To clarify, the amendment passed 52-48 with 9 dems voting yes. Reid decided it needed 60 votes and it was thus filibustered.
SIAP: Steve Kerr on the Texas shooting
- Thread starter DrHoops
- Start date
To clarify, the amendment passed 52-48 with 9 dems voting yes. Reid decided it needed 60 votes and it was thus filibustered.
You have stated that you agree with Kerr: why not just end it there with his argument and not go after him? Who cares if he is left, right, diagonal, up, or down?I said Kerr is a lefty. He joined the LIncoln Project to get Biden elected. The goal of the Lincoln Project was to get a Democrat elected. Biden.
Warriors' Kerr Backs Effort to Remove Police From Oakland Schools
While the NBA mulls over when basketball season can safely begin, Warriors Coach Steve Kerr says he’s using his free time to learn about racial issues and on Tuesday, he put his words into actions.www.nbcbayarea.com
"Steve Kerr isn’t just one of the winningest coaches in the NBA, he’s one of the more outspoken ones as well. Known for his progressive politics"
NBA coach Steve Kerr visits the Kennedy School
NBA coach Steve Kerr visits the Kennedy School to talk both sports and personal politics.news.harvard.edu
I can't imagine any rational person would be against gun violence, no matter who it involves. Ask Steve before you jump to conclusions about his opinions.
Because that wasn't the topic. Politics and Kerr not gun violence was the topic. There are multiple threads related to the shooting and guns. I even started one with data.
I thought the topic was the most recent school shooting: that has to be the main topic, right. Why not focus on that rather than Steve Kerr?
There's three separate threads focusing on it. I started one. Another has 565 posts and 4K views. This one is about Steve Kerr. As in the thread title. "Steve Kerr on....". He's part of the topic. If you don't want to talk about Steve Kerr why don't you visit the other threads. They don't have the Steve Kerr part.
I don’t love having armed police in schools, but I’m for it now. They will still be woefully out armed and it will probably end up like the Brooklyn grocery store.
I haven’t read that either but I read they followed him from his grandmothers and was there at the same time. Not sure if that is correct. That part is pretty murky from what I’ve seen.
It can be mitigated by having officer interact with kids, and teachers talking to kids about how Officer Friendly is just here to help us type things.
I think the thread is about what Steve said, not Steve himself. You are allowed to talk about whatever you want, true: I just don't get the focus on the source rather than the argument and whether a topic is political or not. What does it matter?
https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/202...-grassley-blocks-universal-background-checks/. I’d have to dig into the differences in the bill.I don't disagree with much of this. I'd exempt military from the 21 rule. I'd also say the Pubs have tried to "do something" but was thwarted by Reid and the dems via filibuster.
Grassley, Cruz, Tillis Introduce Bill to Improve Background Checks and Firearm Safety; Safeguard Second Amendment | U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
WASHINGTON – Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) today...www.grassley.senate.gov
And note it was approved 52-48 with dems in the majority.
Biden and the Progressive agenda.
The Progressives Have Already Won
They have President Joe Biden on their side. But will their ideological victory be empty?
Impact of AOC.
Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez an Insider Now?
After three years in the halls of power, she’s seen the “shit show” up close—and hasn’t given up on her vision for how to change it.
If you want to argue the progressive agenda didn't contribute to the mess we are in - another day. Enjoy the margaritas.
Last edited:
So did the Pubs filibuster it? Hr 8 or 4, the article was unclear on what the bill was. Because it could be passed today with 50 dem votes unless the Pubs filibuster.
It doesn't make any sense. Read posts 15, 101 and 107, shake your head, and be thankful that's not how your brain functions.
Look at your creepy little self. Yuck. You are so triggered. Go work on emojis with your "brain." Gadfly.
Last edited:
As noted because there's a hypocrisy in his speech. The left rises for certain shootings but is reticent for others. So when a "pull police from schools" celebrity speaks out it causes a gag reflex. It's inherently political to cherry pick the crimes you wish to be vocal about. And again both sides do it. The right in the thread about murder rates and Chicago. There's an implied message that's political. Unfortunate but reality.
He didn't offer any insight that isn't covered in the other thread. Because he was a celebrity Ribbon called out what he perceived as a rush to judgment and posturing
I am amazed how dems want to defund police (remember when Clinton did the 100k police addition? How times have changed.) , which causes the population to buy guns, then wants gun control. This perplexes me.
That is still a source argument, and you are better than that. I also think you are assuming a lot. I heard Steve say something about gun violence and legislation. If you don't care for the legislation, fine. But, why is he not allowed to talk about gun violence? It is the 800 lb elephant in the room. Gun violence is the main topic, and it is a topic that took his Dad's life.
Steve Kerr lives in a bubble. He has no idea. The far left is lost on policing. Yes it's crazy how much it has changed
Last edited:
It is a source argument. Steve Kerr on... The source is a pull police out of schools progressive who lives in a bubble. What happened to his dad has no bearing on the crime in this country. Is he riding beats with cops. Sitting in on confined dockets? Attending bail reduction hearings on gun charges? No. He's a celebrity in a bubble with woke feelz that wanted to pull cops from schools. The irony.
As for the content of his speech he didn't provide any new insight. I'm for gun legislation. The data reveals stringent permits and banning high capacity magazines are the best route. It's covered in 3 other threads.
Last edited:
He bought the gun in New York. You can have the strictest gun laws and they're worthless if the verification process doesn't work. And in New York, it didn't work.
Last edited:
-Background checkes - already have them.
-Assault rifle ban - define 'assault rifle' and how it's different from any other hunting rifle
-No open carry - how many mass murders are committed by people openly carrying. Or the fact that open carry actually discourages crime and shottings
-Hold the gun industry accountable - sure just as soon as you hold alcohol companies accountable. Alcohol accounts for far more drunk driving deaths than deaths by shootings
-Require firearm training and licensing - like they already do in states like Florida for open carry - not very original on your part. Do you think these mass shootings would be stopped by firearm training? Seriously? If anything, they'd make them deadlier
-Who is stopping the ATF from having computers?
-Eliminate gun shows. Again, how many of these killing are with weapons that have been illegally obtained.
None of your ideas will stop mass killings. Not in the slightest.
Last edited:
welcome to Pleasantville Elementary School.
what could possibly go wrong.
we can arm everyone, or disarm everyone.
the US has gone and is further pushing the arm everyone route.
most of the rest of the industrialized world has gone the disarm route.
perhaps we should just compare the results of the two opposing strategies.
idiocracy at work.
Last edited:
Then don't blame Republicans for not passing the laws you want. You have control of all Congress and Presidency.
Own it.
Be careful not to cut yourself. Your skin is exceptionally thin.
P.S. That shitty little post required two edits? Dang, how many tries did it take before you finally passed the bar exam?
At least he can make his living as a lawyer, unlike at least one other poster ID on this board.
There goes the mantra again. We’ve been through multiple times even in this thread most of the meaning. Most liberals want the police demilitarized. Do you think Bloomington needs a tank, for example? And they want some funds allocated to social workers/therapists, something I’ve read many police are in favor of.
I’ll just stop at your first because you aren’t being honest. Guns are easily purchased without background checks at gun shows and auctions.
Lmao. Have you heard of a guy by the name of Joe Manchin? There one or possibly two Dems who might hold up legislature. The rest constitutes the entire Republican Party. Don’t be obtuse.
They are everywhere else. I think they should be everywhere. I was just pointing out that there are already laws in place for it.
But you have to have an excuse not to actually read anything that might show the futility of Dr. Hoops suggestions.
Yeah, I have. Last I knew he is a Democrat. Not a Republican.
So why blame Republicans? If people in your own Party don't agree with you, why should anyone else?
Um...there are nearly four times as many deaths from firearms annually than there are annual deaths from drunk driving in the U.S.
I wonder how many in Steve’s locker room have multiple high capacity weapons- I obviously can’t say for sure but I’d bet it’s multiple. I wonder if he’s pontificating to them about it? Much like several on this board this is just another opportunity to virtue signal & throw rocks at the right without any desire to look at it objectively…
Of course. Kerr is a far left progressive. He comes out on mass shootings. Abbot yesterday in his speech said more people die by guns every weekend in Chicago than have died in Tx schools.
Both sides have their bent. Kerr was playing to his imo. Abbott was playing to his imo. Simple as that.
Both sides are right
