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
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: What a novel idea! [View all]Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)142. "I was not responding to the "ISIS" or "Redneck Taliban" comments."
How convenient; because you decided you would fixate solely on my grabbers and quislings comment to declare dialogue with me to be closed at the expense of the balance of my comments.
Again, you maintain a double-standard.
Did I ever suggest giving up any rights? No. What I do suggest is redefining what you perceive to be rights.
So, just like that you have declared yourself the sole arbiter of rights.
What you seem to refuse to accept is that your reality is not the sole reality. You don't get to decide what are rights and when people are allowed to exercise them. People know their personal circumstances better than you.
You may consider your suggestion declined.
If you think walking down Main Street America with a loaded gun is some kind of right, then we have nothing to discuss.
I have plenty to discuss. Someone choosing on their own terms to refuse to listen is more a matter of their imaginary moral superiority than any position of victory on their part.
That and the fact that since I do believe in the right to defense outside the home coupled with the fact you continued on for another two-and-a-half paragraphs ipso facto refutes your unilateral declaration. Just sayin'
I don't know what you find reasonable about that. You also live in a society that has an incarceration rate several times as high as any other industrialized country.
You claim that you want something done about gun violence (apparently you're OK with non-gun violence or something). Yet, when the fact emerges that homicides are more times than not committed by felons you complain that the criminal justice system is overbearing.
Make up your mind. Why do you pretend to respect RK(B)A but complain convicted criminals being convicted? If conviction for a crime is not sufficient to delineate who can or cannot own a gun I'm left to assume your position is -- as many grabbers would suggest -- that no one, regardless of personal conduct, is entitled to own a gun. This may come as a shock to you but the entire background check system relies upon criminal convictions. If you're against the criminal justice system then presumably you would be against universal background checks. Please feel free to clarify your point because you seem to be speaking from both sides of your mouth.
Your prison system is being privatized more and more. The NRA and white privilege helps ensure you keep those penitentiaries well stocked.
And yet the grabbers and their quislings seem to have no solution except to criminalize peaceable people. Your argument rings of hollow and hypocritical. Is this some bizzarro plan to lock-up all the peaceable people in prison for their own protection while the felons of the world are left to run riot?
At the same time, quit offering the mentally ill a quick fix, like an easy to access firearm to end it all with and maybe take a few others along for the ride.
And your solution is what, exactly? If a person is not a convicted felon or flagged by a mental health professional why should they be barred from exercising their inherent right to self-defense?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
157 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
This is very serious....never volunteer to give up a right because it feels good.
ileus
Aug 2014
#62
I think a good start might be civil dialog between gun owners and those who want gun control
Starboard Tack
Aug 2014
#3
You can think I'm "pro-control" if that makes you feel better, but you are wrong.
Starboard Tack
Aug 2014
#47
Rights cannot be given up. They exist in in the absence of written law. nt
Nuclear Unicorn
Sep 2014
#125
But you're OK when people defending their inherent rights are compared to ISIS and the Taliban.
Nuclear Unicorn
Sep 2014
#130
You've been given suggestions, but you didn't like them, and/or ignored them. N/T
beevul
Sep 2014
#143
"The NRA and white privilege helps ensure you keep those penitentiaries well stocked."
beevul
Sep 2014
#144
If you think I am a "gun control activist" then you have some serious problems ahead
Starboard Tack
Sep 2014
#135
I think you're someone who claims to want a discussion, then dodges inconvenient questions.
beevul
Sep 2014
#138
You claim you want a civil dialogue but then you immediately applaud a guy who calls others
Nuclear Unicorn
Sep 2014
#124
I think you are definitely right on 2A needing an updated interpretation.
Starboard Tack
Aug 2014
#15
"Lift 'er up!!! Git er done!!!!" Having nothing to do with your reply or the OP....
NYC_SKP
Aug 2014
#50
Seems to me it's been moving completely the opposite way to what you describe.
Starboard Tack
Sep 2014
#96
Most states simply went and adopted objective criteria and implemented the ONLY legal way for
shedevil69taz
Sep 2014
#105
I'm very familiar with product placement having worked in that industry for several years.
Starboard Tack
Sep 2014
#89
Good, because I never thought movies or games were the cause of violence
Starboard Tack
Sep 2014
#107
Many actors talk out of both sides of their mouths when it come to gun violence
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2014
#93
Try Renner's "Bourne Legacy" for glorification of guns and violence
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2014
#101