Another horrendous school shooting....What will the Left do NOW?

[BasicHumanUnit]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

And don't be stupid and say something like "Gun control is not a game" (in your PeeWee Herman voice)...it's a metaphor.

 

[forkup]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

 

[TheOldSchool]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

And don't be stupid and say something like "Gun control is not a game" (in your PeeWee Herman voice)...it's a metaphor.

That’s a terrible idea and not how the world works. Just stick to your argument that the massacre of children is nothing more than a small price to pay for gun rights.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

I see your point. And whether the argument is old or not is irrelevant if it's a vital issue like the 2nd Amendment.
And doing nothing is unfortunately also a bad idea.
2nd Amendment rights must be protected.....not always eroded.

The argument that giving up a pound more liberty for an ounce of security is dangerous and is also a very valid argument.

The UK has no 2nd Amendment and FAR fewer guns, yet they have not only a dramatic rise in crime, but also gun related violence.
How long do you think it will be before the UK has a mass shooting at one of it's schools? I say it will be within a year. We'll see.

So let them argue their talking points.....the Pro 2nd Amendment side needs to voice it's own arguments and demands.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

That’s a terrible idea and not how the world works. Just stick to your argument that the massacre of children is nothing more than a small price to pay for gun rights.

You have no ground to stand on - Mr. Pro Abortionist

So using your logic.....we should never have fought in WWII because children died.

 

[TNHarley]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

But that argument is irrelevant. We have a 2nd.

 

[TheOldSchool]

That’s a terrible idea and not how the world works. Just stick to your argument that the massacre of children is nothing more than a small price to pay for gun rights.

You have no ground to stand on - Mr. Pro Abortionist

Okay Mr. pro mass slaughters

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

But that argument is irrelevant. We have a 2nd.

Are you saying you think there as been "No Infringement" ?

 

[Auld Phart]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

And don't be stupid and say something like "Gun control is not a game" (in your PeeWee Herman voice)...it's a metaphor.

That’s a terrible idea and not how the world works. Just stick to your argument that the massacre of children is nothing more than a small price to pay for gun rights.

Just stick to your argument that the massacre of children is nothing more than a small price to pay for gun rights.

That's a soundbite from the Left, not the Right.

 

[jillian]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

something that would probably be easily substantiated if rightwingnuts would lift the ban against the CDC studying gun deaths.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Okay Mr. pro mass slaughters

Spastic knee-jerk, cowardly gun grabber response.

You are claiming that grabbing guns will save lives, when already your "Gun Free Zones" are where most children die.

You're irrational if you think you can take all guns away.

Remember, ONLY CRIMINALS AND THE MENTALLY DISTURBED shoot up innocent people.

But you focus on objects. Do you blame cellphones for texting deaths also?

 

[bodecea]

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

I see your point. And whether the argument is old or not is irrelevant if it's a vital issue like the 2nd Amendment.
And doing nothing is unfortunately also a bad idea.
2nd Amendment rights must be protected.....not always eroded.

The argument that giving up a pound more liberty for an ounce of security is dangerous and is also a very valid argument.

The UK has no 2nd Amendment and FAR fewer guns, yet they have not only a dramatic rise in crime, but also gun related violence.
How long do you think it will be before the UK has a mass shooting at one of it's schools? I say it will be within a year. We'll see.

So let them argue their talking points.....the Pro 2nd Amendment side needs to voice it's own arguments and demands.

You say that the UK has a dramatic rise in crime and gun related violence, and yet you provide no link. Show us.

 

[TNHarley]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

something that would probably be easily substantiated if rightwingnuts would lift the ban against the CDC studying gun deaths.

Why do you think the CDC should study gun deaths?

 

[bodecea]

Okay Mr. pro mass slaughters

Spastic knee-jerk, cowardly gun grabber response.

You are claiming that grabbing guns will save lives, when already your "Gun Free Zones" are where most children die.

You're irrational if you think you can take all guns away.

Remember, ONLY CRIMINALS AND THE MENTALLY DISTURBED shoot up innocent people.

But you focus on objects. Do you blame cellphones for texting deaths also?

We get it. You. don't. care. about. mass. shootings.

 

[miketx]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

And don't be stupid and say something like "Gun control is not a game" (in your PeeWee Herman voice)...it's a metaphor.

That’s a terrible idea and not how the world works. Just stick to your argument that the massacre of children is nothing more than a small price to pay for gun rights.

The massacre occurs because you want to prevent people from defending themselves in schools. Simple as that. You are a butcher.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

You say that the UK has a dramatic rise in crime and gun related violence, and yet you provide no link. Show us.

Typical Left Lemming....always crying to be spoon fed.

I don't care to hold your hand and walk you to the evidence. Grow up.
The BBC published a report recently stating that.

GOOGLE keeps you from appearing ignorant.

 

[miketx]

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

I see your point. And whether the argument is old or not is irrelevant if it's a vital issue like the 2nd Amendment.
And doing nothing is unfortunately also a bad idea.
2nd Amendment rights must be protected.....not always eroded.

The argument that giving up a pound more liberty for an ounce of security is dangerous and is also a very valid argument.

The UK has no 2nd Amendment and FAR fewer guns, yet they have not only a dramatic rise in crime, but also gun related violence.
How long do you think it will be before the UK has a mass shooting at one of it's schools? I say it will be within a year. We'll see.

So let them argue their talking points.....the Pro 2nd Amendment side needs to voice it's own arguments and demands.

You say that the UK has a dramatic rise in crime and gun related violence, and yet you provide no link. Show us.

Regressive liberal ROE


1. Demand a link or an explanation of the truth they are objecting to.

2. Promptly reject all explanations as right wing lies. Smoke spin deflect

3. Ignore any facts presented.

 

[OldLady]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

And don't be stupid and say something like "Gun control is not a game" (in your PeeWee Herman voice)...it's a metaphor.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.
It's not a game so stop using that as a metaphor. This is not a contest. It's not about compromise, it's about trying everything that might work. You sound like you belong among the worthless in Congress. Go get you there and remain silent, as usual, spouting your excuses about "fair deals."

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

As you can clearly see...the Left has NO INTEREST whatsoever in grown up conversation.

Instead, they say moronic things like "oh, you want to see more children massacred".

You can't reason with imbeciles. This is EXACTLY why I propose we no longer pass laws that are anti-2nd Amendment without equal or greater PRO-2nd concessions.

 

[OldLady]

After the dust settles from the last one.....and all the Gun Grabbers and the Left media have marched, screamed and protested....and after the 2nd Amendment side suffers even more restrictions......

What next?

Do you think the Left will EVER concede there are enough laws on the books?

We ALL know that no matter what, even if ALL guns were totally confiscated, that school shootings will never be completely eradicated by Gun Control measures.

We also know that the Left RESISTS any suggestion that we need to focus on the human factor.

So how many "Inches" do we surrender after every shooting to Gun Grabbers?

Inches make Feet and Feet make Miles. If they get a few inches after EVERY incident, it won't be long before they've achieved their goals.

I propose that for ANY and EVERY concession made to Gun Grabbers, an equal or better concession MUST be made to lawful and law abiding gun owners.

For example, IF the Pro-Gun side allows the age restriction to be raised, then the Anti-Gun side Must agree to no limits on magazine size.

If the Pro Gun side agrees to more stringent background checks, the Left MUST agree (in written law) that states like California CANNOT write their own anti-gun laws.

We cannot continue to give give give without concessions from the other side. Who the hell in their right mind would ever agree to a strategy like that and have any hope of staying in the game?

Claiming the left thinks they can prevent all shootings is a straw man argument. What they do claim is that restricting guns would probably make the frequency go down and more then likely the damage done when these attacks do happen will be less severe. But that's a harder argument for you to win, so you rather revert to this old chestnut.

something that would probably be easily substantiated if rightwingnuts would lift the ban against the CDC studying gun deaths.

Why do you think the CDC should study gun deaths?

It kills a lot of people every year. Many less die of the flu and we go after that extensively.