Gun ownership poll

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Accused of something for the first time, that supposedly happened 35 years prior. The accusers OWN WITNESSES said it wasn't Kavanaugh. But never mind, insinuate he was guilty. The same thing was done to Clarence Thomas.
That's how some people work.

Meanwhile, the law of the land (for those of us who care) says a person is innocent until proven guilty. I guess that's just another law, like the 2nd Amendment, that we can ignore when convenient.

I bet you think Deshaun Watson did it though.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I bet you think Deshaun Watson did it though.

Why? Be clear with your insinuation.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

Why? Be clear with your insinuation.

Lots of evidence against him. Innocent until proven guilty tends to be selectively used to defend people who you like or with whom you side. Carrying it as a mantra to replace your own reasonable thoughts about whether a person did something or not is pretty silly. The law has technicalities - facts do not.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Lots of evidence against him. Innocent until proven guilty tends to be selectively used to defend people who you like or with whom you side. Carrying it as a mantra to replace your own reasonable thoughts about whether a person did something or not is pretty silly. The law has technicalities - facts do not.

There’s lots of evidence against Kavanaugh and Thomas? Where? They were able to produce essentially none but a politically convenient claim.

Nobody has made a contradiction or double standard. You’re just accusing him of it because of an assumption you’ve made up?

None of which has anything to do with the subject of the thread.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

There’s lots of evidence against Kavanaugh and Thomas? Where? They were able to produce essentially none but a politically convenient claim.

Nobody has made a contradiction or double standard. You’re just accusing him of it because of an assumption you’ve made up?

None of which has anything to do with the subject of the thread.

To circulate back to the subject of the thread, I think there are very few restrictions that will pass Sup Ct review for the foreseeable future so the debate seems more theoretical than anything else. I think that’s bad, you likely think that’s good. That’s about where we are.

[Mark17]

Regarding schools, there are common sense proposals out there, like locking all side doors and only having one main entrance open, and that with one or two armed guards and metal detectors (same type of setup as airports have when people board airplanes.)

Do a little research to see who's been proposing such solutions, and who has been opposing them.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Regarding schools, there are common sense proposals out there, like locking all side doors and only having one main entrance open, and that with one or two armed guards and metal detectors (same type of setup as airports have when people board airplanes.)

Do a little research to see who's been proposing such solutions, and who has been opposing them.

If common sense is not common, perhaps another term is more appropriate.