Active Now

Slartibartfast
.
Discussion » Questions » Politics » Do you think that any propaganda will be spread at the NRA gathering tommorow?

Do you think that any propaganda will be spread at the NRA gathering tommorow?

Within hours of the Texas school shooting propaganda about it shot across the internet.  The shooter was a illegal immigrant. The shooter was a transgender. The  Texas school shooting  was staged and the parents standing outside the school were actors - it was staged so that law enforcement would be taking away from the border and illegals could sneak in. Propaganda like that is designed to breed hate and it has to stop. Cheers!

Posted - May 26, 2022

Responses


  • 10948
    Thought I would add a poem that I wrote about the internet back in 2000.

    It's Alive: They say to be a true life form something new from it can be born. I may be crazy but now I see alive and well the Internet it be. It breeds violence it breeds hate - lets kill it now before it is too late. It created a new market for something that has always been wrong - now more children are crying well abused by the strong. So now it is time for the Internet to evolve and it's new shape and form is ours to solve. Cheers!
      May 26, 2022 9:07 AM MDT
    2

  • 10052
    Solve? 
      May 26, 2022 4:43 PM MDT
    2

  • 33805
    I do not care about any  of that. 

    I want to know how he got in the school so easy. I want to know why police were forming a barricade instead of going to the shooter.  There should never be 1:30 time between 911 call and the shooting of a shooter.  
    Thank God for the border patrol agent who went and shot the POS. 
      May 26, 2022 10:48 AM MDT
    1

  • 10557
    We live in a very immature world.  Adults who should know better act like teenagers.  Leaders who should be leading are instead having "pissing contests" (both genders).  And everyone just HAS to find someone else to blame for everything (democrats, republicans, blacks, whites, immigrants...).  Few take responsibility for their own actions (and this doesn't just apply to "leaders").  When a problem arises, people don't want to fix it, they’d rather use it as an opportunity to push their own agenda.  So they gossip, lie, and concoct rumors, yet see nothing wrong with doing so.  Immature!

    NOBODY will do anything about gun violence.  Oh, they may cry out "we should do this", or "we need to do that"; a few may even try to make a token effort, but they dare not go any further.  Everyone screams that they have rights, but those rights only apply to themselves - and they'd rather die than to forgo even one of those "rights" for the sake of another.  Immature!

    {And this holds true for most other issues as well - abortion, climate change, race, etc.}

      May 26, 2022 1:49 PM MDT
    5

  • 10052
    There are so many layers and viewpoints on this and as you said, other issues. I sincerely believe that most people aren't capable of understanding these complexities, and/or of being open to considering something they think or believe isn't 100% fact/absolute. It's just the way it is. Immature, as you kindly put it. When it comes to the gossip, lie and concoct rumors, I really don't buy that they don't KNOW it's wrong. That's a step further than immature, I think.  

      May 26, 2022 4:37 PM MDT
    5

  • 13277
    There are two possibilities.
      May 26, 2022 4:43 PM MDT
    1

  • 193
    The only propaganda is from from people falsely accusing the NRA of wanting people to be murdered in cold blood just for kicks with guns.
      May 26, 2022 6:03 PM MDT
    2

  • 16619
    Not quite - they want the wealthy arms manufacturers to continue making lots of money by gulling the public into thinking it needs to walk around armed to the teeth.
    Violence begets violence, and issuing weapons capable of killing large numbers of people should not be available willy-nilly. Semi-automatic weapons and high cap magazines were absolutely outlawed in Australia in 1996, no massacres since (family murder-suicides are in a different category). Other murders dropped sharply, suicides slightly, there was an uptick in sexual assaults but the trend was upwards before that. Tasers and insect repellent are still perfectly legal, ever cop a face full of the latter? It's as effective as mace.
      May 26, 2022 8:32 PM MDT
    3

  • 33805
    I guess these never happened??
    2011 Hectorville siege 29 April 2011
    Wedderburn shooting 23 October 2014
    2014 Sydney hostage crisis15–16 December 2014
    2017 Brighton siege 5 June 2017
    Ellenbrook murders 15 July 2018
    2019 Darwin shooting 4 June 2019
    Melbourne nightclub shooting 14 April 2019
    <!--/data/user/0/com.samsung.android.app.notes/files/clipdata/clipdata_bodytext_220527_082749_074.sdocx-->
      May 27, 2022 7:28 AM MDT
    0

  • 16619
    A "massacre" is defined as four or more murders committed in a single incident. None of those cited meet that definition - the Sydney "hostage crisis" had a total of 2 vics not counting the gunman and one of those was killed by friendly fire, a glass shard from the windows shattered by police snipers. I already said that murder suicides by family are a different category so Ellenbrook can't be used as an example.
      May 27, 2022 6:34 PM MDT
    0

  • 33805
    So a shooting only counts if the person dies? 

    Dawin shooting.  You are still not at 0. This post was edited by my2cents at May 27, 2022 8:51 PM MDT
      May 27, 2022 8:43 PM MDT
    0

  • 16619
    1 in 26 years in Australia, you're at roughly 1 a week in the States. My better half carries a can of insect repellent in her purse, she's never had to use it. My daughter HAS used hers, the would-be assailant stumbled from the scene blinded. Lethal force not required.
      May 27, 2022 9:14 PM MDT
    0

  • 33805
    Hardly. We have never had 52 mass shooting resulting 4 or more victims fatalities who were not family killings (your definition) in a year. 


    1997 (0)
    1998 (3)
    1999 (4)
    2000 (4)
    2001 (0)
    2002 (0)
    2003 (1)
    2004 (3)
    2005 (2)
    2006 (4)
    2007 (4)
    2008 (6)
    2009 (8)
    2010 (2)
    2011 (5)
    2012 (7)
    2013 (5)
    2014 (5)
    2015 (8)
    2016 (9)
    2017 (8)
    2018 (9)
    2019 (10)
    2020 (1)
    2021 (9)
    2022 (3)

    Now what is the population difference between AU and USA? Of course you have less we have 15x as many people as you do. 

    I have never had to defend myself nor has my daughter or my Mothers. (Bio and Step) 

    This post was edited by my2cents at June 1, 2022 4:46 AM MDT
      May 28, 2022 7:28 AM MDT
    0

  • 16619
    The NRA should be called out for being the terrorist organisation that it is. And those who bleat about the Second Amendment should at least consider reading the bloody thing.
    "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state ..."
    The italics are mine. In modern America, a well-regulated militia means the National Guard and absolutely nobody else. America didn't have an army when the Bill of Rights was chartered, it couldn't afford to pay one, so irregulars who could be formed into militias were required (as happened in 1812). In 2022, unless you are in the National Guard or subject to a military draft (abolished in 1973), the Second shouldn't apply to you anyway.
    The US Army is now one of the largest and certainly the best funded and equipped in the world, so state militias are no longer required and the Second is now an anachronism. This post was edited by Slartibartfast at May 27, 2022 7:51 AM MDT
      May 26, 2022 8:20 PM MDT
    1

  • 33805
    Bill of Rights is the rights of the people....
    2nd says clearly....the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  It does not say, you must be a member of the militia. Militia at the time meant every able bodied military aged male. (So do you believe, 2nd only applied to military aged men in the 1700s?  It did not. 2nd applied to men young and old and women young and old)
     
    Militia today still means all able bodied military aged males.
      May 27, 2022 6:52 AM MDT
    0

  • 16619
    Once more you completely ignore the first half of the amendment, particularly the term "WELL-REGULATED". Private paramilitaries are generally detrimental to the security of a free state, as is seen in Northern Ireland. And a rabble in arms isn't regulated at all, never mind well.
      May 27, 2022 6:38 PM MDT
    1

  • 33805
    It is not a restriction nor a requirement,  it is a a stated reason, that THE PEOPLE have this right.  We do not only have the 2nd amendment itself to tell us what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote this right.  They were very clear of their pro-arms position.  https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/the-founding-fathers-explain-the-second-amendment-this-says-it-all

      May 27, 2022 8:42 PM MDT
    0