A message to those who wish to ban or restrict guns: Give up.

[Johnny Rico]

Last edited Sun Jul 22, 2012, 03:49 PM - Edit history (1)

In the wake of the tragedy in Aurora, there has been post after post here in GD on the subject of guns and the NRA. About 90% of them can be summed up as follows:

How can those sorts of guns possibly be legal...ban them!
F--k the NRA!
Ban all assault weapons!
Shut down the Gungeon!
Consfiscate all semiautomatics!
F--k the NRA!

Etc.

Ladies and gentlemen, it's time for a wake-up call. No meaningful gun control is going to be passed this year. Or next year. Or any time in the foreseeable future. Support for gun ownership and concealed carry is at an all time high, with no end in sight. If anything, gun rights are going to be expanded, not restricted.

You can vent about the issue all you like. A good thing, I suppose, if it makes you feel better. You can even get more involved with gun control organizations such as the Brady Campaign and the VPC. Heck, if every person who's advocted for more gun control on DU gave them their support they might reach 1% of the membership and power of the NRA!

So...vent away. The issue will be off-topic in GD by next week, and you'll have to go to the Gungeon (ooh...scary!) if you want to speak on the subject..,so get your digs in while you can! Just don't fool yourself that anything you do or say on this topic is actually going to change anything in the Real World.

[Pamela Troy]

1. Dear Johnny Rico. No.

I won't shut up about it.

Why do you want us to?

[Johnny Rico]

6. I never said to "shut up", I said to "give up".

IOW, be realistic about the subject and not pretend that the gun control agenda has the slightest chance of coming to fruition.

As per my advice, if you want to vent on the subject be sure to do so in the next few days while it's still on-topic here in GD.

[Pamela Troy]

8. NO.

I won't.

Why do you want us to?

[Johnny Rico]

16. Because it's more realistic.

And being realistic is a good thing.

[Pamela Troy]

19. Aaaah. Of course. Why bless your caring heart..

You are trying to "help" us to be more realistic!

Sounds more like gun fanatics are getting a little worried that we just might not be so unrealistic as some would like to pretend.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

47. Historically gun control issues have lead to defeats for the Democratic Party. I assume you care

about that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

84. You mean like FDR. Did he lose the 1936

Election or something?

Now since the NRA got as strong as it has you have some of a point.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

115. The defining one in California was Prop 15 and Tom Bradley in the 1982 general election

Brought out horde of conservatives. The gun control initiative went down to defeat as did Tom Bradley's run for governor. Some have blamed it on racism, others the gun vote. Since then a great deal more time and attention has been spent of the timing and content of initiatives since many perceive they will impact other races being voted on at the same time.

http://www.newamerica.net/node/12969 is not a source I would normally use, but it is insightful in this case.

[nadinbrzezinski]

125. It was both

But I also expect as more and more of these shootings happen, that will change. When it does, it will be "sudden" and the political class will be the last to react.

[JDPriestly]

148. Right. When things just become intolerable for the high and mighty, they are finally changed.

Making and selling guns is very profitable. Deaths are soon forgotten -- unless the victim is someone you love.

So easy to make and sell guns, and if used for hunting or sport, useful. But the numbers of guns on the loose in our country and the irrational attitude toward them suggests we are a very sick society.

What to do? I have no idea. Gun registration would probably help, but be fought to the nth degree.

Local laws prohibiting the carrying of guns on local streets passed by the citizens of particular towns would be helpful. I think they could work. It would require changing state law in some states, but local rule is a popular idea. So, if one city wants to have gangsters rule its street, it could allow open carry, and all the gun-lovers could go there to indulge their fantasies, while the rest of us could ban carrying guns, require registration within our city limits and enjoy the tranquility. Why not? Seems fair enough to me. Don't ban guns. Just allow local towns and cities and counties to decide for themselves what the gun regulations should be.

[former9thward]

328. Registration and the banning of guns really helped in Chicago.

The murder capital of the U.S.

[Joseph Harrolds]

388. +1

[cleanhippie]

90. No, he is not trying to "help" you, he is telling you that you are wasting your time.

Which is as true as true can be. Gun control is a dead issue. Right or wrong is irrelevant. Its dead. Its not going to happen. The only thing gun control does now is cost Democrats elections if they advocate for it. Period. Why do you think no Dem advocates for it?

Again, its not right or wrong, its the reality of the situation. That is all JR is saying.

[Pamela Troy]

98. Every massacre like this

makes the issue of "gun control" a little less dead. People are getting fed up.

At one time, it was considered useless to argue for giving women the vote and abolishing slavery and child labor.

[cleanhippie]

100. Uhm ok, Pamela, whatever you say.

If thinking that makes you sleep better, more power to you.

Have a nice day.

[Pamela Troy]

103. That's the best you could do?

Looks like you're just typin' to be typin'.

[cleanhippie]

108. Thats the best YOU could do?

Looks like denial is not just a river in Egypt.

[Pamela Troy]

119. I've offered arguments.

All you've done in this exchange so far is cop an attitude.

[cleanhippie]

124. Again, you tell yourself whatever you need to.

Me, I will stick with reality.

Buh-bye, now.

[Pamela Troy]

128. I see. You got nothing.

Run along.

[cleanhippie]

130. Reality is everything.

And there is plenty for you, if you want it.

now you run along.

[choie]

356. well, Pamela Troy

looks like we're just going to have to deal with men (or women) and their little penis extensions...

[nadinbrzezinski]

106. Tually she's correct

Can't tell you how many mass shootings it will take, but nothing in us politics is forever.

[cleanhippie]

112. Lets talk again in 6 months and see if reality has changed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. Did I say six months?

No

I don't expect it to happen in my lifetime, but I expect it to happen

When it does, it will be "sudden" as well.

[cleanhippie]

127. Ok, if you say so.

Have a nice day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

131. So everything in us politics is static and we have no changes ever

Is that what you are telling me? I could suggest a few history books, but truly my wall would benefit far more.

[cleanhippie]

134. No, nadin, not everything, just this thing.

Why do you insist on being dishonest about what is being said here?


I'm really trying to be polite with you, but your need to mischaracterize this conversation is rude enough that we should just stop right now.

Feel free to believe whatever you want about how this issue (gun control) will go in the future. I disagree with your assessment. What more needs to be said?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

143. So 150 years from now the NRA will still be considered heroes?

[cleanhippie]

144. I cannot say that they are considered heroes right now, and I am not clairvoyant, so...

[Spitfire of ATJ]

235. Gun nuts consider the NRA to be heroes. They're fighting the good fight.

[cleanhippie]

284. And gun grabbers are not fighting the good fight. They are fighting the wrong fight.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

285. "Gun Grabbers" just doesn't have much sting to it. Certainly not as much as recent events.

[cleanhippie]

287. I think it does.

It hits the gun grabbers much harder than the "gun worshippers."

[Spitfire of ATJ]

288. "gun worshippers."? I don't know anyone who says that.

[img][/img]

[cleanhippie]

305. Sure you do. Look around. Your fellow grabbers use it frequently.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

345. Where? Here? I'm from outside.

Where they're universally called, "gun nuts".

But then, you know that.

Or don't you get out much?

[cleanhippie]

349. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

352. Obviously....

I just told you I've never heard the term, "gun worshippers" and I guess you must figure I'm lying.

It may be a term used here, but the common term is, "gun nuts".

I've heard "enthusiasts" for those wishing to be polite, but not, "worshippers".

[cleanhippie]

353. Uhm, ok.

Have a nice day.

[xmas74]

295. If someone you cared for was killed

you wouldn't care if most saw it as the "wrong fight". All you think about is when it happened, the look on his parents faces as they've tried to live their lives without their only child. It's all you think about-that, and if there had been a bit more control he would be alive right now.

When it's personal things change.

[nadinbrzezinski]

151. So you truly believe this will not change?

Puts you in good company with others that believed that too.

[cleanhippie]

155. Current reality and political discourse suggests that gun ownership rights will continue to expand.

Thats not my opinion, or my belief, its the facts, and nothing more.

And why do you feel it necessary to continually make your arguments and statements as personal attacks to me? WTF? This is not how adults discuss adult topics. Please, grow up and act like an adult or we are done here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

164. I am pointing to you, which you have trouble comprehending

That current reality will change. How many events in US history that were never ever going to change, stamp your feet all you want, did.

Slavery
Civil rights
Women's right to vote

Should I go on?

[cleanhippie]

166. I understand what you are saying, I simply disagree with you.

The one thing on this issue I can agree with is that you and I will not see anything other than the continued course during our lifetimes.

[nadinbrzezinski]

168. The arc of history is long

And trends toward justice.

Now I thought you were done

[cleanhippie]

171. Perhaps. Only time will tell.

I'm done when I feel like being done. As long as you keep your personal attacks to yourself, I have nothing but time to talk with you.

Maybe you could take a second to recognize that I am trying to find a place where we can find some common ground. AT the very least, we could agree to disagree, no?

[nadinbrzezinski]

176. That could have happened a while ago

And given you are personally attacking people, kind of funny.

[cleanhippie]

181. Wait, what? I'M the one making personal attacks?

Really? wow, nadin, just wow.

I see that my initial assessment of your dishonesty was spot on. I should have listened to the several PM's I got warning me of this.

Oh, well, I tired.

[nadinbrzezinski]

188. Yes you have

And not just on me.

[cleanhippie]

191. Sigh.

Reality is just not your thing today, I guess.

[nadinbrzezinski]

195. Notice the personal attack?

You are on a roll today.

[cleanhippie]

199. Bwahahaha!

You can really be funny when you want to be.

You have a nice day, ok? A really, really nice day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

204. You to

[cleanhippie]

207. Thanks.

[bighart]

291. The differnece in this case is as follows:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
This one sentence is the cornerstone of the argument and wasn't part of the argument in the other issues you mention.
It does change the game considerably and any political arguments around this issue have to confront the constitution head on.

[nadinbrzezinski]

297. You might quote all you want

Cultures change and what militia do you drill with regularly?

And rational people are not saying take your security blanket from you, but you guys are so damn radical that even what even what reasonable people agree upon, 100% background checks, you get a tummy ache over.

I am betting George Washington and the rest of the founders would have an issue with certain classes of people having access to firearms, mostly because they did.

You keep this up, the backlash, and it's going to come...it's cyclical, you won't like. I hope you are alive to see it.

In the meantime, when is the next mass shooting? Can't wait now. Because even if I don't like it, it will come. It's the price we all pay for this idiocy. And it is those shootings that will force the change.

[bighart]

331. Please note that I am not advocating for gun rights.

I am simply pointing out that this is a difference to many other issues.
I am also not saying that things won't change in the future, but it will take a serious amount of political will to make it happen.
I believe it will take an amendment to the constitution to make any serious change to the status quo. There may be some minor changes such as requiring slightly more detailed background checks etc. but no serious changes short of at minimum of a re-interpretation of the second amendment.

[nadinbrzezinski]

359. And the last one, may still come.

This is the mistake the NRA and it's fans are making. Accepting the things most normal people take for granted as common sense, would help to LOWER, not end, these things, and would help to make the case... see we are willing to play along.
'
Instead, and at this point i do not expect to see, it, what I expect to see is a mass shooting a year, beyond the 3-5 in the inner cities, that affects the right side of the tracts. And it is THOSE shootings that will force that change. The other period where that happened was the 1930s. Getting a Tommy Gun these days, while possible... is all but easy.

[nebenaube]

260. we've been fighting about abortion and payer in school for how long now?

n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

265. And I guess we should cede the field

And in that case move somewhere else...I don't like theocracies.

[The Doctor.]

138. The problem, Nadine,

is that the gun issue will never be resolved because of the inherent insecurity of our people.

When you take away that insecurity through education and universal solvency, then add a generous helping of mental health support, THEN, and ONLY THEN will gun crime become a rare creature.

[nadinbrzezinski]

152. That's part of the recipee indeed

Why I said I won't see it.

But it will be solved some day, like other horrific issues in our past.

[The Doctor.]

163. I hope you're right.

I know that you are, actually. Thing I'm worried about is whether we'll get to that point before exterminating ourselves.

[nadinbrzezinski]

165. Oh we will

Unless somebody starts deploying tac nukes... Which thankfully are not in civilian hands.

[zappaman]

169. That's a pretty bold prediction...

"someday something will happen, but who knows when and I won't be around" is pretty much the gist of it, eh?
Wow.

[cleanhippie]

183. I think responses like that only serve to give them the percieved satisfaction of having the

last word.

[cleanhippie]

156. I can agree with you.

[Cooley Hurd]

111. Hippie? Making excuses for the NRA?

Umm ok, Cleanhippie , whatever you say...

[cleanhippie]

116. Bwahahahaha! Here comes the dishonesty we've come to know and love!

Please, continue to fabricate things. Its funny.

[Pamela Troy]

122. Do you have anything to offer other than posturing?

Anything?

[cleanhippie]

126. Yep, its called reality.

And it has been offered to you several times by several people.

The whole you can lead a horse to water metaphor is now appropriate.

You have a nice day, ok?

[Pamela Troy]

129. And I've responded to those people. At least they brought something to the table.

Now run along. The grownups are talking.

[cleanhippie]

132. Bwahahahahaha! Your childish attempts at insult are funny.

The last resort of the loser of the argument.

[Pamela Troy]

136. You again?

I thought you were leaving.

[cleanhippie]

139. You again?

You just can't quit me, can you?

[Egalitarian Thug]

219. That's the problem, they're not. Somebody has the data on one of these threads,

and it shows that this kind of calamity occurs, there is a spike of anti-gun sentiment, but it evaporates in a few days and the trend continues. This downward trend has been steady for over 30 years.

You face two problems; The Reich-wing mythology that pervades the minds of too many citizens, and the fact that even many of those that think it should be harder to get one generally only think it is somebody else that should be restricted, not them.

[movonne]

161. Dear Johnny Rico...you must be in your glory today...you have been on

every discussion on this subject today...poor baby will be tired tonight...

[snappyturtle]

189. Please watch:

http://billmoyers.com/segment/bill-moyers-essay-living-under-the-gun/

[rbixby]

376. So accepting the occasional massacre is just the cost of doing business?

[soccer1]

33. Give up?

What cowards we would be to abandon our beliefs! That's not going to happen and our efforts, over time, will not be in vain. The United State of America is in it's infancy....a young nation that has lots to learn on many fronts. This issue, like any important societal issue will not die....our children and our children's children will continue the discussion about violence, the gun culture, peaceful resolution of conflict, etc. etc. etc. My hope is that our nation will grow wiser as it grows older.

[Duppers]

110. Bravo!!

And the same thing coulda been said about slavery in the pre civil war days.

Reason prevails... eventually.

[Mojorabbit]

35. I totally agree with your assessment. nt

[soccer1]

272. You're being kind of general here.......

"gun control agenda" covers a lot of ground. Since gun laws are mostly decided by the states, the laws vary, accordingly. Are you suggesting that no states will ever tighten up their gun laws, that the present societal trend towards fewer restrictions on gun ownership will never change in any state? I'm not sure which part(s) of the "agenda" you are referring to.

[lastlib]

373. Not only no, HELL, NO!!!!

I WILL NOT GIVE UP!!! The Gun Crazies have got to be stopped!!! Human lives are at stake!!

(I don't suppose that means anything to the NRA sociopaths, or the gun makers who profit from death...)

[jaysunb]

2. Sorry, I'll never give up advocating for the banning of

ALL guns not used explicitly for hunting.

[randome]

9. Even though you KNOW that will never happen?

I would prefer to live in a gun-free society but I'm not going to waste my energy on wish fulfillment.

[Johnny Rico]

23. Exactly so. n/t

[lunatica]

25. Evidently neither on symathy.

[randome]

34. 'Sympathy'? You think I don't feel something for those who died?

Or for those who want such deaths to happen less frequently?

I simply don't see taking away guns as a viable goal. We all KNOW it will never happen. I wish it was different. I really do. I do not own a gun and I doubt I ever will.

[The Doctor.]

135. No, because if you're realistic about the issue of guns,

then you are a heartless monster who revels in the deaths caused by morons and assholes with guns.

'Being realistic = Evil' In the mind of any ideologue.

[tblue]

253. I hope to God you don't live to regret not doing

all you can. Inaction is complicity. So glad abolitionists and suffragettes didn't share your pessism and defeatism. I sure wouldn't be able to vote if they had.

Giving up before you fight. I hope the young people of this country are a little more committed and braver than that.

[jaysunb]

262. +1 nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

48. So you are willing to disarm the weak and leave them to the mercy of the predators in our society

How delightfully progressive of you.

[shadowrider]

85. You misunderstand. The predators will also give up their weapons if a law is passed

that they have to.

[treestar]

3. No.

Not going to.

[tblue]

256. I will never unilaterally disarm to benefit the NRA.

And I won't do the NRA's job for them. Like some on here.

[leveymg]

4. Great advice: Give up, just at the moment this issue is gaining traction. Thanks for your concern.

"Just don't fool yourself that anything you do or say on this topic is actually going to change anything in the Real World."

You know when you hear this sort of response, they're afraid something is about to change.

[Johnny Rico]

12. You bet, I'm terrified that Obama is going to take my guns away...not!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/21/us-usa-shooting-guns-campaign-idUSBRE86J18M20120721
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2012/0721/Colorado-shooting-highlights-barriers-to-tough-gun-control-Obama-and-Romney
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-20/obama-joins-romney-in-reticence-on-gun-control-after-shootings

That's quite the traction you have on this issue!

[Trunk Monkey]

18. I'm not sure the issue is gaining traction

Last edited Sat Jul 21, 2012, 04:54 PM - Edit history (1)

The Denver ABC affiliate poste a story about how easy access to gun caused this shooting and the overwhelming majority of respondants essentially said " Molon Labe"

and that's right here at ground zero

Edited to explain the term Molon Labe

The Ancient Greek phrase ???ὼ? ???έ (molṑn labé; reconstructed Ancient Greek pronunciation [molɔːn labé]; Modern Greek pronunciation [moˈlon laˈve]) means "Come and take them". It is a classical expression of defiance reportedly spoken by King Leonidas I in response to the Persian army's demand that the Spartans surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae. It is an exemplary use of a laconic phrase.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe

In America, both the original Greek phrase and its English translation are often heard from pro-Second Amendment activists as a defense of the right to keep and bear arms. It began to appear on web sites in the late 1990s and early 2000s.[6] And when the government of New Orleans defied Federal court orders to return weapons that had been seized during Hurricane Katrina,[7] the phrase again gained popularity among supporters of the Second Amendment, as the phrase has connotation of a strong belief in the ideals of personal freedom and in the individual right to self-protection.[citation needed] In the Second Amendment or firearms freedom context, the phrase expresses the notion that the person uttering the phrase is a strong believer in these ideals and will not surrender their firearms to anyone, including governmental authority, without strong resistance.[8]

/EDIT

[Johnny Rico]

21. Precisely my point. n/t

[shadowrider]

81. You might want to explain what "Molon Labe" means. n/t

[CTyankee]

31. We've seen an awful lot of this meme lately haven't we?

Methinks this gentleman doth protest too much...

[Lizzie Poppet]

44. Gaining traction? I very much doubt it.

Outside of places like this, DailyKOS, etc., the buzz is already fading. It may be a sad commentary on the state of the American attention span these days, but even here this topic will barely be mentioned in a week or so. There simply is no significant groundswell to enact additional gun regulations.

And frankly, we (that is, the left) need to get back to twisting the knife into the staggering, bleeding hulk of the Romney campaign. That's something we might actually be able to accomplish...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

49. Lets see in 6 months how much traction it really has

To claim it now is wishful thinking.

[cherokeeprogressive]

65. Gaining traction like slicks in a snow storm.

Except for here at DU... which is absolutely meaningless.

[leveymg]

79. If you think "DU is absolutely meaningless", why hang around here?

Must be the free Kool-aid they serve in the gungeon.

[Tsiyu]

186. I've asked that question many times

because there is so much criticism of this site from that poster. You can FEEL the venom in that one's posts.

I will save you my theories, but the few times I've read the Troglodytes braggin about having "moles" over here, I always have a few names in mind....

( Some folks aren't as slick as they think they are... they skirt the edges of things...but they always end up outing themselves in the end )

[cleanhippie]

93. "You know when you hear this sort of response, they're afraid something is about to change."

[Cooley Hurd]

113. rec rec rec...

[treestar]

280. And every time a shooting like this happens, it's going to come up

And it happens too often.

I think they may not realize they are saying just put up with these shootings; they are part of the price of freedom (or their idea of freedom).

[Panasonic]

5. Look at UK. No gun culture there.

And 96 murders a year vs 9,600 murders in the US.

What policies should we go with? I say we go with the UK's policies. It works, and it works for health care too.

But we've got numbnut politicians to deal with.

[Johnny Rico]

27. Do you think there's the *slightest* chance that those numbnut politicians will enact UK-style

gun control here in the US?

Because if you do, you're fooling yourself.

[EX500rider]

174. While the UK has a very low murder rate it isn't that low..

.....613 dead in 2011 in just England & Wales. Add in N Ireland and Scotland and it'd be higher. And about 40% by stabbing.

[Panasonic]

354. Murders by gun

2011 statistics: 39.

Just 39.

I'm talking about firearms.

[GreenStormCloud]

380. So its OK with you if they are murdered by stabbing?

As long as the criminal violence isn't gun violence you are cool with it?

[Fumesucker]

7. I'm pretty much an agnostic on guns, don't care that much one way or the other..

But I think your gloating attitude is designed specifically to stir shit and I think you're going to be quite successful at it.

[kurtzapril4]

162. Bingo!

All they're doing is gloating. They won. We all know it. Now they should go crawl back under their rocks, until the next massacre, when they'll come out to gloat once again.

[Son of Gob]

10. A message to Right Wingers: Fuck you.

[Major Nikon]

88. ...and the apologists they rode in on

[cleanhippie]

97. Wow, that is the strongest argument yet!

[Major Nikon]

105. It wasn't intended to be an argument

But feel free to continue on your own.

[cleanhippie]

178. Ahh, I see. Glad I didn't mistake your post for something intelligent to say then.

[Pholus]

196. Frankly, it's no less valid than "give up" nt

[cleanhippie]

201. To be fair, JR's argument was much more substantial than "give up".

Although I admit, that soon into the thread, "give up" was all that anyone could hear.

[Pholus]

211. Oh yes: Give up. It's hopeless but whine if you must.

You are confusing "substantial" with "things you want to hear."

[cleanhippie]

213. If you say so...

[Pholus]

224. Enlighten me o wise one: What was said substantially different than my summary?

Followup: How is the OP any different than a troll?

[cleanhippie]

96. Well, that sure showed the Right Wingers.

[Son of Gob]

154. Aww, did hurt I your feewings?

[cleanhippie]

158. No, not at all. It find it hillarious when people who have nothing substantial to say feel the need

to say something, anything, regardless of how childish or ignorant it may seem.

Please, continue, the entertainment value is priceless.

[Son of Gob]

167. Just as I thought

I say Fuck You to Right Wingers and you get all bent out of shape. You're not fooling anyone.

[cleanhippie]

170. Actually, I'm unsure you were thinking at all.

The only one getting bent here is you, friend.

[Son of Gob]

175. I'm thinking you exposed yourself

and it's Hilarious. You just couldn't help yourself could you? That Fuck You Right Wingers really left a mark!

[cleanhippie]

179. Youre on a roll, don't stop now.

I'm sure Comedy Central will call any minute now.

[KarenS]

11. *sigh* nevermind. n/t

[myrna minx]

13. No.

[Warren Stupidity]

14. A message to the gun culture: you have blood on your hands.

[randome]

17. Do you really think that's going to make them give up their guns?

There are more productive ways of lessening violence in this country than spending time on an issue that we all KNOW will never change.

[Warren Stupidity]

26. No. But I think we have a responsibility to not be silent.

Silence is complicity.

[randome]

32. Agree with you there.

But maybe we should talk less about removing guns and more about improving the lives of those who go on killing sprees.

Because we are NOT going to remove the guns. I simply don't see that as a viable topic.

[Lizzie Poppet]

51. Or stop focusing on the sprees...

...and instead, as a society, try to do more to address the root causes of the far-more-commonplace (but less sensational) incidents of "regular" homicide and criminal assault. That sort of crime is overwhelmingly more likely to threaten the average American with death of grave injury than some psycho like Holmes is.

For example, continuing pressure to end the idiotic War on Drugs and decriminalize various currently-illegal substances would do far, far more to reduce violence than an attempt to enact more-restrictive gun laws...even if the former were successful.

[randome]

57. I agree with you about the decriminalization aspect.

I also think we're about to enter a more Progressive era. The GOP's old, white men are dying out. Climate change is about to show who really cares about the people, etc.

A better climate for helping people with illnesses and to have more satisfying lives. THEN we can consider more common sense gun regulations.

See post #55 for a good list of regulations we can -and should- press for now.

[beevul]

252. Really?

Did anyone mention to you that the theater was a "gun free zone"?

Seems to me there was some gun control fail there, as well as anything else you'd like to point fingers at.


So if the "gun culture" has blood on its hands, so does "gun control".

[Johonny]

15. Hey who knew Clayton Williams was a DU member

"If it's inevitable, just relax and enjoy it".

[lunatica]

20. Sure. Thanks for restoring my sanity.

Fucking idiot OP.

[baldguy]

22. And the occasional horrific civilian massacre is just the price the rest of us have to pay.

Over and over again, apparently.



Sorry, but some of us liberals see tragedy is a tool for the living to gain wisdom, not a guide by which to live.

"Too often we honor swagger and bluster and wielders of force; too often we excuse those who are willing to build their own lives on the shattered dreams of others. Some Americans who preach non-violence abroad fail to practice it here at home. Some who accuse others of inciting riots have by their own conduct invited them. Some look for scapegoats, others look for conspiracies, but this much is clear: violence breeds violence, repression brings retaliation, and only a cleansing of our whole society can remove this sickness from our soul."

[randome]

28. It's still not going to change anything.

All the needless deaths, all the random violence. Face it, we live in a sick culture. You don't have to convince us of that!

But removing the symptoms will do nothing for the underlying disease.

We CAN'T take away the guns. It will never happen and we all know it.

So let's put our energy into making Aurora a more rare occurrence.

[Fumesucker]

60. The only allowable option to be discussed is Moar Securiteh...

Good security that isn't more dangerous than not having it is expensive, it requires trained professionals and not minimum wage workers.

We all know that better mental health care and cutting down on the guns are both complete non starters so the only option left is more security..

[EX500rider]

185. How does 9,000 dead out of 300 million make us a sick culture? n/t

[GCP]

370. Well, if it had the same rate of gun deaths as the UK

The total would be around 230 instead of 9000

[EX500rider]

375. And if we had the same rate of stabbings the figure would be higher..

Does Venezuela have a sick culture too? South Africa? Jamaica? Mexico? Or just the US?

[Quantess]

24. I don't care. Guns are boring.

The 2nd amendment is a snoozefest. Weeelllllp, it looks like I am going to be making full use of the "trash thread" option.

[Johnny Rico]

29. But you cared about it enough to tell that to the world?

[Quantess]

67. Yeah, I know...

But it was the first thread about guns I clicked on, and I promise it will be the last!

Have fun with your thread, cause I don't care about guns, but I suppose it's nice that someone does. Sigh... oh well. No offense intended but good grief, I would rather iron and fold socks, for excitement.

[Johnny Rico]

70. Out of the *hundreds* of gun threads, you chose mine first!

I feel, well...honored!

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. You are right, won't change right now

But in politics nothing is forever.

As you guys prevent reasonable solutions, since apparently 100% background checks are evil, when the backlash comes, and it will, that is the way us politics works, it will be worst than going for the lowest common denominator.

There was a time you could order a tommy through the Sears Catalogue. There was also a time smoking was simply accepted and pushed by doctors. Will I see it? Nope...but the road from here to there will be slick with very fresh blood.

[randome]

39. Background checks are clearly a good step!

Waiting periods, too!

[Mojorabbit]

40. A background check would not have prevented this horrific event from what we know so far. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. But it could prevent others

The reductio ad absurdum goes like this, since it would not prevent this, we should not even do it...fuck it!

There is a reason it's called a fallacy.

Regardless when things lie this are fought, the backlash may lead to the fate of the tommy, which iirc I cannot buy at Sears anymore. You should become familiar as to the reason why.

Or perhaps I am wrong and I can go to Sears and by a Tommy...

[Johnny Rico]

46. Go to Gunbroker, not Sears.

http://www.gunbroker.com/All/BI.aspx?Keywords=thompson+1927*

There's one going for only $799, quite a deal!

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Thank you for proving my point

Of course you are also familiar with all the background involved in this.

The fact that you missed it is very telling. I hope some day we will not be able to get some toys at the equivalent of sears, will have to gen them at the equivalent go Gunbrowker, and with even more checks.

Won't see it, but that is what fighting reasonable, common sense measures will get you.

And I can't wait for my nephews and nieces to see that.

Otoh I hope you are alive to see it, and can eat those words.

[Johnny Rico]

68. I'll freely grant that there's far more gun regulation now than before the 1930's.

But the trend for the last decade (and the foreseeable future, as you point out yourself) is for more gun freedom, not less. I'm not foolish enough to think we'll ever get back to pre-1930s levels of gun freedom, though. Unlike those who think they can get meaningful gun control, I'm realistic on the subject.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. I would not call it freedom

And trends do reverse you know this.

It will take many more shootings, outside the wrong side of the tracts, but the 1930s regulation came from that.

So if you truly care, either get behind what is reasonable, or wait for the backlash. The 1920s were just as "free" then shootings started to be common on main street with tommy guns. None could have predupicted the sudden demand for regulation while living at the time.

No, this mass incident will not do it, and can't tell you how many it will take...but it will.

And I hope my nephews enjoy that.

For the momemt, I'll be careful when I attend any soft target.

[cleanhippie]

121. Johnny, I applaud your efforts here...

but people that refuse to face reality cannot be reasoned with.

[Moltisanti]

141. agreed.... Even a minor Gun Control measure would not get 20 votes in the Senate...n/t

and probably much less in an election year... NRA has won for now...

[Mojorabbit]

71. I said no such thing

I merely pointed out that in this case, with the info we have so far, it would have been useless.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. And I pointed out that this is actually a favorite NRA

Talking point. And reality is, I gotta ask, why didn't he buy them in Cali when he went to a local gun shop, the pawn shop, but in Colorado? Apart of crossing state lines, I suspect much looser gun laws had something to do with it.

[Mojorabbit]

137. I don't follow the NRA so I don't have any idea what their talking points are

My understanding is that he was living in Colorado. It would be logical that he bought his weapons where he lived. I am not getting the California connection?
I am not following the intricate details of the story. I have been fighting a migraine all day and I pretty much agree with the forensic psychiatrist
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101742710

I am sick of the media giving breathless unending speculation about this story. It is just asking for copycats.

[nadinbrzezinski]

172. He visited a local gun shop

Here in San Diego, where he even tested some of the toys.

Given he's a "local" boy, I am actually following it a tad closer

Get something for the migraine and feel better.

[Lizzie Poppet]

66. We already have background checks.

Moreover, the majority of gun owners wholeheartedly support them. Private sales are a current loophole, but that's not a matter of lack of support for extending the background check system to private sales, but one of the significant work and expense of creating a support infrastructure to enable them to occur (and, to some degree, of the difficulty of anything resembling effective enforcement).

Mind you, background checks seldom catch actual criminals attempting to buy guns. To even attempt such a purchase when you know full well that there will be a background check would be remarkably stupid, even by criminal standards. But it does weed out the really dim ones, and that's a good thing.

For my part, I'd like to see a much more extensive tie-in of mental healthcare records to the background check system, and a carefully considered expansion of the mental health-based criteria for denial (currently limited to persons "adjudicated mentally defective&quot . I mean, we're denying people access to air travel on what are often spurious grounds because we can't get over our post-9/11 hysteria after more than a decade...surely we can be a bit more cautious about the mentally ill buying firearms.

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. But 40% of all gun transactions do not involve one

And the NRA is opposed to that.

Yes, reasonable people agree with them, not the NRA or rabid gun owners.

Mind you the rabid type are doing a lot of damage, just as the other side, it's a .22 rifle, RUN!

[Lizzie Poppet]

76. I discussed that in my initial reply.

The biggest problems with trying to extend the background check to private transactions are the lack of infrastructure to support it and the question of even remotely effective enforcement. Personally, I think the former can be overcome, particularly in an era of smart phones and extensive access to the internet. I'd like to see it...and as a shooter myself, I'd have no obejction whatsoever to using it. I'd rather be confident the person I sold a firearm to was a legit purchaser with no felony record or mental health problems!

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. I agree, it can be done

But the political reality is that the NRA opposes this.

[aikoaiko]

192. Would you give me the source of your 40% statistic?

I can't find an actual study that produced it - only editorials repeating it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

197. The good folks at Harvard.

[aikoaiko]

206. Which good folks?

[nadinbrzezinski]

221. Harvard Injury Control Institute

attached to the school of public health. Their study is referenced by a few folks, so here you go, a link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Why I used Wiki... it is quite comprehensive.

It is also extremely well sourced... which I usually do not say that for Wiki. The study is even there...

[aikoaiko]

239. Thanks, I found it.

Guns in America by Cook and Ludwig
http://www.policefoundation.org/pdf/GunsinAmerica.pdf

Here is the table that summarizes their data.
[IMG][/IMG]

Yes, the respondents reported that 60% of the purchases happened at a store, and another 30% from friends and family, and only 4% from a gun show.

[nadinbrzezinski]

245. Aka private.

We should strive for 100% checks.

Will it stop all? Nope. But it will stop some.

[aikoaiko]

263. Ok, but its clear that the gun show is a small source of private gun exchanges.

And the family and friends sources include gifts and inheritances.

[nadinbrzezinski]

264. It's called that way, but that's what it is

40% are not background checked, is that clear now?

[aikoaiko]

274. So you want to get rid of all nonchecked private sales, gifts and inheritances?

Its not just private gun show sales, right?

[nadinbrzezinski]

275. 100% back ground checks

Yup.

Exactly.

[Ikonoklast]

36. No.

Right-wing meme used against Democrats, "Just give up."

FUCK NO.

[2on2u]

37. I need a license to drive my car. I need insurance for my car. I would need extensive training

to get a pilot's license. Cars and planes can kill, they are dangerous. If I wanted to drive a train I would have to go to some sort of extensive training.

If I wanted to anything that was dangerous to myself or others, required high skill levels, involved expensive equipment etc I would need training and or a license.

However if I want one of these, all I have to do is go to the store and buy one. I find that interesting indeed.

[dickthegrouch]

55. I agree completely

Registration (Guns and owners)
Annual Psych evaluations
Removal of privileges for the slightest infraction

The only way to go assuming we can't get rid of the things entirely (which is by far my preference).

[randome]

61. I agree with your list, too.

[JeepJK556]

62. But

You don't need a license to buy a car. Or plane. Only to operate one in public.

The same is true of guns. If you wish to carry it in public, you must get a license. Keep it in your home? None needed.

[2on2u]

109. If I attempt to drive my car in public (license plate) and I don't have authorization to do

so I will be apprehended and booked.

[Angleae]

177. If you attempt to carry gun in public and don't have authorization to do (CCW)

you are just as likely to be apprehended and booked

[mbperrin]

133. In Texas, you cannot buy a vehicle without a current valid license AND insurance

coverage effective at the moment of transfer.

[GreenStormCloud]

159. Yes you can. I live in Texas and have done so.

All you have to do is have the cash to pay for the car. Now if you want to take a loan for the car then the loaning company is going to want protection and will want you to insure it, but the state will demand insurance only if you drive it on public roads. If you are going to use it as a farm/ranch vehicle only then you don't need anything but the money. No tags, no registration, no driver's license, no insurance needed as long as it stays on private property.

[mbperrin]

286. You're breaking the law and fraudulently keeping the state of Texas from collecting the tax due

on the sale of that vehicle.

You cannot transfer title without insurance and a valid license, so your failure to execute the transaction is cheating the state out of the sales tax. But don't believe me. Believe the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles.

http://www.txdmv.gov/vehicles/titles/title_vehicle.htm

Sellers

Vehicles are required to be titled in the buyer's name within 30 calendar days.



So now you see why scofflaws like you are resented by law abiding people like me. BTW, you see no exception to the title transfer within 30 days for private property and so on. That's because there are no exceptions.

[GreenStormCloud]

292. Are those goalposts heavy? You have moved them.

In your previous post you said nothing about the title, only about a DL and insurance. If the vehicle never drives on public roads, as many ranch trucks don't, then you don't need a DL or insurance. You can buy the vehicle without them.

Title is a different goalpost.

I properly titled my very used car, but did not bother with comprehensive or collision insurance. I do carry liability.

[mbperrin]

300. Actually, you paid money, but own nothing if you didn't transfer title. Just keep ignoring the Texas

DMV reg that requires ALL sales to be titled within 30 days.

No response to cheating the state out of tax revenue, I see.

You're the one moving the goalposts - no reasonable person would think that buying a vehicle did not involve getting title to it.

Well, you're in good company - no business in Texas pays much tax, either, after Perry licked their asses by gutting any meaningful business tax.

[GreenStormCloud]

357. Your original post said NOTHING about title.

You said that a DL and insurance were needed. Read you own posts. I am talking about DL & insurance, NOT title.

[mbperrin]

358. No title, no ownership. So says Texas.

I can't help it if you don't know the law. I gave you the link. I wished you well. I do so again, we have nothing to gain here from simply repeating to and fro.

[GreenStormCloud]

369. But you don't have to have insurance for the car if it doesn't go on public roads.

You can twist what I said all you want to, but you will still be misrepresenting what I said.

I said you don't have to have a DL or insurance if you stay on private property.

[mbperrin]

374. You have to have a driver's license AND insurance effective for that vehicle at the moment of title

transfer. What you do later is beyond the control of the state unless you venture out on the road, but to legally purchase a vehicle in Texas, you must have a driver's license and insurance on the vehicle being purchased, and you only have 30 days to get the title transferred, or you are breaking the law.

People with no license and no insurance cannot buy a vehicle in Texas legally. Failure to transfer title is defrauding the state of sales tax revenue, period.

Now that's the law. My son in law owns a dealership that sells 700-800 cars a year. In summer, I often help with paperwork, so I'm not guessing, plus I gave you the link directly from the DMV.

Many guns are sold illegally in the same way that these vehicles are driven illegally - no papers, no taxes, just a general breakdown of the mores of society and the needs of the many in favor of a greedy loner - that's true. And then when the day comes that they need the assistance of some program or agency that got killed because of no revenue, they may get a little smarter. I hope that they do feel some deserved pain.

[GreenStormCloud]

377. You are still wrong about the insurance.

I doubt that your son-in-law sells vehicle that go directly to farm/ranch only use. New vehicles are almost never purchased for that. Ranch-only trucks are usually vehicles that are at the end of their useful life, often unsafe for public roads. Since all of his sales are for vehicles that will be on public roads, then all of his sales will need for the buyer to have the car insured.

We are in agreement about the title. I have never argued about the need to transfer the title and pay the tax.

While a vehicle is operated on public roads insurance and a DL is an absolute must. But if the transfer takes place on private land and the vehicle will never leave that private land, then no insurance is needed.

Junk yards still have to transfer the title, even on cars that are to be scrapped, but they definately don't insure a car that is about to be crushed. Check with a junkyard if you don't believe me.

If a rancher buys a ranch-only truck in a private sale, then he has the seller bring the truck to his ranch. Since the seller will be on public roads and already owns the truck, the seller will have it insured. Or the rancher arranges for the truck to be towed to the ranch after purchase. Once on the ranch the title is signed over, but no DL or insurance is needed by the buyer as the truck will never again go on a public road.

If he restores the vehicle to use on public roads, then he has to get it registered, insured and all of that.

There are also showroom vehicles that are never driven, but are hauled from show to show. Perfectly restored antique vehicles, such as a 1967 Mustang. Those care will be titled, but will not have liability insurance, although due to their value a wise owner will have their value insured - but not liability. Does your son-in-law deal with antiques?

Regarding guns, in Texas, for private sales, no paperwork of any kind is required by the state.

[Redford]

378. Maybe it's just me but don't MOST people who buy vehicles drive them on public roads?

This whole subthread is a little moot for the majority of us that don't ever drive a vehicle off our land. Just saying......

[GreenStormCloud]

379. True. But the other guy was saying that insurance was ALWAYS required.

I was pointing out that there are different categories of sales in which insurance is not needed. He doesn't want to acknowledge that there are exceptions.

[mbperrin]

383. Okay, I was going to just stop, but you won't. GIVE A LINK

that shows those exceptions. Here's mine, given previously, from the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles which lists NO exceptions. It's really time for you to pony up on this ridiculous point. You never have addressed the loss of sales tax revenue to the state.


http://www.txdmv.gov/vehicles/titles/title_vehicle.htm
Buyers

If buying from an individual, have the seller accompany you to the county tax office to avoid any unwanted surprises. Before submitting the title application, a tax office representative can tell you if the title being signed over to you is correct and if it has any legal or salvage issues.

If you buy your vehicle from a dealer, the dealer is required to file the title papers on your behalf, so you will not have to visit the tax office. Make sure the dealer provides you with a receipt showing the vehicle has been titled in your name within 30 calendar days.

In addition to the title, ask the seller to provide you with the signed vehicle title application and any other supporting documents, such as a release of lien or power of attorney. Keep a written record that includes the name and address of the seller, date of sale and vehicle information, including the Vehicle Identification Number. Failing to title a vehicle within 30 days may result in the buyer being fined.

You must provide proof of liability insurance when you title and register your vehicle or if the vehicle you purchased has current Texas registration that is transferred to you.

[GreenStormCloud]

384. Again, you keep yapping about title.

I am not arguing about title. I am saying that there are exceptions to the requirement for insurance. Do you really think that a car that is being bought for scrap and will be crushed is going to be covered by liability insurance? Use some common sense.

Here are some exceptions to the requirement to have liability insurance, section 601.052

§ 601.052. EXCEPTIONS TO FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
REQUIREMENT. (a) Section 601.051 does not apply to:
(1) the operation of a motor vehicle that:
(A) is a former military vehicle or is at least 25
years old;
(B) is used only for exhibitions, club
activities, parades, and other functions of public interest and not
for regular transportation; and
(C) for which the owner files with the department
an affidavit, signed by the owner, stating that the vehicle is a
collector's item and used only as described by Paragraph (B);
(2) the operation of a golf cart not required to be
registered under Section 502.284; or
(3) a volunteer fire department for the operation of a
motor vehicle the title of which is held in the name of a volunteer
fire department.
(b) Subsection (a)(3) does not exempt from the requirement
of Section 601.051 a person who is operating a vehicle described by
that subsection.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Former military vehicle" has the meaning assigned
by Section 502.275(o).
(2) "Volunteer fire department" means a company,
department, or association that is:
(A) organized in an unincorporated area to answer
fire alarms and extinguish fires or to answer fire alarms,
extinguish fires, and provide emergency medical services; and
(B) composed of members who:
(i) do not receive compensation; or
(ii) receive only nominal compensation.

I have now proven at least ONE exception to the insurance requirement. It will take some googling to find the others.

How about addressing my question about junkyards. Do junkyards have to have liability insurance on cars bought to be crushed? The title still has to be transferred. The junkyard can't crush cars they don't have title to.

[mbperrin]

382. Finally, back on topic. Yes, any felon, drunk, druggie, illegal, insane, or other

deviant, criminal or other lout can purchase all they can afford any time at any gun "show."

There's your problem. A lot could be solved if we would simply shoot to death at the crime scene anyone with a gun visible on them or near them. Might make it a bit more unattractive to rob convenience stores with underpaid clerks with a weapon that could take their life for an absentee owner.

There is no other reason to allow guns to be sold this way other than to cater to the criminal element, and I would wish that they would all get just what they've got coming and quickly.

[GreenStormCloud]

385. All FFL at a gun show have to follow the same rules as at the store.

Private parties follow the same rules as they would at their homes if they are making a private sale that happen to take place at a gun show.

Criminals tend to avoid gun shows. Too many cops around. When I buy a gun I prefer to go to a gun show because the selection is larger. Haven't bought a gun in years. I would like to get a SIG-Sauer P220 in .45ACP, and a Ruger Blackhawk in .45LC/ACP convertible. But there are other things that have a higher finicial priority.

[beevul]

254. Wrong on so many levels.

"I need a license to drive my car."

Only on public roads. A license is not required to simply own it.

"I need insurance for my car. "

Insurance is not required to simply own it.


"I would need extensive training to get a pilot's license."

You arent required to have a pilots license to own an aircraft.


"If I wanted to drive a train I would have to go to some sort of extensive training."


How much training would be required to simply own one?


Apples and oranges.

[2on2u]

386. Usay. n/t

[Sherman A1]

38. Thank You Very Much For this Posting

and my answer is NO.

[jimlup]

41. Very sad commentary on political discourse...

So we should give up even if we strongly believe we are right? Sorry I don't accept your post as correct. If applied retroactively it would say that logically we should never have stood against:

1. Slavery
2. Oppression of Women
3. Oppression of workers
4. Racism
5. Vietnam (I recall this argument being used regularly during the Vietnam era.)
6. ...

Well I'm sure I could go on if given a moments reflection. I just don't buy your fatalism. It is a false inertia that only appears to be present because of the fact that we have not won yet but we will eventually...

[Johnny Rico]

43. The "fact" that you're going to win eventually?

Where did you get that crystal ball, and how much do they cost?

[wakemewhenitsover]

72. How about you? Where did you get your crystal ball?

How do you know there's no point in striving for gun control?

[wakemewhenitsover]

73. There's a term for the OP's state of mind...

Learned helplessness. Wikipedia has a decent definition:

Learned helplessness is a technical term that refers to the condition of a human or animal that has learned to behave helplessly, failing to respond even though there are opportunities for it to help itself by avoiding unpleasant circumstances or by gaining positive rewards. Learned helplessness theory is the view that clinical depression and related mental illnesses may result from a perceived absence of control over the outcome of a situation. Organisms which have been ineffective and less sensitive in determining the consequences of their behavior are defined as having acquired learned helplessness.

Reminds me of a great Steve Forbert tune: "You Cannot Win if You Do Not Play."

[Johnny Rico]

75. Heh. Touché

I think there is a difference in that I'm saying gun control is the third rail of politics right now, and certainly will be for a while...whereas the other assertion was that gun control would succeed, no ifs, ands, or buts.

I will grant that at some point gun control may well pass..but based on my reading of the political landscape it's going a long time, and many gun control advocates agree with me on this point.

[wakemewhenitsover]

142. Let's say there's no hope of rapid change in gun control laws....

Is that a reason to stop agitating for change?

Speaking of change... in 2008, it would have been possible to make the case that Democrats should not nominate an African-American man whose name sounds like Osama (and whose middle name is Hussein) for President because there's no way these bigoted United States would elect him. I, for one, was dubious.

Sometimes, it's hard to gauge exactly where the American people are at. Maybe, as a nation, we've reached a point where we've seen enough. If those who seek gun control throw in the towel before the match begins, we'll never know. And, what's the worst that will happen if we strive for gun control? Perhaps we prevent a backslide.

It seems that you are pro gun control. If you had taken the time to write to or call your congressperson, or send that buck to the Brady Campaign, instead of doing this post (thought-provoking as it is), you might have made a tiny difference in a positive direction. If everyone reading this thread did the same, it might make a slightly larger difference.

And I have a hunch I know what you're thinking, so I'll toss some more song lyrics: "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one." The fact that I'm not the only one is significant. There is strength in numbers. I say, let's keep up the pressure.

[Johnny Rico]

147. I'm afraid you've completely misread me. I'm against gun control.

Let's say there's no hope of rapid change in gun control laws....is that a reason to stop agitating for change?

Since I'm against gun control, the answer is "yes"!

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

Can't stand that song...talk about your pie-in-the-sky utopian nonsense...

[wakemewhenitsover]

255. You're right. I did misread you.

Since you are against gun control, your credibility is zero in advising those in favor of gun control to give up.

[Johnny Rico]

258. I think the points made in my OP stand regardless of my feelings on the matter.

You presumably disagree.

Oh, well...

[shadowrider]

92. It's impossible to win when your side keeps going backwards n/t

[jimlup]

282. That certainly doesn't appear to be true in Europe or the UK

Highly developed economies that function quite well without legal firearms.

[tosh]

45. Never.

Why would you care?

[bahrbearian]

50. I could really use the Un-rec feature right now.

[grantcart]

52. Sad but true

The reality is that there are millions of people who are willing to stake all of their vote on this one issue.

We need to prioritze and this isn't on the top ten list.

It is logical to pursue a change in the restrictions on the use of the database, but even that should wait until after the elections.

[Lint Head]

53. No. Giving up and going to the Gun Free Speach Zone is irrelevant. I think this is a game changer.

DU is not the only platform for demonstrating ones opinion regarding guns and violence.

We'll see if you are right. People have short memories but I think the blood spilled will speak for itself this time.

[Johnny Rico]

56. Why would this be a game changer when Virginia Tech, with almost 3 times the deaths, wasn't?

Not to mention all other mass shootings...

[randome]

59. It is a game-changer. For about a month.

Then it drops off the radar. The same thing will happen this time because mass killings ARE rare.

It's human nature to think in the short-term, not long-term.

[Lint Head]

63. Only the future knows.

[shadowrider]

87. A month is far too long. I give it till the end of next week. n/t

[Tejas]

58. Members can't be bothered with the cause, only the tool.

Screw addressing social economic inequalities or mental health or anything else that contributes to the anger and what all in this country, let's just ban inanimate objects and get back to Idol.

[shadowrider]

91. Thus the thread started in the gungeon n/t

[liberalhistorian]

64. Nice try. You can go collect

your NRA paycheck now. And who the fuck are you to tell us what to do and think in this regard? Especially as a fairly new member?

The civil rights workers were told to give up, it would never happen, legalized discrimination and segregation were too entrenched also. Good thing they didn't listen to people like you who like the status quo as it is, as long as YOU are not a victim.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

77. Christ, Johnny, how small is it?

Cope.

[Tsiyu]

223. DUzy

"Give up, Johnny! Give up!"

[GarroHorus]

82. The gun debate was over the moment the assault weapon ban was passed, and the gun lobby won.

All the AWB accomplished was to insure that there would never again be a majority for any party in the Congress that dares to pass gun control legislation.

[craigmatic]

83. Even if you ban all guns they'd still be a black market to get them. All we can really do is try to

make sure we prevent crazy people from having them. There needs to be a mental test to go along with a background check.

[L0oniX]

86. Indeed. Talk is cheap.

"if every person who's advocted for more gun control on DU gave them their support they might reach 1% of the membership and power of the NRA"

[ThoughtCriminal]

89. S-U-R-R-E-N-D-E-R DOROTHY

You're no match for flying monkeys!

While you're at it, give up on universal healthcare, progressive taxation, unions, fair wages, voting rights, Social Security,...

Oh yeah? Someday, the NRA will meet a bucket of water and everyone will wonder why somebody didn't do that years ago.

[Evoman]

94. Maybe not after this killing spree. And maybe not the next one when 30 are shot in a mall.

And maybe not the one after that, when another school full of children are massacred.

But eventually, civilians will get tired of shedding blood so you can cock stroke your guns. Maybe the child of a prominent politician will be killed.

And things will change. Things always change.

[graham4anything]

95. Dr. King was told to give up too, so was Nelson Mandela

People told Martin Luther King to give up too
And Barack Obama was told to give up

As someone from NYC, Mayor Mike Bloomberg(lifetime democrat/liberal now independent after posing as a repub to get elected) with his personal fortune he has vowed to give away by the time he is old on this issue, what he wants, he can speak as he is not scared of the NRA as they have less money than he does. (See, money can be a good thing and not always mean bad).

True, nobody in 2012 pre-election will do anything.

But after Obama is reelected, and if the Dems have both parts of congress, who knows what great stuff can happen.

And these events can be preventable without guns being banned too...long as bullets
disappear or better Control happens to prevent further Kaos.
Make a gun irrelevant and it don't have any power (like Dorothy told the Wicked Witch).

somethings take a while.

After all, Obama's election happened 50 years after LBJ signed the Civil Rights / Voting rights acts.

give it time and anything is possible.

as John Lennon sang "And the world can live as one&quot ("all you need is love&quot

Abraham/Martin/JFK/Bobby/John Lennon. What do they all have in common with the 12 who died yesterday?

[TheKentuckian]

257. You lost me when you labeled the authoritarian fascist Bloomberg as a liberal

Stunning with all the unsustainable issues we have that "the polls don't support" or "we don't have the votes for" that on this one, "damn the torpedoes" that won't feed one hungry belly, educate a single mind, keep one molecule of carbon dioxide, stop a single Arctic deep water oil well, create a watt of clean energy, hold one war criminal accountable, house one family, generate any revenue, or close the wealth gap one iota.

Don't give "we can walk and chew gum" bullshit either. The only walking is backward, the wealth gap is bigger than it was when Bush was in office, shell is drilling the Arctic, the assault on public education has been stepped up, our civil liberties have been further eroded.

Of course I don't give a shit about gun control except for reducing it and getting more advanced hardware into the hands of more citizens to restore the balance between the military and police and the populace but I don't get this as the hill to die on over so many more that impact orders of magnitude more people, in fact even at the expense of any action on them at all.

[Cheap_Trick]

99. Meanwhile, IN THE REAL WORLD

more people will be killed by gun toting, trigger happy NRA propoganda spouting assholes. Maybe even someday someone you give a shit about.

As for the gungeon? Meh, nothing more than Free Republic Lite.

[Ineeda]

101. You know,

trying to simply have a conversation about this subject is like trying to talk to a member of the Phelps clan. And it's sickening. Those that worship guns -- and I mean that literally -- are blinded by their faith. I might be more respectful of their point of view it they showed even the tiniest modicum of sympathy towards the victims of their beloved deity.

[stonecutter357]

102. Johnny Rico

Full Ignore

[OmahaBlueDog]

104. If you want to fight firearms abuse, fight it the same way tobacco is being fought

Education.

For example - Sure, you can buy a gun to protect your home. Statistically you are about as likely to shoot yourself as a burglar. Consider whether you really want to invest in a good weapon and invest in the time at the range to practice and invest in a good safe to lock up your weapon. When you consider all of that, 99% + of all Americans would be better off defending their homes with a well designed electronic security system and beefier locks and windows.

[Pholus]

229. Darn. I thought you were going to say class action lawsuits...

[Hoyt]

364. +1. We also changed how people viewed tobacco and banned its use in a lot of public places.

Unfortunately, too many are busy promoting more guns, glamorizing carrying them, etc.

We'll do nothing and in a decade there will be another 100 million guns polluting our society until we finally decide to do something about it.

[airplaneman]

107. Some other things I sure "Give Up" was suggested seriously.

-Womens Right to vote.
-Anti segregation was communism.
-World War 2-we could have giving up like Fracne did!
-discrimination and civil rights.
I could go on and on but you get the idea.
I do respect the posters right to express opinion but I beg to differ that give up is an acceptable wide scale position to take.
-Airplane

[Doctor_J]

114. That's what the segregationists said in the 40's

just because a far right fringe group has ahold of the government now doesn't mean we have to give up.

[1monster]

117. Ya think? Well, here's another view...

&feature=related

[Douglas Carpenter]

118. Some day the American people will stand up to the gun nuts. But what on earth will it take?

[NRaleighLiberal]

120. Never. n/t

[liberalmuse]

140. Well, that's the spirit!

"Give up". Bwahahahaha! Nevah!

[HankyDub]

145. "Give Up" Messages found on DU in previous years:

1800: For all those fighting to expand the franchise beyond landowning men--give up

1850: For all those fighting to end slavery--give up

1890: For all those fighting for Female Suffrage-- give up

1920: For all those who want to regulate banks--give up

1930: For all those fighting segregation--give up

1950: For all those who support universal suffrage for everyone over 18--give up

1970: For all those who support gay rights--give up

1980: For all those who support drug legalization--give up

1990: For all those fighting for marriage equality--give up

2003: For all those who oppose the Iraq war--give up

All of these movements started with a tiny minority who were opposed by an arrogant majority who told them to "give up" and "be realistic."

Fortunately for all of us, the arrogant, condescending Johnny Rico's who have always been on the wrong side of every issue were eventually defeated.

And so will it be again.

[TheKentuckian]

299. We can't remove an anti-trust exemption or stop food stamp cuts or even keep critical firefighters

But this one we got, huh? The wealth differential is still growing. The bottom 80% of us have significantly less than 10% of the wealth and the bottom FIFTY percent barely ONE PERCENT. That needle is fucking moving backward but for this statistically null fetish we've got all the zeal in the world and are borrowing moral authority from everywhere from the anti-slavery movement and regulating banks (another thing we either cannot do or do so poorly that it enhances their hand).

Probably right, we do a fair job of reducing rights but are piss poor at advancing and maintaining them anymore.
We have become adept at using polling to justify abandoning beneficial policies for the many and better at ignoring the polls when support is great for massively beneficial laws.

I figure the anti's are being pushed and resourced by wealthy authoritarians supposedly on both sides of the aisle, hence it was the one "progressive" leg the Turd Way was always willing to stand on and swim against the current no matter what the cost (which is completely outside the norm for about any other issue).

[NoGOPZone]

146. Fuck the NRA nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

149. Odd timing for triumphalist rhetoric

Speaks to character, actually.

[Johnny Rico]

150. Not odd at all. After seeing post after post calling for draconian gun control,

a dose of sanity was in order...hence this post.

[Ineeda]

153. Draconian? Really? Point one out please. Just one. n/t

[HankyDub]

160. any restriction is viewed as draconian

because every one is seen as a slippery slope situation. This is the way the gun nut thinks.

[Johnny Rico]

180. Here's half a dozen. Need more?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=989807
"I think getting rid of all the guns would be a start."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=989004
"I swear, people who buy that junk ought to be committed for observation."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=990065
"It should be totally illegal to sell these kinds of weapons and ammunition. And yes, I wish the government would take all these weapons away from people...PERIOD!!! "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=983574
(in regards to a proposal to ban all hunting ammunition)
"I'm willing to sacrifice your hunting hobby so that more humans might live."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002980471#post51
"If I had my druthers, I'd ban 'em all."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002993133
"I see no reason for guns to be brought into cities. Period. It should be an automatic prison offence to bring a gun over a city line, ever."

[Ineeda]

293. My God -- you are out of your fucking mind!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=980522
"I oppose bans on "cop-killer" bullets and large-capacity magazines and waiting periods as well."

[Johnny Rico]

294. Because I support the law as it currently stands? Um, ok....

[Hoyt]

366. And folks like that are walking around in public with a gun or two strapped on every day.

[HankyDub]

157. more like insanity

The insanity of the gun nut movement still holds sway, but all things are cyclical. Like all other conservative movements, yours will be defeated. Your obsession with these tools of oppression, namely firearms, is a sickness. It is a mental illness.

Ironically, the more victories you win the more you create incidents--like this most recent one--that undermine your cause.

I see you are proud of the recent victories for the NRA. Pride comes before the fall.

[MattBaggins]

173. Why hasn't this thead ben moved yet?

It is flame bait and nothing more.

It belongs in the gungeon.

[nadinbrzezinski]

182. Because they can't

Feel free to alert for a lock though.

[DainBramaged]

222. Nope, voted 5-1 to keep it open, I tried, it insults and disgusts me however

so I guess the gunnies win today.

[Johnny Rico]

187. Because guns are currently on-topic in GD.

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news

There must be a couple hundred threads about guns (at least) in GD right now. Should they be moved to the gungeon as well?

[MattBaggins]

190. If their only purpose is flame bait, then yes.

[Johnny Rico]

194. Are you trying to get the anti-gun threads whose only contribution to the dialogue is

"F--k" the NRA" moved as well?

[MattBaggins]

238. Fuck the NRA is perfectly fine for DU

In fact openly admitting to being a member of the NRA should be treated on DU the same as advocating for third parties.

There is nothing wrong with DUers insulting a corrupt organization.

[Major Hogwash]

198. Because the sewage pipe to the gungeon backed up.

Message to gun nuts -- FUCK THE NRA!!!

[niyad]

184. no, I will not give up

you know, this is the same advice given to the women who fought for the right to vote, and those who fought for civil rights, etc.

nice try, my dear, but I regret to inform you that your oh-so-caring advice falls on deaf ears.

[Pholus]

193. And yet you feel threatened enough in the last couple of days to make this post?

I sense insecurity.

Or a bit of guilt...

[Johnny Rico]

202. If you think I feel any guilt, you don't know me very well!

As for sensing that I'm insecure and threatened, let me assure you that the reason I made this post was because I thought it would be interesting to confront those who are emotionally invested in draconian gun control with a reasoned attempt to point out that their efforts are futile. I was curious if any of them would admit so...and have been pleased to see that a couple have! One has gone so far as to admit that he won't see meaningful gun control in his lifetime, and others have expressed similar sentiments.

Of course, the majority simply type a emotionally-charged "Never!"...but that was to be expected.

[Pholus]

217. I figured it was either guilt or trolling. Guess it's just trolling then. nt

[DainBramaged]

200. Wow, well, since you feel that way, and mock us to boot, fuck you.

You royally suck, you are the reason America is ass deep in guns and why kids die to protect YOU from having your iron dicks taken away.

Fuck you you precious flower you.

[Tsiyu]

203. Typical bully

or Wicked Witch:

"Surrender Dorothy"

You know the only reason gun ownership is up is because all the racists hate Obama. They want a race/political war and they want to be well-armed.

So align yourselves with those pieces of shit, why don't you?

And tell us we're just "helpless" to change anything.

Bullies always spew that fucking bullshit - whether its about slavery, women's suffrage, health care, a living wage, taxing the wealthy. Gloating like pigs at the trough...
,
"Give UP!" these cretins say, because they have no regard for their nation, only for themselves.

I believe in gun ownership. I do not believe anyone but a lunatic needs a 100 round mag. That cat's out of the bag, still people should fight. But You continue to fight for the racists, the lunatics, the teabaggers and the sociopaths.

"Give up fighting against insane lunatic psychopaths!" you cry?

My response?

FUCK NO

[DainBramaged]

205. Always the same until they get the tombstone

actually, it's a perfect coming out thread for him, don't ya think?

[aikoaiko]

208. Or a forced time out?

Some bullies get those.

[DainBramaged]

209. It's as if he is mocking us for choosing life over death

I wonder how he would feel if we mocked HIS presidential candidate or his membership in the NRA, that precious flower that he is...

[Tsiyu]

210. Yeah...it is

Perfect.

You can smell the anchovies in Mongolia

[DainBramaged]

214. SAY I have a question, will you defend the right for Gays to marry as vehemently?

Just askin'.

[Johnny Rico]

218. Absolutely yes.

Granted, it's not something I post about...but there are lots of things I don't post about.

Now what?

[Tsiyu]

228. Here Here!!!! Hear Hear!!!!

I will be singing "Oh Happy Day!"

[spanone]

215. nobody's taking your guns...

and fuck the nra

[Johnny Rico]

220. When did I assert that they were? And please, be specific.

[quinnox]

216. right wing gun nuts often make idiotic arguments n/t

[orpupilofnature57]

226. " From my cold dead hands " Never !! Gun Nuts Dance in my

world and there ain't shit your going to do about it.

[DainBramaged]

227. Regarding the rest of the world, he knows nothing, just where to get a deal on gun oil

one trick pony. Bet he went to Charlton Heston's funeral. I bet he shoots at his computer too. And I guarantee his lack of a girlfriend isn't because of his steel guns.......

[Akoto]

230. Have all the guns you like. Regulate the ammo, I say.

Without bullets, the much worshipped guns are reduced to makeshift clubs, but at least people will still be permitted to own them!

I'm not pro-gun, but if people want them, fine. Just keep tight controls on the bullets. Background check, permit only so many to be purchased at a time, and get rid of the extended clips that let people fire dozens of shots without a reload.

Will it fix everything? Hell no, this is a complex problem. It's going to take small steps to eventually fix the larger issue, considering how valued guns are by a large segment of the population.

[Johnny Rico]

232. Bringing things on-topic...will you grant that your proposal doesn't have the slightest chance

of actually coming to pass?

And out of curiosity, what would you propose be done about existing inventories of ammunition? Heck, I have over 30,000 rounds, myself.

Also, what about reloading equipment? There are home reloaders who can put out thousands of rounds a day.

[Demit]

243. Why do you have over 30,000 rounds? What are you planning to do with them?

[Johnny Rico]

246. Mostly, just collect them. I like to have a few hundred rounds for each of my guns.

I actually don't shoot that much, but each time I get a gun I buy a few hundred rounds for it.

That tends to add up over the course of 30 years...

[nadinbrzezinski]

248. I hope you realize a few of those rounds are extremely old stock by now

Shakes head.

[Johnny Rico]

250. 30 year old ammo isn't considered "old".

I've fired 80 year old ammo. It went "bang" every time.

[nadinbrzezinski]

303. Bang has nothing to do with stability

Do me a favor, and I am serious as a heart attack, if you ever call 911 for medical aid, be nice enough and let them know.

There is a reason we need to go to the range and fire off the two boxes and well..replace them. There is also a reason cops and the military cycle their stores...stability.

[Johnny Rico]

306. 30 year old ammo that's been stored under proper conditions is perfectly stable.

If you don't know that, you're simply not informed on this subject.

In any case, the ammo which is in my self-defense firearm is quite recent.

It's inconsequential if I have a dud round when shooting 80 year old 7mm Mauser ammo through my Spanish M1916 at the range...not that I have.

[nadinbrzezinski]

360. Well, I guess I will take the word of a pro on this

nothing personal... and I mean A PRO!

Have a good day.

[zappaman]

323. How old was the ammuntion you used when you were in the middle of the ...

"shoot outs involving high powered weapons"?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002995290#post61

And this, and I am serious as a heart attack, thank God that engine block stopped a few bullets, eh?

[Demit]

290. So you overbuy ammunition, for no particular reason.

I know people like that, who collect more than they'll ever use, and it piles up inside their houses. I don't understand the compulsion, because I don't have it.

[Johnny Rico]

296. Why is it overbuying to have around 300 rounds of ammunition (on average) for each firearm one owns?

I know people who have far more than that per gun.

and it piles up inside their houses

Good grief, it all fits in a closet...

[Demit]

304. I was speaking of hoarders in general, who hoard other things (that pile up inside their houses).

I'd say if you have 30,000 rounds of ammunition stockpiled in your house, some of which hasn't been used in 30 years, I'd say that's overbuying, and that's hoarder behavior.

[Johnny Rico]

309. Ok...you say I'm a hoarder. I say I'm not.

Now what?

[Demit]

333. Now, nothing. I don't know you & hopefully don't live near you so it doesn't matter to me.

It's one thing to have a hoarder neighbor who has so many "collections" in the house that you have to walk through pathways to move around. It's quite another to live near someone who has 30,000 stored rounds of live ammunition. If you had a fire, it'd be pretty hazardous to be your neighbor then. Not to mention your family, if you have any living with you, or the firefighters.

[Johnny Rico]

334. With all due respect, you don't seem to know much about ammunition.

Loose ammunition in a fire isn't particularly dangerous. Without a barrel to go through, the bullet simply pops out of the case.

[Demit]

351. You're right, I don't.

I have thought about getting a gun, from time to time, but it would be only the one. I can't imagine wanting a hundred of them, with 300 rounds for each one, all stored in a closet, waiting.

[Johnny Rico]

355. The collecting bug bites us all in different ways...

[nadinbrzezinski]

363. With all, due respect

You have no idea of the precautions fire personnel take around fires where ammo is involved.

Don't you think there is a reason for it?

Or you are telling me hazmat, fire personnel and police have no clue either?

FYI I am a former emergency services worker, and a fire response to your place, once they found about the bullets, and mass storage, would completely change it.

But go ahead, tell me fire, police and EMS have no clue either, particularly police. Locally it's led to the bomb squad having something to do. I guess EOD techs in particular are especially clueless.

For the record, it does not involve a firing pin.

[nadinbrzezinski]

371. You are correct

If they are in a gun safe, they cook off, they stay in the safe.

If they are not, my local fd let's tem burn to the ground due to the risk to fire personnel.

[Pholus]

247. Stocking up for a zombie invasion or Y2K prob'ly.

Some people are just naturally insecure. They need security blankets.

[Akoto]

277. No, I will not grant that.

I am only 27 years old, and I've already witnessed many historic events people told me would never come to pass. Considering that, as well as my lack of ability to see the future, I refuse to answer one way or the other.

As to the remainder of your remarks, I do not know. It's not an issue one can fix off the top of one's head. To summarize my original post, small steps for a complex issue.

[Politicub]

231. Then regulate the buying and selling of ammo

People will still have their guns but it will be harder to stockpile ammo.

[Johnny Rico]

233. See #232.

[starroute]

234. The same people who freak out over gun rights also freak out over TSA searches

The other response to this shooting that's going around is that we need to increase security at places like movie theaters and shopping malls.

Now, how well do you think that's going to go down?

If the pro-gun fanatics find themselves having to pass through a metal detector every time they go to the movies, might they start thinking that gun regulations are a less intrusive option?

When you can't go up against a brick wall, the alternative is to pull a judo move and use your opponent's strength against them. And that's the point at which things start to change.

[Pholus]

237. Thanks for showing me that it "could be worse."

Let's be serious and look at what will really go down if your policy actually got implemented. My damned belt buckle will set the metal detector off and while I'm being strip searched they'll let the next moron through with his kiss-covered 357 which he uses to shoot me while I'm shopping in the mall.

The enemy of my enemy is still a moron sometimes...

[TheCowsCameHome]

236. Give up?

Because you say so?

Fuck you and the NRA.

[randr]

240. Support for gun ownership and concealed carry is at an all time high? w/math edit

Membership in the NRA is, by their figures, somewhere between 3 and 4 million. If by support do you mean the amount of money the NRA pours into our political system that nearly every American thinks has been bought and sold by special interests?
Last time I looked the most recent count of American citizens stood at 313,955,000 which gives the NRA at whooping 1% of the population.
Their are more people living in NYC alone that oppose the loose laws of fire arm procurement.
I guess the only might the NRA really has is to threaten our Representatives each election cycle.

[Logical]

241. name ONE state that has voted AGAINST concealed carry when placed on the ballot?

[randr]

249. Name a state where enormous amounts of outside money

Last edited Sat Jul 21, 2012, 10:24 PM - Edit history (1)

has not poured in to corrupt our elective process.

[nashville_brook]

271. +6000 (for the number of rounds of ammo Holmes possessed)

[Pholus]

242. Careful on the math.

3 million / 300 million = 0.01 = 1%, not 0.01%.

And yes, these NRA types are vocal because they understand that most people have actual lives that don't revolve around their aspirational ornaments of choice.

[orpupilofnature57]

244. As Time goes on numbers are at an " all time high "

Skewed statements are what Gun Nuts are all about.

[4th law of robotics]

251. Your math is off

3 million / 313 million is roughly 1%.

And according to the Census (2011) those under 18 (so neither voters nor NRA members) are roughly 24% of the population (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html).

Meaning it's 236 million Americans or 1.3%.

[morningfog]

259. Those who get hardons and jerk off to weaponry hold this country back.

Fuck em.

[Faygo Kid]

261. Yep. No matter how horrid, this is not the ditch we will die in.

Progressives are losing on all fronts. I'm over 60, and can see that we are losing. Money talks. A reasonable solution would be to ban assault weapons and to let states and municipalities regulate firearms, but that won't happen. PERIOD.

[-..__...]

266. The Future of Gun Control...

That's the way it is folks... hem-haw, froth at the mouth, gnash your teeth, pound your chests... whatever.

The gun grabbers have been mud-stomped before, and they'll be mud-stomped again.

Accept it... deal with it... live with it.

[Johnny Rico]

268. Most here aren't willing to listen to reason on the subject. Not all, thankfully.

[-..__...]

270. But... but... but...

they're already organizing and in the process of getting their collective shit together and are damn well determined to see this thing through to the end...



"Reason" means nothing to them.

[quaker bill]

267. Folks fought to end slavery for 100 years

before it finally happened. In this regard I am unconcerned about the current popularity of firearms. I am unconcerned that little will happen at this time. The correctness of an idea is not measured by its popularity or its timeliness. As any number of mass slayings and one on one murders make clear, liberal access to firearms makes this a more dangerous place. May they rust into pieces.

[Johnny Rico]

269. "May they rust into pieces."

Did you know that a well cared for firearm will remain perfectly operational for centuries? I've personally fired guns from as early as the 1870's.

Just an FYI.

[grantcart]

276. And it didn't happen with a vote. Your historical reference is not relevent IMO but actually makes

his point.

We have 30 big issues before us and this one should be last on the list, not because it is not a valid one, but because it is actually counterproductive. Each time it comes up it actually drives more money, more members to the NRA.

Frankly I prefer to move outside the country and live in other places where liberal access to firearms is not the historical norm, but we do not have the political muscle to win on this issue.

[quaker bill]

289. I do not propose activism

As a Quaker, I oppose violence and the conditions that lead to violence. You are correct, the availability of guns is only a small issue in this regard, and concerted activism is politically counterproductive.

The ownership of slaves was once a cherished "civil liberty" too. A war was fought over it (among other things). The issue of ending slavery was ongoing many decades before the war. The breakdown in civil order and cooperative relations between the States had much to do with this issue and its impacts economically.

Quakers began activism to end slavery in the 1660's, the movement was well underway when the Constitution was written. The institution was ended one state at a time up until the Civil war when it finally ended nationally. The point is that activism was actually working, which is why the south chose to band together to protect the institution. If activism had not been working, the conflict would have never arisen.

Quakers are quite used to being unpopular, the Commonwealth of Virginia passed a "Quaker act" before the establishment of the union. They were concerned that we kept freeing their slaves. Thomas Jefferson was among those sponsoring the act as we had liberated some of his property....

That said activism will not be the cause of the end of the RKBA. It will be the Holmes types, because at some point the Freedom to go see a movie or go to work without being shot for it will take precedence. The only question left is how many corpses will be involved before it happens.

[grantcart]

311. I am very familiar with the work of both Quakers and Mennonites.

Frankly if there were more I might still be a Christian, but now I prefer to associate with Buddhists as the basic premise of nonviolence is accepted as basic point of religion.

Quakers have always been ahead of the curve and that is why, for example, that President Grant would only appoint Quakers as agents for the Bureau of Indian Affairs and why instantly it eliminated all of the corruption of the most corrupt departments of the US.

But I am advocating activism.

This is a political website.

My point is simply that there are other issues more compelling that we are more likely to win.

[quaker bill]

315. I am fine with activism on other issues as well

In this case, activism only promotes opposition and stuffs the coffers of the NRA.

I agree that there are easier issues where progress is possible. This one will solve itself over time.

[grantcart]

316. "In this case activism only promotes opposition and stuffs the coffers of the NRA", 100% agreement.

It also serves to accelerate and highten the Obama Derangement Syndrome.

[nadinbrzezinski]

298. Problem is that it's not even the historic norm

That's a Hollywood myth. The west, for example, wasn't as armed up as the modern us. And places like the real tombstone, not the Hollywood one, had laws that would give the modern NRA fits.

[grantcart]

312. Yes the mythologizing on the issue is rather astonishing.

[BeyondGeography]

278. It's going to take a Nixon to China-type deal

Maybe sometime in the latter part of this century when the Republican Party has come to its senses.

[Odin2005]

279. Gun Control is political suicide. Look at 1994.

A big reason we lost control of Congress that year is because the Assault Weapons Ban brought the nuts and crazies to the polls.

[Jim Lane]

281. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

BTW, just in case any of you are so fixated on your beloved guns that your fixation overwhelms everything else, "shots" here is used in the hockey sense, not in the sense of firing a gun. (The subject line is a quotation from Wayne Gretzky.)

If supporters of gun control reject Johnny's advice and keep advocating for their position, will their success come in the short term, the middle term, the long term, or never? No one can say with certainty. What we can say with certainty (or very close to it) is that, if they follow Johnny's advice, they are doomed to failure.

Of course, most supporters of gun control are not anti-gun nuts in the sense of being fixated on their cause. Rather, most of us support gun control as one among several ideas that would make society better. Alas, no one has unlimited time, energy, or money. In setting priorities among one's goals, it's reasonable to consider, as one factor, the prospects for success.

But if anyone decides to "give up" on a principle solely because the opposition seems daunting, then he or she is a gutless wimp.

[LAGC]

283. I have faith in President Obama.

That he won't use this tragedy as an excuse to advocate restricting law-abiding citizens' freedoms.

He has an 'F' rating from the Brady Bunch. Let's keep it that way and win this election in November!!

[SaveAmerica]

301. No, and thank you for the encouragement to fight on harder

The times they are a changin

[bowens43]

302. ahhh.... no

we won't give up.

If we don't win in the end, our country will disappear.

We will win eventually despite the whining and moaning of the servants of the death merchants.....keep kissing their asses....they're laughing at you.


you know nothing about the real world.

[pinboy3niner]

307. To put it impolitely, FUCK YOU!

I'll work for reasonable gun control if I want. Regardless of what YOU may think of those efforts.

[ellisonz]

313. +1

[pinboy3niner]

314. Hey, ellisonz

I miss you, bro.

We gotta do another Occupy action together!

[ellisonz]

317. Aloha!

I've been so busy with work (parks and rec) plus I'm training for doing some ultralight backpacking. Funny, I've been in dangerous situations for years both for various jobs and hiking in remote areas and never once felt the need to tote a gun. I think these assholes opposed to progressive gun control are just scared little children reaching for a stick because they don't have the knowledge and/or the courage of their convictions.

[pinboy3niner]

325. Shit, bro, you know I carried weapons--and used them--in VN

Afterward, I once (reluctantly) did some .22 target shooting with a friend in the National Park Service. And once I went quail hunting with a friend from the Army hospital. Didn't kill anything, but almost got shot up by other hunters. It was a close call.

I'm Pretty sure that I have no desire to kill any living thing. And I probably should mention that I have pretty strong objections when anyone here suggests that military combat vets come back to be civilian killers.

As much as we've learned over the years, there are always some who don't have a fucking clue about PTSD.

My M-16 may have been my savior in-country. But there's no way I'd want to carry one here.

I don't feel a need to tote a gun, either.

[ellisonz]

327. I think some of the gun nuts...

...mistake a predilection toward peaceable means and anti-militarism as a refusal to either fight a foreign enemy or as an acceptance of victimization by criminals. They would be sorely mistaken. There are a time and a place for military style weapons, and it's not in the streets of LA, Tucson or Aurora, Colorado. I think the biggest danger to public safety in this country remains easy access to firearms for the criminally intent, to the tune of 10,000 dead every year over the last decade, that this social phenomenon generally transcends definition by race, class, or military status is social fact.

[pinboy3niner]

330. I think the worst thing for vets returning from combat abroad...

...is to come home and find this shit happening here.

[SecularMotion]

308. A message to Johnny Rico, Hell No!

We are reaching the tipping point. I can see it happening something like the movement against drunk driving. One day the number of deaths becomes unacceptable and the movement begins. There will never be a ban against guns in the US, but the public is waking up to the fact that it is far too easy for unbalanced people to obtain weapons that can cause mass murder.

[alarimer]

310. Gun fetishists can go fuck themselves.

I hate them and I hate guns.

[The Midway Rebel]

318. A message to Johnny Rico:

No. Its called democracy so suck it you fascist. I will continue to metaphorically piss on you and your guns.

[stubtoe]

319. 'Fraid so. That horse is so far out of the barn it can't be put back.

[Johnny Rico]

320. There are a lot of posters up-thread who refuse to see that.

They're letting their emotions rule them on this one.

[fascisthunter]

321. give up? LOL... arrogant nutcase

[joeybee12]

322. Has anyone alerted on this? "Boys and girls"???

One of the more condescending posts I've seen.

[zappaman]

324. Pretty sure condescending posts aren't alertable

just for being condescending...

[samsingh]

326. some of us still want to talk about ideas for saving innocent lives and we're not smug

enough to say business as usual is fine.

also, i don't expect guns to be banned because of the self serving interests out there. but i don't like how easy lunatics can arm themselves and massacre at win.

[Cherchez la Femme]

332. Nuts

[Rex]

335. IIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

[pinboy3niner]

336. FUCK THE NRA!

Thanks, Johnny. It felt good to say that.

[ohheckyeah]

337. I have no problem with banning

assault weapons. I have no problem with doing away with the conceal carry laws. I don't think we're going to see those two things happen anytime soon, though.

[Johnny Rico]

338. Which is pretty much the point of my OP!

While I'm very pro-gun and am personally against virtually all gun control, the entire point of my OP was that regardless of where one comes down on this issue, no meaningful gun control legislation is going to be passed for a long, long, time.

Sadly, comprehending that seems to be beyond most of the people who have replied. I'm heartened that you and some others are capable of realizing it.

[ohheckyeah]

341. I know -

I have had a number of friends going off about gun control and I just let them vent.

I don't believe nationwide gun laws are the answer. I think local and state laws are the answer - what works in rural southwest VA isn't likely to work in New York City. We live rural and own a rifle, shotgun and a couple of pistols - most were given to my husband by his father or grandfather. I have a personal handgun that I keep in a case in my nightstand.

I'm seeing some very interesting behavior at DU over this whole issue and the shooting....things that make me wonder.

[Chorophyll]

339. Dear Johnny Rico: don't tell me what to do.

And don't call us "boys and girls." Who do you think you are?

[Johnny Rico]

342. Would you also object to a post that tells people who own guns that they should have to turn

them in? The would be "telling someone what to do", as well.

If you answer "yes" I'll certainly give you credit for consistency.

And don't call us "boys and girls." Who do you think you are?

[Chorophyll]

344. I object to any post that asks people to "give up" on a cause they believe in.

And I will not lighten up, Francis. This is a serious topic.

[Johnny Rico]

346. Would you feel better if I edited the OP not to say "boys and girls"?

But what to replace the phrase with? Think, think...



Hm...I suppose that's right out.

I keep thinking that a musical will help me out...

I know, Cabaret!

Damen und Herren, Mesdames et Monsieurs, Ladies and Gentlemen!

Damen und Herrren it is, then! That should satisfy everyone!

[Chorophyll]

365. Whatever. I see you've edited it.

I guess that means I shouldn't give up on anything, ever, right? Yay me.

[Douglas Carpenter]

340. restricting guns would be just as foolish for the Dems as passing civil rights was in the 60's

[YoungDemCA]

343. Yep, we might as well kiss the redneck wannabe vote goodybe!

[Johnny Rico]

347. How'd that work out in 1994? I know, let's ask President Clinton!

"On November 8, we got the living daylights beat out of us, losing eight Senate races and fifty-four House seats, the largest defeat for our party since 1946....The NRA had a great night. They beat both Speaker Tom Foley and Jack Brooks, two of the ablest members of Congress, who had warned me this would happen. Foley was the first Speaker to be defeated in more than a century. Jack Brooks had supported the NRA for years and had led the fight against the assault weapons ban in the House, but as chairman of the Judiciary Committee he had voted for the overall crime bill even after the ban was put into it. The NRA was an unforgiving master: one strike and you're out. The gun lobby claimed to have defeated nineteen of the twenty-four members on its hit list. They did at least that much damage...."

---Bill Clinton, "My Life"

[YoungDemCA]

348. How many of those NRA 'swing voters" are still Democrats?

I'd actually be curious to know....

[Johnny Rico]

350. I haven't the faintest idea, but there's no reason to think that 18 years laters the next generation

would replace them under similar circumstances.

Not that such circumstances are going to take place. A new assault weapon ban will not be passed in the wake of this shooting.

Hence my OP.

[Hoyt]

367. Sadly, that's when lots of folks started arming up, packing in public, and supporting right wingers.

Just look at the TParty and their love affair with guns, bigotry, etc.

[SoDesuKa]

361. We Have a Machine Gun Problem That's Only Going to Get Worse

Machine guns aren't like ordinary guns. They have a history of changing the world, and they are continuing to change the world. There will eventually be restrictions on private ownership of machine guns, even if we have to start from scratch. It may involve a reassessment of policies that feed into the worldwide demand for machine guns, but it will happen.

At the present time support for private gun ownership is tied up with personal security, but easy access to machine guns does not enhance person security; it threatens it. These massacres are coming closer together and with gathering intensity. It's only a matter of time before some "revulsion threshold" is crossed.
[center]
Eventually a Madman Will Get Hold of One of These[/center]

[Johnny Rico]

362. Are you under the impression that there *aren't* heavy restrictions on machine gun ownership?

There have only been two, repeat two homicides committed with legally owned machine guns in the last 80 years or so.

Legal owners of machine guns are the most responsible gun owners in United States history.

There will eventually be restrictions on private ownership of machine guns,

To own a fully automatic weapon requires tons of paperwork and an extensive BATFE background check.

easy access to machine guns does not enhance person security; it threatens it.

What easy access wold this be? Are you confusing machine guns with semiautomatics?

[99Forever]

368. Give up?

Same to you as the NRA.

[LanternWaste]

372. I imagine an intractable dogma would indeed see that.

"so get your digs in while you can! "

I imagine an intractable dogma would indeed see that in any conversation re: this weekend's massacre. I imagine that same person will perceive contrary opinions as little more than "don't fool yourself that anything you do or say on this topic is actually going to change anything in the Real World..." much as the Catholic church did during the Enlightenment.


"You can vent about the issue all you like. A good thing, I suppose, if it makes you feel better..."
Much as are you doing... Six of one often equals half a dozen of the other.

[Pisces]

381. And a black man could never be President, and Gays would never be allowed in the Military or given

the right to marry ( certain states)!!

You give up trying to depress peoples moral outrage. We can and will demand change. Change is slow, but it happens.

Assault rifles will be banned along with those useless 100 bullet clips etc. You will see the comprise happen.
Gun shows will be then next thing to go. Get over yourself. Arrogance is the first step to defeat.

[Joseph Harrolds]

387. +1

[Hal2814]

389. Kick

[darkangel218]

390. I just recced your thread

It was a good OP.

[PeaceNikki]

391. How totally and utterly odd that you would. The poster is a banned repeat troll.

And that was over 2 years ago.

[darkangel218]

392. I like looking up old threads

[pintobean]

393. She followed the link from Discussionist

It gets posted there frequently.