Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Repuke lead Brady Campaign dancing in blood, again...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:31 PM
Original message
Repuke lead Brady Campaign dancing in blood, again...
http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/release.php?release=1145

This shows that having even more guns in more places is the wrong answer to America's gun violence problem.

"This shooting occurred in the shadow of the Washington Monument just two blocks from the National Mall, in a museum dedicated to the remembrance of hate-directed violence that has seen almost 30 million visitors in the few years since it opened.


Ahh, Which DC Gun control law, STOPPED the shooter???? Right, none did...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. Apparently, the Heller Decision didn't stop him either...
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Hence the term "lawless." Criminals are kinda like that, you know?
No doubt the Brady folks (and it is correct to call the Violence Policy Center both Republican-founded, Republican-lead), never miss an opportunity. But they just couldn't remind themselves that Eleanor Roosevelt packed, esp. when the Klan was posting bounty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. I thought the Heller decision removed the laws against having guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. it didn't remove the prohibition against CARRY
it merely let people own handguns in their homes.

it's irrelevant. the guy walked up and started shooting, and was almost immediately taken down by a security guard.

even if there were 10 people with CCW's standing around, it's unlikely they would have made much of a difference.

otoh, what is ironic is that heller (the person) WAS A DC SECURITY GUARD.

fwiw, i fully support RKBA.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. what's interesting Paulsby, is your acknowledgement that CCW may not have made a difference
I suppose from your POV this means you should let the guns flow, cause bad guys are gonna get them anyway....

From my POV, I'm wondering how a racist with a record got his hands on the rifle he used.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. it has nothing to do with "letting the guns flow"
it has to do with the fact that people, under the 2nd, have rights to possess firearms.

imo (not yet supported by federal law/constitutional analysis), that includes the right to carry.

i think in a nation with over 200 million guns, yes the bad guys WILL get them, even if we immediately banned sale of all guns in this coutnry.

lots of drugs are banned. people have little problem getting drugs.

i also know, based on statistics, that CCW'ers are amongst the most law abiding of demographics.

this matches my 20 + yrs experience as a cop (and former firefighter)

but of course it is true that CCW's won't always make a difference.

seatbelts don't always make a difference either. in rare cases, they make the situation worse.

it doesn't therefore follow that wearing seatbelt is a bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. There you go, making sense..
Keep it up and villager ("somewhere, a village is missing its idiot" comes to mind) will put you on ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. NYT says he used a rifle ; I can't find a DC law that says he can't have a rifle.
Doubtful that DC would permit people to walk around with a rifle let alone show up a museum with one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. i saw one report that said rifle
another said shotgun. i have no idea which is correct
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. It was a .22 rifle. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. .22 ... interesting
the sirhan sirhan round
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I'm kind of shocked he managed to kill anybody.
Those things are infamously non-lethal unless you hit somebody in the brain or a vital organ. I once saw somebody pump 7 .22 rounds into a wild chicken before it finally kicked over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. Sounds like a pretty baddass assault weapon.
Should 22s now be included with assault weapons?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackson1999 Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #10
26. DC Laws
You CAN have a rifle in DC
You CANNOT carrry it around outside (broken law)
You CANNT have one if you are a felon (broken law)
And, of course, you can't use it.

Paul, name ONE NEW LAW that would have prevented this. If you cant, you are just exploiting the tragedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. Shameless
Ambulance chasers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. Being a convicted felon didn't deter him either.
Edited on Wed Jun-10-09 08:22 PM by madeline_con
It's the lunatics, not the laws that are fucked up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. and yet somehow, he was still able to get a gun...
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Which proves stricter laws will do nothing to stop lunacy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. of course! Why the fuck have background checks *at all!?*
Why should we *close* the loopholes that you and your NRA drones want opened even wider!?

Because more and more guns can only equal less and less gun violence!

Somehow!

some way!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. You're putting words in my mouth. Shame shame.
I said lunatics will still have weapons, even if my legal weapons are tightly regulated or outlawed. Why is this so difficult for some people to undertsand?

Let me state it another way. Taking legal weapons will not stop lunatics from going berserk with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. so what "well regulated" aspects of the gun trade are you *for*?
Edited on Wed Jun-10-09 09:41 PM by villager
since -- words out of your own mouth -- you were against "stricter laws..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I own weapons for self defense. If you don't like that, it's just too bad.
Banning weapons would also make you less safe, not just the "gun nuts".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. so we are back to what loopholes allowed today's Felon to get his gun
I hope that you would be for closing such loopholes.

Rather than telling various shooting victims that it's all just "too bad..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Did be possibly have his gun from back before
he became a felon? Anything is possible and we shouldn't speculate but wait for the facts to come out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Do you have a link saying he bought it at a gun show?
Otherwise, he could have gotten it through several channels, like on the street, private illegal sale, etc. You don't even know it if WAS a loophole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. And another thing....
I never said anything in regard to shooting victims. I have a right to protect myself and family from becoming victims of just the type of freak who killed Mr. Johns today. Wanting to keep that right makes me in NO way responsible for that poor man's death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. a tad defensive, what?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #21
27. Nice typecasting. Guess you are one of the people Gavin De Becker warned about
Typecasting: He’ll imply that you’re too snobbish, bigoted, uninformed, or proud to accept his proposal. He hopes you’ll become anxious to prove him wrong by swallowing his lure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-10-09 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
28. My false dichotomoy is prettier than your false dichotomy..
I dressed mine up with glitter and tinsel, so there! nyah nyah nyah!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC