|
Post by elaine on Jun 20, 2016 13:27:54 GMT
Because the people in the video are selling a specific POV. Regular peas should mostly be people you can trust to give you the straight story about how the lack of guns is affecting their country. Peas can have an agenda just like anyone else. I don't see why you'd believe one over the other.1. They are most likely NOT affiliated with a gun-related or gun-control related activist group. And even if one were, there are multiple Aussies here at the Pod and on this thread. So, chances are if that video reflected current events and opinions, at least a few Aussies would comment in support of it. 2. You can check their post history to determine if they have some apparent bias on gun threads here. 3. Their views and experiences are current, not 20 years old.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jun 20, 2016 15:46:45 GMT
I see this as the same as rainbow, but the other side I'm not following you here. Can you clarify your meaning? yes, this is the type of shit from the other side that makes them look like idiots and makes pro-gun people dig their heels in.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 20, 2016 16:16:41 GMT
Because the people in the video are selling a specific POV. Regular peas should mostly be people you can trust to give you the straight story about how the lack of guns is affecting their country. Peas can have an agenda just like anyone else. I don't see why you'd believe one over the other.You expect everyone to believe the propaganda crap that you post as gospel truth. Many peas have shown you that it's not true, not accurate or very outdated.
|
|
jayfab
Drama Llama
procastinating
Posts: 5,591
Jun 26, 2014 21:55:15 GMT
|
Post by jayfab on Jun 20, 2016 16:24:03 GMT
Because the people in the video are selling a specific POV. Regular peas should mostly be people you can trust to give you the straight story about how the lack of guns is affecting their country. Peas can have an agenda just like anyone else. I don't see why you'd believe one over the other.And the makers of the videos don't? I don't see you believe one over the other.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 5, 2024 3:23:38 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 17:31:38 GMT
I'm not following you here. Can you clarify your meaning? yes, this is the type of shit from the other side that makes them look like idiots and makes pro-gun people dig their heels in. Thanks for clarifying for me. And I agree.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 5, 2024 3:23:38 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 17:41:18 GMT
I'm not following you here. Can you clarify your meaning? yes, this is the type of shit from the other side that makes them look like idiots and makes pro-gun people dig their heels in. The "shit" coming from the other side is trying to find ways to stop from happening 20 six year olds from being shot and killed, 49 folks at a night club shot and killed, 42 people in a city are shot and 7 die during a 48 hour period, a mother shot and killed protecting her children while they played in their front yard. In case it's not clear each of these incidents involved shooters with different motives but with one common denominator. Guns! The "shit" I'm hearing from the other side when faced with this dilemma is the only way to handle a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with gun, more laws penalize law abiding gun owners and my favorite bit of paranoia is "they" want to take away our guns. None of this "shit" will stop these senseless killings involving guns. Yesterday Paul Waldman wrote a column titled "The Question Gun Advocates Should Have to Answer". This quote from the article stuck with me " But the truth is that gun advocates do actually think the price we are paying is a reasonable one for the existing gun regime." I think he is right. God help us.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jun 20, 2016 19:16:38 GMT
yes, this is the type of shit from the other side that makes them look like idiots and makes pro-gun people dig their heels in. The "shit" coming from the other side is trying to find ways to stop from happening 20 six year olds from being shot and killed, 49 folks at a night club shot and killed, 42 people in a city are shot and 7 die during a 48 hour period, a mother shot and killed protecting her children while they played in their front yard. In case it's not clear each of these incidents involved shooters with different motives but with one common denominator. Guns! The "shit" I'm hearing from the other side when faced with this dilemma is the only way to handle a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with gun, more laws penalize law abiding gun owners and my favorite bit of paranoia is "they" want to take away our guns. None of this "shit" will stop these senseless killings involving guns. Yesterday Paul Waldman wrote a column titled "The Question Gun Advocates Should Have to Answer". This quote from the article stuck with me " But the truth is that gun advocates do actually think the price we are paying is a reasonable one for the existing gun regime." I think he is right. God help us. but the deal is, most people aren't like Rainbow or believe the NRA is 100% right. Lots of gun owners are okay with sensible gun laws, with tougher background checks and other ways to try and keep the public safer, but the other side doesn't want to work that way. It is easier to say "god help us" than it is to work with people to make gun owners feel like their rights are being ripped away and still do better at keeping guns from crazy. We'd be better off if both sides would take steps in, quit calling each other names, and work together. Neither side comprising keeps us stuck at exactly the place we are now. Maybe the first attempt isn't the best optiob, then we can try again.
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Jun 20, 2016 20:57:54 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 5, 2024 3:23:38 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 21:15:02 GMT
Rainbow is the perfect example of why it's important to seek information from as many credible sources as possible, to be open to (real) discussion with people of differing views, and how important it is to use critical thinking skills so that you don't give in to unreasonable fear and paranoia. Shrieking about freedom while living a life paralyzed by fear and filled with a steady stream of doom, gloom, and paranoia has got to be a really miserable existence. Then there's the irony. How "free" are you when all you can talk about is "defending your freedom" ? The FUD is working on her and it's sad.
|
|
|
Post by kiwifarmer on Jun 20, 2016 21:33:37 GMT
I am from NewZealand and we have strict gun laws. Our police are not routinely armed. They do not wear them as part of their uniform as in many other countries.
My family are a family of gun owners. They have had to go through safety classes and interviews of themselves / family/ and have a registered gun owner as a referee to be able to obtain a gun license. Homes are inspected for safe storage of weapons, so accidents dont happen.
I am glad.
To say you need guns for "freedom " is poppycock. To be honest, it appals me the number of mass shooting USA has every WEEK.... it is absolutely horrific to think that there are people who are going about their daily business and just dont come home because so idiot who has got hold of a killing stick has decided to let loose on the world. Of course the criminal underworld will always find a way to get guns....but as another poster says....they are usually using them on each other not the general public cause they have chosen to be God for the day.
I truly hope your country sees fit to do something..... the statistics speak for themselves
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 5, 2024 3:23:38 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 22:19:25 GMT
The "shit" coming from the other side is trying to find ways to stop from happening 20 six year olds from being shot and killed, 49 folks at a night club shot and killed, 42 people in a city are shot and 7 die during a 48 hour period, a mother shot and killed protecting her children while they played in their front yard. In case it's not clear each of these incidents involved shooters with different motives but with one common denominator. Guns! The "shit" I'm hearing from the other side when faced with this dilemma is the only way to handle a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with gun, more laws penalize law abiding gun owners and my favorite bit of paranoia is "they" want to take away our guns. None of this "shit" will stop these senseless killings involving guns. Yesterday Paul Waldman wrote a column titled "The Question Gun Advocates Should Have to Answer". This quote from the article stuck with me " But the truth is that gun advocates do actually think the price we are paying is a reasonable one for the existing gun regime." I think he is right. God help us. but the deal is, most people aren't like Rainbow or believe the NRA is 100% right. Lots of gun owners are okay with sensible gun laws, with tougher background checks and other ways to try and keep the public safer, but the other side doesn't want to work that way. It is easier to say "god help us" than it is to work with people to make gun owners feel like their rights are being ripped away and still do better at keeping guns from crazy. We'd be better off if both sides would take steps in, quit calling each other names, and work together. Neither side comprising keeps us stuck at exactly the place we are now. Maybe the first attempt isn't the best optiob, then we can try again. If one can believe the polls the majority of gun owners are ok with expanded background checks and stopping those on terrorist watch list from buying guns. Both of these issues are being voted on in the Senate today. They will fail. Right now federal gun laws and to a certain extent local gun laws are dictated by the NRA. I read an article on the NRA and the affect they have on elections. Besides giving the candidate the maximum amount of $2,700 they also have a Superpac. Who knew NRA had a SuperPac. Anyway this articles listed I think 11 candidates of choice, how much was donated, and how many of their candidates won. All but one won. If you look at the amounts donated in these smaller races they make up a chunk of the campaign's overall donations. So these elected officials will not go against their biggest benafactor. As long as the NRA is calling the shots there will there will never be any compromises. Regardless of what the majority of gun owners say. That is because the majority of gun owners won't rein in the NRA. The only people who can rein in the NRA are members. It happen in the 1970s so maybe it's time for it to happen again but this time swing the NRA back to what it was.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 20, 2016 22:30:51 GMT
but the deal is, most people aren't like Rainbow or believe the NRA is 100% right. Lots of gun owners are okay with sensible gun laws, with tougher background checks and other ways to try and keep the public safer, but the other side doesn't want to work that way. It is easier to say "god help us" than it is to work with people to make gun owners feel like their rights are being ripped away and still do better at keeping guns from crazy. We'd be better off if both sides would take steps in, quit calling each other names, and work together. Neither side comprising keeps us stuck at exactly the place we are now. Maybe the first attempt isn't the best optiob, then we can try again. If one can believe the polls the majority of gun owners are ok with expanded background checks and stopping those on terrorist watch list from buying guns. Both of these issues are being voted on in the Senate today. They will fail. Right now federal gun laws and to a certain extent local gun laws are dictated by the NRA. I read an article on the NRA and the affect they have on elections. Besides giving the candidate the maximum amount of $2,700 they also have a Superpac. Who knew NRA had a SuperPac. Anyway this articles listed I think 11 candidates of choice, how much was donated, and how many of their candidates won. All but one won. If you look at the amounts donated in these smaller races they make up a chunk of the campaign's overall donations. So these elected officials will not go against their biggest benafactor. As long as the NRA is calling the shots there will there will never be any compromises. Regardless of what the majority of gun owners say. That is because the majority of gun owners won't rein in the NRA. The only people who can rein in the NRA are members. It happen in the 1970s so maybe it's time for it to happen again but this time swing the NRA back to what it was. The NRA is the largest political contributor to congressional elections, to keep their interests protected.
|
|
|
Post by Kelpea on Jun 20, 2016 23:13:10 GMT
Yup the votes are tallied and sensible gun control was voted down just moments ago. We are a seriously effed up nation.
|
|
jayfab
Drama Llama
procastinating
Posts: 5,591
Jun 26, 2014 21:55:15 GMT
|
Post by jayfab on Jun 20, 2016 23:30:49 GMT
Yup the votes are tallied and sensible gun control was voted down just moments ago. We are a seriously effed up nation. ? So disgusted with these yahoos.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jun 20, 2016 23:41:05 GMT
but the deal is, most people aren't like Rainbow or believe the NRA is 100% right. Lots of gun owners are okay with sensible gun laws, with tougher background checks and other ways to try and keep the public safer, but the other side doesn't want to work that way. It is easier to say "god help us" than it is to work with people to make gun owners feel like their rights are being ripped away and still do better at keeping guns from crazy. We'd be better off if both sides would take steps in, quit calling each other names, and work together. Neither side comprising keeps us stuck at exactly the place we are now. Maybe the first attempt isn't the best optiob, then we can try again. If one can believe the polls the majority of gun owners are ok with expanded background checks and stopping those on terrorist watch list from buying guns. Both of these issues are being voted on in the Senate today. They will fail. Right now federal gun laws and to a certain extent local gun laws are dictated by the NRA. I read an article on the NRA and the affect they have on elections. Besides giving the candidate the maximum amount of $2,700 they also have a Superpac. Who knew NRA had a SuperPac. Anyway this articles listed I think 11 candidates of choice, how much was donated, and how many of their candidates won. All but one won. If you look at the amounts donated in these smaller races they make up a chunk of the campaign's overall donations. So these elected officials will not go against their biggest benafactor. As long as the NRA is calling the shots there will there will never be any compromises. Regardless of what the majority of gun owners say. That is because the majority of gun owners won't rein in the NRA. The only people who can rein in the NRA are members. It happen in the 1970s so maybe it's time for it to happen again but this time swing the NRA back to what it was. I can't help that the Senate won't pass it. I am not and will not be a member of the NRA. DH joined one year and I found an opposite cause to donate the same amount of money to (this was years ago, I dont remember which one). Dh and I have canceled each others votes in many elections recently because he votes for the pro-gun rights canidate where as I vote based on other criteria
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 20, 2016 23:43:17 GMT
All four bills failed.
Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers.
I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks.
If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass?
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 20, 2016 23:45:34 GMT
If one can believe the polls the majority of gun owners are ok with expanded background checks and stopping those on terrorist watch list from buying guns. Both of these issues are being voted on in the Senate today. They will fail. Right now federal gun laws and to a certain extent local gun laws are dictated by the NRA. I read an article on the NRA and the affect they have on elections. Besides giving the candidate the maximum amount of $2,700 they also have a Superpac. Who knew NRA had a SuperPac. Anyway this articles listed I think 11 candidates of choice, how much was donated, and how many of their candidates won. All but one won. If you look at the amounts donated in these smaller races they make up a chunk of the campaign's overall donations. So these elected officials will not go against their biggest benafactor. As long as the NRA is calling the shots there will there will never be any compromises. Regardless of what the majority of gun owners say. That is because the majority of gun owners won't rein in the NRA. The only people who can rein in the NRA are members. It happen in the 1970s so maybe it's time for it to happen again but this time swing the NRA back to what it was. I can't help that the Senate won't pass it. I am not and will not be a member of the NRA. DH joined one year and I found an opposite cause to donate the same amount of money to (this was years ago, I dont remember which one). Dh and I have canceled each others votes in many elections recently because he votes for the pro-gun rights canidate where as I vote based on other criteria Thank you. I wish more reasonable gun owners separated themselves from the NRA like you.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jun 20, 2016 23:57:16 GMT
All four bills failed. Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers. I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks. If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass? it doesn't pass because it isn't the average gun owners voting. It is the NRA backed politicians and the politians that are going to vote against any Democrat backed plan in an election year. I have no problem with universal background checks. I think it will be hard to police private sales, but it doesn't hurt to try.
|
|
|
Post by lumo on Jun 20, 2016 23:58:16 GMT
Yup the votes are tallied and sensible gun control was voted down just moments ago. We are a seriously effed up nation. ? I just don't understand. Why? Why are the simple concessions -- which are SO simple they're ridiculous -- proposed by these bills just not even worth considering to these assholes in DC? Why should one more person die so that they can continue to get their $2700 from the NRA? Is that what a life is worth to them? I actually feel despondant over this. Nothing will ever change. Never. The innocents will continue to be slaughtered, the public will wail and mourn and demand change, and everything will stay the same.
|
|
|
Post by paperaddictedpea on Jun 21, 2016 0:02:24 GMT
Yup the votes are tallied and sensible gun control was voted down just moments ago. We are a seriously effed up nation. ? Nothing will ever change. Never. The innocents will continue to be slaughtered, the public will wail and mourn and demand change, and everything will stay the same. This pretty much sums up how I feel. It's so depressing.
|
|
|
Post by Kelpea on Jun 21, 2016 0:09:17 GMT
All FOUR proposals. What does that say about us. We are a disgusting society who has continued to place guns over human lives. I, too, am despondent.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 21, 2016 0:12:31 GMT
All four bills failed. Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers. I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks. If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass? it doesn't pass because it isn't the average gun owners voting. It is the NRA backed politicians and the politians that are going to vote against any Democrat backed plan in an election year. I have no problem with universal background checks. I think it will be hard to police private sales, but it doesn't hurt to try. Then the GOP politicians should come up with legislation if that is what it will take. Otherwise, it is really a shell game of gun owners claiming they want universal background checks, etc., and then pointing fingers when legislation doesn't pass. It it isn't the people like me who have no interest in owning guns that are voting those politicians in, because that IS an issue I vote on. It is people like your husband who are gun owners that put those NRA backed politicians in office. And you can't blame gun control advocates for viewing the gun owners who vote them in responsible. I wish more gun owners were like you. FTR, I am not for taking away guns, just for universal checks, closing the gun show loopholes, and eliminating private ownership of semi-automatic weapons and high capacity cartridges. Guns have a place for hunting, and while I will never understand the desire to own a handgun for self-protection, I have no interest in preventing people who are not mentally ill, nor with a history of domestic violence, from owning them for that purpose.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 21, 2016 0:18:06 GMT
All four bills failed. Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers. I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks. If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass? it doesn't pass because it isn't the average gun owners voting. It is the NRA backed politicians and the politians that are going to vote against any Democrat backed plan in an election year. I have no problem with universal background checks. I think it will be hard to police private sales, but it doesn't hurt to try. Also - I was doing some reading on this subject yesterday - there are many, both Republicans and Democrats, who won't vote for any gun control legislation not because they're afraid of losing any NRA contribution they may receive, but because the NRA has a history of pouring a huge amount of money into any moderately pro-gun candidate running *against* someone who has shown favor for gun control. Any candidate in a truly contested seat can't afford this. This is an organization with only 3-5 million members, depending on who you ask, but basically with as many people as the population of ONE decently large city, having a huge impact on the lives and safety of billions of people. And not just with money donated by individuals, but in large part donated by the companies (even those outside the US) who make and sell guns. The NRA and its political action subsidiaries spend far more money on lobbying each year than on the educational and safety programs that are their primary stated aim. It's corporatism, plain and simple, and people are dying for it. Sad, sad, sad.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 21, 2016 0:25:48 GMT
All four bills failed. Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers. I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks. If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass? Because Congress is bought and paid for by the NRA!
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 21, 2016 0:25:57 GMT
All four bills failed. Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers. I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks. If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass? Because Congress is bought and paid for by the NRA!
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 21, 2016 0:26:00 GMT
All four bills failed. Until universal background check legislation passes, I am not convinced that the majority of gun owners are for reasonable gun legislation. It is all hot air with absolutely no regard for public safety until they force their lobby group - the NRA - to reflect what they claim they want. Otherwise, is is all about me, me, me and lining the pockets of gun and ammo manufacturers. I knew the proposed bills wouldn't pass, but I'm still disappointed, especially being subjected to claims that most gun owners want limited gun control in the form of background checks. If that is true, why doesn't the limited proposed legislation pass? Because Congress is bought and paid for by the NRA!
|
|
|
Post by JBeans on Jun 21, 2016 0:56:08 GMT
Rainbow is the perfect example of why it's important to seek information from as many credible sources as possible, to be open to (real) discussion with people of differing views, and how important it is to use critical thinking skills so that you don't give in to unreasonable fear and paranoia. Shrieking about freedom while living a life paralyzed by fear and filled with a steady stream of doom, gloom, and paranoia has got to be a really miserable existence. Then there's the irony. How "free" are you when all you can talk about is "defending your freedom" ? The FUD is working on her and it's sad. This is how I see the US gun fundamentalists. People with a fear that something is lurking and the potential for their life to be in danger to the point that they feel the only remedy is to carry. I mean, as Canadians, we have guns. We love our guns. We love our hunting. Our pistols. Our gun clubs. We hated our long gun registry so much we scrapped it. So, frankly, we loosened our gun laws. The difference is, we have no want to carry them. We don't feel this fear. Correct me if I am wrong, but I see this gun culture in the US revolve around year upon year of conditioning of two things. 1. Pride. Pride in arming oneself. Pride in such an easy ability to own a gun. Pride in the sense that guns are sexy. Special. Pride in power. Guns give you power. Pride that there is some chance you could be the hero because you have a gun. Pride that gun ownership defines you. 2. Fear. Fear that not having a gun will make you powerless. Fear that not having a gun makes you less free. Fear that danger is lurking everywhere. Fear that someone is out to get you. Fear that the only thing that can reasonably protect you is a gun. How do you even begin to change a culture that is based around pride and fear?
|
|
|
Post by marykate on Jun 21, 2016 0:58:52 GMT
I'm originally from Canada. Most of my uncles and male cousins own hunting rifles, which they know how to use, because they go deer hunting every autumn. It's part of a traditional hunting way of life.
But my uncles and cousins don't own semi-automatic assault weapons, because they're not psychotic, and because they're not interested in hunting down their fellow human beings (the only real purpose for a semi-automatic).
They live quite freely and happily under Canada's supposedly tyrannical gun laws, and every fall, someone bags the big one.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 5, 2024 3:23:38 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2016 1:11:06 GMT
If one can believe the polls the majority of gun owners are ok with expanded background checks and stopping those on terrorist watch list from buying guns. Both of these issues are being voted on in the Senate today. They will fail. Right now federal gun laws and to a certain extent local gun laws are dictated by the NRA. I read an article on the NRA and the affect they have on elections. Besides giving the candidate the maximum amount of $2,700 they also have a Superpac. Who knew NRA had a SuperPac. Anyway this articles listed I think 11 candidates of choice, how much was donated, and how many of their candidates won. All but one won. If you look at the amounts donated in these smaller races they make up a chunk of the campaign's overall donations. So these elected officials will not go against their biggest benafactor. As long as the NRA is calling the shots there will there will never be any compromises. Regardless of what the majority of gun owners say. That is because the majority of gun owners won't rein in the NRA. The only people who can rein in the NRA are members. It happen in the 1970s so maybe it's time for it to happen again but this time swing the NRA back to what it was. I can't help that the Senate won't pass it. I am not and will not be a member of the NRA. DH joined one year and I found an opposite cause to donate the same amount of money to (this was years ago, I dont remember which one). Dh and I have canceled each others votes in many elections recently because he votes for the pro-gun rights canidate where as I vote based on other criteria This just shows how complexed this issue can be.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jun 21, 2016 1:15:25 GMT
I don't see anyone proposing anything to help the mentally ill get better care, to expand those programs. Why not do that? Don't act like nothing can be done because you didn't restrict gun rights.
|
|