Influential people with anti-gun views often want to “wade into the debate” after a big shooting. They’d have us believe that they are apolitical people who were above or outside of the debate, but because something that happened was so terrible, it merits them taking the highly unusual step and perhaps enduring some personal sacrifice.
But, if you do a quick search, most of the celebrities who act like this have a history of doing it. The truth is, they’re part of the anti-gun movement, they do this after every high-profile shooting and they’ll do it again.
Want some solid proof? Just look at the talking points. If they were a fresh voice entering the debate, they’d bring some fresh ideas with them. But, they say the same thing all of the other celebrities do. So, it makes sense to point out that they’re being disingenuous so that people can see that they’re faking it.
But, after the Kansas City Super Bowl parade shooting, there’s another valuable point to be made: These “I’m not normally political” celebs don’t want to talk about the factual circumstances of the shooting itself.
The fact is, this was a gang shooting, not a mass shooting. While every life lost is a tragedy, we can’t treat all deaths by bullet the same way if we want to productively solve the problem. Laws that might prevent suicide differ from laws that might dissuade criminals and laws that could dissuade a suicidal mass shooter. When we try to “one size fits all” the problem, we don’t arrive at useful conclusions.
But, as we know, the anti-gun movement isn’t after solutions. They’re after guns. To admit that the shooting in Kansas City was a gang fight and not a mass murder situation would tip the audience off. Anybody with even half a lick of common sense knows that gang members who were already carrying guns illegally aren’t going to be stopped by any new anti-gun laws. All that would accomplish would be to burden good people while leaving gang members’ guns alone.
So, to avoid this awkwardness and keep people from seeing that they’d made a category error (aka a “fallacy of composition”), these celebs go straight to things like this:
This 🤬 is SAD man! Kids are being shot and somebody didn’t come home tonight. We cannot allow this to be normal. We cannot ourselves to become numb and chalk it up to “just another shooting in America” and reduce people in statistics and then move on tmrw.
This is a SERIOUS…
— Justin Reid (@JustinqReid) February 15, 2024
To categorize a problem properly and come up with a real solution, we first have to look at the whole problem. We can’t look at it from one angle through somebody else’s glasses if we want to see clearly enough to know what’s even going on. But, we can’t expect a guy who said “I hate guns dawg” in the past to give us an honest opinion on the solution. The hate is all he knows, and it’s all he wants fans to know.
Blinding us to the real situation with thoughts about children and victims might seem like the empathetic thing to do on the surface, but stopping there keeps our minds on the surface instead of digging deeper.
You’ll never get an honest debate from the people who post such inanities — they’re not interested in hearing both sides. They’re only interested in pushing their views, which they believe are the “correct” ones.
Witness on our own forum: Miner49er and dacian. They come here and spew their lies and hatred. And the admins here are apparently OK with that. Hell, Miner49er can even doxx a participant — but that’s OK too, as there don’t appear to be any rules of decorum here, or any rules at all.
Stop wishing for people to seriously and honestly engage — it’s not going to happen.
who did he doxx?
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/armed-attorneys-will-the-atf-require-ffl-licenses-of-anyone-wishing-to-sell-a-firearm/#comments
Oh, that.
we already know one of them is dacian, he was outed here a long time ago. Don’t know what the airplane guy is about though.
The guy posting under N64456 may be using his aircraft registration number, and Miner looked it up on a database to see who owned that plane. That’s why he posted it multiple times in response to every one of the guy’s posts. Not selling an airplane — “outing” the owner, if it is his number.
I haven’t found a “forum rules” posting to see if doxxing is not allowed — most sites will throw you out for it.
Is it doxxing if it’s public info?
It’d be like posting your HAM callsign and getting pissed that somebody looked you up in a public database.
Like, oh shit the white pages are a thing!!! OMGZZZZ!!!!!
Oh, hey there, Miner. Nice new nick.
“The guy posting under N64456 may be using his aircraft registration number, and Miner looked it up on a database to see who owned that plane“
Well there you go, now you’ve gone and done it.
None of my posts specifically identified any particular poster with any particular bit of public information I posted.
It is you, who has connected November 64456 with the public info in one of my posts.
“They come here and spew their lies and hatred“
Nope, I post a source or citation for every fact in my comments.
And I never expressed hatred for anyone, but I do point out the criminal guilt of those who wish to give aid and comfort to America’s domestic enemies.
And I have never posted under any other handle, Miner49er the one, the only, accept no substitutes!
“Nope, I post a source or citation for every fact in my comments.
And I never expressed hatred for anyone, but I do point out the criminal guilt of those who wish to give aid and comfort to America’s domestic enemies.
And I have never posted under any other handle, Miner49er the one, the only, accept no substitutes!”
Liar
“Liar“
Is that all you got?
Empty insults.
Empty insults as you hide behind anonymous handle on the Internet.
Sad!
Evidently don’t understand the context of my single word ‘liar’ applied to you as you spread your lies as you hide behind an anonymous handle on the Internet.
Its not an insult, its the truth.
“None of my posts specifically identified any particular poster with any particular bit of public information I posted.”
You’re a liar; it’s very clear what you intended by posting that info.
But — no problemo; post any personal information that you can dig up. The admins don’t object and there apparently aren’t any rules against it.
“you hide behind an anonymous handle on the Internet.”
Post your personal information, then.
N64456 Cessna Skyhawk landed in Anchorage, AK September 2021, still there.
Private Dyin’,
Yeah, no sh*t, Sherlock. No one wants to be harrassed, online or otherwise, by idiots of the like of MajorLiar or dacian the demented. If those idiot trolls were not a constant, ongoing infection on this site, I would be happy to post under my actual name. As long as we have deranged trolls lurking about, I’ll choose to maintain my anonimity (the “death threats” don’t bother me – “BRING IT, B*TCH!!”), but I have family, so . . . I choose to retain whatever pretense of anonimity I can maintain.
But anyone who posts anything online and deludes themselves into believing that they are “anonymous” is ‘getting high on their own supply”. I’m sure even mental midgets, like MajorLiar and dacian the demented, could “out” me if they chose to . . . but it would require them to do some actual work, and work is like unto kryptonite for Leftist/fascists, so I feel fairly safe.
And if my “risk” is that MajorLiar, dacian the demented, or any of their Leftist/fascist cohort, are “coming after me”. Yeah, not even SLIGHTLY worried about that. Always be grateful for your enemies’ stupidity and incompetence.
C’mon, man! More guns means more gun crime, fewer guns means less gun crime! Everybody knows that! It’s common sense! Get the guns, stop the crime. What more could anyone ask for?
“It’s common sense! Get the guns, stop the crime. What more could anyone ask for?”
No laws.
No laws, no crime at all !
Law is the root of all crime.
I’ll never understand why “doxxing” is an issue. For generations our addresses have been publicly. The real issue is cowards not willing to back up what they say! I’ll share my address with anyone. I am not afraid.
Then post it up, Phillip. Here and now.
Yes they were teenagers having a shootout. And there are many who are also avoiding another truth.
The “young guns” are all from fatherless homes. Because according to the smartest people in the room. A father is not necessary.
So now Big Daddy Government will take over and discipline them.
Considering that your taxes go towards the creation of crime statistics, you might as well get your money’s worth.
I recomend starting with table 43 of the FBI’s uniform crime report.
Some fun facts:
Black males account have a 95.5 murderers per 100,000, white males have 5.5.
For males ages 15-24:
black: 207.4 per 100,000
White: 8.3 per hundred thousand
For males 25-34:
Black: 119.5
White: 7.6
I could go on and on. We don’t have a gun problem in the US, we have a problem with young black males.
🤫Shhh, you’re not supposed to use facts or statistics when discussing this, nor is the word “thug” available for usage.
Thuggish behavior is thuggish behavior.
Only a racist would assume the word “thug” is descriptive of black people.
So naturally all the dems believe the word “thug” is descriptive of black people.
thug
[ thuhg ]
See synonyms for: thugthugs on Thesaurus.com
noun
a violent, lawless, or vicious person, especially one who commits a crime such as assault, robbery, or murder: It wasn’t uncommon for hired thugs to intimidate shop owners until they paid up.
(sometimes initial capital letter) one of a former group of professional robbers and murderers in India who strangled their victims.
we can’t call these murderers THUGS?
ok then I will not call these THUGS well THUGS …. oh wait…I see the problem now and its an issue of incorrect attribution like the mayor said, so correctly its MURDERING THUGS…ok, fixed.
Here’s the racial reference — it’s getting so that you can’t use any word without checking a scorecard first.
“The word’s original and ongoing use to refer to criminals is still very much present in the culture at large, however, and use of thug by a white person to refer to a Black person is generally understood to lack the nuance the word carries when used by a Black person, and to instead be an offensive insinuation that a Black person can be assumed to be engaged in criminal behavior.” — https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thug
Kind of like the “n” word that blacks can use but whites are forbidden. Because whites “lack the nuance,” I suppose.
‘MURDERING THUGS’ is correct then and not racists. The correct ‘nuance’ is there, no lack of nuance in that. Oh wait though, if these happen to be ‘MURDERING THUGS’ who are black then its still not racist.
I find this mayor to be offensive and perverted in trying to ‘redefine’ as racist the rightful and legitimate outrage against these these ‘THUGS’, these ‘MURDERING THUGS’. It is racist in its self in this case to not acknowledge these ‘THUGS’, these ‘MURDERING THUGS’ actions by trying to make the ‘thug’ term applied appear racist when in reality is is not.
Gee whiz, I wonder who wrote that very convenient racially satisfying description at Merriam Webster.
Or, we have an urban poverty problem and the urban poor tend to be black people.
Do young black men elsewhere show any greater propensity to violence than comparable young men of other races???
It isn’t a poverty problem. There have always been poor people. They all don’t act like that. I’ve never seen “poor” people dress so well. It’s a morality problem. They need better role models.
P.S. USA poverty vs. “developing nations” poverty. Compare and contrast.
One big problem is the poison spewed into our society by the introduction of wholesale biblical slavery into North America.
White people brought the first black slaves into North America in 1619, and we couldn’t get it stopped until 1865.
That’s almost 250 years of forcing black folks to work on pain of torture and death, raping their women folk and selling their children for profit, using Christian religious teachings as authorization from God above for the moral sin of slavery.
And even today, white folks still proudly fly the flag of those who committed treason against the United States of America in order perpetuate biblical chattel slavery in our Country.
Do the math, that’s 246 years of Government ordered systemic racism in America, versus only 159 years of so-called freedom, the vast majority under racist Jim Crow discrimination.
The descendants of those white folks are responsible for the terrible damage done to the psychological well-being of black folk in America, Hank Williams said it best “a crushed, undying race“.
Sadly, white folks don’t realize the poison our forefathers baked into our society with their prejudice and oppression of our black brothers and sisters.
If you believe that the US is a racist nation, you’re fucked in the head.
It’s never the fault of the actual criminals. It’s the Christians! Everything bad is their fault! They supposedly did this thing centuries ago that is still forcing a young black man to not care about m-u-r dering people. Brilliant take as usual, Miner.
You and that Neo-Nazi that hangs out here are two peas in a pod. It’s the Jews! It’s the Christians! You guys are textbook bigots. It makes sense that both of you were pushing Hamas propaganda right after they targeted civilian populations for killing, rape, and abduction. The rape was so violent, some women had broken pelvises. And you guys willingly pushed lies on their behalf. Now you’re running cover for another cold blooded killer. You manage to justify this behavior in your mind, just like terrorists feel justified for their actions.
As a matter of fact, they do in England, France, Sweden, basically every country in Europe with significant African populations.
Also the whole continent of Africa.
It’s still somehow the fault of Christians and Jews because everything bad is. Just ask our resident bigots.
“It’s still somehow the fault of Christians and Jews“
Oh, I think the Muslims are just as delusional and dangerous as any particular religion.
But it’s not the Muslims who are trying to ban books in my library, it’s not the Muslims who are trying to ban other religions from entering the United States, it’s not the Muslims who are interfering with our wives, sisters and daughters control of their own bodies… Here in the US, it’s mostly Christians.
And when we consider 246 years of biblical slavery in the United States, it wasn’t the Muslims who tortured and killed black folk, it wasn’t a Muslims who raped their women and sold their children… It was 100% Christian love.
Leviticus 25:44-46
King James Version
44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.
“It was 100% Christian love.”
0% of people who engaged in that were Christians. You have a comically bad perception of Christianity. You’re always using verses from the part of the Old Testament known as the Book of Moses in the Torah. If you’re putting down anyone by quoting from that, then it would be Jews, not Christians. (Not that you have even studied the entire Bible and the history to better understand it.) The really bad part is, you have no interest in actually learning what Christianity is. You’ve already made up your mind about what group you’re going to hate. Textbook bigotry.
“Oh, I think the Muslims are just as delusional and dangerous as any particular religion.”
It’s always an afterthought with you. You only say that after I call you out on your constant Christophobia.
“But it’s not the Muslims who are trying to ban books in my library”
That’s only because the Muslims aren’t in control of your library. Christians are only trying to remove porn, especially porn that is being pushed onto children in public libraries and schools. It’s hilarious that you think Muslims are okay with that.
“it’s not the Muslims who are interfering with our wives, sisters and daughters control of their own bodies”
You mean abortion, as in taking the life of an innocent and defenseless baby. Muslims are against abortion. You should check into the laws of some Muslim countries. If they controlled the USA, it would be the same.
*not Book of, but Five Books of Moses
“0% of people who engaged in that were Christians“
Fascinating!
So you’re saying that the leadership of the confederacy were not Christians?
Robert E Lee engaged in slavery, and you say he wasn’t a Christian, what a surprise.
“Many of the major Founding Fathers owned numerous slaves, such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. Others owned only a few slaves, such as Benjamin Franklin. And still others married into large slave-owning families, such as Alexander Hamilton“
So you are saying George Washington was not a Christian, that’s quite a revelation, especially considering you are not a historian and have no particular academic achievement in the study of American Christianity.
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/founding-fathers-views-slavery#:~:text=Many%20of%20the%20major%20Founding,families%2C%20such%20as%20Alexander%20Hamilton.
“That’s only because the Muslims aren’t in control of your library“
Correct, it’s the Christians who think they are in charge of the library and are abridging the public’s fourth amendment right to freedom of the press, not the Muslims.
And you’re saying today’s Christians do not live under the law of the Old Testament?
You do know, that is contrary to the teachings of Jesus, right?
Matthew 5:18 KJV
“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.“
Better quit eating that bacon, you’re breaking God’s Law.
“abridging the public’s fourth amendment right to freedom of the press”
There is no right to push pornography onto children. You’re acting like adults aren’t free to get whatever book they want. Calling it book bans is being disingenuous. It’s a porn ban. You have no right to secksually* indoctrinate children. Decent people understand that. That’s why Democrats try to obscure what is going, just like “securing” the border.
If open borders are wonderful, then why can’t you say that? If secksually* indoctrinating children is wonderful, then why don’t you articulate that to their parents? You know why. That’s why you’re only calling it a book ban. You’re a dishonest person, just like the other sick people pushing these things.
*avoiding moderation system
“Better quit eating that bacon, you’re breaking God’s Law.”
Yes, why don’t Christians worry about that, Miner? It’s almost like you have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re the only one out of billions of people that understands Christianity. They’re all wrong, and you’re right.
Miner: “I don’t like you because you believe [fill in the blank].”
Christian: “I don’t believe that.”
Miner: “You’re doing it wrong. The bogeyman in my head believes those things. You have to be that bogeyman. I refuse to acknowledge your beliefs. You have to believe what I want you to believe. You can’t tell me otherwise.”
Parents have every opportunity to control what books their children may access at the library, it’s their responsibility to properly raise their children.
Do you really want the government-controlled libraries raising children, or should parents themselves control which books their children have access to.
Jesus Christ, the Son of God, stated definitively that God’s law was still in effect and would not change until “heaven and earth pass”.
Matthew 5:18 KJV
“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.“
So what higher authority than Jesus do you have that authorized the suspension of the kosher dietary laws?
I don’t dislike anyone because of their beliefs, no matter how silly they might be.
My problem occurs when they attempt to enforce their silly beliefs upon my life.
Personally, I feel sorry for those who worship a god of genocide, child murder and slavery.
We’ve talked about this before. You have to be open to learning in order to learn. It’s pointless to to keep saying the same thing, if you aren’t listening. You can’t look at a few individual verses without understanding the context. Let’s check the previous verse (17):
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them.”
Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. That was his mission. The Old Covenant was never meant to be permanent. Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant, just as he said he would. There’s a reason Christians don’t worry about eating pork, etc. There’s a reason followers of Judaism and Islam are concerned about that. They don’t follow Jesus. Things like dietary laws and circumcision (I’ve seen you mention that before) are even specifically discussed in the New Testament. That’s why I tell you that you think you’re putting down Christians, but you aren’t. You’re talking about something you don’t understand.
I’m not trying to be mean by saying that you can’t read a few verses, and think that you have a grasp on the Christian faith. I’ve read the Bible from cover to cover, and studied various parts of it, and I’m about as far away from an expert on the Bible as you can get.
Thanks for your respectful reply, refreshing!
I just don’t get how you can dismiss the plain text of Jesus‘s statement.
“The Old Covenant was never meant to be permanent.”
The term ‘old covenant’ does not appear in the Bible, much less a declaration that the Old Testament wasn’t permanent.
Yes, Jesus said he came to fulfill the law… And then immediately after said not one jot or tittle of the law would be changed until heaven and earth passed away.
Most interested folks believe when he said fulfill, he meant fulfill the prophecies in the old testament, not voiding the law in any way as borne out in his very next statement.
Back to another comment, you claimed that no one who engaged in slavery in America was a Christian…
Are you serious, do you really maintain that George Washington, James Madison, the entire leadership of the confederate states of America (including Robert E. Lee) were not Christians?
You can’t believe that’s a mainstream view of most of today’s Christians…
It’s called the old covenant because Jesus fulfilled it, and then made a new covenant.
“And then immediately after said not one jot or tittle of the law would be changed until heaven and earth passed away.”
That’s correct. There’s some added context for that. Verse 18:
18 “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
It has been fulfilled/accomplished. Jesus did what said he would do.
We can’t really know the status of anyone’s faith. What we do know is what Jesus taught. He said the most important commandments are to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. If you do those things, then you can’t oppress people, and think you’re following Jesus.
Again, thanks for the detailed, respectful reply.
“It has been fulfilled/accomplished. Jesus did what said he would do“
I’m not sure I can agree with that statement, all has not been fulfilled.
Jesus has not returned like a thief in the night, the believers have not been taken up into heaven.
The kingdom of God has not been established on earth, believers asleep in Christ have not risen from the grave.
Satan has not been chained and thrown into the lake of fire.
And you must admit, most American Christians of today would not agree with you that George Washington and Robert E. Lee were not Christians.
It’s actually a textbook logical fallacy, the ‘no true Scotsman fallacy’.
“In this form of faulty reasoning one’s belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn’t apply to a supposedly ‘true’ example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one’s argument.
Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.”
I have a nice reply for you, but apparently it hasn’t made it through moderation.
But I did want to clarify this:
“Miner: “You’re doing it wrong. The bogeyman in my head believes those things. You have to be that bogeyman. I refuse to acknowledge your beliefs.”
No, I do acknowledge the religionist’s beliefs, I just don’t share them
“You have to believe what I want you to believe“
I don’t assert any beliefs, my position is a position of disbelief.
Theists assert ‘there is a God(s)’, atheism is merely the disbelief in that claim.
People can have whatever ill-founded beliefs they wish, as long as they don’t inflict their beliefs on others.
Laws that prohibit business or personal activities on somebody’s holy day’,
Forced public swearing of allegiance to a nation ‘under God’, denial of employment or public benefits or even entry into the country because someone is of the wrong religion, etc.
And I can tell you, no atheist has ever cried kill all the Jews, no atheist has ever demanded let’s take back to the holy land for Jesus!
“I’m not sure I can agree with that statement…”
There are a zillion different interpretations, hence a zillion different denominations. People can’t even agree on what a few lines in the US Constitution mean. However, the new covenant replacing the old is central to the Christian faith. It’s further hashed out within the New Testament, and foretold in the Old Testament.
Anyone can call themselves a Christian. Politicians usually try to make themselves out to be like their constituents, even if that isn’t the whole truth. That’s why they’ll put on a cowboy hat when they’re talking to ranchers or speak differently depending on the audience. They might leave a political rally in an old pickup, only to ditch it for a limo a few blocks away. That actually happened. I think it was Fred Thompson.
There are plenty of people who profess to be Christians while they are living in sin. Everyone falls short and sins. That’s why we need grace. But when you intentionally live your life in defiance of God’s commandments, then you can’t follow Jesus. If you’re a Christian, then you wouldn’t want to do that in the first place. You can’t simultaneously oppress people and be a Christian.
From the song “O Holy Night” adapted from a French song in 1855:
Truly He taught us to love one another;
His law is love and His gospel is peace.
Chains shall He break, for the slave is our brother;
And in His name all oppression shall cease.
I’m sure American Christians could identify with that as soon as they heard it, beginning in 1855.
Serpent_Vision:
There’s a bunch of very poor white people in Appalachia. They are generally gun owners and they usually don’t shoot each other.
I suspect the source of the problem is a combination of urbanization, poverty, and (especially) culture.
The media is busy shaping the narrative that racist white people are killing everyone with AR’s henceforth known as the “murder snowball.”
They intentionally ignore or merely pay lip service to the “murder avalanche” of intra-racial warring over nonsense like street-cred and social media disses.
Eventually what happens, if it isn’t already happening, is every sheltered Karen sees every shooting incident as a racist white guy with an AR. If the media doesn’t report that it’s a gang shootout or a disgruntled transistor or just some nut on meds with absolutely no ideology whatsoever how is Karen to know? She won’t do any research and all her friends believe the same so belief becomes fact and shapes worldview.
Of course they don’t want to talk about the fact that many, Many, MANY more people are killed and injured in gang related shootings than mass shootings. If they acknowledged this reality, then they’d have to acknowledge the fact that the problem isn’t guns. The problem is all of President Obama’s bastard sons. Of course transgender folk are now committing many of the mass shootings as well.
If 3-5 counts as “many”.
https://www.newsweek.com/mass-shootings-transgender-perpetrators-1790854
it depends on how one defines ‘mass shooting’ and the correct application of the term ‘transgender’ instead of the political and main stream media deceptive spin on it to push gun control.
First, ‘transgender’ (often shortened to ‘trans’) means a person whose gender identity differs from the gender they were biologically at birth. It does not mean they have had surgery or hormones to actually ‘transition’ to the opposite gender ‘physically’. So to be ‘transgendered’ really means, and as its applied by the ‘trans’ community its self, that one only need adopt a gender identity (e.g. male/female) – OR – a ‘neutral’ gender identity/expression or an identity expression (e.g. Agender, Nonbinary, etc…) that differs from the gender they were biologically at birth.
Second, its disingenuous and deceptive for NewsWeek to use and apply the term ‘transgender’ as they are using it.
Third, the majority of mass shooters (who lived or not) expressed gender identity issues and/or wanting to be ‘transgendered’. So in reality the transgender shooter in Nashville did not actually mark “the first instance of a transgender shooter in a mass shooting” as its claimed.
If the definition of ‘four or more’ the anti-gun like to use is applied; For example, in a nationwide collective sense, last year in 2023 on a single day on 15 July, there are over 87 ‘mass shootings’ carried out by ‘transgender’ shooters if the shootings, although distributed across the nation individually, are counted in groups of four fashion – collectively, 384 people injured/killed by ‘transgender’ shooters in a single day in 2023.
“the majority of mass shooters (who lived or not) expressed gender identity issues and/or wanting to be ‘transgendered’.“
Interesting, that doesn’t comport with what you posted last week:
“.40 cal Booger
February 18, 2024 At 08:32
I never said at anytime that “that all mass shooters are liberal Democrats”.
You lie once again Miner49er.
and learn what context means and stop cherry picking out of context. This is what I posted:
“Trivia fact for mass shooters: The majority of mass-shooters (which includes school shooters), over 90%, have no political affiliation or preference of either left or right wing.“
Yeah, another empty claim with no source or citation.
“Interesting, that doesn’t comport with what you posted last week:”
Miner49er, your statement is 100% iie.
I never said at anytime that “that ALL mass shooters are liberal Democrats”.
“Trivia fact for mass shooters: The majority of mass-shooters (which includes school shooters), over 90%, have no political affiliation or preference of either left or right wing.“
One does not need to be ‘liberal democrat’ or have a political affiliation or preference of either left or right wing – to be trans.
Once again Miner49er, learn what context means.
‘transgender’ (often shortened to ‘trans’) means a person whose gender identity differs from the gender they were biologically at birth. It does not mean they have had surgery or hormones to actually ‘transition’ to the opposite gender ‘physically’. So to be ‘transgendered’ really means, and as its applied by the ‘trans’ community its self, that one only need adopt a gender identity (e.g. male/female) – OR – a ‘neutral’ gender identity/expression or an identity expression (e.g. Agender, Nonbinary, etc…) that differs from the gender they were biologically at birth.
GENDER IDENTITY – not ‘liberal democrat’ or political affiliation or preference of either left or right wing identity.
the majority of mass shooters (which by the way includes school shooters) (who lived or not) expressed gender identity issues and/or wanting to be ‘transgendered’ – or in other words for an ignorant person like you, not ‘liberal democrat’ or political affiliation or preference of either left or right wing identity but rather ‘gender identity’.
BREAKING NEWS: Talkshow Host Bribes Justice Clarence Thomas To Retire! They Big Mad!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsAg9nJMmI4
Really, why would anyone be upset with Justice Clarence Thomas, he’s the best Justice money can buy:
“The conservative justice, who has come under scrutiny for his failure to disclose such gifts, took at least 38 vacations, 26 private jet flights, eight flights by helicopter, a dozen VIP passes to sporting events, as well as stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica, the nonprofit news site reports. ProPublica notes that Thomas appears to have broken the law by failing to disclose flights, cruises and sports tickets.“
https://www.npr.org/2023/08/10/1193162713/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-gifts-disclosure
Your anti-gun agenda will fail because you’re not willing to sacrifice anything for it. We’ll give our lives to ensure Liberty lives on…. Humans deserve autonomy. The majority of the country has tired of tyranny again, I hope you leftists learn this before its too late!
Kansas City Mayor Cries Racism For Calling MURDERS “Thugs”… Lefties Are Losing Grip Of Reality…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_16sA8Y-Xko
BREAKING: 2 ADULTS charged with MURDER in KC Shooting… total of Four Now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zff_tSsSXfM
2 questions:
Who is Justin Reid
Why do we care?
and yes, I’m serious.
His Twitter/X account lists him as a “SuperBowl LVII & LVIII Champion, Philanthropist, Serial Entrepreneur”
Other than that, he’s a rich American with influence and money, someone who might be very useful to our side.
@Jennifer: how about making contact with him to discuss real solutions, and see how it goes?
I think you know how that’d go.
Wait – stop. Go back to the original article. What exactly did he say that was wrong?
He said (paraphrased) “WTF – more kids getting shot in America, and somebody didn’t make it home. Let’s pray our leaders implement REAL solutions so our kids won’t know this violence.”
Who disagrees with that? What he said was perfectly reasonable. And I also pray that our leaders will implement REAL SOLUTIONS so kids won’t know this violence.
That doesn’t mean stupid “solutions” like “common sense gun reforms”. It means REAL solutions, like eradicating gangs, getting fathers back in the home, etc.
If someone were to talk to him about real solutions before the Gabby/Moms get to him, he might become a real voice and a real advocate for real solutions.
I took one glance at that Kansas City parade and knew exactly what it was.
Like a multi- hundred thousand person shooting gallery?
If the Vikings somehow EVER won the Superbowl, I’m pretty sure I’d leave the state for a couple of weeks to miss all of the ” fun “.
If it were not for the shootout I would not have known there was a Super Bowl…We quit wasting time watching football after the take a knee clown shows, etc.
As for the perps…What happens when heads are full of pure demoCrap. You could not find a grain of respect between their ears for the 2A or for others if you used the Hubble Telescope.
TRUMP 2024.
Past time for romney RINO nikki to go away…
https://youtube.com/watch?v=GjLlr2fK5IQ&feature=shared
“romney RINO nikki to go away… “
I agree, she should withdraw her candidacy immediately.
There’s no incentive. She’ll withdraw when the donor money stops coming in. She doesn’t have to spend all of that money running for the nomination this year. She’ll have millions for future “campaigning” (wink, nod).
“I agree, she should withdraw her candidacy immediately.”
Some think Haley is preparing for a third-pary run. And she has some deep-pocket Dims supporting her.
Maybe she is more cagey. Maybe she is keeping her campaign alive against the prospect Trump cannot win election, and/or Trump cannot serve.
Wonder what “Plan B” is for Republicrats if Trump cannot continue to campaign, or serve? The VP ascends to the presidency?
“against the prospect Trump cannot win election, and/or Trump cannot serve.”
I thought the same. Then there’s the money to think of.
“she has some deep-pocket Dims supporting her”
Who?
I wish she would run third-party, that would be the end of the Republican stances.
I think it’s much more likely she will offer her self as Plan B when Trump receives his felony convictions.
“But, as we know, the anti-gun movement isn’t after solutions. They’re after guns.”
QED. There is no effective counter to that mindset. There is no rational discussion; not even a chance of “compromise”. Trying to reason, or find common ground with gun-grabbers is wasted time and effort. Gun confiscation is a religious, not ideological, dogma.
With outright defiance of the Supreme Court rulings in Heller 1&2, McDonald, and Bruen, the leftists/statists/liberal/ socialist/communist faction in the country demonstrates the commitment to gun confiscation that we face.
“Pro-gun legislation” is simply hinged on the voting patterns is states who are considered “pro gun”. Voting is about counting; change the count, and “pro gun” states become “anti gun”.
The “anti gun” people know that eliminating votes is the key to power. The “pro gun” people do not understand that as a constant, and lack the activist mind and funding to fight the long march necessary to end the religion of gun control.
Gee, some criminals or criminal wannabees didn’t obey the “common sense guns laws” the Democrats enacted. I think the Democrats should pass a new “common sense gun law” that makes it a crime to violate 2 or more “common sense gun laws” at the same time! That’ll teach those criminals and make them comply with common sense laws. BTW, has anyone figured out how “gun violence” occurs without human interaction with those pesky inanimate objects?
Golly Wally. How can you not understand that those “inanimate objects” don’t need to abmulate; those objects are perfectly capable of influencing the minds of humans to do crimes.
Just by being reachable, guns shape the human mind to “use me, use me”. It is this power of persuasion/attraction, that causes humans (already disposed to evil, unless constrained by other mental conditioning) to kill other humans (at a rate of about 93 million per year).
Without the presence of guns, bad people would simply access more acceptable weapons, such as hands, feet, knives, hammers, screwdrivers (non-alcoholic), cars, trucks, etc.
It is not who you kill, but how you kill.
(sips non-alcoholic screwdriver.)
“needs vodka.”
“needs vodka.”
Got something stuck in your throat?
AP carefully avoids any mention of gangs, bit it’s pretty easy to read between the lines:
“The argument began when two groups of people grew agitated over the belief that people in the other group were staring at them, according to affidavits from police. Surveillance video shows Mays and someone with him aggressively approached the other group, police say.”
https://apnews.com/article/chiefs-super-bowl-celebration-shooting-charges-7cb29dc9956d325103df9bf766a0c407
This went down because they thought they were staring? That’s it?
It doesn’t take much for rival gang members to go off on each other or others. Simply wearing a certain color in some cases can do it, so rival gang members ‘staring’ at each other, or others staring at them, is not an ‘abnormal’ reason for violence in gang culture. From what I can find so far it looks like these were rival gang members, members of one gang staring at members of the other gang.
…we have found that the best predictors for violence are the number of males in the community and the population density — higher numbers of males and higher population density means it is more likely violence will erupt. Harvard Gazette – violence
“the best predictors for violence are the number of males in the community“
Yep, because men are much more violent than women.
That is one of the central elements of toxic masculinity, both men and women get angry, but men are much more likely do use physical aggression because of their ‘feelings’.
Bigot Miner didn’t follow the link.
“…we have found that the best predictors for violence are the number of males in the community and the population density…”
Real science would point out that the absolute best predictor, singular, predictor, for violence is the presence of humans in the community.
A lot of heat but not much light here, I am putting my bet on criminals that should have been in jail.
@Dude
“I thought the same. Then there’s the money to think of.”
That always must be considered.
“But, as we know, the anti-gun movement isn’t after solutions. They’re after guns. To admit that the shooting in Kansas City was a gang fight and not a mass murder situation would tip the audience off. Anybody with even half a lick of common sense knows that gang members who were already carrying guns illegally aren’t going to be stopped by any new anti-gun laws. All that would accomplish would be to burden good people while leaving gang members’ guns alone.”
A truer statement was never made. The left is using punk violence to justify their anti-gun insanity so they might rule and for nothing else. Just more commie control action.
Comments are closed.