CFP wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

pacino wrote:Madeline Dean withdraws from the Lt Gov race to run for PA-4 (Montgomery County).

if paul perry wasnt such a sissy he would be pa 4 now and probably the favorite to win it. sigh.

Can't wait for Muroff to run in this district, or maybe in one of the other 27 available races, wherever he has to go to run so he can win!

Rendell is weighing his options


has he officially moved to Montco yet? Dude was literally a ward leader in Mt Airy

edit: he's running in the PA5 against Sheehan and a million others

thephan wrote:TODAY @ ~1015 AM

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch laid into critics of gun rights during a speech to activists at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, blaming the FBI for dropping the ball in preventing mass shooters from obtaining weapons and accusing the media of trying to capitalize on mass shootings.

"I’ll say it really slowly so all the people on the platform in the back can hear me loud and clear: many in legacy media love mass shootings," Loesch said, referring to the media assembled on risers toward the back.

"You guys love it. I'm not saying that you love the tragedy, but I am saying that you love the ratings. Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.”

Quick take: A cold hard fucking wow.

She has a point when you compare how everyday gun violence is treated versus mass shooting and tragedies like in Florida; HOWEVER, she not only did it the most heartless way possible, she did it dishonestly. No one believes that the NRA gives one iota about gun violence in inner cities and she's just using it to make a shitty point.

WHAT ABOUT CHICAGO

I did not watch the video. Was there applause? That would be extra vile.

slugsrbad wrote:

thephan wrote:TODAY @ ~1015 AM

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch laid into critics of gun rights during a speech to activists at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, blaming the FBI for dropping the ball in preventing mass shooters from obtaining weapons and accusing the media of trying to capitalize on mass shootings.

"I’ll say it really slowly so all the people on the platform in the back can hear me loud and clear: many in legacy media love mass shootings," Loesch said, referring to the media assembled on risers toward the back.

"You guys love it. I'm not saying that you love the tragedy, but I am saying that you love the ratings. Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.”

Quick take: A cold hard #$!&@ wow.

She has a point when you compare how everyday gun violence is treated versus mass shooting and tragedies like in Florida; HOWEVER, she not only did it the most heartless way possible, she did it dishonestly. No one believes that the NRA gives one iota about gun violence in inner cities and she's just using it to make a #$!&@ point.

I don't know; I think local gun violence gets its share of coverage on local news, as I'm sure it does in other markets. It is impossible for national news outlets to cover all gun violence; there are not enough hours in the day. If she is suggesting that a similar event in an urban school district would somehow get less coverage in the national media, I strenuously disagree.

The MSM has plenty to boost ratings these days without mass shootings.

fwiw, Chris Hayes DID hold a townhall in Chicago on gun violence a few months ago

traderdave wrote:

slugsrbad wrote:

thephan wrote:TODAY @ ~1015 AM

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch laid into critics of gun rights during a speech to activists at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, blaming the FBI for dropping the ball in preventing mass shooters from obtaining weapons and accusing the media of trying to capitalize on mass shootings.

"I’ll say it really slowly so all the people on the platform in the back can hear me loud and clear: many in legacy media love mass shootings," Loesch said, referring to the media assembled on risers toward the back.

"You guys love it. I'm not saying that you love the tragedy, but I am saying that you love the ratings. Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.”

Quick take: A cold hard #$!&@ wow.

She has a point when you compare how everyday gun violence is treated versus mass shooting and tragedies like in Florida; HOWEVER, she not only did it the most heartless way possible, she did it dishonestly. No one believes that the NRA gives one iota about gun violence in inner cities and she's just using it to make a #$!&@ point.

I don't know; I think local gun violence gets its share of coverage on local news, as I'm sure it does in other markets. It is impossible for national news outlets to cover all gun violence; there are not enough hours in the day. If she is suggesting that a similar event in an urban school district would somehow get less coverage in the national media, I strenuously disagree.

I think the GOP would love some mass shootings in inner-city schools instead of suburban school.

traderdave wrote:

slugsrbad wrote:

thephan wrote:TODAY @ ~1015 AM

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch laid into critics of gun rights during a speech to activists at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, blaming the FBI for dropping the ball in preventing mass shooters from obtaining weapons and accusing the media of trying to capitalize on mass shootings.

"I’ll say it really slowly so all the people on the platform in the back can hear me loud and clear: many in legacy media love mass shootings," Loesch said, referring to the media assembled on risers toward the back.

"You guys love it. I'm not saying that you love the tragedy, but I am saying that you love the ratings. Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back.”

Quick take: A cold hard #$!&@ wow.

She has a point when you compare how everyday gun violence is treated versus mass shooting and tragedies like in Florida; HOWEVER, she not only did it the most heartless way possible, she did it dishonestly. No one believes that the NRA gives one iota about gun violence in inner cities and she's just using it to make a #$!&@ point.

I don't know; I think local gun violence gets its share of coverage on local news, as I'm sure it does in other markets. It is impossible for national news outlets to cover all gun violence; there are not enough hours in the day. If she is suggesting that a similar event in an urban school district would somehow get less coverage in the national media, I strenuously disagree.

Don't worry, I disagree with myself too. I just think that there IS a point in there, but that she nor the NRA is actually making it.

Right after being named the most dangerous city in America, Baltimore has a town hall coming up to discuss like everything... why someone is murdered daily basically... I do get to say I drive a Hopkins van through some bad neighborhoods in the 'most dangerous city in America' on a daily basis... street cred baby! Sobering fact I learned about Baltimore... most city schools don't have outside recess due to the threat of gun violence... sweet

Several schools in Philadelphia are the same way.

You know what? Teaching isn’t stressful enough. Let’s give the added stress of being 1 of a few designated heroes in the building, and just hope that your class gets chosen to be the one that gets shot at. While we’re at it, let’s assume that any teacher could actually choose to shoot any of his students let alone actually disable/ kill him. It will also be nice to get an email instructing one to leave his students alone and go hunting for the active shooter.

STOP

thephan wrote:I know you offered the caveat of some improbability Phred, but the insurance seems the least likely. although the case can be made that it is most logical, the risk model should say it is either a no, or it is beyond affordable. Even with some of what I said there is a creepy 'guns for rich guys' aspect that seems like the low IQ argument of 'crime finds a way' would be thrown like chaff.

Part of the goal is to make it more expensive and cost prohibitive in some cases to get a gun.

I'm still amazed that one of these grieving parents doesn't snap and start picking off NRA leaders. I'm against violence for any reason, but I could hardly blame them.

Monkeyboy wrote:I'm still amazed that one of these grieving parents doesn't snap and start picking off NRA leaders. I'm against violence for any reason, but I could hardly blame them.

I've thought about this, too. Not doing the shooting but someone starting to pick off NRA members or Senators/Congresspeople.

This whole thing is insane because if you arm the teachers and a kid brings a gun to school, he/she knows to take out the teacher first and continues on his way. I doubt it would do anything to minimize the loss of life. And even if it does, it would likely cause other cases where guns are used in schools the same way cops sometimes accidentally kill unarmed citizens ... and cops are supposedly trained. It would also increase the possibility that teachers might shoot other kids during a mass shooting. It also absolutely disrupts the learning environment in general to introduce more guns in a situation where kids are supposed to be learning

There are so many reasons why this is a bad idea, when removing assault weapons from the equation and tightening gun laws would be the best solution.

1 wrote:You know what? Teaching isn’t stressful enough.

SUMMERS OFF GIVE ME A BREAK SNOWFLAKE!!!

Another thought: we definitely don't want the teachers that are eager to have guns to have them, do we?

Even if a student didn’t have a gun to start with, let’s not forget how easily they could wrestle it away from a 115 lb female teacher with a week of firearm “training”.

Well they’re also going to be biometric activated to achieve maximum revenue for gun manufacturers, so don’t worry about that