I would say it is more of a socioeconomic background thing. A black kid in a two parent, middle income+ home will generally do as well as a white or Asian kid in the same circumstances--- maybe even better when it comes to getting accepted to a top level school, due to the tendency to recruit URM. Yes, black kids are disproportionately more likely to be in single-parent homes and that will lead to many disadvantages in life. But black kids, despite their high likelihood of being in single parent homes, are rarely the ones shooting up schools. (I'm not sure how this turned into a discussion of black kids in fatherless homes, but I do have a few people on ignore and might have missed how we got there.)
Uvalde School Shooting
- Thread starter Gold Trojan
- Start date
- Status
So @troypwr is asserting that none of alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, heroine, or illegal immigrants have killed others? My god, that might be the dumbest statement I've ever seen. Like, literally, that should disqualify you from engaging in any type of discussion whatsoever for the rest of your existence. How you are even able to dress and feed yourself with extremely stunted intellect such as this is quite baffling.
Translation: @xuscx, like most libs, has NO FKING CLUE what he's talking about with regards to guns. All he knows is "my dem overlords say guns bad, must ban". So he's 100% for it even though he doesn't have the mental capacity to even understand what he's trying to argue. Which is why when anyone asks him a question that requires a modicum of gun knowledge, he's quick to pivot. That's what happens when somebody talks out their asss regularly.
The Left has not figured out that there are more firearms in the USA than people.
The Left presses on with their Progressive view of the world and attacks on free speech, police defunding, propaganda campaigns with the MSM and social media, false prosecutions of an elected POTUS, weaponizing the DOJ against parents of school aged kids, and are agreement that the murder of Ashli Babbitt for what amounts to trespassing, is justified.,
Do you really believe your posturing will have any effect?
The Left's assault on the 2A has only one purpose - Power.
Be careful what you wish for Marxists. You will no longer serve a purpose to the Global Elite if the 2A is overturned.
I know. You are smarter than the Founders of this country.
The Left presses on with their Progressive view of the world and attacks on free speech, police defunding, propaganda campaigns with the MSM and social media, false prosecutions of an elected POTUS, weaponizing the DOJ against parents of school aged kids, and are agreement that the murder of Ashli Babbitt for what amounts to trespassing, is justified.,
Do you really believe your posturing will have any effect?
The Left's assault on the 2A has only one purpose - Power.
Be careful what you wish for Marxists. You will no longer serve a purpose to the Global Elite if the 2A is overturned.
I know. You are smarter than the Founders of this country.
Idiot brandon on his visit to Uvalde adds more insult to injury by demanding that Border Patrol agents be disarmed. Border Patrol agents turned around and went home. Good for them! F**k joe biden!
Compton schools have had this policy since the early 1970's when the city went from an All America City to absolute hell. They wired up all the lockers, made students carry their books, and had an armed guard at a single point of entry. Not one shooting in 50 years at any schools. Not one parent complaint. Trump is right.
Well; (lets see in 2 years from now) following up this statement with action, how many ”gun free zones” get shot up in Polk County, FL.
Sounds like their Sheriff means “business.”
The ONLY way to confirm it… F@#K around, and find out!
Posting "THIS IS A GUN FREE ZONE" sign is the same thing as ringing the dinner bell for criminal wolves on the prowl.
I can't speak for what "the left" has figured out, but I shared that stat about 9 pages ago. Gun ownership in the US is nearly twice that of the next closest country. You say that like it is a good thing that America has more firearms than people.
And you have to love MAGA logic: A woman, part of a mob battering through a locked door to attack members of congress in the Capitol is "murdered" by a police officer whose job it is to protect the Capitol and fired after issuing a warning. (Incidentally the woman was an MP who knows damn well that she would have to shoot a mob storming an unauthorized area on base.) But a guy who goes looking to "defend" property he was not asked to defend, in a city he does not reside, in violation of a curfew, is a "hero" for shooting a guy who chased him with a plastic grocery bag. SMH
Last edited:
WOW…
Debunking your first “strawman example”: “after issuing a warning”. Defiantly not an accurate statement, watch the videos. If her skin color was a protected class, and the Capitol Police Officer was a lighter shade or without skin pigment, the liberal media would be “singing a different toon.” The Capitol Police unlocked the doors from the inside. A bunch of fools, agitators and misguided grandmas were also in the crowd of “mostly peaceful“ insurrection. NONE of our politicians were EVER in danger of losing their lives.
No weapons were involved. No bombs were a part of the “worst day” in American democracy.
Second ”strawman example”: Hey; a court of law found ”that guy” NOT GUILTY.
You weren’t part of the jury, therefore, you (as a NON participant) can comment all you wish, your opinion doesn’t matter, in the court of law.
Convince me, I’m wrong.
Last edited:
Well that was totally unproductive…Kind go what has come out of Washington a lot lately.
? What was unproductive? Storming the Capitol? Shooting a rioter who was trespassing? Going to a riot to "protect" property and ending up killing people?
Funny how it's the liberals who would love to see guns taken away, and/or largely controlled to such a degree that the majority of citizens wouldn't be able to have them. Or get them very easily.
Yet they're perfectly fine with open borders, defunding the police, putting DAs into office who let criminals out onto the streets, stand by and say very little about smash and grabs and all other crime that is going on out on the streets of liberal cities.
If there was ever a time we need to be able to have that option to protect ourselves it's now. Because of liberal policies.
And what of the "holier than though" privileged liberals (as in celebrities, politicians, etc.) who have no problem surrounding themselves with security...who carry weapons, by the way. Perfectly fine for them, right? It's not unlike the big walls they put up around their homes. Why should they be doing that when many would like to build a wall of protection along the southern border? Does that make them racist too for wanting that wall around their homes? Because surely they know that it won't only be white people trying to break into their house. But somehow it's racist if we want to protect our borders by building a wall.
And what of the lesser privileged liberals who will be the first to cry and beg for mercy when they need to call a LEO, who is carrying a gun (by the way), to protect them from an intruder, or the like. They'll sure be begging for a LEO with a weapon if they need that kind of help.
So much hypocrisy, and so much inconsistency in their arguments.
At the end of the day, the kind of people who commit the type of heinous crimes we saw last week are evil. And evil people don't follow the rules. They will find a way to get that gun anyway. It's a cliche response, I know. But it's true. They'll get them through illegal avenues, or even from someone coming across that border the liberals love to leave wide open. Even while the rest of us follow the rules that they, the libs, want to push on us. Keep us unprotected while the evil ones get their hands on these weapons anyway.
Case closed.
Yet they're perfectly fine with open borders, defunding the police, putting DAs into office who let criminals out onto the streets, stand by and say very little about smash and grabs and all other crime that is going on out on the streets of liberal cities.
If there was ever a time we need to be able to have that option to protect ourselves it's now. Because of liberal policies.
And what of the "holier than though" privileged liberals (as in celebrities, politicians, etc.) who have no problem surrounding themselves with security...who carry weapons, by the way. Perfectly fine for them, right? It's not unlike the big walls they put up around their homes. Why should they be doing that when many would like to build a wall of protection along the southern border? Does that make them racist too for wanting that wall around their homes? Because surely they know that it won't only be white people trying to break into their house. But somehow it's racist if we want to protect our borders by building a wall.
And what of the lesser privileged liberals who will be the first to cry and beg for mercy when they need to call a LEO, who is carrying a gun (by the way), to protect them from an intruder, or the like. They'll sure be begging for a LEO with a weapon if they need that kind of help.
So much hypocrisy, and so much inconsistency in their arguments.
At the end of the day, the kind of people who commit the type of heinous crimes we saw last week are evil. And evil people don't follow the rules. They will find a way to get that gun anyway. It's a cliche response, I know. But it's true. They'll get them through illegal avenues, or even from someone coming across that border the liberals love to leave wide open. Even while the rest of us follow the rules that they, the libs, want to push on us. Keep us unprotected while the evil ones get their hands on these weapons anyway.
Case closed.
EVERYONE of them… hypocrites.
Whoever recorded this should have (a) not allowed it to get to social media and/or (b) blocked out his face. Yes, what he is saying is disturbing, even if he doesn't mean it. But this should have been something for the parents, authorities and medical experts to address --- not social media fodder. You can't be sharing a kid on social media like that, unless it is your own kid or the parents have given permission. The adult who recorded this, if she is the one who let it get to social media, should be disciplined.
Last edited:
Your whole argument lends nothing to the discussion but unfounded political fodder that has been tossed back and forth to cause division.
This freedom hating Prime Dictator of Canada blackface wearing autocrat has unilaterally decided to disarm Canadian citizens. Dementia Joe is blathering how we should look to his ideas. Yeah, this hypocrite is overflowing with credibility.
Attachments
-
pic.jpg
Ronald Reagan would never have survived if he was shot with a 9mm instead of a 22. That is one of the reasons Ronald Reagan supported the assault weapon ban in 1994 and helped it get passed.
OK -- so you have no problem with the guy who brought up Babbit? Just me for responding to him. Got it!
Well, lets continue, and thanks for responding...
So explain the black on black carnage in places like Chicago, South Central LA, Detroit, etc etc? Whats to blame for that?
I lived in inner city LA when we first arrived in the US...just east of DTLA, place now known as Historic Filipinotown...its where the Original Tommy's is at, where Rampart Police Station became famous about 15-20 years ago...
This got brought up because some folks here like to express outrage with mass shootings ( it does deserve to be brought up and discussed), while staying quiet about the inner city issues prevalent, and has been going on for generations...
Last edited:
Did you really type this????
Texas mass shooting timeline: 14 years of violence in Texas
Texas has seen nine mass shootings over the last 14 years while lawmakers have steadily loosened restrictions on carrying firearms.
apps.texastribune.org
Like I said, if you don't do it it'll be done for you and you won't like it. There are no more excuses left to make.
You cannot compare Roe v Wade with a US Constitutional Amendment. A state cannot decide whether a US Constitutional Amendment applies in that particular state. There is no US Constitutional Amendment with respect to the right to an abortion. Get it?
Your statement is actually disturbing. If our elected officials can arbitrarily decide to take away freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution, which a “freeze” like Trudeau is decreeing would be, they can take away anything else and seize complete dictatorial power. You don’t want that. There’s no such thing as “Well, just this one time” when it comes to violating the Constitution.
I hear anti-America folk say “Canada is a free country too”. But they are not free like America, and this is just one more instance of proof. Canada doesn’t have the Constitution that we have that protects the people from government tyranny. Their personal freedoms, especially freedom of speech and freedom of religion, have always been much more limited than ours.
Read our Constitution, particularly the first and second amendments, and you’ll see that it is designed specifically to limit the government, not the people, and to guarantee certain freedoms. This is why we can’t have a SCOTUS that interprets the Constitution by any other standard than the text and original intent. The day that happens is the day we lose Constitutional protection and freedom dies.
“It’ll be done for you” must not happen, or it will set us on a path that you don’t want to go down. You think you do, but you don’t.
A republican judge overturned California law that required you to be 21 to buy an assault rifle. Can you tell me what amendment that was.
The Second Amendment. Read the section about the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Overall, according to federal law, one is considered to be an adult at the age of 18 with respect to legal rights. Drinking alcohol is not a constitutional right. This is why the legal drinking age is 21.
1. That’s not the SCOTUS
2. We are not supposed to have Republican or Democrat judges. The judiciary must remain separate from the legislature as part of our system of checks and balances.
3. I have not read what the judge’s ruling was based on. That’s what you need read, perhaps you can find it online.
It will go to the SCOTUS, and the 26 amendment clearly says right to vote at 18, and does not say anything else. I just want to see if these new judges are true to their word or if is was all BS.
Show ignored content
There were days when it was tempting - for one second - to click on this link but I've learned over the years that it's a fruitless endeavor that's not worth my time.
There were days when it was tempting - for one second - to click on this link but I've learned over the years that it's a fruitless endeavor that's not worth my time.
You know why that's funny? Because we all know that kids say stuff they don't mean or understand. Oh, and that twitter user lives in Hong Kong. Any chance that video was edited at the beginning so that any context could be applied? The child almost looked like he had a prepared answer....why is that? He laughed and smiled saying he wouldn't kill his teachers. This is hardly the confession of a serial killer in waiting.
Regardless of their ruling, there are no conclusions to be drawn regarding state’s rights in this case. The 2nd amendment makes no distinction between 18 yr olds and 21 yr olds, and it is assumed that they have the same rights under it.
You are drawing your own conclusions about the case, and wanting to hold the SCOTUS to that standard. It doesn’t work that way.
- Status
