Skip to main content

A little while back I changed my sig line to this Irish proverb because it reminded me of our community at DK: "It is in the shelter of each other that people live."

We all stumble at some time and need the comfort of others and many find that at DK. When natural disasters or climate change storms hit, we collectively weep, reflect, hope, discuss, and take action by donating or writing to help others here and in communities around the world.  It is in the shelter of each other that people live.

We do fundraisers for community members and communities in the U.S. and around the world. We do diaries and blogathons to educate, raise money, or take action to help others individually or to make DK and our world a better place.

As President John F. Kennedy said:

So, let us not be blind to our differences, but let us also direct attention to our common interests and the means by which those differences can be resolved. And, if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.

So many emotions flow from the killer's murder of his mother, 20 children and 6 teachers/principal. Such horrific violence is also a trigger for those who suffered various traumas in our lives, pushing those always-present, awful memories to the surface.  

We are all struggling with wrapping our hearts and minds around this tragedy.  Markos recalled this the other day:

I was in the middle of extreme violence as a 7-8-year-old boy in El Salvador in the late 70s as that nation boiled into civil war. I'm good at repressing and forgetting, but this tragedy has brought a lot of that back and I'm having a hard time processing this all.

I've been alternating between unbearable grief and unbearable rage -- not just for the precious children who lost their lives yesterday, kids so similar to my own. But also for all the other children in that school who'll have to carry that trauma for the rest of their lives. Like me, right now, despite being 41 fucking years old.

He is far from alone. We need each other.

Can we give shelter to each other by exercising a little more restraint in our gun control/safety diaries and comments? Can we try to be a little more civil? If a comment irks you, can you stop one second, re-read and listen to what was said, not just the words written down, but also consider the feelings that might be attached to those words?

No one life is more important than another.  No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard. Can we not just listen to one another because the very act of being heard provides shelter.

It is in the shelter of each other that people live.

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

  •  Tip Jar (138+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sara R, KelleyRN2, blueoasis, citisven, joedemocrat, KVoimakas, commonmass, meagert, Onomastic, rockhound, leu2500, noweasels, Tom Seaview, Lefty Coaster, expatjourno, 43north, Shuksan Tahoma, Quilldriver, Siri, confitesprit, BobTheHappyDinosaur, dance you monster, flumptytail, raina, JekyllnHyde, TheFacts101, Catte Nappe, greenbird, antirove, 3goldens, CTLiberal, gizmo59, RoCali, mythatsme, Melanie in IA, BlackSheep1, glorificus, mahakali overdrive, Terre, Polly Syllabic, Ebby, SallyCat, ceriboo, MBNYC, DavidW, OllieGarkey, Ekaterin, chantedor, tobendaro, envwq, Dogs are fuzzy, Mark Sumner, psnyder, gerrilea, Massconfusion, peregrine kate, Otteray Scribe, parse this, frisco, geez53, Steveningen, Friend of the court, Glen The Plumber, skyounkin, wader, Empty Vessel, hester, El Bloguero, justiceputnam, high uintas, cany, scribe, shesaid, freedapeople, erratic, broths, Purple Priestess, emidesu, blue jersey mom, Gooserock, historys mysteries, revsue, KenBee, CA ridebalanced, NYmom, RebeccaG, zestyann, Chacounne, blueoregon, maggiejean, rodentrancher, kj in missouri, fisheye, middleagedhousewife, cap76, joanbrooker, Free Jazz at High Noon, OMwordTHRUdaFOG, wishbone, Mnemosyne, FindingMyVoice, CorinaR, karmsy, Agent99, DaveCaswell, ilovecheese, rb137, jguzman17, Involuntary Exile, sawgrass727, tofumagoo, uciguy30, Colorado is the Shiznit, elkhunter, SolarMom, twigg, Debby, John Crapper, nomandates, Crazy Moderate, Daulphin, Chaddiwicker, Horsefeathers, dotsright, Bule Betawi, majcmb1, Kitsap River, Denise Oliver Velez, not4morewars, JaxDem, evilstorm, eeff, jadt65, Kentucky Kid, ban nock, Joy of Fishes, Oh Mary Oh, belinda ridgewood

    "It is in the shelter of each other that people live." Irish Proverb

    by Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:18:18 PM PST

  •  Thank you for this well done diary.. (31+ / 0-)

    There are good kossacks on both sides of this debate. And a lot of the RKBA people are allies on important issues. I believe Daily Kos is meant to be a big tent progressive site and that means it is a given that not everyone will agree with me all the time. I try to treat people with both courtesy and respect....

    For the record, I've never been really for or against gun control. I've just never given it a lot of thought. I don't own a firearm and don't want to. I guess that means it has been easier for me not to get emotionally involved during this debate...

    As a member of Courtesy Kos, I am dedicated to civility and respect for all kossacks, regardless of their opinions, affiliations, or cliques.

    by joedemocrat on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:27:53 PM PST

  •  Its hard to be civil with people who lie , (7+ / 0-)

    but I try .
    Its the bald face lies that get to me , people who I know know better , spewing the same old disproven BS over and over , standing in the way of progress with their BS .

    "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

    by indycam on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:27:54 PM PST

  •  Very insightful commentary, and very appropriate. (19+ / 0-)

    Excellent post, PDNC.  Here, we all care, and we should all be safe.  A rare place, this is.  Can't begin to explain how much it means to me.


  •  Yes, we can and must. (19+ / 0-)

    We're all feeling so frightened, so grief stricken right now.

    We're all in desperate need of gentleness and understanding.

    It's more than allowed. It is how we will get through this and go on in honor of those who were so cruelly taken.

    "Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism." Hubert H. Humphrey

    by Onomastic on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:41:09 PM PST

  •  Very nicely expressed. (22+ / 0-)

    Unfortunately, as I've observed so often in these epic verbal battles precipitated by some event, it's transferred to personalities and other personal issues that have nothing to do really with the examination of the political, or social or humanitarian questions at hand, and that's especially true with issues where some users identify so very strongly with a position or the people who hold them that they are unable to separate it from the personal.  If we could all keep that in mind and try to focus on what would bring the most good for the most people, understanding that there will still be plenty to argue, then it would be a milestone in thought-provoking conversation.

    I appreciate your plea here and encourage everyone who reads it seriously to really, really think about your message, not, as so often happens, interpret it as applicable to those other people with whom we disagree.  This ironically is what I've seen sometimes over the years when different people, Hunter, Media Blades, Kos and others have tried to help define what is reasonable as opposed to what is problematic in our examining subjects.

    Objectivity in evaluations may not be totally possible, but the pursuit of it is admirable and almost always leads to more measured thought and self-knowledge.

  •  Some people find it difficult to be civil (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    high uintas, theboz, fuzzyguy

    If they believe it nigh impossible for people of good will to rationally disagree.

  •  Thank you for an excellent diary (18+ / 0-)

    In addition, I am long overdue to change my sigline. You have provided nicely.

    "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse

    by Catte Nappe on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:52:06 PM PST

  •  Thanks PDNC (22+ / 0-)

    This is a very important diary that I hope will help with some of the tone.

    I think everyone on this site certainly would like the same thing, which is to never see another mass murder here.

    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

    by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:52:18 PM PST

  •  Thank you! (20+ / 0-)

    I posted comments yesterday, which I thought were respectful, yet unfortunately were in support of the 2nd Amendment, with my patient reasoning, citing what I felt was the indisputable the position of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington on the inherent untrustworthy nature of all governing bodies, and my initial comment in the thread received 2 HR's and 1 REC, and being new to this community, but having been an avid reader for almost two years, I found this upsetting. I meant no disrespect, and did nothing that I thought was deserving of such a response, especially since the 2 people who gave me the HR did not even comment on the thread to explain their HR, and even those who did respond, seemed more intent on calling me names like "coward" or "jerk" than actually having an intelligent discussion. I have since questioned my participation in this community given such a response.

    I am a strong supporter of virtually all liberal causes and worked very hard to get Obama elected both in 2008 and 2012. I am not anyone's enemy, and for the record, I don't actually own a gun myself, and I have never personally owned a gun, but I do support the 2nd Amendment: RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, but not because I have any fetish or fear about owning one myself, but rather, because I believe it is a fundamental right that is critical to our nation's ideals and strengths. I believe this should be discussed in respectful tones, without HR'ing people for saying things that you do not agree with.

    •  Well, "Noobie" Welcomes (11+ / 0-)

      Tough week to start jumping in, but thanks to PDNC your safe in here.

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

      by meagert on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:58:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ahh.... yeah, you could say that again. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Otteray Scribe, fuzzyguy

        And I do appriciate that this tragedy causes immense sorrow and fear, but my feelings on the 2nd Amendment transcend any incident of this nature. I don't trust the government, as a matter of principle. I just don't, and I don't think anyone should, ever.... not fully at least. And this is what I was trying to explain.

        And thank you for the welcome.

    •  Welcome TheFacts101 (8+ / 0-)

      Can I call you TF101 for short :)

      I'm a 2nd supporter as well, don't own a gun either. I imagine yesterday was like baptism by fire, but it's usually not like that. Hang in there.

      "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

      by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:44:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I didn't see the comments (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Otteray Scribe, TheFacts101

      and HR'ing seems way inappropriate, but if you didn't in some way acknowledge the raw feelings around this event people may have seen them as very insensitive. I tend to be analytical and sometimes I jump in with something that's intended to clarify and if I don't first acknowledge the other person's position they feel trampled upon. Sometimes I have failed to properly consider their feelings and sometimes they just have a particular sensitivity that caused them to misinterpret my words. It happens.
      But I doubt I have HR'd people more than once or twice a year, and only when something is clearly out of bounds. Don't let this experience turn you off; you just came in at a difficult time.

      Stay fired up: now is the time to focus on downticket change! #Forward

      by emidesu on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:46:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I provided a link to my comments above (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        emidesu, Otteray Scribe

        but here it is again:

        In support of the 2nd Amendment

        If you are inclined to read and give me candid respctful feedback, it would be well appreciated.

        •  I see a few things: (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheFacts101, Sandino, Otteray Scribe

          1) your style is a little formal and that can be offputting at a time when feelings are running high. You are clearly knowledgeable but it's almost like you're clobbering people with that at some points. I make that mistake too. And in this particular situation, suspicion runs high that people may only be here to shill for the NRA, especially if the account is new.
          2) It's pretty unusual for a Dem to make such strong statements about not trusting the government. We hate violations of our civil liberties as much as anyone else does, and we do not really like giving over our freedoms, but we have a lot of positive feelings toward the government as well, which I'm sure you understand as a fellow liberal. When someone makes statements in which his fear of government tyranny is prioritized over his concern for dead 6 year olds, it kind of sets people off.
          3) you gave off a real sense of inflexibility. It's understandable, we all have issues like that, but maybe this week isn't the best time to jump in? And using all caps was rather intense.

          Having said all that, the HR's were uncalled for. I think it was just an artifact of emotions running high. We fight around here, we make up, we get over it.

          Stay fired up: now is the time to focus on downticket change! #Forward

          by emidesu on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:17:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Here's some more candid feedback.... (4+ / 0-)

          a.  Your oft-repeated pride in your callousness in the face of 20 dead 1st-graders was designed to piss people off, and succeeded.  
          b.  Your tough guy "my hands are lethal weapons" nonsense is pretty typical of a certain kind of wackjob, in my considerable experience of the type.  You might want to lighten up just a tad, Francis.  
          c.  We get that you don't trust the government, any government.  Saying it 20 times doesn't convince us more.  It's also what Republicans who oppose social security and national health care and taxes on "job creators" are constantly telling us.  
          d.  Your repeated "I know you're afraid" is also pretty annoying to many of us.  I don't think we're afraid.  I think we're sick that 20 1st graders were just slaughtered--that doesn't make us afraid.  And we're not afraid to admit it really touched us in a fundamental way--no need to brag about our calluses.  

          Always happy to provide a little feedback....

          To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

          by joesig on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:02:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, I cannot take back what I wrote, (4+ / 0-)

            and upon reflection, I guess was feeling a bit defensive of what feels to be misplaced retaliation against a basic right. I repeated myself because I felt like my point was not heard, and I tried to make it clear that my mistrust was a prudent approach, not that I simply distrust the government on all issues. I passionately support single payer health insurance, and am all for taxing the wealthy and investing heavily in infrastructure projects and education, etc. and I am completely against any privatization of social security, or any other republican measures, and don't get me started on separation of church and state, because the Christian Dominionist folks I find especially offensive. As I said above, I am very liberal on almost all issues, except for this one.

            And for what it's worth, anyone's hands can be deadly, with just a little training. The attitude of dealing with danger in a detached manner, that is the hard part. I've survived some harsh experiences, which is not meant as any sort of a bragging, I just have. And this affects you. And I loved that movie.

            In any case, thank you for your brutally honest feedback. I appreciate the candor. If no one is honest with you, you never learn.  

            •  Ah, the start of a long and beautiful relationship (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Sandino, TheFacts101

              Anyone who likes Stripes can't be all bad.  Best of luck to you here.  

              And can I point out what does seem to be a bit of a contradiction?  It's the trust thing.  If you trust the government with your health care, and your retirement, and building your it possible the government might be trusted enough for a few relatively minor bits of gun "control", like, say, limiting purchases to one a month, or ending the private sale exemption, or maybe even something crazy like limiting armor piercing bullets or the sale of .50 cals designed to bring down airplanes?  Is it possible to trust just a bit?

              To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

              by joesig on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:45:40 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I trust the government to a point, (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Otteray Scribe

                and the 2nd Amendment is where there is a line in the sand for me. I trust social services administration to provide a service, sure, why not, but that is not in the same league as trusting police to tell law abiding citizens what firearms they can have. Please tell me that you see that there is a profound difference between those two areas of trust.

                I do not grant the government any rights when it comes to firearms with respect to law abiding citizens. I want the populace to be armed and dangerous, so dangerous that any government official will think twice before attempting to impose any sort of a tyranny against the populace.

                Don't get me wrong, I will engage in a civil approach on all measures in dealing with problems, and I do not personally advocate violence as a solution, my point is for there to be an armed populace merely as a deterrent, this is all. If there is an armed populace, I firmly believe that no violant uprising will ever be necesary, because no despot would ever attempt a tyrrany against an armed populace. Never happen. That's my point. "Talk softly, but carry a big stick."  

                •  I think this is a game for you. Unfortunately. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  No rights for the government regarding firearms when it comes to law abiding citizens?

                  So, fully automatic .50 cal machine guns are ok?  

                  Non-registered dealers buying and then selling hundreds of guns a month (because they "changed their mind" about owning for personal use) is ok?  

                  No need for gun locks or gun safes, even when children or mentally unstable family members share the house?  

                  How about armor piercing and exploding rounds? All ok?  

                  And the biggest piece of your nonsense is that you don't own a gun yourself, supposedly: which tells me you don't actually believe what you say.  If I say I believe voting is important: I vote.  If I say owning guns to fend off an untrustworthy government is important: I own guns.  

                  Enjoy your time at DK: you'll annoy many, and change no minds with your absolutism, but you'll have a pretty good time.

                  To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

                  by joesig on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 07:47:10 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Let me take this in parts (0+ / 0-)

                    Firstly, I do not own a gun, no, but I would like to, if I had the funds. Or if I felt the urgent need, then I want to make sure that I can, legally. I do not at present, but I will someday purchase one when I have discretionary funds. I am trained in fighting, and I do know how to use fire arms, and I have used them, and I am not gonna engage in any bragging about my life, but suffice it to say, I am not an ordinary citizen. (And please do not insult or attack me for describing myself in this superficial manner. I prefer to keep my personal life out of this. Please respect this.) And, although I do not personally own one, no, I do have friends and family who own guns. But the point is, I want an armed populace, period. Yes, I am inflexible in this, but so were the founding fathers, hence they encoded this into our constitution. Please try to remember this when you criticize me for being "inflexible." Consider: are you "inflexible" in your commitment to the Separation of Church and State? Are you? Because I am. So, similarly, for those (law abiding citizens) who desire to own a gun, they should be allowed to own one, Period. If one does not desire one, then I respect that, and I do not believe that respecting a person's personal desire on this subject negates my views on the necessity of allowing by constitutional law an armed populace.  

                    Secondly, there already is a law regarding "FULLY AUTOMATIC MACHINE GUNS" which was enacted about 50 years ago .... so if you are asking me if I feel we should repeal that law, no. Of course, this leads to the question of where I draw a line in the sand. Well, let's look at the text from the 2nd Amendment:

                    SECOND AMENDMENT TEXT

                    "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 passage stats: "right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

                    Not infringed, is the point. I admit that I error on the side of allowing for as much freedom as possible. Let me be clear, I am not paranoid or afraid of the government, I just believe in principle that no government should ever be fully trusted. This is a principle I have. Prudence. I am advocating for a healthy intelligent reservation of granting any governing body unilateral trust. This is all. Can you not see the wisdom of that prudent distrust? Can you not see that the founding fathers shared that same prudent distrust, and that it was specifically because of their prudent distrust of all governing bodies that they penned the 2nd Amendment... along with the other checks and balances in our government's constitutional charter? Isn't it a fact that the founding fathers felt that the greatest danger to freedom was from the abuse of power by the government itself? Isn't this a fact? Can we at least agree on this one basic fundamental truth and that it is inherent to the charter of the US Constitution? Can we?  

                    Please try to put aside the tragic events of gun abuse and objectively consider this one question: Can we ever fully trust any government?

                    John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington, said NO!

                    I say NO!

                    This is not paranoia, this is wisdom from studying history and understanding how governments must work. This does not make governments evil, no, but it just means that we must be ever vigilant and never fully entrust the government, and most especially, we must never entrust any governing body to disarm the people. Look, if I felt that a government could be fully entrusted, I would vote for disarmament in a heartbeat, but I just don't. I think that gun control advocates are engaging in wishful thinking, mistakenly believing that government can be fully trusted, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, evidence that they blindly blatantly ignore. There is a line in the sand here. And, I realize that republican tea party wackos voice an extreme distrust of government on all issues, but that is not what I am saying here. I do not share those irrational illogical fears, (and so please do not group me with them) but I do council prudence in this one area. Just this one. And, again, remember, so did our founding fathers. I think some liberals are deluding themselves if they think the government can be fully trusted on all issues. Yes, on most issues, but not all.

                    The focus of gun control advocates is always on protecting people from gun abuse, and I appreciate their fears due to the abuse, and I share those same fears, I assure you, but they seem to completely ignore the wisdom and intent (on this one issue) of our founding fathers' which was driven by prudent distrust of all government. They, and the majority of folks here on Daily Kos, seem to have completely forgotten this, which, as I said in another comment, I find rather ironic, since it is the Liberal community who have been the most diligent in voicing concern over the abuses of power of the government. Why would you trust a government to disarm a populace when you know full well that that government is already abusing its powers.

                    Need I mention issues which I am sure you well know: Started a war under false pretenses? Indefinite detention?
                    Guantanamo? Drone Strikes? Torture? Targeted Assassinations? Patriot Act? Repealing of Habeas Corpus?

                    Need I go on?

                    Why have they forgotten or ignored these? Why?

                    Well, I think I know why. It's because of fear. Fear makes people blind, all too often. I have seen it in my personal life, and I am seeing it here on Daily Kos. I know the signs of fear all to well.

                    And, for the record, I get why a government sometimes needs to do these sorts of things to protect the people, like taking out Bin Laden, etc. but I think it is clear that governments, by their very nature, are capricious. And, I know I am repeating what I have written several times now, but please be honest: don't you see the truth of this?

                    Unfortunately, since the NRA folks are typically right wing republican idiots, usually evangelical Christian fanatics filled with their delusional and frightening "holy war" end-of-days lunacy, and even though they obviously do support the 2nd Amendment, they rarely voice the pertinent issues in an intelligent way that reflects my own sentiment and spirit. And, since I saw Daily Kos folks writing diaries on this subject with a fervor that seemed one-sided and unchecked, I felt it necessary to comment here on Daily Kos to explain why some liberals (who agree with you all on most other issues) actually do support the 2nd Amendment, and that we do so for reasons that I felt that liberals would appreciate, and I believe, should agree with. Fortunately, I had created an account a few weeks ago, because I felt like I might have something to say here, but I had only really used it to post a cute cat~dolphin video and an RIP comment on an IGTN diary.

                    But here, since you asked, these are my views....

                    I am in favor of background checks to determine if a person has a criminal record.

                    I support gun locks and guns safes. I even support the notion that we might benefit from people being required to take a class in proper safe gun use and safe secure storage. Yes. People take driver's test to drive cars. This seems prudent, and does not seem to infringe on a person's right to drive.

                    I am uncertain of my position on "armor piercing" bullets, although my understanding is that this law is also already in place, and upon reflection, I don't believe I would vote for repealing it, no.

                    Lastly, please don't dismiss my position as "nonsense" ... I believe I have been nothing but respectful of you and your views, and I have even been deeply appreciative of your candor. This can only be the beginning of a long relationship if there is mutual respect. I taken time away from my responsibilities to explain the other side of this issue, which seemed lacking on Daily Kos. I felt during these past 2 years that the discussion here has been very helpful to the Democratic Party, and turn, to democracy itself, and for this I am sincerely grateful. But, in all candor, I do not think I have the time, patience for childish insults and name calling, or maybe "thick skin" ... to play here much longer, but I absolutely will continue to read, and I will always be a fan.

                    •  Interesting. (0+ / 0-)

                      First, as you probably know, the Amendments, by definition, were not "encoded" into our Constitution.  They were added later.  Clearly the Founding Fathers chose not to add a Second Amendment-like right into the actual Constitution.  It came 2 years later.  

                      And you're completely consistent in your inconsistency.  You're not an absolutist on the 2nd.....finding it completely acceptable whatever exceptions happen to be carved out at the moment--no fully automatic weapons (rifle or pistol), no sawed-off shotguns, some registration but not complete registration or purchasers.  There's no guiding principle there, just adherence to the NRA position.  Why isn't the same fully automatic rifle the military uses be ok for a well regulated militia?  What's the principle?  

                      And I am curious about the source of your extreme deadlines.  After all, you brought it up...not anyone else.  If you make a claim, back it up, while remaining anonymous if desired. Are you a UFC fighter, the master of Dim Mak the death touch, a disciple of Kwai Chang Caine?  

                      Are you familiar with the concept of straw man arguments?  When you argue that liberals, or this site, seek the confiscation of all is complete nonsense.  No one serious is proposing that.   Many of us, including people like me who own guns and actually made their living with guns as part of their tool belt, want smarter restrictions and tougher regulation.  I'm a believer in the 2nd Amendment, just not in the idea that it's the only amendment that matters, and that any restriction on guns is a violation of our Constitutional protections.

                      To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

                      by joesig on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 08:19:31 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You've made assumptions (0+ / 0-)

                        I never said that I support the views of the NRA.... in fact, if you will reread my last comment, I thought that I just said that I thought they were idiots and did not reflect my views.

                        I am expressing my views as to why I support the intent of the 2nd Amendment and what that intent was.

                        "encoded" "written" "articulated" "represented" "enshrined" .... choose whatever word you prefer, the intent of the founding fathers remains the same.

                        I have not been inconsistent, you never asked my specific views until this morning, hence this evening was the first time I gave specifIc positions. My focus in my comments was and is to advocate for us all to remember the intent of the 2nd amendment and why it is there. We can add restrictions, and background checks, etc .... but there will always be abuses. Can we mitigate them, yes, and we have, but only to a point, and that is my point, namely, to keep things in perspective. There will always be abuses. There is always danger and with that danger, tragedies occur. This is a sad reality. Perspective.

                        It's good that you have trained, please do not dishonor mine. I have shown you nothing but respect here.  

                      •  and you are incorrect (0+ / 0-)

                        some people are advocating for complete ban.

                        •  You're all over the map. Not sure this is helpful. (0+ / 0-)

                          Look, to me, it seemed like you started out with a complete absolutist position: 2nd Amendment above all, callous towards death of children because RKBA is essential, never ever ever trust the government, implied no controls or restrictions.  

                          At this point, you say we can add restrictions and background checks and limitations on types and numbers of armaments.  You've just put yourself in agreement with 99% of DK, with the exception of the very very few calling for a complete ban on ALL  weapons, as opposed to just assault rifles.  Your new reasonable take is in complete opposition to your previous absolutist take.  Which is good, in my humble opinion.  I've never seen anyone on this site advocating for complete and unquestioning trust in the government or even the president--you're arguing against a straw man.

                          I am curious what you studied, and your perspective and experiences regarding personal violence.  

                          To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

                          by joesig on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 09:46:46 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  And to me, you have been inconsistent. (0+ / 0-)

                            You have been respectful in one moment, and completely disrespectful in another. Whereas, I think I have been entirely consistent in my dealings with you and in here throughout my comments, and I have been nothing but respectful to you and to others. I, however, do not feel I have been accorded the same respect that I have given. I have been called immature names on this site for merely stating the harsh reality with brutal candor, and my points have been ignored, resulting in my feeling the foolish need to repeat myself. And then, in a laughable observation, I am criticized for repeating myself, yet we both know that I would not have felt the need to repeat myself, if my points were heard the first time. And now you want to interrogate my background, after I already expressed the respectful desire to leave my background in superficial terms, and you do so with a mock tone of civility, yet we both know that your aim is now merely an ad hominem attack to discredit my points, but since my points stand on their own, regardless of my background, this is a pointless endeavor, and one that dishonors the accord I have given you. In short, you have lost my respect.

                            Here is the entirety of my position:

                            I advocate for a tempered perspective. This is all.

                            I have said my piece.

                            Good day, Sir.

                  •  and no, this is not a "game" for me (0+ / 0-)

                    Please give me a little more credit than that.

        •  Feedback it is, then: (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sandino, Sharon Wraight

          In the comment you linked, you said "it is the armed populace that holds that line."

          That is a fantasy, plain and simple. The combined military power of the US exceeds any armed force in the world, let alone a bunch of citizens with pistols and rifles.

          It is fine not to trust the government, but simple firearms are not going to be much of a challenge for the US military to deal with, should you decide on armed resistance. In most cases, the local police could handle it, with some backup from the national guard if needed.

          The government can be resisted, but that takes the form of protest and political action, not lock and load.

          •  As I just posted above (0+ / 0-)

            The point of an armed populace is as a deterrent, because no despot would ever attempt to impose a tyrrany against an armed populace. And with regards to the hypothetical scenario, if such a tyrrany were to occur, and if a violant uprising were to arise, given our cultural ideal of freedom and justice, I highly doubt that the entire military and the entire police would side with the tyrrany and blindly follow orders, so whose to say which side would have superior fire power. It would be bloody, and both aides would experience far more damage than any woiod want, and given this fact, only somone fighting for freedom in the face of tyrwnny would be willing to raze those stakes. Again, I want an armed populace because I believe only an armed populace will prevent the need for such a tragic future. And I completely agree, that civil approaches protesting the government is the only solution to civil problems. However, against an unarmed populace, those problems can become uncivilized brutal tyrrany. The US government already does things that border on this, but their hands are always tempered, because at the end of the day, they know that the populace is armed. Yes, the government can crush any single isolated incident involving an armed group of individuals, in normal times when the government has the moral high ground and is deemed legitimate by the general populace, but in the unfortunate situation of a tyranny, and the populace deems the government de-legitimate, resulting in an entire population rising to reject a militant police state tyrrany, wherein significant factions of that military force sides with the populace, (because they are their brothers and sisters and friends) then the force that the tyrant government would be facing would be massive and pervassive, and they would thus be unable to deal with the conflicts permeating an entire nation rising up in defense against police brutality. 

    •  With a handle like 'the facts 101' (0+ / 0-)

      You should acquaint yourself with the history and language of the 2nd amendment, rather than the NRA abridged version that removes the words well-regulated militia, and ignores the plain language and context that makes the RKBA a right of states to raise militias independent of the federal government.

      Between the condescending name and the fact-challenged tirades, I can see why one might assume you were a wing nut troll.

      •  Okay, you don't like my tag, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and you are basically calling me a "wing nut troll" ... so if you want me to leave, just HR my comments and be done with it, and I will get the message and leave, but I don't appreciate the name calling and I don't appreciate criticisms about what I felt was an innocent spur of the moment whimsical selection of an innocuous name. And here I thought this was a safe diary from this sort of insulting childish abuse.


        "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."

        The way I read these words, and not because of any NRA propaganda, but because of the words themselves, is as follows. 

        * This is the right: 
        A) "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

        * This is the reason for the right:
        B) "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," 

        FACT: "security of a free state" is the reason ... and the enemy of that "free state" was, is, and always shall be, the government itself.

        HISTORY 101
        Let's remember the context within which this text was written, and by whom, namely, the colonial founding fathers who had just engaged in a violant overthrowing of a tyrannical government, therefore, what was formost in their mind when they wrote and signed this document was to make sure that the populace was armed to protect against a tyrannical government, which, in those days, meant muskets, but today, means whatever weapons are available today. I think the intent of those words are clear and plain, and I don't need any NRA propaganda to see this. 

        Just The Facts 

        •  Just a bit more history, then (0+ / 0-)

          There were also resentful natives who had been ousted from their lands and sometimes felt inclined to try to take it back by force, and there was That Other Country Up North which had remained loyal to the "tyrannical oppressor" (George III wasn't any such thing - just a damfool with very bad advisors and very poor judgment in picking ministers). Oh yes, and That Other Country had beaten off our attempt to invade and conquer, and there was a not unjustifiable suspicion that they might want revenge.

          So yeah, there were reasons over and above mistrust of their own government why the 13 States might want "a well-regulated militia".

          If it's
          Not your body,
          Then it's
          Not your choice
          And it's
          None of your damn business!

          by TheOtherMaven on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 12:22:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "Over and above" is open to debate.... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Who's to say which is prominent and which is not, but what we do know is that all facets of the trilateral nature of our government was forged by an axiom of checks and balances, with the clear and expressed intent being: the prevention of abuse of power by any despot ruler, and thus it is clear, i believe, to all fair minded individuals, that the right to bear arms was also primarily to ensure against government tyrrany.

  •  It's not the comments that bother me, I haven't (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZhenRen, mrblifil, Sandino

    read all that many since Friday.

    What bothers me is that this site is petitioning the White House for gun regulation while it has a group on this site that is against regulation, RKBA.

    Last week, before this unspeakable tragedy occurred that group was celebrating the lifting of the regulations against carrying a loaded gun outside the home in Illinois. Where are the limits? guns in National Parks, bars, schools, churches. And that would include semi-automatic guns which are still legal.

    Is this not sheer hypocrisy?

    ❧To thine ownself be true

    by Agathena on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 05:59:37 PM PST

    •  No, it is not (14+ / 0-)

      I signed the petition, and am fine with RKBA arguing against, and not all do by the way.

      We are not,one site, and we disagree on things al the time...I mean seriously, whether it's health care, I/P, or whether Obama is,progressive enough, we argue all the time.

      I agree with the diarist, let's remember that we are working together generally, though we may disagree on some specifics.

      "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

      by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:09:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Could we at least agree to disagree here? (9+ / 0-)

      Celebrating the expansion of a right has always been a progressive value. Not a justification for scorn and public ridicule.

      Is it hypocrisy, not at all, we try to speak with one voice but that voice must be tempered by logic and reason.

      It was the trauma of 911 that gave rise to the Patriot Act and all subsequent tyrannical bills to follow.  The John Warner Defense Act, The Animal Enterprises Act, the NDAA, etc.

      Let us be the voice of reason. Let us help construct and guide our party on a path that will help ALL Americans while maintaining our Constitution and our freedoms.

      Let's not repeat the mistakes of past generations that history teaches us.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:27:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (6+ / 0-)

        I cannot agree to disagree...I can promise to disagree with less venom.  I think you are wrong about guns...and I will be vocal about it, and I will forcefully try to pass a new AWB, and,other gun control measures.

        And i expect that you will object and argue against that...and that's OK.

        And on other issues we will agree.

        "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

        by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:34:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm good with that. (6+ / 0-)

          I don't have to agree all the time with everyone. I've never liked to fight if it can be avoided.

          "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

          by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:46:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We are gonna argue (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, high uintas, fuzzyguy

            But let's try to have that be in the philosophical sense of the word rather than popular sense of the word.

            "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

            by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:48:54 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  maybe if we can find a way (4+ / 0-)

              to change the terminology?

              "Gun control" has been taken to mean "no guns for anyone, nevermore," when what I think it means is "let's do something about regulating the proliferation of assault weapons designed to maim and kill and their acquisition by untrained and possibly dangerous people."

              Maybe something like "regulation" rather than control? And proposing that people who buy guns be required to pass a safety course similar to what's required for a driver's license?

              The truth is rarely pure and never simple. -- Oscar Wilde

              by Mnemosyne on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:42:25 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Does the term "assault weapons" include (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                high uintas, ZhenRen, Sandino

                all semi-automatic guns and ammunition?

                Another problem with the so-called gun conversation here is that those who advocate regulation are expected to know all about guns. They are called ignorant if they don't know what an assault weapon is, if they are not familiar with ammunition and calibers whatever. We just want to prevent people from getting shot we don't need to be gun experts for that.

                I agree with you on the word "control" - words are so important. "Regulation" is better.

                ❧To thine ownself be true

                by Agathena on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:13:44 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I do understand your point (5+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Agathena, theboz, gerrilea, oldpunk, fuzzyguy

                  One of the issues that crops up is that advocates for stricter gun laws often don't target the laws effectively. If you ban a gun that can be easily modified to the point where kits are openly sold to do the modification you are wasting time.

                  For that reason it's important to have people who do understand guns involved in the process. If we agree that to outright ban guns is impossible and also agree that there are real problems we need to make decisions that are as informed as possible.

                  I am a supporter of the 2nd but do not own a gun and know precious little about the different types of guns out there. I have to defer to those who know the details. That is why dialog is so important, if we can get agreement across the board then the NRA honchos will be meaningless.

                  "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                  by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:41:37 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  My battle-experienced veteran (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Agathena, high uintas, GreenMother

                    father taught me to shoot when I was a child. I had my own rifle, and was expected to be able to take it apart, clean it and reassemble it before I was allowed live ammunition.

                    I was also a proud Junior member of the NRA, with the marksmanship badges to prove it.

                    I have no problem with people who hunt to feed their families through the winter, or who keep guns to shoot rats in the barn. But no civilian needs a weapon designed for combat, where dozens, even hundreds, of shots are fired within seconds.

                    This country has upwards of 300 million guns, more than any other on the planet. And with the recent rash of laws permitting both concealed and open carry, I'm afraid to walk down the streets of most American cities, because you never know what kind of nutcase just came back from wherever he could buy guns most easily.

                    So, yes, we need to talk. And it helps to remember that the NRA is no longer a membership organization -- it is a lobbying arm for the munitions industry.

                    The truth is rarely pure and never simple. -- Oscar Wilde

                    by Mnemosyne on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:57:35 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  That's just a form of shutting down conversation (0+ / 0-)

                  Claiming only experts can have an opinion, then throwing up tons of largely irrelevant jargon. It is actually a standard part of  the techniques of propaganda... google it.

                  •  Please, no one said that you can't have an opinion (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    Knowing the subject matter you're talking about helps facilitate legitimate discussion however.

                    If you don't understand some technical aspect, that's okay but in this specific context that was the problem with the AWB, it had nothing to do with functionality but looks. That was a failure of the congress, IMO.  They get paid to know the subject matter.

                    As for your "google it", nope you make the claim, our site policy is you prove it.

                    -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                    by gerrilea on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 04:31:17 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

        •  I've met the enemy and the enemy is me. (6+ / 0-)


          If we don't call each other names, then we can have a good honest debate.  

          Who knows, maybe you'll change my mind, maybe I'll change yours???

          I'd ask you these things:

          Do you not believe if we propose gun bans that we will not lose more elections?

          Do you not believe we are fulfilling the Right's meme that "Their coming for your guns" won't impact our electability?

          Are there any other legitimate options that you are willing to discuss besides gun banning?

          We've continually proposed such things as legalizing pot, fully funded mental health services, living wage jobs, re-establishing our social safety nets and taxing the wealthy to pay for it.

          Are these not options any longer for you? Were they ever?

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:58:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  All that's for another day. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, meagert

            As I am about to cook dinner.  This is,olive branch day, let's leave it there for now.

            "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

            by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:05:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  this was twigg's diary basically (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, Onomastic, oldpunk, fuzzyguy
            We've continually proposed such things as legalizing pot, fully funded mental health services, living wage jobs, re-establishing our social safety nets and taxing the wealthy to pay for it.
            ....that we work toward a society where people are so better off they don't feel the need for arming/attacking/defending.

            That we can all agree on, that we should renew our basic assumptions with each other about...instead of pie fights and questioning validity and motives at the drop of the pixel.

            But that's the long game and people are right now in the grievous  moment by and large, and sincerely so I believe with likely a few exceptions*..none seen here btw

            Your points might be better heard in some time, right now, not so some for later, you'll need it.

            And you know what, PBO was reelected, guns issues didn't derail his reelection, onward we go.

                 So to those very few real trolls out there shit stirring*, the very few....haahaa, you lost.

            This machine kills Fascists.

            by KenBee on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:19:17 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  I think that's what we've done. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Empty Vessel, gerrilea

        Disagreeing is something we're pretty good at here on DKos ;-)

        Stay fired up: now is the time to focus on downticket change! #Forward

        by emidesu on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:50:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I can't agree because I will never consider (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ZhenRen, Sandino

        carrying a gun to be a human right as described in RKBA. That's your culture and your belief and it is not shared in the rest of the industrialized world.

        By "our Constitution and our freedoms" you mean the second amendment. It is an archaic amendment misinterpreted by the  the Supreme Court and supported by the gun lobby. It has nothing to do with modern weapons and nothing to do with modern society.

        There is no history for the slaughter going on the USA. It is unique to our time and the USA with its gun "free for all."

        ❧To thine ownself be true

        by Agathena on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:06:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  A wonderful diary, PNDC.... (13+ / 0-)

    ...much needed, words to help calm troubled waters and help us see one another as fellow strugglers on the road.

    When we communicate with love and respect, our words are much more powerful.


  •  Well said, but (10+ / 0-)

    it is difficult. We're talking about really fundamental, defining issues: the value of a child's life. Enumerated rights on whose definition, scope and value we differ. What kind of society we are, and what we'd like to be.

    On the one hand, you see assumptions that someone is indifferent to the life of a child. On the other, the same presumed indifference to the way someone defines themselves as a citizen.

    This is deep stuff, and it's no wonder tempers get heated.

    Fuck you, I put on pants yesterday.

    by MBNYC on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:02:41 PM PST

  •  Some voices are more valid than others (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tobendaro, JekyllnHyde, Sandino

    People who can't back up their views with evidence and logic don't deserve to have their views considered valid.

    One reason our society is in the shape it's in now is because of the affirmative-action program for conservatives that our media has been running since at least Ronald Reagan won his first term in office.

    Conservatives can say pretty much whatever they want and have their views presented as equal to liberal views even though the vast majority of the time they can't present empirical evidence to support their views and liberals can.

    If life were simply a show of Crossfire, that would be fine. But it's not. The consequence of allowing views based on illogical thought at best and lies at worse to be considered valid is that policies based on those views get put into place and, not surprisingly, turn out to be as horrid as the views are.

    The result of this in the area of gun control was on display in Connecticut on Friday. Automatic and semi-automatic weapons serve one purpose and one purpose only; efficiently killing as many people as possible as quickly as possible. They belong only in the hands of our military. When they are widely owned by the population at large, massacres are the inevitable result.

    •  Don't forget that some people here (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      and IRL, for that matter, have really big hearts and maybe not the kind of education that others have been privileged to receive. I have to remind myself of that constantly; a person who seems to be spouting nonsense may not be aware of the usual conventions of argument but making an attempt in good faith. Furthermore, we are all strong on some subjects and weaker on others; does that mean we can't have an opinion on all of them? None of us has absolute knowledge, but we try and sometimes we change our minds.

      Stay fired up: now is the time to focus on downticket change! #Forward

      by emidesu on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:01:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Can we all agree to this? (15+ / 0-)

    This diary is an HR free Zone.
    If the comment strays from PDNC's positive waves, we'll all just ignore it. Or...just HR me if it makes you feel good.

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

    by meagert on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:05:12 PM PST

  •  This is a forum, it's not a shelter. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla, Sandino

    I have always disagreed with people who wish to make it anything more than a forum, at least outside of the universe of people who consent to make it more than a forum.  In other words, I don't go into diaries that are constructed as safe havens of one sort or another, but the default for a given diary and for Daily Kos as a whole is that we're governed by site rules and generic decency.  Generic decency is what's at issue here, and different people will define it differently, but to me if something is vitally important I'd be ashamed of myself--I'd feel like I flunked a basic standard of decency--if I refrained from advocacy because it might make my virtual friends sad.

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:06:24 PM PST

  •  I think if the diarist has included the word (0+ / 0-)

    F#@king in a diary to describe whatever it is he or she is in opposition to then the chance of having civil discourse is fairly limited.

  •  I choose a different path (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tobendaro, Agent99, megisi, dnta, Agathena, Sandino

    I'll simply try to avoid the RKBA crowd as much as I can. My introduction to the group was belligerent and they haven't changed. I had replied to someone else and I got jumped on and hounded for days. It's happened more than once.

    I want nothing to do with them. They have offended many and have many amends to make.

    Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

    by Just Bob on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:11:40 PM PST

    •  This is true. I'm done with the RKBA crowd. (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Just Bob, megisi, dnta, Agathena, Sandino

      Most people instinctively recoil and seek shelter from loud, aggressive people who swagger in to this community armed to the teeth and itching for a fight.

      Kids in Sandy Hook knew to run and hide.

      I have seen a family member shot point blank.

      I am absolutely done with silently being beaten down by the RKBA people here. And I have refrained entirely from engaging with them until this moment.

      From now on, the rights of all Americans to be free from the threats of gun violence will far outweigh their freedom to be aggressive assholes.

      Let's make the whole country a safe shelter from gun violence.

      "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

      by Agent99 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:04:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Beautifully put, PDNC. (11+ / 0-)

    I've simply stayed out of the more contentious diaries. I see little point in trying to hash out these complex questions in this kind of forum, which has some significant limitations (along with its many strengths).
    Right now, learning to treat each other here with kindness and compassion is a worthy goal. Sign me up for that effort.

    Some DKos series & groups worth your while: Black Kos, Native American Netroots, KosAbility, Monday Night Cancer Club. If you'd like to join the Motor City Kossacks, send me a Kosmail.

    by peregrine kate on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:12:24 PM PST

  •  Your words are good (11+ / 0-)

    and your heart even better. Thank you for this diary. I hope anyone who needs a welcoming place to talk will stop by Top Comments tonight. The topic is hope.

  •  Sure, I'll stay civil and think it's a good call (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agathena, Sandino

    But, I won't back the heck down from fighting against the decades-long effects of the NRA protecting a practically maverick industry and fomenting FUD in too many right-wing people about black helicopters filled with black people.  I compare this to the Republican push for privatization of government's public funds and sowing distrust in public institutions (and roles, people) at the same time: it's social conditioning that has led to seemingly reasonable conversations becoming almost impossible due to historical biases with little value to offer.

    If someone abuses facts to offer more "truthiness" on gun culture and violence in the USA not being related, I'll treat them like any other polarized person who might have a story to tell, but possibly a dangerous one that needs to be stripped down and possibly taken to pieces.  In front of our community.

    Facts can be harsh enough, regardless of our emotions involved.

    "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 Dec 16, 2012 at 06:19:50 PM PST

  •  It comes down to one question (4+ / 0-)
    President Barack Obama: “Are we prepared that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?”

    "It strikes me as gruesome and comical that in our culture we have an expectation that a man can always solve his problems" - Kurt Vonnegut

    by jazzence on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:23:44 PM PST

  •  I got a little sanctimonious with someone today (12+ / 0-)

    Implied he was more concerned with deer eating his gardens than dead children. Really shitty of me, and as it turns out, our views really weren't all that different to begin with. I apologized...suggesting that anyone doesn't take the death of children personally is unfair and uncivil. I hope we can avoid doing that, no matter how heated the debate gets. I doubt there is a single member of this site who's heart isn't broken by what happened.

    You must work-we must all work-to make a world that is worthy of its children -Pablo Casals Please support TREE Climbers for victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation.

    by SwedishJewfish on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:26:21 PM PST

  •  Beautiful diary PDNC (12+ / 0-)

    I want to believe that we can be a shelter to one another but I fear that our community is torn apart. The anger is so overwhelming and the need for vengeance is so strong that reason has left the building.

    I can take the barbs thrown at me, but I'm reading comments savaging the mother of the shooter. She's dead, a victim for fuck's sake! We know almost nothing about her and people are walking right up to the edge of saying she deserved her end.

    Kitsap and left, she felt driven out. Kitsap! This is not the community I knew, the one that pulled together to help so many people. The community who posts IGTNT diaries and leaves messages for Sara's quilts.

    I am heart sick tonight.

    "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

    by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:30:02 PM PST

    •  It's all just passion. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PavePusher, KenBee, Onomastic, rockhound

      It's a perfectly fine response to a horrible event. We need the passion to help sort out the realities.
       As long as we listen to each other, we'll be able to solve a lot of things.

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

      by meagert on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:35:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Passion is always good (6+ / 0-)

        attacking others with passion, not so much. No one here did this, all of us are gutted by it. We need to work together. If we do we can be a very powerful force.

        "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

        by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:39:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Over the last couple days (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Agent99, high uintas, Sandino

          RKBA folks have taken some really hard hits, some that crossed way over the line.  I recognize that, and it's true.

          This is an olive branch diary...but please don't think it goes,only in one direction.  Some of the folks in RKBA have been serious bullies over the years.  Y'all gotta look at some of your behavior too, talk about it amongst yourselves, and figure out how you all are gonna reduce some of your venom as well.

          I am not excusing the innapropriate insults that have been directed at you in the last couple days....but I am not excusing your bullying, venom and gang tactics either.

          To be clear, I am not blameless, I am trying to reign in some of my own shit too.

          "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

          by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:02:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hopefully Kitsap will be back. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            My hope is that theatre goon, (whose words I appreciate in non-gun diaries), and others will focus on and sincerely contemplate the idea that the lives of six and seven year olds are far more valuable than anyone's "right" to own, brandish, and fire weapons which are only designed to kill people.

            I saw one inappropriate comment, and read theatre goon's diary, but the main thrust of that comment, (and most likely the reason it was so heavily recced),was an attempt to get the RKBA people to reflect on their armed aggression.

            I have yet to see that reflection.

            An honest diary expressing true comprehension, empathy, compassion, justice and sorrow would be a welcome RKBA diary at the moment.

            Thanks for creating this safe space to speak.

            "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

            by Agent99 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:53:52 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree mostly with what you say (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              high uintas, evilstorm, Oh Mary Oh

              But I somewhat reject the idea that they "sincerely contemplate" the lives of the many children killed. Let me explain, while I understand what you mean, I think it sets things up so that no conversation is possible.

              While there may be few, and I know at least one (non-RKBA) who argue that the loss of these children's lives is,the price of freedom...most do not agree that we have to make that choice.  Rather, they argue (incorrectly in my view) that an armed populace will reduce these sorts of crimes.

              They are offended, in some sense rightly, when people suggest or hint at the idea that they don't care about the lives of children or place the lives of children second to their gun rights.

              Now, they may well be wrong, and I beleive them to be wrong.  I beleive their (and many others) advocacy of less gun restrictions did lead to this tragedy...but that does not mean that this tragedy was their intent, or even that they accepted it as a sad byproduct. I Am sure none wanted this tragedy, and only a few twisted fucks would argue the second.

              Where we need to be careful is ascribing our perception of the result of lax gun laws as the intent of the people who favor them.  As wrongheaded as they may be, they beleive that an armed country is a safer country, a country where these sorts of tragedies would occur less frequently.

              I beleive they are wrong, way wrong, dangerously wrong...but they are not evil even if their mistaken support of lax gun laws leads to evil actions of others.  There are a few twisted fucks on the pro-gun side...but with a few exceptions, those twisted fucks don't last long on DKos.

              "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

              by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:38:29 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  EV (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Empty Vessel, theboz, oldpunk, fuzzyguy

                Not everyone who is RKBA is in total agreement on everything. I don't think that more guns makes things safer except in a very personal sense, say someone like Kitsap who feels vulnerable without her weapon. The views on guns vary.

                I personally believe that the 2nd amendment gives us the right to have a gun. I believe that the framers wanted an armed citizenry, one that is knowledgeable and proficient with their weapons should they need to take them up.

                I personally don't believe that a room full of guns would stop a tragedy like what happened. I also don't think that room would necessarily be a lit fuse. Responsible people can own and carry a gun without going insane from just having it and killing willy nilly.

                I believe in reasonable gun laws, but I want them to be effective. If you ban a certain type of gun that will not stop all of these tragedies. If you banned guns all together, that would not make our country gun free. We have to be smart about what we do, not just window dressing to make people feel better.

                As for what happened. My gawd, there are no words for how I feel.

                "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:02:53 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  And I am not advocating for a complete ban (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  high uintas

                  I am advocating for a new Assault Weapons Ban, and something along similar lines for handguns (though I gotta say, I am closer to wanting an outright ban on handguns, but I ain't advocating for that)

                  You can see my thoughts on a new AWB here

                  I'd be interested in your thoughts on it.

                  "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

                  by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:08:34 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  First (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Empty Vessel, fuzzyguy

                    As I've said before I don't know guns, I'm woefully ignorant of particulars of most weapons.

                    Remember that hunters go for game bigger or faster than deer. There is a huge difference between a deer and an elk or moose.  

                    On the size of the clip, yes I can see where that would slow the shooter down some. I would like to get the thoughts of some of the RKBAers who actually know what they are talking about if you get my drift.

                    "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                    by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:48:21 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  One thing (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      high uintas

                      As I conceived of this, it would not absolute limits on each catagory.  Rather a formulae or points awarded in each catagory.  So, you could have fully automatic bb gun with a massive capacity, say, or an elephant gun that took half an hour to reload.

                      It would be left to the gun manufacturers to design their guns to remain under some defined "lethality" value.  So, for instance, they could design a clip that was a royal pain in the ass to change to reduce the firing rate and thereby increase the muzzle velocity.

                      The idea is to do something like cafe standards for cars.  The rule doesn't tell companies how to achieve greater mileage, and not all cars have to get the exact same mileage, so companies can figure out on their own how to achieve the mileage goals.

                      Less stupid micromanaging, no outright bans, but still achieving something substantive in terms of gun control.

                      "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

                      by Empty Vessel on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 10:31:37 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  RKBA has no authority (0+ / 0-)

                      They don't know more than others, they just proclaim more certainty.

            •  No one in RKBA (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              theboz, oldpunk, fuzzyguy, joedemocrat

              needs to reflect on "their armed agression".  I do not know what the hell you are talking about.

              "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

              by high uintas on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:05:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thank you, high uintas, for proving my point. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Instead of responding with empathy, compassion and understanding, you shoot straight from the hip with an absolute refusal to even acknowledge that internal reflection might be wise.

                Locked and loaded armed aggressive assholes love to terrify people.

                I am fully prepared to stand with the six-and-seven-year-olds and fight you unarmed.

                "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

                by Agent99 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 09:42:38 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You have no idea how I feel (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  If you knew anything about me you might have some justification for your imagining whether I have compassion, empathy or understanding. You attack and then blame the person you attacked for the attack.

                  I don't own a gun, never have. What should I reflect on? I have raised a child and do have grand children in schools, my heart breaks for those people who have lost what is precious to them.

                  So you think I'm a "locked and loaded armed asshole". Projection much?

                  "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                  by high uintas on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 10:47:52 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not seeing that. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I'm seeing some heightened feelings, but since I know there is a lot of anger, I give people more leeway than normal. Maybe it's because I'm not at one of the extreme poles on this issue, but I see people getting a little overboard and assume they will calm down and apologize to each other at some point. It generally happens.

      Stay fired up: now is the time to focus on downticket change! #Forward

      by emidesu on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:05:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •   great effort PNDC, point made, point lost (5+ / 0-)

    yet on several of the people here in comments have, without any pushback  (because they can get away with it in the argument free zone)  have continued their extremely provocative and argumentative lines while even having the gall to pretend to agree with you.
    And I won't be back to argue the point either...I see what I see and know what I know as the young singer sang...

    Good luck, and thank you for speaking up with the other rational and fair minded people who have as well. Without you we would be worthless as a site.

    I love that picture of the fella with the sign.
        It ought to be the site's sig.

    This machine kills Fascists.

    by KenBee on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 07:01:32 PM PST

  •  Wonderful PNDC. (2+ / 0-)

    A lot of buttons get pushed when something this unspeakable happens.  As the President noted, when it comes to children we wear our hearts outside of ourselves.  Emotions are incredibly raw right now and your words are very calming. Thank you.

  •  I applaud the civil way you have (3+ / 0-)

    written this diary, and I think your goals are admirable. I have tipped and rec'd this diary as a result.

    However, I disagree with you. Let me tell you why.

    There are certain times in life (like now) when polite conversation simply has to be thrown out the window in order to achieve a higher realm of being. It is my strong belief that the time is now for more effective, more restrictive gun control. I will not rest until that has happened, because 27 beautiful, innocent people in Connecticut are dead tonight.

    Full stop. Period.

    I can't take this anymore. I mean it. I have a 12-year-old daughter, and she deserves more than the motherfucking bullshit America has doled out to her, and every other child for that matter. Kids matter.

    Our children are everything. They mean everything.

    Of course, I am not suggesting making horrific comments that are hateful to community members I dislike, but I am suggesting that I'm not going to stop pushing back just because some here would view that behavior as distasteful or impolite.

    Fuck that shit.

    My civility went out the window on Friday. I cannot bear this again. My child cannot bear this again. The children of the United States cannot bear this again.

    This community should not be asked to bear this again!

    OK, that's all I got. Thanks for at least trying to elevate the discourse.

    Who cares what the fucking Republicans would vote for? They'd vote for cooking poor children and exporting them as delicacies if they had the chance. -- Jim P

    by Colorado is the Shiznit on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 08:56:13 PM PST

    •  Look at it this way (0+ / 0-)

      For some folks, they live in unsafe circumstances.  Maybe it is a family where the mother works somewhere that the risk of being raped is nontrivial and she feels more comfortable with a concealed handgun.  Maybe they are worried about a rash of home invasions where the families are being harmed and a shotgun helps them sleep at night.  I am not saying you have to agree with them, but try to have empathy.  Rather than trying to male them feel bad for owning guns, try to help them with their security.  Help them find a way to feel safer so they don't find it necessary to be armed.

  •  NO (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agathena, mrblifil, Sandino, Agent99

    i will not 'be civil' with people who think that their property is more important than other people's dead children.  


  •  Kids are not yet buried (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99, Sandino

    I feel a lot of outrage, still. Tonight, right now. I guess your heart's in the right place, but as a parent of a boy the age of the victims I can tell you this weekend has been rough. There are some folks here with attitudes I find abhorrent, and it's possible I might say something immoderate. That's part of "dialogue" too, and even if I tried to fashion myself with a mode of behavior more to other people's liking, I don't think I'd be capable of such an effort at present. Already tonight the anti-regulation chapter are dipping their toes in the water to see if it's safe to come out and play. They'll shout "FUCK THE NRA" and then spout the same kinds of apologetic garbage as if freshly minted from the beautiful mind of Wayne LaPierre. It bothers me, is what I'm saying. Already their leader is pointing out how difficult it would be to extirpate guns entirely, there's no point in trying, resistance is futile.

  •  I'm sorry, but no. It's inherently uncivil for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    someone to insist that their misinterpretation of an anachronistic right trumps the right of others to not live in a world where their children are riddled bullets in their kindergarten classroom.

    It's as simple as that, and I see no reason (beyond the rules of the forum in which I happen to be engaged with them) to be particularly civil in kind.

  •  Thank You PDNC (1+ / 0-)

    Nicely done.

  •  A civil discussion is only possible as long as you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    allow it.

    This web site is not a democracy Patriot, your voice is more valid than mine because you are buds with the owners and administrators of the site. My views are tolerated as long as you wish to allow them. I realized that a long time ago and I accept those conditions when I post here. It's too bad people resort to wishing death to other members over guns but of course that's to be expected. If you are allowed to say the most vile thing because you are a part of a generally accepted viewpoint some people will.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 03:58:54 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site