Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Posted by Bothell none (My Page) on
Sun, Dec 23, 12 at 23:31

I saw a few excerpts from this mornings newsshows and big surprise the Republicans are parroting what the NRA tells them to say. Can anyone believe that the republican party isn't bought &paid for by the NRA. All voters should be letting their elected representatives know that gun rights don't equal semi-automatic weapons rights. It's time to let those who suppposedly represent us that this is not acceptable. WHO RUNS THIS COUNTRY, it shouldn't be the NRA.


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Sorry, but I have my own mind. I've had a whole lot to say LONG before I rejoined the NRA, and in fact the reason I DID rejoin is just the opposite-- not because I agree with them, but rather because THEY agree with ME.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

So Bill, you agree with their position that guns aren't the problem, because they've blamed everything else except guns and now the republican lawmakers are spewing that crap as dogma. I have no problem with responsible people having guns, I do have a big problem with the total lack of control on who can have guns and what guns they can have. The NRA is disgusting in their lack of responsibility for how guns are managed in this country. How many dead children does it take to realize there needs to be limits on who has guns and what guns they have. I hope no one you love is ever a victim of gun violence because none of us can ever realize how that must feel.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Bothell: " big surprise the Republicans are parroting what the NRA tells them to say"

Which Republicans? Does this statement include conservatives, too? Don't bother; I think I get it :D

You beat me to it, Bill. Who says gun ownership rights advocates are parroting the NRA? As far as I'm concerned, the NRA is advocating for what the NRA supporters want. The positions of the NRA don't accurately represent what each specific member/supporter believes in; no organization can do that, but the NRA isn't telling me what I want or what I believe in; I'm telling the NRA. So are a lot of other people, and what the NRA's stated positions, suggestions, ideas, etc. are a critique of ideologies from groups and individuals.

The NRA is far from perfect, but it is the major advocate for gun owners/enthusiasts.

Speaking of parroting, aren't these tired phrases: lock-step, parroting, spewing, etc., "parroting", too? Something original, please.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

So Bill, you agree with their position that guns aren't the problem, because they've blamed everything else except guns and now the republican lawmakers are spewing that crap as dogma.

I believe that a HUGE part of the problem is that the back ground check system isn't being allowed to work the way it's supposed to, that if mentally challenged and emotionally disturbed people were added to the list as they're supposed to be, that many of these tragedies wouldn't occur. Another big part of it is the lack of anyone to defend these kids. On this one, I DO agree with the NRA. There SHOULD be a cop in each school, or atleast allow teachers with permits to carry CONCEALED. And that IS carry-- not put in the desk, or their brief case. That means carry in a holster on their person.

I hope no one you love is ever a victim of gun violence

A close friend of mine lost his 20 y.o. son last wednesday night to a firearms accident. The kid was cleaning his hunting rifle to put it up for the year-- took out the clip, and forgot there was a round in the chamber.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I'm really sorry about your friend, Bill. There is nothing on God's good earth more terrible than losing your child.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

My condolences to your friend and his family, Bill.

How heartbreaking.

Condolences to you, too--when our friends hurt, we do as well.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

"or atleast allow teachers with permits to carry CONCEALED. And that IS carry-- not put in the desk, or their brief case. That means carry in a holster on their person."

No, No , No, No, and NO. Do you realize how many times as a teacher that I have had to break up fights in a hallway. I mean that I have to physically restrain adolescents with both arms. I do not always have control of everything on my person like a holstered gun. They could easily take that gun from me in that situation. At my school I know that probably would not happen, but in a rougher school it certainly could. That is a HORRIBLE idea.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Frank, the etiquette of hallway fights would have to change. You would need to get permits for tasers and pepper sprays and liberally apply to participants and supporters, as the scene dictates. If that escalates the situation, by all means draw down on the kids and threaten to shoot them. I'm sure such a program would work at least for the first few times. We must protect the children, you know. The solution to gun abuse is not dilution but distribution (of more and larger weapons.)


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Nicely done :).


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Okay ,Bill and all you who are sick of the government being in your face. Who's going to pay for armed guards at every school in America? There would have to be more than one in large institutions.

Another question. If guns aren't the issue, does America have more crazy people living here than other countries with low gun deaths?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I'm certainly not a member of the NRA and would like to see a ban on assault rifles, but something struck me that was said at the news conference. We do have a guard in every bank. Seems our money is more important than our kids.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

What about parochial schools, day care centers, etc., etc., etc.?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Do you really have an armed guard in every bank?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Another blind member of the so called liberal mindset.

Please read the entire news, not just the news that has Republican in it.

Another prominent Democrat, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, underwent an even more dramatic conversion. As a member of the House representing a Republican-leaning upstate district in 2008, she voted to repeal a law that banned semiautomatic weapons in the District of Columbia and required gun owners to register their weapons and store them unloaded, with trigger locks. She earned an “A” rating from the NRA. Even as gun-control advocates complained about her January 2009 appointment to the Senate, she told a newspaper reporter that she kept two rifles under her bed. “If I want to protect my family, if I want to have a weapon in the home, that should be my right,” she said.

Fairness is not a characteristic of liberals here.

Here is a link that might be useful: Dems who hate gun control..for political reasons


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Brush's comment reminds me that personal choices may conflict with larger public policies because personal circumstances cannot be the same for all people. Those that "hate" gun control may not be any more political than those that "love" gun control. Politicizing the issues is a way of pulling special interests into the fray. Every State and territory ought to have a right to set its own standards within the constitutional framework.

If you live in a pro-gun state and move to a gun-control state, you would have to comply to the laws and standards of the pro-gun state.

Al was looking for solutions. This could be one of them.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

BTW, did you note LaPierre's comb over? Who does he remind you of?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Another question. If guns aren't the issue, does America have more crazy people living here than other countries with low gun deaths?

Oh guns are the issue, but apparently it isn't the mentally ill that you have to worry about,it is all the "sane" crazies with guns.

Apparently only about 4% of violent crimes are committed by the mentally ill.

Here is a link that might be useful: A Misguided Focus on Mental Illness


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

You mean that someone killing one or more people without government permission is a priori NOT insane? Ninety-six percent of the perps are sane? Brings us to Evil and the minions of Satan then.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Do you really have an armed guard in every bank?

No.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Thank God!!!!


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

We already have armed police at the high school and middle school. Now we need them to ride the buses, be at the bus stops, come to all the sporting events and graduations, concerts, and all activities, as well as all the elementary schools.

The school police are already involved with taking care of fights, theft, traffic in the HS parking lot, and intervention with troubled kids. So we'll need several police at each school.

Every year, there are at least a dozen fights that that the teachers break up. One last year was rather memorable when an enormous, really strong kid 'lost it' and it took half a dozen teachers to subdue him, sending two to the hospital.

And what happened to "trash the teachers" and bad, bad teachers unions and horrible liberals in our schools? Now they should be armed to keep the NRA free to lobby for unrestricted military weaponry everywhere?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

To assume that all gun owners are republicans is as wrong as it gets. To assume all gun owners agree with everything said by an NRA member is equally wrong. To assume that people always vote for only candidates of a single party is wrong.

"All voters should be letting their elected representatives know..."

Whatever's on their minds!


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Okay ,Bill and all you who are sick of the government being in your face. Who's going to pay for armed guards at every school in America?

I find it interesting that jg chimes in about armed gards in banks, but not about the ones in schools when the reason I know it could work is from the time I lived in south Florida in the MID 90's and there were Metro Dade cops in every single school, from kindergarten to high school. No one saw anything wrong with it, and in fact it was a POSITIVE INFLUENCE on relations between young kids and the police. But yet, JG stays silent there. I guess she's not allowed to speak up when it contradicts the liberal agenda here in the forum.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Ann T is right. Most mass murderers are not mentally ill.

Remember Breivik in Norway and that horrible school shooting in 2011? Totally sane but a narcissist.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I'm sorry, but I can't disagree more. ANYONE who goes into any kind of crowd and opens fire looking to do as much damage as possible and kill as many as he can, isn't right in the head. He may not be insane by the legal definition in that he knew what he was doing and can aid in his own defense. But that doesn't mean his elevator goes all the way to the penthouse.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Tue, Dec 25, 12 at 12:17

It's about time some of us showed up to offer an alternative view to those that would gut the bill of rights, piecemeal, for their illusion (of safety).

I just mentioned on another thread that I received about a dozen positive emails (comments about another thread), several from largely lurkers who feel so overwhelmed by the tenor of this forum that they won't even bother to comment on anything political because they know they'll be bullied and shouted down. How 'tolerant' is THAT?

What you're seeing is the result of gun owners becoming increasingly weary of being treated like they slapped someone's mother. I'm not a republican OR a democrat. I vote in every election, but I haven't voted Rep or Dem for a president since I voted to keep Gore out, because as far as I'm concerned, we haven't had a candidate qualified to lead the country.

Most mass murders are not mentally ill?? That's incredibly ...... interesting. GMAB

Al


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

How about making it illegal to keep a loaded gun where a toddler can get it and shoot himself?

How about slapping a 10 year jail sentence on someone that stupid?

How about making gun owners carry liability insurance - if they leave their weapons somewhere stupid and they get stolen, then they're liable for the damage their guns cause?

Might see gun owners become a lot more responsible and careful how they keep their weapons, don't you think.?

And I agree with many hunters and sportsmen that there is no reason for semi-automatic weapons with extended magazines - 30, 50, 100 rounds, certainly sold to anybody and everybody who wants one.

And I don't think we need the gun show 'loophole' to continue. We closed that here in Colorado after Columbine, and there are still plenty of ads in the newspaper for private, unlicensed people selling and trading their guns.

But at least we don't have some massive, all-in-one marketplace where anybody that has the cash can buy any gun they desire, no back ground checks or anything, hundreds of not thousands of guns trading hands in a single weekend.

As for concealed carry - fine. Do a rigorous course, maybe have a competency test every five- ten years. Not the nonsense going on in Arizona and other states where all you have to do is ask for one, no exams, tests, training, or anything.

Now as a long-time gun owner, hunter, target shooter, etc, none of these restrictions make me wring my hankie about losing my 2nd amendment rights.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Al, for the timorous defenders of the 2nd Amendment lurking out there, the act of expressing one's POV and the resulting backlash only hurts the ego and challenges one's beliefs in non-threatening ways. IOW if they are too "chicken" to participate, they should remain lurking and communicate with you by private and secure emails.

By the way, Ron Paul is against armoring schools too. He is very pro-gun, of course, but is for small government and large and healthy civil society doing for itself.

Here is a link that might be useful: Ron Paul nixes NRA proposal to put armed security in every school


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Tue, Dec 25, 12 at 14:58

Ron Paul is a man I respect and admire. I wish he was our president.

Note that he said: "Real change can happen only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America, meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions, and peaceful cooperation through markets. We cannot reverse decades of moral and intellectual decline by snapping our fingers and passing laws." Would you say it's primarily the left or the right contributing to this decline? You might consider the 'right' a throwback, but I wouldn't mind seeing us go back to a more moral time.

He also CONDEMNED the left for the knee jerk reaction I've been addressing for the few days I've been here. "Paul also slammed the response to the shooting from the '"political left,"' saying he found '"emotional calls for increased gun control"' to be '"misguided"'."

I also noted that Mr. Paul didn't offer anything immediate that would help the children. I've be asking if anyone has a better plan than putting guards (no matter how distasteful it is to ALL of us - including me), into place? Anyone?

Al


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I've be asking if anyone has a better plan than putting guards (no matter how distasteful it is to ALL of us - including me), into place? Anyone?

In fact, several people have offered options which include limiting access to certain kinds of guns and ammunition and more requirements (responsibility) on gun owners. I guess because they don't fit your agenda, you don't hear them.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Hard to believe it but Al and I seem to be the only pro-Ron Paul posters on HT. Small government, non-imperial foreign policy, strong local communities, truly free markets, and sensible gun control.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I'm just telling you what I have read (about mass murderers) In fact, I read an article in Newsweek in the Dr's office well before these last few shootings and it described mass murders in 3 categories and only one was mentally ill.

I agree that a sane person would not be able to comprehend how a person could do that who was not mentally ill. But, as I mentioned, the Norway shooter of 2011 was found to be sane, not mentally ill.

The nut job who ambushed the firefighters this past week and killed two said he just liked to kill people. ??


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Birthers, baggers, secessionists, now they want to deport Piers Morgan. By the way, how are all these gun-totin' school pistoleros going to deal with high-powered scope-equipped snipers?

It just goes on and on.

-Ron-


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Funny that they want to deport Piers Morgan. They are upset that they think he's after their right to bear arms. However, they are fine with trying to stop his right to freedeom of speech. And, I'm sure they don't see the hypocrisy in that.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

The Second Amendment trumps all the others, being the only one with absolute rights and the one protecting us against tyranny of big government. Right?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Tue, Dec 25, 12 at 21:09

Jill - we don't have a magic wand that will eliminate guns in the hands of criminals. To limit the law abiding citizen's access to guns makes everyone BUT criminals, who will still have guns, vulnerable and completely at the mercy of criminals. That's your plan? In order for that plan to work, you would HAVE to disarm criminals first, and have a plan to keep it as such. Are you with me insofar as the logic in that. If not, I invite you to reason your way around what I said. It's not about an agenda, it's about being realistic.

"The nut job who ambushed the firefighters this past week and killed two said he just liked to kill people. ??" .... and that's someone's ... anyone's idea of normal??

Yeah, Ron, it goes on and on. You think maybe guns can be uninvented? You think any guy with access to a machine shop isn't going to start producing semi-automatic or FULLY automatic guns the day they are banned? They would now, if they could produce them competitively. You're simply being totally unrealistic. You have a dream, and all you see is a vision of it's fruition - you have no idea how or what it takes to get there. You can't even make a logical stab at eliminating the truly bad ideas. The biggest obstacle we need to get over is, millions of guns are in the hands of criminals and madmen. If you can't solve that problem, you can't solve anything.

Al


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

The proposed plans I mentioned were to limit the types of guns available and the types of ammunition available. The fewer guns of mass destruction there are, the fewer can fall into the hands of those that shouldn't have them.

But it's very clear to me that as soon as anyone talks about any kinds of limits on guns or ammunition, you stop listening and revert to NRA talk.

Clearly no point to the discussion that you claimed you wanted to have.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Tue, Dec 25, 12 at 22:07

Jill - please flesh out your plan so we can ALL see how it's going to work. I think what you just said is incredibly naive, but at the same time - you can never discount the fact that you might hit on the one simple solution to this very complex problem that millions wrestling with it, including me, have overlooked. You don't really think that if I thought a law limiting types of guns available would help, I wouldn't be for it - do you? You absolutely must have the answer to how to get the guns out of the hands of bad guys FIRST - or you turn everyone into victims. When you have that answer, get back to me please, and I promise I'll use it in every post - but it has to pass the logic sniff test.

Informed gun owners aren't against all laws, but they ARE against stupid, feel-good laws, and particularly those that are clearly shown to lead to a slippery slope. We understand there is and has been a gun-grabbing element that wants ALL guns out of the hands of private citizens. Look no further than this forum for absolute proof of that.

Al


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

"I agree that a sane person would not be able to comprehend how a person could do that who was not mentally ill. But, as I mentioned, the Norway shooter of 2011 was found to be sane, not mentally ill."

The Norway shooter of 2011 was found to be sane. OJ was found not guilty.

----------------


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Well, Al is already ignoring me. I lay out principles important to the Defenders of the 2nd Amendment in very clear terms without allllll that extra fear-mongering thrown in to pull everyone's trigger (pun intended). Maybe not very pretty reading. Not enough italicizing and bold-ing and upper case formats, and quote marks.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Tue, Dec 25, 12 at 22:40

Why would I assume you want me to answer your question? or you that I would want to? If you don't know the answer, maybe someone else who wants to get into a protracted semantical argument will .... or you could look it up. I must have missed all those important principles.

Al


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

[chuckling] Brush up on your put downs, Al. In the meantime:

"The Second Amendment trumps all the others, being the only one with absolute rights and the one protecting us against tyranny of big government. Right?"

From earlier today, one I consider the principle stance of the gun enthusiasts, survivalists, and anarchists.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

The only sort of gun control that works is No Guns. No guns for the public, the criminals or the police. Even that is not perfect, but it is generally effective.

You are not going to do that. At most, there may be a bit of tinkering around with specific weapons but that will not stop either gun crime or massacres.

Americans have their own cultural reasons for living with guns, which sets them apart from those countries that do not. It is nobody else's place to pass judgement on that.

End of argument for me.

Best wishes
Jon


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I wonder how much the NRA is paying Al? He suddenly appears here like probably thousands of others have on all the diverse forums on the web. They have their marching orders and points to try to sway. Ain't working this time, Al.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

david has fleshed out this type of plan very nicely. Repeatedly. Go read it.

You don't really think that if I thought a law limiting types of guns available would help, I wouldn't be for it - do you?

Yes, actually I do think that if it limited your access to those guns. Therefore, no point in discussing.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Wed, Dec 26, 12 at 10:06

Looks like a Duel is the only way to settle this, may the "good guy" win.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

If every gun owner and defender of the 2nd amendment is going to be accused of being a mouthpiece for the NRA, it eliminates one of the reasons not to join.

And when that's the only chink one can find in an argument, some perceived connection to some organization, it doesn't make the argument any less strong. Trying to degrade what is said by simply connecting it to the NRA is as meaningless as trying to connect gun owners to a particular political party, even when they tell you that's wrong.

The reactionary, emotional statements I read here would be much more accurately labeled as "talking points" and are hopefully not indicative of the ability of most adults to have logical, sane, practical thoughts about difficult issues. If you think scoring points on an internet forum by insulting someone will strengthen your position, you may be someone without the mental facilities to process difficult issues, unfortunately rendering it impossible for you to make a substantial contribution. Workable solutions will come from reason and logic, not emotions and unbridled passion, regardless of how emotional and passionate anyone might be about any particular issue. Those should be one's motivation to seek the truth, some solution, not to craft zingers.

The mere presence of a firearm does not dispose anyone to become homicidal. Trying to figure out "what goes wrong" in the minds of these wackos, or at least to recognize one when they are in our midst, are the only actions we can take to try to prevent future tragedies. The fact that nobody knows how to do that sadly and unfortnately still does not make it possible to UNinvent any kind of guns, or remove them from any "bad hands" already possessing them.

Let's really examine what is acceptable in our society...

It is acceptable for some children to be injured on school buses that have no seat belts because it would be too expensive to install them while senators live like royalty with unlimited health care that actually provides them and their family with "the good stuff" as they fly around in private aircraft and ride in vehicles with bullet-proof glass. There are many videos from cameras in school buses that show what happens when one tips or flips. Horrific and preventable.

It is not acceptable to allow anyone into a courthouse or many other public buildings full of adults without passing through a metal detector (facilitated by police officers) because public servants deserve and require protection from the public they are serving.

It is acceptable for schools, well publicized gun (defense) free zones, to be completely unstaffed by law enforcement or protected in any way besides a locked door and video camera. Extremely unlikely the glass is even bullet proof.

It is not acceptable for any member of any family who has ever had a president in it to come to harm in public, so the taxpayers foot whatever bill is necessary to ensure it doesn't happen.

It is not acceptable for anyone who testifies in a criminal trial to experience retaliation, so the government will pay to move them and change their life/name around.

It is acceptable in the name of saving a few bucks to not thoroughly check the backgrounds of those applying for daycare, janitorial, and other jobs around children. Horrific and preventable.

Why does our society protect adults in general, and public servants particularly, more vigilantly and capably than children? If protecting children is the goal, so many things could be easily accomplished in that regard that have nothing to do with guns. Is it really about the numbers, of which those for preventable accidents are much smaller per incident but so much higher collectively, or about the horror of single incidents with a high number? I'm sure we would all prefer to address both, should viable solutions exist. The public servants in public buildings have decided to spend however many tax dollars they need to keep themselves safe but say we have no money to protect schools or buses to the same degree.

Compare the "gun issue" to nuclear weapons. The mutually assured destruction. It is the same with guns, the reasonable expectation of force, both by a potential perpetrator of a crime, and the potential victim.

With countries, the knowledge that both sides are capable of destroying the other is reason to not use them. But they exist. Deciding it would be better if they were not here does not cause them to cease to exist. As we have seen, it has caused them to come under the control of dangerous hands. It is because other countries (and possibly wackos) have them that we keep some around.

The same is for "military style assault weapons" which have been explained as no different in action than many other weapons nobody is railing against, just in appearance. They exist. When law abiding citizens are not permitted to have them, they do not magically cease to exist. I don't think wackos really care what a gun looks like, just what it does, but that's certainly only logical supposition, which may not be and probably is not applicable to the behavior of wackos. When one has the reasonable expectation that a threat may arise in the form of a semi-automatic weapon, the reasonable preparation for defense would be to have a semi-automatic weapon to ensure the possibility of neutralizing that threat. Or a security system which can withstand such attack.

Criminals who were already breaking laws, or wackos who could care less about any law will not likely succumb to the new law and surrender whatever guns they have stolen, or decide not to steal guns for their deranged plans. So then criminals have a situation where their reasonable expectation of force available against them will be less. They already have that. Turning a semi-automatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon is something many criminals can do, and do do, even though the law says they may not.

What is it about any type of gun law that makes people think THOSE are the ones criminals will heed? Do you really think someone who is willing to break a law that says murder is illegal will choose their weapon based on the laws of the day and location? Would we feel better if they murder in accord with the gun laws?

If a wacko wants to kill many people, a fast-shooting gun is certainly not the only option. Especially if they are an adult man (or man-sized boy) and the target is women and children.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Thanks, purpleinopp, for your long and thoughtful post. I and most people in opposition on HT don't believe that the NRA is the cause of the current controversy but recognize that the organization's leaders have stepped into the public forum to lead the pro-gun, anti-regulatory battle. You can't deny that.

Placing metal detectors, security personnel, and impenetrable defense in all public places (including major and minor shopping centers as well as schools) would cost the taxpayers trillions of dollars in defense against handguns in the hands of nutters. There are other ways of killing people that will not stop public killings, too numerous to iterate and some very lethal.

In the meantime, a large and hyper-alert population of poorly trained gun wielders will primed to shoot first when feeling threatened. Killings will be few but the incidents much more common than at present. I would not want to be a policeman or other safety officer in that kind of environment.

M.A.D. works because atomic weapons are held by relatively few countries and those stockpiles are closely held under extreme guardianship. Criminals and nutters are unlikely to acquire such weapons or have the skill to make them from lesser explosives. So that argument is spurious.

The uneven and apparently unfair distribution of safety technology against harm concerns the values our leaders place on different segments of civil society. School buses should require seat belts, as you rightly post. Most of us do not have the resources to match security provisions enjoyed by public officials and the more wealthy among us.

This fixation on criminals having guns is interesting because the criminals have always been armed in this country except perhaps burglars and white-collar criminals. The penalties for even brandishing a gun are so severe that many petty criminals try not to use them.

Criminal gangs are never mentioned in these kinds of discussions because they are a threat not only to other competing gangs but to law enforcement and to those they prey on. Most of us never have to confront these gangs unless we interfere with gang operations. All the handguns in the world will not protect you or your family against the cold-blooded wrath of such gangs.

Well, I have to get to work after the long weekend and holiday. Best to you and a belated Merry Christmas.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

"the organization's leaders have stepped into the public forum to lead the pro-gun, anti-regulatory battle. You can't deny that."

Being completely unfamiliar with the NRA, and who might or might not be a member, (besides Charlton Heston,) what they might or might not say, where they might or might not say it, it would be impossible for me to even ruminate about such. HT has taught me the name of their spokesperson. That is my extent of knowledge about the NRA, so I'll trust your apparently more fully educated opinion. Either way, I don't care about the NRA and have never given that more than a passing thought, but what I've read this past week on HT makes me think it may be something I should investigate to see if I think membership would correlate to defense of the 2nd amendment.

"Placing metal detectors, security personnel, and impenetrable defense in all public places" Your idea, not mine.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Slightly off topic, one reason they don't have seat belts in school busses is because the kids won't necessarily wear them, or put them on wrong, and then there's the whole thing of seat size / child size where parents keep their kids in a booster seat until they're 12 or something. So you'd have to have the driver or someone else move along constantly and check to see if the seat belts were worn properly. IOW, its not that easy.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Purp, I have read on dozens of boards and comment sections nearly word-for-word that disclaimer about knowledge of the NRA and the concluding suggestion about joining the NRA in response to our opposition to its stances. Sorry, your credibility just took a nosedive.

Marshall
Gun owner and defender of the second amendment


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

That's fine, and irrelevant. My credibility has nothing to do with the issue. A habitual liar is still correct if they say the sky is blue. I expected stereotypical personal attacks by posting here, status quo.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Thanks you, purp, for your continued dodges from commenting on my points. This seems to be the pattern of non-responsiveness of your kind of defender of absolutist gun rights.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

M.A.D. works because atomic weapons are held by relatively few countries and those stockpiles are closely held under extreme guardianship.

Funny but I remember all the protest in Europe re U.S. nukes being placed in bases on that continent. Same for the U.K. Anyone else remember the long occupation outside Greenham Commons' RAF base? With U.S. Cruise missiles stationed in Europe at short distances from the Soviet Union, we were forcing them into a "launch on warning" nuclear response.

If M.A.D. were so perfect, why the continual push for disarmament and restrictions on development of new weapons and technology. And if M.A.D. functions so well, why the near hysteria regarding Iran's development of nuclear energy?

Greenham Common Women's Peace Camp

edited for missing word

This post was edited by nancy_in_venice_ca on Wed, Dec 26, 12 at 13:23


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Marshall, I read what you said and respect it. Did I miss a question? If not, what did you say to which you were expecting a response? I just read your last few posts again and still see nothing that seems to request a response from me or anyone else. As you have said you have doubts about my veracity, I don't see your point in soliciting any further input from me or why it would interest you, but would consider and be happy to answer any questions to which my response would have some meaning for you, in regard to the topic.

Please do not put words in my mouth, such as absolutist.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Well, purp, the way debates go is for you to make your points (which you did very well) and then I make my points in rebuttal. You then come back with comments to refute my rebuttal, if you can. Coming back with ad hominen attacks does not do much to advance debate nor does throwing aside such a meaningful term as "absolutist" as not worthy of discussion merit applause. This discussion in the end comes down to the very unclear meanings within the Second Amendment. The absolutist interpretation is that there can be no limits put on gun ownership by government, the current accepted exceptions being convicted felons and the criminally insane. Period.

Before the Constitution was ratified, the weak central government under Washington did not even field an army, so to put down the Shay Rebellion, had to search for militias. The States and Commonwealths had little to offer, so Washington had to scramble to find enough men to suppress the rebellion. Later, under the Constitution and 2nd Amendment, Washington called up State militias to help put down the Whiskey Rebellion.

The idea that current times require well-armed private militias to resist the government would have been seen as seditious by Washington and the Founders. Keeping of firearms by upright citizens would seem to them to be prudent, based on the life styles of the time. I am not sure how far these men would have gone to regulate private ownership of military style weapons.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Wed, Dec 26, 12 at 16:12

Lily - I'm not trying to sway you, I could care less what you think, but I will point to flaws in your reasoning or present the other half of one-sided pictures when they are painted. It's actually very helpful for others to see how some people respond when they have nothing to offer the conversation, yet feel the need to do their part by poisoning the well. That tactic is usually indicative of a weak position, or a comment made by someone who lacks sufficient understanding of the topic to make meaningful contributions to the conversation. The insult, from you, doesn't really bother me, because it DOES offer me the opportunity to call attention to the tactic, so thank you.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

The founders were not fond of a strong central government, and wanted the people to always have the ability to restrain an overzealous government, or overthrow it if they felt it necessary, and to protect themselves and their properties. The Second amendment, in its two parts, addresses the right to keep and bear arms collectively and individually. As I think about the 'individual right' - the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, it seems odd that anyone would deny the fact it IS an individual right, when all you need to do is look at who 'the people' are as they are referred to in the first and fourth amendment. If the people were only the militia, it would be as logical to interpret the first amendment to mean that only Christians were to have freedom of religion; or preventing abridging the freedom of speech would only be extended to orators of high status, or freedom of the press would be extended to newspapers and a few printing presses producing pamphlets; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble meant that you could only assemble if you were peaceful and quiet. Instead, 'the people' means the whole of the people - you and me - everyone.

Who is guaranteed The right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, and not be violated, or have warrants issued except upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized? Is it limited to people who own houses and pay taxes? People that have already been arrested? any other special group? or is it to everyone - again, the whole of the people?

If first and fourth amendment rights are extended and gladly enjoyed by the body of all of "the people", why should we feel as though we are not enjoined from infringing on the right of the body of all of 'the people. to keep and bear arms?

"In the meantime, a large and hyper-alert population of poorly trained gun wielders will primed to shoot first when feeling threatened. Killings will be few but the incidents much more common than at present. I would not want to be a policeman or other safety officer in that kind of environment."

This is the same type of prediction hysterically presented and preceding every single relaxation of gun laws (a state becoming a 'shall issue' state, for instance). The press and every anti-gun group invariably predicts the worst, but it never materializes. In fact, the pendulum usually swings in the opposite direction if it swings at all.

The NRA and GOA and a few other smaller organizations have its spokesmen that you might occasionally catch on TV, especially now because of the sensationalistic nature of the recent shootings. You don't normally see them at other times except on channels watched mainly by sportsman because it's hard to argue with their logic. The anti gunners have people like Obama, Biden, Holder, Gore, Feinstein, Schumer, Gumble, Costas, Rosie, Oprah ....... and the list goes on & on.

Here is something people with an anti-gun position might consider: I think gun control advocates should join together and all clearly post their homes as being gun-free zones. That would demonstrate both the advocates solidarity and sincerity - sort of like cheer-leading for each other. Since these zones will be recognized as gun-free, and in order to prevent gun violence by proxy, please be sure if you discover someone breaking into your home, when you dial 911 that you don't forget to tell the operator to tell the police to leave their guns at the station, all the while remembering it's safer in your home when you're unarmed than it is when you have a gun, AND the fallacy in the statement "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun". (That should take some of the pressure off the rest of us.)

"911. What is the nature of your emergency?"

"HELP!! SEND THE POLICE!! HELP! Someone is breaking through my back door with an axe. NO - THERE'S TWO OF THEM! Send the police ..... but for the love of ______ (insert deity), tell them to leave their guns at the station!"

Al



 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Another hysterical response from Al. Both definitions of hysterical. Be afraid, very afraid!


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

"Coming back with ad hominen attacks"

Such as?

My post was not addressed at anyone in particular and contained no attacks.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

  • Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on
    Wed, Dec 26, 12 at 18:28

On this thread, Marshall very recently said: "Coming back with ad hominem attacks does not do much to advance debate ...." I agree, but I'm not sure how he'd square the 'hysterical response' comment a post or two above, with that admonition?

Purple - the back & forth exchanges just plays into his hands. The best course is ignoring someone when their focus is on producing heat instead of light.

Al


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

In case anyone is interested in the actual numbers, you can go here for the NRA: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000082&cycle=2012

and here for labor unions in general:
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?cycle=2012&ind=P

No surprise. It's the democrats who are ruled by the unions. The NRA gave $1,061,710 in total political contributions most of which went to GOP candidates.

Unions gave $413,556 to Barack Obama ALONE!


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Al, you make me question your reading ability (not your intelligence, of course). You declaimed my post by quote as hysterical and then proceeded to doubling down with fear-mongering in detail. That's is why your post was so funny.

I would just love to get some real responses to the points I posted without the responding rhetorical flourishes and diversions. Fat chance, that.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

"The Second Amendment trumps all the others, being the only one with absolute rights and the one protecting us against tyranny of big government. Right?"

From earlier today, one I consider the principle stance of the gun enthusiasts, survivalists, and anarchists.

Sorry, but I disagree. I'm a gun enthusiast, and I couldn't agree more with that statement. They're ALL absolute rights. Every last one of them. The only difference netween the 2nd and the rest of the Bill of Rights is that the 2nd gives the rest teeth. Without the 2nd amendment, sooner or later some maroon would come along and try to flush democracy down the drain.

The proposed plans I mentioned were to limit the types of guns available and the types of ammunition available. >

Jill-- what types of ammo would you "limit the availability" of?


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I would just love to get some real responses to the points I posted without the responding rhetorical flourishes and diversions. Fat chance, that.

Well, those tactics probably worked in fig-ville.

-Ron-


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Where are the points, Marshall? I'll see what I can do.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

I suppose you are right, Ron.

Bill, your argument about the absolute right to bear arms cannot stand up to how the other Amendments were written. You as a private citizen of sound mind and body and means, may have an absolute right to "bear arms" (I love that) but if you are a law breaker or are deemed a threat to society, the right is removed. The felony or condition for forfeiture may not involve weapons at all. Therefore, it is not an absolute right.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Marshall-- but so are the others if you commit a felony. ALL rights, including the one of freedom (for atleast some time), are removed. The ONLY rights not forfeited that I can think of are the rights to representation and against self incrimintation.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Okay, so we agree on the basic principle that in the interest of a civil society and in response to antisocial/mental health issues, that society may limit the right to bear arms. I have unregistered weapons because I've had them so long they were grand-fathered in. (edited remove too much information.)

This post was edited by marshallz10 on Wed, Dec 26, 12 at 20:40


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

but I don't claim to be more than a passive gun owner. Occasionally my son and I take shooting practice with his handguns.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Seen on Facebook:

"We reduced drunk driving without a total ban on alcohol.
We knew that more alcohol was not the solution."


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Hoot! very clever


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Okay, so we agree on the basic principle that in the interest of a civil society and in response to antisocial/mental health issues, that society may limit the right to bear arms.

Only in so far as the paramters by which all the other rights may be removed by law..

I have unregistered weapons because I've had them so long they were grand-fathered in.

Understood, and I don't blame you. Although registration is voluntary in cases of private sales here in Maine, I also choose not to register them. But let me ask you-- if you advocate for giun registry, they why not volutarily register the ones that were grandfathered? :-) Nevermind-- I know the answer, and I agree.


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Right, these are family heirlooms and not designated for the gun trade. Besides, I don't want to be in another govt database. :)


 o
RE: The Republicans fall in lock step with their NRA masters

Like I said.... :-)


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here