Florida to students: Nope, we don’t care
Florida legislators aren’t going to ban assault weapons just because a bunch of sissy kids think they should.
The Florida House rejects a motion to take up a bill banning assault rifles.
State Representative Kionne McGhee, a Democrat from Miami, asked for an unusual procedural move to consider his legislation, which had been filed earlier in the session but was never scheduled for a hearing.
“The shooting in Parkland demands extraordinary action,” Mr. McGhee said Tuesday on the House floor, as a group of Stoneman Douglas High students, who had previously arrived, peered down from the gallery.
The motion failed, 36 to 71, in a vote along party lines. At least one student burst into tears, Mr. McGhee said. One girl covered her mouth in despair, as a woman patted her arm to comfort her. The episode lasted 2 minutes and 38 seconds.
As the news began to spread aboard a bus of students headed to the capital, Anthony Lopez, 16, a junior, slammed his head back on the bus seat. He placed a hand on his forehead. “That’s infuriating,” he said. “They’re acting inhuman.”
“The one we fear we have is that nothing will change,” he added.
A similar proposal filed last year in the wake of the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando also went nowhere.
The right to buy an assault weapon, or a hundred assault weapons, is our most sacred right of all. You can take our freedom of speech, our right to assemble, our freedom of association, but our right to amass enough firepower to kill everyone at the next town meeting, don’t even think about it.
Apparently you can even take our right to life.
You only have a right to life while “preborn.” After that, all bets are off.
Check out Dinesh D’Souza’s tweets on the topic for a refreshing breath of sweet humanity.
(That was sarcasm. Double Dee continuous to be a felon in the moral as well as the legal sense.)
Have you seen that, an hour after the Florida congress refused to accept the gun control motion, that great state’s House of Reps approved a resolution declaring pornography to be a public health risk?
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/374816-florida-house-votes-to-declare-porn-a-public-health-risk-within-an-hour
I assume they still believe the canard about eyesight and hairy palms.
AoS, you’ve gotta get your priorities straight. God don’t like us lookin’ at them dirty pictures, but the Bible didn’t say nothin’ about automatic weapons. In fact, Jesus said to sell your cloak and buy a sword…well, a semi-automatic weapon’s just a 21st century sword. Gotta keep up with the times!
Hey, AoS, while we’re talking about priorities – I just purchased a case of wine for some friends of mine who’ve done me a favor. I had some trouble getting the order made, because whatever I ordered, however I removed things, I kept getting the message “Your legislators don’t think you should have that much wine.” The goddamned Republican legislature in this state, a legislature that would never dream of gun control, has talked about allowing students to open carry in school, and forbids state agencies to use global warming as an explanation for anything, has taken it upon themselves to decide that they know what is best for a 57 year old professional woman with a doctorate in Biological science and no drinking problem.
Because alcohol kills. Yes, it does, if misused. But guns don’t kill, people kill. Guns kill when they are used as intended; alcohol kills when used to excess. But we must ban the alcohol, because of God, I presume. The guns we must get out there in greater and greater amounts.
I presume it is a good idea, if we’re going to have that many guns flying around, to put some limit on the amount of alcohol. The only problem is, that only applies to alcohol ordered for delivery where they can tell I’m buying it. I could walk into the local grocery store, whip out a wad of cash, buy my alcohol, then go to the next grocery store (or even the next cashier) and get as much as I want. So I don’t feel any safer knowing that all these armed rednecks at least can’t get that much booze, because they have no trouble at all getting whatever they can pay for (and if they’ve got enough guns, they might not even pay for it).
All about priorities. Regulate guns? Nanny state. Protect the environment? Nanny state. Serve healthy food in the school cafeteria? Nanny state. Want to buy a second case of wine, because you have more than 12 friends? Oh, dear me, no, that is a legitimate role of government to make sure you are legally prohibited from such shenanigans. (Frankly, though, to be honest, I suspect a lot of that is to protect the local liquor purveyors, since as I indicated, I would have no trouble getting plenty from them).
Dear, sweet Christ on a Kawasaki, iknklast, that is the funniest un-funny thing I’ve read in a long time. It’s like living in a photographic negative of reality.
Good grief, I’ll second AoS @7. I don’t know how they’ll cope with me. We wait until one of the wine merchants has a sale and then buy that summers bbq wines, plus if there are some favourites that cellar well some for use years hence. Damn site for than one case…
Are they trying to kid us that no legislators or captains of business in you state have wine cellars?