Okay, I'll take your word for it, I obviously don't know how balls and strikes are being called locally. I will say though, this narrative is awfully familiar to the way whites in Mississippi would respond to the missing freedom riders in the 50s. You know, the "outside agitators from up north looking for trouble and probably found some" bit.
When you have both black and white making the same claim... And local black pastors speaking in public telling groups to pack up their hate and get out of here....Malik Shabazz spoke a couple of days after the shooting in charleston and told people to take up arms and kill all the slave owners, he was met with fury from the ame churches in the area and that was the end of that
I agree with you on that fully. I think reasonable regulations would happen a lot sooner if "anti-gun" was switched to "pro-regulations" it is inclusive to far more of the population and sounds far more open to compromise. I still believe Canada is where you should look not Australia. We require a license and a background check to buy rifles and further education for handguns. It allows for weeding out of people who shouldn't have guns in the first place.
Not an unfair point. But I think my natural skepticism guides me on this one. It's only because I KNOW that government can't properly manage a grade school cafeteria that I'm suggesting we flag the easiest targets. On this one, for me, it's simple. If I see an 18-30 year old man with middle eastern features and a Koran tucked under his arm, boarding the same plane as I am and talking or acting like no other cookie-cutter passenger traveling to Miami (because I do think that conduct matters), I'm probably going to be mindful of his area on the plane. Even if only subconsciously. I'm suggesting that law enforcement not trip over itself to avoid the Koran part. But this is also why I'm completely in favor of cutting down TSA to a skeleton crew of special needs students sitting by a metal detector, licking envelopes as occupational therapy and listening for beeps. The Shoe Bomber and Underwear Bomber - Exhibits A and B. TSA didn't nab them. And neither of them fit the profile exactly. But attentive passengers who weren't afraid to jump on the guy acting suspicious and with strange noises coming out of his fly - they saved that one. Conduct matters. But in both cases, their conduct was enough to raise suspicious and for one reason or another the FBI didn't snap them up earlier. Doesn't mean we should stop trying. See, I'm absolutely NOT in favor of profiling your doctor. If she dressed like a coat rack with a couple of eye slits cut in it, she might be worth some attention. A lesson we learned in San Bernadino. But I just wouldn't waste my time, nor any government resources, keeping an eye on your doctor for any reason other than to crank one out under my little blue airline blanket. If Al Qaeda starts recruiting hot looking women to stuff explosives in their lower compartments, I would change my profile. Or maybe just join them. When she gets lumped in with all of the bad ones who should be profiled - hard - that's unfair and I'm not proposing that. There's just no reasonable way to deny or ignore that Islamic zealotry is one of the common indicia of the majority of people committing mass killings around the world. It's one of the most significant features of the profile. As an aside, how is it that a country like Pakistan can be so forward thinking about professional women?! They elected a woman president decades before we will. Of course, they also exploded her to smithereens, but that doesn't negate the accomplishment.
And you guys even have bigger game to shoot than we do. Not to mention, if there's anyone that needs a good mass shooting it's a gaggle of obnoxious, English-hating, snot-blowing Quebecois separatists. (Don't worry. You don't have to say anything. I know you agree. Everyone does.)
sounds great to me. I'm still not understanding why this whole business over the confederate flag has ripened into such a grievance for you. It can't be something you care that much about.
Heard a rumor that the shooter himself was in the closet as he was a regular at the club. Also, the whole story about him becoming enraged at seeing two men kiss? One MAY have been his crush. But again, just a rumor and I can't find any valid sources.
Well, that's certainly the message, but is it really the reality? Liberals are not the ones telling women what to do with their bodies. Liberals are not the ones telling people to go fight in foreign wars. Liberals are not the ones limiting individual and community freedoms. Where do you see a liberal trying to control anyone's actions?
Oh really? Liberals aren't the ones saying to be tolerant of Islam. Tell me that Islam is tolerant of abortion. Tell me Islam is intolerant of rape. Tell me Islam is tolerant of gays Tell me liberals aren't trying to limit free speech. Tell me liberals aren't trying to limit gun rights
That's simply being disingenuous. The AR-15 is derived from the M-16, the prime infantry weapon of US forces for fifty years. It can even use the same ammunition, NATO ammunition; NATO is a military organization. And the weapon was devised for use as an assault weapon by the military. It may not legally be capable of full automatic firing but it is still a very effective killing machine as are the copycats or improvements made by other manufacturers. I fail to see the importance of the lexicon used when the utilization is the problem. Without checking the specifications, I doubt that there is a significant difference in performance among any of them. If you believe the NRA will quietly allow any restriction, even the color screw holding the buttplate, you just haven't been paying attention. How could they be convinced that ammunition designed to not simply put a hole in a target but to tumble, tear, shatter and shred human flesh is not in the nation's best interest?
Tossing gay guys off roof tops. Stoning a women into hamburger because her breath smelled like stray cock. Cultural differences that we just can't understand and really shouldn't judge.
Well, I guess banning the AR-15 wasn't the silver bullet that would have stopped this one. Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Liberals are tolerant of all talk, they're not telling you that you have to put your arm around a Muslim today. And of course Islam is intolerant of abortion - they are among the most conservative of religions, not liberal. Every action you cite is the action of a conservative religion. LIberals are not trying to control speech and while a minority may want to beat every sword into a plowshare, the majority want only to make your guns less of a danger to the rest of us. To go any further with this discussion you'd need to be a lot more specific when you say they want to limit gun rights.
it isn't and it hasn't. I just found it relatable to this situation . We found instant symbolism to blame for one crime: but we're not allowed to say radical Islam. If I had to find a grieve ace over it as an outsider or transplant, I would say that outside groups caused local governments to override the will of their own citizens. That doesn't make me a confederate flag waver or supporter, it just makes me someone who noticed that msm painted a different picture than local news and papers.
Roadblocking and causing anarchy at a candidates rallies isn't trying to silence the speech of others?
Roadblocking and causing anarchy at a candidates rallies isn't trying to silence the speech of others?
You're not talking philosophies here, you're talking partisan politics - the downfall of everything built here in 250 years.
Laughable. Liberals are tolerant of all talk as long as they approve of the opinions. Otherwise the person is a bigot/racist/sexist/whateverthefuckofthedayist
