What is the meaning of $1.05 as seen at March For Our Lives?

  • Emma Gonzalez at March for our Lives

    At the March for our Lives rally, the podium has a sticker - $1.05. It seems unusual to me, a non-American. What is its meaning?

    I'll have to downvote this question for lack of preliminary research, as it's quite easy to find the answer to this with a search engine.

    @Revetahw Yeah, that's fair. But at the time I had no idea it was NRA or Rubio related, or even a recent development. All I could think of was the song Freedom isn't Free ($1.05) which seems related but ... it's not.

    I just searched for "1.05 march for our lives". Google even suggested it as I typed 1.05 ma... Interesting question though.

    @Revetahw And Stack Exchange is supposed to be one of the first sites you find with that search engine.

    @JesseTG Thank you. I agree, Stack Exchange should be the top search result for 50% of searches. A search for "march for our lives $1.05 meaning" returns this page as the top 3 results.

  • ohwilleke

    ohwilleke Correct answer

    4 years ago

    As Vox explains it is directed at Senator Rubio, who has opposed the March and their movement, representing the value they believe he has placed on their lives by dividing the number of dollars he has received from the NRA by the number of school children purportedly harmed by his pro-gun stance:

    [T]hey came up with it by dividing the amount the National Rifle Association has spent to support Rubio’s campaigns, $3.3 million, by the 3.1 million public and private students in the state. Since Rubio’s first senate bid in 2010, the NRA has spent about $1 million to support his campaigns, and $2.3 million to attack his opponents, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

    Comments deleted. The question is asking for the message behind this symbol. This is not the place to discuss the merit of that message.

    Do you mean "the number of school children in the state" (which is what the quote says) rather than "purportedly harmed"?

    @JBentley "potentially harmed" might be a better word choice.

    It might be worth noting that one of the speakers explained the tags; the explanation was very similar to the one here, but maybe a direct quote from the speakers themselves would be better?

License under CC-BY-SA with attribution


Content dated before 7/24/2021 11:53 AM