Sandy Hook mom delivers address....

Liberals deal with emotion. If a tragic mom could say that there were thousands of gun deaths in the last four months, no one is going to contradict her.

This is no different than tragedy that touches any family. A mother whose child died of a peanut allergy will want all peanuts banned. When an elderly man accidentally stepped on the gas instead of the brake causing his car to kill ten people at a farmer's market the knee jerk reaction is to ban driving for every one over 70. They want a blanket law to deal with their incident. What they really want is for the incident to not have happened and find the one thing that will stop it from ever happening again.

In the last few days, a student stabbed a number of other students with a small razor type knife. They believe he might have picked up this weapon in the campus lab. Immediately there was question as to whether schools should have these instruments in school labs at all. Maybe they should be banned. The classes that require these instruments be eliminated or perhaps done only by computer animation.

When you start making laws dealing out of an abundance of feelings, those will undoubtably be bad laws.
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.
 
Manchin, Toomey Tout Background-Check Amendment As ?Common Sense,? Not ?Gun Control? - By Eliana Johnson - The Corner - National Review Online

“I don’t consider criminal background checks to be gun control,” said Toomey, a Republican senator from Pennsylvania. “I consider them to be common sense.”

When this reaches the House, and the GOP kills it....it will be the death of the "safe" Gerrymandered districts that many of the baggers think they enjoy. If the House does not kill it, the moderate Repubs who sent it to the Presidents desk will face ultra-right candidates in the primaries in 2014. They lose again....This is a Lose-Lose proposition for the GOP. Those checks from the NRA are looking less attractive each day...
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.

The Supreme Court does not agree with you....but you already know that.
 
If only every person who experienced a personal tragedy were given a forum to voice their opinions.
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.

Oh I agree, because a conservative would NEVER do that!

wtc-911.jpg
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.

Oh I agree, because a conservative would NEVER do that!

[]

Show me where I said that or admit that you built a strawman because you can't refute what I posted.
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.

Oh I agree, because a conservative would NEVER do that!

[]

Show me where I said that or admit that you built a strawman because you can't refute what I posted.

Shut up, I'm still building!

images
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.

The Supreme Court does not agree with you....but you already know that.

Really,how so??
 
There is no law that doesn't infringe on people's rights that would have prevented that crime.

Would she be wanting cars banned if it had been an auto accident that killed her child?

How about knives?

5 Gallon buckets of water?

Swimming pools?

Punish the criminal, don't take or infringe on my rights.

Emotions have no place in Government.

The Supreme Court does not agree with you....but you already know that.

Really,ho0w so??


They didn't read what I posted.. simply posted a knee-jerk can response.
 
Manchin, Toomey Tout Background-Check Amendment As ?Common Sense,? Not ?Gun Control? - By Eliana Johnson - The Corner - National Review Online

“I don’t consider criminal background checks to be gun control,” said Toomey, a Republican senator from Pennsylvania. “I consider them to be common sense.”

When this reaches the House, and the GOP kills it....it will be the death of the "safe" Gerrymandered districts that many of the baggers think they enjoy. If the House does not kill it, the moderate Repubs who sent it to the Presidents desk will face ultra-right candidates in the primaries in 2014. They lose again....This is a Lose-Lose proposition for the GOP. Those checks from the NRA are looking less attractive each day...

Why are so many want to infringe on a constitutional right,why?? and by the way you are wrong on your wish that people see things as you hope they do.
 
There is nothing new about the political left exploiting victims of a tragedy to tug at people's emotions to try and push their agenda through.
 
There is nothing new about the political left exploiting victims of a tragedy to tug at people's emotions to try and push their agenda through.

Politicians do it all the time at our expense. Look at 9-11. The intent there was to make us more safe but at the same time we've been majorly inconvenienced and our privacy seriously has been infringed upon.
 
There is nothing new about the political left exploiting victims of a tragedy to tug at people's emotions to try and push their agenda through.

True that - look what liberal Bush did with 9/11.

It's disingenuous to compare Sandy Hook to 9-11. 9-11 was a foreign attack that killed thousands of people in three states. It was an event that hadn't rocked the country that hard in almost three generations. Had the president stayed in the shadows he then would have been criticized and accused of not caring about 3,000 dead Americans.

I don't recall him ever inviting one of the survivors to give the weekly presidential address to 300 million people and urge them to support an agenda that infringes on people's freedom, but maybe I missed that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top