Right to bear arms?

Is that really the issue? Are you going to make an issue over the use of hyperbole?

1 Like

I think it matters. These things can be measured and have some effect on policy so we should be as accurate as possible.

Surprise, surprise. NRA and wingnuts are opposed to the “Thoughts and Prayers” bull passed in the Senate.

Even a watered down, practically symbolic act is too much for them.

While SCOTUS just opened the floodgates for “any guy with a gun”

Interesting. Not shocking.

The Good Guy With a Gun is a religious myth so powerful it has begun to transform the tradition that bore it. When Representative Lauren Boebert recently quipped, “A lot of the little Twitter trolls, they like to say ‘Oh, Jesus didn’t need an AR-15. How many AR-15s do you think Jesus would have had?’ Well, he didn’t have enough to keep his government from killing him,” it was a joke meant to deride and dismiss charges of hypocrisy against followers of a man sometimes called the Prince of Peace arming themselves to the hilt. Yet it was also a view into a fascinating religious development currently underway, one shaped by an understanding that bullets could have prevented the sacrifice at the heart of the Christian faith.

Actually, JC was a pacifist, at least according to my grandparents’ church, Church of God Anderson Indiana (not World). He didn’t have any weapons.

1 Like

Take a look at this:

Senate passes gun-safety bill, breaking years-long stalemate | The Hill

The Senate voted 65 to 33 Thursday evening to pass a bill to strengthen background checks for gun buyers younger than 21, provide billions of dollars in money for mental health treatment and help states administer red flag laws, setting up a vote in the House as soon as Friday. The strong bipartisan vote for the bill is expected to give it enough momentum to sail through the House and make it to President Biden’s desk, giving him one of the biggest domestic policy achievements of his first two years in office.

Senators hailed passage of the legislation, which cracks down on straw purchasers and illegal gun traffickers and closes the boyfriend loophole to deny guns to romantic partners convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses, as a bipartisan breakthrough.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle praised it as the most significant anti-gun-violence legislation to pass the Senate in nearly 30 years. Congress has done little to crack down on gun violence since it passed the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act in 1993 and the crime bill in 1994.

But will it make any big difference?

1 Like

Like I said, it’s about as good as “Thoughts and Prayers”

It’s a start, but I don’t think it will put much of a dent in it. In order to put even a dent in it, more has to be done and gun nuts won’t like it. Most of what gun nuts believe is their amendment rights, isn’t part of it.

It seems to be mainly about criminal access to guns and domestic violence. Not much against potential mass shooters besides the stricter background checks.

Sounds like gopers are more concerned about blaming President Biden for dead immigrants in trailers than taking responsibility for dead children in classrooms.

In a tweet, Abbott said Monday evening’s discovery rests squarely on Biden. “At Least 42 People Found Dead Inside Truck Carrying Migrants In Texas. These deaths are on Biden,” Abbott said, before officials raised the death count to at least 46.


I don’t disagree, but I do have one question about the domestic violence bit- this is about sales after this bill. What if the domestic abuser already has a gun, bought before this law and/or prior to abuse? Or let’s say the abuser already had the gun and was abusing the spouse prior to this law and then shoots the spouse OR the abusee gets the gun and shoots in self-defense? Granted, if the abusee can prove self-defense, regardless of shooting to kill or just to stop the abuser, should be fine concerning this law, but if the abuser shoots and kill (like that which happened to Rita Coolidge’s sister, Priscilla Coolidge). It does nothing to protect women from the abuser killing them with a gun, if they abuser already had it.

BTW, Repugs spew so much BS, I’m really surprised there are people who still believe them. I don’t, but I know there are a LOT of gullible people out there who still believe the Repugs.

Between Uvalde and these roasted migrants, Mexicans should rethink coming here.

You’d love that, wouldn’t you? There’s just one problem- those who were in that school were citizens of the U.S. or at least have a card/permission to be in this country. One can live in the U.S. legally without being a citizen too. So they could have been either a citizen or legal residents.

The U.S. started with immigrants who invaded the Native American’s country, so maybe everyone who’s ancestors who have been here since the Pilgrims need to rethink being in the U.S.

So, you’re advocating for terrorism? If white men shoot at you, you should take the hint?

And from what part of Europe do you come from?

1 Like

Just saying life in America isn’t that good for Mexicans.

The Uvalde shooter was brown.

Oh, you’re just saying. The only reason life in the States isn’t a good one for Latinos is due to racist people, especially those who chose to do harm.

So, because of that, a white man won’t shoot at you or your kids?

Mexicans in America are far more likely to suffer at the hand of other Mexicans than Whites.

Very common myth there. Check your facts

1 Like

Even if that were true, which it is not, how is that different from where they came from? That said, how do you tell the difference between someone from Mexico, Argentina, and the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico? I don’t believe you can. If Puerto Ricans have it so bad, why do they come to the mainland to live, especially after their home is demolish by a hurricane? It’s really not as you say. It’s more often than not, racist white people who give them a difficult time, just as racist white people give Black people a horrifying time.