Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, June 03, 2019

Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney cautioned against focusing too heavily on politics "too soon" after a gunman on Friday killed 12 people at a city government building in Virginia Beach, Va.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

F*** Republicans. "Pro-life" my a**

We have mass shootings over and over and over and over again. Nothing is ever done.

This shooter used 'extended magazines' that have been used in so many mass shootings.

If you can't hit something with 8-10 bullets, you have no business owning or shooting a gun. Fewer people would have died had he had to reach in his pocket for another magazine, eject the one in the gun, and insert the new one instead of shooting off so many rounds without having to reload.

#1 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-03 04:15 AM | Reply

It will always be too soon, the NRA decided that for us a long time ago. They have so much blood on their hands that one wonders if the members have souls.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-03 08:01 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

This is a classic false argument.

This is the best time to talk about it.

#3 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-03 10:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The GOP/NRA logo should be a classroom full of mowed down first graders.

#4 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2019-06-03 11:17 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

My brother is a gun nut. My good friend is a gun dealer (legally of course).

Both are against much in the way of regulations but they understand the need for some at least.

Why can't the GOP understand this?

#5 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-06-03 11:42 AM | Reply

I tried to resist this clickbait thread, but a reminder that President Trump outlawed bump stocks just has to be mentioned.
Remember them? Just one more thing Trump has accomplished.

#6 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2019-06-03 11:50 AM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 2

#6 Wow! Such bold and decisive leadership.

Totally meaningless after signing an EO ending the prohibition of sales of weapons to people who were mentally ill.

#7 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-06-03 11:58 AM | Reply

It's hilarious to read these comments. Liberals LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE the Constitution until we get to a topic that goes against their opinion. Then, all of a sudden, the Constitution is completely wrong. This is our 2nd Amendment. It's going to stay. It's there for a reason...a very good reason. Our ultimate goal is to find a way to express our 2nd Amendment rights without our rights being infringed. It's right there in plain text.

But let me put it in a way that exposes the Right's hypocrisy so Liberals can finally understand their own hypocrisy a little more (at least for objective people). Cons LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE America until we get to a topic that goes against their opinion. We are a nation of immigrants. We are a nation that was created to help people who can't help themselves. But Cons ignore that and want to stop immigration as much as possible. Our ultimate goal is to find a way to be generous with our borders while ensuring security, not closing the borders because Cons don't like them open.

It's the same exact premise. Our nation was founded on certain principles but both sides want to remove those principles because they are only thinking of their own opinions and are incapable of compromise (if the 21st century has anything to say about it). So don't go shouting at how bad guns are when you won't own up to your own hypocrisy.

#8 | Posted by humtake at 2019-06-03 12:00 PM | Reply

It is too soon to talk politics about the border crisis. Thoughts and prayers.

Gun violence only kills 10000 Americans a year. That is nothing compared to losing jobs picking crops and cleaning bathrooms.

#9 | Posted by bored at 2019-06-03 12:19 PM | Reply

We are a nation that was created to help people who can't help themselves.

Wrong. We are a nation that was created for personal liberty. Individual Freedom, that's why we were created.

#10 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-03 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Advertisement

Advertisement

It may be too soon to talk about this shooting, but it's not too soon to talk about the umpteen other mass shootings in this country in 2019...

#11 | Posted by catdog at 2019-06-03 01:02 PM | Reply

This might have been a valid response after the first mass shooting. But now?

I heard Robert Bork (en.wikipedia.org) talk about the Second Amendment. He said that from the plain words of the text, the Federalist Papers, and the history of the time there could be no question that it applied only to what today we call the National Guard. He said the NRA shouldn't waste their time talking about the Second but instead should work for an Amendment that really did apply to an individual right to own a weapon. Turns out, of course, that they got it done by activist judges.

#12 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2019-06-03 01:07 PM | Reply

It's way too late to be talking about guns for all those who have lost their lives with gun nuts tell us they won't even discuss reasonable laws to make our children safer.

#13 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-03 01:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

What reasonable gun law would have prevented this shooting?

#14 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2019-06-03 02:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Wrong. We are a nation that was created for personal liberty. Individual Freedom, that's why we were created.

#10 | Posted by boaz

Individual Freedom as long as it "does not pick my pockets or break my bones".

Long before Emma Lazarus wrote about the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, George Washington noted that for "the poor, the needy, & the oppressed of the Earth," America was already what he called "the second Land of promise." This Promised Land offered, said James Madison, "an Asylum to the persecuted and oppressed of every Nation and Religion."

The Founders believed that the purpose of government was to protect life, liberty, and property from what they called the depravity of human nature(see Donald J Trump) -- from man's innate capacity to do the kinds of violence that slave-owners, to take just one example, did every day.

"Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness. In one in which the measures of government receive their impressions so immediately from the sense of the community as in ours it is proportionably essential.

To the security of a free constitution it contributes in various ways – by convincing those who are intrusted with the public administration that every valuable end of government is best answered by the enlightened confidence of the people, and by teaching the people themselves to know and to value their own rights; to discern and provide against invasions of them; to distinguish between oppression and the necessary exercise of lawful authority; between burthens proceeding from a disregard to their convenience and those resulting from the inevitable exigencies of society; to discriminate the spirit of liberty from that of licentiousness – cherishing the first, avoiding the last – and uniting a speedy but temperate vigilance against encroachments, with an inviolable respect to the laws."

Annual Message to Congress, January 8, 1790
by George Washington

#ReadTheReport

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-03 02:55 PM | Reply

Wrong. We are a nation that was created for personal liberty. Individual Freedom, that's why we were created.

#10 | Posted by boaz

In your case, as a black man, who without a long struggle by the 'liberals' you denigrate so freely, you'd still be calling white men 'Massah,' would have spent your military time peeling potatoes, and you certainly wouldn't be voting freely or living in the neighborhood of your choice.

And according to your party, 'individual choice' doesn't extend to women in the most personal areas.

#16 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-03 03:26 PM | Reply

#16,

Liberals like Americanunity continue to show why Democrats are the most racist people on earth.

#17 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-03 03:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Liberals like Americanunity continue to show why Democrats are the most racist people on earth.

#17 | Posted by boaz

Liberals fought for YOUR rights. Conservatives turned fire hoses and dogs on them.

Unlike you, I'm not prejudiced against minorities. Hell, you're prejudiced against your own minority.

#18 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-03 04:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sadly, the wrong people are being killed if anyone thinks republicans are going to act.
If ( name your favorite republican here), or anyone in their families were gunned down, the solution would be in place by end of the week.

#19 | Posted by Docman at 2019-06-03 04:17 PM | Reply

Nothing Can Be Done.

Is what they want you to believe.

Don't accept it.

#20 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-03 04:20 PM | Reply

Sadly, the wrong people are being killed if anyone thinks republicans are going to act.
If ( name your favorite republican here), or anyone in their families were gunned down, the solution would be in place by end of the week.

#19 | POSTED BY DOCMAN

What "solution" did the GOP propose when Rep Scalise was shot and nearly killed?

#21 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-03 04:21 PM | Reply

When Lyndon Johnson signed the 1967 Civil Rights Act, he is quoted as saying, "we've lost the South for a generation." That's exactly what happened. "Conservatives" fought every bit of progress in extending rights to minorities - like BOAZ - every step of the way.

"Liberals" are responsible for every right minorities enjoy today; voting rights, equality in lending, housing, employment, in the military, ending legalized segregation and Jim Crow laws, outlawing hate crimes, and a long list of other rights BOAZ takes completely for granted.

Without the efforts of 'liberals' he'd be living in the world of the 1940's, where he would not have risen in the ranks of the military or been able to live the life he does today.

#22 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-03 04:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

JeffJ.
Scalise is bit player in DC.
Plus he survived.
If sitting republican senator and or his family murdered, the legislation would be delivered and signed before the funeral.

#23 | Posted by Docman at 2019-06-03 04:31 PM | Reply

Nothing will be done until the NRA goes into the dustbin of history. Without their threats against any Republican politician who dares to even mention common sense regulation, we could make some progress in this area.

When Republicans won't take action on closing the 'gun show loophole'/allowing sales of handguns between private parties without a background check or fix an ad hoc system of current background checks that often fails to uncover domestic abusers or the mentally ill, Republicans prove they simply don't care and will do nothing.

#24 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-03 04:35 PM | Reply

If it's too soon then let's talk about gun laws in light of some earlier mass shooting.

There are mass shootings occurring on a near-constant basis in America. There will always be a recent one to hide behind.

#25 | Posted by JOE at 2019-06-03 04:58 PM | Reply

I tried to resist this clickbait thread, but a reminder that President Trump outlawed bump stocks just has to be mentioned.
Remember them? Just one more thing Trump has accomplished.
#6 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE AT 2019-06-03 11:50 AM | REPLY | FUNNY: 2 | NEWSWORTHY 2

#6 Wow! Such bold and decisive leadership.
Totally meaningless after signing an EO ending the prohibition of sales of weapons to people who were mentally ill.
#7 | POSTED BY NIXON AT 2019-06-03 11:58 AM | REPLY

Worth posting in toto again just for the butthurt inflicted upon Festering...

#26 | Posted by e1g1 at 2019-06-03 08:21 PM | Reply

How's this for effective, common sense gun laws. Require a license to own or possess any semiautomatic weapon. Require meaningful training and background checks INCLUDING psychological evaluation. Repeat the checks every two years.

Licensee pays for all.

#27 | Posted by contrecoup at 2019-06-03 08:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hell, you're prejudiced against your own minority.

If holding my community accountable for bad behavior and presenting a bad face to the world is being prejudiced, then so be it.

#28 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-03 08:46 PM | Reply

27
Effective?

I agree training is needed.
In NY you have to attend a class by a certified trainer that's always some wannabe cop. Then pass finger print check, background check, interview with local PD, etc
Then you get your pistol permit. Then you buy the pistol.
That is the first time you legally get to shoot a pistol (unless you were a veteran). It just seems odd to turn somebody loose with a pistol that hasn't (legally) ever shot a pistol before.

#29 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2019-06-03 08:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I agree training is needed.

Sounds like "infringing" to me.

#30 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-06-03 09:39 PM | Reply

STFU Mick.

It's Pulse. It's the Colorado movie theatre. It's Sandy Hook.

Is it too soon to talk about those, jagoff?

#31 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-03 11:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#29 | Posted by 101Chairborne

It's effective:

New York has third-lowest rate of gun deaths, study shows

WASHINGTON -- New York has the nation's third-lowest rate of gun deaths among the 50 states, according to a new study that found a correlation between firearm safety laws and reduced gun deaths.

The study published Thursday by the Giffords Law Center, a group that advocates for stronger gun laws, showed New York's 900 reported deaths by firearm in 2016 ranked as the lowest per capita of any state except Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

www.syracuse.com

And:

Stronger Gun Laws Linked to Less Gun Violence, Study Find

The report, which grades states on their gun safety measures and compares those scores to 2018 gun violence statistics, found that seven of the 10 states with the strongest gun laws also have the lowest rates of gun deaths.

Only California and New Jersey earned an A grade on the report, though five states – Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and New York – earned an A-.

www.usnews.com

#32 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-04 03:52 AM | Reply

People talk about it every time and pretend like they're not allowed to talk about it.

#33 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-06-04 07:56 AM | Reply

How's this for effective, common sense gun laws. Require a license to own or possess any semiautomatic weapon. Require meaningful training and background checks INCLUDING psychological evaluation. Repeat the checks every two years.
Licensee pays for all. - #27 | Posted by contrecoup at 2019-06-03 08:24 PM

Are you equally behind licensing to exercise other rights? Have to get a license before the lock installed on your mouth is removed, for example?
Have to get a license and governmental data review before hitting that 'submit' button?
You're required to incriminate yourself in a court of law if you haven't been licensed by the government?
Surely only government licensed media sources sounds like a great plan for you, no?
If you want to treat arms like a privilege, you need to remove the Constitutional protections that it has.
Sounds like your work is cut out for you.

#34 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-04 09:50 AM | Reply

If holding my community accountable for bad behavior and presenting a bad face to the world is being prejudiced, then so be it.

#28 | POSTED BY BOAZ

When white people hold their community responsible for bad behavior (e.g., majority of mass shooters and serial killers), I'll think about it.

Or is it only minority communities that have a responsibility to "police" themselves?

#35 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2019-06-04 03:11 PM | Reply

#34

The only other activity commonly undertaken by civilians that is as dangerous as shooting is operating a motor vehicle.

Driving requires licensing and training.

IMHO, proving that you can safely operate an AR-15 is a small price to pay in order to lessen the body count.

#36 | Posted by contrecoup at 2019-06-04 03:13 PM | Reply

IMHO, proving that you can safely operate an AR-15 is a small price to pay in order to lessen the body count.

#36 | Posted by contrecoup

And then maybe our "militia" would become well-regulated as the Constitution demands.

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-04 04:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Gun loves can't even tell you what a "well-regulated militia" is.

Nor can they explain how it is "being necessary to the security of a free State."

How does that even happen?
???

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-04 04:06 PM | Reply

#38,

And you dont know what a comma is. Right after that, it says under no uncertain terms that my right to bear and own weapons WILL NOT BE INFRINGED.

#39 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-04 06:23 PM | Reply

Virginia Beach shooter killed 12 using silencer and high-capacity magazine.
A handgun with a silencer and high-capacity magazine has no "purpose other than increasing the gun's lethality" for a mass attack, a gun-reform advocate said.

#40 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-04 06:46 PM | Reply

I agree with Chris Rock. Buy all the guns you want. Bullets? $5,000 each. Owning 3 bullets is a felony. No 2nd place amendment problem.

#41 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-06-04 07:52 PM | Reply

Driving requires licensing and training. - #36 | Posted by contrecoup at 2019-06-04 03:13 PM
This remains a false statement.

The only other activity commonly undertaken by civilians that is as dangerous as shooting is operating a motor vehicle.
So let me make sure that I have you analogy correct:
Let's assume that your incorrect statement quoted above is correct (but we know it is not).
You are equating driving with shooting. Driving requires a license and training, so should shooting.
Owning a vehicle requires no license or training, so neither should owning firearms? Still liking that analogy you're pushing?

#42 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-05 07:12 AM | Reply

Buy all the guns you want. Bullets? $5,000 each. Owning 3 bullets is a felony. No 2nd place amendment problem.
#41 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-06-04 07:52 PM

The constitution doesn't protect the right to bear guns. It protect the right to bear arms.

arms
/ärmz/
noun
plural noun: arms
1. weapons and ammunition; armaments.

#43 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-05 07:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Owning a vehicle requires no license"

But operating a vehicle does.

I'm agreeable to the same terms with guns. You?

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-05 07:58 AM | Reply

Buy all the guns you want. Bullets? $5,000 each. Owning 3 bullets is a felony. No 2nd place amendment problem.

Good then.

An abortion will cost $10,000 each. Limit 3 per woman. 8 months or less. Felony charges for any doctor who performs one out of this scope.

No Roe V Wade problem.

Agree?

#45 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-05 07:59 AM | Reply

lol the $5000 bullet thing. Funny Chris Rock line, but the guy has never seen ammo made.

You can make bullets out of wheel weights. A guy in his garage can churn out a thousand in a few hours with a progressive reloader.

#46 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-06-05 08:13 AM | Reply

lol the $5000 bullet thing.

Never mind the fact that this argument has been analyzed and most legal experts agree that it would be an unconstitutional measure on a number of fronts.

#47 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-05 08:25 AM | Reply

But operating a vehicle does. I'm agreeable to the same terms with guns. You?
#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-05 07:58 AM

Once again, operating a vehicle does NOT require a driver's license.
I've linked citation to that above. I've given examples numerous times. Anyone still parroting that falsehood is only doing so to try to intentionally misinform people.

#48 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-05 10:12 AM | Reply

I'm agreeable to the same terms with guns. You?
#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-05 07:58 AM

And to answer your question: If the right to bear arms is changed to a privilege like driving automobiles on public lands, then I'm certainly agreeable to the same terms. You can bring your gun with you whenever and wherever you like, enforced by state and local government, if you use it unlicensed you'll answer to a jury...or is it a fine...is operating a vehicle unlicensed even a misdemeanor these days?

#49 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-05 10:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Once again, operating a vehicle does NOT require a driver's license."

Yeah...in certain specialized circumstances, like on farms, and off public roads. But general driving, like on interstate highways, requires a drivers license.

Unless, of course, you're redefining "operate" to mean turn on the fan and crank up the radio.

#50 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-05 10:15 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort