Republican strategist Karl Rove said on "Fox News Sunday" the only way to stop gun-related violence, like the Wednesday massacre at Emmanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston S.C., was to repeal American citizens' Second Amendment rights.What do you think?
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/21/karl-rove-only-way-to-stop-the-violence-is-to-repeal-2nd-amendment/#ixzz3dkUxvTNh
The use of the tools of violence is a symptom of a deeper problem, one that won't go away if you can a tool. Too mnay people can't grasp this.
The best indicator for the proclivity of a society towards violence is the Gini index. It measures the economic gap in society. The smaller the gap between the haves and the have nots the less violence of any sort. The best recommendation is to implement tax strategies that promote income equality.
Unfortunately there is no more agreement about how to implement those policies than gun regulation.
Anything Karl Rove says means nothing to me he is on the same level as Bloomburg and Rahm Immanuel at least in my mind. If we are talking taxes I'm for a flat tax with no subsidies I don't care what you make or are married and have kids and a house you should pay the same as someone who rents and is single.
There is no difference between a Democrat and a Republican politician.
Didn't we already have this discussion in the Political section?
.
We are a divided nation.
Politics divide rich from poor, men from women, black from white, legal vs illegal, religious vs sectarian, where one side is demonized. All of this is designed to turn out a base voting block.
Is if really a surprise that fringe lunatics flip out from time to time?
I must say I'm not worthy of carrying the water of those church members. To bring themselves to forgive already is a testament to their faith, and I just don't think I could get there, at least not that fast. They simply chose love over hate.
I just wish there was at least CC holder among them.
Greg
Quote from: Geeman on June 22 2015 05:32:41 AM MDT
We are a divided nation.
Politics divide rich from poor, men from women, black from white, legal vs illegal, religious vs sectarian, where one side is demonized. All of this is designed to turn out a base voting block.
Is if really a surprise that fringe lunatics flip out from time to time?
I must say I'm not worthy of carrying the water of those church members. To bring themselves to forgive already is a testament to their faith, and I just don't think I could get there, at least not that fast. They simply chose love over hate.
I just wish there was at least one CC holder among them.
Greg
wolfie;
I think he is full of shit.
Pat
Good comments
He went to the same high school my kids go to. Where is a facepalm emoji when you need one.
They will NOT take any of my guns.
The fact that they would even consider repealing the second amendment is the very reason it was created.
Sheep in Wolfs Clothing. Its not the USA we grew up. Also turn that fraud shit FOX NEWS off. Complicate with agenda.
One of the best decisions I ever made was to get ride of broadcast in my home. No Antennae, no dish. We get all our news online, and I have learned not to read articles that don't link to reputable sources for their information.
It is amazing how much BS gets filtered that way.
Quote from: sqlbullet on June 24 2015 08:55:51 AM MDT
One of the best decisions I ever made was to get ride of broadcast in my home. No Antennae, no dish. We get all our news online, and I have learned not to read articles that don't link to reputable sources for their information.
It is amazing how much BS gets filtered that way.
What is a reputable source?
You're taking his statement and twisting it. He wasn't advocating for repeal of the second amendment. His point was that in order to get rid of all gun crime, all guns must go away. As long as there are guns, there will be gun crime. His answer to the question was honest and logical, but doesn't mean he would support the 2nd amendment being repealed.
Quote from: Patriot on June 26 2015 07:26:42 AM MDT
You're taking his statement and twisting it. He wasn't advocating for repeal of the second amendment. His point was that in order to get rid of all gun crime, all guns must go away. As long as there are guns, there will be gun crime. His answer to the question was honest and logical, but doesn't mean he would support the 2nd amendment being repealed.
Right, and he should have just kept his mouth shut. Sometimes things make sense and/or sound better in our head than when we try to articulate and explain....
Quote from: radiotom on June 25 2015 06:03:59 PM MDT
Quote from: sqlbullet on June 24 2015 08:55:51 AM MDT
One of the best decisions I ever made was to get ride of broadcast in my home. No Antennae, no dish. We get all our news online, and I have learned not to read articles that don't link to reputable sources for their information.
It is amazing how much BS gets filtered that way.
What is a reputable source?
A source published by a recognized researcher in the field in a peer reviewed journal.
Or
A peer reviewed and audited database where the data is verified to be normalized. WISQARS would be a great example.
In other words, anything that has had the scientific method applied to it's results by multiple researchers at divergent locations.
Quote from: Patriot on June 26 2015 07:26:42 AM MDT
You're taking his statement and twisting it. He wasn't advocating for repeal of the second amendment. His point was that in order to get rid of all gun crime, all guns must go away. As long as there are guns, there will be gun crime. His answer to the question was honest and logical, but doesn't mean he would support the 2nd amendment being repealed.
Exactly!
In essence, I concur with sqlbullet....
We cannot attempt to govern the condition of the human heart without placing a heavy burden on those who traditionally follow the law. Laws only communicate a standard of conduct to "good people". Criminals will do as they please regardless.
Murder has existed since the beginning: If its not guns then swords, not swords then hands or rocks....
Not sure how one can ban hands and rocks.
JDC
Quote from: redbaron007 on June 28 2015 03:00:38 PM MDT
Quote from: Patriot on June 26 2015 07:26:42 AM MDT
You're taking his statement and twisting it. He wasn't advocating for repeal of the second amendment. His point was that in order to get rid of all gun crime, all guns must go away. As long as there are guns, there will be gun crime. His answer to the question was honest and logical, but doesn't mean he would support the 2nd amendment being repealed.
Exactly!
At least somebody gets it.
Easy to spin if you leave out one sentence he said (noted in all caps below).
"Now maybe there's some magic law that will keep us from having more of these. I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough oomph to repeal the Second Amendment, that's not going to happen. I DON'T THINK IT'S AN ANSWER".
I agree. I don't think it's an answer.
The interesting thing is many of the founders thought the bill of rights was completely un-needed because the rights enumerated were so innate at the time.
IMHO the second amendment was worded the way it was not to limit the use of firearms to a military context, but to guarantee understanding the citizens needed access to military grade hardware.
Curiously, this was the exact rational that the supreme court used in Miller to uphold the 34 NFA. Specifically, that short barreled rifles and shotguns and fully automatic firearms were not issue to the common infantryman. Therefore, they argued, such guns enjoyed no protection.
As a result, I am huge fan of the Miller ruling. Properly applied today, it means I should be able to readily buy without restriction a short barreled selective fire suppressed rifle, because that is exactly what the common infantryman of today is issued. Further, such an application of the Miller ruling strikes down magazine capacity bans, as the typical soldier today is equipped with 30 round magazines.
Rove is just a White House "yes man" as are so many others, no matter what their party affiliation.
To be a Patriot, you have to accept the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and be willing to fight for
freedom over tyranny. To stop "gun violence, you need to stop gun criminals..." End of story!
I don't see the point in using the term "gun crime" if a person is killed with a knife/gun/car why is only the one killed with a gun matter.
Quote from: 10mmfan on June 29 2015 03:20:08 PM MDT
I don't see the point in using the term "gun crime" if a person is killed with a knife/gun/car why is only the one killed with a gun matter.
A point a cite all the time when discussing the role of guns in violence. Or the role in drinking in automobile fatalities. Doesn't matter to me if the driver was inattentive due to inebriation or because they wanted to select their favorite Jay-Z playlist.
The ONLY way to stop cyber crime is to ban the integrated circuit.
Greg
That's actually not what he said, but thanks for reposting sensationalist click bait.
If that's the case then I think Karl Rove (the architect) is a complete idiot!
Quote from: Charlie_Zulu on June 28 2015 05:31:54 PM MDT
Quote from: redbaron007 on June 28 2015 03:00:38 PM MDT
Quote from: Patriot on June 26 2015 07:26:42 AM MDT
You're taking his statement and twisting it. He wasn't advocating for repeal of the second amendment. His point was that in order to get rid of all gun crime, all guns must go away. As long as there are guns, there will be gun crime. His answer to the question was honest and logical, but doesn't mean he would support the 2nd amendment being repealed.
Exactly!
At least somebody gets it.
Easy to spin if you leave out one sentence he said (noted in all caps below).
"Now maybe there's some magic law that will keep us from having more of these. I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough oomph to repeal the Second Amendment, that's not going to happen. I DON'T THINK IT'S AN ANSWER".
I agree. I don't think it's an answer.
Yes thank you.
As much as I don't like Rove, you guys need to be very careful of the junk wolfie is trying to sell. HE is in favor of gun control. This kind of gun control:
"The left may have lost several battles, Everitt says, but the war for gun control will go on."
http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/07/02/eyes-on-the-prize-gun-control-advocates-see-success-on-the-horizon
Thats right Pablo, I agree with 92% of gun owners who want background checks. I also want national reciprocity.
I also agree with Trump on securing the border.
PS: The left keeps winning, gay marriage the ACA just last week. Liberals have been winning since 1776 and I hope you celebrated them for creating the greatest nation in the world on her birthday.
The "92%" is doubtful.
But, really, don't deflect - why did you post the original link in the first place?
I mean dude, you wrote:
QuoteRepublican strategist Karl Rove said on "Fox News Sunday" the only way to stop gun-related violence, like the Wednesday massacre at Emmanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston S.C., was to repeal American citizens' Second Amendment rights.What do you think?
When you knew he didn't say that. What is your point?
Quote from: Pablo on July 04 2015 10:27:42 PM MDT
What is your point?
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y216/habs21/TrollFaceDancing_large_zps9he9vof3.gif)
Criminals and the environments that produce criminals are the problem. Offenders should be locked up at hard labor, no parole. Violent repeat offenders and habitual criminals should be promptly executed. Hangings in the public square or stadium style and Pay for view would be fine :)
One of my favorite movies. Cool Hand Luke. Especially the scene with the blonde cleaning the car. And the chain gang with blood hounds. Joy Harmon was the blonde. Any man that can watch that scene without losing their mind is under????.