Florida House Republicans reject assault rifle ban... as Parkland students watch

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

This is so messed up...

https://www.local10.com/news/parkland-school-shooting/florida-house-votes-down-motion-to-take-up-weapons-ban-with-douglas-students-present

[Dr. MB]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

[kyc0705]

Every action like this should only strengthen the students' movement.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

[Dr. MB]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

[junior chįmp]

They did manage to pass this:

Florida House passes H.R. 157 declaring pornography a public health risk

[Sestak]

They did manage to pass this:

Florida House passes H.R. 157 declaring pornography a public health risk

Florida, ladies and gentlemen.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

I think the mere presence of Parkland survivors doesn’t make the proposal automatically correct but I will say: to buy beer you have to be 21. The same should be true of your second amendment rights.

[gerritcole]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

you hear of the constitution or NAH?

[Sestak]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

you hear of the constitution or NAH?

We restrict the first and fourth amendment rights of students all the time.

[Roronoa D. Law]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

you hear of the constitution or NAH?

If that your response why can't children under 18 years of age have a gun.

[gerritcole]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

you hear of the constitution or NAH?

We restrict the first and fourth amendment rights of students all the time.

restricted within school, not outside. no guns inside of school - fine outside

[dead0man]

publicity stunt goes wrong, news at 11

[Landslide Lyndon]

publicity stunt goes wrong, news at 11

It seems like Sanchez has some stiff competition for the title of Worst Human Being among Atlas Posters.

[fluffypanther19]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

[ProgressiveCanadian]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

Read the rest of the second amendment buddy, it says a well regulated militia.

[Virginiá]

publicity stunt goes wrong, news at 11

I don't know dead0, the least they could have done was allowed a debate on such a bill. Republicans control the state House with a large majority, they still have final say. Let the process play out and see if they could be convinced. That is what is so frustrating here, and I would add that this happens with all sorts of other policies too. They won't even allow a discussion on it, even if they personally doubt they'll change their mind.

Instead they didn't even want to chance it, and/or perhaps have to go on record voting down the bill, which if so seems silly because by denying debate, they still denied the bill.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Should we just start passing stupid and ineffective legislation because the props that activists brought in are able to muster up some fake tears?

Fake tears?! DEPLORABLE.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

Read the rest of the second amendment buddy, it says a well regulated militia.

One could argue that this is what they meant by a well regulated militia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Military_Reserve

[Sestak]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

Read the rest of the second amendment buddy, it says a well regulated militia.

One could argue that this is what they meant by a well regulated militia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Military_Reserve

Pretty sure that is at least somewhat refuted by Federalist 46.

[Tekken_Guy]

The house is flipping for sure.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

The lack of empathy some people in this thread are showing is devastating.

[Sestak]

The house is flipping for sure.

Republicans have a 76-40 majority. Not happening.

[Dr. MB]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

Read the rest of the second amendment buddy, it says a well regulated militia.

Well, the supreme court has interpreted militias to not be necessary for ownership of a weapon countless times.

[AtorBoltox]

I don't support a ban, but... at least consider it?

There is no reason why an 18-year-old should be able to purchase an assault rifle. Period.

Because they are an adult exercising their right to bear arms, perhaps?

Read the rest of the second amendment buddy, it says a well regulated militia.

Well, the supreme court has interpreted militias to not be necessary for ownership of a weapon countless times.

You mean starting in the 1980s the right wing hacks on the court rewrote the meaning of the 2nd amendment.