Skip to main content

View Diary: Georgians can soon take guns to taverns and airports, but not into the building where law was passed (176 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Actually, as a long-time gun-owner who ... (9+ / 0-)

    ...abandoned the NRA in the second half of the '80s, I've followed the efforts gun-restriction advocates for more than two decades. And I've heard for that whole period how reform is just around the corner.

    I didn't say that no changes in the other direction occurred. I said they were modest. I stand by that and disagree that most of the legislative and court victories have been substantial. With a few exceptions, those victories have been nibbles around the edges while the other side have repeatedly scored.  

    And, yes, lots of people believed that gun reform was going to be a slam dunk. Take a look at news coverage and statements by gun-restriction advocates around February 2013.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 01:41:13 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well, I don't know if they really believed it or (4+ / 0-)

      not - they had to put on the best face regardless. I thought it had a shot, but it would be difficult.

      And the money the pro gun reform groups are raising is one big difference - I don't think groups like those have had that type of money in the past.

      And that money is not just going to outspoken pro gun reform Dems, it's going to Dems in tough races in red/purple states to help Dems overall.

      "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

      by We Shall Overcome on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 02:06:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think we were complacent (6+ / 0-)

      we thought that rational people would agree that 100 bullet magazines were a tad excessive, and that background checks were reasonable.

      Who would have thought the NRA would become an industry shill whose sole purpose is to make profits for gun manufacturers, at any cost to public health and safety?

      Naive, we were, I guess. We surely underestimated the passion that comes with making a lot of dough.

      That's why I suggested a boycott today--against Georgia and other states that push "guns everywhere" legislation. People in those states don't want extreme gun legislation--and their police, and restaurants don't want it either--but they may need a tangible way to show their legislatures and their governor that they're not alone, and that such extremism may not be a good idea for the state.

      •  That's becoming a common thread in these "pro" (6+ / 0-)

        gun legislative pushes - public safety experts, police, big parts of the community are against it, but because the Tea Party has gotten its claws into state legislatures over the past 10 years, especially since 2010 or so, the gun lobby has the legislators in their pockets doing their bidding.

        It's overreach and will come back to bite them - hopefully sooner than later.

        "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

        by We Shall Overcome on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 03:46:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "Police"? Huh. How have the sheriffs taken (0+ / 0-)

          the recent gun control policies in your home state?

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 07:25:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yep, police ... (2+ / 0-)
            Police Chief Jack Cauley said the majority of his department did not want the ban repealed. The Public Service Commission recommended the ban stay in place, Stevens said.
            http://www.denverpost.com/...

            According to the dictionary, sheriffs are sheriffs, and police are police.

            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

            by We Shall Overcome on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 08:16:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Police Chief is a political position. (0+ / 0-)

              Survey of rank and file police always show a support for individuals being able to defend themselves.  I'll point you towards a police only forum (that requires police verification); http://www.policeone.com/...

              •  I guess you didn't read the comment: (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Glen The Plumber, TheFern
                Police Chief Jack Cauley said the majority of his department did not want the ban repealed.

                "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                by We Shall Overcome on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 04:59:54 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You have far more faith in what a politically (0+ / 0-)

                  appointed position has to say about what the majority actually want than I do.  I'm sure he has done a blind poll of his department to make sure his words match observable reality. Could you link or at least show where this speaker obtained the data necessary to make his statement?

                  I linked a nation-wide response of certified LEO officers so even if his statement is valid its not the norm.  

                  •  What's the relationship between "Police One" (0+ / 0-)

                    and the NRA? It seems mutually beneficial:

                    Video: 2013 NRA Annual Meetings- Concealed Carrie - PoliceOne
                    Watch 2013 NRA Annual Meetings Concealed Carrie and other Female Police Officers videos on PoliceOne.
                    www.policeone.com/...6253230-2013-NRA-Annual-Meetings-Concealed- Carrie

                    Video: NRA 2013: Lights, Sights, Lasers with XS Sight Systems
                    At the NRA 2013 Annual Meeting Wes Doss of Khyber Training caught up with Stephanie Pastusek of XS Sight Systems to discuss the Lights, Sights, Lasers ...
                    www.policeone.com
                    ...6507076-NRA-2013-Lights-Sights-Lasers-with-XS- Sight-Systems
                    NRA awards Texas department with grant
                    Apr 16, 2013 ... The Vindicator LIBERTY, Texas The Liberty Police Department was awarded a grant by the National Rifle Association Foundation (NRA) for ...
                    www.policegrantshelp.com
                    ...6198325-NRA-awards-Texas-department-with -grant

                    NRA 2012 Public Service Award presentation | BLUtube
                    Sep 22, 2013 ... On 14 September 2013, Brian C. Smith on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Self- Defense Institute accept the 2012 Public Service Award during ...
                    blutube.policeone.com/...2685679833001-nra-2012-public-service-award- presentation

                    Video: NRA Training: Bringing the Street to the Range - PoliceOne
                    Watch NRA Training Bringing the Street to the Range and other Handguns videos on PoliceOne.
                    www.policeone.com/.../5955842-NRA-Training-Bringing-the-Street-to-the- Range

                    http://www.policeone.com/...

                    "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                    by We Shall Overcome on Thu Apr 03, 2014 at 09:46:57 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  Most owners of firearms that can accept (0+ / 0-)

        100 round mags find them excessive.  This is why they aren't commonly found.  They are pricey and jam frequently while being a pain to load.  The market is niche and mostly explored by those interested in novelty.

        You do understand there are a great many states that have allowed firearms in places that Georgia is now and a boycott over that range of goods and services is fundamentally impossible to enact as a movement?  I'm going to assume that the answer to both parts of that questions is "no".

    •  From our POV in CT we're winning (8+ / 0-)

      We passed new gun laws.  Gun nuts obviously got a bit incensed but nobody takes them all that seriously.  A big part of why we were able to do it was because it was a white upper middle class neighborhood where the median house price is $375,000.  Alot of wealthy traditionally GOP people pushed for tougher regulations because Sandy Hook was waaay too close to home for them.  It wasn't the Dem base that pushed it, it was the GOP base that did.  The stay at home soccer moms.

      Unfortunately, I think it didn't catch on outside of the Northeast because it wasn't too close to home.  Sandy Hook is 15 minutes from New York State.  Sandy Hook might as well be another world from Ohio which may explain why they not only didn't have the same urgency to pass more restrictions on gun laws but also why they have idiot Republican representatives pushing Newtown Truther bullshit.   I'm afraid that until it's their children huddled in some closet in a school praying they won't be the next ones shot that these fuckwits won't do jack shit about guns.  

      This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

      by DisNoir36 on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 04:32:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Connecticut is one of the happy exceptions... (3+ / 0-)

        ...and so is California, although I am not in agreement with all the restrictions here while still believing that several should be even stronger.

        But Connecticut was already way ahead of other states before Newtown. California has been a leader, too. Colorado's Democratic legislators are the ones who deserve credit for courage in the face of the gun lobbyists. Three of their number paid for that action even though the laws could not be repealed. In November, if the results can be comprehended granularly enough, we'll see whether those laws have pissed off enough Coloradans to put the Republicans back in the legislative majority.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 05:35:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sir, Please be forgiving of my ignorance, which is (3+ / 0-)

          huge, as well as this comment/question perhaps being off-topic.

          That being said, can you tell me or point me to where I can find the logic behind it ever being OK to bring personal guns into a public (non gun-related, i.e. target shooting, etc.) venue? Please know I am not trying to argue, just desperate at the moment for somehow coming to an understanding, if possible.

          And if I sound in any way rude, please forgive and hear my sincere intent.

          Dance lightly upon the Earth, Sing her songs with wild abandon, Smile upon all forms of Life ...and be well.

          by LinSea on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 05:46:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Views on the subject range from it's never... (5+ / 0-)

            ...okay all the way to no place except maybe detention centers should be allowed to bar firearms.

            Here's a self-defense argument you'll hear from some people who think most public venues should not be allowed to bar firearms: the Aurora shooting. The guy from whom I had taken weekend gun lessons, mostly to learn California firearms law and hone my rusting skills, said afterward the slayings that if people in that theater had been armed, the shooter would have been dead or incapacitated long before 12 other people there were.

            I'm of the opinion that if 5 armed people in that theater had decided to start shooting, many more patrons would have been killed or maimed. The guy I took lessons from might have been able to pick the guy off in the dark, chaotic theater, but most people don't have such skills. And, at the time, Colorado law was such that one could qualify for a concealed-carry permit with "training" on the internet. They would never have to actually fire the gun they were going to conceal to get that permit, but they would never have had to have fired ANY gun to do so. People like that are as likely to shoot themselves or the movie-goer two feet in front of them as they are to shoot a moving, firing target 20 or 50 feet away.

            Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

            by Meteor Blades on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 06:12:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thank you, sir, so very much for taking the time (3+ / 0-)

              to respond. I am in weepy mode this afternoon and thinking of the world my grandbabies (nearly 5&9) will inherit, which way too often seems unthinkable to me. I would hope that persons of your intellect, logical reasoning abilities and clarity will prevail -- IOW, luvs 'ya, MB. :^)

              Dance lightly upon the Earth, Sing her songs with wild abandon, Smile upon all forms of Life ...and be well.

              by LinSea on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 06:43:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  What causes me alarm, much as do the (2+ / 0-)

              climate change deniers, is that the same folks who so devoutly believe

              that if people in that theater had been armed, the shooter would have been dead or incapacitated long before 12 other people there were
              seem, to me, to be all too often in the majority of those who show up to vote. I know, I know -- we gotta' keep on keepin' on. Jes really tired tonight. Thank you, sir, for all you do and are. :^)

              Dance lightly upon the Earth, Sing her songs with wild abandon, Smile upon all forms of Life ...and be well.

              by LinSea on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 08:51:38 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I think the mistake you make is assuming that (0+ / 0-)

              in order to surpress another one has to hit the target.  That's not true.  Return fire towards the point of shooting would have made the shooter have to re-evaluate what they are doing and move them from being risk-free in walking around firing to having to judge their every move for exposure.

              The same way that any action is easier and accomplished more quickly when their is less stress being applied and less risk of injury in doing it.  This would slow down the rate at which the aggressor was able to operate before more trained force arrived.

              One should neither discount nor dismiss the added risk and stress factors of facing return fire.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site