Reply With Quote
You just stated your premise, dumbass.
I'm not saying they weren't. I'm saying the president is full of and that his comment was lord preening.
You just stated your premise, dumbass.
You're not saying guns weren't the answer but you're saying Trump was wrong to say guns were the answer? Guns were called in a bit late. Had there been armed security this event likely never takes place.
So two options, choose the most realistic:
1. Ban all guns and ensure no one who could ever commit an act like this has access to a firearm (which means basically everyone)
2. Secure large gatherings of unarmed people using armed people (you know, the the federal government does for themselves)
I asked a question. What premise did I state? Be specific.
Your premise is that reck scoffed at these deaths because they are Jewish.
If it isn't your premise there is no reason for you to ask the question at all.
I never mentioned Reck in the question.
Do you think it's ok to scoff at these deaths just because they were Jewish?
Yes or no
He was blaming the temple for the body count.
Most indelicate.
No, you didn't.
So you believe no one here scoffed at these deaths because they are Jewish.
Cool. I agree with that.
in b4 MOAR GUNS is always the correct answer
I heard his statement. He did not blame it on the temple. He said the event could have been different had there been armed protection inside the temple. He's not going to be able to disarm the US. Obama couldn't do it in his 8 years. Clinton couldn't do it in his. The Bush tandem didn't try. So suggesting disarmament or gun laws as the answer is naive since we cannot create an ad hoc utopian society and we certainly cannot do it in retrospect. We can ensure people we care about are protected however. This is why the police exist - because we (you and I) cannot control the other 300+ million people in this country.
So you're using confirmation bias by suggesting he was blaming the temple. it's clear he wasn't.
Strawman
Why were the cops called?
You refuse to condemn it. Noted.
Not at all, it's a reasonable condensation of the point you made and are trying to make.
Noted that you remove and ignore tough questions.
Safe space quoting
what tough question, that we need a police force to contest criminal force?
Not challenged by me. I never said the police are the problem here.
Who scoffed at it?
I'll condemn them, DMC.
No one here has scoffed at it.
I asked why they were called. The obvious answer is because they could neutralize the shooter and perhaps save lives. They would have been called even if they were unarmed, but they intentionally are not unarmed. They are not awaiting a Utopian society - they deal with the society we have now.
Why then is it wrong to suggest anticipating these kinds of attacks and being prepared for them is prudent? Does it shatter your imaginary security bubble?
You've made your position known. No need for further comments on the matter.
Bowers made his disdain for US President Donald Trump known, saying he “did not vote for him” and has never “worn or even touched a MAGA [Make America Great Again] hat.”
Oops
Were those Twitter posts confirmed to be him?
Not making light of what this guy did, but I’ll at least give him credit for criticizing the hilarious notion that a multi-billionaire who’s various businesses have utilized immigrant labor and overseas labor is going to bring about a populist uprising that defeats globalism.
Not sure how murdering a bunch of random Jews in Pittsburgh will do to end globalism either though, but at least the shooter can say he’s smarter than most Alex Jones listeners
It has been established Trump wasn't hardcore enough for this guy. He's more of a Bannon type of guy.
I think so
Its on many news sources
More seriously though, not going to get into a gun control argument, but it is worth noting that most synagogues in this country have a fair amount of security in place because of potential for stuff like this. The synagogue i went to growing up and the 3-4 other ones that I had friends who went to had doors that stayed locked and all visitors needed to be buzzed in. There was also always 1-2 off duty cops during sabbath and other services.
Point of all that being the “If only they had a good guy with a gun!” argument that’s relevant for mass shootings at schools, movie theatres, etc., could very well not apply here. It’d be really unusual for a synagogue to not have any security, especially during sabbath services.
Never mind, just read that there wasn’t any security presence there today.
Its re ed that synagogues need to have so much security in the first place but it’s irresponsible that this place had an open doors policy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions