So Very Sad....

[HoosierFaithful]

5 hours ago, mrflynn03 said:

Nothing is ever as it seems.  These things start organically, then agitators, community organizers, and agenda pushers latch on. It happens all across the political spectrum so it is not one sided.

It is just the way the game is played . Been that way for centuries. 

That's quite the cynical view.  

[rico]

3 hours ago, HoosierFaithful said:

That's quite the cynical view.  

I think a majority of America is cynical right now.

[Reacher]

Chicago Public schools are being sued-

“It’s appalling that 10 to 14-year-old kids would be coerced, by their teachers, to participate in a political demonstration,” said Chris Cleveland, chairman of the Chicago GOP, in a statement. “A 10-year-old kid isn’t going to have an informed opinion on these political matters, and shouldn’t be expected to have the fortitude to hold a different opinion from everyone else in his or her classroom. This is political indoctrination, pure and simple.”

“It’s a violation of CPS policy, of state law, and of the First Amendment for a government-run school to organize a political demonstration and pressure students to participate in it,” he added.

[KoB2011]

2 hours ago, Reacher said:

Chicago Public schools are being sued-

“It’s appalling that 10 to 14-year-old kids would be coerced, by their teachers, to participate in a political demonstration,” said Chris Cleveland, chairman of the Chicago GOP, in a statement. “A 10-year-old kid isn’t going to have an informed opinion on these political matters, and shouldn’t be expected to have the fortitude to hold a different opinion from everyone else in his or her classroom. This is political indoctrination, pure and simple.”

“It’s a violation of CPS policy, of state law, and of the First Amendment for a government-run school to organize a political demonstration and pressure students to participate in it,” he added.

What exactly does this prove? I can file a lawsuit and make allegations for anything. 

Side note: glad to see Congress taking swift action after a tragedy. I know they haven't had adequate time to think of all the negative consequences of legislation, but still, glad to see after a death they're preventing it from happening. It is simply not okay for dogs to keep dying in flights. I know, I know, dogs can find other ways to die, but glad they're stopping them from dying in this way. 

[mrflynn03]

As long as gun control advocates are unwilling to compromise on gun control nothing will move legislation wise. 

What are these legislators willing to discuss in trade for any of their proposals?  I'm asking because I havent seen anything but maybe they have. 

National reciprocity would be a good one. Believe it or not, alot of people who are travelling/ moving through a state when relocating, aren't familiar with another states laws and are at risk of being turned into felons with possible prison time for doing what was legal in their home state.  

The dog overhead bin bill will probably not require any debate and will probably move swiftly with bipartisan support if it goes that far.  Much different than dealing with a bill that will soak up alot of time and heated exchange . 

[Reacher]

2 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

What exactly does this prove? I can file a lawsuit and make allegations for anything. 

I thought you were saying these student walkouts were led by students and free from political influence?  Below you say "the kids are driving the boat". Along with Baltimore, it shows there was quite a bit of political influence. The walkout was organized by the Womans March- a political entity- and supported by teachers unions- another political entity and organized by the schools- not the students. The more I learn, the less credit I can give students for their role. My 10% to 90% range is trending more towards the students 10% side. 

 

On 3/14/2018 at 9:08 PM, KoB2011 said:

I don't think students should be getting bused to rallies by the government. That's a huge overreach even if you don't factor in the lack of school funding in my opinion. 

Having said that, I don't think students messaging is being fed to them. I think they've grown up going through drills that make them afraid for their lives and they have had enough. There is a strong wind of change in this country and the kids are driving the boat. 

I actually saw a clip last night of a girl in front of a microphone waiting for a paper to be handed to her which she then read from. Sure didn't sound like she was familiar with it the way she stumbled through it. 

On 3/14/2018 at 6:17 PM, KoB2011 said:

There protests nationally today as students walked out of schools. Regardless of your feelings on why they are protesting, surely we can all agree it is wonderful to see young people getting involved and peacefully protesting. 

Not all kids were protesting peacefully- http://www.wsmv.com/story/37734086/antioch-high-school-holds-second-peaceful-protest-after-walkout-turns-violent

I'm not faulting you at all for not knowing that some rallies turned violent.

It's more a reaction to the comment "peaceful protest" which are often reported that way but in reality are anything but.

[KoB2011]

I'll try to touch on everything from these two posts but if I miss on something, apologies in advance. 

From a compromise standpoint, I think compromise requires dialogue. One side is choosing to not have it. What do you want to see as a compromise? The one thing you're suggesting is a violation of states rights. 

I do think students walking out is something the students care about on their own. A GOP leader filing a lawsuit doesn't disprove that. 

I am sure their messaging is being fine tuned by other groups; this is common place. If you're taking any talking points from someone else yours is too. 

I am sure there were exceptions to peaceful protests too, but that happens both ways. If you'd like you like to group people by the fringe that's probably a losing proposition for us all. I am confident I can find something you believe in but don't want to be categorized by the fringe. 

[rico]

16 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I'll try to touch on everything from these two posts but if I miss on something, apologies in advance. 

From a compromise standpoint, I think compromise requires dialogue. One side is choosing to not have it. What do you want to see as a compromise? The one thing you're suggesting is a violation of states rights. 

I do think students walking out is something the students care about on their own. A GOP leader filing a lawsuit doesn't disprove that. 

I am sure their messaging is being fine tuned by other groups; this is common place. If you're taking any talking points from someone else yours is too. 

I am sure there were exceptions to peaceful protests too, but that happens both ways. If you'd like you like to group people by the fringe that's probably a losing proposition for us all. I am confident I can find something you believe in but don't want to be categorized by the fringe. 

Let me ask you this......what kind of a city is Chicago?  What are they known for?  

Crime, corruption, and their politics.

[mrflynn03]

What if a state wanted to ban the distribution of political material from a specific party by non residents, or not allow NPR or certain media outlets to broadcast.

Or maybe a state would not allow one to express his right to avoid self incriminating which would affect nonresident too. Or implement a poll tax or an aptitude test to vote.  

None of this would hold up in a court.  These are constitutionally protected rights transcending state boundaries.

Why should the right to carry and not fear legal repercussions in another state you don't reside in when doing so in your own state is legal be different?

My wifes family lives in illinois 25 miles west of the border. If, when visiting, i merely had my pistol unchambered with loaded magazine in my glovebox and got caught( legal in indiana) I go to jail and face felony charges. Mag unloaded in glovebox and pistol in locked case im fine. I know this but most people don't.

Maybe not allow carrying across state lines but have protections for non residents transporting?

In exchange for national age limit of 21 and a 7 day waiting period . 

That seems equitable. 

http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/05/concealed-carry-reciprocity-in-no-way-threatens-states-rights/

[KoB2011]

43 minutes ago, rico said:

Let me ask you this......what kind of a city is Chicago?  What are they known for?  

Crime, corruption, and their politics.

Chicago is known for many things. These were nationwide protests though, so zeroing in on Chicago would be silly. 

[rico]

5 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Chicago is known for many things. These were nationwide protests though, so zeroing in on Chicago would be silly. 

No, to not know how their "politics" are would be silly.

[KoB2011]

8 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

What if a state wanted to ban the distribution of political material from a specific party by non residents, or not allow NPR or certain media outlets to broadcast.

Or maybe a state would not allow one to express his right to avoid self incriminating which would affect nonresident too. Or implement a poll tax or an aptitude test to vote.  

None of this would hold up in a court.  These are constitutionally protected rights transcending state boundaries.

Why should the right to carry and not fear legal repercussions in another state you don't reside in when doing so in your own state is legal be different?

My wifes family lives in illinois 25 miles west of the border. If, when visiting, i merely had my pistol unchambered with loaded magazine in my glovebox and got caught( legal in indiana) I go to jail and face felony charges. Mag unloaded in glovebox and pistol in locked case im fine. I know this but most people don't.

Maybe not allow carrying across state lines but have protections for non residents transporting?

In exchange for national age limit of 21 and a 7 day waiting period . 

That seems equitable. 

http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/05/concealed-carry-reciprocity-in-no-way-threatens-states-rights/

That's a fair point and worth considering, I'll have to think more on it. 

I don't think the First Amendment stuff is a great example because there are restrictions there. I also think, and this may just be a wording issue, a law that targets only non-residents wouldn't hold up. Lack of reciprocity laws aren't an issue of targeting non-residents, it's applying a states law equally to a non-resident. 

I do see your point, however, that we need to have a federal standard for what the Second Amendment means and what it protects and that should apply equally in all states. 

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, rico said:

No, to not know how their "politics" are would be silly.

I know how their politics are. What's your point? This isn't at all about Chicago, it's a nation wide protest that happened. 

[rico]

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I know how their politics are. What's your point? This isn't at all about Chicago, it's a nation wide protest that happened. 

Go back to the school thing.  

[KoB2011]

28 minutes ago, rico said:

Go back to the school thing.  

By school thing do you mean because a republican in Chicago is suing over the school protests? Are you talking about the education thread? If you could be specific when you make a point it would help; I'm not capable of figuring out what you mean when you are vague and it's derailing what has been an otherwise good discussion. Just state clearly what you mean and don't try to make me interpret it, this shouldn't be difficult if you have a clear and concise point. 

[mrflynn03]

My intent was to equate banning distribution of political material to my point on protecting people transporting. A better way to put it would be a state like illinois banning possession for residents but a non resident getting in legal trouble for transporting. 

Looks like you understand where I was trying to go. And I do believe states rights is an important division of power.

I can understand a state enacting or not their own reciprocity laws and not want a federal reciprocity law. I do think protecting people travelling is a good idea with maybe a national standard for storage.  I used reciprocity as an example because it is a good bargaining chip to me and can lead to what I believe are equitable laws. A small part of the overall issue.  

I do agree dialogue is needed for compromise. Its unfortunate emotional issues push sides to the extremities of the debate. 

[mrflynn03]

On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:40 PM, HoosierFaithful said:

That's quite the cynical view.  

That Is a fair point.  I tend to be sometimes.

[rico]

13 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

By school thing do you mean because a republican in Chicago is suing over the school protests? Are you talking about the education thread? If you could be specific when you make a point it would help; I'm not capable of figuring out what you mean when you are vague and it's derailing what has been an otherwise good discussion. Just state clearly what you mean and don't try to make me interpret it, this shouldn't be difficult if you have a clear and concise point. 

What party controls Chicago?

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, rico said:

What party controls Chicago?

Again, I would ask you make a real point and not derail the thread as you've attempted numerous times. We have done well avoiding getting into partisan politics until this point. 

This isn't a Chicago issue; guns or the protest. It's a nationwide issue so to zero in on Chicago is silly. 

[Reacher]

3 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I do think students walking out is something the students care about on their own. A GOP leader filing a lawsuit doesn't disprove that. 

I am sure their messaging is being fine tuned by other groups; this is common place. If you're taking any talking points from someone else yours is too. 

An elementary school in MN had 6-7 year olds participating in the walkout. When I was in the 3rd grade, students weren't organizing walkouts.

You said " I don't think students messaging is being fed to them"  Now its "I am sure their messaging is being fine tuned by other groups; this is common place." ???

I'm proud I went to school during a time when critical thinking was taught. As such, I scan news sites from all over and form my own opinions instead of following any "fake news" narrative.

As for guns, get rid of bump stocks, gun show loopholes, and have universal background checks. In return, allow nationwide reciprocal carry and stop states from imposing rules and regulations that run hundreds/ thousands of $ that are nothing more than a regressive tax penalizing the poor who often are the most in need of protection.

[KoB2011]

56 minutes ago, Reacher said:

An elementary school in MN had 6-7 year olds participating in the walkout. When I was in the 3rd grade, students weren't organizing walkouts.

You said " I don't think students messaging is being fed to them"  Now its "I am sure their messaging is being fine tuned by other groups; this is common place." ???

I'm proud I went to school during a time when critical thinking was taught. As such, I scan news sites from all over and form my own opinions instead of following any "fake news" narrative.

As for guns, get rid of bump stocks, gun show loopholes, and have universal background checks. In return, allow nationwide reciprocal carry and stop states from imposing rules and regulations that run hundreds/ thousands of $ that are nothing more than a regressive tax penalizing the poor who often are the most in need of protection.

There's a massive difference in having a message fed to you and having in fine tuned by someone else. If you don't think so then you don't think any modern president has ever given us their opinion because they all have speech writers. 

I won't return the pot shot you took, but I'm comfortable with my critical thinking and the number of places I pull information from. I have never been one to just believe a single source on anything, no matter what that source may be. 

[Reacher]

For those still following the Parkland shooting, it looks like "the jail to school pipeline" was a factor here and was (partly?) responsible for Cruz still being in school,  not getting help, and being allowed to buy weapons-

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/03/16/broward_countys_jail-to-classroom_pipeline.html

The rules were in place to prevent this tragedy but were not followed-

https://apnews.com/9f92fe777771465b87f6ec828e40e9fb

[Hoosierhoopster]

On 3/16/2018 at 8:08 PM, Reacher said:

 

As for guns, get rid of bump stocks, gun show loopholes, and have universal background checks. In return, allow nationwide reciprocal carry and stop states from imposing rules and regulations that run hundreds/ thousands of $ that are nothing more than a regressive tax penalizing the poor who often are the most in need of protection.

I like the discussion of compromises, but you're starting the discussion of compromises with state rights, and I would think you know that the NRA has been actively backing a nationwide concealed carry law for decades, in its interest in increasing gun carry across the country. This seems kind of disengenous, honestly, it's been the NRA's top legislative priority. Among other things, law enforcement in many large cities (NY, LA etc.) oppose the measure as it could cause an erosion of stricter gun laws by causing states to bow to states with weak or less strict gun restrictions. Some states don't even require a permit for concealed carry, that's brilliant.   Basically, impose lax concealed carry laws of some Southern states and sparsely populated areas on major cities, etc. where law enforcement are all for the types of restrictions that this NRA-backed drive seeks to weaken. Great. Then there's the overriding obvious issue of whether Congress can negotiate away state rights, and the precedent that sets - which is, for what it's worth, directly contrary to the position that the Fed Govt shouldn't weaken states rights. Not getting political, but is that really where you want to go? Do you understand that this idea is directly contrary to recognition of states rights?   Without going on at length, you're simply ignoring states' police power, that is the power reserved to states to regulate public safety (which in turn recognizes that states are different and have different needs in regulating public safety). More than a dozen state attorneys general have come out strongly against this NRA-backed drive, as unconstitutional. We're talking constitutional principles of federalism.

[mrflynn03]

What if indiana passed a law outlawing gay marriage and arrested and imprisoned a gay couple who were travelling through the state?  So then the federal govt passes a law saying gay marriage is legal everywhere nullifying state laws. Gay marriage isnt constitutionally protected though the supreme court has or would have a ruling favoring gay marriage in this situation. So i say with reciprocity, if it would pass then send it to the courts. 

Or maybe im just being facetious.

[Reacher]

HH, I'm not as up to speed on this as you are. I was piggy backing on some earlier comments. Seems to me there should be compromise somewhere. As far as states rights, states do recognize other states Drivers Licenses. Kentucky has a minimum age of 16. They don't arrest 15 year olds from other states do they? One could argue that a 14 year old from Iowa with a valid license poses a threat to drivers in KY. Common sense to me is the same reciprocity should apply for a different type of state issued ID. Why doesn't it? Drivers licenses are not enumerated in the constitution whereas the right bear arms is. Mr Flynn's argument makes sense to me as well. I know there are arguments and emotions at play on both sides. My personal view is that we should error on the side of less regulation. Don't restrict rights unless there is a reason to do so. Bringing it back to Parkland, the Cruz kid should have been arrested , provided counseling, been subject to background checks when buying guns that would have prevented such purchases, been on the radar of the FBI, etc. Regulations were already in place to deal with such an issue and were not followed. I don't see more rules that will not be followed by authorities and broken by criminals anyways as the solution. 

I'll admit my bias is antiregulation due to the industry I work in. Lets mandate prospectuses to safeguard the public from making uninformed investment choices ???