Or did you just want to violate the SOP of this group?

Yet he posts that the Group Host should ban people for harassing others when all they are doing is asking questions. When my time on earth is done, I hope I have something more to my credit that "I spammed a message board".

There seem to be a large number of pro-gun trolls who are banned and then simply sign up again to continue trolling.

How do we prevent returning trolls?

Take it elsewhere.

This isn't the proper place for that, take it elsewhere.

Don't know much about the fire service I see.

I'm free to do as I please on my off duty days as long as it doesn't bring negative attention to the dept. or city.
Are you saying that answering a post of yours brings negative attention?

And since when is replying to a post trolling?

Do you feel like discussing pro gun-control trolls violating the SOP of this group?

It seems to be the only kind of "victory" the gun control activism people ever get these days.

Getting a post hidden or a poster banned is cause for celebration, well that and Bloomberg writing another check so none of you ever have to get out your checkbooks or start passing petitions. All talk, no action in the real world.

Shall we crack down on those as well?

You want to talk about gun trolls, so you post about guns and domestic violence?

and stop trying to disrupt the discussion. After you alert Skinner in ATA about these trolls, please come back and have some comments on your OP story. You are not afraid are you?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1259

Have at it, I will be looking for your question in ATA

to stop using that term in reference to me as I find it offensive. You have been warned and stopped using "stalker" so now you substitute "follower" I am not your follower, I am a poster on this democratic board asking the OP a question, no more than that.

How many times do I have to ask you?

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:33 PM - Edit history (1)

at least we do not require a group that is a safe haven and blocks anyone you disagree with. I see you did your clean up and are now at only 35 blocked now. Good job.

Number Blocked members
1 hack89
2 Eleanors38
3 Crepuscular
4 Bay Boy
5 ManiacJoe
6 bossy22
7 Straw Man
8 oneshooter
9 Duckhunter935
10 friendly_iconoclast
11 rrneck
12 customerserviceguy
13 ProgressiveProfessor
14 sarisataka
15 appal_jack
16 Travis_0004
17 geckosfeet
18 Hangingon
19 NYC_SKP
20 Jenoch
21 spin
22 shedevil69taz
23 SoutherDem
24 Lurks Often
25 ileus
26 Recursion
27 SQUEE
28 MO_Moderate
29 S_B_Jackson
30 HALO141
31 Jgarrick
32 Valakut
33 arst1
34 Nuclear Unicorn
35 TupperHappy

This is my post that got me blocked.....

They have seen the data and heard the arguments. You and I don't need to speak for women.

And the percentage of women keeps going up. A lot of new Illinois FOID cards and new gun owners out there.

My classes have been running about 40% to 50% women. A lot of couples and a good number of single women living alone. Some aren't interested (at this time) in getting a carry permit, but they want the option of having and knowing how to use one in their home, just in case.

and that each of these women goes free and is not charged with murder (or manslaughter at the minimum) and when convicted that they get let out early for good behavior (which rarely happens since these prisons are not all filled up).

In the meantime, a whole lot of women have died because their abuser had access to a firearm, and they have been beaten down so much that they could not imagine defending themselves.

has been SYG 90 years before Florida even thought of it.

Come on- domestic violence victims begin by loosing their confidence, and then they loose their self respect, and then they get beat up more and loose their minds, it is a slow progressive hell and giving a woman who has been assaulted a firearm is not a remedy for most. And then whenever a woman tries to defend themselves - by even simply shooting a warning shot- they get landed in jail for 2x's the time that any man ever got for putting her in the hospital. Get real.

Generally domestic violence is not solved by an arms race. The solution is to disarm.

Not every woman who decides to defend herself lives with her abuser. Many are stalked by an ex or would-be partner. Their rights should not be sacrificed.

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:44 PM - Edit history (2)

Since twice as many people are murdered with bare hands as "assault weapons" there is no disarming

Most of the women I know who are armed didn't wait for an assault, but acted proactively. Most seem well-versed in situational awareness as well. In any case, it's their choice, and as a man, I choose not to speak for them.

who doesn't already know this?

Why the hell is anyone with any kind of restraining order not kept from ever having a gun.

This is both tragic and obvious.

By the state and national background checks, which are conducted on every firearm sold through a gun store and through most gun shows.

As to; "ever having a gun", that depends on a conviction or the length of the TRO. (Not that a piece of paper has ever stopped a determined a-hole.)

But we don't permanently remove their civil rights until they are actually convicted. If you want an accusation to be all that's needed to permanently remove rights, you're going to have more problems with the ACLU than the NRA.

but, the current Supreme court has ruled differently. I do have the right to my opinions, and I think that anyone with a restraining order needs to be kept firearm free.

and continue to treat it as an individual right and continue to bar anyone with a restraining order as a prohibited person from buying or possessing a firearm. The same as we deny convicted felons and anyone adjudicated mentally incompetent or dangerous to themselves or others.

Which is exactly what you just said you want, right?

I know my wife refuses to be a willing victim, she carries her own S&W 642.

they always cite rape as a reason. Yet, many of those same voices will demand a woman have no opportunity to choose proactively defend herself. It seems women are only allowed to choose AFTER they have been forced into submission by a sexual predator.

...was to retroactively make the gun Lanza used an "assault weapon".

Funny how they just couldn't focus on universal background checks that don't involve intrusive licensing or registration requirements. Nope, had to jump straight for their standard boilerplate "solution": protruding pistol grips.

To reduce domestic violence murders, huh? Not to reduce domestic violence levels, of course... we need Democrats in control of the Federal and State legislatures and executive offices to get that. And funny how we have a hard time getting that done. Almost as if... advocating for ineffective gun laws gets gun owners politically-motivated to a far greater extent than non-gun-owners.

Women are expected to take one for the team...and make sandwiches for Bloomberg and his boys.

When you propose your legislation be sure to name it the Wife-Beater, Rapist and Stalker Protection Act.