http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/28/enough-enough-obama-demands-gun-control-colorado-shooting/
KEK whatever happened to the "Obama isn't trying to take away your guns" myth again?
>>199
>breitbart.com
>>>/trash/
>>224
Lets not going down the route of reddit and ban right-wing new sources.
Hiro, please make it against the rules to complain about the source.
>>199
>breitbart
This is a blog site, not a news site.
>>>/trash/
>>235
Breitbart is "right-wing" in the same sense that Infowars is libertarian.
>>199
This is said after every shooting and then fuck all happens.
>>199
Gun control is already as tightened as it can be, sellers and retailers that carry guns are doing longer background checks, people with even the slightest criminal records or physical/mental illness are being denied.
We need to focus on education I can't stress this enough instead of hiding a generation of stupid kids from guns like we do from alcohol, cigs, and drugs (how well is that going btw) we need to teach them about these things and why shooting innocent people is wrong we need to shape them to be the model citizens from a young age.
>>235
B reitbart is a blog
>>235
Stop begging Hiro for shit, fucking redditor newfags
>>246
No it's not.
It's just as credible as the Guardian, and it's an advertiser here on 4chan.
Hopefully, Hiro won't betray 4chan's advertisers.
>>275
>It's just as credible as the Guardian
ebin memə
In one incident 16 people were shot during gang related violence last week in New Orleans. I wonder why he didn't comment on that or bring it up then.
Source
>http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/shot-playground-party-parade-35364110
>All those people complainign about the source
So, did Obama say this after all? Obviously, if Breitbart is lying, Obama doesn't want stricter gun control, right?
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
>>320
Yes he said it, ignore the shitposters whining about the source.
>>339
No, he clearly didn't. Breitbart always lies, so Obama couldn't have said it.
It's not a credible source, so I don't believe it
>>199
common sense :^)
>>199
Disgusting to see a man use a tragedy to push his agenda, especially this soon.
I'm European and support a reasonable gun control, but to see Obama use this massacre just to push for gun control is repulsive.
Shame on you America
>>406
Not even the fbi is calling this a massacre, lol
Stop sensationalizing what you're saying other people shouldn't politicize.
>>413
He killed people didn't he?
So are you okay with politicians using death to pursue their objectives?
Have you no respect for the dead?
>>425
The reason that I dislike politicians using death to pursue their objectives is the same reason I dislike people using sensationalist language to further their own objectives, as you just did again.
Through attempting to color the truth your personal favorite hue, you are no better than those who attempt to exploit the truth for their own ends.
>>436
I have no personal agenda. As I said I'm European and US firearm laws don't influence me in the slightest. Moreover I'm in favor of gun control.
We might not call it a massacre, still I find that president Obama making such a statement so soon is very distasteful.
Nobody "needs" a gun, you racist right wing nutjobs.
>>462
>bill of needs
Go read the US constitution please
>>315
I was waiting for this to blow up in the news, and was curious as to why it didn't
>Black shooter
Oy vey, shut it down.
>>462
Sure thing bud. I'm sure you don't "need" to humblebrag about your opinions on social media yet you do. You are just as bad as they are. Fuck off.
>>474
It's almost like because it happens so often they perceive it as acceptable behavior. That's true racism.
>>486
And to expand on that, all you faggots on this board shouldn't be picking sides so quickly with anything. If they all have external pressure whether it be huffpo or gawker, it should all be read objectively and as if it's incomplete. You people are doing a terrible job already, let's not turn this board to utter shit.
If you can't pick up on the forced narratives from both sides you should stop reading news. You are fragile, and should be kept in a cabinet with other easily breakable things nobody wants.
>>509
I read right wing sources like Breitbart and Drudge, but I just skip the commentary and analysis and read the actual facts of the article.
If people can just do that then it's not a big deal as to where a news story comes from, unless it's Gawker, which doesn't even pretend to be a news source.
>>224
This
Breitbart is incoherent paranoid-fueled drivel. They're one step away from becoming the conservative equivalent of the onion.
>>545
Breitbart is literally just Drudge with commentary.
>>545
Back to r/Salon you go.
- guns
+ muslims
+ Hillary
we are in for a scare. viewers beware
>>545
Gawker media pls.
>>607
The one good thing about Obama is he's going to take Hillary down with him
le reddit army
>>1000
Wew.
>>1000
Damn.
>>1000
Fuck
why doesn't the right to bare arms extend to nukes?
>>1000
shit
>then we have to do something about the easy accessibility of weapons of war on our streets to people who have no business wielding them. Period. Enough is enough.
This is getting infuriating. The problem lies in the people wielding the guns. If you want to take care of this issue, then improve mental health care. We have a mental illness problem in this country, and it's hard for people to notice because thoughts are a secret world that's kept inside one's head. Sometimes it's hard to tell that someone's the type of person who would snap and do something like this. We need to work harder on weeding out these kinds of people before they even snap, so that they can be treated and not have to live such an agonizing life that would eventually resort to these kinds of actions.
Banning guns won't do anything and Obama knows this. He's just hoping that the citizens don't know this.
>>235
>Hiro, please make it against the rules to complain about the source.
Blog sources are against the rules. If he made it against the rules to complain, then people banning about sources that are legitimately trash would be banned as well.
>>1000
first /news/ GET?
>>1022
Because the government decided to infringe on our right to reduce their capitals of bureaucracy to ash via nuclear hellfire.
#RightToBearNuclearArms
>>1025
The government can't help the mentally ill because they created the mentally ill by allowing all our food and water supplies to be tainted by as many chemicals as possible, as we pump young children full of mind altering drugs so they sit down and shut up in the government mandated education facilities, not to mention their allowance for large corporations to slowly bleed the country of it's wealth and economically uplifting occupations thanks to free trade and mass immigration, while also turning a blind eye to the gargantuan illicit drug trade that grips a significant portion of the country in addition.
But le guns are to blame, right goys You need to turn them in so that when you realize the government has long since sold out the people to whatever big dicked corporate interest shoves a wad of bills in their pocket, you have no means to remove it, because that would be mean and wrong and probably racist and sexist.
>>1112
congration
you done it
>>199
relevant to this thread:
>>1111
>>1156
Is it even a secret anymore?
The plan is probably to get everyone as mentally ill as possible so that they cannot become self reliant, making government the center-point in everyone's lives.
Destroy the family, steal your wealth, and get you hooked on drugs, then take away the guns as you replace the native population with a more docile/retarded one.
>>1000
Fuck you man.
>>1111
>>199
>literally ignoring the constitution once again
into the trash he goes.
i hope he ends up as an ornament on a christmas tree.
>>406
>shi happens
>not talking about this shit that concerns a lot of people
Also there is no reasonable control for America, gun control does not correlate to lower/higher crime stats in any traceable way.
>NIGGERS KILLING EACHOTHER EVERY SINGLE DAY IN DETROIT
>EH
>SHOOTING IN NON-NIGGER CITY HAPPENS
>OBONGO CHIMPS OUT WE NEED DEM GUN CONTROLZ NIGGUH
>>1000
News OP on first checked post when?
breitbart is just right wing gawker.
>>1771
Nice try, GIDF
>>1000
lepointingdubber.jpg
>>1771
>senior editor literally campaigned for democrats
>>199
Nice.
>>275
>and is an advertiser here on 4chan
>the rules shouldn't apply to people or if they bribe us
>>199
Fuck him.
He doesn't even have a chance come November.
Trump will btfo Obama.
>>2381
Stop believing the breitbart clickbait, Anon, Obama isn't going to do anything or else he would have done it by now. He's practically a lame duck with both houses of congress belonging to the GOP until he gets out.
>>2381
Youre right, there's like no chance Obama can win the election next year.
>>2387
>Anon, Obama isn't going to do anything or else he would have done it by now.
That's not the point, faggot. The point is that he's pushing the same tired gun-control narrative across the country, which, anyone with half a brain knows is not going to prevent or even lessen gun homicides. You don't need to look any farther than Chicago to know that this issue goes far deeper than just outlawing guns.
And for all the reddit faggots ITT shitting up the topic, make sure to Google and look for other sources who report the same thing before you throw a tantrum.
Didn't take long for the paranoid schizos from pol to ruin another board
>>2395
That IS the point, faggot, and you're so blinded by confirmation bias and obama derangement syndrome that you read any article that says Obama's coming for your guns and you automatically believe it. What don't you understand about how Congress is republican and won't pass any of his gun control agenda?
And the faggots like you that think if you don't like clickbait like Breitbart then you must be from reddit need to lurk the fuck moar. Next you're going to tell me infowars is a valid source too, amIrite?
>>2401
Obama does want more gun control, that's a simple fact, and this article is just him commenting about his opinions on a recent shooting.
People make comments on the time talking about how it's all hot wind, but it's still wrong to ignore matters when the president himself is commenting on eroding away constitutional rights.
Regardless of the state of congress it's not good to ignore this stuff.
>>2408
Since this discussion is becoming more tinfoil by the minute, I think it's more likely that it's a ploy by gun manufacturing companies to whip up lagging sales numbers than it is a plot by Obama to erode your constitutional rights.
>>199
>21st century
>Civilians still have guns
Bloodthirsty barbarians
Guns bring nothing but crimes
>>2415
It's not just the 21st century, anon.
It's 2015.
>>199
>open news
>first thread is shitty 8gag clickbait
See this is why /pol/ needs to be fucking purged. How is that rightwing blog not a banned link yet?
>>2420
Are you kidding? I'm from /pol/ and kikebart isn't welcomed there.
>>2421
Your offspawns sure thin otherwise.
>>2425
I think they are breitbart interns, whether paid or unpaid I don't know. This happens on /pol/ all the time, or at least it's been happening for while now. I know the word shills is a meme and gets overused horribly, but these either are honest to god shills or Breitbart.com has some of the most staunch defenders of any site to the right of Gawker. (they are the right-wing Gawker)
It's funny when the interns come to /pol/ because they stick out like sore thumbs when they talk about how Israel is 'BASED' and use memes incorrectly. Then there are the twitter attentionwhores like Milo and Ben (both editors for breitbart) who think /pol/ is their personal army and youtube view count mealticket.
>>287
Sadly that's rapidly becoming true. The Guardian's quality is in a nosedive.
I'm not a fan of blatant rightwing media, but I can't help but notice that there's not nearly as much whining when similar sites like Salon or HuffPo are posted.
>>2414
>Since this discussion is becoming more tinfoil by the minute
Nice argument, because any discussion of having the government infringe upon constitutional amendments is OBVIOUSLY tin-foil territory. The government would never do such a thing, right?
Do a favor and fuck off back to whatever shit hole you crawled from if you're gonna dismiss any line of discussion that's not within your faggot narrative.
>>2432
>The government would never do such a thing, right?
It isn't that they wouldn't ever do a gungrab 50 years in the future, or that they aren't doing other unconstitutional things like warrantless surveillance, but it's that a gungrab isn't possible legally or physically in any way shape or form for the foreseeable future. Even if Obama tried to bypass Congress and sign an executive order, his own parties supreme court justices would be voting with Scalia and Clarence Thomas that he violated the second amendment and it would go as far as his immigration executive order did: nowhere.
Which brings us back to the point of why Breitbart would even feature such a story when they realistically know a gungrab isn't feasible in today's society. They do it because idiots like you will click on stories like that every single time. It's called clickbait. It's how they make money.
>>2435
>a gungrab isn't feasible in today's society.
You're probably right, but watching how quickly the idea freedom of speech is crumbling with upcoming generations doesn't leave a lot of confidence that we're that far off from a point where it is feasible.
Hunting can be an important ecological control for many pest species who do not have anything checking their populations and guns are an important part of culture for some people so I dont think eliminating all guns is a good idea but I do believe that the distribution system can be shored up in a way that can greatly reduce the chances of a person with mental disorsers or a poor track record with the law from obtaining firearms
Nothing will happen once again
These guys should just obtain their guns illegally and that way Obama fucks off.
Regardless of the source, this isn't news. Obama does this shit every time there's a shooting by a white person.
>>2887
I like how you get to define what news is.
This isn't some top 10 celebrity gossip article, it's the president of the United States talking about a hot button issue.
>>2888
I'm just saying this is par for the course.
>>2888
You don't get to define this as news when it clearly isn't.
Obama has been saying 'Enough is Enough' for the last few shootings with no gun control legislation. There is nothing new in this story except rehashed partisan red meat and reframing the latest mass shooting to blame it on Obama. Breitbart knows as well as everyone else that no appreciable federal gun legislation will ever happen again while Obama is president but that doesn't stop them from writing clickbait stories like this one for adsense. They know there are millions of poorly educated saps who believe the tinfoil radio hosts who have been saying "The guberment is coming for your guns!11" for the last 30 or 40 years who will click on bait stories like this one every time they see one.
>>1217
mentally ill spotted
>>2926
>You don't get to define this as news when it clearly isn't.
The president is commenting on a recent event that relates to a hot button issue. This is news.
The kind of logic you're pushing is bullshit. If it's not newsworthy, and it's not something people want to talk about, they'll stop talking about. It'll fade off into the archive along with the threads about trees falling down and Santa appearing at your local mall.
Whether or not Obama has the power right now to do anything about this is a moot point, as it's something he's still readily pressing. When the president stops talking about wanting to erode our rights, I'll stop talking about him talking about it.
>>2931
Too many things add up for the conspiracy of making everybody mentally ill to not be true...
>>2932
>The president is commenting on a recent event that relates to a hot button issue.
He's saying exactly the same thing he said when the last shooting happened, and the shooting before that, and the shooting before that. There is absolutely no indication that any gun legislation at all is going to be brought up by either Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell while Obama is still president.
>The kind of logic you're pushing is bullshit.
That's funny, I was just thinking the same about you.
>If it's not newsworthy, and it's not something people want to talk about, they'll stop talking about.
If it's from a clickbait merchant like Breitbart then the discussion will inevitably become about Breitbart's latest clickbait tactics and marketing schemes. Which is the point of why Breitbart even published such an article to begin with.
>Whether or not Obama has the power right now to do anything about this is a moot point,
No, it's the point of the fearmongering Breitbart clickbait piece OP linked to.
>When the president stops talking about wanting to erode our rights, I'll stop talking about him talking about it.
So when Breitbart stops making bait like this you will stop giving them free adsense clickthrough revenue. Good job there.
>>2945
>He's saying exactly the same thing he said when the last shooting happened, and the shooting before that, and the shooting before that.
And he's saying it again, and that's news. I don't know what angle you're pushing here, but I don't just ignore the president, even if he's just howling at the wind. Comment on your opinions on how you feel he's impotent on being able to do anything about the matter if you must, but you still have the right to comment.
Ultimately though, the thing that seems to be causing you the most grief, rather than anything related to the actual statements of the president, is that the OP linked to Breitbart.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/us/colorado-springs-planned-parenthood-obama-responds-to-gun-violence.html
Well there you go, the New York Times with the same headline. Does this make things better for you, or do you just want to stifle conversation on this subject as a whole?
>>2963
>I don't know what angle you're pushing here
The fact that you think I'm pushing an angle instead of explaining how Breitbart is an inferior, nonviable newssource speaks volumes.
>nytimes.com
The OP could have posted any of hundreds of different versions of the story, including some written from a more partisan conservative angle, but he chose the Breitbart clickbait version. This is the price he pays for that, and anyone who posts Breitbart clickbait here of any kind will pay the same price.
>>2968
The price people will pay is you coming into threads and whining. Alright.
Thank you great defender of justice.
>>2978
>he thinks it's just me here who hates breitbart
I thin you will find that people that are wise to Breitbart's tactics are a dime a dozen around here, especially on /pol/ and /v/. In any case, good luck with your Breitbart internship. It's hard to imagine why anyone would want to defend the gawker of the right as much as you without being motivated financially.
>>2982
Well if you actually look at this conversation it wasn't about Breitbart at all. In fact is started here >>2887, where a person outright said this wasn't news, regardless of it being from Breitbart.
At some point though you switched it away from folks wanting people to stop talking about Obama's continued campaign against the second amendment, directly onto a matter we were disregarding for the moment.
And you say I'm a shill?
>>2995
I did not make >>2887, my first post ITT was >>2926.
All I'm saying is that you had better get used to Breitbart being shit on if you or OP or anyone continue to post their clickbait stories. You might as well post the dailycaller or politico version, or else archive it, because I won't be the only one whining if I see a yet another misleading breitbart outrage headline.
>>243
Yea, if 20 6-yr-old kids getting murdered didn't change anything, I'm not feeling it about this one.
>>235
i support this post
Why are half the news posted here from breitbart?
>>3886
no journalistic standards on this board except for some vague 'no blog' rule.