding the crime rate....I grew up in Houston and have lived there, in Dallas and in Waco. That being said, much like what someone said about Chicago/NYC is true in pretty much every place I've lived. There are places in each city with significantly higher crime rates than others. We now live in Kansas City and the crime here is insane....it was also insane in Portland, OR before we moved to KC.
Regarding the city of Cut and Shoot, I've never been there. But, I have been to Gun Barrel City (yes, that's the name) in Texas and it is about as small town as they come. I also know that there are many other states with cities names after guns (someone pointed out Rifle, CO for instance).
I'm not a fan of guns at all. There needs to be some real change (and soon) regarding gun laws & reform. I just simply wanted to say that if someone lives in Texas, they aren't locked and loaded. Stereotypes can be bad for everyone involved.
Well said… saying everyone from Texas is a gun nut is short sighted and ridiculous..
"The heart and mind are the true lens of the camera." - Yusuf Karsh
I’m sick of these mass shootings being called “tragedies.” They are not tragedies. Tragedies are things like earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes or other unpreventable disasters that kill people. Let’s call these what they are, freedumb killings.
i saw someone ran over a bunch of people in texas, so prepare for the defense of mass killings using that episode of car violence to excuse the shootings.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
i saw someone ran over a bunch of people in texas, so prepare for the defense of mass killings using that episode of car violence to excuse the shootings.
Whether it is cars, guns or anything else, people need to stop wanting to kill each other.
Post edited by dudeman on
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,293
I’m sick of these mass shootings being called “tragedies.” They are not tragedies. Tragedies are things like earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes or other unpreventable disasters that kill people. Let’s call these what they are, freedumb killings.
To me, the tragedy is that I live in a country where mass shootings are rapidly on the increase and a lot of people don't seem to care about doing something about it.
As for earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and such, I don't think of those as tragedies at all. They are naturally occurring incidents that are an integral part of nature. I've never know anyone who has died in such an incident, but I'm sure that if I did, that loss of life would feel tragic to me, but the incident itself would not. It's what planet earth has always done and nature is never wrong.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
How delusional is this? From WaPo and the congressman representing the district in Tejas where the latest has occurred.
Self, the congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
“The immediate aftermath is not the time for politics,” he told The Washington Post. “We have long ago traded faith in God, which means civic action based on that faith, for faith in government.”
I’m sick of these mass shootings being called “tragedies.” They are not tragedies. Tragedies are things like earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes or other unpreventable disasters that kill people. Let’s call these what they are, freedumb killings.
To me, the tragedy is that I live in a country where mass shootings are rapidly on the increase and a lot of people don't seem to care about doing something about it.
As for earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and such, I don't think of those as tragedies at all. They are naturally occurring incidents that are an integral part of nature. I've never know anyone who has died in such an incident, but I'm sure that if I did, that loss of life would feel tragic to me, but the incident itself would not. It's what planet earth has always done and nature is never wrong.
Those natural occurrences don’t happen every day nor are we not warned, except in the case of earthquakes, of which proactive steps are taken and have been taken to lessen the impact of the “tragedy.” Same with the other natural events.
Nothing can be done. Thoughts and prayers. Tejas authorities can’t even hold a press conference yet. Gotta make sure your comments align with Abbott & Costello’s.
One wonders if there’s a tipping point and if so, how many deaths or incidents have to occur before there is change? Or is it, nothing can be done?
Just wanted to chime in as a native Texan (and might be moving back soon) that not everyone in TX is a gun nut. I have never even held a gun. I grew up with friends that would go hunting all the time and I was often invited. I'd go, but would stay back and play guitar while the others went hunting. I know some very responsible gun owners (& collectors) and don't really associate myself with irresponsible gun owners.
Regarding the crime rate....I grew up in Houston and have lived there, in Dallas and in Waco. That being said, much like what someone said about Chicago/NYC is true in pretty much every place I've lived. There are places in each city with significantly higher crime rates than others. We now live in Kansas City and the crime here is insane....it was also insane in Portland, OR before we moved to KC.
Regarding the city of Cut and Shoot, I've never been there. But, I have been to Gun Barrel City (yes, that's the name) in Texas and it is about as small town as they come. I also know that there are many other states with cities names after guns (someone pointed out Rifle, CO for instance).
I'm not a fan of guns at all. There needs to be some real change (and soon) regarding gun laws & reform. I just simply wanted to say that if someone lives in Texas, they aren't locked and loaded. Stereotypes can be bad for everyone involved.
I appreciate and respect your thoughts on this but I’ll respond with my own.
I’m sure there are good citizens of Tejas and beautiful places there. But I’m sure the same can be said of North Korea, China and Russia. And while I can’t change the government of those countries, nor can I change the government of Tejas as I don’t live there. That said, it seems the majority of the voting citizens of Tejas prefer their authoritarian government and aren’t willing to change it, as is their right.
I used to have faith that the voting public could and would change things on election day for the better but with the attack on voting rights that single out the “other”, gerrymandering to the extreme and the recent authority of Tejas’ DA to dis-enfranchise the choice of one selected county’s voters, I don’t have that faith and it seems generally accepted.
All of that said results in my boycotting Tejas as that’s all I can do. I won’t spend my money there and I wish others would do the same, including Pearl Jam and any other entity that has a choice of where to locate their show, convention or business. If my employer relocated to Tejas, I’d resign.
It seems the majority of Tejanos not only are fine with authoritarianism but also their gun culture, both of which I want no part of. Enjoy the shows if you’re going and stay safe.
Comments
Regarding the crime rate....I grew up in Houston and have lived there, in Dallas and in Waco. That being said, much like what someone said about Chicago/NYC is true in pretty much every place I've lived. There are places in each city with significantly higher crime rates than others. We now live in Kansas City and the crime here is insane....it was also insane in Portland, OR before we moved to KC.
Regarding the city of Cut and Shoot, I've never been there. But, I have been to Gun Barrel City (yes, that's the name) in Texas and it is about as small town as they come. I also know that there are many other states with cities names after guns (someone pointed out Rifle, CO for instance).
I'm not a fan of guns at all. There needs to be some real change (and soon) regarding gun laws & reform. I just simply wanted to say that if someone lives in Texas, they aren't locked and loaded. Stereotypes can be bad for everyone involved.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
My wife was driving her mother to an appointment on I295 NB in Maine a few weeks ago and drove past the police as they were responding to an active shooter on the SB side who had opened fire randomly on cars just minutes before they got on the road.
Point being, it can happen anywhere in the good ol' US of A.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
“May 6, 2023 (Saturday)
For years now, after one massacre or another, I have written some version of the same article, explaining that the nation’s current gun free-for-all is not traditional but, rather, is a symptom of the takeover of our nation by a radical extremist minority. The idea that massacres are “the price of freedom,” as right-wing personality Bill O’Reilly said in 2017 after the Mandalay Bay massacre in Las Vegas, in which a gunman killed 60 people and wounded 411 others, is new, and it is about politics, not our history.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution, on which modern-day arguments for widespread gun ownership rest, is one simple sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” There’s not a lot to go on about what the Framers meant, although in their day, to “bear arms” meant to be part of an organized militia.
As the Tennessee Supreme Court wrote in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”
Today’s insistence that the Second Amendment gives individuals a broad right to own guns comes from two places.
One is the establishment of the National Rifle Association in New York in 1871, in part to improve the marksmanship skills of American citizens who might be called on to fight in another war, and in part to promote in America the British sport of elite shooting, complete with hefty cash prizes in newly organized tournaments. Just a decade after the Civil War, veterans jumped at the chance to hone their former skills. Rifle clubs sprang up across the nation.
By the 1920s, rifle shooting was a popular American sport. “Riflemen” competed in the Olympics, in colleges, and in local, state, and national tournaments organized by the NRA. Being a good marksman was a source of pride, mentioned in public biographies, like being a good golfer. In 1925, when the secretary of the NRA apparently took money from ammunition and arms manufacturers, the organization tossed him out and sued him.
NRA officers insisted on the right of citizens to own rifles and handguns but worked hard to distinguish between law-abiding citizens who should have access to guns for hunting and target shooting and protection, and criminals and mentally ill people, who should not. In 1931, amid fears of bootlegger gangs, the NRA backed federal legislation to limit concealed weapons; prevent possession by criminals, the mentally ill and children; to require all dealers to be licensed; and to require background checks before delivery. It backed the 1934 National Firearms Act, and parts of the 1968 Gun Control Act, designed to stop what seemed to be America’s hurtle toward violence in that turbulent decade.
But in the mid-1970s a faction in the NRA forced the organization away from sports and toward opposing “gun control.” It formed a political action committee (PAC) in 1975, and two years later it elected an organization president who abandoned sporting culture and focused instead on “gun rights.”
This was the second thing that led us to where we are today: leaders of the NRA embraced the politics of Movement Conservatism, the political movement that rose to combat the business regulations and social welfare programs that both Democrats and Republicans embraced after World War II.
Movement Conservatives embraced the myth of the American cowboy as a white man standing against the “socialism” of the federal government as it sought to level the economic playing field between Black Americans and their white neighbors.
Leaders like Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater personified the American cowboy, with his cowboy hat and opposition to government regulation, while television Westerns showed good guys putting down bad guys without the interference of the government.
In 1972 the Republican platform had called for gun control to restrict the sale of “cheap handguns,” but in 1975, as he geared up to challenge President Gerald R. Ford for the 1976 presidential nomination, Movement Conservative hero Ronald Reagan took a stand against gun control. In 1980, the Republican platform opposed the federal registration of firearms, and the NRA endorsed a presidential candidate—Reagan—for the first time.
When President Reagan took office, a new American era, dominated by Movement Conservatives, began. And the power of the NRA over American politics grew.
In 1981 a gunman trying to kill Reagan shot and paralyzed his press secretary, James Brady, and wounded Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy and police officer Thomas Delahanty. After the shooting, then-representative Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation that became known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, or the Brady Bill, to require background checks before gun purchases. Reagan, who was a member of the NRA, endorsed the bill, but the NRA spent millions of dollars to defeat it.
After the Brady Bill passed in 1993, the NRA paid for lawsuits in nine states to strike it down. Until 1959, every single legal article on the Second Amendment concluded that it was not intended to guarantee individuals the right to own a gun. But in the 1970s, legal scholars funded by the NRA had begun to argue that the Second Amendment did exactly that.
In 1997, when the Brady Bill cases came before the Supreme Court as Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court declared parts of the measure unconstitutional.
Now a player in national politics, the NRA was awash in money from gun and ammunition manufacturers. By 2000 it was one of the three most powerful lobbies in Washington. It spent more than $40 million on the 2008 election. In that year, the landmark Supreme Court decision of District of Columbia v. Heller struck down gun regulations and declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.
Increasingly, NRA money backed Republican candidates. In 2012 the NRA spent $9 million in the presidential election, and in 2014 it spent $13 million. Then, in 2016, it spent over $50 million on Republican candidates, including more than $30 million on Trump’s effort to win the White House. This money was vital to Trump, since many other Republican super PACs refused to back him. The NRA spent more money on Trump than any other outside group, including the leading Trump super PAC, which spent $20.3 million.
The unfettered right to own and carry weapons has come to symbolize the Republican Party’s ideology of individual liberty. Lawmakers and activists have not been able to overcome Republican insistence on gun rights despite the mass shootings that have risen since their new emphasis on guns.
Tonight, I am, once again, posting yet another version of this article”
No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
From the WAPO article:
Abbott said in a statement Saturday that the Allen shooting was an “unspeakable tragedy,” while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said he and his wife were “praying for the families of the victims of the horrific mall shooting.”
Self, the local congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
Prayers definitely do not work they never did
Un-permitted open carry doesn't work
Selling guns to whomever wants them does not work
How about stricter gun control laws with enhanced stricter background checks?
How about an assault rifle ban?
How about common sense gun laws?
How about red flag laws that are followed and implemented?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Self, the congressman, rebuked criticism of officials offering “thoughts and prayers” after shootings while opposing gun control legislation, saying on CNN that “people want to make this political, but prayers are important.”
“The immediate aftermath is not the time for politics,” he told The Washington Post. “We have long ago traded faith in God, which means civic action based on that faith, for faith in government.”
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Nothing can be done. Thoughts and prayers. Tejas authorities can’t even hold a press conference yet. Gotta make sure your comments align with Abbott & Costello’s.
One wonders if there’s a tipping point and if so, how many deaths or incidents have to occur before there is change? Or is it, nothing can be done?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I’m sure there are good citizens of Tejas and beautiful places there. But I’m sure the same can be said of North Korea, China and Russia. And while I can’t change the government of those countries, nor can I change the government of Tejas as I don’t live there. That said, it seems the majority of the voting citizens of Tejas prefer their authoritarian government and aren’t willing to change it, as is their right.
I used to have faith that the voting public could and would change things on election day for the better but with the attack on voting rights that single out the “other”, gerrymandering to the extreme and the recent authority of Tejas’ DA to dis-enfranchise the choice of one selected county’s voters, I don’t have that faith and it seems generally accepted.
All of that said results in my boycotting Tejas as that’s all I can do. I won’t spend my money there and I wish others would do the same, including Pearl Jam and any other entity that has a choice of where to locate their show, convention or business. If my employer relocated to Tejas, I’d resign.
It seems the majority of Tejanos not only are fine with authoritarianism but also their gun culture, both of which I want no part of. Enjoy the shows if you’re going and stay safe.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Nothing can be done.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©