Political pawns? Please explain this disclaimer I found on the website. "Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them."
I've said what I had to say. I don't engage in long, useless, on line discussions. I have a 5 grandchildren in middle school/high school. I understand all of it.
Again, so what. At the Women's March in my town last year a 17 year old girl gave an incredible speech (that she wrote herself, because kids aren't idiots). The youth were already involved in the organization before this. You may have grandchildren but I have a nephew who is smarter than 95% of adults I know and he has a very well informed and thought out opinion on gun control Amazing how people can be so gung ho about the second amendment but the minute someone exercises their first amendment rights they're dismissed as pawns .
The "political pawns" BS is just meant to discredit kids who are trying and learning to be involved in their society. Instead of helping them, whatever that means to you - educating them on gun safety, educating them on the political process, educating them on the role of activism in a democracy, KEEPING THEM FROM BEING MURDERED IN SCHOOL, some small minded people look to just insult and diminish them. They''re not pawns. They have minds and thoughts and goals and hopes and fears of their own that their expressing because they feel (rightfully so) that adults have failed them
We will see in a few decades which citizens shape the future in the USA. Unless the big corporations and corrupt politicians keep growing in power naturally.
Can anyone provide the source from which anti-gun freaks came to the conclusion that kids are getting murdered in school at record numbers? A different thread was closed down before I could ask an anti-gun freak for the third time to answer that question.
Really? I've been called a weak coward who needs a gun as a substitute for a dick, and a person who advocates kids getting killed. And you thought anti-gun freak was too strong? Where were you when I was being called names? I didn't think it would take luck to have someone provide the source from which they came to the conclusion that kids are getting murdered at school in record numbers. I'm just asking someone to support their claim.
Exploited? You just agreed their feelings are real. How exactly are they being exploited by getting out a message they themselves believe in?
To be fair: it seems that was because you expressed in a certain way no improved gun control is needed. Not simply because you own guns or are advocating other solutions. Gun owners that get kind of blunt when others consider improved gun control as the main part of the solution of bringing the number of mass and school shootings down, and in return argue it is not so at all are usually the kind of gun owners who righteously are afraid of getting restricted in their toy options if gun control would get succesfully improved
Anyone who cares to see how the students were used can connect the dots for themselves. All the information is available on the internet. As I stated above, I don't engage in lengthy, useless, internet arguing.
Hahaha For sure there are people with an agenda that jumped on this opportunity to utilize the press the kids are getting. That happens in every single political movement. The NRA uses stories in the media to get their message out too. Everyone does. The kids know what they’re doing though. Their message and feelings are real.
Connect the dots in the opposite direction and you'll get the opposite conclusion. Connecting the dots is stupid when the completed picture is right in front of our faces. Instead of making assumptions about these kids, let's listen to what they're saying.
To be actually fair, I've never said that no gun control is needed. So, you weren't being fair. And it's usually that kind of anti-gun . . . person who, rather than being fair, mindlessly attribute remarks to people when no such remarks were made.
Sure, and how about we suggest to them their right to march up to FBI headquarters and demand to see the people who thought that school kids weren't important enough to do something about a kid who said he wanted to be a professional school shooter.
