Skip to main content

View Diary: Just Another Murder with a Gun (154 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not one of those guns fires itself. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cedwyn, FrankRose

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 05:59:39 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  seriously...the impulse to violence is the problem (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xxdr zombiexx, wenchacha

      taking guns away is like trying to put a band-aid on cancer.

      Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

      by Cedwyn on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 06:15:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I believe guns are technically quite dangerous (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Cedwyn, wretchedhive, FrankRose

        because they are designed to control an explosion and hurl a small heavy projectile for the purpose of penetration and destruction - whether it's a can or a moose or an enemy on the battlefield.

        But clearly most people handle them just fine, as they do cars, gasoline, knives, farm equipment and other dangourous stuff.

        Most people are responsible.

        Crime is crime. It has a rate and actually that rate IS decreasing.

        These horrible massacres are a different critter and represent a tiny tiny fraction of human events. Maybe 1/10000th of the population? 1/100000th?

        We can prevent some while other will slip through - it's it terrible and I have no bright ideas on how to prevent the Adam Lanzas and jared Loughners of the world.

        The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

        by xxdr zombiexx on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 06:24:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Start with reducing the ease of access (9+ / 0-)

          That line about "Not one of those guns fires itself" is a dodge. The person firing the gun wouldn't be doing it if he hadn't had access to it.
          It is indisputable that irresponsible people have easy access to lethal weapons. 30000 gun deaths per year, 11000 of them homicides, that's evidence. Since 40% of Americans are armed and obviously many of those armed Americans are irresponsible about their guns, that means the responsible gun owners are a small minority of the population. And for the convenience of that small minority, the rest of us, the vast majority, have to put up with the result of irresponsible gun owners having easy access to guns and ammunition.
          Does that sound right?
          When are the responsible gun owners going to step up and fix this problem OF THEIR MAKING?
          Or are they going to try to wiggle out of it and claim it's not their responsibility?
          Because unless they take the responsibility to fix this problem, there is no such thing as a responsible gun owner. The ones that think they are, are fooling themselves, they are enabling the slaughter.

          If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

          by CwV on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 08:01:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  47% of US households have a gun. (0+ / 0-)

            The vast, vast, vast majority of them has done nothing wrong.  The problem is NOT 'of their making'. How can you justify infringing on their rights for your percieved security?

            Did you agree with warrantless wiretaps in the wake of 9/11? After all, why should you have the 'convenience' of a warrant, if any attack that uses phones to coordinate would 'enable the slaughter'?

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 08:48:51 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  If you are responsible and have done nothing wrong (8+ / 0-)

              then why are you so opposed/upset by simple and sensible proposals for training, licensing, registration, and real/full
              criminal background checks?

              I know you will respond that there are many regulations, but there is no federal registration, training or licensing requirement. Background checks are a federal requirement with a huge loophole and thus only cover about 60% of firearm sales (private sales are exempt and many dealers qualify as private sales because of the loopholes), and even then they are not full criminal background checks as those typically take a couple of weeks (the ones now are just a quick check on an incomplete database that lists many people that are banned from owning guns, but not even close to everyone that is banned from owning guns such as convicted felons).

              Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

              by DefendOurConstitution on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:06:55 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  If you have done nothing wrong, why are you (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FrankRose, xxdr zombiexx

                so opposed to just letting us search your house or listen in on your calls or....

                Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:12:07 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Because my free speech is not killing over 30k (6+ / 0-)

                  Americans every single year.  In any case your comparison is incorrect as you should be comparing it to items I own that could cause/result in harm to others: my home and my car - both are registered and insured.

                  Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

                  by DefendOurConstitution on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:23:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well, over 1/2 of those people kill themselves (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    FrankRose

                    so at least stop distorting that number.

                    Or do you think that people don't have the right to take their own life?

                    Also, something I missed the first time through: Either you're a licensed dealer or you're an illegal dealer. The only legal ones are those with an FFL.

                    My comparison is right on the money with your "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" BS.

                    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                    by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:45:36 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Suicides count too. They are gun deaths. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      DefendOurConstitution

                      Whether they have the right to suicide is not the issue.
                      Many of them would not have happened without easy access to weapons, either.
                      You can split hairs all you want, it just proves to all how irresponsible you are. Absolutely refuse to take ANY level of responsibility for the carnage and litigate any argument therefore.
                      This whole string shows exactly what I was saying: the "responsible gun owner" is so rare as to be non-existent. It's like "Clean Coal", it's bullsh!t.

                      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                      by CwV on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 01:49:18 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Every gun owner is responsible (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        KVoimakas

                        for every killing.

                        Great logic.

                        Every drunk is responsible for every drinking-related death.

                        All those people who go to NASCAR events sponsored by Bud are supporters of alcohol-fueled mayhem.

                        Clearly.

                        Now, about those tobacco users......

                        The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

                        by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:39:04 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  That's right, misunderstand. On purpose. (0+ / 0-)

                          Of course that's not what I said.
                          It's the insistence that guns and ammunition be freely available, uncontrolled, to anyone who wants them, when it's obvious that a lot of people are getting them, that shouldn't.
                          And then rationalizing and twisting the argument to avoid having to admit the plain truth: the proliferation of guns and ammunition have created a dangerous situation for everyone because irresponsible people have too easy access.
                          This is the kind of dishonesty that makes having a "conversation" with gun...owners impossible.

                          If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                          by CwV on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:22:35 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I am not a gun.....owner (0+ / 0-)

                            How many motherfucking times do you need to be told this?

                            Anti-gun folks shoot themselves in the foot with this histrionic "if you don't foam at the mouth with us you;re responsible for dead kids" shit.

                            The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

                            by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:35:48 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You may not be a gun owner (0+ / 0-)

                            but you use the same dishonest arguments, you shuck the responsibility for them.
                            Do you really not see how fighting for easy access to weapons impacts all of us, all of society?
                            That particular blind spot is crucial.

                            If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                            by CwV on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:13:06 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You INSIST on being obtuse. Please proceed. (0+ / 0-)

                            The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

                            by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:43:20 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Now you are projecting. (0+ / 0-)

                            Another dishonest tactic employed by extremists. Do you take lessons for this or does it come naturally?

                            If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                            by CwV on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 07:54:55 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  And my right to keep and bear arms hasn't killed (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KVoimakas

                    anyone.

                    I will continue to compare constitutional liberties to.....constitutional liberties.
                    Shockingly, I find that appropriate.

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:56:12 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yes, YOUR right has... (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      DefendOurConstitution, CwV

                      And MY right has. OUR collective "right" has resulted in many, many thousands of deaths and injuries. At least get real about that.

                      The question is, are you ok with that? You seem to be. I don't think I am. Given my druthers, we'd get all the guns, lock them up, and save a lot more lives.

                      That won't happen, of course, not here. Not with "responsible" people like you around, guaranteeing those guns stay on the streets and in homes. So, we'll nibble around the edges. And I don't want to hear your whining.

                      •  The concept that rights have limits (e.g. when we (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Agathena

                        start infringing on others' rights) is not something that their sacred text allows them to consider.

                        I would love to have a discussion about that, but it is futile to try to engage them (just like it is futile to engage an anti-abortion nut regarding fetus viability, except the anti-abortion nuts are not responsible for as many deaths as the NRAvangelists are).

                        Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

                        by DefendOurConstitution on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 11:05:38 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  The 2nd amendment wasn't written strictly for me (0+ / 0-)

                        It is a right protected by the Bill of Rights for all Americans.

                        And our rights are not subject to your feelings of insecurity.

                        'Whining'? Nah. I prefer 'voting'.

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 12:42:50 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  This is not about you, it's about thousands of (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      DefendOurConstitution, CwV, madhaus

                      victims killed by too many available guns in the country. Your (you and the other gun hobbyist's) responses are glib and mocking in light of the tragedy of the diary.

                      JohnWelch's quote here.

                      ❧To thine ownself be true

                      by Agathena on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 11:23:13 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

            •  A telephone's purpose is not to kill (8+ / 0-)

              DO you understand that we have a major problem in this country with gun violence? DO you get it that a large number of these gun deaths would not happen if the perpetrators had to go through so effort to attain their weapons?
              Obviously, you refuse to step up to the fact that your lobby for your hobby has put all of us in danger by squashing sensible regulation and yes, I understand that it's a pain in the 4ss to have to register your guns and take a test for a permit, it's a pain in the 4ss  for me to have to go through engineering inspection to register vehicle I built for road use. It does prevent me from building a vehicle that uses a rocket motor because that would threaten the safety of everyone else on the road. That's a reasonable regulation as is the one that says I must have brakes and headlights. I'm less enthused about insurance, but it is also required in order to get a plate. It doesn't prevent me from building it, it's just one more thing that is involved in this hobby.
              Preventing regulation of weapons, lobbying to prevent regulation, arguing against regulation are pure dodges of responsibility. You can't call yourself responsible then dodge that responsibility.

              If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

              by CwV on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:09:13 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  There comes a time... (5+ / 0-)

              There comes a time when being "responsible" is to understand that it's not just about you. As a gun owner, you may have to be inconvenienced to save some lives.

              Get over it.

          •  If that drunk driver hadn't been drinking (0+ / 0-)

            if we had just banned alcohol....or at least had laws regulating its use, where you can use alcohol and laws about not driving drunk.

            Sure lots of people use alcohol responsibly, but this is just a dodge - alcohol kills. Period. You cannot argue it away. Dead is dead.

            Number of alcohol-induced deaths, excluding accidents and homicides: 24,518

            In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver

            Where's the petition to ban it?

            Are people so enamored with alcohol they rationalize leaving it legal?

            We can go on like this all day.

            The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

            by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 05:36:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Alcohol IS controlled (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              madhaus

              if not for the laws, many more people would be getting killed by drunk drivers. The laws all over the country were toughened up in the last two decades and sure enough, drunk driving accidents and the death rate have gone down. Your example proves my point.
              And no, it's not 100%, and neither would gun control solve 100% of the problem, but it would make a dent in it.

              If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

              by CwV on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:29:48 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Actually... (8+ / 0-)

        ...I think anything short of removing them is like putting a band-aid on cancer. Removing them would be more like eliminating cigarettes. While it wouldn't wipe out cancer, it would significantly reduce it.

        I wouldn't worry about it. People will still have plenty of ways to kill each other. They'll just have to work a little harder at it.

        I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

        by itsjim on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 07:46:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  the majority of u.s. gun deaths are suicides (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose

          factor in "suicide by cop" incidents, and its share grows.  

          Firearm suicides

              Number of deaths: 18,735
              Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.1

          All firearm deaths

              Number of deaths: 31,347
              Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.2

          but the majority of those gun-related suicides are carried out with a handgun, or at least not the kind of guns an AWB would touch.

          Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

          by Cedwyn on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 08:08:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And suicides don't count as deaths? n/t (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            itsjim, SilentBrook, mungley, splashy

            Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

            by DefendOurConstitution on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:08:22 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  That's okay too. (4+ / 0-)

            There are still plenty of other ways to commit suicide. Nobody is proposing a ban on ropes.

            This stat is misleading. Nobody needs a semi-automatic handgun to commit suicide as, if done properly, it shouldn't require more than one shot.

            I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

            by itsjim on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:14:34 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  but that misses the point (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas, FrankRose

              if the majority of u.s. gun deaths are suicides, the problem is suicide.  as you say, they'd find another way in the absence of guns, so let's address the suicide.

              as for banning types of guns, i just don't see any not-toothless measures getting out of congress, not anytime soon.  and it would consume everything and gun deaths would continue apace until it got sorted.

              but there are less dramatic solutions that can be implemented a lot sooner.

              http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

              Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

              by Cedwyn on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:18:43 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Really? (5+ / 0-)

                How about people who survive being shot, but whose quality of life is significantly and permanently diminished? Do you have any numbers for that? Is that not germane to this discussion? How about people who are not shot, but are traumatized just by being there? The effects of gun violence transcend simple body counts.

                I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

                by itsjim on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:49:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  more murders by firearms than all other methods (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                splashy, madhaus

                added together.

                Stop trying to justify the enormous number of guns in the USA. You can pull out all the stats you want, you are defending a deadly weapon, how idealistic and relevant is that?

                ❧To thine ownself be true

                by Agathena on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 11:27:51 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  i'm not defending anything except reality (0+ / 0-)

                  like it or not, the second amendment exists.  given that, we have no choice but to find solutions that don't involve banning guns, like ending the war on (some) drugs.  repeal the tiahrt amendment.  strengthen the social safety net.  etc.  

                  an AWB would likely face an injunction as soon as the ink was dry.  so its implementation would be delayed -- gun deaths proceeding apace all the while -- as it all wended through the courts; do you really expect this SCOTUS to rule the way you want should an AWB be challenged on constitutional grounds?

                  most gun deaths, in addition to being suicides, involve handguns; the guns/incidents that would be affected by an AWB account for 2% of u.s. gun deaths, tops.

                  so, if one were serious about addressing (gun) violence, one would not advocate putting everything on the line for a solution that could only address 2% of the problem.  not if one were smart, anyway.

                  Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

                  by Cedwyn on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:45:20 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  The desire to own guns is related to the impulse (5+ / 0-)

        to violence, they go together like a fever and a flu.

        The flu needs to be cured, but it would be great to take something to spell the fever in the meantime.

        "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

        by ranger995 on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 08:16:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Dude, you're sounding like a Chatty Cathy (4+ / 0-)

      who's been loaded with NRA slogans.

    •  The more guns, the more funerals (3+ / 0-)

      a great number of guns, a great number of funerals.

      I've heard all the gun peoples' responses before, they even bring up abortion rights into the discussion. The excuses are getting tired. There needs to be gun conrol. period.

      ❧To thine ownself be true

      by Agathena on Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 09:45:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site