Gov. Walz condemns lawmaker for saying gun control advocates should be ‘stomped on and run over’
twincities.com/2019/02/24/tim-walz-condemns-l...
twincities.comPosted Feb 25, 2019, 6:34 PM UTC
212214
twincities.comI read this quote in an article yesterday in the Star Tribune. I was aghast and told my wife, this better go viral. So glad we have a governor that agrees this kind of talk is unacceptable.
58
Wow that made me realize I read the title wrong. I was like wtf
1†
I'm no longer surprised to hear what these Trumpers say to each other when they think they're surrounded by nothing but like-minded folks.
31†
Not all of us who like guns are trump people :(
56
Yeah I like going to the range once in awhile, but this talk is absolutely atrocious
30
I go to the range all the time and I also am not happy about him representing us
21
Where do non-Trump folks go to buy guns & ammo? Which gun stores are not owned by Trump supporters?
-10
I think that's what gets me most, that I'm just no longer surprised when shit like this happens. At this point it's just completely on-brand.
14
We’ve seen this narrative play out before. Will we be able to stop it this time?
6
Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of hope on that. Those who would be outraged have already come to expect this type of thing, so it's hard to get people mobilized when so many are burnt out from getting worked up.
10
Stop what?
-1†
Maybe you can tell me what you think I'm referring to. By the looks of your comment history, you just might be the type to agree with this guy.
13
Devils advocate: Kind of like Black Lives Matter protestors chanting "What do we want? Dead Cops! When do we want it? Now!" ?
...I hope you're equally judgmental when people on both sides of the aisle say stupid violent things.
-11
We’re those BLM protesters in a position of power? No? Hmm...
6
It's funny that you condone their behavior because they lack "positions of power." I guarantee you wouldn't stand by that reasoning if it was a crowd of average Trump voters marching through the streets calling for the deaths of Democratic politicians.
Look in the mirror dude. You're just as bad as the people you despise.
1
I agree that was not appropriate for protesters to advocate violence. Do you think elected officials should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen?
3
Well, elected officials are often average citizens, but I don't think it's unreasonable to hold elected officials to a higher standard than the average citizen.
That's not what I was arguing though. I was implying if OP was going to apply the words of one rural politician to all Republicans he should also do so with BLM crowds and all Democrats.
1
Good thing nobody elected those people to office.
2
You’re whole post history reads like the rantings of someone with TDS. He’s infected your mind. It’s all you post about.
Maybe chill for a few minutes
-24
Like I’d ever consider the words of someone who uses the term TDS.
19
TDS?
-2†
“Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
A gaslighting way of saying “you’re deranged for thinking this guy is a walking constitutional crisis.”
Don’t trust your lying eyes and ears, basically.
18
So butthurt you respond to my same comment twice.
-22
You vastly overestimate your influence. Begone
8
Did you really think you could shame someone into not hating Trump? LOL
14
Nah, he was trying to shame you into not being a dick to people on the internet. Apparently didn't work.
-15
You guys really have gaslighting down to a science. If anything I said was “being a dick to people on the Internet”, you should probably stay off of Facebook and Twitter.
12
History teaches us we should probably take fascists at their word. Note this scumbag also prefaced his statement with talk about how everyone has "had enough" and "people should think about how to respond to this."
He ended with remarks on the American Revolution. Stating that the last time arms were confiscated it started a revolution and it will happen again if they try to steal your arms.
Email your reps. He should be censured.
29
So you think a guy that is opposed to taking away people's rights is a fascist and those that want to limit people's rights are the good guys?
-20
The guy threatening violence against political opponents doesn’t seem like something the Germans and Italians did pre-WWII? Hmm...
28
Taking away rights is what the Germans and Italians did pre WW2.
1
You have an extremely simplistic idea of what fascists are, that much is clear.
1
Good grief are you predictable.... 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
-13
What part was I wrong about? If it goosesteps like a fucking fascist, is it not a fucking fascist?
7
Gun rights aren’t absolute, btw. Even the ultra-Conservative Justice Scalia said as much. Are you further to the right than the most extreme conservative that has sat on the SCOTUS?
23
What do you people not understand about "shall not be infringed". That's pretty basic plain English.
-11
What do you people not understand about "well-regulated militia". That's pretty basic plain English.
16
We're not going to be selling guns out of vending machines in Walmart vestibules. Get that into your head. There are going to be requirements one must demonstrate they meet in order to take ownership. Those requirements are going to be debated and refined in an effort to keep them out of the hands of people that have demonstrated they cannot be trusted with the responsibility of gun ownership. My right to own and carry has not been infringed and none of these proposed bills will negatively affect any responsible gun owner.
1
How many crew-served weapons do you own? Any armor?
Gun rights have been infringed for a long time. The question isn't whether there are limits to that right, but where exactly that limit is.
1
Freedom isn't on a left/right axis. That axis is for statist paternalistic assholes that think they know what is best for other people.
-12
We tried “every man for himself.” It didn’t work and we had to form civilizations.
3
History teaches us we should probably take fascists at their word.
He made an idiotic statement and is anti-gun control therefore he is a fascist..? Wonderful logic.
-27
You know what, you can stand by the "idiotic statement" excuse if it's just one off thing from a far right person. This is not an innocent "idiotic statement". State and federal reps should not be this extreme in their rhetoric and he is far from the first one. The commander in chief is probably the biggest perpetrator of incitement to violence. The proposed law is literally expanding background checks. There's no gun confiscation, etc. Gun advocates tout the"good guy with a gun" and"tough on crime" but the minute a law is proposed to ensure only good guys have guns and to be tough on crime it's met with incitement to violence. The recent white supremacist terrorist attacks that have taken place in the US since Trump took office are a testament to how far right the GOP is. Their not conservative, they are nearing religious authoritarianism.
23
So democrats can call 2a supporters domestic terrorists and you don't see a problem there do you. Go kick rocks bud!
-22
I support the 2nd amendment. I don't have a gun, but I have shot guns and enjoy them. I personally cannot afford a gun or else I'd probably have one because I've looked into gun ownership. Minnesota is easy as hell to get a gun. I'm also not a criminal and a speeding ticket is my worst offense. I want background checks to limit guns to people who may not be stable. I work with unstable people who have guns and it's scary. I'm not calling all 2A supporters terrorists, just the ones who have committed terrorism, like the synagogue shooter, the bomber from Florida, the church shooter. Those people are the ones who should not have guns
12
That's irrelevant to my comment. I'm not trying to defend him or the GOP, I was merely satirizing the fact that you abruptly and illogically mislabeled the guy as a fascist. What you said was as absurd as someone calling you a communist on the sole basis that you're pro-gun control.
-24
"We disagree with these people so much we should run them over with our cars."
"Whoa. That dude is a fascist."
"Whoa. Dude. Be reasonable here. Your language is really over the line. Let's not be throwing around the f-word at people who just proposed we should kill people we disagree with."
18
You can't bring common sense to the conversation. It makes too much sense and their tiny minds explode.
-11
I correctly labeled him a fascist because he suggested that his fellow citizens be curb stomped and run over. And alluded to the American Revolution, an armed rebellion (one I don't necessarily disagree with), as he suggested how those in the crowd should react. All in reaction to supporting background checks.
Regardless of the proposed legislation, a government representative calling for violence against supporters of something he disagrees with IS fascist in nature and has no place in our democratic society.
3
calling for violence against supporters of something he disagrees with IS fascist in nature
Lol wow that is ignorant... If "a government representative calling for violence against their opposition" is fascist in nature, then it is even more so communist in nature (a simple google search can give you thousands of examples of mass killings done by communists). Experts estimate 50 to 100 million people were killed for opposing communism.....
(scroll down to estimates) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes
1
Thank you for defending the good name of fascists everywhere. So honorable of you.
Right wing reactionaries like Bahr (based off his statements here) are fascist in nature. They believe in some sort of return to the past, a bygone era. Check. They support a strong man leader, which gives rise to authoritarian government and I'd bet the house Bahr is obsessed with Trump. Check. They also support forceable/violent suppression of opposition. Check.
1
I emailed Cal and told him he was an idiot.
I also emailed my rep, asking for a censure vote. Violent talk has no place in state politics.
17
I did too. Feel free to use my letter as a template to your rep.
I am sure you've heard about Rep. Bahr's abhorrent statements at a gun owners rally at the Capitol. In response to proposed background check legislation he said:
"There are a lot of us in this room that have had enough and it's time for us to start riding herd on the rest of these people that want to take your rights away from you... They need to be kicked to the curb and stomped on and run over a few times."
He then directly referenced the American Revolution as an appropriate response to those in the crowd.
A government representative directly calling for violence against supporters of something he disagrees with is beyond the pale and has no place in our democratic society.
I would hope the House and DFL leadership is considering an appropriate response to his statements, including possible censure.
I look forward to your response.
3
Next election guess who's getting stomped. https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/members/profile/15455
4†
I'm all for it, but just take some stock of this area. This is Kurt Daudt country, a district where they could run a dead possum that someone found on the side of the road, and people would vote for it as long as it has an 'R' next to it's name on the ballot.
Even before this current embarrassment, they were voting for the previous dipshit.
-
Tom Hackbarth was detained at a Planned Parenthood clinic in 2010 because he was lurking around with a loaded gun. He claims that he was just trying to find a woman that he'd met online, and was worried that she was cheating on him, despite having never met her and having no contact information for her. Tom Hackbarth was married at the time. ( MPR News )
-
Tom Hackbarth also tied union activity to the behavior of Fidel Castro and Adolf Hitler. ( MPR News )
The backlash for this? He was re-elected twice, and only lost the third election because they found someone nuttier to run against him in the primary.
His name? Cal Bahr.
15
Tom Hackbarth was detained at a Planned Parenthood clinic in 2010 because he was lurking around with a loaded gun. He claims that he was just trying to find a woman that he’d met online, and was worried that she was cheating on him, despite having never met her and having no contact information for her. Tom Hackbarth was married at the time. ( MPR News )
So wait... his defense for hanging around an abortion provider with a loaded gun was implying that the gun was actually for using on a cheating girlfriend?
“I wasn’t going to shoot up a doctor’s office, I was just going to shoot a woman I was dating!”
“Checks out, carry on good sir!”
4
St. Paul prosecutors said there were inconsistencies in Hackbarth's story, but they ultimately decided against filing any charges.
He might have been there to intimidate or attack people at the clinic, something that you think might warrant an arrest.
He might have been there to stalk a woman that he'd met online, while he was married. Something that the party of family values surely wouldn't stand for.
He might have been there to confront the boyfriend of the woman that he'd met online. With a loaded gun. Which, again, both legally and morally, might warrant some type of action from law enforcement and/or the party.
It was one of those incidents where, for a minute, you think people are going to show some spine and decide that this really isn't appropriate behavior for an elected official. But nope, just lay low for a bit, wait for all of this to blow over.
2
they could run a dead possum that someone found on the side of the road
Yeah like they could find one that didn't end up in a stew pot.
1
I'm not optimistic. A third to a half of us were dumb/hateful/AFRAID enough to elect these pieces of shit to begin with.
10
I will shamelessly knock on doors in his neighborhood for whoever runs against him. I'm sick of this shit.
7
One thing these authoritarian nutbags have going for them at least: they're pretty goddamn incompetent.
3
I’m not sure where I went wrong, but somehow this discussion has gotten away from the main point of the article, that conservative politicians are speaking like authoritarian tyrants.
3
[deleted]
2
"Elected dumbass is forced to urge gun owners to violence with legs, wheels."
This guy just knows stomping is too much exercise for his constituents, but he's on the hook if a pickup truck runs the curb at a gun control protest.
2
Yeah, what do you have against just using a gun? /s
1
[deleted]
1
You can insert a better comment than that? Ah.... your a socialist, just hate anger and name calling. No facts, no basis or ideas.
0
[removed]
0
Whoever said that is a dumbass, but that doesn't change the fact that all this nonsense about gun control is a waste of time.
Imagine if all of the time spent pointlessly debating about gun control was spent advocating for actually useful things like criminal justice reform or education reform..
-3†
I dunno. It’s never a bad thing to get the right-wing on record opposing every common sense measure put out there.
11
I dunno. It’s never a bad thing to get the right-wing on record opposing every common sense measure put out there.
You'd have to find a common sense gun control measure. Most of them don't survive the slightest bit of critical thinking.
0†
Universal background checks aren’t common sense? Geez, that was difficult.
7
Universal background checks= universal gun registration. Enforce the laws we already have, like actually going after straw purchasers. Private gun sales and borrowing my uncle's hunting rifle aren't the source of the problem..
-1
Considering criminals get their guns almost exclusively through theft, what do you thing universal background checks are going to accomplish? Every single sale from a licensed dealer already involves a background check.
The way most of the universal background check laws are written, if I go to the range with my best friend and hand him my gun to shoot while I'm standing there, I have just "transferred" the gun to him and committed a felony. That's common sense, though, right?
Or--another common feature--when I die, my kids don't get to inherit, the guns must be turned in. Still common sense? Where they do write in an exception (Thanks, statist overlords!), my kids would have to pay thousands of dollars of transfer fees.
-1
criminal justice reform or education reform
it's almost as though we can do more than two things at once
9
Yes, of course legislators can do more than two things at once; however, each legislative year is finite, which means everything done has an opportunity cost... therefore, all of the time spent in gridlock on gun control is time that could've been spent making progress on something more beneficial to society that is also more likely to get bi-partisan approval.
3
We spend a good deal of time on criminal justice reform actually. And we have one of the best education systems in the nation. I think addressing gun violence is a very good thing to do at this point.
5
Yes, we have a ruling class called the three tiers, executive, legislative and judicial. Yes, we have maga giant corporations worth billions and have influence on issues. In a perfect world everyone is honest, just and has the people in their best interest. All our leaders are elected and have limited time leading. I for one think term limits on members of congress should be in place, say two terms. This would eliminate corruption and payoffs from lobbyists. That was the original idea our founding fathers wanted. They envisioned normal everyday citizens serve for a few years. Shop owners, ranchers, builders not lawyers. We have strayed from this idea considerably for sure. One thing for certain, The choices we have as Americans are all availible because of capitalism and entrepreneurs creating better products and services. All the goes away with Socialism, free this free that, high taxes and govt involvement in business stifle the drive for production and drive. Choices are eliminated, large corporations leave, the rich move away to better havens and the trest of us are left with huge debt and the feeling of worthlessness. Our system with all its faults is the best system in the world. This is why so many strive to come here by either legal or illegal means. People are fleeing Venezuela by the millions, if Socialism is so great why aren't people attempting to get in. Sorry to ramble on, enjoy your day.
-3
username checks out.
2
The socialist in this State keep chipping away at our 2nd amendment. Socialism requires a disarmed society so that all rights are removed. History shows the first step is to disarm a society. Venezuela, Cuba, China, Soviet Union and North Korea. The Nazi's disarmed the Jews before they murdered them. Now we have people in this State that have actually been duped into believing gun control works. The 2nd amendment protects ALL of us a rogue tyranical govt.
-6
Username checks out
5
Lol
3
I'd bet a hundred bucks that this one believes the NAZIs were liberals.
5
They had SOCIALIST in the name of their party!!!!
1
Yeah, and North Korea has "Democratic" in the official name of their country. Do you think they people there democratically elect their officials? LOL
You must be really confused by "Buffalo Wings", too.
They co-opted the socialist party, and adopted the Fascist ideals of Mussolini. They murdered the socialists, communists and other leftists. Read a fucking history book once in a while that isn't written by Dinesh D'Souza...
6
So, we're just going to ignore all the other countries that don't have armed citizens?
Oh, right, they don't line up with your batshit "logic".
1
Laugh all you want. Then tell me one nation that isn't oppressed under Socialism. Socialism is the stepping stone to communism. How is socialism working for France, Sweden and Uk? Mass migration, rape culture and no go zones for sharia law. Have you been watching or informed about the yellow vest movement? Socialism does one thing. It evens the income so everyone is poor except for the ruling class elitists. Capitalism give everyone a chance to better themselves and keeping the more freedoms. Sure there is some corruption but under Socialism no one can stop the corruption by the ruling class as history shows.
-7
"Sure there is some corruption"
That's an odd way to say that we've living in the biggest Oligarchy this world has ever seen. You worry about the political elites, but completely ignore the rich and corporate. Why?
5
Probably not the best choice of words I can agree but is this really newsworthy? I heard r Kelly was wrecking some prison sheets with that lame dude from empire. That's more this pages speed isn't it? The guy spoke a little tok harsh for your intestinal fortitude I get it but if you think people are going to idly sit by and let hf8 and hf9 pass like a breeze in the night your are sadly mistaken. How about we let law enforcement do their job and enforce laws already on the books. Let's start there with your common sense gun grabbers and not infringe anymore than lawmakers already have.
-12
I guess in the age of Trump, calling for violence perpetuated against the opposition is the new normal. Nothing to see here.
What’s wrong with universal background checks?
4
We don't need more laws. We don't enforce the ones we all ready have. What would a new one do?
-1
Ooh! Ooh!
Do the "Criminals don't obey laws so we don't need laws" one next!
1
Nope they don't hence the word criminal.. But laws on the books have us covered. Universal background checks create a defacto registry and as we have seen OR and CA you register and they show up for your property. So yes enforce what we have on the books first.
1
lmao he just walked right into that. Nicely done.
1
Ahh gun control. The easiest way to push independents to the right.
-33
You'd think threatening violence would be a bigger red flag, but... naaaaahhhh
30
Exactly why the DFL didn't win any state wide elections in MN.
13
You might be too subtle for the trumpers to pick up on it.
1
You act like this is sports. He's urging his supporters to assault innocent people, your moral compass should be able to tell you that's wrong.
9
Good, get the fuck over there
-4
Nothing like threatening violence to convince people that you can be trusted to responsibly handle deadly weapons.
Is this what a “good guy with a gun” sounds like?
Probably not.