Skip to main content

View Diary: After Aurora: When "thoughts and prayers" simply aren't enough (157 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I believe that you are right (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    caul, splashy, DefendOurConstitution

    Most of us do not want an outright ban on firearms but we do want them to be "well regulated". The problem is that the NRA dominates the discussion and shouts down everyone else. As does the right wing on every issue. They have a culture of shouting and misrepresenting facts. The President has said on many occasions that he does not want to eliminate gun rights. Yet the common "wisdom" is that he does want to take guns away. Why is this? Because the NRA is lying. And no one will call them on it.

    Hey RKBAers - do you think that the President wants to take away your guns? Will you stick up for the truth? Will you tell the NRA to stop lying? Will you defend the President and the Democratic party from the lies told by the NRA? Will you tell the NRA that no Democrat leader is willing to take them on and make reasonable gun control to keep deadly weapons out of the hands of psychotic people like the Aurora shooter a priority?

    I do not wish to confiscate anyone's firearms but I would like firearms owners to take responibility for the damage guns cause.

    •  Psychotic? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rockhound, happymisanthropy, wishbone

      The guy had no history of mental illness or criminal behavior, as far as we know. Those with mental illness are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms.

      Should car owners take responsibility for the bad acts of other drivers? Should all knife owners be held responsible for stabbing deaths? I own a chain saw, a very dangerous tool that must be used carefully. Am I at fault if someone accidentally injures themselves with their chain saw?

      Why should anyone be held liable for the acts of complete strangers?

      None of us in the RKBA group has any use for the NRA. Their lying and fearmongering is disgraceful.

      "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

      by happy camper on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 08:06:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Car owners are held responsible for the actions of (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DefendOurConstitution

        others, they are required to carry uninsured motorist insurance. And yes you are responsible for what happens with your chain saw. You are partially at fault if someone injuries themselves with your chain saw. Ever heard of the law of torts? Ever thought about civil law and civil suits?

        Why should I be held responsible for the actions of a company I own stock in? Yet my stock price and dividend will suffer if the company loses a big suit. Is that fair to me?
        Everyone who pays taxes takes responsibility for the irresponsible actions of others. According to your logic why should we? How do you feel about health care reform?

        Can you please explain where RKBA and the NRA differ? Honestly I would like to know. Because I do not see any difference. What do you guys stand for?

        •  You have moved (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wishbone

          the posts. This:

          they are required to carry uninsured motorist insurance.
          Is much different than this:
          I would like firearms owners to take responibility for the damage guns cause.
          The former protects me from someone's actions. The latter makes me responsible for someone's actions--actions that have no direct effect on me.

          See the difference?

          Read again:

          Am I at fault if someone accidentally injures themselves with their chain saw?
           And:  
          Should all knife owners be held responsible for stabbing deaths?
          Yes or no?

          "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

          by happy camper on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 10:29:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You are not at fault if it is not your chainsaw. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DefendOurConstitution

            Unless you are the owner of the property that the accident happened at. You are not responsible for your gun if it is store properly and locked. But you should be responsible for the irresponsible use of your firearm. Our concern is not with the responsible law abiding gun owner who uses sound judgment and discretion in the use of his/her firearm. Can you agree that gun owners should be encouraged to act responsibly?

            Our argument is with the position that all regulation is an infringement on freedom. We believe that irresponsible people should not have access to guns. For the same reason that drunks should not be driving cars while drunk. All gun owners do not share responsibility for gun deaths. But those who fight common sense rules for the use of guns are in part responsible fro the harm that guns cause.
            If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.

            •  Of course (0+ / 0-)

              all gun owners should be encouraged to act responsibly. You will find no disagreement on that with any RKBA member. Nor will you find any one here who will claim that all regulation is infringement. That is a very extreme position that even the NRA does not share. And we're all liberals here, so the NRA is held in the same contempt by us (except for their shooting sports and hunter safety division) as by any one else here.

              We believe that irresponsible people should not have access to guns
              Agreed.
              All gun owners do not share responsibility for gun deaths.
              Thank you.

              Common sense rule are fine, and I am all for them, as long as they reduce irresponsible or criminal use of guns, without infringing on rights. Irresponsible morons, like people who leave loaded guns where kids can get them, or the pinheads who go target shooting in the middle of a drought (Utah) and set the woods aflame, give all gun owners a bad name.

              Effective and reasonable regulation can be done--witness the success of the NICS background check system, which many people are surprised to learn was backed by the NRA. It has prevented more felons and domestic abusers from buying firearms than all the hardware and magazine size restrictions ever tried.

              See? We agree on all sort of things...

              "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

              by happy camper on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 12:28:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Actually car owners DO take responsibility (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DefendOurConstitution

        By buying insurance on their cars.

        We are all held liable for injuries with a chain saw, because they get medical help.

        In fact, we are all held liable for massacres, because we all help pay for the medical needs of the victims, the police and other people that deal with the situation, and the businesses deal with the loss of business from the situation.

        We are all paying, so I'm thinking that having the gun owners pay more by having insurance is a good thing. It puts the costs on the people who want it to be easy to get weapons.

        Women create the entire labor force.

        by splashy on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 01:24:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Insurace! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DefendOurConstitution

      I'm advocating for insurance on each and every gun.

      Women create the entire labor force.

      by splashy on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 01:21:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site