• 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!

One year after Parkland...1100 children killed

Casper said:
The goal is the make ownership of all firearms illegal and Nation wide confiscation, nothing less.
Click to expand...

LOL.

The pearl clutching starts only 25 posts in!

So far, all responses except for post #3 have demonstrated no concern at all for the horrific star in the OP.

I think my point has been made.
 
Threegoofs said:
Not bad! Only three a day!

Lois Beckett on Twitter: "1,100 American kids have been killed with guns since Parkland. There were more than:

40 college-bound seniors: [url]https://t.co/OACdcwbSfV

80 infants/toddlers: https://sinceparkland.com/categories/infants-and-toddlers/

30 artists: https://sinceparkland.com/categories/artists/

40 community volunteers: https://t.co/BqSQJxaJqB… https://t.co/951MqEKwEy"[/url]

I look forward to hearing how they all really deserved it because they are criminals, or they don’t count because they’re suicides/have stupid parents/blah blah blah.
Click to expand...

They could have run themselves over in a car. (not sure how but some wingnut will be along shortly to suggest this)
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

The pearl clutching starts only 25 posts in!

So far, all responses except for post #3 have demonstrated no concern at all for the horrific star in the OP.

I think my point has been made.
Click to expand...

What is your point
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

The pearl clutching starts only 25 posts in!

So far, all responses except for post #3 have demonstrated no concern at all for the horrific star in the OP.

I think my point has been made.
Click to expand...

I don't see any point being made other than you refuse to actually back up the statistics you pulled from an unsupported site and you are attempting to try to smear lawful and responsible gun owners.
 
Threegoofs said:
Seems like there would be safety ordinances regarding pools, and liability to the owner.

Your point?
Click to expand...
There are safety ordinances and liability to gun owners as well.
 
TurtleDude said:
he doesn't like gun owners. He doesn't like gun advocates tend to vote for politicians who aren't fans of his global warming hysterics
Click to expand...

So another words, if political candidates who were for gun rights were usually also for taking action against global warming, he would be for gun rights.
 
DebateChallenge said:
So another words, if political candidates who were for gun rights were usually also for taking action against global warming, he would be for gun rights.
Click to expand...

I suspect that is the case. His entire "tenure" on gun threads has been attempts to smear gun owners for political reasons. If you go back to when he first joined this board, and when he first posted on the gun threads, he had made comments about Gun owners that strongly suggested why he was trying to smear us with crimes committed by people with guns. You also won't find any rational or even somewhat reasoned arguments as to what would prevent what he pretends bothers him
 
TurtleDude said:
based on past posts, the goal is to try to imply guilt on honest gun owners for our political leanings, not to actually suggest anything constitutional or sensible as a solution. The fact is-gun banning groups are well known for cooking the facts and some have used the term "children" to count individuals several years past the birthdate one needs to achieve to vote in federal elections or serve in the military
Click to expand...

Often they use the term "children" to count all people under the age of 21, such as when it comes to purchasing handguns.
 
Casper said:
The goal is the make ownership of all firearms illegal and Nation wide confiscation, nothing less.
Click to expand...
You would have a better chance of being struck by lightning on the dark side of the moon.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Often they use the term "children" to count all people under the age of 21, such as when it comes to purchasing handguns.
Click to expand...

gangs understand that the penalties for juvenile offenders are often far less severe than for those over 18 years of age. So often younger gang members are tasked with doing things (such as transporting narcotics) that will not result in the same sort of hard time that an older gang member would face. Also-since juvenile records are generally "sealed" adults with extensive juvenile gang activities may well have "clean records". The gun banners would have you believe that most "children" (who are often the same age as the men who stormed the Nazi held beaches at Normady or were battling the VC and NVA in the streets of Saigon during the Tet offensive) killed with guns were cute little girls swinging in the playground when some machine gun battle killed them or that NRA members left cocked and unlocked assault pistols in the playrooms of toddlers.
 
TurtleDude said:
I suspect that is the case. His entire "tenure" on gun threads has been attempts to smear gun owners for political reasons. If you go back to when he first joined this board, and when he first posted on the gun threads, he had made comments about Gun owners that strongly suggested why he was trying to smear us with crimes committed by people with guns. You also won't find any rational or even somewhat reasoned arguments as to what would prevent what he pretends bothers him
Click to expand...

I understand that you can’t address the topic and have to whine about the poster and imaginary ‘motivations’.

If you can’t deal with the content, you’re more than welcome to exit the thread.
 
Threegoofs said:
I understand that you can’t address the topic and have to whine about the poster and imaginary ‘motivations’.

If you can’t deal with the content, you’re more than welcome to exit the thread.
Click to expand...

we are waiting for you to make an actual point rather than trying to smear gun owners and gun ownership with unsubstantiated BS from Twitter
 
Threegoofs said:
I understand that you can’t address the topic and have to whine about the poster and imaginary ‘motivations’.

If you can’t deal with the content, you’re more than welcome to exit the thread.
Click to expand...

NPR told us this morning that dozens of new gun control laws were enacted after Parkland in multiple states. Given that, has there been a measurable impact on the number of child deaths due to gunshots from historical values to the numbers in the year post-Parkland?
 
TurtleDude said:
we are waiting for you to make an actual point rather than trying to smear gun owners and gun ownership with unsubstantiated BS from Twitter
Click to expand...

I thought the point was the number of dead kids.

Of course, around here it’s the point is it’s a threat to people’s toys.

But I guess that’s a point too, just a sad one.
 
Threegoofs said:
I thought the point was the number of dead kids.

Of course, around here it’s the point is it’s a threat to people’s toys.

But I guess that’s a point too, just a sad one.
Click to expand...

Is it your claim that we will need to reduce the number of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens to have a measurable effect on the number of children killed by gunfire?
 
Threegoofs said:
I thought the point was the number of dead kids.

Of course, around here it’s the point is it’s a threat to people’s toys.

But I guess that’s a point too, just a sad one.
Click to expand...
Let us see if we can get some honesty from you

what was your purpose of citing unsubstantiated twitter accounts of the number of children killed? I think anyone with an IQ over Iguana understands when you call firearms "toys" you are displaying a rather inane hostility and contempt towards gun ownership. SO either you are dishonestly trying to pretend that gun owners in general or most gun owners are either OK with children being killed, or are actually responsible.

What is it?
 
Rucker61 said:
Is it your claim that we will need to reduce the number of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens to have a measurable effect on the number of children killed by gunfire?
Click to expand...

Did I write that?

Or are you clutching your pearls preemptively?
 
TurtleDude said:
Let us see if we can get some honesty from you

what was your purpose of citing unsubstantiated twitter accounts of the number of children killed? I think anyone with an IQ over Iguana understands when you call firearms "toys" you are displaying a rather inane hostility and contempt towards gun ownership. SO either you are dishonestly trying to pretend that gun owners in general or most gun owners are either OK with children being killed, or are actually responsible.

What is it?
Click to expand...

I’m just putting it out there.

You guys are the ones clearly OK with this carnage. Literally not one sentence written about the scale of these deaths, but lots of wailing about ‘accuracy’ and ‘banning’ and politics.

My point has been made. By you guys.
 
Threegoofs said:
Did I write that?

Or are you clutching your pearls preemptively?
Click to expand...

That's what we call a "clarifying question". Evidently your actual intent wasn't discernible from your post, so rather than jump to a conclusion I'm trying to understand exactly what you mean. I've found that the best way to do that is to ask the OP a clarifying question. This is the opportunity to say "Yes, I meant that" or "No, I didn't mean that: I meant this".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom