HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » "My Mom"-Daught...

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:12 AM

"My Mom"-Daughter Of Slain Sandy Hook Principal Stars In New Hillary Clinton Ad

Last edited Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Thank you, Erica. You are a hero just like your mom. You are using your heartbreak to promote gun reform that will stop the murders of our children and families in our homes, our schools and our streets. A progressive cause that is so long overdue.












“She reminds me of my mother: she isn’t scared of anything,” Erica Smegielski says.

Dawn Hochsprung, will appear in a new ad for the Hillary Clinton campaign in the upcoming primary states of Connecticut and Rhode Island.

Smegielski, to whom Clinton devoted the final portion of her victory speech Tuesday night, argues in the ad, “My Mom,” that Clinton is the presidential candidate best equipped to reform the country’s gun laws.

The 60-second version of the ad begins with Smegielski describing how painful it was to lose her mother in the December 2012 mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. Hochsprung, one of 26 victims of the massacre, was killed while trying to protect her students.

“No more families should have to go through what we have,” Smegielski says. “Hillary Clinton is the only candidate that has what it takes to take on the gun lobby.”

Clinton’s campaign website says she would strengthen gun background checks by closing loopholes and end legal immunity for gun makers and sellers whose products are used in violent acts, among other reforms.

“No one is fighting harder to reform our gun laws than Hillary,” Smegielski continues, as footage of her hugging Clinton appears on screen. “She reminds me of my mother: she isn’t scared of anything. And that’s how I know she is the person who can actually make a difference.”



176 replies, 6835 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 176 replies Author Time Post
Reply "My Mom"-Daughter Of Slain Sandy Hook Principal Stars In New Hillary Clinton Ad (Original post)
Haveadream Apr 2016 OP
jmg257 Apr 2016 #1
frylock Apr 2016 #2
NWCorona Apr 2016 #3
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #6
LanternWaste Apr 2016 #8
frylock Apr 2016 #9
Haveadream Apr 2016 #153
CorporatistNation Apr 2016 #28
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #52
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #82
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #100
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #103
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #106
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #107
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #111
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #113
jmg257 Apr 2016 #108
Octafish Apr 2016 #109
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #112
jmg257 Apr 2016 #114
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #115
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #116
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #140
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #165
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #166
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #167
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #168
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #169
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #170
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #171
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #173
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #174
notadmblnd Apr 2016 #175
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #151
riversedge Apr 2016 #164
artislife Apr 2016 #67
frylock Apr 2016 #68
pangaia Apr 2016 #76
George II Apr 2016 #99
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #105
jmg257 Apr 2016 #110
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #117
Haveadream Apr 2016 #137
uponit7771 Apr 2016 #144
riversedge Apr 2016 #152
Haveadream Apr 2016 #4
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #119
Haveadream Apr 2016 #128
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #148
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #5
Vinca Apr 2016 #7
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #10
bvar22 Apr 2016 #46
CorporatistNation Apr 2016 #30
pangaia Apr 2016 #77
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #51
jmg257 Apr 2016 #56
artislife Apr 2016 #69
artislife Apr 2016 #66
jillan Apr 2016 #121
sufrommich Apr 2016 #11
Haveadream Apr 2016 #12
oasis Apr 2016 #13
Haveadream Apr 2016 #16
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #59
Haveadream Apr 2016 #70
sarae Apr 2016 #38
Logical Apr 2016 #129
mikehiggins Apr 2016 #14
bvar22 Apr 2016 #58
pangaia Apr 2016 #78
berni_mccoy Apr 2016 #15
Haveadream Apr 2016 #17
berni_mccoy Apr 2016 #18
azurnoir Apr 2016 #172
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #20
Logical Apr 2016 #130
Chezboo Apr 2016 #19
BreakfastClub Apr 2016 #21
sarae Apr 2016 #37
Fla Dem Apr 2016 #118
Haveadream Apr 2016 #22
Il_Coniglietto Apr 2016 #41
Haveadream Apr 2016 #48
Il_Coniglietto Apr 2016 #57
Haveadream Apr 2016 #64
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #147
JaneyVee Apr 2016 #89
Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #127
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #23
Haveadream Apr 2016 #24
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #25
Haveadream Apr 2016 #26
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #29
DemonGoddess Apr 2016 #143
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #145
jfern Apr 2016 #81
Haveadream Apr 2016 #87
stone space Apr 2016 #101
bvar22 Apr 2016 #155
stone space Apr 2016 #162
Logical Apr 2016 #131
That Guy 888 Apr 2016 #27
Haveadream Apr 2016 #31
That Guy 888 Apr 2016 #32
IamMab Apr 2016 #35
That Guy 888 Apr 2016 #54
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #42
jack_krass Apr 2016 #139
DemonGoddess Apr 2016 #33
Haveadream Apr 2016 #96
TeddyR Apr 2016 #34
Haveadream Apr 2016 #40
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #43
katmille Apr 2016 #72
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #74
katmille Apr 2016 #79
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #83
TeddyR Apr 2016 #45
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #75
Logical Apr 2016 #132
sarae Apr 2016 #36
fleabiscuit Apr 2016 #39
Duckhunter935 Apr 2016 #44
Haveadream Apr 2016 #47
Surya Gayatri Apr 2016 #49
UtahLib Apr 2016 #50
Armstead Apr 2016 #53
CTyankee Apr 2016 #61
Haveadream Apr 2016 #65
bvar22 Apr 2016 #85
CTyankee Apr 2016 #90
Haveadream Apr 2016 #93
CTyankee Apr 2016 #102
bvar22 Apr 2016 #156
stone space Apr 2016 #104
bvar22 Apr 2016 #123
kcr Apr 2016 #124
bvar22 Apr 2016 #125
stone space Apr 2016 #150
kcr Apr 2016 #160
stone space Apr 2016 #149
bvar22 Apr 2016 #158
stone space Apr 2016 #161
Lucinda Apr 2016 #55
TeddyR Apr 2016 #63
DesertRat Apr 2016 #60
mcar Apr 2016 #62
Haveadream Apr 2016 #92
NastyRiffraff Apr 2016 #71
Haveadream Apr 2016 #98
katmille Apr 2016 #73
Haveadream Apr 2016 #94
jfern Apr 2016 #80
Cha Apr 2016 #84
Haveadream Apr 2016 #95
Cha Apr 2016 #97
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #86
stone space Apr 2016 #163
FlatBaroque Apr 2016 #88
Haveadream Apr 2016 #91
postatomic Apr 2016 #120
TeddyR Apr 2016 #126
postatomic Apr 2016 #142
TeddyR Apr 2016 #154
Haveadream Apr 2016 #138
postatomic Apr 2016 #141
bvar22 Apr 2016 #157
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2016 #122
azmom Apr 2016 #133
quickesst Apr 2016 #134
Agnosticsherbet Apr 2016 #135
cyberpj Apr 2016 #136
Chan790 Apr 2016 #146
Vattel Apr 2016 #159
dr60omg Apr 2016 #176

Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:15 AM

1. NO doubt Hillary is the most anti-gun candidate. We shall see how that plays out in the GE.

This ain't Australia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:17 AM

2. You're not going to hear a damn thing about gun control in the GE.

It probably drops off the radar after CT votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:19 AM

3. ^^this^^^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:50 AM

6. I agree

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:54 AM

8. I'm certain you place great faith in your prophecy.

I'm certain you place great faith in your prophecy. Possibly a sandwich board with scripture on either side and a white robe may allow you more credibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #8)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:57 AM

9. Well bless your little heart!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #9)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 10:52 AM

153. Change is hard, change is possible



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:22 PM

28. PRECISELY! HILLARY IS VERY GOOD AT "USING" PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUFFERED GREAT TRAGEDY!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #28)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:43 PM

52. Either that ...

... or she actually feels compassion for for people. You might try it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #52)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:02 AM

82. Here's an example of HRC's compassion for human life



Ordering the taking of life of another human being then making light of it- is sickening and makes her no better of a human being than Gadaffi was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #82)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:59 AM

100. Really you're equating Gadaffi's death to all those children in Sandy Hook? Despicable. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #100)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:21 AM

103. That's the message you got.

I did not comment in regards to the massacre at Sandy Hook.

But her callousness in regards to other lives does nothing to make me believe that she has compassion for any life let alone the children who died at Sandy Hook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #103)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:32 AM

106. You're the one who used her laughing over a the death of a murderous dictator to say

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:09 PM - Edit history (1)

she had no compassion for human life. What am I to assume you mean? You used that situation to suggest she doesn't care for human life which includes all innocents deaths, such as those at Sandy Hook.

Frankly I have no problem with her laughing over Gaddfi's death. I cheered when they got Bin Laden. Does that mean I have no compassion for any human life?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #106)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:40 AM

107. A world leader cackling gleefull over the taking of any human life is sick.

I don't care how you try to shame me.

Either all human life has value or it doesn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #107)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:55 AM

111. Fortunately all things in life are not either/or, black/white

and this thread was about the ad featuring the daughter of the Sandy Hook principle who was mowed down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #111)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:00 AM

113. Either all human life has value or it doesn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #103)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:44 AM

108. You're kidding right? Gadaffi = 26 1st graders?? Gadaffi = Hillary? WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #108)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:49 AM

109. Madeleine Albright on 500,000 dead Iraqi children: ''We think the price is worth it.''

Due to economic sanctions on medicine and food, the ones she and her boss President Bill Clinton found so pressing for our national security.

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.

—60 Minutes (5/12/96)

http://fair.org/extra/we-think-the-price-is-worth-it/


For the record: Even in 1991, Iraq was no threat to the United States or to Saudi Arabia. Poppy Bush and his cronies had to lie to the American people, just like his dim son would a decade later.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014778172#post54

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #108)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:57 AM

112. Not only Gadaffi

that was merely the video I used to show her callousness toward other human lives.

But let me ask you this- were those 26 children's lives more valuable than dead Syrian, Iraqi or Libyan children who have died as a result of Hillary's actions?

As I said either all human life has value or it doesn't.


How many times has she mentioned the poisoned children of Flint Michigan since the primary there. No, she tossed them a couple cases of water and is pretty much done with them since she got the votes she wanted from their parents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #112)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:12 AM

114. Ah - ok - I understand your point better now.

Last edited Tue May 3, 2016, 12:55 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #114)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:13 AM

115. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #112)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:40 AM

116. Bernie Sanders hands are not clean. He has backed the Military Industrial Complex

and the NRA when it suited him.

Bernie Sanders Loves This $1 trillion War Machine
The Daily Beast
2/9/2016

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire — Sen. Bernie Sanders has railed against big defense corporations at rallies, but he has a more complex history with the military-industrial complex. Most notably, he’s supported a $1.2 trillion stealth fighter that’s considered by many to be one of the bigger boondoggles in Pentagon history.

Sanders has made his opposition to Hillary Clinton’s hawkishness a cornerstone of his campaign. But he hasn’t exactly been antiwar all his career. When it has come time to choose between defense jobs and a dovish defense policy, Sanders has consistently chosen to stand with the arms-makers rather than the peaceniks—leading to tension with some of the most adamant adherents of progressive ideology.

In 1985, for example, protesters massed at the General Electric plant in Burlington, Vermont, where Sanders was serving as mayor. They were protesting the fact that the plant was manufacturing Gatling guns to fight socialists in Central America.

Jim Condon, now a Democratic state legislator in Vermont, was news director of a local radio station at the time and describes himself as an “old acquaintance” of the senator.

“There were protesters who were unhappy that General Electric was manufacturing Gatling guns at the plant, and so they would lock themselves to the gates and engage in civil disobedience. And so the mayor, Bernie, finally got cops to go in and arrest the protesters,” Condon told The Daily Beast. “The GE plant was one of the largest providers of jobs in the city. So it was economically important that the plant stay open and people who worked there went to work.”

When it comes time to make speeches, Sanders has slammed defense corporations for political gain.
“We know that there is massive fraud going on in the defense industry. Virtually every major defense contractor has either been convicted of fraud or reached a settlement with the government,” Sanders said in Iowa City last year at a town hall. “We need a strong military, it is a dangerous world. But I think we can make judicious cuts.”

But when those defense corporations come to his own backyard, he quietly welcomes them in.
The Vermont senator persuaded Lockheed Martin to place a research center in Burlington, according to Newsweek, and managed to get 18 Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets stationed at the city’s airport for the Vermont National Guard.

“In very clever ways, the military-industrial complex puts plants all over the country, so that if people try to cut back on our weapons system what they’re saying is you’re going to be losing jobs in that area,” Sanders said at a Q&A in New Hampshire back in 2014. “We’ve got to have the courage to understand that we cannot afford a lot of wasteful, unnecessary weapons systems, and I hope we can do that.”

History has shown that Sanders has not had the courage to do that.
Immediately after he made those comments, an audience member pointed out that the F-35 fighter jet project had a lifetime cost of $1.2 trillion: “When you talk about cutting wasteful military spending, does that include the F-35 program?” the questioner asked.

>>>snip<<<

Sanders countered that the plane was “essentially built.” He acknowledged in his 2014 Q&A that while the F-35 was “incredibly wasteful,” it is now the “plane of record… and it is not going to be discarded.”

>>>snip<<

In New Hampshire, where the Democratic primary is being held Tuesday, Sanders rallied supporters at a downtown Manchester theater. For an hour, he railed against the big banks and the current minimum wage. He never mentioned national security policy—or the big defense corporations he sometimes supports.

More>>>>

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/09/bernie-sanders-loves-this-1-trillion-war-machine.html


NRA tweets support for Bernie Sanders
The Hill
By Tim Devaney - 03/07/16 11:36 AM EST

The National Rifle Association is tweeting its support for comments from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) at Sunday's Democratic presidential debate.

The NRA tweeted Monday that Sanders was “spot-on” during the debate when he defended his vote for legislation that would hold gun manufacturers liable for shootings.

http://thehill.com/regulation/272029-nra-tweets-support-for-bernie-sanders


The Washington Post
By David A. Fahrenthold July 19, 2015

How the National Rifle Association helped get Bernie Sanders elected

BURLINGTON, Vt. — A few days before Election Day in 1990, the National Rifle Association sent a letter to its 12,000 members in Vermont, with an urgent message about the race for the state’s single House seat.

Vote for the socialist, the gun rights group said. It’s important.

“Bernie Sanders is a more honorable choice for Vermont sportsmen than ­Peter Smith,” wrote Wayne LaPierre, who was — and still is — a top official at the national NRA, backing Sanders over the Republican incumbent.

More>>>>
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-nra-helped-put-bernie-sanders-in-congress/2015/07/19/ed1be26c-2bfe-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #116)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:20 PM

140. Have any video of him laughing gleefully at deaths of those whom his decisions caused?

I'm betting you don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #103)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 06:02 PM

165. Since the OP is about Hillary's ad about Sandy Hook

And since I was replying to a comment accusing Hillary of being "very good at "using" people who have suffered great tragedy" asserting that it was her compassion for them that made her take the stand, it stands to reason that yes, your response to my comment with a video of her cheering the death of Gaddafi is absolutely comparing Gaddafi to Sandy Hook.

I cheered when Gaddafi died because of the hand he had in the killings of 270 innocents on Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. That you would compare her compassion for the victims of Sandy Hook to her satisfaction over the killing of a monster like Gaddafi saddens me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #165)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 06:15 PM

166. As I said before- a world leader gleefully cackling about the death

about the death of anyone tyrant or innocent- is inappropriate and is an example of her compassion for her fellow human beings.

I can't tell you how many times some perceived enemy of the left has passed and been brought to the attention of posters here. Where the judgemental prigs have come out and shamed those who have danced on their graves.

HRC could give a rats as about anyone other than herself and what is hers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #166)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 06:20 PM

167. You may have a point on the professionalism of it all ...

... but it's just not enough to muster a care for it. I think there is perhaps a spectrum of acceptability. I'm a big believer spiritually in respect for the dead as a whole, but I've made exceptions for the truly despotic. I didn't cheer when Scalia passed but someone like Gaddafi, I had no problem raising a glass. I think it depends on how horrific the person actually was. I am against the death penalty, not because I couldn't pull the switch myself if I knew someone was guilty, but because I do not believe a bureaucratic system can 100% know whether someone is guilty. To paraphrase Increase Mather in his letter that ended the Witch craze of 1692 Salem, "it were better for ten Witches to be freed than for one innocent person to be hanged." And yes, that's an area I disagree with Hillary on. Horrors that I might not accept every policy a candidate puts forth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #167)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 06:30 PM

168. Gadaffi was horrific

He was a tyrant and was responsible for the deaths of many many of his peoples. And now HRC as a result of her decision to have him killed- is responsible for scores of Gadaffi's people being killed too.

So let me ask you- why aren't the dead innocent Libyans lives as valuable as those who were murdered at Sandy Hook? And if you believe as I do that they are- what does that make HRC?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #168)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:32 PM

169. I think war is war.

War has casualties. I'm sure there were innocents killed in the Bosnian War but I think the atrocious that were going on there made a strong case for our being there. While I am no war hawk, there are times where force is necessary. I am 100% for what went on in Libya. War may be an evil, but it is a sometimes necessary one. Outside of our coffee house socials and dog walks in the park, the world is a very, very dangerous place. I think Hillary understands this in a way that Bernie does not.

And ultimately I have no real issue with her cheering Gaddafi's death. It might have been a little excessive in terms of diplomacy. She's certainly no Obama. None of these current candidates have his finesse. But it's certainly not something that will make me not vote for her. I'm going to vote for whichever Dem wins the nom, not just because of the policies (which I think are close enough though I weigh more with Hillary's policies), but because of the character of the individual. Again, neither of them is an Obama, but I think she'll do pretty well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #169)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:36 PM

170. You then do believe that some lives have more value than others

I don't accept that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #170)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:49 PM

171. I don't agree with the premise of your statement.

It's like asking me how long I've been beating my wife.

How does one value a life anyway? I believe that life is sacred, but I also believe that there are times when when we have no choice but to engage in the evil of war (you remember my saying it was an evil right?). Should it be a last resort? Absolutely. Do I believe in some quantifiable "value" assigned to life where Gaddafi is equal to the Sandy Hook children? Not at all, but if you're going to frame my words in terms of the value of life, then please define your debate terms. What is the value of a life?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #171)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:10 PM

173. It does not matter what the value is. Either all life has equal value or it does not.

My point all along is that here is a woman who shows that she cares nothing for human life if she can sit in front of the world and cackle gleefully at the death (whether deserved or not) of another human being.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #173)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:15 PM

174. If you're defining it as everyone being equal without quantification or qualification,

Well fine, but then actual real-world scenario changes things.

If someone has a gun pointed at your mother and just happens to be standing on a trap door leading to a pit of poisonous snakes and you have your finger on the button, are you going to let your mother die for the value of that killer's life? And, if so, are you not essentially valuing your mother's life as less than the shooter? To place their lives at equal value is to make no choice at all and keep the status quo, which, in effect, would be not pushing the button. But do you think that's the wisest choice? And, more importantly, is it the choice you would make?

These life valuing equations fall apart when confronted with actual life choices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #174)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:24 PM

175. HRC saved no one. In fact, her decisions made things in the Middle East worse and many many more

have died as a result.

Your question to me does not compare to what has occurred in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world as a result of her actions while SOS. But if I did have to make the choice- I would not be proud of what I chose to do- whether it was to let my mother die or take out her oppressor. I would not cackle gleefully as a result of that action.

Again, a world leader cackling gleefully at the death of another human being, deserved or not- is not only inappropriate, it is sick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #28)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 09:24 AM

151. Correction...

... HILLARY IS VERY GOOD AT "USING" PEOPLE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #28)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:27 AM

164. Stop with your nastiness. The daughter of the slain mom wants to be heard. Shame on you

for knocking her down--and make no mistake--YOU Are slamming the slain woman and others who died at Sandy Hook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 06:02 PM

67. Just like Flint's water did. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to artislife (Reply #67)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 06:03 PM

68. Yarp.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:47 PM

76. Double this.

Wind in the willows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:56 AM

99. It's been a major issue in just about every Presidential campaign since I can remember.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:26 AM

105. Wrong. This is a BIG issue for HRC. You certainly won't hear from the NRA loving BS.

If it wasn't for the NRA, Bernie Sanders would never even been elected to his 1st term in congress. He may have a D- rating with the NRA, but that is just a ruse. He's in their pocket lock, stock and barrel. If he ever became President (which is never gonna happen) you would not hear one word about Gun Control ever come out of his mouth.

He is an dispassionate politician concerned only with his own well being.

The NRA made Smith the only incumbent that it actively opposed in 1990. The group eventually spent between $18,000 and $20,000 on advertising and direct mail in Vermont, according to an estimate from the time.

The beneficiary was Sanders, who was Smith’s main opponent in the 1990 House race.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-nra-helped-put-bernie-sanders-in-congress/2015/07/19/ed1be26c-2bfe-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html


<iframe width="792" height="445" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Hillary will fight to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, other violent criminals, and the severely mentally ill:

-Support legislation to stop domestic abusers from buying and possessing guns. Although federal law generally prohibits domestic abusers from purchasing or possessing guns, this protection does not apply to people in dating relationships or convicted stalkers. Hillary will fight for legislation to prohibit all of these domestic abusers and stalkers from buying guns.

-Make straw purchasing a federal crime. When an individual with a clean record buys a gun with the intention of giving it to a violent felon—only so that felon can avoid a background check—it should be a crime. Hillary will fight to make so-called “straw purchasing” a federal crime.

-Close loopholes that let persons suffering from severe mental illness purchase and possess guns. Hillary will fight to improve existing law prohibiting persons suffering from severe mental illness from purchasing or possessing a gun. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives should finalize its rulemaking to close loopholes in our laws and clarify that people involuntarily committed to outpatient treatment, such as the Virginia Tech shooter, are prohibited from buying guns.

-Keep military-style weapons off our streets. Military-style assault weapons do not belong on our streets. They are a danger to law enforcement and to our communities. Hillary will work to keep assault weapons off our streets and supports reinstating the assault weapons ban.

Much More :
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/gun-violence-prevention/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #105)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:51 AM

110. A lot of that seems reasonable, even "sensible".

background checks - check
AWB - maybe
Straw Purchases double illegal - check
Mental illness barred - ok
Domestic abusers barred - check
Revoke the licenses of bad-actor dealers - fine, ATF can do their job

The gun industry must be held accountable for violence perpetrated with their guns - Not buying it, just makes little sense DEPENDING on particulars

Consider Australian mandatory buy-back - no way

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #110)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:41 AM

117. Agree, Thank you. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #105)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 08:29 PM

137. Thank you, Fla Dem!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #105)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:28 AM

144. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #2)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 09:35 AM

152. I think you crystal ball is broke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:20 AM

4. This is a long time Progressive cause

There is a real coalition building in this country that wants to stop the loss of our children and family members to epidemic gun violence.

Everyone, keep pushing for change!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #4)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:59 AM

119. Yes, Bill Clinton signed the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban



The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) — officially, the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act — is a subsection of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a United States federal law that included a prohibition on the manufacture for civilian use of certain semi-automatic firearms it defined as assault weapons, as well as certain ammunition magazines it defined as "large capacity."

The ten-year ban was passed by the U.S. Congress on September 13, 1994, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton the same day. The ban only applied to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment, and it expired on September 13, 2004, in accordance with its sunset provision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban


Unfortunately, when it came up for renewal in 2004 Republicans blocked it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #119)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:05 PM

128. Gratitude to Bill Clinton

The Right Wing will turn back the clock on our civil rights every chance they get. Mind boggling. Impossible to imagine any other objective but greed and callous disregard for other's lives.


Thank you for your post and the link.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #119)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 08:08 AM

148. The AWB was a stupid law that did nothing except make ARs even more popular


How useful was it in preventing the Sand Hook shooting? CT had a state version of Clintons AWB and the rifle used in that shooting was compliant.

Did any breathe a sigh of relief after the Sandy Hook shooting because the rifle didn't have a bayonet lug? I think not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:50 AM

5. No she is not

 

She is just pandering for now and will evolve back to Annie Oakley as soon as she can for the general

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:53 AM

7. Remember 2008. She was definitely Annie Oakley during that election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:02 PM

10. Yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:31 PM

46. I am cursed with a memory:


[font size=4]Annie Oakley Rides Again!!![/font]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:29 PM

30. Yes The Cameleon!

Whatever a given audience wants to hear... Then she'll double down and lie about it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #30)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:51 PM

77. My memory may be slipping but I do not remember

a democratic candidate who engaged in such blatant pandering in my lifetime..Except maybe in 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:42 PM

51. Wow.

It amazes me how pro-gun the far left has become since Bernie became a (sort of) credible candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #51)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:54 PM

56. Not seeing the far left =pro gun connection. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #51)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 06:03 PM

69. See your post has increased it even further.

 

Such a prime example why leaving the Democratic Party for good is looking better and better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 06:01 PM

66. Yeah, Miss Annie Oakley Clinton..

 

and the lies and mis-directions just keep coming. Soon I will hear of her virgin birth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:44 PM

121. Amen to that!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:03 PM

11. Very powerful ad. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:12 PM

12. Yes, it is

It is heartbreaking. It is impossible to listen to people talk of the senseless murders of their children and family members and not be galvanized to do something about it. Whether it is the families in Sandy Hook or Mothers of the Movement, all are unified in bringing the crisis of gun violence to light. We must create legislation that regulates weapons. The Right Wing will fight it so it will take Progressives to do something about it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:13 PM

13. The ad captures Hillary's extraordinary ability to reach people on

a personal level in one-on-one situations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #13)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:24 PM

16. Yes, it does. Like Obama on this issue

Here he is breaking into tears for the families of gun violence. Impossible not to be moved by this issue.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #16)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:16 PM

59. Of all his things I felt he may have done poorly

 

Obama did some of the best speeches to try to force people to fix this problem. I felt of all of the politicians his were the most heart felt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to northernsouthern (Reply #59)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 06:04 PM

70. Yes, he is an outstanding an example to all of us

We have been so fortunate to have him as our President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #13)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:08 PM

38. +1

yes...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:10 PM

129. LOL, are you serious? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:16 PM

14. If only we could believe HRC would do anything at all about this after the GE

This is the problem. THe gun lobby is powerful and how much political "capital" would have to be used to bring it to heel? How many people actually think HRC will actually fight against them in any effective way?

Back last year the HRC campaign identified Sanders votes on the gun issue as a possible weakness in his armor. They have hammered it home at every point to great effect. Does this mean President Clinton (v.2) will lead a crusade to solve this problem?

Does anyone really think there aren't much more important issues (TO HER) than this one?

Right now the only people paying attention to this campaign are the small minority of voters who are either Clinton or Sanders supporters (I'm not concerned with the Trump/Cruz faction right now) and Sanders has been outgunned by the Clinton camp. What happens in the General Election.

If Clinton loses we Progressives will get blamed, of course, but that won't change a thing. It is hard to imagine the US public being dumb enough to put either Tweedle-de-dumb and Tweedle-de-dumber in the Oval Office but it could happen.

Hillary Clinton may be a wonderful person BUT she is running a campaign which incorporates the worst aspects of Establishment politics and, thanks to the Internet, that is all out in the open. There are very many people who can see what is behind the curtain.

Black Lives Matter activists and Occupy activists seem to have few illusions about where their issues are likely to end up when the dust settles. It seems a pity that there are so few of them.

Another pity is that when the inevitable "politically expedient" betrayal takes place, like choosing not to prosecute Wall Street outsiders, or keeping Single Payer off the table despite a campaign of promises to fight for such things, lots of idealistic and committed volunteers will be disgusted and dismayed by what us old timers can see coming.

The bright spot? Now there is a place for them to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikehiggins (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:08 PM

58. The Hillary Crowd has twisted Bernie's stand on guns.

He opposed giving victims of gun violence the right to sue manufacturers...a stand with which I agree.
All manufacturers are protected in the same way. To do otherwise would lead to chaos.
The dam would be broken.

The manufacturers of Louiville Sluggers (baseball bats) would be open to lawsuits when a bat is used by a "bill collector" to break someone's legs...
For that matter, so would the manufacturers of 2 X 4s.

The manufacturers of Kitchen Knives would be open to lawsuits. The Kitchen Knife is frequently used in domestic violence.

and, yet, Clinton supporters SwiftBoat Sanders on this issue screaming "He protects the gun manufacturers!!!"
Sanders is advocating common sense protection ALL legitimate manufacturers in the USA (except manufacturers of defective products and cigarettes)...even those who make pillows (can be used to smother someone), and those who make rope.

Sanders, like myself and Obama believe in sane, common sense regulation of GUN owners and sellers.
*Ban Assault Weapons and high capacity clips*

*Thorough Background Checks

*close Gun Show Loopholes

*Institute a "Buy Back" programs like the one in Australia that has been extremely successful.

*Recognize that there is a vast difference between rural gun owners and suburban and urban gun owners.


*A caveat on "Assault Weapons". It has recently come to my awareness that some "assault type rifles" like the AR-15 and other semi-auto variations of the military M-16 ARE used by subsistence hunters who live in hostile environments, like Alaska. Because of their design and plastic body parts, they are more reliable in extreme cold and mud. Much more so than standard hunting rifles.



Hillary would be a fool to try and run on Gun Control in the GE.
Not because it is wrong,
but because that issue is a LOSER.
Bernie's pragmatic approach to the problem would do much better nationally on this issue in the GE.

Expect to hear no more about Gun Control from Hillary after the convention...
and no more phony pleas using the children of Sandy Hook as stage props.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #58)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:55 PM

78. +3,576,198

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:17 PM

15. Obama: "She's running around like she's Annie Oakley"


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to berni_mccoy (Reply #15)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:29 PM

17. Hillary is on the right side of this issue

and the families affected by gun violence and the progressives who care about it are pushing forward with everything they have to change the legislation. That is why they are backing Hillary in droves. She is loud and clear about her position on this issue. Looking to the past will not save lives. We have to come together to push for change now.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #17)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:46 PM

18. "She is loud and clear about her position on this issue." ... for now...

IF she's elected, nary a word will be spoken about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to berni_mccoy (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:53 PM

172. she was loud and clear in rural PA this weekend "I'm FOR the 2nd amendment"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #17)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:25 PM

20. Bernie is even more so.

 

The only significant difference between their gun control policies is his (absolutely correct) opposition to enabling ludicrous nuisance lawsuits against manufacturers of a legal product. The notion that there's any further difference between them is propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #17)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:11 PM

130. The gun companies did nothing wrong. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:00 PM

19. Politicizing dead elementary school children and faculty

and excusing herself for millions of dead Iraqis and thousands of dead and injured American veterans. What could be more despicable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chezboo (Reply #19)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:26 PM

21. It's a political issue and this woman has EVERY RIGHT to speak out. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BreakfastClub (Reply #21)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:07 PM

37. Absolutely

It should be politicized. I'm tired of the NRA's efforts to silence these discussions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BreakfastClub (Reply #21)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:52 AM

118. She has a very personal right to speak out. The NRA wants to silence their voices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chezboo (Reply #19)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:48 PM

22. Erica is speaking out on behalf of her Mom and the murdered children

She is a hero and an example to all of us. She is channeling her pain in a way to protect others from ever having to experience it. She deserves nothing but respect. Cynicism on this issue only makes those using it look like they are focused on petty politics and on the wrong side of Right Wing legislation that is killing people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chezboo (Reply #19)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:17 PM

41. This is political

From President Obama's address on the Roseburg shooting:

And, of course, what’s also routine is that somebody, somewhere will comment and say, Obama politicized this issue. Well, this is something we should politicize. It is relevant to our common life together, to the body politic.

...

This is a political choice that we make to allow this to happen every few months in America. We collectively are answerable to those families who lose their loved ones because of our inaction. When Americans are killed in mine disasters, we work to make mines safer. When Americans are killed in floods and hurricanes, we make communities safer. When roads are unsafe, we fix them to reduce auto fatalities. We have seatbelt laws because we know it saves lives. So the notion that gun violence is somehow different, that our freedom and our Constitution prohibits any modest regulation of how we use a deadly weapon, when there are law-abiding gun owners all across the country who could hunt and protect their families and do everything they do under such regulations doesn’t make sense.


https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/10/01/watch-president-obamas-statement-shooting-oregon

This already IS a political issue. We could make real change if we had politicians brave enough to fight for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Il_Coniglietto (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:40 PM

48. thank you, Il_Coniglietto

Obama is one of the people leading the way and progressives everywhere should take up the cause so we can create change to save hundreds and thousands of lives.

thank you for the quote!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #48)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:03 PM

57. I may disagree with him on some issues

But I'm confident we'll look back at Barack Obama as one of the finest presidents we've ever had. His advocacy on gun violence in particular has been so important. His clear frustration with not only congressional Republicans, but some Democrats has mirrored the way most Americans feel. Here he is, the most powerful person on Earth, stymied by a cowardly, do-nothing legislature. But he doesn't give up, and I'm optimistic our next president will fight the gun lobby just as forcefully.

YW! I remember cheering when I watched him say it. The link I posted has video of the entire response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Il_Coniglietto (Reply #57)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:55 PM

64. Beautifully said!

he has been exemplary in the face of nearly insurmountable odds. Despite the roadblocks, he has set a progressive standard on many issues, particularly those of civil rights. Like you, there are policies with which I disagree but the country and the world are so much better for having him as our President. I am going to miss him terribly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #64)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:57 AM

147. I like Obama very much too but he didn't take action on gun control until his second term


He waited until any gun control proposals wouldn't affect his reelection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chezboo (Reply #19)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 08:57 AM

89. You sound like republicans.

 

Wouldnt want to politicize a political issue!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chezboo (Reply #19)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 05:08 PM

127. To politicize Hillary's vote on IWR and blame Hillary for Bush's decision would be no different

Than blaming Sanders for all of the gun violence deaths. Hillary has said more than once she was sorry for her vote on IWR and would not vote the same way again. I am still waiting on Sanders to apologize about his votes on the Brady Bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:50 PM

23. HRC isn't proposing anything that will prevent the next Sandy Hook massacre.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #23)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 02:56 PM

24. The people of Sandy Hook and Mothers of the Movement disagree

All progressives should do whatever they can to put pressure on legislators to change the laws.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #24)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:08 PM

25. I put pressure on my legislators to change laws for the better.


But I do not support laws the restrict gun ownership that have little chance of reducing actual gun violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #25)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:13 PM

26. There is a movement in this country to radically change access to guns

Like civil rights issues, like LGBT issues, it will be an uphill climb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #26)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:25 PM

29. If HRC follows Obama's example, she won't push for any changes until after her second term election


If she is the nominee and if she wins the GE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:22 AM

143. Reasonable gun control

must be in place. PERIOD. Just this weekend, TWO massacres. Last night, shootings at a PROM FFS.

Assault weapons have one purpose, and one purpose only. That is to kill PEOPLE. This is what they're designed for. Sure, they're hunting weapons. If your game is people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemonGoddess (Reply #143)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:52 AM

145. Which laws would have prevented those two shootings?


You brought them up so surely you know some legislation that would have prevented there occurrence.

Did you know that CT had a Assault Weapon Ban in place and that the rifle used in the Sandy Hook shooting was compliant?

Did it work for you? Were those deaths any less horrible with that ban in place? I think not. Such a ban only made antigun people feel like they did something.

I have an AR and it is a fine self-defense rifle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #24)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:01 AM

81. What's her plan? Try to claim that it was all Bernie's fault?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jfern (Reply #81)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 08:48 AM

87. It is not all Bernie's fault

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2016, 07:15 PM - Edit history (2)

In fact, family members of the victims have been contacting his campaign, imploring him to be a powerful voice advocating for change in the antiquated gun laws that make our country a deadly place for millions of Americans every day. This is a civil rights issue. The number of Americans killed by gun violence is greater than those who are lost in war and most of them are in demographics that are historically most oppressed or vulnerable.

Nothing is stopping Bernie from being a champion of this progressive cause in the same way he has embraced others. In fact, were he to do so, especially because he has the support of so many millennials, he could singlehandedly be the catalyst for sweeping change. Every family member, friend and advocate of those murdered or destroyed for life is hoping he will do so.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #87)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:12 AM

101. ^^^^^--THIS--^^^^^

 

In fact, family members of the victims families have been contacting his campaign, imploring him to be a powerful voice advocating for change in the antiquated gun laws that make our country a deadly place for millions of Americans every day. This is a civil rights issue. The number of Americans killed by gun violence is greater than those who are lost in war and most of them are in demographics that are historically most oppressed or vulnerable.

Nothing is stopping Bernie from being a champion of this progressive cause in the same way he has embraced others. In fact, were he to do so, especially because he has the support of so many millennials, he could singlehandedly be the catalyst for sweeping change. Every family member, friend and advocate of those murdered or destroyed for life is hoping he will do so.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #87)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 03:26 PM

155. Nonsense.

There is nothing Bernie could have done that would have made any difference. Bernie is for sensible gun control, as am I. Those light thinkers who insist that manufacturers should be held liable for how assholes use their products.

Did you know that a bar of soap can be used to choke a person to death, and has actually happened? Should manufactures of soap be sued for wrongful death.


The only difference is between Hillary and Bernie that Bernie believes (as I do) that manufactures should not be sued unless their product is defective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #155)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 06:58 AM

162. Are you advocating that soap manyfacturers be given...

 

...special legal protections under the PLCAA?

Did you know that a bar of soap can be used to choke a person to death, and has actually happened? Should manufactures of soap be sued for wrongful death.


Right now, soap manufacturers have to take their chances with judges and juries.

The soap industry isn't covered by the PLCAA.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #24)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:12 PM

131. What law would of stopped Sandy Hill? I bet you have NO ANSWER. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:19 PM

27. So Clinton no longer touts her experience with guns?

 

“I disagree with Sen. Obama’s assertion that people in our country cling to guns and have certain attitudes about trade and immigration simply out of frustration,” she began, referring to the Obama comments on small-town Americans that set off a political tumult on Friday.

She then introduced a fond memory from her youth.

“You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl,” she said.

“You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. It’s part of culture. It’s part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter.”


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/12/clinton-touts-her-experience-with-guns/

Which Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to That Guy 888 (Reply #27)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:34 PM

31. Gun control is an important part of her platform

As it is part of Obama's. The better part of the last decade have taught most compassionate people that gun violence is an out of control epidemic. It is a place where the Right Wing is digging in and it is something progressives are moving forward on. Back in 2012, the gun enthusiasts were already targeting Obama and Hillary for their work to change the gun control landscape.

The most important action we can take right now is to be a unified force to do everything we can to push legislation to make our homes and streets safer. Gun violence takes the lives of 33,000 a year. The RW will do everything they can to stop us.


Republican U.S. Senate hopeful Craig James of Texas drew a standing ovation this week after warning that President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seek an international agreement banning the use of guns on U.S. soil.

James, sitting on stage at a Grassroots America candidate forum in Tyler on May 16, 2012, said: "I’m going to stand up because I want to make sure you don’t forget what I’m going to say right now." An Austin American-Statesman reporter recorded his remarks.

"If anybody in this room has not been following this, the United States, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are negotiating with the United Nations about doing a treaty that will ban the use of firearms," James said. "I want you to know that the Second Amendment is about to be busted and if we don’t stand up and stop this and scream and make sure that Washington, D.C. hears us, then we’re in trouble with the Second Amendment.

"Where is the next part that they take away? This is insane," James said. He subsequently urged everyone to make sure friends and neighbors understand the U.S. is trying to ban and get rid of the Second Amendment, which says: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

"Don’t let them fool you any other way. We don’t want to wake up one morning and realize that we have to send our firearms (away) – and I’ve got a bunch of ‘em," James said. The ovation followed.



http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2012/may/17/craig-james/craig-james-says-barack-obama-and-hillary-clinton-/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:51 PM

32. Unified force... I'm a bit particular about who I unite with.

 

Someone who constantly changes her core values doesn't have my trust or vote. Not to mention the pandering (which isn't necessary and can be a little insulting). She doesn't have to be my abuela but she could listen to people who don't pay her $250,000 a pop. Then there's her judgment, she listens, she studies (so the press tells us) then she makes Gawd-awful decisions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to That Guy 888 (Reply #32)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:03 PM

35. I don't have the same "core values" that I did 10 years ago, or 20. Does that make me evil?

 

Or did I just gain 10 or 20 years of perspective and it influenced how I think about those values in the here-and-now? Can you acknowledge that life experience will change opinions over time, and that people are allowed to grow and evolve?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IamMab (Reply #35)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:46 PM

54. Were they really core values, or just political expediency?

 

That is a big question non-Clinton supporting Democratic voters have about Clinton.

Core values are pretty big. They are literally the center of your world view of what's important. Is it wrong to invade a nation just because someone wants to be a "war-time President". Opposing that war would be politically naive and the republicans might call you a hippie or a.. a... <gasp> peacenik could you really take that kind of risk?

Help unions retain jobs or help companies hire H-1b visa holders for half pay (hey maybe you could run for Senator in Punjab) ?

The most basic core value, do you help others, or help yourself at the expense of others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:18 PM

42. So a persons chioce of suicide

 

Is gun violence? I guess suicide by hanging is rope violence, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:09 PM

139. Just 8 years ago Hillary was a champion of thd 2nd ammendment

 

Would you truly have us believe that now she's our savior from gun violence? Hillary, have you no shame? Using dead children and grieving relatives as electioneering tools? Really?

In a just world (or one where people had better memory), Hillary would not be able to get away with this scummy, bottom feeding behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:55 PM

33. well

I live in a very Red part of my very Red state of Indiana. I know many gun enthusiasts. MOST of them are in favor of sensible and reasonable regulation for guns.

So many of us are sickened by all the mass shootings we see, regardless of which side of the political fence we sit on, D or R.

This issue isn't going away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemonGoddess (Reply #33)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:35 AM

96. No, it isn't

Now is the time to step up and challenge the greed of the gun lobby who profit from the death of our most oppressed and vulnerable. There is a movement in this country to stop them and we can all be part of it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:03 PM

34. I'm challenging ANY Hillary supporter

 

To tell me two things (or even one of the two things) - (1) what EXACTLY is Hillary proposing that would have prevented a tragedy like Sandy Hook and (2) what EXACTLY is Hillary proposing that would result in less gun violence? I'm more interested in the first since Hillary keeps using Sandy Hook for political benefit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #34)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:12 PM

40. Just two examples of many

On gun control - another hot-button issue that has split the presidential field - Clinton again stressed "what we can do together."

"I do support comprehensive background checks, and to close the gun show loophole, and the online loophole, and what's called the Charleston loophole, and to prevent people on the no-fly list from getting guns," said Clinton. "What I am proposing is supported by a great majority of the American people and a significant majority of gun owners."


http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sticking-resolution-clinton-has-nothing-say-trump-n490836



Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sparked a larger debate over the use of executive action with the proposal for confronting gun violence that she released Monday. Clinton said she would act on her own whenever possible if Congress does not pass gun control legislation.

Clinton's proposal includes pushing for comprehensive federal background checks, closing loopholes in the system, repealing legislation that gives the firearm industry immunity from lawsuits, and improving laws intended to prevent the mentally ill from purchasing or possessing guns.

She specifically mentioned using executive action to tighten loopholes surrounding gun show and online weapon sales if necessary.

"I want to push hard to get more sensible restraints," Clinton told NBC. "I want to work with Congress, but I will look at ways as president."


http://www.infowars.com/hillary-on-using-executive-orders-to-take-guns-amen/


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #40)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:23 PM

43. Would that have prevented Sandy Hook

 

or any other mass shootings?

Please answer the question posed.

The Sandy Hook weapons were stolen and were nit classified as assault weapons per Connecticut law that was a continuation of the expired federal law.

To answer the question posed, no her positions would not affect any of the mass shootings or suicides that I know of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #43)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:13 PM

72. That question has no answer.

We don't know. YOU don't know. Perhaps if the shooter had gotten treatment for his mental illness. Perhaps fewer children would have died if the shooter had had fewer guns or less ammunition or if his gun had jammed or if .... or if ..... or... or.
So that question can only be answered by vigorous pursuit of more and better gun safety legislation. And by the passionate support of such legislation by courageous people like Erica Smegielski and Hillary Clinton who are not afraid of gun worshippers and the NRA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to katmille (Reply #72)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:42 PM

74. Yes it does

 

You just do not like it. The weapons were purchased years before. A federal background check was passed. The murderer killed and stole the weapons. The rifle used was not classified as an assault weapon and any semi-automatic rifle would have the same rate of fire. Magazine limits are always grandfathered so the magazines would have been available. Mental health, we are alwsys told that is just an NRA talking point. None if the proposals mentioned would have much of any effect, especially with suicides which are 2/3 of gun deaths.

I am for sensible legislation that actually might do something, not feel good stuff like cosmetic bans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #74)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:59 PM

79. Nope, still doesn't.

Keep loving your guns if you want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to katmille (Reply #79)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 01:06 AM

83. Don't love them and never have

 

They are objects that perform a function.

Typical of a gun control person to post insults directed at firearms owners. Shows the level pepole will sink to instead of using the knowledge we have to actually come up with measures that might work. Good night, it is past my bedtime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #40)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:28 PM

45. None of the talking points you just quoted

 

Would have prevented Lanza's mother from purchasing the weapon that Adam Lanza used at Sandy Hook, or prevented Lanza from killing his mother and stealing that weapon. So I ask again, what exactly is Hillary proposing that would have prevented Sandy Hook (hint, the answer is "nothing"?

The "no fly list" issue is comical - has anyone on the no-fly list ever committed a gun-related crime in the US?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #45)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:44 PM

75. So was Adam on the no fly list

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #40)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:13 PM

132. Neither of those would of stopped it at all!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:04 PM

36. thank you

Erica's a brave woman!

If any issue should be politicized, it's this one. It needs to be discussed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:11 PM

39. Time for Hillary, Time for Hillary to push for Smart Guns

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleabiscuit (Reply #39)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:24 PM

44. Fine if they work, until then

 

I will take my dumb guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:33 PM

47. Michelle Hockley, Mother from Sandy Hook

She is fighting for change to prevent more tragedy.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:41 PM

49. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:42 PM

50. K&R. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:45 PM

53. Throwing Obama under the bus

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #53)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:26 PM

61. I'm not sure. Having had a family member killed in gun violence I can totally empathize

with her. Until it happens to your family, you don't know what you would feel and say. You want to say something that means a lot but often your words and how they are heard are different. Please try to be understanding here...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #61)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:59 PM

65. My heart goes out to you, CTyankee

There are no words for your loss except I am deeply sorry for you and your loved one's pain. No one should have to go through that.




Sending you so much heartfelt care.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #61)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:20 AM

85. Would that differ from family members killed by kitchen knives or basebll bats?

Should we make these manufacturers liable for damages caused by these products.
How about pillows used to smother people?
Should they be liable for the deaths caused by their products too?
Where will you draw the line?

Bernie's approach is the only sane approach.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #85)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:10 AM

90. the fact is that the gun was too easily available. It was in the house, always loaded,

for "protection" by a drunken, angry man. My niece was 24 years old, recently married. He wounded her grandmother and then turned the gun on himself. It was a bloody godawful scene when the police arrived. My brother collapsed at her coffin at the funeral. Her sister ended up going into the ministry because of the tragedy.

My answerto your question is "I don't know." And frankly, I don't care to even think about it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #90)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:28 AM

93. Oh, God, CTyankee

no words...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #93)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:12 AM

102. thanks honey. I spoke with the sister, my older niece because I found out that my

brother had some unclaimed property. I gave her the info and told her that, while she can do what she wants of course, I like to think it could be used for her kids college fund and that my brother would do something for them all these years later. He had a terrible life and finding this out was like a redemption. It was good to hear that she was well and her mother was well also. My heart breaks for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #90)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 03:33 PM

156. Sorry about your tragic loss.

Hope you find some peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #85)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:22 AM

104. "Guns ARE more dangerous than pillows"

 

How about pillows used to smother people?


Perhaps that is why we make lawsuits against pillow manufacturers so much easier to do than lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

Should they be liable for the deaths caused by their products too?


Lawsuits against pillow manufacturers are allowed.

Where will you draw the line?


The PLCAA draws the line at GUNS.

There are no restrictions against suing pillow manufacturers. Only judges and juries stand in the way.




Guns ARE more dangerous than pillows

By rasbobbo

Thursday Jan 20, 2011 · 3:24 PM CST

It seems to me any rational discussion of gun laws has to begin with this as a bottom line stipulation. You may not see this as a huge leap, but I can assure you, to many 2nd amendment absolutists, it is the Grand Canyon.

See, the argument goes; you can kill somebody with a car, too. Or a baseball bat, or a plastic bag, or a pillow. They are all inanimate objects & equally dangerous, or equally non dangerous. I've had some folks break it down for me molecularly; it's just a bunch of molecules arranged in a certain way, none of those molecules is inherently dangerous, so how could one arrangement be more dangerous than another? Facile nonsense, to me, but it is an argument I hear all the time.

Yes indeed, cars do kill people - a lot of people. Cars are dangerous machines. We recognize that & have certain registration & licensing procedures because we recognize that. Further, to operate your motor vehicle in public we require insurance & further licensing licensing that requires certain knowledge & physical skills. You may have to prove you can parallel park your vehicle. I do not know what the ballistic equivalent of parallel parking would be, but I am reasonably sure that the overwhelming majority of handgun owners/carriers have never passed such a test.

The wise wise heads on the Supreme Court have determined that by birth, every American is given the right to own a loaded handgun. I don't think they made the leap to "handguns are not dangerous."

The even wiser heads in the Arizona State legislature have determined that it is appropriate for the citizens in this state to carry concealed firearms pretty much anywhere - bars, cars, churches, Jack-in-the-Box, you name it. Some of the really superior thinkers in the State legislature have said the more people packing heat the safer everybody is. That college classes full of armed students would be safer environments for learning. (Question: Who gets to sit in the back?)

I know I live in a country with about as many guns as people. I know those guns are not going to go away. I know many Americans just love their guns & many see any sort of restriction as the first step toward taking their love away. In fact, I found a friend of mine's reason for owning the dozen or so that he has, "I just like 'em," as compelling as any 2nd amendment, fight tyranny, self defense argument. I don't want to take everyone's guns away Not even if it was possible - which it is not.

Can we not, as a starting point at least in any discussion of firearms & firearms safety, at least acknowledge that a loaded handgun is more dangerous than a pillow? I've posited this here on dkos a couple of times & gotten a lot of vehement denials. Not surprising to me really. What is surprising is that not one of the "safe, sane, there should be training," folks ever finds their way into a thread to say, "c'mon, of course it's more dangerous. That's why I lock mine up." "That's why I don't give my six year old a loaded gun when he goes to sleep." "That's why I don't just leave it loaded on the coffee table." Nope, when it comes to the most basic of admissions, that a loaded handgun is more dangerous than a pillow, the safe, sane folk are really quiet.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/20/937642/-

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #104)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 02:10 PM

123. Canyou please post a link to support your claims,

especially the one about lawsuits against Pillow Manufacturers for wrongful deaths?

Or Baseball bats?

or kitchen knives?

I have personally never heard of one, and Goggle turned up nothing,
so help me out here with a few links to these lawsuits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #123)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 04:17 PM

124. How about you post a link proving there's a law that bars suing pillow manufacturers?

Just because you have personally never heard of it doesn't mean there are laws that don't allow them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kcr (Reply #124)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 04:32 PM

125. I can't prove a negative.

With the exception of Cigarette manufacturers, or manufacturers of a defective product, I can't find a single case where a manufacturer has been sued.
You made the claim that pillow manufacturers HAVE been sued for wrongful death without links or support.

Did you just make that up?
...because it sure looks like it.

I'll make it easier.
Find a case where a manufacturer of Kitchen Knives has been sued. Kitchen Knives have been used in many domestic murders.
If you can't produce a link, or even a rumor, then I (and everyone else reading this thread) will know you are just blowing smoke out of your ***.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #125)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 09:18 AM

150. Link to the claim in question?

 

You made the claim that pillow manufacturers HAVE been sued for wrongful death without links or support.

Did you just make that up?
...because it sure looks like it.


Or did you just make that up?

Because it sure looks like it.



I can't prove a negative.


I prove so-called "negatives" every day, but be that as it may, if pillow manufacturers are actually mentioned in the PLCAA, then it shouldn't be all that hard for you to find and quote the relevant passage from the law, or at least find some random claim to that effect on the internet by somebody other than yourself.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #125)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 04:23 PM

160. I'm not asking you to prove a negative

I'm asking you to back up your claim, which wasn't negative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #123)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 09:09 AM

149. Can you please quote the claim of mine that you want me to support?

 

Canyou please post a link to support your claims,

especially the one about lawsuits against Pillow Manufacturers for wrongful deaths?


I claim that the PLCAA does not protect pillow manufacturers from lawsuits.

Like cigarette manufacturers and lawn dart manufacturers, anybody wanting to sue pillow manufacturers have only judges and juries standing in their way, not the special legal giveaways afforded to gun manufacturers in the PLCAA.

If you claim that pillow manufacturers are given the same special legal protections in the PLCAA as gun manufacturers, then perhaps you could quote the relevant passage from the law?







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stone space (Reply #149)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 04:05 PM

158. Here it is (quote):

In post #104, that:

[font color=red]"we make lawsuits against pillow manufacturers so much easier to do than lawsuits against gun manufacturers. "
[/font]

All I'm asking for is a link to support your preposterous claim, or just a verifiable example of a pillow manufacturer being sued for the improper use of their product....just ONE example will do.

Help me out.
Educate me.
Post a link.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #158)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 06:55 AM

161. The quote is valid. Pillow manufacturers are not covered under the PLCAA.

 

"we make lawsuits against pillow manufacturers so much easier to do than lawsuits against gun manufacturers. "


What part of the quote are you disputing? Are you claiming that pillow manufacturers receive special legal giveaways under the PLCAA?

Pillow manufactures still have to deal with judges and juries, just like cigarette manufacturers and lawn dart manufacturers and auto manufacturers and hammer manufacturers.

And just like gun manufacturers, were it not for special corporate legal protections like the PLCAA.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:53 PM

55. Erica was really great in the gun violence forum yesterday. She is a very good

advocate for common sense regulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lucinda (Reply #55)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:39 PM

63. Agreed

 

What commonsense regulations does Hillary support that Bernie does not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:22 PM

60. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 05:26 PM

62. This is beautiful

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mcar (Reply #62)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:26 AM

92. Yes, it is. Their courage and advocacy are examples to us all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 06:39 PM

71. K&R

I think Erica trumps all the naysayers here. She is beautiful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NastyRiffraff (Reply #71)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:40 AM

98. Erica is beautiful, just like her mother who died trying to save the children

They are incredibly brave.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:16 PM

73. Thanks, Haveadream.

This is an amazing post. So impressed with the courage of Erica and Hillary Clinton!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to katmille (Reply #73)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:30 AM

94. thank you, katmille

Together we really can make a difference. We have to try and keep trying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:00 AM

80. Does she know that Annie Oakley approved $4 million in gun sales from that manufacturer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 05:48 AM

84. Mahalo for Erica's heartbreaking and heartfelt story, Haveadream~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #84)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:30 AM

95. Thank you, Cha

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #95)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:38 AM

97. Sorry,

about the messing up of your thread, here in gdp.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 08:40 AM

86. In 2008 she bragged about shooting ducks.

 

My local ducks are my friends. She shoots them for sport with her Daddy because it is big tradition that Obama does not understand, that was her 2008 position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #86)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:23 AM

163. Erica was talking about her mother, not some ducks.

 

My local ducks are my friends.


Her mother is dead. And your exaggerated concern about your ducks in the context of her mother's murder is offensive and dismissive of gun victims and their families.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 08:55 AM

88. Before I trash this thread

I want to just remind people that Hillary will say anything and do nothing. NEVER, ever HER.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:24 AM

91. Cleo Pendleton implores people to become advocates for gun control

?w=560


Cleo Pendleton grasped a microphone and described the final moments of her daughter’s life to a group of hundreds at the Canaan Baptist Church near New Castle Friday.


“She says, ‘I think I’ve been shot,’ and then she tries to run, and then she buckles to her knees,” said Pendleton, a member of Mothers of the Movement, a group of women who have had children killed in violent acts.


The group is traveling the country to advocate for stricter gun laws.
The event Friday was organized by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in advance of Delaware's primary Tuesday.


On Friday, Pendleton implored the crowd to become politically active, describing how her daughter, Hadiya, had been gunned down in Chicago just a week after performing a dance at President Barack Obama’s second inauguration in 2013.


President Obama mentioned Pendleton's death in his 2013 State of the Union Address in Congress, where Pendleton's parents, Cleopatra Cowley-Pendleton and Nathaniel A. Pendleton Sr., attended as guests.The crime scene is "just a mile away from [President Obama's] Chicago house.

http://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2016/04/22/clinton-campaign-sponsors-gun-violence-talk/83413970/




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:40 PM

120. Thank you for posting this. Oh, and that whole K&R thing

Sorry you've had crap thrown at you by The Sandman supporters and some gun nuts.

It's a powerful ad and speaks to the kind of person Hillary is and her commitment to gun control. Gabby and Mark strongly support Hillary on the issue of gun control. It all works for me.

Again - thanks for posting this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to postatomic (Reply #120)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 04:49 PM

126. Explain to me how Hills' proposals

 

Would have prevented Sandy Hook?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #126)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:45 PM

142. The School was in lock down and secure

The shooter used an assault weapon to literally shoot an entrance into the building. If he hadn't had the AR-15.....

Hillary will continue the ban of assault weapons. We don't need military grade weapons in the hands of untrained and dubious individuals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to postatomic (Reply #142)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 11:22 AM

154. Facts matter

 

And the fact is the weapon Lanza used was not a "military grade weapon." It isn't used by a single military in the world and it isn't an automatic weapon but only fires one bullet every time you pull the trigger, just like any of the thousand other brands of semi-automatic rifles and handguns on the market. And Connecticut had an assault weapons ban in place at the time of the shooting -- the firearm Lanza used complied was legal to possess under that ban. So explain to me why the firearm Lanza used should be banned?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to postatomic (Reply #120)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 08:43 PM

138. Thank you, postatomic

Thank you for your post and the mention of Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly. They are currently on the campaign trail to put the issue of much needed gun legislation on the table.



Here is more about the incredible work they are doing with their organization, Americans for Responsible Solutions:








On January 8, 2011, a mentally ill young man shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords in the head, killed six of her constituents, and wounded 12 others. Since that tragedy in Tucson, America has seen too many more mass shootings – but no response from Congress. This inaction on gun violence was thrown into even starker contrast after the massacre of 20 children and six of their teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

On the second anniversary of the horrific Tucson shooting, as America mourned the dead in Newtown, Gabby and her husband, retired Navy Captain and astronaut Mark Kelly, launched Americans for Responsible Solutions to encourage elected officials to stand up for solutions to prevent gun violence and protect responsible gun ownership.


As gun owners and strong supporters of the Second Amendment, Gabby and Mark know we must protect the rights of Americans to own guns for collection, recreation, and protection. But they also agree with the vast majority of Americans, including gun owners, that commonsense protections from gun violence can prevent shootings from shattering communities like Tucson, Aurora, and Newtown.

Even commonsense solutions to protect our communities from gun violence have been hard to achieve. Why? Because entrenched interests like the gun lobby have used big money and influence to stop Congress from acting. Until now, the gun lobby’s political contributions, advertising and lobbying have dwarfed the influence of average, law abiding citizens. No longer. With Americans for Responsible Solutions and likeminded friends engaging millions of people about ways to reduce gun violence and supporting lawmakers willing to take a stand for responsible policies, legislators will no longer have reason to fear the gun lobby and their dangerously deep pockets.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Reply #138)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:38 PM

141. Thanks for adding this

Americans for Responsible Solutions is one of the few PACs that I support through my time and money. I tried to find the video of Gabby talking to some locals a while back. Even though she has a hard time talking there was no denying her passion and her support of Hillary. Gabby is an amazing and inspiring human being.

Take it from me: Talk is cheap.

In fact, a lot of the people running for president seem downright terrified to even have a rational conversation about the problem of gun violence in America. We’ve listened closely to all of them, and we’ve looked at all of their records. Only one candidate for president has the determination and toughness to stand up to the corporate gun lobby—and the record to prove it. That candidate is Hillary Clinton.


https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/why-mark-i-are-supporting-hillary-clinton-president/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to postatomic (Reply #141)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 03:47 PM

157. Please post a link to where Hillary has, as you put it,

stood up to the gun lobby. She was senator for two terms, surely she must have done something then.
Maybe I'm just having a senior moment, but I can't reacall a damned thing.

I DO know that as Secretary of State, she approved sales of Hundreds of Millions of dollars of guns and ammunition to brutal dictators in the Middle East.

So help me out here. When has Hillary "stood Up' to the Gun Manufacturers, besides standing up to collect donations to the Clinton Foundation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:45 PM

122. The Willie Horton school of politics. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 06:25 PM

133. And here she is pandering to gun nuts in Pennsylvania.

“I learned how to shoot a gun behind our Lake Winola cottage,” Clinton said. “I’ve gone duck hunting, and I know how important gun rights are to the people of Northeastern Pennsylvania. But we have to take the guns off of criminals and reduce gun violence without infringing upon the anyone’s Second Amendment rights.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 07:47 PM

134. K&R...

This should be a top priority for everyone who is sick of gun violence in this country.

On the subject of the Hillary haters who hate, no matter the cost, the heartbreak, the loss of life, and the good of our nation........ they are some sick puppies. 💩😞

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 07:48 PM

135. We need to reform gun laws.

Revoking the gun corporation immunity to lawsuits would be a great beginning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:55 AM

146. Ugh...it's been playing on my TV for 2 days now.

 

It's not doing Clinton any favors, all anybody has to say about it is that they think it smells of "political exploitation" from a candidate that was last here in 2008 talking about the need to protect our gun manufacturers (and we have a lot of them for some reason) from frivolous gun-control measures and lawsuits.

Combined with (Democratic!) Gov. Dannel Malloy's endorsement of Clinton on the same day he was laying-off state employees and talking about the need to "reform" (read: bust) public-service unions...I think CT may be an upset looming that nobody sees coming. Clinton is hemorrhaging support here in the last week or so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Sun Apr 24, 2016, 04:08 PM

159. Don't worry gun owners, Annie Oakley will ride again.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haveadream (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:26 PM

176. Annie Oakley has pivoted again on guns this time in Pa another of her "home states."

So, which Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread