Time for RKBA DU'ers to make a choice...the NRA or the USA?

[HankyDub]

EXCLUSIVE: NRA Threatens Senators Who Support Campaign Finance Disclosure

In a letter opposing the DISCLOSE Act of 2012 — a bill to allow citizens to know what corporations and wealthy donors are paying for the “independent expenditure” attack ads enabled by the 5-4 Citizens United ruling — the National Rifle Association (NRA) is warning Senators it will score the issue in its legislative scorecard for this Congress.

The NRA opposes the measure — arguing that its “provisions require organizations to turn membership and donor lists over to the government” and would unconstitutionally abridge the right of citizens “to speak and associate privately and anonymously.” The legislation would merely require groups that opt to run outside political ads to tell voters which donors funded those efforts. By setting up a separate bank account for independent political spending, a group like the NRA would be able to keep its membership list private and would need only disclose the large money donors paying for the group’s campaign ads. Far from being unconstitutional, this sort of disclosure was explicitly endorsed in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United majority opinion as “the less-restrictive alternative to more comprehensive speech regulations.”

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/13/516229/exclusive-nra-threatens-senators-who-support-campaign-finance-disclosure/

_________________________________________________________________________________________

So are you democrats, libruls and patriots, or are you NRA supporters?

Put up or shut up time.

I know you will do the right thing. It's time to stop supporting the NRA. No more NRA dues. No more NRA soundbytes. It's time for librul gun nuts to put the country ahead of their precious precious gun lobby.

Which side are you on, boys? Which side are you on?

[DontTreadOnMe]

1. If you own two sets of golf clubs, then you are a golf nut.

How many guns do you need to own to be a gun nut?

[permatex]

3. Define gun nut.

I own dozens of long guns and handguns, doesn't mean I'm a "gun nut". Just means I enjoy the fine craftsmenship of a fine tool. Also alot of fun to go to the range and shoot them.

[DontTreadOnMe]

21. If you own more than ONE gun, you are a "gun nut"

If you are afraid of that label, then just don't admit to owning more than one gun in public. Golf Nuts brag about their "more than one" set of clubs... c'mon, just admit it, you are a Gun Nut.

[permatex]

22. Thats your definition,

why would I admit to something I'm not?
I enjoy the fine craftsmenship of a firearm, in no way does that make me a gun nut.
You can attach all the labels you want, your have a 1A right to do so, I have the right to totally reject your interpertation of it.

[Hoyt]

31. That's your opinion. The facts speak differently. Sorry, couldn't resist.

[permatex]

74. What facts would that be?

[Tejas]

203. *chirp chirp

I thought for sure that Hoyt would have schooled you by now with a plethora of his "facts", but alas. Then again, I don't recall as to where Hoyt has ever schooled anyone with his so-called facts.

[sarisataka]

33. By that rationale

every hunter who hunts waterfowl and big game is a gun nut?

[NewMoonTherian]

71. I disagree.

A person who enjoys hunting can easily own more than half a dozen guns, and not be very interested in guns at all.

I think most people who own multiple guns aren't gun nuts. They're more likely hunting enthusiasts, target shooting enthusiasts, or something else. The guns simply happen to be a tool used in their hobby.

Then again, there are plenty of gun nuts, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm a gun nut, and that doesn't mean my opinion should count less than anyone else's.

[TheWraith]

77. Hope you don't own more than one pair of shoes.

Otherwise you're a shoe nut. And if you own more than one kind of kitchen knife, you're a knife nut. After all, it's not like tools are ever varied for different purposes, such that you might need more than one. Dress shoes are exactly the same as hiking boots, a target rifle is exactly the same as a handgun, and a butter knife is exactly the same as a carving knife.

The lengths that some people will go to to demean and insult people who own guns and people who support owning guns--which is, by the way, the overwhelming majority of the American public--always astounds me. It reminds me of the pro-lifers, a group of people so tied up in hating and stereotyping people and things they know absolutely nothing about, based on caricatures and misinformation.

[shadowrider]

96. You better not eat more than one Buffalo Wing at a time or you're a wing nut n/t

[PavePusher]

101. ROFL.... n/t

[rhett o rick]

110. If you urinate often, you're a pee-nut. nm

[permatex]

115. Good one..............

[rhett o rick]

122. Oh yeah! What if you really liked lugs?

Help! Someone stop me.

[permatex]

123. Please stop

my sides are busting from laughing so hard.

[rhett o rick]

126. I recognize the symptoms and only vodka will remedy. brb. nm

[permatex]

129. I'm having a

ready for it, whiskey and kool aid, mango peach kool aid.

[rhett o rick]

147. Hey, I never criticize another's drink.......as long as they are willing to share. nm

[rhett o rick]

130. I hope no one thinks I am mocking this thread. nm

[hack89]

133. Of course not. nt

[permatex]

137. Not at all

We need some humor here now and then.
thanks.

[ileus]

148. Hard to duck hunt with a 300WSM

[oneshooter]

153. Easy to hunt, hard to find the parts.

[cherokeeprogressive]

149. What a steaming crock of runny human shit.

I've been golfing for 35 years and have NEVER met a golfer who has more than one set of clubs and if I have they certainly didn't brag about it.

You can call me a gun nut. I don't mind. You can call me whatever the fuck you want... like it matters in the slightest what you call me.

[Scuba]

176. I have three sets of clubs.

[cherokeeprogressive]

183. Question: If the starter sent you to the first tee to go out with my threesome...

Would you be sure to let me know you were playing with one of your THREE sets of clubs? Do you rotate them?

[Scuba]

184. Well, there's two sets I play with regularly, depending on my mood....

... the third set is more of a collector set.


My "new" set is 22 years old.

[slackmaster]

161. Anyone who owns three or more of anything is a collector

If you are afraid of that label, then just don't admit to owning more than one gun in public.

I think you must be a philatelist or something.

[Go Vols]

171. now I am a car collector

cool

[rl6214]

79. Never heard anyone called a "golf nut"

Did you make that one up yourself?

[permatex]

2. Don't forget that this will apply to all

like tha NAACP, Planned Parenthood, ACLU. Do you really want to go down that road just because the NRA is opposed to it?
I would like to see where these other org. stand on this.

And if I'm wrong on this, someone please correct me.

[HankyDub]

6. I'm proud to support the NAACP

Got nothing to hide.

[permatex]

10. I never said they got nothing to hide

Are you aware that the ACLU also opposes this?

[HankyDub]

18. ACLU agreed with Citizens United too

They are wrong.

Bribery is not speech.

[AtheistCrusader]

4. I do not stand with the NRA. Never have.

Most of us haven't. Some do so out of rational self-interest to access various shooting ranges that have membership as a requirement.

[HankyDub]

5. Good on ya!

It's time to make a choice for the rest. Your shooting range or your democracy?

You have a rational self-interest in preserving democracy.

[AtheistCrusader]

7. membership can be as little as $25 a year.

They aren't doing any advocacy off that amount, and it gains you access to the range. I don't see a problem with it.

The NRA can't swing this election. Rank and file NRA members know LaPierre is full of shit, that he's endorsing the candidate in this election that ACTUALLY banned assault weapons.

The NRA may have some money to sling around, but will otherwise be a non-factor this election.

[HankyDub]

8. "The NRA can't swing this election."

The NRA can swing many house and senate elections, just on their ratings. They can do it this year, they can do it any year.

You know that they can.

Now...$25 a year can be donated to all kinds of worthy causes. No need to donate it to a democracy eating machine.

[AtheistCrusader]

14. Yet, the NRA gives positive ratings to Democrats, just fine, as long as they come down on the

NRA's side of the firearm issue. Happens all the time, actually. In fact, in 'smaller' races we are less likely to see the political biases of the NRA board override the hard, fact-based rating endorsements.

At the president level, yeah, they override. By all factual basis, the NRA should be endorsing Obama, not Romney. At the governor level, they certainly have endorsed Democrats over Republicans in recent memory.

[HankyDub]

16. Now the NRA will give negative ratings

to any Democrats that support democracy. Sorry...that ship has sailed, that argument is done.

[Hoyt]

35. NRA supports a lot of right wing causes unrelated to guns. Check out their leadership.

[AtheistCrusader]

42. Sure, the NRA board has become highly politicized.

Not sure that changes anything I just said.

[permatex]

45. Does the NRA itself

or is it the board members?

[Hoyt]

50. When grover norquist goes to scratch Republican congressperson's back, he's lobbying for more guns,

lax gun laws, cuts to social programs, more warmongering, and a host of other right wing issues. He uses the membership of the NRA as leverage, just as he uses his TParty affiliations. The gun culture is just a tool of folks like him.

You really need to wise up.

[permatex]

53. You didn't answer the question.

Does NRA lobby for positions other than gun rights? Or is it the board member that do separate of NRA?
Can you provide links to your assertations, because I just went to the NRA website and I can't seem to find anything like you describe.

[Hoyt]

55. Permatex, rather than buying another gun, try getting an education on how these organizations work.

[permatex]

60. Could you PLEASE answer the question?

Really, where does the NRA support other than gun rights?
I don't like that org., but you made a statement that they support RW positions other than gun rights, so, if you will, provide the link to your statement.
Thats all I'm asking. If you don't have it, just say so.

[sarisataka]

62. I would have to say he posted a fact

rather than opinion. It was not qualified in any way.
So by the Hoyt standard you are correct in asking for either a cite or confirmation that

Sometimes things are clear without the need to study them

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117244467#post70

or the I-know-it-is-true-because-I-know-it standard

[friendly_iconoclast]

61. Hoyt, rather than dodging, try providing *actual evidence* to back up your assertion...

[friendly_iconoclast]

65. You, yesterday: "When you quote something like that, it is customary to give a link to the source."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117249755#post15

You just love to serve dishes you won't eat yourself, don't you?

[rl6214]

82. And of course this is just your "opinion" because there is no proof to

back any of this up.

Really, YOU need to wise up.

[gejohnston]

124. and you support cops

machine gunning fleeing 14 year olds that committed no crimes, so what's your point?

[Clames]

9. I choose my range and democracy.

Hanky tries to throw down a glove but apparently forgot to bring it....

[rrneck]

38. He just thought it was a glove.

It's probably a sock.

[Clames]

85. Certainly explains the smell.

[PavePusher]

11. Sadly, Real Life(tm) is not as binary as you wish it were. n/t

[PavePusher]

12. P.S. What's an "NRA soundbyte(s)"?

If the NRA says 2+2=4, and I agree with them, does that make me an "NRA supporter" or their assertion a "soundbyte"?

[HankyDub]

17. I'm disappointed

I thought the gungeon was filled with patriotic democrats. Was I wrong?

[PavePusher]

28. You are not wrong about it being "filled with patriotic democrats".

But your definition of "patriotic" is not perfectly congruent to everyone elses.

You should make your peace with that.

[sarisataka]

36. Patriotic=

do as you are told, do not question your betters, my country/party right or wrong...

[PavePusher]

97. P.S. You've dodged the question.

If you are going to ask nebulous questions, be prepared to provide clarification.

Spider Robinson had something interesting to say about "patriotism" in his essay Rah, rah, R.A.H.!, IIRC.

[HankyDub]

142. here are some:

http://rush_awards.tripod.com/truthaboutguns.html

[PavePusher]

154. Anonymous web page with no citations to the claimed quotes.

Yeah, that'd hold up in court.

[krispos42]

13. If the NRA is so powerful, why don't Democrats realize that...

...in order to preserve democracy it's time to stop the hysterics about guns and yank the anti-gun planks from the platform?

[HankyDub]

15. Well, sweetheart

I don't know what "hysterical anti gun planks" are in the platform. Are there any this year?

You're deflecting anyway. We are talking about democracy, which is not protected by guns. Your first amendment protects your second amendment.

You know the NRA is that powerful. Y'all brag on that.

[hack89]

20. The ACLU opposes this bill on first amendment grounds. nt

[HankyDub]

24. Bribery is not speech. nt

[hack89]

26. So the bill is bad but the NRA's tactics are bad too? Is that it? nt

[HankyDub]

37. Did I say the bill is bad?

It isn't the only solution we need, but it's a start!

[hack89]

48. So the ACLU is wrong. OK nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

64. Should DUers quit the ACLU over their opposition to it?

[HankyDub]

66. Not unless the ACLU starts paying speaking fees to Glenn Beckkk and $arah Palin

in addition to being wrong about this bill.

[bongbong]

93. Good on ya

I'm glad somebody has the patience to explain basic facts & logic to the gun-relgionists. They love to do ask for "proof" to self-evident facts and waste your time, whilst "busy" cutting-n-pasting NRA Talking Points & memos that you have to rebut over and over.

Since you're new around here, you'll find out that if you prove one gun-relgionist wrong on something (naturally easy, but it still takes time), about 20 other gun-religionists will hound you about the identical NRA Talking Point that you've already proven to be a lie.

[HankyDub]

102. I'm actually not new here, but thanks

Some of the old timers here in the gungeon remembered me when I came back, using the same handle.

I was tombstoned about a year ago for violation of the rules, I believe it was for supporting a 3rd party candidate (Green). I'm ready to be a good boy now, at least in that respect.

I'm very familiar with gungeoneer tactics, but I'm pleased that moderators now allow for a more open discussion, instead of deleting so many perfectly valid comments because of complaints from gun absolutists.

I also would like to add, in fairness, that I have learned a great deal from our RKBA friends here. They helped me refine my arguments and even changed the way I think about these issues. They aren't bad people...or at least only a very few are bad people

[permatex]

104. We really aren't that bad

but when you get people like bongbong and Hoyt who do nothing but hurl insults and make wild accusations, of course we come down hard on them.
I am new here, and you seem like a pretty fair person. I hope to have good conversations with you in the future.

[HankyDub]

135. some of my old buddies would disagree with you

I'm not above some wild accusations and insults. Spice of life doncha know.

[Tejas]

205. and then they came for the fire extinguishers.......

Your first amendment protects your second amendment.

YUP, that worked sooooo well in Britain. So well that .gov is proposing to ban fire extinguishers in the home because fires should be left to 'professionals'. WTF?


You know the NRA is that powerful. Y'all brag on that.

Er, no, YOU think/know the NRA is powerful. The rest of us (both antigun and progun) look at the numbers.

4m members vs 80m gunowners. WTF?

[hack89]

19. Do I also have to choose between the ACLU and the USA?

Because they agree with the NRA.

WASHINGTON – The Senate today and tomorrow will debate a campaign finance bill that includes disclosure requirements that raise significant civil liberties concerns. The American Civil Liberties Union is urging senators to vote against the bill because those disclosure requirements are overly broad and inconsistent and will likely infringe upon the free speech and privacy rights of Americans.

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/aclu-urges-no-vote-disclose-act

[HankyDub]

23. the aclu has done a great deal of good for this country

the NRA has not.

The ACLU doesn't pay speaking fees to Glenn Beckkk and $arah Palin. The NRA does.

The ACLU is worried that donations might decrease. There is that possibility, but preserving democracy is more important than preserving their funding.

[hack89]

25. They helped pass all our present gun control laws

including NICS. They are the largest source of gun safety instructors in America.

Considering the plummeting gun crime and accident rates, I think they have done a lot of good.

[HankyDub]

27. post hoc ergo propter hoc

Fallacious reasoning.

[hack89]

29. So show us the harm that the NRA has done America

show us the stats, the numbers, that conclusively demonstrate that the NRA's gun policies have made America a more dangerous place.

[gregoire]

34. So you don't watch your local news or read your local newspaper?

The affect of the NRA is very clear especially in minority areas. They have flooded the streets with guns in poor areas.

[sarisataka]

39. How can I get one of these

NRA guns? Do you have any choice in what they hand out or do you just get in line and see what they have on the truck?

[friendly_iconoclast]

58. You'd better watch it- some folks don't like skeptics who cast doubt upon their One True Faith...

[Hoyt]

43. NRA doesn't really care what happens to guns after they are sold, only that they are sold.

Then, they use the unfortunate situation you describe to scare people into carrying guns (more sales). It's just a vicious circle that sooner or late someone is going to have to bite the bullet and handle, no matter how loudly those who can't walk down a city street without a gun scream.

While we dick around with it for another decade, another 100 million guns will flood the streets. The NRA and its industry related supporters just count the money they make off trafficking lethal weapons.

It's just another racket.

[permatex]

47. And I can proudly say that I'm doing my part to add another 100 million guns sold.

Matter of fact, just for you, I'm going to purchase that Valmet Model 76 rifle I've been looking at for $1800.00 today.
Thanks Hoyt for helping me make a decision on this.

[Hoyt]

51. Who you planning to intimidate, or excite with that piece of crap (my opinion)?

[permatex]

56. Just where did you get that I'm going to intimidate anyone with it?

Unless you meant cans, bottles, pieces of wood. The one I'm going to by looks like this:

I have never liked the wire style folding stock that you have posted, I'm old school, I prefer non folding stocks in either wood or plastic.

[permatex]

91. Ordered, paid for, on it's way to a las vegas gun store for p/u next week, also ordered

6 xtra 30 rnd. mags for it. Chambered in .223 cal.
Can't hardly wait for it to get here.

[Meiko]

120. Sweet

a bullet hose.....

[friendly_iconoclast]

63. Bambi's mom, that's who. They are well made, and would be a great deer rifle...

...with a 5-round magazine.

[Trunk Monkey]

162. Are you posting gun porn now? NT

[sarisataka]

54. Very nice

A friend had one that he let me borrow for a while. Accurate and reliable.
Only issue I had was that, like any AK style rifle, the fore-grip tends to get uncomfortably hot.

[rl6214]

90. I know you're going to whine about this BUT

Cite the source from that show where the NRA is making money off the trafficing of lethal weapons.

[permatex]

95. Oh c'mon

doncha know thats just his opinion, that way he doesn't have to provide proof.

[rl6214]

107. Yeah, I know

Hoyt has been dancing around like this for as long as I can remember.

[permatex]

108. I've gone back in the archives

and read alot of his stuff. Funny as hell.

[Hoyt]

121. Lord man, they've figured out how to take a "percentage" of things by just handling lobbying, etc.

If you guys would open your eyes -- and stop straining at the front sight -- you'd get it.

They do the dirty work for the manufacturers, gun shops, etc., by greasing the palms of right wing legislators to keep the gun river wide open.

And that's my opinion after years of working with organizations with PACs and lobbyists.

[permatex]

127. Thats your opinion

but you still don't have any proof of it, because if you did, you wouldn't hesitate to post it given your hatred of the NRA.

Something new- gun river?
Where do you gun controllers come up with these?
Gotta admit, its original.

[hack89]

46. The reports that for the past 30 years have trumpeted historic declines in gun violence?

Yes - I have seen those reports.


Did the NRA also flood those areas with drugs and drug gangs? Or is that irrelevant to the discussion?

[HankyDub]

49. still slipping in that fallacy eh

I thought we dealt with that. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

[hack89]

52. So let me get this straight

gun violence in the poor areas of town is proof of the harm the NRA does to America even though that gun violence has steadily decreased to historic lows.

lower gun violence = harm. Is that your logic?

[HankyDub]

67. That's a twisty pretzel.

Gun violence in urban areas is the result of three things, in my opinion.

The drug war.

Poverty due to outsourcing.

Lax gun laws.

Unlike you I don't subscribe the the Post hoc fallacy or the single cause fallacy.

[hack89]

68. Yet as gun laws got laxer, gun violence went down

so again - what harm was done by changing the gun laws? How did the NRA actually harm America?

You need to show me something that says "because of this thing the NRA did, harm was done and things got worse."

Harm =/= we have never been safer.

[HankyDub]

72. This is a logical fallacy, a combination of two, in fact.

Have your friends explain that to you.

As for the very real harm that the NRA has done, check out the US congress. Check out the fanatical gun nut right. Check out the various militias that have sprung up.

The NRA is partially culpable for these things by promoting extremist rhetoric and exerting a crushing weight on our political system...

[hack89]

73. No it is not

I am saying that laxer gun laws did not lead to a increase in gun violence. Do you dispute that gun laws are laxer or that gun violence is a historic lows? Both are true statement. I am not saying that laxer gun laws caused lower gun violence rates. Only that they did not lead to a increase in gun violence. Have your friends explain that distinction to you as you seem to have problems grasping it.


Once again - show me the explicit harm. Show me how "fanatical gun nut right" has increased the danger to you and your family in anyway. Explain to me how more and more people owning more and more guns has led to ..... what exactly? More shootings? NO. More deaths? NO. More political violence? NO. What do you have besides your seemingly irrational paranoia?

[HankyDub]

78. The reduction is not uniform

You said:

Considering the plummeting gun crime and accident rates, I think they (the NRA) have done a lot of good.

Gun crime rates are no longer plummeting. They have leveled off. In my opinion this is probably due more to abortion being safe and legal since 1973 than any movement on gun laws. According to the NIJ:

Homicides committed with firearms peaked in 1993 at 17,075, after which the figure steadily fell, leveling off in 1999 at 10,117. Gun-related homicides have increased slightly each year since 2002.

http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/

State Firearm Death Rates, Ranked by Rate, 2007


http://www.vpc.org/fadeathchart10.htm

Summer of Gun Violence Continues in New York, Extending Troublesome Trend


Following yesterday’s shootings, which claimed the lives of three of the eight victims, the NYPD released a series of frightening statistics that illustrated a significant jump in gun-related violence in the past year, which worked to contradict Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s assertion that gun crime “traditionally” peaks during the heat of the summer.

Total gun incidents during this week rose from 47 in 2011 to 62 in 2012.

http://www.allmediany.com/news/5065-summer-of-gun-violence-continues-in-new-york-extending-troublesome-trend

Chicago’s crime issue will take ‘incremental change’

[...]“We have an unacceptable level of gun violence in this city…The goal is zero murders, zero shootings,” McCarthy says. However, “while we have a double-digit reduction in the overall crime rate in the city, we’ve got an increase of about 90 shootings so far this year so that doesn’t match up.” [...]

http://thegrio.com/2012/06/25/chicagos-crime-issue-will-take-incremental-change/

Seattle to address increase in gun violence

Between January and May of 2012, 21 people in Seattle have lost their lives due to homicide -- already one more than all of 2011.

http://www.krem.com/news/northwest-news/Seattle-to-address-increase-in-gun-violence-159444475.html

Editorial: Trenton gun violence surge amid pending police layoffs presents dangerous combination

As the rate of shootings rises in Trenton, the number of police officers in the city will soon drop substantially. Police last week reported a 66 percent increase of gun-fueled violence over last year, a “red flag” indicating an escalation of illegally procured guns in the city.

http://www.nj.com/times-opinion/index.ssf/2011/07/editorial_trenton_gun_violence.html

Robberies, Gun Violence Increased Last Year, Justice Report Says (2006)

Americans were robbed and victimized by gun violence at greater rates last year than the year before, even though overall violent and property crime reached a 32-year low, the Justice Department said yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/10/AR2006091000931.html

Among comparable nations, the US consistently has a much higher homicide rate and gun homicide rate than other comparable countries. So to pretend that lax gun laws don't contribute to these higher homicide rates isn't honest. So while I would not say that weaker gun laws = more gun crimes, (many factors influence the rate at which gun related crimes occur) the easy availability of guns is certainly one of them.

[hack89]

80. "Overall violent and property crime reached a 32-year low"

certainly not the "epidemic of violence" that all the fear mongers keep bringing up.


There will be minor ups and downs - crime is a complex phenomena. Doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of Americans have never been safer.

[HankyDub]

84. so you're pointing out that

overall crime is still dropping, while gun homicides appear to have leveled off?

Why would you do that?

Anyway, we are far from the original topic. Why does the NRA support bribery?

[Clames]

89. Why wouldn't he?

Probably not in the habit of ignoring facts that establish trends unlike the anti-gunners.

[hack89]

94. I notice you were using old data

here is the latest from the FBI - it shows a continuing decrease in firearm murders.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

[hack89]

98. Why does AARP or any other political pressure group

support "bribery"? You might have something if the NRA was doing anything unique.

[HankyDub]

103. is the AARP

threatening lawmakers who are considering voting for the Disclose act?

And no, not a big fan of the AARP.

[permatex]

106. They probably do

they're just not as loud as the NRA about it.

[HankyDub]

109. not according to them

http://www.aarp.org/about-aarp/press-center/info-06-2010/disclose_act_statement.html

[permatex]

112. I apologize,

let me clarify, they aren't lobbying on this particular piece of legislation, but they do lobby on other legislation which concerns their base, and I'm fairly sure they do put pressure on Sen. and House member for a piece of legislation that their base wants.

Hope I cleared that up.

[hack89]

111. Not on this particular issue

but you know what I mean - the NRA is doing what every influential political issue group does.

[Meiko]

119. Nobody is threatening anyone

some senators are being told that there will be a political price to pay for certain decisions, this goes on constantly in this country. Lobbyists do it all the time there is nothing new here. The only reason there is a stink about it is because it's the NRA. The anti gun arm of the Democratic party has no use for the NRA and will do anything to discredit it. I don't belong to the NRA and never will but as a gun owner I can appreciate their support of the 2A and gun rights in general. I don't agree with everything the NRA does but I don't agree 100% with the Democratic party either, why would I? I still reserve the right to do what I think is right without interference from the government, a political party or a lobbyist group.

I have to reserve further comment until I have more time to look at this issue in closer detail.

[HankyDub]

132. The reason I am making a stink is that they are advocating agains the interests

of 99% of the public, which is to have a clean(er) political process.

If you support the NRA by paying dues, you materially support its efforts to protect bribery.

[Meiko]

146. I understand what you are saying

I am not sure your 99% figure is correct, the public has never agreed on 99% of anything but like I said I want to spend some time looking at the issue a little closer.As I have stated in this group before I used to be an NRA member years ago but I got tired of the constant solicitation for money and I didn't care for the in your face RW political rhetoric, stuff gets old after while you know.

[GreenStormCloud]

151. Try using the FBI murder RATE. It shows the true picture.

The U.S. population is increasing so naturally the total number of murder will have an upward trend due to that. But the declining murder rate is keeping the total number of homicides about level. Here is the FBI table of murder rate:

http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/State/RunCrimeTrendsInOneVar.cfm
1995 8.2
1996 7.4
1997 6.8
1998 6.3
1999 5.7
2000 5.5
2001 5.6
2002 5.6
2003 5.7
2004 5.5
2005 5.6
2006 5.7
2007 5.6
2008 5.4
2009 5.0
2010 4.8

You are tap dancing with statistics to try to paint a picture that is worse than reality.

[rhett o rick]

118. There you go again with your harping on "logical fallacies".

W/o logical fallacies, DU would be a waste land. I am fine tuning mine.

[HankyDub]

134. hehehe...this is a quote you might like

Logic is neither a science nor an art, but a dodge.

--Benjamin Jowett

[rhett o rick]

136. Good quote.

I have been tempted to take a class in logic but not sure my brain can handle it.

[rl6214]

88. I have been in many of the poor areas and housing projects in El Paso and have NEVER

seen anyone from the NRA out there handing out guns or even selling them. I WANT MY CHEAP GUNS!!!

[rhett o rick]

114. Wait, wait, oh I get it. You are baiting. Yep. The old "show me some stats" bait.

Good for you. I thought that was dead.

[hack89]

116. Yea - I know. It really is cheating to insist on actual facts and evidence

but sometimes I just feel like being a dick.

[rhett o rick]

125. No, no, you're not a dick. I was commending you for demanding that he provide evidence

instead of presenting the case yourself. That's a trick the Climate Deny'ers use. I think it's called bait and bitch.

[hack89]

131. But I have posted that evidence

here in this thread for example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=50292


I have posted this link to the FBI crime stats time and time again over the past couple of years:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime


One has to be deliberately obtuse to deny that gun violence is at historic lows and has steadily declined for 30 years. You have never been safer - that is what the facts really say.

[rhett o rick]

138. I will bow to your stats.

That's serious not mocking. I am not here to argue.

[hack89]

139. Peace out. nt

[HankyDub]

140. up in one 5 year period, down in another

I'm pleased to see it going down.

Doesn't actually speak to my point about uniformity, for which I provided examples.

You have never been safer - that is what the facts really say.

Now this I think is VERY interesting. The stats do indicate that we are safer from a variety of crimes. So then all this shrill fear mongering about needing more and more guns to protect ourselves...it's all just bullshit, right?

I live in the south bay area, and I'm quite safe here. My lady was born and bred in Oakland, super proud of her town, too. I spend lots of time there and I have never felt that I would be safer if I was armed. It's better to have a brain than to have a gun, and it's odd how the brain seems to shut off when guns are involved.

[hack89]

141. Yes - the shrill fear mongering about CCW, open carry and SYG are just bullshit.

but it still needs to be challenged.

[HankyDub]

143. That isn't an answer to my question, is it now.

[hack89]

145. But it is an honest assement of the gun control mentality here

"gun violence is down and I have never been safer but guns are evil and must be controlled because ... because ... because guns are evil. That's why."

Why don't you go fix a real problem in society?

[rhett o rick]

113. Hey, I am alerting you this. You cant say that in mixed public.

Ergo propter my hoc.

jk

[permatex]

117. LOL.

Group hug everyone.

[rl6214]

87. Glenn Beckkk and $arah Palin?

Isn't that (kkk $) cute?

[HankyDub]

144. You support these two individuals?

And don't think they are racists?

[gejohnston]

152. I have no idea

One uses it to get ratings and make money, and the other one is a dimwit who may or may not be. Why do I say that about Glen? He told, IIRC, Fortune in an interview that he is a "rodeo clown" and "doesn't give a rat's ass about the political process."

[rl6214]

156. I saw that about beck as well...

He's just in it for the money, willing to say anything outrageous for the cash. Should have had the $$$ for him.

[rl6214]

155. Don't support them at all...

I just think your little symbols are so cute...something a middle schooler would do.

[HankyDub]

41. Ahem...

"The legislation would merely require groups that opt to run outside political ads to tell voters which donors funded those efforts. By setting up a separate bank account for independent political spending, a group like the NRA would be able to keep its membership list private and would need only disclose the large money donors paying for the group’s campaign ads. Far from being unconstitutional, this sort of disclosure was explicitly endorsed in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United majority opinion as “the less-restrictive alternative to more comprehensive speech regulations.”

[4th law of robotics]

30. As long as we don't have to choose between mindless hysteria and reason.

[gregoire]

32. All of those violent CONservatives should have their names published!

Preferably with home addresses. If you're going to commit violence against Americans, you should at least be willing to make your support public.

Of course other political groups should not be forced to release the names of their members. That would negatively affect free speech.

[HankyDub]

40. Ahem...

The legislation would merely require groups that opt to run outside political ads to tell voters which donors funded those efforts. By setting up a separate bank account for independent political spending, a group like the NRA would be able to keep its membership list private and would need only disclose the large money donors paying for the group’s campaign ads. Far from being unconstitutional, this sort of disclosure was explicitly endorsed in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United majority opinion as “the less-restrictive alternative to more comprehensive speech regulations.”

[villager]

44. That was always the choice. But the NRA has its apologists very well trained.

n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

57. So how *does* the NRA 'train' apologists? Do let us know...

[villager]

70. Folks like you, for example, dutifully internalizing -- and repeating - their crafted talking points

n/t

[permatex]

75. I must have missed the NRA apologist class.

Where do I go to make it up?

[friendly_iconoclast]

81. Easy- just read "The Protocols of The Elders of The NRA"

One goes to the nearest gun store or shooting range and asks for "El Cid" or "Moses". When someone responds, give them the secret handshake.
They'll fill you in on the rest...

[permatex]

92. Thanks.

When I go p/u my new Valmet next week, I'll be sure to do that.

[PavePusher]

100. Stop. Bragging.

I hate you.

[villager]

157. so.... you completely support what the NRA is doing with the Senate?

That's the question, your artful apologetics aside.

Do you dare waver from their orthodoxy?

Or not?

[permatex]

158. I'm curious,

could you show us where he said he supports what the NRA is doing in the Senate?
I mean, after all, you wouldn't post something about what one said w/o proof, would you?

Oh wait.

[friendly_iconoclast]

163. The advanced search function is your friend. Donate, and you'll be able to use it too:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117222584

Why I'm not going to rejoin the NRA just yet.

I'm waiting to see if they actually are the non-partisan supporters of the Second Amendment they claim to be. If they are, their only honest course of action
in a Rmoney/Obama race will be to withold any endorsement. If they do go into the tank for Willard, they're no more than a better-financed version of the
Second Amendment Foundation.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002467295

I'll state right off the bat that I'm not thrilled with the NRA personally, because I'm about 90% sure that despite their proclaimed non-
partisan stance, they are in fact a right-wing political movement with a bitchin gun club...

[villager]

202. Then why defend a group that even you see as saturated with right-wing politics?

Glad to see you can find the side of light, however....

[friendly_iconoclast]

207. I didn't defend *them*, I asked *you* how they allegedly 'trained' apologists.

A question that you've yet to answer, btw...

[villager]

208. Sort of obvious, isn't it? They've positioned themselves in the minds of gunfolk in such a way that

...even people like you still defend them!

They've crafted a fake image of themselves, twinned to their ideas of "freedom" (and/or "what it means to be an American,&quot etc., in successful-meme fashion so that -- as with voting Republican -- people defend them against their own best societal interests.

[gejohnston]

209. The Republican did that as a whole, not the NRA

and the Dems made matters worse by abandoning the inter-mountain west in the 1970s, whole the GOP was pouring shit loads of money into propaganda efforts of "real westerners are Republicans."

http://www.wyomingalmanac.com/wyoming_politics
scroll down to myths one and two.

[friendly_iconoclast]

210. Kindly point out this "defense" of the NRA you keep mistakenly attributing to me.

[villager]

212. Then you can join the rest of sane and compassionate humanity in the wake of Aurora.

n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

213. Using a tragedy to dodge a question? How tacky of you.

[villager]

214. Ignoring a tragedy to continue a debate about an organization you're still defending? How craven.

n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

215. And again, pointing out *your* specious claim is not a defense of *them*. A pox on both your houses!

Last edited Thu Jan 3, 2013, 05:39 PM - Edit history (1)

-*The NRA* for becoming (as I said before) a hypocritical right-wing political movement with a bitchin' gun club...

-*You* for trying to spread faith-promoting rumor and slandering a fellow DUer when called on it. You don't like the NRA? Fine- but hate them for real
reasons instead of some half baked CT.

[friendly_iconoclast]

83. So how did *you* learn enough about them to 'know' they come from the NRA?

One of the NRA's websites? An NRA defector? Do tell...

[NewMoonTherian]

59. Question not related to the NRA.

Why do I want the government to know who funds political ads? Not saying I don't want it; I think I just missed some part of the conversation.

[HALO141]

69. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[rl6214]

76. I have never belonged to the NRA, never sent them a dime BUT

I do support the RKBA and will fight for my gun rights and to oppose attempts to past stupid feel good gun laws.

[HankyDub]

86. not my point

now would you care to discuss the NRA attempting to intimidate lawmakers into opposing the Disclose act?

[rl6214]

105. Your quote:

"So are you democrats, libruls and patriots, or are you NRA supporters? "

Just pointing out I am NOT an NRA supporter, that's it.

[patrice]

128. Check it out. Rand Paul is trying to replace a treasonous oath to Grover Nordquist with one to NRA

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002934164

[gejohnston]

164. Rand Paul?

Nordquist can get the corporate cash to follow through. I doubt Paul could.

[slackmaster]

150. You seem...

...familiar.

[frebrd]

159. Please Satisfy My Curiosity

What makes you think that all RKBA supporters are "boys"?

[PavePusher]

160. It's just another stereotype the Anti's buy into as created gospel....

as it makes their construction of Strawmen(tm) easier.

[HankyDub]

167. I'd be absolutely delighted

to teach you about the history of the US labor movement, and this anthem, written by a woman:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Which_Side_Are_You_On%3F

[sarisataka]

170. Maybe I missed something

a) this doesn't show how RKBA supporters are boys

b) to me the lyrics support the NRA/ACLU position

Poor folks ain't got a chance
Unless they organize

Requiring published membership lists help to break up an organization, IMO

[HankyDub]

172. you did miss something

this law does not require organizations to publish their membership. I have pasted the relevant portion of the OP several times on this thread.

a) I never said that RKBA supporters are boys. I merely referenced the lyrics of a labor movement song. There are two sides on this issue of disclosure, and the NRA are on the wrong side. Which side are you on?

b) to me, the right to organize is not the same as the individual right to keep and bear arms. The NRA lists prominent labor groups as enemies. As the labor movement shows us, violence (including gun violence) works for the oppressor, not for the oppressed. See also: Homestead Strike, Gandhi, MLK.

[sarisataka]

173. Sorry I misinterpreted post #150

my bad

b) I see your point better with that explanation.

I do worry about unintended consequences from this law and have not made up my mind. I do despise the "Funded by Citizens For/Against..." that is backed by corporate money but I am also not comfortable with broad based disclosure of memberships of groups that take a political stand.

Luckily for me I am not a one issue voter so don't lockstep the NRA anyway. This law bears watching along with campaign finance reform in general.

BTW I forgot to thank you for the links.

[gejohnston]

175. which is ironic

I know a lot of union members that are also gun owners and NRA members. Some members had problems with that stance. And no, you don't know the history of the labor movement very well. The oppressor used the power of the State, the ones you seem to think should have guns.
BTW, MLK was a gun owner. He applied for a Alabama CCW in 1956. He had armed guards who carried illegally. Rosa Parks was also a gun owner.

[HankyDub]

177. MLK said this:

"By our readiness to allow arms to be purchased at will and fired at whim… we have created an atmosphere in which violence and hatred have become popular pastimes."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Take a seat.

No armed guard was able to use his weapon to protect MLK from an assassin's bullet. MLK is just another victim of gun violence, and he never once advocated for the use of guns to achieve his goals.

Rosa Parks is not remembered for her use of gun violence to achieve her goals. She is remembered for her use of non-violence to achieve those goals.

I know exactly what the history of violence in the labor movement is. Whenever labor activists used violence to attempt to achieve their ends, their violence was used as a justification for even more overwhelming violence by their opponents. That's why I referenced the Homestead strike. I could also reference Fred Hampton or Huey Newton.

Contrary to what you believe, I am not in favor of ever increasing militarization of the police. I'd also like to greatly scale back the size of the armed forces. But these ends are not ever going to be achieved by further arming the general populace.

[gejohnston]

179. don't care what he said

I'm saying what he did. He did not advocate change through violence, but he did not preach pacifism either.

There are many people who very honestly raise the question of self-defense. This must be placed in perspective. It goes without saying that people will protect their homes. This is a right guaranteed by the Constitution and respected even in the worst areas of the South. But the mere protection of one’s home and person against assault by lawless night riders does not provide any positive approach to the fears and conditions which produce violence. There must be some program for establishing law. Our experience in places like Savannah and Macon, Georgia, has been that a drive which registers Negroes to vote can do more to provide protection of the law and respect for Negroes by even racist sheriffs than anything we have seen.

The way I read this, he was saying "if they come to your door, by all means blow them away" but change can not be achieved by reacting, but proactive non violence enmass. That is an important distinction many seem to miss.

A couple of church guys with pistols vs a pro hit man with a rifle at a distance. No shit.

Not saying the labor movement should have used violence, nor and I saying those union members I know would use their guns in violence. They go hunting and target shoot.

I did not say Rosa Parks was willing to use guns to attain her goals. That said, if the Klan came to the door, some of the sheets would have red stains.

Look Grandma, my name is not fucking sweetie. You missed the point. The companies used the power of the state. Police, national guard, and active duty military. Sometimes they hired mercenaries. Most anti guns types only the "state" should have guns. It has nothing to do with local cops with machine guns and armoured cars.

[HankyDub]

180. I know you don't care what he said

Because if you did, you couldn't possibly make this sick attempt to use his memory to advocate for your cause.

He was anything but an advocate for your cause.

I find your interpretation of the quote you edited to add to be "interesting." To compare today's paranoid and overwhelmingly white gun rights movement to the struggle of black people in the civil rights era south is pretty vile. This brings me back to the NRA, which fully supports the new Jim Crow voter ID laws being pushed by the right all across the country.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/25/teammates-nra-news-introduces-alecs-voter-id-su/163485

So once again, if you actually give a shit about what you claim to care about, one of the first things you need to do is abandon and denounce the NRA.


The companies used the power of the state. Police, national guard, and active duty military.

No doubt about it. The oppressor will always have the upper hand when the oppressed resort to violence. Guns are instruments of oppression. I'd like to see our police forces be disarmed, but that isn't likely to happen when they are constantly confronted by armed citizens. It isn't reasonable to expect the police to disarm in that situation.

When it comes to the military, that's a larger cultural question in my opinion. In order to dismantle the oppressive military apparatus, we need to start with a cultural shift. We need to stop lionizing current and former military as valorous heroes and freedumb defenders and recognize what they are actually doing. What they are actually doing is operating the enforcement arm of the US's vicious corporate backed foreign policy agenda, which is in direct opposition to the actual interests of the average US citizen. As such, being a current or former member of these organizations is something to be deeply ashamed of.

Then, if/when we scale back the operational capacity of these organizations or eliminate them altogether, we can return to the true intent of the authors of the 2nd amendment, namely a citizens militia whose purpose is defense from foreign invaders, not projecting imperial power.

[gejohnston]

181. Now I remember why I dumped the Green Party

I find your interpretation of the quote you edited to add to be "interesting." To compare today's paranoid and overwhelmingly white gun rights movement to the struggle of black people in the civil rights era south is pretty vile. This brings me back to the NRA, which fully supports the new Jim Crow voter ID laws being pushed by the right all across the country.

No, I did not edit nor did I add anything. What evidence do you have that the NRA supports voter suppression laws? ALEC might push the agenda of members, but that does not mean all members agree or want the same things.

I'm not a member of the NRA, and MM is hardly a hardly an objective source anymore than townhall is. One is right, one is left, but the honesty of both are less than ideal. The only reason David Brock switch sides was because his benefactors did not like him being slightly nice to Mrs. Clinton and when he came out. The latter got him fired from the American Spectator. The was a smear artist then. Now he is simply getting even. His spots did not change.

No doubt about it. The oppressor will always have the upper hand when the oppressed resort to violence. Guns are instruments of oppression. I'd like to see our police forces be disarmed, but that isn't likely to happen when they are constantly confronted by armed citizens. It isn't reasonable to expect the police to disarm in that situation.

That is the stupidest pile of pseudo intellectual bullshit I have read in a long time. That is why I quit supporting the Green Party. These "armed citizens" are also oppressors. Gangsters and predators are oppressors. The only difference is one is supported by taxes and the other is supported by greed and the drug culture. In Norway and New Zealand, the police are disarmed, but the citizens are not.

When it comes to the military, that's a larger cultural question in my opinion. In order to dismantle the oppressive military apparatus, we need to start with a cultural shift. We need to stop lionizing current and former military as valorous heroes and freedumb defenders and recognize what they are actually doing. What they are actually doing is operating the enforcement arm of the US's vicious corporate backed foreign policy agenda, which is in direct opposition to the actual interests of the average US citizen. As such, being a current or former member of these organizations is something to be deeply ashamed of.

I won't waste my time with this drivel. As a veteran, go fuck yourself.

Then, if/when we scale back the operational capacity of these organizations or eliminate them altogether, we can return to the true intent of the authors of the 2nd amendment, namely a citizens militia whose purpose is defense from foreign invaders, not projecting imperial power.

A lot more complex than that, but a Swiss model military would be better. The 2A doesn't have a fucking thing to do with the MIC.

[HankyDub]

182. you misinterpret

You edited your post to add the quote. I did not mean to imply that you altered the quote in any way.

I'm not a member of the NRA, and MM is hardly a hardly an objective source anymore than townhall is.

Don't ad hominem media matters. Is the NRA supporting voter Id laws or aren't they? BTW, I'm glad you aren't an NRA member. Hopefully you will speak out among your fellow gun owners against this extremely regressive group. They certainly aren't going to listen to me, maybe you will have a better chance.

These "armed citizens" are also oppressors. Gangsters and predators are oppressors. The only difference is one is supported by taxes and the other is supported by greed and the drug culture.

Not sure why you're angry at me about what I said there. I completely agree with the above statement. I just recognize that "gangsters and predators" aren't the only categories in which people fall when they use guns to oppress other citizens.

As a veteran, go fuck yourself.

Oh my! Hitting a little too close to home there. You were the one who brought up the active duty military as an instrument of oppression, I was merely elaborating on your point. I have lots of respect for veterans, the ones who throw their medals away or write books called War is a Racket. Those people are truly heroes. The ones whose self-image is boosted by constant militaristic pandering...not so much.

A lot more complex than that, but a Swiss model military would be better. The 2A doesn't have a fucking thing to do with the MIC.

Again we agree. I think swiss gun laws, and ammunition laws are a good model. I think their military is a good model. I do disagree that the 2a has anything to do with the MIC. The 2a was intended to be a prophylactic against the formation of the MIC in the first place.

[gejohnston]

185. calling it as I see it.

Not ad hominem at all. Just calling it as as I see it. The left is equally dishonest as the right if it serves their purpose. Those are the facts about David Brock. The Joyce Foundation paid for the article. Brock was then and now a mercenary. Read his book, it is common knowledge. The NRA doesn't give a shit about voter suppression laws. If anything that is guilt by association. Since the NRA supports many Dems and even Bernie Sanders.......

Those others are the State. You seem to think hunters and target shooters are a bunch of racist militants.

You don't get how Swiss ammunition laws work. There might be limits on how many you can buy at a store. You can buy all you want at a public range, cheaper because the government pays part of it. If I could buy subsidized ammo at the range, I wouldn't buy that much at the store even if I could. Or, are you confusing ammo laws with military regulations concerning military issued ammo? It applies to privately owned guns as well as the issue assault rifle. I support Vermont's and Wyoming's laws. BTW, Wyoming has a better history of race and labor relations than Chicago and California. Not spotless, just better.

[HankyDub]

190. please try to stick to the facts

The NRA doesn't give a shit about voter suppression laws.

False. Inform yourself. The media matters article in question lays their position out very clearly, even shows video

The fact is that the NRA continues to support Jim Crow voter ID laws throughout the US. Here are additional sources--feel free to attack these messengers as well.

http://meetthenra.org/issues?field_issue_value_many_to_one=Voting%20Rights

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-04-06/politics/politics_nra-alec_1_nra-officials-alec-gun-rights?_s=PM OLITICS

Not ad hominem at all. Just calling it as I see it.

In this case, calling it as you see it is also leveling ad hominem attacks against people who say things you wish were not true. When you attack David Brock as a "mercenary" instead of attacking the points he makes, that's an ad hominem.

According to the information that I have, ammunition purchased at Swiss firing ranges must also be expended there. I could be wrong about that, would welcome more information.

I also think Swiss laws regarding gun permits, gun sales and gun transport are very reasonable.

[gejohnston]

191. how about something from the NRA

admitting it instead of propaganda sites? The CNN article quotes someone who doesn't like the NRA.
Your evidence is kind of Ummm lacking.
No, I had the same opinion of Brock since I read his book and the timing of him switching sides. It was really obvious when they had the "paid for by the Joyce Foundation" with gun control articles, including the "Al Qaida thinks you can buy machine guns at gun shows, so it must be true" hoax. I explained how ALEC works, the CNN said the same thing without the propagandist quotes like:

Josh Horwitz heads an advocacy group called the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. He said the NRA's role with ALEC cements his view that the NRA is really a base for the conservative movement.

"People think the NRA is just a gun group. It's really not." Horwitz said.

Horwitz's group has created a cheeky website, "Meet the NRA.org." It lists the NRA's board of directors, and it has a rolling information bar that features some of their more colorful statements.

You really need to check out your sources better. That is kind of like saying "being gay is a choice" and citing the Family Research Council.
IIRC, your previous incarnation called a respected criminologist a dishonest fraud who rigged a study to reflect his personal views. Problem was, the results were opposite of his hypothesis and his personal views.

[sarisataka]

186. For a moment I thought you were reasonable

I see I was wrong

As a veteran, go fuck yourself.

Oh my! Hitting a little too close to home there. You were the one who brought up the active duty military as an instrument of oppression, I was merely elaborating on your point. I have lots of respect for veterans, the ones who throw their medals away or write books called War is a Racket. Those people are truly heroes. The ones whose self-image is boosted by constant militaristic pandering...not so much.

Allow me to 2nd M. Johnson's words above.
I consider those who turn their medals in to be hypocrites who are seeking public absolution for sins, real or imagined.
Being retired I can look back and be proud of my service to the country. I put my life on the line, endured hardships in places most Americans could not find on a map if you gave them directions and may many people from whom I learned more than school ever taught me. Blessedly I killed an minute percentage of them and more than once made a friend of an enemy.
I go out of may way to avoid recognition or any accolades since I was just doing a job. Those that failed to return or returned with less than they went with are the heroes. They have sacrificed for this country.

To those, I will let you decide if the shoe fits, who sit back and criticize military members for US actions while sitting in smug self assurance that their hands are clean, I give you these quotes from Prussians who understood war much more than any protester:

“War is...the continuation of politics by other means.”
Karl von Clausewitz (1780-1831)
Prussian general and military theorist

“War is not the continuation of policy. It is the breakdown of policy.”
Hans von Seeckt (1866-1936)
German military officer

Soldiers get to clean the shit politicians create. The politicians are responsible to the citizens. Therefore all citizens share in the failures of politicians.

And to all protesters, I always pose the same question: "How have you ever served this county." Please think before replying and not all service is in the military.

[permatex]

187. Amen brother, amen.

[HankyDub]

188. people interested in justice are rarely reasonable

I put my life on the line, endured hardships in places most Americans could not find on a map if you gave them directions and may many people from whom I learned more than school ever taught me.

I don't doubt it, but I would highlight that you did these things in places faaaar faaaar from the US. Whether it involved occupying Southeast Asia, invading Grenada or bombing Iraq, none of these actions protected the rights of Americans. Rather, they involved projecting US military might throughout the world, "liberating" areas so they could be further exploited by multinational corporations.

sit back and criticize military members for US actions while sitting in smug self assurance that their hands are clean

Quite the contrary...I know that my hands are not clean. None of our hands are clean. This is what makes me angry when I think of our oppressive militarist actions. I am culpable. You referenced this fact later when talking about politicians being accountable to citizens. I completely agree.

I go out of may way to avoid recognition or any accolades since I was just doing a job.

Sounds great.

Btw, quoting preening self-important Prussian militarists hardly seems like a great way to make your point. These vicious aristocrats have the blood of millions on their hands.

"How have you ever served this county."

I have served the people of this country by teaching hundreds (thousands?) of its young people and preparing them for college and future employment. Like you, I don't want accolades or recognition for the work I have done. I was doing a job.

People who are "merely protesters" are also serving their country. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. Perhaps you should think about this fact and consider it before asking another protester such silly questions.

[sarisataka]

192. They are not mutually exclusive

Blanket condemnation of all vets is neither just nor reasonable

I don't doubt it, but I would highlight that you did these things in places faaaar faaaar from the US. Whether it involved occupying Southeast Asia, invading Grenada or bombing Iraq, none of these actions protected the rights of Americans. Rather, they involved projecting US military might throughout the world, "liberating" areas so they could be further exploited by multinational corporations.

The people whose friends and families were in mass graves 100 yards from their front door didn't care about corporations. They were happy to be alive.

Quite the contrary...I know that my hands are not clean. None of our hands are clean. This is what makes me angry when I think of our oppressive militarist actions. I am culpable. You referenced this fact later when talking about politicians being accountable to citizens. I completely agree.

Unusually astute. In person we might actually have a 'spirited' conversation.

Btw, quoting preening self-important Prussian militarists hardly seems like a great way to make your point. These vicious aristocrats have the blood of millions on their hands.

Unlike some (many?) I accept truth even if I find the source distasteful.

Perhaps this is more to your liking

While war and non-violence do sound contradictory, they are both conflict resolution vehicles. I have said time and again that Satyagraha (non-violent struggle) is not same as making peace. It is still a fight that has to be fought as bravely as a soldier in a war -- just the weapon is different.

Many people mistake non-violence as compromise or avoidance of conflict. It is not. On the other hand, it is standing up for what is right (truth) and justice. Fighting a violent war is better than accepting injustice. So, really there is no contradiction in fighting a just war, and believing in non-violence. Both are duties to be carried out to preserve justice and truth.-Ghandi

or an American general who, by modern standards would be a war criminal
"Some of you young men think that war is all glamour and glory,
but let me tell you, boys, it is all hell!"
-General William T. Sherman

I have served the people of this country by teaching hundreds (thousands?) of its young people and preparing them for college and future employment. Like you, I don't want accolades or recognition for the work I have done. I was doing a job.

I give you full credit then. Teachers are seriously under-recognized and under-appreciated.

People who are "merely protesters" are also serving their country. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. Perhaps you should think about this fact and consider it before asking another protester such silly questions.

I agree with dissent equaling patriotism. I do not agree all protesters are serving. To go out on days when the weather is not too bad and wave a sign for an hour before tee-time is not giving up much.
Viet Nam Vets Against War have enough of my respect to hear them out. Either they have BTDT and we can agree to disagree or discuss the matter from a common viewpoint. Those who out themselves as false flags (those who lie about their service) deserve the ridicule and derision they receive from all true vets.
Those who never have been in the military, have no family or friends in the military, know no one even second hand- they must prove themselves or admit being naive and blindly following a popular belief.

[HankyDub]

193. this does seem like a worhtwhile conversation

I will continue my end of it when I have more time.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

194. fixed it for you --

people interested in justice vengeance are rarely reasonable.

[rl6214]

198. +1000 and thank you for your service

[rl6214]

199. "As a veteran, go fuck yourself. "

+1000 and thank you for your service

[Meiko]

196. So we are clear

You are saying that a person who belonged to the military should be ashamed of that service?.

As such, being a current or former member of these organizations is something to be deeply ashamed of.

[friendly_iconoclast]

200. You distort the true history of Rosa Parks and of the civil rights movement in general.

Not that such revisionism is anything new:

http://www.onthemedia.org/2010/aug/27/tabula-rosa/transcript/

BOB GARFIELD: In that same Washington Post obituary there was, it seemed, a palpable sense of disappointment that the myth is, in fact, a myth. Why are we so reluctant to let it go? TIM TYSON: There's a sense in which Mrs. Parks is very important to our post-civil rights racial narrative, because we really want a kind of sugar-coated civil rights movement that's about purity and interracial non-violence. And so we don't really want to meet the real Rosa Parks. We don't, for example, want to know that in the late 1960s, Rosa Parks became a black nationalist and a great admirer of Malcolm X. I met Rosa Parks at the funeral of Robert F. Williams, who had fought the Ku Klux Klan in North Carolina with a machine gun in the late 1950s and then fled to Cuba, and had been a kind of international revolutionary icon of black power. Ms. Parks delivered the eulogy at his funeral. She talks in her autobiography and says that she never believed in non-violence and that she was incapable of that herself, and that she kept guns in her home to protect her family. But we want a little old lady with tired feet. You may have noticed we don't have a lot of pacifist white heroes. We prefer our black people meek and mild, I think.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/http:/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x337407#337605


14. More on Timothy Tyson, Robert F. Williams, and armed African-Americans:

Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 12:30 PM by friendly_iconoclast

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Tyson

....In 1998, Tyson published an influential article in the Journal of American History, "Robert F. Williams, 'Black Power,' and the Roots of the Black Freedom Struggle." The following year, his Radio Free Dixie: Robert F. Williams and the Roots of Black Power, published by UNC Press, won the Frederick Jackson Turner Prize for best first book in U.S. history from the Organization of American Historians, as well as the James A. Rawley Prize for best book on the subject of race. "Radio Free Dixie" provided the foundation for "Negroes with Guns: Rob Williams and Black Power", a documentary film made by Sandra Dickson and Churchill Roberts at the University of Florida's Documentary Institute and broadcast on national television in February 2007. "Negroes with Guns," for which Tyson served as lead consultant, won the Erick Barnouw Award for best historical film from the Organization of American Historians....

An interview with Robert F. Williams:

Another interview with Williams:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5457524655277645843#

You can buy the DVD of "Negroes with Guns: Rob Williams and Black Power" here:

http://newsreel.org/nav/title.asp?tc=CN0178

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=331645&mesg_id=331645


Remembering Robert Hicks and the Deacons of Defense

http://www.thesouthernshift.com/news/2010/04/remembering-robert-hicks-and-deacons-defense

Remembering Robert Hicks and the Deacons of Defense
Submitted by Southern Shift on Mon, 2010-04-26 11:32

The story around Robert Hicks and his group Deacons for Defense have all but been erased from public consciousness. You check on familiar touch points like YouTube and there's nothing there. Pictures are hard to find and articles are scant. The thought of armed Black men standing up to the KKK and successfully protecting lives and propert during the harsh days of the Jim Crow South is a scary thought for many. The truth of the matter is many African Americans did not sit back and just allow themselves to be beaten and terrorized by the KKK. Hicks represented an underplayed part of our history..


The passing of Robert Hicks will not be acknowledge on the same scale as the passing of Guru, Dr Dorothy Height and Benjamin Hooks but he is no less important. We tip our hat because he did what many have come to belive was the unthinkable.We also encourage folks to try and pick up a copy of the movie that stars Forest Whitaker

-Davey D-

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/us/25hicks.html?scp=1&sq=robert%20hicks&st=cse

Robert Hicks, Leader in Armed Rights Group, Dies at 81

Someone had called to say the Ku Klux Klan was coming to bomb Robert Hicks’s house. The police said there was nothing they could do. It was the night of Feb. 1, 1965, in Bogalusa, La.

The Klan was furious that Mr. Hicks, a black paper mill worker, was putting up two white civil rights workers in his home. It was just six months after three young civil rights workers had been murdered in Philadelphia, Miss.

Mr. Hicks and his wife, Valeria, made some phone calls. They found neighbors to take in their children, and they reached out to friends for protection. Soon, armed black men materialized. Nothing happened.

Less than three weeks later, the leaders of a secretive, paramilitary organization of blacks called the Deacons for Defense and Justice visited Bogalusa. It had been formed in Jonesboro, La., in 1964 mainly to protect unarmed civil rights demonstrators from the Klan. After listening to the Deacons, Mr. Hicks took the lead in forming a Bogalusa chapter, recruiting many of the men who had gone to his house to protect his family and guests....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deacons_for_Defense_and_Justice

Deacons for Defense and Justice
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Deacons for Defense and Justice is an armed self defense African American civil rights organization in the U.S. Southern states during the 1960s. Historically, the organization practiced self-defense methods in the face of racist oppression that was carried out by Jim Crow Laws; local and state agencies; and the Ku Klux Klan. Many times the Deacons are not written about or cited when speaking of the Civil Rights Movement because their agenda of self-defense, in this case, using violence (if necessary) did not fit the image of strict non-violence agenda that leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. preached about the Civil Rights Movement. Yet, there has been a recent debate over the crucial role the Deacons and other lesser known militant organizations played on local levels throughout much of the rural South. Many times in these areas the Federal government did not always have complete control over to enforce such laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Deacons are a segment of the larger tradition of Black Power in the United States. This tradition began with the inception of African slavery in the U.S. and began with the use of Africans as chattel slaves in the Western Hemisphere. Stokely Carmichael defines Black Power as, “The goal of black self-determination and black self-identity—Black Power—is full participation in the decision-making processes affecting the lives of black people, and recognition of the virtues in themselves as black people.”[1] Those of us who advocate Black Power are quite clear in our own minds that a “non-violent” approach to civil rights is an approach black people cannot afford and a luxury white people do not deserve.[1] This refers to the idea that the traditional ideas and values of the Civil Rights Movement placated to the emotions and feelings of White liberal supporters rather than Black Americans who had to consistently live with the racism and other acts of violence that was shown towards them.

The Deacons were a driving force of Black Power that Stokely Carmichael echoed. Carmichael speaks about the Deacons when he writes, “Here is a group which realized that the ‘law’ and law enforcement agencies would not protect people, so they had to do it themselves...The Deacons and all other blacks who resort to self-defense represent a simple answer to a simple question: what man would not defend his family and home from attack?”[1] The Deacons, according to Carmichael and many others were the protection that the Civil Rights needed on local levels, as well as, the ones who intervened in places that the state and federal government fell short.

[Simo 1939_1940]

211. Thanks for this very fine post!

It's now saved in my "RKBA file".

[Atypical Liberal]

165. People should have a right to unionize and organize and have their privacy respected.

I do not support Citizens United. I do not believe in Corporations being viewed as people for the reasons of free speech, because their treasure chests give them much more "voice" than people.

That said, I believe in people to have the right to unionize and organize and form organizations to promote and protect causes they believe in.

If people want to gang together in common cause to protect free speech, they should be able to do so. If people want to gang together to legalize marijuana, they should be able to do so. If people want to gang together to protect women's reproductive rights, they should be able to do so. If people want to gang together to protect the environment, they should be able to do so.

And doing so should not mean that such people should have to have their identifies given to the government just because they are members of such an organization.

So I support regular people organizing and pooling resources to advocate for their cause and petition the government on the behalf of their members.

What I would not want to see, however, is this mechanism corrupted by ultra-wealthy interests infiltrating such organizations and using them as a front for their massive wealth to make the voice of the organization more powerful than its constituents really are.

Perhaps a compromise on this would be that the normal rank-and-file membership should be kept confidential but all contributions over a certain dollar amount, say, $1000, have to be reported.

In other words, I don't see why 4 million people who pay $35 a year to have the NRA protect their interests should have to have their privacy given up. They are regular Americans who are simply organizing to protect an issue important to them.

I'd feel the same way for regular Americans who belong to NORML, or Greenpeace, or the ACLU.

[HankyDub]

168. it's unfortunate that you didn't read the OP

The NRA opposes the measure — arguing that its “provisions require organizations to turn membership and donor lists over to the government” and would unconstitutionally abridge the right of citizens “to speak and associate privately and anonymously.” The legislation would merely require groups that opt to run outside political ads to tell voters which donors funded those efforts. By setting up a separate bank account for independent political spending, a group like the NRA would be able to keep its membership list private and would need only disclose the large money donors paying for the group’s campaign ads. Far from being unconstitutional, this sort of disclosure was explicitly endorsed in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United majority opinion as “the less-restrictive alternative to more comprehensive speech regulations.”

Also, please look into the difference between the dues that NRA members pay, and the NRA-ILA.

[Meiko]

189. I agree with your post

and I feel the same way. It's nobody's business how much money I give. Corporations should not be considered people, period. That being said every penny given to a politician by a corporation should have visibility. I don't care about tracking money given by lobby or union groups and it's not right to be turning over lists of peoples names for exercising their 1A rights. The damn government is just too nosy for their own good.

I don't know why the NRA has been singled out but they are just a lobby group, no more, no less. If you don't like them get over it, they have every right to be here.

[DWC]

166. Whoso side am I on??

Just like you and every other individual I am on my own side. The difference is very few have the guts to admit that fact publicly. I will do everything in my power to to assure my rights (and yours) are not infringed by anyone. Two of those right are Privacy and Bearing Arms.

How we citizens of the USA spend the money we earn is no one else's business. BTW, thanks for the post. Because of it I am about to contribute a little extra to the NRA for its support of my privacy as well as 2nd amendment rights.

Semper Fi,

[HankyDub]

169. and again, it's a shame that people don't read before they post

The NRA opposes the measure — arguing that its “provisions require organizations to turn membership and donor lists over to the government” and would unconstitutionally abridge the right of citizens “to speak and associate privately and anonymously.” The legislation would merely require groups that opt to run outside political ads to tell voters which donors funded those efforts. By setting up a separate bank account for independent political spending, a group like the NRA would be able to keep its membership list private and would need only disclose the large money donors paying for the group’s campaign ads. Far from being unconstitutional, this sort of disclosure was explicitly endorsed in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United majority opinion as “the less-restrictive alternative to more comprehensive speech regulations.”

[DWC]

201. I read Your OP before I posted.

Last edited Wed Jul 18, 2012, 08:38 PM - Edit history (1)

I strongly disagreed with it then; I disagree with it now; and I stand by my post.

Semper Fi,

[Callisto32]

174. No TRUE Scotsman.....

[HankyDub]

178. fail

I never said that no true democrat or librul could be a gun nut. I merely pointed out that the NRA is threatening legislators who might be inclined to vote for the Disclose Act.

[Meiko]

195. Please stop using the word threaten.

No Senator or Representative has ever been "threatened" by the NRA.The use of the word implies that some harm will come to them if they don't comply. As a lobby group the NRA is merely informing politicians that there will be a political price to pay depending on which way they vote, hell I have written such letters to Senator McCain myself, so many in fact that he won't even respond to me any more. It's the way politics work, that's why we give money to lobby groups, it's the only way to get their attention. If our Representatives would listen to the people who elected them there would be no need for lobbyist's.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

197. boys?

so then - - you don't mind if girls support the NRA . . .

no men and women on DU ???

[Tejas]

204. Neither.

And the constant barrage of extremist rhetoric to rid this country of firearms is nauseating.

[4th law of robotics]

206. You realize that if there were no movement to ban guns

via creeping regulations there would be no NRA right?

Or at least no lobbying version of the NRA. It would be a hobby club.

If you were to try to ban sailboats the Yachting Club of America would suddenly become very politically active.