Agreed.
Even Brietbart uses paragraphs:
*********
The newest iteration of the gun control debate concerns whether teenage survivors of last week’s shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, should be immune from criticism when they argue for gun control.
This is a relatively new question: other school shootings, like Sandy Hook in 2012, have involved children too young to have opinions.
But the answer is no: once you enter the political arena, your views are fair game.
Democrats have perfected the art of using sympathetic public figures to argue for positions most Americans reject, then accusing critics of mean-spiritedness when they disagree.
We saw that tactic in the Khizr Khan controversy in 2016, when a Muslim father whose son died fighting for the U.S. blasted Donald Trump from the podium at the Democratic National Convention. When Trump responded, he was accused of attacking a Gold Star family.
Likewise in the gun control debate, where people who disagree with impassioned calls for gun control from some of the students who survived the Parkland shooting are being accused of attacking children.
Some of the responses to the students are, indeed over-the-top, such as conspiracy theories about whether some of them are trained actors. It is probably true that some are being coached or fed talking points, but that does not make their beliefs less sincere.
However, the fact remains that many of the arguments used by the teenagers are weak, or simply false.
Take Emma Gonzalez, whose gun control speech last week was highlighted by CNN. It is simply not true that it is “harder to make plans with friends on weekends than to buy an automatic or semi-automatic weapon,” as she claims. Gonzalez also blamed the couple that the suspect was living with for not taking away his guns “when they knew he expressed homicidal tendencies.” But they have said that they never saw the warning signs that others who knew him saw.
Or take one of the students who participated in the extraordinary White House listening session on Wednesday, who tearfully cited a false story that has been circulating on the Internet, thanks in part to Chris Cuomo of “#factsfirst” CNN. The story claims that it is possible to purchase an AR-15 rifle in five minutes. It was easily debunked, yet to the distraught student, it seemed very real. His feelings are completely right, but his facts were completely wrong.
The students’ admirable passion does not make their views more credible. Students tend to know less, not more, than other people on most issues, due to their youth and inexperience. They are also more susceptible to being manipulated by adults with agendas.
That does not mean they should be ignored, either, but it is appropriate to ask whether their highly politicized views are really the necessary consequence of their experience as survivors.
The reason that question is legitimate is that there are students whose views are entirely different from those being highlighted by CNN. Buried two-thirds of the way down an Associated Press article titled, “Survivors of deadly school shooting lash out at Trump,” a student named James Ciaramello says: “I mean, tighter gun control, it’s not gonna help. There’s always a way around it.” Needless to say, he is not being featured and fêted by cable news.
Some other survivors of mass shootings also oppose gun control. They include Colorado House Minority Leader Patrick Neville (R), who survived the iconic Columbine shooting two decades ago. They also include U.S. House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), who survived lass summer’s mass shooting at a Republican baseball practice.
Those who survive such events are just as divided as the rest of Americans on the issue of gun control. The idea that even sincere critics of the teenage gun control advocates are “attacking” the “kids” is not only offensive, but corrosive to democratic debate. We do a disservice to the children who survive such horrors by telling them that Americans who disagree with them are their enemies. We cannot protect them by protecting them from the truth.
A final observation: the White House listening session showed the wide range of views on this most difficult of topics. After years of being lectured about gun control by President Barack Obama every time a mass shooting happened, it was striking, and refreshing, to watch President Trump listen.
And it was inspiring to watch students, teachers, and parents listen respectfully to each other. It was a model of civility to which we should all aspire.
Libs are hoping if they trott “The Children” out there with the liberal talking points they will get a pass.
Aint gon’ah happen this time.
Especially with shills like this dip S#!t Hogg
Too bad we can’t have children who’ve been murdered [aborted] speak out on the horrors inflicted upon them.
Crisis as Leftest Opportunity bump for later....
...Democrats have perfected the art of using sympathetic public figures to argue for positions most Americans reject...
Change for the sake of change based solely on Emotion is one of the basic foundations of liberalism and the Democrat party.
Old enough to vote? How can they not be mature enough to buy a rifle?
They did it with that Gold Star mother against George W. Bush (Cindy Sheehan). They tried to do it with that Arab Gold Star Mother and Father with President Trump during the Democrat Convention, and now they are doing it with the Florida kids.
Don’t we all just love being lectured by teenagers. There’s nothing they don’t know - just ask em.
"We want open borders, no cops, sanctuary cities, and empty prisons."
For you working, productive drones out there we want to strip you of the right to defend yourself.
Note to the SJW brats: Go to hell.
One, they're kids. They lack experience and education. Their only reference on firearms, rights, security comes from a coddling, vehemently anti-gun liberal media and education system. If we're lucky they've gotten some reality from their parents. But in general their only frame of reference is extremely skewed.
Two, they've just been through a scary and emotional experience. This is not the time to make important decisions. Issues with broad impact such as national firearms policy and the debate surrounding it require, even demand reasoned and rational thought. People who have just (possibly even quite literally) had the excrement scared out of them are generally not capable of looking at an issue dispassionately.
Of course, these same reasons are exactly why the pro-disarmament liberal media is using these kids. They've had years to indoctrinate kids who haven't experienced enough of life yet to know the MSM is full of horse pucks. Ever notice that advocates for "gun control" (aka incremental disarmament) only come out of the woodwork and make their play immediately after one of these random evil events? It's because they know that looked at calmly and reasonably, their proposals make no {expletive} sense. That's why they only push in the aftermath of an incident - when people's emotions are running high and they can vilify any opposition with cheap shots. They are disgusting in every sense and in every way.
I wonder if author Joel Pollack is related to the Pollack family who lost their daughter, Meadow, in the shooting. Mr. Pollack was wearing a “Trump 2020” shirt while trying to find his daughter — a bold move for a resident in that dark blue left-wing Rat hole of Broward County. I really admire him, and his sons, one of whom was so well spoken at the meeting with the President.
All the more reason to engage. The snowflakes think they can just yell and demand. The media loves showing them yelling at Rubio and Trump, but we really need discussion of facts, which the libs don't want. However, we need to force a discussion so that we don't let emotion force anyone into very poor illogical decisions.
These kids are too good at this.
Something ain’t right...
They are being used.
What are the students responsibilities in all of this when they admit they knew this guy was trouble? Did they demand security at the entrances? No, maybe they should take some of the blame.
I’m actually surprised - The kids from Sandy Hook are old enough to appear on camera and yet we haven’t seen or heard anything from them.
Normally a non-issue but we all know the Media wants to parade kids out to push their own agenda and NOTHING will do it like the Sandy Hook kids.
You see, this is why I think the Sandy Hook thing was partially faked. And “I’m from” Sandy Hook.
Teenage kids don’t need to start running the country. They are just being exploited by the gun control crowd.
By ignoring them they are allowed to bask in their limelight and feel like they won something. What needs to happen is for reasoned adults to be seen in contrast to them (preferably on the same stage), taking their disrespectful righteously indignant barbs and deflecting them with real-world experiential solutions. These adults must debate the students into logical holes where they become frustrated, angry, and irrational in response. They must be confronted with facts, statistics, prior legislations, and other historical evidence that student minds haven't absorbed yet.
The students must be made to feel embarrassed by their youth and inexperience, as Ronald Reagan once quipped, such that they would think twice before fronting for an issue again until they are mentally and emotionally prepared for the rebuttals, and until they can comport themselves respectfully towards more accomplished people than themselves.
Michelle Malkin was right in yesterday's column, Do Not Let the Children Lead
Excerpt:
This is not compassion, but abdication. America is not a juvenilocracy. It is a constitutional republic. There is a reason we don't elect high school sophomores and juniors to public office or allow them to cast ballots. There are many, many reasons, actually.Pubescents are fueled by hormones and dopamine and pizza and Sonic shakes. They're fickle and fragile and fierce and forgetful. They hate you. They love you. They need you. They ignore you. They know everything. They know nothing. All in the span of 10 seconds. I know. I have two of them.
If you're lucky, they've only Googled "Should I eat Tide pods?" or "What happens if I snort Ramen powder?" and not actually attempted the latest social media stunt challenges.
But that's what kids do. Because they're kids.
Many may be exceptionally smart, passionate and articulate beyond their years, but they do not possess any semblance of wisdom because they have not lived those years. Their knowledge of history, law and public policy is severely limited (Common Core certainly hasn't helped). And their moral agency and cognitive abilities are far from fully developed.
Most are in no position to change the world when they can't even remember to change their own bedsheets.
-PJ
I say we ban all children.
That’s just as sensible as banning guns to solve school shootings.