Skip to main content

You live long enough in this life (or sometimes not so long) and some tragic event will touch you. For most of us, these events change us. And our opinion about such events matter.

As for me, I'm lucky. My uncle was murdered by the mob before I was born. A childhood friend committed suicide by hanging when I was 10. A cousin died of leukemia at 13 when I was a teen. I was attacked by seven mobster wannabees in college, had my head smashed into a windshield several times fighting them, but got out fairly unscathed.

 

I had friends in the first World Trade Center bombing who got out alive. I was mugged while living on the west coast and survived. I lived through the Los Angeles riots, watched as rioters broke through a strip mall one block from me, but luckily never got hurt. I lived through the Northridge earthquake in 94 and, while my apartment was cracked in two others weren't so lucky. I was in an airplane that lost one of its engines at 39,000 feet, had a rough landing and lived to tell the tale. I was in two auto accidents where a driver rammed into my driver's side door, turned two of my cars (one an old Hyundai) into bananas, and was lucky enough to survive both without injury.

I was down in the battery during 9/11. My wife and I escaped the city by foot. A good friend of mine wasn't so lucky. His son died in Tower one and my hometown lost over 35 people.

My mother and father have alzheimers and emphysema. That's tragic. I have an uncle who recently committed suicide. I have an aunt who did the same due to not being able to handle her illness anymore. I've had bumps in the road, been affected by the economy, and get irritated when someone who's lived a charmed, sheltered life goes on and on about how everything bad that happens to people is their own fault.

But nothing...not one solitary thing...was as horrible as hearing the news that a friend of mine lost a child in Newtown. Having two young children of my own, the awareness of that kind of pain is real.

And when ignorant people shoot off at the mouth at how our government is trying to steal our guns, how Newtown didn't happen and that all the parents were actually actors, and how nothing is more important than showing the world how this event means nothing compared to the likelihood of gun control measures...I just get enraged.

The only reason anyone needs guns is to hunt for food. Maybe as a last resort - a pistol to protect your house (my dad was an ex-marine specialist and he never had anymore than a bb gun to ward against intruders. He taught soldier's how to shoot, saw war first-hand, and was 100% for gun control).

Any other reason to have a gun is simply to kill something or someone who never did you or anyone else harm. It's a cruel, primitive, ugly machine.

And nobody on this fucking planet needs an assault rifle. If you think you need one as a civilian, you're an insecure little homunculus who suffers from a small dick or a smaller brain - or a cowardly wuss who really thinks the government is "out to get them." Give me a break.

As I've said, I've been lucky - I've been touched by tragedy dozens of times but never got the worst of it. I've had the luxury of eventually being safe...but I've hardly ever been blind. There but for the grace of God go I. You don't have to have any religion to understand how we're all in this together and how your entire life can be turned upside down in a matter of seconds. Some events are out of our control. Others are not. Guns are dangerous. Not just people.

Originally posted to VerbalPaintball on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM PST.

Also republished by Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA) and Shut Down the NRA.

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

  •  Tip Jar (222+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    louisev, Bob Love, Red Bean, tin woodswoman, Andrew F Cockburn, Gentle Giant, DefendOurConstitution, cassandracarolina, snowwoman, TokenLiberal, Scioto, Bisbonian, wilderness voice, SteelerGrrl, Glen The Plumber, Progressif, nokkonwud, Chaddiwicker, Wee Mama, hester, profundo, tampaedski, wader, yellow cosmic seed, oldpotsmuggler, peterfallow, SilentBrook, Ozzie, ladywithafan, poco, Steve15, mn humanist, surelyujest, randomfacts, Hopeful Skeptic, davespicer, skod, Cat Whisperer, FogCityJohn, HeyMikey, mamamedusa, Steven D, erratic, jamess, CwV, glorificus, blueoasis, blueyedace2, dance you monster, tapestry, Chinton, trumpeter, Metalgirl, FG, Yo Bubba, ApatheticNoMore1966, BachFan, fumie, Miggles, radical simplicity, lady sisyphus, sailmaker, FloridaSNMOM, Ducktape, gloriana, cybersaur, Portlaw, fisheye, Miss Jones, j7915, tofumagoo, S F Hippie, exiledfromTN, mikeconwell, carpunder, Agent99, BYw, Cory Bantic, bleeding blue, shopkeeper, teresahill, greycat, ratcityreprobate, emmasnacker, msazdem, sfinx, karmsy, revsue, ridemybike, HappyinNM, Mr Bojangles, Celtic Merlin, greengemini, ImABlondOK, begone, UFOH1, dotsright, BeninSC, alain2112, mama jo, mamamorgaine, arizonablue, cocinero, Over the Edge, Freakinout daily, dansk47, RebeccaG, Onomastic, broths, cosmic debris, asilomar, One Pissed Off Liberal, Mathazar, mystery2me, m00finsan, HoosierDeb, Hastur, cpresley, lineatus, rb608, jan4insight, earicicle, alice kleeman, NYmom, SaintC, LeftOfYou, Lilyvt, The Nose, Nebraskablue, offred, timewarp, kiga, Calamity Jean, dle2GA, CTLiberal, stevenwag, Lefty Ladig, alba, chimene, keirdubois, 2thanks, sfarkash, ranger995, Pithy Cherub, laker, sawgrass727, Marjmar, Eowyn9, DianeNYS, NYC Sophia, Texknight, aseth, anana, remembrance, helpImdrowning, WakeUpNeo, progdog, CanyonWren, chantedor, TAH from SLC, edsbrooklyn, VictorLaszlo, Southern Lib, Its a New Day, Sharon Wraight, not a cent, kingneil, Ian H, Mr Horrible, Williston Barrett, The Eyewitness Muse, Kamakhya, dov12348, mofembot, Siri, PinHole, madhaus, dull knife, marykk, NancyWH, 84thProblem, teabaggerssuckbalz, blue in NC, GreyHawk, Kevskos, lulusbackintown, deha, MadRuth, a2nite, annrose, ARS, ItsSimpleSimon, Smoh, middleagedhousewife, Karl Rover, Robynhood too, lyvwyr101, Lost and Found, AaronInSanDiego, angel d, irishwitch, ChurchofBruce, Brit, Anima, mythatsme, weneedahero, ragged but right, jakewaters, worldlotus, Bluesee, sponson, Agathena, Sand Hill Crane, sidnora, SadieSue, kharma, tommymet, Tod, Skaje, Thestral, mrkvica, ChuckInReno

    "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

    by Verbalpaintball on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 12:49:49 PM PST

    •  The gun nuts who don't agree to strict (24+ / 0-)

      Gun control are selfish.

      Sensible people agree that guns have no place in society.  As thom Hartman said, the 2nd amendment has racist origins.  Guns are racist.

      •  Of course it's selfish (24+ / 0-)

        "Why do I have to have my rights abridged because of some crazy guy?"

        Has any of the pro-gun folk who utter this see how childish this argument is?  Society has worked off the "one bad apple spoils the bushel" from the beginning of history.

      •  "Guns are racist." (14+ / 0-)

        Annnnnnd we've gone off that rails, that quickly.

        I see what you did there.

        by GoGoGoEverton on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 02:58:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, we're not (61+ / 0-)

        too fond of them in my family. Growing up in the middle of nowhere (wyoming) learning about guns was one of the things my father taught us about early.

        You'll note I said "Learning about." Oh, he did eventually teach us to shoot. After he was sure we understood how to use them safely and responsibly. I remember several of the classes, even 20+ years later.

        These days I do own guns...I like target shooting. Don't even keep ammunition here, because so much could go wrong (I buy the ammunition i plan to use at the target range, almost always at the range itself, and go home when I run out.)

        I have zero problem registering these guns. I don't for one second worry they'll be "taken away." A whole lot of really, really responsible gun owners are not at all happy with that sort of propaganda.

        These are weapons. They can hurt and kill people. I make no mistake about that, even if I never would use them as such. That there are so many willing to be so dangerously irresponsible terrifies me.

        We NEED better gun control. We need to try... something. Cause doing nothing is not working. Sorry, I know this was a bit... ranty. Im just so tired of these people who are...well, like you said, selfish. I'll add deluded to that.

        Even something as simple as liability insurance would help give people a nudge toward being more responsible. But they reject even that... Its disturbing.

        The only Bug-type Pokemon that can learn the move Fly - Volcarona and Genesect - Are not Flying types.

        by kamrom on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 03:00:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Responsible gun owners do worry (9+ / 9-)

          Responsible gun owners and responsible non-owners do worry about guns being taken away.

          You are not really a responsible gun owner; you are just some clown who likes shooting at targets.  

          Democide (government inflicted or sponsored murder including genocide and politicide) had killed more people than wars in each of the last 50 centuries and has killed 16-17 times as many people as war.  And war kills more people than homicide.    And if you think that it can't happen here, you will fit right in with all the people who thought it could not happen in their country - until it did.
          People have a bug up their butt because 20 children were killed.    Well, 1 to 1.5 million children were killed by just one rogue government, according to the Holocaust Museum, not even counting the adults.  In Sandy Hook, 1.4 children and 0.43 adults were killed per minute for a total of 14 minutes.    In Rwanda, 6 men, women, and children were killed every minute of every day for 100 days.   That lasted over ten thousand times longer than a sandy hook.  In the end, 800,000 to 1 million people were murdered.   It takes over 3000 years to kill a million people at our current rifle homicide rate (and that includes all rifles not just those that are incorrectly called assault weapons).

          Gun prohibition, gun registration, and gun confiscation are all unacceptable.

          For OP this is "personal".   Subjective knee jerk response.   Rationalization to support prejudices, not rational thought.   Dairying while intoxicated.

          The war on alcohol (prohibition) was followed by a major increase in violence including homicide.
          The war on drugs was followed by a major increase in violence including homicide.
          The war on guns will be followed by a major increase in violence including homicide.

          You want gun control?   How about we tell the US military they have to replace their M-16 assault rifles with AR-15 modern sporting rifles.    And they aren't allowed to use magazines which hold more than 10 rounds.    And the police are not allowed to use magazines holding more than 10 rounds in their weapons (they usually carry pistols with 15 round mags).  

            You don't need magazines that hold more than 10 rounds (7 in New York) to kill defenseless victims.   It makes no difference whether the bad guy has ten 30 round clips or thirty 10 round clips.   That magazine can be changed faster than you can decide to rush the guy with a #2 pencil.   And if the guy can count to 10, he will still have a round in the chamber when he changes magazines.     You do not need an "assault weapon" (doublespeak) to kill defenseless victims.  You don't even need a gun.    The sandy hook massacre could easily have been accomplished without any firearms.  It is when you aren't attacking defenseless people you need these scary features.     When you are attacked by one or more dangerous perpetrators, you may indeed need the features which are classified as "assault weapon" and "high capacity magazine" in gun-grabber doublespeak.    In the time it takes to change magazines, a single bad guy can fire off a dozen rounds.   The US military doesn't go into combat armed with only bolt action rifles (excluding snipers) or 10 round magazines.   The police don't either.   Not when they expect to be shot at.    Or attacked by anyone with any non-firearm.    No, police and military carry scary guns.   Because that is what you want and need when you are facing people who have the means and inclination to hurt you rather than defenseless victims.

          New York State has banned magazines which hold more than 7 rounds.    Yet the NYPD fired an average of 6.9 shots per officer per gun fight, 16.8 shots total for all officers, with a 9% hit probability.   Think about that.  16.8 shots were needed on average but you are only allowed to carry 7.  NYPD carries pistols that have a capacity of 15 rounds.

          Now, that said, most weapons optimized for concealed carry only hold about 7 rounds.    This is not enough.   But the weapon you have on you when you need it is better than the one you want but don't have.  

          Dialing 911 will not save you.   Dialing 1911 might.   By the time 911 is called, you are probably already dead.   If you are still alive, you don't have much chance of surviving until they get there, if you really needed them.   Here are average response times to priority calls:
             Detroit: 24 minutes (down from 34)
             Sandy Hook Elementary School: 20 minutes
             Albemarle County, VA (rural portion): 11:48
             Atlanta 11:12
             El Paso 11:11
             Denver: 11:00
             Tucson: 10:11
             Kansas City: <10 minutes
             Nashville/davidson <9 minutes
             Mineapolis: 8:13
             New York City: 8 minutes
             LAPD: 5.7 minutes
             http://gundata.org/...

          On the other hand, Newsweek has reported that law-abiding American citizens using guns in self-defense during 2003 shot and killed two and one-half times as many criminals as police did, and with fewer than one-fifth as many incidents as police where an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal (2% versus 11%).
          http://www.forbes.com/...
          There are 3.7million  burglaries in the US each year.   In 28% of cases, someone is home and in 7 percent of cases someone is home and the victim of a violent crime.    That is 10130 burglaries per day, 2836 cases per day where someone is home, and 709 cases per day where one or more home occupants are victims of violence.   This doesn't include rapes, kidnappings, etc. which aren't related to burglary.    
          http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/...

          The gun-grabbers reward the sandy hook shooter with lots of media coverage and damage to civil rights.    Like the Patriot Act after 9/11 and the anthrax attacks.   And show every terrorist in the world that you only have to kill a few kids and America will self destruct.   Shred the constitution and move toward the very kind of police state that the 2nd amendment was established to protect against.

          Parent poster kamrom blathered:

          We NEED better gun control. We need to try... something. Cause doing nothing is not working. Sorry, I know this was a bit... ranty. Im just so tired of these people who are...well, like you said, selfish. I'll add deluded to that.
          We need to do something?     Throw the US constitution and civil rights under a bus to try random things we already know will not help.   That is worse than stupid.   It is dangerous.   This shotgun approach to law is far more dangerous than an actual shotgun.  "Doing nothing is not working"? guess what, homicide and violent crime in the US is at record lows even though there are more guns than ever and most states now allow concealed carry permits on a must-issue basis.  Homicide rate is a third of what it was when James Madison wrote the 2nd amendment and the 2nd lowest it has been in American history (it was lower before the escalation of the war on drugs).   Even at the peak of the war on drugs associated violence and the prohibition associated violence, the homicide rate was lower than it was when Madison wrote the 2nd amendment.    Mass shootings are not on the rise, either.

          Before you even think about infringing on a constitutional right, you need:
            - A compelling state interest.    Reducing homicide deaths is not a compelling state interest when compared to the democide deaths and oppression of a rogue governenment that the 2nd amendment was specifically intended to protect.
            - Necessity.   You can't achieve the results by non-infringing means.    Gun control is not necessary; there are other means at our disposal.
            - Effectiveness: The infringement must actually serve the compelling state interest.    Gun control is not effective.

          And even if you had satisfied all three of those conditions, the bill of rights was established to protect the civil rights from the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the legislature.   Why do you think they are constitutional rights, not merely 10 laws?    The 2nd amendment is NOT on the table.

          In the time of the founding fathers, gun ownership was considered more of an inalenable right than voting.    In 1776 If you did not own property, you could not vote but you could own a gun.  Women could vote if they owned property.   In 1787, states get to regulate voting and they favor adult white male property owners.   If you were black, you could not vote but in some states free blacks could possess guns and in some states even slaves could possess guns with the ownership of their master.   If you were a minor, you could not vote but you could own a gun.

          Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
              Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
          Gun control will not save lives and no amount of cherry picked or deliberately falsified statistics will change that fact.

          Homicide rate in the US is 4.8 (per 100,000).   World average is 6.9.   Average for the Americas is 15.4 and Africa is 17.0.   In Honduras, the rate is 91.6; thats right, Honduras has a gun ownership rate that is 14 times lower than the US but a homicide rate by firearm that is 19 times higher than the US total homicide rate (including non-firearm homicides).   Europe has a lower rate, but this is true even in countries with very high firearms ownership.    

          If you plot the homicide rate or the violent crime rate vs gun ownership ranking of all the countries in the world, not just cherry picked ones, you can clearly see that gun ownership is not the cause of violent crime.   Indeed, there is a negative correlation between gun ownership and homicide rate.    
          http://www.objectobot.com/...
          http://georgeoughttohelp.tumblr.com/...
          http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

          Homicide rates are not correlated with gun ownership in US states, either:
          http://www.objectobot.com/...

          Violence peaked around 1992 and has been declining since.  A number of things have happened.   The number of households with guns has declined, the total number of guns has risen dramatically, and the number of states which allow concealed carry has risen dramatically.   The decline in violence seems to have happened almost exactly when the number of states which "shall issue" concealed carry permits reached 50%.
          http://www.americanthinker.com/...

          •  Take your paid-for propaganda elsewhere... (4+ / 5-)

            You post here again and I will have you reported.

            If anyone knows how to give this person a negative rating, please do so.

            "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

            by Verbalpaintball on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 10:49:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  this reads like a parody of NRA talking points (11+ / 0-)
            You are not really a responsible gun owner; you are just some clown who likes shooting at targets.  
            Gun prohibition, gun registration, and gun confiscation are all unacceptable.

            For OP this is "personal".   Subjective knee jerk response.   Rationalization to support prejudices, not rational thought.   Dairying while intoxicated.

            People have a bug up their butt because 20 children were killed.  
            The gun-grabbers reward the sandy hook shooter with lots of media coverage and damage to civil rights.    Like the Patriot Act after 9/11 and the anthrax attacks.   And show every terrorist in the world that you only have to kill a few kids and America will self destruct.
            Before you even think about infringing on a constitutional right, you need:
              - A compelling state interest.    Reducing homicide deaths is not a compelling state interest when compared to the democide deaths and oppression of a rogue governenment that the 2nd amendment was specifically intended to protect.
            •  Re: parody of NRA talking points? (0+ / 0-)

              None of these statements were taken from the NRA or influenced by the NRA.    You are using the NRA as a boogie-man.

              Blockquote #1: This is an NRA point?   The NRA is the organization of target shooters and hunters.    It has a very poor history when it comes to self defense owners and 2nd amendment rights.  

              This atlantic article gives some of the history of guns and the NRA, although it completely bungles the facts regarding gun rights in the time of the founding fathers when the right to own guns was more universal than the right to vote.  From the 1920s through 1977, the NRA actually promoted gun control.   Finally, control was wrestled away from the recreational shooters:
              http://www.theatlantic.com/...
              Even today, the NRA is weak on 2nd Amendment.

              Commenter I was replying to uses deadly weapons purely as toys and in a way which prevents him/her from using them for protection and is happy to sell out the constitutional rights of those who would use them for self protection or against government tyranny.    Sell out the people the 2nd amendment was written to protect.

              blockquote #2A: They are unacceptable; they all undermine the ability of the people to defend themselves against a government gone rogue.   The government should not be allowed to know who has guns, how many they have, or where they are located.   This information has historically been abused by governments and has already been abused by the US government.  

              Blockquote #2B:  We do not allow the families of victims to try the accused, for a reason.  Because they are traumatized and emotionally biased.    The fate of even one person is not to be put in the hands of the emotionally compromised, let alone the constitutional rights of hundreds of millions.

              #3: Anyone want to seriously argue that people do not have a bug up their butt?

              #4: Adam Lanza couldn't have hired a better publicist to provide him the notoriety and immortality he sought, now could he?

              #5: Wikipedia on Strict Scrutiny

              U.S. courts apply the strict scrutiny standard in two contexts, when a fundamental constitutional right is infringed,[1] particularly those found in the Bill of Rights and those the court has deemed a fundamental right protected by the "liberty" or "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment, or when a government action applies to a "suspect classification" such as race or, sometimes, national origin.

              To pass strict scrutiny, the law or policy must satisfy three tests:

                  It must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. While the Courts have never brightly defined how to determine if an interest is compelling, the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of multiple individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections.

                  The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. If the government action encompasses too much (overbroad) or fails to address essential aspects of the compelling interest, then the rule is not considered narrowly tailored.

                  The law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest, that is, there cannot be a less restrictive way to effectively achieve the compelling government interest. The test will be met even if there is another method that is equally the least restrictive. Some legal scholars consider this "least restrictive means" requirement part of being narrowly tailored, though the Court generally evaluates it separately.
              http://en.wikipedia.org/...

              You may trust the government that interred Japanese-Americans, deliberately kept 399 black subjects infected with syphilis, prosecutes people for medical and recreational marijuana use, brought us the Patriot Act, unlawful detention and torture (Guantanamo), assassination of american citizens, and has exhibited 14 out of 14 defining characteristics of proto-fascism will never turn on us.     The founding fathers who created that government did not.   I do not.     Too bad we can't send you to your own special "be careful what you wish for, you might get it" hell without others having to suffer the consequences.

              US Risk of Homicide:
                 4.8 persons per 100,000 per year.
              20th Century risk of democide, world wide:
                 235 persons per 100,000 per year
              http://www.hawaii.edu/...

              I spent hours when I should have been sleeping and recovering from cold/flu to check my facts and was not going to waste time sugar coating it  so as not to insult people who deserved to be insulted.    These were not ad-hominem attacks in lieu of valid argument, I was merely reprimanding posters for posting irresponsibly while presenting valid arguments.  As one commenter pointed out, no one has been able to offer anything but ad-hominem attacks on me while completely failing to offer any valid argument.

          •  jeez (11+ / 0-)

            The Americanthinker? Why not Glenn Beck or Fox Nation? Right wing talking points are HRable, so I HRed.

            This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

            by Karl Rover on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 12:51:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  source (0+ / 0-)

              Why?   Because they had the graph.     And the data in the graph seems to be correct.   Liberal sites tend not to  post these graphs because they don't support the prejudices or they never even bother to do the research.   I don't think I have ever been to that site before.  

              In a 2012 paper, Lott quotes another researcher:

              Yet, as Carlisle Moody and his co-authors recently summarized
              the literature:
              There have been a total of 29 peer reviewed studies by econ-
              omists and criminologists, 18 supporting the hypothesis that
              shall-issue laws reduce crime, 10 not finding any significant
              effect on crime, including the NRC report, and [Aneja, Do-
              nohue, and Zhang]’s paper, using a different model and dif-
              ferent data, finding that right-to-carry laws temporarily in-
              crease one type of violent crime, aggravated assaults. 8
              Similarly, the only academic research examining the impact of con-
              cealed handgun laws on accidental gun deaths or suicides finds no re-
              lationship. 9
              http://www.law.umaryland.edu/...
              One should not necessarily even expect the protective effect of concealed carry on the holder and his or her friends/family to make a big dent in statistics.    CCW holders are not police and they rarely shoot or arrest the perpetrator.    How would a CCW holder arrest someone?   Unlike a police officer, the CCW holder cannot shoot they perp as he runs away.   And the CCW doesn't have the police department and the police benevolent association to back him/her up and pay legal fees.   The perp may thus commit up to the same number of crimes he would have committed if he hadn't encountered the concealed carry holder.   Perhaps even +1 as he still needs the money to buy crack, for example, that he didn't get from the CCW holder.     The deterrent effect of the perp's brown underwear moment could be offset by the statistical +1 effect since the perp needs to redo the crime in order to achieve the original objective.     Also, perps generally go after victims who appear weak.    They may not know a CCW holder is carrying a gun, but the CCW does and ends up not carrying him/herself like an easy target.   So you could, in theory, have a situation where 100% of the CCWs were completely protected from crime and yet crime statistics stayed the same because there are still plenty of sheep for the wolves to prey on.

              The right to bear arms is an individual right, not a statistical one, protected by the constitution.   Gun rights advocates don't have to prove that gun ownership is even marginally effective at preventing crime; gun banners, however, have to prove that there is an absolutely overwhelming reduction in crime due to restricting guns.   Even a totally unachievable 100% reduction in firearms homicide rates would not begin to offset the over 1600% higher democide risk.   In the 20th century alone, by one estimate 262 million people were killed by democide in China, USSR, Germany, Japan, Cambodia, Turkey, Vietnam, Poland, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, North Korea, Mexico, United Kingdom, Indonesia, and other countries.    The US annual homicide rate of 4.8/100,000 is pretty meager compared to a 20th century average annual rate of 237/100,000 - 50 times higher.    Yet, Verbalpaintball would throw civil rights under the bus if only to "save one life".    

              Contrary to baseless assertions, I am not paid by anybody to post here.    I am not a member of the NRA.   I don't even own a gun.    I did not copy some right wing talking points.    I did the research.   If the right wing happens to use some of these points, even a stopped watch is right twice a day.  

          •  Oh Christ. (9+ / 0-)
            Reducing homicide deaths is not a compelling state interest
            Which is presumably why the state never prosecutes homicide.

            Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

            by MBNYC on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 02:09:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Rec'd. This RWTP isn't a RWTP, it's a fact. (9+ / 0-)
            In Rwanda, 6 men, women, and children were killed every minute of every day for 100 days.
            A well-updated wikipedia:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/...

            Guns and Government-sponsored genocide: (bold type added)

            The killing was well organized by the government.[14] When it started, the Rwandan militia numbered around 30,000, or one militia member for every ten families. It was organized nationwide, with representatives in every neighborhood. Some militia members were able to acquire AK-47 assault rifles by completing requisition forms. Other weapons, such as grenades, required no paperwork and were widely distributed by the government. Many members of the Interahamwe and Impuzamugambi were armed only with machetes. Even after the 1993 peace agreement signed in Arusha, businessmen close to General Habyarimana imported 581,000 machetes from China[15] for Hutu use in killing Tutsi, because machetes were obviously cheaper than guns.[16] In a 2000 news story, The Guardian reported, "The former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, played a leading role in supplying weapons to the Hutu regime which carried out a campaign of genocide against the Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994. As Minister of Foreign Affairs in Egypt, Boutros-Ghali facilitated an arms deal in 1990, which was to result in $26 million (£18m) of mortar bombs, rocket launchers, grenades and ammunition being flown from Cairo to Rwanda. The arms were used by Hutus in attacks which led to up to a million deaths."[17]
            Can't happen here?
            I'd have agreed with you prior to the USA PATRIOT Act.
            The response to people fleeing, or weathering-out Katrina. The deep seated interests in keeping pot illegal, despite obvious changes in public opinion.
            The vested interests of feeding young men of color into prison or graves.

            I'd like the next 4 years of the Obama Administration to address the police-state in America.  The first four certainly didn't.
            Bush Lite isn't dark beer, and I want something rich and satisfying, with color and flavor.

            •  One of the biggest threats to our freedom (9+ / 0-)

              is the private prison-industrial complex.  There was a diary earlier today about 'too big to fail' also means 'too big to jail.'  Based on simple observation, I agree with that.  

              The banksters and the white collar criminal class are taking over the country. They own the damn prisons.  They have a vested interest in keeping the drug wars going. The last thing they want is a decrease in the crime rate.  

              The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand. - Sun Tzu

              by Otteray Scribe on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 09:03:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  When they call your mortgage "due" rather than (8+ / 0-)

                abide by the terms of the A.R.M., and drop the rate 3 percent?
                They're damn eager to make certain you're not going to protest foreclosure via a firearm.

                One friend lost his business, another the house.  Both had payments which were "recorded" late.

                Fine print, way down in there.  Money sent, via wire, EFT or courier may take up to 3 business days to post.  Failure to pay on-time, breaches the agreement.

                Both cases, the Sheriffs showed-up first, with a restraining orders, seeking "temporary surrender of all owned firearms" and serving notice of forfeit and foreclosure.

                "Temporary" has yet to terminate, and the Court is reluctant to return the firearms, and vacate the R.O..  15 months for one, 21 for the other.  
                Both loans with "too big to fail" TARP-recipient banks.

                Something stinks, and it's not just the Provolone.

                As the fellow who lost his business said:  "I'm starting to understand the support Dillinger received from the public back in the Depression."

              •  Nice attempt to change the subject. (0+ / 0-)

                If lacking in integrity.

                *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

                by glorificus on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 06:10:52 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  This is not a new user. (12+ / 0-)

            Has been here seven years and over 2,200 comments.  These are not RW or NRA talking points as presented, but are well-documented facts as 43north also points out.  Facts are just that...facts.  Both sides of an argument are free to use them as desired.  

            Uprated because I do not believe the commenter is a troll, and the arguments are just that...arguments in favor of a position.  Hope everyone remembers that HR are not for disagreement.  HR is for disruption so egregious that it should be hidden from the public.  These HR appear to me to be for disagreement, and if so, are in violation of the FAQ.  

            The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand. - Sun Tzu

            by Otteray Scribe on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 09:12:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Uprated against HRs for disagreement. (4+ / 0-)

            HRs which, apparently, were largely supported by unsupported accusations of shilling -- which accusations will be HRed.

            Hint -- accusations of shilling are HRable, disagreeing with a poster's facts and opinions are not.

            It's really fairly simple...

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

            by theatre goon on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 04:09:05 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Damn, too late to rec this, sorry. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BlackSheep1, theatre goon, whitis

            I'll note that all the people wailing against you... have not directly addressed and refuted a single one of your statements.

            Rather telling, eh?

          •  tl;dr (0+ / 0-)

            *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

            by glorificus on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 05:58:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Show me that history please, not some (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        OMwordTHRUdaFOG

        "re-write".  I love Thom Hartman, but on that claim, he is wrong.

        So, will you address the millions killed by "free speech" costing us $4 TRILLION for unfunded wars that have impoverished millions of Americans, killing 133,000 per year? Or the billions brainwashed and killed throughout history because of "religion"?

        If we want to stop violence, then let's put them blame where it belongs.  Let's do something about it that will better the lives of every human on this planet, anything less and it's "selfish".

        -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 Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 10:53:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep. Get those guns out of private hands in the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sponson

          city and suburbia.

          Although as heartless, nasty and ignorant as your earlier comment was, gerrilea, I find it enormously rude you re-entered the comments.

          *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

          by glorificus on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 06:14:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I couldn't agree more. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blueness, weneedahero, Smoh

        to hell with the gun nuts.

         I don't give a rat's ass what they think---or why they think it.

        Couldn't care less.

        We are going to achieve gun-control in this shooting gallery of a country---- whether  they like it or not.

        I have zero sympathy for their views--- and no patience for their bullshit.

        Gonna happen whether they like it or not.

        "Hey----Hey---NRA---How many kids have you killed today?"

        by lyvwyr101 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 11:42:21 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  How many more will be sacrificed at the altar of (37+ / 0-)

    the gun Cult before we regain control of Congress and get sensible regulations passed?  Isn't over 100k people getting shot every year enough? (don't worry "only" about 30% die!)

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 01:45:27 PM PST

    •  Nonsense question (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PavePusher, Neuroptimalian

      Nobody is "sacrificed" to anything. Murderers who are determined to commit crimes obtain weapons (legally or not!) and commit massacres with them. This has NOTHING to do with any weapon in the hands of a non-murderer. Nothing whatsoever. I could own a warehouse full of military hardware and never kill anyone. There is no relation between weapons owners and murderers, being one does not make you the other.

      I can own a car, have a driver's license, and buy alcohol legally. When combined, those things are deadly as hell. But we don't ban the things themselves, we ban the improper use of them. And when someone misuses them and causes injury or death, we blame the person who did the deed.

      No one and no thing is responsible for these crimes but the criminals themselves. No measure targeting anyone or anything but those criminals is going to make any difference.

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

      by DarthMeow504 on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:10:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nonsense is that "no one is responsible" although (4+ / 0-)

        I agree that a lot of "responsible" gun owners allow their firearms to find their to children, felons and other people that should not have access to them.

        Your comparison to drunk driving is BS.  We have done many things in terms of laws and safety features to reduce these tragic deaths and they have been reduced significantly. All responsible drivers are subjected to the regulations, because the regulations save lives. No one says that no one is responsible for what drunk drivers do - we all are and should continue to work hard to reduce these tragic deaths.  Bar owners have gone to jail for allowing drivers to drive drunk and it is about time that gun owners be held responsible as well.  I know that the majority of gun owners are responsible, but even a small percentage of a very large number of firearms is too many.

        Regulations like I propose may be an inconvenience to responsible gun owners, but in no way violate the Second Amendment so it's time we get them.

        Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

        by DefendOurConstitution on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 07:23:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  People who misuse their responsibilities (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BlackSheep1

          ...bear culpability under the law. That's not grounds for preemptively removing their rights without just cause. The price of living in a free society is we must trust other citizens to exercise their rights and freedoms responsibility and only penalize them when and if they cross the line.

          We don't ban alcohol or cars. We tried banning alcohol, and look how well that turned out. We penalize people when they misuse these things, we don't take them away to keep them from having the opportunity to do so. The freedom of a non-criminal citizen outweighs the dubious benefits of preemptive restrictions.

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

          by DarthMeow504 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 08:14:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Gun industry buys the laws (3+ / 0-)

      Sadly, we will continue to sacrifice our friends and neighbors on the alter of gun until that time we no longer allow corporations like the gun industry to buy the laws they want.

      As long as corporations can buy the law-makers and they laws they want, then our laws will always favor corporate profits over human lives.

      And the way to stop corporations from buying those law-makers and the laws that maximize their profitability at the expense of the health and safety of citizens is to outlaw the giving of financial gifts to our law-makers and make ALL elections for public office funded entirely by public money.  

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

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:07:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes-isn't (0+ / 0-)

      one of the reasons for Daily Kos is to elect more and better democrats?

      We DO need to regain control of the congress and get sensible gun-control legislation passed.

      "Hey----Hey---NRA---How many kids have you killed today?"

      by lyvwyr101 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 12:01:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It is supposedly a curse in some foreign (53+ / 0-)

    culture to wish one's child predecease an enemy. I can think of nothing worse.
    I have two sons. The worst that's happened to the older one is appendicitis. The younger one was in the hospital for weeks as they fought to save his lungs from multiple issues. He was assaulted by an ex-Marine he thought was a friend for nothing more than an exchange of words. His skull was fractured in four places. He needed plastic surgery and has a titanium plate in his forehead. The cold gives him headaches now. One more punch and he may have died.
    And you never stop worrying about them, no matter how old they are, how healthy, how happy... I imagine I will worry about mine to my last breath.

    It must be my powerful love for my sons that does not allow me to understand how, in light of the numbers of children we lose to gun violence and gun accidents every year, every month, every week and day, how any parent of any child of any age can oppose common sense measures to decrease the number of these tragedies.

    How can they not think of their children, understand the risk to their own, every time another one dies senselessly. What causes such a disconnect?

    It is beyond my abilities to comprehend.

    I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

    by Gentle Giant on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 01:45:42 PM PST

  •  Many people do very adequately hunting big (22+ / 0-)

    game with bow and arrow. I'm just saying.

    There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

    by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 02:36:21 PM PST

    •  I figure there should be a deer season (8+ / 0-)

      for buck knives. Hand to hand (sorta) with a ten point buck! That's manly!

      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

      by CwV on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 03:22:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Guns aren't needed at all (5+ / 0-)

      Bow and arrow for hunting and home security by Louisville Slugger.

      +++ The law is a weapon used to bludgeon us peasants into submission. It is not to be applied to the monied elite.

      by cybersaur on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 04:15:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  We would need a lot more bow hunters (6+ / 0-)

      to keep the deer population in check, at least in Iowa. We have a bow season, a muzzleloader season, and a shotgun season. In the 2011-12 season, a total of 145,000 deer were killed by hunters. Of those, 23,000 were taken by bow hunters, and 4,000 by muzzleloaders. Deer multiply like rabbits. They have become overpopulated in the state. It will take an annual kill of about 120,000 to keep the population stable.

      I have no problem with deer hunters using shotguns, but no deer hunter needs an assault rifle with a 30-round magazine.

      •  Deer overpopulation? Timberwolves for you. n/t (5+ / 0-)

        you don't believe in evolution, you understand it. you believe in the FSM.

        by Mathazar on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 06:57:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Everyone and their sister have been buying (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lyvwyr101

        bows lately, ever since the movie of The Hunger Games came out. I don't know if that will eventually result in more bow hunters in Iowa, but I'm guessing it will be a buyers' market for used archery supplies pretty soon.

        •  I know more bow hunters (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lyvwyr101, HiBob

          than rifle hunters.  But I know a lot more rifle hunters who actually get a deer.  I find bow hunters fascinating.  I often here jokes from hunters - "I don't hunt I just walk around the woods with a gun" kind of things.  But with bow hunting you have to be very very patient and careful.  And enjoy sitting aorund woods watching nothing go by - or not taking your shot because you can't put the deer down in 1 shot or you don't want to lose your arrow or both.

          "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

          by newfie on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:17:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Deer actually don't multiply like rabbits. And I'm (4+ / 0-)

        not trying to pull some sort of an NRA talking point thing on you. Deer produce offspring once a year, and more typically have only one. Rabbits, on the other hand, have a very differnt gestational cycle.

        But, believe me, I know where you're coming from. Once in the ninties I drove from Salt lake to Chicago, and saw two whitetails die by jumping into the sides of semi trailers just while I was trying to get through Des Moines. Not quite like the time that I was on the road between Barranquilla and Santa Marta Colombia and saw hundreds and hundreds of very big lizards (24" total length and up) slaughtered on the roadway, but I've never seen anything in the U.S. like the deer slaughter I saw that time in Iowa.

        So, one possible alternative is government employed deerhunters. Probably even armed with bows, because of the human population density in Iowa.

        There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

        by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 08:24:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That has been (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Karl Rover, oldpotsmuggler, lyvwyr101

          done in Valley Forge.  They've done it for a few years and it has made a significant difference.  Deer were so overpopulated here that on any given evening a drive through the park - there is a major Route that cuts through and is heavily traveled - I could easily count 100-150 in about a 2 mile stretch.  At night all you see are pairs of glowing eyes along the roads.  Had one jump out of the woods in front of a truck and then leap into my windshield one night.

          And forget about the flora.  Nothing really grew in the park below 5 feet.  And living around the park you had a hard time growing anything but deer food - unless of course you own a pair of very large labs who live to silently chase down deer.

          Much different now.  We still see visitors but not a herd of 20 in my front yard.

          "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

          by newfie on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:24:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Lots of deer and hunters around me (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Karl Rover, oldpotsmuggler, lyvwyr101

          Bow and rifle. They have different seasons here (OR) Bow bunting seems more  sporting to me.
          I don't hunt myself (too much like hard work.) Plus I am a combat vet---I learned long ago to come inside if you can when its cold and wet and i had my bellyfull of lugging carcasses around. I still practice moving through the forest quietly.
          I live in the middle of a private forest (not mine, but I have 10 acres) and the timber company that manages it allows hunting. consequently we have hunters all over these hills in season. i see the same guys every year so I guess they got their  own little places staked out.
          Ive never had any problem with these people and they don't litter (except one I'm looking for)

          Happy just to be alive

          by exlrrp on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:49:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I look at it as kind of a payback (4+ / 0-)

    I do think I understand where some of these people are coming from.  It's a basic distrust of the government brought about by a series of events, none necessarily connected.  Living in the USA under the currrent conditions is kind of a payback for Kent State, the Pentagon Papers, the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, warrentless wiretapping, and on, and on, and on.  I'm and old geezer and can remember back in the Eisenhower days when there was a general belief that the government was looking out for people.  I offer no solutions, but can remember quite clearly those days when everyone thought threats came from overseas.  

    •  I disagree. I think people who prefer their guns (18+ / 0-)

      to other people's children or other people are too locked into their own little worlds.

      They would never participate in a massacre so they think no one else would.

      And they say the massacres that do happen are just extreme outliers - can't prevent that. Or there must be some way besides messing with THEIR guns.

      Except the slaughters are happening much more frequently, so the gun lovers just scream "Second Amendment!!! Don't TOUCH my guns!!!" as the blood becomes a river.

      *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

      by glorificus on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 03:29:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  False dichotomy (3+ / 0-)

        It's not a choice between my (theoretical) gun or your children. One has nothing to do with the other. You're attempting to spread responsibility for crime to people who aren't criminals. Collective punishment. Isn't that against the Geneva Convention, let alone common sense?

        Here's a news flash: I'm never going to mess with your children no matter how many guns I do or do not own, so how about you leave me the fuck alone and focus on the actual criminals?

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

        by DarthMeow504 on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:16:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You are being left alone (6+ / 0-)

          You don't have a right to a Spree Shooters Special with high capacity clips. Do your thing. Take up sword swallowing. Play paintball. Juggle flaming chainsaws. Let your freak flag fly. But don't demand some imagine prerogative that states your hobby supersede questions of public safety. As pointed out multiple times on this thread, it's just selfish.

          •  As long as you seek to take something from me (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BlackSheep1

            ...then I'm NOT being left alone. I'm being penalized for something I had nothing to do with, when doing so serves no legitimate interest of government or society. Whatever I choose to own or do not own makes no difference to anyone and is none of their business. Unless I choose to commit a crime, nothing I do or own is any concern of yours.

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

            by DarthMeow504 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 07:56:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  What bullshit. The laws that allow YOU to own (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mrkvica

              a gun with little or no hassle also allows Cho, Loughner, Holmes and Nancy Lanza to purchase guns.

              If you don't see a problem with that, I'd be surprised except I bet you are an RKBAer by attitude if not actual membership.

              Do you know what "E Pluribus Unum" means? Not in relation to this country, but what it means?

              Look it up, and then feel free to move to another country as you sure aren't interested in improving the U.S.

              *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

              by glorificus on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 06:22:32 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Damned right I see a problem (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                fuzzyguy

                ...with penalizing, restricting, and punishing millions of innocent people for the insane and highly criminal actions of a few. And I refuse to comply with your attempt to do so. What part of leave me and mine the fuck alone do you not understand?

                And if you think a regime of gun prohibition is going in any way to have the effect of "improving the country", then you're delusional. Look at alcohol Prohibition and the War on Drugs and educate yourself on the effect of those kinds of laws and the disasters they spawn.

                I'm not moving, and I'm not giving up anything of mine and I'm not submitting to your demands. Period. And there are millions of others who feel the same way.

                Fortunately, I don't think you're going to succeed in getting your way. The can of worms that would be opened by such an attempt and the harm done in it's wake would be staggering. Thankfully, you won't have to bear the blood on your hands that a War on Guns would cause. Maybe, just maybe we can finally kill the War on Drugs as well and put the criminal black marketeers and their gangs out of business without you opening grand new vistas of illegal business opportunity for them.

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

                by DarthMeow504 on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 09:09:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well, you work on ending the War on Drugs and (0+ / 0-)

                  I'll work on gun control. We'll see what happens.

                  And if you really want to left alone, what the fuck are you doing on dKos? Stay off all message boards.

                  *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

                  by glorificus on Mon Jan 28, 2013 at 04:18:40 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  "Leave me alone" means don't attack me (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Steve15

                    and don't take things from me or ban me from things that I have a free right to own and possess barring you initiating a prohibition regime against them. It doesn't mean I don't want to discuss issues, or engage in debate. It means keep your hands and your laws off of me.

                    It saddens me greatly that some people want to start up a new Prohibition when we're not even done counting the costs and burying the bodies from the last Wars on X we've been fighting. We haven't closed those down yet, the last thing we need is another. It's not a progressive thing to do, this insistence on repeating failed policies and engaging in easily predictable folly. The horrific costs and collateral damage of a prohibition on guns is obvious to anyone who's given the concept a rational examination, and yet some wish to unleash that nightmare on us all with no heed to the consequences of what they propose. Their cure is worse than the disease, and yet they wish us all to swallow it regardless of the harm that will result.

                    So you go ahead and keep beating the drums of a War on Guns, and I'll keep protesting the horrific cost in blood and treasure that such a war will cost. We will see what happens indeed.

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

                    by DarthMeow504 on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 06:01:13 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yeah, just keep whining. (0+ / 0-)

                      *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

                      by glorificus on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 07:38:08 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Keep up the personal attacks (0+ / 0-)

                        ...it proves you don't have a logical and sound rebuttal to make. Ad hominem attacks are the hallmark of a bankrupt argument.

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

                        by DarthMeow504 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 12:12:21 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Personal attacks? Those 20 dead kids and (0+ / 0-)

                          their dead teachers are the personal attacks to which I pay attention.

                          Along with the more than 500 dead young people in Chicago annually.

                          *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

                          by glorificus on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 03:29:40 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Appeal to emotion (0+ / 0-)

                            You're just a fountain of logical fallacies, aren't you? You could be used in a debate class as an example of what not to do.

                            You cite the results of a determined murderer with stolen weapons as reason to ban weapons from non-criminals without any bother to establish how this would work, how it would be enforced, and how you would prevent the well known pitfalls of prohibition. People keep making the "cliche" argument that determined criminals will acquire guns anyhow regardless of laws to the contrary because it's never been successfully countered and in fact has been proven time and again. The Sandy Hook case itself is proof! The shooter wasn't legally allowed to own guns, so he murdered someone and stole weapons! The only logic a gun ban has in that situation is "well if no weapons exist, nobody can steal them!" which is ludicrous considering that no ban has ever successfully prevented a black market. All prohibition does is empower and enrich criminals who cash in on the lucrative opportunity to traffic in contraband. All a ban will accomplish is to push the banned items underground. The idea that you can use laws to push the genie of 200 year old technology back into the bottle is pure fantasy.

                            You go on to cut the legs out from under your own argument by citing Chicago and it's murder rate. How can you have failed to notice that Chicago has one of the most restrictive set of gun bans in the nation? How well has that worked out for them? Given these facts, can you fail to see that Chicago's example of gun control is a demonstrated failure? How can you honestly propose doing the same thing again and again no matter how many times it's been proven ineffective and expect to be taken seriously?

                            Anti-gun fanatics like you take every incident as an excuse to push more gun bans of the type that failed to prevent the very incident they're using as a banner. At what point will you wake up and realize that it doesn't work? The only explanation for such behavior is that your belief blinds you to logic, or more cynically that you don't care about actually solving the problem and are only using any excuse to push your predetermined agenda.

                            I swear, it's like repukes and tax cuts. Economy is good, tax cuts! Economy is bad, tax cuts! Bad economic event, tax cuts! No matter what, tax cuts is the solution! Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts! Who cares if it works? If it makes things worse, we'll have more excuses to call for more tax cuts!

                            For some, and you appear to be among them, "gun control!" is an ideology bordering on religious faith just as much as tax cuts is for some rabid conservatives. Logic be damned, results be damned, gotta keep the faith.

                            A true progressive is concerned with what works and not with purist ideology.

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

                            by DarthMeow504 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 10:21:58 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm now sure who you think you are, but you (0+ / 0-)

                            think much more highly of yourself that I think is warranted.

                            Speaking of "ideology bordering on religious faith"; anyone who would rather have their guns instead of living people has issues I find repulsive.

                            Keep on whining.

                            *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

                            by glorificus on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 06:57:41 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Commenter DarthMeow is useless... (0+ / 0-)

                            He is EXACTLY the type of person who's callous indifference to a horrific event is reason enough he should have every last one of his guns taken away.

                            I'm so fucking tired of these nasty little pieces of work commenting on this post and disrespecting the deaths of those in Newtown. Their arguments are self-centered, childish and full of paranoia. They have no idea how that event has affected those parents, that town, and reasonable-minded people all over the world.

                            And they're as far from "brave" as can be. In fact, the whole lot of them are pathetic cowards. Sorry. You need a gun to feel important and rant against your second amendment rights? You're pathetic.

                            "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

                            by Verbalpaintball on Thu Jan 31, 2013 at 08:43:12 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I agree. I'm not reccing it because I do not put (0+ / 0-)

                            it past the RKBAers to start HRing it which will cause Markos to ban everyone.

                            I appreciate your views.

                            *There are two sides to every horseshit.* Kos

                            by glorificus on Thu Jan 31, 2013 at 04:39:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

    •  People who fear their government (8+ / 0-)

      seldom seem to mention Kent State, Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, The Pentagon Papers.

      They may talk about 9/11, Benghazi consulate.

      The fear seem to be more "out there" and ephemeral.

    •  Government was different in the 50's and 60's (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Steve15, lyvwyr101, a2nite

      I think the government of the 50's and 60's was a different creature then it is today.

      50 years ago, our law-makers were not as dependent on wealthy interests and private financial gifts to get into and stay in office.  Running a campaign was less expensive, there was less use of mass media to garner votes, and the congress-corporate revolving door employment pattern was less entrenched.

      Over the intervening years, getting in office and staying in office has become a year-round activity involving personal appeals to wealthy and corporate interests.   Hence, law-makers' constituency has changed from doing something that most voters will like to doing something that those wealthy patrons will like.

      Now voters know the game is rigged, and they no longer trust the law-makers to hold their best interests at heart.  I myself do not trust my "representatives" to represent me; it is no suprise to me that others feel they want to arm themselves against this uncaring  corporatocracy.

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

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:23:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I've seen more than my fair share (26+ / 0-)

    of tragedy too VP.

    At least 3 gun related events impacting my lifetime:

    1 resulting in death;

    1 resulting in life maiming and ultimate derailment;

    1 resulting in hair-trigger stress-reflex, no matter the threat.


    I might buy a gun someday for hunting, if it comes to that.

    But buying a gun as means of inter-personal persuasion,
    I never will understand.

    Reminds me way too much of an updated version of Godwin's Law:

    If you need a gun to win an argument of wills,
    you've just surrendered your claim to human decency.


    Here's how the game is really Rigged.

    by jamess on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 03:25:36 PM PST

  •  I have FB "friends" who are Arkansas, OK, (27+ / 0-)

    KS people who post a lot of stuff about God, Guns and God and Guns.  Yesterday one posted a video of Pete Williams from NBC getting the facts of the Newtown shooting very wrong only a couple of days after the event - when everyone was getting the details wrong.  He was upset about all of the "lying".  The video centered around an erroneous report that there were no semi-automatic weapons involved and had thousands of comments attached - many of which were not only the anti-gun safety nuts, but also people who believe the conspiracy theory that the event never happened.

    I sat pissed off for about an hour trying to decide what to say - whether or not to say anything at all - and thinking "these people are so fucking dumb".

    After a time I posted.  I explained that the story was wrong because it was a very early report.  Pointed him to a more recent and reliable source at the Hartford Courant.  I closed by saying that there were real people who were tragically traumatized and wounded by this event.  That he knew that I existed and I hoped he would take my word for the fact that the people in that area also exist as I know people who live there who are all hurting and very, very sad because the event - horror - was very real - not some conspiracy created to take any one's guns.  I closed by saying that I hoped that they were praying for these people, their families and everyone touched by his tragedy at their church.

    A while later he posted in response thanking me for providing clarity on how wrong that video clip was and assured me that they were praying for the people of Western Connecticut at their church.

    Maybe I've done some good.  But seeing his post suggests to me that this is going to be a tough battle because there are manipulative people out there who are spreading lies and that's just really awful.

  •  So sad for your friends who lost a child @Newtown. (22+ / 0-)

    It is absolutely the deepest pain any of us could ever feel, and so many of us who have been victims of gun violence, or who have had family members who have been shot, have felt the pain of Sandy Hook so deeply.

    I wish deep healing, and equally deep gun reform legislation, for your friends in Newtown. Please express our deepest sympathy, empathy and condolence on the loss of their sweet dear child.

    So many people here have spoken out about their experience as victims of gun violence, myself included, only to be told to "go eff yourself" by the people who value their weapons apparently more than they value the lives of our children.

    Thank you for your personal voice, and thanks to all who are speaking out as victims of gun violence. It is difficult, especially when we are trying to communicate with heavily armed people who gang up on those whom they deem vulnerable.

    Remember, those of us who have survived gun violence are stronger than those who hide behind their weapons.

    Peace.

    "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 Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 05:12:44 PM PST

    •  Are you kidding me? A child's life more valuable (7+ / 0-)

      than my gun? NEVER!!!!!!  My gun is in the Constitution, and children are not, therefore my guns are superior!

      /snark, cause the situation is so sad that I have to make fun of their "reasoned" positions or else I would explode.

      Great comment (yours, not mine).

      Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 05:24:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Defend, I'm hurting, too. But in this diary, let's (9+ / 0-)

        Join together in expressing compassion, empathy and condolence for such a devastating loss.

        I do not know how to get through to people who believe their right to own weapons trumps our loved ones right to survive.

        But I do agree with all of the well-written calls for a kinder dialogue which have been posted by so many Kossacks recently.

        So join me in expressing kindness for Vpb and all those who have lost loved ones to gun violence.

        Thanks, and peace to all.

        "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 Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 05:57:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  False dichotomy (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        i love san fran

        It's not a choice between my (theoretical) gun or your children. One has nothing to do with the other. You're attempting to spread responsibility for crime to people who aren't criminals. Collective punishment. Isn't that against the Geneva Convention, let alone common sense?

        Here's a news flash: I'm never going to mess with your children no matter how many guns I do or do not own, so how about you leave me the fuck alone and focus on the actual criminals?

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

        by DarthMeow504 on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:18:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Okay, you've posted this twice. (6+ / 0-)

          It seems you are the one that is creating the false dichotomy.   The gist of the message here is that when you attempt to make laws to provide some controls over access to weapons that can cause grievous harm - even the simplest most common sense regulations are decried as assaults on MY rights!!!  Frankly, I see little of that from most here but you would have to be totally ignorant not to see that occurring in this country.  

          And you know what.  Some suggested measures may not do anything to prevent further tragedy.  But you have to wonder why you respond with a repeated statement about it not being about  a choice between MY theoretical gun and children instead of saying X measure would not be very effective I think we should do Y instead.  You choose instead to try to shut down discussion by throwing up false arguments.

           You know, I was recently in a college book store with a backpack.  I was asked to leave my backpack in a nearby cubby instead of carrying my possession with me.  Why was that?  Because some people (criminals) would use such a thing to mask their theft.  I had no intent to steal - for crying out load I would drive back in I got home and found I did not pay for an item - but I complied with the rule because some people do steal.  I don't feel that my rights were infringed.

          "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

          by newfie on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:40:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks (7+ / 0-)

      Discussion of violence like this feels so personal that even writing a post like this feels unsettling.

      Nonetheless, my connection to this should be utilized for some good. There's very little I feel I can do that is enough. I see Facebook postings every day that are heartbreaking.

      "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

      by Verbalpaintball on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 06:19:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm not a gun-control absolutist. (5+ / 0-)

    I think people should be allowed to hunt and to own hunting rifles, in at least a restricted fashion. Hunting has been part of human culture for a long time, like since the get-go :) a hundred-thousand years ago, in Africa. If you think hunting is immoral, fine. Be a vegetarian. But your ancestors ate meat, from animals killed violently, and your descendants may well do the same. Cars are also fatal. They kill a lot of people each year. Guess what? An awful lot of people who fully realize this, also drive.

    Yes, I believe guns kill people, and unrestricted availability of fire-power is a problem in society. But, for me, it isn't black-and-white. I believe we should move in the direction of restricting guns, without banning them outright.

    Thanks for the diary.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 05:40:28 PM PST

  •  Thank you..... (23+ / 0-)

    This really resonates with me.

    Rte 25 at the Newtown/ Monroe town line - 26 angels.

    It suffocates me.

    I paid my taxes today at the town hall -boxes and boxes of cards from people around the World - 100 feet of them lining both sides. I couldn't breathe.

    The ache is unrelenting

    The pain for the parents of lost children is unbearable.

    Wearing a green and white ribbon is a cop out for what these children and their parents really need.

    A commitment to pursue reasonable gun regulations.

    We can make it happen.  The time is NOW!

    •  I cannot understand... (15+ / 0-)

      How this cannot resonate with anyone who has a child, niece, nephew, friend or aquaintance of someone who has a child. The idea that anyone can put their personal, self-centered paranoia ahead of the right thing in lieu of an event like this is mind boggling to me.

      "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

      by Verbalpaintball on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 06:26:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I carefully avoided watching or reading (14+ / 0-)

      anything about the Newtown shootings.  I knew enough to know that hearing anything more would just make me cry, & I have enough things in my personal life I can cry about already.

      While, luckily, I can't match the diarist in terms of tragic events, I can say that I've lost two family members to gun violence.  My sister-in-law's husband committed suicide at age 40, leaving his wife and three small sons behind.  He shot himself in the chest on Easter Sunday, after the boys had finished their Easter egg hunt.  The only upside was that he didn't kill them too, which apparently he was considering (according to the suicide note).

      My mother-in-law was shot in the back by her estranged second husband, who then killed himself.  She had a restraining order against him, but he borrowed a gun from a friend, and shot her while she was working in her garden.  Her legally blind, mentally handicapped son heard the shots and tried to save his mother by giving CPR.  She left behind seven grown children (two handicapped), and four grandchildren.  Sadly she never knew the other eight grandchildren who were born after she was murdered, including my own two.

      Would James have still killed himself if she didn't have a gun handy?  Would Bill have murdered Katie if he had not been able to get a gun from his friend?  I don't know.  I think maybe things would have turned out better, and maybe my kids would have a grandma, and maybe my little nephews would still have their daddy.  In my house, we own a hunting rifle, which is in an upstairs closet separate from its ammo.  We don't feel the need for any other weapons, and for the life of me, I don't see why anybody needs any kind of weapon that will kill multiple people at a time. Or any people at all.

      •  Take good care of everyone you love. (4+ / 0-)

        I'm so sorry to hear of such heartbreaking loss, and I respect your good judgement to limit your exposure to further pain.

        There are so many families suffering the tragedies of gun violence, and everyone grieves and heals in our own time.

        May your two children grow up in a world safe from the threat of gun violence, and may all of your family members heal and find a way to let go of the pain.

        The pain may always remain in the background, but I have found that it is easier to heal when there are zero actual guns around in the present.

        Life should be sweet and safe for us and for all of our kids.

        Peace.

        "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 Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 07:22:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Who the heck (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DefendOurConstitution, lyvwyr101

        "loans" their gun to someone?  That fails the responsible gun owner test.

        Sorry for your losses.

        "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

        by newfie on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:42:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  i really thought that after the tragic event (12+ / 0-)

    in Newtown that even the most avid gun lover
    would want to see tougher regulations.

    Like so many others here, i've thought about this a lot,
    and i think it's all about fear, and a whole lot of selfishness.

    It's why people don't seem to mind that we've lost thousands
    of our sons and daughters in the "war on terrorism,"--
    whatever the hell that even means.

    They are willing to let these young people die,
    deluding themselves into thinking this makes them safe.

    "No Restrictions on Guns, Ever!" says to me that their
    own fear [and selfishness] is so great that they'd rather
    have the occasional Newtown occur than give up their
    high-powered, rapid-fire, multiple shot guns.

    Their argument:  if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

    Well....ok.  i'll take my chances with that.
    If tougher laws lessen the frequency of this kind of event,
    i'm ok with that.

    [Hunters--you can keep yours, but only with more regulation
    and better control.]

    [and for those who are afraid of the gubmint--
    grow up.]

    •  More than selfishness, (6+ / 0-)

      that's a lack of empathy, a disconnect, an inability to feel the pain and suffering of others.

      "No Restrictions on Guns, Ever!" says to me that their
      own fear [and selfishness] is so great that they'd rather
      have the occasional Newtown occur than give up their
      high-powered, rapid-fire, multiple shot guns.

      We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate. -Pres. Obama, 1/21/13

      by SoCalSal on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 08:09:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I would say they are complicit in the carnage. n/t (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lyvwyr101

        Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

        by DefendOurConstitution on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 08:21:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Have you stopped beating your wife yet? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PavePusher, i love san fran

          Nonsense accusations don't solve anything. I'm complicit in exactly jack shit. The murderer is responsible for it's actions and no one else. Leave me the fuck out of it.

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

          by DarthMeow504 on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:21:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Your three comments here spew nothing... (7+ / 0-)

            but arrogant nastiness. You have EXACTLY the type of self-absorbed, gun embracing narrow mindedness that everyone here is talking about. Your attitude is selfish and defensive. Good. You should be defensive. You're defending a rationale that has no place in this or any Other society.

            I'm so sick and tired of having futile conversations with people such as you. You have no f**cking idea what you're talking about. You only know what you want at the expense of civilized society.

            "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

            by Verbalpaintball on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:23:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  He forgot to say "guns don't kill ..." n/t (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              lyvwyr101, WakeUpNeo

              Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

              by DefendOurConstitution on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 08:38:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  We aren't a civilized society hence the reliance (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WakeUpNeo, ChurchofBruce

              On killing machines. We don't play citizen on the TV either.

            •  My RIGHTS are at issue here (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              BlackSheep1

              ...and you're calling me "selfish"? You're the one seeking to take something from me when I did NOTHING wrong. Of course I'm defensive!

              You claim my rights have "no place in this or any Other society" and come "at the expense of civilized society" when you've failed to establish how they affect you in any way whatsoever except your philosophical opposition or personal morality. It's eerily reminiscent of the arguments against gay marriage, they can't explain how what strangers they'll never meet do in their private lives has any effect on them but they're all fired up to restrict them!

              What I do or do not own does not affect you, society, or anyone else in any way UNLESS I choose to commit a crime. Until I cross that line, I remain a free citizen and you have no standing to compel me to change to suit your whims. Deal with it.

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

              by DarthMeow504 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 01:19:04 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Excuse me? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Recall, ChurchofBruce, Smoh
                you've failed to establish how they affect you in any way whatsoever except your philosophical opposition or personal morality.
                I don't have to establish anything to you, you nastly little wretch. 20 CHILDREN WERE KILLED BY AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON ONE MONTH AGO, INCLUDING THE DAUGHTER OF ONE OF MY FRIENDS.

                Yet, your great concern throughout all this is your own lame "gun rights." It is your lack of empathy, and that of people like you, that means we should be expediting gun control.

                You're whining because I'm suggesting we "take something from you?"

                WHAT WAS TAKEN BY ALL THE PARENTS IN CONNECTICUT? IS THAT LESS IMPORTANT THAN YOUR PATHETIC ARGUMENT ABOUT OWNING A FIREARM.

                You are pathetic. Your argument's pathetic - and you are far too immature, paranoid and ignorant to own a gun.

                "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

                by Verbalpaintball on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 02:23:04 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Why blame me? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ban nock

                  I did nothing to anyone, not in Connecticut or anyone else. Nothing I owned or intend to own did any harm to anyone. Why are you going after me and my things and my rights? I did nothing. What I do or do not own is none of your damned business.

                  I had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with this tragedy and you have no right to penalize me over it. I'm sorry this happened, but I'm not going to submit to your desire to scapegoat me and millions of other people who did nothing to deserve it.

                  Do you understand this? I'm not a criminal, I'm not a perpetrator of violence, and I've done nothing to anyone. I'm not giving you a damned thing of mine no matter how much you claim it's "for the children".

                  A murderer committed a heinous massacre with a stolen weapon. Attacking me and my rights and property will not change that, will not benefit the victims, and will not prevent any other crimes. Your proposed course of action would solve nothing.

                  Just because you are aggrieved does not give you the right to come after me and take things from me. I didn't do anything. I do not deserve to be punished and I refuse to accept it.

                  Also, your insults are disgusting and unbecoming of an enlightened debate. Ad hominem attacks and appeals to emotion do not serve your case.

                  My answer remains no. Good day to you, sir or madam.

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

                  by DarthMeow504 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 08:08:58 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You did nothing? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Smoh, BlackSheep1

                    Rather than trying to look for ways to have some measure of gun control - or at the very least a ban on semi-automatic weapons - you and your ilk (NRA members, gun enthusiasts, etc.) see this all as a catalyst to strengthen your resolve that nobody should be hampered in their attempt to have a gun that shoots 30 rounds in a second.

                    You're on the wrong side of this argument, man, and you just don't see it. Maybe because its still just theory to you.

                    I've seen a little to much to be able to comfortably fold myself into discussing "theory" of gun control.

                    Pistol for the house. Rifle if you live in the midwest and shoot for food.

                    If you shoot for sport, no. If you buy for hobby, no. This is not a sport or a hobby.

                    "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

                    by Verbalpaintball on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 06:47:48 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That's your opinion. I disagree. (0+ / 0-)

                      To many people, shooting or collecting ARE hobbies and a sport, and it's not your right to tell them otherwise so long as they aren't harming anyone.

                      Moreover, a ban on semi-automatics is utterly ridiculous and will never fly. Do you even know what "semi-automatic" means? Most firearms in existence are semi-automatic, it means they fire once per trigger pull and are loaded with an external magazine. It's the most basic type of firearms technology there is and has been in existence since the turn of the 19th century. And they don't fire "30 rounds a second", that's utterly impossible for a semi-automatic weapon. Clearly you don't know the difference between semi-automatic and fully automatic, and yet you want to set policy on things you clearly don't have the first clue about.

                      Your ignorant, emotionally derived notion of what is "reasonable" and "common sense" is nothing of the sort and will not only be ineffective in solving the problems you're seeking to tackle, they'll also create far more problems than they solve. You;d set up a prohibition regime that would criminalize ordinary citizens, waste huge amounts of resources, and empower and enrich a black market that would be a nightmare. if you think the War on Drugs has been a debacle, just wait. A War on Guns will make it look like a walk in the park.

                      Don't say you weren't warned.

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

                      by DarthMeow504 on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 08:57:32 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  oops, end of the 19th century n/t (0+ / 0-)

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

                        by DarthMeow504 on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 08:58:30 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

      •  What you have just described is the defining (8+ / 0-)

        characteristic of the far right: a complete lack of empathy. It is their fundamental value that "I have nothing moral, emotional, cognitive, or physical in common with them, and therefore their experiences—and indeed the very breaths that they take—are entirely irrelevant to me. Let them live or die. I don't care and there is no connection whatsoever between their lives or deaths and my own."

        It is the worldview of the colonialist, the dictator, the racist, and the paranoiac.

        -9.63, 0.00
        "Liberty" is deaf, dumb, and useless without life itself.

        by nobody at all on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:05:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  My younger sister died (4+ / 0-)

    when she was 5 days old.

    File that where you wish.

    •  Catesby, I'm sorry for your loss. (4+ / 0-)

      Every loss hurts those who are directly affected so deeply, and the hardest thing in the moment is to look around and realize that the world keeps spinning, utterly incognizant of our pain. But we hear you. And we mourn your loss.

      My mom lost her mom and baby sister/brother when my mom was a toddler, due to lack of decent health care for women. I fight with every breath to correct the injustice of health care discrimination against women.

      I know that we can support and love one another, and come to some reasonable agreements regarding gun violence.

      Peace and sweet dreams to you this night.

      "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 Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 08:45:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  If people kill people, make them less dangerous (10+ / 0-)

    As a general social policy we try to make dangerous things less dangerous. We require helmets for motorcycles, seat belts in cars, safety inspections for big rigs and planes, safety equipment in boats, etc. These are devices that can kill people so we try to insulate against that danger.

    If people kill people, that puts people in the situation of these devices. The general social policy would be to make them less dangerous. Sensible gun policy would do that. Sensible might mean (for example) and in line with the above:

    - No high capacity weapons. This reduces the rate at which damage can be inflicted before being contained and increases the chances of others to escape damage  
    - Registration and liability insurance, as with vehicles. This puts responsibility on the owner and gives greater incentive to be in physical control of weapons, while also allowing compensation to victims of damage from those weapons.
    - Limitations on who can possess them, such as skill requirements, periodic relicensing (subject to fines and taking into consideration mental and legal status as felons, etc)
    - Demonstrating proper storage practices (gun safe or other facility) and familiarity with using it. This should be a requirement for insurance.

    Those seem well in line with standard social policy on dangerous items. Since people kill people, according to the NRA, that should apply to people. Let's do what we can to make people less dangerous.
     

  •  I've been thinking lately (4+ / 0-)

    that the really avid gun toters would want more restrictive access and accountability. Like, make them special. And then they can feel even badder about themselves. Like they're part of an exclusive club of experts. Real bad asses. Now they're just  like any other idiot with a gun, as far as anyone knows.

    •  In the end they are just the zealot tools of the (6+ / 0-)

      NRA and gun manufacturers.  They repeat the tenets of they 2A religion as handed down by the NRA priests.  The zealots only care about the idols and the 27-Word Gospel that the NRA handed them, so do not hold your breath and wait for "responsible" gun owners to stand up for sensible firearm regulations.  To put it in context, it would be the same as a pro-lifer admitting that women should have a right to choose - never gonna happen because it would destroy their cult/religion.  In the meantime, the NRA and gun manufacturers are swimming with the god that they created the gun cult/religion for - money.

      Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 08:28:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is important: (4+ / 0-)
    If you think you need one as a civilian, you're an insecure little homunculus who suffers from a small dick or a smaller brain - or a cowardly wuss who really thinks the government is "out to get them." Give me a break.
    Gun Guys seem to think that being a Gun Guy makes them tough and respectable or some nonsense.

    In reality, it makes one look like a coward and an idiot. Or like a little boy playing cowboy, only way stupider and more pathetic.

    Maybe we just need to get the word out: If you have a gun to look tough, you're doing it wrong.

    It is more important to be a confident and articulate speaker than to know jack shit about anything.

    by VictorLaszlo on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 10:08:55 PM PST

    •  and this is civil discourse? Wow. (0+ / 0-)

      I know lots of gun owners in my rural central California county.  Many are women who live alone.  I'm a 50-something female and I own a few guns.  My husband doesn't particularly like guns, but he supports my hobby.  I am neither insecure nor do I suffer from a small dick or a smaller brain.  

      The insults piling up around here have pretty much sent me away from this site for awhile - similar to leaving during the HRC piefights.  I check in from time to time to see if the discourse is improving.  No.

      How many diaries have we seen on DKos about the encroaching police state (check my UID, I've been here awhile)?  Tons.  The government's ever-expanding power is well document. See e.g. Glenn Greenwald, now of Salon.  It's not all that paranoid to distrust the government.

      Once again, I will have to take my leave.  I'm tired of being insulted.

      And before someone posts "but you're not tired of dead children!!!"  remember that my gun ownership did not and never will kill any children.

      •  You see nothing but your own... (5+ / 0-)

        narrow needs.

        Sorry. The government is not "the enemy." They are not secretly trying to turn us into a police state. Get a grip on reality. Your view is NOT IT.

        I DON'T CARE that YOUR GUN didn't kill any children. Your support of the NRA and their ability to allow semi-automatic weapons available for the masses HELPED THIS PSYCHOPATH in Newtown murder 6 year old children. Whether you have the intellectual ability to understand your direct connection to this kind of thing or not is not the issue. It's your continued support for this kind of gun ownership in the wake of THE DEATH OF DOZENS OF SIX YEAR OLD CHILDREN. Give me a break.

        There were a great many German citizens who supported Hitler. They believed him when he told them Jews were the enemy of the German people. People will believe anything. It doesn't necessarily mean its true. What you support says something. You can't just disconnect it because you don't want to be insulted.

        "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose. It's how you ladle the gravy." - Felix Ungar

        by Verbalpaintball on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:52:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I really believe (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VictorLaszlo

      it's that whole man-card thing.

      "Hey----Hey---NRA---How many kids have you killed today?"

      by lyvwyr101 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 12:41:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for the post (6+ / 0-)

    I too have been the victim of crime. I have been trying to explain why I feel so strongly that we need to delegitimize self-defense as a reason to own a gun. I have tried to express that in my experience, the incidents were ambushes and specifically designed to shock and confuse. So, I don't think a gun is your best weapon of self-defense, I think it 's your brain that can help you the most. But, when you're ambushed by an assault weapon, there isn't anything that can protect you.

    Thanks for posting, based on my experience writing about being victimized, I know it's not easy. But, it's important that people know what violence is in actuality.

  •  Jim Brady was not for gun control. (4+ / 0-)

    Until. He. Got. Shot.

    Abortion Clinics OnLine, the world's first and largest source for online abortion clinic information. Join my DK Abortion Group.

    by annrose on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 06:20:59 AM PST

  •  Thank you for this sensitive post on our human (4+ / 0-)

    condition.  The loss of your friend's child in Newtown is so tragic and my concern goes out to all those left to sorrow including myself.  We must put down our realities with guns such as you did here because it lifts us up to action, little by little.

  •  my nephew committed suicide with a shotgun.. (4+ / 0-)

    as a young adult. Imagine coming home to that scene. No particular reason for it to happen.

    I don't own guns.

    This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

    by Karl Rover on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 08:27:12 AM PST

  •  A great diary and discussion that shows what's (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, WakeUpNeo, a2nite, Smoh

    important.  People that want gun regulations have no interest in taking anyone's rights away - we just feel that human life is too valuable (and its loss is tragic/traumatic) to continue with the status quo of easy/convenient firearms for anyone who wants them (can't buy one legally?  no problem! plenty of unscrupulous gun dealer out there that will sell a gun to anyone with money).

    This is not a discussion about guns, it is a discussion about celebrating the lives of our loved ones.

    Lets have people/family appreciation days instead of gun/idol appreciation days.  Lets celebrate life, not death (although it sure is hard to ignore all the death).

    If over 100,000 people getting shot every year* is not enough for our politicians to break the grip that the NRA has on them, then what is?

    * don't worry as "only" about 30% die!

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 08:58:39 AM PST

Ed in Montana, Joe Bob, kelly, zane, Ducktape, Radiowalla, hester, NYmom, Bob Love, Gary in NY, madhaus, alain2112, sponson, annrose, teresahill, cosmic debris, fumie, Brit, wader, revsue, lulusbackintown, Lilyvt, Texknight, psnyder, NYC Sophia, mrkvica, Miss Jones, ranger995, Damnit Janet, HeyMikey, annetteboardman, RebeccaG, kismet, bobnbob, Steven D, lyvwyr101, Bluesee, Skaje, UFOH1, Freakinout daily, Chinton, chimene, offred, Kevskos, madmommy, reflectionsv37, bleeding blue, dansk47, GreyHawk, Hastur, PinHole, rb608, Ozzie, Ginny in CO, Red Bean, Cory Bantic, Over the Edge, begone, Ian H, esquimaux, BachFan, irishwitch, detroitmechworks, tommymet, cybersaur, Mr Bojangles, profundo, mskitty, deha, VictorLaszlo, mystery2me, blueoasis, erratic, gooderservice, SadieSue, CTLiberal, dilireus, middleagedhousewife, blue in NC, suspiciousmind, Mr Horrible, cpresley, One Pissed Off Liberal, dov12348, timewarp, fisheye, BeninSC, asilomar, Cat Whisperer, weneedahero, gloriana, edsbrooklyn, FishOutofWater, wilderness voice, carpunder, skod, aseth, alba, also mom of 5, kingneil, HappyinNM, mn humanist, Steve15, mamamedusa, NewDealer, lineatus, Sharon Wraight, mikeconwell, Calamity Jean, tofumagoo, smartdemmg, TokenLiberal, mofembot, nokkonwud, BYw, Karl Rover, HoosierDeb, Celtic Merlin, ARS, greengemini, LinSea, TheFern, CanyonWren, LeftOfYou, Nebraskablue, WakeUpNeo, earicicle, shopkeeper, DefendOurConstitution, Ibis Exilis, stevenwag, sfarkash, louisev, angel d, davespicer, Nannyberry, Lefty Ladig, mamamorgaine, FogCityJohn, Anima, Lost and Found, samanthab, pixxer, ItsSimpleSimon, AJ in Camden, cocinero, Oh Mary Oh, progdog, nosleep4u, ciganka, Onomastic, Jane Lew, yellow cosmic seed, TAH from SLC, mama jo, Hopeful Skeptic, Sand Hill Crane, trumpeter, dle2GA, worldlotus, peregrine kate, randomfacts, ratcityreprobate, Miggles, SteelerGrrl, Southern Lib, Mathazar, i saw an old tree today, Williston Barrett, Mindful Nature, Siri, S F Hippie, surelyujest, a2nite, Tom Begnal, FloridaSNMOM, jan4insight, cassandracarolina, oldpotsmuggler, arizonablue, Glen The Plumber, OooSillyMe, Marjmar, Bisbonian, Robynhood too, mythatsme, Sue B, kiga, Greenfinches, SwedishJewfish, wozzlecat, remembrance, glorificus, SanFernandoValleyMom, Agent99, broths, Joy of Fishes, averblue, Yo Bubba, alice kleeman, GwenM, Alhambra, birdfeeder, Smoh, ApatheticNoMore1966, peterfallow, tampaedski, oslyn7, GeekGurl2000, Progressif, oregondem30, Vet63

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site