• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dinesh D'Souza is a terrible human being

Tigerace117 said:
Maybe if you are so obsessed with an inanimate object that you are willing to viciously attack kids who just survived a school shooting because they don’t agree with you, you should take a long hard look at yourself. Because, frankly, everyone else is.
Click to expand...

Why does that matter. It’s faulty logic, an appeal to emotion. They don’t get a free pass to spew facist rhetoric because they survived a horrible event.
 
Anagram said:
So it’s cool to be a massive asshole to people just because they advocate for what they believe in?

I disagree with the kids too, but that is so muchnot the right response. It’s not like Dinesh is making any argument with those tweets, he’s just being a dick. IMO people going out of their way to be a dick should be condemned normally, (though not illegal or anything like that), but especially going out of your way to be a dick to kids who just went through a school shooting.

This beside the fact that the only effect those tweets could have is to hurt his cause.
Click to expand...

I wasn’t condoning what Dinesh said only pointing out that the kids don’t get to be immune from criticism
 
Crovax said:
The previous case was pre Heller
Click to expand...

Well, of course it would be. That I'm aware of. And while I haven't read Heller in a while, I've used it and McDonald in briefs in gun cases (to defend gun rights, believe it or not).

I'm not about to dig through the 70ish pages right now, but I am certain that they preserved the "military-style weapons"/"unusual and dangerous" weapons exception, as well as other ones, and identified self-defense as the core of the 2nd Amd. So to the extent any argument about constitutionality of bans like this one comes up in the future, the main lense it's going to be looked at is through the relation of the need to the possession of the weapon in question to the ability to enjoy the core right of self-defense.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I do suspect that they may be dubious about whether banning something like a semi-automatic AR-15 is going to seriously impede someone's right to defend themselves when they can have all the handguns and shotguns they want.

(And isn't a handgun recommended for public self-defense while a shotgun or two for home-defense?)
 
Crovax said:
I wasn’t condoning what Dinesh said only pointing out that the kids don’t get to be immune from criticism
Click to expand...

Talk about back-tracking. I'll stick with your original words:
PhysicalRemoval said:
Aw, what is wrong? Can not take any dissent?
Click to expand...

holbritter said:
An adult (supposedly) mocking some kids that just went through some terrible ****, is not dissent. It's disgusting.
Click to expand...

Crovax said:
Maybe the kids shouldn’t have put themselves in the political spotlight by using a tragedy to advocate taking away rights from people
Click to expand...



And that is condoning it no matter how you may want to spin it now. He tweeted a picture of them crying as the ban gets shot down and you defended the mockery.

This has nothing to do with dissent or debate. D'Souza's move was simply soulless and had nothing to do with gun control debates.
 
Mr Person said:
Well, of course it would be. That I'm aware of. And while I haven't read Heller in a while, I've used it and McDonald in briefs in gun cases (to defend gun rights, believe it or not).

I'm not about to dig through the 70ish pages right now, but I am certain that they preserved the "military-style weapons"/"unusual and dangerous" weapons exception, as well as other ones, and identified self-defense as the core of the 2nd Amd. So to the extent any argument about constitutionality of bans like this one comes up in the future, the main lense it's going to be looked at is through the relation of the need to the possession of the weapon in question to the ability to enjoy the core right of self-defense.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I do suspect that they may be dubious about whether banning something like a semi-automatic AR-15 is going to seriously impede someone's right to defend themselves when they can have all the handguns and shotguns they want.

(And isn't a handgun recommended for public self-defense while a shotgun or two for home-defense?)
Click to expand...

Heller talks about unusual weapons. I think the main part of why an AWB doesn’t stand up in court is that it’s based mostly on cosmetic attributes and the govt will have to show a compelling interest now that the RKBA is confirmed by the court
 
Crovax said:
I wasn’t condoning what Dinesh said only pointing out that the kids don’t get to be immune from criticism
Click to expand...

People should absolutely criticize their arguments and proposed solutions. We certainly shouldn’t enact whatever legislation the kids think there should be just because they went through a tragedy.

That’s not what happened here though. There was no criticism. He was just a dick.
 
"and these children that you spit on, as they try to change their world, are immune to your consultations, they're quite aware of what they're going through" - David Bowie


GOP members are currently accusing children who survived a massacre of being paid to speak out on gun control laws. The same politicians who gladly accepted political donations from the National Rifle Association and the gun lobbies.
 
Crovax said:
Why does that matter. It’s faulty logic, an appeal to emotion. They don’t get a free pass to spew facist rhetoric because they survived a horrible event.
Click to expand...

Faulty logic is screaming “tyranny” every time someone disagrees with you on the subject of the toll known as firearms. Your entire argument is based on fear—-the fear, and the ignorant fear at that, that somebody is going to come “grab your gun.” You have no room to accuse others of “appeal to emotion” which isn’t even the case.

“Fascist”? Are you even listening to yourself right now? I guess that’s case in point right there. No, there is nothing “fascist” about this situation.

And you and your ilk don’t get a free pass to spew moronically stupid statements because you are deeply in love with a tool.
 
Crovax said:
Heller talks about unusual weapons. I think the main part of why an AWB doesn’t stand up in court is that it’s based mostly on cosmetic attributes and the govt will have to show a compelling interest now that the RKBA is confirmed by the court
Click to expand...

Yeah, I do remember the assault weapons ban being something about having two out of a list of mods, and it really didn't make sense. But that doesn't mean they're all going to be like that.
 
Mr Person said:
Talk about back-tracking. I'll stick with your original words:








And that is condoning it no matter how you may want to spin it now. He tweeted a picture of them crying as the ban gets shot down and you defended the mockery.

This has nothing to do with dissent or debate. D'Souza's move was simply soulless and had nothing to do with gun control debates.
Click to expand...

No I defended his ability to criticize not how he did it. Which is why I clarified my position but apparently you know my mind better than me.
 
Crovax said:
No I defended his ability to criticize not how he did it. Which is why I clarified my position but apparently you know my mind better than me.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything about "ability to criticize" in this:

Crovax said:
Maybe the kids shouldn’t have put themselves in the political spotlight by using a tragedy to advocate taking away rights from people
Click to expand...


Nobody said he doesn't have the right to do so and nobody said he wasn't physically able to do so (not sure what else is supposed to fit under "ability"). They said he was a piece of **** for doing so. Two different things.
 
Mr Person said:
Yeah, I do remember the assault weapons ban being something about having two out of a list of mods, and it really didn't make sense. But that doesn't mean they're all going to be like that.
Click to expand...

Well they all look end up look like that because there is no real way to do it without banning all semi automatic weapons. Just look at the one Diane Feinstein introduced last year
 
Mr Person said:
I don't see anything about "ability to criticize" in this:




Nobody said he doesn't have the right to do so and nobody said he wasn't physically able to do so (not sure what else is supposed to fit under "ability"). They said he was a piece of **** for doing so. Two different things.
Click to expand...

Well it seems to be the prevailing sentiment that these kids shouldn’t be criticized on thier political positions. Dinesh is a jerk but anytime you advocate taking away rights people usually treat you like a jerk. I mean it’s twitter, no one is there for a civil and thoughtful discussion.
 
D'Souza is an opportunity douchebag and always has been. He's has every right to expose his vileness....but he has to live with the consequences of his actions.
 
Chillfolks said:
While I agree he is an ass, Dinesh has as much right to comment on those kids protests as they have the right to protest
Click to expand...

And , people have the right to comment on how terrible a human being he is.
 
Crovax said:
Well it seems to be the prevailing sentiment that these kids shouldn’t be criticized on thier political positions. Dinesh is a jerk but anytime you advocate taking away rights people usually treat you like a jerk. I mean it’s twitter, no one is there for a civil and thoughtful discussion.
Click to expand...

You keep talking about one thing as if it's something else.

Let me repeat: THEY WERE NOT CRITICIZED ON THEIR POSITIONS





Tweeting a photo of traumatized kids crying and saying "worst news since their parents told them to get summer jobs" - HOLY ****ING **** IS HE SERIOUS?! - is not criticizing a position.

These kids are going to hurt until the day they die. Do you not understand that? Nobody is saying FL should pass a law just because they wanted it to. This is all about D'Souza being an unimaginable bastard.




Crovax said:
Well it seems to be the prevailing sentiment that these kids shouldn’t be criticized on thier political positions. Dinesh is a jerk but anytime you advocate taking away rights people usually treat you like a jerk. I mean it’s twitter, no one is there for a civil and thoughtful discussion.
Click to expand...

Again, see this post. The opening line is a lie.

You keep defending D'Souza while claiming you aren't.
 
Last edited:
Crovax said:
Well they all look end up look like that because there is no real way to do it without banning all semi automatic weapons. Just look at the one Diane Feinstein introduced last year
Click to expand...

Hey, I haven't made my actual views on gun control clear in this thread...

I'm just pointing out that I dont' necessarily agree that a semi-auto ban or an "assault weapons" ban would be unconstitutional and therefore take away actual "rights". Doesn't mean I think it would actually work.
 
Mycroft said:
If these kids want to get into the mud, don't complain if they get dirty.
Click to expand...

They're not dirty. And participating in the political process using their Constitutional right to free speech isn't "getting into the mud" just because you disagree with the policies they're advocating.
 
Cardinal said:
They're not dirty. And participating in the political process using their Constitutional right to free speech isn't "getting into the mud" just because you disagree with the policies they're advocating.
Click to expand...

Give me a break. Everyone who makes statements to the media end up in the mud. Doesn't matter if its Trump, a Congressman, or some activist spouting off. You will ALWAYS end up with someone tweeting crap about them. It comes with the territory.

These kids are not exempt.
 
Mycroft said:
Give me a break. Everyone who makes statements to the media end up in the mud. Doesn't matter if its Trump, a Congressman, or some activist spouting off. You will ALWAYS end up with someone tweeting crap about them. It comes with the territory.

These kids are not exempt.
Click to expand...

Mm hmm. Have you noticed that the kind of person who says, "That's the way the ball bounces" is typically the one who drops it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom