Paul trending on Facebook right now
-
Paul is trending on Facebook right now. It's due to his actions at the current marches. I thought I'd see some postings about it here on the board but I can't seem to find them.
but he got trending on FB due to what he said today
-
-
-
-
oobu24 wrote:
Did you hear Paul’s bodyguard say “Stay with Nancy?” I don’t blame him for having a couple bodyguards at a rally against gun violence. Not after what happened to John.
-
Nancy R wrote:
oobu24 wrote:
Did you hear Paul’s bodyguard say “Stay with Nancy?” I don’t blame him for having a couple bodyguards at a rally against gun violence. Not after what happened to John.
Yes, I caught that too. His "people" are always in the "wings".
-
oobu24 wrote:
Yes, I caught that too. His "people" are always in the "wings".
-
oobu24 wrote:
Nancy R wrote:
oobu24 wrote:
Did you hear Paul’s bodyguard say “Stay with Nancy?” I don’t blame him for having a couple bodyguards at a rally against gun violence. Not after what happened to John.
Yes, I caught that too. His "people" are always in the "wings".
Exactly and I am sure they are armed.
-
armed body guards is different then a teen boy with an assault rifle using it randomly inside a school.
this is what is wrong with the entire problem. Not all of us who are against mentally teen boys having easy access to weapons and taking them in a school and using them are against adults having their personal guns.
it's just doing nothing is....well, doing nothing about it. we just keep letting it happen. of course now, the survivors are getting mocked and harrased too. wow.
I remember the mid 90s. I had a kid in school. He had to only use clear backpacks and the school had metal detectors and guards. why? well, we had a gun problem back then.
funding cut the security.
there is nothing wrong with Paul having armed guards. different then allowing a lunatic easy access to a weapon. especialy one with a huge history
-
Exactly and I am sure they are armed.
And March for Our Lives was about sensible gun control, such as closing the loopholes that allow minors to buy guns, not taking guns away from trained and license professionals like law enforcement or security professionals who use them in their work. Only crazy gun nut alt-righters have equated sensible gun control with "they're trying to get rid of all guns forever!" I like people with guns to be adults who've had training and licensure to handle deadly weapons, not kids who bought them without restrictions thanks to Republicans refusing to regulate gun shows.
-
soymilk wrote:
Exactly and I am sure they are armed.
And March for Our Lives was about sensible gun control, such as closing the loopholes that allow minors to buy guns, not taking guns away from trained and license professionals like law enforcement or security professionals who use them in their work. Only crazy gun nut alt-righters have equated sensible gun control with "they're trying to get rid of all guns forever!" I like people with guns to be adults who've had training and licensure to handle deadly weapons, not kids who bought them without restrictions thanks to Republicans refusing to regulate gun shows.
Ditto! -
soymilk wrote:
Exactly and I am sure they are armed.
And March for Our Lives was about sensible gun control, such as closing the loopholes that allow minors to buy guns, not taking guns away from trained and license professionals like law enforcement or security professionals who use them in their work. Only crazy gun nut alt-righters have equated sensible gun control with "they're trying to get rid of all guns forever!" I like people with guns to be adults who've had training and licensure to handle deadly weapons, not kids who bought them without restrictions thanks to Republicans refusing to regulate gun shows.
Thanks, Soymilk! Agree with you completely.
-
soymilk wrote:
Exactly and I am sure they are armed.
And March for Our Lives was about sensible gun control, such as closing the loopholes that allow minors to buy guns, not taking guns away from trained and license professionals like law enforcement or security professionals who use them in their work. Only crazy gun nut alt-righters have equated sensible gun control with "they're trying to get rid of all guns forever!" I like people with guns to be adults who've had training and licensure to handle deadly weapons, not kids who bought them without restrictions thanks to Republicans refusing to regulate gun shows.
Agreed soymilk!
-
Kathryn O wrote:
armed body guards is different then a teen boy with an assault rifle using it randomly inside a school.
this is what is wrong with the entire problem. Not all of us who are against mentally teen boys having easy access to weapons and taking them in a school and using them are against adults having their personal guns.
it's just doing nothing is....well, doing nothing about it. we just keep letting it happen. of course now, the survivors are getting mocked and harrased too. wow.
I remember the mid 90s. I had a kid in school. He had to only use clear backpacks and the school had metal detectors and guards. why? well, we had a gun problem back then.
funding cut the security.
there is nothing wrong with Paul having armed guards. different then allowing a lunatic easy access to a weapon. especialy one with a huge history
I have owned a gun for many years and have no problem with how long a background check might take for me to buy my gun. I know I am going to use it only when necessary. I also know that somebody like myself does not need an assault weapon to protect myself or family, no problem with banning them. I am in favor of "smart" guns which I think would cut down on the wrong people getting guns. I do think it is kind of ironic that all the school shooting focused on was the gun control and not how government/police failed those children at every level. There were warnings that the FBI knew the shooter was a troubled young man. The security at the school stayed outside when he heard shots instead of doing what he was trained to do which is to confront the shooter and save lives. Let's not kid ourselves about gun violence. We could stop selling guns today and there would still be millions of guns in this country. It is a complicated issue, not just something that can be solved with a couple of laws and some marches. I never said there was anything wrong with McCartney having armed guards, just stating a fact that he can afford heavy security and a lot of people can't and may feel the need to own a weapon to protect themselves.
-
Yankeefan2 wrote:
I have owned a gun for many years and have no problem with how long a background check might take for me to buy my gun. I know I am going to use it only when necessary. I also know that somebody like myself does not need an assault weapon to protect myself or family, no problem with banning them. I am in favor of "smart" guns which I think would cut down on the wrong people getting guns. I do think it is kind of ironic that all the school shooting focused on was the gun control and not how government/police failed those children at every level. There were warnings that the FBI knew the shooter was a troubled young man. The security at the school stayed outside when he heard shots instead of doing what he was trained to do which is to confront the shooter and save lives. Let's not kid ourselves about gun violence. We could stop selling guns today and there would still be millions of guns in this country. It is a complicated issue, not just something that can be solved with a couple of laws and some marches. I never said there was anything wrong with McCartney having armed guards, just stating a fact that he can afford heavy security and a lot of people can't and may feel the need to own a weapon to protect themselves.
I really liked reading this. When it comes to pretty much anything political these days, people get so worked up that they can't say whatever they want to say without demonizing whoever they disagree with and making themselves a martyr and/or savior. This post simply states your opinion calmly and without hatred. Thank you for writing it.
-
HaileyMcComet wrote:
Yankeefan2 wrote:
I have owned a gun for many years and have no problem with how long a background check might take for me to buy my gun. I know I am going to use it only when necessary. I also know that somebody like myself does not need an assault weapon to protect myself or family, no problem with banning them. I am in favor of "smart" guns which I think would cut down on the wrong people getting guns. I do think it is kind of ironic that all the school shooting focused on was the gun control and not how government/police failed those children at every level. There were warnings that the FBI knew the shooter was a troubled young man. The security at the school stayed outside when he heard shots instead of doing what he was trained to do which is to confront the shooter and save lives. Let's not kid ourselves about gun violence. We could stop selling guns today and there would still be millions of guns in this country. It is a complicated issue, not just something that can be solved with a couple of laws and some marches. I never said there was anything wrong with McCartney having armed guards, just stating a fact that he can afford heavy security and a lot of people can't and may feel the need to own a weapon to protect themselves.
I really liked reading this. When it comes to pretty much anything political these days, people get so worked up that they can't say whatever they want to say without demonizing whoever they disagree with and making themselves a martyr and/or savior. This post simply states your opinion calmly and without hatred. Thank you for writing it.
Your welcome, glad you like reading it.
