How Did 15-18 Year Old Kids Organize A Nationwide Movement In Less Than A Week?

[Pogo]

You seem profoundly butthurt that somebody dared to shoot video.

Why would that be exactly?

Why would I butthurt the idiot wasn't doing anything to prepare himself ...

Oh wait ... Let me guess ...
You are probably one of those people that thinks teaching a child to put a condom on a cucumber is appropriate ...
But suggesting their stupid ass should put their phone down and look for something to defend themselves with is not a good idea ...

Once again, you seem to have appointed yourself Eye in the Sky with the all-pervasive power to determine, from parsecs away, exactly what was going on in a space you never saw. As if the simple act of taking a video automatically means there were myriad choices on that table and the video was the one selected.

Whence do you get these superpsychic powers? Krypton? And by what standard do you sit in judgment of one incomplete slice of how somebody you don't know reacted to a crisis you didn't witness?

Again, you're butthurt that a video exists --- cf. "idiot". Why would anyone be whining about the fact that something was documented?

 

[BlackSand]

Once again, you seem to have appointed yourself Eye in the Sky with the all-pervasive power to determine, from parsecs away, exactly what was going on in a space you never saw. As if the simple act of taking a video automatically means there were myriad choices on that table and the video was the one selected.

Whence do you get these superpsychic powers? Krypton? And by what standard do you sit in judgment of one incomplete slice of how somebody you don't know reacted to a crisis you didn't witness?

Again, you're butthurt that a video exists --- cf. "idiot". Why would anyone be whining about the fact that something was documented?

What a senseless pile of garbage ... You're trying way too hard ...

.

 

[Pogo]

Once again, you seem to have appointed yourself Eye in the Sky with the all-pervasive power to determine, from parsecs away, exactly what was going on in a space you never saw. As if the simple act of taking a video automatically means there were myriad choices on that table and the video was the one selected.

Whence do you get these superpsychic powers? Krypton? And by what standard do you sit in judgment of one incomplete slice of how somebody you don't know reacted to a crisis you didn't witness?

Again, you're butthurt that a video exists --- cf. "idiot". Why would anyone be whining about the fact that something was documented?

What a senseless pile of garbage ... You're trying way too hard ...

So you have no answer.

Next in line please....

 

[BlackSand]

So you have no answer.

Next in line please....

You were responding to the answer I gave.
Your response was more senseless garbage ... It didn't deserve the bandwidth you used.

If you care to waste more bandwidth ... Knock yourself out Skippy ...
That dovetails nicely with utter failure associated with the child's ability to act proactively ...
And the idea the federal government may be able to do anything other add to their ever-growing list of failures.

.

 

[Pogo]

So you have no answer.

Next in line please....

You were responding to the answer I gave.
Your response was more senseless garbage ... It didn't deserve the bandwidth you used.

If you care to waste more bandwidth ... Knock yourself out Skippy ...
That dovetails nicely with utter failure associated with the child's ability to act proactively ...
And the idea the federal government may be able to do anything other add to their ever-growing list of failures.

Now you're just reiterating what I already pointed out --- you're butthurt that documentation exists.

And you can't explain why that is. And we already established that.

 

[ChrisL]

Yeah! More gun control measures! That ought to work out well, just like it has for the past 50 or so years! Things have gotten MUCH better.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The day they chose for their protest 420, is already pot day, so half the organization is already done. They just want a day off to get high and be free to block traffic and stick it to adults.

 

[Nosmo King]

Nothing to bargain with? Americans have been laying the bullet ridden corpses of their loved ones on the High Altar of Intransigence in the Cathedral of LaPierre for decades! Why do you need a concession? You are either admitting culpability in mass shootings or you cannot recognize mass shootings for the unnecessary tragedies they are!

Balls the size of tombstones on this guy! Demanding a bargaining chip to stem the tide of shootings and the flow of victims they produce!

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

 

[Montrovant]

Nothing to bargain with? Americans have been laying the bullet ridden corpses of their loved ones on the High Altar of Intransigence in the Cathedral of LaPierre for decades! Why do you need a concession? You are either admitting culpability in mass shootings or you cannot recognize mass shootings for the unnecessary tragedies they are!

Balls the size of tombstones on this guy! Demanding a bargaining chip to stem the tide of shootings and the flow of victims they produce!

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

Do you think restricting weapons that are semi-auto would pass SCOTUS review? Semi-auto is very much common use; I would guess that half or more of the guns in the US are semi-auto. According to this, about 40% of pistols and rifles in the US were semi-auto in 1997: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio....ttpsredir=1&article=1679&context=urban_facpub

I think it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would accept much restriction on semi-automatic firearms as a whole.

 

[Nosmo King]

Nothing to bargain with? Americans have been laying the bullet ridden corpses of their loved ones on the High Altar of Intransigence in the Cathedral of LaPierre for decades! Why do you need a concession? You are either admitting culpability in mass shootings or you cannot recognize mass shootings for the unnecessary tragedies they are!

Balls the size of tombstones on this guy! Demanding a bargaining chip to stem the tide of shootings and the flow of victims they produce!

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

Do you think restricting weapons that are semi-auto would pass SCOTUS review? Semi-auto is very much common use; I would guess that half or more of the guns in the US are semi-auto. According to this, about 40% of pistols and rifles in the US were semi-auto in 1997: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio....ttpsredir=1&article=1679&context=urban_facpub

I think it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would accept much restriction on semi-automatic firearms as a whole.

At one point most of the patent medicines contained opium. At one point most of the insecticides sprayed on crops contained DDT.

Justice Scalia in his opinion on the Heller case cited no rights are absolute.

Not confiscation but banning the further sale, import, manufacture and distribution of semi-automatic firing systems and high capacity magazines. No one's right to self defense would be infringed.

 

[Montrovant]

Nothing to bargain with? Americans have been laying the bullet ridden corpses of their loved ones on the High Altar of Intransigence in the Cathedral of LaPierre for decades! Why do you need a concession? You are either admitting culpability in mass shootings or you cannot recognize mass shootings for the unnecessary tragedies they are!

Balls the size of tombstones on this guy! Demanding a bargaining chip to stem the tide of shootings and the flow of victims they produce!

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

Do you think restricting weapons that are semi-auto would pass SCOTUS review? Semi-auto is very much common use; I would guess that half or more of the guns in the US are semi-auto. According to this, about 40% of pistols and rifles in the US were semi-auto in 1997: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio....ttpsredir=1&article=1679&context=urban_facpub

I think it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would accept much restriction on semi-automatic firearms as a whole.

At one point most of the patent medicines contained opium. At one point most of the insecticides sprayed on crops contained DDT.

Justice Scalia in his opinion on the Heller case cited no rights are absolute.

Not confiscation but banning the further sale, import, manufacture and distribution of semi-automatic firing systems and high capacity magazines. No one's right to self defense would be infringed.

Are opium or DDT Constitutionally protected rights? There is a higher bar involved here.

No, no rights are absolute. However, that does not mean that rights can be changed on a whim, ignoring all previous rulings or precedent.

Semi-automatic is a very low bar to try to set. I don't think it would work without a new amendment.

 

[BlueGin]

These little kids can't even decide which videogame to play next. Yet have managed to set a date for a March on our nation's capitol in less than a week. Is anyone really buying this? Not to mention they magically came up with the same tired old talking points Democrats have failingly foisted for decades...
So... How'd they do it? Or did they at all...?

Fake grass roots groups. As per usual.

 

[Marion Morrison]

These little kids can't even decide which videogame to play next. Yet have managed to set a date for a March on our nation's capitol in less than a week. Is anyone really buying this? Not to mention they magically came up with the same tired old talking points Democrats have failingly foisted for decades...
So... How'd they do it? Or did they at all...?

The infrastructure for those things is already in place, under the guise of some water sales or something company. They have fleet vans and offices throughout the United States. I lost the OS with the pages saved from when they were advertising. Are they hoisting professionally printed signs, or professionally made to look homemade signs?

I see they caught on to people pointing that one out.


Because nothing says "spontaneous grassroots event" like the same damn signs all over the country within 1 day.

 

[Nosmo King]

Nothing to bargain with? Americans have been laying the bullet ridden corpses of their loved ones on the High Altar of Intransigence in the Cathedral of LaPierre for decades! Why do you need a concession? You are either admitting culpability in mass shootings or you cannot recognize mass shootings for the unnecessary tragedies they are!

Balls the size of tombstones on this guy! Demanding a bargaining chip to stem the tide of shootings and the flow of victims they produce!

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

Do you think restricting weapons that are semi-auto would pass SCOTUS review? Semi-auto is very much common use; I would guess that half or more of the guns in the US are semi-auto. According to this, about 40% of pistols and rifles in the US were semi-auto in 1997: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio....ttpsredir=1&article=1679&context=urban_facpub

I think it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would accept much restriction on semi-automatic firearms as a whole.

At one point most of the patent medicines contained opium. At one point most of the insecticides sprayed on crops contained DDT.

Justice Scalia in his opinion on the Heller case cited no rights are absolute.

Not confiscation but banning the further sale, import, manufacture and distribution of semi-automatic firing systems and high capacity magazines. No one's right to self defense would be infringed.

Are opium or DDT Constitutionally protected rights? There is a higher bar involved here.

No, no rights are absolute. However, that does not mean that rights can be changed on a whim, ignoring all previous rulings or precedent.

Semi-automatic is a very low bar to try to set. I don't think it would work without a new amendment.

I contend that the semi-automatic firing system fed by a high capacity magazine is not a constitutionally protected right. And citing that position is not taken on a whim. It is cited on the bullet riddled corpses of innocent Americans. If other weapons can be banned due to their unnecessary lethality, assault weapons can be too.

 

[Marion Morrison]

The prevalence of video in surveillance cameras and personal phones does more to stop crime than 300 million guns in private hands

So a guy who plans on going out the hard way gives a shit about Youtube other than to immortalize his actions?

Holy fuck you're stupid....

Yeah ... Like Seung-Hui Cho (the Virginia Tech shooter) ... Was so afraid of cameras ...
He sent pictures and his manifesto to NBC.

Of course he is responsible for the deadliest school shooting ...
And used two handguns instead of one of the scary looking firearms ... .

Thanks, Black Sand, that is exactly right: we need to identify the crazies and make sure they can't get firearms.

These little kids can't even decide which videogame to play next. Yet have managed to set a date for a March on our nation's capitol in less than a week. Is anyone really buying this? Not to mention they magically came up with the same tired old talking points Democrats have failingly foisted for decades...
So... How'd they do it? Or did they at all...?

you clearly don't have kids. high school kids aren't "little kids"

and when you watch 17 of your classmates and teachers murdered because of NRA imbeciles, you get active quickly.

you seem pretty desperate.

Especially when it pays $15/hr and you wanna take that girl to the Bieber concert, amirite?

 

[Marion Morrison]

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

Do you think restricting weapons that are semi-auto would pass SCOTUS review? Semi-auto is very much common use; I would guess that half or more of the guns in the US are semi-auto. According to this, about 40% of pistols and rifles in the US were semi-auto in 1997: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio....ttpsredir=1&article=1679&context=urban_facpub

I think it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would accept much restriction on semi-automatic firearms as a whole.

At one point most of the patent medicines contained opium. At one point most of the insecticides sprayed on crops contained DDT.

Justice Scalia in his opinion on the Heller case cited no rights are absolute.

Not confiscation but banning the further sale, import, manufacture and distribution of semi-automatic firing systems and high capacity magazines. No one's right to self defense would be infringed.

Are opium or DDT Constitutionally protected rights? There is a higher bar involved here.

No, no rights are absolute. However, that does not mean that rights can be changed on a whim, ignoring all previous rulings or precedent.

Semi-automatic is a very low bar to try to set. I don't think it would work without a new amendment.

I contend that the semi-automatic firing system fed by a high capacity magazine is not a constitutionally protected right. And citing that position is not taken on a whim. It is cited on the bullet riddled corpses of innocent Americans. If other weapons can be banned due to their unnecessary lethality, assault weapons can be too.

Wow! You are just super-ignorant when it comes to guns, huh?

Someone that ignorant should not be talking about things of which he clearly does not know.

What does the AR in "AR-15" stand for?

Also, how old are you? Holy crap!

 

[Fang]

All I can say is.....

The Left GETS IT DONE.....by any means necessary.....they WILL NOT QUIT until you are defeated. PERIOD.

Agreed. Lying, cheating, ignoring facts and violence are all tool the Left uses.

 

[Montrovant]

Is your never ending empty rhetoric what you intend to replace Constitutionally protected rights with ...

.

No rights are absolute. If fully automatic firing systems can be restricted, semi-automatic firing systems can be too.

Do you think restricting weapons that are semi-auto would pass SCOTUS review? Semi-auto is very much common use; I would guess that half or more of the guns in the US are semi-auto. According to this, about 40% of pistols and rifles in the US were semi-auto in 1997: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio....ttpsredir=1&article=1679&context=urban_facpub

I think it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would accept much restriction on semi-automatic firearms as a whole.

At one point most of the patent medicines contained opium. At one point most of the insecticides sprayed on crops contained DDT.

Justice Scalia in his opinion on the Heller case cited no rights are absolute.

Not confiscation but banning the further sale, import, manufacture and distribution of semi-automatic firing systems and high capacity magazines. No one's right to self defense would be infringed.

Are opium or DDT Constitutionally protected rights? There is a higher bar involved here.

No, no rights are absolute. However, that does not mean that rights can be changed on a whim, ignoring all previous rulings or precedent.

Semi-automatic is a very low bar to try to set. I don't think it would work without a new amendment.

I contend that the semi-automatic firing system fed by a high capacity magazine is not a constitutionally protected right. And citing that position is not taken on a whim. It is cited on the bullet riddled corpses of innocent Americans. If other weapons can be banned due to their unnecessary lethality, assault weapons can be too.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...-less-than-a-week.661304/reply?quote=19339709
Is your definition of assault weapons semi-automatic weapons? That's......ridiculous, really. There are all sorts of semi-automatic weapons. Also, assault weapons is often a pretty vague term.

Magazine capacity is a somewhat different issue.

 

[JakeStarkey]

All I can say is.....

The Left GETS IT DONE.....by any means necessary.....they WILL NOT QUIT until you are defeated. PERIOD.

Agreed. Lying, cheating, ignoring facts and violence are all tool the Left uses.

You mean the Alt Right of course.

 

[Fang]

All I can say is.....

The Left GETS IT DONE.....by any means necessary.....they WILL NOT QUIT until you are defeated. PERIOD.

Agreed. Lying, cheating, ignoring facts and violence are all tool the Left uses.

You mean the Alt Right of course.

No I meant you.