Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Guns Have Changed. Our Gun Laws Have Not Kept Pace." [View all]Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)155. Indeed so: it draws in the bigots and haters.
And there are a lot more of them on the pro-control side in this thread than on the pro-gun side: "gun humpers," "fetishists," "mentally ill," etc. In another thread, a poster called for a complete ban on gun ownership and the death penalty for non-compliance. The death penalty.
How "progressive."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
292 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It was the standard rate of fire for the British Army through the Napoleonic War
intaglio
Dec 2013
#142
Not to mention the Girandoni Rifle- 1780, 20 round tubular magazine, semi-auto
X_Digger
Dec 2013
#12
Which was an exotic and uncommon weapon that was pretty much unknown outside Europe
Spider Jerusalem
Dec 2013
#16
Even if I were to concede that point, the point of the poster is still an epic fail.
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#88
Attempting to frame the debate around gun control in such a narrow way is fallacious.
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#137
The OP is correct, but needs to add that gun fanciers' reasons for arming up have changed.
Hoyt
Dec 2013
#153
Were those guns readily available for everyone without universal background checks?
Agschmid
Dec 2013
#151
Remember, kids: if you use all-caps to give your hyperbole extra emphasis...
Lizzie Poppet
Dec 2013
#18
Free clue: parrot-like repetition of inane prattle doesn't make it any more valid.
Lizzie Poppet
Dec 2013
#25
When 20 children are slaughtered and the response is to go to a discussion board to defend guns
DisgustipatedinCA
Dec 2013
#46
Which comment is over the top, and why do you support death fetishists?
DisgustipatedinCA
Dec 2013
#52
If someone opposes women being armed for self-defense does that mean they are pro-rape fetishists?
Nuclear Unicorn
Dec 2013
#233
I have family members with mental illness and you assertion is an insult to those
Packerowner740
Dec 2013
#138
Voting to hide something for that sort of reasoning should get somebody banned.
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#120
Not a strawman at all. You're using a chauvinistic argument with the mentally ill as the hinge
HereSince1628
Dec 2013
#44
My, my, you've missed it entirely. Your bigoted chauvinism abuses the mentally ill.
HereSince1628
Dec 2013
#69
Name calling lacks eruditon...seemly, so does your understanding of "Straw man"
HereSince1628
Dec 2013
#127
Well there ya go, nothing promotes a reasonable discussion of the issues like calling...
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#49
And I'm sure you have a medical background that would qualify you to diagnose so many people...
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#57
Given the context you just used the word in, you clearly don't understand its meaning. nt
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#101
You seem to have each others back in marginalizing the plight of the mentally ill.
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#74
Really? Hearing about how dealing with poverty, poor education, inadequate mental health care...
eqfan592
Dec 2013
#112
Whoever made that silly poster has no idea what the fuck they're talking about.
Lizzie Poppet
Dec 2013
#14
When they can't aim and they miss their target then innocent bystanders will be killed
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#43
Are you suggesting that you have only heard of one instance in which a stray bullet killed somebody?
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#184
It was actually Duckhunter who brought up police shooting and missing their targets
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#193
Just Google "police shoot innocent bystander" and you will get all kinds of results
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#204
Do you think they could have imagined anything like the modern communication infrastructure?
Decaffeinated
Dec 2013
#39
This post is patently false. Gun laws obviously have changed since the days of muskets, like in 1934
Threedifferentones
Dec 2013
#42
Since you are repeating me I will assume you did not actually read my whole post.
Threedifferentones
Dec 2013
#72
Mass shootings are, statistically speaking, red herrings. A lot facts are hard to swallow,
Threedifferentones
Dec 2013
#103
Just as a note: priming and then loading a flintlock is a nice way to get shot in the face
NutmegYankee
Dec 2013
#71
I think your thread was largely ignored because of the odd note it struck
etherealtruth
Dec 2013
#160
Just hie thee off to any of the many rightwing gun forums and your fav terms are perfectly fine.
Warren Stupidity
Dec 2013
#176
There's nothing "progressive" about abject bigotry and pointlessly divisive language.
Lizzie Poppet
Dec 2013
#177
right. We should tolerate all sorts of rightwing nutjob whackery here.
Warren Stupidity
Dec 2013
#185
So do you consider people who use tems like "gun grabber" and "hoplophobe" to be bigots as well?
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#201
You much not pay much attention then, the pro-gun side is filled with bigots
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#208
If you paid any attention at all during the trial there were constant smears of Trayvon Martin
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#212
How can one post rationally to folks who need a gun or two to venture into public,
Hoyt
Dec 2013
#215
You just can't have a rational discussion regarding gun control here in America.
Oakenshield
Dec 2013
#253
An idea that I support in principal, but background checks against what?
HereSince1628
Dec 2013
#290