Page 1 of 3 [ 43 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,399

26 Jul 2015, 6:48 am

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... un-control


Quote:
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal on Friday deflected questions about whether Thursday night’s movie theater shooting should prompt a reevaluation of gun policies.

“We are less than 24 hours out, we’ve got two families that need to bury their loved ones. We’ve got families waiting for their loved ones to leave the hospital and are praying for their recovery,” he said Friday at a press conference in Lafayette, La., where a gunman killed two others and himself.


“There will be an absolute appropriate time for us to talk about policies and politics, and I’m sure that folks will want to score political points of this tragedy, as they’ve tried to do on previous tragedies.”


Why doesn't he just say he believes in the second amendment and he will fight any kind of legislation that erodes it because this is exactly where he stands. It's not inappropriate to say something like this if it is what you believe in response to a question by the press, which they have a right to ask, it's protected by the first amendment in the same constitution that protects the rights of those who own guns. You can still support and love someone while being honest about where you stand on this issue.

Instead Jindal manipulates the situation to make it look like the one who dared ask that question, in all fairness, is evil. So, is the first amendment evil?

Now you could say it is bad judgment for Jindal himself to bring the subject up in light of what happened but he did not. It was a journalist protected by the first amendment that brought it up.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,027

26 Jul 2015, 12:56 pm

The NRA used to make a point of holding a rally wherever someone had died horribly after being shot by someone who probably shouldn't have had access to a gun.

It didn't go over well outside of their own echo chamber.

Jindal is just being the spineless politician he is.

Plus he has this habit of putting his foot in his mouth. So in this instance he listened to his handlers.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,399

26 Jul 2015, 1:26 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
The NRA used to make a point of holding a rally wherever someone had died horribly after being shot by someone who probably shouldn't have had access to a gun.

It didn't go over well outside of their own echo chamber.

Jindal is just being the spineless politician he is.

Plus he has this habit of putting his foot in his mouth. So in this instance he listened to his handlers.

I think he was answering in a way that he hoped would convince everyone anyone who brings up the subject of guns at this time is evil and insensitive and isn't supporting the victims of the tragedy when that is not true. It's okay to bring the subject up because this involved a man going into public shooting strangers. So, it is actually expected the subject appear. Anything else is censorship. That kind of response is censoring.

Think of another example, that of a dangerous curve in a highway. A family of five unfamiliar with the road has a roll over while navigating that turn and everyone dies. Next day, a member of the press says, that particular place has a history of bad wrecks, maybe it's time to straighten this out. Not many would think it an inappropriate thing to say considering it is related to what just happened and he is suggesting the area should be improved.



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,295
Location: New Orleans

26 Jul 2015, 4:40 pm

We should quit letting mental patients from other States where they should not have passed a background check, Involuntary commitment, protective orders, watch movies in ours. The Police in Alabama refused him a Concealed Carry Permit.

South Carolina, recent arrest for drug possession, awaiting trial, passed a background check and bought a gun.

The failure here is with the all powerful background check.

We will make it illegal for some people to buy guns, then run the Law on the Honor System.

Federal feel good employees got paid, health care, retirement, failed at their job, and people got killed.

These are the same people who are to stop terrorists, illegal Aliens, it is all Homeland Security, and like FEMA, they get paid anyway. The more that die, the more TSA we need, and cameras on street corners, and people to watch porn on the internet all day, looking for someone who looks under eighteen.

Jindal is right, some people went to see a comedy, and left dead or wounded, or at least very upset.

That is the issue, grief, Lafayette is a College town.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,044
Location: Seattle

26 Jul 2015, 6:39 pm

If he'd responded with a strong defense of gun rights, he'd have been excoriated as callous, heartless, etc, which goes to show that you can't win with gun controllers unless you toe their line exactly.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

26 Jul 2015, 6:39 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/249177-jindal-now-is-not-the-time-to-talk-gun-control


Quote:
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal on Friday deflected questions about whether Thursday night’s movie theater shooting should prompt a reevaluation of gun policies.

“We are less than 24 hours out, we’ve got two families that need to bury their loved ones. We’ve got families waiting for their loved ones to leave the hospital and are praying for their recovery,” he said Friday at a press conference in Lafayette, La., where a gunman killed two others and himself.


“There will be an absolute appropriate time for us to talk about policies and politics, and I’m sure that folks will want to score political points of this tragedy, as they’ve tried to do on previous tragedies.”


Why doesn't he just say he believes in the second amendment and he will fight any kind of legislation that erodes it because this is exactly where he stands. It's not inappropriate to say something like this if it is what you believe in response to a question by the press, which they have a right to ask, it's protected by the first amendment in the same constitution that protects the rights of those who own guns. You can still support and love someone while being honest about where you stand on this issue.

Instead Jindal manipulates the situation to make it look like the one who dared ask that question, in all fairness, is evil. So, is the first amendment evil?

Now you could say it is bad judgment for Jindal himself to bring the subject up in light of what happened but he did not. It was a journalist protected by the first amendment that brought it up.

Most of his constituents are probably pro-gun leaning so that makes him pro-gun leaning if he wants to get re-elected. There's no rocket science involved there.
Not taking the bait of the opportunistic liberal anti-gun media at a time like that is good judgment on his part.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

26 Jul 2015, 6:44 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
The NRA used to make a point of holding a rally wherever someone had died horribly after being shot by someone who probably shouldn't have had access to a gun.

It didn't go over well outside of their own echo chamber.

Jindal is just being the spineless politician he is.

Plus he has this habit of putting his foot in his mouth. So in this instance he listened to his handlers.

If I were a betting man I'd put money on the NRA's rallies (if there actually were any) being in response to the opportunistic anti-gun media and politicians jumping on the incident in the same way you're claiming the NRA did.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,399

26 Jul 2015, 7:06 pm

Raptor wrote:
Most of his constituents are probably pro-gun leaning so that makes him pro-gun leaning if he wants to get re-elected. There's no rocket science involved there.
Not taking the bait of the opportunistic liberal anti-gun media at a time like that is good judgment on his part.

It's not bait, it's just the first amendment. Okay, let's say he doesn't want to answer that. It's his right. I disagree with his response. He tries to make a man exercising his first amendment right appear evil. He should have just said, I have no comment at this time. No manipulation.

Or, he could have gone so far as to address the real causes behind any form of violence. As usual, he just pushes it aside, continuing the cycle of accusations. He ignores the opportunity to create meaningful dialogue about a problem that plagues the US and demands bipartisan unification.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

26 Jul 2015, 7:23 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Most of his constituents are probably pro-gun leaning so that makes him pro-gun leaning if he wants to get re-elected. There's no rocket science involved there.
Not taking the bait of the opportunistic liberal anti-gun media at a time like that is good judgment on his part.


It's not bait, it's just the first amendment. Okay, let's say he doesn't want to answer that. It's his right. I disagree with his response. He tries to make a man exercising his first amendment right appear evil. He should have just said, I have no comment at this time. No manipulation.

By that hollering FIRE FIRE FIRE in a crowded theater it must be protected.
So is calling blacks ni66ers or gays [email protected]
Hey, 1st Amendment

Quote:
Or, he could have gone so far as to address the real causes behind any form of violence. As usual, he just pushes it aside, continuing the cycle of accusations. He ignores the opportunity to create meaningful dialogue about a problem that plagues the US and demands bipartisan unification.

And exactly what problem would that be that "plagues" us?


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,399

26 Jul 2015, 7:24 pm

Oh come on, Raptor. You know violence plagues America. Otherwise, there would be no shootings. Violent mindset is behind it.

And the question the journalist asked is not the equivalent of hollering fire in a crowded theater even though that choice of metaphor isn't exactly sensitive to the victims and their families at this time, is it now, Raptor? You are not being supportive and loving of the families talking like that!



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

26 Jul 2015, 8:26 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Oh come on, Raptor. You know violence plagues America.

Know it?
No, I don't know any such thing.
Apparently the Federal Bureau of Intimidation doesn't know it either:

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/violent-crime/violent-crime-topic-page/violentcrimemain_finalImage
And wikipedia seems to be in the dark about this thing you seem to know as well:
Quote:
Crime in the United States has been recorded since colonization. Crime rates have varied over time, with a sharp rise after 1963, reaching a broad peak between the 1970s and early 1990s. Since then, crime has declined significantly in the United States,[1] and current crime rates are approximately the same as those of the 1960s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

Quote:
Otherwise, there would be no shootings. Violent mindset is behind it.
Do you hear voiced in your head, too?

Quote:
And the question the journalist asked is not the equivalent of hollering fire in a crowded theater even though that choice of metaphor isn't exactly sensitive to the victims and their families at this time, is it now, Raptor?

What, there are two 1st amendments now for different occasions?

Quote:
You are not being supportive and loving of the families talking like that!
When I first read this little nugget I thought you had to be being sarcastic. I'm not so sure now.
Supportive and loving. :roll:


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,399

26 Jul 2015, 8:49 pm

Those statistics are meaningless. The only valid statistics are city-by-city. You can have a city like Portland, Oregon double murders in the course of a year, only to decrease them the next. You have a city like LA that has a ridiculously high murder rate. It doesn't reflect the rest of the country, just LA. Anyone can manipulate data. Small towns and suburbs typically experience less crime. Mass shootings like the one that just happened in Lafayette are becoming more frequent.

So yes, in many cities across America, a plague of violence is experienced.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,027

26 Jul 2015, 8:53 pm

Quote:
Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana called for tougher gun laws in other states on Sunday, breaking his silence on the issue three days after a gunman with a history of mental illness and violence opened fire in a movie theater in the state’s fourth-largest city.


Bobby Jindal Calls for States to Follow Louisiana’s Example in Toughening Gun Laws

it's weird because his critics say that he has mostly made louisiana's gun laws weaker.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

26 Jul 2015, 9:02 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Those statistics are meaningless. The only valid statistics are city-by-city. You can have a city like Portland, Oregon double murders in the course of a year, only to decrease them the next. You have a city like LA that has a ridiculously high murder rate. It doesn't reflect the rest of the country, just LA. Anyone can manipulate data. Small towns and suburbs typically experience less crime. Mass shootings like the one that just happened in Lafayette are becoming more frequent.

So yes, in many cities across America, a plague of violence is experienced.

Really now?
So what did you mean when you said
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Oh come on, Raptor. You know violence plagues America.
???

Backpeddle much?
:roll:

Oh, and by the way; your starting this thread is yet another data point supporting my assertion that you're an anti. :shameonyou:


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

26 Jul 2015, 9:11 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
Quote:
Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana called for tougher gun laws in other states on Sunday, breaking his silence on the issue three days after a gunman with a history of mental illness and violence opened fire in a movie theater in the state’s fourth-largest city.


Bobby Jindal Calls for States to Follow Louisiana’s Example in Toughening Gun Laws

it's weird because his critics say that he has mostly made louisiana's gun laws weaker.

He's likely trimming his sails to accommodate what he thinks the people want to hear at the time. If he persists and gets tougher gun laws passed (not that they would have or will make a difference) he and his allies in the state legislature might be in for a nasty surprise next election.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley