Skip to main content

Eugene Robinson at The Washington Post:
In Senate hearings last week, LaPierre portrayed life in the United States as one long horror movie. “What people all over the country fear today is being abandoned by their government,” he said. “If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs, that they’re going to be out there alone, and the only way they’re going to protect themselves, in the cold, in the dark, when they’re vulnerable, is with a firearm.”

He left out the zombies.

With so many members of Congress already bought and paid for, it’s understandable that the NRA would feel a measure of confidence. But I believe the pro-gun lobby is seriously overplaying its hand, and that the wind has shifted.

Yardena Schwartz at MSNBC:
In the current debate over gun control, it has become conventional wisdom that the NRA’s opposition to stricter gun laws stands in the way of President Obama’s push for new gun regulation. The theory goes that senators and congressmen refuse to stand up to the NRA because the powerful gun lobby will make sure they lose their next election. But now that argument is being tested, and as it turns out, the power of the NRA may be more myth than reality. [...] “It just isn’t the case like it may have been two decades ago that if you take on the NRA, there’s a political price to pay. In fact, they do a lot worse than they ever did before,” [Democratic Senator Chris] Murphy told Mitchell Reports. The more people know about the NRA’s actual influence, Murphy believes, the more likely the president is to get his gun control measures through Congress. “I think that people are going to be willing to vote for common-sense gun legislation, in part because people are seeing that the NRA is a bit of a paper tiger compared to their reputation down here.”
For more punditry on gun control and other issues, let's head down below the fold.

Glenn Kessler gives "three Pinnochios" to the NRA's talking point that there are over 20,000 gun laws on the books:

By any reasonable measure, this is suspicious figure. Its origin is murky, and it is inconceivable that the same number of gun laws would exist now as some five decades ago. Moreover, even experts who favor the NRA’s agenda have their doubts about the figure or its relevance. It may well be the case that there are “thousands” of laws but what does that mean? What does counting statutes, or local regulations, say about the quality or effectiveness of those laws?
Over at The Los Angeles Times, Congressman Adam Schiff (D) explains his new bill:
In 2005, when Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, granting the gun industry immunity in state and federal court from civil liability in most negligence and products liability actions, the National Rifle Assn. called passage "vitally important" and fought hard for it. Although there are exceptions in the law, it has been broadly interpreted to preclude most negligence lawsuits. The result is that — unlike the makers of chain saws, knives, automobiles, drugs, alcohol or even cigarettes — gun manufacturers and sellers have a lesser obligation to act with reasonable care for public safety. [...]

We need to pierce the liability shield that the NRA and gun manufacturers have helped build for bad actors through this law. That's why I have introduced legislation — the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act — to ensure that the victims of gun violence are allowed to have their day in court. [...] No industry deserves the right to act with reckless disregard for the public safety.

Lee Drutman and Alexander Furnas at the Sunlight Foundation:
To better understand how a vote on gun control legislation might play out, we collected relevant data on 26 senators (19 Democrats, 2 Independents and 5 Republicans) who we saw as potentially conflicted on a gun vote. (For this, we include any Republican who didn’t get at least an A rating from the NRA, and any Democrat who didn’t get an F rating.)

As a start, we note that 40 Republicans either have an A or A+ rating from the NRA, and 34 Democrats get an F. We are pretty sure we know how these 74 senators will vote on any gun reform legislation. That puts gun rights supporters one vote away from the 41 votes they would need to filibuster any legislation. This is not a great starting point for advocates of gun control.

The NRA is counting on riding its reputation as an electoral force in order to swing key members of Congress. But as Senator Murphy and so many others point out, the NRA's effectiveness in elections isn't much to crow about. Members of Congress -- especially those on the fence who represent swing districts -- need to know that NRA support in the wake of Sandy Hook is a liability, not an asset. It's why the race in IL-02 is so important. It's a race that's become an referendum on the NRA. Read the latest fundraising push from kos here.

At The St. Louis Dispatch, Tony Messenger pens a blistering, must-read piece against "Sheriff Joe-wannabees:"

When rural county sheriffs like Michael Dixon of Osage County fire off emotionally charged missives proclaiming that they will fight federal overreach on gun control laws, that’s generally good retail politics, the kind that gets a honk and a wave from a gun-toting, pickup-driving voter. But there are consequences to painting oneself as the protector of one tortured interpretation of one sentence in the Constitution while treating the rest of the document as though it were written in invisible ink.
Consider Arizona’s crusty old Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was harmless enough when putting prisoners in pink underwear, but not so much when he found himself in violation of numerous federal laws for basically ignoring those parts of the Constitution that don’t involve protecting guns or trying to prove whether the president was born in this country.

So when Mr. Dixon and others like him foolishly suggest that they will stand against any and all gun control actions taken by the federal government, they do little more than explain to their constituents how little they know of the Constitution.

LZ Granderson, at CNN, writing about the skeet-shooting fauxtroversy and all of the other trumped up attacks from the right:
[T]he next time the NRA or Trump or whoever else feels the need to question Obama's cred, instead of posting pictures of him shooting a gun or going to church or what have you, he should post a graphic showing he's the first president since Eisenhower to capture at least 51% of the popular vote twice.

That mandate from the American people is really all the cred he needs.

Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of Health and Human Services, calls for a (long overdue)  national discussion about mental illness:

We often fail to recognize the signs of mental illness, especially in young people. And when we do see those signs, our first reaction is often not to reach out, but to turn away. This is a culture we all contribute to. And it's one that all of us -- community leaders, teachers, pastors, health providers, parents, neighbors and friends -- need to help change if we want to reduce the tragic burden of untreated mental health conditions.

That's why President Obama has called for a national dialogue on mental health that will be kicked off in the coming weeks. This dialogue will seek to address the culture of silence and negative perceptions of mental illness that keep so many of our nation's young people from seeking care. It will challenge each of us to do our part to create communities where young people and their families understand how important mental health is to positive development and feel comfortable asking for help when they need it.

The good news is that when people do seek help, we have much more effective treatments and supportive services than we did 50 years ago. The proof is the tens of millions of Americans with mental health conditions who are living healthy lives and contributing to their communities. But people will only take advantage of this progress if they are not afraid to seek help. Now is the time to work together to banish those fears and bring mental health out of the shadows once and for all.

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

    •  NOBODY any more. (11+ / 0-)

      Well, politicians, but they don't really count or contribute to the society we are trying to protect.

      No real people are intimidated by those capitalist thugs.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:14:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The pols aren't intimated, but they're pre-suaded. (6+ / 0-)

        In other words, many have already reached their own peace with gun issues and will vote accordingly when the chips are down. The Red State Senators (of whom there are now a majority!) will proudly defend the Second Amendment. Many others will try to slip, slide and duck.

        Given the polls - and our renewed ability to draw attention to what they've said and done in the past - they probably will not want to have to vote if they can avoid it. But that will be tough, so let's anticipate the excuses ...

        -  All the issues bundled together. Too big a bill.
        -  Pick the elements of "gun control" apart. This won't be effective, that one will be too cumbersome, etc.
        -  Background checks and reporting mental illness. Too invasive of privacy and workable.
        -  Limits on gun shows and private dealing. Forecloses commerce in those categories of transactions, only. That's a two-fer of Constitutional provisions at issue!
        - Etc.

        It will be up to us to (1) build the fires, (2) keep our Senators' feet to them, (3) personalize the vote: show them victims of gun violence they would, in effect, be voting against.

        2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

        by TRPChicago on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:29:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Gimme my gun!!! What do you mean I can't have (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Upyours2

      any gun I want. I love my fifty calibur double barrel mouser with its two thousand round magazine! I put it under my pillow evens. Why if some one knocks on my door I just point it and them as I open the door and they run so freeking fast! hehehe. Even my grown kids and grand children stay away so I can spend all my time drooling over my gun collection. What a life. When it gets lonely I just go out and fire a few hundred rounds into the air and go back inside as I listen to the police cars racing around trying to find out what happened. if they knock on my door I mutter something about my old mower backfiring again. hehehe.

      PS. This was a test, just a test, of the emergency gun kook notification system. Do not leave your workstation. Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Lets make it harder for them to do that. It has worked in other places like Australia.

      Our money system is not what we have been led to believe. The creation of money has been "privatized," or taken over by private money lenders. Thomas Jefferson called them “bold and bankrupt adventurers just pretending to have money.” webofdebt

      by arealniceguy on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:26:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  NRA (0+ / 0-)

      As a life member for over 40 years years the NRA is not a Bully; as the President and his cronnies are. They repersent legal gun owners with a voice against sheep who follow the words of the media who is bias to issues and the true  issues. They have trained multi-millions of peoeple in the propper use and storage of weapons. I have sponsorted The Eddie Egeal program to warn kids to Stay away from guns if the see one and tell an adult. Not like Movies and videos the GLORIFY GUNS and warp and bend the minds of our children. You do know the DOD uses these Vidows to instill in kids the use of weapons to train the for military service before they have full developed, Check it out.

  •  Lapierre's fantasy world (20+ / 0-)

    appears to be crashing down around him. Let's hope it does.

    "Onward through the fog!" - Oat Willie

    by rocksout on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:38:49 AM PST

  •  Heh. Lepierre is reminding me more and more (11+ / 0-)

    of another french creature -- Pepe Le Pew.

    Like Pepe, Lapierre has no idea how offensive it is to be anywhere near him either.

    As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them. John F. Kennedy

    by JaxDem on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:43:30 AM PST

  •  Cantor: 'I visited an inner-city DC school (9+ / 0-)

    yesterday'.........Somebody help me, I'm having a vapors attack.

  •  Americans want an assault weapons ban (17+ / 0-)

    When will our lawmakers realize that the only roadblock to common sense gun reforms is the NRA? Real Americans are demanding laws that will make us safer and get military weapons off of our streets. These gun nut cowards blame everyone and everything but guns for mass murders. How can any organization stand up and protect the "right" to own and use 100-round ammunition drums, only designed for mass killing and nothing else? America is awash in an epidemic of gun violence because we have the most lax and reckless gun control laws in the civilized world.  -  progressive

  •  Interesting... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ssgbryan

    since most gun owners do not oppose reasonable restrictions preventing felons and the mentally ill from possessing guns - and since such legislation is extant - does all this anti-gun propaganda lay the groundwork for UNreasonable legislation?

    Why yes, Virginia, there IS an oligarchy - which controls BOTH major parties and 90% of the media and wants to disarm those who would defend the Constitution.

    •  You sound really familiar...... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cartoon Peril

      David Koch is Longshanks, and Occupy is the real Braveheart.

      by PsychoSavannah on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:58:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  . . . and wants to disarm those who would defend (4+ / 0-)

      there just isn't enough tin foil.

      Why is it that, as a culture, we are more comfortable seeing two men holding guns than holding hands?

      by jsfox on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:01:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here's a slope. Please slide off... (3+ / 0-)

      The priest said, "Today's sermon is called 'Liars', but first I have a question. How many of you have read Chapter 66 in Matthew?" Nearly every hand went up. "You're just the group I need to speak to," the priest said. "There's no such chapter."

      by Back In Blue on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:19:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hahaha (0+ / 0-)

      Constitution, armed defense, lol.

      Everyone! Arms akimbo!

      by tobendaro on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:42:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  In this country, it is the CORPORATIONS (7+ / 0-)

      we need to fear, not the government.

      I have no idea who defends us from them.

      Nobody, I think.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:43:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The corporations... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ssgbryan

        are controlled by people - according to the IRS annual report, 400 individuals control more wealth than the bottom 150,000,000 people in this country - THOSE people, controlling the corporations, also control BOTH major parties. By controlling the parties, they control the electoral process.

        90% of the media is owned by only 6 corporations - also under the control of the 400 individuals above, for the most part.

        Therefore, a small group of very wealthy folk (a plutocracy), aided and abetted by some very influential, but not wealthy folk (combined with the plutocracy, forming a controlling oligarchy) control the parties and the message getting out to "the folk".

        So, you are half right - we should fear the control of the corporations, but since they control the government - the corporations ARE THE GOVERNMENT in fascist America.

    •  Pete only posts about guns (6+ / 0-)

      odd, that.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:49:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He's a zombie (4+ / 0-)

        We have several that only post in gun threads and diaries. They get banned and come back under another name.

        Explain.(1+ / 27-)

        Why not an armed secretary?  Or an armed principal?  Or even an armed kid?

        by Pete Cortez on Fri Dec 14, 2012 at 10:55:28 AM CST

         [ Parent ]

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

        by skohayes on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:21:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I have posted... (0+ / 0-)

          in TWO threads on the Daily Kos...only two threads, my friend. Exhibit some patience - perhaps engage in dialogue with someone with whom you disagree - perhaps we find points of common ground. Perhaps not, perhaps you only learn WHY those with whom you disagree think the way they do.

          Or, contribute to the polarization which divides us by recommending banning those with whom you disagree, etc. That's helpful to reasoned debate in a republic (/sarc).

      •  Pete (to date) primarily posts about guns... (0+ / 0-)

        within the greater context of returning America to a Constitutional Republic, vice the oligarchy sliding toward totalitarianism which is its current state.

        I am new here and gun control is dominating the news - give me time and I will expand my topics of interest.

        •  what does that actually mean? (0+ / 0-)
          returning America to a Constitutional Republic

          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

          by Greg Dworkin on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:14:29 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  it means... (0+ / 0-)

            a Republic (in which sovereign people - you know, those pesky "We, the People", folks) have access to actual facts via a free press (vice one in which 90% of the media is controlled by 6 corporations in turn controlled by less than 400 individuals) which prints factual information (vice propaganda - see: http://thomas.loc.gov/... ) and have free and fair elections to select folks who will represent them vice the same 400 individuals who currently control both major parties and the aforementioned 90% of media.

            In so doing, the people spell out what the government CANNOT do to them via a written constitution which a judiciary interprets in accordance with how it was written and adopted by those same "We, the People", not in accordance with how these unelected justices think IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN written (as they are selected from and by the same oligarchy which controls the media, the government including the judiciary).

    •  Gee, that's really special (6+ / 0-)

      How about not just felons or the mentally ill, but anyone with a domestic violence charge against them?

      Guns increase the probability of death in incidents of domestic violence.1

      Firearms were used to kill more than two-thirds of spouse and ex-spouse homicide victims between 1990 and 2005.2

      Domestic violence assaults involving a firearm are 12 times more likely to result in death than those involving other weapons or bodily force.3

      Abused women are five times more likely to be killed by their abuser if the abuser owns a firearm.4

      A recent survey of female domestic violence shelter residents in California found that more than one third (36.7%) reported having been threatened or harmed with a firearm.5 In nearly two thirds (64.5%) of the households that contained a firearm, the intimate partner had used the firearm against the victim, usually threatening to shoot or kill the victim.6

      Laws that prohibit the purchase of a firearm by a person subject to a domestic violence restraining order are associated with a reduction in the number of intimate partner homicides.7

      http://smartgunlaws.org/...

      Let's not just limit it to the mentally ill (who are only responsible for about 10% of violent crimes) and felons.

      “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

      by skohayes on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:29:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  while I dont know the laws in all the states... (0+ / 0-)

        I know that in my home state, if one has a "restraining order" or a record of domestic violence, the court may order that the offender is not allowed to possess guns.

        The reasonable gun regulation reasonable people desire are already on the books. Let's enforce them and stop this silliness about trying to ban weapons which "look scary". That is a position completely borne of ignorance and fear.

        •  The court "may" order that the offender (0+ / 0-)

          is not allowed to possess guns? And under what authority does that court have to tell someone that they're not allowed to own a gun? Who enforces it?
          Do the police go to the house of the offender and take his guns?
          You're going to have to try harder than that, Pete.

          “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

          by skohayes on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:52:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  That is what we do in the military (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mamamedusa, skohayes

        Lautenberg amendment.

        Get busted for domestic violence & you can't handle weapons anymore.

    •  Are you saying that it's shooting season (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cartoon Peril

      on the Corporations, & the people who run them & control their stock?

      Well, grab your AR-15 & show us how it's done. And you'll be marked down for any innocent bystanders who get killed or injured in the process -- far more for each than every criminal you liquidate.

      Until then, I'm not convinced you have a point worth listening to.

      The ballot box is still the safer & more effective tool for change.

      •  NO. That is not what I am saying... (0+ / 0-)

        if that were what I was saying, you would have read my words actually saying that. That is apparently what you are projecting on me due to your jumping to conclusions and/or failure in reading comprehension skills.

        •  That's what I'm hearing (0+ / 0-)

          What other way can I parse your assertion that we need guns because a small group of people control so much wealth? Otherwise, saying simply I have lots of military-quality weaponry ought to be enough to be a deterrent.

          There's a big difference between talking & doing. Don't talk the talk unless you're willing to act. And accept the consequences -- such as murder.

  •  Good roundup--thanks, Georgia! (7+ / 0-)

    It's so nice to look at all those banner headlines and realize that yes, the NRA is indeed overplaying its hand.

    At LAST we're beginning to question whether this modern Baal-Moloch, always hungry for sacrificial victims, is a legitimate god.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:50:53 AM PST

  •  ah cherie -- (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eeff

    what is a table saw, but a frightening weapon?
    solution: remove the blade.

    now, wait: i've been up all night, just took meds, will come back to retract whatever i just said.

    c'est la vie, irresistible escuelete d'saute.
    (unless, in truth, we hear music d'Nashville group.)

    * Join: The Action: End the Bush Tax Cuts for Richest Two Percent * Addington's Perpwalk: TRAILHEAD of Accountability for Bush-2 Crimes.

    by greenbird on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:52:30 AM PST

  •  Lord of the Flies mentality (24+ / 0-)

    Lapierre seems to have a Lord of the Flies mentality, that when disaster strikes people fall into a state of nature that is "red in tooth and claw". It's a popular post-apocalyptic view, but it just doesn't seem to match up with reality.

    People didn't fall into savagery when Sandy hit. When town is hit by a tornado, the town pulls together and rebuilds. Then there is a flood, people will drive for hundreds of miles to volunteer to help with the sandbags. People join volunteer fire departments, and accept the risk, and it isn't because it's lucrative.

    The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

    by A Citizen on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:53:51 AM PST

    •  Lapierre throws everything at the wall looking (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eeff, Vatexia, skohayes

      for something to stick.

      •  Indeed (0+ / 0-)
        “What people all over the country fear today is being abandoned by their government,” [LaPierre] said. “If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs, that they’re going to be out there alone, and the only way they’re going to protect themselves, in the cold, in the dark, when they’re vulnerable, is with a firearm.”
        Shit does stick to the wall when hurled at it. So his answer to the smaller government that Americans fear (but I thought we feared a bigger government -- I'm so confused) is guns to...shoot tornadoes and hurricanes?
    •  the survivalist (8+ / 0-)

      post-apocalypse, Mad Max wing of the right has taken over, via the Tea Party, many other groups.  NRA is one.

      Justice For Will Will spent his brief, courageous life fighting for the rights we all take for granted. Please share his story to support the fight!

      by KibbutzAmiad on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:58:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  GOP is another nt (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KibbutzAmiad, mamamedusa
      •  Disaster (9+ / 0-)

        Lord of the Flies is often treated as if it fact rather than fiction, that civilization is a veneer, and once you scratch it, you reveal a beast. But disasters tend to reveal the best in us. You can cherry-pick people who behave badly in a disaster, but they aren't representative.

        Some people might point to the Stanford Prison Experiment, where subjects played roles as guards and prisoners, but this wasn't stripping away civilization, this was creating an artificial civilization with perverse incentives. It created unchecked power.

        When disaster strikes, we really are "all in this together". In the Stanford Prison Experiment, it was the guards vs. the prisoners, and the guards had all the power.

        Margaret Thatcher once said "There's no such thing as society." She couldn't have been more wrong. People pull together in disasters. The evidence is that we don't revert to Mad Max. The Lord of the Flies people might say "Well, if the disaster is big enough, then we will have a Mad Max world." It seems doubtful based on the evidence, but even so, the best tools in a disaster might be a shovel, a wheelbarrow and sandbags.

        The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

        by A Citizen on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:33:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  those who believe (5+ / 0-)

          that only an angry God and the threat of damnation keeps us in line tend to reject that and assume we will all act as rabid lone wolves.  It's a telling thing about the right, I think.

          Justice For Will Will spent his brief, courageous life fighting for the rights we all take for granted. Please share his story to support the fight!

          by KibbutzAmiad on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:51:46 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Another unpublicized survival tool (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mamamedusa, Dogs are fuzzy

          is simple: get to know your neighbors. Because if/when disaster strikes, they're going to be the first people you'll turn to for help.

          And even if the disaster is "big enough", banding together in local groups where everyone knows each other (& can share those resources that are hard to move) will improve the odds of survival far more than accumulating the largest stockpile of firearms. I expect a group of half-a-dozen single mothers with small children are more likely to survive a "Mad Max" apocalypse than one heavily-armed gun nut: the gun nut has to sleep sometime.

  •  Seriously overplaying its hand? (6+ / 0-)

    SHHHHHHHHHHH!

  •  One of the laws I'd like to see (8+ / 0-)

    tightened up is the one where you can straw purchase a used gun as long as you "don't know" the person you're buying for is a criminal.

    Um, what?  

    Let's just get rid of that giant loophole once and for all.

    David Koch is Longshanks, and Occupy is the real Braveheart.

    by PsychoSavannah on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:00:36 AM PST

    •  It seems straw purchases can be traced (8+ / 0-)

      to certain gun dealers who 'tend' to cut corners on the law.

      Chucks Guns just outside of Chicago is reported to be an EPICENTER of straw purchases with a huge percentage of guns used in Chicago crimes ultimately traced back to them.

      Check's guns is apparently still open for business.

      Do you think it would be a good idea to MAYBE raid the place?

      I know they aren't growing marijuana or trying to help sick people with it, but they are actually appearing to be directly responsible for a large number of actual real crimes in which people were hurt.

      I know Americans prefer their law enforcement waste as much money as possible harrassing and ruining innocent Americans who have done nothing to you, but, since I hear all this uproar about 'saving lives" and "doing something about guns" do you think we can have the cops try to REALLY save some lives? Or do you really believe marijuana is a bigger threat to america than legal guns?

      if you do, I doubt both your intelligence and your sense of judgment.

      This is simpler than shit and America has it totally fucked up.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  there is a small percentage of dealers (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xxdr zombiexx

        who risk imprisonment and losing their licenses for a quick profit.  It is to the advantage of all dealers to weed out these few bad apples

        •  But Obama will send the DEA into raid (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Laconic Lib, Odysseus

          medical marijuana clinics and we'll hear their fucking bullshit reasonings.

          Americans seem to think that marijuana is a bigger threat to them than guns.

          And they could not possibly be any stupider.

          And that goes all the way to the top, if stupid decisions are being made.

          Which they are.

          The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

          by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:47:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  we agree on weed but sadly the science of (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            xxdr zombiexx, mamamedusa

            medical weed is ignored as the feds exert their power over the states, in this case asserting federal laws on weed trumps state laws.  Heck the IRS even disallows business deductions for the clinics on the grounds they are a criminal enterprise (BTW ever seen an infrared photo of S. Cal?  the amount of weed grown on public lands with impunity is staggering)

            •  Ronald reagan did with marijuana research (5+ / 0-)

              what the NRA did with gun violence research: deep-sixed it.

              Since the early 1980s NO federal funding has been used to search for good applications of cannabis. Only research to find bad stuff was authorised.

              Even today - in the 21st Century - it is still so banned its virtually impossible to study.

              The purpose is clear: thwart anything that interrupts the propaganda stream.

              Same with eliminating gun violence stats: that seems to be a basically evil maneuver: we dont want people to be able to show how deadly guns are.

              Can't show how positive weed might be, can't show how bad guns can be, both clearly GOP policies and SOME cannot see the parallels - perhaps even brag about their lack of dot-connection..

              The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

              by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:04:23 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  The ATF needs a lot more agents to (4+ / 0-)

          enforce any gun laws.  This Republican House, even if a modicum of gun control legislation passes, can - and no doubt will - refuse to appropriate enough money for enforcement.  It's the deficit, you know.

          "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

          by SueDe on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:49:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Back off "dr." (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Laconic Lib

        #1 - not every fucking thing is about marijuana
        #2 - I'd have shut the fucking place down if it was me in charge
        #3 - IT IS CURRENTLY NOT ILLEGAL, BY FEDERAL CODE, TO STRAW PURCHASE A USED GUN.

        So take your "you's" and "Americans are stupid" crap and stuff it in your pillow case.

        David Koch is Longshanks, and Occupy is the real Braveheart.

        by PsychoSavannah on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:46:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  What Chuck's Guns is doing is (4+ / 0-)

        perfectly legal.
        What those 87 gun stores in Phoenix (responsible for about 50% of guns sold to Mexican criminals) is perfectly legal.
        Why would we raid them when they're not breaking the law?

        “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

        by skohayes on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:37:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  with all the focus on straw purchases (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mamamedusa

          I thought they were already illegal.

          Imagine my surprise to find out they are legal.

          Apparently, even though people are complaining about them, they aren't illegal and people can do as they wish.

          Why would we want to continue to tolerate such things?

          The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

          by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:41:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Is it? That would be different from drug law. (0+ / 0-)

          It may be perfectly legal for all I know, but if you owned an apartment building and there were hundreds of meth labs in it, the DEA would wonder about you (and cause you trouble).

          •  Are meth labs legal where you are? (0+ / 0-)

            My point was that we need to change the laws, not raid gun stores for doing something the law now allows.

            “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

            by skohayes on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:27:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Park a surveillance van outside. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mamamedusa

        Get pictures of every customer.  ID them from photos and track their criminal records.  Show a pattern of lawbreaking.  Compare those photos to eyewitness accounts and sketches of suspects to see if they match.

        There's a lot of pressure that a committed civilian group can put on these bad gun dealers.

        -7.75 -4.67

        "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

        There are no Christians in foxholes.

        by Odysseus on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:32:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  NRA reasoning confuses themselves (14+ / 0-)

    “What people all over the country fear today is being abandoned by their government," said LaPierre.

    WTF?

    I thought people wanted their guns to protect themselves FROM the Big, Bad Gubment. But no, now they need their guns because the benevolent, kind, helpful government might not be able to help people in their time of need after a natural disaster.

    Maybe LaPierre and his NRA minions should tell all the GOP Congress members they've bought to stop trying to drown the government in the bathtub, then, huh? Whaddya say, Wayne -- tell your puppies in Congress to quit blocking federal disaster relief and infrastructure investment?

    Un-be-freakin-leavable that they can't even keep their own delusional ranting straight!

    •  They don't want to be abandoned by (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tb mare, mamamedusa

      The government they may have to one day ptew! ptew! ptew! shoot at. Speaking of mental health...

    •  The NRA doesn't have 'reasoning' (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      indie17, ssgbryan, llywrch, Dogs are fuzzy

      It has emotionalized propaganda, just like the DEA and the ONDCP about marijuana.

      Both groups of liars take a tiny true fact [we must provide security for our homes] and blows it into a friggin' mythological religion.

      Somehow we are involved in 3 gunfights a week, just to get toilet paper at the corner market.

      the NRA takes a very basic reality and blows it so far out of proportion is bears no resemblence to reality. And that is where their 'reasoning' BEGINS.

      You do not arrange your entire waking life around the remote probabilty of being a victim of a crime.

      the NRA propaganda totally erases the logic needed in self-defense and perpetuates this ridiculous idea that guns will somehow magically protect you.

      I am willing to wager at this point in time that more than a full third of people buying handguns or 'assault style rifles' will not have 5 minutes of training in dealing with them.

      I'd like to see mandatory training courses people have to pass before they can own certain guns - handguns and semi-auto rifles in particular. I asked the gunnery sargent what he thought about this: "Oh hell yes!"

      he is a big believer in training.

      Me too.

      I don't think it would hurt and people can keep their guns.

      A pragmatic compromise ...

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:32:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  NRA would back that if they were member-based (0+ / 0-)

        A lot of their members are firearms instructors who would gain business as a result.

        The NRA before about 40 years ago would have backed it because teaching firearms safety was part of their core mission.

  •  I'm wondering if Citizens United weakened the NRA. (5+ / 0-)

    In that it used to be a pretty big deal in the world of wingnut PACs, and now it's just one of many hundreds of wingnut PACs and, consequently, has lost influence.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:06:01 AM PST

  •  This constant drum beat by some (9+ / 0-)

    that if Democrats vote for any gun regs they will end up losing elections needs to stop. It just isn't true.

    Why is it that, as a culture, we are more comfortable seeing two men holding guns than holding hands?

    by jsfox on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:06:24 AM PST

    •  It's entirely possible. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      entlord

      What do you think happens to Harry Reid if he makes an effective gun contro law that gets passed?

      think he'd be re-elected in a state like Nevada?

      Politics, as usual, is going to totally fuck the good ideas, water them down with half-assed compromises and we'll have that half a loaf of shitty break pragmatists always rave about.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:24:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Chris Murphy is a Senator (7+ / 0-)

    Not a Congressman. He was elected this past November.

    Just sayin'.

  •  NRA needs to stand down (6+ / 0-)

    Right now I am suspicious either they have been infiltrated by SNL or Colbert

  •  If Americans feel abandoned by their govt. . . (11+ / 0-)

    during times of disaster as LaPierre suggests, then they need to look to the Party of No who obstructed disaster aid relief for the victims of Hurricane Sandy. . .

  •  Chris Murphy is a U.S. Senator (6+ / 0-)

    leave it to MSNBC, such a reliable source of misinformation, to identify him as a "Rep."
    Perhaps they are still in mourning that Chris Murphy has replaced their beloved Tail Gunner Joe Lieberman.
    We in Connecticut could not be more pleased that Lieberman is gone.

  •  Wayne LaPierre (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SoCalSal, mamamedusa

    The other day, this song popped to mind with regards to him.  After seeing a bit of a report that says he is not, personally, a gun guy.  (He just does it for the money, it would appear.)  Before this is over, he may find a need to retire, so the organization can clean up their image, which is likely not possible with him remaining at its helm.

    "Taxes are for the little people" - Leona Helmsley (before being sent to jail for tax evasion)

    by Land of Enchantment on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:18:41 AM PST

  •  NRA empty suits (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ssgbryan, Boreal Ecologist

    NRA hacks like LaPierre are hollow men, empty suits who have gotten by on brazen bullying since their schoolyard days and have been handsomely rewarded for their efforts by the weapons industry.  These hacks are nothing more than immoral mouthpieces for an industry that profits from murder by fanning the flames of fear in order to sell more and more guns.  The fact that most actual NRA members agree with many sensible gun control measures sought by the Obama administration shows you everything you need to know about the NRA and who it really represents.  The vast army of NRA members that LaPierre claims to have covering his back on every outrageous demand is no longer there.   Instead, out on the sharp end of this debate for the NRA we've got LaPierre and a few other empty suits, wearing tinfoil hats and carrying paper swords, staring with goggle-eyed dismay at the majority of Americans and the majority of NRA members who are now arrayed against them, and soiling their pants whenever they look back at the ever-diminishing band of credulous NRA members who can still stomach supporting the NRA empty-suits' increasingly insane demands.  The time to start ending the insanity is now.  Call your Representative and Senators--demand they support the President's gun control agenda.  

  •  below the fold (0+ / 0-)

    For more punditry on gun control and other issues, let's head down below the fold.

    I guess one item on mental health makes that true. But, it does relate to gun control as well.

    I am off now to make some obviously needed coffee.

  •  What, practically, is the NRA's electoral clout? (5+ / 0-)

    Does their endorsement actually swing a huge number of votes that would be otherwise available for a progressive or Democratic candidate?   It is reported that 72% of the NRA membership supports various limited forms of gun control.   So the nuts and bolts vote counting question would be - how many of the remaining 28% are the kind of survivalist, creationist, UN-fearing crazies who would never vote for a Democrat anyway?   Most, I would guess.

    Then, does their endorsement stimulate a lot of great volunteer door-knockers and phone bankers?   Similarly, I'd guess not.   LTE letter-writers?   Maybe, but I'd bet that a lot of that is astro-turfed anyway.

    So...at the end of the day...I'd submit that the importance of the NRA endorsement is the money that they give in campaign contributions.   Not that that is insignificant, but 2012 showed that a good ground game can overcome a financial deficit - at least to some extent.  

    A quick OpenSecrets search indicates that the NRA disposed of about $20M (between direct contributions and PACs) in 2012.   That's a lot, but - as Bush Bites points out - not as much as many of the new PACs and 503c's.   This was spread over 176 candidates, for and against.  

    I have to run, so I'll let others parse the success rates and impact.  I think it is lower than people think.  But the bottom line is that their resources are not unlimited, and if we make them spread them over more candidates who oppose their extremism, their impact will be further diminished.

  •  Privacy laws (11+ / 0-)

    Another barrier to effectively dealing with mental illness is privacy laws. As a college professor, I became concerned about one of my students, who was writing rants on depression, his family falling apart, how much he liked playing violent video games, and yes, how important gun ownership was.

    What to do with that information? I was barred from contacting his parents (Buckley Amendment), even if I had had their contact info. I contacted the psych services at the college, and they said since he'd already left campus for the summer, there was nothing they could do. Nada. They told me it was illegal for me to contact the police in his home community, and besides, I didn't want the kid arrested, I just wanted to make sure he wasn't the next Columbine shooter.

    On the psych office's advice I sent an email to the kid -- to his college email, the only one I had -- saying I was concerned about him. I never heard back and don't know if he even got the message.

    When I read about the Newtown shooting, all I could think about was how easy it is for a young adult to fall through the cracks where people know there's something strange going on but haven't any idea what to do or who to call, or are told they're not allowed to because of privacy blah blah blah.

    •  although in this case (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SoCalSal, LilithGardener

      and other cases, the eventual perp is not always easily identified.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:54:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  As a retired educator, I ran into that problem (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      drmah, LilithGardener, llywrch, mamamedusa

      several times, and agonized over it.

      I recall an interview with a school official (counselor) at the high school in Newtown who said that when Lanza left the school he feared for him because no one would then be keeping track of him, trying to get him help, etc.

      The community college he was attending knew Loughner had serious mental health problems, but once he dropped out of school, they had no way to help or intervene.

    •  Not-so-good news (0+ / 0-)

      According to Kathleen Sebelius, "The good news is that when people do seek help, we have much more effective treatments and supportive services than we did 50 years ago."

      Seriously, not so much.  It might be true if the mentally ill person him- or herself seeks help, but forget it if you have a very ill family member who is not only violent, but resistant to treatment.  There is literally nothing you can do until they show violent intent -- by which time it might well be too late.  

      There are many, many cases of horrific crimes committed by mentally ill people whose families have tried desperately to get them help, to know avail.  The warning signs were there, for example, in the case of Jared Loughner, who shot Gabrielle Giffords, whose classmates at Pima Community College reportedly took seats near the door so they would be able to escape when he "blew."  The Virginia Tech shooter scared his professor/adviser so much that she insisted someone stay close by when he was in her office.  Adam Lanza's mother seems to have struggled to get treatment for her son, too.

      Obviously most mentally ill people harm no one.  But we really need to take a look at mental health services, balancing safety with privacy rights of the mentally ill.  It is a huge challenge, but if there were someone to turn to when one fears a violent family member, maybe some of these horrifying events could be prevented.

      War begins where reason ends. Frederick Douglass, 1866

      by politichic on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:12:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  How long until the Right demands a photograph of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ten canvassers

    Obama's vagina in order for them to feel he's qualified to fight for women's rights?

  •  Add gun control to the LONG and growing list of (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bon Temps, Laconic Lib

    Democrat agenda items that will die in the Senate at the hands of the filibuster because Reid and Senate Dems didn't have the nuts to change the rules.

  •  Congressman Schiff's statement (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laconic Lib, ssgbryan, llywrch

    "No industry deserves the right to act with reckless disregard for the public safety"  doesn't go quite far enough.  It should be that no entity deserves the right to act with reckless disregard for the public safety.  
    The House and Senate come to mind.

    "A different world cannot be built by indifferent people." Anon from a fortune cookie I got.

    by coloradocomet on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:08:56 AM PST

  •  Doing nothing is not an option this time (4+ / 0-)

    Maybe if a Senator or two got his walking papers in 2014 for blocking violence control measures? Or the House saw a couple of new faces come 2015 because a Representative loved weapons and killing more than his constituents?

    Yeah, the conventional wisdom for decades has been not to cross the NRA. That would get flipped in a big hurry if the NRA lost a couple of its pet congressmen in 2014. Which would have the salutary effect of getting the attention of a couple of other lizard-brained knuckleheads.

  •  One. More. Time. (7+ / 0-)
    [T]he next time the NRA or Trump or whoever else feels the need to question Obama's cred, instead of posting pictures of him shooting a gun or going to church or what have you, he should post a graphic showing he's the first president since Eisenhower to capture at least 51% of the popular vote twice.

    That mandate from the American people is really all the cred he needs.

    When someone is impatient and says, "I haven't got all day," I always wonder, How can that be? How can you not have all day? George Carlin

    by msmacgyver on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:16:19 AM PST

  •  Look at the incentives (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skohayes, indie17, Laconic Lib, mamamedusa

    Every time a suicidal person buys a gun, the NRA and the gun industry make money.

    Every time a criminal buys a gun, the NRA and the gun industry make money.

    Every time a sociopath buys a gun, the NRA and the gun industry make money.

    Every time a violent, delusional or paranoid person buys a gun, the NRA and the gun industry make money.

    In fact, the more weapons and the more ammo these people buy, the more money the gun industry and the NRA make.

    The NRA and the gun industry have zero liability for putting weapons in these people's hands. There is literally no downside for them to arming crazy, dangerous people, only an upside.

    If we are talking about gun safety there is no reason to listen to them at all.

    If you want something other than the obvious to happen; you've got to do something other than the obvious. Douglas Adams

    by trillian on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:29:55 AM PST

    •  How does the NRA make money off a gun sale? (0+ / 0-)

      You wanna 'splain that to me, Lucy?

      •  Sure (0+ / 0-)

        The vast majority, some say 74%, of NRAs funding comes from the gun industry, so yes those dollars come from sales of guns and ammo.  Every sale gives the industry more money to contribute to the NRA, which it does, in exchange for which the NRA makes sure as many guns as possible continue to be sold.  It makes sense for both parties.  What doesn't make sense is to pretend that the NRA is some altruistic organization concerned with its individual members or the hunting/sportsmen community or Constitutional issues or anything else.  It is primarly interested in making sure as many guns and as much ammo are sold as possible.

        A report on the topic here

        Even more direct is the NRA's "Round Up" program whereby gun and ammo sales invoices are "rounded up" to the next whole dollar with the round up going directly to the NRA.  A real such "round up" invoice is included in that report.

        If you want something other than the obvious to happen; you've got to do something other than the obvious. Douglas Adams

        by trillian on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:43:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  A technical question for those (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541

    familiar with the bills being proposed. Does any of it deal with detachable magazines? A 10 round limit for a fixed magazine is one thing. It would probably take upwards of ten seconds to replenish it. But a detachable magazine? I would guess one of these could be changed inside two seconds, with a little practice.

    Also, I think 10 rounds is too much. Four or five gives you all the firepower needed for any responsible purpose, IMHO.

    Note to Boehner and McConnell: "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." --Bob Dylan-- (-7.25, -6.21)

    by Tim DeLaney on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:55:33 AM PST

    •  NY went with 7 (5+ / 0-)

      And, yes.. you are correct.  The kid in Newtown could have done just as much damage with 10 round magazines as with 30.  There was no one to confront him while changing magazines.  Some reports say he only used 15 rounds from 30 round magazines.  So, magazine limits would not have helped in Newtown.

      The Gabby Giffords shooting in Tuscon, however, show how limits on magazines would help.  Loughner had a 30 round magazine for his Glock, and was subdued when he when to change it.  Lives could have been saved if he hadn't been able to possess more than 10 round clips.

      I agree we should limit magazine capacities. The biggest problem is this - usually these bans are only on new sales going forward.  There has been a run on high capacity magazines for all semi-automatics the past two months. It has run up the price 2-3 times normal and they are still flying off the shelves when they are available.  Millions sold, from some accounts.  (same with AR-15's and others)

      I think there should be some limit on rate of fire as well, but I do not know if that is technically feasible.

    •  Yes and no. Feinstein bill addresses it. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tim DeLaney

      Detachable magazines are legal by themselves but make a weapon illegal if it otherwise has military-looking features.

      You're asking the right question.

  •  Americans for Responsible Solutions (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541, mamamedusa

    I signed up for this PAC started by Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly.

    Today I was incensed by the reports that an assault weapons ban will not even make it to the floor for a vote although background checks will. So I decided to write to the PAC on the matter and get their take on this.  After you register on that site there is no way to contact them again unless it is to make a donation.  It's a minimal site with very few links and certainly no "Contact Us" link.  Does anyone know more about this?

    I sent the following to my congressman and then to the Brady Campaign.  

    Why am I hearing that the assault weapons ban is being abandoned even before it comes up for a vote?  The vase majority of people want a ban on these automatic weapons of destruction but elected officials are still quaking with fear at the toothless NRA. Is this what's happening?  I am appalled at the lack of conviction and courage by elected officials in Washington. How long are we to be intimidated by these gun nuts?
    But my real concern at this time is that I can't contact Americans for Responsible Solutions.  They really need to enhance their web site.
  •  The NRA has had a field day with this country. (0+ / 0-)

    The NRA played the fear-card (large marauding gangs of violent brown-skinned criminals rampaging through our streets) to an incredible degree of success for them-- and complete and utter failure---for this country--on so many levels.

    They've played on racial prejudice---regional biases---class differences---political differences---religious differences---you name it---they've expolited every bias and prejudice there is in this country---and made money hand over fist doing it.

    They have literally worked to destroy this country----for the sake of  a profit----and they have engaged in a shameless expolitation of the second amendment for political clout.

    Mayan Word For 'Apocalypse' Actually Translates More Accurately As "Time Of Pale Obese Gun Monsters."......the Onion

    by lyvwyr101 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:17:06 AM PST

  •  Democrat (0+ / 0-)

    Your right about one thing white use to add up to 32% of the world population.How it
    adds up to 8% of the world population.White people are going extinct.So any voting that was won .Was because we are already out number by minority's.Plus with  white democrats that are helping to make sure that white people will go extinct.I don't understand Democratic Christian how you can call yourself a Christian.I mean Your helping every Anti American Organization in the world. The same one's that were shouting no more God at your Democratic convention .The same people that want to kill you the first chance they get because you are a christian.The same people that have set up a baby killing assembly line in America.How many is it now 1 million a year. whats it going to be next year 2 million it's just like human sacrifice.I think you people are quite misguided.
    You see the problem with white people is that they don't stick together like minority's do.We come from European descendants.The black are killing every white person they can get their hand on in South Africa. They have almost have kill them all off.And once the illegal get citizenship you might as well call  our country United States Of Mexico.Every white person will become the minority.If your a white guy?You can't stick up for your own race. You are call a racist.But the Blacks can do it .The Mexican can do it.The Chinese have 1 billion Chinese people.The Muslim can do it .But if your white you can't stand up for your own race.One day your white ancestor will be waking up in the morning . And hoping those minority's won't do to them what whites have done to them in the past.White people they are destroying themselves and to stupid to know it for all their supposed smarts.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site