Gun Control

Young Anti-Gun Demagogues Copy Their Elders

"There cannot be two sides," say the adolescent activists, tarring their opponents as NRA puppets.

|

David Hogg began his speech at the March for Our Lives rally in Washington, D.C., on Saturday by accusing Marco Rubio, Florida's Republican senator, of exchanging students' lives for donations from the National Rifle Association. Dividing the $3 million or so that Rubio has received from the NRA over the years by the number of primary and secondary students in Florida, Hogg figured that the senator had charged $1.05 for each of the 14 teenagers killed in the February 14 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, where Hogg is a senior.

Hogg and the other young activists who attended demonstrations across the country on Saturday to demand legislation aimed at preventing school shootings may have energized the debate about gun control, but they certainly have not elevated it. Taking their cues from the grownups they say have failed them, Hogg and his compatriots assume their opponents are motivated by greed, cowardice, and crass political considerations—anything but honest disagreement.

"School safety is not a political issue," the March for Our Lives website insists. "There cannot be two sides to doing everything in our power to ensure the lives and futures of children who are at risk of dying when they should be learning, playing, and growing."

There cannot be two sides. That sort of logic practically demands contempt for anyone who does not share your policy preferences, as illustrated by Hogg's comments about legislators who do not vote the way he thinks they should.

"They're pathetic fuckers that want to keep killing our children," Hogg said in an interview with The Outline. "They could have blood from children spattered all over their faces, and they wouldn't take action, because they all still see those dollar signs."

Hogg is only 17, but comments from older, supposedly wiser advocates of gun control reflect a similar attitude. "If you're a political leader doing nothing about this slaughter," Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) tweeted after the Parkland attack, "you're an accomplice."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who is five times as old as David Hogg, shares his assumptions about people who disagree with her, although she expresses them in more temperate terms. "The students protesting inaction on gun safety," she tweeted on March 14, "have the courage to stand up to the NRA and lawmakers would do well to follow their example."

If fear of the NRA is the only conceivable reason why people would fail to support the legislation favored by Hogg, Murphy, and Feinstein, there is no point in debating whether, say, an "assault weapon" ban, a limit on the capacity of magazines, or background checks for every gun transfer can reasonably be expected to have a meaningful impact on the frequency or lethality of mass shootings. The only sensible course is to shame or scare people into doing what everyone knows is the right thing—whatever that happens to be at any given moment.

"Our lives are more important than your guns," said a sign held by a teenager at the D.C. rally. Similar slogans, presumably written by adults, could be seen on signs held by preschoolers. The implicit message—that Americans must surrender their firearms and their Second Amendment rights in the name of protecting children—was not exactly designed to provoke a fruitful dialogue. But that approach makes sense if you think all the relevant issues have already been settled.

Lara Vance, a middle-aged Kentucky woman who was interviewed at the D.C. rally, said she was "rather shocked that this is even an issue." After all, "This is something that can be solved. It doesn't take a lot of thought. We know what the problems are, and we need Congress to get their act together and get this problem solved."

I disagree with pretty much every part of that, but I have no doubt that Vance sincerely believes it. I wish she would extend me the same courtesy.

© Copyright 2018 by Creators Syndicate Inc.

Advertisement

NEXT: How To Think About The Americans' Final Season: Podcast

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The ‘solution’ as always is for kids to mortgage away their future by funding a war on guns that ends up destroying far more of them than could be dreampt of in an autistic fantasy.

    1. Well then, we better start actually doing so,Ethan’s about all these free range progtards that threaten our liberty. As long as they’re around, tunings will get worse.

      1. ‘Doing something’ fucking obtuse auto correct.

        1. (Or an alcoholic’s fantasy.)

          1. Do you look george? anderson story Google pay me $135 to 175$ every hour for web based working from home.i have made $21K in this month online work from home.i am a normal understudy and I work 2 to 3 hours per day in my extra time effectively from homelook here more

            http://www.richdeck.com

            1. Do you know davis? george story so good i ma very happy after listen Google pay me $135 to 175$ every hour for web based working from home.i have made $21K in this month online work from home.i am a normal understudy and I work 2 to 3 hours per day in my extra time effectively from home look here for more details
              http://www.9easycash.com

          2. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

            This is what I do… http://www.onlinecareer10.com

      2. As long as they’re around, tunings will get worse.

        There’s nothing I hate more than being out of tune.

        1. You can tune a piano, but can you tune a fish?

          1. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

            This is what I do…….. http://www.onlinecareer10.com

      3. Progtards, what a great way to win them over to your cause. Oh and a great debate tactic.

      4. Many people want to have good income at home but they dont know how to do that on Internet there are a lot of ways to earn huge amount of money, but whenever people try that they get trapped in a scam so I am sharing with you a genuine and guaranteed way for free to earn huge amount of money at home anyone interested should visit the page and i am more than sure that you will be succeed. Best Of Luck!
        Regards a humble Human being,look here more

        http://www.richdeck.com

    2. Please watch and share this profanity-laced interview with David Hogg, one of the astroturfed Parkland student gun control activists. This is what they are all about:

      http://freebeacon.com/issues/david-hogg-wild

      Quotes from the 17 year old:

      “When your old-ass parent is like, ‘I don’t know how to send an iMessage,’ and you’re just like, ‘Give me the fucking phone and let me handle it.’ Sadly, that’s what we have to do with our government; our parents don’t know how to use a fucking democracy, so we have to.”

      “It just makes me think what sick fuckers out there want to continue to sell more guns, murder more children, and honestly just get reelected. What type of shitty person does that? They could have blood from children splattered all over their faces and they wouldn’t take action, because they all still see these dollar signs.”

      To Senator Rubio: “What about the $176,000 you took for those 17 people’s blood?

      1. Someone might want to clue the kid into the fact that the United States isn’t a Democracy, which is amusing when he claims his elders don’t know how to use one. Fact: they’re using him pretty well. Opinion: he doesn’t realize that fact.

      2. Hogg is such a contemptible little fucktard.

        1. He’s like most 17-year-olds. He thinks he know way more than he does and he is highly susceptible to activists manipulating him. That said, he does sound like something of a dickhead.

          1. You have just insulted dickheads, who are nowhere near as stupid as Hogg…

        2. I’m seeing stuff saying that there was a significant amount of high school bullying and cliqueishness going on atthat school, and that Hogg was among the in crowd perps.

          Nto sure if it’s true, and would like to see some actual reporting, but wouldn’t find it surprising given how his sneer ability appears so well exercised.

      3. Are the anti-gunners so obtuse that they cannot see how counter-productive such things as Camera Hog’s rhetoric are?

        They act like they are better than me, but man, they are stuck on crazy.

        Let Camera Hog be the face and voice of this movement to do to guns what failed with Demon Rum and Reefer Madness. This is like ending juvenile delinquency by banning “Tales from the Crypt” comic books (Kefauver Commmission, “Seduction of the Innocent”, moral panick), or calls to burn Beatles’ White Albums over the Helter Skelter murders and shaming those of us who kept our White Albums. Madness.

    3. The Constitution does not demand truancy laws and government schools. Indeed, the internet has made school attendance an optional luxury in practical terms. Scott Adams has made the case for a single government school over the internet which would be much easier to implement than raising the 2/3 majority needed for hacking the Bill of Rights. Eliminating school subsidies could pay for such a thing the same way Republicans think their wall can be built by retasking what would otherwise be handouts to Mexico. In order for many private schools to compete with that single government school we need only eliminate taxes on all private schools.

  2. This link Hogg needs to be taken down hard. Although I doubt the little turd will dare enter a venue where there will be any debate, or hard questions. Such is the way of leftist trash like him.

    1. Why are you wingnuts so threatened by this “little turd”? To the point you want to silence the Parkland students?

      You are no better than the proggie snowflakes who shout down campus speakers.

      1. Who is asking to silence him?

        1. This link Hogg needs to be taken down hard.

          I can’t interpret wingnut very well but that sentence seems to indicate Hogg should be “taken down hard”. Or maybe a link he is on.

          1. So you complete ignore the line about him being invited to a debate with someone who disagreees with him to demonstrate how weak Hoggs arguments are? That’s not silence. Taking someone down is a rhetorical device.that implies destroying Hoggs arguments, not silencing him. Reading is fundental, but comprehension is more so.

            1. Jesse, you expect far too much from a buttplug.

              1. I expect average intelligence from everybody. My expectations are sadly not met well over half the time despite the statistics.

                1. People get dumber the more emotional they get. And the internet seems to attract emotional people.

                2. Aim for at least median intelligence, and you’ll be more satisfied.

            2. Oh I absolutely want to take him down. In a public debate, where he and his insipid ideas are crushed. Just like PB is slapped around here every day. Best way to make an example out of him. Then he will be a laughingstock.

              1. Oh I absolutely want to take him down. In a public debate, where he and his insipid ideas are crushed. Just like PB is slapped around here every day. Best way to make an example out of him. Then he will be a laughingstock.

                Except he won’t be taken down. He will double down on the retarded notion that he is correct.

                1. And he’ll look like a retard doing it.

                2. He won’t be taken down for the simple reason that whoever opposes him will be silenced by the true believers in the audience. It’s hopeless with these … people

            3. I hear ya Jesse although what does one expect from a buttplug?

              1. Pain?
                Pleasure?
                Easy cleanup?

            4. They want us to “listen and believe” because if we talk back they’ll have to silence our hate speech.

          2. There are many things you can’t do very well. Like read context. That statement was immediately followed by “Although I doubt the little turd will dare enter a venue where there will be any debate, or hard questions,” making it clear that the commenter was referring to defeating Hogg in a debate or with hard questions.

          3. PB, if I meant an ass beating I would have said so. The kid needs to be crushed in an open debate, and learn how weak and soft headed his ideas are. Kind of like you.

          4. Paid your mortgage yet? Are we still footing the bill? Fuck you, goose stepping, ProgTard.

            1. Is ProgTard the term backward, bigoted, disaffected, right-wing authoritarians use to describe those of the American liberal-libertarian mainstream?

              1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland|3.28.18 @ 2:31PM|#
                “Is ProgTard the term backward, bigoted, disaffected, right-wing authoritarians use to describe those of the American liberal-libertarian mainstream?”

                Naah. Just lying pieces of shit like you.

              2. As if progressivism has anything to do with liberalism or libertarianism. Nice try though.

          5. taken down hard.

            In this context this obviously means destroyed in a debate. But you are too much of a dishonest hack to acknowledge that. This kid is spreading false information on a daily basis and he needs to be defeated on it.

            1. Yep. He needs t be discredited fast. Or they will parade him around for at least an election cycle. Remember Cindy Sheehan? They had her out there at all kinds of events, news programs, etc.. until the progs got Obama elected and it turned out there never really was much of an anti war movement. Merely an anti Bush movement. Once Obama was commander in chief 99% of the anti war movement evaporated and Cindy Sheehan was thrown away like rotten garbage. Once this kid outlives his usefulness, he’s gone too. Better to discredit him now.

          6. That doesn’t mean he should be silenced. It means his arguments should be refuted and he should be publicly embarassed for it.

            1. Agreed, but you miss one essential thing: he and his myrmidons will not care that he is refuted and, therefore, he cannot be publicly embarrassed for it. Hogg and his ilk are beyond redemption.

          7. What’s hilarious is that PB is whining about wording much milder than the genocidal diarrhea in the comments of sites like Democratic Underground every day.

            Maybe don’t play so rough if you can’t withstand the occasional elbow yourself.

      2. Why are you wingnuts so threatened by this “little turd”?

        You’ve used far more insulting language toward Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives whose influence solely rests on their ability to speak out.

        You are no better than the proggie snowflakes who shout down campus speakers.

        Ah the Robby Soave gambit; equivalencing criticism of leftist speakers with violent disruption of non-leftist speakers.

      3. Why are you wingnuts so threatened by this “little turd”?

        Because right-wingers, for all of their bluster, know they have been losing, and losing hard, in America for the entirety of their lifetimes. The sentient among them recognize it is likely to get worse for them as America’s electorate changes.

        Taking doomed absolutist positions and ranting bitterly is just about all most of them have left.

        1. So what happens when the electorate (and, presumably, the population) changes to 100% people who want others to pay for stuff?

          1. Don’t reply to trolls. It clogs up the comment section.

            1. If we stopped replying to trolls there would be no comment section.

              1. Keep responding, I need free entertainment

        2. Oh Art (can I call you Art?) I think people other than the far left haven’t been losing hard, but if they have, they’re hardly all taking absolutist positions.

          But thanks for providing yet another example to this article about demagoguing. I’m guessing you didn’t read it. Keep up with your own practice of defining others as the unreasonable ones, your opinions as the one true path, and some day you might just get it right.

          1. I call him/her/it RAK, short for Royal Arse Kisser!

          2. Issues regarding which America’s liberal-libertarian mainstream has crammed progress down right-wing throats:

            Treatment of gays.
            Environmental protection.
            Torture.
            Abortion.
            The war on doobies.
            Prayer in public schools.
            Voter suppression.
            Consumer protection.
            Restrictions on abusive policing.
            Contraception.
            Treatment of blacks.
            Creationism in science classrooms.
            ‘Race music.’
            Health care.
            Treatment of women.
            Miscegenation.
            Social Security.
            Labor law.
            Civil Rights Act.

            Open wider, my faux libertarian friends, because your betters are not done yet.

            1. 1, 4 and 5 on that list were ended or legalized by libertarian spoiler votes.

            2. So no republicans and conservatives voted for the Civil Rights Act? LOL.

              80% of your list are just things that exist in liberal minds. No “right winger” was ever against woman buying contraception, they just don’t want taxpayers or religious organization to pay for it. When did anyone cram creationism down their throats?

              Anything burdensome regulation in real life that affects people in real term comes mostly from the left. Did you know that waiters be jailed in some city in CA if they give straw without asking if the customers want it?

            3. So no republicans and conservatives voted for the Civil Rights Act? LOL.

              80% of your list are just things that exist in liberal minds. No “right winger” was ever against woman buying contraception, they just don’t want taxpayers or religious organization to pay for it. When did anyone cram creationism down their throats?

              Anything burdensome regulation in real life that affects people in real term comes mostly from the left. Did you know that waiters be jailed in some city in CA if they give straw without asking if the customers want it?

            4. You’re not our “betters” and you sound like a cartoon villain. Enjoy watching your evil plans fall apart.

        3. Yeah Arty, I’m so threatened that I would love to,debate him on national TV. You fucking dumbass.

        4. HAHAHAHAHA

          That’s why the GOP has the US Congress and Presidency, and holds a majority of state legislatures and governors.

          Taking doomed absolutist positions and ranting bitterly is just about all most of them have left.

          Hi pot! You should meet the kettle!

          1. The only reason the GOP gets control of Congress and the Presidency is to give it up again.

        5. Is that really Artie or one of the many people who just pretend to be Artie to mock him and his excessive and overly-dramatic posts?

          It is difficult going thru life as a living example of Poe’s Law as Artie does.

        6. Could not agree more. But I’m certainly no right-winder.

          Sanity, rationality and mostly, personal liberty have been on the run for a long time trumped by the likes of you who knows everything and plans to snow all of us through your domination.

        7. Hey Arty, have you looked up the record of Anti 2A candidates? It doesn’t look so good.

      4. Why are YOU so threatened by anyone who disagrees with you that you must call them “wingnuts”? Works both ways, you know.

      5. Why are you wingnuts so threatened by this “little turd”?

        Because when teens and tweens start running the government, totalitarianism soon follows: Nazi Germany and the various communist dictatorships were all rooted in youth movements. Hogg is the typical little brownshirt.

        To the point you want to silence the Parkland students?

        Nobody wants to “silence” him. News media should force him to defend his positions using reason, data, and evidence. He would fall apart, because his position is selfish and irrational.

      6. Hogg doesn’t represent the Parkland students at all. he represents blomberg’s everytown and Bloomberg’s general assault on the Second AND fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment rights.

        Hogg standing there with gun felon Viv Mensa was all you needed to see.

      7. @Palin’s Buttplug Hey fucking shit head, control freak. You still masturbating at photos of concentration camp victims and victims of Holodomor? Go fuck yourself, control freak, you and Hogg should go fuck each other in the ass, I bet you’ll be the pitch, fucktard.

      8. Yeah I don’t agree with him, but I do like to see youth excercising their 1st amendment rights despite all the “old and wiser” fuckups who think they have the answer to everything and that kids should just sit down and listen to their “wiser” elders.

    2. Here’s one idea… contribute 3 cents with alarming regularity to this March for our Lives garbage, using pre-paid cards. Since cost of money for them is going to be at least 25 cents per transaction, your contribution performs a net drain of coffers and erases some leftist cash from the table. Only two things snap a progs mind into focus: handcuffs, or losing cash. Arguments are a waste of time until one or both of these events occur first.

  3. This link Hogg needs to be taken down hard.

    Who has HE threatened to kill?
    He just beat you, but you’ll never be able to grasp that. Right-wing snowflake. (lol)

    1. This Hogg kid is in this for pure reasons. He is not doing this with thoughts of a political or journalistic future at all. He is like an angel. I bet he wouldn’t even be corrupted by the reigns of power if he were elected to some office. He is the type of person that should be running this country. And the fact that he happens to be handsome has nothing to do with the fact that he was somehow selected to speak for all these other kids.

      1. I’d bet he becomes as bitter as Maxine Waters should he enter politics, but he’s got to learn to smile as he’s screwing the public – LBJ did not erect a virtual plantation to corral white people so he’s not going to have the same luxuries at the polls. That’s a learned skill which he may or may not posess. I say he doesn’t make it, and burns out on hate.

        1. Handsome? He looks like a serial killer with his crooked face. The Nazi salute he did at the end was prescient.

          1. You have to compare him to other Democrats, not the general public. He’s probably handsome based on the relative sample set.

            1. Leave Clinton and Pelosi of this!

      2. I think Hitler was also for some type of purity.

    2. >Who has HE threatened to kill?
      >> Although I doubt the little turd will dare enter a venue where there will be any debate, or hard questions.
      So is rational debate murder now, since words are violence as well?

      >He just beat you
      He literally didn’t even want to debate Alex Jones on the topic of gun control, a man know for being a meme first and an idiot/entertainer second (according to whom you talk to). He’s not exactly intellectually adept enough to realize that Prohibition-era moralism and moral panic doesn’t actually result in anything good. In fact, it tends to create more problems than it actually solves, just like most leftist trash who pretend to be rational yet use the exact same tactics Bible-thumping fundamentalists used during the Satanic Panic.

      1. debate Alex Jones

        He probably won’t fling shit with monkeys either.

        1. Only because the monkeys don’t want to stoop to his level.

        2. PB, if you’re pinning the success of the gun confiscation movement on this little teen punk, you’ve lost already.

      2. In fact, it tends to create more problems than it actually solves

        See, alcohol prohibition, sex work prohibition, drug prohibition, cigarette prohibition, immigration prohibition, etc.

    3. He just beat you

      …by drawing a crowd 1/4 the size expected?

      1. If somebody has to declare victory, they probably didn’t win.

        1. You mean you can’t just post a mission accomplished banner and call it a day?

    4. Who has he beaten? Still no gun confiscation. NRA membership increased. Not even Rubio is returning NRA money. All hogg has done is exposed how weak democratic thinking is. So easy an idiot child can do it. He’s also exposed the racism of the left by highlighting the fact that his white friends lives get far more media attention than the vast majority of minority gun violence.

      1. So easy an idiot child can do it.

        Children are experts at irrational emoting.

      2. NRA membership increased

        I don’t even really like the NRA but I’m tempted to donate because of this shitstain and his enablers.

      3. Correct.

        Gun ban advocates don’t actually care about violent death. If they did care, they would focus on violence among a small subset of black men where they could make a big difference without having to pass any new gun laws, for not very much money and without civil rights violations like Stop and Frisk. Read this hopeful and depressing article on how.

        ProPublica: How the Gun Control Debate Ignores Black Lives

        Quote:

        America’s high rate of gun murders isn’t caused by events like Sandy Hook. It’s fueled by the deaths of black men. Gun control advocates and politicians frequently cite the statistic that more than 30 Americans are murdered with guns every day. What’s rarely mentioned is that roughly 15 of the 30 are black men.

        Twenty years of government-funded research has shown there are several promising strategies to prevent murders of black men, including Ceasefire. They don’t require passing new gun laws, or an epic fight with the National Rifle Association. What they need is political support and a bit of money.

        1. To those people, black lives don’t matter.

    5. Dumbfuck Hihnsano is desperate for that gun ban!

      1. But somehow still thinks he’s a libertarian.

        1. Progressive Libertarian not much different than his/hers/its Progressive Democrat & Progressive Republican tovarisch! Lest we forget Progressivism is just Communism with better propaganda!

          1. Progressivism is just the PC thought of the moment being enforced by mob rule.

            I think the concept was well covered in Huxley’s Brave New World

            “Sleep teaching was actually prohibited in England. There was something called liberalism. Parliament, if you know what that was, passed a law against it. The records survive. Speeches about liberty of the subject. Liberty to be inefficient and miserable. Freedom to be a round peg in a square hole.”

            I know for a fact that reading this or, anything like it is no longer on the preferred English lit lists in public schools around my neck of the woods.

            God forbid, the young think for themselves.

    6. Comprehension still escapes you after all this time on Reason?

    7. “He just beat you, but you’ll never be able to grasp that. Right-wing snowflake. (lol)”

      He hasn’t ‘beaten’ anyone. He wouldn’t dare debate anyone, for fear of have no his stupid ideas torn apart. He’s a weak little snot nosed punk that knows nothing. Like you.

    8. Where in the quote you provided do you see the word “kill”? Are you mentally challenged?

    9. Who has HE threatened to kill?

      Who did these teenagers threaten to kill? Initially, nobody, that just came later.

      And to be clear “take down hard” means force him to face others in a rational debate, instead of giving him a platform to push his self-serving ideology.

  4. “They’re pathetic fuckers that want to keep killing our children,” Hogg said in an interview with The Outline.

    Haha. Dude is 17. This line cracks me up.

    1. Hogg is such a useful idiot, he forgot to change the speech written by the Boomer anti-gun speech writer to fit his age.

      1. He’s not even that useful. He is constantly mocked. Him crying a out college rejection letters on Twitter was hilarious. Now he’s an expert in white priveledge and voting rights, even though he quickly walked back the latter. He is purely an idiot.

        1. He’s not even that useful.

          Agreed.

          so why bitch about him?

          1. Because mockery of liberals appointing him as their leader for gun control is hilarious.

            1. I feel sorry for him and his inevitable fall from the public eye. He won’t handle it well.

              1. Oh great. Another school shooting spree.

            2. Leader? Really?
              That kid couldn’t lead hungry wolves to fresh meat.
              Follow the money. How much did he put in the kitty? How much from the usual suspects?
              Thought so.

          2. We’ve got to do something while we polish our monocles.

            1. Bill Clinton had Monica to keep him busy while he was polishing his monocle.

          3. bitch because the media and left are using him and claiming that due to his age and circumstance we have no right to questions him thus silencing all debate and when only one side is allowed to be heard that side often wins through deception

          4. Hogg’s parents didn’t beat him nearly enough.

            1. Or teach him that profanity just makes him look even more stupid.

              1. The. beatings would help with that.

          5. Why do you incessantly bitch about people you disagree with?

          6. “so why bitch about him?”

            You progtards have anointed him your bun grabbing prophet. Slobbering all over him on the commie news outlets. So why don’t you ask them?

    2. I too found this odd. It reads like an admission that he is parodying lines he has heard before, without bothering to think about the context. Or he’s just been really busy since puberty.

      1. I’m not sure if he’s been thru puberty as he mostly acts like a 2 y/o throwing tantrums.

        1. No wproblem ne’er the progtards love him so much. They identify with that.

    3. Time to reinstate the draft!

      Let’s see who the pathetic fuckers are then!

  5. Here’s a video of Hogg with Hitler the Socialist voice over. Youtube put a warning on it because it does not like dissent much.
    Hogg video with a Hitler the Socialist voice over

    1. Hilarious.

    2. That was great!

    3. omg, it’s perfect – todays left is copying Hitler in more ways than ever. Truth is stranger than fiction? Thanks for sharing. I note that the Tube took down comments [not just closed them]. That’s disappointing, as without subtitles, most Americans have no idea what the content of that speech was, which means the avalanche of people being “offended” is one of the great fictions of our time.

    4. Damn they have it in restricted state now. Better download before they disappear it completely.

    5. I imagine YT’s justification for censorship (as it has been in past cases like this) is that Hogg is a minor.

      Which of course is bullshit; if a minor’s parents allow the minor to insert himself or herself into a nationwide political debate, the minor should be subject to the same criticism and ridicule as an adult would be.

      1. The number one thing NOT to do is to coddle adolescent stupidity.

    6. Thanks so much for that! I’m reblogging it in a different language.

    7. He’s just upset that Robby is late with the links.

    8. Hogg looks more like Goebbels than Hitler.

  6. Let Rubio be an example….trying to work with these clowns is a fool’s errand.

    Do. Not. Give. Them. An. Inch.

    1. Rubio should proudly announce he’s taking MORE money from the NRA.

  7. It don’t get why there is no pushback at all against Hogg and his ilk. Lots of people believe in the second amendment who don’t give a shot anout the NRA or have received any funding from them.

    I find their basic argument offensive anyway. By their logic, anyone who doesn’t support a return to alcohol prohibition enjoys drunken violence, liver cirrhosis, and deadly road accidents. That is what the Prohibitionist argued back then.

    1. Because CNN and the media stopped being media and are just propagandists. They should be forced to register as lobbyists at this point.

    2. It don’t get why there is no pushback at all against Hogg and his ilk

      Because a huge number of people fall for the “emoting teen” act hook, line, and sinker. And of course the MSM is 100% behind disarming America regardless.

      1. That and the whole thing is a fraud! International socialists are no more going to get rid of the Second Amendment and pass Kristallnacht gun laws than National socialists are going to repeal the 14th Amendment and replace it with a Coathanger Abortion amendment. Both non-issues are misdirection, red flags to drum up support for totalitarianism NOT hedged against by the Bill off Rights. Banning electricity is the Dems’ way of bringing back human slavery just as censoring the Internet is the Republican strategy for bringing back their economy-destroying Comstock Laws.

    3. Because pushing back against a kid looks bad. That’s why the gun grabbers cream their pants when a school shooting gives them the chance to use kids as props. Basically the same reason Islamofascists use kids as suicide bombers.

      1. Same as their championing of comedians. When they make a point they like, it’s “OOH, SICK BURN BY JIMMY KIMMEL, THE GENIUS POPE!!!”

        When he is criticized, it is “Dude, he’s a comedian. Why so mad?”

        1. Yep. Clown nose on, clown nose off. They learned it from watching Jon Stewart.

  8. he $3 million or so that Rubio has received from the NRA

    DRAIN THE SWAMP!

    1. After cheering on the 1.4 billion spent by team Hillary… You’re worried about 3 million. On top of that the NRA is driven solely by members donations, very active members, and not merely a front group for entities like Soros. You have weird care abouts.

      1. I certainly never cared for Hillary.

        I did like Obama as POTUS as he is the only president who seriously wanted to correct our fiscal path (Simpson Bowles) and truly reform spending.

        The white trash piece of shit we have now does not care about fiscal reform.

        Call me whatever you like for my fiscal responsibility.

        1. Seriously wanted to correct spending? You point to a commission whose findings Obama didn’t once adopt into his own budget request. Obama constantly called the GOP who sought spending caps terrorists with bombs strapped to their chests. He doubled the debt. He had record revenue from. Taxes for 7 of 8 of his years but never decreased spending.

          Your arguments tend to be very ill informed.

        2. Ah, so that’s why he gave the nod to Harry Reid to block the budget 5 years running: re-spending that 2009 “stimulus” money over and over [per OMB rules] was fiscally conservative… who knew?

        3. shriek loves his Democrat presidents!

        4. No he absolutely did not, the commission was great, but funny how Barrack “I have a pen and a phone” Obama didn’t implement any of it, nor exercise his veto power, nor executive order…

        5. Obama is your model for fiscal responsibility? I just face-palmed so hard, I think I gave myself a concussion. This is the guy who campaigned on a promise to cut the deficit in half. That sounds nice, until you think a little and realize that it just means going broke a little slower. About to drive over a cliff? Don’t bother turning away, just drive a little slower!

          He did keep that promise, but only by technicality. First, he inherited a wildly inflated deficit due to porkulus part one. Second, his spending was restrained by Republican majorities who managed to find some tiny sliver of a spine as long as the president was a Democrat.

          You’re right that Trump and the majority of Rep congresscritters couldn’t give two shits about fiscal responsibility. I won’t even try to defend them, since their behavior has been indefensible.

        6. Obama’s budget requests grew from $3.5T to $4.1T over his eight years. How is that remotely “fiscally responsible?”

        7. >Obama
          >Fiscal Responsibility

          What sort of fucked up fairy-tale world do you live in? You’re talking about the guy that doubled the debt after the last president spent us into the ground. In fact, Obama isn’t even unique in being fiscally irresponsible. Trump and Bush also fit the bill for the same goddamn thing. You must be pretty fucking stupid to think that Obama was fiscally responsible in any sense, especially after Obamacare became law and the 2008 stimulus are actually things he helped waste our money on.

        8. I did like Obama as POTUS as he is the only president who seriously wanted to correct our fiscal path (Simpson Bowles) and truly reform spending.

          BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!1!!!!111!!!!!!

          That might the most hilariously stupid thing you’ve ever claimed. And that’s saying a lot, because there’s a lot of stupid to choose from.

        9. You keep bringing up Obama and Simpson-Bowles like it means something when, as it repeatedly pointed out, he ignored it.

        10. “”I did like Obama as POTUS as he is the only president who seriously wanted to correct our fiscal path (Simpson Bowles) and truly reform spending.””

          Well if he wanted to, he sure didn’t show it. He double the countries debt in 8 years from 10T to 20T.

    2. You do know, don’t you, that gun control organizations also donate to political campaigns? Do you figure that the NRA’s dollars have some sort of magical power that Bloomberg and Brady dollars don’t?

      1. And note the gun grabbers routinely outspend the NRA in almost every contest.

        1. The Lefties will tell you that’s “whataboutism” or “false equivalence” when they don’t want to have to defend their own organs.

          1. They try to use it to deny precedence.

          2. Probably because they are ashamed that their organs suffer from ED!

            1. “It’s not our fault! Russia hacked our erections!”

              1. So lacist.

      2. PB will just play stupid and pretend it’s a “conspiracy theory” that anti-gun organizations exist.

    3. I think most people here would be happy to see Rubio working only in the private sector.

    4. How much did Rubio’s opponent receive from Bloomberg and Soros?

    5. The NRA s a great force for freedom. Why do you hate freedom so much PB?

    6. The NRA’s power and passion comes from its 5 million and growing members and tens of millions of sympathizers.

      The True Source of the N.R.A.’s Clout: Mobilization, Not Donations

      Quotes: (but read the whole article)
      To many of its opponents, that decades-long string of victories [in Florida] is proof that the N.R.A. has bought its political support. But the numbers tell a more complicated story: The organization’s political action committee over the last decade has not made a single direct contribution to any current member of the Florida House or Senate, according to campaign finance records.

      In Florida and other states across the country, as well as on Capitol Hill, the N.R.A. derives its political influence instead from a muscular electioneering machine, fueled by tens of millions of dollars’ worth of campaign ads and voter-guide mailings, that scrutinizes candidates for their views on guns and propels members to the polls.

      Compared with the towering sums of money donated to House and Senate candidates in the last cycle ? $1.7 billion ? the N.R.A.’s direct contributions were almost a rounding error.

      The N.R.A. directly donated a total of just $1.1 million to candidates for federal office in 2016.

      1. Well it will probably be easier for the 5M + to have their way when all the anti-gun crowd focuses on the one (NRA).

    7. he $3 million or so that Rubio has received from the NRA

      DRAIN THE SWAMP!

      From CNN Money:

      Contributions [to the NRA] came from nearly 30,000 donors, with around 90% of donations made by people who gave less than $200 in a single year. According to the NRA, the average donation is around $35.

      Heaven forbid politicians should be supported by one of the biggest, most broadly-based grassroots organizations in the country, and organization that only receives a small fraction of its donations from industry.

    8. NRA has 58% approvals among all Americans, and 6 million members making it the largest civil rights group in the US.

      Bloomberg and the gun control lobby outspend the NRA 28:1

  9. Satitirical David Hogg video (inappropriate and offensive to some audiences):

    https://youtu.be/BRi-UouACL8

    1. Why is this video deemed offensive and inappropriate? If the same type of video were released with Trump instead of Hogg, would it similarly be deemed offensive and inappropriate?

      1. SNL is probably jealous they didn’t produce just that Number 2, and helped lobby for YT to take it down. If they copy it now, they will get roasted for being brain dead.

        1. Everything one YouTube that isn’t Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, Buzzfeed, etc. is “inappropriate” now.

          They’re eventually going to squeeze out all independent content and turn it into what TV was before cable.

          1. I’d call that a business opportunity.

            YouTwo.com

    2. That’s GOOD!
      Can we get Hihn to start in a similar one? All caps and bold!

    3. to funny but true of just about every progressives speech

  10. I only want to see his face on a milk carton. Or as a poster child for abortion.

  11. “This is something that can be solved. It doesn’t take a lot of thought. We know what the problems are, and we need Congress to get their act together and get this problem solved.”

    OK, “We” — What *exactly* are “the problems”?

    Also, why do “we” have such faith in Congress?

    1. He was then asked about specific policies (not a lot of thought remember) and hogg said it wasn’t his job to create policy.

      1. “It’s so easy, I have no idea how to do it!”

        Not that I would expect a 17 year old to know how to do anything other than surf the internet, frankly, but no one forced him to make a fool of himself in public.

        I feel bad for all those kids and the tragedy they suffered, but not bad enough to excuse their attempts at infringing on my natural rights to punish someone else.

      2. Hogg was mis-quoted; what he actually said was “uh, um, my script doesn’t cover that question, dude”

    2. Also, why do “we” have such faith in Congress?

      They’ve done such a bang up job so far.

  12. “Our lives are more important than your guns.”

    “Our lives are more important than your automobiles.”

    “Our lives are more important than your swimming pools.”

    “Our lives are more important than your sugary drinks.”

    1. Their lives, per Hogg, are NOT more important than not wearing clear bookbags.

      1. “”Their lives, per Hogg, are NOT more important than not wearing clear bookbags.””

        Or having the knowledge that privacy is an 4th amendment issue, not a first.

        1. Well, clothing is a first amendment issue, but yes.

          1. I believe his complaint was that it violated their privacy.

      2. Well duh, everyone knows that it’s obvious to infringe on natural rights before infringing on fashion sense. Ask any tween.

      3. Having to use a dorky clear plastic book bag would interfere with his right to look super cool.

        And also let everyone else see he buys off brand hair products.

    2. Our lives are more important than yours.

      FIFY

    3. “Our lives are more important than your guns.”

      We’re happy to give you free room and board in a gun free zone; you should feel quite safe there. It’s called “federal prison”. How about it?

  13. “Taking their cues from the grownups they say have failed them, Hogg and his compatriots assume their opponents are motivated by greed, cowardice, and crass political considerations?anything but honest disagreement.

    I maintain that one side is, in fact, motivated specifically by cowardice. “Cowardice” is precisely the correct term for those who would sell our rights short out of fear.

    I suspect this is partially a legacy of the War on terror. It became fashionable for to argue that sticking up for our Fourth Amendment rights in the face of the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, or mass data collection was only for people who were too stupid to be scared. Likewise, those of us who were concerned about the government violating the Fifth and Eighth Amendments in its torture policies or denying trials and counsel to American citizens. There didn’t seem to be any constitutional violations of our rights that couldn’t be justified as acceptable given our current level of fear and cowardice–and that logic flowed freely from the supporters of both the Bush and Obama administrations for sixteen years after 9/11.

    Fear really is the mind-killer and one side of the gun control debate’s argument is that we should sell our Second Amendment rights short out of fear. We should call that out for what it is–it’s cowardice. If they don’t like being called out as cowards, then they should stop acting like cowards.

    1. I honestly don’t think the most vocal of these kids is actually afraid of anything. They just see a chance to get some attention and make their political role models happy. This Hogg kid is 100% gearing up for a long and lucrative political career.

      1. in politics comes the safety of knowing you have a body guard with a gun

    2. Now you know how all the other animals feel around rapey otters.

    3. It’s obvious to some people, except the government and people with chilly IQ’s which are the majority, that the only way to defend against an unpredictable decentralized enemy is to arm everyone. This is historically just some simple common sense.

      More centralization of domestic defense forces, more surveillance, and more watch lists will never, ever, in the history of things achieve their stated end result. It’s a literal impossibility.

      This is why thinking individuals should rightfully recognize that it’s a big lie at worst or just shoddy emoting at best.

      Sort of like how it was ‘discovered’ that hardening targets like airports just moved the soft target even while anyone with two brain cells to rub together realized that was an obvious move for the terrorists.

  14. Please point this out to Mr. Hogg and his friends:

    This week’s Economist points out that Brazil is one of the most violent countries on the planet, with 61,000 murders last year, up from 39,000 in 2003. Criminal gangs and armed bands of retired cops apparently kill at will, and even members of the legislature can be murdered with relative impunity.

    Yet Brazil has “common sense gun control” in spades. From Wikipedia:

    ‘In Brazil, all firearms are required to be registered with the minimum age for gun ownership being 25.[1] It is generally illegal to carry a gun outside a residence, and a special permit granting the right to do so is granted to certain groups, such as law enforcement officers.[2] To legally own a gun, an owner must hold a gun license, which costs BRL R$1000,[2] and pay a fee every three years to register the gun, currently at BRL R$85.[3] Registration can be done online or in person with the Federal Police.[4] Until 2008, unregistered guns could be legalized for free.[5]”

    The article goes on to state:

    “Thus, disarmament is effectively happening in Brazil,[12] as are massive gun confiscations,[13] notwithstanding its refusal by Brazilian people (at the referendum of 2005). … However, 2012 marked the highest rate of gun deaths in 35 years for Brazil 8 years after a ban to carry handguns in public went in to effect.[16]”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Brazil

    Comment, Mr. Hogg?

    1. No doubt the comment would be, “We need to be like Denmark! What’s a Brazil?”

      1. Meanwhile, Denmark is doing its best to become Syria.

        1. More falafel?

          1. no sandwiches, just the plate.

    2. They have an open border like we do, but that’s by default. If you can’t smuggle something into Brazil… send a 5 year old to take your place. Funny thing is… the left here has the same ideation: ban guns, and break down the border. Talk about wheel spinning. Progs need their own designation in the DSM – call it ‘pre psychosis’, as their break from reality is not one of near totality, but highly selective. Kind of a blend of OCD and schizophrenia maybe?

      1. Meanwhile, cocaine flows freely across our own border. If you’re already smuggling in 1,000 pounds of coke, how much harder is it to bring in an 8 pound AK-47? Or 10 of them? Criminals will always have access to guns. Gun control will only affect those who abide by the law.

    3. Every Brazilian gun I’ve shot has been a jam machine. I would think that criminals would prefer throwing knives or bows and arrows.

    4. How about Mexico? Jamaica? Etc. The list of countries that have implemented highly restrictive gun control to very ill effect is far longer than the number that have seen good come from it.

    5. “But they’re not industrialized!”

      Because somehow that argument makes any sense.

      1. Not one person, not one, pointed out the relevance between industrialization and violent crime.

  15. Very sad to see young minds [from Parkland] being turned into fascist demagogues. The template is pretty easy to spot: whatever the issue, facts are mean and opposition is evil. It’s a place of permanent adolescence, and barely above a second grader sticking fingers in ears saying “la la la la la la…” Thankfully, it’s not a majority of students, but those people are locked out from tv broadcasts [like the scripted CNN event where students were not allowed to express themselves, but admitted if they picked “questions/comments” from a list] and their voices go unheard.

  16. P.S. The same cowardly logic flowed freely in response to the financial crisis of 2008 from both the Bush and Obama administrations. How could you quibble about the constitutionality of nationalizing GM, creating an unaccountable new bureaucracy, stripping bondholders of their property, or using tax payers’ future paychecks to bail out Wall Street investors–when the only supposedly rational thing to do was to be scared out of your wits?

    “Never let a crisis go to waste” only works on cowards, and our own reluctance to call cowards out for being what they are is part of the problem.

    1. But for many, there is no longer any ethic, or tolerance, for the idea of “toughen up”. Makes me laugh everytime I see some hipster wearing a “keep calm and…”. None of those pussies can keep calm about anything.

    2. that recession would have been over in a year if the government had stepped aside. banks would have been forced to work with those they loaned money to and the fall out from Gm may have been smaller more active auto companies possible owned by the empolyes instead of the unions

      1. I’m not confident about that. The major issue was not that so many homeowners were underwater on their loans. That amounted to a very small amount of money in comparison to the derivative markets that collapsed when the loans did. How would banks have dealt with the fallout from those secondary markets?

  17. Hogg says we need to do “everything in our power” but whines about the clear backpack mandate. Does it occur to him that that’s an example of weighing costs and benefits and that different people have different values for costs and benefits?

    1. No. No it does not.

    2. I seriously doubt Broward County public schools teach critical thinking.

    3. Clear backpacks. Hilarious, as the Florida problem was the adults, specifically those in government: federal on down to local. The DOJ found a way to break the background check system using grant money to promote schools not reporting crimes, and the sheriff of Coward County helped broker that system with the local school board. Then there’s the 911 call, which drew a crowd of spectators with badges. I’m not sure I want to say anything bad about the ‘resource officer’ assigned to that school: I’m deeply disappointed obviously, but it was the sheriffs job to vet people for that job, and his selection process was as defective as he was. School shooters are most often connected with that school [by current or prior attendance], so an officer assigned may find to save kids he has to shoot a kid. That’s tough, and very different from an impersonal street situation in that familiarity can cause hesitation. Finally, a clear backpack does zero about the logarithmic risks of an open campus – we should have built fences and created easily defendable choke points after Columbine, but… educators as a group don’t do security. Not at all.
      Actually solving problems does not empower statists, and we can usually cross out their proposals as a starting point, and go from there.

      1. we should have built fences and created easily defendable choke points after Columbine

        No, we absolutely should not have done this. School shootings are still rare. We don’t need to spend untold billions on new fences and armed guards. We don’t need to waste untold millions of hours of peoples’ time on security theatre. We’ve already done that at airports and we know that is is a gigantic waste of resources. It makes the experience miserable for everyone involved. And all it really does is move the soft targets out into a cluster at the security line.

        The way we are handling things right now is pretty balanced between the cost and the actual risk. Keep campuses open. Let people come and go, but keep an armed guard on site during business hours. It would be better if we lifted the “gun free zone” BS and let teachers and admins carry if they are willing and able, but that decision should probably be made by each community, not by federal edict.

        1. Quit using facts and logic!

        2. Why did we not do this in Little Rock in 1957?

          why were federal troops sent to Little Rock?

    4. kind of hard to make a bullet proof clear back pack, all though how many books does it take to stop a bullet. And since when does anyone hide a rifle in a back pack

      1. A few books will definitely stop a .223 bullet fired from an AR-15. Your point about the rifle in the backpack is pretty good. I’m not even sure that your could hide an AR-15 in a regularly sized backpack if you broke it into two pieces at the takedown pins. Maybe I’ll test this. The clear backpack could help to identify the guns most commonly used in mass shootings (pistols are used in ~75% of mass shootings). You know, assuming the would-be mass shooter doesn’t just come into the building gun in hand and start shooting.

        1. I was looking around. It seems 3 books is enough for .223.

          1. At what range? And what books?

            3 copies of War and Peace might stop a bullet at a hundred yards but what about 3 Harlequin romance paperbacks?

            And how about halfway across a classroom?

            1. Good point. It seems most of today’s text books contain very little that would stop a bullet. Or initiate a thought.

              1. Eh. Textbooks tend to be pretty thick and hardcover. They’d be among the best books for stopping a bullet. Of course, you could just aim somewhere other than the backpack.

                1. Indeed they do tend to be thick. It gins up the price for the textbook industry.

              2. They have a lot of glossy illustrations and a lot of white space. They are pretty thick, they would stop a bullet. Agreed that the content isn’t the most intellectual, but that isn’t needed. Thickness and toughness of paper is what’s needed. Those glossy illustrations require tough paper.

            2. It looked like 3 hardcover books of around 300-400 pages each from a distance of around 10 feet.

            3. Any student in high school reading Harlequin romances deserves to get shot.

            4. One copy of War and Peace might stop a .223 at 100 yards. I’d bet serious money that two copies would almost never penetrate. Much depends on the exact projectile – FMJ tending to penetrate more, jacketed softpoints tending to fragment.

              But also remember that it is the velocity of the .223 that kills. Slow it down so that there is not so much cavitation/organ destruction and lethality declines to .22 Long Rifle levels.

              1. I’ll take your word for it but not to the point of testing it with me as the test dummy:).

        2. ” I’m not even sure that your could hide an AR-15 in a regularly sized backpack if you broke it into two pieces at the takedown pins. ”

          Assuming we are talking about a typical high school book bag, then no, an AR15 would not remotely fit – not even a carbine – 16″ of barrel plus the upper receiver being over 21″ total. You’d need something like a 10″ SBR to make it work.

      2. “”kind of hard to make a bullet proof clear back pack, all though how many books does it take to stop a bullet. And since when does anyone hide a rifle in a back pack””

        DJK’s comments aside. This is how authority works. You seek it’s shelter and it does what it wants in the name of doing something. Not what you want, is reasonable, or effective.

        1. Haha. I am in no way trying to imply that the clear textbook idea is going to be effective. The responses re: books and the like were more for my own/others’ amusement.

  18. …there is no point in debating whether, say, an “assault weapon” ban, a limit on the capacity of magazines, or background checks for every gun transfer can reasonably be expected to have a meaningful impact on the frequency or lethality of mass shootings.

    That, of course, is the point.

    1. Only a day or two after the shooting, I saw some teacher’s union rep on CNN making a clear, concise argument that nothing but outlawing guns altogether would solve the gun violence issue. From the way she was making the case, I had to suspect that she wasn’t just speaking extemporaneously and that this was a long-practiced speech, not something specifically in reaction to this particular shooting. These people are absolutely opposed to anything short of total weapons confiscation, and I have to guess that “solving the gun violence issue” isn’t really the issue with them. Which raises the question of why exactly it is that they’re so adamant about having a disarmed populace.

      1. Which raises the question of why exactly it is that they’re so adamant about having a disarmed populace.

        It’s obvious why every Democratic party politician wants this, but yeah for the life of me I don’t get it from norms. But then I look back and realize that the education establishment, the popular media, et al. have been saturated with anti-gun propaganda for my entire life. That combined with the fact that – I hate to say it – most people are kind of stupid, renders them incapable of seeing past the propaganda to form a rational opinion that doesn’t depend on feelz.

        1. Yeah, I think 99% of gun control supporters are motivated by some combination of TEAM tribalism, sloppy reasoning and fallacious statistics, and childhood training to fear and loathe guns; they aren’t intending to support the ultimate end game of enabling oppression. The remaining 1% have kept their secret pretty well from the useful idiots.

          1. I think the Administrative Class is beginning to see that they might not be able much longer to buy the allegiance of the masses with government benefits. They want to disarm the populace to insure their own safety and continued power.

        2. It never surprises me to find leftists engaging in one form of magical thinking or another.

          Why should the issue of weapons be any different?

      2. “Solving gun violence” is a huge tell – it blames a thing. It informs they are set on doing nothing about providing security, and look almost exclusively to external factors. Talking about “school safety” involves an all encompassing mirror and… can’t have that, no. It’s the blame game, and it’s beyond weak now – body counts aren’t fun, and lives are ruined. The Florida incident [along with its following propaganda] just might cement a point Boortz made years back: teachers unions are a bigger threat to this country than Al Qaeda ever was.

        1. As I always say, they’re the “gun” control movement, not the “violence” control movement. If it doesn’t involve controlling guns, they’re not interested.

          1. But didn’t you know that the gun murder rate is tiny in England? Just ignore all those homicides committed with other weapons. They don’t count.

            1. With the sole exception of homicide, the UK is a more violent country than the US. You are more likely to become the victim of a crime of violence in the UK than in the US.

              UK is violent crime capital of Europe (Telegraph)

              Quote:
              It means there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the UK, making it the most violent place in Europe… By comparison, America has an estimated rate of 466 violent crimes per 100,000 population.

      3. OK, so nothing but outlawing teachers altogether will solve the issue of teachers having sex or other harmful relations with students?

        1. Damn! Fine point.
          And think of all those tax dollars no longer wasted on teacher salaries!
          If it only saves one kid, it is worth it.

      4. “These people” who want an outright weapons ban are a tiny percentage compared to those who are polling in favor of limiting magazine sizes, outlawying bump stocks and AR-15 types of weapons that can kill lots of people in a few minutes. You can always make “slippery slope” arguments I suppose.

        1. Maybe Lester,

          You are correct in that there is no consensus on what should be done among them.

          But what is being done is more important than what people wish.

          Assault_Weapons_Ban_2018

        2. I suppose. Yes, “slippery slope” is a logical fallacy. Problem is, this is a political discussion. Logic usually fares poorly in such an environment. Indeed, in many different political debates I see people arguing that the slope should be slippery “hey, if this works for terrorists, why not for drug dealers, they’re just as bad” etc.

          For this subject, the question is: what happens if they get those laws? Will they just toast victory and move on? Or will they say, as they did with the Brady Bill, that it’s “just a good start”?

          And what happens after the next mass shooting? Will they just say “oh well, we did the best we could; some things are just beyond the government’s power”? I very much doubt it.

          1. The “slippery slope” fallacy is frequently misused against libertarians. It does not apply when there’s a known way one thing can lead to another, which is pretty much how legal precedent works.

            Which is why free speech advocates has been so successful by not giving an inch to censors, no matter how reasonable their proposed restrictions seem, or how unpopular the content. Rights don’t just protect popular things.

      5. They really are the enemy. I don’t see how the progressives can be reasoned with at all anymore.

  19. There were plenty of scatterbrained teenagers yammering on about this or that when I was that age, too. The difference was that nobody put them in front of a TV camera. Indeed I think the leftist power players are regretting giving Hogg so much spotlight at this point.

    1. They have created a monster.

    2. I don’t know. I was in high school when Columbine happened. I don’t remember anyone saying anything more than “Woah, that’s f-ed up. So what are you doing this weekend?”

      1. so what are you doing this weekend? most kids went hunting

      2. I had a pretty rough time in school growing up. I knew people who had it worse. Columbine upset me because I knew the school system was a violent clusterfuck and had often wondered when something like this would happen.

        Watching everyone give their brilliant insights about it wasn’t therapeutic. I spent some time yelling at the television.

        Unsurprisingly, nobody learned anything.

    3. The difference was that nobody put them in front of a TV camera.

      Worship of youth and rejection of age and experience is a hallmark of totalitarian movements: it was a major part of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

  20. ” Taking their cues from the grownups they say have failed them”

    I think you’re confusing “cues” and “scripts”. They agree with those grownups because they’re all reading from the same script, given them by the grownups.

    They’re not allowed to have their own opinions, and still be part of this movement, with all the perks they get in return.

    1. Everything I know about leftist politics I learned from Star Trek villains.

      You are my future generals. Together we can raise armies of followers! Go to your posts! The first great victories are upon us. You will see. We have millions of friends on Marcus 12. We shall exterminate all who oppose us! Our purity of purpose shall not be contaminated by those who disagree, who will not cooperate, who do not understand. They must be annihilated.

      1. “Freedom?! That is worship word! Yang worship! You will not speak it!”

      2. Perhaps we should all create sock puppet identities that claim to be Progressive and then only quote SciFi villains on liberal sites in order to highlight the ignorance.
        Then again, it might not have the desired effect. What’s the worst that could happen?…shudder…

  21. Gun absolutists complaining about strident opposition?

    These days, there is no nut quite like a gun nut. Except a religious zealot.

    1. “Gun absolutists complaining about strident opposition?”

      Lefty assholes spouting nonsense?
      Almost like some statist-bleever pitching his religion.

      1. Don’t be his porn.

        1. Pick a reasonable position on guns and work toward a mainstream compromise or be overrun by the backlash against gun absolutism.

          Either way is fine by me. I prefer that a right to possess a reasonable firearm for self-defense in the home be vindicated.

          1. Why should I compromise on my inalienable right to own a gun? I mean, women have the inalienable right to terminate pregnancies whenever they want. I think most people understand that if you have a gun and use it for legal purposes, then you you shouldn’t have to compromise on their rights to own a gun in the first place (ala Heller vs DC). So seeing that the Supreme Court ruled on it and agreed with my position, I think my position on guns is very reasonable. So please, fuck off, you wannabe pseudo-intellectual that can’t even read crime stats.

            1. If you don’t compromise and insist on absolutism the mainstream will shove progress down your throat, and the backlash could make your intransigence counterproductive.

              Have you been paying attention to American progress during the most recent five or six decades?

              Work toward a reasonable compromise or open wide(r).

              (Think about how quickly the wingnuts were overrun on gay marriage.)

              1. A reasonable compromise means that both sides get something out of it. What would you offer in terms of increased gun freedom in exchange for some increased control? Compromise does not mean that we only partly capitulate to the gun grabbers. It means that we get something out of it. I will agree to universal background checks (by the use of the NICS system for all) in exchange for CCW reciprocity in every jurisdiction that allows CCW for anyone. I’ll even agree to that reciprocity requiring an 8 hour training session and fingerprinting/background check.

                1. Their idea of “compromise” is always the same: “you’ll let us violate some of your rights now, and in return we’ll violate the rest later.”

                  No.

                  I have the same reasonable position on guns that I do on speech: “Keep your fucking hands off it.”

                2. NICS background check at the Virginia State Police booth at a gunshow is under $5.
                  Background check for a dealer transaction in Tennessee costs $10 and includes both TBI TICS and federal NICS checks..
                  Background check for a private transaction in Tennessee costs $30.
                  The Bloomberg Everytown Universal Background Check for a private transaction in Washington State is $50+.

                  The $30 to $50 or more is in fact a sin tax against private gun transactions.
                  But instead of inhibiting private sales, it just inhibits using the private transaction background check.
                  I have read that the Washington State fee actually leads to non-compliance.
                  I know few comply with the private transaction BC in Tennessee.
                  UBCs are BS.

              2. “progress”

              3. If you don’t compromise and insist on absolutism the mainstream will shove progress down your throat, and the backlash could make your intransigence counterproductive.

                Your concern trolling is touching.

              4. NARAL insists upon absolutism.

                What progress was shoved down NARAL’s throat?

          2. We have already.

            Poll: 58 percent say gun ownership increases safety

            Quote:
            Nearly six in 10 Americans say that gun ownership increases safety… In the poll, 58 percent agree with the statement that gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves.

            These findings represent a reversal from 1999, when a majority ? 52 percent ? said gun ownership reduces safety. And they come at a time when 47 percent of American adults say they have a firearm in the household, up from 44 percent in 1999.

          3. Self defense in the home? How dare you enable a racist oppressor using violence against an unfortunate victim, who has been forced by the 1% to take extraordinary risks, and work long hours for low pay (without union representation)!

          4. Ah, the old tried and true “reasonable position”. Nothing like claiming the mantle of rationality to end all discussion. Up to your usual tactics, I see.

            1. But, hell, I’m feeling charitable. I’ll engage today. Tell me your definition of “reasonable firearm”. What makes it reasonable?

              1. Suitable for self-defense in the home rather than designed to penetrate tank armor, for example, or spray death upon a large group of people in seconds,

                1. So no shotguns then?

                  1. Why not? The average shotgun seems a reasonable choice for self-defense in the home. I do not recall anyone killing a dozen or more people in a school, theater, or concert hall with a shotgun.

                    1. Shotguns kill WAY more people than assault rifles. And no mass shooting have been committed with shotguns? navy yard was it is among scores

                      by the way you claim on the other that that gun murder rate rose the past 25 years is BS, t fell about 60%

          5. “Pick a reasonable position on guns”
            You are off point

          6. Can you suggest a “reasonable compromise” that will not be denounced as a “loophole” by the Anti-gun extremists five years down the road? And, are you and all the other advocates of “reasonable” gun laws willing to commit yourselves to opposing the extreme proposals when they’re raised five years from now? If you’re not willing to disavow the extremists, no one is likely to regard you as “reasonable”.

            1. I’m left wondering why we’ve passed all these unreasonable gun control laws over the past few decades. Why not just start with what’s reasonable.

          7. A reasonable position on gun control is “the constitution says ‘shall not be infringed’, so we cannot infringe”.

            Would you accept the need for permission from the sheriff to exercise any other of the bill of rights?
            Do you have a 4th amendment permit in your wallet?
            Does your church give out 1st amendment permits?
            Ever see a congressional witness take the fifth amendment and have the congressman tell him he needs a permit first, so he must testify?

            1. By that line of reasoning (absolutism), child pornography, false advertisements for securities, and screaming in a courtroom or on a public corner are lawful, because the First Amendment forbids ‘any law . . . abridging’ the right of expression.

              Absolutists are destined to be disappointed — and, mostly, disregarded — by the arc of American progress.

              1. The problem is that America’s gun owners are not the “absolutists” that you make them out to be. We have already compromised. Ever hear of the Brady Law? Yeah, I have to prove I’m not a criminal just to exercise a basic right. You really think that isn’t a compromise?

                Or requiring the government’s permission to carry a handgun? Yeah, I’ve jumped through the hoops and gotten the permit to do that. You think that isn’t a compromise?

                Yeah, I know. Not enough! How fucking much more do you want? And what guarantee do I have that you won’t be back for more before the ink is dry? You see, in an actual honest compromise the issue at hand is settled. If it isn’t, then you’re not bargaining in good faith.

                1. “How fucking much more do you want? ”

                  Whatever he feels like at any given moment. Such is the way of the leftist tyrant.

              2. God you’re stupid. Owning a semi automatic gun for the purposes of home defense is legal. It’s not legal for you to yell fire at a crowded theater when there isn’t one.

                What gun control activists advocate for is scarcely different from college snowflakes arguing for banning hate speech because it might lead to violence. They’re in favor of paring down legal actions for the sake of security. There’s a difference between placing practical limitations on someone’s decisions that could arguably affect someone else and protecting freedom from intrusive policies done in the name of security.

                If we just banned immigration from middle east countries, we could probably reduce the number of terrorism from very little to even more little. Would you agree with that? Given that immigration is not a constitutional right, I can just tell charge you for being “absolutist”. Ridiculous.

              3. Pornography, yes (per the SC); child pornography no. There are issues of consent.
                False advertisements, yes. However, after the advertisement, the speaker will be liable for the false nature of the advertisement.
                Screaming in a courtroom, yes. However after the screaming, the speaker will be liable for contempt of court.
                Screaming on a public corner, yes. However after the screaming the volume or other aspect of the speech may bring the speaker into conflict with other laws.
                You see, in all constitutional cases, it is only after actually breaking a law that you have to interact with the cops. Only to exercise the second amendment have we allowed prior restraint to reign supreme.

                I do notice though, that none of your absurdium examples involve getting permits beforehand, or paying fees, or limits on the number of screams, or any other common sense restrictions placed on the (shall not be infringed) second amendment right.

                And for the record, use of the word ‘absolutism’ is yours; I prefer ‘straight forward reading’.

                1. Good luck with your approach.

                  In an America whose electorate becomes less backward, less rural, less religious, less bigoted, and less white on essentially a daily basis, I expect your approach to become counterproductive.

                  I see little prospect that America’s future will include enough hunters, militia members, gun collectors, and disaffected yahoos to maintain an electoral coalition for gun absolutism in America’s future.

                  One problem with absolutism is that when the dam breaks a flood is predictable.

                  1. Enjoy yourself in your bubble.

                  2. ALL long term polling shows that support for gun bans has fallen in 40, 30, 25, 20, 15, 10 and five year metrics.

                    Younger people are the most opposed to gun bans.

                    moreover CNC and 3d make gun bans and substantive gun control a luddite fantasy of only the least educated

                    1. Believe whatever you like about long-term polling. When all states are majority-minority like Texas is today, progressives will simply ban guns.

              4. By that line of reasoning (absolutism), child pornography, false advertisements for securities, and screaming in a courtroom or on a public corner are lawful, because the First Amendment forbids ‘any law . . . abridging’ the right of expression.

                Child pornography has a victim: the child. False promises for securities have a victim: the buyer. Owning a gun doesn’t have a victim.

                Restrictions on screaming in a courtroom or on a public corner are not restrictions on free speech, any more than keeping guns out of courtrooms amounts to gun control.

          8. “”Pick a reasonable position on guns and work toward a mainstream compromise””

            Or pick a reasonable position and forget compromise.

            Who decides what defines “reasonable” You? Progressives? Children?

            I doubt many of us would find as reasonable, your definition of reasonable.

            1. Not to mention, compromise is a two way street

              How about 21 to buy a gun, and in return there is federal CCW reciprocity?

          9. “Either way is fine by me. I prefer that a right to possess a reasonable firearm for self-defense in the home be vindicated.”

            Hint: No one here gives a crap about what is fine by you or any other lefty ignoramus who is incapable of reading the constitution.

            1. Prepare to have reasonable gun safety provisions imposed against your will, Sevo, and to have little say in the matter if you are unwilling to be part of a solution. This seems destined to resemble gay marriage, abortion, interracial marriage, Social Security, desegregated schools, and dozens of other issues — society will progress against the efforts and wishes of the backward.

              1. Asshole, who do you think is going to ‘impose’ these ‘safety provisions’? The numbers are not on your side. Even some of the most left people I know own pistols, AR-15’s, AK-47’s, etc..

                Stupid douchebag.

              2. “”Prepare to have reasonable gun safety provisions imposed against your will, Sevo, and to have little say in the matter if you are unwilling to be part of a solution””

                Or perhaps you should get ready to cry some more when this doesn’t happen.

                If they did, what are you going to do when those provisions do nothing to stop gun violence?

              3. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland|3.28.18 @ 7:39PM|#
                “Prepare to have reasonable gun safety provisions imposed against your will, Sevo, and to have little say in the matter if you are unwilling to be part of a solution.”

                Prepare to have lectures regarding A-2 jammed up your ass, prick.

    2. >Everyone that doesn’t want all heavy metal banned is a Satanist, being manipulated by the Devil to do His will, said the clueless Bible-thumper in 1980
      >Everyone that doesn’t want all guns removed from the hands of law-abiding citizens who haven’t been tried in the court of law is a gun nut being manipulated by the NRA to do their will, said the absent-minded leftist in 2018.

      1. *convicted in the court of law

        1. “for a violent offense” I might as well add

    3. Speaking of nuts, you obviously have not yet met any pit bull nutters – into victim-blaming big time.

  22. Hogg figured that the senator had charged $1.05 for each of the 14 teenagers killed in the February 14 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland

    Freedom costs a buck o five?

    I wonder if Hogg has dreams of being a boss someday?

    1. Or Sir Dennis Eton-Hogg

    2. By the look of him, I imagine he has more dreams of being a bottom someday. Just like Tony.

  23. Shutting down debate is what progs do best. “Either you’re with us or against us…” They will ignore things that don’t suit their agenda-like a woman who can’t protect herself from an abusive spouse because she doesn’t have access to firearms.

    Wonder how many of these marching fools smoke weed, and are aware of the numbers of innocents who have been killed as a result of the drug war? Its waay waaaaay more than all these shootings put together. A war on guns will certainly have a higher body count.

    1. Like Chris Plant says, the greatest power of the media is the power to ignore.

    2. As a sort of aside to the above, Honolulu in Hawaii (one of the few states with gun registration) is putting feelers out to confiscating all guns from medical marijuana users. They have already gotten a list of medical marijuana users that own guns. It’s just a matter of starting the confiscations.

      1. I believe I’ve seen other localities floating this idea, too. Because stoned people are so violent. Might get into a mild verbal scuffle over the last Cheeto.

      2. No one wants to ban or confiscate guns. Ever! It’s a crazy and paranoid idea!

        Hawaii, Which Registers Guns and Medical Marijuana Users, Starts Disarming Patients

        Quote:
        Hawaii is one of 29 states that allow medical use of marijuana, but it is the only state that requires registration of all firearms. …you can probably surmise what this means for patients who use cannabis as a medicine, which Hawaii allows them to do only if they register with the state. This month many of them received a letter from Honolulu Police Chief Susan Ballard, instructing them to turn in their guns.

        “Your medical marijuana use disqualifies you from ownership of firearms and ammunition,” Ballard says in the November 13 letter, which Leafly obtained this week after Russ Belville noted it in his Marijuana Agenda podcast. “If you currently own or have any firearms, you have 30 days upon receipt of this letter to voluntarily surrender your firearms, permit, and ammunition to the Honolulu Police Department (HPD)…

        1. Trump should put Hawaii under martial law. Then Liquidate the people infringing on the rights of Hawaii’s citizens.

          1. We should simply expel both Hawaii and Puerto Rico; they simply aren’t worth the hassle.

  24. “I don’t know of anyone who wants to take your guns away”

    “Nobody wants to take your guns away”

    The Left can’t even gaslight properly.

    1. Anyone saying “nobody wants to take your X away” is a dead giveaway that they do, in fact, want to take your X away.

      1. I guess you’ll have to talk to Brian.

  25. I thought boomers would win the prize for “Worst Generation Ever” but Generation Z is coming on strong.

  26. These kids are great at convincing people that already agree with them. As for those who are up for grabs, it seems like the more time you give them to talk, the better they are at alienating others, which is typical of the gun control crowd. Particularly galling is the notion that every generation before them has created this shithole that we’re all living in, and they’re here to save us.

    1. Well, then sonny, come over here where my cane can reach you, and I will show you guns are not the only thing you should fear – – – – – –

  27. Hogg is just young and stupid enough to say what he really thinks, and not surprisingly what he really thinks is exactly the same as what he’s been told to think by people like Feinstein.

    It’s good to see the various special interest groups that are putting these kids forward don’t mind hiding behind their personal tragedy, though.

  28. Perhaps I could be accused of “whataboutism” but the irony of this article is almost ludicrous if one looks at the things that the NRA spokespeople have said about those expressing a point of view against their agenda (especially in the media). Here are some quotes from the NRA:

    Dana Loesh:..

    “Many in legacy media love mass shootings. You guys love it. …Crying white mothers are ratings gold? ”

    Wayne LaPierre back when the Brady Bill was passed:

    “In Clinton’s administration, if you have a badge, you have the government’s go-ahead to harass, intimidate, even murder law-abiding citizens,”

    “The key question here for the president is has he looked into the eyes of Ricky Birdsong’s family because that blood this hands,”

    “I’ve come to believe he needs a certain level of violence in this country,” LaPierre told ABC News on the March 15, 2000 episode of Nightline. “He’s willing to accept a certain level of killing to further his political agenda. ”

    This February from LaPierre at CPAC:

    “The left’s message is absolutely clear. They want revenge; you’ve got to be punished.” (Is “the left” everyone to the left of LaPierre?)

    ” For the first time, we also face an enemy utterly dedicated to destroy not just our country, but also Western civilization.”

    So, these kids are utterly dedicated to destroy Western Civilization? Way to demonize your opposition Wayne..

    1. Do you really doubt that much of the appeal that gun control has for the American Left lies in the belief that only ‘right-wingers’ own guns and that draconian gun laws offer the left a way to punish gun owners for having voted the “wrong” way? I think this whole debate would be much different if the general perception was that gun laws would affect people on the Left and the Right in a relatively equal way.

      1. After the San Francisco earthquake of 1906, the mayor had signs posted that “LOOTERS WILL BE SHOT!” Looters fear Samuel Colt Equalizers and nuclear weapons for the same reason.

    2. Everything the NRA said in those quotes has been repeatedly proven true. Being offended by that is your problem.

      And yes, exaggerating the other side’s behavior to excuse vastly worse behavior by your side is indeed whataboutism.

  29. The only thing standing between Western Civilization and tyranny is the Second Amendment.

    1. Right, because there is “tyranny” in England and other countries in which no one carries guns, even the police? Good job being dumb.

      1. England has no bill of rights, and no free speech.

        1. England just sent someone to prison over a dumb internet joke video. It’s a dictatorship. If you have such a problem with our respect for human rights, feel free to fuck off and live there.

          1. “you” meaning the person up there, not you KevinP

            1. Understood 🙂

              At the turn of the 20th century, the UK had virtually no gun control laws and very little crime. Any person could buy and carry a revolver in his pocket anywhere in the UK. The right to keep and bear arms was slowly extinguished over the 20th century while the crime rate has soared. See page 14 of this UK parliamentary report for a fascinating graph. It shows that the number of indictable offences per thousand population in 1900 was 2.4 and in 1997 the figure was 89.1 – an increase of 37-fold. Since the early 1960s, the homicide rate has more than doubled.

              UK House of Commons Library: A Century of Change: Trends in UK Statistics Since 1900 (see page 14)

        2. English Bill of Rights

          Oddly enough, there’s a lot of overlap with the US Bill of Rights. Coincidence? I think not!

          1. I’m pretty sure the English Bill of Rights can be altered by a simple majority in Parliament and subsequent consent of the Monarch.

            In other words, its really no different than any other act of Parliament.

            Not to mention that the modern government there demonstrates that they take it even less seriously than our government takes our bill of rights what with the millions of spy cams, near complete prohibition on arms, and so called ‘hate speech’ laws.

      2. Yes, dipshit, there is. Orwelian surveillance is a fact of life in the UK (CCTV cameras, Internet snooping, data retention laws, etc.). People get put in jail for making satire videos. The government denies entry to the country based solely on political views.

        Nevermind the massive child rape crime sprees brought on by the government’s ongoing effort to replace the indigenous population…

      3. What protects western europe from tyranny is a free USA.
        What protects USA from tyranny is the Bill of Rights.

      4. Fearless Truthteller|3.28.18 @ 5:24PM|#
        “Right, because there is “tyranny” in England and other countries in which no one carries guns, even the police?”
        Mostly correct, except for the normal content of lies;

        “Good job being dumb.”
        Good job being stupid and a liar.

  30. When I was 18, I thought the adults around me were too old, too narrow minded and clueless about how life really was and how to get things done. When I was 21, I was amazed how much they had learned in three years. My point is simple. When I meet a teenager, any teenager, who does from the start assume they are smarter, more insightful and wiser than every adult around them, I might listen to what they have to say. Listening to kids like Hogg who has become nothing more than an emotional bomb thrower who is clearly getting off on his 15 minutes of fame is idiotic. Teenagers have such limited life experience they cannot see past what is right in front of them and unfortunately, these kids are being used by adults with very specific political agendas. Adults who for years have attempted to recreate the US in their image only to lose the fight again and again. They see these kids as a tool to help them achieve their vision and as soon as they are no longer useful, they will cast all of these kids aside.

    1. This punk will probably never mature.

    2. When I was 18, I thought the adults around me were too old, too narrow minded and clueless about how life really was and how to get things done. When I was 21, I was amazed how much they had learned in three years.

      I resemble that remark 🙂

      And it does make me wonder about the current trend toward permanent childhood that the system is pushing us towards. Who wants a world full of moral infants? I mean, that would benefit nobody, except maybe elitist powercreeps with bad intentions… Oh.

  31. When the child learns that the problem is the very initiation of force he advocates as a solution, there may be an epiphany. Remember what George Orwell said about hoodwinking the impressionable: “The trouble is that if you lie to people, their reaction is all the more violent when the truth leaks out, as it is apt to do in the end.”

  32. Hogg isn’t copying his elders – he’s a zealot following orders.

    In another time and place, he’d be first in line to join the SS.

    1. Are you this stupid in real life?

      1. I made my statement. I stand by it. Go back under your bridge.

      2. Hogg and his friends do seem to be enjoying the limelight:

        Photos: Student School Massacre Survivors and CBS Reporter party like rock stars

        Quotes:
        Shocking photos posted to Twitter of a CBS News reporter and students who survived last Wednesday’s high school massacre in Parkland, Florida that killed seventeen students and faculty, show the reporter and students laughing uproariously and posing for the photos like they are partying rock stars.

        These photos were taken over the weekend on the set of an interview taped for broadcast Monday morning. This means the students were only three or four days out from surviving a massacre in their school. In just a few days they have become celebrated heroes of the anti-Trump resistance and are acting and being feted like rock stars.

      3. Fearless Truthteller|3.28.18 @ 5:25PM|#
        “Are you this stupid in real life?”

        You’ve proven yourself to be far, far less intelligent and you’ve only been here a short time.
        Fuck off, lefty imbecile.

  33. I see the “there cannot be two sides” stuff was massaged out of the mission statement at marchforourlives.com some time between this morning and now.

  34. Hoog and Gonzalez are EXACTLY why gun control is more about irrationality than reason.

    How a couple of kids – creepily elevated to mythical hero status – with no life experiences (one event doesn’t give them right to attack the rights of other people) became the face of gun control is troubling in my view.

    1. People like them are ironically the reason people like me will never give up our guns. We know what they’re capable of.

      1. Yep. I am buying more and also gifted two NRA memberships in the last week.

        1. Can you gift a couple to Hogg and Gonzales?

  35. Collectivism got the intellectuals. Then it got the colleges. Then the high schools. And now it’s in the kindergartens.

    They’ve created the equivalent of millions of cells ready for activation. Primed, loaded and ready to fire. And with every new intake of kids into the public schools, their ranks grow.

    Your children will eat you alive. And they’ll tell you it’s for your own good.

    1. “Collectivism got the intellectuals. Then it got the colleges. Then the high schools. And now it’s in the kindergartens.”

      Nailed it!

  36. A little Trivia:

    About as many school-children die in school shootings as do in school transportation related accidents. And people will tell you, with a straight face, that school-buses are statistically safe and related deaths are a rare events not to be worried about (and they are right!), but then they will turn around and tell you about the absolute holocaust that is taking place in our schools.

    Fuck these kids, and the proggies that are organizing them.

    1. As many kids die in school shootings as school transportation accidents. Your point os supposed to be what exactly snarkhead? Thanks to “no rules” conservatives like you, the US is highest in the world among civilized countries both in auto deaths and gun deaths. But to the feebleminded like yourself, this is an indication that “we should solve neither problem.” How does this logical inference possibly follow? For a site called Reason, I have never seen somewhere so utterly devoid of it. Any signs of intelligent life here? (Note: using the phrase “proggie” or “libtard” does NOT count.)

      1. Ah. “gun deaths”. Gun ban advocates in this country routinely perform the scam of including gun suicides in “gun death” and “gun violence”, more than 60% of the total. Suicides are a voluntary act committed by people with many deep problems, and they choose a gun or other means to end their difficult existence. But including them into “gun death” greatly inflates the statistic and it is regularly mindlessly regurgitated by our ignorant media.

        Consider the top four methods of suicide in the US:
        Someone who commits suicide by jumping off a bridge or structure is not a victim of Bridge Violence or Building Violence.
        Someone who commits suicide by poisoning is not a victim of Drug Violence or Natural Gas Violence.
        Someone who commits suicide by hanging himself is not a victim of Rope Violence.
        Someone who commits suicide by using a gun is not a victim of Gun Violence.

      2. For a site called Reason

        DRINK!

      3. Fearless Truthteller|3.28.18 @ 5:18PM|#
        “As many kids die in school shootings as school transportation accidents. Your point os supposed to be what exactly snarkhead?”

        Is it possible for a lying asshole like you to post once without both proving your stupidity and lying?

      4. Thanks to “no rules” conservatives like you, the US is highest in the world among civilized countries both in auto deaths and gun deaths.

        Well, yes, the more totalitarian (“civilized”) a country is, the less ability people have to travel freely by car or commit suicide by guns.

        But to the feebleminded like yourself, this is an indication that “we should solve neither problem.” How does this logical inference possibly follow?

        It follows quite simply by having emigrated from one of those “civilized countries”, and I prefer liberty over excessive safety.

      5. “the US is highest in the world among civilized countries both in auto deaths and gun death”

        In overall homicide, if you are not a criminal you are safer from homicide in the US than you are in Canada, Australia or the European mean. Over 90% of Us muder is criminals killing criminals.

        Secondly your “gun deaths” (suicide+homicide) when looked at as ALL suicide+homicide shows MANY developed coutnries with higher rates, Japan has a 40% higher rate and S. korea a 55% thier rate, and 30 developed democracies are +/- 10% of the US rate.

        Your claim that sucide by gun is violent but sucide from jumping form a building is “non violent” or that a gun murder is violnt byut a knife murde ris not, shows how your cogntaive bias rejects a

        1. Why bother. It’s been clear for a long time that the anti-gun crowd is not about life, but guns.

  37. It would be awful if someone were to take that shot of Hogg with his fist raised and Photoshop it so that the fist was an open hand. I don’t condone that at all.

  38. Truly dumb article which puts the lie to the title of this site as “Reason.com.” (Should be “emotionaldiarrhea.com” if this article is at all representative of the usual level of abstract thought around here.) For one, a 17 year old high school student cannot be a “demagogue.” Learn what words mean before using them, not afterwards. Two, you cannot in good faith complain about your political opponents demonizing you and preventing reasoned debate while demonizing them as “demagogues”; you cannot complain that the students are “tarring” you as “NRA puppets” while in the next breath you accuse them of being mere puppets of this article. This article is a shameless rhetorical appeal devoid of rational thought. And, as a matter of fact, numerous studies have shown that countries with gun control have fewer deaths. The science is very well settled on this issue.

    1. You know, they pay trolls over on The Federalist.

    2. dem?a?gogue
      noun
      a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.
      synonyms: rabble-rouser, agitator, political agitator, soapbox orator, firebrand, fomenter, provocateur
      “he was drawn into a circle of campus demagogues”

      1. Hogg is not a politician or a political leader. The use of the phrase “demagogue” to describe a non-politician makes no sense. By contrast, the use of the phrase to describe Donald Trump, the most archtypical demagogue since Adolf Hitler, is extremely apt.

        1. Attempting to spark a political movement….Rhetoric of a political firebrand….

          What?? He doesn’t have an official politician’s license????

          I guess you’re right.

        2. Sorry, you don’t get to use kids as political spambots and then cry that people are being mean to the kids when your agenda gets the criticism it deserves.

          Nice scam, we’re just not falling for it.

        3. Fearless Truthteller|3.28.18 @ 5:51PM|#
          “Hogg is not a politician or a political leader. The use of the phrase “demagogue” to describe a non-politician makes no sense.”

          There is dumb, dumber, and then our newest asshole.

        4. Hogg is not a politician or a political leader. The use of the phrase “demagogue” to describe a non-politician makes no sense.

          Hogg is one of the leaders of a single-issue political movement and a self-described activist; he uses language for political ends. So, yes, the phrase “demagogue” is applicable and accurate.

        5. Dictionary definition of demagogue:
          A political orator or leader who gains favor by pandering to or exciting the passions and prejudices of the audience rather than by using rational argument.

          … orator or leader …

          Hogg is not an orator?

          The dict def is not just leader or politician but anyone who engages in demagoguery.

    3. A study titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” looks at figures for “intentional deaths” throughout continental Europe and juxtaposes them with the U.S. to show that more gun control does not necessarily lead to lower death rates or violent crime.

      http://www.law.harvard.edu/stu…..online.pdf

      See Table 1 on the fourth page of this study for firearm ownership rates, including high rates in many European countries:

      Table 1: European Gun Ownership and Murder Rates
      (rates given are per 100,000 people and in descending order)
      Nation, Murder Rate, Gun Ownership Rate
      Russia, 20.54, 4,000
      Luxembourg, 9.01, 0
      Hungary, 2.22, 2,000
      Finland, 1.98, 39,000
      Sweden, 1.87, 24,000
      Poland, 1.79, 1,500
      France, 1.65, 30,000
      Denmark, 1.21, 19,000
      Greece, 1.12, 11,000
      Switzerland, 0.99, 16,000
      Germany, 0.93, 30,000
      Norway, 0.81, 36,000
      Austria, 0.8, 17,000

      1. There is tons of data supporting the view that gun control is ineffective.

        Perhaps the most telling statistic is that in the US, legal gun owners are much less likely than the general population to commit violent crimes.

  39. People don’t respect conservatives because they refuse to face facts or accept scientific evidence. If you want to have unlimited rights to guns despite the fact that this means the US will have the highest rate of gun violence in the civilized world, and will result in the murder of children, then own that. Instead, you lie and attempt to discredit science and basic logical reasoning and pretend that more guns don’t lead to more gun violence, in contradiction of every study ever conducted. Pretty shameful to play so fast and loose with the truth that even a 17 year old high school student can cath you.

    1. People don’t respect Leftists because they refuse to face facts or accept scientific evidence. If you want to have a disarmed citizenry despite the 10s of millions of disarmed citizens murdered by the governments that disarmed them, then own that.

      Instead, you lie and attempt to discredit science and basic logical reasoning and pretend that disarmed citizens don’t lead to more government violence, in contradiction of the evidence of the history of the world.

      Pretty shameful to play so fast and loose with the truth that the only way you can push your hideous agenda is to hide it behind it the tears 17 year old high school students and our concern for them.

      1. What science or logical reasoning are you referring to? I see no sign of it in your comment. Science has consistenyly shown that the US has a rate of gun homicide which is 25 times higher than other wealthy industrialized nations. This is a fact. When compared to other countries with gun control, such as England or Japan, the US’s rate is 50-100 times higher. England and Japan are not tyrannies and they do not murder their citizens.

        Though this is tangential, it is worth pointing out that the Holocaust has nothing to do with gun control and your attempt to connect it with this issue is silly. Ultimately, it discredits your point since Nazism was a reactionary, right-wing, nationalist, xenophobic movement. Nazism was not about curbing gun violence, but about purifying the nation from dangerous immigrants. The movement has been carefully studied by Donald Trump, one of its contemporary acolytes.

        1. When you look at all violent crime, committed with and without guns, the US is not really an outlier. It is generally in the middle of the industrialized nations. The murder rate is a little higher because guns are somewhat more likely than other means to result in death. But murder is a rare part of violent crime and on the whole, violent crime in the US is not much different from the rest of the First World.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L…..By_country

          1. Care to respond to KevinP, Feerless Dumbass?

          2. “the US is not really an outlier. It is generally in the middle of the industrialized nations.”

            There are no wealthy nations above the U.S. in the intentional homicide chart. None. This proves my point. Violent crime is too broad and ill-defined a category to be compared internationally. Even if there was an apples-to-apples comparison, it’s really changing the topic.

            1. Why would we only compare wealthy nations?

              “”There are no wealthy nations above the U.S. in the intentional homicide chart. “”

              Source?

              1. The same source he cited. Click on the link above. Every nation with a higher homicide rate than the US is significantly poorer than the US. You wouldn’t compare rich and poor nations because wealth is a confounding factor. If you want to be proud that the US has less homicides than Honduras or Venezeuala though, be my guest.

                1. Fearless Truthteller|3.29.18 @ 12:42PM|#
                  “The same source he cited. Click on the link above. Every nation with a higher homicide rate than the US is significantly poorer than the US.”

                  Here, asshole, read it and weep:
                  https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/
                  comparing-death-rates-from-mass-
                  public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/

                2. Ah yes,

                  I noticed the US was 94th on the list when I sorted by rate.

                  When I sorted by count we were 8th, Russia was #7.

        2. ” it is worth pointing out that the Holocaust has nothing to do with gun control”

          Book Excerpt: Gun Control in The Third Reich: How registration enabled confiscation

          Quote:
          Alfred Flatow was a German Jew who won first place in gymnastics events during the 1896 Olympics. In 1932, he registered three handguns as required by a decree of the liberal Weimar Republic. The government warned that the police must carefully store the registration records so that no extremist group could ever obtain them. That feat was realized, however, when an extremist group led by Adolph Hitler seized power the following year and used those very same registration records to disarm “enemies of the state.” In 1938, the records were used to disarm Jewish gun owners such as Flatow, whose arrest report stated: “Arms in the hands of Jews are a danger to public safety.” He would later die in Theresienstadt concentration camp.

          1. This has been debunked:
            https://tinyurl.com/y9wukbkt
            https://tinyurl.com/nqmvy4u

            Thanks for playing.

            1. “The power of a police state
              In short, Nazi-era Germany imposed greater gun restrictions for Jews (and other perceived enemies)”

              From your link, asshole.
              What is cherry picking paying these days?

        3. Fearless. every single thing you just said is utter bullshit. All your data is crap, National Socialism is a leftist construct, and Trump is the opposite of a Nazi, as are all his policies.

          Your ignorance is astounding. Are you really just an empty vessel that waits for progressives to fill your empty head with this garbage?

          1. National Socialism is as right-wing a movement as it gets. Please go to a Neo-nazi rally (“Unite the Right!”) where they wave Trump-Pence signs and chant “Jews will not replace us!” and tell me how many liberals you find. Trump admittedly used to study the speeches of Adolf Hitler, as is well documented, and has many, many, many supporters among living, breathing Nazis. They will all tell you how much they love and admire Donald Trump, just like you. You will fit right in there.

        4. Brazil and Mexico have higher rates.

          1. Yes. And?

            1. You wrote this.

              Science has consistenyly shown that the US has a rate of gun homicide which is 25 times higher than other wealthy industrialized nations.

              My post was a refutation.

    2. You’re right, I don’t respect conservatives who refuse to face facts or accept scientific evidence. I don’t respect people who refuse to do this in general, and the data on this issue suggests that gun control measures do not reduce crime. They could possibly even increase it, although causality should not be assumed.

      Re: unlimited firearm access. A lot of gun control advocates seem to think that anyone can walk into a Wal-Mart and buy an AR-15. There are already extensive laws for background checks for ALL sales except private ones taking place behind closed doors (how should those be enforced, exactly?), including disqualifications for all felons, the mentally ill, and those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes, and many states and localities have even more restrictions. These systems failed in the case of the VA Tech shooter when the state police did not add him to the federal background checking system, NICS. We can vastly improve the hodge-podge of systems that are already in place and produce tangible results. Lives will be saved. Adding more exemptions to a system that doesn’t relay the existing ones will not help.

      1. There are already extensive laws for background checks for ALL sales except private ones taking place behind closed doors (how should those be enforced, exactly?)

        Probably the same as our drug laws, and with the same shitty results. Not that the grabbers care how many people will die or have their lives ruined by such a witch hunt.

        1. many of them do care- as long as those people are black.

          To so many of them, black people exist to take one for the team.

    3. People don’t respect conservatives because they refuse to face facts or accept scientific evidence. If you want to have unlimited rights to guns despite the fact that this means the US will have the highest rate of gun violence in the civilized world, and will result in the murder of children, then own that

      The science is crystal clear: implementing gun control does not reduce gun violence.

      Why do you refuse to face facts or accept scientific evidence?

  40. “to demand legislation aimed at preventing school shootings”

    #FakeNews

    You don’t know what they are “aiming” at. What they propose *doing* is taking guns from law abiding citizens.

  41. The impressionable Hogg needs to pay heed to history:

    From Skeptic.com:

    A national effort to reduce mass murders, the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004, produced this consequence:

    “The ban didn’t appear to have a significant impact on the number of mass murder incidents in that decade compared to other decades, and within the decade, there was no downward trend. This only shows that the availability of assault weapons doesn’t change the number of mass murder incidents, which means that killers just switched to different weapons, obtained illegal weapons, or made improvised weapons.

    During the ban, large attacks like the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Park Bombing occurred, and the average number of people killed per incident increased from 9.4 pre-ban to 11.3 during the ban, then decreasing to 7.6 after the ban expired. The average number of people injured per incident increased from 8.0 to 35.0 during the ban and decreased to 5.6 after the ban.

    More consequences detailed in:

    “Gun Control and Mass Killers”
    https://relevantmatters.wordpress.com/
    2016/06/30/rush-draft-why-gun-control-
    fails-against-mass-killers/

    Merge the links and delete the spaces.

    1. Ironically, the number of people who quote phony statistics about the effectiveness of the ban is pathetic. They use the phony numbers the same way they use statements like “98% of dealers at gun shows are unlicensed” to imply that there is no regulation on the sale of guns when in fact those 98% of dealers are not selling guns but other items that do not require you to have a license to sell. Gun grabbers lie because they know the facts destroy their narrative.

  42. A big FUCK YOU to David Hogg and all the other fucking commie ass hats.

    Move to your beautiful communist paradise in Cuba. It’s not far away David Hogg, commie ass hat.

    1. Seriously, I would love for all these fucking wannabe tyrants to just fuck off to the dictatorship of their choice.

      We’re not holding our people hostage behind a wall. Indeed, people escape from countries like that to come here. Something to consider for people who insist we do everything wrong.

    2. You sound like a disaffected, socially inadequate, half-educated, authoritarian right-wing yahoo, Rockabilly — probably superstitious and an inhabit of one of our can’t-keep-up southern or rural stretches.

      American society has been progressing against your preferences throughout your lifetime, and your betters will continue to arrange progress without regard to your conservative aspirations.

      Carry on, clingers.

      1. You sound like a disaffected, socially inadequate, half-educated, authoritarian right-wing yahoo

        Where my self-awareness gone?

  43. Since this site is called Reason.com, why are its denizens so averse to facts and logical reasoning? Facts are facts, friends: the U.S. owns more guns than all other countries combined, and has a gun homicide rate which is 25 times higher than the average high-income nation. Please see the American Journal of Medicine, “Violent Death Rates: The US Compared with Other High-income OECD Countries, 2010.”
    In some cases, our gun homicide rate is 50-100 times higher than nations with gun control, such as England or Japan. If you don’t mind being responsible for the deaths of children so you can enjoy polishing your gun collection, then
    be honest about that. But facts are facts. No need to invent fairy tales about “good guys with guns” saving the day.

    1. Why do you support increasing the rate of rape and other violent crime in America?

      Huge increase in crime across UK with 29% increase in both rape and robbery

      By comparison: US: 130,603 rapes in 2016 for a rate of 32 per hundred thousand population
      England and Wales: 48,773 rapes in 2017 for a rate of 84 per hundred thousand population – nearly three times as much!

      1. Thanks for the non-sequitor. “A different problem exists in another country! Look!”

    2. But facts are facts. No need to invent fairy tales about “good guys with guns” saving the day.

      Indeed, no need to invent, because it actually happens on a pretty regular basis. Even the CDC found this, once they could be bothered to consider the possibility. And the media buries all such details because it’s doesn’t fit the agenda.

      The facts are facts, and they’re on our side. Might want to reconsider your canned talking points, they’re getting stale.

      1. Right. Show me some of these studies. They don’t exist, or are nonsense. The FBI actually collects data on this and you can find that the number of violent crimes prevented by someone with a gun is about 1500 a year. Miniscule compared to the number of gun deaths in the US. It’s not even close. Countries with gun laws have about 1/100 of the gun violence we have. This has been proven, over and over and over again. You’re probably a climate denialist who doesn’t believe in evolution and thinks smoking is good for you too, amirite?

    3. Facts are facts? FACT: The US cannot be compared to any other nation because they don’t have a Constitution protecting their God-given rights. FACT: guns save far more lives than they take. FACT: knife homicides are highest in gun-control nations English citizens are being attacked daily by migrants and are powerless to stop them thanks to UK’s gun laws.

      1. The God to which you refer is a childish fiction.

        Choose reason. Every time. Especially over sacred ignorance or dogmatic intolerance.

        Most especially if you are older than 12 or so. By then, childhood indoctrination fades as an excuse for backwardness, ignorance, bigotry, and superstition. By ostensible adulthood it is no excuse.

        Choose reason (and science, and tolerance, and education, and modernity, and inclusivity). Be an adult. Or, at least, try.

        1. “Mom, other people have beliefs I don’t like, make them stop!”

          You’re hilarious. Go back to whatever Atheism+ trollboard you slithered out of.

        2. The God to which you refer is a childish fiction.

          No, the God to which you refer is a childish fiction. The God to which Christians refer is a useful psychological and social abstraction.

          Choose reason (and science, and tolerance, and education, and modernity, and inclusivity). Be an adult. Or, at least, try.

          You need to take your own advice. Desperately.

      2. FACT: “The US cannot be compared to any other nation because they don’t have a Constitution protecting their God-given rights”

        Nearly all other countries have constitutions. Other liberal democracies with guaranteed freedoms and bills of rights exist. Is everyone on this site so ignorant of the world?

        FACT: “‘guns save far more lives than they take.”

        No study has ever shwon this. Every study shows that countries with more guns have more gun crimes and more homicides. The chances of you stopping a crime with a gun are miniscule. You’re statistically far more likely to accidentally kill yourself or a family member. Please stop inserting your foot in your mouth. You wouldn’t know a fact if one hit you in the head. I stopped reading your comment after this point because I couldn’t take any more ignorance in one day. Open a book sometime. There’s a whole world of knowledge out there.

        1. OK, newest lefty asshole gets schooled:
          Fearless Truthteller|3.29.18 @ 6:15AM|#
          “FACT: “The US cannot be compared to any other nation because they don’t have a Constitution protecting their God-given rights”
          Nearly all other countries have constitutions. Other liberal democracies with guaranteed freedoms and bills of rights exist. Is everyone on this site so ignorant of the world?”
          Yes, and having a Constitution is only worth something if it protects us from scumbags like you. Those other places don’t.

          “FACT: “‘guns save far more lives than they take.”
          No study has ever shwon this.”
          I linked (upthread) where studies show that the US has far fewer deaths from mass shootings than other (wealthy) countries. That may not address the specific claim, but it’s a pretty good proxy.
          You, OTOH, as a slimy lefty, have had your links busted (see upthread)
          Are you proud of being a brain-dead lefty posting lies and propaganda, or just a fucking idiot?

    4. Fearless Truthteller|3.28.18 @ 5:43PM|#
      “Since this site is called Reason.com, why are its denizens so averse to facts and logical reasoning?”

      Since this site is called reason, why is a lying piece of shit like you here?

    5. “our gun homicide rate is 50-100 times higher than nations with gun control, such as England”

      Oh really? Were you aware that England compiles their gun crime stats differently than in the US? For example, a gun related incident is NOT counted in England unless it results in a criminal conviction?

      In other words, you’re spreading nonsense propaganda, and probably have no idea what you’re talking about. Which is typical of progressive drones.

      1. Yeah, I’m really going to take the word of the “Last of the Shitlords” on this issue over the American Journal of Medicine. In any case, you’re wrong about how England compiles their crime statistics. (I’d send you a link to prove it, but apparently that’s forbidden here. How reasonable.)

        1. Fearless Truthteller|3.29.18 @ 6:11AM|#
          “Yeah, I’m really going to take the word of the “Last of the Shitlords” on this issue over the American Journal of Medicine.”

          Help yourself, asshole, You can believe any lies you please, and obviously do.

  44. One in five Americans wants the Second Amendment to be repealed, a national survey finds. Let’s work on that as current 2nd Amendment is grossly inappropriate for today’s circumstances. So you see there actually are two sides, retain a crappy 2nd Amendment OR repeal and rewrite a better civilian arms amendment for our Constitution.

      1. Or we could just accept that the Second Amendment, like the First, recognizes a human right that is just as important today as it ever was, and always will be.

        But where’s the fun in that?

    1. There isn’t a damn thing wrong with the 2nd Amendment – there is, however, something wrong with Liberal Fascists want to disarm private citizens.

      1. So you agree that slavery allowed by the Constitution should not have been terminated by an amendment. Do you actually have any idea of what purpose amendments serve? Also, there are no absolute rights only defined rights. Get with sonny boy.

        1. How do you draw that conclusion based of his post?

          If he’s supporting the 2nd amendment, he wouldn’t be against the amendment process.

          Seems like you are trying to put words in his mouth, and then beat him up with the words you planted.

          “”Also, there are no absolute rights only defined rights.””

          Keep that in mind when people push to show ID for voting.

        2. Nothing in the Constitution guaranteed slavery as a right.

        3. >So you agree that slavery allowed by the Constitution should not have been terminated by an amendment.

          PFTHAHAHAHAHA

  45. And we see once again why adolescents and people in their early 20s were manipulated by theri elders to be the cutting edges of the French Terror, the Nazi Party, and the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

    The despicable Emma Gonzalez has said that Nikolaus Cruz was a weird kid, so OF COURSE they harassed and bullied him.

    Just to be clear about what these “Child Crusaders” are really all about.

    1. There was nothing clear about your schizophrenic rant. What did your symptoms of delusional paranoia have to do with the topic? Help me out here.

      1. “schizophrenic rant… delusional paranoia…” – Tolerant and Inclusive Progressive Alert!

      2. I’d like to help you out. Show me where you came into this discussion.

        BTW, you need to steer clear of discussions that are clearly way above your educational level and IQ. Try the Sponge Bob Square Pants Blog instead.

      3. Fearless Truthteller|3.28.18 @ 5:52PM|#
        “There was nothing clear about your schizophrenic rant. What did your symptoms of delusional paranoia have to do with the topic? Help me out here.”

        Why do assholes like this give themselves such obviously dishonest handles?
        Is it a brag about how stupid they are on top of their dishonesty?

      4. Fearless, you clearly have stunted cognitive functions. While this makes you an excellent servile drone for your progressive masters, it renders you woefully inadequate when dealing with your betters (such as libertarians). Best you just sit down and be quiet. We’re very busy here.

  46. I think it’s hilarious the anti-gun movement is now pretty much stuck with Hogg, who is a total asshole. They picked a preppy white dude and an edgy hispanicish girl for magazine cover purposes, and now they have to deal with the fact he’s about as appealing as AIDS.

    1. Yep. I want to repeat my message to please watch and share this profanity-laced interview with David Hogg, one of the astroturfed Parkland student gun control activists. This is what they are all about:

      http://freebeacon.com/issues/david-hogg-wild

      Quotes from the 17 year old:

      “When your old-ass parent is like, ‘I don’t know how to send an iMessage,’ and you’re just like, ‘Give me the fucking phone and let me handle it.’ Sadly, that’s what we have to do with our government; our parents don’t know how to use a fucking democracy, so we have to.”

      “It just makes me think what sick fuckers out there want to continue to sell more guns, murder more children, and honestly just get reelected. What type of shitty person does that? They could have blood from children splattered all over their faces and they wouldn’t take action, because they all still see these dollar signs.”

      To Senator Rubio: “What about the $176,000 you took for those 17 people’s blood?

      1. Hogg thinks that tossing F-bombs makes him sound like a grown-up when, in reality, it makes him a bigger asshole than he is already. Somebody needs to serve him a knuckle sandwich for lunch.

        1. It makes him sound like a spoiled brat playing dress up and stumbling around in daddy’s shoes.

          And he talks to his parents like that because they have trouble using a smartphone? Explains a lot.

  47. “Hogg is only 17” as were the majority of the Hitlerjiungen. Hogg is being groomed as a good little Fascist ready to strip people of their Constitutional rights.

    1. So info has come out that only about 10% of the attendees at march in DC were under 18. The average age of the majority attendees was 49. Most were women and many were not their supporting gun control, but peace. This data was collected by 6 researchers who interviewed many of those attending the rally. Of course, if you listened to the media, the overwhelming majority of attendees were teenagers. So yet again, the MSM lied.

  48. The sure bet of the day is that the David Hogg residence has more guns than the average American household.

  49. Hooboy. There is just no reasoning with those who are either stupid or propagandized or both.

    1. Indeed. Which is why we’re keeping our guns.

  50. This is something that can be solved. It doesn’t take a lot of thought.

    Which is fortunate, because they don’t seem to have the capacity to give it much.

    1. It doesn’t take a lot of thought because it’s already been solved in most other countries. Welcome to Earth, where other countries exist. Some have ideas as well, and may have already fixed problems we still have. Learning! Try it sometime.

      1. Fearless Truthteller|3.29.18 @ 6:02AM|#
        “It doesn’t take a lot of thought because it’s already been solved in most other countries.”

        More bullshit, asshole.

      2. Name one country that had a “gun violence problem” that “solved it”.

        Countries that never had a “gun violence problem” to begin with don’t count.

        The homicide rate in most of the industrialized west has been dropping at the sme rate for all countries over the last 30 years or so. Some started with jig rats and some with low. Gun control legislation has not significantly affected any changes.

  51. COngress are not the ones to solve thus phenomenon, except to repeal the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act. As the Parkland shooter has proven, schools are NOT “gun free”. If they WERE gun free, 17 people who are now dead would be alive. They are dead because honest moral selfless people like Mr. Aaron Feis, the coach who wilfully placed his own body between some of his beloved students and this perp’s bullets, have been disarmed. HE could have fired back, ending the massacre before it had claimed so many. Just like what happened in Maryland earlier this week.

    Repeal the FGFSZA and dedicated people like Mr. Feis CAN be armed, and CAN save lies. What percentage of the “mass shootings” over the past five decades have taken place in theoretically gun free zones? To my recollection, all but two. There would have been another except that only three died, one short of “mass shooting” status.

    And perverts like that Parkland shooter would be seriously restrained because they would NOW that SOME number of adults normally at that school COULD BE armed and able to take him, the perp, out. Not an acceptible scenario.

    1. Another area of concern that MUST be dealt with at Federal level.. that programme that netted the Broward County schools a $54Mn prize from FedGov for “reducing their arrest rate” of school age students MUST be ended. Why? Because the “fix” was in… and commonly known. Broward County chose to sacrifice the safety and security of their school kids by refusing to charge the shooter with at least three felony charges, for variouThes crimes he had committed. When a young male assaults his own Mother, putting her in hospital with serious injuries, he has PRoVEN hiself a danger to soceity and must NOT be allowed to roam free without a custodian.. let alone be able to buy guns. He was not charged, as he SHOULD have been, due to the terms of that programme initiated under the kinyun administration. The schools succeeded in reducing the ARREST rate by simply not charging or arresting for felony behaviour. The reduced ARREST rate hid the continuing CRIME rate, but Broward got the $54Mn FedBux. And the kids got shot. Had that felony been reported to NICS, he’d not have been able to buy the rifle he used to kill.

      1. This was NOT a failure of existing gun control laws. It was a failure of the custodians of the public schools, and LE in Broward COunty. SOMEONE ought to sit that pottymouth Hogg down for a few minutes, plug his piehole, then inform him of these and other similar issues that aided, enabled, and abetted the shooter. Then tell that Hogg critter that when bad kids like that start shooting, and no one else has any guns, WHO will stop that bad guy? Are YOU willing to stand still within range and HOPE against hope his gun jams? If so, you’re crazier than we thought.

  52. You mean that they had the support and encouragement of high school teachers, principals, pro gun control parents, and activists? They didn’t dream all this up on their own and pay for it with their milk money?

  53. “This is something that can be solved. It doesn’t take a lot of thought” — probably why none of these jejune activists cannot explain what they mean when they say we must “do something”. What “something”? They can’t really say. Why? Because once they leave what they really want (elimination of gun ownership by ordinary citizens) behind they have no ideas only rhetoric.

    And the worst of it is (a) they will vote, and (b) they will reproduce

    1. Yeah, you’re right. Gun violence is such a complicated problem that no other nations on Earth have solved it. Except for the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Germany, Taiwan, China, Iceland, Romania, etc… Practically every other industrialized wealthy nation on Earth has figured out how to solve this problem, but this is “too complicated” for us. Please learn how to think. It’s very simple: when gun control is effectively implemented, the rate of gun homicides drops to close to 0. We have a rate of gun homicide which is 100 times the rate of many of those countries. You choose to believe it has nothing to do with the fact that we own more guns than all other countries on Earth combined because you’re not a smart person. This isn’t rocket science. You were probably the last guy around claiming that cigarettes save lives too

      1. Fearless Truthteller|3.29.18 @ 6:00AM|#
        “Yeah, you’re right. Gun violence is such a complicated problem that no other nations on Earth have solved it. Except for the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Germany, Taiwan, China, Iceland, Romania, etc… Practically every other……………”

        Do you ever post with out lying you slimy piece of lefty shit?

      2. None of the countries you have listed ever had a gun violence problem to begin with. That is to the extent that it’s true that any of them actually have no gun violence problem now. some of the countries you have listed are somewhat in the doubtful camp.

  54. I agree with the author. I find those activists who focus on gun control to be among the least tolerant of anyone on any side of any issue. So they only see one legitimate side of the issue, demonstrating a truly undemocratic spirit. Of course, this is what you would expect from anyone who wants to take away rights.

  55. Is the definition of “demagogue” anyone you don’t agree with?

  56. Well now Hogg is attempting to lead a boycott of Laura Ingraham for tweeting about his whining about being rejected by four colleges in California. Apparently this little fascist not only wants to strip people of their 2nd amendment rights, but their 1st amendment rights as well. He is a shining example of just how authoritarian and dangerous progressives are and why they can never be given any real power to lead this country.

  57. Just wondering if he still has to put the trash cans out every Tuesday night

  58. I am currently effectively ready to makes $135 to $150 per hr by working on the web from home. A month ago I have gotten $17359 from this simple locally situated online employment. This activity is on the web and simple to do in low maintenance or Full time even No Special Experience required for this activity. Each individual would now be able to join this activity and begin wins online like me by simply take after directions on this blog…….. GOOD LUCK….

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.Jobpost3.tk

  59. There sure are a lot of ad hominem attacks on the Parkland students lately. Their rhetoric is over-the-top just like adults. So what? That’s the story Sullum? Perhaps you should watch some NRA TV and write about their over-the-top rhetoric? The Parkland kids have learned how to play the media for all it is worth. Yes, that’s very adult of them but hardly something to be critical of, unless you want to be critical of all the folks out there taking advantage of the media and its gaze to prop up your arguments.

    So if you are mad that the Parkland students are using agitprop to get their message across just remember Mr. “Lock her up” used this strategy to gain the presidency. We raised them in our image.

  60. Terribly written article. I don’t believe it’s inconceivable that someone that survived a school shooting would have ideas about control similar to his, without the need to “copy their elders”. What a stupid premise for an article and then no offer of proof except his ideas sound similar to someone else’s. So what? This whole article is childish reductionism (literally).

  61. Hogg is really living high on the backs of his dead HS friends: this horrific incident has led to his being the favorite young school tool of the anti-gun, leftist media, and he is gobbling it up like some drunk halfwit. Maybe the media should take a look at how voraciously he has hyped himself, on the corpses of those who died, using their deaths as catalyst for energizing all those young undeveloped minds out there. This kid is the yabbering definition of a ‘usefool tool, and idiot’ — he’s a front page illustration of how easily duped you can be by your own moment in the limelite. But what about other students who can also talk, and feel totally different from hogg? Where are they? You would think he was the only view out there from the HS crowd. And of course, since he is making the most out of free speech, using is mouth to nauseate us all, he now wants to shut down those who disagree with him, like Laura Ingraham, but trying to get the public to boycott her sponsors….so she doesn’t have the same free rights to speech that he is enjoying. He is your typical little Stalinist halfwit.

    1. I find it amusing how many people are commenting on what a tool this kid is. Seems he’s struck a nerve and made most of you pop your collective gun boner. Seems perfectly reasonable that his gun control views are more a result of being shot by a wacko with an AR and seeing his friends slaughtered. Keep calling him a fascist and a “stalinist halfwit”….you’re playing with your own rights. You are all in denial. At the end of the day there is no constitutional protection for your owning a gun that serves no purpose other than killing people. This has already been adjudicated by the supreme court. In my opinion, another assault weapons ban is imminent….it will either happen after the next mass shooting or when the pendulum swings left again. Enjoy them while you can. Ad hominems against this kid will ultimately work against you.

      1. “”Seems perfectly reasonable that his gun control views are more a result of being shot by a wacko with an AR and seeing his friends slaughtered.””

        Except that he wasn’t shot. Did he actually see his friends get slaughtered? I don’t think so. Did he know that they did and that alone could affect him? Sure.

        “”At the end of the day there is no constitutional protection for your owning a gun that serves no purpose other than killing people.””

        Any gun can be owned for the purpose of target practice. There is no such thing as a gun that serves no other purpose but to kill people, just as it’s true that all guns can be used to kill people.

        You may get a assault weapons ban. We’ve had one before. I fully expect it not to make a difference like the last one. Then what?

        1. My bad….meant “shot at”.

          1. Did he really get shot at?

            Or was he in a room with a closed door while hearing shots being fired.

            1. Does it matter? Maybe he was slightly less terrified because he was only in the room near the one where students were being executed?

              “You may get a assault weapons ban. We’ve had one before. I fully expect it not to make a difference like the last one. Then what?”

              Then you lose the right to buy (possibly own) them. Probably for good this time. I agree that it might not make much of a difference in the homicide rate but this battle isn’t being fought with logic and reason, in case you didn’t notice. The NRA is doubling down on an indefensible position and should maybe re-think their strategy….e.g. figure out a way to limit access to assault rifles without getting a full-blown ban. Guess they’re willing to roll those dice and we’ll see what happens but, in my opinion, the writing is on the wall.

  62. What a surprise that another gun-loving, white supremacist Trumpkin has perpetrated a massacre! First Dylann Roof, then James Alex Fields, then Stephen Paddock, now Nikolas Cruz! How many more of these sick “MAGA” enthusiasts must murder before we recognize Trumpkinism for the murderous ideology it really is? Please stop genuflecting towards Fuhrer Trump for a few moments and listen to reason, friends.

    1. Fearless Truthteller|3.29.18 @ 3:29PM|#
      “What a surprise that another gun-loving, white supremacist Trumpkin has perpetrated a massacre!”

      What a surprise our newest slimy piece of shit is still here spouting propaganda!
      Fuck off, slaver. And read A-2 while you’re at it.

      1. Fearless Bullshitter isn’t very good a parody.

  63. Jacob usually writes accurate titles. But this time he is calling the initiation-of-force looters anti-gun. Those looters insist that First Responders? like the IRS, DEA, FBI, California Police, ATF and other armed goons he heavily armed to do the looting for them. In fact, to please the econazi/warmunist/new left united front a small change in the Second Amendment would make everything kewl: “…the right of the government to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The only thing better than that would be to edit in “the security of a totalitarian State…”

  64. I’m seeing stuff saying that there was a significant amount of high school bullying and cliqueishness going on atthat school, and that Hogg was among the in crowd perps.
    ????? ??????

    1. Interesting. Either this is ThomasD using a sock, or this bot copy/pasted a part of an earlier comment.

      The script reads right-to-left and flipped the order of the name row. Unshockingly the website linked to his handle is shady and generated a bogus browser “allow” prompt.

      So yeah. Don’t click on that.

      1. It’s a bot.

        I rarely sock, and only then for comedic effect. Not even sure I’ve ever even done it here – registration is too much effort for making a crappy joke.

  65. It’s incredible, the amount of factually inaccurate information in the posts in this thread from gun advocates. We know that the fewer guns in our society, the fewer gun deaths we would have. That it has worked in many countries of the world. But no, the gun crazies place their love of guns over the life of people. The time has come for the 2nd A to be repealed. It is inappropriate in today’s circumstances. A recent survey finds that 1 in 5 favor repeal. I laud the young people who will be replacing the gun crazies as they die off and that the day will come when guns are largely eliminated. If nothing else, remember this fact, fewer guns = fewer gun deaths.

    1. Fmontyr|3.29.18 @ 8:38PM|#
      “It’s incredible, the amount of factually inaccurate information in the posts in this thread from gun advocates. We know that the fewer guns in our society, the fewer gun deaths we would have.”

      Yes, it is incredible. Lefty scumbags like you keep spouting propaganda and bullshit.
      Fuck off.

    2. Citation needed.

    3. And yet, nothing chicago or new york has done has stopped hundreds of gun deaths every year. You are completely talking out of your ass, but you pretend that statistics are on your side. They are not.

      Why are you even on this website?

  66. BTW, you slimy piece of shit:
    Fmontyr|3.28.18 @ 8:52PM|#
    “So you agree that slavery allowed by the Constitution should not have been terminated by an amendment. Do you actually have any idea of what purpose amendments serve? Also, there are no absolute rights only defined rights.”

    No, lefty asshole, there are rights in abundance, limited only by direct harm caused to others.
    Fuck off.

    1. Put another way, lefty asshole: Do you think there must be a defined right to drink a beer at the ball park?
      Fuck off.

  67. What a twatttt.

  68. As the 2004 sunset/renewal date for the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban approached, the Centers for Disease Control and the National Research Council did separate reviews of the empirical research on the impact of gun control laws on gun violence. They could not find measurable impact of gun laws on violent behavior. And there was not enough support in Congress to push a vote for renewal.

    Hogg and Gonzalez are long on self righteous anger and rhetoric, but they seem to assume that because they are promoting what is called “gun control” that it will have to impact gun violence because it’s called gun control.

    This angry rhetoric demonizing guns and shaming gun rights supporters would not even make it through the door at an American Society of Criminology symposium on gun control or gun crime. They seem to think that getting petulant and demanding will get them what they want without explaining why or how it should or could work. That might be how a spoiled brat gets their first car from mommy and daddy, but its not a good program for criminal law.

    This rhetorical excess reminds me of the Dry Forces campaign to impose local option prohibition of alcohol in 1953, the rhetoric to defend and maintain it to 1968, and the hysteria they evidenced at repeal. Color me skeptical.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.