DEAR AMERICA: Here's Why Everyone Thinks You Have A Problem With Guns

[xchrom]

http://www.businessinsider.com/americas-gun-problem-explained-2013-4?op=1



America is truly an exceptional nation.

It's not because of our education system, our economy or our scientific establishment.

No, America is really only exceptional when it comes to the number of guns, the frequency of gun murders, and the shockingly high number of annual gun deaths.

Other countries don't have the problems that the United States do. Other industrialized countries don't have tens of thousands of gun deaths per year, or regular mass shootings, or a population as armed as it is violent.

When Americans kill one another, they usually use a gun. In fact, Americans use guns to murder each other twice as often as they use any other murder weapons.



In 2015, it is projected that for the first time in decades more people will die by guns than by motor vehicles.


At the current rate, 339,000 Americans will die by guns over the next 10 years. That is roughly equivalent to the current population of Tampa, Florida.

[99Forever]

1. K&R

[morningfog]

2. The gun strokers will be pissed as hell when they can't pimp out the car death stats anymore.

Anyone who denies we have a gun problem is an extremist or a fucking idiot.

[etherealtruth]

6. ...."is an extremist or a fucking idiot"

The two are not mutually exclusive

[Crunchy Frog]

18. Both. And DU is crawling with them.

[SunSeeker]

34. Yup. The gun nuts are swarming DU. nt

[Robb]

3. B-but, but, SWIMMING POOLS!!

FREEDOM!!

K&R.

[sylvi]

81. Yeah, who cares about drowning deaths?

Firearm deaths really get the juices flowing!

[lolly]

94. All the people who pass laws regulating swimming pools do

You need all kinds of permits to put a swimming pool in your backyard.

If you sell a house with a swimming pool, you are required to have 2 layers of barriers between the pool and the street.

And if you mess up and a child does wander in and drown in your pool, you are liable.

That's why insurance companies factor a pool into their homeowner policy costs.

When they have similar regulations to prevent gun deaths, come back and play this game.

[sylvi]

96. And yet 137 children

under the age of 15 still died in pools just between Memorial Day and Labor Day last year.

[url]http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Newsroom/News-Releases/2012/Nearly-140-Tragic-Child-Drownings-In-Pools-and-Spas-Reported-By-Media-In-Summer-2012/[/url]

Obviously the people who demand the right to have pools are cold-blooded bastards who don't give a shit about children. After all, if it saves just one life...

And BTW, not all states or municipalities require either a permit or barrier for above-ground pools. Also, "if you mess up and a child wanders in" and harms themselves with an unsecured firearm, you are liable.

[BainsBane]

99. Okay, 38,000 died in gun homicides

And another 74,000 from accidents. Next? Swimming pools are well regulated. Guns are not. more false equivalency to justify the highest homicide rates in the first world.

[sylvi]

115. "False equivalency"?

The kids dead by drowning are just as dead as the ones by guns, and both are just as preventable, the drownings arguably more so. No one really needs a swimming pool, it's a frivolity.

The difference is one is a number you are personally willing to accept, by a means you personally have no gripe against. If it was strictly the principle of children dying needlessly you'd be against both guns and pools.

[lolly]

118. No--people aren't willing to accept it

That's why they keep passing laws and working on ways to make them safer.

But I forgot one of the key rules of logic for gunners:

"If anybody anywhere ever dies from anything besides gun violence, then that proves we should never, ever have any regulations on guns."

[Robb]

120. Let me know when your city requires a six-foot fence around every gun, and we'll talk.

[cui bono]

103. How many concealed swimming pool permits are given out annually?

Just wondering...

[Ikonoklast]

136. Get back to me when a swimming pool is used in a road rage incident to kill someone.

[marions ghost]

4. The daily death toll

kills something in all of us. It is no way to live.

[Progressive dog]

5. K&R

[spanone]

7. k&r...

[marmar]

8. k/r

nt

[onehandle]

9. The NRA is a Distributor of Radical Domestic Terrorism Tools and Methodology. nt

[hack89]

10. There are certainly some easy measure we can take

1. Since suicides are the majority of gun deaths, single payer health care with full mental health coverage is the top priority.

2. The next problem to tackle is violent felons. Focus the legal system on violent crime - if you use a gun to commit a crime then go to prison for a very long time.

3. Crack down on illegal gun sales. Quadruple the size of the ATF and give them the tools to monitor gun dealers and shut down the dirty ones.

4. Legalize drugs to lessen drug related gang crime.

5. Universal background checks.

[RC]

19. Running audits on gun manufactures by the ATF to see who they are selling to.

That subject never seems to come up.

[hack89]

30. The ATF needs to be quadrupled in size.

Gun manufacturers have to sell through licensed gun dealers. Closer monitoring of the dealers is what is needed.

[bobclark86]

39. I'm sure those wholesalers and government agencies are the big problem... n/t

[Bigmack]

31. Your #4 would also create space in prisons for #2..nt

[hack89]

33. There are too many non-violent people in prison because of stupid drug laws. nt

[rdharma]

46. So.... what does that have to do with the price of tomatoes? nt

[hack89]

55. Go read the post I was answering. I was merely agreeing with it.

relax - you are trying too hard.

[rdharma]

57. It's not hard to see that you are purposely trying to confuse apples with oranges.......

....... in order to further your pro-gun agenda.

The jailing of people guilty of northing other than the possession of minor amounts of marijuana ....... has absolutely NOTHING to do with the question of GUN VIOLENCE.

But, nice try!

[hack89]

59. And I never said it did.

I said we need to legalize drugs and crack down on felons. Another poster said that legalizing drugs would leave prison space for felons. I agreed.

You are trying too hard. Relax.

[rdharma]

60. Good!

[SunSeeker]

68. Getting single payer is not "easy." However, a person can easily get rid of their guns.

That move alone will greatly reduce their chance of a gun death.

[hack89]

71. Certainly people have the freedom to make that choice

you are right that it is easy.

Mandating it by law would be impossible.

[sylvi]

75. It's always easier to stomp on a liberty

than do the hard work of changing attitudes. Just ask George Bush.

[SunSeeker]

76. And what liberty is being stomped on here?

My point was it is easier for people to just get rid of their guns if they don't want to die a gun death than it is for us to get single payer. How is it "stomping on liberty" to educate the public about the unassailable fact that guns--all guns--are a danger in the home, so that each person can make the rational decision to get rid of the guns he or she owns?

[sylvi]

77. Sorry, I misread your post

I thought you were advocating government forcing people to get rid of their guns.

[cui bono]

104. 6. Allow lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

[av8rdave]

110. Lawsuits against gunmakers, and a realistic chain of liability for gun owners

[hack89]

114. You can sue gun manufacturers

if you are harmed because of either a defective product or because they violent the law regarding the manufacturing, distribution and sale of weapons.

You cannot sue if they obey every law and someone takes a gun and hurts you through a criminal or negligent act. Just like you can't sue Anheuser-Busch if a drunk drive hits you.

[newfie11]

11. K&R

[dballance]

12. While I Completely Agree Easy Access to Any Kind of Gun is a Real Problem...

and we should work to pass stronger regulation of the high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons; there is a greater problem here in the US. It's not just the easy access that's a problem.

When I was a kid in the late '60s we had all sorts of toy guns. From the Western Six-Shooters (cap guns) and fancy belt with dual holsters I had all the way up to toy machine-guns (noise makers - no caps). We had the pistols that took those ribbons of ammo that were little circles of gun-powder. Boy it hurt if you exploded them on your fingers. We played cowboys and indians and we played soldier. And we could take those to school to play at recess.

What we didn't have was people taking weapons into theaters, schools, malls, college campuses and other public places with mass murder on there minds and as their goal. I've done some google searches and the only mass-shooting I find before the '80s is the 1966 Tower Shooter at Univ. TX Austin.

So what is the difference between the time the soldiers came home from WWII when kids started playing army and the TV shows like Gunsmoke had us playing western lawman or cowboys and indians and no one took rifles to public places to shoot as many people as they could before getting gunned down themselves and now?

I don't know. I'm not a sociologist or psychologist. But there is something more than just guns at play here.

[HockeyMom]

22. We were a much more laid back society back then

I grew up in the 50s. We now have a population that is so stressed out and angry in their daily lives. So many people just don't know how to channel all that stress and anger into something positive. They turn to violence instead. When there is easy access to weapons, well, that becomes their tools. How many times have to heard that a person "just snapped"? No, they didn't just snap. It was being built up over time, if one really searches into it.

Maybe we need Stress and Anger Management classes in our schools?

[hack89]

36. We have some of our lowest murder rates in 100 years

The murder rate today is the lowest since 1963 - the modern peak was 10.2 in 1980.

The national homicide rate for 2011 was 4.8 per 100,000 citizens — less than half of what it was in the early years of the Great Depression, when it peaked before falling precipitously before World War II. The peak in modern times of 10.2 was in 1980, as recorded by national criminal statistics.

“We’re at as low a place as we’ve been in the past 100 years,” says Randolph Roth, professor of history at Ohio State University and author of this year’s “American Homicide,” a landmark study of the history of killing in the United States. “The rate oscillates between about 5 and 9 [per 100,000], sometimes a little higher or lower, and we’re right at the bottom end of that oscillation.”

Last year’s rate was the lowest of any year since 1963, when the rate was 4.6, according to the Uniform Crime Reports compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-19/lifestyle/35929227_1_homicide-rate-randolph-roth-gun-control

[Act_of_Reparation]

26. I don't buy that, but I think you're on the right track...

Studies have failed--over and over again--to link violent behavior to media, be it books, movies or video games. Live action role playing, like "playing army" or "cowboys and Indians", seems to me just as unlikely to influence behavior as, say, Dungeons and Dragons.

Gun control is a touchy subject with gun owners because, in part, the numbers aren't especially clear. While those states with the highest gun murder rates are those with loose gun laws, those states with the lowest gun murder rates generally have loose gun laws as well. States with strict gun laws, tend to fall somewhere around the mean.

This doesn't mean gun control laws don't help, despite what some gun enthusiasts would assert. Rather, it means there are other social factors at play that our current policies do not directly address.

Economics (relative deprivation, anomie), population density (diffusion of responsibility), health care (mental health in particular) would play much bigger roles, in my opinion, than violent media or children's games.

[dballance]

35. I Think You May Have Mis-Understood Me. I Agee w/ You - I'm Saying We Had Media, Role-Playing...

toy guns and all the stuff we have now. And we didn't all turn into mass-shooters.

I'm not at all a proponent of the thoughts that violent video games and toy guns make kids violent mass-shooters. What I was trying to point out is there is something else wrong with us.

[sylvi]

79. While I don't believe a videogame or a movie

While I don't believe a videogame or a movie is necessarily going to prompt an otherwise stable individual to go out kill someone, I don't think there's any question that what we see in the media at least desensitizes people to violence and its sequelae.

Consider: When I was a teenager, the graphic (for their time) driver's ed movies that showed real films of car accidents had us cringing and hiding our eyes. Nowadays, the simulated violence in movies and games outstrips that and there are websites dedicated to nothing but real gore and carnage and they have thousands of hits per day. The comments at those sites as callous and disturbing as any one might read from a psychopath's diary.

That desensitization might just be the final straw, that final ounce of stimulus that breaks the line between an aversion to violence and the press of a trigger, or the swing of a club, or the stab of a blade.

[pipoman]

27. Probably a combination of things

but I find it very interesting that the big increase beginning in the early 1980's coincides with Raygun's de-funding of mental health services reimbursement to the states in 1981.

Early 1980's: Seeking to cut federal expenditures, the Reagan administration directed the Social Security Administration to pare the SSI and SSDI rolls. Social Security administrators responded by developing definitions of mental illness that diverged from those used in the past and those employed by mental health professionals. The resulting dislocations ultimately produced a public outcry that compelled the administration and Social Security to back down.

1981: The 1981 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act repealed the provisions of the National Mental Health Systems Act, cut federal mental health and substance abuse allocations by twenty-five percent, and converted them to block grants disbursed with few strings attached. New York State, which used block-grant monies to fund community-based programs, and other states have to cut mental health programs.

1981: The President's Commission on Mental Health issues its final report, albeit without fanfare.

1984 New York’s inpatient population was 32,000
Mid-1980's: Federal support for mental health treatment increased as advocacy groups protest against funding cuts and Democrats in Congress buried funding allocations in omnibus budget bills.

1986: The federal State Comprehensive Mental Health Plan Act compelled states to devise detailed service plans that emphasized the needs of the seriously mentally ill in order to remain eligible for federal block grant funds. In its emphasis upon planning, it closely resembled New York State's efforts to insure that seriously ill people receive adequate care.

http://www.archives.nysed.gov/a/research/res_topics_health_mh_timeline.shtml

When we were kids (and for many decades before) people who were 'a threat to themselves or others' could and would receive inpatient mental health services and involuntary commitment. After the de-funding, many states require the commission of a criminal act or the ability to self pay before a person can be committed..at that point many people who could benefit from mental health services end up in the prison system..Compare this graph to the second graph above and the defunding by Raygun..



(Of course we are not supposed to talk about this failure in threads about gun violence because gun violence has nothing to do with mental health and any attempt to ponder a connection is a dirty, filthy, NRA talking point)

[CanSocDem]

53. I grew up like you...

...with toy guns always an integral part of our playtime fantasies. When we were old enough to own BB rifles, we felt as if we were given a license to kill....

So we killed what we could with such minimal firepower and when adolescent angst built up during group hunting expeditions, spontaneous wars would break out with everybody jumping for cover and 'careful' shots directed at ass and legs. Cease-fire negotiations would usually start within minutes and peace would be restored and hormones soothed.

Nowadays, macho-gratification experiences like these are nothing like what's available to young people of today, on the latest video game.

And they're missing the inter-personal interaction, we had dealing with the same issues.

.

[pipoman]

97. They get coordination, critical motor skills,

problem solving, interactivity with people all over the world..they gain experiences too..

[Flashmann]

13. America is truly an exceptional nation.

USA! USA! USA!

We're #1!...We're #1!

[ProudProgressiveNow]

14. Well presented facts and graphs...

K&R....

[cleduc]

25. ditto

[no_hypocrisy]

15. Like the photo above, the problem starts with the indoctrination of firearms to children.

Guns and death are abstract concepts to children. Point a toy gun and yell "Bang! You're dead!" and you "win". The only thing hurt is feelings. No matter anyway. You're OK and you're going to continue to be OK because you have a gun. That's why kids have no problem picking up a loaded gun and thinking it's a toy and nothing bad will happen because they're handling it.

Fast Forward. Guns, firearms, etc. become part of a sense of security, replacing wit and courage. When some gun owners are threatened, they have "protection". They can depend on firearms to win an argument, to threaten a perceived adversary when they don't have either the right to do something or they have a weakened position or they are at a disadvantage. Guns do the talking for them.

I honestly don't think that guns and firearms encourage innate homicidal tendencies within owners/possessors. However, guns and firearms do give rise to potential harm by their existence. I mean cases where the trigger lock is off, the weapons aren't secured in a gun locker or safe, the chambers aren't empty, or a round going off because of pressure on the trigger when squeezed just a little too hard. Face it, they are inherently dangerous when a lot of people get them without the necessary training.

And with the lack of understanding of the weapons, they remain a "toy" to adult owners. The debate is more than gun registration and gun ownership. It's about owners.

[Logical]

16. The only way to solve this problem is to collect all the guns. Too many are stolen every year....

to make anything else work. 300 million guns in america and a million sold a month. Not much to do about it at this point.

[hack89]

38. Gun owners are told here that no one is coming to take our guns.

are you saying that this in not true?

[rdharma]

48. You're very perceptive! nt

[hack89]

56. So you think you will take away my guns? Ok. nt

[rdharma]

58. No jack booted thugs are going to take your guns......

Why don't you give that ridiculous straw argument a break?

You're sounding truly desperate.

[hack89]

62. Gun confiscation will never happen in America. I know that.

That is a fantasy held by fringe gun controllers and feared by fringe gun owners.

I guess I misread your post - I thought you were in favor of it. Sorry for the confusion - I agree that gun confiscation will never happen.

[rdharma]

65. "I agree that gun confiscation will never happen."

Now, ...... maybe you can explain that to some of your more paranoid fellow gun enthusiasts.

[hack89]

66. And perhaps you can correct some of the more enthuisatic gun controllers

who advocate total gun bans.

[rdharma]

87. Sorry! I just can't find your imaginary bogeymen! nt

[hack89]

88. Here, let me help

The only way to solve this problem is to collect all the guns.

This is the post that started this sub-thread. If you are not going to be serious then don't expect to be taken seriously.

[rdharma]

89. Help me find that quote!

I must have missed it...... or you must have imagined it!

[hack89]

90. First post in this sub-thread.

now you are just being silly.

[rdharma]

95. Post #?

[hack89]

107. Now you are really being silly. nt

[OwnedByCats]

116. It gets rather confusing

There seems to be several different agendas on DU. Some believe our current laws are fine, they just need to be properly enforced. Some want to see more laws put in place, while some just want more "common sense" laws. Some want certain guns banned, those being "assault weapons", while others want a complete confiscation of ALL guns.

The problem is those promoting confiscation cannot tell us how they expect to rid the illegal gun population and somehow think taking away the law abider's guns will do the trick. Yes I can just see it now, criminals lining up at police stations all over the country to surrender their guns. Yeah, like that's gonna happen, right?

I do always find it funny when someone says "nobody is talking about taking your guns away" or "nobody is going to take your guns away". There are many here talking about and wanting to do just that. Whether they will be successful in their agenda to disarm law abiders to be left at the mercy of the law breakers, is another story.

[rdharma]

132. If ANY legislator proposes to CONFISCATE GUNS, please send me a DU mail........

........ IMMEDIATELY! And I'll publicly apologize to all those who I've accused of being "excessively paranoid" about this issue.

But as of now..... nobody has shown me that "gun confiscation" is in the works.

[OwnedByCats]

133. I don't know if it's actually "in the works"

or not, but I was just stating that although quite a few here would feel more comfortable with new laws and only confiscation of AW, some on this board do want complete gun confiscation from law abiders and some of those people believe it will happen. If and when is another story altogether of course.

[rdharma]

134. I'll await your DU mail when/if that happens!

Buh-bye!

[OwnedByCats]

135. With all due respect -

unless you are calling for complete confiscation and lecture that it will happen, my original post doesn't apply to you so don't expect an e-mail IF that actually happens.

[DeadEyeDyck]

54. psssst

That, "everybody gets to keep their guns" statement is for the trolls.

[rdharma]

91. No. It's a FACT!

Nobody qualified to own firearms is getting their guns "confiscated"!

No black helicopters....... no jack booted thugs....... no flying monkeys or black helicopters!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

112. Define qualified and define what happens WRT the "unqualified".

[rdharma]

131. Fm 4473 nt

[AndyTiedye]

63. BURGLARS are Coming For Your Guns When You're Not Home

Another good reason to keep those guns locked up.

[hack89]

64. I have two sturdy safes. One for guns and one for ammo. nt

[BainsBane]

98. Naturally the take away from learning 339,000

People will die in the next 10 years is to worry about your fucking guns. It's all about you and how much you can have, not anything so trivial as human life.

[hack89]

108. I support gun control with the exception of gun bans.

are you saying I should be supporting gun bans?

[BainsBane]

109. I said precisely what I meant

You show exactly where your priorities lie. You have made that abundantly clear time and time again.

[hack89]

113. So it is a purity test you are looking for

not only do I have to agree with you 100% but I have to share your disdain towards gun owners. Not sure I can do that.

[Crunchy Frog]

17. Well we just love our freedom more than everone else.

hundreds of thousands dead or maimed is small price to pay. At least that seems to be the consenus in this country, at least among those whose opinions count. It's even quite a popular minority veiw here on DU.

From what I can tell, it appears to be utterly impervious to reason.

[pipoman]

20. And I find it bizarre

when people wish to concern with "gun death" to the complete exclusion of death in general....pretending that in the absence of guns there would be 30k less deaths in the US annually..refusing to question what happened to overall murder and suicide rates in countries like Australia when they enacted gun bans..the fallacy of this bizarro world is belief that guns cause murder and suggesting availability of mental health and addiction services for anyone is an 'NRA talking point"..

[mountain grammy]

21. we can force car manufacturers to put seat belts and air bags in cars

but any kind of safety requirement on a firearm is a massive assault on freedom and will bring down America! Well, won't it? Come on all you second amendment "experts" out there. Waiting for your outrage.

[gopiscrap]

40. Double Amen

[bobclark86]

43. I don't see how a "safety feature" would help...

As comparably few gun-related fatalities are accidents. Most are suicides, followed by murder. Most car accidents are just that: accidents.

Here's a breakdown of gun-related fatalities from the 2010 CDC figures:

Suicide: 19,392

Assault: 11,078

Accidents: 606

Another figure from the same figures:
" Intentional self-harm (suicide) by other and unspecified means and their sequelae": 18,972

Seems like we've got a depressed-ass country, here. But we can't have single-payer health care... as that would just be communist and lead to rationing care by death panels...

[mountain grammy]

52. Yes, no doubt medicare for all would help, but guns are still a problem.

It's ridiculous to believe otherwise.

[justhanginon]

23. Amen brother!

I was listening to Up w/ Steve Kornacki this morning and heard that one of the RW nut balls reasons for being against gun control was that they (gun stores) would no longer be allowed to advertise in church bulletins any more. Surely you jest! Not to worry, oh followers of Jesus, this is not true. You will still be able to CCW and read ads for more guns while listening to the word of God. I'm not religious but what is wrong with that picture?
Speaking of pictures, the pic of the young man holding what certainly looks like an assault weapon is just very sad.

[nineteen50]

24. This is what happens

when being #1 is the only acceptable position, you place profits and possessions before people and you allow the highest bidder to purchase your democracy.

[diabeticman]

28. All facts first mentioned in Bowling for Columbine BUT needed to be restated/updated

[valerief]

29. I wonder if these numbers include death by WAR GUNS. nt

[pipoman]

41. They do include

police shootings, undeniable self defense, and suicides...

[valerief]

74. Yeah, but do they include WAR? Just wondering. nt

[pipoman]

80. No, this is on US soil...pretty sure..

[valerief]

84. Makes sense. So it's even MORE Americans dead/injured from guns. nt

[pipoman]

86. Depends on the context of the word "from"..

if you mean 'as a result of the use of', I would agree.

if you mean 'caused by', I would disagree..guns usually don't cause death...except in cases of something like arms dealers kill someone who crosses them up, etc..there is usually some other cause, oil, money, religious disputes, armed robbery, domestic disputes...this last week seems to indicate that guns nor bombs made these guys want to create terror and the absence of both would have not influenced that desire....

[valerief]

119. Those are other crimes usually of oppression. Guns kill. Killing is a separate crime. nt

[pipoman]

127. People kill...for many reasons...

[aikoaiko]

32. If you want to change America's gun violence, see this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022697225

[SunSeeker]

42. Uggh. If you want to see gunners whine go there.

That's 10 minutes I'll never get back. Bending over for gunners has not gotten us anywhere. We've been doing it for decades. The outrage after Sandy Hook is the only thing that has moved the needle, albeit only at the state level for now due to our broken congress.

[aikoaiko]

45. Cooperation =|= bending over

But if it does for you than so be it.

[SunSeeker]

67. Manchin and Toomey did a shitload of cooperation, all for nothing.

The NRA bought the Congress, and until that changes, our Congress will be worthless for any gun regulation.

[aikoaiko]

69. Manchin and Toomey was too little too late.

The anti-gun side had already made the mistake of pushing another benighted AWB.

The recent gun control blitz failed because of the love of banning some guns.

As long as the anti-gun strategy is to incrementally increase limitations to the point of elimination then there will be those who fight the increments.

So instead of the AWB, had the president said "no new federal gun bans" or, better yet, eliminated the sporting requirement from imports, then we might have universal background checks.

[SunSeeker]

72. OFFS. Reid never pushed the AWB.

Besides, gun control failed in Congress because it is owned by the NRA, not because of "the love of banning some guns." It is ironic that you would complain about the lack of compromise when you absolutely refuse to ban ANY firearm, including assault rifles, which no civilian has a legitimate need to own.

[aikoaiko]

78. The AWB was voted on as an amendment and failed.

Well I think our little dialogue illustrates why gun control failed this session.

[SunSeeker]

82. Exactly. The AWB was not inextricably linked to background checks. Which proves my point.

Reid purposely set it up so that the senators could just vote on background checks as a stand alone measure, rather than forcing them to vote on it as a package with the AWB. They still voted no. Why? Because the NRA lied that background checks would lead to gun registration and confiscation.

And the NRA scored the vote, which made the senators pee in their pants. Even though I am sure the senators knew what the NRA was saying was a ridiculous lie, the red and swing state senators' gun nut base didn't, and the senators feared if they voted yes, they'd never get past their next primary, with NRA money flowing to their challenger.

[BainsBane]

111. That is dishonest bullshit

Gun owners OVERWHELMINGLY supported background checks. The gun lobby and their lackeys did not. So now they have the nerve to claim that bill was defeated not because of the corporate backed gun lobby and their lies that some uneducated idiots who follow Fox and RW radio believed but because some people on this website dared to exercise their right to free speech. There really is no low to which some will not stoop to justify gun proliferation. That entire thread is based on fiction and is written by an OP who doesn't have the most basic knowledge of the legislation in question.

If the face of massive deaths, the principal issue ego, that people on this board had the fucking nerve to support a DEMOCRATIC President on gun control. That anyone could look at the massive loss of life and corporate take over of congress to defeat something with 90% popularity and worry that someone might have said something to hurt their feelings is repulsive. 1)This board has fuck all to do with that legislation. 2) if some don't like hearing a Democratic position on guns, don't come to a Democratic discussion board. We support our president and our party, not the right-wing gun lobby and it's corporate masters. No amount of deception is going to make decent human beings decide that human life is less important than the egos of gun nuts who don't like to hear someone challenge what they believe is their god given right to have their own personal paramilitary arsenal. I have ZERO respect for anyone who opposed background checks or who now seeks to blame for its failure anyone but the NRA criminal protection racket and their political bag men for its loss.

Everyone should now know exactly what we are dealing with from the gun crowd on this board. We see their contempt for free speech and exactly where their allegiances lie.

[aikoaiko]

117. And yet the gun control legislation failed and you think its just the NRA to blame.

Yes, there was general support for this legislation, but not a lot of commitment to it. Heck, even the anti-gun side was unhappy with it because it didn't mandate universal background checks.

If you want gun owners to really care about giving you what you want, then figure our what they want in return. It doesn't have to be a zero-sum game.

[BainsBane]

122. Gun owners aren't the problem

And America doesn't negotiate with terrorists.

[aikoaiko]

124. LOL.

Now there is a prime example of the rhetoric of compromise and good will from the anti-gun side.

[BainsBane]

126. Sure, laugh

If you were concerned with compromise, you'd have taken it. But you didn't. Your response is to instead misrepresent the legislation, as though people here are stupid enough to believe that crap. The only people who think there was anything uncompromising about that legislation are idiots who believe Fox and Rush. The rest of us actually know what was in the bill, and we know your version of events comes straight from the RW entertainment complex. I didn't negotiate the bill. Joe Mansion did. But pretend it's all about what a few people online say because . . . Well, I don't even know why because the argument is so mind boggling absurd, it's hard to imagine there is any point. But I suppose the point as always is to disrupt, to do everything possible to try to keep Democrats from engaging in democracy--which is the ultimate target of gun authoritarians.

So keep laughing while children die, and while an additional 4000 Americans have died since Sandyhook. Yuck it up with your pal Slackmaster.

[Paladin]

128. Who's your model of compromise and good will? Wayne LaPierre? (nt)

[BainsBane]

130. Evidently it's claiming the bill in congress failed

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2013, 12:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Cause people on this site hurt the itty bitty feelings of gun nuts. The real joke is when they try to pass themselves off as speaking for typical gun owners.

[BainsBane]

129. Good will

It takes a lot of nerve to talk about good will after spreading false propaganda about last weeks gun bill.

[SunSeeker]

37. K&R

[cvoogt]

44. Hey, why no cars

in that pie chart? Cars are weapons too!!! //carcasm

Imagine there's no guns.. it isn't hard to do.

[DeadEyeDyck]

47. first, you must take self inflicted deaths

and accidents out of the equation. They confound the cohort.

[rdharma]

49. Here you go.... HOMICIDE WITH GUNS IN US.....

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/194/number_of_gun_homicides

[rdharma]

50. "Unintentional" deaths in US with guns

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/194/number_of_unintentional_gun_deaths

[Zoeisright]

61. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

Big words. Little meaning.

[BainsBane]

101. Why? What difference does it make?

None. They result from guns. Intent only influences prosecution, not how dead a person is. Dismissing those lives as irrelevant is repulsive.

[judesedit]

51. These people don't even care about their own kids Most people won't let their kids play with matches

[galileoreloaded]

70. cars are safer than ever before, humans are still emotional creatures. yawn. nt

[Apophis]

73. The Democrats really need to take a stand against guns.

On this issue, they're no different than the Republicans.

[Ruby the Liberal]

83. K&R

And bookmarked original link. Thanks.

[indepat]

85. Find it most curious indeed that firearm deaths trended upward from the gipper's early reign

throughout GHWB's incumbency, then trended downward during WJC's incumbency, then upward again under junior's reign. Is there some correlation in number of firearm death's and national policy?

[Recursion]

105. There's a correlation between violent crime and Republican social/fiscal policy

That's normal, what's unprecedented is the 50% or more drop during Clinton's terms: that's a lot more than can be explained by just the good economy, and it hasn't crept back up yet.

[VPStoltz]

92. And because teachers are such lazy asses and haven't taught us how to read...

The 2nd Amendment DOES NOT guarantee everyone the "right to bear arms."
But there's no sense arguing with stupid.

[EC]

93. This just reminds me of

all those kids with the guns in Africa...you know the little armies. I wonder how armed the new "Christian soldiers" are - the ones that go to those Jesus camps like Pelosi filmed.

[cui bono]

102. Yeah, but other countries probably give you your chicken wings when you order them.

[madville]

106. The majority of violent deaths are drug related as well

Legal and cheap drugs would see gun homicides drop over 50%. I believe the government likes seeing brown people kill each other in vast numbers though so I doubt that will change anytime soon.

End the war on drugs!!

[Robb]

121. 1,100 is not the majority of 11,078.

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/bill-conroy/2012/03/drug-war-related-homicides-us-average-least-1100-year

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

[One_Life_To_Give]

123. Two America's

Over Half (6151 of 11078) gun murders fell upon one minority group.
So 13% of the population bears 55% of the gun murders.
That equates to a roughly order of magnitude (10 fold) difference in what would be perceived by a White person living in predominantly White neighborhood, White workplace etc. Verses what an African American living in predominantly AA neighborhood etc would experience.

In other words for many in the US it's somebody else's problem. Convincing people to do something to fix what they perceive as someone elses problem is always more difficult.

[xchrom]

125. i think gun violence is also a womens issue -- a big one.

since SO MUCH gun violence is also directed toward them.

we don't tend to talk about it in those terms though.