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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
Wed May 16, 2012, 03:04 PM May 2012

The VA Tells the Truth About Guns. The NRA Can't Handle It.

By Dennis A. Henigan
Vice President, Brady Campaign; Author, 'Lethal Logic'
Posted: 05/16/2012 10:45 am

The Veterans Health Administration launched a public awareness campaign about gun access by dementia patients after an 83-year-old veteran pulled a pistol from his pocket in August 2000 and shot a doctor in a V.A. hospital emergency room in Salisbury, N.C. The agency later found that 40 percent of veterans with mild to moderate dementia had a gun in their homes.

In response, the VA's Office of the Medical Inspector issued an invaluable publication, "Firearms and Dementia," explaining the risks of firearms in the home. Although the focus is on the lethal mix of guns and persons suffering from dementia, the VA underscores the risk to others as well. According to the VA, "[t]he presence of firearms in households has been linked to increased risk of injury or death for everyone in or around the home, usually as an impulsive act during some disagreement," noting that "[t]his danger is increased when one of the persons in the household has dementia."

-------

Of course, this is enough to drive the NRA around the bend. In a statement entitled "Veterans Administration Overdoses on Anti-Gun Prescription," the gun lobby decries the VA pamphlet as "what the taxpayers get when people who know nothing about firearms issues take their cues from people who lie about firearms issues..." Then, intending to inflict on the VA the unkindest cut of all, the NRA suggests "that if one of its pamphleteers isn't related to the Brady Campaign's Dennis Henigan, he or she ought to be." I would be proud to be related to the authors of the VA's publication but, to my knowledge, I am not.

The VA's public education campaign is threatening to the NRA precisely because it was not initiated by gun control advocates, but rather arises from a desire by medical professionals at the VA to take common-sense steps against entirely preventable deaths and injuries to veterans from guns kept in the home. The VA has done nothing more than give sound advice based on the best medical and public health knowledge about the risks of guns. For doing so, it now faces the wrath of the gun lobby.

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/the-va-tells-the-truth-ab_b_1521027.html?ref=gun-control


NRA-ILA Statement:

Veterans Administration Overdoses on Anti-Gun Prescription
Posted on March 9, 2012

"The presence of firearms in households has been linked to increased risk of injury or death for everyone in or around the home" and "Firearms in the home can increase the possibility of completing suicide." Not only that, while locking up guns is a good idea, "The best way to reduce gun risks is to remove the gun from your home. . . . The safest action is to get rid of the guns."

Sounds familiar, of course. But this time, the anti-gun propaganda isn't from one of the handful of people in the medical field that the Joyce Foundation pays hundreds of thousands of dollars to write up "studies" characterizing guns as too dangerous for private individuals to possess. Instead, it's from a federal government entity whose employees apparently read such stuff and, through some combination of naïveté, ignorance and bias, fall for it.

In this instance, the anti-gun message comes from the Department of Veterans Affairs' Office of the Medical Inspector and Geriatrics and Extended Care Strategic Healthcare Group. The VA's statements appear in a pamphlet called "Firearms and Dementia," which, the name of the pamphlet notwithstanding, is directed at anyone who has a child, in addition to people who are responsible for individuals suffering from decreased mental acuity.

The VA's statements are derived from "studies" that have been discounted or discredited by so many researchers, for so many years, that it hardly bears repeating. Gary Kleck, for example, summed up serious researchers' opinions of the "studies," referring to them as "nonsense" and saying "there is virtually no credible research supporting the skeptical view" that keeping guns at home generally increases Americans' safety risks.

More: http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2012/veterans-administration-overdoses-on-anti-gun-prescription.aspx?s=&st=&ps=


Anyone here want to defend the NRA?
141 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The VA Tells the Truth About Guns. The NRA Can't Handle It. (Original Post) ellisonz May 2012 OP
Just like the V.A. to try to remove the #1 choice for suicide for men. HereSince1628 May 2012 #1
Damn our public health professionals! ellisonz May 2012 #2
Seriously11! What wer thay thinkn?????? HereSince1628 May 2012 #3
Angry, demented old men is the NRA's primary market. denverbill May 2012 #4
Ouch! So true though. Pretty fucked up world we live in. Starboard Tack May 2012 #6
The NRA will defend possession of firearms for certifiable mental cases randr May 2012 #5
yet refuse to allow pot users their 2nd Amendment Rights. gejohnston May 2012 #7
When did the NRA say anything on the subject? randr May 2012 #41
why should they? gejohnston May 2012 #43
Kinda goes against the ethos in Vietnam Scribejohn May 2012 #106
Crickets bongbong May 2012 #8
"Gun-religionists?" eqfan592 May 2012 #68
LOL bongbong May 2012 #77
Faith to do what? ManiacJoe May 2012 #78
Anything bongbong May 2012 #82
You do know that faith and worship are not the same thing, right? ManiacJoe May 2012 #84
I don't hate being called it. I simply think it's completely idiotic. :P eqfan592 May 2012 #86
Religion bongbong May 2012 #89
"Try to substitute rationality for blind faith & you'll be further ahead" eqfan592 May 2012 #90
So what are YOU substituting for rationality? cleanhippie May 2012 #131
wonder how well you would do in other forums if you went in and called out Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #100
That's because women's rights and LGBT equality are important causes... DanTex May 2012 #101
note: Iverglass. Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #102
Was there point in there somewhere? DanTex May 2012 #104
about as much point as your post. Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #105
LOL. Nice One! I was just thinking how much I missed being in third grade... DanTex May 2012 #108
and you were standing in the mirror when you thought it. -- Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #109
A lot of stuff is tolerated in the gungeon that wouldn't be elsewhere. DanTex May 2012 #110
have at it -- Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #111
Faux outrage by you... DanTex May 2012 #112
oh dear -- Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #113
That's not a link to you calling out a fellow pro-gunner's personal insults. DanTex May 2012 #114
wrong. Show me where a 2A supporter is the first to throw out the insult. Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #115
Don't play dumb. DanTex May 2012 #116
3 links.... as opposed to the hundreds of times that it is started by Antis, OK. got it. -- Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #117
Those 3 links were to google searches. Many more than three links in there... DanTex May 2012 #118
to me as a woman. you don't see the insults because you don't want to see them Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #119
This has nothing to do with you "as a woman". DanTex May 2012 #122
Anti's attitude and tone in this group is demeaning. terms like Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #123
Yeah, that makes no sense at all. DanTex May 2012 #124
have one your own self Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #125
and have another one Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #126
LOL. You think calling gungeon dwellers "cowboys" is an over-the-line insult? DanTex May 2012 #133
simply removing the word spinster gejohnston May 2012 #134
is DanTex getting us confused or what? I never said anything like that about Iver. Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #138
you still do not understand because you are NOT a female. --- how about I call you Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #135
Ignored my question. I'll ask again. DanTex May 2012 #136
I never called Iverglass a bitter spinster. good lord! Yes. Yes. and HELL NO to answer your Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #137
Thank you. One more thing. DanTex May 2012 #139
sorry, I meant the collective Your (as in Your Side)... Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #140
Thank you. DanTex May 2012 #141
LOL bongbong May 2012 #120
then, by all means YOU go into those groups and YOU call them Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #121
I wonder if he was allowed to drive. Nuclear Unicorn May 2012 #9
Don't think the NRA needs to be defended DonP May 2012 #10
Conservative funding will do that! bongbong May 2012 #13
ALEC is not a slush fund, it is a gejohnston May 2012 #14
A rose by any other name bongbong May 2012 #76
Anti-Democracy? GreenStormCloud May 2012 #80
Nope bongbong May 2012 #83
Sure they do DonP May 2012 #33
LOL bongbong May 2012 #75
Tell us again how the so called "gun religionists" are keeping the Brady bunch and the joyce rl6214 May 2012 #99
Yeah, academics and well-trained profressionals don't know anything! ellisonz May 2012 #16
interesting...... gejohnston May 2012 #17
What I really love about the NRA Statement... ellisonz May 2012 #18
Gary Kleck is not the only one gejohnston May 2012 #23
Breathe 100% nitrogen. Fast, painless, and no mess. GreenStormCloud May 2012 #27
"they are out of touch when it comes to kids and old people with dementia." ellisonz May 2012 #32
I concede nothing gejohnston May 2012 #35
You're actually not being quite accurate... ellisonz May 2012 #36
Actually, I trained the masters of tangent gejohnston May 2012 #38
but it is getting there gejohnston May 2012 #52
Ummm, didn't say any of what you claim DonP May 2012 #30
Glad you so readily defend a right-wing political organization like the NRA... ellisonz May 2012 #34
I guess that bi-partisan thing confuses you, huh? DonP May 2012 #45
Statistically speaking... ellisonz May 2012 #46
unless they come across an anti gun Republican gejohnston May 2012 #48
Moved Kasich up to a B from F just before the election. safeinOhio May 2012 #93
got a cite for that? gejohnston May 2012 #94
Sure, safeinOhio May 2012 #95
What is the point of this post? Doctor_J May 2012 #39
I honestly haven't seen him claim to be a Democrat. n/t ellisonz May 2012 #47
why does that sound so gejohnston May 2012 #49
The Allen West poster on your living room wall? ellisonz May 2012 #55
That is not even remotly funny gejohnston May 2012 #56
I don't think you understand what McCarthyism is... ellisonz May 2012 #58
actually I do gejohnston May 2012 #60
It's true. ellisonz May 2012 #62
Try specific Dems in his area gejohnston May 2012 #67
Slander-by-insinuation against Veterans noted. PavePusher May 2012 #11
Can't handle the truth... ellisonz May 2012 #15
Bed bunker? gejohnston May 2012 #50
Use the youtube! ellisonz May 2012 #54
space saving safes gejohnston May 2012 #57
And you'll be ready in case of zombie apocalypse! ellisonz May 2012 #59
I thought your definition of a responsible gun owner gejohnston May 2012 #61
See even the VA knows that guns kill people...the NRA is pretty much spot on. ileus May 2012 #12
What they have to gain is keeping innocent people from getting killed. Something you don't seem to Hoyt May 2012 #19
Not everyone gets dementia. GreenStormCloud May 2012 #22
If they'd have stuck with crazy old turds like my father ileus May 2012 #40
Only in your gun obsessed mind. Hoyt May 2012 #42
Senile dementia is a problem that involves much more than just guns. GreenStormCloud May 2012 #20
Maybe they just have perspective/objectivity that those addicted to guns don't. Hoyt May 2012 #21
or more likely, gejohnston May 2012 #24
Ding. Ding. Ding. We have a winner. N/T GreenStormCloud May 2012 #26
Different perspective for them - Yes. Objectivity for them - No. N/T GreenStormCloud May 2012 #25
They also have an interest in protecting VA employees. HereSince1628 May 2012 #28
True, but the OP was about gun in the home. GreenStormCloud May 2012 #29
Too bad all entities don't show same sense of responsibility regarding guns. Hoyt May 2012 #31
The pamphlet could have been done better -- with more finesse. aikoaiko May 2012 #37
This is purely anecdotal, but sylvi May 2012 #44
Thanks for you valuable input. GreenStormCloud May 2012 #64
Probably because most families are smart enough to remove the firearms... ellisonz May 2012 #79
My Dad's an old retired vet moroni May 2012 #91
My hat's off to you sylvi May 2012 #92
Having been in your position, moroni, my heart is with you. NT Simo 1939_1940 May 2012 #129
welcome to DU and GC&RKBA Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #127
What GSC said, and I'll add that while you describe your experience as anecdotal Simo 1939_1940 May 2012 #128
Criminals also have homes and guns. Atypical Liberal May 2012 #51
Zimmerman and Loughner are recent examples that bring into question your last assertion. Hoyt May 2012 #53
Only for abnormal definitions of "rare". ManiacJoe May 2012 #72
There are a bunch of folks like Zimmerman walking around and being called "law-abiding" by the Hoyt May 2012 #73
Very true, but... ManiacJoe May 2012 #74
You can repeat, in whatever form you choose, the suggestion that law-abiding citizens are Simo 1939_1940 May 2012 #130
How so? Atypical Liberal May 2012 #85
Nonsense. ellisonz May 2012 #63
You are wrong as usual. GreenStormCloud May 2012 #65
Perhaps... ellisonz May 2012 #70
Whom did she murder? GreenStormCloud May 2012 #71
LOL, and no cars, no car accidents. Atypical Liberal May 2012 #87
Same tripe, different day. Simo 1939_1940 May 2012 #88
Excellent point. ileus May 2012 #66
Does AAA approve of driving for dementia patients? Remmah2 May 2012 #69
The VA is a favorite cause of mine. jeepnstein May 2012 #81
"Many of them gave a part of themselves that they'll never get back." Simo 1939_1940 May 2012 #98
A recent book which tackles the issue squarely Scribejohn May 2012 #96
Thanks - looks like my kind of book. TBF May 2012 #97
Hope you enjoy it... Scribejohn May 2012 #103
I read many mysteries/thrillers TBF May 2012 #107
K&R Cali_Democrat May 2012 #132

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
1. Just like the V.A. to try to remove the #1 choice for suicide for men.
Wed May 16, 2012, 03:08 PM
May 2012

I'm sure the next missive will be to remove rope, wire and belts so that the second choice for suicides is made more difficult...

















randr

(12,408 posts)
5. The NRA will defend possession of firearms for certifiable mental cases
Wed May 16, 2012, 03:31 PM
May 2012

yet refuse to allow pot users their 2nd Amendment Rights.
This alone shows how much the NRA really cares about the Constitution.
Crazies can carry arms yet peaceful non-violent people have no right to their own pursuit of happiness, let alone own a gun.
All the NRA is is a lobby for weapon manufacturers disguised as defenders of the Constitution.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
7. yet refuse to allow pot users their 2nd Amendment Rights.
Wed May 16, 2012, 03:46 PM
May 2012

Say what? Did the NRA say anything on the subject? That was the ATF's call. The only way to reverse that is to repeal federal prohibition laws and maybe amend the Gun Control Act of 1968.

peaceful non-violent people have no right to their own pursuit of happiness, let alone own a gun
unfortunately, the people they buy the pot from are anything but peaceful non-violent.

randr

(12,408 posts)
41. When did the NRA say anything on the subject?
Wed May 16, 2012, 09:18 PM
May 2012

My point exactly. When do they not jump up and down defending their precious 2nd Amendment?
Most pot in this country is grown by gun totin red neck mericans and not the street shit from Mexico.
End the drug war and stop the international violence that plagues our southern neighbors, but that may slow down the sales of guns unfortunately.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
43. why should they?
Wed May 16, 2012, 09:53 PM
May 2012

Most pot smokers I have known are assholes who have a problem with people who are not. When asked, I have yet to run into one who has a problem with their connection blowing people away. They are no different than people who buy blood diamonds.

Most pot in this country is grown by gun totin red neck mericans and not the street shit from Mexico.
Who said anything about Mexico? Those good peace loving souls in California and British Columbia sell to wholesalers and retailers that don't exactly take their business disputes to court like civilized people. I actually like rednecks, you know 99 percenters that drink beer.

End the drug war and stop the international violence that plagues our southern neighbors, but that may slow down the sales of guns unfortunately.
That proves my point, the typical bong owner has more responsibility for gun violence in North America than the NRA. How would that slow down gun sales? You seriously think the cartels are getting their machine guns and grenades from gun shows?

Scribejohn

(7 posts)
106. Kinda goes against the ethos in Vietnam
Sat May 26, 2012, 12:16 PM
May 2012

If pot smokers weren't allowed to carry firearms then there wouldn't have been many shots fired by US troops in Vietnam.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
8. Crickets
Wed May 16, 2012, 03:54 PM
May 2012

Crickets from the gun-religionists usually out to defend their poor widdle self-esteem builders.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
77. LOL
Thu May 17, 2012, 11:19 PM
May 2012

Gun-religionists hate being called that. Faith in metal objects that kill people do things like that to you.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
82. Anything
Fri May 18, 2012, 03:14 PM
May 2012

Worship guns, worship the NRA, worship the art of killing, worship whatever makes gun-religionists feel good about themselves.

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
84. You do know that faith and worship are not the same thing, right?
Fri May 18, 2012, 04:08 PM
May 2012

Would I be correct in assuming that "faith" was not the word you intended two posts back?

eqfan592

(5,963 posts)
86. I don't hate being called it. I simply think it's completely idiotic. :P
Sat May 19, 2012, 12:14 PM
May 2012

And I think it only underscores your own inability for rational thought and discussion on the topic.

And for the record, I'm an atheist.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
89. Religion
Sun May 20, 2012, 09:30 PM
May 2012

> And I think it only underscores your own inability for rational thought and discussion on the topic.

I think your gun religion underscores your own inability for rational thought and discussion on the topic. Naturally you want to defend your article of faith, your gun. Your faith blinds you. Your gun religion blinds you. Same as any religion. Try to substitute rationality for blind faith & you'll be further ahead

eqfan592

(5,963 posts)
90. "Try to substitute rationality for blind faith & you'll be further ahead"
Sun May 20, 2012, 10:40 PM
May 2012

That you say these words to me (or the rest of the words in your post) without having any real understanding of my position on the issue in the first place only serves to underscore that these words would have served you far better if you had spoken them while looking into a mirror.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
100. wonder how well you would do in other forums if you went in and called out
Sat May 26, 2012, 08:45 AM
May 2012

oh . . . say . . . .

Fem-religionists

or . . . maybe . . .

LGBT-religionists


wonder how long you would last . . . .

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
101. That's because women's rights and LGBT equality are important causes...
Sat May 26, 2012, 11:44 AM
May 2012

...whereas "gun rights" is a dog-whistle that right-wingers use to rile up the gun-religionists that make up their base.

I wonder how well you'd do in those forums if you went in and insisted that women's and LGBT rights groups really have a lot in common with the NRA...

My prediction:

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
109. and you were standing in the mirror when you thought it. --
Sat May 26, 2012, 12:23 PM
May 2012

I have kids. I can do this all day . . .

always and forever REMEMBER IVERGLAS and how it was the Fem/LGBT that brought her down. NEVER FORGET.

Insults that are thrown in GC&RKBA will not be tolerated elsewhere on this board and people are learning how bad it is in here.

Things will change.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
110. A lot of stuff is tolerated in the gungeon that wouldn't be elsewhere.
Sat May 26, 2012, 12:54 PM
May 2012

For example, repeatedly citing FOXNews, Townhall, WashingtonTimes, etc in GD would at least get you laughed at, and eventually PPRed. Also, comparing feminists and LGBT advocates to the NRA crowd probably wouldn't go over too well outside of this forum.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
112. Faux outrage by you...
Sat May 26, 2012, 01:20 PM
May 2012

Somehow personal attacks by pro-gunners don't seem to bother you much. Hmmm....

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
114. That's not a link to you calling out a fellow pro-gunner's personal insults.
Sat May 26, 2012, 01:35 PM
May 2012

Faux, partisan outrage by you.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
115. wrong. Show me where a 2A supporter is the first to throw out the insult.
Sat May 26, 2012, 01:40 PM
May 2012

I could be wrong but, in most intances I am seeing ANTIs throwing out the FIRST insult and the 2Aers are the ones automatically thrown in defensive mode and trying to make a joke out of the insults and actually taking the insults and making them terms of endearments. note: The Gungeon. note: Toters. etc.

I am not saying it doesnt happen, mind you...but, I am saying it is far more rare for the 2Aer to be the one to START the process.

as a woman, you have no idea how insulting your position above was to me about Feminist comments.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
116. Don't play dumb.
Sat May 26, 2012, 01:56 PM
May 2012

How about "anti-rights" or "bigot" or "gun grabber"? Does that ring a bell? Try some google:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22gun+grabber%22+site:democraticunderground.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=gun+bigotry+site:democraticunderground.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=gun+%22anti-rights%22+site:democraticunderground.com


Also, how exactly is my position on feminism insulting to you. My position is that women's rights (along with minorities, LGBT, etc.) are important issues, and they shouldn't be trivialized by putting them in the same category as "gun rights". That offends you as a woman? Please...

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
117. 3 links.... as opposed to the hundreds of times that it is started by Antis, OK. got it. --
Sat May 26, 2012, 02:09 PM
May 2012

trivial? thanks.

If this is such a trivial issue to you why do you bother wasting your time posting in this group?

DON'T PLAY DUMB

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
118. Those 3 links were to google searches. Many more than three links in there...
Sat May 26, 2012, 02:28 PM
May 2012

...although I still haven't seen a single example where you complain about name-calling or personal insults by someone who doesn't agree with you politically. Like I said, faux outrage and pure partisanship on your part.

Second, by "trivial", I mean that "gun rights" are trivial compared to actual civil rights. That doesn't mean the whole issue is trivial: the 30,000 people who die every year from guns are not trivial.

Third, you never explained how what I said was insulting to you as a woman. You're not just going to toss out the accusation that I posted something insulting to women and not back it up. Are you?


DanTex

(20,709 posts)
122. This has nothing to do with you "as a woman".
Sat May 26, 2012, 02:48 PM
May 2012

Explain how anything I said was in any way offensive to you as a woman. You won't, and you can't, because I didn't.

Here's what you posted:

as a woman, you have no idea how insulting your position above was to me about Feminist comments.

If you're going to insinuate that I posted something about feminism that was offensive to women, you need to explain what it is. Don't just toss around that accusation. That's irresponsible and offensive in itself.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
123. Anti's attitude and tone in this group is demeaning. terms like
Sat May 26, 2012, 04:47 PM
May 2012

equating guns with phallic symbols and "cowboy" attitude.

Your position that you did not understand what I was saying about calling out people in other groups.

Maybe you did not understand and I give you the benefit of doubt.

The very fact that I was NOT talking to you in the first place. You interjected yourself into this subthread.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
124. Yeah, that makes no sense at all.
Sat May 26, 2012, 06:39 PM
May 2012

My position, which has been clear all along, is that feminism and LGBT rights are worthy causes, whereas "guns=freedom" is for the Norquists and Nugents. That's why calling people out for being LGBT advocates or a feminists is not the same as calling people out for being NRA mouthpieces.

I don't need the benefit of the doubt, because I didn't do anything wrong. If you felt insulted "as a woman", that's because you didn't pay attention to my posts and instead just went looking for something to be insulted about.


PS, I found another post for you, where a pro-gunner calls DUers in favor of gun control "gun grabber losers". This, of course, is a much stronger insult that "gun-religionist", and I know you saw it because you were part of the thread. But, you said nothing, because all kinds of insults are OK by you as long as they're directed at people you disagree with.

Hypocrisy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/124099632#post45

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
125. have one your own self
Sat May 26, 2012, 06:43 PM
May 2012

Get in line all you gun nuts and get a bite to eat!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=40329

as for the other topic.... You are being deliberately OBTUSE about it. so PeaceOUT

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
133. LOL. You think calling gungeon dwellers "cowboys" is an over-the-line insult?
Mon May 28, 2012, 08:31 AM
May 2012

Try this: in an iverglas grave-dancing thread:

The other one... was just a bitter spinster with a chip on her shoulder/ax to grind.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117239829#post19

Wait, lemme guess! "As a woman", this doesn't bother you at all, because women of a certain age who aren't married are worthless to society and so we should laugh about how bitter they must be. Hahaha, that's so funny and appropriate on a Democratic message board. Did I get that right?

Or maybe it's only OK by you if it's posted by a worshipper of the almighty gun...

Hypocrisy.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
134. simply removing the word spinster
Mon May 28, 2012, 10:20 AM
May 2012

(she mentioned an SO) the rest is a fair description. It seems that you are assuming that Tuesday implied Iverglas' bitterness is from being single. I did not see that. Iverglas certainly seemed bitter in her rants.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
138. is DanTex getting us confused or what? I never said anything like that about Iver.
Tue May 29, 2012, 06:40 PM
May 2012

bitter or spinster NONE OF IT!

I NEVER SAID IT.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
135. you still do not understand because you are NOT a female. --- how about I call you
Tue May 29, 2012, 05:00 PM
May 2012

cowgirl and tell you that your baseball (or whatever) is really just a phallic symbol.

you are dense.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
136. Ignored my question. I'll ask again.
Tue May 29, 2012, 06:18 PM
May 2012

Do you think it's OK to call iverglas a "bitter spinster"? Do you find that to be sexist and inappropriate? Do you think it perpetuates a certain gender stereotype? Or is it OK as long as the person posting it agrees with you politically?

Also, "you are dense" is a personal insult. Kind of ironic in a thread where you complain about too many personal insults in the gungeon, don't you think?

And finally, I never called you a cowboy or anything else, except for pointing out your faux and hypocritical outrage, which I stand by. You accused me of having a position "about feminist comments" which was insulting to you "as a woman": a completely unfounded accusation, and you still haven't been able to point to anything I said that was remotely insulting to women or feminism.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
137. I never called Iverglass a bitter spinster. good lord! Yes. Yes. and HELL NO to answer your
Tue May 29, 2012, 06:37 PM
May 2012

questions.

You have been dense in this conversation and twisting things and taking things out of context and why on earth and calling this faux outrage IS insulting.

I never accused YOU of anything.

what I am trying to get across to you is how it feels to be a 2A woman READING in this godforaken hellhole of a group.

The insults bandied about between both sides is beyond the pale.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
139. Thank you. One more thing.
Tue May 29, 2012, 07:06 PM
May 2012
I never accused YOU of anything.

Actually you did. Right here:
as a woman, you have no idea how insulting your position above was to me about Feminist comments. (emphasis mine)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117238940#post115

Did I take that out of context? No. You accused me of posting something about "feminist comments" that was insulting to you "as a woman".

How it feels to be a 2A woman reading this group is a different matter. I won't deny your experience, but I will point out that the sexism I've seen here has been far more prevalent from the pro-gun side, like the example I cited. I'm pretty sure iverglas has been called a lot worse than a "cowboy" on many occasions.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
140. sorry, I meant the collective Your (as in Your Side)...
Tue May 29, 2012, 07:10 PM
May 2012

I don't know which side started it. I just want it to stop.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
120. LOL
Sat May 26, 2012, 02:37 PM
May 2012

So the choice to be a gun-religionist is the same as "choosing" to be a female, or an LGBT?

Methinks you've memorized too many repig Talking Points!

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
121. then, by all means YOU go into those groups and YOU call them
Sat May 26, 2012, 02:41 PM
May 2012

Last edited Sat May 26, 2012, 04:51 PM - Edit history (1)

the equivalent type of vile insults you use in here and see what happens .... note: IVERGLAS!!!!

get it or not .. the rest of DU is getting the point:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=99632

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
10. Don't think the NRA needs to be defended
Wed May 16, 2012, 04:51 PM
May 2012

The NRA versus Brady, Hennigan and their Gun Grabbing friends?

Let's see.

NRA has 23 (or is it 26 now?) pieces of sponsored/supported legislation passed at the state and Federal level in the last year.

NRA has won multiple major cases in both appellate and SCOTUS, including getting big fat checks from the cities that lost.

The whole SYG, Castle and CCW issues have dropped off the front pages again with no serious action being taken on it anywhere.

The NRA membership is now close to 4.5 million dues paying members and growing.

Brady hasn't had a single piece of gun control legislation passed in over a decade.

Their annual allowance from the Joyce Foundation has been shrinking.

Not even the fans of gun control on DU bother to actually join and pay membership dues to Brady.

Sounds like one organization is actually getting their agenda moved ahead and the other has been reduced to whining impotently in increasingly rare editorials and online. Why bother defending a group that is clearly and consistently winning the argument?

As for the VA?

Excuse me if I don't take much they have to say seriously, after ignoring returning veterans with PTSD, agent orange and other service related illnesses and serious mental problems for over 40 years under both D and R administrations.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
13. Conservative funding will do that!
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:08 PM
May 2012

The NRA gets lots of help from conservative slush-funds like ALEC. Right-wingers LOVE the NRA.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
76. A rose by any other name
Thu May 17, 2012, 11:18 PM
May 2012

Conservative bucks funding anti-Democracy initiatives are evil no matter what they're called.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
80. Anti-Democracy?
Fri May 18, 2012, 08:17 AM
May 2012

NRA gains are being made (27 bills signed so far this year) through the democratic legislative process. Many Democrats have voted for those same bills. It isn't anti-democratic. It is simply that your side is losing.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
83. Nope
Fri May 18, 2012, 03:16 PM
May 2012

> It is simply that your side is losing.

Nope, it's the influence of money & lies on politics. CONservatives don't win by Democracy, they win by lies & out-spending the truth.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
33. Sure they do
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:33 PM
May 2012

You just can't seem to find any proof of that.

Let's just take your "word" for it, right?

We'll just ignore the millions of NRA members from both parties paying all those dues and the "round up" contributions many non members voluntarily make when they buy ammo or other shooting supplies.

Now, what's your excuse for no grass roots financial support for the "Oh so popular" gun control agenda?

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
75. LOL
Thu May 17, 2012, 11:17 PM
May 2012

ALEC, the noted right-wing slush fund, has admitted they're part of the money behind the SYG laws being passed.

Your gun-religion blinds you to facts. Sad.

 

rl6214

(8,142 posts)
99. Tell us again how the so called "gun religionists" are keeping the Brady bunch and the joyce
Fri May 25, 2012, 11:30 PM
May 2012

foundation from getting any donations and/or membership.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
16. Yeah, academics and well-trained profressionals don't know anything!
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:17 PM
May 2012

*what a bunch of snobs*

God Bless the NRA/RNC and their delirium

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
17. interesting......
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:23 PM
May 2012

academics who are funded by interest groups to do "advocacy scholarship" to get results antis like are "highly regarded scientists"
However, award winning academics who are not so funded and publish results you don't like are "hacks." Who are the anti intellectuals here?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
18. What I really love about the NRA Statement...
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:27 PM
May 2012

Is that it echoes your two favorite topics: Gary Kleck and the Joyce Foundation while making a completely illogical argument about guns and the mentally-ill. The NRA is out-of-touch with reality! Do you hear that ringing? It's the little alarm clock deep in your brain telling you you're repeating a bunch of canned bullshit.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
23. Gary Kleck is not the only one
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:40 PM
May 2012

he is simply the best known.
While agree with you that they are out of touch when it comes to kids and old people with dementia. That said, suicide is not "gun violence" or "rope violence." If someone with dementia decides to go with dignity, what is the problem with that? IMHO, I view that condition as mental and intellectually dead. Tell you what, if my mind starts going, I promise to sell or give away all of my guns except for one pistol and one round.
From what I have read, the best prevention is to stay mentally active.

Do you hear that ringing? It's the little alarm clock deep in your brain telling you you're repeating a bunch of canned bullshit.
The same could be said of your side. It is actually more true with your side. Most murders are committed by criminals killing other criminals.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
27. Breathe 100% nitrogen. Fast, painless, and no mess.
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:48 PM
May 2012

If my health every become bad enough that I decide to exit with dignity I plan to breathe pure nitrogen.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
32. "they are out of touch when it comes to kids and old people with dementia."
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:33 PM
May 2012
- thank you for conceding that the NRA is wrong.

"If someone with dementia decides to go with dignity, what is the problem with that?"

When they harm others too...

"The same could be said of your side. It is actually more true with your side. Most murders are committed by criminals killing other criminals."

"Criminals" have families too...and considering how messed up our criminal justice system is (a point you readily concede), that's not saying much.




gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
35. I concede nothing
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:39 PM
May 2012

I call it as I see it, including Larry O'Donnell's anti Mormon religious bigotry.

"Criminals" have families too...and considering how messed up our criminal justice system is (a point you readily concede), that's not saying much.
Yeah they do, but gangsters choose to become gangsters. Since I do not buy pot, coke, meth, or indulge in illegal gambling, I don't contribute to the problem.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
36. You're actually not being quite accurate...
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:51 PM
May 2012

A substantial percentage of homicide victims have criminal records or in the commission of a crime, that is not the same as gang affiliation carte blanche.


Note: Arguments include brawls due to the influence of narcotics or alcohol,
disagreements about money or property and other arguments.

Felony types include homicides committed during a rape, robbery, burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, and violations of prostitution and commercial vice laws, other sex offenses, narcotic drug laws, and gambling laws.

Gang homicides include gangland killings and juvenile gang killings.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/circumst.cfm#reasons


What does Lawrence O'Donnell have to do with any of this? You are the master of tangent. The truth is that the NRA is full of shit as the OP amply demonstrates and is part of a false ideology that distorts the facts to meet a political agenda. Shame on the NRA, shame on its enablers, and shame on those who make excuses for the failed gun control policies of this country.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
38. Actually, I trained the masters of tangent
Wed May 16, 2012, 08:09 PM
May 2012

so I guess that makes me the supreme master of tangent

What does Lawrence O'Donnell have to do with any of this?
I happened to come across his anti-Mormon screed. Quite frankly, it was every bit as vile and full of shit as Mike Savage talking about Muslims or Pat Robertson talking about Wiccans. The fact that the religion happens to be part of my heritage, pissed me off even more. Yeah, I have problems with them just like I do with every other organized religion.
Yet, I have not seen any progressives or other "open minded and tolerant" types. I used LO as an illustration of ideological blindness and hypocrisy. Open minded and tolerant of those who you like, but have no problem with individual rights violations of those who you don't. If you are going to be a liberal, you need to be consistent. I detest dishonesty, hypocrisy, closed mindedness, etc from the left as much as I do from the right. You might call it priggishness, I call it being consistent to principles.
 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
30. Ummm, didn't say any of what you claim
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:26 PM
May 2012

I just pointed out the real world results over the past decade plus.

But I did notice that none of you or your ilk have refuted any of the basic facts posted.

The ongoing frustration over NRA related bi-partisan victories in court and legislatures is easy to understand. How about; "the sun was in my eyes" or "the ball took a bad hop". Those always worked in little league as excuses for losing.

I'll take the legislative and court victories and you can have your self defined moral high ground.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
34. Glad you so readily defend a right-wing political organization like the NRA...
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:34 PM
May 2012

...what are you doing on a Democratic website again?

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
45. I guess that bi-partisan thing confuses you, huh?
Wed May 16, 2012, 10:44 PM
May 2012

Do you actually think all these gun laws from CCW to SYG and Castle doctrine have been passed in every state just with GOP votes?

That would mean that either the GOP actually runs everything in this country from local, state and Federal or ... that not all Dems think like you do... thankfully. I'm guessing #2 is the correct answer.

Hell, one of the first people in line for a CCW permit in Wisconsin was the Minority leader of the House, who also voted for the measure along with all but 6 Dems.

Anyone that thinks it's only the GOP passing these laws is dense beyond redemption. But keep your ultra simplistic vision of what "every Dem thinks".

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
46. Statistically speaking...
Wed May 16, 2012, 10:58 PM
May 2012

...The NRA overwhelmingly funds Republicans and has done so for the last two decades. It's donations to Democrats are token at best.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000082 - See graph #3 - you can read graphs right?

safeinOhio

(32,527 posts)
93. Moved Kasich up to a B from F just before the election.
Tue May 22, 2012, 09:06 PM
May 2012

Gave a couple of thousand to Strickland's re-election and millions to Portman.

safeinOhio

(32,527 posts)
95. Sure,
Tue May 22, 2012, 09:51 PM
May 2012
http://www.wytv.com/content/news/local/story/National-Rifle-Association-Endorses-Gov-Ted/6oP2yOLxhU6XJtpDcIFArQ.cspx

During the visit, Strickland addressed his opponent's track record when it comes to voting on gun laws and the Second Amendment. While Kasich currently has a B rating with the NRA, the Governor said his opponent has a very inconsistent record when voting on gun laws throughout the years.

"When I was in Congress, John Kasich was in Congress with me," said Governor Strickland. "We faced a very important vote--the Clinton gun ban vote. I voted against it. He voted for it. He earns an 'F.' I earned an 'A+.'"

Representatives from the NRA said Kasich's position on the Second Amendment changes from year to year, like the weather changes from day to day.

"NRA members deserve better than that," said Hohenwarter. "Sportsmen deserve better than that. We don't wanna put defending our Constitution, defending hunter's rights to hunt on the weather."

Strickland also addressed the fact that his running mate Yvette McGhee-Brown has an "F" rating with the NRA.

"John Kasich, when it really counted, got an 'F,'" said Strickland. "When we were dealing with the Clinton gun ban he got an 'F' and it's the governor who makes decisions regarding what happens in the state of Ohio, not the lieutenant governor."

John Kasich's campaign filed charges with the Ohio Election Commission on Monday against Strickland's campaign.



Note: Kasich filed charges against Strickland's campaign for saying he had an F rating. The commission thru out Kasich's charges that he didn't have an F ratting.



The NRA changed Kasich's grade because he came out and said he now supports the 2nd. The same thing Obama has done, where is his B?
 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
39. What is the point of this post?
Wed May 16, 2012, 08:23 PM
May 2012

Dozens or hundreds of anti-choice, anti-union, anti-teacher, anti-environment, anti-education, anti-health laws have been passed too. Here's a clue: the groups passing those gun laws you love so much is the same one passing the ones I am referring to.

Why do you call yourself a Dem?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
58. I don't think you understand what McCarthyism is...
Thu May 17, 2012, 12:39 AM
May 2012

...and it's not a habitually pro-NRA and gun nut poster, who never posts about much else, not ever vocalizing his support of the Democratic Party.

And yeah, that was funny...

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
60. actually I do
Thu May 17, 2012, 12:51 AM
May 2012

much more than you. It does sound like a purge of "those Dems who do not think exactly like me" which is what the tea baggers are doing to the Republicans.
Well, what does pro NRA and "gun nut" have to do with being a Dem?

who never posts about much else, not ever vocalizing his support of the Democratic Party.
You know this how? Have you done a search? Or is this just more "common sense"? Has he shown support for Republicans, Libertarians, Greens or anyone else?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
62. It's true.
Thu May 17, 2012, 01:04 AM
May 2012

Also, star members now have advanced search function... Searches for that member's post with the search terms "Obama," "Republicans," and "Democrats" for the last year in all forums and groups turns up not a single post in favor of Democrats at large or against Republicans. In short, the poster makes no posts about the Democratic Party, other than prattling on in support of the NRA's extremist gun policies. If he's shown support for Democrats, it's sure not on DU.

That's not McCarthyism, that's pointing out the obvious!

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
67. Try specific Dems in his area
Thu May 17, 2012, 09:27 AM
May 2012

of course, IIRC, he lives in the Chicago area. There the choice is a corrupt union busting Republican and union busting, corporate criminal coddling Rahm.
The ToS only says vote for and support Dems during the general election. Provide evidence that he supports Republicans as a rule, not some specific policy that Republicans like to use as a wedge issue that many Dems also support.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
11. Slander-by-insinuation against Veterans noted.
Wed May 16, 2012, 04:55 PM
May 2012

Please keep such foul filth to yourself in the future.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
61. I thought your definition of a responsible gun owner
Thu May 17, 2012, 12:56 AM
May 2012

was one that kept them in a safe. I would think you would support such products. Another example of reform=prohibition and void of any actual operating principle.

ileus

(15,396 posts)
12. See even the VA knows that guns kill people...the NRA is pretty much spot on.
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:07 PM
May 2012

What the VA stands to gain in pissing on the 2A is unclear...

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
19. What they have to gain is keeping innocent people from getting killed. Something you don't seem to
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:33 PM
May 2012

care about because of your love of all things guns.

I had to take guns away from my father-in-law -- retired Air Force with 25 some years, and retired Deputy Sheriff with about the same -- when he became confused/demented after several years on dialysis.

He was already having hallucinations that my wife, who cared for him 24/7 for most of 3 years, and I were ghosts/demons. I stopped him one time as he was digging through his drawer for his revolver. Took a shot gun away from him too. Fact is, guns and dementia don't mix.

Your day will come as well, and I hope someone is prepared to relieve you of your guns (just like many children of elderly do with automobiles).

Believe it or not, the OP is serious stuff -- as are people walking around with guns while on prescription meds that alter one's judgement. Heck, even Sudafed can make one high and meaner.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
22. Not everyone gets dementia.
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:38 PM
May 2012

Some people retain alert, active minds into their 90s and even 100s.

And many people die before dementia can set in.

ileus

(15,396 posts)
40. If they'd have stuck with crazy old turds like my father
Wed May 16, 2012, 08:59 PM
May 2012

it would have been fine....but when they injected their antigun agenda opinion the whole body of the text turned to shit.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
20. Senile dementia is a problem that involves much more than just guns.
Wed May 16, 2012, 05:34 PM
May 2012

Guns are definately dangerous and must be handled with care, as must cars, knives, electric power tools and just about everything else. When a person suffers from dementia the entire dwelling must be made fool-proof in much the same was that a house is baby-proofed. For such a person many things that they formerly used must be taken away, including guns as well as car keys.

The problem with the VA is when they move beyond advice concerning dementia to general advice concerning guns. Then they seem to be parroting the VPC.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
28. They also have an interest in protecting VA employees.
Wed May 16, 2012, 06:01 PM
May 2012

That piece of the puzzle can't really be cast aside as unimportant in this.

The VA is scared of both terrorists who want to punish the government and of vets who might 'go postal.'

I'll admit it does negatively effect my mood when I have to pass through metal detectors to get a blood test for diabetes, but I understand their fear. We live in fearful times, that's why the R's are winning.


GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
29. True, but the OP was about gun in the home.
Wed May 16, 2012, 06:42 PM
May 2012

When I go to the VA I leave my gun in the car. Officially, guns are forbidden even in cars in the parking lot, but what they don't know won't hurt them.

aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
37. The pamphlet could have been done better -- with more finesse.
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:55 PM
May 2012

Compare the brochures for firearms and driving with dementia patients. I think they put a little more thought and care in the driving brochure.

Firearms:
http://www1.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=1186

Driving:
http://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=1162
 

sylvi

(813 posts)
44. This is purely anecdotal, but
Wed May 16, 2012, 10:20 PM
May 2012

I've been an R.N. on a V.A. dementia unit for the past 11 years. The issue of firearms in the home causing trouble for the patients or their families has never arisen in my experience. As to the exact reason for that, I'm not sure. Perhaps the family removes or otherwise secures the weapons, if any, long before the individual ever has any contact with the system. Perhaps by the time a dementia sufferer reaches the point that their judgement is so impaired that they may become violent, they don't even recognize a firearm for what it is or understand its function. I do know the nursing database we collect on admissions contains no questions about firearms. Neither does the history collected by the physician. In my career I don't recall any reports of firearm-related violence on the part of patients after the onset of dementia. No self injury. No shooting at others. That goes for other weapons as well. Most of the violence I've ever seen or heard of involving dementia sufferers involves striking, scratching, pushing people down, and the like. The use of weapons, even makeshift ones, is extremely rare.

That is not to say it doesn't happen. In all probability I'm confident it does. I'm just observing, from my experience, it has not been a notable problem in the lives of my patients or their families.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
79. Probably because most families are smart enough to remove the firearms...
Fri May 18, 2012, 02:52 AM
May 2012

Why the NRA insists on denying that those with debilitating mental illnesses shouldn't be told by their doctors to give up the guns is beyond reason.

 

moroni

(145 posts)
91. My Dad's an old retired vet
Mon May 21, 2012, 10:53 AM
May 2012

I recently removed some weapons from my Dad's home. He's 80 now and has a moderate case of dementia. I did not remove them due so much to his mental condition as I did due to his advanced age and vulnerability to criminal activity. As he was going to be in and out of medical facilities, I did not want the weapons to be stolen from his home while he was being treated. As it was, he never went back home and is living with me (also a retired vet) and my wife, a registered nurse with the V.A. At his level of physical ability, he can barely pick up a spoon and feed himself. He does not have the strength or coordination to use a gun, unless he knocks it off the table by accident and it lands on your toe.

 

sylvi

(813 posts)
92. My hat's off to you
Tue May 22, 2012, 07:29 PM
May 2012

I know how tough it is on families to be caregivers for a loved one with dementia. I can't tell you how many vets like your dad get placed in our system and then rarely even get any visitors, let alone a family member willing to commit to their care at home. It takes a special person to be able to shoulder that task.

That's not meant as an indictment of all families with elders placed in long-term care. Some just aren't able to cope physically or emotionally with that responsibility at home.

Simo 1939_1940

(768 posts)
128. What GSC said, and I'll add that while you describe your experience as anecdotal
Sun May 27, 2012, 11:01 AM
May 2012

one would think that if there were any actual problems associated with firearms in the homes of persons with dementia - you would be an individual in a position to know about it.

I started taking care of my Dad in '99 when he developed dementia - one of his neighbors called me reporting odd behavior. One of the first questions the neighbor asked was whether or not there were guns in the house - entirely reasonable. He wanted to be assured that he and his wife were safe in trying to assist my father while I was making arrangements for his care. (I informed him that there were no guns in the house -- save my old boyhood .22 rifle in the rafters of the garage.)

 

Atypical Liberal

(5,412 posts)
51. Criminals also have homes and guns.
Wed May 16, 2012, 11:20 PM
May 2012
"In response, the VA's Office of the Medical Inspector issued an invaluable publication, "Firearms and Dementia," explaining the risks of firearms in the home. Although the focus is on the lethal mix of guns and persons suffering from dementia, the VA underscores the risk to others as well. According to the VA, "he presence of firearms in households has been linked to increased risk of injury or death for everyone in or around the home, usually as an impulsive act during some disagreement," noting that "his danger is increased when one of the persons in the household has dementia." "

Of course, it is well known that people who commit crimes with firearms almost always have extensive prior criminal histories. And criminals also have homes.

The common denominator here is not guns in homes, it is criminals in homes.

The idea of the law-abiding person who just snaps is a rarity.
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
73. There are a bunch of folks like Zimmerman walking around and being called "law-abiding" by the
Thu May 17, 2012, 08:59 PM
May 2012

gun culture's lobbyists/promoters/panderers -- NRA, Republicans and other right wing gun groups.

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
74. Very true, but...
Thu May 17, 2012, 09:10 PM
May 2012

... how big is that bunch and when did it move out of the "rare" classification?

Simo 1939_1940

(768 posts)
130. You can repeat, in whatever form you choose, the suggestion that law-abiding citizens are
Sun May 27, 2012, 11:48 AM
May 2012

responsible for a significant number of firearm-related homicides - but you'll get ZERO support.

Reposting link from downthread:

http://www.cardozolawreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=138:kates201086&catid=20:firearmsinc&Itemid=20
 

Atypical Liberal

(5,412 posts)
85. How so?
Sat May 19, 2012, 12:11 PM
May 2012

How so?

Events like Zimmerman are not just rare, they are extremely rare.

And Loughner had known mental issues well prior to his crime.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
63. Nonsense.
Thu May 17, 2012, 01:38 AM
May 2012

No gun, no fatality from gunshot.

"The idea of the law-abiding person who just snaps is a rarity."

Domestic Violence + Financial Difficulties + Alcohol/Drug Abuse + Mental Illness = Snapping.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
65. You are wrong as usual.
Thu May 17, 2012, 05:42 AM
May 2012

A person with a history such as you listed "Domestic Violence + Financial Difficulties + Alcohol/Drug Abuse + Mental Illness" is almost certain to already have a police record and convictions. A law-abiding person who suddenly goes on a murderous rampage almost never happens.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
71. Whom did she murder?
Thu May 17, 2012, 02:02 PM
May 2012

I said, in my post: "A law-abiding person who suddenly goes on a murderous rampage almost never happens." So whom did she murder? She committed suicide and didn't even use a gun for it. She hung herself.

 

Atypical Liberal

(5,412 posts)
87. LOL, and no cars, no car accidents.
Sat May 19, 2012, 12:17 PM
May 2012
No gun, no fatality from gunshot.

Wow, your powers of deductive reasoning are staggering!

Domestic Violence + Financial Difficulties + Alcohol/Drug Abuse + Mental Illness = Snapping.

Except such "snapping" is exceedingly rare. The biggest determinator for committing a crime with a gun is a prior criminal record.

Not owning a gun in your home.

Yes, obviously if there is never a gun in a home there can never be a shooting in that home.

But gun ownership in a home is not the biggest determinator. It's whether or not the gun owner in that home has a past criminal history or not.

http://www.cardozolawreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=138:kates201086&catid=20:firearmsinc&Itemid=20

The overwhelming majority of people who commit homicide with firearms have extensive criminal histories. Such people also live in homes.

 

Remmah2

(3,291 posts)
69. Does AAA approve of driving for dementia patients?
Thu May 17, 2012, 01:21 PM
May 2012

The people at the Brady Campaign are pure genius.

jeepnstein

(2,631 posts)
81. The VA is a favorite cause of mine.
Fri May 18, 2012, 08:38 AM
May 2012

And the thing about some Veterans, their mental conditions, and their guns is a valid point. The problem is many of our Veterans have nobody, no support structure, and the VA is their primary health care and mental health provider. We have men in their nineties who are still wrestling with demons they've carried around since the 1940's. I seriously doubt the VA is trying to take away our guns. I do have no doubt that they need to better educate their staff and make more mental health care available to our Veterans.

If you ever had to deal with a young man who went from United States Marine to Coloring Books for Life in a split second you might understand. They get pushed out the door to deal with a world they really didn't want to be a part of, a world where their injury dictates their every waking minute. Of course they get angry, depressed, and are at times inconsolable. We owe it to them to do better. Many of them gave a part of themselves that they'll never get back.

Simo 1939_1940

(768 posts)
98. "Many of them gave a part of themselves that they'll never get back."
Fri May 25, 2012, 08:22 PM
May 2012

One of my cousins (Nam vet) fell into that category.

This is an issue that really tears my heart out.

Scribejohn

(7 posts)
96. A recent book which tackles the issue squarely
Fri May 25, 2012, 02:29 PM
May 2012

Does in thriller form for gun control what John Grisham did for death penalty statutes with The Chamber (IOW, nada - but a good thrill ride neverthless).

FREE on kindle for a while.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Second-Amendment-1-ebook/dp/B007A53RX0/ref=zg_bs_157321011_5

...One simple thesis.
But it threatens the very
roots of the Constitution.
There's too much at stake.

20,000 gun deaths a year, schoolyard massacres, and now a wave of militia bombings... America is under siege.

At the heart of the storm is Josette Horvath, the FBI counter-terrorist agent whose world is torn apart when her young son, Daniel, falls victim to a militia bomb. Her brother Bernard's latest political studies thesis meanwhile focuses on the thorny issue suddenly foremost with the President and an outraged America: stricter gun control.

But Bernard doesn't appreciate just how momentous and far-reaching his thesis is destined to become. And as Josette, torn between tracking the bombers and coping with her son's fate, discovers the extent to which the far right have infiltrated the FBI and the White House - she realizes this is one final battle she can't possibly win.

An explosive, uncompromising thriller which confronts head-on one of the most fiery issues of the past two decades: gun control.

Reviews:
If Vince Flynn and John Grisham got together to tackle probably the most controversial issue of the past two decades - Gun Control - this is what they might come up with. Hair-trigger suspense all the way. Electrifying.
Crime Ink

The FBI and Capitol Hill go head-on against the far-right and self-appointed militias in this no-holds-barred thriller. Amongst all the bullets and mayhem, the thorny issue of gun control is also handled sensitively – but don't expect much time to draw breath between the two. A 'loaded' issue in more ways than one.
Books, etc.

A novelist of real accomplishment.
Amazon co.uk.

John Matthews is a leading British thriller writer. His books span genres of crime, action, mystery and legal-thriller and include: Basikasingo, Crescents of the Moon, Past Imperfect, The Last Witness, The Second Amendment, Ascension Day, The Shadow Chaser and The Prophet.

They have been translated into 12 languages with total sales of 1.2 million. In 2007, Past Imperfect was included in a top ten all-time best legal thrillers list in The Times. He was one of only two British authors in the list.

Scribejohn

(7 posts)
103. Hope you enjoy it...
Sat May 26, 2012, 12:02 PM
May 2012

It was loosely based on a Clinton-style administration then updated recently so that the stats were fresher. But it's a thriller first and foremost - with the wrangling over gun control as the backdrop.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»The VA Tells the Truth Ab...