On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 1:07:10 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:07:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

Maybe he was. Or maybe he wasn't. All of the TV political pundits go
over the top from time to time, but, taking everything into
consideration, I think that Scarborough has a valid point of view. I
don't agree with it entirely, but it's clear to me that PolitiFact
tends to be a little bit selective ...

You can't blame "politifact", for at least pointing out Scarborough for that.

You snipped out the issues that I pointed out.

In Media Matter's article on Joe Scarborough entitled: " No Evidence For Joe Scarborough's Claim That Guns On Campus Will Prevent Mass Shootings"

There's no evidence against it, either.

There was actually...direct evidence...at the University of Alabama, but in 2010. Faculty member Amy Bishop had a gun, but used it - firing first -on innocent people:
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_U...ville_shooting

What else fits the qualification?

He may be right -- or not.

This proves directly that he isn't right. The civilian gun-holder merely uses it first.

Mog, you're hopping around from democrats.com to politifact to
mediamatters, compounding each one's spin, as if it makes up some kind
of coherent argument.

You have to prove it doesn't.

It doesn't.

It does.

To keep it brief, what democrats.com said about
Scarborough's statement is a flat-out lie.

Several say he did, but OK, let's say he didn't.

Regarding Media Matters, they were
throwing out some red meat to liberals. They never tried to counter
Scarborough's point.

Though they didn't, a counter point was there with the Univ of Alabama Amy Bishop case.

Scarborough in the other case was reacting ...

That's just the problem. Quoting material from a popular TV host doesn't add up to sound conclusions. That Univ of Alabama shooting happened in 2012, then in 2015, Scarborough uses that failed gun-carrying incident to support keeping guns there.

On Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 1:59:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 1:07:10 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:07:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

Maybe he was. Or maybe he wasn't. All of the TV political pundits go
over the top from time to time, but, taking everything into
consideration, I think that Scarborough has a valid point of view. I
don't agree with it entirely, but it's clear to me that PolitiFact
tends to be a little bit selective ...

You can't blame "politifact", for at least pointing out Scarborough for that.

You snipped out the issues that I pointed out.

In Media Matter's article on Joe Scarborough entitled: " No Evidence For Joe Scarborough's Claim That Guns On Campus Will Prevent Mass Shootings"

There's no evidence against it, either.

There was actually...direct evidence...at the University of Alabama, but in 2010. Faculty member Amy Bishop had a gun, but used it - firing first -on innocent people:
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_U...ville_shooting

What else fits the qualification?

He may be right -- or not.

This proves directly that he isn't right. The civilian gun-holder merely uses it first.

Mog, you're hopping around from democrats.com to politifact to
mediamatters, compounding each one's spin, as if it makes up some kind
of coherent argument.

You have to prove it doesn't.

It doesn't.

It does.

To keep it brief, what democrats.com said about
Scarborough's statement is a flat-out lie.

Several say he did, but OK, let's say he didn't.

Regarding Media Matters, they were
throwing out some red meat to liberals. They never tried to counter
Scarborough's point.

Though they didn't, a counter point was there with the Univ of Alabama Amy Bishop case.

Scarborough in the other case was reacting ...

That's just the problem. Quoting material from a popular TV host doesn't
add up to sound conclusions. That Univ of Alabama shooting happened
in 2012, then in 2015, Scarborough uses that failed gun-carrying
incident to support keeping guns there.

Oh, sorry. Well not that incident "per se", but the same location in support of keeping guns there and elsewhere.

On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:59:51 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 1:07:10 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:07:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

Maybe he was. Or maybe he wasn't. All of the TV political pundits go
over the top from time to time, but, taking everything into
consideration, I think that Scarborough has a valid point of view. I
don't agree with it entirely, but it's clear to me that PolitiFact
tends to be a little bit selective ...

You can't blame "politifact", for at least pointing out Scarborough for that.

You snipped out the issues that I pointed out.

In Media Matter's article on Joe Scarborough entitled: " No Evidence For Joe Scarborough's Claim That Guns On Campus Will Prevent Mass Shootings"

There's no evidence against it, either.

There was actually...direct evidence...at the University of Alabama, but in 2010. Faculty member Amy Bishop had a gun, but used it - firing first -on innocent people:
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_U...ville_shooting

What else fits the qualification?

He may be right -- or not.

This proves directly that he isn't right. The civilian gun-holder merely uses it first.

The pro-gun people would say you got it exactly backwards. The Univ.
of Alabama is a gun-free zone. The shooter was a criminal who was
carrying illegally. Scarborough and others would say the shooting
could have been minimized if there were staff members who were
carrying concealed, legally.

Which is right? Again, nobody knows. But it's people like Bishop who
the pro-gunners would say are the problem, and the large majority of
legal gun owners are the solution. The whole point of legalizing
concealed carry is that there are dangerous criminals, like Bishop,
and nothing will stop them except a "good guy with a gun."

I make no judgment about it. There simply is not enough evidence, only
opinion.


Mog, you're hopping around from democrats.com to politifact to
mediamatters, compounding each one's spin, as if it makes up some kind
of coherent argument.

You have to prove it doesn't.

I already did.


It doesn't.

It does.

You're late to the party. Go look at Scarborough's words about what
[most] Americans are concerned about, and you'll see how they were
spun.

Then look up the others.


To keep it brief, what democrats.com said about
Scarborough's statement is a flat-out lie.

Several say he did, but OK, let's say he didn't.

For chrissake, his exact words were transcribed from the show. Go back
to your article and track them down.


Regarding Media Matters, they were
throwing out some red meat to liberals. They never tried to counter
Scarborough's point.

Though they didn't, a counter point was there with the Univ of Alabama Amy Bishop case.

Exactly the opposite. Bishop was a criminal and a killer. No one could
legally carry a gun there. Scarborough's [opinionated] point is that
is the reason she was able to keep killing.


Scarborough in the other case was reacting ...

That's just the problem. Quoting material from a popular TV host doesn't add up to sound conclusions. That Univ of Alabama shooting happened in 2012, then in 2015, Scarborough uses that failed gun-carrying incident to support keeping guns there.

He's arguing for legal carry by qualified citizens. Bishop was not
carrying legally. She was committing a crime.

--
Ed Huntress