Gabby Giffords Makes False Implication [Pic+]

Submitted by: 5cats 4 years ago in

She suggests her shooter had NO background check to buy his gun(s) but the facts say otherwise.
There are 33 comments:
Male 2,711
Nothing but *crickets* from 5Cats again... no surprise, eh?
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@5Cats
"His Freind [sic] Says He Attended "several" Gifford rallies?"

There`s that old comprehension-problem of yours again... the quote is "MIGHT have gone to some other rallies" and it was followed with this one: "It wasn`t like he was in a certain party or went to rallies..." Where did you get that he attended "several"?

"The shooter is pictured, at various "protests" with a man who was a key part of Gifford`s campaign staff?"

Really? When? Where? First I`ve heard of it, citations please.

"Who SAID that he`d done some volunteer work?"
Duh, YOU did: "Even worked FOR Gifford`s campaign before..." Still zero evidence for it though.

So... are you prepared to admit it now? Are you ready to finally say those momentous words, "I was wrong"?
0
Reply
Male 14,334
@OldOllie

Ya they juist released them all and hey look shooting went up lets push against guns now that must be the problem!
0
Reply
Male 15,832
OMFG! A liberal LIED to make a political point? ALERT THE MEDIA!!!

Maybe part of the problem is that confining the mentally ill to hospitals and disclosing their records are considered to be a violation of their civil rights. And who do we have to thank for that? Oh, I don`t know, let`s see...who could it be, who could it be? Could it be...LIBERALS?

0
Reply
Male 4,395
I think the words you were looking for 5Cats is "Sorry guys, I was wrong on this one". The 1.5 rating doesn`t lie.
0
Reply
Male 37,794
@chalket: His Freind Says He Attended "several" Gifford rallies? The shooter is pictured, at various "protests" with a man who was a key part of Gifford`s campaign staff? Who SAID that he`d done some volunteer work?
Of COURSE he hated her later on! El Duh! He was "not sane" eh?

@panzerlenis: Oh don`t get me wrong! Gifford has EVERY right to hold her opinion! Strongly too! I don`t "blame her" one little bit! I`m glad she`s getting better, honestly I am.

But as @InTheNameOf pointed out: Someone (in the Media for example) should have "fact checked" or stepped in to clarify her words.

@12chars: Hey dude, I believe you. It`s no skin off my teeth whomever you are! Welcome to IAB and keep those suggestions coming! :-)
0
Reply
Male 906
5Cats, hi. I am a real person. Just letting you know.
0
Reply
Male 1,380
At first, I was offended by this post. I find it difficult to try and trump someone`s opinion when they have been so deeply affected by an event like Gabby was. I may not agree with her opinion, but I respect the fact that it was forged in personal tragedy. What bothered me most was the fact that no one on this site seems to give one sh*t about people being killed by guns, or showing any compassion for anyone who wishes to protect their family by owning a gun. Those arguments are only pulled out to reinforce already held opinions. All anyone seems to care about here is winning an argument.
0
Reply
Male 1,380
But then I realized something. You are arguing about politics on an entertainment website. All the crazy right-wing posts, all the crazy left-wing posts - none of it matters. Not a single person has changed their mind due to what`s been discussed here. Not a single politician has changed their vote because of this website. Arguing about gun control here is no different than sending complaints about how you can`t buy season tickets to your favorite sports team to your Internet service provider.

Yes, I am saying all the energy you have put into your detailed and passionate arguments here makes you nothing more than an idiot.
0
Reply
Male 335
She got shot in the head....she has brain damage....give her a break....but fact check what she says.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@5Cats
Which wing-nut website are you getting your info from, dude? It`s amazing how much misinformation you can absorb and spew as "fact!"

"She suggests her shooter had NO background check"
No... she suggests nothing of the sort.

"he was a full Democrat supporter"
Uh, no. He was registered as an Independent and didn`t even vote in 2010.

"worked FOR Gifford`s campaign"
What?! ...Loughner had expressed a longstanding dislike for Gabrielle Giffords.

When making outrageous statements, it helps to cite your sources so people don`t get the impression you have your head up your ass.
0
Reply
Male 60
"You know if we all stopped commenting so much on these idiotic baiting right wing posts then IAB wouldn`t get so many page views and they wouldn`t keep posting this s.hit."

+1. Please stop responding to his stupid posts. Just let him post with 0 comments. That would make my year!
0
Reply
Male 8,132
You know if we all stopped commenting so much on these idiotic baiting right wing posts then IAB wouldn`t get so many page views and they wouldn`t keep posting this s.hit.
0
Reply
Male 37,794
@peakingo: @McGovern`s initial post makes sense to me. It`s poorly written, that`s true, but I understand it easily.
At least, you know, I think so...

Am I experiencing "reverse deja-vu"? ;-)

(I`ll translate it if @McGovern doesn`t want to do so...)
0
Reply
Male 3,445
This post is a new low.
0
Reply
Male 761
No, I mean it honestly. What you wrote initially made no sense and I`m still waiting for clarification.

I don`t like to argue over semantical topics or psycholinguistics, which you`re trying to argue by deciding what she`s thinking and specifically the logic behind her stance on gun control.

which as I`ve stated, I don`t necessarily support, but that isn`t the point. This thread isn`t about the legitimacy of her stance on gun control.

No, this thread, this contentious argument is over the propaganda presented by 5cats, written on this blog as a means to inflame a hot topic by INTENTIONALLY misrepresenting her quoted statement to people who do not understand basic linguistic usage.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
@peakingo
OK cognitive linguistics isn`t your strong point or mabey it`s an out to an argument you can`t win.

Here`s her logic "I was shot in the head with a 9mm pistol that passed a background check. Lets ban "assualt rifles" and make background checks manditory because it`ll prevent things like this from happening!"
0
Reply
Male 761
That`s irrelevant 5cats, what`s relevant is the accusatory statement of the post title and context of article.

Everything else is subjective and argumentative, I commenting on the context of the article and title YOU posted, which is 100% wrong, degrading, and reeks of sad right wing propaganda.
0
Reply
Male 761
What drives me absolutely crazy is propaganda like this. The person who wrote this knows that it`ll be easily misunderstood and instead of clearly explaining for people who are dumb and reactionary who don`t understand the context, he instead decided to inflame this topic just for ad revenue and his personal agenda.

He chose to make up a lie and create a story, have it spread on the internet so dumbasses can hate on a woman who was shot in the head and is still living.

Above all else, politics, policies. She`s a goddamn human being.


As gun rights supporter, I believe that regardless of where you buy a gun a background check should be mandatory. I don`t think it`s too much to ask that a weapon like a gun should be traceable.
0
Reply
Male 37,794
@peakingo: Did you read this part:

[quote]Before expanding the existing system, wouldn’t it make more sense to ensure that our current background checks are implemented properly?[/quote]

What the article SUGGESTS is that those who ARE mentally ill (or otherwise unfit to own a gun) SHOULD be prevented, BUT the current system "is broken" because it fails to enforce it`s own laws. NOT because it "needs NEW laws" to work.
More Laws =/= Better Laws.

Canada has dozens of "anti-gun laws" which are "on the books" but NEVER enforced. What good does adding more unenforced laws of any sort do?
0
Reply
Male 37,794
And FYI: Essentially what she`s requesting is a "background check" for ALL GUN PURCHACES ANYWHERE WITHIN THE USA.
Think about that: every single gun will need to be registered. Every single transaction would need to "pass police scrutiny" before it was allowed.

We have that in Canada! Every firearms buyer MUST have proper documentation. It costs a fortune and makes it VERY difficult to buy or sell a gun.

BUT "long rifle registration" FAILED miserably and painfully in Canada! It cost countless BILLIONS and prevented: nothing.
Zero crimes "prevented"
Zero crimes "solved"
A decade later and it was STILL not finished. Thank heaven the Conservatives (Capital C) made good on their promise to scrap it.
0
Reply
Male 4,395
She was shot in the f*cking head you assh*les. Of course she is going to be anti-gun now. Some of you make me so sick. If my mother had been shot in the head and survived she could say whatever the hell she wanted about guns. Seriously you guys are horrible horrible people.
0
Reply
Male 37,794
Hey! I`ll admit it`s most likely a simple mistake.

BUT! You can bet 1,000s of "gun grabbers" will believe it, if they don`t already!
Heck, some even think her shooter belonged to "The Tea Party"! (He didn`t, he was a full Democrat supporter. Even worked FOR Gifford`s campaign before).

The Grabbers are parading her around like Saint Gabby: The Perpetual Victim Of Guns.

Her husband was apparently genuine in his attempted buying of an AR-15 "just to show" how easy it is. Yeah, for a former astronaut who`s spouse is a Senator! Duh!

Anyhow, she`s reminding me of "Saint Cindy Sheehan" of Camp Casey in that bad way...
0
Reply
Male 761
mcgovern, I read that 3 times and it`s so horribly written I can`t even guess what the hell you`re trying to say.
0
Reply
Male 761
Here`s a full break down on Conjunctive Adverb usage as well as proper coma usage.

Those people — criminals, or people suffering from mental illness, like the young man who shot me — can buy as many guns as they want on the Internet or at a gun show, no questions asked.

The main clauses are criminals... and buy as many guns...

She making a comparison that her shooter was mentally ill and not necessarily grouped with people buying guns w/o a background check.

To view this in another way, this is what she`s saying:

Those people — criminals, or people suffering from mental illness can buy as many guns as they want on the Internet or at a gun show, no questions asked.

And as a means of connecting it to her personal experience, she mentions that her attacker suffers from mental illness and if he was denied a gun after a BG check then he still had other options.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
@peakingo

But not the one that shot her so there`s what your solution get you NOTHING!

[quote]Why does this attitude so popular amongst the anti-gun folk?[/quote]

Politicians do as I say not as I do. Geee what could go wrong there!
0
Reply
Male 761
She did absolutely nothing of the sort. What she did is use a CONJUNCTIVE ADVERB (like) and now morons who don`t understand common language usage are misinterpreting it as if she said he SPECIFICALLY used no background checks.

Here`s the full quote that`s caused this:

"Those people — criminals, or people suffering from mental illness, like the young man who shot me — can buy as many guns as they want on the Internet or at a gun show, no questions asked."

She did not state that he did buy a gun without a background, she is addressing him as mentally ill person, which is a FACT. The connection is that mentally ill people and criminals use these opportunities to buy a gun without a background check. Which is also a FACT.

Here`s what she`s saying. My shooter was mentally ill, and though not the case with him, others with mental health issues and criminal backgrounds can buy guns online with no questi
0
Reply
Male 155
Poor taste. Typical.
0
Reply
Male 2,762
She`s still a form of politician- a lifeform notoriously low on brain cells. Further, she was shot in the head- I doubt improved her logic processing abilities any- is it too soon for the `make fun of the gimp` jokes?
0
Reply
Male 202



"It`s OK for me and the people I know to have guns, but not not for members of the public."

Why does this attitude so popular amongst the anti-gun folk?
0
Reply
Male 6,683
Uhh not to defend her but she`s missing a portion of her brain. I think you can give her a slight pass for missing some details. With that said knowing the full details helps make a better decision, her mental faculties may have been affected here.
0
Reply
Male 38,483

She`s brain damaged. No one pays any attention to what she says.
0
Reply
Male 37,794
Link: Gabby Giffords Makes False Implication [Pic+] [Rate Link] - She suggests her shooter had NO background check to buy his gun(s) but the facts say otherwise.
0
Reply