General Discussion

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)

93. I am dubious of explanations involving "cultural issues", personally. Seems to be a knee-jerk

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:35 PM

Dec 2012

fall back position, time honored and used by the likes of Pat "I blame Lesbians and Atheists for 9-11" Robertson and Mike "God didn't protect the school because he wasn't wanted there" Huckabee.

We don't know what "cultural issues" played into this shooting except for one; that the mom, the one with the high-powered weaponry, was apparently a "survivalist". So from that I think we can draw certain reasonable "cultural" assumptions around the milieu she existed in. But they're not the ones favored by erstwhile "culture warriors" of the right.

That said, what we do know about this shooting is that the shooter killed lots of people in a short period of time using a gun designed to do exactly that. Gun violence, and in fact all violent crime, are decreasing, and yet there is consensus emerging that something needs to be done about this type of incident.

Therefore, targeting the weapons peculiar to this kind of incident is appropriate.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

102 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Does the Democratic Party Platform reflect DU views? It supports an indiviual right to bear arms. [View all] kelly1mm Dec 2012 OP

not gun nuttery though fascisthunter Dec 2012 #1

Agreed. However, many here are saying ALL guns need to be confiscated, or all assault weapons, or kelly1mm Dec 2012 #5

Only those pipoman Dec 2012 #9

Why Does The World Need Individual Weapons Of Mass Destruction? cantbeserious Dec 2012 #32

That horse has left the stable.. pipoman Dec 2012 #41

And That Is A Non-Responsive Answer To An Honest Question cantbeserious Dec 2012 #47

It's short and more polite than pipoman Dec 2012 #74

Now What - Stiff Penalties For Not Registering - Stiff Taxes For Purchase Of Guns And Ammo cantbeserious Dec 2012 #100

None of which the supreme court would allow Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #101

Yeah...No, the constitution is very real pipoman Dec 2012 #102

The platform supports a renewed assault weapons ban. DanTex Dec 2012 #16

Please scan active posts and you'll find many of us do support our party's platform and others don't jody Dec 2012 #2

Lots of debate for sure. I think it is good. However there have been NUMEROUS posts calling for a kelly1mm Dec 2012 #6

I have not noticed the "full confiscation" posts. DURHAM D Dec 2012 #13

Here is one. I will edit to add more as I come across them: kelly1mm Dec 2012 #29

Nope, not there. DURHAM D Dec 2012 #43

Are you seriously trying to say that there has not been one post calling for the confiscation of kelly1mm Dec 2012 #52

You are the one making the claim DURHAM D Dec 2012 #64

You just don't want to read the words. former9thward Dec 2012 #55

Where have you been? Berserker Dec 2012 #60

So you support the renewal of the assault weapons ban. Who knew? DanTex Dec 2012 #18

You clearly don't know what AWB was. It banned cosmetic features that were easily eliminated in jody Dec 2012 #22

You clearly haven't read the Democratic platform, which calls for it's renewal. DanTex Dec 2012 #25

DanTex I have DU posts going back years discussing our parties platform. Is all you want just to jody Dec 2012 #58

Stop changing the subject. DanTex Dec 2012 #65

I have not changed the subject but are trying to avoid my simple question. Do you want to expand jody Dec 2012 #69

LOL. Dodge. Are you still claiming to support the Democratic platform? Answer please. DanTex Dec 2012 #72

I must assume you do want to expand the AWB. Your true position is what worries many pro-RKBA jody Dec 2012 #73

Dodge again. Why is it that the pro-gun crowd can't stay on topic? DanTex Dec 2012 #76

I support the Democratic Party Platform. You don't because you want to expand AWB. jody Dec 2012 #85

So you support the AWB? Because that is part of the platform. DanTex Dec 2012 #89

The "cosmetic features" is a RW talking point. NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #42

Only the features below were banned. Which of those were more than cosmetic? jody Dec 2012 #45

Actually, there were a lot more and most NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #66

Sorry they are cosmetic and as I said easily omitted in new production. That's exactly what happened jody Dec 2012 #70

I just explained why they are not merely "cosmetic". NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #92

Have a blissful evening and goodbye. nt jody Dec 2012 #94

And this is where it becomes important to know what you're talking about. beevul Dec 2012 #75

Agreed - it's important to know what you're talking about. NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #90

Yup. beevul Dec 2012 #97

IN or around 1971 the Feds told Colt, the only maker of AR-15 rifles at the time oneshooter Dec 2012 #95

Wasn't it '86 when the registry was closed? beevul Dec 2012 #98

I think the platform strikes an appropriately vague tone. Robb Dec 2012 #3

Not on the 2nd being an individual right, that part is clear in the platform. Although some here kelly1mm Dec 2012 #10

I support an individual right to own guns... but only one per person. Maybe two, tops. reformist2 Dec 2012 #4

Ok - that view seems to be in harmony with the Democratic Party platform. nt kelly1mm Dec 2012 #15

Nearly every murder in this country pipoman Dec 2012 #21

Since there is not an single "DU View" how can the question be answered? Lionessa Dec 2012 #7

True. You are correct. I could have worded that better. Although I wonder how many people kelly1mm Dec 2012 #11

For that, it is a good OP, most probably don't Lionessa Dec 2012 #14

own and fondle them them in your home . . . not tote them to school, parks, etc DrDan Dec 2012 #8

That would be kind of hard in my line of work. nt kelly1mm Dec 2012 #12

which is . . . DrDan Dec 2012 #17

Let's just say that I am required to be armed at all times as a condition of employment. nt kelly1mm Dec 2012 #30

not the focus of the OP then DrDan Dec 2012 #34

Ummmm, what? Since I was the Op, I will decide what it's focus is, thank you. I am not asking for kelly1mm Dec 2012 #44

you do not think "individual right" and military, LEO etc are different? DrDan Dec 2012 #62

So... LP2K12 Dec 2012 #20

2A allows guns in the home - not at school or in parks DrDan Dec 2012 #23

I'm a sport shooter... LP2K12 Dec 2012 #46

and my safety is an inalienable right DrDan Dec 2012 #56

I don't LP2K12 Dec 2012 #63

HAHAHAHAHA!! Zoeisright Dec 2012 #33

I went to school... LP2K12 Dec 2012 #57

DU is far to the left of the Democratic Mainstream banned from Kos Dec 2012 #19

Those who want to squelch dialog on this board are not "far to the left of the Democratic Mainstream AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #78

Bullshit. 66% of self identified democrats support gun control. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #80

Personally I think the members that want all guns confiscated are nutty to the extreme former-republican Dec 2012 #24

so you wouldn't want ALL guns confiscated? Why is that? DrDan Dec 2012 #26

I like shooting former-republican Dec 2012 #31

thought so . . . DrDan Dec 2012 #37

You have named yourself incorrectly. That "former" part....... kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #39

In some areas it is needed to protect oneself NOT from people NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #54

If you can help it, please don't kill snakes. beevul Dec 2012 #79

Why? Joe the Revelator Dec 2012 #27

Not according to a number of posters here who are calling for rl6214 Dec 2012 #28

There is no need to outlaw guns Autumn Dec 2012 #35

It also favors free trade agreements and MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #36

Nothing there that says we have to support the NEA. So we shouldn't. They are dangerous thugs. kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #38

the national education association? HiPointDem Dec 2012 #40

I meant the NRA, smartass! kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #48

Not as dangerous as the coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #51

Just as the 'right' to free speech does not include the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #49

Yes- I do agree. Thanks for the reasonable response, one that is in conformity with our kelly1mm Dec 2012 #67

PERFECT ! What's wrong with that? I own 3 guns. It is CRAZY gun nuttery that is the problem. RBInMaine Dec 2012 #50

Some would say that 3 guns is too many and that you are a gun nut. That seems to be the kelly1mm Dec 2012 #53

The platform is perfect as is, we are not the Left's TeaParty, & regulated responsible hunting & gun RBInMaine Dec 2012 #59

post #4 says you should only be allowed one, maybe two firearms max. So, to some, you would be part kelly1mm Dec 2012 #68

66% of Democrats support gun control. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #83

What in that post was against gun control? S/he had several reasonable enhancements to the current kelly1mm Dec 2012 #87

I support this. It balances our individual rights with some common-sense regulations. Chemisse Dec 2012 #61

I'd like to see reasonble regulation that outlaws anything that fires more than once per 10 minutes Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #71

I suppose that does technically fall within the scope of the Democratic Party platform. Do you kelly1mm Dec 2012 #77

Fair argument. However, it is generally accepted that limits on personal ownership of "Arms" are Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #82

Ok - I agree 'what are the reasonable limits' is what the debate will (and should) focus on. While kelly1mm Dec 2012 #84

Thanks. It seems to me that one common denominator in these incidents is that they often involve Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #86

As far as mass shootings, you are correct. However, if looking at annual firearm kelly1mm Dec 2012 #88

I am dubious of explanations involving "cultural issues", personally. Seems to be a knee-jerk Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #93

I don't support it. I oppose special rights for guns. Dems to Win Dec 2012 #81

You can't support the Second Amendment and also support a ban on so-called assault weapons derby378 Dec 2012 #91

Really? So the 2nd Amendment means everyone has a right to personal ownership of ANY weapon? Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #99

Sounds quite reasonable to me. JDPriestly Dec 2012 #96