Skip to main content

Primarily because of Chicago, I was challenged by the owner of a gun blog to illustrate how well gun control works.

I accepted it.

US = no gun control = 14078 gun homicides= 0.00446% of the population= 4.69 per 100,000

Somalia = no gun control = 138 gun homicides = 0.0000138% of the population = 1.38 per 100,000

Yemen = no gun control = 990 homicides (by any means) = 0.0000413% = 4.30 per 100,000 (this total includes deaths by swords, stonings, long curved knives and guns).

-----------
Japan = good gun control = 11 gun homicides= 0.00000866% of population = 0 per 100,000

S. Korea = good gun control = 14 gun homicides = 0.0000290% of population = 0 per 100,000

Spain = good gun control = 67 gun homicides = 0.0000565% of population = 0 per 100,000

Finally, Australia. a single country on both sides of the spectrum! One that had no gun control, then passed legislation which controlled guns. In similar terms out of 100,000, it went  from a high ratio of 4.71 to 1.06....  Gun control where you make it illegal to own a weapon of a military grade, works deliciously well...

Now, blog owner.  Prove how homicides go down when you give everyone a gun...

The NRA has their head wedged so far up their butt, I bet it hurts bad when they try to sit down...

Originally posted to kavips on Mon May 06, 2013 at 03:53 PM PDT.

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 (153+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, DRo, Penny GC, Bob Duck, shopkeeper, a2nite, Glen The Plumber, puakev, PrometheusUnbound, ZedMont, sawgrass727, MsSpentyouth, lissablack, dream weaver, DefendOurConstitution, Darryl House, voracious, psnyder, Empty Vessel, nominalize, Matt Z, jdld, davespicer, Jason Hackman, lexalou, detroitmechworks, filby, aseth, mlharges, RAST, murrayewv, Ginny in CO, copymark, serendipityisabitch, gramofsam1, The Hindsight Times, SaintC, Kimbeaux, snowwoman, zozie, antirove, petulans, Laurence Lewis, frsbdg, jaywillie, Bluesee, Kevskos, pat bunny, Smoh, Black Max, ridemybike, Larsstephens, sethtriggs, night cat, PsychoSavannah, sagesource, S F Hippie, Bryce in Seattle, roses, DBunn, Magnifico, GeorgeXVIII, FogCityJohn, lynneinfla, mystique mist, Miggles, thomask, Simplify, awakenow, oldpotsmuggler, remembrance, maggiejean, science nerd, Emerson, YucatanMan, Sandino, Creosote, john07801, VTCC73, greycat, westyny, NYFM, Mathazar, Leap Year, davis90, fumie, jan4insight, WakeUpNeo, MadRuth, Voter123, nswalls, TFinSF, rapala, mamamedusa, astro, Habitat Vic, tampaedski, PinHole, democracy inaction, mconvente, Apost8, MNGlasnant, XStryker, BeninSC, camlbacker, Miss Blue, ctexrep, Duncan Idaho, blue aardvark, wader, No one gets out alive, hubcap, Rileycat, rigcath, Debby, zerelda, Silvia Nightshade, tytalus, rasbobbo, envwq, MKinTN, kharma, Texknight, Beetwasher, stunzeed, splashy, artisan, timewarp, sturunner, letsgetreal, Loudoun County Dem, Buckeye Nut Schell, dmhlt 66, cpresley, humphrey, Shockwave, randomfacts, el dorado gal, eeff, marleycat, slowbutsure, Its a New Day, unionblue, essjay, FutureNow, mjr, legendmn, Tea and Strumpets, Involuntary Exile, Oh Mary Oh, klompendanser, elginblt, JerryNA
  •  Love the 'right back atcha'! (36+ / 0-)

    Numbers don't lie, just the lying liars. And guns do kill, that is what God made them for...
    Peace and Blessings!

    United we the people stand, divided we the people fall.

    by Penny GC on Mon May 06, 2013 at 04:02:54 PM PDT

    •  Or as someone once said ... (7+ / 0-)

      Figures don't lie, but liars figure.

    •  But this analysis shows very little (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FrankRose

      For example, do you believe that guns make people kill with knives and other weapons?

      If not, then you need to normalize based on the number of homicides done with other weapons before comparing gun homicides.

      In addition, Somalia does have gun control.  See http://www.gunpolicy.org/....

      Finally, this is hardly going to convince anyone.  The argument against gun control is more based on the famous Franklin quote (http://en.wikiquote.org/...):

      They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
      •  What? (9+ / 0-)

        Please stop with the strawman.

        Allowing you to own one/several of a few hundred types of guns while banning one type is not forcing anyone to give up an "essential liberty".

        Christ, this constant "infringement" argument because your special pony isn't the right color makes me ill.

        Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

        by Miss Blue on Tue May 07, 2013 at 06:29:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  One type? Exactly what type are you planning to (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose

          ban while still allowing a few hundred other types?

          And unless there is something special and unique about just this one type of gun, why bother banning it?  But if there is something special and unique about it then how can you claim that there is no infringement just because you do not ban all the others?

          •  Ok, how about this then (0+ / 0-)

            The if the Founding Father intended guns, then we collect all the guns and hand out brand new muskets for everyone, as many as you would like. That was their frame of reference that is what you get. The gun manufacturers get to make lots of new toys and you get all the muskets you want. I am good with that.
            Peace and Blessings!

            United we the people stand, divided we the people fall.

            by Penny GC on Wed May 08, 2013 at 09:34:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Right. Because freedom of religion only applied (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              andalusi, Sitting Jack Flash

              to religions that the Founders were familiar with.

              Freedom of the press only applied to those presses in use back in the day.

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

              by KVoimakas on Wed May 08, 2013 at 09:41:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, see how easy it is to throw strawmen around (0+ / 0-)

                They bounce so easily from topic to topic.

                United we the people stand, divided we the people fall.

                by Penny GC on Wed May 08, 2013 at 09:58:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The topic is constitutionally enshrined rights. (0+ / 0-)

                  Bouncing?

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

                  by KVoimakas on Wed May 08, 2013 at 10:16:06 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You do not have a constitutionaly enshrined right (0+ / 0-)

                    to own a gun, they haven't figured out where to put it with birth, just like the parenting manual...

                    United we the people stand, divided we the people fall.

                    by Penny GC on Wed May 08, 2013 at 10:47:34 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  See: second amendment. (3+ / 0-)

                      Constitutionally enshrined right to keep and bear arms.

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

                      by KVoimakas on Wed May 08, 2013 at 10:52:38 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  For a well regulated militia which was replaced (0+ / 0-)

                        with the military after the civil war.

                        United we the people stand, divided we the people fall.

                        by Penny GC on Wed May 08, 2013 at 11:47:32 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  And I think the right to (0+ / 0-)

                          life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is first to owning guns and a little hard to do with being shot...

                          United we the people stand, divided we the people fall.

                          by Penny GC on Wed May 08, 2013 at 11:50:02 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  The right of the people to keep and bear arms (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Sitting Jack Flash, FrankRose

                          shall not be infringed.

                          The well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state.

                          The prefatory part of the second explains why there is an individual right to keep and bear arms. We might've moved on to the National Guard (organized militia) but we did not remove the unorganized militia (see US Code).

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

                          by KVoimakas on Wed May 08, 2013 at 01:34:27 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Your opinion and mine: both do not matter (3+ / 0-)

                          At least so far as the law of the land is concerned. The Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment as an individual right, not one belonging only to members of a militia (which most men in the United States belong to anyway).

                          You may argue that their interpretation is wrong, that this wasn't what the writers of the Constitution meant, or that the definitions or placement of commas mandate a certain reading. And certainly you can (and should!) discuss the limits to place upon individual ownership or use of firearms.

                          But what you cannot argue---at least, not without departing from reality---is the plain fact that as of this moment, people in the United States do have a right to firearms. That is the what SCOTUS decided the Second Amendment safeguards and until and unless the ruling is overturned, that is how the law will and must treat the Second Amendment as meaning.

                        •  Militia Act. The Militia was all able bodied men (0+ / 0-)

                          And it's pretty clear from both context and history that "regulated" in the Second Amendment means being able to show up armed and knowing how to use their weapons - regulations as we conceive of them today pretty much did not exist back then.

                          •  well regulated = well trained. (0+ / 0-)

                            So where's the training requirement?  ANY training requirement, even the most basic safety knowledge so idiots don't let their kids play with weapons and kill other kids.  The NRA is even against this!

                            Most people are not talking banning guns.  A few people are, but the vast majority in the center are only in favor of common sense regulations.  All but one of the proposed pieces of legislation went no-where close to banning guns, and the one exception talked about a few specific assault rifles (not banning all guns).  No, I am not interested in getting to a dumb game of defining "assault rifle".  Most of the proposed laws that were filibustered were about background checks (not banning), stopping mentally ill people from buying guns (not banning), closing the gun show loophole (not banning), and stopping strawman purchases to stop guns being bought in large quantities in lax states for sale to criminals in strict gun law states (again, not freaking banning).  So quit the game of but but Second Amendment and freeeeedom.  The Heller case which broke new ground in reinterpreting the "personal right" ALSO stated that gun regulations were allowed.  It's not an unlimited right for anyone to buy any weapon and carry it anywhere.

            •  Good idea - can do the same with the 1st Amendment (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas

              So people have free speech as long as they do not use electronic bullhorns, typewriters, electronic media, the Internet, or any kind of printing technology that did not exist at the time of ratification of the Bill of Rights.

  •  I'm having that same argument on Twitter... (50+ / 0-)

    he's holding up Switzerland as a shining example of a heavily armed country. However, the demographics are FAR too different. Switzerland is a wealthy, educated country. We have rural jackasses giving guns to kids for Christmas and leaving those guns out, loaded, and unsecured.

    Also, Switzerland treats its drug addicts. Drug-related crime and violence are quite low as a result. Not here.

    "...Males are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes.” —Newt Gingrich in 1995

    by BadKitties on Mon May 06, 2013 at 04:03:58 PM PDT

  •  Gun control just won't work.... (12+ / 0-)

    ....when you have Indiana shipping them over the state line by the hundreds.

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

    by Bush Bites on Mon May 06, 2013 at 04:35:29 PM PDT

  •  Do all these stats come from (3+ / 0-)

    Gunpolicy.org?

    I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. A Lincoln

    by quadmom on Mon May 06, 2013 at 04:43:10 PM PDT

  •  data kills! n/t (7+ / 0-)

    The era of procrastination, half-measures, soothing & baffling expedients, & delays, is coming to a close. We are entering a period of consequences - Churchill

    by PrometheusUnbound on Mon May 06, 2013 at 04:51:26 PM PDT

  •  When one person is shot every 5 minutes it is (22+ / 0-)

    plain to see that what we have does not work. [ to get one one every 5 minutes, divide 525,600 minutes per year by ( the 32k plus that die every year plus the 70k plus that are treated at ERs and survive ) = one person shot every 5 minutes ]

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

    by DefendOurConstitution on Mon May 06, 2013 at 05:17:06 PM PDT

  •  I'd caution you about homicide statistics in least (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Iberian, Texas Lefty

    developed nations, and especially those in conflict zones, many deaths go unreported.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Mon May 06, 2013 at 05:18:53 PM PDT

  •  Non-gun homicides? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose, Kentucky Kid, gerrilea

    Rapes? Robberies? Assaults? Burglaries?

    I'm almost certain your opponent will ask this same question.

    ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
    My Blog
    My wife's woodblock prints

    by maxomai on Mon May 06, 2013 at 05:29:56 PM PDT

  •  Deliciously well....hardly.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose

  •  I often hear the excuse that (23+ / 0-)

    more guns = less violence, citing the increasing number of actual firearms in circulation. The estimate I always hear is 300 million, although I have no idea who came up with it or how accurate it actually is.

    Of course, that makes no sense--- if guns aren't the problem, as they're wont to say, they're not the solution, either.  Because if they don't kill people, they don't protect people.

    But what they conveniently miss is that fewer people have guns--- the gun ownership rate in this country is on a statistically steady 40-year-slide.  The sale of guns is steady, but that's because the average owner has 7.8 guns (and rising).  The gun culture is less about hunters and people with one pistol for self-defense, and more about avid collectors and gun geeks who just love the darn things.

     The problem with gun violence isn't just the guns, or just the people--- it's the people with guns.  Fewer people with guns = less gun violence.   Gun removal programs like in Australia, or gun control legislation like background checks on every sale... these lead to fewer people with guns.  And that means less gun violence.

    Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

    by nominalize on Mon May 06, 2013 at 05:46:29 PM PDT

  •  More on Australia.... (0+ / 0-)

    Fists give way to firearms

    Australia reloads as gun amnesties fail to cut arms

    I'd probably refrain from using them in any pro-gun control arguments...they seem to be losing the war on that

  •  WE need your citations, please. (0+ / 0-)

    for the other countries.

  •  We're Americans; we're exceptional (exceptionally (12+ / 0-)

    Stupid, evil, selfish & narcissistic). That's why guns, money & property are more important than humans.

  •  Was that last sentence necessary? (0+ / 0-)

    I can't send a link to this diary to more than a very few people because of it.

    With great regret, you get no tip and no rec from me.

  •  the australia turn-around (23+ / 0-)

    can not be emphasized or repeated enough.

    keep in mind, when the australian government passed gun control legislation
    (quite sweeping!) it was under right wing conservative rule.

    if only we could swallow our pride and learn from other nations
    if only...

    we might have looked to the french or germans for health care
    perhaps the south koreans for infrastructure...
    maybe the australians..... for gun control.

    if only.

    if only.

    every adult is responsible for every child

    by ridemybike on Mon May 06, 2013 at 07:28:33 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, but... (13+ / 0-)

    Japan, South Korean, Spain, and Australia don't have video games or movies depicting violence either.

  •  This should be the last word on the subject. (3+ / 0-)

    Unfortunately, it won't be.  But the stats are irrefutable.  

    Life is good. Injustice? Not so much.

    by westyny on Mon May 06, 2013 at 10:22:24 PM PDT

  •  the common debate tactic I see (4+ / 0-)

    is that they cite some tiny jurisdiction. The gun fetishist near me at work cites a tiny city in minnesota with less than 5k people as an example of how lots of guns make you really safe.

    He didn't cite suicide stats (in MN, gun suicides are rampant in rural areas according to a recent report on the local news), so I assume he was talking about other crimes. But the city in question is far from major population centers.

    He isn't interested when I ask him about Arizona, gun paradise, or other places like that.

  •  Aren't you missing something here? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose

    Home invasions and violent crime went up.

    How's that help anyone?  Sure I may not get killed by a gun but have you ever been the victim of a violent crime and had to live with it?

    How does trading one evil for another actually solve society's problems?

    Besides when comparing nation to nation, you're comparing apples to oranges.  Japan has a higher rate of suicide than we do.  The UK's serious crime is almost 5 times that of ours.

    Add to that not one of those other countries have the people agreed that "keeping and bearing arms" is an individual right.

    How do we work within the system we currently have?

    What solutions do you suggest will reduce violence, including "gun violence"?

    Will your solution include addressing recidivism?

    Will your solution include monies to fund mental health, living wage jobs, ending the racist drug war, etc?

    -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 02:40:01 AM PDT

    •  H4 (14+ / 0-)

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

      Why should any solution also have to be responsible for non-gun violence, living wage jobs, etc? That's ridiculous. Should we never try to solve any problem unless the solution also includes a cure for cancer?

      ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

      by TFinSF on Tue May 07, 2013 at 03:51:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So, no adult conversation will be had here. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose

        What's ridiculous is your bigotry.

        Clearly you have no desire to actually address the problems your "precious" gun control has brought us.

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

        -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 05:45:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And you... (5+ / 0-)

          have no desire to actually address the problems your "precious" guns have brought us.

          As you have demonstrated in comment after comment in diary after diary.

          Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

          by Miss Blue on Tue May 07, 2013 at 06:43:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Really "Miss Blue", had you actually read any (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FrankRose

            of my diaries or comments, you'd know I've never owned a firearm AND I have presented my suggested solutions to the violence in this nation.

            You all don't want to make real honest policy decisions that will actually help all of us, I do.

            Therein lays the difference.  

            -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 07:50:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Bigotry!? (4+ / 0-)

          Hello.  My name is Coquiero.  I am a gun bigot.

          Because I want everyone to go through a background check, and I want some regulations on certain types of guns and gun accessories that make it easy to kill a lot of people at once.  That's some dark oppression and hatred right there.

          I am also a Christian bigot, because I call people who actively campaign against LGBT issues bigots, so that makes me a bigot against their religion.

          I think you guys need to coin that phrase.  Forget about "gun grabbers", you should just call us "gun bigots"!  It's much more descriptive.  And shows how far off the beaten path you have gone.

          I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

          by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 07:24:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The sad thing is, (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            coquiero, rigcath

            they will compare the "bigotry" that gun owners suffer as being the same or similar to the bigotry LGBT folks suffer.  It's mystifying.

            "I don't want a unicorn. I want a fucking pegasus. And I want it to carry a flaming sword." -mahakali overdrive

            by Silvia Nightshade on Tue May 07, 2013 at 07:29:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  ??? Have you not been paying attention??? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Texas Lefty, FrankRose

              As a transgendered woman, I am part of that LGBT group.

              Which makes me just as qualified as anyone else to speak on these issues.

              The facts are that I do not agree with your "solutions" under our Constitutional Republic.

              -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 07:57:35 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You're allowed to disagree with me. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                coquiero

                My problem is saying gun owners are an oppressed minority just the same or close to the way LGBT folks are oppressed.  I just don't see how they are remotely similar.

                "I don't want a unicorn. I want a fucking pegasus. And I want it to carry a flaming sword." -mahakali overdrive

                by Silvia Nightshade on Wed May 08, 2013 at 06:30:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm not the one that made that comparison. (0+ / 0-)

                  You and Coquiero did.

                  A strawman to attack perhaps?

                  -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 Wed May 08, 2013 at 09:28:24 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Oh Jesus dude, (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    coquiero

                    I wasn't attacking anyone.  I was expressing my frustration with this particular argument that Coquiero brought up because I have seen it numerous times on DKos.  I can go dredge up links if you think I'm full of shit but I have a migraine and I'm not in the mood.

                    Just call me an asshole and HR me already if that will make you feel better, Christ.

                    "I don't want a unicorn. I want a fucking pegasus. And I want it to carry a flaming sword." -mahakali overdrive

                    by Silvia Nightshade on Wed May 08, 2013 at 09:57:10 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  There is no "beaten path" here. You lost round (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Texas Lefty, FrankRose

            one on the gun control issue.  Wasting months of bickering, arguing and attacking anyone who does not agree with your solution(s).  Where did it get us? Further divided and distrustful of one another while accomplishing NOTHING!

            As a transgendered woman, Conquiero, I believe that all religions should be banned or severely restricted.  But what stops my desires from becoming law?  The Constitution.  

            I've faced religions hatred and violence my entire life.  I've been assaulted, beaten, robbed and when I go to the police, what do they do? NOTHING!  "Well, if you didn't dress that way there wouldn't be a problem!"

            Your one-dimensional "solution" that denies those of us from legitimate discussion and participation in this process IS bigotry just like the religious zealots.  You are no better than they are.  It's the same hatred and the same emotional manipulation that denies our society the ability to progressively move forward.  

            My goal has always been Equity Under Law.  When you present a solution that includes "the restrictions" being made across the board for all Americans,  NO exceptions for LEO, the Military, the Secret Service, etc, then I'll listen.

            Up until that time you'll be wasting more lives by not actually addressing humanities violent nature as is revealed in our American Society today...  

            I am not safe from the Christian down the street whom thinks I should burn in hell.  I'm not safe from the institutionalized misogynistic policies of our created government.  

            Are any of us safe from the rape and pillaging of the Military Industrial Complex that sucks a trillion dollars a year from us all?  Are any of us safe from the School to Prison Pipeline that has become a self-feeding monster perpetuated by the Banksters that leads to a more violent culture and society?

            NOPE.  

            While it's great to hear that we may have common ground, it's you that has gone off the "beaten" path here, not me.  I've been paying attention and I don't get easily distracted by shinny objects.

            Guns didn't create these societal problems we face and "restricting" them won't fix them either.

            -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:28:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  gerrilea (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rigcath

              I am ridiculously sorry that you have faced hatred and violence.  I say that with nothing but sincerity.

              But when you say things like this:

              Your one-dimensional "solution" that denies those of us from legitimate discussion and participation in this process IS bigotry just like the religious zealots.  You are no better than they are.  It's the same hatred and the same emotional manipulation that denies our society the ability to progressively move forward.  
              let's just say it gets in the way of having any kind of conversation at all.  I am no better than religious zealots because I want people to be subjected to a background check and have limited magazine sizes?

              Listen to yourself.  When I say that you have veered off the beaten track, this is precisely what I am referring to.

              I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

              by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:42:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  There never was any conversation here. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FrankRose

                Just a lot of emotionally manipulative arguments and ad homimens meant to shut anyone up that doesn't agree with your solutions.

                What part of Equity Under Law do you not understand?  

                Seriously.  

                How will your precious gun control be constitutionally cognizable with the Miller Decision?  If you don't make the ban or restrictions universal?  Meaning every American including LEO, military etc.

                You'll waste years of continuing the status quo and more people will die.  How's that a legitimate position again?

                We have all the tools we need right now.  EDUCATE our children with critical logical thinking skills.  Teach them peaceful resolution to conflicts.  Act peacefully as a society (ending the death penalty, ending the racist drug war) and as a nation (ending unfunded resource wars).

                Unless we address how we are manipulated into being a violent society, no one will be any safer.  

                Why won't you address these things?  Fear? Hatred? Have you no ability to think critically?  Why do you accept the media's "solution" of how and not why people are violent?  Laziness? What?

                The British have finally figured that out:


                http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...

                        The UK violent rate of 2034 per 100,000.
                        Australia 1677 per 100,00.
                        South Africa 1,609 per 100,000
                        Canada 935 per 100,000

                        The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents.

                    -cut-

                        Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

                Why can't we learn from their mistakes?  Why are we being misdirected and divided????

                I tried to point this problem out in this diary and was lambasted for it.

                You see, my position has never changed here.  I want to wake up in a nation where my fellow Americans don't feel the need to own a firearm or will use violence as their first and only solution to their problems.

                We need to stop criminalizing people.  JUST STOP IT!  The vicious cycle will never end and will never be corrected until we do.  Banning assault weapons, magazine sizes and UBC will give the Prison Industrial Complex a new clientele base for generations.  Is that what you want????  More generations of Americans economically, socially and politically oppressed by our Corporate Overlords????

                I don't.

                Have a great day, this is the end of my rant, for now.

                -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 09:52:29 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't think you're defending what you think you (0+ / 0-)

                  are.

                  You are aligning yourself with a group of people who do not have the same end goal in mind as you do.

                  I read what your wrote, tried to push aside the attacks on my moral character, and I can see what your point is, but I'm telling you that you are arguing for the same thing as the RBKAers but for entirely different reasons.

                  Doing away with gun regulations isn't going to stop criminalizing people.  

                  I must say that I have never before seen the argument that we need to do away with gun regulations to attain a peaceful society.  That's  a new one.

                  Also, I agree that universal background check should mean just that.

                  I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                  by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 10:16:29 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  "I must say that I have never before seen the" (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    PavePusher

                    argument..."

                    The reason why you never saw it before is because I didn't say that, a strawman.

                    Your moral character was brought when up said you were a "gun bigot".  You tried to defend your "morality" and I didn't fall for it.  The emotions, the hatred and authoritarian mentality are no different than any other bigot.  I see it for what it is, nothing more or less.  

                    As for "aligning myself" with others.  The one thing we have in common is the Constitution and how we perceive it as the rules our government must follow.  It limits our government's actions, not ours.

                    As I mentioned above, I detest all religions and believe they should be banned.  I won't get what I want even if I attempted an Article V solution, it won't happen.  Does this mean that I should degrade and attempt to deny those from exercising that right? Nope.  I'm a spiritual person that was once like them, I'm a recovering Catholic, so I can empathize with their beliefs.  They have every right to believe whatever the wish, even if it means my death, sadly.

                    But I can educate my fellow Americans into seeing me as their equal.  I can show them through a lifetime of exposure that "Hey, she's just like me!"  I can show them that their beliefs intentionally spread fear and hatred and hurt me far worse than if they put a bullet in my head.  I can try to change the world, one person at a time. There are many that cannot see past their own bigotry to even allow me a moment to exist, that's what I detest the most.

                    A closed mind.

                    Same goes with the 2nd Amendment.  I believe we all have that individual right.  I know, for me, a firearm is meant for one thing, killing and I would pull the trigger if it came down to my life or yours.  I chose not to be a killer. That's my choice to make, not yours.  I've learned through the years that violence is easy and the escalation of violence even easier.  It's as easy as pulling the trigger, but that trigger doesn't pull itself.

                    My fellow RKBA members have proven that they know and understand that reality better than anyone else here.  They actually understand that the violence comes from the person not the object they wield.

                    And in that vain, I wholeheartedly agree.  If we are to progressively evolve as a society, and as a species, we must change ourselves.  

                    I cannot stop people from believing what they do.  

                    I cannot stop someone from pulling the trigger.

                    But WE can teach them, together.

                    We can give every American the tools they need to be successful Adults and then treat them that way.

                    We, as a nation, must demand that our government follow the rules we gave it.  The expansion and protection of rights to all people, not their abrogation.

                    In short, we must demand Equity Under Law if we are to move beyond the status quo. We must teach it and live it.

                    You know what then? I won't care if my fellow Americans have the capacity to kill hundreds in seconds, why? Because I know they won't hurt me intentionally.

                    I know that they will value my life as much as they value their own because I am their equal.

                    -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:35:31 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Well, all I can say is what my mother used to (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      TFinSF

                      tell me,  "People know you by the company you keep."

                      As for "aligning myself" with others.  The one thing we have in common is the Constitution and how we perceive it as the rules our government must follow.
                      That's just pure bullshit.  That somehow the constitution belongs to you and the RKBAers and the rightwing goofballs wearing bad hats with teabags taped to them.

                      I believe in the constitution.  It's mine as much as yours.

                      I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                      by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:44:02 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  ROFL, so now you say I'm guilty because of (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        PavePusher

                        the company I keep?

                        Do you not understand that your false logic has no bearing on me?

                        Hon, where did I say that the constitution was mine????  You failed at reading comprehension.  I said we shared how we view the Constitution, get it???

                        Where did I say I was a teabagger?

                        Where did I say I was a rightwing goofball?

                        Prima Facia evidence that your bigotry is no different than the religious zealots amongst us.

                        So much for your "moral superiority", when confronted with legitimate conversation, you belittle and attack to hide your failure to address the subject.

                        LMFAO.

                        Have a good day.

                        -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:52:58 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  You just created another Strawman... (0+ / 0-)

                        but this one is quite... flaccid.

                        What you said:

                        That somehow the constitution belongs to you and the RKBAers and the rightwing goofballs wearing bad hats with teabags taped to them.

                        What she said (and you even quoted it...):

                        The one thing we have in common is the Constitution and how we perceive it as the rules our government must follow.
                        Your "translation" fails badly.

                        Your hate-mail will be graded.

                        by PavePusher on Wed May 08, 2013 at 11:43:09 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Not even close (0+ / 0-)

                          Jesus, read your own comment.

                          If you and your ilk have in common "the Constitution and how we perceive it as the rules our government must follow", then logically she is claiming that I DON'T have that in common with you.

                          Hence my claim that you and she seem to think that your belief in the Constitution is somehow purer than mine.

                          That's total bullshit.

                          So my comment was totally appropriate and right on the money.

                          I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                          by coquiero on Wed May 08, 2013 at 11:59:21 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

      •  The logic is ridiculous. They'd have us do nothing (7+ / 0-)

        about anything unless it solved everything. It's like some demented, passive aggressive nihilism.

        •  You lost the first round, now what do you suggest? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PavePusher

          Continuing your temper tantrum of ad hominem's will not solve the problems.

          Maybe we should start from the beginning and define the problem.  I view our problem(s) as one created by the policies coming out of DC that have oppressed millions forcing us all into abject poverty creating the conditions for violence.  Policies that were codified when we lost control of the House in the 90's due to the first AWB.

          You'd have the argument be only about "gun violence"...a canard because it's actually gone down in the last 40 yrs.

          You've been distracted by the shinning objects and fail to admit that we destroyed ourselves by allowing the republicans to take control of our government.

          They stripped social programs and started unfunded resource wars, shipped our living wage jobs to slave-labored nations, increased the racist war on drugs and the accompanying social destruction it brought and then you blame it all on the gun?

          Who you kidding?

          Now you try to label me to avoid responsibility.  What's it gotten you?

          NOTHING.

          I expected rational minds to accept defeat and move onto things that will actually help all of us.  Say like ending NAFTA, GATT and our participation in the WTO, creating living wage jobs and funding social programs that will allow us to remain in power WHILE doing the right thing.

          What a novel idea, Democrats actually doing the right thing for a change.

          You just want the easy answer.  What would happen if you got every firearm in America removed?  Well, sure there wouldn't be any gun deaths, but would that stop people from killing each other by other means?  Would it stop the 600,000+ attempted suicides each year?  Would it address the despair and poverty that kill 133,000 American each and every year?

          NOPE.

          Get back to me when you wake up and want to discuss these things honestly.

          So much for that "passive aggressive" bullshit, I was being polite.

          Now you can either shit or get off the pot.  And stay out of the way from those of us that will demand the right things be done.  Those of us that will get more AND better Democrats elected, not the corporate lapdogs that pretend at "caring", just enough to the next election.

          -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 01:13:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  "Accept defeat?" (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TFinSF

            Because a bill failed to pass the house?  We should--what--all go crawl up under a rock whimpering and moaning?

            What political process are you part of?  That's not the one I'm part of.

            You really amp up the hyperbole when people don't agree with you, don't you?

            You seem deeply concerned about poverty and mental health issues.  I agree with you.  Let's continue to work on those.

            One is not exclusive of the other.  That's all several commenters, including myself, are trying to say here.

            And please, dial back the righteous indignation.

            I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

            by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 03:48:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Just saw this posting, what you perceive I'm (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              PavePusher

              saying and what I've said are not the same things.

              The bills failed the Senate, not the House.  You are whimpering and moaning and still playing your Bingo Game because you will not address these issues maturely.  Playing games isn't productive or mature.

              And you all still ignore the fact that we can accomplish the same things without gun control but for whatever reasons REFUSE TO.

              Then you tell me to dial back the indignation I feel at your folly?  PEOPLE are still dying.  WASN'T the argument about "saving the children"???

              Clearly when it comes down to it, it wasn't about saving anyone and I can only conclude you only want the guns and all that moral righteousness of stopping "gun violence" was a red herring.

              WE can still do things that will save lives and all you can do is attack me personally, even after you lost the vote on gun control?

              I don't believe any of you any longer.  I will be printing these replies out and saving them as a reference point for any future "discussions"...  After the next mass shootings or needless and preventable deaths...

              You were given the opportunity to make a difference and chose not to.

              -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 Wed May 08, 2013 at 05:39:26 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I can't take you seriously (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TFinSF

                Your comments are silly and meaningless.  I don't say this to attack you, I'm just saying that your comments are so over the top and out of order as to be comical.

                You seem to conflate every commenter who would like any measure of gun control into one person.  Until you get a more nuanced way of relating here, I'm afraid it's hopeless.

                I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                by coquiero on Wed May 08, 2013 at 07:50:02 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Do you mean I must use your techniques of (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  PavePusher, wishbone

                  false logic including poisoning the well, ad homimens, innuendo and sly insults? Is that the "nuanced way of relating" you want?

                  Didn't you conflate my position as being like a rightwing goofball?

                  Oh, that's right, you did.

                  Didn't you then accuse me of "hanging with the wrong crowd" and quote your dear Mother?

                  Oh, that's right, you did.

                  Now you say trying to save lives by other means than your "precious" gun control is "silly and meaningless".

                  If that don't take the cake here.  

                  I took the time to explain my position in detail and you this is your answer.

                  I guess all you really wanted was the guns after all.

                  Have a great day.

                  -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 Wed May 08, 2013 at 08:10:02 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  As my kids say (0+ / 0-)

                    whatev's.

                    You haven't explained anything!  All you've done is yell at me and tell me what I think.  Incorrectly, of course.

                    But you are convinced that you are righteous and I am a gun grabber, so that's fine.

                    The fact is your opinion of me has no bearing on anything, so as I said, whatev's.

                    I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                    by coquiero on Wed May 08, 2013 at 08:43:40 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  Your entire comment is effectively (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            coquiero, TFinSF

            a word salad of incorrect assumptions and assertions about what I believe, how I engage politics, and sundry disjointed observations about the state of affairs in our political discourse.

            It merits no deeper consideration or thought, for much the same reasons as a two-year old's response to mommy telling him he can't have another cookie merits no deeper consideration or thought by the mother.

    •  Um. You think gun laws make violent crime go up? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coquiero, rigcath
      How does trading one evil for another actually solve society's problems?
      I don't think it's a "trade".
      What solutions do you suggest will
      Generally, the solutions to all other problems seem really easy, because people don't oppose common sense solutions with the requirement that we solve something else first.

       Nobody says, "I don't want to increase mental health spending until we get gun violence under control", because there's no lobby organized to find hurdles to mental health spending.

      "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

      by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:09:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think humans have been taught to express (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PavePusher

        their violent tendencies and restricting or banning things won't change that one bit.

        They'll find ways to continue to hurt, maim and kill...

        And you still didn't answer the question.  What solutions do you offer now that gun control has been taken off the table?

        -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 01:17:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'd take the Australia experiment. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coquiero

          I don't know what you mean by "expressing violence", but they seem to have fewer of the things I don't like, such as deaths.

          And you still didn't answer the question.  What solutions do you offer now that gun control has been taken off the table?
          Gun control hasn't been taken off the table.  That there are other means to address the same or different problems that gun control would address is irrelevant as far as I can tell, except for people who think they can make a rule whereby we have to go pound sand doing everything in the world before we can, say, limit magazine size.

          "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

          by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 02:27:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Okay, show me where you got what you (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PavePusher

            wanted?  There was a vote in the Senate and all the measures failed.

            Months of attacks and division and we're still no further ahead in dealing with the violence in our society, are we?

            From where I'm standing, yes, gun control is off the table until at least the next election, another year and a half...

            So, what do we do until that time?  Continue to allow 600,000 Americans to attempt suicide?  Continue to allow 133,000 Americans from dying from poverty?  

            Do we actually address gun violence in our inner cities brought about by the racist drug war? That's the majority of gun crimes in this nation and why aren't we talking about that now?

            Or are ALL those deaths an inconvenient truth you wish to ignore until you get your way?

            As for you not understanding "expressing violence",  children are taught that violence is an acceptable "solution", from cartoons to mega hit movies.  They/we are inundated with violence in the media, videos, games, etc.  We are conditioned into accepting violence as a "legitimate" solution.  See our unfunded resource wars we've been waging for the past 10 yrs.  If we don't get our way, we'll bomb the hell out of you!

            Why can't prisoners get the mental healthcare they need? Why can't any needy American? Oh, that's right, there's no money because we spent it on tax breaks for the wealthy, the ever expanding Military and Prison Industrial Complexes and the New American Police State.  We spent it on supporting the criminals on Wall Street and then we're told that we must gut Social Security too!

            Again, we have another year and a half to go, I'd like it to be productive.

            So if you aren't going to do anything else except wallow in your defeat, then you must really go pound sand!

            Thanks for playing.

            -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 02:53:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  This is standard NRA boilerplate: (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              coquiero
              As for you not understanding "expressing violence",  children are taught that violence is an acceptable "solution", from cartoons to mega hit movies.  They/we are inundated with violence in the media, videos, games, etc.
              ...And it's nonsense.
              •  Clearly you have nothing to add to this (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PavePusher

                discussion because you'd be able to prove what I've presented is nonsense, you haven't.

                People are conditioned into accepting violence as a "legitimate" solution.  From men shooting children over loud music to maniacs gunning down unarmed men after following them for blocks.

                They use the same defense our government uses when it commits war crimes and intentionally undermines legitimate foreign nations..."self defense".

                That violence permeates everything in this nation.  Is it any wonder children kill their siblings while "pretending" they are Wrestle Mania actors?  To kids thinking it's funny to set puppies on fire to girls cooking kittens alive.

                That inundation of violence diminishes us all.  It dehumanizes us into the most vile acts.  And all you can come up with is "it's an NRA talking point"?

                Keep telling yourself that so that you can sleep well at night, I don't believe you.

                -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 04:35:08 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Hard to prove to the author (0+ / 0-)

                  of the nonsense that "what is presented" is nonsense.

                  You argue that violence permeates everything in this nation, then tell us that gun control is criminalizing us all.

                  Your ranting comments are the definition of nonsense.

                  You said yourself that there is no conversation here.  That's as much your fault as anyone else's.  

                  I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                  by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 04:43:16 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  The nonesense is you continuing to believe (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    PavePusher

                    guns are the cause of the violence we have.

                    It's a symptom caused by years of republicanism.   And what I said was that criminalizing everything doesn't address the problem.  It becomes a problem unto itself with recidivism.  The dehumanization continues in prison creating an ever more violent society, a self-feeding cycle that perpetuates the Prison Industrial Complex.

                    This is the second time today you've failed at reading comprehension.  Is it a hobby of yours to create straw arguments and intentionally misrepresent what others say so that you can convince yourself of your moral superiority?

                    If so, it's not working.  Let's try to solve these problems together.  What do you suggest as a solution now that gun control is off the table?

                    Will you waste another six months feigning indignation and thrashing your teeth or will we try to work together to actually help each other again?

                    If this is nonsense, I'll end this conversation with you for good.  Please don't waste any more of my time if you aren't serious about addressing the things we can change, right now.

                    -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 Tue May 07, 2013 at 05:07:14 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Why would I want to solve problems together (0+ / 0-)

                      with someone who continually insults me?  My reading comprehension is well above average and I have never asserted my "moral superiority".

                      Are you delusional?  You are the angriest person I have ever met who advocates for non-violence and peaceful solutions.

                      All you have to do in order me to stop "wasting your time" is stop responding to me. Your need to have the final word makes this "conversation" possible.

                      I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                      by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 05:13:27 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  90 per cent didn't get what It wanted. This time. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              coquiero

              But nothing is off the table.  

              "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

              by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 05:15:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And while you continue to lick your wounds and (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PavePusher

                attempt to form a coalition to defeat the republicans in the Senate and House, thousands more will continue to die.

                Why can't we at least attempt to push my suggestions???? Since gun control will not pass in this Congress. Or are we going to be forever divided while the status quo remains?

                Is it because you really don't want to help the 600,00+ Americans that attempt suicide and the 30,000+ that succeed?  Don't you want to help the 133,000 Americans that have died from poverty? Don't you want to end the unfunded resource wars? Make the 1% pay their fair share? End the racist drug war?  Rebuild our cities while creating living wage jobs for all?

                Is your position truly that empty? Either you get your precious gun control or you won't work towards Equity Under Law for all?

                Is that it?

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

                by gerrilea on Tue May 07, 2013 at 05:53:41 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Quite a list you have there. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  coquiero

                  It's amazing how much good will and cooperation and effort you expect from the Republicans, not to mention from me, after approving of their disgusting performance in blocking the will of ninety percent of Americans.   NINETY PER CENT.

                  It's great, it really is, that you've delivered the challenge to change the entirety of society after you and yours blocked something as miniscule and as popular as expanded background checks.  You probably even think that you are pushing change, when in reality you're telling people that no matter what, a well funded group of ten percent can block anything.  

                  Here's what I'm taking from this: fuck giving up on the reasonable changes to background checks, magazine sizes and banning military weapons.  It's the percentage shot, and if it doesn't pass, every senator can eat campaign ads featuring their votes.

                  Oh....by the way....thanks for nothing.

                  "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

                  by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 06:34:29 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So, you're taking your toys and going home? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    PavePusher

                    I could care less what the republicans want.  We need a leader to beat their asses into submission, use the full power the Office of the President can muster to get them back into their little boxes. One that will use the bully pulpit to put them in their places...sadly, I'm still waiting for that President.

                    And it's it odd that you now blame me for allowing the Supreme Court appointments that occurred under GW that lead to the Citizen's United Decision?  The one that allows our Corporate Overlords to buy our politicians lock, stock and barrel?

                    Isn't it odd that if we go back to the first AWB that actually got us handled our pink slips in the 90's the same republicans wouldn't have been able to "deregulate" media outlets that gave rise to the likes of Fox News and Rush?  And the Impeachment of a sitting president for getting a blow-job?  Or get the repeal of Glass-Steagall that lead to the biggest heist in human history and causing the collapse of the entire world's economy???

                    Your "precious" gun control has done more damage to this nation in 20 short years than all the guns ever have. Let's not forget the million plus dead Iraqi's and hundreds of thousands of dead Afghans!  

                    You see, my position hasn't changed one bit.  The only way your banning of "assault rifles" can be considered even remotely constitutional, as per Miller, would be to ban them for all Americans, including LEO, Military, etc.

                    That's not what was pushed.

                    UBC's and magazine restrictions will do nothing to lower gun violence.  Don't take my word for it...The NYS Sheriff's Association doesn't believe it either.  You see, my State did pass Gun Control:

                    http://www.nysheriffs.org/...

                    • Requirement of NICS checks for private sales (except between immediate family). We believe that this will ensure that responsible citizens will still be able to obtain legal firearms through private transactions, with the added assurance that private buyers are approved by the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System. We remain concerned that this provision will be very difficult to enforce and will likely only affect law abiding citizens.

                    -cut-

                    •Assault weapon ban and definition of assault weapons. We believe that the new definition of assault weapons is too broad, and prevents the possession of many weapons that are legitimately used for hunting, target shooting and self defense. Classifying firearms as assault weapons because of one arbitrary feature effectively deprives people the right to possess firearms which have never before been designated as assault weapons. We are convinced that only law abiding gun owners will be affected by these new provisions, while criminals will still have and use whatever weapons they want.

                    -cut-

                    • Reduction of ammunition magazine capacity. The new law enacts reductions in the maximum capacity of gun magazines. We believe based on our years of law enforcement experience that this will not reduce gun violence. The new law will unfairly limit the ability of law‐abiding citizens to purchase firearms in New York. It bears repeating that it is our belief that the reduction of magazine capacity will not make New Yorkers or our communities safer.

                    Somehow I'm to blame, really? Even the professionals don't believe you.

                    So, you really don't want to progressively push this nation forward?  You have no legitimate solutions to help stop the violence we all must face?

                    I've been pushing for my suggestions for years, only to be laughed at, ridiculed and belittled. And here we are nothing still gets done.

                    Great game we go going, isn't it?

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

                    by gerrilea on Tue May 07, 2013 at 07:37:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No, I'm taking the gun votes and jamming them (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      coquiero

                      right back up your barrel.   After declaring it all "off the table", I'm doing the exact opposite of quitting.  Thanks for your concern in my finding some other solution that you will allow me to look for as long as I give up on the gun thing.  See you in November 2014.

                      "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

                      by Inland on Wed May 08, 2013 at 07:41:43 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Really now, so it was never about saving the (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        PavePusher

                        children, was it?

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

                        by gerrilea on Wed May 08, 2013 at 08:00:28 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Of course it is. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          coquiero

                          Because we don't believe that you get to decide what actions we get to take for the children based on what you say is "off the table".  

                          Your attempt to say, "Not that, only this" fails because we care about children more than we care about you.

                          "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

                          by Inland on Wed May 08, 2013 at 08:08:00 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  If your position were true then why haven't (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PavePusher

                            you done anything constructive towards those ends?

                            Your gun control attempts failed...so what's your next move?

                            Stomp your feet and whine until you get what you want?  IN the mean time, how many more people will die?

                            And BTW, until the next election, what chances are there for a gun control bill getting through this Congress?  My guess is slim to none...meaning it's off the table.

                            I like to deal in reality.  We still control two branches of this government. We could do other things until such time as you believe you'll get the votes for your "precious".

                            Why won't you even consider other options? Ones that we could actually accomplish? Are you afraid they'll actually work and you won't get the guns after all?

                            -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 Wed May 08, 2013 at 08:26:07 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

  •  Well.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose

    ... I certainly don't believe that more guns = less violence, and I was disappointed that the recent sane measures proposed (universal background check, limits on assault weapons and magazine capacity) did not pass.

    But I have to take some of your argument to task.  There are numerous holes in your example but let's talk about the most glaringingly obvious one - folks in Yemen and Somalia don't have guns because they can barely feed themselves much less own luxury items like firearms.

    The NRA disgusts me but the opposite side is equally full of bull IMHO.  Wishing for no guns in America is roughly analagous to wishing for no fish in the sea.  No wait, bad analogy,there will BE no fish in the sea someday but there will always be guns.

  •  You make a strong point here, I wish this gets put (0+ / 0-)

    out to a huge audience.

  •  Correlation and cause (0+ / 0-)

    What's hard about the debate is that everyone has to assume cause.

    1. We who are in favor of greater gun control point to nation after nation where gun control and violent death are correlated, and the people opposed will say, "It's their culture." It might be the culture. It might be a nanny state. It might be the presence of extended families. It might be village structure. Sure. You bet. It might be. It's not very likely, but sure.

    There's a point at which correlation kicks in and coincidence steps away.

    2. Those who believe that a gun never hurt nobody, that the problem is "people," can always point to the evil that lurks in men's souls. Who, after all, can deny it? On the other hand, to make their case that a gun is a crime preventer, they have to find a) a criminal, b) a murderer, who then c) did not commit a crime because of the presence of a gun. I.e. they have to find a negative. Further, they have to prove that the criminal stopped BECAUSE of the gun.

    It's not going to happen.

    This is a recipe for some extremely frustrated gun enthusiasts, who will not be able to prove their side or accept what they would otherwise recognize as inductive reasoning.

    "...ere God made us He loved us; which love was never slacked, nor ever shall be." - Juliana of Norwich

    by The Geogre on Tue May 07, 2013 at 05:58:12 AM PDT

  •  Number is off a little (0+ / 0-)

    Most recent census: 311,591,917 people equals 4.52 per 100K people - but I concur with your point.

    Not trying to be critical but when I read diaries I like to fact check before commenting.

    The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

    by ctexrep on Tue May 07, 2013 at 06:16:48 AM PDT

  •  So you factored in the other things that reduce (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shamash, FrankRose

    violent crime as a whole?

    Gun control isn't the ONLY thing those states have which impact that. Look at our health care (mental health care), social safety nets, education, drug laws...yeah, no. It's just about gun control. </sarcasm>

    I'm curious. UBCs couldn't get out of the Senate, not to mention through the House. How do you think you're going to get anything more stringent done?

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

    by KVoimakas on Tue May 07, 2013 at 07:57:15 AM PDT

    •  Maybe it's not JUST about gun control. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rigcath, coquiero, Shockwave

      But somehow, I don't think that means we should NOT have gun control.  That it's a eeny weeeny bit about gun control should be enough.

      Just as nobody would say "we can't have social safety nets because crime isn't JUST about social safety nets, there's also drug laws".   Nobody would, because nobody is throwing up reasons why we can't do something that helps because there's something else that helps, outside of guns.  Only in RKBA world does something that helps get ruled out because of a endless list of things we could also try.

      "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

      by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:13:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You make it sound like we don't have gun control (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose

        right now.

        We do.

        You make it sound like I would not support various forms of gun control legislation.

        I do.

        What I do not support are bans on any types of firearms (in the small arms sense) or putting what amounts to a poll tax on exercising a civil right (among others).

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

        by KVoimakas on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:30:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

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

          If I made it sound as if you wouldn't support something, it could be because you made an argument that, on its face, was invalid and a pretty transparent attempt to throw roadblocks into laws that you admit would be of some help.  

          "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

          by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 09:25:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  If at first you don't succeed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rigcath

      give up.

      That's what you keep saying, KV.

      I'm curious. UBCs couldn't get out of the Senate, not to mention through the House. How do you think you're going to get anything more stringent done?
      Such a strange message for a political site.  Imagine if LGBT had given up, or people of color during the '60s.

      "Crap.  It didn't work.  They didn't vote for such and such bill.  I guess we should just give up on equality."

      Think about what you are saying.  It is such a dumb argument.

      I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

      by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:16:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're misunderstanding the argument. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KVoimakas, FrankRose

        So no, it's not 'dumb'.

        He didn't say 'give up', he said 'try another route toward the desired result.' The desired result is less deaths, right?

        I see what you did there.

        by GoGoGoEverton on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:22:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  For you and I, perhaps (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Inland
          The desired result is less deaths, right?
          For others, the desired result is decidedly different.  

          I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

          by coquiero on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:36:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Um. No. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coquiero

          Even after all the other routes are tried, and even if they succeed, we'd still be looking at laws regarding guns for the desired result of FEWER deaths.

          It's not like, "you don't need gun laws now that cars are safer, you've had your quota of saves".

          "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

          by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 09:43:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  With the overall goal being 'less deaths'. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FrankRose

            So if one route is currently not successful in getting closer to that goal, that doesn't mean someone that proposes an alternate route is 'quitting'.

            I see what you did there.

            by GoGoGoEverton on Tue May 07, 2013 at 09:54:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  When the alternatives are in lieu of, yes it is. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              coquiero

              You're quitting on the laws requiring guns and quitting on saving the lives such laws would save.

              Of course, that's the entire point: "Go try to cure mental illness first, THEN will be ready to discuss a limit on magazine size" is meant to put off gun laws forever.  

              "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

              by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:06:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Coming from your perspective (0+ / 0-)

                it would really help the cause to restrict the obtaining, carry and use of firearms if you could eliminate other variables that gun advocates point to.

                I see what you did there.

                by GoGoGoEverton on Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:44:12 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  How do you figure? nt (0+ / 0-)

                  "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

                  by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 01:15:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Let's say that national mental health services (0+ / 0-)

                    access and unemployment demonstrably improved over the next 5 years.

                    And then, let's say that gun deaths as a % of the population/deaths stayed static.

                    You could then point that out to a lot of people on the fence who aren't sure and say 'HA!'.

                    I see what you did there.

                    by GoGoGoEverton on Tue May 07, 2013 at 01:42:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  So there would be 90 plus percent in favor (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      coquiero

                      of expanded background checks instead of just ninety?

                      That's what I get for my five years in proving that mental health and low employment don't affect gun crimes?  

                      "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

                      by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 02:12:20 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Fair point on background checks. (0+ / 0-)

                        When it didn't pass I commented that was ashamed of our Senate to not pass something that has such support. I took KV's comment as referring to all of the efforts in general...even if the background checks had passed I don't think you could overall consider the group of efforts a success.

                        I see what you did there.

                        by GoGoGoEverton on Tue May 07, 2013 at 02:49:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

      •  Trying to get dems to quit preemptively (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rigcath, coquiero

        is a pretty well worn tactic of Republicans.  When they start demanding that proposals never be made and nominations be withdrawn, we know we're winning.

        Another well worn tactic is proving how intractable the opposition is by being ridiculously impervious to reason.  KV says that the senate won't pass laws, but he uses his own intransigence as illustration of how impossible it is to get a true gun "rights" advocate to give a fuck about anything.

        "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

        by Inland on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:24:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I asked an important question. I'm not saying (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Texas Lefty, FrankRose

        give up.

        I'm curious as to your plan to get these things done.

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

        by KVoimakas on Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:29:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Whether gun control or single payer healthcare... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KVoimakas, rigcath

    ...or incarceration rates or the metric system, the US is too introspective to listen to any lesser country.

    When you think that by definition you are #1, why should you listen to or learn from anybody else.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Tue May 07, 2013 at 09:18:46 AM PDT

  •  On this topic, all I get to enjoy is the diary.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coquiero, Glen The Plumber

    The comments are an endless wave of back and forth with regressive/conservative/Republican concern trolling.

    It's really amazing to me that Kos puts up with it.  We can't mention any other MMORPG in the Warcraft diaries, we can't correct spelling in the Cat/Dog diaries.. but we can argue for more guns and less gun regulation on a progressive site.  

    Amazing isn't exactly the word for it.

    When extra-terrestrial beings make their first appearance on our planet, and ask for representatives of our species to best exemplify humanity, I'm sending a nurse, a librarian, and a firefighter.

    by Wayward Son on Tue May 07, 2013 at 09:38:17 AM PDT

  •  Good job. But prepare to refute counter-arguments (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coquiero

    From my experience, these are usually some sick variation of American exceptionalism.

    Somehow, in conservative minds the US is so unique that no global lessons, facts and figures ever apply to it (except for a very select few cherry-picked by Faux News et al.).

    I heard this argument regarding the unacceptably-high US incarceration rate: "these other countries don't have the same challenges as we do."

    The man who said this is a very sweet person, highly educated, quiet, a great person in every respect except for conservatism. He is also too young to suffer from automatic pre-Civil-Rights prejudice.

    How to counter this?

    1. Follow up on what you did and add more and more countries, asking "do ALL these countries really have not a single lesson to teach us? How unique are we really?"

    2. Even better, send the ball back deep into their court, requesting that they spell out precisely in what ways they think the US is so unique, that its gun/jail/health policies have to be apart from any other comparable nation on Earth.

    They will either stutter, or start rolling out the prejudice. The "unique circumstances" cannot be anything but a codeword for "too many uncivilized brown people with too many rights, living in the same country with white people", or something of the sort.

    Anyone has other ideas?

  •  Oh-thy're gonna hurt for a while! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coquiero

    Gun-control---up!

    NRA--down!

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

    by lyvwyr101 on Tue May 07, 2013 at 12:24:36 PM PDT

Thumb, MichaelPH, Mimikatz, JR, sagesource, MadRuth, jotter, copymark, teacherken, Gooserock, Emerson, Shockwave, MsSpentyouth, Pescadero Bill, Wintermute, mlharges, jdld, eeff, frsbdg, StevenJoseph, Bryce in Seattle, hubcap, kissfan, Eternal Hope, rasbobbo, KMc, roses, Voter123, Miss Blue, Iberian, splashy, Beelzebud, dylanfan, antirove, Texknight, kharma, pat bunny, westyny, jaywillie, NYFM, zerelda, ybruti, sawgrass727, rapala, humphrey, Bluesee, greycat, el dorado gal, democracy inaction, YucatanMan, EJP in Maine, Kevskos, FutureNow, Beetwasher, Inland, Sandino, PinHole, turdraker, Cory Bantic, zozie, fhcec, detroitmechworks, tommymet, myboo, Kingsmeg, sleipner, XStryker, VictorLaszlo, The Hindsight Times, dilireus, democracy is coming, lynneinfla, bstotts, cpresley, Babylon, john07801, timewarp, BeninSC, Habitat Vic, Loudoun County Dem, camlbacker, puakev, Matt Z, artisan, letsgetreal, GeorgeXVIII, aseth, South Park Democrat, mconvente, mamamedusa, Involuntary Exile, NewDealer, filby, Buckeye Nut Schell, Akonitum, envwq, petulans, jjohnjj, lissablack, legendmn, maggiejean, mjkellett, TheFern, WakeUpNeo, shopkeeper, DefendOurConstitution, Tortmaster, astral66, davespicer, Larsstephens, FogCityJohn, p gorden lippy, TFinSF, serendipityisabitch, gramofsam1, Tea and Strumpets, stunzeed, klompendanser, samanthab, elginblt, anonevent, ericlewis0, science nerd, Oh Mary Oh, ZedMont, slice, I love OCD, coquiero, Bob Duck, slowbutsure, lexalou, marleycat, sethtriggs, thomask, Empty Vessel, randomfacts, blue aardvark, Miggles, Apost8, PrometheusUnbound, No one gets out alive, ridemybike, Mindful Nature, S F Hippie, a2nite, Darryl House, This old man, LittleSilver, jan4insight, tytalus, oldpotsmuggler, rat racer, JustinBinFL, Glen The Plumber, ShoshannaD, Buckeye Liberal, The Geogre, Silvia Nightshade, remembrance, Neapolitan, Alhambra, JerryNA, Smoh, peterfallow, rigcath, tampaedski, Jason Hackman, Kimbeaux, oslyn7, night cat, blugrlnrdst, dream weaver, Penny GC

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site