Skip to main content

View Diary: Some House Republicans appear ready to back universal background checks for gun purchases (200 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No Bob, you'll see what you want to see. (8+ / 0-)

    There's three versions of anti-gun posters here on Dkos.

    1) Honest.  Twigg for example.  Hates guns, wants them all gone, willing to work on a reasonable solution with nearly anyone who will listen.  Knows he won't live to see the day that guns in the hands of anyone but the military and a few, very few select police, will happen.  Works towards "better".

    2) Dishonest.  There's a two page list of Kossacks for this one.  
    Meme:  "Now, we're not coming for your guns, other than the 'assault weapons'."  Now, is operative, not dismissive.

    Press them on a definition and you'll read this:
    "Assault weapons now, and that means anything other than a five shot revolver, or a muzzle loader.  
    Sooner or later, BHO will appoint SCOTUS Justices, and we'll get around Heller vs. DC and take the fucking handguns too."

    So "reasonable compromise" is read: "Fuck you, we're taking them all.".

    3) Heartfelt emotional.  
    "Think of the Children."  
    "IF just ONE life is saved."

    These are the people I have difficulty arguing with.  They really mean (for the most part, a few are category 2 persons) what they say.
    They're hoping that Gun Control will fix what years of failed domestic policy hasn't.
    That failed communities, schools, families can be remedied by Gun Control.  Urban renewal didn't do it.  Housing Authorities didn't do it.  The War on Drugs certainly didn't do it.
    Maybe a ban on guns will.  If not, WE TRIED.  Sometimes trying is the best you can do, as there's just too much to cope with.

    If the criminals and cops still have guns?  Well, at least there's less guns someplace else.  If hangings, cuttings, jumping and overdoses take the place of gun suicides?
    At least it's not gun suicides.  Mental Health care is so expensive, so hard to "fix".

    At least WE TRIED by outlawing the guns.

    I want to hug those people, not smash them in the face.  
    As it's like your child finding out Santa existed, just not in the exact form expected.
    Santa was an ideal, not a tangible outcome.

    •  So let me see if I follow... (9+ / 0-)

      You suggest that there are three types of "anti-gun" posters here:

      1. Those who want to ban/confiscate all guns and are honest about it.

      2. Those who secretly want to ban/confiscate all guns but are pretending/lying that they don't.

      3. Soft-hearted but naive people who want to save children, etc.

      Wow.

      The paranoia evidenced in your distinctions is clear.

      What about people here (probably the vast majority) who respect the Second Amendment and would like to see limits on magazine capacity, for example, or simply a more beefed up background check system?

      I guess they'd fall into your second category of "liars" because what they really want, ultimately, is confiscation/ban.

      Good lord...

      •  That's How I See the Problematic RKBAs... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, sidnora, FogCityJohn, mrblifil

        I don't mind hunters.

        I don't mind gun enthusiasts taking the kids to the range or skeet-shooting.

        I don't mind people who keep a handgun /shotgun / 22 (hopefully unloaded, with bullets in a separate drawer) for protection for their family.

        I believe that gun-owners who think they need an arsenal to protect themselves from their government are a bit insane, and they are the ones pushing this argument so far out into cray-cray land.

        Yes, meaningfully reduce arsenals in the homes of America.  Make the shooter have to re-load after six shots.  Make it so he can't fire bullets as fast as his finger can twitch.

        Why does this all seem so hard?

        Because you are arguing with deluded people.  As you say, its when you mix in a little paranoia with the reason that you get statements such as "registration enables confiscation", without any follow-up, such as you are trying to provide, which is "but the government will never do that."

        They cannot hear that last part.  Their neurons seem to freeze on the first part.

    •  4) People pushing reasonable strategies (6+ / 0-)

      that actually work.
      I have a three-part proposal:
      1: Mandatory background check on all sales, so that people who can't have guns can't get them easily.
      2: Registration, so that the change in title (like with cars) can be used to make sure the background check took place.
      3: Magazine cap at 10 rounds.

      1&2 cut down on the black market. Step 3 makes mass shooters slightly less lethal over the course of the event (more reloading, more chances to take the person down).

      "He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

      by Hayate Yagami on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 11:16:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  tipped for conversation (4+ / 0-)

        I agree with item #1.  Totally.

        Item two will work, only-if by some extraordinary measure, we go door-to-door and conduct an inventory.
        Otherwise, it exempts millions of firearms in existence.
        Vehicle titles have been the law since... 1969?
        If I want to buy a Packard V-12 there's no title exchange, despite the power of that automobile.

        Item three?  We're actually better with people having malfunctioning large magazines, than many small magazines of known reliability.  Loughner was tackled with a malfunction, not an out-of-ammunition situation.

        If he knew he was empty, and possed three 10-round magazines instead of that stupid 30-rounder?
        click-click bang.
        You'd need proverbial Super Man speed:  "Faster than a speeding bullet"

        •  re #2: (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Bluesee, JayBat, a2nite, 43north

          I'd settle for grandfathering in older weapons if it meant that we could start registering the new ones. Certainly not a perfect solution, but I'll gladly take a that over not moving  at all.

          "He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

          by Hayate Yagami on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:51:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site