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

calimary

(91,331 posts)
167. OH, I see, it was a "legal semi-automatic rifle that were AWB compliant."
Sat Oct 25, 2014, 04:57 PM
Oct 2014

Oh, that changes everything!


Actually - what SHOULD change is that very thing. OBVIOUSLY those "AWB compliant" measures weren't worth squat. And need to be VERY thoroughly revisited, reconsidered, and either replaced with a stronger restriction or otherwise tightened further. And what was so "legal" about being able to have wanton unrestricted access to weapons like that - in a household in which one knows full-well that there's a troubled kid in residence?

Makes no difference to me. You can split hairs all day. It's your right, of course.

And I realize full-well, also, that just tightening restrictions and/or imposing new laws or whatever - is not an ultimate cure-all, either. I recognize that won't cure this particular disease. But it may slow it down. And even just slowing it down might mean instead of 20 little coffins at Sandy Hook, maybe there might have been 15 or 16. Tragic as hell, but maybe the carnage might not have been quite as large. A death count, still, but I'd go for even a slight reduction. EVEN ONE less family with that empty seat at their Christmas dinner table, and black bunting dominating instead of the green-and-red.

Just the same as what happened in my own neighborhood - in a slightly different context. This one was a stop sign.

TOO many neighbors were against it for the stupidest reason of all. Meh, nobody stops for stop signs. Meh, not in front of MY house. Meh, won't work. Meh, won't do any good. Yeah, human nature. I know all about it. Makes people sneak and try to get around the rules and cut corners and blah-blah-blah. I was staunchly FOR a stop sign on our street. Why? Because we had ridiculously reckless and selfish speeders on our street who wouldn't stop or slow down for ANY reason. Even if you were a pedestrian and the rules in the California Motor Vehicle Code say you had the right-of-way. Even if you were a nanny pushing a baby carriage. Even if you were out walking your dog. Even if you were a slow-moving senior citizen shuffling along on a nice little afternoon walk. Never mind. Speeding up or down the street was more important. I know all about stop sign behavior. There's something here called the "California stop." Which is - you don't stop at all, at a stop sign. You slow down. You roll through it at a reduced speed. Okay FINE. FINE!!!!! Let's STILL do it. It's STILL a worthwhile idea! And we did it. And there's a stop sign at this particular intersection that's a real trouble spot. And you know what? They still, indeed, do NOT stop.

BUT DAMMIT, THEY SLOW DOWN!!!!! THEY ACTUALLY DO SLOW DOWN A LITTLE!!!!

And you know what THAT means? It means that the little old lady shuffling across the street might have an extra second or two to get out of the way. It means one less nanny having to dive into the ivy in the easement between the sidewalk and curb - to get out of the way of an oncoming speeder who felt no need to stop or slow down because that nanny dared to be in their way. And I have seen that. I've SEEN the nanny having to dive into the ivy to get out of the way in the nick of time because some asshole speeder from up the street didn't want to drive more slowly and responsibly and didn't have time to slow down enough, or soon enough. If they only just are forced to slow down a little, that's STILL enough time to get to safety, to cross the frickin' street safely! So it seems to me - doesn't matter if they won't stop at the stop sign. We STILL need the stop sign. Because at the very least, the speeders slow down. Even if just a little. IT'S ENOUGH TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!!!! IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. A DIFFERENCE FOR THE BETTER.

For the same reason, I am all in favor of tightening all kinds of restrictions, and imposing more restrictions whenever possible - on guns. Your argument may actually not be with me - but with all the nutcases out there who make you and your gun stance look bad. I'm guessing YOU are law-abiding and respectful of your guns and what you know they can do in the wrong circumstances. But as long as there are nutcases willing to defy the rules, or ignore the rules, or fight against the rules, or try to undo the rules or prevent the rules from being enacted, I think we have to keep on with the rules. And the rules won't fix everything. But maybe, like the stop sign, they might reduce some of the risk, and the carnage. Maybe instead of 20 little coffins after Sandy Hook, there might have been 15, or 12, or seven, or less. Even ONE less would have meant the rules worked. And were beneficial.

Recommendations

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

No- our politicians are cowards, quaking at the feet of the NRA Marrah_G Oct 2014 #1
Please allow me to add....' A HERETIC I AM Oct 2014 #9
land of the free, home of the brave.... Marrah_G Oct 2014 #11
Home of the used to be A HERETIC I AM Oct 2014 #17
yup Marrah_G Oct 2014 #19
I love my country, but it embarrasses the shit out of me these days. n/t A HERETIC I AM Oct 2014 #20
Sadly, sounds about right. nt Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #37
We'll try, but the NRA will stop us. shenmue Oct 2014 #2
This is the 87th shooting spartan61 Oct 2014 #3
Well, you do understand part of the problem. ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #25
Nah...they would rather turn the schools for the "poor kids" into prison camps VanillaRhapsody Oct 2014 #4
Or at least send the little monsters to private schools Jackpine Radical Oct 2014 #178
the poor ones already refuse to allow their angels to ride the school buses with the VanillaRhapsody Oct 2014 #179
What should be done to reduce the numbers of school shootings? Jenoch Oct 2014 #5
In my opinion, ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #7
I think a national UBC law could help, Jenoch Oct 2014 #8
The news here said he was given the gun for his last birthday. Hard to lock up a gift you gave your lunasun Oct 2014 #48
My son has several guns he's got for gifts....all locked up. ileus Oct 2014 #78
tribes DustyJoe Oct 2014 #80
But that's largely irrelevant mythology Oct 2014 #128
UBC law? I'm not familiar with that term. NaturalHigh Oct 2014 #63
Universal Background Check Jenoch Oct 2014 #66
Ah, got it. Thank you. NaturalHigh Oct 2014 #67
we don't need any more science dsc Oct 2014 #10
That is a pretty dark view point, in my opinion. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #14
Unless your theory is that our children are somehow worse than those of every single solitary dsc Oct 2014 #16
Canada has lots of guns, but they have very few mass shootings in comparison to the US. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #21
they don't have anything like the gun laws we do dsc Oct 2014 #23
Sure, but do you really think laws like that would have stopped any school shootings in the US? ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #29
yes I do dsc Oct 2014 #38
Small correcton sarisataka Oct 2014 #50
The guns are a symptom, as opposed to the disease. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #58
Granting that, do you think laws can significantly reduce the number of guns out there? Recursion Oct 2014 #223
The 'our culture' that is producing these children Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #40
His father gave him a gun for his birthday.not sure if it was registered or not but registering lunasun Oct 2014 #54
There is no gun registration in WA state. ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #194
It's not just guns though. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #59
I agree that it's not JUST the guns laundry_queen Oct 2014 #90
Then we have very similliar views on this subject. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #119
Your post has LOTS of sensible ideas and observations, laundry_queen. calimary Oct 2014 #186
Thank you calimary laundry_queen Oct 2014 #195
Yeah, no kidding. calimary Oct 2014 #201
There is no right to shoot anyone. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #202
Indeed. But let's look at that statement from the viewpoint of the assholes who've used calimary Oct 2014 #204
I agree with everything you wrote laundry_queen Oct 2014 #203
You're right, I wouldn't want you as president. branford Oct 2014 #205
Fuck the Second Amendment Ampersand Unicode Oct 2014 #214
So glad you will NEVER have the chance to shred the BoR. GGJohn Oct 2014 #216
Do you have any idea how your 'ideas' would damage the U.S. economy? Jenoch Oct 2014 #218
So, someone kills your meat for you, right? You hire it out, rather than get your hands dirty? X_Digger Oct 2014 #222
You Would Be Suprised At What You Can Own.. ozone82 Oct 2014 #76
A Canadian can own a semi-automatc rifle. Jenoch Oct 2014 #143
Those gun laws have cut our gun murder rate in half in the last few decades hack89 Oct 2014 #26
No better medicine combined with an older population has been almost wholly responsible for that dsc Oct 2014 #39
So what laws do you want? Nt hack89 Oct 2014 #46
an outright ban on dsc Oct 2014 #69
None of which is going to happen. GGJohn Oct 2014 #72
when I was a kid, for that matter a young adult dsc Oct 2014 #99
Not even comparable. GGJohn Oct 2014 #101
The first two will never happen hack89 Oct 2014 #79
Without doubt etherealtruth Oct 2014 #96
In many cases retroactive enforcement is the only option. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #132
To the NRA & gun makers, this is free product promotion. lastlib Oct 2014 #6
i think people are just supposed to be happy that it wasn't ISIS or Ebola that kills them JI7 Oct 2014 #12
Ebola Ebola Ebola malaise Oct 2014 #13
Sadly no, not until the NRA is denounced as a terrorist organization and banned from existence. InAbLuEsTaTe Oct 2014 #15
Which ain't never going to happen because tha NRA isn't a terrorist organization. GGJohn Oct 2014 #73
No, just a right wing "nut job" group etherealtruth Oct 2014 #97
True, but that doesn't make it a terrorist organization. GGJohn Oct 2014 #102
Sure it does. The NRA promotes the use of unsafe firearms that are used to commit terrorist acts. That makes it a terrorist organization. InAbLuEsTaTe Oct 2014 #209
Huh? branford Oct 2014 #210
So you think AR-15's, for example, that can deliver multiple shots per sec using clips w/ dozens of rounds is a safe weapon protected under the 1st Amendmt? InAbLuEsTaTe Oct 2014 #213
1st Amendment? GGJohn Oct 2014 #217
What utter bull pucky Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #226
Huh, again? branford Oct 2014 #230
Balderdash!!!!! GGJohn Oct 2014 #212
We told Congress and they just ignored us. Rex Oct 2014 #18
Precisely. 99Forever Oct 2014 #22
Exactly. Jamastiene Oct 2014 #228
Nothing will get done as long as there is an NRA. Cleita Oct 2014 #24
And I am sure the RW would love to do the same for planned parenthood and the ACLU hack89 Oct 2014 #27
No. That's up to the lawyers and politicians to figure out. Cleita Oct 2014 #31
It is not going to be done by trampling over the first amendment hack89 Oct 2014 #32
Fuck that and the second Ammendment excuses. Cleita Oct 2014 #35
Have you read the Democratic Party platform? hack89 Oct 2014 #43
And a crackdown on the NRA, whatever it takes, to defang them. n/t Cleita Oct 2014 #49
How? What law can you write that won't be used against liberal groups? hack89 Oct 2014 #51
I'm not a lawyer. It's up to our politicians to figure it out and it's up to us Cleita Oct 2014 #53
Half those politicians are republican hack89 Oct 2014 #56
So you want to trample on the 1st Amendment because of your hatred of the NRA? GGJohn Oct 2014 #74
The first Ammendment is about freedom of speech not freedom to kill. Cleita Oct 2014 #83
And you would be violating the NRA's freedom of speech. GGJohn Oct 2014 #84
I can't answer your question because I'm not the right wing. Cleita Oct 2014 #86
Nice attempt at a smear, too bad it failed. GGJohn Oct 2014 #87
So by your logic subversive organizations like ISIS and Al Queda have Cleita Oct 2014 #93
You're comparing the NRA to Al Queda and ISIL? GGJohn Oct 2014 #94
Good. You are a waste of time. eom Cleita Oct 2014 #95
I'm not the one wanting to curb a civil right just because I don't like the message. GGJohn Oct 2014 #100
This isn't about message. It's about actions that undermine Cleita Oct 2014 #106
No, this is about your wanting to shut down an organization that you disagree with. GGJohn Oct 2014 #109
the difference is that the NRA is vastly more effective at killing Americans dsc Oct 2014 #136
Who has the NRA killed? GGJohn Oct 2014 #137
The NRA has killed the spirit and resolve of gun control proponents and politicians. branford Oct 2014 #145
In fairness a better analogy is to the tobacco companies dsc Oct 2014 #153
But that's not true. GGJohn Oct 2014 #158
in comparison to smokers I would bet at most 1 in 10 of the deaths dsc Oct 2014 #161
With you, Cleita! calimary Oct 2014 #141
You realize you are calling for censorship and oppression by the Government? NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #148
very true Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #152
And I hope you've been making that point to the NRA, too. calimary Oct 2014 #163
Wow, that was the biggest fail post I've read in a while. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #166
A lot of people believe in free speech, except when they don't agree . . . nt branford Oct 2014 #169
The relatively easy fix to most of these shootings ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #28
Uh-huh... I'll bet the mother of that kid who blew away all those children at Sandy Hook calimary Oct 2014 #142
You should probably brush up on your facts. ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #144
Yep. I'm sure they stored all those nice harmless guns properly and safely calimary Oct 2014 #155
You really need to take a deep breath and think about what you are trying to say. ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #168
what hyperbole, I really think you believe it Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #157
OH, I see, it was a "legal semi-automatic rifle that were AWB compliant." calimary Oct 2014 #167
Now you are beginning to understand. ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #170
Wrong. I already understood that. calimary Oct 2014 #173
You have used the word 'restrictions'. Jenoch Oct 2014 #175
What should be done depends on your goals. ManiacJoe Oct 2014 #193
you are correct Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #180
No, the real problem there is that the AWB didn't do what its supporters think it did Recursion Oct 2014 #221
Start shaming the NRA's footmen in congress LuvLoogie Oct 2014 #30
We also need to frame it differently. Dumbed-down so more of the low-information voters can start calimary Oct 2014 #41
"Start shaming them." It's been going on for years. Eleanors38 Oct 2014 #70
School shooting. Shooting that happens in a school. School. Shooting. kcr Oct 2014 #81
I think we know. Gun-apologists. They'll seek ANY rationale to keep and get more damn guns. calimary Oct 2014 #126
Whose "moving goalposts?" The banners, clearly. Eleanors38 Oct 2014 #207
It depresses me that even here on DU there are all these gun nuts Arugula Latte Oct 2014 #45
+1 Hoyt Oct 2014 #131
I hear ya, Arugula Latte. calimary Oct 2014 #183
I'm asking you this with respect, GGJohn Oct 2014 #184
Harry Reid knows no shame. He really wants to be Senate majority leader. Nt hack89 Oct 2014 #52
Only in America world wide wally Oct 2014 #33
I do not think so, because guns are everything but killing machines and when they do kill.. Tikki Oct 2014 #34
The true answer ... No. Just no. Kablooie Oct 2014 #36
Just a thought, we are not tops with suicides Beringia Oct 2014 #42
No. You don't want to hurt the feewings of the gun fetishists! Arugula Latte Oct 2014 #44
No. n/t Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #47
Isis! Ebola! booooga woooga! jberryhill Oct 2014 #55
No, you're not. Nothing will change. Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #57
No! peace13 Oct 2014 #60
well here is one suggestion posted on my high school graduating classes Facebook page Douglas Carpenter Oct 2014 #61
that would be a horrible idea dsc Oct 2014 #211
I would say so too. Douglas Carpenter Oct 2014 #224
In my state after we had 20 young children and 6 staff murdered scarystuffyo Oct 2014 #62
A high price to pay to get sensible legislation... marions ghost Oct 2014 #115
CT scarystuffyo Oct 2014 #134
It wasn't universal registration though NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #146
CT had an AWB before Sandy Hook nt hack89 Oct 2014 #225
I agree with what you are saying davidpdx Oct 2014 #64
Actually do something? You mean more than bitch on the internet? LOL, no. Don't be stupid. flvegan Oct 2014 #65
Federal government is good at some things, bad at others. Federal government can be slow, liberal_at_heart Oct 2014 #68
Not even the lead story any more... JCMach1 Oct 2014 #71
Vast swaths of our country value guns more than children. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #75
This is a sad but very true answer to the question... Tikki Oct 2014 #85
Not as long as we take a passive approach to security. ileus Oct 2014 #77
Yes, We, the People Are Beyond Tired fredamae Oct 2014 #82
No. Takket Oct 2014 #88
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2014 #89
Why weren't there school shootings when guns were more available? former9thward Oct 2014 #91
Children, even in High School, feared reprisal from their parents if they were caught messing... Tikki Oct 2014 #103
There is much truth to your post. former9thward Oct 2014 #107
Yes...but guns tag along with this part of Society's downgrade. Tikki Oct 2014 #111
Truly. These people parading around openly wearing their massacre machines are public menaces. calimary Oct 2014 #127
How do you propose to stop open carry where it's legal? GGJohn Oct 2014 #129
I'd be working to reverse that and make it ILLEGAL. calimary Oct 2014 #140
You won't get any flaming from me. GGJohn Oct 2014 #147
Try proper concealed carry Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #159
True, and I live in one of those states that have hot, dry summers, average temp-110 GGJohn Oct 2014 #164
Well, that opens a great can of worms. LWolf Oct 2014 #92
Nope. nt cwydro Oct 2014 #98
Not until a close family member of Lint Head Oct 2014 #104
There is no solution to prevent a lone nut with a gun. Too many guns and too easy to obtain. nt Logical Oct 2014 #105
+1 Cleita Oct 2014 #108
Sadly, other people's children do not trump arthritisR_US Oct 2014 #110
Now they are also claiming 1st Ammen. rights like Cleita Oct 2014 #112
Who is doing that? GGJohn Oct 2014 #113
... Cleita Oct 2014 #116
Except I'm not, but you knew that. GGJohn Oct 2014 #117
Your words speak for themselves and you aren't the only person who says it. Cleita Oct 2014 #118
The NRA is terrorizing politicians? GGJohn Oct 2014 #120
Wow, the lengths they go in service to arthritisR_US Oct 2014 #114
Make a law if your gun is used in a shooting mandatory 5 years jail marlakay Oct 2014 #121
Very sensible law. GGJohn Oct 2014 #122
Let all the people out who went to jail for pot marlakay Oct 2014 #123
We need more logical thinkers like you. GGJohn Oct 2014 #124
This message was self-deleted by its author GGJohn Oct 2014 #125
There is nothing we can do. Banning guns will never happen LittleBlue Oct 2014 #130
And, even if by some stroke of a miracle, the 2A was repealed, GGJohn Oct 2014 #135
Exactly! LittleBlue Oct 2014 #156
It wouldn't even do that-- the right would be protected by the 9th, federally. ;) n/t X_Digger Oct 2014 #208
Ban all Guns!!! n/t PowerToThePeople Oct 2014 #133
Easier said than done, GGJohn Oct 2014 #138
How? nt branford Oct 2014 #139
Starting with the cops. Dr. Strange Oct 2014 #150
Lets hear your plan Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #160
Never. Ever. hifiguy Oct 2014 #149
Back in the 1970s you didn't hear about school shootings FrodosPet Oct 2014 #151
it is more because we didn't have cheap assault weapons and semi automatic rifles dsc Oct 2014 #154
Yeah, we did. GGJohn Oct 2014 #162
there is a difference between guns being around and guns being cheap dsc Oct 2014 #165
Those semi autos back then were cheaper to buy than today relative to the level of wages. GGJohn Oct 2014 #171
The mid to late 70's is considered the second most violent period for school shootings hack89 Oct 2014 #174
I always carried a knife to school, as did most people I knew FrodosPet Oct 2014 #185
Americans have never been safer hack89 Oct 2014 #189
And the most violent was the mid 1990's (nt) Recursion Oct 2014 #220
very true Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #181
I have mentioned this in the past Jenoch Oct 2014 #192
Which is odd, because shootings in schools were much more common in the 1970s than today Recursion Oct 2014 #215
The sad reality is that any serious anti gun legislation would drive gun sales through the roof. Initech Oct 2014 #172
I actually wondered RadicalGeek Oct 2014 #176
Gun sales would soar as people would buy firearms to protect themselves. branford Oct 2014 #188
I would like to see a fraction of the concern for 1 ebola death directed at gun violence. Vinca Oct 2014 #177
Death machines are the major U.S. industry, so no, not in our lifetimes. nt valerief Oct 2014 #182
not really Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #187
I waiting for the move to ban branford Oct 2014 #190
If it saves just one childs life........ Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #191
lets talk about swimming pools dsc Oct 2014 #196
Insurance isn't required for a swimming pool. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #197
there is no permit whatsoever to buy a gun in my state or any state which borders mine dsc Oct 2014 #198
Connecticut. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #199
And nevertheless, still more children die in swimming pools than by guns, branford Oct 2014 #200
Not in my lifetime. kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #206
Well, let's look at why they have plummeted over the past 20 years, maybe? Recursion Oct 2014 #219
No - Because The Right Wing Will Protect Their Benefactors cantbeserious Oct 2014 #227
no. our precious guns will not allow it. period. spanone Oct 2014 #229
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are we ever going to get ...»Reply #167