• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bodies not even cold, and Feinstein politicking already...

Called it earlier today. :D

I look forward to more vomit inducing gun control measures because of this.

Gun grabbers are very predictable.
 
Feinstein calls for new gun control laws after shooting | The Daily Caller

Really no point in quoting the story, as you can guess it. People shot dead in DC, hours later this hack is already whining about needing more 'gun control.'

What a big steaming pile of poo she is. And all like her are as well.
Not sure why you're so disgusted by this.

Look at it this way. She sees gun control as an actual answer to the problem of gun violence. Something that can actually reduce the numbers and make people safer. Now I'm sure you disagree with this, but given that she believes it, don't you think it's only proper for someone to advocate something that they believe in right after something like this?

If someone was killed by a bunch of drug mules smuggling in weed in to the country, and someone argued after that that we need to change our drug laws, I wouldn't see that as disgusting, or politicking. I see it as advancing what you believe is part of the solution.

If her idea is stupid, then of course criticize her for it, but give up on the "it's not the right time!" crap. It's a bull**** argument. Either defend your stance on it's merits or let it go.
 
Look at it this way. She sees gun control as an actual answer to the problem of gun violence. Something that can actually reduce the numbers and make people safer. Now I'm sure you disagree with this, but given that she believes it, don't you think it's only proper for someone to advocate something that they believe in right after something like this?

1) She is just the kind of person that would rail about the 'other side' using the death of people for political gain.
2) She is a moron for her beliefs on guns and violence, and they have been nothing but disproven over and over.
 
Gee bowl me over with a lead ball. A dozen people shot to death by lone gunman and someone has the audacity to bring up a need for gun control. Shocking. How insensitive.
 
Gun control got those people killed, it's against the law to have firearms on base. Feinstein needs to just shut up and retire, besides, there's a certain firearms related defense contract issue she had not so long ago that she barely escaped from. That bitch belongs behind bars.
 
Not sure why you're so disgusted by this.

Look at it this way. She sees gun control as an actual answer to the problem of gun violence. Something that can actually reduce the numbers and make people safer. Now I'm sure you disagree with this, but given that she believes it, don't you think it's only proper for someone to advocate something that they believe in right after something like this?

If someone was killed by a bunch of drug mules smuggling in weed in to the country, and someone argued after that that we need to change our drug laws, I wouldn't see that as disgusting, or politicking. I see it as advancing what you believe is part of the solution.

If her idea is stupid, then of course criticize her for it, but give up on the "it's not the right time!" crap. It's a bull**** argument. Either defend your stance on it's merits or let it go.

Cons prefer their liberals quieter, less aggressive. They'll get up on their hind legs and applaud each other enthusiastically for jumping all over any liberal or progressive idea but just let someone lead off with something that they disagree with and they get all bucket-mouthed and pouty like a teenage girl who got felt up in the drive-in.
 
Last edited:
1) She is just the kind of person that would rail about the 'other side' using the death of people for political gain.

If she would then she's a huge hypocrite.

2) She is a moron for her beliefs on guns and violence, and they have been nothing but disproven over and over.

I agree. But I do see Roughdraft's point that if this is something you really believe would stop incidents like this shooting, then now is a good time to advocate for them, just as some on the other side are being critical of the policy against firearms on the base. It's a good time to learn from the mistakes and see where we can improve in the future.
 
Cons prefer their liberals quieter, less aggressive. They'll get up on their hind legs and applaud each other enthusiastically for jumping all over any liberal or progressive idea but just let someone lead off with something that they disagree with and they get all bucket-mouthed and pouty like a teenage girl who got felt up in the drive-in.

Oh look, partisan BS rather than on topic discussion. Shocker.

If she would then she's a huge hypocrite.

Yes, she is.

I agree. But I do see Roughdraft's point that if this is something you really believe would stop incidents like this shooting, then now is a good time to advocate for them, just as some on the other side are being critical of the policy against firearms on the base. It's a good time to learn from the mistakes and see where we can improve in the future.

Nothing she, or any other anti-gun person has put forth, would stop any future shooting. Period. Making legislation to 'feel good' or feel as if 'we have done something', is pointless, ignorant, and a waste of time.
 
Nothing she, or any other anti-gun person has put forth, would stop any future shooting. Period. Making legislation to 'feel good' or feel as if 'we have done something', is pointless, ignorant, and a waste of time.

I'm definitely against any legislation she's likely to propose, I just am not against people honestly trying to come up with solutions to situations like this shooting. I have many problems with her legislation, but I don't have anything wrong with her proposing it right now.
 
Feinstein calls for new gun control laws after shooting | The Daily Caller

Really no point in quoting the story, as you can guess it. People shot dead in DC, hours later this hack is already whining about needing more 'gun control.'

What a big steaming pile of poo she is. And all like her are as well.

Anti-2nd amendment scum never let a bad gun story involving white victims(or alleged racist shooting black people) go to waste. Someone should tell her that if she wants people to give up semi-automatic firearm and standard capacity magazines then the police and other government agencies need to give up theirs as well and, the people that guard her ass can share a gun.
 
Last edited:
I'm definitely against any legislation she's likely to propose, I just am not against people honestly trying to come up with solutions to situations like this shooting. I have many problems with her legislation, but I don't have anything wrong with her proposing it right now.
It's more than disgusting to use the dead as political props, there is a special place in hell for her and those that would try to use tragedy to advance something against us.
 
Not sure why you're so disgusted by this.

Look at it this way. She sees gun control as an actual answer to the problem of gun violence. Something that can actually reduce the numbers and make people safer. Now I'm sure you disagree with this, but given that she believes it, don't you think it's only proper for someone to advocate something that they believe in right after something like this?

If someone was killed by a bunch of drug mules smuggling in weed in to the country, and someone argued after that that we need to change our drug laws, I wouldn't see that as disgusting, or politicking. I see it as advancing what you believe is part of the solution.

If her idea is stupid, then of course criticize her for it, but give up on the "it's not the right time!" crap. It's a bull**** argument. Either defend your stance on it's merits or let it go.

The point of the OP was that her timing was horrible. She has an opinion. Great... but she should shut her big fat blow hole right now. It's not the right time. It's like arguing for presidential helmets minutes after Kennedy got his brains sprayed all over his wife.
 
The point of the OP was that her timing was horrible. She has an opinion. Great... but she should shut her big fat blow hole right now. It's not the right time.
I'm good with her shutting it permanently and going into retirement.
 
It's more than disgusting to use the dead as political props, there is a special place in hell for her and those that would try to use tragedy to advance something against us.

If she's just using it to score a political point then I absolutely agree. If she's advancing because she sincerely believes that this legislation will limit situations like this one, then I completely disagree with her ideas, but I don't have any problem with her promoting them. I think its reasonable to discuss what could be done differently in the future, just like when you criticized the policy of not allowing guns in your first post. It's what we should be doing after a tragedy like this.
 
I'm definitely against any legislation she's likely to propose, I just am not against people honestly trying to come up with solutions to situations like this shooting. I have many problems with her legislation, but I don't have anything wrong with her proposing it right now.

If they honestly want solutions on how to stop such mass shootings, they need to drop the whole 'gun violence' thing, drop the stupid idea that guns are responsible for such events, and deal with the mental health system they destroyed decades ago.
 
Feinstein calls for new gun control laws after shooting | The Daily Caller

Really no point in quoting the story, as you can guess it. People shot dead in DC, hours later this hack is already whining about needing more 'gun control.'

What a big steaming pile of poo she is. And all like her are as well.

The only predictable thing is the boomsticklovers immediately defended their extremist views of guns against the obvious need of gun control.

But then boomsticklovers are nothing if not consistently wrong.
 
Fans of irony, take note.

Let's see, I started the thread, I am discussing the topic, you are not discussing the topic. Yep, you fail. Do you have any comments on the actual topic, or just more off topic trolling?
 
If she's just using it to score a political point then I absolutely agree. If she's advancing because she sincerely believes that this legislation will limit situations like this one, then I completely disagree with her ideas, but I don't have any problem with her promoting them. I think its reasonable to discuss what could be done differently in the future, just like when you criticized the policy of not allowing guns in your first post. It's what we should be doing after a tragedy like this.
Fair enough, however the rhetoric looks like pre fabricated talking points to me, and these anti-gunners could have the decency to wait, look at information, and then form a coherent plan based upon what they believe. If these "solutions" were truly based on what happened they wouldn't look exactly like the "solutions" that have been postured since the Brady group was formed.
 
The only predictable thing is the boomsticklovers immediately defended their extremist views of guns against the obvious need of gun control.

Let's see, from which 'side' of the argument did an elected official come out and make statements on top of dead bodies to advance their agenda? Oh, the anti-gun side. You FAIL miserably, but that's not new is it?
 
Let's see, I started the thread, I am discussing the topic, you are not discussing the topic. Yep, you fail. Do you have any comments on the actual topic, or just more off topic trolling?

More irony. Thanks.
Here's you discussing the topic...

"Really no point in quoting the story, as you can guess it. People shot dead in DC, hours later this hack is already whining about needing more 'gun control.'
What a big steaming pile of poo she is. And all like her are as well."

And you call my post 'partisan B.S.'? Get out. Reap what you sow, buddy. You opened the thread with a bucket-mouthed blanket condemnation of a point of view- don't expect others to pick your thread up out of the gutter you tossed it into.
 
Back
Top Bottom