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

Gun Control & RKBA

In reply to the discussion: Why the NRA wins. (3) [View all]
 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
1. Confusing the murmur of nightly murders with mass shootings
Thu Jan 30, 2014, 09:40 AM
Jan 2014

results in the blunt force trauma of social solutions: Prohibition. Here in DU, attention is given to sociopathic mass shootings, and not so much to drive-bys, robberies gone violent or even domestic fights, unless they serve the purpose of attack & smear of gun-owners, which happens to be the same purpose for posting of mass shootings. Therein is the lesson: Second Amendment defenders are CONSTANTLY reminded of the visceral hatred of a comparatively small number of gun-control advocates, and act accordingly with SUSTAINED and UNDIMINISHED resistance to virtually any proposal to diminish acts of violence.

If ever there was a vanguard for NRA activism, it is the withering animosity of these keyboard prohibitionists and their counterparts in legislative bodies and MSM. They operate as virtual free-consultants. The NRA "wins," the Democratic Party gets smash-mouthed, and what measures which could address the routine violence and schoolyard spectacular remain in deep freeze.

The NRA have got these extreme prohibitionists right where they want, doing what they want.

Recommendations

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

Why the NRA wins. (3) [View all] rrneck Jan 2014 OP
Confusing the murmur of nightly murders with mass shootings Eleanors38 Jan 2014 #1
Kick! (nt) NYC_SKP Mar 2014 #2
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Why the NRA wins. (3)»Reply #1