Skip to main content

View Diary: Re: NRA's Worse Nightmare: Gun Confiscation. Why Hasn't it Happened Yet? (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Several member's of this forum have been very (6+ / 0-)

    vocal about their desire to achieve confiscation.  Many of these anti-gun diaries do nothing put pour gasoline on the fire.

    •  I support (10+ / 0-)

      the 2nd Amendment.

      I support responsible gun ownership.


      I am not responsible for what "several members of this forum" say, or believe, or advocate for.


      I think have a goof like LaPierre out there,

      hurts the cause of "responsible gun ownership."


      Even the SCOTUS has ruled that "reasonable exceptions" to the 2nd Amendment, are not prohibited by the Constitution:


      The Scalia Second Amendment Exceptions
      by jamess -- Mar 17, 2013

      •  I also (7+ / 0-)

        support those "reasonable exceptions:"

        1) limits the type of weapon;

        2) concealed weapons prohibitions;

        3) prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill;

        4) forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings;

        5) laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms;


        IMO such legal exceptions enhance "responsible gun ownership"

        -- not prevent it.

        •  Your idea of reasonable isn't the same as other's (4+ / 0-)

          The only things from your list that I would begin to entertain are items 3 and 5.

          Furthermore, stating demands and then asserting that these things are "reasonable" or "common sense" is really not conducive to making progress on the issue as it is effectively an ultimatum.  That being said, I really don't think that there will be any progress on this issue.  There will be no compromise and at most some enhanced rules on background checks will be passed and I would be surprised to see even that get through the House.

          Your statements also suggest to me that you view the legally armed citizen, not the criminal, as being the problem that needs to be addressed.  This is a lot of why the push for gun restrictions is failing.  If there is one thing that should have been learned by the efforts over the last three months is that if there is to be progress on reducing violence, including gun violence, that a different approach than an assault on people's liberties is going to be required as this will do nothing but drive them to hard lined, no compromise stances.

          •  I view (7+ / 0-)

            people who use guns,
            to hurt or intimidate unarmed people,

            as the problem.


            That, and the "mental competence" to own and respect  guns, in the first place

            as another BIG problem.


            re: those exceptions, Scalia made room for them.

            not me.

            •  Your definition (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Canis Aureus, Neuroptimalian
              use guns, to hurt or intimidate unarmed people, as the problem.
              Is a crime and does not represent law abiding citizens, it represents criminals.  
              •  it's not always so "cut and dried" (7+ / 0-)

                given the Stand your Ground laws:


                The fatal flaw in 'Stand Your Ground' laws
                by jamess -- Jan 02, 2013


                It used to be, a Deadly Threat had to be present and imminent,
                before you could "legally" respond in kind,

                with legal "deadly force."


                Now it's not so clear.  Some reading/interpretations of SYG,
                find that you only have to "feel threatened"

                to respond with non-equal "deadly force."

                Even when that threat was unarmed. Even in public places.
                Talk about slippery slopes.

                •  There is no 2A right to be a menace with a gun, (6+ / 0-)

                  not to oneself or to others.

                  David Waldman's weekly GunFail series is testament that significant guns are in the hands of people who ARE A MENACE to themselves and others.

                  The series Just Another Day in the Gun Grazy USA provides daily reminders that permissive gun policy has enabled one industry to profit handsomely from the flow of a dangerous legal product into the hands of people who can and do create a menage with a gun.

                  "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                  by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 01:09:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So how to address this: (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    noway2
                    significant guns are in the hands of people who ARE A MENACE to themselves and others.
                    How do you remove guns from those who already have them, yet are apparently a threat?

                    Do you go after law abiding citizens with further restricting of their rights or do you impose further penalties and stricter sentences for gun criminals and their deeds?

                    The first idea does zero to remove guns from those who have them already and yet are a threat....the second idea has a chance of deterring them, even a small one is better than zero chance.

                    •  The first step to solving any problem is admitting (3+ / 0-)

                      that it exists. Simplistic black and white choices do not reflect reality. There is no simple pool or law abiding gun owners vs. a pool of criminals.

                      ...law abiding citizens with further restricting of their rights...
                      The current state of failure has many inputs, not least of which has been a sustained attack over many years against policies that improve gun safety and increasingly permissive gun policy, that imposes the menace of untrained/careless/impulsive/angry gun owners in the public domain.  

                      Would you clarify what you would be willing to do, to separate unsecured firearms from the hands of minor children?

                      Would you clarify what you would support to separate lawful alcohol use from lawful RKBA?

                      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                      by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 04:34:50 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Sure (0+ / 0-)
                        Would you clarify what you would be willing to do, to separate unsecured firearms from the hands of minor children?
                        Enforce child neglect laws for one....your child gets a hold of an unsecured weapon and hurts themselves or others or is simply seen or known to have been placed with an unsecured weapon and you risk using your children.  Use public messaging to make this crystal clear.  Impose even stricter penalties for gun crimes committed by those who have no legal right to have a gun in the first place and yet use them in a crime.  Hold parents criminally responsible, IF the gun was given to a child with known reasons not to have one and/or a crime was committed with the gun and the child obtained the gun from a parents home and the gun was unsecured.  Perhaps make new laws that would require supervision of an adult if a child uses a gun ever. (this idea would have the most opposition....since some children are quite capable and responsible and compete and/or hunt regularly....I have used guns since the age of about 7 or 8 and won my first college scholarship at the age of 9)
                        Would you clarify what you would support to separate lawful alcohol use from lawful RKBA?
                        I completely support laws that prohibit the use of a gun while under the influence of alcohol and/or prescription drugs that would hinder your ability to use a firearm responsibly.   I feel the threshold of "under the influence" and/or penalties should be along the same lines as drunk driving.  

                        None of these ideas further restrict a law abiding gun owner nor make them have to change their own gun owning ability at all and would also work.

                        None of these ideas target the law abiding and only put the restrictions and further penalties on those committing crimes.

                         Even in the case of parents responsible for children's safety...this is already law and if a parent puts a child in danger in any regard and that danger was neglectful....they are not law abiding but themselves criminals and breaking the law.

                        Can I ask you for your ideas?

                        •  Are you aware that fewer than half the states (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          oldpotsmuggler, a2nite

                          prohibit sale of a firearm to someone under the influence of alcohol?

                          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                          by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 05:09:12 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  The focus of this diary (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Neuroptimalian

                          is about some citizen's fears of confiscation.

                          I was responding to your apparent concern with "further restrictions" which you frame as:

                          ...law abiding citizens with further restricting of their rights...
                          I find the idea of confiscation ludicrous even without our history of strong RKBA permissiveness. The practical barriers are too high; it takes multiple officers significant time, and incurs significant risk that an officer would get shot. We don't have the manpower, or the time.

                          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                          by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 05:23:36 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  ok, but you asked me my views on two particular (0+ / 0-)

                            issues and I answered.  I wish to know your views for discussion:

                            Would you clarify what you would be willing to do, to separate unsecured firearms from the hands of minor children?

                            Would you clarify what you would support to separate lawful alcohol use from lawful RKBA?

                          •  I've discussed my views repeatedly - and you (0+ / 0-)

                            dKos has a search feature that you can use to satisfy your curiosity easily.

                            Sorry, but even if I had the time, I must refrain from indulging your attempt to thread jack Jamess' diary.

                            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                            by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 06:06:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Wow, really. You asked questions and I was kind (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KenBee, noway2

                            enough to explain in detail my views to "satisfy your curiosity" and did so with true desire to have a discussion about it...since YOU asked and all.

                             Yet you apparently can't even answer the same question you drilled me on.

                            Ok, then.....don't worry about it.  I know the answer now.  No need to explain.  

                             

                          •  Sorry, if you misunderstood my comment (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            jamess, a2nite

                            It wasn't personal.

                            This diary is not the time nor the place, we are Jamess guests here.

                            I have already engaged in lengthy discussions with several RKBA members re my support for RKBA and where I think states will go forward if Federal level regulations fail. The next time I do have time, I'll send you an email so you can join in, if you care to do so at that time.

                            No way was I implying that you should care what I think. Just that if you can't wait to know what I think, it's all there at your finger tips in my diaries and comments.

                            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                            by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 06:41:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

      •  The NRA doesn't have much support here at DKos (6+ / 0-)

        I fail to understand why so much energy is spent on complaining about them, which amounts to preaching to the choir.  Even most Liberal gun rights supporters are turned off by their right-wing irrationality.  You are correct, though, their generalized position does hurt the cause of responsible gun ownership; which should be a non-partisan issue.

        •  I focus on the NRA (8+ / 0-)


          because most of Congress,

          is afraid of their NRA's shadows.


          They have no courage of their own convictions.

          Instead they look to the NRA, to know what to think or say.


          It's pathetic.  And worse yet, it's anti-democracy in action,
          speaking of the Constitution.

          •  Any power the NRA has comes in two flavors (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jamess, a2nite

            One is lobbying capability which can be represented in terms of dollars.  Their dollars come from two sources: manufacturers (and their ilk) and citizen members.  Shooting sports are not exactly a cheap hobby, so it is no surprise that there is plenty of money in the industry.  This is people speaking with their wallets.

            Two is the ability to mobilize people into action.  They have a very active communication network, effectively a grape vine.  They are prolific in emailing their members, they publish magazines, they make telephone calls, they distribute paraphernalia, they are active in the industry with respect to training and standards.  In essence, they are immensely visible.

            If the politicians fear them, it is because they fear their ability to influence voters.  One of the real problems with opinion polling is turning support for an issue into making it important enough to cause people to vote in support of it which is a a much higher and more difficult standard.

            •  No way 2 know who is getting paid to serve (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              oldpotsmuggler, a2nite

              as a spokesman for the NRA, or whether some are just volunteer spokesmen for the NRA.

              "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

              by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 01:11:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Accusing a member of Daily Kos... (0+ / 0-)

                of being a paid hack is H/Rable. I'm sure you know that by now.

                •  standards differ...accusations of NRA shillery (0+ / 0-)

                  often made and altho reasonable gun owner MB has been often quoted about dkos past policy of accusations of shillery it hasn't stopped the common daily accusation/implications, nor have  moderating principles prevented open discussions about antagonizing or declaring some commentors to be 'HOS' with justifications being twisted accusations of trollery...which summed up become 'disagreement'..like I said, standards differ if they even exist anymore.

                  This machine kills Fascists.

                  by KenBee on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 12:34:42 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  They are not afraid of the NRA, they are afraid of (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ban nock

            the huge percentage of gun owners in this country and are likely having their switchboards ring off the wall for months now with angry voters.

            I agree that a large percentage of people wish to see universal background checks in place, but even that support is fading with the latest polls out...so are these people calling their representatives 24/7.....because I guarantee you that the gun owners are doing just that.  

            My husband is a voter and a Democrat but very ho hum about politics and I can tell you....I have never seen him so interested in an issue...ever.

        •  No way 2 know why some kossacks persist in (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          oldpotsmuggler, a2nite

          repeating NRA talking points and RW memes, ad nauseum.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 01:10:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  at least those arguing for confiscation are (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Patrick Costighan

      for something that would potentially make a difference. Banning weapons that are almost never used in crimes makes a lot less sense.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 11:26:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  No way 2 guess which members of this forum (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      oldpotsmuggler, WakeUpNeo

      are very vocal in their opposition to any gun safety reforms.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 01:05:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site