Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nasty Jack

(350 posts)
Thu May 14, 2015, 04:47 PM May 2015

U.S. PAYS DEARLY FOR GUN NUTS' RIGHTS TO THEIR TOYS


You, the taxpayers, shell out some $12.8 million per day, "to cover the costs of gun-related deaths and injuries." And that's conservative, according to a recent report by Mother Jones on gun violence in this country. It all stems from the radical National Rifle Assn. gun nuts that insist on more guns on the street with absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to. Wacky Wayne LaPierre, NRA head, is on an unconscionable drive to sell, sell, sell all the weaponry possible to keep the gun manufacturers happy. To hell with a moderate NRA membership that strongly favors universal background checks and a saner approach to responsible gun laws. The magazine says we'll never know the true cost due to the millions being spent by the NRA and other gun rights groups to keep the true facts from the public. This preventable gun violence increases your taxes for items like medical treatment, legal fees, long-tern prison costs, long-term medical disability, mental health care, emergency services, police investigations and security enhancements.

Wanna stop this crap? Contact Congress and tell your representatives you're not going to stand for this anymore.

House: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
Senate: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state
White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments

http://nastyjackbuzz.blogspot.com/

64 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S. PAYS DEARLY FOR GUN NUTS' RIGHTS TO THEIR TOYS (Original Post) Nasty Jack May 2015 OP
K&R..... daleanime May 2015 #1
Finding an OP title... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2015 #2
By what portion would UBC reduce that number? clffrdjk May 2015 #3
It's just another on the hit parade list discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2015 #4
Oh yea I fully expect the "it's a good first step" reply clffrdjk May 2015 #5
I just wonder who he used to be? DonP May 2015 #9
Lol he does seem a bit familiar but I haven't been around enough lately to give a good guess. clffrdjk May 2015 #11
I applaud the newbie's enthusiasm, but ManiacJoe May 2015 #6
Did you know that the magazine Mother Jones takes its name from a women that was the Nuclear Unicorn May 2015 #7
Anyone who uses Mother Jones as an objective source on this issue has questionable intelligence Shamash May 2015 #8
NOT TO WORRY Nasty Jack May 2015 #40
An argument from authority, by a "legal professional" that gets the law wrong? friendly_iconoclast May 2015 #53
Here, let me fix that for you. beevul May 2015 #10
Here to stay. Nasty Jack May 2015 #12
Now that there is funny stuff! DonP May 2015 #16
Fine. Get back to me on the 12th... beevul May 2015 #17
Golly. We've never encountered and ardent gun control advocate before. Nuclear Unicorn May 2015 #18
I guess that makes you #3 discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2015 #19
ROFL... beevul May 2015 #20
When will that be exactly? clffrdjk May 2015 #21
My replies. Nasty Jack May 2015 #24
If everyone you are talking to doesn't make sense to you maybe you are the problem. clffrdjk May 2015 #27
The comments Nasty Jack May 2015 #29
My point stands clffrdjk May 2015 #35
Several have shown that your contention about no restrictions is demonstrably false. Nuclear Unicorn May 2015 #33
LOL OK.... virginia mountainman May 2015 #25
Comedy gold. cherokeeprogressive May 2015 #30
... and stay and stay and stay ... Straw Man May 2015 #31
ONLY GUN NUTS THINK THEY ARE IMMORTAL Nasty Jack May 2015 #41
"absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to" blueridge3210 May 2015 #42
WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU! Straw Man May 2015 #56
Funny, controllers said I wouldn't last long on DU. That was 9 years ago. Eleanors38 May 2015 #39
Interestingly... Puha Ekapi May 2015 #57
"absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to." blueridge3210 May 2015 #13
Origional headline not enough. Had to add an insult to it. oneshooter May 2015 #14
This message was self-deleted by its author oneshooter May 2015 #15
Interesting choice of words sarisataka May 2015 #22
What other rights cost too much for us to have??? ileus May 2015 #23
"absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to" blueridge3210 May 2015 #26
this baffled a lot of Torontonians: they can't GET that reforms that 70% of *NRA* members want MisterP May 2015 #28
The problem is the gun control movement and their "its a good start" attitude hack89 May 2015 #34
Exactly. Straw Man May 2015 #36
DREAMER Nasty Jack May 2015 #43
"Change is coming" - gun control's motto for 20 years and counting. Nt hack89 May 2015 #44
No gun show "loophole". blueridge3210 May 2015 #46
Dreamer sounds spot on... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2015 #47
"You people need to learn that changes are coming." ... LOL! What again? DonP May 2015 #48
Really trying to crimp the mirth aren't you? discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2015 #49
His crystal ball needs a *lot* of Windex; this from him, in 2013: friendly_iconoclast May 2015 #54
Channeling your inner... Puha Ekapi May 2015 #58
There is no such thing as a gunshow loophole. Nuclear Unicorn May 2015 #62
The problem with the gun-control outlook is its extremism... Eleanors38 May 2015 #38
Well "Nasty Jack"......... pablo_marmol May 2015 #32
Nasty Jack, you've got a bit of cognitive dissonance going on: friendly_iconoclast May 2015 #37
WHAT THE HELL IS THIS ALL SUPPOSED TO MEAN? Nasty Jack May 2015 #45
And you tend to yell way too much. n/t oneshooter May 2015 #50
It's necessary to get through to gun nuts. Nasty Jack May 2015 #51
You might try using the truth sometime. blueridge3210 May 2015 #52
And again with the insult oneshooter May 2015 #55
who do you... Puha Ekapi May 2015 #64
I have no idea... Puha Ekapi May 2015 #59
It means.. virginia mountainman May 2015 #61
LOL... Very good post Friendly! virginia mountainman May 2015 #60
but....butt guns kill people donja' know!!! ileus May 2015 #63
 

clffrdjk

(905 posts)
3. By what portion would UBC reduce that number?
Thu May 14, 2015, 05:16 PM
May 2015

What version of UBC are you proposing? I don't like the idea of taking 4 30 mile trips over six days and spending an additional $60 just to lend my brother a pistol for an afternoon.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,476 posts)
4. It's just another on the hit parade list
Thu May 14, 2015, 05:23 PM
May 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=111255

1. Ban all assault or assault-type weapons
2. Ban all high-capacity magazines over 5 rounds
3. Universal background checks for all gun purchases
4. Mandatory training for anyone owning a gun
5. Mandatory state reporting of the mentally ill
6. Federal registry of gun owners
 

clffrdjk

(905 posts)
5. Oh yea I fully expect the "it's a good first step" reply
Thu May 14, 2015, 05:31 PM
May 2015

But it was the only one he mentioned in the post so I want to see just how he thinks it will make a difference.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
9. I just wonder who he used to be?
Thu May 14, 2015, 06:12 PM
May 2015

The proposals and misrepresentations he makes are common, overused and only supported by "Hemenway quality research", in other words, a sack 'o crap.

But I'm sure this dedicated crusader for gun safety, unlike the hundreds that came before him, will change minds and offset the 90 million plus US gun owners out there, and SCOTUS with his simple logic and passion.

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
6. I applaud the newbie's enthusiasm, but
Thu May 14, 2015, 05:37 PM
May 2015

a bit more research on his part would be nice.

Hopefully he will not turn out to be another drive-by poster just flogging his blog.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
7. Did you know that the magazine Mother Jones takes its name from a women that was the
Thu May 14, 2015, 06:03 PM
May 2015

public face of the early Worker's Rights Movement and that they often had to resort to massed armed resistance against deputized private security firms to secure their rights?

 

Shamash

(597 posts)
8. Anyone who uses Mother Jones as an objective source on this issue has questionable intelligence
Thu May 14, 2015, 06:08 PM
May 2015

It is like reading a report from the Family Research Council on the topic of homosexuality.

But to be fair, the Mother Jones report does mention in small print that the costs the US pays for letting people drive cars are causing a "total value of society harm" of 871 billion, or four times what the article says are the costs of firearm ownership. It conveniently neglects to put this in its big infographic, since it would make their calculated gun costs look small by comparison. The societal cost of alcohol abuse is estimated by the CDC at 224 billion. Does this mean we should take the same legal approach to alcohol availability as some people want for firearm availability? As I recall, we tried that once. Remind me how well it worked out...

Add in some skewed statistics, dodgy assumptions, notable omissions and propaganda techniques and it's all in a day's work for a Mother Jones piece on the subject.

But I guess if we will "never know the true cost", then by definition the costs listed in the story cannot be taken at face value...

Nasty Jack

(350 posts)
40. NOT TO WORRY
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:26 PM
May 2015

Not to worry, there are more less sophisticated people like yourself that don't understand Mother Jones.
 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
53. An argument from authority, by a "legal professional" that gets the law wrong?
Fri May 15, 2015, 10:04 PM
May 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=167005

When a criminal wants a gun he or she doesn't steal it like cops and the National Rifle Assn.tell us. They obtain it through a legal straw purchase



http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=167031

No such thing as a "legal straw purchase"

A "straw purchase" is defined as "the illegal purchase of a firearm by one person for another", as you might read on the ATF web site:

https://www.atf.gov/publications/factsheets/factsheet-dont-lie-campaign.html

...along with reports of prosecutions for same:

https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/three-dover-men-indicted-conspiracy-involving-straw-purchase-handgun


I predict an entertaining, yet abbreviated career here at DU



 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
10. Here, let me fix that for you.
Thu May 14, 2015, 06:15 PM
May 2015
U.S. PAYS DEARLY FOR GUN NUTS' RIGHTS TO THEIR TOYS


U.S. Pays dearly for the costs of gun violence. The responsibility of which can be laid at the feet of those perpetrating such acts, and pretty much nowhere else.

Nasty Jack

(350 posts)
12. Here to stay.
Thu May 14, 2015, 06:47 PM
May 2015

Folks, i'm not going away and will be around when all the above gun controls are enacted.
 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
17. Fine. Get back to me on the 12th...
Thu May 14, 2015, 07:26 PM
May 2015
Folks, i'm not going away and will be around when all the above gun controls are enacted.


Fine. Get back to me on the 12th of never about your little wish list.
 

clffrdjk

(905 posts)
21. When will that be exactly?
Thu May 14, 2015, 07:52 PM
May 2015

If you are here to stay will you participate or just post op's without comment?

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
33. Several have shown that your contention about no restrictions is demonstrably false.
Fri May 15, 2015, 06:58 AM
May 2015

Any comment on those counterpoints? Or a revision of the OP?

Straw Man

(6,622 posts)
31. ... and stay and stay and stay ...
Fri May 15, 2015, 02:02 AM
May 2015
Folks, i'm not going away and will be around when all the above gun controls are enacted.

Planning to be immortal, are we?
 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
42. "absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to"
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:34 PM
May 2015

Cannot legally purchase a firearm if adjudicated mentally ill.

Still think there are no restrictions on who may purchase firearms?

Puha Ekapi

(594 posts)
57. Interestingly...
Sat May 16, 2015, 10:50 AM
May 2015

...there are a number of controllers who crashed and burned and were served a pizza in that time frame

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
13. "absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to."
Thu May 14, 2015, 06:54 PM
May 2015

Must be 18 to buy a long gun; 21 to buy an handgun.

You could at least avoid the obvious dishonesty.

Response to Nasty Jack (Original post)

sarisataka

(18,490 posts)
22. Interesting choice of words
Thu May 14, 2015, 08:56 PM
May 2015

since I always teach my students and children that guns are not toys.

Also, since pro-control groups promote draconian penalities and per the article

Keeping individuals charged with a gun-related crime costs the government and taxpayers more than $5.2 billion annually. It is the largest direct expense incurred by gun violence, according to Mother Jones.

is it not therefore a shared cost between "gun nuts" and gun control?
 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
26. "absolutely no restrictions on who they are sold to"
Thu May 14, 2015, 10:07 PM
May 2015

Illegal to purchase a firearm with a felony conviction or domestic violence conviction.

Hard to take you seriously when you start your argument with falsehoods.

Try again.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
28. this baffled a lot of Torontonians: they can't GET that reforms that 70% of *NRA* members want
Thu May 14, 2015, 11:11 PM
May 2015

(and 90% of the whole country) can't get passed because one corporate cartel is allowed to cry and cry and cry and cry and never be right once in fact or principle, but because they have the money we have to consider whether our torsos are sturdy enough to protect our loved ones whenever we buy a movie ticket because someone's brain broke and he calls himself the Joker

hack89

(39,171 posts)
34. The problem is the gun control movement and their "its a good start" attitude
Fri May 15, 2015, 08:39 AM
May 2015

you are correct that there is widespread support for universal background checks. The problem for gun controllers is that they cannot resist taking advantage of every tragedy to push for everything they want - which includes many things that do not have widespread support. Sandy Hook is the perfect example - congressional Democrats dusted off every single pet gun control proposal, most of which had no bearing on preventing another Sandy Hook. That is why UBCs failed - it was bundled together with registration and an AWB.

A prime example of "its a good start" is Washington state, where they passed a universal background check law. The first words from the group that wrote the initiative was "its a good start" and they planned to propose stricter gun control laws.

So if we know that a group's ultimate goal is to severely restrict our civil liberties, why would we be expected to help them pass anything that gets them closer to their ultimate goal? Now if the gun control movement would come to gun owners and say "all we want to do is pass UBCs and we promise we will not propose stricter measures" then UBCs would be the law of the land.

Straw Man

(6,622 posts)
36. Exactly.
Fri May 15, 2015, 11:16 AM
May 2015
The problem is the gun control movement and their "its a good start" attitude

After the NY legislature passed the "SAFE" Act -- arguably the most restrictive gun control package in the nation -- one representative said from the floor, in session that "There's more to come." Against such a background, talk of compromise and "reasonable" laws sounds like what it is: just so much hypocritical cant.

Nasty Jack

(350 posts)
43. DREAMER
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:39 PM
May 2015

You have to be kidding. We need to also close the gun show loophole, put more stringent control on concealed/open carry, require rigorous training to purchase a gun, ban all assault weapons and large clip magazines, mandatory reporting of mentally by each state and start a national gun registry. That will make gun control advocates happy. You people need to learn that changes are coming.
 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
46. No gun show "loophole".
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:45 PM
May 2015

Private sellers were specifically exempted in the legislation and cannot access the NICS system.

Concealed/Open carry are not the problem; the people who can qualify for a carry permit are not the ones causing problems regarding criminal misuse of firearms.

"Assault Weapon" is a meaningless phrase to describe a weapon a legislator does not like; it has no bearing on public safety. Magazine capacity has no impact on criminal misuse of firearms; Cho at VA Tech uses standard 10 round magazines that were legal to possess in VA.

The ACLU opposes mandatory reporting of MH records as an invasion of privacy.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,476 posts)
47. Dreamer sounds spot on...
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:48 PM
May 2015

...as a characterization of believing all that stuff you wrote, but I recommend the occasional fit of wakefulness. So stop dreaming and begin living.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
48. "You people need to learn that changes are coming." ... LOL! What again?
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:58 PM
May 2015

Lots of "changes" coming, but none your ilk will like. Since control "fans" started telling us that, we now have CCW in all 50 states, constitutional carry in 3 more this year very likely ... and violent crime continues to drop to 40 year lows after 5 years of record firearm sales, much to the chagrin of the control minded that would rather pretend it's an epidemic. But the CDC and FBI, rank shills of the NRA that they are, keep telling a different story with their reports under those right wingers, Eric Holder and President Obama.

You really need to take your latest persona to Castle Bansalot and join the Greek chorus singing about the "Tide is Turning" .

That "change is coming" - "the tide is turning" song is over 2 decades old now and shows no signs of ever actually happening but you'll find kindred spirits that will tell you how wise, wonderful and brave you are.

The best part is you never have to actually do anything to show your support for gun control. Just keep whining online, as if it matters in the real world. No checks to write, no groups to join, just feel like a hero for a snarky post or two.

BTW, either your caps lock key is jammed or you're 14 years old and desperate to make an impression. Either way, fix it and try to stop being insulting and rude before you get banned again.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
54. His crystal ball needs a *lot* of Windex; this from him, in 2013:
Fri May 15, 2015, 10:29 PM
May 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172110786#post30

Gun control

Good points. But I think you underestimate the power of a progressive movement combined with more awareness by the public that gun ownership is mostly uncontrolled and this needs to be fixed. It all comes down to just how long we can sustain an interest in passing "some" gun control measures, and 2014 might just fall into place.
 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
38. The problem with the gun-control outlook is its extremism...
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:07 PM
May 2015

As with most prohibitions, the gun-control outlook (it isn't a movement) just can't get enough, and has never seen a control measure it doesn't like. Twenty years ago UCB could have been a national measure, or at a minimum extended to many more states than is currently the case. But the talking heads/groups promoting this legislation are on record for wanting more, more, and more restriction. Extremism begets extremism. Controller/prohibitionists have in effect sunk their own ship.

I would point out that nearly 75% of Americans see the Second as recognizing an individual right to keep and bear arms (Gallup since 1959).

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
32. Well "Nasty Jack".........
Fri May 15, 2015, 03:37 AM
May 2015

.......what folks like you fail to acknowledge is that defensive gun use is a reality. Even a survey by gun-restriction "scholars" Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig came up with high numbers of defensive uses. As high, in fact, as offensive uses.

Which means whatever cost the taxpayers are forced to pay in criminal gun uses (offensive) is saved by what is NOT SPENT by these defensive uses.

Derp.....derp......derp.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
37. Nasty Jack, you've got a bit of cognitive dissonance going on:
Fri May 15, 2015, 02:01 PM
May 2015
https://www.authonomy.com/user/ce4841e0-4c17-42e6-94fa-b88c46acbf40/

Nasty Jack

As a former data broker in the junk mail industry for 35 years, I came to the realization that business and government were dangerously placing our names and personal data in great jeopardy. Since leaving the business, the security of consumers' private information has been acutely and repeatedly compromised, leading to today's identity crisis, something I hope to help remedy in my writing.

In April of 2005 I launched my blog, "The Dunning Letter," which advocates giving back control to the consumer of their sensitive data, and compensating them when it is sold.


http://nastyjackbuzz.blogspot.com/

My Blog List

Arizona Progress ACTION
-
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Home
-
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence


http://www.bradynetwork.org/site/PageServer?pagename=BCP_privacypolicy

Email List Subscription

The Brady Campaign and the Brady Center use your email address to send you news and alerts that you have requested. When subscribing to this and future email lists, the Brady Campaign or Brady Center will collect and store the personal information that you provide. However, the Brady Campaign and the Brady Center will not sell your name or e-mail address to spammers or share it with unaffiliated groups.


http://lists.nextmark.com/market;jsessionid=E0139AAAA40D938D476D02BFF32F9CD3?page=order/online/datacard&id=163065

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence - Donors/Members Mailing List

Founded in 1974 (Formerly known as Handgun Control) this public citizens lobby works for legislative controls and governmental regulations on the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer, and civilian possesion of guns. Activists are individuals who have responded by mail on a gun control issue.

SEGMENTS COUNTS THROUGH 03/17/2015
TOTAL UNIVERSE / BASE RATE $75.00/M
DONORS/MEMBERS (TOTAL FILE) $75.00/M
DONORS/MEMBERS (24 MOS) $80.00/M
DONORS/MEMBERS (12 MOS) $85.00/M


SELECTS
CATHOLIC $15.00/M
GENDER $8.00/M
JEWISH $15.00/M
NON-RECIPROCAL FEE $25.00/M
PRE-SORT $1.50/M
SCF $8.00/M
STATE $8.00/M
ZIP $8.00/M
ZIP+4 $8.00/M



 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
52. You might try using the truth sometime.
Fri May 15, 2015, 09:03 PM
May 2015

The regular posters here have repeatedly dealt with the faslehoods you have posted so far. Let go of the talking points and look at the facts in evidence.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
55. And again with the insult
Fri May 15, 2015, 10:41 PM
May 2015

You insist on being taken seriously, and all you seem to be able to do is yell and insult.

Pitiful, and childish

virginia mountainman

(5,046 posts)
60. LOL... Very good post Friendly!
Sun May 17, 2015, 04:51 PM
May 2015

More torpedoes into a very shaky wheelhouse.. One that is propped up on lies, willful ignorance, and deliberate misinformation..

And yet, he thinks they are winning!

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»U.S. PAYS DEARLY FOR GUN ...