Twitter | Search | |
Kurt Eichenwald
Contributing editor, Vanity Fair; MSNBC Contributor, New York Times bestselling author.
63,218
Tweets
1,650
Following
449,821
Followers
Tweets
Kurt Eichenwald 9h
Rubio is getting slammed in the public meeting. But please remember: , whatever you think of him, showed up. - Rick Scott, who led the largest health care fraud in American history - is hiding in the governor's mansion like the coward he is.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald retweeted
Kurt Eichenwald 9h
Anyone who thinks represents intellectual conservative thought must also believe that a Big Mac is fine French cuisine.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 9h
Anyone who thinks represents intellectual conservative thought must also believe that a Big Mac is fine French cuisine.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 9h
Replying to @Paul_McCrunkney
...Im just amazed there is actually a cartoon of anvils falling out of the sky.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 9h
Replying to @Paul_McCrunkney
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 9h
I love it when there are people who think they can bully me. They never even see the anvil falling out of the sky until it crushes them. As most everyone who knows me well says, they would never want to be on my bad side. RR.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @NEOBillRyan
I TOTALLY agree. That is one on my list of things that should be done.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @FeasterFamine
Thank you for proving my point. When you go after political categories of guns (assault weapons arent a type of gun, they are a political definition. Assault rifles are a type of gun) it accomplishes nothing. The policy got reversed in a few years.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @kurteichenwald
...bump stocks could have been banned if people LEARNED about guns, saw the danger these posed, & fought. But no one did. Bump stocks were used to kill 58 people in Vegas. I cried that night because I failed to persuade people to join my 4-year long attempt to get them banned.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Here's an example of why you need to understand guns. I was writing/videoing "BAN BUMP STOCKS!" in 2014. Pointed out you couldn't aim with them, only for massacring crowds. But the topic wasn't sexy. No one cared. More fulfilling to say "ban guns" when that would never happen....
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @SagebrushRick @NRA
...which is why we have to outsmart them. Biometric guns, liability insurance, universal background checks, ban high caps - let them "2nd Amend" about that and reply "Hmmm...exactly how does that apply here?" It doesn't.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @HFlassbeckEcon
....but u wont know how 2 create gun control with teeth. One way to try 2 stop King Kong might be 2 shoot him. Another might be to gas him. But if, before you make either decision, u learn about King Kong & what stops him, you succeed. Know guns and legal precedent. And succeed.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @NRA
...have backed them up. The gun problem can be solved so long as we care first about solving the gun problem, not about putting in some policies we read on a bumper sticker. Become armed with knowledge. Learn about guns and the law. Then fight the .
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @kurteichenwald
...and once you start to go after the soft underbelly of the gun issue - and it is there, big and ready to rip apart - the shootings will drop dramatically. And the gun nuts wont be able to credibly scream "2nd Amendment!" because the courts have already spoken on these and....
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
If you say "ban assault weapons" as the answer, you don't know enough about guns. "Assault weapons" is a political term about unrelated guns. "Assault rifle" is a type of gun. The scariest thing to gun nuts: Gun control folks who understand guns and so know what to regulate.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 10h
Replying to @booksanescape
...this is why these calls fail. "Assault weapons" dont exist. That is a political term that wrapped in guns based on how they looked. Its assault rifles. But a semi-auto handgun with a 30-round mag is more dangerous than an assault rifle w/o a high cap mag. So ban high cap mags.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 11h
Replying to @kurteichenwald
I WANT TO NOTE: Lots of people commenting on this thread are adding in FANTASTIC ideas on gun control, none of which are simplistic, never-will-happen-because-court-precedent-will-stop-it ideas. Read them through. These are sophisticated answers. And they would work.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 11h
Replying to @Soenda
Absolutely.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 11h
Replying to @kurteichenwald
...in other words, like in most things, the simple answers just make people feel good. If you know guns, and RESPECT them for their danger (which gun nuts dont), answers can be found that make mass shootings far less possible even WITHOUT banning guns.
Reply Retweet Like
Kurt Eichenwald 11h
Replying to @kurteichenwald
...a lot of rules that being reckless (like not having a combination safe) costs a lot more, etc. etc..you DRAMATICALLY decrease the danger. ALL of these things are not blocked by precedent - in fact, many have precedent on their side. If u know the issue, u can stop the carnage.
Reply Retweet Like