Gun apologists are swarming DU today.

[onehandle]

Defending their right to Weapons Of Mass Destruction.

That's what the Second Amendment has accomplished.

[HassleCat]

1. Swarming?

Careful. I think you may be building a straw man. I haven't seen that many.

[uponit7771]

3. There are more than 1, 1 more than there should be

[JonathanRackham]

53. Just the usual flame bait.

[Laha]

96. I've been lurking for around 10 years

Usually keep my opinion to myself. But I've seen so many that I haven't been able to stop myself from arguing. I'm getting burned out just continuing to read.

[CincyDem]

2. Have to care for "The Precious". n/t

[Iggo]

8. Save the guns. Fuck the people.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

58. That pretty much sums it up... the "gun nuts" have won. If this latest tragedy doesn't lead to sensible gun control, NOTHING will!

[PJMcK]

81. I thought the same thing about Sandy Hook (n/t)

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

95. Yeah... the NRA has its lobbyist claws into too many Congress critters.

[tenderfoot]

4. Such a shame that they're never there to save the day.

They're online complaining about gun free zones.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

59. Yup... strange, isn't it?

[Initech]

5. Fuck those people.

[TeddyR]

6. I don't think weapon of mass destruction

Means what you think it means. If you want to ban guns then get enough votes to repeal the 2d Amendment and make it happen. A terrorist is responsible for this tragedy.

[840high]

38. .that^

[Iggo]

7. Guns are more important than people.

America!

Fuck yeah!

[99th_Monkey]

9. Saying an AR-15 "is not an assault rifle".

[ManiacJoe]

46. Whoever is saying that would be correct.

While the AR-15 rifles often meet the artificial definition of "assault weapons", "assault weapons" and assault rifles are not the same thing. However, the term "assault weapon" was purposely chosen to cause confusion.

[rockfordfile]

10. They're essentially giving support for this terrible tragedy by no matter what happens.

They're essentially giving support for this terrible tragedy by no matter what happens.

[beevul]

11. "Gun apologists"

That's what you call people who blame the shooter instead of the gun, because you blame the gun.

I can't say I've seen you or any of the other gun hating folks say much about the asshole that made decision on top of decision directly leading up to this shooting. I've seen more vitriol by far directed at everyone that didn't do it. The nra, gun culture, ad nauseum.

I also can't say that surprises me.

[CincyDem]

14. Yeah - cuz this would have been much worse if...

...in his hatred, instead of reaching for his handy-dandy easy access assault rifle, he had to reach for some else.

Like maybe a rock. I guess you think we'd be reading headlines about an attacker in Orlando killing 50 people with...a rock.

The shooter wouldn't be a "shooter" without the American infatuation with guns. Instead, he might only be a rock thrower. Still a hater but not a killer.

It doesn't surprise me that the NRA, the gun culture and the ad nauseum want to focus on the person rather than the guns. Then they don't have to admit that the magnitude of the destruction between a shooter and a rock thrower is solely because of their presence in the world.

[beevul]

16. Thats just the kind of canned response I expected.

Yeah - cuz this would have been much worse if......in his hatred, instead of reaching for his handy-dandy easy access assault rifle, he had to reach for some else.

Yeah, it definitely wouldn't have happened if we had gun laws like...france.

Like maybe a rock. I guess you think we'd be reading headlines about an attacker in Orlando killing 50 people with...a rock.

Are you proposing background checks on gasoline?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

The shooter wouldn't be a "shooter" without the American infatuation with guns. Instead, he might only be a rock thrower. Still a hater but not a killer.

Just like the rock throwers in France, right? I guess that big bad nra went international huh?

It doesn't surprise me that the NRA, the gun culture and the ad nauseum want to focus on the person rather than the guns.

That's good. It shouldn't. The person made the decision. I didn't make it. You didn't make it. The nra didn't make it. 'Gun culture' didn't make it.

[CincyDem]

19. talk about predictable. lol

Of course the "gun culture" didn't make it...they just enable it to become a massacre.

Thanks for pulling out all the NRA talking points in one place. Whenever I hear you guys say "France"...all I can think of it Dan Ackroyd from the Coneheads.

In the past 16 years, 155 people have died in mass killings in France(130 in a single terrorist attack).
In the past 16 years, 440 people have died in mass killings in the US.

When it comes to "canned responses", it sounds like you've already got your tweet from the NRA with the company line. I wish I were surprised but it's as expected.

Have a nice day.

[jamzrockz]

32. Do you know

Last edited Sun Jun 12, 2016, 08:10 PM - Edit history (1)

The US has 7.5x as many people as France? just saying

[CincyDem]

34. DOH...you're kidding. There are more people in the US than France ?

Da fuk...now it all makes sense to me. I've been such a jerk to not join the cult of the NRA. How ever will I atone. Time for me to prostate myself at the altar of the gun manufacturers and their false equivalencies. Where do I sign up. Guns for everyone !!!

Cuz god f'ing knows we don't want to be like France.

7.5x...Da fuk...

Have a nice day.

[jamzrockz]

35. Then why in the world did you

post a total number of mass shooting victims instead of a per capita one? If I didn't know any better, I would have thought that you were trying to use statistics to fool DU readers.

[treestar]

85. well how often does it happen in France?

gun laws might not stop it all, but it could stop a lot of it.

[beevul]

93. Thats the wrong question.

The right question is: Do gun laws prevent it there at all?

[ileus]

92. If only we could ban guns then no one would ever get killed again...

[Hoyt]

33. If you detest gunz, you detest those who promote and need them to enjoy life.

[frazzled]

12. Don't engage with them

We're right, they are wrong. They will never accept that. So I think the best thing is to state our positions, but refuse to listen to their excuses. There is NO excuse for these weapons. Putting aside any other issues that pertain to this tragedy--terrorist tactics and ideology, hatred and bigotry--the issue of guns remains an equal and critical issue.

We must remain steadfast on all fronts: solidarity with the LGBTQ community, resistance against terrorist ideologies and methods, AND the rational, essential need to enact gun laws at the federal level in this country.

[liberalnarb]

13. Yes, its disgusting.

[Crunchy Frog]

15. Totally predictable. Happens every time there's a mass shooting.

Makes it a sickening experience to come here for information.

[etherealtruth]

56. Every single damned time

[B2G]

17. Plenty of radical Islam apologists about as well. nt

[840high]

39. I saw that immediate

when the news broke.

[ileus]

66. That's okay because Islam is the enemy of our real enemy....Christianity

We can't bash Islam without giving the GOPers a foothold on being right in their hate. GOP = Christians.

So we give Islam a pass and blame guns.

[B2G]

73. Yes, you're probably right, but

what is continually ignored here is the fact that one of our biggest group of supporters in the Dem party are African Americans...who take their Christian faith very seriously.

If the average black voter read some of these post bashing their religion, they would be mortified.

Makes the mind boggle, really.

[Orrex]

18. My ignore list has grown considerably today

I'm tired of coddling the gun zealots who don't give a shit about tens of thousands of murders as long as their precious guns are safe.

[catnhatnh]

22. Make sure I'm on the list

Hell I became a "gun zealot" when the US government took me and taught me to use an M-16...the AR15's meaner, full automatic older brother. I didn't notice a fucking person complaining then. Oh-and do you expect those millions of troops coming back from battlefields all around the world will give up packing a gun? If not are they also gun humping assholes?

[Orrex]

27. Thanks for the tip.

Oh-and do you expect those millions of troops coming back from battlefields all around the world will give up packing a gun?

Are you seriously justifying the carrying of a firearm in civilian life on the basis that you needed one while actively serving in the military? Do you know how crazy that sounds?

Since you decided to pull rank, here's how I'll answer: while you're serving in the military in a military capacity (i.e., not on leave and not in reserve on US soil) then you're welcome to wield whatever firearms the chain of command has deemed appropriate to the situation and setting. But when you're back in the civilian world, where there is no fucking need to own an AR-15, then I expect you to behave like a civilian.

Had you been an explosives expert during military life, I wouldn't give you the thumbs up to stockpile C-4 just because you feel like it.

If you feel the need to pack an AR-15 in civilian life, then perhaps it's best that you not have access to one.



Reply or don't, because I sure as hell won't see it.

[Dem2]

31. Done

Added to the normal nastiness I've come to expect, this just confirms what I already had suspected.

[pintobean]

20. We're seeing just the opposite.

[hunter]

21. What do you mean, pintobean?

Please explain.

Defending guns is disgusting on a day like this.

[pintobean]

24. Anyone can read the posts about guns

and see what's there. It's not as the OP claims.

[hunter]

62. I've engaged a few.

Rapid-fire gun fetishists are disgusting.

Every one of them is a potential terrorist.

[Marengo]

68. Define "rapid-fire".

[hunter]

71. Yep. Disgusting.

[Marengo]

72. Huh? It's a simple question posed out of curiosity for how you define "rapid-fire"...

As the term seems no have no firm definition.

[hunter]

77. Because that's just another common ploy of the gun lovers.

Whatever guns you are defending, that's probably the sort I'm talking about.

My brother has my grandpa's bolt action deer rifle, but nobody in my family cares to hunt anymore.

[Marengo]

82. I'm not defending anything in this conversation, simply asking for your definition of

"Rapid-fire". It means something quite different to many. As has been demonstrated on DU, some think it's the ability to fire more than one round without a manual reload. Others seems to define that by how many rounds the magazine holds, or what mechanism loads a new cartridge into the chamber. so, within the perimeters of the widely varying definitions, who is a potential terrorist?

[hunter]

84. Who the fuck cares?

Some men talk about guns like other men talk about porn stars.

No thanks.

[Marengo]

86. Non-responsive. Why are you so evasive? You clearly have a definition in mind...

Why not share it?

[pintobean]

70. That hyperbole has nothing to do

with the fact that the OP is inaccurate.

[hunter]

79. My wife just asked me why I'm typing so hard.

Good thing I'm not shooting bullets, right?

Yep, I'm angry, and I'm disgusted by anyone who'd defend their own gun fetishes at a time like this.

Let them cower in their filthy caves.

Every one of them is a potential terrorist.

[pintobean]

80. I guess that explains the lack of substance

and inability to stay on topic?

[hunter]

83. Piss on guns. That's MY topic.

I have no idea what your topic is, you being so terse.

The second amendment as many interpret it is just as fucked up as "constitutional" slavery was.

The gun fucks will vote for Trump. There's no need to coddle them here.

[Marengo]

89. Who is a potential terrorist?

[jmg257]

23. Haven't read too many apologize for shit. Ny

[AntiBank]

25. because it's a strawman argument, designed to whip conflict

When I see people willing to admit that a repeal of the 2nd Amendment would ignite a limited scale civil war from coast to coast and they accept the loss of life that will absolutely occur if the police state tries to confiscate hundreds of millions of firearms, well then we have a serious discussion.

The votes will never come for repeal. I also think something more limited DOES need to happpen. That said, nothing can stop all or even a majority of random and determined lone wolfs.

[Angel Martin]

42. that is what is so bizarre

we want to confiscate guns to prevent violence.

So we advocate an action that will lead to civil war and probably hundreds of thousands of deaths....

[AntiBank]

44. it's because people do not fully think out consequences, they just knee-jerk babble feel good fluff

[lancer78]

47. Most gun control laws

like the AWB can be compared to Mastu***tion. It feels good but doesn't accomplish anything.

Laws like waiting periods for handguns and background checks ARE effective, and is why the murder rate has gone down 50% in the last couple decades.

[liberal N proud]

26. Standard practice after every shooting

Same tired message, generated by the gun industry, touted by the NRA and regurgitated by the gun apologists.

How many more?

[lancer78]

48. And than

you have the standard practice of the gun-grabbers, calling for gun bans and confiscation in clear violation of at least 2 of the Bill of Rights.

[liberal N proud]

57. There you have it - your right to own guns overrides 50 peoples right to life

Put that in perspective!

Gun nuts think it is a small sacrifice to kill thousands of innocent people each year so they can wave an AR-15 in the air and shout freedom.

How many have to die? How many?

[lancer78]

60. All you have to do to ban guns

is remove the 2nd and 5th amendments. Shouldn't be that hard right? FYI I don't own any guns. Legally unable to do so because of past mental health issues.

[Skittles]

28. they can all fuck themselves

fucking COWARDS

[left-of-center2012]

29. This is no time for alarmists

There is no swarming of gun defenders on DU.

[still_one]

30. There is no need for civilians to possess automatic assault weapons with large clips, whose

only purpose is to kill people

As far as other types of guns though, in responsible civilian hands, used for hunting and the like I see no problem, unless of course they go hunting with Dick Cheney

[Odin2005]

36. As opposed to authoritarians who are always exploiting tragedies?

I am 100% OK with Obama's proposals on guns, what I am not OK with is all the posters here screaming "BAN ALL GUNS LIKE IN AUSTRALIA!!!"

[SwankyXomb]

37. They only love their guns

Concern for the victims, and maybe preventing some of these incidents in the future, never enters into their cold, dead hearts.

[alcibiades_mystery]

40. Gunner trash are the worst piece sof shit on the Internet

Ignore those assholes.

[Dem2]

45. You got that right

I never tell people if I'm gonna iggy them - except gun-nuts.

They need to know that I consider them to be human excrement.

[Skittles]

54. biggest cowards on the planet

seriously

[smirkymonkey]

61. +1000

I despise them!

[Marengo]

69. Who on DU qualifies as "gunner trash"?

[SCantiGOP]

41. Confront them

Reasonable people know that banning assault weapons is not going to threaten the right of a sane American to own a pistol, hunting rifle or shot gun.

[Angel Martin]

43. part of the credibility problem

elected Democrats have on guns is the far left calling for confiscation when the elected politicians say they are not going to do that

[lancer78]

49. They start in

because some gun-grabber started in first. I will wager you a hundred bucks that if noone mentioned banning guns, no gun apologists would say anything.

[L. Coyote]

50. Lots of strawmen running about too. And the Trump trolls think this is all about Trump.

The Trump trolls are drooling for a bump in Trump's numbers, as if hate became more popular today! How perverse is that expectation?

[Skittles]

55. that's fear talking

paranoid gun humpers react to fear

[villager]

51. They are sick obsessive puppies. Not sure why DU thinks a welcome mat needs to be laid for NRA

...talk-point pushers...

[JohnnyRingo]

52. Gun ownership is not a partisan issue.

Nearly as many Democrats own guns as Republicans these days. They aren't mostly kooks or fetishists either, most have reasons to own one and don't plan to scrap it.

Proposing overreaching gun bans is political suicide for either party. That may frustrate some, but it's the real reason nothing is ever done.

[Dem2]

65. It isn't

...and this gun owning liberal is all for reasonable steps to make it more difficult for people to own the types of weapons used to slaughter dozens of people as fast as one can pull the trigger. It's really kind of obvious, if a revolver is good enough for home defense, then nothing of greater capacity or rep-rate is needed for hunting.

[JohnnyRingo]

88. I'm mostly with you

When I was young we had to go to a dealer to legally buy a gun. Now in Ohio we can go to a gun show and buy one from a private individual with no accountability. I imagine the gun dealers are with me that that loophole should be closed.

I believe there are limited uses for tactical firepower however, though I personally don't need or have any. If, for instance, I had to drive the perimeter of a ranch in BFE Montana mending fences and rounding up strays, I wouldn't mind having a high power semi auto in the gun rack of the truck.

People who say they need one because they might have to battle Seal Team 6 in a hypothetical revolution are delusional.

[FLPanhandle]

63. More Islamic extremist apologists here than gun apologists.

IMHO, both sets of apologists are wrong.

We can blame both Islam and Gun Laws.

[ileus]

64. Scumbag bastards.

Fuck the NRA.

[Night Watchman]

67. TELL me about it!

[romanic]

74. I've been accused of being one.

And that is not the case with me. I support the right to bear arms for protection; an assault rifle doesn't fall under protection though. It's an assault weapon with the purpose of killing off a number of insurgents in war, not to carrying around to protect. That's where the line should be drawn.

[Demsrule86]

75. We take the White House and the Senate which is likely

We put judges on the court who can read and understand what militia means. There is no individual right to carry.

[MariaThinks]

76. i'm a huge supporter of gun laws. But the Boston marathan killers used bombs, not guns.

and this disgusting murderer had explosives that would have been used, even if he did not have guns.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

91. And not to minimize the three people who were killed and dozens that were injured in Boston...

....Omar Mateen's legally purchased AR-15 inflicted over 16 times more in terms of lethality.

Guns are still far and away the most efficient and effective way to inflict mass causalities.

[Jester Messiah]

78. People rightly discern that religious radicals are trying to kill them.

How will you convince such people that disarming is a good idea right now?

[Bettie]

87. The thing that makes me most angry

is this:

Had this been an accident, a fire or some other tragic accidental occurrence, there would be steps taken to reduce the chances of a similar incident.

Because this was a gun related incident, a mass murder, we can be certain that no steps will be taken, in fact, some state legislators will be tripping over each other to decrease regulations to ensure that it DOES happen over and over.

In an accident, tragic loss of life can mean greater safety for others.

In a mass shooting in the US, the tragic loss of life is doubly senseless because it will eventually lead to fewer regulations and more killing. People are barely even shocked by this anymore.

[Johonny]

90. The paid lobbyists of the NRA flock to the DU every mass shooting

The gun manufacturers will not be denied their money they make from the gun fear.

[KamaAina]

94. Must be a day that ends in a 'y'.