Trump falls!! Hurt too

[Ford]

Trump was shot at.

No question. Shots happened, <snipped irrelevant assumption>
… why?

Because he had a gun.

He had a gun, and was raised in a society where a gun is sold (both figuratively and literally) as a solution to whatever ails 'ya.

Worried about someone breaking into your house? Gun. Worried you might be robbed walking down the street? Gun. Worried about driving into a "bad" neighborhood? Gun. Worried that you just don't look cool enough? Gun!

Gun! It's the cure-all for all your fears!

Unfortunately, people also have decided that it has other uses. Angry that you got fired from a job you hated anyway? Go in there and shoot up the place. Did you get picked on in school? Take a bunch of guns there after you graduate and open fire. Pissed at a politician? Go to a rally or campaign event and shoot them (Trump should probably have a nice long talk with Gabby Giffords). Angry at Hollywood movies? Open fire on a crowded theater. Hate a certain minority? Take a gun to their house of worship and blast away. Abortion got you all worked up? Kill a doctor/bomb a clinic. Then of course there's the garden variety shooting that happens on the regular when one gang has beef with another...grab your guns and head over to their hood!

This kid seems to have decided at some point that taking an AR-15 (the wildly popular gun due to relentless marketing) and "solve" his "problem" the only way he knew how.

The gun culture in this country is so messed up. Back when I was still making commercials, I did some for a local gun dealer. Like with any client, I would gather info before writing the copy, and I went to their website. It's crazy, and it was just like every other one. A name like "Patriot Tactical" or "Eagle Firearms" or "Freedom Tactical Supply" with big, bold letters, American flag themed everything, and of course AR-style rifles prominently displayed on the landing page.

I wondered what sort of other firearms they sold, so I decided to see if they had a deal on a Henry rifle. In the words of Obi-Wan, "an elegant weapon, for a more civilized age." I had to dig a few pages deep into the rifle section to find anything that wasn't gussied up to look like an assault rifle. Now, when I was a kid, my dad was a member of the NRA...back in the 70s before the organization went nuts...and we got their magazines delivered to the house.

With the exception of "Armed Citizen" - a page or two of blurbs about someone who defended themself or their house with a firearm that read like a small town paper's police blotter - it was all about guns for hunting, sport shooting, or collecting. The ads - and this was a big platform for manufactures to sell to NRA members - were high gloss and all about the quality and workmanship behind the firearms...shotguns and deer rifles mostly. The exotic wood grains used, the detail in the stock, the bits and bobs made of quality shiny metal. The content of the magazine was completely devoid of any sort of "girding for war stuff" you'd find in rags like "Soldier of Fortune."

Now you go to a gun store's website and you've gotta drill down to find a hunting rifle with a wooden stock or a shotgun. It's all weapons of war, or things that are made to look as such.

 

[marc]

Well someone tested what would happen if an AR-15 grazed someone’s ear. Yea, he was cut by shrapnel from the teleprompter

 

[Derec]

If the person is qualified, there is no reason to point out they were a “dei” pick.

I disagree. The question is not whether X meets minimum qualifications, but that discriminatory selection (by e.g. considering only black females for positions such as SCOTUS justice, Veep or US Senator from California) makes it unlikely that the best person for the job will be selected.

It is also a big middle finger who does not belong to the favored demographic. Dems already struggle for support from white men. Overtly discriminating against us will not help this.

In the context of Ms Harris, racist snd misogynist is a reasonable conclusion in the absence of a compelling argument, even if turns out to be in error.

No, it is not.

Let’s be clear: The REAL meaning of. “DEI hire,” properly construed without the obvious racist content of MAGAts, is that a QUALIFIED person of color, woman, gay, trans, what have you, is able to compete and get hired on equal footing with white, hetero, cisgendered men.

No, it is not, for the reasons I already explained to the Hound.
How did Kamala or KBJ or Laphonza Butler "compete and get hired on equal footing with white, hetero, cisgendered men" when the people who selected them made it clear that they would not consider any "white, hetero, cisgendered men" for the position under any circumstances?

MAGAts have repurposed the meaning to their own bigotry,

Biden and Goodhair are MAGAts now?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If the person is qualified, there is no reason to point out they were a “dei” pick.

I disagree. The question is not whether X meets minimum qualifications, but that discriminatory selection (by e.g. considering only black females for positions such as SCOTUS justice, Veep or US Senator from California) makes it unlikely that the best person for the job will be selected.

It is also a big middle finger who does not belong to the favored demographic. Dems already struggle for support from white men. Overtly discriminating against us will not help this.

I think what matters is, as long as they are minority or a female, their selection will be questioned by some, regardless their qualifications, regardless how good they are for the position.

And we just have to suck it up and understand that some people just won't drop it.

After all, Donald Trump was shot at, and what are those people talking about? DEI. Tells ya how fucked up their priorities are.

 

[Shadowy Man]

If the person is qualified, there is no reason to point out they were a “dei” pick.

I disagree. The question is not whether X meets minimum qualifications, but that discriminatory selection (by e.g. considering only black females for positions such as SCOTUS justice, Veep or US Senator from California) makes it unlikely that the best person for the job will be selected.

once the bar of “qualified” has been surpassed, “best person for the job” will always be subjective.

 

[Jarhyn]

Well someone tested what would happen if an AR-15 grazed someone’s ear. Yea, he was cut by shrapnel from the teleprompter

I would love to see someone square all the geometry of the shot position, the supposed angle, the position of the teleprompters, etc. too.

If it had been a bullet wound half his ear would be torn apart.

Teleprompters are generally in front of a person though. His ear was behind him, almost fully occluded on the side of the projectile by his fat head. A bullet would have taken his ear off, and shrapnel wouldn't have made it to that side of his head.

 

[ZiprHead]

Well someone tested what would happen if an AR-15 grazed someone’s ear. Yea, he was cut by shrapnel from the teleprompter

I would love to see someone square all the geometry of the shot position, the supposed angle, the position of the teleprompters, etc. too.

If it had been a bullet wound half his ear would be torn apart.

Teleprompters are generally in front of a person though. His ear was behind him, almost fully occluded on the side of the projectile by his fat head. A bullet would have taken his ear off, and shrapnel wouldn't have made it to that side of his head.

So much that we don't know about this incident. All we know is the weapon was an AR type weapon. We don't know what the actual weapon was and what types of rounds it shot. And the shot certainly didn't come from 20 feet away as in the demonstration above. The further from the firing point the lesser the power of the shot carries. The above demo is shit.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

 

[Politesse]

That tie is in danger.

 

[Elixir]

That tie is in danger.

Nothing, to a guy who just took a bullet for his country.