General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHere's why I have a problem with the gun grabbers on DU
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Lone_Star_Dem (a host of the General Discussion forum).
First, I am totally for universal background checks, limits to magazine capacity, etc.
But if you really cared about reducing gun deaths, the focus would be on mental healthcare, the war on drugs and gang violence.
Tackle those root causes and you'll make headway. Everything else is just noise.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)Talk about noise!
On a side note, how do your "root causes" contribute to all of the accidental gun deaths each year? Or do those not count?
B2G
(9,766 posts)Most are not gun related.
Do you want to ban cars as well? It's not 'noise'. The 3 things I cited are the primary causes of gun related homicides.
louis-t
(24,618 posts)"should we ban all cars" rhetoric to come out.
Robb
(39,665 posts)
CTyankee
(68,202 posts)ah, yes...that is evergreen...
TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)And I got TWO responses with that same "point."
It's a bullshit point, but good enough for those who want to equate a device designed to kill with anything else that can kill on accident.
The number of absolutely unthinking gun defenders on DU never ceases to amaze me. Only a portion of them can be trolls, so what is the others' excuse?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)if you get rid of the cars, how do you get to the ER in a hurry because of an accidental gun shot wound?
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)
cha-ching!
Response to louis-t (Reply #9)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Marr
(20,317 posts)I think you should be required to purchase liability insurance for every gun you own.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)If we ban motor vehicles and go back to bikes, we would save over 100 lives a day!
mac56
(17,821 posts)But you can't seriously compare motor vehicle accidents with premeditated firearm massacres.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)The poster above was talking about accidental gun deaths.
mac56
(17,821 posts)I don't see where the poster above asked about autos and bicycles either.
Disingenuous.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Especially considering the post to which you replied.
TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)Yes, I used the phrase "gun nuts" a few months ago. What I didn't do is try to start a discussion on a liberal website with a canned right-wing slur for gun control advocates.
I'm sure that you and the original poster would be much better received at...other sites.
P.S. - In the post you linked to, I used the exact same term that the original poster of that post used...to describe GUN NUTS. The original poster of this thread basically states that you're a "gun grabber" if you're not on board with the NRA's bullshit talking point that this is strictly a mental health and gang violence issue. Apples and oranges.
geckosfeet
(9,644 posts)Or go whole hog and make it anti-constitution. No. No. I am sure you would prefer anti-gun.
But how about these? Curiously discriminatory anti-senseless killing? Or selectively anti-death? Possibly anti-death-by-firearms-but-everything-else-is-a-ok.
People are often surprised to learn that there are ten smoking caused deaths for every firearm related death in the US.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was nearly killed more than 2 years ago by a man with a gun. Today, her brain injuries make speaking difficult, and yet she has become an active spokeswoman for new restrictions on guns.
Ironically she has not lost her love of guns. Target practice is still a form of entertainment at her mother's house deep in the Arizona desert. Her husband Mark Kelly uses pots and water bottles as targets, while Giffords watches from the patio with her mother cheering him on.
Watch more of Dana Bash’s interview with Gabby Giffords Tuesday on AC360 – 8 p.m. and 10 p.m. ET, only on CNN.
Kelly isn't shooting with just any kind of gun – he's using a Glock 9 millimeter handgun, the same kind of gun his wife was shot with.
"But in that case it had a magazine that held 33 rounds," he said. "This, when it's full, holds 17."
The gun is actually Giffords' – Kelly said he gave it to his wife as a gift years ago.
"She's a gun owner," he said. "She's from the West."
Giffords and Kelly argue because of their love of guns, they have more credibility in their fight to expand background checks to private gun sales.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/08/gabby-giffords-still-loves-gun-culture/?hpt=hp_c4
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)etc. What might have stopped them is making guns the cultural equivalent of walking around with a confederate flag or swastika. Maybe if Lanza's mom and dad had not raised their kid in a gun nut environment, none of this would have happened.
Instead, you guys tell us cretins like this are good for our society:
Personally, I think anyone who wants an assault weapon or hi-cap mag should be committed for treatment under the better funded mental health system we all know is needed.
CTyankee
(68,202 posts)
Owl
(3,768 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Gungeon folks used to tell me they are fine, upstanding gun owners.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
B2G
(9,766 posts)Funny.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Do you have a link to an NRA website or other source identifying such "NRA canned" phrases?
If you did, it would add some credibility to what you claim is "canned NRA phraseology" and reduce the belief that some can have that you just made this up.
villager
(26,001 posts)But you'll always defend gun nuttery when/where you can.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Democratic Party to the Republican one?
Did you do that by pushing for the AWB without convincing a majority of the voters that is what they wanted?
If so, the Republicans who won the House seats on the AWB issue should thank you.
Robb
(39,665 posts)
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)If Dianne Fienstein hadn't gone off the deep end prior to the '94 election, the long-term control of Congress would not have changed hands.
There are many millions of firearm-owning Democrats who don't post on this board, who don't belong to the NRA, and are not going to be influenced by anthing that you say.
I suspect that in the real world, you're not going to influence anyone.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)You did notice that didn't you?
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)well, well, this other guy in school who is a bully says it so you must be a bully too!
Maybe, wait wait....just MAYBE sometimes a lot of intelligent adults on a topic have the same questions that others do and no one answers them because they don't have a good answer.
So they whip out 'talking points' and 'bingo cards' because the only way they can deal with an issue is emotions.
\
"But you'll always defend gun nuttery when/where you can. "
Is gun nuttery anything like 'being able to have an abortion nuttery?' - you know, like believing in a right you have and working to defend it. Like free speech. A right to vote. Etc.
So believe in something makes a person a nut? Another great way to address your concerns on an issue.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)as opposed to defending what's obviously just false and misleading propaganda designed to trick people into believing something that is not true.
villager
(26,001 posts)Indeed-
Nika
(546 posts)... your hands just advocating universal background checks.
You would of been better off at the task of generating a reasonable discussion without the use of such a right wing trigger word.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Robb
(39,665 posts)I guess all of us who want gun safety legislation -- me, Obama, most people in the country, the parents of slaughtered children -- we're out to inconvenience YOU.
Yeah. That makes sense, or at least it would to a paranoid, gun-cuddling psychopath. 
Fla_Democrat
(2,622 posts)I guess some parents of slaughtered children are more equal than others.
Robb
(39,665 posts)Actually, it's that hundreds of parents of slaughtered children are more equal than one.
Response to Robb (Reply #28)
Post removed
Response to Robb (Reply #10)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Apophis
(1,407 posts)Huh.
I've seen it used widely by gun owners of any political stripe.
Gun confiscation is a highly emotional issue that crosses party lines. But I assume you already know that.
Robb
(39,665 posts)See it all the time in Utne.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)is an absence of any interest in the root causes of unnecessary gun violence.
When, if ever, have any shown any interest in mental health care? Or the war on drugs and gang violence? Or any other root causes?
Are they sincere about what they're posting? Could some, or many of them, just be seeking to disrupt boards like this and see a repeat of the 1994 elections? Could some of them just be juveniles?
Added:
Another observation is that they commonly want to squelch speech. You've already been attacked for using a common phrase "gun grabbers."
Would any phrase as an alternative to "gun grabbers" satisfy them?
It's unlikely.
TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)...should be "GUNS."
If that's not true, why aren't we having a discussion about about "mental health violence?"
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)However, 35 a day die specific to a bullet.
Feel free to call me a gun grabber. Sticks and stones will break my bones, however, a gun and a bullet will kill me.
Note that someone else posted an article
12 people were wounded today in knife attack.
All 12 will live.
12 people in a mass shooting will most likely cause 12 dead people if the person is NRA trained
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)First there will always be mentally ill you can't prevent that you can only treat it. So the new laws would add mental illness to background checks.
Second there is a big push to end the war on drugs
Third gang violence is a symptom of poverty and lack of opportunity.
To fix that will take a paradigm shift
in our nation which ain't going to happen soon .
Simple solutions to a complicated problem are really not getting at the problem of gun violence.
And what gun grabbers there are on DU will never take your guns away.
mokawanis
(4,489 posts)They don't shoot people nearly as often as gun nuts do.
If you're saying that we shouldn't advocate for gun-control legislation, or that we're not capable of doing that while also addressing the need for better mental-health care, dealing with gang-violence, etc then you're not paying attention.
msongs
(73,754 posts)
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Here's what I like about "gun grabbers" They don't shoot people nearly as often as gun nuts do.
rdharma
(6,057 posts)
of gun control at all is met by wild-eyed accusations of gun grabbing by the gun lobby.
And as if they really give a shit about mental health care either....
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)so here come the tree grabbers....A Florida man was gobbled up by a sinkhole.....here come the hole grabbers..
LonePirate
(14,367 posts)No guns = no gun deaths. Seems pretty clear to me. I say grab away.
Marr
(20,317 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)The vast majority of gun violence in this country is committed by sane reasonable people. All gun deaths have one thing in common. Guns
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)slackmaster supports the cavalier use of racial slurs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2078967
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)
Blue_Tires
(57,596 posts)I've solicited several opinions here already, and would like to see more...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172117897#post32
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Fixing such "root causes" leaves plenty of holes.
A fantastic mental health care system will not help anyone who refuses to use it. Such as the shooters in several recent mass shootings.
"The war on drugs" is being focused on via ever more draconian enforcement. Leading to greater violence. So focusing even more on it will cause more shootings. I thought your goal was to reduce gun deaths.
Program after program after program has been created to combat "Gang violence". All of them have failed. So you propose to do more that has failed. I'm not so sure continuing to fail will somehow save lives. Perhaps you could explicitly explain how you plan for failure to succeed this time.
Fact is, "gun grabbing" works. It's been shown to work extremely well - Fully automatic weapons were commonly used in crimes in the prohibition era. The "gun grabbers" got a hold of them, and today automatic weapons are rarely used in crimes.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)The second amendment is still the law of the land.
A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Also funny how you think the Constitution is utterly immutable. I guess that's why we still have slaves and women can't vote. Oh wait....
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)That's what we did when we wanted to ban slavery and allow women to vote. We changed it.
But if we have a vote to repeal the second amendment, and it fails (it certainly will)....you need to agree to uphold it as is. That's how democracy works.
trixie
(867 posts)
Warpy
(114,615 posts)and a dead giveaway.
Yes, we need to re establish the system of state mental health that was destroyed by deinstitutionalization and replaced with nothing but broken promises and dying on the street. However, we also need to get military weapons of mass murder off the street, too.
Liability insurance requirements are one way, peanuts for non auto hand guns and long guns for hunting, high on semi autos of all types and confiscatory on military arms. Taxes on ammo are another, if you want less of something, tax it and require insurance on it.
Universal background checks are a good idea, but they're not going to catch everybody, especially the ones who are too paranoid to seek mental health care even if it's free and available.
Taverner
(55,476 posts)There's lots of corollary causes
If it means one less death that magazine limitations, registration and background checks saved us from, it's worth it.
Fla_Democrat
(2,622 posts)to allow random stop and search of people, you know, who may be carrying a gun... is it worth it?
Serious question.
Why is unreasonable searches and seizures above scrutiny,
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
but well regulated open to interpretation?
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.
Response to Fla_Democrat (Reply #65)
Name removed Message auto-removed
DonCoquixote
(13,961 posts)The problem with the gun market as is now is that there is no real way to make those who claim rights take the responsibilyt that goes with it. Take a look at fast and Furious, where the Feds knew that certain people were selling guns to the Mexican syndicates, but since these good citizens of Arizona maintained their right to stockpile ammo, and sell it to whoever they wanted, the feds go hamstrung, thanks in part to Jan brewer looking for any way to slam Obama.
I am in Florida, the "gunshine state", where an ar-15 is easier to get than an Playstation 3. People like Eric and Dylan (aka "Columbine"
got their gunss here, as do many that end up all around the country, even in places that have regulations, because some people here frankly do not care what happens in the rest of the nation. You take their money, you take their hotel fare, but when they take the guns home, no one cares.
So yes, we need to tackle mental illness, and yes, the war on drugs is useless, but anytime you sell soemthing that can get people killed elsehwere, the feds do have a duty, not a right, to step in and say "hey Mister Amateur under the table gun dealer, just who the hell did you sell a half dozen ar-15s to last week? And did you have to sell them the damned high capacity mags and cop-killer ammo too?"
I am a former hot dog vendor. I cannot tell you the myriad maze of departments and details, as well as minimum ONE MILLION DOLLAR insurance, it takes to sell a hot dog in the state of Florida. Admittedly, I have been food poisoned enough from Florida restraurants that I do understand why all this is needed. However, it never ceased to be abusrb that I was watched like a Hawk, but if I sold something that was made for the express purpose of killing a group of well armed people, I could have done the whole buisness under the table, and pocketed the Taxes.
PS: side note, here is a Florida tourist tip: you are much more likely to get food posioned at the high end restauants then the shacks. The restraurants hire lawyers to avoid doing what the law demands, while Ma and Pa fish shack know they are watched like hawks, especially since some rich bastard is usually wanting to turn whatever beach they are on into some condo, and they put pressure on the government to "enforce the laws."
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Fla_Democrat
(2,622 posts)would look if posted here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1262
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)then I may post it tonight.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)Riiiiiight.....
Shit like this is the reason RW gun weirdos are not to be trusted - they can't even admit there's a problem.
liberal N proud
(61,194 posts)The only one who talk about guns being taken from them are the radical gun enthusiasts or since we are using tags "gun nuts"
Calling for gun control is not equivalent with gun ban.
cbrer
(1,831 posts)many cultural changes that have occurred to bring us where we are today.
If one traces induced fear, political cronyism, and (implied) powerless status of individuals, corporate greed, imperialistic foreign policy then bleeding over into American society...
One can easily make the logical leap to a perpetually "excited" state where many perceive limited options and singular powerlessness. Whether "real" or not, perceptions and emotions make an enormous impact on our lives.
PLUS, add in another factor that seems little discussed here: Legal, mood altering drugs. Users, dependents, dealers (legal and otherwise) build a subculture much more prevalent than in our earlier cultural state where "GUNS" were simply another tool or past time.
One cannot realistically condense this problem into 3 paragraphs. But we CAN discuss reality, and get off each others asses in order to find real fucking solutions.
Peace out.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Gun enthusiasts refuse to bend on gun control for one reason.....they believe in the slippery slope. If the government passes gun control, and no improvement is made in gun violence statistics, these same control advocates will start pushing for more and more stricter gun control. And eventually it will lead to gun confiscation. Now now....but down the road it might.
Gun enthusiasts believe gun bans and confiscations are the ultimate goal of gun control advocates. It's a chip, chip, chip on our constitutional rights until they come crumbling down under the illusion of safety and security.
There are serious trust issues at play here between Americans and their government. Gun control is only one example where this distrust is clearly evident.
PA Democrat
(13,428 posts)don't care about the abysmal state of our mental health care system, about the war on drugs and gangs? Seriously, the vast majority of people here are quite capable of focusing on numerous issues at once.
B2G
(9,766 posts)And i read this board daily.
PA Democrat
(13,428 posts)and I can assure you you are wrong. Sometimes a better approach to constructive discourse is to refrain from name-calling and inflammatory remarks.
Your earlier thread on the stabbing on the Texas college campus looked to me like another attempt to start a flame war rather than a constructive dialog.
DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)Happiness.. is a warm gun mama!
How come I have never had any urge to even think of owning a gun? Maybe I need to actually hold one in my hand.. feel it!
Touch the trigger... oooh.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)We need to focus on ALL these things:
Mental healthcare
The failed warrondrugs
Gang violence (aka jobs for the poor, minorities, and city dwellers)
Limiting magazine capacity
Limiting ownership/stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction aka assault weapons
Permanently ending gun ownership by violent criminals and people who have proven that they cannot own guns responsibly
Requiring registration of all guns mandatory along with mandating insurance of individual guns and making gun owners fully accountable for any harm that results if their guns negligently find their way into the wrong hands
Guess that makes me a "gun grabber".
derby378
(30,262 posts)We take care of the first three items on your list, then the impetus for everything that follows those three will diminish rather quickly.
I'll even double-down and say our educational system needs higher standards and possibly more money. I'm tired of seeing schools that look more like prisons than educational institutions.
Do all these things, and then people like you can leave me and my Kalashnikov alone. And my 30-round magazines.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Prohibitionist.
Though I do agree that simply confiscating firearms would solve any of the gang violence or mental health issues that cause our urban areas to have higher than normal levels of violence.
Kingofalldems
(40,278 posts)Stopped reading after that.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Made a very good piint. If one really wants to reduce violence then the pooinrs made need to be address. Otherwise any measures taken will fail.
Skittles
(171,716 posts)"gun grabbers"? paranoid much?
gollygee
(22,336 posts)There is plenty of violence that does not involve those groups of people. Road rage violent angry people, domestic violence cases, etc. Plus there are plenty of accidental gun deaths.
Not all violent people are mentally ill by a very long shot, and not all mentally ill people are violent either.
I think to call those three things the root causes of gun violence in our country is ridiculous.
Response to B2G (Original post)
devilgrrl This message was self-deleted by its author.
otohara
(24,135 posts)Mental health?
Did you hear the GOP laughing at Ashley Judd's issues with depression?
So glad you totally for background checks, that's might big of you.
Aren't you glad that the shooter in Arizona was stopped before he could reload and shoot more people?
Bucky
(55,334 posts)Last time I grabbed a gun, it was my own...
curlyred
(1,879 posts)Honestly, the tired refrain of "they're taking my guns away!" Is getting SO old. Heard it for years. Hasn't happened. Isn't going to happen.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Unlike y'all, us "gun grabbers" can multi-task. We can understand that it will take a multi faceted approach to curb violence. We have been fighting for improved access to mental health care. we have fought hard to remove the stigma associated with mental illness.
We have long realized that gang violence is often associated with poverty and desperation.
We also understand that the easy availability of guns and the glorification of the gun is a large part of the issue.
Tackle these root causes and we'll make headway
sarisataka
(22,695 posts)among the 'gun grabbers' but that term is reserved to refer to the 'gun fuckers', er... 'gun humpers', I mean 'gun nuts' or was it 'murder enablers'? I forget, so many labels have been applied to the 'small penised' 'cowards'.
In any case, I gave up the name calling and labeling for Lent in the interest of trying to have serious discussion on gun control, as my President has asked.
Lone_Star_Dem
(28,158 posts)It's the consensus of the DU hosts that this is in violation of the "no whining about DU" clause in the SOP for GD.