Lauren Blocked Me for Being a Troll

Somehow I was labeled an internet "Troll" by Lauren after daring to post on one of his anti-gun Google+ posts that the real issue with Friday's massacre isn't that people have guns, it's the people themselves that are dangerous. He deleted my comment and then commented that no "NRA propaganda" will be allowed in his stream. I then posted a comment asking why my post was deleted then, since I did not mention the NRA (I actually dislike the NRA) but merely stated it's people who go about shooting others, not guns themselves. He then deleted my comment again and said he blocked me.

I'm getting really fed up with with internet, lately. Especially Google+. I have "known" Lauren for years. We have talked many time about politics, technology and current events. Now that I think about it, he never comments on anyone else's posts but his own and that's after someone comments on his.

Regardless, how is trying to have a discussion about a subject "trolling?" I dislike the NRA. I dislike their lobbying and their agenda. I have told them so when they tried to recruit me (I am a white, gun owning veteran, after all) and I have publicly told others, both in person and social media.

Just because I happen to believe the root cause of gun violence isn't the guns themselves doesn't mean I agree or support the NRA. I believe the root cause of any violence is much deeper than an individual action or the tool used to bring about that action. In gun violence, obviously it's a gun. However, a gun didn't shoot itself; a gun didn't drive itself to a school; a gun didn't target innocent children and teachers and a gun didn't load and re-load itself.

A person did.

But apparently that opinion will label someone a "troll" and be block-worthy. Especially by someone whom I've been connected and friendly with for (three?) years.

Lauren Weinstein

9:55 PM  -  Public

"Yet recent efforts by the police chief and other town leaders to gain some control over the shooting and the weaponry turned into a tumultuous civic fight, with traditional hunters and discreet gun owners opposed by assault weapon enthusiasts, and a modest tolerance for bearing arms competing with the staunch views of a gun industry trade association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which has made Newtown its home."

In Newtown, Conn., a Stiff Resistance to Gun Restrictions »

The legislative battle in Newtown, Conn., shows how the slightest attempts to impose restrictions on guns can run into withering resistance, made more pointed by the escalation in firepower.

Hide comments

Steven Solomon9:57 PM

Memo
Fr: The National Affairs Office
To: The Nation
Re: A Sane Policy on Gun Ownership
Dt: 12/16/2012

Here’s how a scheme would work to benefit our citizens with a rational manner of controlling fire arms without outlawing them. All of the following is in keeping with historical and constitutional precedents dating to the time of our nation’s founding.

1: All weapons must only be legally purchased with a license to own granted after training in fire arms use and safety and determination of the licensee’s physical and mental ability to use them safely.

2: All buyers must be insured prior to purchase and cannot then be registered without proof of insurance.

3: All sellers of fire arms are required to be licensed, insured, and obligated to report all sales to “The Federal Agency of Fire Arms Control” which shall maintain a database to be shared with local law enforcement.

4: Rapid fire (aka assault weapons) are prohibited from personal use outside of licensed ranges and must be stored in licensed armories.

5: Sales of ammunition in amounts greater than nine rounds per clip or belt are prohibited.

6: Armor penetrating rounds are prohibited, as are explosive rounds.

7: All of the above shall be applied across all States, Commonwealths, Possessions and Territories of the Union.

By the way, the most secure back stop against the insanity that has been going on is in requiring insurance on guns and owners. I don’t have a lot of nice things to say about insurance companies, but they do not bet against themselves.

Expand this comment »

Kelly Sullivan10:01 PM

I never do understand this. Everyone I know with guns is usually the first to say that they're also upset with the idea of children getting killed. You'd think that's at least a starting point.

Lauren Weinstein10:06 PM

NRA propaganda platitudes will be deleted.

Jim Douglas10:07 PM

Politicians beg lobbyists for money on a daily basis; they don't necessarily talk to constituents on a daily basis.  But (speaking of lobbyists), somebody is maintaining a low profile this weekend. https://twitter.com/NRA

Heidi C.10:12 PM

Good to see resistence in Connecticut!
It shows they can think for themselves!

Lauren Weinstein10:13 PM

NRA propaganda troll deleted and blocked.  Associated comments removed for thread continuity.

And that comment was deleted, too? All for stating an opinion that people are the problem, not guns?

Post comment

Cancel

ADDENDUM

I sent Lauren an email with a link to this above blog post and his response was just as disregarding of other points-of-view as his above post:

I am sick to death over the death of 20 beautiful children, and I am
similarly sick to death of gun apologists.  They have wiggled and
schemed and lobbied and lied and turned this country into the
laughingstock of the world.  And when someone -- anyone, I don't care who --
figures that an asinine statement like "guns don't kill people, people do"
is going to advance a discussion by one iota, my patience is gone.  There
is no room for discussion on the basics of this -- with me -- any more.
Guns shows must meet the same rules as gun stores.  Private ownership of
assault style weapons and associated ammunition systems must be restricted.
Past that, I'm open for discussion.  Since your opening comment on the
thread in question was the quintessential NRA platitude, I saw no evidence
of your being willing to accept those initial two premises.  If I'm
wrong in that assumption, do let me know.  Otherwise, I'm afraid my
capacity for continued communication, friendship, or whatever you want
to call it with you has been decimated by those tiny little bodies in
holiday clothing, riddled with bullet holes from a Bushmaster, and the
slimy faces of the gun fetishists in interviews spouting their "what we
really need is more guns!" excrement.  I'm sure there are people out there
willing to conduct endless scholarly discussions on such points.  I'm not.

Capice?