Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Wow. Somebody at CNN gets it. No specific solutions are offered, but at least he gets it.

Good job Mr. Granderson.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/opinion/g ... ?hpt=hp_t2

And it will keep continue to happen until the advocates accept that ridding the country of guns is a hopeless -- and unconstitutional mission -- and that the real goal should be addressing the factors that lead to the various forms of gun violence: factors such as poverty, mental health and failing schools.

93henfan wrote:Wow. Somebody at CNN gets it. No specific solutions are offered, but at least he gets it.

Good job Mr. Granderson.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/opinion/g ... ?hpt=hp_t2

And it will keep continue to happen until the advocates accept that ridding the country of guns is a hopeless -- and unconstitutional mission -- and that the real goal should be addressing the factors that lead to the various forms of gun violence: factors such as poverty, mental health and failing schools.

I agree with the premise - I don't see how you can ever effectively roll back gun ownership and gun proliferation in this country, so even if that was proven to be a laudable strategy it just isn't feasible.

The problem with the three factors he cites, though, is that at least one of them, poverty, isn't realistic to be solved in our time or any time in the future - we're going to always have poor people. The mental health one seems easy to come close to an answer on, but you're still going to have the undiagnosed whackos who first actionable sign of mental illness is going to be the shooting rampage. And I wouldn't put failing schools in there - I don't see them as a factor in gun violence, they're more like a symptom or a result of the first item, poverty.

-
Moonbats will continue to chip away

If they were actually concerned about birds they would ban wind turbines

California One Signature Away from Statewide Ban on Lead Ammo
breitbart.com/Big-Government ^ | 9-17-2013 | AWR Hawkins



Legislation that would completely ban lead ammunition from the state of California is sitting on Governor Jerry Brown's (D) desk, waiting for his signature to become law.

California already has a lead ammo ban in eight counties, but the Democrat-dominated assembly wants to broaden the ban to cover the entire state.

According to Fox News, proponents of the ban claim it will protect endangered species, like the condor.

Yeah, because conks are so concerned about dealing with poverty.

Grizalltheway wrote:Yeah, because conks are so concerned about dealing with poverty.

Poverty is not a problem in this country...the definition of poverty is.

Free schooling, food stamps, free phones, roofs over people's heads...our poor are better off than most people in the world.

What people want is a big screen TV in every pot. They want to keep up with the Joneses in material things, That is a silly race that will never end.

Grizalltheway wrote:Yeah, because conks are so concerned about dealing with poverty.

The intolerance of the tolerant is a fickle game...

93henfan wrote:Wow. Somebody at CNN gets it. No specific solutions are offered, but at least he gets it.

Good job Mr. Granderson.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/opinion/g ... ?hpt=hp_t2

And it will keep continue to happen until the advocates accept that ridding the country of guns is a hopeless -- and unconstitutional mission -- and that the real goal should be addressing the factors that lead to the various forms of gun violence: factors such as poverty, mental health and failing schools.

Wrong, we must rid the world of guns and conks. Only then will conk greed be eradicated. Saint D1Backjon has already spread this gospel.

-
Just as Global Warming was changed to climate change

The new phrase that pays is Gun Reform

Gun Control didn't work

I find it hard to believe I'm the only one chuckling while I read this article. Yes, there is a huge problem with guns in this country, and no we're not going to be taking guns away from law abiding citizens, but these solutions are utopia & not reality.

No sane person would ever believe that the GOP, the party most closely with defending the 2nd amendment, would support INCREASING SPENDING for education and or the poor (the author's stated solutions). Please....

One of the biggest reasons the GOP has with difficulties identifying with more & more Americans today is they have become the party of "NO", the party of keep things the way they are/were because they were good for us.

Look at the Obamacare debate, there are certainly SOME good things as part of this new legislation no doubt & there are also things that are NOT very good about it as well. The GOP & the Tea Party have railed against it for god knows how long, but let's remember this: Before ObamaCare Health Care in this country & the price for it was a rapidly growing problematic issue. Even with ObamaCare being implemented it will still be a problematic issue. If we de-fund or repeal it what is the GOP plan? Exactly, they don't have one.

Sorry to divert from guns but when it boils down to it, it's all the same strategy...

bluehenbillk wrote:Look at the Obamacare debate, there are certainly SOME good things as part of this new legislation no doubt & there are also things that are NOT very good about it as well. The GOP & the Tea Party have railed against it for god knows how long, but let's remember this: Before ObamaCare Health Care in this country & the price for it was a rapidly growing problematic issue. Even with ObamaCare being implemented it will still be a problematic issue. If we de-fund or repeal it what is the GOP plan? Exactly, they don't have one.

Sorry to divert from guns but when it boils down to it, it's all the same strategy...

a) I challenge you to find SOME good things in the Obamacare legislation.
b) Pre-Obamacare, our group plan rates increased an average of 8%-11% per year. This year, in the first year of Obamacare, our group plan rates are going up 30%.

I'll take the status quo, thank you very little.

AZGrizFan wrote:

bluehenbillk wrote:Look at the Obamacare debate, there are certainly SOME good things as part of this new legislation no doubt & there are also things that are NOT very good about it as well. The GOP & the Tea Party have railed against it for god knows how long, but let's remember this: Before ObamaCare Health Care in this country & the price for it was a rapidly growing problematic issue. Even with ObamaCare being implemented it will still be a problematic issue. If we de-fund or repeal it what is the GOP plan? Exactly, they don't have one.

Sorry to divert from guns but when it boils down to it, it's all the same strategy...

a) I challenge you to find SOME good things in the Obamacare legislation.
b) Pre-Obamacare, our group plan rates increased an average of 8%-11% per year. This year, in the first year of Obamacare, our group plan rates are going up 30%.

I'll take the status quo, thank you very little.

a) no longer being turned down for insurance due to pre-existing conditions
b) it's still bad legislation

There are very minor things that they could have done that would have made health care more affordable and accessible. However, the goal wasn't to make it more affordable and accessible, it was to ram through as close to an Utopian plan as possible. For that, mission accomplished.

In all sincerity, this "conk" would support single payer over the ACA.

Why do we call it "gun violence" but we don't refer to "car violence" or "alcohol violence"???

An inanimate object cannot commit a violent act...

ASUMountaineer wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:a) I challenge you to find SOME good things in the Obamacare legislation.
b) Pre-Obamacare, our group plan rates increased an average of 8%-11% per year. This year, in the first year of Obamacare, our group plan rates are going up 30%.

I'll take the status quo, thank you very little.

a) no longer being turned down for insurance due to pre-existing conditions
b) it's still bad legislation

There are very minor things that they could have done that would have made health care more affordable and accessible. However, the goal wasn't to make it more affordable and accessible, it was to ram through as close to an Utopian plan as possible. For that, mission accomplished.

In all sincerity, this "conk" would support single payer over the ACA.

Utopian, for WHO? The Insurance companies?

A new history textbook is out

Via YAF:
The authors of United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination have taken it upon themselves to change the Constitution of the United States. The high school textbook contains an altered version of several Amendments in order to condition young minds into believing liberal propaganda.

The textbook notes the Second Amendment as, “The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”

The actual Second Amendment reads, “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.”

AZGrizFan wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
a) no longer being turned down for insurance due to pre-existing conditions
b) it's still bad legislation

There are very minor things that they could have done that would have made health care more affordable and accessible. However, the goal wasn't to make it more affordable and accessible, it was to ram through as close to an Utopian plan as possible. For that, mission accomplished.

In all sincerity, this "conk" would support single payer over the ACA.

Utopian, for WHO? The Insurance companies?

"As close to," incompetent bastard. Of course, the end result is bad for consumers and damn awesome for insurance companies. Thank you Lord Obama!

Bronco wrote:A new history textbook is out

Via YAF:
The authors of United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination have taken it upon themselves to change the Constitution of the United States. The high school textbook contains an altered version of several Amendments in order to condition young minds into believing liberal propaganda.

The textbook notes the Second Amendment as, “The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”

The actual Second Amendment reads, “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.”

Wow. So now you must join the military or the police to possess a weapon according to this AP History prep textbook. Only the Government should have guns, and the People should be powerless to oppose it.

Progressive wishful thinking put in our classrooms.

And the Founding Fathers do another roll, six feet below the surface.

AZGrizFan wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
a) no longer being turned down for insurance due to pre-existing conditions
b) it's still bad legislation

There are very minor things that they could have done that would have made health care more affordable and accessible. However, the goal wasn't to make it more affordable and accessible, it was to ram through as close to an Utopian plan as possible. For that, mission accomplished.

In all sincerity, this "conk" would support single payer over the ACA.

Utopian, for WHO? The Insurance companies?

Yes.

Remove for-profit insurance and prices will go down.

93henfan wrote: Wow. So now you must join the military or the police to possess a weapon according to this AP History prep textbook. Only the Government should have guns, and the People should be powerless to oppose it.

Progressive wishful thinking put in our classrooms.

And the Founding Fathers do another roll, six feet below the surface.

The dumbing down of America.

We've gone from calling people, "special" to calling them "advanced."

I always thought Gun Control was using a rest, or two hands for a pistol?

Bronco wrote:A new history textbook is out

Via YAF:
The authors of United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination have taken it upon themselves to change the Constitution of the United States. The high school textbook contains an altered version of several Amendments in order to condition young minds into believing liberal propaganda.

The textbook notes the Second Amendment as, “The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”

The actual Second Amendment reads, “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.”

Ho Lee Fuk

Bronco wrote:A new history textbook is out

Via YAF:
The authors of United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination have taken it upon themselves to change the Constitution of the United States. The high school textbook contains an altered version of several Amendments in order to condition young minds into believing liberal propaganda.

The textbook notes the Second Amendment as, “The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”

The actual Second Amendment reads, “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.”

Advanced Placement? More like Advanced Indoctrination, amirite?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmRDI6OjSVw[/youtube]

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Utopian, for WHO? The Insurance companies?

Yes.

Remove for-profit insurance and prices will go down.

Um yeah, because demand would decrease. Amirite?

expandspanos wrote:

Now that's funny...Sad, but funny...

I didn't even get a phone.