Sparks wrote: »

They do; but showing up with firearms openly carried? Against a protest led by kids?

Back to my point about perceptions. If it were a rally, as has been done before, against a group of adults there would be no thought of inappropriateness, but against kids!!!!!!!! Won't someone think of the children.

If anyone thinks that's going to be thought remotely acceptable in any civilised society, they need to go soak their head for a while.

Says you.

It's their second amendment right to do so and it's no less valid than any other right because it involves guns. Also the kids are either there are their own behest or as is the case in so many rallies at the direction of adults with ulterior motives.

You cannot keep playing the kid card as defense. They either want to be treated as adults ( in which case they need to be told the world is not a candy coated sweet) or they don't (in which case go home to your safe space where you'll get a trophy for participating).

Cass, someone shows up to yell at kids and brings a gun with them which they're happily displaying and yes, they're worse. Flat out, no contest, completely lunatic fringe worse.
You Just Don't Do That.

Sparks, yes you can as is their right and protection under the second amendment.

Because you and other liberals don't think it's right or are offended by it does not make it illegal or wrong. As i keep saying, the kids are being used a human shields against any form of attack because it's known that any attack on kids (verbally of course) is seen as a no go.

Sorry not buying it.

I don't know and that's the scary part. They've had school shootings in the US since the last century; they never figured out why and then suddenly it starts to show up across the western world from the 60s onwards. It's almost like watching the spread of a disease and nobody's looking at why it's happening.

The guns have always been there, yet its only in the last 15 to 20 years that it's becoming a more and more frequent thing. The guns and how they operate have not changed so does anyone else think it's the people wielding them and if so why not address that issue?

Who'd you hear it from?

You:

Sparks wrote:

They might not know the technical details of the firearms, the law, the history of the problem and so on - but they're kids. They're not expected to.

What I said was

What you said was what i've quoted above. Just scroll down a bit, its right there.

they have a right to protest that something's broken and needs fixing

No ones is arguing that, but they're not protesting the problem, they're protesting what they incorrrectly think to be the problem and because of political and social pressure they think they're right.

, and that how it got fixed was a seperate thing and if they don't know that, well, (a) they're kids, they're not supposed to be experts, and (b) the experts don't know either.

Now its because they're not experts? Above it was just because they're kids and didn't have to know. The fact that they don't know through ignorance or lack of trying is a sign that something is wrong. They look for the easy path which is guns.

I've said before if they ban all the guns in the morning without addressing the underlying cause of what drives kids to want to murder other kids then nothing will change other than the method those murders are done by.

By the by the kids protesting against guns are ignoring the fact that most school shooters are kids themselves. Perhaps this is a starting point to examining the real issues behind these killings.

It's when they want specific legislation that the requirement for expertise comes in. I don't see placards saying "amend article 13.4.2.3(a) to read ...". I see placards saying the equivalent of "stop shooting at us and sort this **** out".

So go back to the public faces of this movement you said were not fair game. They don't say "sort this out" they say ban guns, the NRA has blood on its hands, etc. No middle ground, no seeking reform. just get rid of the 2nd amendment and we'll all lvie with unicorns and rainbows.

They'll certainly try, it's what they do. Hell, ours are as bad, just look at the Healy-Raes.

We cannot compare us to them. We have guns as a privilege, we don't have the 1st amendment either, and no TD would get elected in this country on the "power" of any gun lobby group. As for the Healy-Raes, another story for another day.

That doesn't mean that if a bunch of kids whose school got shot up want to grab an incumbent by the neck and ask why, after over a century of this kind of thing, they haven't fixed it yet and why are they paying for their pensions anyway, well, it's a question I've wanted to ask of our lot a few times myself about things.

Can you not see the problem with this?

The "kids" are protesting the NRA, blaming Trump, and attacking pro-2nd/gun groups. Not the politicians, not the legislators of each state, not the representatives of their county.

Then you'll have Schumer, Pelosi, Waters, Warren, et al, coming out and giving rousing speeches and then going back to Washington and either not bothering to do anything or introducing such a poorly worded bill that it'll get shot down immediately.

I've posted on this very thread examples of congressmen/women giving laughably unintelligible press conferences and interviews with one admitting she didn't even understand the contents of her own bill on gun reform.

You set term limits on Senators and Congressmen and you'll see a marked improvement in performance as they have a short period of time to get stuff done rather than trying to fill a seat for 40 years.

My point being the "kids" are aiming their anger at the wrong people so is it any surprise they get "f**k you" in response. You ask a pro-gun person to give up their guns.

Turning round and saying they faked the school shooting, or showing up at the protest carrying guns, or doing any of the truly ****ty ****ty things people have been doing in the US to them? No, that's just wrong.

Don't lump a tin foil hat, paint chip eating, window licking conspiracy with a valid counter protest. Its disingenuous.

I never got the point to that specific complaint, whether it was about democrats, republicans or actresses, to be honest.

Its the same complaint about Hollywood going to these anti gun rallies yet making millions/billions by glorifying gun violence. If they truly oppose guns so much then stop make making movies that romanticize it and then maybe i'll listen.

I mean, you make that jibe, the return's always going to be to point out that you can't take firearms into the NRA AGM.

Yeeeaaaahhhh.................... perhaps you wanna fact check that.

Yup, ****ty stupid program...
...as was Bush's "Wide Receiver" scheme which invented the whole "ship guns to mexico" thing in 2006.

I'm not trying to do a "they're worse than them", but Obama was seriously anti gun, made it known, yet his administration created this cluster f...... Bush was not anti gun (which doesn't excuse it, just saying).

Again, we literally don't know. We desperately need to and nobody's looking at it, they're all too busy having a pissing match.

And there is your problem. Who can shout the loudest and invoke the greatest sympathy, regardless of whether it's accomplishing anything or not.

And if that **** starts showing up over here...

It won't and for the reason its happening in America. Irish people are too subservient for anything close to this to happen here. We don't have the same thoughts or freedom of thought they have in America. We have a problem with someone it's either don't speak to them ever again, spread rumors about them, or report them to the Gardaí/Welfare. Or some combination of the three.

So what? Didn't stop them getting shot.

You brought it up as a point, hence my remark:

Sparks wrote:

and what the hell are you yahoos doing with our taxes to say it's this bad?"

Nobody's ever going to repeal it.

I know, that is my point. It's a loosing battle and not one people against these school shootings and violence should be fighting. Their time, money and energy would be better spent elsewhere where it will make a difference, but some force or a level of ignorance is driving this train in the wrong path and nobody is questioning why.

Engaging in nothing but ad hominem attacks on them is another.

People on the pro gun side see one of two things.

1. Kids that don't know the level at which they are playing
2. Kids that are being manipulated by the media and other interest groups

When they hear these young adults (they're not kids ffs) attacking their rights and freedoms from a position of ignorance and mi-information they will retaliate.

I don't see how name calling gets anything done. It weakens your argument and makes people ignore the rest of what you have to say. However i don't believe someone is exempt from attack and to some this is a personal attack on their liberties and that will get a personal response. Also the young adults have made serious and possibly defamatory remarks about President Trump, Dana Loesch, and others on the pro gun side. So not innocent kiddies as some believe they are.

And showing up carrying firearms openly at a protest is so far away from the concepts of dissent and rebuttal that it's ludicrous.

The dissent and rebuttal remark was in response to your comment on the two faces of this anti gun campaign as per the quoted piece and my response, and not the kids at the march in Albuquerque which i've addressed at the start of this post.