hmm...

What's another word for "meh"?

Notable for the level in which it contributes absolutely zero to an intellectual and honest discussion...

and where is this hypothetical discussion going on, that the OP is not contributing to?

I have the minor misfortune of living in a RW gun-toting area, so I hear discussion all the time. I wouldn't say I've ever heard discussion on that side that I'd characterize as "intellectual and honest".

on edit - the peddling of fear is a very normal occurence, on fox, on hate radio, and in people's conversations. Its like an itch they have to scratch - fear of their neighbors, fear of other countries, fear of their government, fear of animals (wolves, bears, etc), and all this fear tends to devolve down to needing to have a bunch of guns. I think Tom Tomorrow describes the real situation with some creativity, but fairly accurately.

Come on, use your intellect

we are talking about gun nuts here.... that does not compute with them.

Did somebody hurt your gun's feelings?

Right?

It's just a cartoon. Don't be scared...

Or do you believe that guns talk to people?

and that the goggly eyes mean the people only THINK the guns are talking to them?

And also it's a spoof on scifi/horror films?

Are you aware it's about gun nuts and not guns?

...of the millions of gun owners are you suggesting think their guns speak to them?

Seeing as how you described it as "accurate"...

Probably a fair amount. I mean, what they think are rational arguments sure makes me think they have complete conversations with their guns.

Thank goodness for people like you...

I'm really appreciative.

Cheers

Oh please!

Aren't we all noble and serious! Ooooooo!

The reason gun control has failed is because of lobbyists and the NRA and the GOP.... and stupid people with no common sense....period.

I have nothing to do with it.

Well, when a majority thinks sensible gun laws are OK and it doesn't happen, that indeed must be it.


And I will keep pointing out that gun nuts are irrational and not worth even listening to, thank you very much.

You keep on being an apologist so YOU can feel happy.

Everything about over the top 80s action flicks rolled up into one seriously cheesy show. One of my favorites was when he was living among the Amish, and the Amish patriarch backed him up with a machine gun. When questioned why an Amish man would use a machine gun, he stated "hey, it's the 80s!".

more complex and clever. Oh, and I am a strong supporter of gun regulation, so my position on this issue is not why this one doesn't impress me.

The basic premise is a good one, but he doesn't really go anywhere with it.

Saying "I thought I would be safe..."

It's not about irony. It's about guns as alien mind-control parasites, and ti nails that perfectly.

All firearms should be securely stored

Too true...

Tom Tomorrow...brilliant.

It's what this nation, its economy and its major religions were founded on.

K & R.

This to be literally true.

If it was only so simple i would 100% support banning an inanimate object that could make people act outside of their will. Alas I cannot absolve responsibility from those who commit crimes.

By the logic of this, Dunn should immediately be set free and all charges dropped because he was not responsible for his actions.

A young Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old baby on New Year's Eve, less than a week after the baby's father died of cancer.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=15285605

Is dishonest, fearful propaganda really the answer?

It is only your irrational fear and hatred that causes you to see and believe such stereotypical rhetoric.

is based on stereotypical exaggerations in order to support personal opinion. The anti 2nd Amendment position needs people thinking everyone with a gun is a mindless zombie. It needs people believing all gun owners think it's ok to shoot black teens. It needs people believing there are no gun control laws. It needs people living in a constant state of fear.

If DU does not support the platform of the Democratic Party and its stated position on the 2nd Amendment, I will happily abide and no longer post any facts concerning the issue. Won't become another anti cheerleader, but I will respect the rules.

Pro-gun pals? LOL

...are never careless, are thoroughly trained, always keep their firearms secured, use safety practices that guarantee a gun never accidentally discharges, only use their firearms for recreation or self-defense, always remain calm in a crisis, and would use a firearm against another human being only in extreme situations where they or someone else is in grave danger. Cool.

Now, if we could only find a way to keep the firearms out of the hands of the hotheads, the crazies, the thugs, the thieves, the drunks, the paranoids, the abusers, the suicidally depressed, the klutzes, the absent-minded, the ones compensating for whatever inadequacies, the racists, and the Dirty Harry wannabes.

just to score a political point. Well, at least not if you wish to be taken seriously.

Which is why you can't use the ultra-professional, super-responsible gun owners as models for the population of gun owners that are actually out there.

Hundreds of million of guns and owners, but the things in your previous post were the rare exception.
Try again.

1. Estimated 300 million guns (a few "hundreds of millions&quot

2. Estimated 80 million gun owners (not even a hundred million) and at least half of those are Liberal Democrats. You do NOT speak for ALL gun owners, and ALL gun owners do not vote as a bloc. Many of the Democratic gun owners support sensible gun control measures and the Democratic Party platform.

I agree that there are many more lawful American gun owners than there are gun nuts, but that is why we need regulation that is aimed at preventing abuse of the Second Amendment by anti-social malcontents and the mentally challenged. The right-wing NRA has been allowed to frame this discussion for far too long, and the result has been lax (or in many communities, no) gun regulation, and extremely easy access to guns by criminals and our youth.

We are working to reverse the right-wing approach to the gun culture in this country, just as we are working to reverse the disastrous right-wing economic policies which almost destroyed this country.

I hate to rain on this left vs right thing you got going on, but gun owners in general support sensible gun control measures. The disagreement comes when we try to define "sensible."

Aside from the lack of enforcement capabilities, one of the biggest hurdles to effective gun control is convincing the majority of gun owners to give up more of their 2nd Amendment rights because a few malcontents and mentally unstable are irresponsible. You don't do that by equating them to zombies or calling them murderers.

There is not one place in the US where there isn't some kind of regulations on guns. This kind of rhetoric also does not help.

Instead of fighting the "right-wing" on this issue, you would have better results understanding why so many moderate Democrats and Independents disagree with the anti 2nd Amendment crowd.

Whether it's people arguing for unfettered access to heavy weapons, or telling us the absolute need for racial pogroms in browner parts of hte world, we can always be dure there is a contingent of DU telling us that "the party approves therefore so must you."

a response to a pro-gun poster who questioned whether or not Democratic Underground supported the Democratic Party platform as it relates to the Second Amendment. You may put words in my mouth if you wish, but I did not tell you, or anyone else, that "the party approves therefore so must you."

On the other hand, I totally support the Democratic Party platform, always have, and always will because I am a Liberal Democrat. That doesn't mean that I "march in lockstep" with anyone, only that I support Democratic values and goals. YMMV...

Yes, as with any issue, some will be against one thing or another, but I have not seen one pro 2nd Amendment person on this site calling for a total change.

picking on the "victims" again...

Neither reality or honesty is really the anti 2nd Amendment crowds tactic of choice.

(honestly, in reality)

Ah, the implication (by selection bias) that SYG is purely modern day White on Black "lynching".

From Frostiken's excellent explanation on the topic on Reddit:

You know, there's an unfortunate racial component to this. Not the crime, but the defensive gun use.

Blacks have been systematically overrepresented as both victims of crime, and victims of gun control. They've been told, for as long as I can remember, that self-defense is someone else's responsibility—that good, honest, decent black people have nothing to do with guns, because guns are for white folks, police, and criminals. This has been the mantra of all the 'community leaders' (particularly Jesse Jackson, who was on the news every other night in Chicago) and city councils who pass gun control as an illusion to fighting crime. Even the news media is in on this: despite the fact that, in Florida, 'Stand Your Ground' laws disproportionally favor defensive shootings by blacks, the media continues to try to push the belief that SYG is something that only for white people.

Have you ever seen the 'we respect the second amendment, but' propaganda videos that groups like MAIG put out? Here's one:

Check out this white-washed group of 'hunters' asking for more gun control. Let me open your eyes on this: hunting is not something people on minimum wage can afford to do. It's not something accessible to people who live in, or even around cities. Furthermore, hunting rifles and scopes are not something people on minimum wage can afford.

That gun Obama is firing?

A several-thousand-dollar Beretta shotgun. These 'classic'-style guns that gun controllers love can cost over $30,000. Again, the message is there: guns are for wealthy white rural people, not poor inner-city blacks.

The bottom line is that the vast majority of gun control laws - Baltimore, Washington DC, Chicago, New York, California - are around to keep guns out of the hands of black people. Who do you really think is affected by laws that forbid legal carrying of concealed weapons? The guys who already have guns stuffed down their pants?

1) Gun control doesn't work. It simply doesn't. Nothing short of complete disarmament at gunpoint - and even then, only on something that is an island nation where borders are much easier to control - has been proven to work. Ideas to 'carry insurance' won't do anything except burden legal gun owners (and we both know that's what you intend for it to do). Same with a registry, licensing, and making a kerfuffle about face-to-face sales.

When Missouri lifted its handgun purchase restrictions, crime with handguns skyrocketed. But the overall murder rate immediately reversed a six-year rising trend and began to fall.
Because it turns out, murderers will still murder with something else.

2) Urban renewal, effective schools, and tremendous investment in schools and family does work. This is how New York tackled its crime problem - decades of strict gun laws had nothing to do with it. Effective policing is a requirement as well - meaning a fair and unbiased justice system, and a removal of racially-motivated laws and enforcement. Unfortunately this takes a lot of time and money, and those aren't things that politicians can afford to spend. Money spent is something your opponent can attack you with. Time spent means you probably won't see results until you're out of office (and people will be asking why you wasted all that money).

3) Removal of hurdles that stop the largest victims of gun crime - poor blacks - from being able to protect themselves, and a change in culture to tell poor blacks that it's okay to protect themselves. Where I live there's a decent population of blacks (mostly due to a nearby military base), but there's almost never anyone of color at the gun range.

We've been passing stupid gun control laws for 100 years. And nobody has ever actually been able to link any of them with anything. So why do we keep hearing that we just need one more gun control law?

PS: Here's the footage from the woman who defended herself and kids from three armed invaders. Notice the weapons she used - a HiPoint carbine 'assault weapon'.

Here's also a video from Colion Noir on this exact topic. Stop-and-frisk is not a racist program on its surface. There is nothing in its directive that says 'being black or brown is probable cause', but we can all agree that it's a racist program because of how the law applies. White people simply don't get stopped. Nothing in the law says that black people need to get the maximum sentence for a weed conviction either, but again, we know it's a racist law because of how the law applies, and it's a major reason why I'm excited to see weed possession at least decriminalized.

So how can anyone honestly say gun control any less racist? When they say 'you can keep your guns' and 'nobody will stop you from getting a gun', who are they really referring to when they say 'you'?

in murder rates. And how nice that you lean heavily on the race card. What a load of hooey.

than black shooting white

Whatever the race of the shooter, it also appears that there is a greater probability of conviction if the victim is black or hispanic.

Mistyped. The study shows that there is a greter probability of ACQUITTAL is the victim is black or hispanic. Sorry.

Which was the original point being made.

I do admit though, that your observation is also correct. I'm not sure if this is a result of impoverishment on the part of the deceased meaning a higher percentage of them were engaged in actual criminal behavior, or racism on the part of the juries. If I had to guess, it would be a little bit of both.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Juries appear to be more likely to believe that it was self defense if the VICTIM is non-white. A black shooter is more like to a acquitted if the victim is black or hispanic, but far less likely if the victim is white.

Further. If the shooter is white and the victim is non-white. acquittal is almost guaranteed.

Lesson: if you are going to shoot someone and claim self defense, your chances are excellent if th victime isn't white. Your study provides strong evidence that juries are influenced by the race of the victim.

I am more than willing to believe that there remains is a substantial undercurrent of racism, especially in the south.

However, what you're leaving out is the relative rarity of White on Black SYG defenses. Seven in total. Compare that to the over sixty defenses of White on White SYG defenses, and you see that this law appears to be disproportionately affecting white violence (justified or not). Given Florida's relatively large percentage of blacks, the number of White on Black defenses would have to be two and a half times larger (17+), for it to be proportionate to the White on White defenses.

And whether someone gets of it or not, the victims are still just as dead.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

even The Button's made to be pushed--as we found out too late in the 50s

thebrought the gun humpers out. K&R.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]