Tim McGraw

Discussion in 'Lounge' started by Fracman, Apr 19, 2015.

  1. cicpup

    cicpup Resident PITA Supporting Member

    So the good ole country boy currently on his "Shotgun Rider Tour " is donating his proceeds to a gun control group? The world truly is [email protected] up.

    **Chase Bryant and Billy Currington are the billed openers throughout McGraw’s 35-date tour—but on Thursday afternoon, Currington dropped out of the July 17 performance due to the media maelstrom. One day after tweeting “i didn’t sign up for sh!t, just hearing about it like you are,”**

    Kudos to him.

  2. shane73

    shane73 Member

    I love Tim McGraw but after seeing this. SEE YA TIM.
  3. sdbrit68

    sdbrit68 Supporting Member

    Gotta help support the artist
  4. SWAGA

    SWAGA No longer broke... Lifetime Supporter

    I don't see what the problem is.
    The benefits of one (1!) concert goes to an organization to protect children against gun violence.
    And immediately this gesture is bastardized into gun control.
    Talk about hypocrisy and paranoia.
  5. sdbrit68

    sdbrit68 Supporting Member

    The issue, and I have no clue what side of the spectrum your political beliefs fall.

    Many of us, our experience with liberals is, " Its for the kids" as their mantra, and if you give them an inch, they try to go a mile, their attitude is by any means possible, truth doesn't matter.

    Many of this group think the " Its for the kids" means I should not be allowed to have a weapon, especially those evil looking assault rifle, even though AR does not stand for that......and the fact, other weapons they haven't attacked fire the same rounds.

    A armed and trained security guard, or two or three armed teachers could have also avoided this horror, but they wont even consider that part of the equation.

  6. "Unite, organize and mobilize parents and communities to implement change by establishing, building, training and empowering volunteer led Promise Communities"

    Could you clue us in on this change that is their approach?

    This is from their blog~~

    Strong Regulations on Gun Sales Prevent High-Risk Individuals from Accessing Firearms and Can Reduce Violent Crime
    Posted by SHP Press · March 20, 2015 1:56 PM

    “By expanding and strengthening policies designed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, we can reduce the number of people killed each year by gun violence.”

    Researchers at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School for Public Health, and the University of California, Davis looked at studies published between 1999 and 2014 on policies meant to prohibit individuals at high-risk for committing gun violence from acquiring guns, and policies meant to keep guns out of the hands of prohibited individuals and away from the illegal firearm market.

    They concluded that strong regulations on gun sales do prevent at-risk individuals or prohibited purchasers from obtaining guns, and in turn, reduce violent crime rates.

    Another blog post, does these blog entries sound the least bit familiar?

    Why Gun Owners Should Support Background Checks
    Posted by SHP Press · March 15, 2015 5:00 PM

    "Every day that background checks are used, they stop more than 170 felons, some 50 domestic abusers and nearly 20 fugitives from buying a gun. However, those same criminals can currently buy identical guns at a gun show or over the Internet with no questions asked."

    Here, read Rep. Mike Thompson's piece on why gun owners should support the new background check bill and why background checks are paramount to protecting the Second Amendment.

    Last year, 260 House representatives voted to fund the background check system, including 76 Republicans. If they can vote to fund it, they should also vote to better implement it.

    And yet more~~

    Posted by SHP Press · March 15, 2015 10:00 AM

    “You can reduce the rate of suicide in the United States substantially, without attending to underlying mental health problems, if fewer people had guns in their homes and fewer people who are at risk for suicide had access to guns in their home.”

    Experts told the New York Times that not enough attention is being paid to the means in which different populations commit suicide. For example, if a walkway over a bridge has a high fence, a struggling college student would be deterred from jumping off, or if a parent kept their guns locked away and unloaded, a teenager can't end their life suddenly on a particularly difficult day.

    Determining who is most at risk of committing suicide is difficult. In one study, 60% of patients deemed "low-risk" who were released from acute psychiatric care died by suicide. Blocking the means by which people commit suicide is of utmost importance due to the unpredictability and swiftness in which a person decides they want to hurt or kill themselves.
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2015
  7. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    Brother, how do you think they plan to protect children from gun violence?..... There won't be pushes for mental health improvements for at risk people, there won't be money spent on encouraging families to raise children in one household, which would drastically lower the number of whacko nut job kids thrown into society...... The real hypocrisy IMHO lies in using dead children to further a agenda......
  8. I could post the whole blog, but most should get the drift. This is a gun control group with a softer, more nice image than mad mommies for gun control.
  9. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    I agree, you can dress a tiger up in a tuxedo, doesn't change the way it behaves....
  10. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    I have read a lot about this.

    I am really torn. For one, I in no way support gun control. And I don't want to support anyone who does.

    But from what I understand, the money raised from this concert doesn't support the gun control group, but rather the families involved in the Newtown incident.

    Now, that may not be true, i don't know. I know the article cited here says it goes to the group. But I know I read somewhere it goes to the families.

    Also, McGraw has a sort of personal reason to do this

    Now, personally, I think if he really wanted to benefit the families AND support the Second, he should do something on his own and have it be in no way affiliated with any gun control group.
  11. Back2School

    Back2School Member

    Much like you, I have been following this. I agree he could easily do a donation or even a fundraiser concert for the town and not tie it to a gun control group.

    BTW Snopes gives this a mixture on if its in support of a gun control group so you know it has to be 100% true if they would give it something that extreme.

    And props to Travis Tritt for calling Tim out on it too :)
  12. Hermitt

    Hermitt Hey! Get Off My Lawn! Member

    I would tend to think that most of the 'families' are part of the gun control group. So if you give the money directly to the families, they will in turn give it to the group.
  13. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    Perhaps it is going to a gun control gorup.

    I'd just like to know for sure before we go bashing the guy.

    I mean, look at the spin the media did on the whole no functioning guns at the NRA show.

    They took a small kernel of something with some truth and twisted it into something it wasn't.
  14. Back2School

    Back2School Member

    The only question I would ask is how many times has the media twisted something IN FAVOR of gun owners or against gun controllers?

    Look, I am definitely not hardcore conservative, nor am I hardcore liberal but I am for individuals rights. Just like the article I linked about how veterans are being abused and put on deny lists for guns because they went to the VA, this group wants the same thing for everyday Americans. Liberals support this now because they mistakenly believe its aimed at conservatives. When we get a conservative president, he could change it to deny liberals (or more appropriately their security teams). Some people are willing to place their future in jeopardy simply to hurt a perceived enemy now. I believe that type of thinking is incredibly short sighted.
  15. McGraw is a proud progressive democrat, he has made it clear longgggg before this every came up. He supported the Clintons, Obama, AND now Hillary Clinton. He supports the 2A as much as any rich person, it is OK for him, but not the peasants. Hillary, Obama, and Biden have all claimed to support the second amendment.

    He few years back he made it known that he has an eye on running for some type of office.

    He had aspirations as far back as 2006.

    1/13/2006 3:53:29 PM ET

    NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Country singer Tim McGraw says he wants to run for office someday in his adopted home state of Tennessee — perhaps for governor or U.S. senator — and he’s getting encouragement from a fellow Democrat, former President Clinton.

    Last edited: Apr 19, 2015
  16. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

  17. tallbump

    tallbump Supporting Member

    See, that's the stuff I didn't know and was withholding judgement until I knew more.

    Seems fair to me.

    But now that I know, I can't support him
  18. MaryB

    MaryB Supporting Member

    Nothing to add other than he just killed his music career...