Absolutely. Attack the ones that inform you (media), the ones that protect you (law enforcement), the ones that oversee justice (the courts), the ones that dissent (protesters), the ones that are not like you (immigrants, homosexuals, minorities). Call them animals, say they're not really people, call them the Deep State. Call them childish names. Obfuscate. Attack reality until the listeners either reject what's clearly in front of them or get so bogged down in trying to shed light on it that they exhaust themselves. Turn the two sides against each other. Claim to be the only one who can fix it.
if you want suicides then use homicides and suicides. You don't ever use 'gun related deaths'. That includes self defense. It includes cops shooting someone to stop an assault. Those are good gun deaths if such a thing exists. No **** the country with the most guns would have the most gun deaths. What type of analysis is that? If an analysis used 'gun related deaths' you should know something is fishy.
What is so hard about understanding the 2nd amendment? What is so hard to understand America is addicted to their guns? This is not a left or right issue. Sure, leftist politicians love pushing the ban agenda, but there is a reason why it never goes anywhere. Democrats love their guns too. So you get your ban? Now what? Who's going to pay gun owners for their guns? Do you really think they are just going to give them up for free? Do you think criminals are going to give up their guns? This is why talking about banning guns is ignorant. It is never a thoughtful debate and it only stops at 'whats the concern with banning guns'.
If you want to reduce gun deaths, then sure that could work (not sure you could though). Personally my goal would be to reduce homicides and suicides, regardless of the means.
Universal heath care where everyone has equal access to mental health treatment? Agree. let's do this .
Whoa there you evil communist! let's not use that dirty word, Universal health care.. How about.. BIGGER AND BETTER more AFFORDABLE healthcare for EVERYONE, poor or rich. I'm all for the mental health but how do you get a kid like that to take it seriously. he was mocking it(mental health) in one of the instagram posts.
FBI knows about him as well, but what could FBI do? They cannot commit him to mental health institutes right?
You're answering a question with a question. That's not helpful. If it's so easy, please explain the use of the 2nd amendment in today's America. What does this have to do with anything? America is also addicted to opiods... we recognize that's a problem Yes, let's worry about who is going to pay gun owners (when the country spends billions upon billions upon billions on defense already.) The money is there. No, criminals won't give up their guns.... AND? You realize deadly force isn't the only way to have force to protect yourself from guns, right? Moreover, you have to start somewhere. Yes, it's ignorant because people hold up the 2nd amendment as sacrosanct without actually putting that much thought beyond that. Personal safety concerns?? Ok, then let's replace guns with effective non-deadly force weapons. Armed militia concerns?? C'mon, we know we're not going to be able to take down the US military complex as an armed populace with guns. Human right?? Please...
Thoughts and prayers to the victims families for this particular mass shooting. As well as the next 10 to 20 inevitable mass shootings. The shooter was very evil. There, that should cover me for at least the next 6 months or so. Seriously, if nothing was done after Sandy Hook, nothing will ever be done.
this kid has more balls than the the "grown ass babies" in the political world. BOTH sides. He reminds of a young Peter Parker. He makes me proud to be a Naturalized citizen of the EEUU, that's USA for you non foreigners. =)
Guns will not be banned in our lifetime. I would say that the vast majority of Democrats I know are against a flat out ban. Where issues arise are on banning particular types of guns, or limiting those that can get guns or how many guns someone can own. Those are tougher questions. You can't buy or consume alcohol in the USA until you are 21, but in most states you can get an AR-15 at 18.
It was just the founding fathers have no realization what "arm" means two hundred years in the future. If we survive as race, I wonder what "arm" will mean in three hundred more years. particle phasers that can destroy a building? pulse rifles that can shoot down a space ship?
This type of argument makes absolutely 0 sense to me. We need guns because of "good gun deaths" which are deaths that prevent bad guys with guns causing deaths? Here, let me give you this widget. It's cool to have!! It will result in some violence, but we can just give more of these widgets to more people and that will help prevent the violence these widgets can cause in the first place. Problem solved!! It makes no sense. There is effective non-lethal weapons. There'd be a lot more effective non-lethal weaponry if guns were banned and non-lethal weaponry was proftized. So no, there's not really and good gun deaths at the core. And cop shooting gun deaths (some of which even if you accepted the idea of good gun deaths, clearly aren't that anyway)... c'mon, we're talking like 1k-2k of those a year, compared to the 30k+ overall gun deaths. What do you mean? I thought the pro-gun folks argument was guns weren't the problem. It's the people....??? The analysis presented shows what many pro-gun, pro-NRA people seem to not believe. That guns are a huge part of the problem, if not part #1. According to them, lowering gun count per capita isn't a solution because we need to address so many other things and not the # of guns. If it's not enlightening to you that more guns = more gun deaths, of which by the way America not only conforms to, but also (1) far outpaces anywhere else in regards to more guns, and (2) generally is above the best-fit line (meaning even more deaths than you'd expect... then clearly you'd agree that we can help these problems by removing guns?? I can't make any sense of your position....
By the way, if you are on the aggressive pro-gun side of this debate, you're basically siding with the same Russian meddling in our democracy pushing their agenda in an effort to weaken the US... https://www.wired.com/story/pro-gun-russian-bots-flood-twitter-after-parkland-shooting/
Why bother posting this? The people you are calling out dismiss this stuff in every situation. It's useless, relevant information lol. I think Franklin Graham would dismiss agreeing with Satan at this point.
