Skip to main content

View Diary: RKBA: Liberal Alternative to the NRA (354 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Cursory judgement based on a cursory glance (14+ / 0-)

    is not much of an addition to the conversation.

     But thanks for the purity test questions. My record with the Democratic Party throughout my 63 years needs no such questioning.

    "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

    by meagert on Tue Feb 19, 2013 at 07:16:36 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not questioning your record at all, why would I? (11+ / 0-)

      Just observing that whatever LGC means by "reasonable regulations" is buried deep. Can't help wondering why that would be.

      into the blue again, after the money's gone

      by Prof Haley on Tue Feb 19, 2013 at 07:21:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This doesn't appear to be an answer (6+ / 0-)

      This is not an answer to any of the questions.  It's a statement of loyalty to something else.  

      I think the answers to those specific policy issues are far more important than when you have voted for a Democrat.


      by otto on Tue Feb 19, 2013 at 07:47:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No purity tests for me, thanks (14+ / 0-)

        Daily Kos has a search function. You may research the  answers given by the Group name, or individuals. As there are many members in the RKBA Group, there are as many answers. Contrary to opinion, the Group is made up of as many opinions on some things, as there are opinions on DailyKos about any subject.

        "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

        by meagert on Tue Feb 19, 2013 at 07:53:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  PUrity test? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coquiero, Prof Haley

          Isn't it simply a discussion of where someone stands on certain policies?  

          You are demonstrating the problem with discussing things with gun advocates.  They don't respond to any sort of real discussion.  It's almost always, "That won't work, because..."


          by otto on Tue Feb 19, 2013 at 12:14:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks, otto. (5+ / 0-)

            Been there, seen it, bought the tshirt.
            Your welcome to go through my comments, and pick out whatever you want to disagree with. But repeating them a thousand times gets a little boring. The group isn't new to Daily Kos, and neither am I.
             Applying some attempt at button holing my views, like "that won't work..." shows nothing more than you're willing to assign a view to all you disagree with, in an attempt to make your opinion look superior.
             Some people form their opinions quickly, with little research or definition. I don't need to prove my  Democratic/liberal status to those who oppose my views on this subject. I'm not shutting down discussion, I just disagree with measuring up to some other person's standards.
             "If you don't agree with me, then when did you stop beating your wife."

            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

            by meagert on Tue Feb 19, 2013 at 12:40:42 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Oftentimes it is not a discussion ... (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            noway2, Bob Johnson, PavePusher, KVoimakas

            for some -- including me -- military style carbines or magazine capacity are not intelligent points of regulatory focus ... for many reasons.

            But this position, again for some, is enough to engender the (literal or figurative F-you) label of an NRA shill, Scalia apologist, phallic infatuated, nutter.

            It's tiresome and annoying, to say the least.  Especially when the standards of discourse here are inequitably applied -- in favor of the majority proponents of scatter-shot regulation, banning or even 2A repeal.

            There is a common ground founded on progressive values -- though it's unlikely to see the light because of the intense passions on either side of the rights/control debate.

            As a card carrying liberal, progressive democrat ... my inclinations do not lie with an incrementalist approach to any policy that is supposed consensus "correct."  The Iraq invasion should be enough evidence to support that pov.

            As a pragmatic realist, I recognize and support the concept of incremental movement toward reduction of firearm misuse and crime is necessary.  What the incremental movement entails is where the policy debate resides.  If there are valid reasons -- data? -- to object to an "assault weapons" bans, is it worthwhile for both positions to dispense with this particular objective or "purity test" standard?

            Let us mobilize where we can find agreement ... illegal trafficking, dealer inventory controls ...even universal background checks (though I would prefer here a federal standard affidavit form Bill of Sale).

            Grist for the mill.

        •  "Herding cats" is the common lament... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          theatre goon, KVoimakas

          usually from our long-suffering 'organizer-by-default' (and because he was stupid enough to take on the job).

          Yeah, that'll teach him....

          (We love you, man!)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site