[dreit1]

This is the exact type of commentary the article is talking. This conservative strawman you’ve built is far from average. In this absurd, inflammatory commentary replace the conservative boogeyman with a Muslim boogeyman or a gay boogeyman and realize you’re using the exact same type of rhetoric as the people you despise

[s73v3r_]

Can you really call it a “boogeyman” when conservatives have supported and enacted things into law that have been actively harmful to the other groups? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a majority gay government try to deny straight couples fundamental rights, for instance.

[tessierashpool]

is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools? what is the absurd part here? how many kids can a gay person be alleged to have killed just by being gay? there is no conservative boogeyman in my post. I am referring to the practical effects of policy decisions.

[Rebelgecko]

> is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools?

Honestly I think it is, although if I were having a discussion with a coworker I would couch it in slightly different terms, because many of my coworkers aren't very familiar with guns. e.g. defining assault weapons (varies depending on locale), asking why they are concerned about this like bayonet lugs, are they aware of anyone who has been killed by a bayonet charge in the US since the Civil War, what's wrong with barrel shrouds, etc

[manfredo]

> is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools?

Given that the definition of an "assault weapon" has nothing to do with the actual capabilities of a firearm, and everything to do with the shape of its grip, the presence of collapsing stocks, etc. I'd say yes it is pretty absurd. For example this [1] rifle is exactly the same in caliber, capability, and general functionality as the infamous AR-15 yet is not targeted by even the most restrictive States' definitions of assault weapons. Heck, even liberal publications are catching on to the fact that "assault weapons" are a red herring: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault...

> what is the absurd part here? how many kids can a gay person be alleged to have killed just by being gay?

Pick a more relevant liberal policy: How many people have been killed by prisoners on parole? Should all politicians who support reduced prison sentences and earlier parole, as well as individuals who support those policies, be held responsible for the crimes that parolees and released prisoners commit crimes? This number is much greater than the number of school shootings.

That fact should not be used as justification to ostracize, or otherwise take actions against people who believe in more lenient parole and less prison time - and people who support conservative policies should get the same respect.

[1] https://image.sportsmansguide.com/adimgs/e/6/637956_ts.jpg