By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Helloplite on 04 April 2018
Edit Thread
John2290 said:
Helloplite said:
Nah, nothing bullyish about this really. The OTs consistence insistence on calling him a 'kid', is a thinly veiled attempt to diminish him even further. His marks, or college aspirations should have nothing to do with any of this at all. He was a victim of a shooting and it is his right to advocate against guns. This attack by a Republican is clearly aimed at destabilizing his advocacy. It is a smear campaign, therefore. Yes, he could have glossed over this, but ultimately here is a society that treats victims of violence with contempt. To call him a 'kid' is further proof that what he believes in is of far more importance to the OT, than realizing that he has the right to believe anything... including believing that the guns that almost killed him should be banned.

From a European ;)

The kid hasn't entered the world in any manner that gives him any experience to talk on these issues. There is nothing here to diminish, people who listen to ids with no life experience on matters that will effect their own lives is ridiculous not to mention the media use this KID as a propaganda tool on booth sides of the debate. 

Also, I'm not sure you mean what plagiarism is not me, had I not included the wiki article I would not have needed to link to site rules here either. I've read dozens upon dozens of articles from many, many news sites to blogs and vlogs. Everything but the wiki article is my take on the matter hence no plagiarism. Unless I wrote it word for word, which I did not it is my own and no plagiarism took place as the OP is in my own words and the information is all in the public domain. 

Are you sure about this? Being a victim of an attack is literally the best kind of experience one could have before talking about guns. Just like a sufferer of AIDS is the person to rely on about the experience of having AIDS. To diminish him by calling him a 'kid' is a blatant attempt to disregard his political opinions by falsely attempting to imply that his age belies a lack of understanding about the issue he is campaigning for. Experience is not a matter of age.

Now, it is true that the media is using him for its own anti-NRA propaganda. Which is also exactly why the pro-NRA seeks to portray him as a 'kid', who 'does not know' or who is part of some brainwashing liberal-democrat agenda (see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5571375/Ted-Nugent-Florida-school-shooting-survivor-brainwashed.html) -- which in turn is also a form of propaganda. 

Here is the thing: This person is a survivor of a gun attack. His message is that "from personal experience, guns are bad". Your response to this is: "you are too young to have an opinion, grow some more". You throw his literal experience under the bus, only to then imply that his figurative 'experience' in the form of age is an important variable.

I have not been in a gun shooting, so I really have no clue. I trust that he does, and that's a sensible approach. I am not going to belittle him for his age, for his lack of education, or for failing to enter a top school. In fact, I am not going to belittle him at all. As a neutral observer from another continent, I watch American politics with much interest and amusement. It is clear to me that NRA and pro-gun activists seek to belittle him, yet you don't see it at the same time as you are doing it yourself.

On plagiarism: I am an academic, teaching at University. We could go on about this, but let me clarify that I am not accusing you of plagiarism here. You are clearly offering commentary on a series of news articles and wikipedia resources. Of course, this is not an academic setting and no one forces you to list every single resource you used... but let's not alter the meaning of the words here. The best course of practice is to list all primary and secondary source material used... but this is a forum so you are good to go as it is.