Jump to content


Gun Control


Recommended Posts


 

Quote

 

Immediately after the shootings, many on the right decried the teen activists from Parkland, with Fox News’s Todd Starnes calling them “propaganda pawns [used] to peddle a fake news narrative.” But now it seems they have decided that if they can’t beat teenagers lobbying to stop school shootings, they needed to get their own teen. 

As the American Conservative’s Matt Purple wrote, “Conservatives objected that leveraging kids in policy arguments was a lousy tactic — until they found a kid of their own: Kyle Kashuv, just as bright and eloquent as his peers and a stout defender of the Second Amendment.” 

Kashuv has become part of a culture war far bigger and older than him taking place between liberals and conservatives over one of the most divisive issues in America. Kashuv is conscious of the pitted battle over guns and gun control on a daily basis, an issue he says is “very polar[ized] and split down the middle. It’s sad.”

 

 

Link to comment
On 4/17/2018 at 6:39 AM, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Okay, I'm not taking a stance for or against gun control with this post -- but I kinda wonder about that stat. 

 

I mean, 0.9 percent, that's one in a thousand.  But how many of those crimes were the type of crime where you'd pull out a gun?  If it's a simple case of battery--like someone punching me or picking a fight -- I'm not going to pull out a gun on the guy.  And how many of those people even had a gun available when those crimes occurred?  Even for the small percentage of cases where the crime warranted a gun response (e.g., an armed robbery) and the victim happened to have a gun, I wonder how common it would be for the gun owner to be in a position to pull it out and use it.  If I'm working in a liquor store and some guy points a gun at me and tell me to open the register, I'm not going to reach beneath the counter for my gun.

 

That said, 1 in a 1,000 is an awful low number.  But I guess that's what tweets are all about.  

  

 

Link to comment

10 minutes ago, NUance said:

 

Okay, I'm not taking a stance for or against gun control with this post -- but I kinda wonder about that stat. 

 

I mean, 0.9 percent, that's one in a thousand.  But how many of those crimes were the type of crime where you'd pull out a gun?  If it's a simple case of battery--like someone punching me or picking a fight -- I'm not going to pull out a gun on the guy.  And how many of those people even had a gun available when those crimes occurred?  Even for the small percentage of cases where the crime warranted a gun response (e.g., an armed robbery) and the victim happened to have a gun, I wonder how common it would be for the gun owner to be in a position to pull it out and use it.  If I'm working in a liquor store and some guy points a gun at me and tell me to open the register, I'm not going to reach beneath the counter for my gun.

 

That said, 1 in a 1,000 is an awful low number.  But I guess that's what tweets are all about.  

  

 

 

I wouldn't suggest making a decision on gun control by this article.


However, I believe it would be basically 1 in 100 not 1 in 1,000.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, NUance said:

 

Okay, I'm not taking a stance for or against gun control with this post -- but I kinda wonder about that stat. 

 

I mean, 0.9 percent, that's one in a thousand.  But how many of those crimes were the type of crime where you'd pull out a gun?  If it's a simple case of battery--like someone punching me or picking a fight -- I'm not going to pull out a gun on the guy.  And how many of those people even had a gun available when those crimes occurred?  Even for the small percentage of cases where the crime warranted a gun response (e.g., an armed robbery) and the victim happened to have a gun, I wonder how common it would be for the gun owner to be in a position to pull it out and use it.  If I'm working in a liquor store and some guy points a gun at me and tell me to open the register, I'm not going to reach beneath the counter for my gun.

 

That said, 1 in a 1,000 is an awful low number.  But I guess that's what tweets are all about.  

  

 

.9 percent would be 90 out of 1000. 1 percent is 1 in 100

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I wouldn't suggest making a decision on gun control by this article.


However, I believe it would be basically 1 in 100 not 1 in 1,000.

 

Oops.  0.9, not .09.  I guess my dyslexia is acting up again.  LOL :blink:  

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
3 hours ago, knapplc said:

That kid has a fan in Lincoln, and she asked him to come to Prom with her. He accepted, came to Nebraska, met with Rickets, and generally had a swell time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, ew towards this whole thing.

 

Second of all, f#*k Pete Ricketts. Why the hell would he just visit the home of a teenage girl on her prom night to talk about stuff? 

 

Third of all, that kid's eyes look a little too dead and sociopath-esque for me to ever let him into my home to take my daughter to prom.

 

Fourth of all, how could you ever have a great time at prom with a random stranger from the internet? Seems miserable.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

He seems like a pretty intelligent, decent kid. He has views on the 2nd Amendment I don't agree with, but eh. There are worse things in life. :D

 

If he has fun going to prom with the Lincoln girl, good for them.  It's what the kids do these days, I guess.

 

Rickets being there is a pretty normal photo-op for a politician.  I'm surprised they didn't get a baby as a prop for him to kiss, but whatever. 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Not sure why.  I'm not a big fan of Ricketts.  But, I fail to see how this is so outrageous.  

It's not outrageous, but it's gross - like kissing babies. I'm sure politicians of every stripe have done similar stuff, but it's part of why people hate politicians.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...