Skip to main content

Sure, we ain't stuck in WW-II, but that don't make this bullshit any easier to live with. Suggest something like, oh, say, universal background checks, bans on umpteen shot clips, or regulating some random (but not insignifcant) definition of "Assault Weapon", and the completely over the top response from the RKBA/NRA wannabe crowd is all too predictable. "You can't do that, you can't piecemael this shit because, unless you have a true solution, "The Magic Bullet", you ain't allowed to take even target practice at this problem." I mean, it's either all or nothing, right?

So then go with their lead, roll with their flow, but things, from their perspective, only go down hill from there if we do. Hey, RKBA, I got the solution right here. If it really has to be all or nothing, why don't we go for all? Why don't we get rid of all of your little "shoot-em-up" fantasies? Why don't we just kill your whole ability to play with any of your little gun toys? Why don't we just ban the whole mess, and get on with creating the next version of safe and sane civilization?

"You can't do that, because that would be, like, facisim, or nazism, or communism, or maybe even something more horrible than all three of them put together" (and argued with a completely straight face, even though all of the rest of civilization also does something along these lines).

So, then, NRA types, let me ask you. Which is it?

Originally posted to oldpotsmuggler on Mon May 20, 2013 at 08:06 PM PDT.

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

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 (9+ / 0-)

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

    by oldpotsmuggler on Mon May 20, 2013 at 08:06:01 PM PDT

  •  What are you waiting for? (16+ / 0-)

    Why don't you go for the whole taco?

    A minority of people wanted a constitutional amendment banning equal marriage - and they failed.

    A majority of people even wanted a constitutional amendment banning liquor - and WOW did they ultimately fail! After creating one murderous black market, that is.

    There's nothing stopping you from going for the whole shebang.

    As you said... Here, I'll mark it for emphasis:

    I got the solution right here. If it really has to be all or nothing, why don't we go for all? Why don't we get rid of all of your little "shoot-em-up" fantasies? Why don't we just kill your whole ability to play with any of your little gun toys? Why don't we just ban the whole mess, and get on with creating the next version of safe and sane civilization?
    Go for it.

    I encourage you to exercise your right to petition the government for redress of your grievances.

    Have at it, Mr pot smuggler.

    I applaud and tip my hat to your participation.

    Go ahead and pursue your chosen path of action.

    Please proceed, kossack.

    Please proceed.

    :-)

    •  that's gotta be one of the best snarks I have seen (7+ / 0-)

      Good one!

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

      by DefendOurConstitution on Mon May 20, 2013 at 08:48:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dude, here's where you and I differ. I can prove (8+ / 0-)

      RKBA is a pissant right, and you think that it's something. Name one other "Right" that becomes as constricted after a criminal conviction.

      Turns out there ain't none. And do you know why? Because you idiot NRA types followed the lead of your masters and said "yeah, that's okay, let's really spank them ex-felons" even tough there are no real Constitutional Rights, other than the putative RKBA, that don't survive an unsuccessful trip through criminal court.

      P.S. Did you even bother to notice the "POT" part. Are you going to go in favor of the War on Drugs just to be able keep saying "Guns are wonderful"?

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

      by oldpotsmuggler on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:07:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ROFL. (15+ / 0-)
        Name one other "Right" that becomes as constricted after a criminal conviction.
        Voting.
        Turns out there ain't none. And do you know why?
        Ahem!

        Voting.

        even tough there are no real Constitutional Rights, other than the putative RKBA, that don't survive an unsuccessful trip through criminal court.
        xCoughxCoughx VOTING! xCoughxCoughx
        Did you even bother to notice the "POT" part. Are you going to go in favor of the War on Drugs just to be able keep saying "Guns are wonderful"?
        Hmmmm.... I did write
        Have at it, Mr pot smuggler.
        So yeah, I noticed the 'pot' part.

        And since I'm against banning abortion, because taking away the clinic doesn't stop people from having sex, and abortion type things can be formulated from the hardware store or the cleaning aisle in the grocery store...

        And since I'm against banning alcohol, because taking away the beer doesn't make the bad spouses any better at being in a marriage, and booze can be made in a broom closet with ingredients from the grocery store...

        Doesn't it seem like a trend, that I would likely also be against banning of pot, because taking away such an easily grown plant doesn't magically motivate people to get crew cuts and wear ties?

        Oh, and one more time for good measure...

        VOTING!
        •  Please study this before spouting off. There are (6+ / 0-)

          states that allow even persons in prison to vote, and not a single one, last I researched the point, that automatically applies voting forfeiture to all persons convicted of any felony.

          RKBA loss is far and away the top limitation on freedom in this country. And whether or not you applaud this, it still proves that gun owners are second class citizens in the eyes of the law.

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

          by oldpotsmuggler on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:40:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  He (or she) is not "spouting off" at all. (11+ / 0-)
            Please study this before spouting off. There are(1+ / 0-)

            states that allow even persons in prison to vote, and not a single one, last I researched the point, that automatically applies voting forfeiture to all persons convicted of any felony.

            In my State you lose voting rights for any felony, and the only way to possiblt get it restored is through the Governor. I don't agree with it somewhat, but we're not the only state that is like that.
          •  Well, then here's YOUR new thing to learn today! (11+ / 0-)
            State approaches to felon disenfranchisement vary tremendously.
            In Maine and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they are incarcerated.

            In Florida, Iowa, Kentucky and Virginia, felons and ex-felons permanently lose their right to vote absent a pardon from the governor.

            The remaining 44 states have 44 different approaches to the issue.

             In 38 states and the District of Columbia, most ex-felons automatically gain the right to vote upon the completion of their sentence.

             In some states, ex-felons must wait for a certain period of time after the completion of their sentence before rights can be restored.

             In some states, an ex-felon must apply to have voting rights restored.

            http://www.ncsl.org/...

            Now, you could be an asshole and act like william kristol by hiding in the tall weeds of your particular clarifier adjectives.

            that automatically applies voting forfeiture to all persons convicted of any felony.
            "Automatically" could give you elbow room to be a dick... Oh, that state doesn't do it automatically, so I'll skate past the context of the conversation on a technicality... Yeah, you could be a dick and hide your ignorance behind that word.

            "all persons"... Yeah, maybe somewhere there's a few categories that aren't stripped of voting rights, allowing your carefully cobbled statement to be true in the most sheldon cooper type of manner. Unfortunately, you aren't as funny as sheldon.

            "any felony", of course 'any' felony was a careful plant by you so you could try a "GOTCHA" later.

            Don't be a dick, dude. Voting is a right that is also restricted by becoming a felon. Just suck it up and own it that you missed that one, and we can move on like adults. I just had to reply to it because you went on about no other rights being restricted three times! If it was just once, it would have been much lower key, but three times! You'd made such a big deal of it, I couldn't help but dance on that one.

            But anyway, like I said, own up to voting being restricted and let's move on.

            •  Where is it that voting is mentioned in the Bill (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              a2nite, terrybuck, 88kathy

              of Rights, anyway. I must have missed it. How about speech? How about religion? How about search and seizure?

              And, yes, federal law does control federal voting rights. And does not restrict them for a criminal conviction.

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

              by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:38:26 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Law of intended consequences. (5+ / 0-)

            Was this the law in 1934, when "the law went on" Thompson submachine guns?  No.

            It was enacted in 1968, when the tide of Civil Rights Laws removed the State-enacted Jim Crow laws, which restricted access to "white freedoms".

            So we "celebrate" gun control, which was, from the first scribble of Senator Dodd's pen, intended first-and-foremost to disenfranchise black citizens once again.

            RKBA loss is far and away the top limitation on freedom in this country. And whether or not you applaud this, it still proves that gun owners are second class citizens in the eyes of the law.

            The country was in peril; he was jeopardizing his traditional rights of freedom and independence by daring to exercise them.” ~ Joseph Heller, Catch-22

            by 43north on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:09:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Which of the enumerated Constitutional rights (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DefendOurConstitution

        has lost the least ground since 9/11 ?

      •  "I can prove..." (6+ / 0-)

        I urge you to do so.

        Your hate-mail will be graded.

        by PavePusher on Mon May 20, 2013 at 10:09:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I question the method of your "proof". (9+ / 0-)

        So a right is heavily infringed after a conviction by law and the restoration of that right is withheld barring complex and expensive legal action that means it is somehow less than a right?

        Would you care to insert the same logic evenly throughout history and circumstance?  Say the Fugitive Slave Act?    Executive order 9066?  

        If as you a contend, a right is restricted after breaking any law works to legally invalidate that right for all, all the US need to is restrict any right people at any time do not like post conviction and that right diminishes for all.

        Lets look at voting as it is now; after all in many areas felons cannot vote and since the right is restricted that means the right is weakened for all which should naturally lead to more restrictions post conviction which should naturally weaken that right for all.  Perhaps at that point we should institute some sort of government test and a fee to cover the cost of that test before allowing voting since by then it would be reduced to a privilege and not a right.

        I believe you can see the folly of your position being applied outside the limited scope in which you presented it.

      •  once you're convicted (6+ / 0-)

        you have NO rights with out permission from the government.  You can be searched at any time for any reason with out a warrant, you can be detained in a small room with several other people, you are told what you are allowed to have how much you can have and can be required to work for pennies an hour.  Your religion can be restricted, when you eat sleep play watch tv (if at all) is at the whim of government. Heck you even have to get permission to pee.

        as for voting? in my state a felony is an automatic removal forever.  You can petition to get that right back, but it is rare.

        Stupid question hour starts now and ends in five minutes.

        by DrillSgtK on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:08:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you for the diary. Equal rights for all (8+ / 0-)

    start with equal regulations for all, including firearms. To hear them whine you'd think you were try to impose these regulations only on gun owners and on no one else.

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

    by DefendOurConstitution on Mon May 20, 2013 at 08:52:01 PM PDT

  •  *sigh* (6+ / 0-)

    ‎"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 20, 2013 at 09:59:38 PM PDT

    •  ? n/t (2+ / 0-)

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

      by oldpotsmuggler on Mon May 20, 2013 at 10:06:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A gun is like a kitchen gadget, car, baseball bat. (3+ / 0-)

        bare hands. anything but an actual gun.

        Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

        by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 02:05:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Oh and sex. a gun is like sex. abortion a gun (2+ / 0-)

        is like abortion. but it isn't like a gun not at all.

        Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

        by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 02:07:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not helping your cases (nt) (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose, theatre goon, gerrilea

          ‎"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 Tue May 21, 2013 at 06:30:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A gun is like a toy, keep it picked up and put (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DefendOurConstitution

            away so you don't hurt someone. I guess you could say that is my case.

            See I am against sloppy gun ownership. If gun owners actually took care of their toys fine, but always come crying to me when they lose them and tell me it's not their fault if someone gets hurt. Lose track of their guns and now I have to watch out for whoever happens to pick them up. Sloppy sales called straw.

            That's what you bearers don't get. If you actually kept your guns and lost your minds when someone didn't, there would be no gun problem. But the only thing that scares you is the ban fan boogyman and you think put away means banned.

            Just like a child, who thinks a clean room means death.

            Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

            by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:09:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Complete nonsense. (5+ / 0-)

              You are attributing stances to people who simply do not take those stances:

              But the only thing that scares you is the ban fan boogyman and you think put away means banned.
              Not only does this statement make no sense overall, you are insisting that others consider the word "ban" to mean something other than "ban."

              Those who oppose the banning of firearms are not equating, in any way, such a ban to "putting away" anything whatsoever.

              That being the case, your assertion is simply false.

              Further, this:

              Just like a child, who thinks a clean room means death.
              ...is another outright falsehood, and hyperbolic nonsense as well.

              If the only way you can support your own stance is by attributing to others stances that they do not take or by asserting outright falsehoods as facts, perhaps it is time to reconsider your own stance, rather than attacking those that you intentionally mischaracterize.

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

              by theatre goon on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:25:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

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

                Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:34:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Unable to respond? (0+ / 0-)

                  That's okay -- it's not specifically required to be able to uphold your own positions.

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

                  by theatre goon on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:47:07 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Dobie you love me. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DefendOurConstitution

                    Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                    by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:48:13 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not particularly. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      FrankRose, Kentucky Kid

                      I actually have no feelings toward you one way or the other.  Indifferent is the term.

                      You may choose to continue to insist otherwise, but such insistence won't change the facts.  A repeated lie is still a lie.

                      Now, I do find your continued and repeated use of dishonest tactics to be rather disappointing.  It lowers the level of discourse for everyone.  It's something much more commonly seen done by Republicans, and it is sad to see it done here so often these days.

                      Or, perhaps you simply have me confused with some other poster.  If you look closely, you'll see that my username is "theatre goon," not "Dobie."

                      It could just be confusion on your part, I suppose.  I mean, surely you are not intentionally engaging in poor behavior in an attempt to discourage discussion that you may be unable to participate honestly in.  That would be most accurately termed "trolling," and I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt that that is not what you are doing.

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

                      by theatre goon on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:56:26 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas, theatre goon, FrankRose

              I'm thinking at this point that this is more about you than me.

              ‎"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 Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:31:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  "your little gun toys"? (10+ / 0-)

    I have no "little toy guns".  I have a number of full-size real guns, non are toys, although they can be fun to use when at the range.

    But seriously, go to bed.

    Your hate-mail will be graded.

    by PavePusher on Mon May 20, 2013 at 10:12:49 PM PDT

  •  "The lifetime exclusion of felons from jury (12+ / 0-)

    service is the majority rule in the U.S., used in thirty one states and in federal courts. The result is that over 6% of the adult population is excluded, including about 30% of black men,[2] creating a class of citizens defined and punished by the criminal justice system but unable to impact its function."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

  •  I never will be able to contain my disappointment (3+ / 0-)

    that our gun know it alls are so against anything that disturbs the status quo.  The status quo is a run away crazy train.

    On the last 600+ comment battle I was awarded my new signature line.

    Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

    by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 01:48:09 AM PDT

  •  it is not a catch 22 (7+ / 0-)

    The gun owners are against any new regulation of their guns because they see the end goal of any such as a total ban on their guns.  Which to be fair is the stated goal of most people who support gun control.

    Gun owners are the first to point out that every new gun reg has only restricted the rights of gun owners and not criminals, and that because of that the new gun reg won't "fix the problem" either.

    Often the proposed reg makes no sense to gun owners because they see that the reg only tinkers with cosmetic items or is a back door ban.

    It does not help that when you look into the specifics they have a very logical point.  I mean really, what makes a rifle an Assault Rifle - a plastic heat shield vs a wooden one?

    Gun owners see the right to arms to be as important as free speech, and they tolerate no restrictions at all. Keep that in mind when you see them fight all these proposed regs.

    Stupid question hour starts now and ends in five minutes.

    by DrillSgtK on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:22:09 AM PDT

    •  With no guns, there are no gun deaths. Period.n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, DefendOurConstitution

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

      by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:51:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But you'll never get to 'no guns' in the US. nt (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theatre goon, gerrilea, wishbone

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

        by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 06:42:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  How about no out of control guns? That is where (2+ / 0-)

          it should be going and that is what we both should be fighting for.

          Why is that so scary? Why shouldn't all gun owners follow the exacting standards you follow? Why shouldn't they lose possession for a period of years if they get sloppy?

          Why do you fight the imaginary ban fan and not the very real sloppy gun toter?

          Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

          by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:24:34 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I do fight the very real sloppy gun toter. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theatre goon, FrankRose, Kentucky Kid

            That's why I donate my time to teach kids firearm safety.
            That's why I donate my time to teach adults firearm safety.
            That's why I've donated GEAR to adults.
            That's why I support laws against brandishing and negligent discharges.

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

            by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:27:25 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  But you never diary it here or talk about it here. (2+ / 0-)

              You only come at anyone who is trying to do something as the enemy ban fan and get all hateful.  RkBAers are only in the comments section. They never hit the front page. You are in the comments always tearing everything down.

              Have you ever written anything about brandishing or negligent discharge laws you want us to join you in supporting. If you added losing possession, you would have me supporting your diaries. I think that is all we need to do to have successful gun control.

              Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

              by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:34:19 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, I have. If you don't go back far enough (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                theatre goon, FrankRose, andalusi

                in my history, that's not my problem.

                I've talked multiple times about teaching kids firearm safety. I've talked about bringing coworkers and friends to the range so they know what to do, safely.

                I've not written much about brandishing or negligent discharge laws because we have them.

                Stolen is not losing. If you LOSE a firearm, there should be consequences.

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

                by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:44:06 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Stolen off your coffee table is different from (2+ / 0-)

                  stolen from a secure place no one knows about except you. If you brag all over town you have a dandy gun and it gets 'stolen', you lost your gun.

                  I had a friend whose husband was a dealer at gun shows. He got mostly out of it in the 90's. She told me that when she first started spending the night with him she was scared to get out of bed because his house was so tricked out with trip wire alarms. She had to wait till he got up and disabled them. And I guarantee you his neighbors did not know what he did. He was very vague about his home and his house was not a store front.

                  There is keeping guns and there is letting them lay about.

                  I can't believe you don't feel the need to keep up the pressure on cracking down on sloppy gun ownership.

                  Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                  by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:08:46 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No, actually, it isn't. If someone steals (4+ / 0-)

                    something from inside my locked fucking house, that's still stealing and not losing. Now, if the door is open and there are firearms laying around, I can see a case made for that.

                    Since when do I not feel the need to crack down on sloppy handling/usage of firearms? I spend time out in the real world (not this cyber one) doing that.

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

                    by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:12:37 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Oh in the cyber world you only have time to (2+ / 0-)

                      be hateful to anyone who wants to crack down on sloppy handling. Me for instance.

                      Because your locked fucking house s/b OK. It probably is. Who knows.

                      But don't you have your fucking firearms so no one will rob your fucking house. They don' work too well if someone fucking takes your fucking guns that you had to prevent someone from taking your fucking stuff.

                      Oh fuck was that out loud.

                      Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                      by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:19:32 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Which is why my firearms are locked up, except (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        theatre goon, andalusi

                        for the one I am carrying.

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

                        by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:51:00 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  As I said you are probably OK. And as I asked (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          oldpotsmuggler

                          why do you have such a problem requiring all toters come up to your level? Why do you protect and defend their inadequacies and call me a ban fan when I point them out?

                          Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                          by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:56:44 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Because you shouldn't be responsible for (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            theatre goon

                            something that someone does with an illegally obtained firearm.

                            Because not everyone can afford the shit that I can.

                            I am a fan of the firearm owner being held responsible for the damage one of their children does with a firearm (or damage a different child does). Children? Lock your shit up. But if your kids know better (like my mom, her brothers and sisters) you could keep the firearms beyond the kitchen door and NONE of the kids touched them.

                            If memory serves, you support an AWB. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

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

                            by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:21:15 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And yet the person that it is done to gets the (3+ / 0-)

                            bullet in their body. How is that person responsible except they have to go to the hospital to get the bullet out or the graveyard to get their body dumped?

                            Why should that person take a bullet because you were too poor to afford keeping a firearm? Is the person who took the bullet from the firearm you couldn't afford to keep able to afford time off work and hospital bills? Does that person even care whose fault it is? No that person just wants the bullet out of his body.

                            What you deign to support makes no never mind to me. You are just always in my face for asking firearms be kept out of my hair.

                            That is the oopsie. The victim gun owner who has the gun to prevent stuff from being stolen.

                            That plan didn't work sorry. I need to get another gun to protect you from a homicidal maniac that might hurt you.

                            I don't think that plan will work either.

                            Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                            by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:31:47 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're not making sense to me now. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            theatre goon, FrankRose, Kentucky Kid
                            That is the oopsie. The victim gun owner who has the gun to prevent stuff from being stolen.

                            That plan didn't work sorry. I need to get another gun to protect you from a homicidal maniac that might hurt you.

                            I don't think that plan will work either.

                            I'm pressing F2 but no help files are popping up to explain what you mean with what I've blockquoted above.

                            That person takes a bullet because someone else broke the law. Locking your doors and windows = afford to keep. Anything else (like my vault) is just gravy.

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

                            by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:39:09 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I know. You can't seem to understand I DON'T (2+ / 0-)

                            WANT YOUR GUNS. KEEP THEM.

                            I don't care if you are poor or untrained. I don't care. I want your guns under your control at all times in every way.

                            Keep them, keep them, keep them.

                            I will go about my business. And if you are actually keeping your guns, I will never notice your guns.

                            Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                            by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:44:04 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The poor gun owner that can't afford to keep (2+ / 0-)

                            their gun kind of poses a clear and present danger to me. I don't want to KEEP a gun let alone a poor untrained person's gun.

                            Because not everyone can afford the shit that I can.
                            That quote is you.

                            Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                            by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:46:18 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  Sorry I never go back in anyone's history. Just (2+ / 0-)

                  not a big interest of mine. Digging up bones. Who cares. What you want to do tomorrow, that might interest me.

                  Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                  by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:10:50 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Hey Kurt/Kyle (one of these days I may pay (0+ / 0-)

              enough attention to you to figure out who you really are) how about those 18 loaded firearms already confiscated at the Salt Lake Airport this year (as compared to 20 in all of 2012) Loaded guns,! Airport! 2013!

              You may be teaching your buns off but you're either no great shakes as a teacher, or you've chosen to align yourself with the real slow learning segment of society.

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

              by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 07:30:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Literally, no. Relatively, of course. View the (0+ / 0-)

          path of history. Extrapolate. Get used to the inevitable before it comes, chews those like you up, and spits you out.

          In thinking that personal firearm ownership is 100% answer, and 0% problem (and I believe that you're actually way too intelligent to fall for your own bullshit), the planetary vote comes in with the standard NRA/RKBA position barely registering a blip.

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

          by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 07:24:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I think you are so wrong to see the ban fan (2+ / 0-)

      behind every tree. If you actually kept your guns (you meaning the actual gun owner not you in particular) then there wouldn't be a gun problem.

      You can have your guns, but keep them out of my hair, is not banning guns.

      Gun owners who fight keeping their guns will eventually lose their guns. Because there is no defense for sloppy gun ownership and sloppy gun handling.

      Shirley you can see that sloppy gun owners abound. You say train them. I say I don't give a damn just keep the guns in your control. Do whatever it takes but that is not my problem, that is your problem.

      It may be a constitutional right but it doesn't mean I have to spoon feed you. Step up to the plate. There is no crying in baseball or oopise in keep and bear arms.

      We fall into the technical with gun regulations, we need to stick to the goal. I don't care how you keep your guns, just keep them. Let the gun owner be responsible for figuring out how not to lose their gun for being sloppy. (dropping, losing possession, misfiring any non-control.)

      Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

      by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:21:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm sorry your right has been taken away (6+ / 0-)

    OPS, but that's not a good reason to deny the right to everyone else.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:41:50 AM PDT

    •  The reason to change the Constitution is for the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DefendOurConstitution

      benefit of greater humanity in this instance.

      No need to take it personal.

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

      by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:37:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, removal of self defense measures is a boon (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theatre goon, FrankRose

        to humanity.

        Right.

        Sure.

        Ok.

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

        by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:44:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who is saying that you don't have a right to (3+ / 0-)

          self-defense?  Once again - imaginary enemies are being created.

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

          by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:14:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If you ban or limit that which allows for (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theatre goon, FrankRose

            the exercise of a right, you undermine that right.

            For example: if you banned printer ink. Freedom of the press! Well, except for newspapers and magazines...

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

            by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:53:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So a limit on RPGs is a violation of my rights to (3+ / 0-)

              self-defense? How about a limit to TNT? Armored vehicles? Tanks? Apache Helicopters? A-10 anti-tank aircraft?

              I don't hear you saying that those are undermining your right!

              None of the regulations I have ever proposed limit your ability to defend yourself with firearms:

              1. FULL background check on EVERY sale/transfer
              2. Licensing
              3. Registration
              4. Limits on clip/magazine capacity for all firearms
              But then again, they don't violate the Second Amendment or any right that you may attribute to it - except for the slippery slope argument that you will surely roll out after saying how ridiculous is that I compare firearms to RPGs, tanks or helicopters.

              BTW - as far as people that already own clips/magazines that exceed the limits they can be grandfathered or slowly transitioned out - just like leaded gasoline was not banned overnight in spite of all the damage it did.

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

              by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:37:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  We're talking about arms, not ordnance. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                theatre goon, FrankRose, andalusi

                Oh, and last time I checked, you could own a tank or helicopter. Just requires a shit ton of money.

                And I've already explained why I'm against licensing (civil rights shouldn't require a license) and registration (elsewhere). I've even said I have no problem with UBCs as long as they're done correctly.

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

                by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:42:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  How convenient that you can invent definitions (3+ / 0-)

                  any time they suit you.  And I see that you cannot explain why any right is violated by anything I propose, but I knew not to expect any better so I am not disappointed.

                  Since you quoted WikiPedia today, here is their definition of arms:

                  A weapon, arm, or armament is any device used in order to inflict damage or harm to living beings, structures, or systems. Weapons are used to increase the efficacy and efficiency of activities such as hunting, crime, law enforcement, self-defense, and warfare.
                  So no, there is no such difference as you try to create for the convenience of arguing to keep the status quo.

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

                  by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:58:29 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  What's the definition of arms during (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    theatre goon

                    the time period it was used on the Constitution?

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

                    by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:30:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I see! You are an originalist like Scalia! Say no (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      oldpotsmuggler

                      more!

                      BTW - the "arms" during the time period it was used on the Constitution bear no resemblance to even revolvers today either, so does that mean that you only have a right to arms as they existed back then?  Another swing and a miss!

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

                      by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:46:42 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Arms of the time referred to military (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        theatre goon

                        small arms.

                        Those commonly carried by the citizen militia members.

                        So today, if you apply the same logic, you'd see me having the right to keep and bear M4s, M14s (think there are still some round), M9s and others.

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

                        by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:48:07 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I admire your ability to adjust any definition to (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          oldpotsmuggler

                          "we must keep the status quo." (actually the status is not being kept, regulations are significantly more lax now than they were 15 years ago.)  You are much better at it that Rudy "noun verb 9/11" Giuliani.  I am glad that you can express your fanaticism, just not glad at all that your continued support for the NRA's positions keeps adding to the number of people getting shot every year - over 105k  per year in the last couple of years and rising at a rate of about 1,700 per year.

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

                          by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 02:08:56 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm all for reducing all violent crime. Pity (4+ / 0-)

                            you can't get behind progressive solutions to our violence problem like better social safety nets, education, single payer (mental health care), marijuana legalization, jobs, and a better progressive tax system (to pay for infrastructure, thus creating more jobs; to pay for better student grants for education, etc).

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

                            by KVoimakas on Tue May 21, 2013 at 02:25:05 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  yeah yah got me a ban fan who is against (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldpotsmuggler

                            better social safety nets, education, single payer (mental health care), marijuana legalization, jobs, and a better progressive tax system (to pay for infrastructure, thus creating more jobs; to pay for better student grants for education, etc).

                            Heaven forbid ask the gun owners to actually keep control of their guns. They simply don't have time because of being occupied with.

                            better social safety nets, education, single payer (mental health care), marijuana legalization, jobs, and a better progressive tax system (to pay for infrastructure, thus creating more jobs; to pay for better student grants for education, etc).

                            hah hah hah

                            Plenty of time to chase me to the right margin in a diary only 9 people even care about. What's so scary about 9 freaking people. What could we possibly be talking about that needs your time and attention for so long.

                            I don't know. Maybe owners actually keeping their guns under control. Scary stuff.

                            Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

                            by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 03:54:40 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  We've been over this before. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            theatre goon, ER Doc

                            I know you like to state my position as being contrary to your's, but let me direct you back to this comment.

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

                            by KVoimakas on Wed May 22, 2013 at 06:20:14 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Another standard NRA talking point. Where's that (0+ / 0-)

                            one on the GUNHO Board?

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

                            by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 07:46:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Standard NRA talking point, it's all they got. n/a (0+ / 0-)

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

                    by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 07:44:28 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

        •  When Idealt I carried. But what I carried was (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheFern

          cash. More cash than an armored car, and nary a firearm. True self defense has everything to do with the strengthofthe person, and nothing to do with how they try to patch their weaknesses over with the lethal tools that the weak gravitate to.

          The northwoods of Michigan will never be dangerous to defeat you unarmed, and you know it.

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

          by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 07:43:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So, self defense for the weak is a bad thing? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theatre goon, ER Doc

            Gotcha.

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

            by KVoimakas on Wed May 22, 2013 at 06:21:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  For the weak to rely on guns does nothing (0+ / 0-)

              to create strength, so nothing to create true security.

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

              by oldpotsmuggler on Wed May 22, 2013 at 12:31:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Patently false. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                theatre goon, andalusi, ER Doc

                A firearm is a great equalizer. My wife has some health issues (so do I, but they aren't as extreme) and in no physical sense would she be a match for me if I was a violent abusive asshole (which I'm not; probably needed saying with how my words are twisted).

                She has her own firearms and would be better off with one than without. Strength through firepower...eh, guess that works.

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

                by KVoimakas on Wed May 22, 2013 at 12:41:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Woman does not mean weak. Health issues does not (0+ / 0-)

                  mean weak.

                  Thinking that you can't face the world without a safety blanket, I'd go with weak on that one.

                  The one time in my life that I was held hostage under armed guard (and I'm not talking about routine law enforcement measures), I won and no one got hurt. It can be done. Or you can be even smarter than I am and don't do stupid shit to begin with. Hell I might conceivably consider a gun as a last resort, but not anywhere near as a first resort, and that's exactly why I've never needed one.

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

                  by oldpotsmuggler on Wed May 22, 2013 at 01:14:36 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  asdf (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    theatre goon, andalusi, ER Doc, FrankRose

                    I didn't say women = weak or health issues = weak. My wife is not strong. Weak of body is what we're talking about here, not weak of will or mind.

                    This is always the first line of defense:

                    Or you can be even smarter than I am and don't do stupid shit to begin with.
                    And this is also what I think:
                    Hell I might conceivably consider a gun as a last resort, but not anywhere near as a first resort,

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

                    by KVoimakas on Wed May 22, 2013 at 01:52:49 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No one is following this conversation unless you (0+ / 0-)

                      ask them to, and you did. See, that's what I mean by weak.

                      If you don't have backup, you don't make it. I did my 8 years inside federal prisons, all the way up to level 5 FCI Phoenix/Blackrock 100% by myself. That happens, oh, .01% of the time. Everyone else, because of "weaknesses" joins. See, you think that just because you lead your gang you didn't join it, you don't need it. Inside, you, as a person, you'd join or be hurt within a heartbeat. You'd join! (On the outside people like you carry guns.)

                      I never had to give it even a moments thought. So, you and all of your little playmates, have a wonderful night.

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

                      by oldpotsmuggler on Wed May 22, 2013 at 07:18:56 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Interesting take on preventing crimes (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ER Doc, KVoimakas, theatre goon

                    So every hostage who wasn't able to avoid getting hurt or killed deserved it in your estimation? Either because they weren't as awesome as you in defusing the situation or because smart people can always avoid getting into trouble?

                    All the victim's fault, eh?

                    Or maybe you didn't really think through what you were writing because you were too focused on trying to come up with a retort to KVoimakas?

    •  Your right to KEEP hasn't been taken away (2+ / 0-)

      you threw it away because bearing isn't fun if you actually have to KEEP.

      Sloppy bearing no keeping, yippee our rights and no responsibilities.

      This tack might take you into a harbor you might not like.

      Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

      by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:04:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks nt (3+ / 0-)

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Tue May 21, 2013 at 05:49:31 AM PDT

  •  This diary (7+ / 0-)

    is an embarrassment to the site. But you go on with your bad self...

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Tue May 21, 2013 at 05:54:20 AM PDT

    •  Posse's of toters running around fighting every (2+ / 0-)

      effort to get gun owners to keep their guns out of our hair is not an embarrassment to the site?

      Do you read the front page? How many diaries do you see by everything is OK as it is RkBAers?

      Not so many.

      I only see you guys here in the comments section.

      Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

      by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:29:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What, my pointing out the lack of logic on your (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DefendOurConstitution, 88kathy

      side hurts you!

      See, the good thing is that I take out the two strongest NRA talking points in only a small rant, and none of you have any way to argue that that didn't happen.

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

      by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 09:40:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You aren't hurting anybody, despite your attempts (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theatre goon, happy camper

        If you could, you wouldn't be going off on these little Internet based rants this this Diary.  Instead you would actually be doing what you profess to desire so badly.

        So as others have said above: go for it.

        •  If you weren't hurting you wouldn't be commenting (2+ / 0-)

          here, you wouldn't even notice this diary. OPS is doing what he professes to be doing and you all are here saying it won't work and chasing everyone to the right margin. No one will look at this diary who isn't well prepared to be chased to the right margin by RkBAers who say go for it but don't mean it.

          If the little Internet means so little, why are you such a prolific commenter in little rants that mean so little.

          Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

          by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:11:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Reply to various statements (0+ / 0-)
            If you weren't hurting you wouldn't be ...
            I can assure you that the only way in which the recent push for gun restrictions and the ensuing backlash is currently hurting is in the rising prices for ammunition.  At one point, a few months back, I might have considered the RASA types to be a legitimate threat.  While one can't become complacent, I no longer see them as cause for serious concern.
            chasing everyone to the right margin
            On the contrary, neither I, nor the RKBA group, are the ones pushing people to the right.  Indeed, if any group of this fora is to blame for this, it would be the RASA members.  From various news accounts and general talk, I am starting to get the distinct feeling that this country will be exiting stage right in the next few election cycles, which will carry undesirable consequences ranging from an expansion of the wealth divide and the war on everything from birth control to the environment all in the name of profit and religion.  The largely failed push on gun restrictions is most assuredly partially responsible.  
            No one will look at this diary  ...
            Generally speaking, few outside of the pro/anti RKBA types will bother to read these diaries.  For most people gun rights is a non issue.  Indeed, outside of this site and topic specific fora, guns was yesterday's news and will likely remain so until such time as the courts take up the challenge of addressing some of the recent absurdities passed under the guise of safety.
      •  Argue what didn't happen? (4+ / 0-)
        See, the good thing is that I take out the two strongest NRA talking points in only a small rant, and none of you have any way to argue that that didn't happen.
        You created a few strawmen that you knocked down, and only managed that through ignoring the actual facts.  

        In other words, you weren't even able to logically attack arguments that you made up to attribute to others who do not actually take those stances.

        In that sense, yes, you are right -- we have no way to argue that you didn't attack arguments no one made.

        So, what was it you were going for again...?

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

        by theatre goon on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:12:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Standard fare of the theatre is fiction, so your (0+ / 0-)

          life path seems well chosen.

          Except that the thater also includes the ability to spin a great yarn.

          Well, one out of two ain't that bad!

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

          by oldpotsmuggler on Tue May 21, 2013 at 07:51:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You should really get out more. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KVoimakas

            You clearly don't know much at all about theatre.

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

            by theatre goon on Wed May 22, 2013 at 03:56:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh, how often do you play with yourself - er (0+ / 0-)

              play yourself?

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

              by oldpotsmuggler on Wed May 22, 2013 at 12:40:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Really? That's the best you can do? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                andalusi

                A sad little juvenile taunt?

                I would have expected so much more from someone who has done and seen all that you claim to have done and seen.  Instead, I get a retort that I would expect from a child.

                I guess if that's all you've got, though, you should play to your strengths.

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

                by theatre goon on Wed May 22, 2013 at 02:07:41 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh, you don't play yourself, or you don't play (0+ / 0-)

                  with yourself.

                  By the way, you came into my diary and never addressed the issue, and you want to call me weak?

                  So which is it. The folks on my side can piecemeal solutions? Or we have a legitimate point in suggesting bans? Because, from the standpoint of intellectual integrity, you gunnuts don't get both.

                  (God, am I glad to see Markos within viewing distance of ridding this place of the lot of you.)

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

                  by oldpotsmuggler on Wed May 22, 2013 at 07:07:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I did, in fact, address the issue. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KVoimakas

                    If that went over your head, that's not my problem.

                    Additionally, it's not my problem if you can't or won't argue above a middle-school level.  It simply means that your argument is not supported.  Grade-school taunts just don't cut it, here in the grown-up world.

                    If it offends you that I point out when you are acting like a child, this is, again, not my problem.  If you don't like it, don't act like a child.

                    Who said you can't suggest bans?  No one.  That being the case, you assertion here is simply a falsehood.  In fact, your entire diary was based on a series of falsehoods and strawmen.  It was rightfully ridiculed because of that.

                    You may suggest them all you like -- but you may well be expected to support those suggestions with real arguments, instead of letting your own masturbatory fantasies take the place of arguments.  Honestly, your interest in whether or not I play with myself is more than a little creepy.  

                    And, yes, I can see where it would make you happy if Markos would simply remove those who you are unable to respond to in a meaningful manner.  Of course, that would just make the site a bit more like Redstate, where, from what I understand, they simply ban all who disagree with a few users.

                    Some people seem to prefer to never be confronted with viewpoints that don't conform to their own.  Those who have matured beyond a certain point, however, are able to discuss such viewpoints like adults.

                    Honestly, I'm not at all surprised that you aspire to be more like the folks at Redstate.  Saddened, yes -- surprised, no.

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

                    by theatre goon on Thu May 23, 2013 at 04:09:54 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Markos is creating Redstate, and you not only (0+ / 0-)

                      display your lack of character by staying, you display your deep lack of character by coming into his home and insulting him.

                      Do you really think that he's going to let you continue mouthing the same lines as the declared "enemy" (his characterization, not mine)?

                      Dream on. Oh, and don't let the dorr hit you in the ass.

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

                      by oldpotsmuggler on Thu May 23, 2013 at 11:44:21 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You are mischaracterizing what I said. (0+ / 0-)

                        At no point did I say that Markos is creating Redstate -- I said that if he acted in the manner that you apparently want him to, then the site would become more like Redstate.

                        It is a very straightforward statement.

                        Seriously, this isn't even a good lie -- you should really put a little bit of consideration into it when you lie.  This is just ludicrous.

                        That being the case, the only one showing a lack of character here is you.  I do note that you engage in this sort of behavior often -- act poorly, then accuse others of the poor behavior that you, yourself, are engaging in.

                        Extremely dishonest behavior on your part.

                        Really, if you have to continually resort to such outright falsehoods to support your position, perhaps it is time to reconsider that position.  

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

                        by theatre goon on Thu May 23, 2013 at 02:48:22 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Oh, so you're not radical RKBA after all? If that (0+ / 0-)

                          be the case, excuse me.

                          Oh, except for one thing. Assure me in all seriousness, first, that no one you know has ever called you an arrogant bastard.

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

                          by oldpotsmuggler on Thu May 23, 2013 at 06:34:55 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  P.S. Notice I never actually called you an (0+ / 0-)

                          arrogant bastard. My comment was more artfully strctured than that.

                          And that very long list of insulting labels you try to attach to me? If I was ever really going to call you anything, it would be "sick fuck". But I would never do that.

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

                          by oldpotsmuggler on Thu May 23, 2013 at 06:55:46 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I haven't labeled you anything whatsoever. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            andalusi

                            You might notice that I comment on what you say, not on who you are.

                            If you don't want your comments called out as lies, don't lie.  If you don't want to have your comments called out as childish and juvenile, don't make childish and juvenile comments.

                            Again, these are not particularly difficult concepts.

                            And, no, I've never been called an arrogant bastard by anyone who actually knows me (at least, not to my knowledge -- who knows what some coward might say behind someone's back).  I've been called that by people on the Internet who can't respond to an argument in an adult, honest way -- but there are a lot of that sort of intellectually dishonest, immature type on the internet.

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

                            by theatre goon on Fri May 24, 2013 at 03:54:35 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  "Cowards" - See, your type always leaves the back (0+ / 0-)

                            door open. To say that you disgust me would never do true justice to the extent of how revolting you are.

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

                            by oldpotsmuggler on Fri May 24, 2013 at 08:56:58 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  P.S. - What are you trying to bait me into, (0+ / 1-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hidden by:
                            andalusi

                            anyway?

                            Idiot.

                            Oh yeah, "goon", in the theatre context means idiot anyway, so that explains that!

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

                            by oldpotsmuggler on Fri May 24, 2013 at 08:59:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  HR for insult n/t (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            theatre goon
                          •  LOL (0+ / 0-)

                            And there's the outright, personal insult.  Again, is that the best argument you can muster for a stance you supposedly hold so dearly?  Lies, insults, and childish taunts?

                            A well-held position, one would think, could be supported with actual arguments.

                            A bit of ignorance, as well, as for the meaning of the word "goon," but we can't expect more than that, I suppose.

                            And, no, "ignorance" is not a personal insult -- at least, not for those who know the meaning of the word.

                            And whether I disgust you or not is of absolutely no interest to me -- well, that's not wholly true.  It amuses me, somewhat.

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

                            by theatre goon on Sat May 25, 2013 at 04:35:31 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ah, yes, there it is, there it is. Andalusi. Not (0+ / 0-)

                            even vaguely surprised that you need backup.

                            Is there anything that you've ever done that you've actually handeled on your own?

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

                            by oldpotsmuggler on Sat May 25, 2013 at 07:17:01 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  All the time. (0+ / 0-)

                            In fact, the majority of my work is done on my own.  Not sure why this is a big deal, as this is an interactive site and people do this sort of thing all the time.  Maybe you're just trying to divert attention away from your own poor behavior again.

                            And, if you're really so horribly upset that you got caught out in a rules violation, then maybe you shouldn't break the rules.

                            Pretty simple stuff, when you get down to it.

                            But, let me ask this -- do you complain when someone gives you "backup," or are you just being a hypocrite in calling it out in someone else?

                            I already know the answer, of course, as I've never seen you complain when someone offers you support of some sort, but I'm curious as to whether or not you'll admit it.

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

                            by theatre goon on Sun May 26, 2013 at 03:58:52 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So, if you were going to call him something... (7+ / 0-)

                            ...but you wouldn't do that....

                            Sounds a lot like a child holding a finger 1/4" from a sibling's face while chanting "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you...."

                            Sheesh....

                            Your hate-mail will be graded.

                            by PavePusher on Mon May 27, 2013 at 12:35:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That child goes on to become a lawyer... (7+ / 0-)

                            who advises politicians, or aspires for political office.

                            They in-turn, create a lexicon where common terms no longer mean what's in the collective psyche... thus the collective psyche needs to be trained to new meanings for old words.

                            Personally, I thought it was a bit early to reprise that Thanksgiving classic, Alice's Restaurant - replete with the reference to the Group W bench:

                            He said, "Kid, we only got one question. Have you ever been arrested?"

                            And I proceeded to tell him the story of the twenty seven eight-by-ten
                            colour glossy pictures with the circles and arrows and the paragraph on
                            the back of each one, and he stopped me right there and said, "Kid, I want you to go and sit down on that bench that says Group W .... NOW kid!!"

                            And I, I walked over to the, to the bench there, and there is, Group W's where they put you if you may not be moral enough to join the army after committing your special crime, and there was all kinds of mean nasty ugly looking people on the bench there.  
                            Mother rapers.  Father stabbers.  Father rapers!  Father rapers sitting right there on the bench next to me!  And
                            they was mean and nasty and ugly and horrible crime-type guys sitting on the bench next to me.
                            And the meanest, ugliest, nastiest one, the meanest
                            father raper of them all, was coming over to me and he was mean 'n' ugly 'n' nasty 'n' horrible and all kind of things and he sat down next to me and said,
                            "Kid, whad'ya get?"  I said, "I didn't get nothing, I had to pay $50 and pick up the garbage."  He said, "What were you arrested for, kid?"
                            And I said, "Littering."  And they all moved away from me on the bench there, and the hairy eyeball and all kinds of mean nasty things, till I said, "And creating a nuisance."  And they all came back, shook my hand, and we had a great time on the bench, talkin about crime, mother stabbing,
                            father raping, all kinds of groovy things that we was talking about on the
                            bench.

                            The country was in peril; he was jeopardizing his traditional rights of freedom and independence by daring to exercise them.” ~ Joseph Heller, Catch-22

                            by 43north on Mon May 27, 2013 at 01:15:17 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That may be the best use of a ARM quote.... (6+ / 0-)

                            EVAR.

                            8>)

                            Your hate-mail will be graded.

                            by PavePusher on Mon May 27, 2013 at 01:24:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

  •  Give them a break, will you? Can't you see that (3+ / 0-)

    they are depressed from not being able to completely control the conversation like they used to and to add insult to injury there was a "mean diary" on the rec list for over 24 hours.

    We have to change the way we treat them.  Yes they deserve to be treated just as rudely as they treated anyone that dared venture into the area of firearms and didn't totally agree with them, but I would like to think we are better.  As they have become a cartoon worthy of the NRA, the American Taliban or other extremist groups they have done more damage to themselves than our fighting back against them.  We must be better and keep our eyes on the prize.

    Now that we have the attention of the Daily KOS community we have to switch gears from defending ourselves by forcefully pushing back against them to re-focusing on what will actually reduce the carnage: passing firearms regulations.

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

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:11:40 AM PDT

    •  That would certainly explain why the AWB (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KVoimakas, theatre goon, Texas Lefty

      went so swimmingly.

      Wait.....it didn't.

      But who can forget about the Million Mom March in the wake of it's resounding failure.....wait, that was 1994.
      How about a Thousand Mom March? Hundred Mom March?
      .......Dozen Mom March?
      No?

      Well then,
      How about gun control helping a damn good candidate with a 4 to 1 TV ad advantage & a 9 point lead two weeks before the election against a hapless moron that was arrested during the campaign and was abandoned by his own party?
      Surely, with all the support gun control has & with it dominating the national debate; making the election national should bring it home...,
      No?

      Great interpretation. Not fantastical at all.

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Tue May 21, 2013 at 10:37:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I wish I could convince people to switch gears. (2+ / 0-)

      Not try to control guns but enforce owners control their guns. I don't have a clue how to do that and have spent the last few months trying to get others who do know interested. I will continue to do so and to join any effort put forward by the gun sanity group no matter how close or far it is from my original idea.

      Gun control by the gun owner scares the ever loving crap out of the RkBAer crowd as evidenced by their relentless chasing of me to the right margin every time I say anything.

      I will join anything that pushes the ball back in their court. Why should we have to legislate how to control their guns? We should only legislate what happens if they don't control their guns.

      The minute we come up with any parameters trying to show them how to control a gun, they come up with it's not an AR-18 its a AR25 and other childish crap. I want us to rise above the fray and let them suffer gun loss for loss of gun control. Felony gun loss for a period of years.

      I think we can do it.

      Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

      by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 11:58:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nonsense. (4+ / 0-)
        Gun control by the gun owner scares the ever loving crap out of the RkBAer crowd as evidenced by their relentless chasing of me to the right margin every time I say anything.
        Your assertion here is simply false.

        Disagreement with your unsupported assertions is not fear -- it is simply disagreeing with your unsupported assertions.

        Trying to characterize such disagreement as something it is not is, in and of itself, simply another falsehood.

        When you have to resort to repeated and constant falsehoods to support your stance, perhaps it is time to re-examine that stance.

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

        by theatre goon on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:11:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  balderdash. here you are. (2+ / 0-)

          Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

          by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:12:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, I am here. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KVoimakas, FrankRose

            At least, as far as being on a website is actually being somewhere.  Figuratively, at least.

            However, that has no bearing on the fact that your comment was simply a falsehood, as I pointed out.  I note that you did not actually respond to what I stated, instead, diverting to an irrelevant inanity.

            This seems to be a common tactic with you, when you are unwilling or unable to respond in a meaningful manner, you resort to further falsehoods or irrelevant nonsense.

            This does not speak particularly well for your argument, overall.

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

            by theatre goon on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:16:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  This so reminds me of what happened to Grayson. (2+ / 0-)

    Every time he put up a diary he was attacked by the i/p crowd. He couldn't get any traction or do any fund raisers because the i/p drove everyone from his diaries.

    So every time the gun sanity crew has a rant the commenters are chased to the right margin just the same. Because the RkBAer crew can't stop chasing everyone. Calling names and making weird conversation.

    Grayson lost, but he ended up winning. Gun sanity will prevail. And no, things are not even close to sane now.

    Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

    by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:21:34 PM PDT

    •  Amen - it will take a while, but as people become (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      88kathy, oldpotsmuggler

      aware of the level of carnage that we have come to accept as "normal" (one person shot every 5 minutes and of those one die every 15 minutes) ,ore and more will rise to demand that Congress listen to us rather than to the NRA and their gun Cult.

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

      by DefendOurConstitution on Tue May 21, 2013 at 12:51:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Grayson i/p thing was so easy to see because (2+ / 0-)

        Grayson and i/p were very different. Gun sanity RkBAer thing is impossible to separate. Dkos is effectively disabled as a gun sanity hatching point.

        It will take a while. It's just a land yacht driving down the freeway at 40 mph. We will get around them.

        Get the 'oopsie' out of 'keep and bear arms' see GunFAIL and Gun Crazy diaries weekly.

        by 88kathy on Tue May 21, 2013 at 01:12:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site