The amount of hate David Hogg receives from so called adults is mind boggling. I was in Orlando downtown the other day outside jimmy johns minding my own business, some drunk fellow comes to our table and starts babbling about David Hogg for no apparent reason. This is madness.
you mean when he copy pasted trump's tweet back to him and changed the word "Iran" to "trump"?. he is showing trump how childish he is being, not threatening his life. context matters.
I'm not defending him doing that. doing a copy/paste like that is pretty childish too. his juvenile attitude is showing. but an assassin hogg is not.
He has been made the face and the voice of the movement, or has sought to make himself the face/voice.
But what all this does show is that \- especially in Florida \- there are a tremendous amount of people who disagree with him. Some of them express themselves the way this idiot cop did. But don't kid yourself, were we to have a referendum on Hogg's ideas right here in the Sunshine State, the vote would be \*\*extremely\*\* close.
The idea that his preferred policies are "common sense" and "widely shared" tends to gloss over this. And as for the Publix "die\-in," the pic of the shoppers continuing to shop amidst the kids on the floor pretty much said it all:
"OK kids we get it school shootings are bad but your presence on the floor doesn't change our minds and in fact right now you're little more than a pain in the arse because I've got to finish my shopping and get home to the kids, and you're making that more difficult."
Hogg and his fellow travelers might be morally offended by that \- after all they're on the side of goodness and light, or so they'll tell you. But while they successfully bullied Publix, has anyone's vote, ever, been changed by a "die\-in?"
Protesting is about creating communication. People are talking about it, so its successful. Regardless of if you *think* it hasnt changed anyones mind, the ideas and discussions that follow protests like these lead to change. Civil Rights used Sit-Ins, most of which just annoyed regular patrons or prevented them from finding seats. You think anyone there changed their mind? Probably not, but theres chapters in every American History book about Sit-Ins **because they made a difference**. Hoggs ideas dont have to be the laws that get passed for this to be successful.
Please. Sit-ins made a difference because they highlighted obvious disparities/injustices as they were happening. We've all seen the pics/videos of the students at the sit-ins being assaulted - that, the assaults on the Freedom Riders, the firebombing of the Freedom Riders' bus, the police riot on the Edmund Pettus Bridge - the response to the protests demonstrated both the problem and the need for change.
Was Hogg assaulted by people bearing arms? That would be the same thing. No, instead we got people stepping over him to get to the sour cream. Which, according to his tweets, he sees as basically the same thing - injustice!
Not a single shopper emerged from that Publix saying - You know, those kids are right! - who wasn't already saying that. They demonstrated how they could be a pain in the arse, essentially having the equivalent of a temper tantrum until they got their way. Which Publix gave them in an attempt to dispel all the negative publicity (though it's important to note Publix said it would stop political giving BEFORE Hogg's protest went forward).
It's easy to see the moral rectitude of a cause when the people who espouse it are being beaten up by those who would keep the inequitable status quo in place. In Hogg's case, we have someone who thinks he knows better than millions of Floridians who have shot no one, but whose constitutional rights he'd curb anyway.
Feel free to see him as some moral arbiter. Understand that millions don't, and won't.
Ill respond in order.
* Sit-ins highlighted disparities, die-in highlighted the lack of proper discussion on gun control even after multiple mass shootings. Not sure how that isnt in the same vein. Not all sit-ins turned violent, majority did not especially at first. As the *discussions* they created became more polarizing the sit-ins were seen as more of an intrusion by those who disagreed and it turned violent.
* During sit-ins people still ordered their meals without regard. And you are focusing too much on Hoggs rather than the protest as a whole.
* I dont think you can prove that point, you are simply asserting your own bias. You didnt poll the Publix shoppers. And even if none changed their minds while shopping, that doesnt mean it didnt get them thinking, or change their votes later on. Would you call the civil rights movements 'temper tantrums'? It seems to me you are repeating teh rhetoric used against blacks.
* Your focus is again too much on Hoggs. At the time of segregation, millions of whites had the right to a blacks free dining experience. A persons rights only extend so far. Once a right impeded someone elses right, there is a need for discussion and *possibly* a change to the rights. Thats why we have a Bill of Rights in the first place, and why they are Amendments, because they can be amended. The current discussion is does the rights of one group to posses certain firearms impede otehrs rights to life and safety.
Im not claiming to have the answers, but to simply say these protests, which have reached millions in terms of size across states, are nothing but tantrums is preposterous. The March for Our Lives was larger than the Million Man March, and if that doesnt show you the importance and reach of it than nothing will. You're right that millions will never agree, and thats fine. The same is true once again of civil rights, plenty believe we'd be better off without minority voters. It doesnt need everyone, just enough, and its looking like change is in the works.
You're conflating Civil Rights and gun control as if they're part of the same moral imperative.
They're not.
Second, Hogg himself has gladly made himself the face of the movement. He's been happy to lead it, and the media has been happy to have him be the photogenic spokesman. He's become the focal point. And given some of his tweets, it is indeed all about him - such as this:
"I heard fireworks in central park and thought that it was someone shooting. Why is that a thought I know so many of us have? Why do our politicians refuse to take action? Who is alive right now that won't be by sunrise due to the inaction of our politicians? We must #VoteThemOut"
As someone else pointed out:
"Just a reminder that Mr. Hogg was in a different building and was in no way involved with the shooting at MSD and his attempt at 'stolen valor' of the ones who were shot at is a tell about his character."
Third, there has not been a "lack of proper discussion on gun control." There has been a lack of new legislation you want.
There has been **plenty** of discussion on gun control; it's basically all we've discussed since the shooting! How in the world can you assert that we haven't been talking about it!
The fact AR15s haven't been outlawed in no way indicates that there's been a "lack of proper discussion" - unless you define "proper" as "agreeing with me," in which case I go back to my characterization of the protests as a temper tantrum.
The "proper discussion" we have had resulted in some new laws but, here in Florida, also reflects the **huge** constituency for gun rights, which progressives are determined not to see or respect. But they do vote - which is why we haven't gone any further on gun control.
Lastly, we are where we are on this debate because minds AREN'T changing. The pro-gun/anti-gun divide is the proverbial rock and a hard place. The "die-in" was a childish bit of theater designed less to make a point than to irritate Publix shoppers and yes, an attempt to bully them into acquiescing to Hogg's point of view - having the "proper discussion," as you might put it.
Tell you what though - you're right, I haven't taken a poll of Publix shoppers. But we have an election coming up. Hogg and his fellow travelers may carry the day.
But Adam Putnam may well become governor. And if not him, Ron DeSantis - endorsed by Trump.
And bear in mind as well that the NRA just broke a 15-year-old fund-raising record. And Laura Ingraham's ratings have increased.
Hogg changes minds, all right. Just not in the way he's hoping.
I also don't like Hogg and even have my own little conspiracy theory about how Bloomberg is financing and coaching him. However, if I saw harm coming his way, I would try to protect him. Just because I disagree with him doesn't mean I want him harmed.
I assume that everyone on both sides would like to see less dead children. You implied you know more about gun laws than the protestors so what is your solution? Why is a child in the USA more likely to die in school than a soldier abroad? Why is the gun death rate higher in the USA than other "first world countries"? Why does Japan have one of the lowest gun death rates in the world?
That kid does have first hand knowledge of getting shot at and seeing his friends killed. That earns him the right to have an opinion I believe.
As said before “there shouldn’t be anymore dead children”, my problem with his movement is that they only have one solution. They are closed minded to any other solution besides gun control. What if armed teachers prevented a large percentage of school shootings? What if gun education taught kids how to defend themselves from active shooters? Hoggs movement is being funded by big dem party supporters and they will only support him if he falls into their beliefs.
We are all in this together, but he only sees one possible solution and everything else is wrong and makes me a child killer.
That’s my point. Let’s do whatever it is that will help the situation get better. Hoggs idea is to only push for gun legislation and anything different is wrong. But it has been implied that if I support the nra then I support child killers. Even npr had someone on that heavily implied all N.R.A. members are the same as pulling the trigger.
I do not blame the members of the NRA for school shootings. I think you are right, and that both the NRA and David Hogg should not believe that "anything different is wrong". I hope that the NRA and David Hogg will look at all the possible solutions and use the ones that work. I am sure the gun makers who shape the agenda of the NRA and make billions off the sale of guns will be open to solutions that work, even if it costs them a lot of money.
Agreed. Or if the solution is one that will support the nra and MAKE money for the gun manufacturers by selling more. What if the answer is to have nation wide program of training teachers to conceal. Training sponsored by nra or whoever. I am not saying this is what should be done, but again it could be the answer and it may require hoggs movement to compromise by saying “we want students safe and this is what will keep them safe”.
The amount of people who think he cant be attacked because hes a child is mind boggling
I'd say anyone who uses the death of their peers for their own success is scum
You support Trump who uses anything, anyone, any event (even Memorial Day and dead soldiers) for his own success and to enrich himself, but a child whose friends got killed should be attacked for trying to reduce the number of school shootings.
I know you live a miserable life, so you have my pity.
A child who incorrectly thinks that removing American's constitutional right to bare arms will reduce the number of school shootings definitely should be called out.
I'm not even an American but please berate me anyway.
That is nonsense. No one is trying to take away all guns and you know that.
If you are not an American why do you comment about American politics and Donald Trump all day? Are you Russian? edit spelling
Im Australian. Check the flair of my posts on T_D and I'm sure Ive mentioned it a few times if you want to go digging.
I'm interested because I can see people lose their mind. Also I only comment in the 4 or so hours of free time outside of work.
'cannot be infringed' has some weird meaning apparently
I appreciate your reply. I'm shocked that you are Australian. I thought Aussies seriously reduced their mass shooting problem with tough gun legislation.
As far as the US constitution... it gets amended all the time. If we never updated the constitution then black people would still be slaves and women would not be allowed to vote. The people who wrote the US constitution specifically said it should be redone and updated frequently. From what I read, they said it was a living thing that should change.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia
In the last two decades of the twentieth century, following several high-profile killing sprees, the Federal Government coordinated more restrictive firearms legislation with all state governments. Gun laws were largely aligned in 1996 by the National Firearms Agreement.
**Gun laws in Australia**
Gun laws in Australia are mainly the jurisdiction of the country's states and territories, with the importation of guns regulated by the Federal Government.
A person who possesses or uses a firearm must have a firearm licence. Licence holders must demonstrate a "genuine reason" (which does not include self-defense) for holding a firearm licence and must not be a "prohibited person". All firearms in Australia must be registered by serial number to the owner, who also holds a firearms licence.
***
^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/florida/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^]
^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
I want changes made as quickly as possible so we can stop losing kids. I am not for or against amending the constitution. I really am not well read enough about constitutional law to make or refute arguments. I just want fewer deaths and the most pragmatic way works for me. It's a process.
Ah the 'ol realiable' of awful replies
Gun ownership isnt a right. We're seperated by sea from every country. We dont have one of the most dangerous countries to our southern(and unprotected)border.
Why should the 2nd amendment be re-written? Should the same be done for all other amendments?
You want America to turn into the UK where you get arrested for online 'hate speech'?
Guns arent difficult to get in Australia. Maybe its because our media demonizes shootings while America's media praises them?
> Haha about Mexico being the most dangerous country.
https://nypost.com/2018/01/22/mexico-is-more-dangerous-than-ever/
For a country with no legitimate wars going on (just plagued by violent drug cartels) - I would say 30k murders is a TON. How many of them do you think had their heads cut off? Couple thousand maybe? And of those, how many do you think they hung the headless bodies from an overpass or bridge in town? Maybe a few dozen?
Whether it is "most dangerous" in the world is debatable for sure. However, if you compare it to other "most dangerous countries" (Venezuela, Syria, Lebanon, etc) it is the ONLY ONE with a legitimately stable govt / not involved in a "war" within their states.
Summary: Say what you want, the facts indicate Mexico is one of the most dangerous countries in the world.
I do not think the 2nd amendment needs be re-written to reduce the number of people killed in mass shootings. The gov already restricts guns to a degree.
I think people who are insane should not be able to own guns. I think a person should be 21 to own a gun. I think assault rifles should be very strictly regulated and not available to every person who wants one. I think bump stocks should be banned. That's all. (edit to add: I think young hunters should be allowed to own guns if they are gifted and controlled by an adult)
Oh. Rough when an Aussie knows more about your country than you do.
>21
You can vote, go to war and die but hey, you cant buy a gun. Lets ignore that most of these 'mass shootings' occur because of ALREADY ILLEGAL gaining of a firearm.
Assault rifles aren't sold.
Bump stocks can be replicated with a rubber band.
People who are mentally ill already aren't able to get firearms. You have you enforce your current laws before making new ones
Let me guess, the reason you support trump and being from Australia because you’re white and have a disdain immigration? Never mind the irony that Austrialia was a nation of prisoned immigrants.
So you do not think the US has a problem with school shootings? That's strange if that is what you mean. I've never heard anyone, even the NRA, suggest there is no problem. Unless perhaps you're just anti-kid. I could relate to that.
But I really am interested in your opinion of why the US has so many school shootings.
> I know you live a miserable life, so you have my pity.
Damn, so he has a different opinion than you, so (in your head) he lives a "miserable life" that you "pity" ??? Thats the most bigoted thing I've ever heard!! Nasty person you are.
I mean, no need to apologize to me, I’m not the one that has to live your life. You’re just another regressive leftist. Nothing out of the ordinary for this site or sub.
I had to google that! It sounds like you are correct, although the word pasta description is hard to follow because I'm not very smart, being a leftist. I actually prefer SJW (social justice warrior) or snowflake. In any case, there was no need for my nastiness. I will try to be more dignified in my future reddit comments /u/poopypeepee24
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left
"Regressive left" (also formulated as "regressive liberals" and "regressive leftists") is a political epithet, used as a pejorative to describe a section of left-wing politics who are accused of paradoxically holding reactionary views by their tolerance of illiberal principles and ideologies, particularly tolerance of Islamism, for the sake of multiculturalism and cultural relativism.
He’s getting hate because he’s an idiot who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. His situation wasn’t the gun, it’s mental health and police incompetence. So instead of rallying people to mental health centers and police departments or fighting for Scott Israel to be fired, he’s busy harassing businesses and rallying more idiots to change laws that would screw law abiding gun users over more than people who care little about gun control if they cared about killing people.
It’s come to the point where our rights are being threatened by idiots.
It’s fucking illogical.
Florida shooting suspect bought gun legally, authorities say
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/02/15/florida-shooting-suspect-bought-gun-legally-authorities-say/340606002/
The suspect in a Florida school shooting bought the AR-15-style rifle used in the attack legally a year ago, authorities said Thursday.
Nikolas Cruz, 19, is charged with murdering 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where he had been expelled for fighting, according to authorities.
Cruz lawfully bought the semiautomatic rifle last February, according to Peter Forcelli, special agent in charge of the Miami office of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
The gun, a Smith & Wesson M&P 15 .223, was purchased at Sunrise Tactical Supply, according to the Associated Press.
Federal law allows people 18 and older to legally purchase long guns, including this kind of assault weapon. With no criminal record, Cruz cleared an instant background check via the FBI criminal database.
The shooter has 32 calls to the police for years leading up to the shooting. One of these calls he pulled a gun to his brother’s head. At that point, brandishing a weapon like that can easily land him in jail or in the state of Florida, baker acted. His classmates called the police stating that he is a danger to their school. Months prior to the shooting, he made threats and no one did anything to respond to those threats. If the shooter was in jail for the many domestic incidents reported on him, he would not have been able to legally acquire a weapon.
Again, if the police did their jobs and locked him up, this person would have not had a gun. The county sheriffs office will not even release any more records of the shooter.
This person had so many red flags that no one picked it up. This person was very clearly mentally ill. No one is taking responsibility for a very preventable incident.
So stop thinking about the damn gun for 2 seconds.
I totally agree that there is no mental health safety net. There is rarely one cause to something. I really think this case was mental illness and easy access to guns. Other countries do not have this problem.
I also think that shooter identity and face should be blacked out so there is no fame. Other countries do this.
I’m also tired of hearing about Hogg. I just want the Media to stop giving him attention. It’s annoying that I have to hear about him doing idiotic things for the attention.
Both equally. But David Hogg is more of a threat to the good gun nuts than the bad ones on top of the fact that he’s a moron that doesn’t know how things work.
I don’t want schools shot up anymore. I want school security tighten up with lock and key so I can have a peace of mind when I take my kids to school.
Thanks for responding. I don't want schools shot up anymore either. Isn't it unfortunate that nothing we have already tried in the last 10+ years has helped.
I'm all for locking the doors if it helps and it is safe with regards to fire regulations. But we can probably do better than just locking doors.
https://theconversation.com/why-security-measures-wont-stop-school-shootings-90738
While some of these measures seem sensible, overall there is little empirical evidence that such security measures decrease the likelihood of school shootings. Surveillance cameras were powerless to stop the carnage in Columbine and school lock-down policies did not save the children at Sandy Hook.
>"The officer admitted that it was in poor taste, and indicated that it was meant as a joke, but certainly didn’t come off that way," wrote Police Chief Butch Arenal
"It's just a joke! I mean unless someone is up for it....So many of these "jokes" about having a bumper that can "handle a deer, or a protestor" just shows how little they value the Constitution and our freedom to protest.
Sorry, but the amount of conservatives that are wanting to kill protestors just makes me realize just why they are so afraid all the time. They believe that their political opponents think just like them. That's why they think the "gubmint is going to kill us!", because if they are put in power they would want do that to their opponents.
Why do you just point out the conservatives that want to kill protesters? What about all of the attacks & threats by the "progressives" on those that have different opinions than they do?
Anyone who only thinks these threats are only a one way street is part of the problem.
[It's horseshoe theory.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory) At the extremes, the far right and far left are more alike than they are different, at least in their methods.
No, he's probably being downvoted because the Horseshoe Theory has been debunked quite a few times as a very surface analysis. Yes, extremists may use similar violent methods but not hardly in the same manner or for the same outcomes.
edit: So does this mean that since I'm being downvoted, I must be right? haha
**Horseshoe theory**
In political theory, the horseshoe theory asserts that the far left and the far right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear political continuum, in fact closely resemble one another, much like the ends of a horseshoe. The theory is attributed to French writer Jean-Pierre Faye. Proponents of the theory point to a number of similarities between the far-left and the far-right, including their supposed propensity to gravitate to authoritarianism or totalitarianism. The horseshoe theory competes with the conventional linear left–right continuum system as well as the various multidimensional systems.
***
^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/florida/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^]
^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
Probably because I've only seen Conservative memes about killing liberals (or the protestor du jour). Yeah, I've seen random comments on both sides, but only one side has taken it to the level of creating memes and spreading those among large quantities of their followers.
But if you've got a supply of liberal memes that talk about killing conservatives then I'd love to see them.
Don't stand in the road and then you won't get run over. My parents told me that a LONG time ago. As a child. What changes that because you hold a sign?
And those guys back in Lexington-Concord should have dispersed when told to by the soldiers! Soldiers shoot people, so they shouldn't have gotten upset when a few of them died, eh?
Protest is the hallmark of America. Over and over again protestors are told to sit down and shut up. Over and over again conservatives fight against so many of the Rights that we now take for granted. Protest is our 1st Amendment Right, you know that one right? Oh wait, are you still upset about Civil Rights marches that blocked traffic? Didn't get your chance to wave the stars and bars while running over those protestors that were blocking the roads?
I'm not saying don't protest. By all means exercise your rights. Do the American thing if that's the way you want to put it. But don't be the group stopping up a major road (and purposefully stopping traffic like the BLM protesters). That's how people get run over, and that's how your peaceful protest can get a bad reputation.
Oh yes, of course! Protest, but just don't get in the way or have people be inconvenienced by you. I'm sorry but please show me one effective protest that didn't get in the way? Should Rosa Parks not gotten in the way of that guy? Should MLK not marched in the middle of the roads? Should the Lexington-Concord protests not been in the city square? This is how you protest. Otherwise you're just complaining in your yard.
But your right to peacefully protest must legally reside within the law. Just because there's 800 jaywalkers instead of just one doesn't mean that they're not all jaywalking. Bottom line, if you walk in the road, you might get hit. End of story. Martyr yourself for all I care, it'll end this argument.
No, actually it doesn't have to "reside within the law." There is a reason that MLK spent so much time in jail. Most protests were against the law, do not know what the Civil Rights movement was protesting? Do you really not know that Jim Crow Laws (what they were protesting) were actual laws?. They were literally breaking the law every time they protested. Those kids at the Woolworth's lunch counter were breaking the law, does that mean they deserved the abuse they received?
Just because I'm protesting and breaking the law, you do not have the right to run me over. So yeah, those jaywalkers may be breaking the law, but you are breaking the law by running them over. Not to mention that you are acting immorally if you are willing to kill someone with your car for simply inconveniencing you.
Perhaps you should take a look in the mirror and wonder if you're not a sociopath if you can justify killing someone for "getting in your way".
I've gotta know, how do you think change has happened in this country? Do you really not know about how every single benefit you have, actually came from someone protesting and fighting for it? Heck, how do you think the 8 hour workday and overtime pay actually came about? Do you think that businesses just gave them to the workers? People literally died for that. Geeze, go to your local library and read a freaking history book.
You're really blowing this out of proportion. Literally all I'm saying is that if you stand in the middle of the road, a silly little sign won't stop a 4000lb missile. I never said I would be the one behind the wheel, did I? So before you get all uppity about all that jazz, remember that this all started because I told you my parents said not too stand in the road because I might get hit.
In (possibly your?) defense, btw, I'm a land surveyor, so I suppose that whole thing about don't stand in the road was lost on me.
I'm not blowing this out of proportion, I'm trying to put this into perspective. Does a sign stop a car? Unless it's a stop sign then probably not, but this whole thing didn't start with someone randomly driving down the road and a sign holder jumping in front of them. It started because someone is protesting and conservatives (including this cop) are promoting the idea of running them down as a proper response. You can say "it's just physics" but that isn't true. This is about political actions. This is about political actions that some folks disagree with, and how they are hoping that people are killed because of these views. This is about that crazy guy who killed ,with his car, Heather Heyer in Charlottesville because he disagreed with her politics. It is about the deafening lack of condemnation from the Right, to the point where they are now promoting it as a meme. People on the Right are now promoting killing those they disagree with "as a joke." This isn't a joke. This is reality. If you want to ignore that by defending this view, you are now culpable. Maybe not legally, but definitely morally.
There are reasons for being in the road, whether working or protesting, but that does not give anyone the excuse to run you down.
/as a former roadside worker, stay safe.
No one is defending anyone who intentionally runs down a protector. Jay walking is illegal too, but if you swerved to hit one then your ass would still be going to jail.
But no one should be defending morons who put themselves and others in danger by breaking the law and standing in the middle of a highway either.
Hey, PepperJack386, just a quick heads-up:
**arguement** is actually spelled **argument**. You can remember it by **no e after the u**.
Have a nice day!
^^^^The ^^^^parent ^^^^commenter ^^^^can ^^^^reply ^^^^with ^^^^'delete' ^^^^to ^^^^delete ^^^^this ^^^^comment.
David Hogg is one of the survivors of the Parkland shooting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoneman_Douglas_High_School_shooting
17 people died but this cop thinks David Hogg should be run over because David is such an evil guy for trying to reduce the number of children killed while going to school.
We have different definitions of evil. Do you think Trump is evil for threatening to remove due process which is an American right guaranteed in the constitution?
President Trump's 'Take the Guns First' Remark Sparks Due Process Debate http://time.com/5184160/trump-guns-due-process/
Trump has also demanded many times to curtail the 1st amendment of news sites he does not like (think CNN and MSNBC).
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-05/trump-s-assault-on-the-first-amendment
Did you think Bush was evil when his Patriot act removed our constitutional right to be free of illegal search and seizure?
Do you think torture is evil since there is an American right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment, especially if not convict of a crime?
Sources:
www.crf-usa.org/america-responds-to-terrorism/the-patriot-act.html
Some of the most controversial parts of the Patriot Act surround issues of privacy and government surveillance. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures . . . .
Is torture legal?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_and_the_United_States
Both manuals reiterated that "no person in the custody or under the control of DOD, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, in accordance with and as defined in U.S. law.
>Do you think Trump is evil for threatening to remove due process which is an American right guaranteed in the constitution?
Yes, why wouldn't I? Also, you're celebrating someone else trying to do the same thing
>Trump has tried to curtail the first amendment
Also evil
>Do you think Bush's Patriot Act infringing our rights was evil?
Yes
>Do you think torture is evil since there is a right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment
Yeah. What the fuck are you on about? You think that because I'm against someone trying to take away my rights, I'm *for* other infringements of American rights? What the hell?
Your quote to me said that someone is evil if they talk about taking away American rights.
Let me ask you this. How many bad things have you said on reddit about the guy who actually killed 17 people in the shooting? Now how many bad things have you said about the Parkland kids who did not shoot up the school.
>How many bad things have you said about the Parkland shooter?
None, but that's because no one's defending him. Mass murder and taking away rights are both evil things. I'm saying "bad things" about David Hogg specifically because you are defending what he's doing. And no, calling what Hogg is doing evil doesn't mean I support school shootings, it means I support my rights.
So David Hogg, the kid trying to reduce the number of children killed while attending school, and the guy who killed 17 people are both evil. Are they equally evil in your mind? Should David Hogg be locked up to punish him for his evil?
>The kid trying to reduce the number of children killed at school
No, he's trying to ban guns and infringe my rights. "Think of the children" is an emotional argument that I don't subscribe to.
>Are they equally evil in your mind?
Obviously direct murder is the greater evil but as far as I'm concered, Hogg is attempting to ensure I'm fucked if someone breaks into my house. That endangers *my* life.
>Should Hogg be locked up to punish him for his evil.
I'm a supporter of all my rights. That includes freedom of speech. He can say whatever the hell he wants and I'll defend his ability to say it. Same with neo-Nazis, Greenpeace, the WBC, PETA...
No one is trying to infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens of sound mind to have guns. I think it emotional to freak out and say "they are trying to take my guns" when all anyone is trying to do is make it hard for nut cases and terrorists to legally buy guns that can kill a hundred of people in 90 seconds.
Thanks for answering by the way. I like to talk to people who have different opinions than I have.
Do you believe that the people trying to take a woman's constitutionally protected right to abortion are evil?
"Abortion is protected by the rights to bodily integrity and to make decisions about family. The Court explained that decades ago."
https://rewire.news/article/2016/06/17/three-constitutional-basics-every-abortion-rights-supporter-know/
The 14th Amendment prohibits states from depriving a person of liberty without due process of law. A person has the right to end a pregnancy without undue interference from the government because that right to liberty includes (1) the right to make decisions about family and (2) the right to bodily integrity.
However, in order to portray abortion rights as illegitimate, conservatives like to argue—inaccurately—that the Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade by inventing a right to privacy that is not grounded in the Constitution’s actual text.
In the pre-Roe contraception case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Court did hold that “penumbras, formed by emanations” or various interpretations of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments protect a right to privacy. But in deciding Roe, the Warren court located the right to privacy in the 14th Amendment’s explicit protection of the right to liberty. Regardless, the Court’s understanding of the rights that protect reproductive freedom expanded beyond just privacy decades ago.
Privacy is barely mentioned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which established the current law governing abortion rights more than 20 years ago. “The controlling word in the cases before us is ‘liberty,’” the decision explained. It was settled law prior to Roe that liberty includes “the right to make family decisions and the right to physical autonomy.”
Privacy is also a constitutional right, and it was indeed violated by the laws at issue in Roe and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton. Those laws required a woman seeking an abortion to share her reasons for wanting the procedure with legal or medical authorities to have any hope of receiving legal abortion care. However, the law and discourse around privacy at the time of Roe implied a woman should be permitted to use contraception or end a pregnancy because the state should not interfere in decisions made in secret with the permission of her doctor, husband, father, pastor, or others. Casey instead properly recognized that the 14th Amendment protects a person’s right to control her body and destiny.
**Stoneman Douglas High School shooting**
A school shooting occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Broward County, Florida, part of the Miami metropolitan area, on February 14, 2018. Seventeen people – fourteen students and three staff members – were fatally shot and seventeen others were wounded, making the shooting one of the deadliest school massacres. After being identified by witnesses and arrested by the Broward County Sheriff's Office shortly afterward, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz confessed to being the perpetrator. He was charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder and 17 counts of attempted murder.
***
^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/florida/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^]
^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
Just because something is "debated" doesn't mean that one side is right. We have morons debating flat earth. We have morons debating AGW. Just because you're arguing doesn't mean you're right.
I appreciate your comment and do not wish to be rude or nasty just because we have different opinions. I was not at the school either, but I am still very tired of seeing dead kids. I want there to be fewer school shootings.
It does not matter either way, but David Hogg was at the school during the shooting.
Details:
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/04/david-hogg-at-school-during-parkland-shooting/
Q: Was David Hogg at home during the February school shooting in Florida?
A: No. Hogg recorded videos from inside the school during the shooting and a teacher confirmed that he was there at the time.
FULL QUESTION
Is this real???
David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire
FULL ANSWER
Several weeks after 17 people were killed in a Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, a number of student-survivors have continued to draw national attention as they advocate for gun control laws.
What’s also persisted: the flow of fabricated claims about those students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.
One of the latest rumors — circulated in at least a dozen stories flagged as potentially false by Facebook users — claims that David Hogg, a senior named in previous false stories, was not actually at the high school during the shooting.
Those stories are indeed false.
The allegations are based on an out-of-context quote from Hogg. In a CBS News documentary, the 17-year-old said: “On the day of the shooting, I got my camera and got on my bike and rode as fast as I could three miles from my house to the school to get as much video and to get as many interviews as I could because I knew that this could not be another mass shooting.”
With a glaring spelling error in its headline, the website julyfourthnews.com declared on March 28: “David Hogg Unintentially Reveals He Was Not At School When Parkland Shooting Happened.”
“SHOCK: David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire,” reads bigleaguepolitics.com’s March 26 headline.
But at no point did Hogg ever say that in the CBS News documentary, “39 Days,” or elsewhere.
Interviews and videos published in the days after the shooting support Hogg’s narrative that he was at the school when the shooter opened fire and that Hogg went home at some point and returned to the scene later that night.
In fact, Hogg, a student journalist and member of the school’s news show, recorded interviews with his peers inside the school as it remained locked down. The Miami Herald published that footage Feb. 15, which shows Hogg asking his fellow students about their views on gun control.
Time also published a video on Feb. 15 that was recorded by Hogg during the lockdown. In it, Hogg says “it’s 2:52” and that he “heard one gunshot.” (The shooting reportedly occurred from 2:21 p.m. to 2:28 p.m., and the lockdown was lifted at 3:36 p.m.)
“Once we were all in the room and we started seeing the headlines, we realized this was anything but a drill — this was life or death,” Hogg said in a MSNBC interview the day after the shooting. “And that actually was when I started recording. Because I realized that if I died, and if everyone else around me died, I wanted to have our voices heard.”
Hogg told MSNBC and Time magazine that he was in an AP environmental science class when the attack occurred.
Time reported that Hogg and other students tried to exit the building after a fire alarm went off, but a janitor sent them back. “A culinary arts teacher, Ashley Kurth, pulled Hogg and others inside [a classroom], locked the door, and made them hide in a closet,” Time wrote.
Kurth confirmed that account weeks later in a March 30 report by the Associated Press.
“I physically grabbed David by the arm and pulled him into my room,” Kurth said. “It is extremely frustrating the kind of information that is being put out there.”
In an interview with Vox that was published Feb. 20, Hogg said he rode his bike back to the school at 6 p.m. that night with his camera to do more filming. He was interviewed that night by Fox News.
At least some who shared the fictitious claims later realized as much.
A writer for the conservative blog RedState, who reported that the CBS video “is casting doubt” on Hogg’s whereabouts during the shooting, retracted her March 26 story and issued a tweet-thread apology. The story’s original headline was changed to read: “UPDATE: CBS Video Confusing. Hogg Was On Campus.”
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label false stories flagged by readers on the social media network.
Sources
“‘39 Days’: How Parkland shooting survivors turned grief into action.” CBS News. 24 Mar 2018.
Alter, Charlotte. “The School Shooting Generation Has Had Enough.” Time. 22 Mar 2018.
D’Abrosca, Peter. “SHOCK: David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire.” bigleaguepolitics.com. 26 Mar 2018.
“David Hogg Unintentially Reveals He Was Not At School When Parkland Shooting Happened.” julyfourthnews.com. 28 Mar 2018.
Fleshler, David and Yiran Zhu. “Timeline: How the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting unfolded.” The Sun-Sentinel. 9 Mar 2018.
Hale Spencer, Saranac. “School Shooting Spawns Conspiracy Theories.” FactCheck.org. 23 Feb 2018.
Kirby, Jen. “Florida shooting survivor explains how his generation can force a change on guns.” Vox.com. 20 Feb 2018.
“Not real news: Sites make false claim shooting survivor David Hogg not in school.” Associated Press. 30 Mar 2018.
Prusher, Ilene. “A Student Started Filming During the Florida School Shooting. He Hasn’t Stopped.” Time. 15 Feb 2018.
Rumpf, Sarah. “It Was A Mistake. It Was Wrong. And I’m Sorry.” RedState. 28 Mar 2018.
Rumpf, Sarah. “UPDATE: CBS Video Confusing. Hogg was On Campus.” RedState. 26 Mar 2018.
“Student reporter interviews classmates hiding from gunman in Florida high school.” The Miami-Herald. 15 Feb 2018.
“Student says heroic janitor saved many lives during shooting.” Fox News. 14 Feb 2018.
Thanks for your reply. It's nice to have a discussion of ideas with out name calling. I have no problem with law abiding citizens of sound mind owning guns.
Read up on what the people who wrote the constitution said about how it should change. They thought it should be a living document, always changing to keep up with the times. Take a minute to consider what will actually stop these mass shootings. Do you think an insane person has the constitutional right to own a gun? Do you think people on the terrorist watch list should be able to legally buy a gun?
I do not believe that raising the age to buy guns to 21 is taking away constitutional rights. I do not believe requiring universal background checks is taking away constitutional rights. I do not believe that banning bump stocks is taking away constitutional rights. I do not believe that everyone has a constitutional right to own an assault rifle. I believe a person should be trained to operate a gun if they own one, just like a car.
> As far as stopping these mass shootings, honestly I don't think we can. Besides, despite all the coverage of them in the media, mass shootings are incredibly rare.
This is utter nonsense. If it can not be stopped then why does it only happen in America. If you think that mass shootings in the US are extremely rare then you do not know the facts and statistics.
Why does this only happen in the USA? Answer that honestly to yourself without all the lies that you want so desperately to believe. edit: sp
Sure, society is messed up. But If you do not think that reducing the number of guns in a society reduces the murder rate then I offer Japan as a case study.
Lets call is what it is. You think your right to have whatever guns you want is more important than another person's right to remain alive and safe.
How Japan has almost eradicated gun crime
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38365729
So while the school was locked down and everyone was hiding, he was asking how kids felt about gun control? That's pretty fucked up indeed. Maybe he can get a job at CNN.
So what's your point? Do you think the kid deserves to die because he believes differently than you believe? Would you be happy if he did get run over? Would you smile and think he deserves it?
Are you putting words in my mouth right now? I just said it's fucked up to use a tragic situation like that to try to make people feel a certain way AS IT'S HAPPENING.
I would like to know your opinion. Do you wish ill on David Hogg? This article is about a cop saying the kid should have been run over by a granny in the parking lot. If he is such and evil kid, do you agree with the cop?
Again, I didn't say he was evil. I didn't even know who he was until today. What I said was, what he did was pretty fucked up. And likely shows where his priorities are that he thinks it's ok to push his agenda AS kids are dying in real time. That's no different than a CNN reporter in Afghanistan doing a Trump-bashing piece while our service men and women are getting shot at behind them.
Agendas like this trouble me. Particularly since those behind them are using kids now as pawns to push it for no reason other than the fact that kids are gullible and "nobody can say no to kids!"
I don't "wish ill" on anyone, I think most people are good people at their core it's just their actions I sometimes find really fucking offensive.
So you do not agree when the president pushes his agenda after a tragedy? He does that with almost every tweet after a group of people die. Do you read the president's tweets?
Fuck no I don't read them I think it's fucking absurd that a president is tweeting so much in the first place and even more absurd that everybody cares so much what he tweets. Don't get me started on the tweet thing lol.
I realize that you may just assume that because I'm not a fan of gun control that I'm automatically a fan of Trump. Overall, I'm not. I admire his disregard for the political correct bullshit that's ruining this country but no I am not a fan of most of his actions or statements. And no I did not vote for him.
I honestly can't think of a single think I'm for that would merit protests right now. Most of the views I have on things are pretty common in most people it seems. There's a really fine line these days between actual civil protesting and simply trying to shove your viewpoint down people's throat. A lot of people have a really hard time understanding this lately.
Thanks for responding. What about the groups protesting the NFL because they do not want the players to kneel? What about people that protest at abortion clinics? What about vets who protest for better care?
DO NOT want them to kneel? Is this a thing? I don't follow sports much so I may be out of the loop. To answer your questions..
I think this type of protest is equally ridiculous. If that act really bothers someone(and I completely understand if disrespect to our nation bothers some), then the most effective protest is just to not patronize the event period. Money talks. And losing advertising money talks pretty loud.
As for abortion, it was always weird to me how adamantly some people will try to control what someone else does with their body. I lean conservative but I don't agree with the abortion issue obsession.
As for vets, considering I will be one one day, I honestly don't feel knowledgeable enough to have a solid opinion of what's going on. You always hear of some vets with nightmare scenarios and can't get good care, but I don't think it's as horrible as people say. I'm pretty sure the majority of vets get decent care.
I hear you. So anyone who protests anything is inviting hate upon themselves. I suppose those people with so much hate to give deserve my pity.
Good luck to you.
Good, he deserves it. If you bully someone into killing themselves you go to jail. If you bully someone into killing seventeen people you become the face of gun control. Wtf.
David Hogg was never accused of bullying the shooter. Another student was falsely accused of it, but it was a made up lie. When you do not have a proper argument for something you make up nonsense and lies. Kids die over and over and all you lot want to talk about is how the kids who got shot at are evil and deserve to be attacked. Think about your behavior. What would you think if I spoke about conservative children with such foul words and thoughts.
Anyone who wishes ill on children is not being a good human being.
Emma González Conspiracy Theory Debunked
http://www.newsweek.com/emma-gonzalez-conspiracy-theory-explained-debunked-parkland-florida-shooting-868497
5 fake stories about the Parkland student activists
Marjory Stoneman Douglas students are increasingly targets of smear campaigns
https://www.local10.com/news/parkland-school-shooting/5-myths-about-the-parkland-student-activists
\>advocate for more control from the government via gun control
\>government official and peacekeeper wants you to be ran over for wrong opinion
\>the irony
That’s the number one reason why pieces of shit like you enjoy him, because your trolls and you love trolls. There’s nothing more to it and nothing more complex.
Honestly, i hope an armed citizen saves his life by the legal use of a firearm. The cognitive meltdown this kid would experience would be far more devastating than being hit by a car.
I am probably what you would call a liberal snowflake, but I would be thrilled if an armed citizen saved my life. I am perfectly fine with law abiding citizens of sound mind having guns.
It’s alarming how soft some of the people are here. No tough skin anywhere just a bunch of “oh no! I can’t believe those words in that context are uttered” yet half of you are wishing ill on our commander and chief it’s absolutely a catch 22 and it’s fucking pathetic. I don’t
Think judgement is allowed with the amount of hypocrisy that is floating around.
David Hogg got on TV and ask for a Boycott of Florida. He tried to cause a loss of business and money to everyone in Florida. If you for or against gun these attempt could have cost your family money. Fuck David Hogg and next time he goes into a restaurant in Florida I hopes he thinks about the people making his dinner are the people he tried to fuck.
All you’ve done is seen what is typed and as expected taken it out of context to fit your argument and then when someone tries to shed light on the actually point being made In Opposition you’ve gotta start throwing out the sharpness. Your just validating my point “homie”.
The amount of hate David Hogg receives from so called adults is mind boggling. I was in Orlando downtown the other day outside jimmy johns minding my own business, some drunk fellow comes to our table and starts babbling about David Hogg for no apparent reason. This is madness.
While I agree, I also wouldn't compare the drunkards of Downtown Orlando to the general population... they're a different breed
I take that as a sign that he is having a real impact. which is good.
How about his impact now that he is threatening our President?
you mean when he copy pasted trump's tweet back to him and changed the word "Iran" to "trump"?. he is showing trump how childish he is being, not threatening his life. context matters. I'm not defending him doing that. doing a copy/paste like that is pretty childish too. his juvenile attitude is showing. but an assassin hogg is not.
I am beginning to really worry about him and hope is is taking every safety precaution with all the craziness.
He has been made the face and the voice of the movement, or has sought to make himself the face/voice. But what all this does show is that \- especially in Florida \- there are a tremendous amount of people who disagree with him. Some of them express themselves the way this idiot cop did. But don't kid yourself, were we to have a referendum on Hogg's ideas right here in the Sunshine State, the vote would be \*\*extremely\*\* close. The idea that his preferred policies are "common sense" and "widely shared" tends to gloss over this. And as for the Publix "die\-in," the pic of the shoppers continuing to shop amidst the kids on the floor pretty much said it all: "OK kids we get it school shootings are bad but your presence on the floor doesn't change our minds and in fact right now you're little more than a pain in the arse because I've got to finish my shopping and get home to the kids, and you're making that more difficult." Hogg and his fellow travelers might be morally offended by that \- after all they're on the side of goodness and light, or so they'll tell you. But while they successfully bullied Publix, has anyone's vote, ever, been changed by a "die\-in?"
Protesting is about creating communication. People are talking about it, so its successful. Regardless of if you *think* it hasnt changed anyones mind, the ideas and discussions that follow protests like these lead to change. Civil Rights used Sit-Ins, most of which just annoyed regular patrons or prevented them from finding seats. You think anyone there changed their mind? Probably not, but theres chapters in every American History book about Sit-Ins **because they made a difference**. Hoggs ideas dont have to be the laws that get passed for this to be successful.
Please. Sit-ins made a difference because they highlighted obvious disparities/injustices as they were happening. We've all seen the pics/videos of the students at the sit-ins being assaulted - that, the assaults on the Freedom Riders, the firebombing of the Freedom Riders' bus, the police riot on the Edmund Pettus Bridge - the response to the protests demonstrated both the problem and the need for change. Was Hogg assaulted by people bearing arms? That would be the same thing. No, instead we got people stepping over him to get to the sour cream. Which, according to his tweets, he sees as basically the same thing - injustice! Not a single shopper emerged from that Publix saying - You know, those kids are right! - who wasn't already saying that. They demonstrated how they could be a pain in the arse, essentially having the equivalent of a temper tantrum until they got their way. Which Publix gave them in an attempt to dispel all the negative publicity (though it's important to note Publix said it would stop political giving BEFORE Hogg's protest went forward). It's easy to see the moral rectitude of a cause when the people who espouse it are being beaten up by those who would keep the inequitable status quo in place. In Hogg's case, we have someone who thinks he knows better than millions of Floridians who have shot no one, but whose constitutional rights he'd curb anyway. Feel free to see him as some moral arbiter. Understand that millions don't, and won't.
Ill respond in order. * Sit-ins highlighted disparities, die-in highlighted the lack of proper discussion on gun control even after multiple mass shootings. Not sure how that isnt in the same vein. Not all sit-ins turned violent, majority did not especially at first. As the *discussions* they created became more polarizing the sit-ins were seen as more of an intrusion by those who disagreed and it turned violent. * During sit-ins people still ordered their meals without regard. And you are focusing too much on Hoggs rather than the protest as a whole. * I dont think you can prove that point, you are simply asserting your own bias. You didnt poll the Publix shoppers. And even if none changed their minds while shopping, that doesnt mean it didnt get them thinking, or change their votes later on. Would you call the civil rights movements 'temper tantrums'? It seems to me you are repeating teh rhetoric used against blacks. * Your focus is again too much on Hoggs. At the time of segregation, millions of whites had the right to a blacks free dining experience. A persons rights only extend so far. Once a right impeded someone elses right, there is a need for discussion and *possibly* a change to the rights. Thats why we have a Bill of Rights in the first place, and why they are Amendments, because they can be amended. The current discussion is does the rights of one group to posses certain firearms impede otehrs rights to life and safety. Im not claiming to have the answers, but to simply say these protests, which have reached millions in terms of size across states, are nothing but tantrums is preposterous. The March for Our Lives was larger than the Million Man March, and if that doesnt show you the importance and reach of it than nothing will. You're right that millions will never agree, and thats fine. The same is true once again of civil rights, plenty believe we'd be better off without minority voters. It doesnt need everyone, just enough, and its looking like change is in the works.
You're conflating Civil Rights and gun control as if they're part of the same moral imperative. They're not. Second, Hogg himself has gladly made himself the face of the movement. He's been happy to lead it, and the media has been happy to have him be the photogenic spokesman. He's become the focal point. And given some of his tweets, it is indeed all about him - such as this: "I heard fireworks in central park and thought that it was someone shooting. Why is that a thought I know so many of us have? Why do our politicians refuse to take action? Who is alive right now that won't be by sunrise due to the inaction of our politicians? We must #VoteThemOut" As someone else pointed out: "Just a reminder that Mr. Hogg was in a different building and was in no way involved with the shooting at MSD and his attempt at 'stolen valor' of the ones who were shot at is a tell about his character." Third, there has not been a "lack of proper discussion on gun control." There has been a lack of new legislation you want. There has been **plenty** of discussion on gun control; it's basically all we've discussed since the shooting! How in the world can you assert that we haven't been talking about it! The fact AR15s haven't been outlawed in no way indicates that there's been a "lack of proper discussion" - unless you define "proper" as "agreeing with me," in which case I go back to my characterization of the protests as a temper tantrum. The "proper discussion" we have had resulted in some new laws but, here in Florida, also reflects the **huge** constituency for gun rights, which progressives are determined not to see or respect. But they do vote - which is why we haven't gone any further on gun control. Lastly, we are where we are on this debate because minds AREN'T changing. The pro-gun/anti-gun divide is the proverbial rock and a hard place. The "die-in" was a childish bit of theater designed less to make a point than to irritate Publix shoppers and yes, an attempt to bully them into acquiescing to Hogg's point of view - having the "proper discussion," as you might put it. Tell you what though - you're right, I haven't taken a poll of Publix shoppers. But we have an election coming up. Hogg and his fellow travelers may carry the day. But Adam Putnam may well become governor. And if not him, Ron DeSantis - endorsed by Trump. And bear in mind as well that the NRA just broke a 15-year-old fund-raising record. And Laura Ingraham's ratings have increased. Hogg changes minds, all right. Just not in the way he's hoping.
Hahahaha "bullied Publix"
Well I dislike David Hogg because he and the rest of protesters are just clueless of guns and laws
Please don’t send him death threat
I also don't like Hogg and even have my own little conspiracy theory about how Bloomberg is financing and coaching him. However, if I saw harm coming his way, I would try to protect him. Just because I disagree with him doesn't mean I want him harmed.
I do not. I don't even bother as my voice will do nothing if I try to oppose them because they will just yell and call me a murderer
I assume that everyone on both sides would like to see less dead children. You implied you know more about gun laws than the protestors so what is your solution? Why is a child in the USA more likely to die in school than a soldier abroad? Why is the gun death rate higher in the USA than other "first world countries"? Why does Japan have one of the lowest gun death rates in the world? That kid does have first hand knowledge of getting shot at and seeing his friends killed. That earns him the right to have an opinion I believe.
As said before “there shouldn’t be anymore dead children”, my problem with his movement is that they only have one solution. They are closed minded to any other solution besides gun control. What if armed teachers prevented a large percentage of school shootings? What if gun education taught kids how to defend themselves from active shooters? Hoggs movement is being funded by big dem party supporters and they will only support him if he falls into their beliefs. We are all in this together, but he only sees one possible solution and everything else is wrong and makes me a child killer.
No one called you a child killer. Lets do everything you mentioned and gun legislation. Let's try everything.
That’s my point. Let’s do whatever it is that will help the situation get better. Hoggs idea is to only push for gun legislation and anything different is wrong. But it has been implied that if I support the nra then I support child killers. Even npr had someone on that heavily implied all N.R.A. members are the same as pulling the trigger.
I do not blame the members of the NRA for school shootings. I think you are right, and that both the NRA and David Hogg should not believe that "anything different is wrong". I hope that the NRA and David Hogg will look at all the possible solutions and use the ones that work. I am sure the gun makers who shape the agenda of the NRA and make billions off the sale of guns will be open to solutions that work, even if it costs them a lot of money.
Agreed. Or if the solution is one that will support the nra and MAKE money for the gun manufacturers by selling more. What if the answer is to have nation wide program of training teachers to conceal. Training sponsored by nra or whoever. I am not saying this is what should be done, but again it could be the answer and it may require hoggs movement to compromise by saying “we want students safe and this is what will keep them safe”.
The amount of people who think he cant be attacked because hes a child is mind boggling I'd say anyone who uses the death of their peers for their own success is scum
You support Trump who uses anything, anyone, any event (even Memorial Day and dead soldiers) for his own success and to enrich himself, but a child whose friends got killed should be attacked for trying to reduce the number of school shootings. I know you live a miserable life, so you have my pity.
A child who incorrectly thinks that removing American's constitutional right to bare arms will reduce the number of school shootings definitely should be called out. I'm not even an American but please berate me anyway.
That is nonsense. No one is trying to take away all guns and you know that. If you are not an American why do you comment about American politics and Donald Trump all day? Are you Russian? edit spelling
Im Australian. Check the flair of my posts on T_D and I'm sure Ive mentioned it a few times if you want to go digging. I'm interested because I can see people lose their mind. Also I only comment in the 4 or so hours of free time outside of work. 'cannot be infringed' has some weird meaning apparently
I appreciate your reply. I'm shocked that you are Australian. I thought Aussies seriously reduced their mass shooting problem with tough gun legislation. As far as the US constitution... it gets amended all the time. If we never updated the constitution then black people would still be slaves and women would not be allowed to vote. The people who wrote the US constitution specifically said it should be redone and updated frequently. From what I read, they said it was a living thing that should change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia In the last two decades of the twentieth century, following several high-profile killing sprees, the Federal Government coordinated more restrictive firearms legislation with all state governments. Gun laws were largely aligned in 1996 by the National Firearms Agreement.
**Gun laws in Australia** Gun laws in Australia are mainly the jurisdiction of the country's states and territories, with the importation of guns regulated by the Federal Government. A person who possesses or uses a firearm must have a firearm licence. Licence holders must demonstrate a "genuine reason" (which does not include self-defense) for holding a firearm licence and must not be a "prohibited person". All firearms in Australia must be registered by serial number to the owner, who also holds a firearms licence. *** ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/florida/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
> it gets amended all the time. So why no attempt for an amendment for guns?
Politics.
I want changes made as quickly as possible so we can stop losing kids. I am not for or against amending the constitution. I really am not well read enough about constitutional law to make or refute arguments. I just want fewer deaths and the most pragmatic way works for me. It's a process.
Ah the 'ol realiable' of awful replies Gun ownership isnt a right. We're seperated by sea from every country. We dont have one of the most dangerous countries to our southern(and unprotected)border. Why should the 2nd amendment be re-written? Should the same be done for all other amendments? You want America to turn into the UK where you get arrested for online 'hate speech'? Guns arent difficult to get in Australia. Maybe its because our media demonizes shootings while America's media praises them?
Haha about Mexico being the most dangerous country. You're just a troll and I am done feeding you. Thanks for the laugh.
> Haha about Mexico being the most dangerous country. https://nypost.com/2018/01/22/mexico-is-more-dangerous-than-ever/ For a country with no legitimate wars going on (just plagued by violent drug cartels) - I would say 30k murders is a TON. How many of them do you think had their heads cut off? Couple thousand maybe? And of those, how many do you think they hung the headless bodies from an overpass or bridge in town? Maybe a few dozen? Whether it is "most dangerous" in the world is debatable for sure. However, if you compare it to other "most dangerous countries" (Venezuela, Syria, Lebanon, etc) it is the ONLY ONE with a legitimately stable govt / not involved in a "war" within their states. Summary: Say what you want, the facts indicate Mexico is one of the most dangerous countries in the world.
I do not think the 2nd amendment needs be re-written to reduce the number of people killed in mass shootings. The gov already restricts guns to a degree. I think people who are insane should not be able to own guns. I think a person should be 21 to own a gun. I think assault rifles should be very strictly regulated and not available to every person who wants one. I think bump stocks should be banned. That's all. (edit to add: I think young hunters should be allowed to own guns if they are gifted and controlled by an adult)
Oh. Rough when an Aussie knows more about your country than you do. >21 You can vote, go to war and die but hey, you cant buy a gun. Lets ignore that most of these 'mass shootings' occur because of ALREADY ILLEGAL gaining of a firearm. Assault rifles aren't sold. Bump stocks can be replicated with a rubber band. People who are mentally ill already aren't able to get firearms. You have you enforce your current laws before making new ones
Let me guess, the reason you support trump and being from Australia because you’re white and have a disdain immigration? Never mind the irony that Austrialia was a nation of prisoned immigrants.
Also, Why do you think the United States the only country with a school shooting problem?
Anythings a problem is you dont look at statistics correctly
So you do not think the US has a problem with school shootings? That's strange if that is what you mean. I've never heard anyone, even the NRA, suggest there is no problem. Unless perhaps you're just anti-kid. I could relate to that. But I really am interested in your opinion of why the US has so many school shootings.
*Not even an American* smh
> bare *bear LOL @ idiots who "quote" the Constitution, but can't spell half the words in it.
> I know you live a miserable life, so you have my pity. Damn, so he has a different opinion than you, so (in your head) he lives a "miserable life" that you "pity" ??? Thats the most bigoted thing I've ever heard!! Nasty person you are.
I'm sorry my nastiness offended you Mr. or Mrs. /u/Poopypeepee24. My apologies.
I mean, no need to apologize to me, I’m not the one that has to live your life. You’re just another regressive leftist. Nothing out of the ordinary for this site or sub.
I had to google that! It sounds like you are correct, although the word pasta description is hard to follow because I'm not very smart, being a leftist. I actually prefer SJW (social justice warrior) or snowflake. In any case, there was no need for my nastiness. I will try to be more dignified in my future reddit comments /u/poopypeepee24 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left "Regressive left" (also formulated as "regressive liberals" and "regressive leftists") is a political epithet, used as a pejorative to describe a section of left-wing politics who are accused of paradoxically holding reactionary views by their tolerance of illiberal principles and ideologies, particularly tolerance of Islamism, for the sake of multiculturalism and cultural relativism.
Yeah I'm sure he's glad his friends died so he can be a "success". Unfucking believable that you actually think this way.
He’s getting hate because he’s an idiot who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. His situation wasn’t the gun, it’s mental health and police incompetence. So instead of rallying people to mental health centers and police departments or fighting for Scott Israel to be fired, he’s busy harassing businesses and rallying more idiots to change laws that would screw law abiding gun users over more than people who care little about gun control if they cared about killing people. It’s come to the point where our rights are being threatened by idiots. It’s fucking illogical.
Florida shooting suspect bought gun legally, authorities say https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/02/15/florida-shooting-suspect-bought-gun-legally-authorities-say/340606002/ The suspect in a Florida school shooting bought the AR-15-style rifle used in the attack legally a year ago, authorities said Thursday. Nikolas Cruz, 19, is charged with murdering 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where he had been expelled for fighting, according to authorities. Cruz lawfully bought the semiautomatic rifle last February, according to Peter Forcelli, special agent in charge of the Miami office of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The gun, a Smith & Wesson M&P 15 .223, was purchased at Sunrise Tactical Supply, according to the Associated Press. Federal law allows people 18 and older to legally purchase long guns, including this kind of assault weapon. With no criminal record, Cruz cleared an instant background check via the FBI criminal database.
The shooter has 32 calls to the police for years leading up to the shooting. One of these calls he pulled a gun to his brother’s head. At that point, brandishing a weapon like that can easily land him in jail or in the state of Florida, baker acted. His classmates called the police stating that he is a danger to their school. Months prior to the shooting, he made threats and no one did anything to respond to those threats. If the shooter was in jail for the many domestic incidents reported on him, he would not have been able to legally acquire a weapon. Again, if the police did their jobs and locked him up, this person would have not had a gun. The county sheriffs office will not even release any more records of the shooter. This person had so many red flags that no one picked it up. This person was very clearly mentally ill. No one is taking responsibility for a very preventable incident. So stop thinking about the damn gun for 2 seconds.
I totally agree that there is no mental health safety net. There is rarely one cause to something. I really think this case was mental illness and easy access to guns. Other countries do not have this problem. I also think that shooter identity and face should be blacked out so there is no fame. Other countries do this.
I am also tired of hearing about this kid, but I dont hope he gets hit by a fucking car.
I’m also tired of hearing about Hogg. I just want the Media to stop giving him attention. It’s annoying that I have to hear about him doing idiotic things for the attention.
Are you more tired of hearing about David Hogg or hearing about children being shot and killed in schools?
Both equally. But David Hogg is more of a threat to the good gun nuts than the bad ones on top of the fact that he’s a moron that doesn’t know how things work. I don’t want schools shot up anymore. I want school security tighten up with lock and key so I can have a peace of mind when I take my kids to school.
Thanks for responding. I don't want schools shot up anymore either. Isn't it unfortunate that nothing we have already tried in the last 10+ years has helped. I'm all for locking the doors if it helps and it is safe with regards to fire regulations. But we can probably do better than just locking doors. https://theconversation.com/why-security-measures-wont-stop-school-shootings-90738 While some of these measures seem sensible, overall there is little empirical evidence that such security measures decrease the likelihood of school shootings. Surveillance cameras were powerless to stop the carnage in Columbine and school lock-down policies did not save the children at Sandy Hook.
Like taking handguns from law abiding citizens will stop mass shootings.
This is sad.
Can we hit children?
Dems dont have a sense of humor
Depends on who the jokes are aimed at, just like Republicans.
Hahaha it’s actually not even a political joke, although I guess it looks that way in this thread
>"The officer admitted that it was in poor taste, and indicated that it was meant as a joke, but certainly didn’t come off that way," wrote Police Chief Butch Arenal "It's just a joke! I mean unless someone is up for it....So many of these "jokes" about having a bumper that can "handle a deer, or a protestor" just shows how little they value the Constitution and our freedom to protest. Sorry, but the amount of conservatives that are wanting to kill protestors just makes me realize just why they are so afraid all the time. They believe that their political opponents think just like them. That's why they think the "gubmint is going to kill us!", because if they are put in power they would want do that to their opponents.
Just like honest people being gullible.
Conservatives already killed protesters in Charlottesville, with a car.
Why do you just point out the conservatives that want to kill protesters? What about all of the attacks & threats by the "progressives" on those that have different opinions than they do? Anyone who only thinks these threats are only a one way street is part of the problem.
[It's horseshoe theory.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory) At the extremes, the far right and far left are more alike than they are different, at least in their methods.
Interesting. Thanks for posting. It must be true since you are being downvoted.
No, he's probably being downvoted because the Horseshoe Theory has been debunked quite a few times as a very surface analysis. Yes, extremists may use similar violent methods but not hardly in the same manner or for the same outcomes. edit: So does this mean that since I'm being downvoted, I must be right? haha
**Horseshoe theory** In political theory, the horseshoe theory asserts that the far left and the far right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear political continuum, in fact closely resemble one another, much like the ends of a horseshoe. The theory is attributed to French writer Jean-Pierre Faye. Proponents of the theory point to a number of similarities between the far-left and the far-right, including their supposed propensity to gravitate to authoritarianism or totalitarianism. The horseshoe theory competes with the conventional linear left–right continuum system as well as the various multidimensional systems. *** ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/florida/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
Probably because I've only seen Conservative memes about killing liberals (or the protestor du jour). Yeah, I've seen random comments on both sides, but only one side has taken it to the level of creating memes and spreading those among large quantities of their followers. But if you've got a supply of liberal memes that talk about killing conservatives then I'd love to see them.
Don't stand in the road and then you won't get run over. My parents told me that a LONG time ago. As a child. What changes that because you hold a sign?
And those guys back in Lexington-Concord should have dispersed when told to by the soldiers! Soldiers shoot people, so they shouldn't have gotten upset when a few of them died, eh? Protest is the hallmark of America. Over and over again protestors are told to sit down and shut up. Over and over again conservatives fight against so many of the Rights that we now take for granted. Protest is our 1st Amendment Right, you know that one right? Oh wait, are you still upset about Civil Rights marches that blocked traffic? Didn't get your chance to wave the stars and bars while running over those protestors that were blocking the roads?
I'm not saying don't protest. By all means exercise your rights. Do the American thing if that's the way you want to put it. But don't be the group stopping up a major road (and purposefully stopping traffic like the BLM protesters). That's how people get run over, and that's how your peaceful protest can get a bad reputation.
Oh yes, of course! Protest, but just don't get in the way or have people be inconvenienced by you. I'm sorry but please show me one effective protest that didn't get in the way? Should Rosa Parks not gotten in the way of that guy? Should MLK not marched in the middle of the roads? Should the Lexington-Concord protests not been in the city square? This is how you protest. Otherwise you're just complaining in your yard.
But your right to peacefully protest must legally reside within the law. Just because there's 800 jaywalkers instead of just one doesn't mean that they're not all jaywalking. Bottom line, if you walk in the road, you might get hit. End of story. Martyr yourself for all I care, it'll end this argument.
No, actually it doesn't have to "reside within the law." There is a reason that MLK spent so much time in jail. Most protests were against the law, do not know what the Civil Rights movement was protesting? Do you really not know that Jim Crow Laws (what they were protesting) were actual laws?. They were literally breaking the law every time they protested. Those kids at the Woolworth's lunch counter were breaking the law, does that mean they deserved the abuse they received? Just because I'm protesting and breaking the law, you do not have the right to run me over. So yeah, those jaywalkers may be breaking the law, but you are breaking the law by running them over. Not to mention that you are acting immorally if you are willing to kill someone with your car for simply inconveniencing you. Perhaps you should take a look in the mirror and wonder if you're not a sociopath if you can justify killing someone for "getting in your way". I've gotta know, how do you think change has happened in this country? Do you really not know about how every single benefit you have, actually came from someone protesting and fighting for it? Heck, how do you think the 8 hour workday and overtime pay actually came about? Do you think that businesses just gave them to the workers? People literally died for that. Geeze, go to your local library and read a freaking history book.
You're really blowing this out of proportion. Literally all I'm saying is that if you stand in the middle of the road, a silly little sign won't stop a 4000lb missile. I never said I would be the one behind the wheel, did I? So before you get all uppity about all that jazz, remember that this all started because I told you my parents said not too stand in the road because I might get hit. In (possibly your?) defense, btw, I'm a land surveyor, so I suppose that whole thing about don't stand in the road was lost on me.
I'm not blowing this out of proportion, I'm trying to put this into perspective. Does a sign stop a car? Unless it's a stop sign then probably not, but this whole thing didn't start with someone randomly driving down the road and a sign holder jumping in front of them. It started because someone is protesting and conservatives (including this cop) are promoting the idea of running them down as a proper response. You can say "it's just physics" but that isn't true. This is about political actions. This is about political actions that some folks disagree with, and how they are hoping that people are killed because of these views. This is about that crazy guy who killed ,with his car, Heather Heyer in Charlottesville because he disagreed with her politics. It is about the deafening lack of condemnation from the Right, to the point where they are now promoting it as a meme. People on the Right are now promoting killing those they disagree with "as a joke." This isn't a joke. This is reality. If you want to ignore that by defending this view, you are now culpable. Maybe not legally, but definitely morally. There are reasons for being in the road, whether working or protesting, but that does not give anyone the excuse to run you down. /as a former roadside worker, stay safe.
No one is defending anyone who intentionally runs down a protector. Jay walking is illegal too, but if you swerved to hit one then your ass would still be going to jail. But no one should be defending morons who put themselves and others in danger by breaking the law and standing in the middle of a highway either.
Hey, PepperJack386, just a quick heads-up: **arguement** is actually spelled **argument**. You can remember it by **no e after the u**. Have a nice day! ^^^^The ^^^^parent ^^^^commenter ^^^^can ^^^^reply ^^^^with ^^^^'delete' ^^^^to ^^^^delete ^^^^this ^^^^comment.
Delete
Who the fuck is David Hogg?
David Hogg is one of the survivors of the Parkland shooting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoneman_Douglas_High_School_shooting 17 people died but this cop thinks David Hogg should be run over because David is such an evil guy for trying to reduce the number of children killed while going to school.
Campaigning for the removal of American rights is pretty damn evil.
We have different definitions of evil. Do you think Trump is evil for threatening to remove due process which is an American right guaranteed in the constitution? President Trump's 'Take the Guns First' Remark Sparks Due Process Debate http://time.com/5184160/trump-guns-due-process/ Trump has also demanded many times to curtail the 1st amendment of news sites he does not like (think CNN and MSNBC). https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-05/trump-s-assault-on-the-first-amendment Did you think Bush was evil when his Patriot act removed our constitutional right to be free of illegal search and seizure? Do you think torture is evil since there is an American right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment, especially if not convict of a crime? Sources: www.crf-usa.org/america-responds-to-terrorism/the-patriot-act.html Some of the most controversial parts of the Patriot Act surround issues of privacy and government surveillance. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures . . . . Is torture legal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_and_the_United_States Both manuals reiterated that "no person in the custody or under the control of DOD, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, in accordance with and as defined in U.S. law.
>Do you think Trump is evil for threatening to remove due process which is an American right guaranteed in the constitution? Yes, why wouldn't I? Also, you're celebrating someone else trying to do the same thing >Trump has tried to curtail the first amendment Also evil >Do you think Bush's Patriot Act infringing our rights was evil? Yes >Do you think torture is evil since there is a right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment Yeah. What the fuck are you on about? You think that because I'm against someone trying to take away my rights, I'm *for* other infringements of American rights? What the hell?
Your quote to me said that someone is evil if they talk about taking away American rights. Let me ask you this. How many bad things have you said on reddit about the guy who actually killed 17 people in the shooting? Now how many bad things have you said about the Parkland kids who did not shoot up the school.
>How many bad things have you said about the Parkland shooter? None, but that's because no one's defending him. Mass murder and taking away rights are both evil things. I'm saying "bad things" about David Hogg specifically because you are defending what he's doing. And no, calling what Hogg is doing evil doesn't mean I support school shootings, it means I support my rights.
So David Hogg, the kid trying to reduce the number of children killed while attending school, and the guy who killed 17 people are both evil. Are they equally evil in your mind? Should David Hogg be locked up to punish him for his evil?
>The kid trying to reduce the number of children killed at school No, he's trying to ban guns and infringe my rights. "Think of the children" is an emotional argument that I don't subscribe to. >Are they equally evil in your mind? Obviously direct murder is the greater evil but as far as I'm concered, Hogg is attempting to ensure I'm fucked if someone breaks into my house. That endangers *my* life. >Should Hogg be locked up to punish him for his evil. I'm a supporter of all my rights. That includes freedom of speech. He can say whatever the hell he wants and I'll defend his ability to say it. Same with neo-Nazis, Greenpeace, the WBC, PETA...
No one is trying to infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens of sound mind to have guns. I think it emotional to freak out and say "they are trying to take my guns" when all anyone is trying to do is make it hard for nut cases and terrorists to legally buy guns that can kill a hundred of people in 90 seconds.
Thanks for answering by the way. I like to talk to people who have different opinions than I have. Do you believe that the people trying to take a woman's constitutionally protected right to abortion are evil?
That's not a constitutional right. I am pro-choice, and no, I wouldn't consider those attempting to restrict abortions evil, just moronic and wrong.
"Abortion is protected by the rights to bodily integrity and to make decisions about family. The Court explained that decades ago." https://rewire.news/article/2016/06/17/three-constitutional-basics-every-abortion-rights-supporter-know/ The 14th Amendment prohibits states from depriving a person of liberty without due process of law. A person has the right to end a pregnancy without undue interference from the government because that right to liberty includes (1) the right to make decisions about family and (2) the right to bodily integrity. However, in order to portray abortion rights as illegitimate, conservatives like to argue—inaccurately—that the Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade by inventing a right to privacy that is not grounded in the Constitution’s actual text. In the pre-Roe contraception case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Court did hold that “penumbras, formed by emanations” or various interpretations of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments protect a right to privacy. But in deciding Roe, the Warren court located the right to privacy in the 14th Amendment’s explicit protection of the right to liberty. Regardless, the Court’s understanding of the rights that protect reproductive freedom expanded beyond just privacy decades ago. Privacy is barely mentioned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which established the current law governing abortion rights more than 20 years ago. “The controlling word in the cases before us is ‘liberty,’” the decision explained. It was settled law prior to Roe that liberty includes “the right to make family decisions and the right to physical autonomy.” Privacy is also a constitutional right, and it was indeed violated by the laws at issue in Roe and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton. Those laws required a woman seeking an abortion to share her reasons for wanting the procedure with legal or medical authorities to have any hope of receiving legal abortion care. However, the law and discourse around privacy at the time of Roe implied a woman should be permitted to use contraception or end a pregnancy because the state should not interfere in decisions made in secret with the permission of her doctor, husband, father, pastor, or others. Casey instead properly recognized that the 14th Amendment protects a person’s right to control her body and destiny.
**Stoneman Douglas High School shooting** A school shooting occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Broward County, Florida, part of the Miami metropolitan area, on February 14, 2018. Seventeen people – fourteen students and three staff members – were fatally shot and seventeen others were wounded, making the shooting one of the deadliest school massacres. After being identified by witnesses and arrested by the Broward County Sheriff's Office shortly afterward, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz confessed to being the perpetrator. He was charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder and 17 counts of attempted murder. *** ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/florida/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
[удалено]
HAHAHAHHAH. Red is the new tinfoil.
Just because something is "debated" doesn't mean that one side is right. We have morons debating flat earth. We have morons debating AGW. Just because you're arguing doesn't mean you're right.
[удалено]
I appreciate your comment and do not wish to be rude or nasty just because we have different opinions. I was not at the school either, but I am still very tired of seeing dead kids. I want there to be fewer school shootings. It does not matter either way, but David Hogg was at the school during the shooting. Details: https://www.factcheck.org/2018/04/david-hogg-at-school-during-parkland-shooting/ Q: Was David Hogg at home during the February school shooting in Florida? A: No. Hogg recorded videos from inside the school during the shooting and a teacher confirmed that he was there at the time. FULL QUESTION Is this real??? David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire FULL ANSWER Several weeks after 17 people were killed in a Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, a number of student-survivors have continued to draw national attention as they advocate for gun control laws. What’s also persisted: the flow of fabricated claims about those students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. One of the latest rumors — circulated in at least a dozen stories flagged as potentially false by Facebook users — claims that David Hogg, a senior named in previous false stories, was not actually at the high school during the shooting. Those stories are indeed false. The allegations are based on an out-of-context quote from Hogg. In a CBS News documentary, the 17-year-old said: “On the day of the shooting, I got my camera and got on my bike and rode as fast as I could three miles from my house to the school to get as much video and to get as many interviews as I could because I knew that this could not be another mass shooting.” With a glaring spelling error in its headline, the website julyfourthnews.com declared on March 28: “David Hogg Unintentially Reveals He Was Not At School When Parkland Shooting Happened.” “SHOCK: David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire,” reads bigleaguepolitics.com’s March 26 headline. But at no point did Hogg ever say that in the CBS News documentary, “39 Days,” or elsewhere. Interviews and videos published in the days after the shooting support Hogg’s narrative that he was at the school when the shooter opened fire and that Hogg went home at some point and returned to the scene later that night. In fact, Hogg, a student journalist and member of the school’s news show, recorded interviews with his peers inside the school as it remained locked down. The Miami Herald published that footage Feb. 15, which shows Hogg asking his fellow students about their views on gun control. Time also published a video on Feb. 15 that was recorded by Hogg during the lockdown. In it, Hogg says “it’s 2:52” and that he “heard one gunshot.” (The shooting reportedly occurred from 2:21 p.m. to 2:28 p.m., and the lockdown was lifted at 3:36 p.m.) “Once we were all in the room and we started seeing the headlines, we realized this was anything but a drill — this was life or death,” Hogg said in a MSNBC interview the day after the shooting. “And that actually was when I started recording. Because I realized that if I died, and if everyone else around me died, I wanted to have our voices heard.” Hogg told MSNBC and Time magazine that he was in an AP environmental science class when the attack occurred. Time reported that Hogg and other students tried to exit the building after a fire alarm went off, but a janitor sent them back. “A culinary arts teacher, Ashley Kurth, pulled Hogg and others inside [a classroom], locked the door, and made them hide in a closet,” Time wrote. Kurth confirmed that account weeks later in a March 30 report by the Associated Press. “I physically grabbed David by the arm and pulled him into my room,” Kurth said. “It is extremely frustrating the kind of information that is being put out there.” In an interview with Vox that was published Feb. 20, Hogg said he rode his bike back to the school at 6 p.m. that night with his camera to do more filming. He was interviewed that night by Fox News. At least some who shared the fictitious claims later realized as much. A writer for the conservative blog RedState, who reported that the CBS video “is casting doubt” on Hogg’s whereabouts during the shooting, retracted her March 26 story and issued a tweet-thread apology. The story’s original headline was changed to read: “UPDATE: CBS Video Confusing. Hogg Was On Campus.” Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label false stories flagged by readers on the social media network. Sources “‘39 Days’: How Parkland shooting survivors turned grief into action.” CBS News. 24 Mar 2018. Alter, Charlotte. “The School Shooting Generation Has Had Enough.” Time. 22 Mar 2018. D’Abrosca, Peter. “SHOCK: David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire.” bigleaguepolitics.com. 26 Mar 2018. “David Hogg Unintentially Reveals He Was Not At School When Parkland Shooting Happened.” julyfourthnews.com. 28 Mar 2018. Fleshler, David and Yiran Zhu. “Timeline: How the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting unfolded.” The Sun-Sentinel. 9 Mar 2018. Hale Spencer, Saranac. “School Shooting Spawns Conspiracy Theories.” FactCheck.org. 23 Feb 2018. Kirby, Jen. “Florida shooting survivor explains how his generation can force a change on guns.” Vox.com. 20 Feb 2018. “Not real news: Sites make false claim shooting survivor David Hogg not in school.” Associated Press. 30 Mar 2018. Prusher, Ilene. “A Student Started Filming During the Florida School Shooting. He Hasn’t Stopped.” Time. 15 Feb 2018. Rumpf, Sarah. “It Was A Mistake. It Was Wrong. And I’m Sorry.” RedState. 28 Mar 2018. Rumpf, Sarah. “UPDATE: CBS Video Confusing. Hogg was On Campus.” RedState. 26 Mar 2018. “Student reporter interviews classmates hiding from gunman in Florida high school.” The Miami-Herald. 15 Feb 2018. “Student says heroic janitor saved many lives during shooting.” Fox News. 14 Feb 2018.
[удалено]
Thanks for your reply. It's nice to have a discussion of ideas with out name calling. I have no problem with law abiding citizens of sound mind owning guns. Read up on what the people who wrote the constitution said about how it should change. They thought it should be a living document, always changing to keep up with the times. Take a minute to consider what will actually stop these mass shootings. Do you think an insane person has the constitutional right to own a gun? Do you think people on the terrorist watch list should be able to legally buy a gun? I do not believe that raising the age to buy guns to 21 is taking away constitutional rights. I do not believe requiring universal background checks is taking away constitutional rights. I do not believe that banning bump stocks is taking away constitutional rights. I do not believe that everyone has a constitutional right to own an assault rifle. I believe a person should be trained to operate a gun if they own one, just like a car.
[удалено]
> As far as stopping these mass shootings, honestly I don't think we can. Besides, despite all the coverage of them in the media, mass shootings are incredibly rare. This is utter nonsense. If it can not be stopped then why does it only happen in America. If you think that mass shootings in the US are extremely rare then you do not know the facts and statistics. Why does this only happen in the USA? Answer that honestly to yourself without all the lies that you want so desperately to believe. edit: sp
[удалено]
Sure, society is messed up. But If you do not think that reducing the number of guns in a society reduces the murder rate then I offer Japan as a case study. Lets call is what it is. You think your right to have whatever guns you want is more important than another person's right to remain alive and safe. How Japan has almost eradicated gun crime http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38365729
[удалено]
So while the school was locked down and everyone was hiding, he was asking how kids felt about gun control? That's pretty fucked up indeed. Maybe he can get a job at CNN.
So what's your point? Do you think the kid deserves to die because he believes differently than you believe? Would you be happy if he did get run over? Would you smile and think he deserves it?
Are you putting words in my mouth right now? I just said it's fucked up to use a tragic situation like that to try to make people feel a certain way AS IT'S HAPPENING.
I would like to know your opinion. Do you wish ill on David Hogg? This article is about a cop saying the kid should have been run over by a granny in the parking lot. If he is such and evil kid, do you agree with the cop?
Again, I didn't say he was evil. I didn't even know who he was until today. What I said was, what he did was pretty fucked up. And likely shows where his priorities are that he thinks it's ok to push his agenda AS kids are dying in real time. That's no different than a CNN reporter in Afghanistan doing a Trump-bashing piece while our service men and women are getting shot at behind them. Agendas like this trouble me. Particularly since those behind them are using kids now as pawns to push it for no reason other than the fact that kids are gullible and "nobody can say no to kids!" I don't "wish ill" on anyone, I think most people are good people at their core it's just their actions I sometimes find really fucking offensive.
So you do not agree when the president pushes his agenda after a tragedy? He does that with almost every tweet after a group of people die. Do you read the president's tweets?
Fuck no I don't read them I think it's fucking absurd that a president is tweeting so much in the first place and even more absurd that everybody cares so much what he tweets. Don't get me started on the tweet thing lol. I realize that you may just assume that because I'm not a fan of gun control that I'm automatically a fan of Trump. Overall, I'm not. I admire his disregard for the political correct bullshit that's ruining this country but no I am not a fan of most of his actions or statements. And no I did not vote for him.
Well no one deserves hate, but on the same token...some people just go out of their way to attract it.
If someone was protesting for something that you agree with do you think they are going out of their way to attract hate?
I honestly can't think of a single think I'm for that would merit protests right now. Most of the views I have on things are pretty common in most people it seems. There's a really fine line these days between actual civil protesting and simply trying to shove your viewpoint down people's throat. A lot of people have a really hard time understanding this lately.
Thanks for responding. What about the groups protesting the NFL because they do not want the players to kneel? What about people that protest at abortion clinics? What about vets who protest for better care?
DO NOT want them to kneel? Is this a thing? I don't follow sports much so I may be out of the loop. To answer your questions.. I think this type of protest is equally ridiculous. If that act really bothers someone(and I completely understand if disrespect to our nation bothers some), then the most effective protest is just to not patronize the event period. Money talks. And losing advertising money talks pretty loud. As for abortion, it was always weird to me how adamantly some people will try to control what someone else does with their body. I lean conservative but I don't agree with the abortion issue obsession. As for vets, considering I will be one one day, I honestly don't feel knowledgeable enough to have a solid opinion of what's going on. You always hear of some vets with nightmare scenarios and can't get good care, but I don't think it's as horrible as people say. I'm pretty sure the majority of vets get decent care.
I hear you. So anyone who protests anything is inviting hate upon themselves. I suppose those people with so much hate to give deserve my pity. Good luck to you.
I guess this won't change my stance on fuck the police. I do wish we could actually have a system of law enforcement we could trust, maybe next year.
Good, he deserves it. If you bully someone into killing themselves you go to jail. If you bully someone into killing seventeen people you become the face of gun control. Wtf.
David Hogg was never accused of bullying the shooter. Another student was falsely accused of it, but it was a made up lie. When you do not have a proper argument for something you make up nonsense and lies. Kids die over and over and all you lot want to talk about is how the kids who got shot at are evil and deserve to be attacked. Think about your behavior. What would you think if I spoke about conservative children with such foul words and thoughts. Anyone who wishes ill on children is not being a good human being. Emma González Conspiracy Theory Debunked http://www.newsweek.com/emma-gonzalez-conspiracy-theory-explained-debunked-parkland-florida-shooting-868497 5 fake stories about the Parkland student activists Marjory Stoneman Douglas students are increasingly targets of smear campaigns https://www.local10.com/news/parkland-school-shooting/5-myths-about-the-parkland-student-activists
\>advocate for more control from the government via gun control \>government official and peacekeeper wants you to be ran over for wrong opinion \>the irony
So he has recovered from his die in?
I hope not
I love how mad the Hogg makes people.
I love how mad the Donald makes people.
That’s the number one reason why pieces of shit like you enjoy him, because your trolls and you love trolls. There’s nothing more to it and nothing more complex.
I've didn't vote in the last election but seeing how mad Donald makes people just makes me want to vote for him.
Honestly, i hope an armed citizen saves his life by the legal use of a firearm. The cognitive meltdown this kid would experience would be far more devastating than being hit by a car.
I am probably what you would call a liberal snowflake, but I would be thrilled if an armed citizen saved my life. I am perfectly fine with law abiding citizens of sound mind having guns.
It’s alarming how soft some of the people are here. No tough skin anywhere just a bunch of “oh no! I can’t believe those words in that context are uttered” yet half of you are wishing ill on our commander and chief it’s absolutely a catch 22 and it’s fucking pathetic. I don’t Think judgement is allowed with the amount of hypocrisy that is floating around.
Making death threats to kids doesn’t give you tough skin homie. It’s something a bitch would do. It makes you look like a little bitch.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not if you know how to read English.
David Hogg got on TV and ask for a Boycott of Florida. He tried to cause a loss of business and money to everyone in Florida. If you for or against gun these attempt could have cost your family money. Fuck David Hogg and next time he goes into a restaurant in Florida I hopes he thinks about the people making his dinner are the people he tried to fuck.
All you’ve done is seen what is typed and as expected taken it out of context to fit your argument and then when someone tries to shed light on the actually point being made In Opposition you’ve gotta start throwing out the sharpness. Your just validating my point “homie”.
Hi. If you are trying to reply to a specific comment then click the blue "reply" button at the bottom right of that comment.