Home General
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

A one time very off topic comment...

2456715

Comments

  • WCDawgWCDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @RxDawg said:
    Freedom isn't free... it costs folks like you and me....

    I get that, but leaders can lead towards water or they can lead us into fire.

  • dawghousedawghouse ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Maybe not such a bad idea to let this topic do a slow disappearance ...

  • WCDawgWCDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @dawghouse said:
    Maybe not such a bad idea to let this topic do a slow disappearance ...

    I don't regret starting this thread.
    The readers who it was meant for don't need any further explanation. Those who take exception are not reachable, that much I'm sure of.

  • benjaminwgreggbenjaminwgregg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    If we ban assault weapons, we may not stop mass shootings, but we'd definitely make them less effective, and our cops would be safer. 3 cops got shot in Pittsburgh b/c crazy people have better weapons than street cops, and equivalent weapons to SWAT. Thats a problem, and what would a security guard do to stop it, if he's bringing a glock vs an ar 15, and the gunman has the element if surprise?

  • GrayDawgGrayDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @WCDawg is sorting you all. Hope you end up on the right list...

  • WCDawgWCDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Teddy said:

    @WCDawg said:

    @Teddy said:
    I try not to blame someone for other people's wrongdoings... And I missed the part where leaders are promoting pipe bombings and shootings.

    Of course you did.

    Yeah, I'm not a mentally ill person.

    I'll make this one point.

    You're not mentally, ill, unfortunately many are, some see political rabble rousing and send bombs or shoot old people in places of worship. Again though, I know you're not reachable, this post really isn't meant for you so much as others who might be more receptive.

  • Dawg1419Dawg1419 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @benjaminwgregg said:
    If we ban assault weapons, we may not stop mass shootings, but we'd definitely make them less effective, and our cops would be safer. 3 cops got shot in Pittsburgh b/c crazy people have better weapons than street cops, and equivalent weapons to SWAT. Thats a problem, and what would a security guard do to stop it, if he's bringing a glock vs an ar 15, and the gunman has the element if surprise?

    Ban everything and only criminals will have it. Hence in word criminal. I say we make everything legal. Then we all have nothing worse than the criminal.

  • benjaminwgreggbenjaminwgregg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Dawg1419 said:

    @benjaminwgregg said:
    If we ban assault weapons, we may not stop mass shootings, but we'd definitely make them less effective, and our cops would be safer. 3 cops got shot in Pittsburgh b/c crazy people have better weapons than street cops, and equivalent weapons to SWAT. Thats a problem, and what would a security guard do to stop it, if he's bringing a glock vs an ar 15, and the gunman has the element if surprise?

    Ban everything and only criminals will have it. Hence in word criminal. I say we make everything legal. Then we all have nothing worse than the criminal.

    I guess, but they've banned assault weapons in a lot of countries and maybe only criminals have them but they sure seem to have fewer mass shootings

  • TeddyTeddy ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @WCDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @WCDawg said:

    @Teddy said:
    I try not to blame someone for other people's wrongdoings... And I missed the part where leaders are promoting pipe bombings and shootings.

    Of course you did.

    Yeah, I'm not a mentally ill person.

    I'll make this one point.

    You're not mentally, ill, unfortunately many are, some see political rabble rousing and send bombs or shoot old people in places of worship. Again though, I know you're not reachable, this post really isn't meant for you so much as others who might be more receptive.

    Glad you're using your enlightened views to reach the huge masses of people on DawgNation. Clearly DawgNation is the best platform to do your good deed and enlighten the masses. All hail the great WCDawg for his great work in solving life's biggest issues. Now we know that WORDS MATTER, and that's the reason people shoot and bomb each other. D@mn words! We need to ban words now, because they've clearly caused more deaths than even AR-15s.

  • LowcountryDawg21LowcountryDawg21 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    I think it’s worth asking ourselves whether the leader referred to above (and others in leadership in our country) is/are the cause of the current state of affairs or the result of a longstanding change in our general discourse in our country?

    I think it’s also worth asking ourselves whether we have the ability, through our vote, our choice of who and what we listen to, and the way we live our own lives, to change the direction of that discourse.

    The right to speak doesn’t confer the right to be heard. The speaker must earn that. If we don’t like what we’re hearing, we should turn it off until the message changes.

    We’re still a free people, and we still have agency. We need to act like it.

  • WCDawgWCDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited October 2018

    @Teddy said:

    @WCDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @WCDawg said:

    @Teddy said:
    I try not to blame someone for other people's wrongdoings... And I missed the part where leaders are promoting pipe bombings and shootings.

    Of course you did.

    Yeah, I'm not a mentally ill person.

    I'll make this one point.

    You're not mentally, ill, unfortunately many are, some see political rabble rousing and send bombs or shoot old people in places of worship. Again though, I know you're not reachable, this post really isn't meant for you so much as others who might be more receptive.

    Glad you're using your enlightened views to reach the huge masses of people on DawgNation. Clearly DawgNation is the best platform to do your good deed and enlighten the masses. All hail the great WCDawg for his great work in solving life's biggest issues. Now we know that WORDS MATTER, and that's the reason people shoot and bomb each other. D@mn words! We need to ban words now, because they've clearly caused more deaths than even AR-15s.

    Everywhere is a good platform. Political sites are actually the worst choice because only the most politically extreme people visit them, you'll never reach that type.
    Honestly Teddy, you seem completely clueless, I wonder if you have any sense of history.

  • WCDawgWCDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @GrayDawg said:
    @WCDawg is sorting you all. Hope you end up on the right list...

    It's coal for you.

  • levanderlevander ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    The problem with the national conversation started in the media. Where way too many people just decided it’s a lot easier to make a buck mud slinging rather than to try to educate people. It’s to the point know where it’s impossible to find a legitimate news source covering politics. And then more and more people wanted more and more partisan leaders. You guys who don’t realize what a terrible partisan Obama was were entirely hoodwinked. And then it got to the point where in a general way, 51% of the nation felt like we needed a big mouth to be president to try to beat some of this nonsense back.

    This whole thing is part of a process. Acting like there’s just one guy causing it all and if we’d just vote for someone different... You’re still gonna have the underlying fundamental problem of a nation who doesn’t know how to discuss issues. And maybe it doesn’t manifest itself through Trump. But it manifests itself in other ways. And not being able to discuss real problems that need to be fixed, it’s gonna manifest itself in terribly **** ways. A lot uglier than just having to have a president who tweets mean things,

  • WCDawgWCDawg ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @pgjackson said:

    @LowcountryDawg21 said:
    I think it’s worth asking ourselves whether the leader referred to above (and others in leadership in our country) is/are the cause of the current state of affairs or the result of a longstanding change in our general discourse in our country?

    I think it’s also worth asking ourselves whether we have the ability, through our vote, our choice of who and what we listen to, and the way we live our own lives, to change the direction of that discourse.

    The right to speak doesn’t confer the right to be heard. The speaker must earn that. If we don’t like what we’re hearing, we should turn it off until the message changes.

    We’re still a free people, and we still have agency. We need to act like it.

    Good stuff. The problem is with people who feel emboldened (and supported by their political leaders) to physically threaten and intimidate others they disagree with. That is the terrifying part. It's not enough for them to simply state their opposition and let others decide which is better. They want to silence and demonize the opposition through constant mobs, attacks, threats, and riotous behavior. They want to make sure that everyone understands that if you disagree with them they will suffer the same retribution. They are not interested in polite discourse or a sharing of ideas. They want conversion and control. Do these mobs of angry rioters represent your political leanings? If so, you are part of the problem.

    I hope everyone does some serious soul-searching before voting in the mid-terms. There is a wave of political violence sweeping the country that is unacceptable in a peaceful and lawful society. Even if you fundamentally disagree with a particular political party, are you willing to support the side that actively encourages the intimidation of its citizens and believes public shaming and humiliation are effective and acceptable methods to address issues? This mid-term election is bigger than just typical political issues like immigration, the economy, national security, jobs...it's about what kind of country do we want to live in. I certainly don't want to live in a country where roving bands of rioters control the political process and the rule of law is supplanted by the rule of emotionalism.

    History is replete with societies that got lost in cult like hatred.

Sign In or Register to comment.