Pages

Jump to bottom

18 comments

1 Sionainn  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 6:52:57am

That’s low, even for the NRA.

2 alinuxguru  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 6:54:37am

re: #1 Sionainn

The NRA blames violent video games for Adam Lanza. They then release a first person shooter app for ages 4 and up. The low bar for the NRA is far lower than you can imagine.

3 blueraven  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 8:21:06am

This is so disgusting. I thought they hit rock bottom with their coffin target shooting app for children, but I was wrong.

Keep digging NRA.

4 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 10:38:24am
I’m not going to defend the NRA. The president’s children are innocent bystanders and deserve privacy, they are not public figures… But I wonder. Is this similar in any way? Consensus?
5 HappyWarrior  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 10:40:17am

re: #2 alinuxguru

The NRA blames violent video games for Adam Lanza. They then release a first person shooter app for ages 4 and up. The low bar for the NRA is far lower than you can imagine.

I heard about that. But yeah seems to me that they’re constantly setting the bar lower.

6 Four More Tears  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 10:41:35am

They’ve become the punchline to a bad joke. These people make tobacco lobbyists look like paragons of virtue.

7 aagcobb  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 10:49:01am

Hey, wouldn’t it be a great jobs program to hire a few million new secret service agents so all children could have the same level of protection as the President’s daughters?/

8 blueraven  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 11:21:08am

re: #4 Major Tom

[Embedded content]

I’m not going to defend the NRA. The president’s children are innocent bystanders and deserve privacy, they are not public figures… But I wonder. Is this similar in any way? Consensus?

In what respect Charlie?
Sorry I dont get your point at all.

9 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 11:26:15am

…Bringing up a public figure’s family members to make a point, personalizing the issue…

10 blueraven  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 11:49:36am

re: #9 Major Tom

…Bringing up a public figure’s family members to make a point, personalizing the issue…

In that broad sense yes. However this was a question in a debate, asked by a reporter, not an attack ad run by a lobby group.

11 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 11:54:36am

Frankly I saw the 4 1/2 minute spot, and I’m not blown away with outrage. It only mentions the president’s kids have 11 guards at their school. No where in the ad does it suggest that every kid should be as protected as the president’s kids, and no where in the ad does it suggest that the president’s kids shouldn’t have protection. The ad also states that David Gregory’s kids are protected by armed guards at their school(s)… Is that outrageous too? I’m not one who believes that more guns = safer environment, always… and I have noticed that a lot of these shooting incidents occur at schools with guards on duty, so I don’t make any claims about the effectiveness of the practice, and I’m certainly not arguing for it. But the ad isn’t all that offensive… Or maybe I saw the wrong ad, or I’m missing something.

12 Locker  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 12:27:28pm

re: #11 Major Tom

I didn’t say it was outrageous or offensive. I said it was “red meat” and a ridiculous premise. I stand by that.

13 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 12:40:39pm

Others (maybe not here) have said it was offensive to mention the President’s children, but fair enough… What is ridiculous about the premise? #18 of the president’s 23 executive orders is, “18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.” Isn’t that what the NRA is saying too? At the end of the ad they something to the effect that we (as a society) protect the wealthy’s interests and saftey more than we do the poor… I don’t think that is ridiculous either. …I don’t now, nor have I ever owned a gun. But I’m curious why everyone dismisses their suggestion so quickly given that the president is suggesting their plan among his many ideas…

14 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 12:56:58pm

Still curious as to why the suggestion is ridiculous. The anonymous down ding notwithstanding.

15 Interesting Times  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 12:58:46pm

re: #14 Major Tom

Go read the two main threads on this topic:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

16 Locker  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 1:07:14pm

re: #13 Major Tom

The problem is comparing the probable threat of violence against average school children to the probable threat of violence against the President’s children and then demanding equal security.

In other words you don’t put troops out in the middle of nowhere to guard a shepherd, you put them around the general… so to speak.

17 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 1:50:30pm

re: #15 Interesting Times
OK, this 35 sec spot, [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…] is a hell of a lot less nuanced than the 4 1/2 minute ad… I had not seen that one. I thought there was only one ad.

re: #16 Locker
I don’t think the longer ad is making the point that they deserve equal amounts of security. (However, the shorter one is less clear on that, and actually seems to suggest that they do. I’ll give you that.)

As for the limited resources argument, I find that a little hollow as 1/3 of schools already have resource officers or guards of some kind on duty. And that there are so many unemployed vets, and older police officers that could fill the roles, hypothetically speaking.

18 Major Tom  Wed, Jan 16, 2013 2:46:45pm

“There’s a huge distinction between the NRA proposal and what the administration has proposed,” she said. “The NRA proposed arming educators and volunteer security guards and private security personnel. The school resource officer program is an actual program that was funded a number of years ago by Joe Biden’s bill to put law enforcement — actual police offers — in schools after they’ve received adequate training.”

“So there’s a huge distinction between police officers who live in the community, who are from the community, and who are wanted by the community,” she said, “as opposed to forcing school districts to accept untrained personnel who really don’t understand how to work in a school setting.” [Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

That’s a decent argument.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 74 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
5 days ago
Views: 172 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1