My comment was directly in reference to your source, not the story. We have had preventable deaths right here, as you should be aware. All are tragic, but I get better news from news stations, not those exploiting tragedy for a political point.
Carrie,
You are one who would prefer to kill the messenger rather that deal with the message. That is irrefutable from your comments. What is it in the remarks of Meadow's father that you take issue with? I would say that you are upset with the network that granted access to a public forum and you would rather he not be heard because of this form of access. That is shameful.
Carrie wrote: My comment was directly in reference to your source, not the story. We have had preventable deaths right here, as you should be aware. All are tragic, but I get better news from news stations, not those exploiting tragedy for a political point.
LOL, like CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS NBC? Every one of those have used shootings to make political points. I'm pretty sure at least one of them has blamed Trump and most blame the NRA (most shooters are not NRA members).
You missed the point. Since no one can read all information depicted as "news", one selects the information from news outlets they consider to be more factual. That is a matter of time available and of personal choice, certainly influenced by beliefs and opinions. I did not even open your URL because of the source. The same would be true if it were attributed to Rush Limbaugh or the Democratic Party. I elect to not consider Fox News a valuable source. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes I consider the method of presentation of the facts to be an editorial. My decision was made whether to take the time based on the source, not the content (but maybe the presentation of the content, also, which has often been my experience with that outlet.)
I have to shake my head when people are labeled "liberals" or "conservatives" because of their opinions on one subject--ANY one subject. I have hunted since I was young. I have a Concealed Carry Permit and a reasonable collection of weapons of various kinds. I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, but not naïve enough to believe every single person is responsible enough or perhaps, more importantly, Moral and/or Stable enough to deserve to own a gun. The choices seem to be "no one should own a gun" to "everyone should be able to own a gun with no requirements" (like background checks). To me, the only rational action lies somewhere in the middle, but there doesn't seem to be many opinions there. I can't think of any gun that is best for all purposes, of which I believe should be primarily three: 1) Hunting 2) Plinking at targets for fun and practice and 3) (my main objective) Self Defense. And in each group are various weapons to achieve a specific goal. You don't rabbit hunt or bird hunt with the same weapon you hunt deer or moose. A pistol is great for self defense for many situations, but in the case of an invasion or war, God forbid, I want something with more rounds before I have to re-load. On this subject, I am called a conservative right winger. On the subject of raping the environment for more money faster, I'm called a "libtard". I prefer discussions rather than name calling and labels.
Complex problems require complex solutions, and as I told one person who was all for arming teachers, "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." ~ Albert Einstein
Also: "Any fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius–and a lot of courage–to move in the opposite direction". ~Albert Einstein
We cannot solve the problem of people dying by guns...by providing more people with guns. It's that simple. We've talked about the fact that kids have crappy educations, that they sit in front of the TV or mobile device, play violent games, are in too large of classrooms, many have single-parent homes, they get bullied, they don't get the one-on-one attention they need for their learning or to help them deal with emotional issues. Teachers & schools are woefully underfunded. How about we fund what's on this graphic first?
I wrote and posted this tongue-in-cheek satire on my own FB wall, thought I'd share it here for y'all too.
So...if we're talking about arming the teachers, why not arm the kids too? Hell, they're the ones getting shot at, shouldn't they have a fighting chance to shoot back (especially in light of the fact that the SRO refused to enter the building and engage the shooter in FL)? Guns for EVERYONE! Guns for Black Lives Matter, guns for Antifa, guns for Muslims, guns for Nazis, guns for Buddhists, guns for the KKK, guns for evangelicals, guns for atheists, guns for cop haters, guns for cop lovers, guns for moms, guns for blind folks, guns for babies! Right? I mean, we should hand them out standard issue to every man, woman, and child. There's more good guys, isn't there? And we can't tell them apart from the bad guys so let's give everyone a gun and let's sort it out day by day.
I think I'm onto something here. This could make an awesome campaign platform. I'll call it Darwin's Revenge.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Attachments:
Last edit: 26 Feb 2018 18:34 by ScienceChic. Reason: added link for source
ScienceChic wrote: ......
We cannot solve the problem of people dying by guns...by providing more people with guns. It's that simple. .......
[/quote]
On the subject of arming teachers I heard the governor of Montana dismiss the idea and say lets just take it off the table.
Don Lemon on CNN read a letter from a teacher who did not want to carry in school and raised a few straw men. Lemon takes the straw men as gospel and dismisses arming some teacher as too silly to even talk about.
You offer a platitude and dismiss it as "that simple".
It is was waste of time to engage people who are that close minded.
Meanwhile I saw a poll that the majority of parents with kids in schools do want an armed presence. It is a local matter, does not require a national debate and is already happening.
GOOD.
Here is an interview with someone who actually trains teachers. It was on AM 760 today. Only for those who allow themselves to hear contrary opinions.
Carrie,
You stated "You missed the point. Since no one can read all information depicted as "news", one selects the information from news outlets they consider to be more factual. That is a matter of time available and of personal choice, certainly influenced by beliefs and opinions. I did not even open your URL because of the source. The same would be true if it were attributed to Rush Limbaugh or the Democratic Party. I elect to not consider Fox News a valuable source. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes I consider the method of presentation of the facts to be an editorial. My decision was made whether to take the time based on the source, not the content (but maybe the presentation of the content, also, which has often been my experience with that outlet.)"
Do you realize what you posted, a decision based on messenger rather than the content. Would you please apologize to Andrew Pollack, father of Meadow, to let him know that dismissing his daughter's death, in your post, was a mistake on your part simply because you do not like the messenger, but that you are respectful of his daughter.
