Skip to main content

View Diary: The picture posted on FB by an NRA friend that set me off (316 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You make the counterpoints (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, FrankRose, happy camper

    And proceed to ignore them in the pursuit of a predetermined conclusion.

    (And you thought mentally unbalanced gun owners did the assaulting?)
    The Sandy Hook shooter was mentally unbalanced, yes, but he was NOT a gun owner. He was a gun THIEF. He illegally stole the weapons he was not legally allowed to buy or own.
    Actually, Adam was deterred from buying a rifle at Dick's Sporting Goods because of the background check.  The only reason he got a hold of a cache of weapons, including an assault rifle, is that
    He STOLE THEM. Hurling slurs at one of the murder victims because she was a gun owner is utterly irrelevant to that fact. It's another version of the "undesirable person was asking for it!" nonsense that shifts blame on to the victim instead of the perpetrator.
    VI responded that I actually wanted to take the gun away BEFORE the shooting spree. Again, stop and consider the “logic”: I shouldn’t focus on taking away anyone’s gun, except for the guy AFTER HE IS DONE shooting up the school, mall, neighborhood, etc. I was immediately and angrily assaulted by other gun nuts who posted that I am somehow blaming law-abiding gun owners and I was truly after taking their guns away.
    Because you are. Who are you advocating taking the guns from? An innocent woman who was murdered and her lawful weapons stolen from her by a deranged criminal. And everyone else who owns guns. You absolutely ARE advocating taking away their guns, and they're rightfully upset about it.

    The Sandy Hook shooter, by your own admission, was legally barred from buying or owning weapons and was refused when he attempted to buy one and failed a background check. So he attacked and murdered a lawful gun owner and stole her guns.

    This is EXACTLY a case of a determined criminal attempting and failing to acquire a weapon legally and resorting to illegal means to get them. Which is exactly what pro-gun people say they will do.

    [They said that] After a shooting spree, [liberal idiots] always want to take the gun away from the people who didn’t do it

    I responded that I actually wanted to take the gun away BEFORE the shooting spree.

    Take the gun away from the innocent murder victim who had her weapons stolen from her. Talk about cognitive dissonance! You're saying you want to take away legal guns from legal owners who did nothing wrong, and then claim that you're not!

    "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

    by DarthMeow504 on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 04:31:37 PM PST

    •  Darth, see above (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      trumpeter


      there is no evidence Adam Lanza ever attempted to purchase a weapon.  The Dick's story was a dead lead.

      "Kossacks are held to a higher standard. Like Hebrew National hot dogs." - blueaardvark

      by louisev on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 04:33:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Really bad argument (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ConfusedSkyes, Yamara

      Take the gun away from the innocent murder victim who had her weapons stolen from her.

      If her guns had been taken away from her she'd still be alive.

      And so would 26 others.

      •  More nonsense (0+ / 0-)
        If her guns had been taken away from her she'd still be alive.

        And so would 26 others.

        Bullshit. Someone who was willing to murder someone and steal their firearms to commit a crime would have gotten a hold of them somehow, some way. A ban on legal guns does nothing to disarm criminals. Unless you think you can somehow magically make guns simply go away?

        Black market guns will always exist and get into criminal hands. You can't stop that with more laws or by disarming law-abiding citizens. You can't put 200 year old technology back into the genie bottle. Too many guns already exist and the capacity to make them is too easy to come by. We're not talking about nuclear weapons here, where it takes massive resources and high technology and scientific expertise. It's 19th century technology. Basic chemistry and blacksmith tools can make guns. Anyone can learn how.

        As long as there is a demand, the supply will exist to meet it no matter how draconian you make the laws. Anyone who doesn't understand this hasn't been paying attention.

        "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

        by DarthMeow504 on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 08:34:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Would have been nice if he had to leave the house (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Fixed Point Theorem, Clues

          to get them...

          A law abiding gun owner failed to secure her guns from her family and was killed with them. Those guns were then used to kill many others.

          It is tragic, but this has no resemblance to some random thief stealing her weapons.

           

          Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

          by k9disc on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:03:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  funny, I don't recall weekly stories (0+ / 0-)

          of gun massacres anywhere else in the world... but we are treated to this crap on a daily basis.  There was just a shootout in a theater a few days ago.

          You fucking gun nuts can all go to hell.

    •  Stolen by her son (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      k9disc, Sychotic1

      whom she regularly took out to the shooting range. And you're assuming the gun was stolen. Do we have proof now that he broke into a gun safe? Because if my mom leaves something out and lying around that she regularly lets me use, and I take it and use it, I wouldn't call that stealing necessarily, more like borrowing.

      I have very little sympathy for Nancy Lanza who had resources out the wazoo (over $200K in alimony a year) but still didn't deal with the fact that she was living with a troubled child. And twenty other young children, as well as six adults, paid for that refusal to deal, for her need to have assault weapons because she was so damn privileged. I do blame this victim.

      An unsuccessful shoe bomb attack resulted in nine years of inconvenience for every flier in the country. It would be nice to think [this diabolical act] might lead to some similar inconveniences. --mrblifil

      by Debby on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 06:47:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think the idea is that she would have had a gun. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sethtriggs, Yamara

        Just not the kind that makes it easy to shoot so many people.

        The fact that her gun was legal is being discussed, because, maybe it shouldn't have been legal.

        If you want to go to a shooting range and shoot, or if you hunt, you can use a non-automatic weapon.

        I went hunting with a double barreled shot gun and had a great time. Sometimes we hit a bird. Sometimes the bird got away. I only had two shots. It was sporting.

        That type of gun is what Cheney shot his friend with. His friend is still alive.

        "Jersey_Boy" was taken.

        by New Jersey Boy on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 07:19:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  He KILLED her, remember? Hello? (0+ / 0-)

        What, do you think he asked her permission first? Killing someone and taking something that belonged to them is the very definition of theft. Your argument is nonsense.

        "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

        by DarthMeow504 on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 08:25:47 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  She was irresponsible. (0+ / 0-)

          Did he break open the safe? Do we know that yet? Because if he had easy access to guns that he was regularly allowed to use, I don't call that stealing.

          And NO this is not the same as saying the girl with the short skirt was asking for it. Maybe more along the lines of the woman tossing bologna slices to the grizzly bear was asking for it.

          An unsuccessful shoe bomb attack resulted in nine years of inconvenience for every flier in the country. It would be nice to think [this diabolical act] might lead to some similar inconveniences. --mrblifil

          by Debby on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 08:47:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You have the sequence backwards (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DSPS owl, k9disc

          It is false that the mother was killed to get her guns. She was killed in her sleep with one of her guns. At the very least she  inadequately secured the guns, if indeed she secured them at all.

          •  from family... Secure them from her family... (0+ / 0-)

            That's kind of crazy, isn't it?

            Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

            by k9disc on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:04:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not if your family is mentally disturbed (0+ / 0-)

              or a minor or in any other way not fit to wave a gun around.

              "I watch Fox News for my comedy, and Comedy Central for my news." - Facebook Group

              by Sychotic1 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 07:07:09 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site