Skip to main content

View Diary: My name is Mark Damico, and I'm tired. (172 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That should help. (22+ / 0-)

    Not.

    No repeal of the constitution would be necessary, nor even the 2nd amendment. Just return to the thrilling days of yesteryear when guns were not nearly so commonly available and legally concealable as they are now. Regulations are still ok according to the Court. We'd like to regulate banks more, I think we would find ourselves better off returning to more reasonable gun regulation as well. The experimental results are in from the last decade's worth of expanded handgun ownership and availability: it's failed to increase our safety.

    Rhetoric recommending that people you don't agree with leave the country is not going to help us to start acting with the common good in mind and we have to learn to do that better than we have been.

    I say that as a multiple gun owner who is now rethinking what the real worth of that hobby is.

    Moderation in most things.

    by billmosby on Fri Dec 14, 2012 at 11:15:28 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  It's gun owners like you who need to help (11+ / 0-)

      lead for those regulations. Toss Wayne LaPierre et al aside, he doesn't care about gun owners, just gun manufacturers and their ability to sell as many guns as they can produce.

      No one wants to take you guns away, not really. But if something reasonable doesn't happen, that may very well be the end result.

      Just in time for Christmas! Support Netroots For The Troops with your on-line purchases.

      by TexDem on Fri Dec 14, 2012 at 11:31:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I left the NRA years ago over (4+ / 0-)

        politics and nonstop begging for just a few hundred more dollars to help defeat old fill-in-the-blank.

        They do good work on gun safety (I was at a range staffed by NRA volunteers last weekend), for those who are interested in handling guns safely. For those who just want to shoot a bunch of people, they haven't got a lot to offer in the way of help.

        Moderation in most things.

        by billmosby on Fri Dec 14, 2012 at 11:46:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I disagree. The NRA has weakened gun laws over (7+ / 0-)

          the years. Like mandating that background checks be destroyed after 24 hours. Or lowering to a misdemeanor the failure to keep good records as a gun dealer. Weakening the ATF. All these moves to weaken the laws makes it easier for the mass killers to mass kill.

        •  Start a Gun Owners organization vs the NRA (5+ / 0-)

          The NRA has become nothing more than a lobbying organ for gun manufacturers. Gun owners need to start a separate organization which pushes responsible gun ownership and safety.

          Chris Hayes just had a discussion where it was mentioned FL just passed a law saying a doctor(in these cases pediatricians) can't ask about gun ownership in a house as a matter of public safety. That's nuts. Would you also stop the doctor from asking about what kind of chemicals etc are the children exposed to in a house? It was a public/child safety issue turned into a gun rights issue.

          The NRA no longer has credence as a gun safety organization. They don't even push for legislation for any reasonable gun safety laws. They see every attempt as an attack on gun ownership. There has to be a counter organization of responsible gun owners pushing for reasonable gun safety laws or it's going to become a self fulfilling prophecy of taking away the guns because the tipping point was passed.(If it hasn't already.)

          The NRA represents the manufacturers, the owners need to be represented by gun owners. Gun owners and gun manufacturers don't have the same overall interest. Manufacturers are only interested in selling as many guns and as much ammo as they can. That's not in the best interest of responsible gun owners.

          It's easier to buy a box of ammo than it is to buy a box of Allegra-D. I can only purchase one box of Allegra-D from a store and they put my name and drivers license number into the system to make sure I don't go to another store and purchase more too soon. What's the limitation for how much ammo you can buy?

          Just in time for Christmas! Support Netroots For The Troops with your on-line purchases.

          by TexDem on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 08:09:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I just watched a segment of Piers Morgan (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            tobendaro, TexDem

            I had recorded last night in which he interviewed a couple of mental health experts with long experience not only working on mass shooter cases but one of them also had long experience with the public health aspects of mental health diagnostics and care. What I got out of that interview was that we do have the capability through screening of identifying people who are mentally ill enough to be capable of committing shootings of the types we have seen (not all of them involve dozens of victims, a lot of them have one or a few). It was also said that there are already laws on the books banning gun ownership for such seriously mentally ill people but because we don't diagnose people until after the fact they are not usually enforced. One of the experts said that over the past couple of decades we have failed the mentally ill miserably, that they mostly suffer in silence because nobody knows they are having problems and there are no systematic programs for finding and helping them. The vast, vast majority never hurt anybody except possibly themselves.

            So the kinds of horrific shootings that make news are preventable, we just have to step up and start treating the mentally ill as ill rather than objects of derision (have you ever seen the term "delusional", "nutbag", etc thrown around on this site? you betcha. illness as epithet.). That would take money and a change of attitude, though. And it would also probably require that mentally ill people be provided places to be that are not out on the street. The efforts of three or four decades ago to liberate people from involuntary confinement has backfired on us and on those people themselves. Do a better job of caring for them, don't just throw the whole system overboard and be done with it.

            Ok, having said all that, I don't think that kind of effort would take care of the "run of the mill" shootings that probably constitute the majority of our 3 parts per 100,000 gun death rate. I imagine somebody has the statistics on that but I don't have time to go looking them up at the moment.

            Any alternate-NRA organization should probably start working on mental health and anger management programs, and not just with shooting prevention in mind. It's clear to me that there are a lot of people suffering in silence out there with mental problems that need help. It will take years and lots of money to do that job properly. Perhaps it will happen more easily if the Affordable Care Act develops properly.

            Also, if I had more money I might well be at the range more often. The last time I went I probably burned 300 or so rounds in about an hour and a half. If I did that a couple of times a week it would come to about 2400 rounds a month. I might get bored with it after a while myself, and I know I wouldn't want to wear the guns out so fast. But there are lots of people with enough money and desire to buy new stuff all the time that they would burn that much.

             So I don't know how an ad hoc rounds per month limit would distinguish between a lot of serious shooting enthusiasts and a spree shooter saving up an overoptimistic 1000 rounds for his big finale.

            There needs to be a dialog on this, and we're far more likely to have a shouting match. Until that changes it will just be more of the same until, as you say, a switch is flipped and we get a confiscation program. Which as I sit today wouldn't really perturb me all that much. But overall it would probably cause even more mayhem than we have developed a penchant for so far in this country.

            It would make the tax, debt limit, and fiscal cliff political football battles look like nothing.

            Moderation in most things.

            by billmosby on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 09:41:34 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  She says she is "sick of Rights" (0+ / 0-)

      Rights are what makes the USA, the USA.
      If she dislikes Rights so vehemently, there is only two options.....repeal the Constitution, or leave.

      •  Only one right was mentioned, (6+ / 0-)

        second amendment rights. Why go so far overboard in your response? Never mind, I know why. You're too new here to know how conversations go on this site. It took me a while too.

        Moderation in most things.

        by billmosby on Fri Dec 14, 2012 at 11:43:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Said she was sick of hearing about their rights. (12+ / 0-)

        We hear about 2nd amendments rights to point of drowning out all other ideas or concerns.  We are inundated with NRA crafted talking points from every pro-gun rights lobby then second anyone even tries to talk about guns in America who is not advocating for them.

        I believe that is what she was sick of.  I am, too.

        The priest said, "Today's sermon is called 'Liars', but first I have a question. How many of you have read Chapter 66 in Matthew?" Nearly every hand went up. "You're just the group I need to speak to," the priest said. "There's no such chapter."

        by Back In Blue on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 02:04:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  When I was growing up, "Love it or leave it" (5+ / 0-)

        was a saying we associated with the far right.

      •  There is another option. Repeal the part of the (9+ / 0-)

        constitution that no longer works. Like the repeal of prohibition. Like the repeal of slavery. We can do anything with the constitution we like. We could abolish the Senate. We could extend the term of a Congressman to 4 years. We could force judges to wear clown makeup as they went about their duties. In other words the Constitution can be changed. And the way you change the constitution is through a political process.

        So take your America love or leave it and shove it.

      •  You might want to pull out your Constitution. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        joy221

        It would help a great deal for you to participate in a discussion if you knew what you were talking about.  The Constitution also guarantees us the right to LIFE.  Your Right to have a gun doesn't trump my Right to have a life, with or without the Constitution being applicable.

        What she's tired of is people trumpeting about their own rights without any concern or consideration of other rights of other people.

        So, no, you're wrong.  The only options aren't to leave the country or change the Constitution.  Another option is to fight to have all parts of the Constitution recognized and maintain a reasonable, logical, and sensible balancing of all the rights.

        "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

        by gustynpip on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 11:43:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  "Right to have a gun doesn't trump my Right to (0+ / 0-)

          have a life"
          Hence, murder being illegal.

          •  Your simplistic positions signify a failure to (0+ / 0-)

            have thought further than your own particular desires.

            We have a Constitutional right to free speech.  Yet there are all sorts of limits.  You can't yell fire in a crowded theatre when there's not a fire.  And that's the case even though both murder and manslaughter, including negligent manslaughter, are illegal.  You can't lie about your product in order to sell it.  That's just for starters.

            We have a Constitutional right to vote.  Yet there are all sorts of limits.  You must be 18 - used to be 21, and it was not a constitutional challenge that led to reducing that to 18.  You must have registered.  You must even have changed your address.

            Likewise, there can and needs to be common sense limitations on gun ownership and carrying.  Your simplistic bumper slogans notwithstanding.

            "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

            by gustynpip on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 02:53:16 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  There has been no real effort to regulate guns (5+ / 0-)

      You are lying to claim there has been.  As long as the gun show loophole exists and 40% or so of people buy guns with no background checks local gun laws won't help much

      •  Me? (5+ / 0-)

        I said the regulations have been greatly relaxed in the last couple of decades and that it was time to think about tightening them up again. Handguns in particular were a lot harder to own legally in past decades than they are now. And as for assault rifles, they were a lot rarer too back then so there wasn't much need for regulation of them.

        Moderation in most things.

        by billmosby on Fri Dec 14, 2012 at 11:58:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And Bill you are absolutely right. Here is a (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Hirodog, billmosby, mkor7, gustynpip

          feature of guns that we do not talk about enough. Guns have no expiration date. They never go bad. So every new gun that is built adds to the numbers of guns. It does not replace a gun. Very few products can say this. Autos, appliances, PC's eventually break and need to be replaced and recycled. My father-in-law has a black powder gun from the early 1700s that works just great today. Works as well as the day it was made. Just requires a little cleaning. He also has a tiny brass cannon that fires real cannon balls. You see he like black powder weapons. And only black powder weapons. But the point is they still work. And that is but a small example of how long these things last. Guns will outlast everything eles built by man. When our skyscrapers have turned to dust our guns will still work.

          •  Yes. (0+ / 0-)

            I have a Trapdoor Springfield that was made in 1890 and a Luger from 1917. The springfield has had all of 20 rounds put through it by all appearances, and the Luger still needs a bit more break-in. I've owned it for 10 years and just decided to fire it last weekend.

            Moderation in most things.

            by billmosby on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 07:45:22 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site