The Stoneman Douglas Town Hall on CNN:
The Stoneman Douglas Town Hall on CNN:
I didn't watch the bit with Rubio, so no running commentary on that bit.
My god, the NRA rep at the Stoneman Douglas Town Hall is good at not answering questions. I mean, she is amazing. She doesn't appreciate people demanding she answer, either. They consider her blaming the media unacceptable, they don't buy her deflection to the federal government doesn't require the states to register blah blah blah, the military doesn't report people who are dangerous, etc.
Damn, Sheriff of Broward County just shut her down for not answering the question from the student.
P.S. NRA rep will not say we shouldn't have automatic weapons.
Ha ha, you go, AP History teacher. Define: "well-regulated militia". Use supporting evidence. Watch NRA rep try to talk 18th century and have history teacher say nope, answer question about right now as the question was phrased.
And NRA rep blames social services and FBI and other agencies.
Clearly, we are not going to get an answer about a well regulated militia. But the Sheriff apparently thinks nobody should have (semi)automatic weapons or bump stocks.
OH, ok, Now the NRA rep is using a rape victim who was under 21 when raped who wishes she had had a gun to defend herself. That's why people should have guns. So much wrong with this.
Hm. While I agree that there are systemic problems and there need to be multi-pronged approaches, I do not agree with the parents who are ok with doing everything except getting rid of the guns. You simply will not have this level of casualties without guns.
I love how the NRA rep keeps harping on improving the background check system. The NRA has been part of fighting tighter background checks.
Oh, boy. The FBI is getting a lot of flak, including for not sending a rep to this town hall. Congrats to Trump for making this an issue. (Btw, I have no idea at what point the FBI triggers certain things, nor how their resources are set up. I'm pretty sure they are not the front line response.)
Nice. The NRA rep is attacking the Sheriff, who is asking her for specific info, and she isn't giving it. My best guess is that this whole system is broken up and there isn't a way to centralize the info and that's a place where something could be improved. The Sheriff needs to take some responsibility as the guy where the buck stops, too, though.
Some seriously articulate questions. And the NRA rep is adeptly not answering and spinning it as a totally different issue. And the audience is educated and not having it.
Oh, please. There were automatic weapons in the 1700s and Congress looked at buying them is not an excuse. She specifically mentioned the Puckle gun, as if that is in any way equivalent to a random private citizen owning an AR-15. I looked it up. A musket could fire about 3 shots per minute, a Puckle about 9. The Puckle was designed and used to prevent a ship from being boarded, it was neither a personal nor a portable weapon. Also, the questioner was correct that the individuals in question who would have been part of that well regulated militia would not have owned anything like a Puckle. Nice try NRA rep.
Well, I hope these kids keep fighting, but it is clearly an uphill battle.
I didn't watch the bit with Rubio, so no running commentary on that bit.
My god, the NRA rep at the Stoneman Douglas Town Hall is good at not answering questions. I mean, she is amazing. She doesn't appreciate people demanding she answer, either. They consider her blaming the media unacceptable, they don't buy her deflection to the federal government doesn't require the states to register blah blah blah, the military doesn't report people who are dangerous, etc.
Damn, Sheriff of Broward County just shut her down for not answering the question from the student.
P.S. NRA rep will not say we shouldn't have automatic weapons.
Ha ha, you go, AP History teacher. Define: "well-regulated militia". Use supporting evidence. Watch NRA rep try to talk 18th century and have history teacher say nope, answer question about right now as the question was phrased.
And NRA rep blames social services and FBI and other agencies.
Clearly, we are not going to get an answer about a well regulated militia. But the Sheriff apparently thinks nobody should have (semi)automatic weapons or bump stocks.
OH, ok, Now the NRA rep is using a rape victim who was under 21 when raped who wishes she had had a gun to defend herself. That's why people should have guns. So much wrong with this.
Hm. While I agree that there are systemic problems and there need to be multi-pronged approaches, I do not agree with the parents who are ok with doing everything except getting rid of the guns. You simply will not have this level of casualties without guns.
I love how the NRA rep keeps harping on improving the background check system. The NRA has been part of fighting tighter background checks.
Oh, boy. The FBI is getting a lot of flak, including for not sending a rep to this town hall. Congrats to Trump for making this an issue. (Btw, I have no idea at what point the FBI triggers certain things, nor how their resources are set up. I'm pretty sure they are not the front line response.)
Nice. The NRA rep is attacking the Sheriff, who is asking her for specific info, and she isn't giving it. My best guess is that this whole system is broken up and there isn't a way to centralize the info and that's a place where something could be improved. The Sheriff needs to take some responsibility as the guy where the buck stops, too, though.
Some seriously articulate questions. And the NRA rep is adeptly not answering and spinning it as a totally different issue. And the audience is educated and not having it.
Oh, please. There were automatic weapons in the 1700s and Congress looked at buying them is not an excuse. She specifically mentioned the Puckle gun, as if that is in any way equivalent to a random private citizen owning an AR-15. I looked it up. A musket could fire about 3 shots per minute, a Puckle about 9. The Puckle was designed and used to prevent a ship from being boarded, it was neither a personal nor a portable weapon. Also, the questioner was correct that the individuals in question who would have been part of that well regulated militia would not have owned anything like a Puckle. Nice try NRA rep.
Well, I hope these kids keep fighting, but it is clearly an uphill battle.
I think the NRA rep was Dana Loesch? She was the one making those really scary proto-fascist NRA ads a few months ago. Look them up on YouTube. Seriously messed up incitement type stuff .
ReplyDeleteYep. I've seen her. She's a real piece of work.
ReplyDeleteTrent Goulding Yep, that Dana Loesch. If GOP Pres. Trump were smart and disciplined enough, he'd take some pointers from how Ms. Loesch spins and whips. Those proto-fascist NRA ads are the kind of thing the Trump White House ought to be doing 24/7, taking advantage of the Scalise shooting or the Saipov attack as a start.
ReplyDeleteIt's a damn good thing Trump so far isn't even in the same ballpark as Loesch, in terms of manipulative skill.
I watched right up until she came on, because I can't stand her, so I saw much if not all of the Rubio stuff.
ReplyDelete1) Rubio still wants to be President, and so is trying to thread the needle here. I don't think he succeeded.
2) For someone with a high NRA rating he conceded a lot-- bump stocks (trivial), more background checks (obvious), raising purchase age to 21 (sensible), mandatory mental health reporting (also obvious) and even some wishy-washy but earnest sounding promises to 'reconsider' magazine size (probably the only real concession.)
3) But at least from the crowd perspective, two complete failures:
"Will you stop taking NRA money?" "Ennnh, no," followed by a tapdance about how they aren't buying him, they're buying into his agenda that no one believed. (He didn't actually say the first part but he did say the second part, and it was awkward and embarrassing to see him make that argument.)
Also a hard-to-summarize long drawn out failure about how the gun control bill would only control 200 guns, but it's trivially easy for 2,000 other equivalent guns to get around the ban. To which the obvious counterpoint was made-- several times-- that, hey, you actually write the laws, you could close those loopholes if you wanted to, with the counter-counter claim (Rubio) that this would somehow be too broad or outlaw all guns or at least all rifles.
I'm just plain old not knowledgeable enough on guns to evaluate those claims, but Rubio's argument seems somewhat unlikely here. Certainly the crowd was having none of it.