Skip to main content

We certainly are privileged to live in a society where people like 20-year-old Blaec Lammers of Bolivar, Missouri, can purchase two assault weapons and 400 rounds of ammunition legally.

If you have been following the news, Lammers is the young man who was contemplating a murderous shooting spree, either at the premiere of "Breaking Dawn," the final chapter in the "Twilight" saga, or at a Wal-Mart store, where he would have access to more ammunition if 400 rounds did not turn out to be enough.

Despite the fact that only a mother's intervention kept us from having yet another mass killing, in the wake of similar occurrences at the "Dark Knight" screening in Aurora, Colo., and at a supermarket in Arizona, there is no outcry for measures to stop this epidemic from spreading.

After all, as we have been told time and time again, it is not guns that kill people, it is people that kill people, a sentiment that is absolutely correct. But why do we have to make it so easy for these people who kill people to have access to heavy artillery?

Blaec Lammers had little or no experience with guns, according to news accounts, Yet Lammers, who has a history of mental problems, had no difficulty buying far more weaponry than anyone could conceivably need for personal protection or for sporting purposes.

Though two days have passed since Lammers' plan was revealed, there has not been a single elected official in Missouri calling for something to be done about the easy access to the type of weapons that simply are not needed and are not what is called for in the Second Amendment.

And who can blame our officials for not saying anything? In Missouri, if you practice your First Amendment right to say something about the Second Amendment, you will face an avalanche of knee jerk responses from people who fear if they make any concession whatsoever that some type of regulation of firearm access is needed, they are opening the door and allowing government storm troopers to sweep in and confiscate their guns.

At the same time, Missouri legislators are proposing bills each year to further increase access to guns anywhere and everywhere. When Missourians voted in the '90s not to allow concealed weapons to be carried, legislators ignored the result and passed the law anyway. After all, the argument from those who supported conceal/carry went, it wasn't real Missourians who defeated the measure, it was just people from Kansas City and St. Louis.

A reasonable person can understand the need for carrying concealed weapons for personal protection, but the laws and proposed laws have come one after the other during every legislative session. The Missouri General Assembly was one of the first in the nation to pass the so-called Castle Doctrine law, one of those pieces of legislation designed to combat a problem that did not exist. Supposedly, there were hundreds of cases of people who had been arrested and jailed because they used guns to protect their property and lives. When that legislation was first proposed in the Show-Me State, I repeatedly asked someone to show me one case in which someone was deprived of their freedom because they had used a weapon to defend themselves- years later, I am still waiting. It never happened, but it certainly helped the National Rifle Association to keep the membership dues flowing when it sounded a rallying cry that people were being deprived of their right to shoot somebody any time they need to shoot somebody.

It was the same sort of twisted logic that led to the "Stand Your Ground" legislation that ultimately led to the death of Trayvon Martin in Florida.

In Missouri, we have had laws proposed that would prohibit employers from discriminating against employees who were in favor of protecting their Second Amendment rights...despite no evidence that any employer had ever discriminated against anyone on those grounds. The elected officials who propose this type of frivolous legislation are the same ones who would oppose any bills protecting the rights of women, gays, minorities, and others who are far more likely to be discriminated against- and who can document the discrimination.

It hasn't been that long since a Missouri representative proposed legislation mandating that churches allow people to carry concealed weapons. This was in response to a shooting in a Micronesian church in Neosho. Thankfully, our churches have yet to be forced to allow people to carry guns (another case of those who favor Second Amendment rights' willingness to trample on others' First Amendment rights).

After word of the "Breaking Dawn' plot surfaced, I immediately read numerous comments from people who said that what is needed is for everyone to be able to carry weapons so that if someone like Blaec Lammers or James Holmes opens fire in a crowded theater, they can pull their weapons and blow them away.

Somehow that scenario does not offer me much comfort.

Can anyone really offer a rational reason why civilians need to carry assault weapons? Legislation that would curb the easy access to these weapons would not deprive anyone of the ability to protect his or her life or property. It would not violate anyone's Second Amendment rights.

Quite the contrary, it would make sense.

And that is why it is never going to happen in the Missouri General Assembly and that is why it is never going to happen in Congress.

Originally posted to rturner229 on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:00 AM PST.

Also republished by Show Me Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What do you think (17+ / 0-)

    an "assault rifle" is?

    "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State ..."- Vermont Constitution Chapter 1, Article 16

    by kestrel9000 on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:03:15 AM PST

  •  Regular massacres are inevitable under our current (14+ / 0-)

    firearms policy.  Why someone needs two semi-automatic rifles and 400 rounds of ammunition immediately with no waiting period or even registration of ownership is rather beyond me.  Looks like it's going to be easier to buy guns than to vote -- what could possibly go wrong with that?

    You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

    by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:18:45 AM PST

    •  So they have to need them? (16+ / 0-)

      Rights based on needs are not rights of citizens.
      They are privileges granted to subjects.

      "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State ..."- Vermont Constitution Chapter 1, Article 16

      by kestrel9000 on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:42:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No one has a right not to have a waiting period (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        historys mysteries, wader

        before a firearms purchase.

        No one has a right not to have a firearms purchase registered.

        You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

        by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:52:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In Law, show me what you propose is true. n/t (9+ / 0-)

          "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

          by meagert on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:56:23 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Here is a link indexing some of the various (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea

            challenges which have been mounted against firearms possession and purchases policies: link (.PDF).  

            As you will see, practically every state or local firearms policy that you can imagine is being challenged, generally in federal court.  The report to which I have linked is dated 9/1/12 and provides present case status summaries.  Here is a sample:

            -- On 10/4/11, the D.C. Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court holding that the District of Columbia’s prohibition against assault weapons and large capacity magazines is constitutional and that District law requiring basic registration of handguns is constitutional.
            The report is 12 pages long.  This, combined with consultation of the pleadings and orders in the summarized cases, would be an excellent starting point for anyone interested in what is and what is not protected under the Second Amendment.

            You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

            by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:13:21 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thank you, but no settled Law as yet. (9+ / 0-)

              And frankly, they are an indication that hodge-podge legislative actions, willy-nilly lawsuits, and partisan lower court judicial findings do not in any way represent Constitutional Law. See my sig line.
               Not a one of us says that all legal restrictions are unconstitutional. But we do believe that it's the State's responsibility to show any incursion into a Constitutional Right be legal.
               Before you go wanting to enact new laws, you might want to do a little research into the current ones (see waiting periods, for one). Which ones are well written, or badly written. Which ones are being ignored, or over emphasized. Which ones require enormous sums of money to enact, or unenforceable requirements (see registration enactment costs, policing and confiscation efforts)

              "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

              by meagert on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:28:24 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The law is quite settled, as I point out below. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                wader, ichibon

                All acts of the legislature, and of legislative bodies such as local governments, are presumed to be constitutional.  Otherwise a democratic government could not operate.

                Right now, my position is legally accurate in all respects, as to my knowledge no court has ruled otherwise.  You are of course entitled to believe that some court may determine otherwise.  I think that will be unlikely, but regardless of the likelihood of that occurring, until then, these laws remain fully valid and in effect.

                I should note that DC v. Heller expressed no opinion about such things as waiting periods and firearms registration.  I have my own doubts as to whether they reduce firearms violence, but I think that when and if such an issue is presented to the courts, it will be found to be well within the legislature's constitutional perogative to impose such requirements.

                You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

                by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:44:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  And this is based on... (15+ / 0-)

          ...what, exactly?

          By that logic, then any imaginable, pointless limitations can be put on any other Civil Right.

          One can only assume, then, that you were fine with what was done to the OWS participants -- no one has a right, after all, to express their opinion in a public location at a time and place of their own choosing.

          "Free Speech zones," huzzah!  But only from the designated protest hours of 1:00 pm until 2:00 pm, and no expressions of dissent with the current governmental agencies.

          In fact, let's have people go through a waiting period before they express their opinions, and have that opinion registered and available to any future governmental agency who later decides that the person so expressing their opinion is an undesirable...

          If it's an acceptable limitation on one Civil Right, surely it's good enough for the rest of them...

          Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

          by theatre goon on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:04:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No right exists without limitations; very few (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            historys mysteries

            people are killed with insults every year, and no airplane, to my knowledge, has been hijacked with pornography.

            You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

            by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:14:44 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  And...? (13+ / 0-)

              How is this, in any way, responsive to the questions I posed?

              At no point did I state that any rights exist without limitation, so that insinuation is simply a strawman, at best.

              And that is, of course, aside from the fact that, if you believe speech has never been used to incite violence, then you are woefully uninformed.

              Such being the case, and that speech can, in fact, lead to violence, then there is no logical reason why your proposed limitation on one Civil Right should not be imposed upon the other.

              Well, I suppose you could be inconsistent about it, and demand one set of restrictions but not the other, but that would be rather hypocritical, in my opinion.

              Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

              by theatre goon on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:21:57 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  That's not something that's true (13+ / 0-)

          just because you say it is.

          I say that mandatory registration violates my Second Amendment rights. See, "shall not be infringed."
          And that's true because I say it is. Therefore, your "true because you say it is" is hereby voided by my "true because I say it is." That's because I said it second and two's a higher number.
          Now:
          Black black no tap back.
          So there.

          I don't mind a three day waiting period for me, anyway, because that's how it is for me. I have  a common last name and i live on the other side of the country from where I was born. I can't walk into a gun shop and walk out with a gun. I have to come back in three days - sooner if the dealer thinks to call and check. If they don't hear back in three days, it's considered  a clear.

          "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State ..."- Vermont Constitution Chapter 1, Article 16

          by kestrel9000 on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:07:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  As a constitutional matter, acts of a legislature (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            historys mysteries, ichibon, cany

            are presumed to be constitutional, so it is not a tit for tat situation.  Unless and until a law can be shown to be unconstitutional, it is constitutional.  

            No court has to my knowledge ever ruled that a waiting period or a registration requirement is unconstitutional.  Hence those requirements are constitutional.

            On a broader scope, I think it quite unlikely that any court will find such requirements to be unconstitutional.  Please refer to the report I mention upthread for a summary of the various legal actions related to these and many other firearms regulations.

            You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

            by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:19:47 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  This is not true (6+ / 0-)

              States enact all kinds of Laws that are not Constitutional, even their own State Constitutions. You know what happens when you presume.....

              "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

              by meagert on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:43:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Consult your precedents again, here is a (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ichibon, cany

                summary from the normally batty Professor Volokh (link):

                The United States Supreme Court has long imposed a presumption of constitutionality on judicial review of statutes, not a presumption of unconstitutionality. See, e.g, O’Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 282 U.S. 251, 257-58 (1931) (citing cases). Further, the Court has described the presumption of constitutionality as “strong” when courts review an act of Congress. See, e.g., United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 416 (1976).

                You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

                by Cartoon Peril on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 10:52:40 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  How About a Waiting Period for Voting?? (7+ / 0-)

          Or speaking??

          Anybody willing to ignore existing laws against murder, rape, robbery and general mayhem is not going to be dismayed by a restriction on how much ammo they can get in a single trip to Walmart.

          True bipartisanship is prosecuting criminals regardless of Party.

          by The Baculum King on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 03:16:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  So, how many SUCCESSFUL mass killings has MO (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KVoimakas

          had with our zero wait time?

          How many folks in IL get shot, especially in East St Louis?

          Almost none of the criminals in IL that conduct their business with firearms have valid FOID cards.  How does Illinois law prevent murder?

          Gun restrictions are not safety measures, see my sig line to get an idea how I got to that concept.

          Bowers v. DeVito "...there is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered."
          Director of Merchandising - the Liberal Gun Club
          Interim Chairman - Democratic Gun Owners' Caucus of Missouri

          by ErikO on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 08:47:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I just purchased 6 pistols (14+ / 0-)

      Somewhat embarrassing but I lowballed them with a telephone bid at an estate auction.  Evidently, I was the only bidder.  Does this mean BATF should kick in my door?

      I would also observe that I used to have an FFL and an explosives license and I need to renew my CWP.  The guns are now legally registered and all the transfer paperwork is in order.

      I would also observe most hunters own between a couple and dozen long guns at any given time.  When is two guns too many?  

  •  In answer: Follow the Money (14+ / 0-)

    As with most things in America, if you follow the money, you understand why things happen the way they do.

    Why is it so easy for people (even emotionally disturbed people who have threatened violence) to get guns?  Because the gun industry makes a profit from every gun and bullet sold.  So the gun industry has a financial incentive to sell as many guns and bullets as they possibly can.  

    AND because here in America, we have a system of government whereby wealthy and corporate interests can buy the laws they want and the law-makers to write the laws just they way the wealthy and corporate interests like those laws to be written.

    So we get laws that speed the sale of guns and ammo to everyone and anyone.  AND we get laws that decriminalize the discharging of guns, even when the results are deadly.

    Every year in America, 100,000+ people suffer a gunshot injury, and 30,000+ of those injuries are fatal (we kill more people by gunfire every year than have died in the Syrian civil war - and the Syrian civil war is not repeated every year).  Every one of those injuries is a profit for the gun industry.  Sadly, a public outcry will NOT change this deadly dynamic.  That would require a change in our governmnet to stop the wealthy and corporate interests from buying the laws and the law-makers they want.

    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:20:25 AM PST

    •  P.S. "and 30,000+ of those injuries are fatal" (5+ / 0-)

      Over half of them suicides, although you are clearly attempting to pass them off as murders.

      Tut, tut....

      •  Some of those suicides are military personnel (0+ / 0-)

        You are correct that a large portion of those deaths due to gunshot injury are self-inflicted.  Tho' you wish to suggest such deaths don't matter, those deaths are still due to guns, and show clearly how dangerous guns are.

        That's why I include the figure 100,000+ Americans suffering gunshot injuries every year: to show the horrifically high numbers of Americans shot every year even when self-inflicted shootings are dis-counted (rare is the person who intentionally shoots him/herself non-fatally).

        A significant portion of those self-inflicted fatal gunshot injuries occur among military personnel; both active duty and veterans.  Tut, tut for you for dis-counting and ignoring the needs of our military personnel so you can play with your guns without interruption.    

        There is no getting around it: guns are lethally dangerous and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in America.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:22:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who said suicides don't matter? (5+ / 0-)

          Oh, right -- no one.

          You've tried this tactic before, and it's as dishonest now as it was dishonest then.

          Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

          by theatre goon on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:15:50 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Guns kill 30,000+ Americans every year (0+ / 0-)

            Good.  So we are all in agreement: guns (and gun onwers) kill 30,000+ Americans every year.

            Next time PavePusher or any other gun enthusiast disputes the fact that there are 30,000+ fatal gun injuries every year in America (or tries to say those deaths are not murders and therefore no big deal), I will be sure to tell them that Theatre Goon recognizes the essential truth that 30,000+ Americans are killed every year by guns.

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 06:21:54 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Suicide by definition is not murder. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              theatre goon, rockhound

              Guns don't kill anybody by the way. People do.

              Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 07:27:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Suicide is suicide; murder is homicide (0+ / 0-)

                The law recognizes 4 different "manner of death": natural, accidental, homicide, and suicide.

                Many states have laws prohibiting suicide as the intentional taking of a life.  Tho' for obvious reasons, few people are ever prosecuted for an act of suicide.

                It is technically incorrect to say suicide is not "murder".  Suicide is indeed the intentional taking of a life, which is how most people define "murder".  BUT clearly, suicide is not homicide, under the legal definitions of the terms.

                Having said all that, I have NEVER claimed that suicide is anything other than suicide.  

                And I agree with you: guns don't kill people - people with guns kill people.

                "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 08:17:15 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Again, who said... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas, rockhound

              ...that suicides are "no big deal?"

              Again, no one.

              Once again, you are being blatantly dishonest by attributing that stance to those who do not take it.

              If you have to resort to such dishonest tactics to support your own stance, perhaps it is time to take a harder look at that stance.  Personally, I think that any stance that must be supported with such tactics is not worth holding -- apparently, you feel differently.

              Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

              by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 07:37:07 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Good - we are all in agreement (0+ / 0-)

                Good.  So we are all in agreement: guns (and gun onwers) kill 30,000+ Americans every year.

                And every one of those deaths is important and significant and needless and preventable.

                I am glad we can all agree on those important points.

                "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 08:25:47 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  It's just too bad... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rockhound, KVoimakas

                  ...that you insist on being so blatantly dishonest in the rest of your arguments.

                  If you wouldn't do that, you might get somewhere.

                  I note that you have yet to defend any of the falsehoods that you have here presented.  I can only assume that this is because you know that you can't.

                  I also have to applaud the great personal courage you are displaying by making these false statements in a thread that has largely been dead for at least a couple of days now.

                  Really, impressive stuff.

                  Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                  by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 08:33:51 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Facts; not falsehoods (0+ / 0-)

                    What I present are the demonstrable facts: every year in America, over 100,000 people suffer a gunshot injury, and over 30,000 people die as a result of those gunshot injuries.  This is a open and shut fact, which you have yet to acknowledge in print.

                    I have made no false statements.  If you wish to claim I have made false statements, please quote verbatim any statement I have made that you think is false.

                    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:16:42 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That's pretty simple stuff. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rockhound, KVoimakas
                      Tho' you wish to suggest such deaths don't matter, those deaths are still due to guns, and show clearly how dangerous guns are.
                      No one suggested that suicides don't matter -- therefore, this statement is a falsehood.
                      Tut, tut for you for dis-counting and ignoring the needs of our military personnel so you can play with your guns without interruption.
                         
                      No one discounted the needs of military personal, nor, even if they had, did they do it for the reason you attribute to them.  Therefore, this statement is a falsehood.
                      Next time PavePusher or any other gun enthusiast disputes the fact that there are 30,000+ fatal gun injuries every year in America (or tries to say those deaths are not murders and therefore no big deal)...
                      No one disputed the total numbers, nor did they try to say those deaths were "no big deal."  Therefore, this statement is a falsehood.
                      And gun enthusiasts support in word and deed the killing of Americans for the profits of the gun industry.
                      This is complete fantasy -- you not only make the false assertion that the firearm industry is based upon murder, but that those who engage in a certain activity support the killing of human beings.  Therefore, this statement is a falsehood.

                      I could go on, but you get my point -- when you post a statement that is not true, it is false.  Very straightforward.

                      Of course, I'm fairly certain that you know the difference between a true statement and a false one.  You just like to play this little game of yours.

                      I do hope that, for once, you can be honest and explain what it is that you get out of it.  Really.  I'm curious.

                      Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                      by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:11:50 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  False statements vs. difference of opinion (0+ / 0-)

                        So PavePusher makes a statement:

                        P.S. "and 30,000+ of thos injuries are fatal" Over half of them suicides, although you are clearly attempting to pass them off as murders.
                        The thing is neither you nor I can know exactly and with any certainty what is in PavePusher's mind when he wrote that statement.  We only have the words in print.

                        To me, those words indicate PavePusher is seeking to minimize or "disc-count" the number of Americans killed by gunshot every year.  To you, PavePusher has some other meaning in mind with that statement.  It is not FALSE for me to say PavePusher means to minimize or "dis-count" the number of Americans killed by gunshot every year: that is my opinion about his statement.  By the same token, it is not false for you to ascribe some other meaning to PavePusher's statement, because that is your opinion of PavePusher's meaning.

                        I am not guilty of making a false statement, I am only guilty of having a different opinion of PavePusher's meaning from your opinion of that meaning.  

                        Don't bother asking PavePusher to come and take your side of this arguement.  Some time has elapsed since PavePusher made that statement, and his recollection of his frame of mind at that time is likely to suffer.  In addition, PavePusher has a partisan bias in ths discussion of guns and gun deaths and any statements he makes now are likely to reflect that bias.

                        (Tho' I myself am kinda interested to know what he meant with that original statement, because he references "attempting to pass them off as murders", and no where in the comment to which he is responding to do I mention murders.)

                        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:58:26 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  No, you kinda missed the point. (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          rockhound, KVoimakas

                          Purposefully, I suspect -- but that's a different matter.

                          You stated that, for instance, PavePusher said something that he did not say.

                          That is not a matter of opinion -- that is a fact.

                          He did not make the statements that you attributed to him.

                          That makes your statement false.

                          You can try to spin it all you like, but it is still the case that you have, once again, made numerous false statements in this thread.

                          Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                          by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 11:15:53 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Check wording carefully (0+ / 0-)

                            From the comment you quoted above:

                            Tho' you wish to suggest such deaths don't matter, those deaths are still due to guns, and show clearly how dangerous guns are.
                            Notice I did not say PavePusher wrote or said anything; I said "you wish to suggest...".  Very different.

                            You give an overly broad meaning to the word "falsehood".

                            Now I will quote you:
                            ...you not only make the false assertion that the firearm industry is based upon murder, but that those who engage in a certain activity support the killing of human beings.  Therefore, this statement is a falsehood.

                            NO!!   I DO NOT say the firearm industry is based on murder: I say the firearm industry MAKES A PROFIT from every person shot.  I DO NOT say that gun enthusiasts support the killing of humans: I say gun enthusiasts SUPPORT the killing of Americans for the profits of the gun industry.  AND, I have detailed (above) exactly how that support is manifested by gun enthusiasts.  Please pay close attention to the words I wrote.

                            If you would like to claim that gun enthusiasts oppose gunshot injuries and deaths, maybe you should describe some concrete examples of what gun enthusiasts are doing to reduce gunshot injuries and deaths.  then we can talk about those concrete actions and not abstract ideas.  This would held bring the conversation back to reality.

                            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 11:46:03 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Meh. Unimpressive. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            You've been caught in falsehoods and are now desperately trying to spin them into something they are not.

                            I provided exactly what you asked for, and now you can't admit that you've been caught out.

                            Typical.

                            Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                            by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 12:05:07 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's really very simple (0+ / 0-)

                            It is really very simple: The CDC tells us that every year ovr 100,000 Americans suffer a gunshot injury, and that over 30,000 of gunshot injuries result in death.

                            One can either face facts and acknowledge the horrible reality those statistics, or one can ignore or run away from that reality.

                            You have said you agree that those statistics are correct, a pretty brave position to take among gun enthusiasts I am sure (I'm guessing you'll get a lot of dirty looks if you bring up the subject with your buddies at the firing range - ever wonder why that is?).

                            Everything else in this discussion is window-dressing.

                            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 12:18:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, not at all. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rockhound, KVoimakas

                            At this point, we are discussing your falsehoods -- the fact that you attribute to people statements that they have not made.

                            You are now trying to change the subject.

                            All you have to do to prove me wrong is to provide, for example, someone actually stating that suicides don't matter.

                            Not someone saying something else, and three paragraphs from you explaining what they really meant -- but the actual statement.

                            The reason that this is important is because facts are always important in any discussion.  If one participant in a discussion cannot keep their facts straight and intentionally misrepresents what others have said, then they are clearly not intending to engage in meaningful discussion.

                            You see, when you attribute these statements to people they have not, in fact, made, you are tarring them with taking a very distasteful stance that they have not taken.

                            This is dishonest and insulting.  Intentionally so, to judge from the fact that you do so repeatedly.  This is the sort of tactic that Rush Limbaugh engages in, and it is as dishonest and distasteful when you do it as it is when he does it.

                            Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                            by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 12:34:46 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  But I have made no falsehoods (0+ / 0-)

                            I have made no falsehoods.  

                            You and I have differences of opinions on the meaning of PavePusher's remarks.  And a difference of opinion is NOT a falsehood.

                            You and I are in agreement: 100,000+ Americans are shot every year, and 30,000+ of those shootings are fatal.

                            That reality stand no matter what you wish to say about me.

                            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 12:49:56 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ROFL (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rockhound, KVoimakas

                            I provide examples of you repeatedly posting outright falsehoods, and now you seek to lecture me on "reality."

                            Now that is some funny, funny stuff -- I can only think, at this point, that it must be intentional.  Some sort of performance art, in which you are trying to apply Republican tactics from a supposed Progressive standpoint.

                            It's still blatantly dishonest, but rather amusing, in an ironic sort of way.

                            Have a fantastic day -- but really, work on your material.  It's getting stale, even if you get an occasional chuckle now and then.

                            It's always best to have some kernel of truth in your lies -- it makes them harder to show for what they are.  You know, take a statement out of context or something, rather than making it up out of whole cloth.

                            Just my advice.

                            Cheers.

                            Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                            by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 12:58:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Slandering me won't change the facts (0+ / 0-)

                            The facts are these: 100,000+ Americans are shot every year, and 30,000+ of those shootings are fatal.

                            These facts are independent of you or I.  These facts are true no matter what you think or say about me.

                            And these facts are really no laghing matter.  Ask anyone who has ever been shot.

                            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 02:03:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

        •  Do you have a point? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          theatre goon

          None of that is relevent to the topic.

          •  Here is my point: (0+ / 0-)

            Here is my point: the gun industry kills Americans for profit.  And gun enthusiasts support in word and deed the killing of Americans for the profits of the gun industry.

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 06:31:16 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  So those hundreds of millions of firearms (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              theatre goon, rockhound

              in the citizens' hands are defective?

              Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 07:28:08 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Interesting point... (0+ / 0-)

                That is an interesting question: are those hundreds of millions of guns defective?

                On the one hand, those hundreds of millions of guns cause on average over 100,000 gunshot injuries to Americans every year, with many fatalities.  Now, many people would say that ANY product that results in so many injuries and deaths MUST BE defective.  Indeed, were we talking about any other consumer product killing 30,000+ Americans every year, there would be a great public outcry and congress would jump into action to write laws to require the manufacturer make the product safer.

                On the other hand, guns are purposefully made to be lethally injurious.  Indeed, gun buyers want guns to be deadly: many people who buy guns especially want guns that can deliver the most devastating injury possible and can deal out such injuries to the largest possible number of people in the shortest possible amount of time.  The gun industry and the gun buying public would strongly resist any attempts to require guns to be less injurious and deadly.

                This makes me think that whether or not you believe guns are defective depends on which end of the gun barrell you are positioned.

                "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 08:52:37 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  This is an outright lie. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas, rockhound
              And gun enthusiasts support in word and deed the killing of Americans for the profits of the gun industry.
              There is no other way to describe this statement.

              You are attributing motives to others based on nothing but your own fantasies, and, as noted elsewhere, crafting stances for others that they simply do not take.

              Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

              by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 07:39:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Gun enthusiasts support death for profit (0+ / 0-)

                Gun enthusiasts support death for profit in word and deed.

                Every time a gun enthusiast says that there should be no restrictions on buying guns and ammo, they are supporting in word a gun industry that makes a profit on each and every person shot.

                Every time a gun enthusiast says there should be no restrictions on gun ownership or use, they are supporting in word a gun industry that makes a profit on each and every person shot.

                Every time a gun enthusiast buys a gun or ammo, they are contributing money to (supporting in deed) a gun  industry that makes a profit from each and every person shot.

                "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:05:56 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Repeating a lie... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rockhound, KVoimakas

                  ...is still a lie.

                  No matter how many times you make these false statements, they are still false.

                  Now, of course, you are adding a new lie -- that anyone seriously states that there should be no restrictions of gun ownership or use.  No one takes this stance.

                  These are simply more lies intended to paint those who disagree with you as something that they are not.

                  In fact, I do not really think that you seriously believe any of the nonsense that you are here posting -- the statements are simply too ludicrous.

                  You are, in my opinion, trolling for the sake of trolling, nothing more.

                  Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                  by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:11:12 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You are the one repeating a lie (0+ / 0-)

                    Can I quote you?

                    No matter how many times you make these false statements, they are still false.
                    You are the one repeating a lie.  You are the one lying about your support for the gun industry which makes a profit on every person shot.

                    I cannot control you, and if you want to continue lying, you are obviouslf free to do so.  But please, remember your own words:

                    No matter how many times you make these false statements, they are still false.

                    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:21:27 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Sure, quote me all you like. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rockhound, KVoimakas

                      However, you are the only one lying.

                      Me pointing out your lies?

                      Not a lie.

                      You making false statements as if they were true?

                      Lie.

                      Really, it's pretty straightforward stuff.

                      Seriously, though, try to be honest for a moment, it's doubtful anyone apart from myself will see your reply at this point.

                      What is it that you get out of this little game of yours?  I mean, really, you're clearly smart enough not to think that you're fooling anyone.  Do you think you're upsetting us?  It's clear that you wait until the thread is dead before you get into the really blatant, to the point of silly, lies.

                      Really, you're not angering anyone.  You're not even taking up that much time -- I can click on the listing of my replies and dispense with your latest round of silliness in like five minutes.  A short break I actually need when doing tedious paperwork.

                      That being the case, clearly you're not actually persuading anyone of anything.  We've got your number, we know you're just posting lies for the sake of it.

                      But, really, what do you get out of it?

                      Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                      by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:04:47 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Me pointing out your lies (0+ / 0-)

                        Me pointing out your lies - is not a lie.

                        I challenged you earlier:

                        If you wish to claim I have made false statements, please quote verbatim any statement I have made that you think is false.
                        I noticed that you have declined the opportunity to offer any quoted material as evidence of my lying.  OF COURSE, you have failed to identify any lies I said because I have said no lies.

                        If you wish to claim that my assertion that gun enthusiasts support in word and deed the gun industry making a profit from every person shot, the YOU WILL BE THE ONE MAKING A LIE, because the truth is, gun enthusiasts DO support in word and deed a gun industry which makes a profit from every person shot.  I have detailed above how exactly that support is manifested; and you have FAILED to offer ANY cogent argument showing how gun enthusiasts oppose the gun industry and the profits that industry makes on killing people.  

                        And here I will quote you, because you gave me permission to do so: No matter how many times you make these false statements, they are still false.

                        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:27:33 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yeah, I responded to that one. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          KVoimakas

                          I'll assume you missed it.

                          I guess you just couldn't bring yourself to answer my questions honestly.  I wasn't expecting that you'd have the courage to do so, but one can always hope.  It's really too bad that you can't bring yourself to join this discussion on a meaningful level.

                          Really, though, if you change your mind, I really am curious as to exactly why you enjoy engaging in this little game of yours.

                          Have a lovely day.

                          Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                          by theatre goon on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:50:45 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  You and me: we are alike (0+ / 0-)

                            I play the same game that you do, and I enjoy it every bit as much as you, and probably for the same reasons.  The only difference is I come down on the anti-gun side, and you on the pro-gun side.  And just like you, my opinions about guns are strongly held

                            In a sense, we need each other to be the foil for our thoughts about guns.  And certainly if we agreed on guns, our discussions would be much shorter.

                            I even think it might be good for people with opposing views to share those views with each other, even if we don't agree.  I certainly have learned a great deal about guns and the various strong feelings that people have about their guns through these discussions.

                            If I don't talk to you before Thanksgiving, I wish you and your a great holiday.

                            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 11:23:39 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There's only one person playing a game..... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            theatre goon, KVoimakas

                            and you do it quite poorly.

                            Good luck with that.

                          •  I'll give him this much... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            He's certainly dedicated and sticks to his guns, so to speak.

                            It would be admirable, if he wasn't dedicated to outright lies.

                            Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                            by theatre goon on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 03:23:25 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

  •  First they came for automatic weapons, (13+ / 0-)

    now they are coming for semi-automatic weapons (which is exactly what ignorant people call an assault weapon, just because it's black.).  The semi has been around for a very long time. Hell, if you've watched Youtube, you can see practiced marksman fire off just as many rounds with a wheel gun, and a couple of speed loaders. It's not the gun. It's not the ammo. It's the poverty, and mental health.
    Fact is, you say:

    And who can blame our officials for not saying anything? In Missouri, if you practice your First Amendment right to say something about the Second Amendment, you will face an avalanche of knee jerk responses from people who fear if they make any concession whatsoever that some type of regulation of firearm access is needed, they are opening the door and allowing government storm troopers to sweep in and confiscate their guns.
    And the facts show, that this is exactly what would happen if people don't defend their rights.
     Spend your time trying to help fund proper Health, Mental Health, and drug law reformation, and you will be suprised how much more effective your efforts will be. That would be true self-defense.
     The fact that more Democrats will be elected if they are less firearm phobic will certainly help to elevate those goals.

    "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

    by meagert on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 09:38:22 AM PST

  •  I might have been his victim (12+ / 0-)

    I live near Bolivar, MO and might have been one of his victims if he had carried out his plot.  It was scary to learn that someone from 'my town' was going to open fire on innocent people.  Yes, if he would have done it, someone in that town probably was carrying and would have shot him.  It can happen anywhere, folks.  Bless his mother, who wisely called the police and notified them of her son's behavior.  She saved many lives, including his.  The fact that he had mental problems before that, and he'd wanted to kill someone in that store in 2009, should have made it impossible for him to have bought the weapons and ammunition.  Mental illness and weapons could have had deadly consequences

  •  Waiting Period Laws (9+ / 0-)

    Public Health Law Research (PHLR) is a national program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.  It is housed at the Temple University Beasley School of Law. PHLR had the following to say about firearm purchase waiting periods.

    "The Bottom Line: In the judgment of a Community Guide expert panel, there is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of waiting period laws as public health interventions aimed at preventing gun-related violence and suicide."

    But we can't let research get in the way of our rush to elect more Republicans by pursuing ineffective gun laws.

    Republicans. Like Romney himself, they have so much and always will, and yet they resent those who have so little and always will.

    by wishbone on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 11:57:41 AM PST

    •  Would be nice if waiting periods (5+ / 0-)

      actually had some sort of evaluation criteria associated with them which might pertain to indicators of irresponsible weapons ownership, perhaps.

      Otherwise, I can't see how a waiting period would be much more than meaningless for most purchases.

      "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

      by wader on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 12:04:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I must say that I pretty much avoid movie houses (0+ / 0-)

    these days. I can wait.

    I wonder how the owners of businesses feel about weapons in their venues? I wonder how they feel about the companies that make money selling weapons and influencing weapon legislation when they are on the losing end of THAT deal, financially?

    202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

    by cany on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 05:39:04 PM PST

  •  Ask a Gun Range Owner (6+ / 0-)

    Seems peculiar that, since it's the presence of the evil guns that causes these massacres, they don't seem to happen at the places with the most guns.

    There has to be some explanation...

    True bipartisanship is prosecuting criminals regardless of Party.

    by The Baculum King on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 06:55:41 PM PST

  •  Asasult weapons? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KVoimakas

    I didn't know he was going to use kitchen knives (the #1 weapon used in assaults based upon the UCR).

    It seems that the safeguards we have in place worked.  The crime was averted and the individual is in custody.
    So, why would we need to change/add gun laws again?

    Enlighten me.

    Bowers v. DeVito "...there is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered."
    Director of Merchandising - the Liberal Gun Club
    Interim Chairman - Democratic Gun Owners' Caucus of Missouri

    by ErikO on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 08:44:02 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site