@Vaulk

What does your referencing of, "reducing the speed limit," have to do with the Second Amendment?

"Take the speed limit for example.  Reducing the speed limit in certain areas by changing the law worked very well actually.  This is because most of the people who were traveling at an unsafe speed were law abiding citizens.  So when the speed limit was reduced and controlled, for the most part, people obeyed those laws and we saw a reduction in automotive fatality as a result of unsafe speeds.  This was GREAT!  But this wouldn't work for gun control as the VAST majority of gun violence (Excluding suicide) is committed by hardened criminals...people who won't follow the law no matter how many we make or how many we times we change them."

And exactly where, does the Second Amendment, offer accommodations for a legal gun owner, to use, and treat, an AR-15, as a Mass shooting weapon, by murdering, 4 or more citizens, during a Mass shooters, gun violence crime? 

"Also, what exactly is a "Mass shooting weapon"?  P L E A S E  tell me that it has something to do with the number of rounds you can shoot in a given period of time because it's absolutely common knowledge that ALL guns can be shot at a ridiculously fast pace if you know what you're doing.  Revolvers can shoot the same number of rounds in a given 60 second time frame as an AR-15."

And what revolvers are you specifically talking about, that can fire the equal amount of rounds, in a given 60 second time frame, thus mirroring the AR-15's firing ability?

Can you please provide, the website, that your researched, that was able to provide, that observed information, that you used, to create your opinion with? 

I'm pro unborn baby.

I believe that adoption, is a better option, when it comes to abortion, or infanticide.

Bible Truth.

It's voluntary to believe the Bible.

Just as its voluntary to not believe in the Bible.

It equals out to a zero sum game.

"In game theory and economic theory, a zero-sum game is a mathematical representation of a situation in which each participant's gain or loss of utility is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the utility of the other participants."

@Plaffelvohfen

And your point is?

There are many points:

Because when it comes to some individuals, and their choices of language, around the other cultures, in public, everyone is getting an earshot of an education, of how the various cultures, refer to each other, based upon the individual language of their culture, and are defining themselves via their individual cultural language choices.

I've heard a Black individual call a Caucasian individual, the "C" word, or the "H" word before?

But I've yet to hear a Caucasian individual, to go out of their conversational way, to refer to another Caucasian individual, as the "C" word, or the "H" word?

And I'm wondering, if maybe two Caucasian individuals, going out of their way to call each other, one of those terms, if they might not be viewed, as sounding ignorant, by any of the other cultures, in public, around them? 

And I've heard Black individuals calling each other the "N" word before, along with other variations that are in direct relation, to that word?
(Does the "N" word maybe, or exclusively belong to the Black culture?)

Because I've heard Caucasian individuals, refer to other Caucasian individuals, as a white "N" word before? 

And I'm wondering, if when two Black individuals, go out of their way to referring to each other, as the "N" word, if they might not be viewed as sounding ignorant, by another of the other cultures, in the public, around them? 


"That someone can be more openly racist than Trump? Sure, evidence abound on this... But a short racist and a tall racist are both racist anyway..."

What does an individuals height (short racist, or tall racist) have to do with an individuals choice of language, is solely being based on their individual culture? 

It has zero to do with an individual, utilizing language, that might, or may come across as racist, to others? 

"Is your point that there a black racists, asian racists, latino racists, etc? Sure, ignorance and bigotry don't discriminate... Still can't see the relevance..."

The relevance is, that maybe some individuals, apparently like to play an individual racist card on themselves, by utilizing a choice of language based solely on their culture?

And maybe those same individual racist card speaker's, prefer not to hear anything about their individual cultural language, or figure, that those of their same culture, will just give them a pass, by calling another a racist, for utilizing the same language, towards another culture, and then getting chastised by some of the public, for that racist remark?

That's a culteral double standard.

Trump didn't say anything racist, but others have unjustifiably surrounded him with their double standard, standards.

When others have used racist language towards others, of a different culture, and got a pass for that action?

That's a double standard, in public view, whether some based on their individual cultures, are consciously willing to view it that way or not?

I guess, it's just par for the course, given the extended uses of certain words, via the various cultures, that utilize certain words, and have been doing it publically for years now?

I guess when it comes to certain words, that could be viewed as racist by some, aren't going away, anytime soon, are they?

Being that apparently certain cultures keep their cultural words of choice, around, with them right? 

For one generation, to maybe, teach to the next? 

I wonder, what culturally chosen languages, I might hear tomorrow, and one individual, may view a word as racist, while another individual of the same culture, maybe won't think anything about it? 

@Ampersand

(Prove it, support your claim?

Possible reference sources:

CNN, MSNBC, NPR, ABC, CBS, NBC, OAN, or FOX news? 

Here's the catch, your sources can't be based on Opinion Journalism, only actual news oriented Journalism?

Because apparently today, many of the Liberal news media outlets, are consciously dishing out liberal opinions, like it's actual news Journalism? 

So, do your research, and see who's reporting on the news that's happening nationwide, and the news involving President Trump, as well? 

CNN, seems to be relying on the President as their primary news fodder supplier, to entertain their viewership with?

NPR, has been doing the same thing, this week?)

And your response is this:
"Your standard is now that no-one criticizing Donald trump is able to use any critical reasoning or intelligence and instead we have to mindlessly wait for Donald Trump to tell us whether or not he's racist. Stop apologizing for racism."

My standard is based on the old school journalism: The who, what, when, why where, and how? The basic principles that actual journalists, go about crafting their NEWS stories with?

And basic journalism 101, means that the news journalist, is unbiased, along with being fair, and equal to the story, so that the public, can be properly informed , and educated, when they read a news paper, or watch their local TV news program? 



@Ampersand

"Stop apologizing for racism."

Did I apologize to you, over racism?

This is twice, now, that you have put words in my mouth? (Show me the quote?)


So you're, in a sense telling me that some of the self "Opinionated Opinion Journalists," are "exercising critical reasoning or intelligence" and they should be able to say what they want, BASED, on their own opinions, and not the factual facts, when it comes to Trump? 

Should some of the Opinionated Liberal news anchors apologize, to the public in general for how they are unfairly, and unequal treating Trump? 

@Ampersand: Do you maybe view yourself as a self created opinion journalist?