Skip to main content

View Diary: I am running against an NRA Democrat. I challenged the NRA at a rally. Here is what happened next. (607 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm a 2nd Amendment supporter (43+ / 0-)

    who despises the NRA. They do no one any favors except for themselves. They do not defend the average gun owner, IMO.

    The problem as I see it is that they suck up all the oxygen when it comes to giving voice to 2nd supporters. They is no room for groups who stand with the majority of gun owners, as a result nothing good comes about.

    Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

    by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:38:02 AM PDT

    •  ^^^^^THIS^^^^^^ n/t (13+ / 0-)

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

      by Meteor Blades on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:58:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If only reasonable people here would confront (15+ / 0-)

        the small but extreme group of RKBA people who seem to control the dialogue on this site. They follow the exact agenda as the NRA, yet very few reasonable gun owners try to control the narrative. I mean there have been militia members and Paulites who get shelter in those diaries and from that core group of members.

        It's just like moderate Christians apologizing for their more vocal fundamentalist counterparts. They spend more time trying to explain to the rest of the world that not all Christians are fundamentalists than they do confronting the fundamentalists.

        "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 Apr 07, 2014 at 10:50:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  MB: why have you not confronted the extreme NRA (6+ / 0-)

        policy stance of the most active gun vigilantes here on DailyKos? In fact, they go beyond what the NRA advocates.

        Yet you and other reasonable gun-owners never confront them. If you can't even shape the dialogue here, how can you expect to shape it in an election like Jason Paul's?

        Here are some of the policy positions supported by the most active RKBA leaders. Forgive my lengthy quoting, but I want to be clear that these are taken in context, in their own words. E.g.: http://www.dailykos.com/...

        Me: Should the 1934 NFA (and 1968 GCA) be overturned? I.e., even if you don't think it's likely anytime soon, you think the NFA should be overturned? [...] should buying, owning, and selling fully-automatic weapons be legal, without registration or licensing (as is currently required)?
        KVoimakas: Where it pertains to shot barrel shotguns/rifles, any other weapons (AOWs), suppressors, and select fire, yes. Pertaining to destructive devices [ordnance], no. [Recommended by: Wordsinthewind, FrankRose, theatre goon, BlackSheep1, Neo Control ]
        CarlosJ: Yes. n/t [Recommended by: KVoimakas, BlackSheep1]
        Me: Should the rate of fire be capped? Should there be a limit on the rounds/minute at which a weapon can be fired, to be legal (without special licenses/circumstances like the Army)? (E.g., machine-guns and the like?)
        KVoimakas: No. nt [Recommended by: Wordsinthewind, Kasoru, Robobagpiper, gerrilea, CarlosJ, shaktidurga, River Rover, theatre goon, IndieGuy, FrankRose, ER Doc, Tom Seaview]
        DispositionMatrix: Ditto.nt [Rec'd by KVoimakas]
        BlackSheep1:  I'll go with that too [Rec'd by KVoimakas, theatre goon, Wordsinthewind]
        Me: do you think buying, owning, and selling fully-automatic weapons should be legal, without registration or licensing (as is currently required)? Without mandatory training (certification)?
        DispositionMatrix [Rec'd by KVoimakas, Wordsinthewind, gerrilea]: Sure, but training should be extremely heavily incentivized. This should also be the case with non-NFA firearms.
        Note: even the NRA does not support this policy on fully-automatic weapons, a.k.a. machine-guns.
        Me: Should fully automatic shotguns be banned?
        KVoimakas: No. nt [Recommended by: theatre goon, CarlosJ]
        Wtf. Fully-automatic shotguns, are you kidding me?! Not just the NRA, but I'm not aware of any politically-viable group that goes this far. This, from the guy invited to speak at Netroots Nation? Yet not a single member who "supports 2A" stands up and says: 'That's absurd, and heinous!'?
        Me: Should all weapons that police & military have also be available for private citizens to buy? (Without registration, licensing, etc?)
        Kasoru: Yes. LEO and the military are answerable to the population. they are not our betters. Politicians do not deserve better protection then anyone else. [Rec'd by gerrilea, CarlosJ, Robobagpiper, FrankRose, Wordsinthewind, blackhand, theatre goon, IndieGuy]
        Me: Do you think that all weapons that the police & military have should also be available for private citizens without mandatory registration, licensing, training, etc?
        ErikO ["I am the Merchandising Director for the Liberal Gun Club and the co-owner of Olsen Training Group, a business that provides firearms safety and concealed carry training.": ... Personally, I think it is a good idea as it would impress upon kids just how important the four rules of safe firearms handling are. [Rec'd by KVoimakas, theatre goon, Wordsinthewind, DavidMS, gerrilea, ER Doc]
        JayFromPA: Police - yes. Military - no.  Police ARE CIVILIANS. All civilians should have the same access to small arms. Military should have access to ordnance. [Rec'd by Wordsinthewind, theatre goon, KVoimakas, DavidMS, buddabelly, gerrilea, ER Doc]
        Kasoru: All but explosive ordnance should be available w/o certification. And there are explosive permits and regulations already available to be had if one wished. If Bill Gates wanted to have a functioning say.. Destroyer? Why not? ... And if he used it wrong- it would get taken care of fast. [Rec'd by theatre goon]
        gerrilea: With proper training, why not? ... [Rec'd by CarlosJ, Robobagpiper, Kasoru, Wordsinthewind, theatre goon]
        FrankRose: Lets simplify your question. ...  I think it is more apt to ask 'Should police have special privriledges' [sic]. My answer is 'No'
        MB, are you reading this? These are the voices of the most active RKBA members. To say that "even the NRA doesn't go this far" is an understatement. Yet these are opinions we are forced, by DailyKos site rules and Admins such as yourself, to treat seriously and respectfully, and ever-so-carefully not insinuate that these policy positions are bxx-xxxx  xxxxxxe? [self-censored, so that I don't violate any site rules about "insinuating mxxxxx ixxxxxx" among gun-nuts.]

        [Long discussion with gerrilea, here highlights:]

        Me: I don't think she's suggesting that all high-school students should be trained in every weapon used by the police and military. ... Gerrilea, did I read you correctly?
        gerrilea [Rec'd by KVoimakas, Kasoru]: The only exceptions would be ordance... No one should have training on nuclear weapons, they should be banned everywhere. Every HS student should be trained an a variety of "arms", the ones used the most by LEO and Military.  The "high tech stuff", it depends what it is I guess.  But even then I'd have to say yes.
        Me: to clarify ... It's not clear to me if your position has changed, so to make sure I got it: [Q's snipped]
        gerrilea: ... What those "arms" are are immaterial, excepting nuclear devices.  They can, in an instant, destroy all life on this planet.  No one should have access or authority to use, build, buy, sell or trade these things. ...  Possession of an instrument one has a protected right to "keep" is not a crime. Semi-auto vs. auto...immaterial. Concealed vs. Open...immaterial. We can "keep arms" any way we chose.  Under my raincoat when it's raining or in a saddle bag when I'm riding a horse or any other variation.
        Me: I want to make sure I accurately understand your views, and that I'm not taking them out-of-context or misstatng them. I think I got most of it, and I appreciate your clarity. These points were all clear to me (but please correct me if I still didn't get it right). [Q's...]
        gerrilea: [... long discussion] I seriously don't know the items our gov't classifies as "ordnance" but I'm pretty sure the standard model has been that anything a person can carry was always acceptable, be it a grenade or grenade launcher. I do know that cannons are lawful to own as well. Again, my only exception would be nuclear, like the propaganda of "suitcase nukes" or dirty bombs.
        Me: Just to be triple-sure, you're talking about tanks, jets, etc. with the weapons systems still enabled (excluding nuclear weapons of course), not disabled... Right? And I'm pretty sure you'd see no objections to expensive weapons being jointly-owned, though you didn't say it explicitly.
        gerrilea: Disabling the weapons systems seems to be counterproductive if we are to protect our nation, state or municipality. ... I'd make this deal with you.  Whatever "gun regulations" that are to be agreed upon are done so with the proviso that they apply to all Americans, including LEO and military. If you ban an AK-47, do it across the board.
        Let that sink in for a minute. Now we're talking about allowing the creation of private arsenals in the US with capabilities equal to the US military (with the sole exception of nuclear weapons). Not a single RKBA member (out of 110), let alone any other member of DailyKos, speaks up when a Kossack advocates that all military weapons, including grenades, grenade-launchers, fighter-jets, missiles, and anything else besides nuclear weapons (chemical? biological?) be allowed to be owned by private citizens. It should not be left to members of RASA or Shut Down the NRA to call out these absurdities.

        And here: http://www.dailykos.com/...

        Me: Do you think all legal weapons should be allowed:
        1) to be carried openly? Anywhere?
        2) to be carried concealed (with whatever permit is required for any other legal weapon)?
        KVoimakas [Rec'd by Wordsinthewind, theatre goon, Crookshanks, Kasoru, Tom Seaview, FrankRose, gerrilea]: Couple things: Yes to both your numbered questions.
        Me: Regarding fully-automatic... I'm not aware of any RKBA members who think fully-automatic firing mechanisms should lead to different regulations on permitting, etc. If they exist, please speak up! For them, what part of the Second Amendment justifies this?
        KVoimakas [Rec'd by Kasoru, theatre goon, Crookshanks, gerrilea, Robobagpiper]: I don't think it's justified but since it's been law since 1934, I also don't see it getting overturned anytime soon.
        So KVoimakas not only thinks machine-guns should be legal, he also thinks it should be legal to carry them in public, openly and/or concealed.

        Etc.

        MB: this small but extreme group of gun-nuts on DailyKos follow an agenda that is even more reactionary than the NRA, yet very few reasonable gun owners here (including you) speak up to control the narrative. This does not help build our community, in fact it divides us. It does not create a powerful, cohesive DailyKos voice. Extreme policies like those advocated by KVoimakas and crew do not help elect either better or more Democrats.

        You write "^^^^^THIS^^^^^^ n/t" when someone says they "despise the NRA" (for not defending the average gun owner, for sucking up all the oxygen when it comes to giving voice to 2A supporters, and not making room for the majority of gun owners, etc).

        Why do you not write "^^^^^THIS^^^^^^ n/t" when we point out that the most active gun-nuts on DailyKos advocate even more extreme policy positions than does the NRA, and we despise these positions?

        I'm sure you don't need reminding that DailyKos is not Faux News. We do not need to "present both sides." We do not need to be 'neutral,' or 'fair and balanced.' We are partisan Democrats, with a party platform and well-reasoned opinions on the most heated political issues of the day. In my opinion those who support open carry of machine-guns, to take one example, should not be tolerated on this site.

        •  Is someone a reactionary for wanting to return (3+ / 0-)

          unions to the height of their power in a workplace?

          Is someone a reactionary for wanting to return to the high taxes we saw on the rich?

          A return to something better doesn't strike me as reactionary.

        •  Start a group dedicated to the repeal of an (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          high uintas, MertvayaRuka, CarlosJ

          Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

          Call others 'extreme'.

          Irony.

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:05:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You forgot the " Or Amend" part of that (3+ / 0-)

            but what else can we expect?

            It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness- Unknown -7.50, -5.03

            by dawgflyer13 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:27:39 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  "Or Amend"? Wow. Totally NOT extreme. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              CarlosJ

              Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

              by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:32:25 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, sooo extreme (3+ / 0-)

                because never, ever in the history of this nation has the Bill of Rights been amended.

                /snark

                Proving, once again, there can be no conversation with some members of the RKBA crowd regarding a better path to reducing gun violence in this country. Because:

                1. there is no such thing as gun violence

                and

                2. any amending or rethinking of the 2A is "extreme"

                Go ahead and slap that authoritarian tag on me too, while you are at it.

                It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness- Unknown -7.50, -5.03

                by dawgflyer13 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 09:15:35 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No. The Bill of Rights has never been amended. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  CarlosJ

                  That's not snark. That's elementary school level history.

                  "there can be no conversation"
                  You can speak out all you like.
                  The more gun controllers speak, the more the American people reject them for being too extreme.

                  Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                  by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 09:25:03 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  ^Constitution (typo, I know what you meant) (3+ / 0-)
                  because never, ever in the history of this nation has the [Constitution] been amended. /snark
                  Also, the Bill of Rights has been interpreted in fundamentally different ways over time -- and it required additional 'extremist' amendments to the US Constitution for it to include e.g. women, Native Americans, Afican-Americans, etc.
                  The Bill of Rights was in force for nearly 135 years before Congress granted Native Americans U.S. citizenship. And it was well understood that there was a 'race exception' to the Constitution. [Slaves] had no access to the rule of law: they could not go to court [so much for Bill of Rights Amendments 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8], make contracts, or own any property. They could be whipped, branded, imprisoned without trial, and hanged. In short, as one infamous Supreme Court opinion declared: "[Blacks] had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."
                  That 'extremist,' Lincoln.
                  •  I did... (2+ / 0-)

                    thanks for the correction - I am only on my first Mountain Dew and I usually need 2 to get me started :)

                    I love how rethinking this amendment has suddenly become an "extremist" POV.

                    As I pointed out to him below: repealing or amending doesn't mean "gun grab" - it could simply mean a better worded and better understood privilege. But, of course, when it comes to the guns - anything other than the status quo (and/or expansion) is "extremist", "authoritarian" and an "annihilation of freedoms".

                    It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness- Unknown -7.50, -5.03

                    by dawgflyer13 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:13:14 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Do tell, what is more "extreme" than (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      CarlosJ

                      repealing an Amendment in the Bill of Rights?

                      And yes, repealing a Right is an "annihilation of a right".

                      The wording is well understood and has been for the entirety of its existence.
                      Of course, it is best understood by those who actually know what the Bill of Rights is.

                      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                      by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:20:26 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I am only going to say this to you (3+ / 0-)

                        one more time because it's getting old, and boring, and repetitive and frankly (no pun intended)... stupid.

                        Repealing OR AMENDING an amendment does NOT equal "take away a right"...

                        And, if you continue to attempt to subtly insult me,  I will start getting nasty back - and there will be no subtle about it. I am not afraid of the gutter and I have NEVER enjoyed the high road (nose bleeds and all of that).

                        Of course, it is best understood by those who actually know what the Bill of Rights is.
                        You want to paint us as gun grabbers, do it... your attempt will fall woefully, and laughably, short, it is simply not the truth.  

                        But please do continue with your false equivalencies... it only hurts you in the end.

                        It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness- Unknown -7.50, -5.03

                        by dawgflyer13 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:34:28 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  The "Bill of RIGHTS" is a list of....ya know..... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          CarlosJ

                          "RIGHTS".
                          So yes, repealing a Right does, in fact mean "taking away a right".

                          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                          by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:52:07 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  gets him airtime I guess (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                          for his twisted talking points

                        •  No it doesn't in all cases however it certainly (0+ / 0-)

                          does when that is obviously the goal of the group supporting the action, and such is the goal of the group of people making the suggestion.

                          How would you feel if Jeb Bush were elected and wanted to repeal or amend the first amendment while constantly complaining that "these people shouldn't be allowed to have free speech".  Where every idea proposed "background checks for speech", "licenses for speech", "word limit on speech", "only so many speeches a month" and on and on and on no matter how many SC losses he decided to just repeal that pesky amendment.

                  •  Lincoln expanded rights. (0+ / 0-)

                    You seek to contract rights.

                    Sorry Sharon, nobody has to give up their rights because you find the freedoms granted to the American people to be "scary".

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:22:32 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  you mean the rights of the children in Newtown (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Glen The Plumber

                      those rights?

                      but you'll tell me they had none (because they're just like fetuses, that's the next step for you)

                      •  They were murdered. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        CarlosJ, DaveDC

                        Do you ask about the rights of those killed in 9/11 to justify torture, warrantless wiretaps and Gitmo?

                        What are you trying to say?
                        Rights don't exist because murderers do?

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 12:39:31 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Last I checked murder was illegal in all 50 states (0+ / 0-)

                        thus the right to not be murdered is protected by a law that punishes this act.

                        You may not be familiar with the legal philosophy of this nation in that it doesn't punish individuals before they committed a crime but only after and only after their guilt has been proven to a jury of their peers.  In this case and only this case is it just to restrict their rights because it has been shown they infrigned on the rights of others first.

                        You on the otherhand you desire to restrict the rights of people before any action is taken.  This is contrary to a system that is designed to protect rights for it forces the system to be a tool of infringement and oppression.  Such as the case where the law restricts the rights of gays to join in a union with one they love and restricts individuals from controlling what they decide to put into their own bodies such as raw milk, or marijuana.

            •  :-) Like that 'extremist', John Paul Stevens, (3+ / 0-)

              formerly a US Supreme Court justice.

              But I'd be fine with the two dissenting opinions (written by Stevens and Breyer) signed by all four of the more-progressive Supreme Court Justices in Heller. Overturning Scalia's misinterpretation of 2A would be a heckuva lot easier, not to mention faster, than amending it. But even this will take a huge effort, including maintaining the White House and Senate in Democratic hands.

        •  You threw up a lot of stuff in that comment (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MertvayaRuka, CarlosJ

          I'll try to address my opinions on them one by one.

          On your linked comment, cosmetic changes on a gun that functions exactly like others of its type should not be banned because someone thinks they look scary. Sometimes those changes are functional, making the firearm more user friendly, sometimes not, but if it's just about looks it is stupid.

          2 On the 1934 and '68 laws I honestly don't know enough because I am not a gun owner or user. I would need to fully educate myself on the pros and cons, not just make a gut decision.

          I do believe that suppressors should be legal to purchase for noise protection, criminals already have them why not legal users?

          3 I don't agree with that one.

          4 I don't like the militarization of the police. I have seen what they can do to peaceful groups. I take the opposite approach and would limit them to a hand gun and a heavy flashlight. Fuck the SWATs.

          5 Where I live at least 3 out of 5 kids are fully knowledgeable about firearm use. They are trained by their parents. I worry more about the 2 out of 3 personally. I think that firearm training is always a good idea.

          6 I live in an open/concealed carry "shall issue" state. I have no problems with it, but I prefer concealed carry.

          As for fully auto, kvoi doesn't see the justification for the law, I disagree but kvoi also said he is comfortable abiding by it.

          Why are you calling for Daddy MB? We are adults with opinions, do you want to censor people?

          Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

          by high uintas on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:05:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just want to say (0+ / 0-)

            I often rec comments that I don't agree with if they aren't abusive or snarky. I have given Bob scores of recs in discussions that were civil.

            A rec does not equal an agreement. Maybe you didn't know that?

            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

            by high uintas on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:10:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Rec'd for reasonable tone and form (0+ / 0-)

            Sadly such a rarity in these discussions that it stood out enough to recommend.

        •  So an adamant defense of the rights of the people (0+ / 0-)

          in accordance with the Bill of Rights on a Democratic site is shocking to you.

          What other rights do you believe should only have the illusion of being defended by Democrats?

          Voting Rights?
          Abortion Rights?
          Free Speech Rights (or are we only agaisnt free speech zones when Bush is President)?
          Right to Trial?

          I'm a little lost because you seem to be terribly offended by people defending the rights of others when I consider that an integral part of being liberal.  

        •  So the vigorous defense of rights (0+ / 0-)

          in accordance with the Bill of Rights on a Democratic site is shocking to you.

          What other rights do you believe should only have the illusion of being defended by Democrats?

          Voting Rights?
          Abortion Rights?
          Free Speech Rights (or are we only agaisnt free speech zones when Bush is President)?
          Right to Trial?

          I'm a little lost because you seem to be terribly offended by people defending the rights of others when I consider that an integral part of being liberal.  

    •  Too bad there's no liberal alternative to the NRA (12+ / 0-)

      That actually has a different position on guns than the NRA…

      Perhaps this could be a start?

      Baby, where I come from...

      by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:23:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So the little people (4+ / 0-)

        Mayors, Brady, Giffords... they qualify, they just aren't sexy enough

        •  I was referring to here at Daily Kos... (7+ / 0-)

          :)

          I fully support those you listed above... absolutely...

          Baby, where I come from...

          by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:41:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  RASA? Firearms and Law? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Caittus, Glen The Plumber
            •  I consider them more of a sane alternative (8+ / 0-)

              to the NRA but you're right, it qualifies...

              My point is that the group that most seeks to present itself as such around here sports the exact same position on guns as the NRA does...

              Baby, where I come from...

              by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:51:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Except in one essential way (8+ / 0-)

                RKBA has never endorsed a Republican.  Ever.

                There is a difference, and its a substantive one from our perspective.  RKBA doesn't stand in the way of progress on other issues in pursuit of its own.  That should earn her some respect.

                •  They endorse the Republican position on guns (11+ / 0-)

                  and oppose the stated Democratic Party platform's position on guns...

                  Try doing that with ANY other Republican position around here... abortion, taxes, same sex marriage, equal pay for women...

                  You really expect accolades for not "endorsing a Republican" at a site dedicated to electing more and better Democrats? Really?

                  Baby, where I come from...

                  by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:25:42 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  KV has written that he would sit out an election (9+ / 0-)

                  rather than vote for a Dem with any "wrong" 2A position.

                  There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                  by oldpotsmuggler on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:48:51 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  My friend kvoi (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    FrankRose, ER Doc, happymisanthropy

                    does not always speak for everyone and I don't remember that but it's possible if the Dem were odious enough on the 2nd. I might do the same, I take the Bill of Rights seriously, all of it.

                    There is a lot of noise here about the 4th, an amendment that most just sat back and let die because...Security! Drugs! Terrorists!

                    Would you vote for a Dem who advocated gutting an amendment to the Bill of Rights?

                    Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                    by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:03:07 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Your friend kvoi wants to gut gun control (11+ / 0-)

                      http://www.dailykos.com/...

                      I'm pro-gun reform. Repeal of the Hughes Amendment (12+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                          MertvayaRuka, Kasoru, theatre goon, ban nock, happymisanthropy, FrankRose, Tom Seaview, BlackSheep1, Robobagpiper, Hangpilot, Crookshanks, DavidMS

                      and delisting of SBRs/SBSs/AOWs and suppressors.

                      Share Our Wealth -10, -7.23

                      by KVoimakas on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 11:44:37 AM PDT

                      And judging by the recommends ...

                      You do know what he is saying right ?

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

                      "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                      by indycam on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:08:23 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I do know indy (3+ / 0-)

                        and I don't agree with everything he says. It is interesting to look at the motivations behind a lot of what we call "gun control".

                        The Gun Control Act of '68 was supposedly a reaction to the Kennedy assassinations even tho' the only issue that addressed them was a ban on mail order guns.

                        IMO, much of the push behind that act was fear of black hands having guns. The Panthers scared them. When it comes to enacting limiting laws doing them is much easier than undoing them.

                        As for machine guns. I don't want them and I can't imagine that it would be a good idea. I'm sure they are fun to play with, those places that do let people come in and have a go at them should be plentiful.

                        Shooting at targets can be fun, blowing the shit out of something can be fun, too. mr.u's favorite part of mining was drilling and blasting...just sayin'

                        Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                        by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 01:08:54 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Controlling one's impulses is not only fun (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          oldpotsmuggler, ThatSinger

                          but grown up; sure you may think dynamite is fun, so does Ted Nugent, but the next guy over may not

                          We have a right to live peaceably on this planet, despite some  RKBA saying we don't

                          •  You are insulting me out of ignorance (4+ / 0-)

                            Do you like fireworks, same stuff as dynamite just smaller.

                            I have never advocated violence, neither does RKBA. Maybe you should educate your self, Ted Nugent is ignorant, too.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 04:05:40 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  no I do not, not by amateurs, drunks and fools (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldpotsmuggler, ThatSinger

                            which is pretty much what we face here

                            I know very well what dynamite is, the damage that it can do and why it is licensed

                            RKBA advocates violence by belittling and demeaning those who wish to even discuss Newtown, the children, and platforms to reduce gun violence

                            And now you're quoting frankrose, 'educate yourself'...  

                          •  You have a very low opinion of your fellow (3+ / 0-)

                            citizens.

                            I do not.

                            RKBA advocates violence by belittling and demeaning those who wish to even discuss Newtown, the children, and platforms to reduce gun violence
                            Same post you call people "drunks and fools".
                            You really have to keep up with what you write.
                            And now you're quoting frankrose
                            "Push play"
                            Irony.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 06:54:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's an effective way to deal with you, Frank. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldpotsmuggler, ThatSinger, a2nite

                            Push  "Play"...

                            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                            by Bob Johnson on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 06:57:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  More effective than your political viewpoint on (3+ / 0-)

                            this issue.

                            I'll give you that.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:02:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hey, tell me again how Bill Clinton thinks talking (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldpotsmuggler, ThatSinger

                            ... about restrictions on guns is a bad idea. Oh, and tell me again how a base commanding officer can "order men and women into a war-zone."

                            Push "Play"...

                            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                            by Bob Johnson on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:06:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So people who you don't like (3+ / 0-)

                            are automatically amateurs, drunks, and fools. You have an attitude that is unbecoming to a liberal, more authoritarian IMO.

                            For your info mr.u was a Miner First Class, attended school to learn his trade and was the lead man of his crew. Still, he loved blasting.

                            Education is always good, I wasn't aware that Frank says that. Wonder why both of us use it on you?

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:56:29 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're insulting and foolish comparison (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            about those who exercise their rights and wish to preserve that exercise is quite revealing.

                            You have an emotional position therefore you have an emotional reaction when that position is fairly critiqued.  If your position cannot withstand a reasonable debate perhaps you should re-examine your position instead of attempting to insult and demonize others.

                          •  One of my neighbors doesn't like black skinned (0+ / 0-)

                            folk. Should her right to live peaceably without the stress of seeing me be cause enough to infringe on my right?

                            No, absolutely not and the same in your case.  The nervous nellie neighbor's fear does not give cause to infringe on anyone else's rights.

                      •  Isn't the Hughes Amendment (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        high uintas

                        the one that prevents transfers of machine guns between civilians with some federal permission slip or something?

                        •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

                          What is crazy about that amendment is that it bans the exchange of fully automatics made after 1986. It's not like "it's raining Tommy Guns!! wOOt" but it's kind of a crazy bill to me.

                          That said, I don't believe that fully autos should be treated like regular firearms.

                          Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                          by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:28:57 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Here's a test. Where do you come down on the (2+ / 0-)

                      Tenth?

                      There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                      by oldpotsmuggler on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 03:52:19 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Okay, you don't want to talk about the Tenth (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sharon Wraight

                      Amendment, how about "The Paramount American Right" the "Right to Privacy".

                      You have noticed that that's not even in our current Constitution, haven't you?

                      How do you feel about that?

                      There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                      by oldpotsmuggler on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:11:06 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  SCOTUS (0+ / 0-)

                        pulled the right to privacy from the many protected rights that are in the Constitution.

                        The U. S. Constitution contains no express right to privacy.  The Bill of Rights, however, reflects the concern of James Madison and other framers for protecting specific aspects of privacy, such as the privacy of beliefs (1st Amendment), privacy of the home against demands that it be used to house soldiers (3rd Amendment), privacy of the person and possessions as against unreasonable searches (4th Amendment), and the 5th Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy of personal information.  In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people."  The meaning of the Ninth Amendment is elusive, but some persons (including Justice Goldberg in his Griswold concurrence) have interpreted the Ninth Amendment as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.
                        How do I feel about the Tenth. Every time I think it's stupidly outmoded something like same sex marriage or pot legalization comes along and proves me wrong.

                        Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                        by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:35:18 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  That's sure not the way that we were taught this (0+ / 0-)

                          subject at the U of U College of Law. I think that you're coming much closer to the Federalist Society.

                          Goldberg was a proponent of national popular will, as opposed to states rights. Allowing the minority to impose its will on the majority is an archaic contruct.

                          There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                          by oldpotsmuggler on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:48:49 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Hint: (0+ / 0-)

                            We have a Federal system of government not a National one.

                            The Constitution was written as a document created by the states a new entity from some of the shared powers of the states.  It only has the authority explicitly granted to it by the states in the limited areas the states allowed it to function.  The 10th amendment is there for individuals who would rather ignore history and conjure beliefs to remind them of the limited nature of the Federal system should in the course of time anyone become unaware.

                          •  How very, very right wing of you. Toes the party (0+ / 0-)

                            line, but doesn't bear even a shred of resemblance to reality. While this country has far more "Federalism" than we one the left would like, we're not even close to where the right wing wants us to be.

                            There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                            by oldpotsmuggler on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 04:19:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Not everyone on the left dislikes Federalism. (0+ / 0-)

                            Your view that everyone does and that everyone who doesn't find the problem you have it is right wing exactly displays the kind of narrowminded thinking that is the cause of quite a few problems you have interacting with others on this site and I would imagine face to face as well.

                            You have a box you place people into if they disagree with you and it closes you and them off from gaining knowledge, understand, and allies.  

                            Nameste.

                          •  You're wrong about "Federalism". Just a fact. (0+ / 0-)

                            There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                            by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 07:52:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Not at all but I don't defines fact as (0+ / 0-)

                            'what I want to be true' as you do.  Many on the left enjoy the benefits of social experimentation and progress of Federalism such as the states who allow gay marriage which then show none of the hand-wrining events predicted occur, or the same for the decriminalization of medical and recreational marijuana.

                            In a national system these pockets of experimentation wouldn't be allowed and thus societal change would not progress nearly as quickly.  

                •  many rarely do anything that isn't driven by guns (7+ / 0-)

                  please check their comments

                  •  If your "group" is about quilts (7+ / 0-)

                    or pooties or gardening then that's what you talk about in your group.

                    Some here have villainized kvoi to the point where he can't say anything without some kind of snark and BS thrown at him. On matters political he is whip smart and very progressive but you wouldn't know that if all you do is sneer at him.  

                    Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                    by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:16:31 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  He's been on occasion far more amenable (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      high uintas

                      than others, I've even thanked him, though sometimes he seems to be a little inflexible, last weekend was maybe such a time

                      And it's a 2 way street, the name calling goes on and on

                      •  You are absolutely right (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        i saw an old tree today, ER Doc

                        We get hot and others do too. I like it better when we can talk but it doesn't always work out that way.

                        Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                        by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:57:00 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  Speaking of making it personal (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      ThatSinger

                      I say thanks to people a lot on this site, and searching the from:to comments isn't possible, I've thanked KVoimakas for engaging in discussion (when it's happened), I thanked Tominator recently for engaging in discussion on suicide, blackhand, someone the other day too, just for being open minded

                      It's great when there's reasonable discussion, too often bruised ego seems to take over, there are some commenters that won't discuss anything, they just ride the leaders wave

                      The links on voting upthread I posted because I'd remembered seeing something similar, it is a genuine concern to me, how the RKBA group thinks they are supporting more & better Democrats, without engaging in how that's coming about, so it looks mostly like personal problems (inability; past grudges; smoking too much pot; drinking and posting; etc)

                    •  "kvoi" made his bed... (7+ / 0-)

                      now he gets to lie in it... you're not seriously trying to assert that "kvoi" has been a model of charm and politeness, are you? He freely, willingly and with apparent relish anointed himself the "face" of RKBA and as their standard bearer bears responsibility for his own actions and those of his cohorts...

                      Seems a great many RKBA'ers have no problem dishing it out, but when it comes to taking it? Not so much...

                      Baby, where I come from...

                      by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:57:03 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No (4+ / 0-)

                        Be reasonable, of course he gets mad at time. I do, too. I descended into taunting kathy88 (irrc) once and really regretted it. She and I carried on and found that we were really in agreement on at least 95% of everything else and it isn't worth attacking one another for.

                        If you talked with him I bet you would find the same agreements with kvoi. The thing is, he is labeled "the gun guy" and no one pays attention to his other political positions or why he is so intent on convincing the guys who come to be trained or to the shooting range that Dems are not the bad guys.

                        It makes it hard to believe that when some here want to ban guns altogether. When it comes to RKBA he is the show runner, but you can't paint all the actions of everyone in the group on him. We have removed people who went over the line in the past, but most folks get a long free speech rope, Bill of Rights again.

                        Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                        by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:04:20 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  He was not "labeled" the "gun guy" (7+ / 0-)

                          he freely placed that hat upon his own head...

                          Tell you the truth, I'm so sick of hearing about how people like "kvoi" and the rest of RKBA are "just like me except for guns" I could spit... I reject that notion because frankly no one who's "just like me" could stomach, much less adopt the NRA's position on guns..

                          The fact is, he and RKBA promote a decidedly Republican position on guns and anyone who did likewise with ANY other subject would have been shown the door here after their first diary... the answer is not to shame and badger the rest of us into adopting that position by telling us our position isn't really the "liberal" position... disingenuous semantic wordplay appears to be the weapon of choice amongst the more vocal/visible members and "kvoi" has shown little to no compunction to engaging in same when he sees fit.. or gets pissed off, which is rather disturbing in and of itself...

                          And yes, until "kvoi", or you or someone with a shred of courage stands up to the bottom feeders in your group, you're ALL painted by the actions of the "few" you claim to reject but never quite get around to doing so publicly...

                          Baby, where I come from...

                          by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:17:49 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Pro 2nd is not Republican (6+ / 0-)

                            and "bottom feeders", srsly?

                            You're right, I'm nothing like you.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 01:49:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Opposition to the Democratic Party's platform (2+ / 0-)

                            position on guns is decidedly Republican/NRA/Tea Party/RKBA...

                            Why are you unwilling to acknowledge that? Be who you are, it's OK... but stop pretending that your position on guns doesn't mirror the GOP/NRA/Tea Party position on guns...

                            OR you could state how it differs...

                            I'll wait...

                            Baby, where I come from...

                            by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 02:44:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How am I in opposition to the platform? (4+ / 0-)

                            This is the platform statement adopted in 2012 by the DNC

                            We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements--like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole--so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few
                            I support this completely, with me already stated caveat on assault weapons. I'll repeat my stance on AWB again.

                            In 2004 they pushed for the assault weapon ban and closing the gun show loophole. I agree but I want to see the definition of "assault weapon". Don't pass laws making weapons illegal just because they look scary, it's like saying pot and heroin are the same thing.

                            Be smart about it, bring gun owner to the table. As for the "gun show loophole" I know that here you have to do a background check if you buy from a firearms seller but private sales are exempt. That is true no matter where you purchase.

                            In 2000 they pushed the following

                            Democrats passed the Brady Law and the Assault Weapons Ban. We increased federal, state, and local gun crime prosecution by 22 percent since 1992. Now gun crime is down by 35 percent. Now we must do even more. We need mandatory child safety locks. We should require a photo license I.D., a background check, and a gun safety test to buy a new handgun. We support more federal gun prosecutors and giving states and communities another 10,000 prosecutors to fight gun crime.
                            Child safety locks make sense in home with children. I've already said I'm for background checks. The test? No. You don't have poll tests and you don't have test to exercise your right to free speech either.

                            Looks to me like the Democratic Party was all about the Prison Industrial Complex in 2004, 10K prosecutors? Wow!

                            I go even further that the Dem Party platform! I am for sensible magazine size limits. By sensible I mean the magazines that come with the gun, no after market 30 round monstrosities.

                            Why are you hatin on me?

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 03:59:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What you have stated is directly at odds with RKBA (4+ / 0-)

                            on a number of issues... I'm curious as to why you would align yourself with such a group, given the positions you speak of above? For example, you state that you support (from the Democratic Party platform) -

                            We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation.
                            I have been called an authoritarian "anti" for stating that exact same position on numerous occasions by numerous RKBA members and their adherents... I've been accused of secretly supporting regulation as a vehicle for confiscation as well... and then there's this:
                            We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence;
                            My experience with RKBA has been that simply mentioning the TERM "gun violence" subjects me to abuse, scorn and condescension... the whole "it's not the guns causing the violence" blather...

                            And this:

                            We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements--like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole-
                            Renders you diametrically opposed to the stated RKBA position, to the extent that I've been told on numerous occasions that there IS NO "gun show loophole"... as for supporting an assault weapons ban, that's gotten me labeled in favour of banning ALL guns by more than a few RKBA'ers...

                            "Hatin' on you?" That's inaccurate... if those are your views, I'm largely in agreement with you... far more than any of the other people who claim membership or alignment with RKBA (the group)... I was unaware of your exact position(s) which is why I asked you... trust me, if I were "hatin' on you", I wouldn't have bothered asking...

                            But it still puzzles me why you'd align yourself with that particular group or at the very least why you've not bothered to speak out against the more vocal, less reasonable members of the group you align yourself with who've taken it upon themselves to castigate and condescend to people like me literally from the word "go"?

                            It would go a long way towards opening up channels of communication, which frankly were poisoned pretty much from the outset, at least in my experience... there never seemed to be an acknowledgment at the outset that RKBA was espousing a position on guns that was dramatically different from the vast majority of liberals like myself who actually support the 2nd amendment as well... if it seems like "hatin'" it's just because I'm sick to death of their bullshit...

                            I apologize if you got caught in the crossfire (pun intended)...  it's too bad people like you aren't more vocal and some of the others (sorry about the "bottomfeeders"remark too) don't take a knee for awhile and let some air into the room...

                            Baby, where I come from...

                            by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 04:41:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Different member have different lines (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            happymisanthropy

                            As for the "gun show" as I said in my comment above our gun shows have background checks on firearm sellers. Private exchanges are exempt as they are in the rest of the country.

                            I'm at a loss on what the "gun show loophole" is, srsly. Are people concerned about private sales only if they are at gun shows?

                            I aligned myself with RKBA because I am very concerned out the whole of our Bill of Rights and because I am a strong supporter of the right to keep and bear arms.

                            I have yet to have a complaint with the core members of our group. I may not agree with everyone on every issue but from the first time I asked to join to now I have found them to be great people.

                            We have had a few members who went to places that I don't go in their beliefs but as long as they are respectful why should I tell them what to think? I just express my own opinions.

                            That is a problem I see here too much. People who are so certain that they hold the one and only true right opinion and that they are entitled to attack anyone who disagrees. Yes, I have seen it in RKBA but I've seen more of it coming from those who attack the group.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 06:34:47 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm sorry, but I disagree with this observation.. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            coquiero, Sharon Wraight
                            I've seen more of it coming from those who attack the group.
                            You've apparently not been looking very hard...

                            Understand, at the outset, this group descended upon this site like a bull in a china shoppe... a liberal blog being told in no uncertain terms that WE must change and FULLY accept their premise about guns, regardless of our own personal beliefs or experiences... there was little to no "I understand this might be a new concept for some of you", just an immediate and blanket demand for acceptance and equal stature... and when it was not immediately forthcoming, many of their members bestowed "oppressed minority" status upon themselves and began tossing about terms like "authoritarian" and accusing us of "losing elections" even after our president was overwhelmingly reelected despite millions of NRA dollars spent trying to convince people that he was out to take their gunzzz... very few of us, certainly not me started out with the mindset of "attacking" this particular group... its "rollout" was handled poorly and I might add several of those on the "tip of the spear" at the onset have been shown the door, some of them several times...  

                            I had personally NEVER had a comment hidden until RKBA showed up... are you trying to suggest that I all of a sudden changed after about 5+ years of posting my opinions here at Daily Kos without incident?

                            You seem like an intelligent, decent person but it doesn't appear you're willing to acknowledge the actions of those who so poorly represent you in this forum by virtue of your aligning yourself with them... it's my sincere desire to find at least a few people from that camp who might be willing to address the obnoxious behaviour of the goons who routinely plod thru these diaries... I guess I'll just have to keep looking...

                            Baby, where I come from...

                            by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 06:57:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Do the experiment I did (5+ / 0-)

                            take the other side for awhile and see what happens. You don't need to wear the taint of being a defender of the 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights, just imagine that you are and read the comments.

                            If you still feel that way, then maybe I am blind. Because I read insults and snark and Bob's ever popular bully diaries. I read people who flat don't know what they are talking about telling others what is what.

                            And most of all I read comments that would scare the shit out of the most moderate of gun owners. People who want to ban firearms altogether as if...

                            BTW, after Newtown I was called a baby killer here, even tho I don't own a gun. Just for having an opinion and being a known RKBAer. An actual baby killer.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:03:30 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  See, here's where we part ways... (3+ / 0-)
                            You don't need to wear the taint of being a defender of the 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights, just imagine that you are and read the comments.
                            I AM a defender of ALL rights covered under the Bill of Rights, just apparently not on your terms, therefore you feel it necessary to play this bullshit game wherein I "pretend" to be "reasonable"... by your standards of course... hey, maybe you are blind?

                            Like I said, I'll keep looking...

                            Baby, where I come from...

                            by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:07:56 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I agree ThatSinger (4+ / 0-)

                            That was uncalled for and I was being an ass. I apologize.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:48:13 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Says a member of a group dedicated to the Repeal (0+ / 0-)

                            of an Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

                            Way to go "defender".

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:36:21 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            i saw an old tree today

                             photo 1127242739_54_zpsef015cc7.jpg

                            Baby, where I come from...

                            by ThatSinger on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 09:06:21 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There you go again... (4+ / 0-)

                            leaving out vital parts of information.

                            It is "repeal or amend"...

                            And repealing might lead to something better, ya ever think of that? No, I guess you wouldn't... because any change is bad, right Frank? Amending it might lead to something better.

                            Repealing it means, "Gun grab"

                            Amending it means, "Gun grab"

                            I thought you trusted your fellow citizens?  Or does that only apply to guns, Frank?

                            You don't trust them to come up with something better?  Perhaps something more definitive regarding gun privileges?

                            It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness- Unknown -7.50, -5.03

                            by dawgflyer13 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 10:32:12 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No. I don't trust people who support repealing (0+ / 0-)

                            rights with establishing rights.

                            Go figure.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:13:28 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Too funny (2+ / 0-)

                            We are advocating repealing or amending an amendment - not a gun grab, and certainly not repealing a right.  

                            But it is interesting how you seem to conflate them.  

                            It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness- Unknown -7.50, -5.03

                            by dawgflyer13 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:20:14 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What do you think the "Bill of RIGHTS" is? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ban nock

                            (Quick hint: It has something to do with....ya know...RIGHTS)

                            I know, it's really interesting how I conflate "rights" with "rights".
                            Real fucking head-scratcher.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:58:24 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hilarious. (4+ / 0-)

                            I bully the poor gun people? You mean all those guys who strap weapons to their sides in case the SHTF?

                            Now that's funny.

                            Those poor little boys, cowering in the corner of because bullying Bob...

                            You crack me up on this gun stuff.

                            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                            by Bob Johnson on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:29:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Don't let them suck you in (0+ / 0-)

                            They all say they support reasonable regulation, then turn around and bitch about the Constitutional illegality of banning machine guns and if you object you get called a gun-grabber. Rinse. Repeat.

                          •  There's Pro and there's Absolute (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PsychoSavannah

                            I dont' argue for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment (even though I think it's the most stupid and embarrassing anachronism in the whole document), but neither do I find the least problem with government regulation of certain types of firearms, ammunition, methods of distribution, including much more careful licensing on a par with state driver's licenses. RKBA top brass is against any of that, which constitutes absolutism from where I sit.

                        •  Recently saw something from him : 'atheism & guns' (4+ / 0-)

                          He was talking about what he believes to be his two minority groups... it was in the context of this past weekends debacle

                          I am not aware of any position he's taken otherwise, gardening, pooties, womens pay, homelessness, ACA, (other than arm minorities), because it gets ridiculous to dig through the 99% of RKBA to see if there are any other positions

                          Quick look, I see one or two comments in the past month not on guns

                          And here's the death knell in chains, when we're told we want to ban guns altogether then don't let us have a rational discussion

                          Happens all the time, talk about agendas; kv is their leader, right?, would appreciate a little leadership, cocky is not cool

                          •  Titular leader. (6+ / 0-)

                            When it comes to DK, it goes like this. I, at one time, worked different hours with less work. I spent significantly more time on here than I do now. I've written diaries about LGBT equality, income inequality, and was a contributing member of Morning Feature (just to name three). These have since been deleted.

                            Now my time is extremely limited and where, I ask, do you think I'd rather spend it? Writing about things 95% (just a shot in the dark) of this site agrees with (pro-union, pro-choice, pro-LGBT equality, etc) and where I lack the knowledge and writing skill to make an appreciable impact or an issue I'd rather correct within the Democratic party?

                          •  One of the reasons that I (5+ / 0-)

                            get involved in these back and forths is because to even question whether encroachments on the 2nd are a good idea turns out to be heresy here. I don't like group think.

                            One of the things that I have always appreciated from RKBA and from you is that you state your opinion, you don't dictate mine. Thank you for that.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 01:47:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  They denigrate mine... (4+ / 0-)

                            day in and day out I'm told that I (and those who share my views) are responsible for Democrats losing elections (despite it being one midterm, one-issue recall election)... I'm called an authoritarian... I'm told that my personal discomfort in the presence of guns is "irrational", despite the fact that it's rooted in very real, very personal losses to gun violence and accidents of literally every type... murder, accident, suicide and combat...

                            I'm fucking sick of it and KV is at the forefront of that... not only has he NEVER bothered to stand up to any of his minions for such behaviour, he has, in fact engaged in it himself...

                            The notion that "group think" isn't in play with RKBA would be laughable if it weren't so insulting to the intelligence of anyone who's been paying attention... just check the list of recommenders in the vile, homophobic screed directed at fcvaguy over the weekend...

                            Please...

                            Baby, where I come from...

                            by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 02:19:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't know what was posted this weekend. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            happymisanthropy

                            I was celebrating my 40th anniversary. Who went after fcvaguy? He may disagree with me on things but he doesn't deserve what you described.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 04:01:25 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Someone said that (0+ / 0-)

                            being gay was a choice? Jeebus.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:50:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  He called being gay a "lifestyle." (7+ / 0-)

                            That's long been right-wing code for "choice." When various gay users, including fcvaguy, pointed out this was inappropriate, KV just doubled down on it.

                            Then fcvaguy got accused of making a big fuss over nothing.  Because as we know, homophobia is never really cause for concern.

                            "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

                            by FogCityJohn on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:11:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That was all explained to him (6+ / 0-)

                            Very eloquently and patiently by some.

                            But, he continues to use that offensive false equivalence even today:

                            I used lifestyle. I also pointed out that (1+ / 0-)
                            LGBT is not a choice and likened a gay lifestyle to a straight lifestyle.

                            Share Our Wealth -10, -7.23

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 10:37:38 AM EDT

                            [ Parent | Reply to This |  Recommend   Hide ]

                            Straight Privilege and all that.

                            KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                            by fcvaguy on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 05:44:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The person being accused (4+ / 0-)

                            of homophobia is a transwoman...

                            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                            by happy camper on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:13:03 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Not to mention (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            high uintas, MertvayaRuka

                            fcvaguy making a transphobic comment- but that's was overlooked because... the person used against was pro-gun?

                          •  I now know you you are talking about (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, MertvayaRuka, CarlosJ

                            It sounds like a fight, but she isn't homophobic. Damn spin.

                            Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                            by high uintas on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 10:04:50 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  you might want to go read the comments (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            coquiero

                            before you state that unequivocably.  They really are bad.

                            Listening to the NRA on school safety is like listening to the tobacco companies on cigarette safety. (h/t nightsweat)

                            by PsychoSavannah on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 06:37:08 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I used lifestyle. I also pointed out that (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            high uintas, MertvayaRuka

                            LGBT is not a choice and likened a gay lifestyle to a straight lifestyle.

                          •  There's an entire diary written about that comment (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            science nerd, Glen The Plumber, poco

                            You might want to take a look.  RKBA's standing in this community appears to be mighty low right about now.  

                            And you started the whole thing.  Nice job.  How about you double down a few more times on your fine comment?

                            Not a good way to make friends and influence people

                            I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

                            by coquiero on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 09:09:06 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  minor correction, today vs. 2011 (0+ / 0-)
                            RKBA's standing in what's left of this community, appears to be mighty low right about now.  
                            The long and steady application of a litmus test, is noted.
                            I believe it hit Black Kos earliest and hardest.
                            I'm told there was a toll in the I-P diarists too.
                            For me, many of the reasons to be here, have decamped the premises.  
                            Some were voices of reason, some were strident, all were earnest.
                    •  Not many here have only one agenda (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      coquiero, Miggles, Sharon Wraight

                      But many of the RKBA have only one interest in their profile, perhaps two, that's suspicious to me in itself

                      Your finger-pointing is not welcomed

                •  Has any group here ever endorsed a Republican? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ThatSinger, Sharon Wraight

                  Would they continue to exist?

                  This is the stuff of false equivalencies

                •  RKBA supports the NRA. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  i saw an old tree today

                  NO respect. None.  Ever.

                  Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

                  by allensl on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:07:11 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No we don't (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    happy camper

                    Individuals may, I do not and many others don't. That is a lie.

                    Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                    by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:52:09 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Where do most of the RKBA members differ from (5+ / 0-)

                      ... NRA on gun policy? I know you do, in some areas, but what about others?

                      Most of what I see from the RKBA crowd here mirrors NRA positions on gun-related legislation.

                      "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                      by Bob Johnson on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:01:39 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Honestly Bob (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        happy camper

                        you would have to talk to each individually. That is the thing, supporting the 2nd isn't a popular position here but IMO we all do it because we honestly believe that it is a right given us and it's worth saving.

                        We are a much more diverse bunch than most here give us credit for. Ask your question of buddabelly or Deo or Frank or KVoi, you'll get a different answer from each, IMO.

                        Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                        by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:46:50 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  To add (0+ / 0-)

                        This comment explains not only my position on the NRA but the reason why you think that RKBA's positions are the NRA's.

                        I believe that the 2nd clearly states that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms. The NRA espouses the same. In fact the NRA grabs up the entire "protect the 2nd" stance for public view, shutting everyone else out.

                        The truth is that the NRA only represents itself and the gun manufacturing lobby and the Republican lobby. They have no interest in average people.

                        Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                        by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:53:18 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  They espouse even more extreme policies than NRA (4+ / 0-)

                        Per my linked quotes, in my lengthy comment above: http://www.dailykos.com/...

                        Where do most of the RKBA members differ from ... NRA on gun policy?
                      •  You have been told (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        high uintas

                        many times by various members of RKBA exactly how their positions differ from the NRA line. You ignore it, though, because it suits your purpose to do so.

                        "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                        by happy camper on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:16:45 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  This may help enlighten you: (4+ / 0-)

                          "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                          by Bob Johnson on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:19:42 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  And, again... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            high uintas

                            these are positions advocated by those individuals who advocate them. Not all of us agree, yet you insist on acting like we do.

                            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                            by happy camper on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:26:09 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Heh. (2+ / 0-)

                            Gee, there sure are plenty of recs from prominent members of the RKBA crowd on those posts, including from the founder of the group.

                            So when you wrote:

                            You have been told many times by various members of RKBA exactly how their positions differ from the NRA line. You ignore it, though, because it suits your purpose to do so.
                            ... what did you mean? Did you mean that the positions of those RKBA members are more radical than those espoused by the NRA? Because that certainly looks to be the case.

                            Kudos to you, of course, for being less radical than the NRA. You should have a chat with the de facto leader of RKBA and a few of your brethren.

                            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                            by Bob Johnson on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:31:00 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And, by the way, what you just wrote is not true. (4+ / 0-)

                            You wrote:

                            Not all of us agree, yet you insist on acting like we do.
                            No, I don't. In fact, my first comment in this string that you have replied to states:
                            Where do most of the RKBA members differ from NRA on gun policy? I know you do, in some areas, but what about others?

                            Most of what I see from the RKBA crowd here mirrors NRA positions on gun-related legislation.

                            So, no, I don't "insist on acting like you all do" as is clearly indicated by what I wrote.

                            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                            by Bob Johnson on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:35:20 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            high uintas, MertvayaRuka

                            The reason I seldom participate in RKBA threads any more is because I grew weary of dealing with people who insist on telling me what I believe, and what my positions on this issue are. And yes, Bob, you are one of those people--and you have a lot of company--who frequently assert that every member of RKBA is in lockstep with the NRA, and demand that we detail the ways we differ from them. So rather than an actual discussion of the merits of any particular policy stance, or it's relation to electoral success or failure, we end up defending against the same spurious accusations from the same people, over and over, ad nauseum.

                            I've just had enough of the pig wrestling. Have a nice day.

                            "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

                            by happy camper on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:05:00 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're fibbing. Again. (3+ / 0-)

                            Or perhaps you're having reading comprehension issues. You insist on putting words in my mouth that aren't there, as I showed you, upthread.

                            Please stop.

                            Thanks.

                            "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                            by Bob Johnson on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:13:02 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  No (3+ / 0-)

                Each of us is an individual with our own positions. And as rduran points out, we are Democrats and it is our intention to grow the party. There are a lot of gun owners who vote R because they believe that Dems are hostile towards them.

                Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:58:55 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  There are a lot of ProLifers who feel the same way (9+ / 0-)

                  that Dems are "hostile" to them... should we adopt their position on abortion to "grow" the party as well?

                  Baby, where I come from...

                  by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:52:00 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Why not? (3+ / 0-)

                    You may not have adopted their position on a woman's right to choose but you've certainly adopted their tactics.

                    I'm your boogie man, that's what I am. I'm here to do whatever I can.

                    by MertvayaRuka on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:57:08 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  "I know you are, but what am I?" (6+ / 0-)

                      How predictable...

                      What "tactics" have I employed? Am I posting bloody photos of murder victims? Am I promoting Republican positions? Am I intimidating candidates?

                      You didn't think that one out very well, did you? Probably seemed like really clever snark at the time... and all you get for your trouble is this heapin' helpin' of fail on your Comments list... goes well with all the others, though, so you've got that goin' for you... which is nice...

                      Baby, where I come from...

                      by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:05:42 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I was responding to you "we" in the comment (0+ / 0-)
                        There are a lot of ProLifers who feel the same way (1+ / 0-)

                        that Dems are "hostile" to them... should we adopt their position on abortion to "grow" the party as well?

                        That is what I meant by "you", not you specifically but the general "you" of the pro-restriction crowd.

                        Probably a very good thing you don't own a gun. You're quick to assume someone is personally attacking you when they're not. And rather than clarify, you respond with aggression instead of trying to de-escalate the situation. Next you'll probably say it's my fault that you responded in a hostile fashion. All very good reasons why nobody should even put you in the same room with a gun, let alone let you own one. You've clearly made the right choice for you and the safety of those around you.

                        I'm your boogie man, that's what I am. I'm here to do whatever I can.

                        by MertvayaRuka on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:35:13 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yes, you're like Gandhi, aren't you? (5+ / 0-)

                          You (and I mean "you" personally) certainly appear to have an excellent grasp of your group's semantic wordplay tactics, I'll grant you that...

                          Why would I "de-escalate" a situation where you clearly intended an insult, whether to me personally or to those who share my views? What, you meant that as a compliment? Not surprisingly, you let fly with the insult but didn't bother to give a single example of "tactics" ANY of us have employed... and now you're playing the victim... the glee with which you AND your group dish it out is only matched by your (you AND your group's) glaring inability to take it...

                          Like I said, you didn't think this one out very well, did you?

                          Baby, where I come from...

                          by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:42:33 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Lucky me, I drew a pair of badasses here (0+ / 0-)

                            Should we go through the threads where people have directly said that gun owners are responsible for dead children? Should we find the diaries and comments where people have claimed "I'm not going to X anymore/am afraid to do Y anymore because guns are everywhere!"? How about all the talk about blood in the streets every time some locality loosens their CCW laws? Didn't we just have one of those not too long ago, predicting the slaughter to come, with bars turning into bad action movie scenes as drunken patrons shoot it out with each other over some dumb reason or another? Or maybe we could talk about the other fearmongering scenarios like "What happens when a good guy with a gun stops a shooting but ANOTHER good guy with a gun shows up? And then another one shows up and shoots him too! And then six more shoot them and each other!", things that have never played out in real life anywhere. That's what I'm talking about, the blatant lies. The demonization. The dire predictions that never come to pass. Are you going to sit there and tell me that never happens here? Are you going to bold-faced lie and say that there's not a steady stream of visceral, bloody, nightmarish scenarios posited every time the topic of relaxing firearms restrictions comes up? Scenarios that have nothing to do with reality and everything to do with the biases and ignorance of the people putting them forth?

                            I imagine you will. You'll claim that nothing of the sort goes on, that it's all just oversensitivity and that your side never, ever plays anything up or works on peoples' fears to make its case. Just like the anti-choice crowd does, with its talk of slaughtered babies and loose-moraled women. Is it an insult if it's true? Maybe. But if you're using those tactics, I don't feel particularly inclined to be polite.

                            I'm your boogie man, that's what I am. I'm here to do whatever I can.

                            by MertvayaRuka on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:46:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Oh, this is rich... (6+ / 0-)
                          Probably a very good thing you don't own a gun. You're quick to assume someone is personally attacking you when they're not.
                          Same could be said of a number of those who are self-professed gun toters here. Of course, if anyone dared point out such a fact directly to them, the RKBA contingent would be dropping HR bombs all over said comment.

                          As always, great (unintended) humor from you...

                          "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

                          by Bob Johnson on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:43:10 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  TRAP laws (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        MertvayaRuka, happy camper

                        have been broadly endorsed on Daily Kos as applied to gun dealers. The legal tactics of anti-choicers are emphatically supported by the RASA types here.

                  •  It's not about adopting (3+ / 0-)

                    "their tactics". A lot of gun owning Americans are liberals. It's just that simple, they are a good fit with the Democratic party. BTW, we are a big tent party and we allow pro life people to be a part of it. We don't have purity tests, yet. (thank FSM)

                    Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

                    by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:06:46 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If someone posted a diary espousing the GOP's (5+ / 0-)

                      position on abortion (i.e."it's "murder" and should be criminalized") , how long do you think it would be before that person was sporting bojo?

                      I'd give it 5 minutes...

                      If someone posted a diary about how "marriage is between one man and one woman because that's how God intended us to live" how long do you think it would be before that person was sporting bojo?

                      You see my point?

                      And yet the promotion of the GOP position on guns happens here day in and day out...

                      A lot of "gun owning" Americans are NOT liberals too... they're Republicans, largely because of the positions on guns, but not entirely...

                      I guarantee you the Democratic Party would lose a helluva lot more supporters by adopting the GOP/Tea Party/NRA position on guns than they'd ever hope to garner by doing so... starting with me..

                      Baby, where I come from...

                      by ThatSinger on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:31:03 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  We have already seen what we 'gain' from adopting (3+ / 0-)

                        your stance on gun control.

                        Namely, 20-30% of registered Democrats voting for the recall of Democrats.
                        10 Democratic Senators unwilling to vote for the President's nominee for SG.
                        Three Senators out of a job.

                        But thanks for the guarantee.
                        Really convincing.

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 05:14:02 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  "But pro-choice would cost us elections!" (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        coquiero

                        If Democrats spoke up in favor of a woman's choice to have an abortion, this would cost us elections.

                        If Democrats spoke up in favor of same-sex marriage, this would cost us elections.

                        If Democrats spoke up in favor of stronger gun regulations, this would cost us elections.

                        Don't you see?!

                        </snark>

          •  I love to think that DKos has help to shape (4+ / 0-)

            gun control for the wider community by allowing the 'responsible gun owners'™ their platform to speak

            And thank you Paulforstaterep
            and I agree the sweater's perfect
        •  I adore Gabby Giffords and her husband (5+ / 0-)

          IMO, we would agree on pretty much everything. I have some quibbles with Brady because to them anything that looks scary is scary, the same w/some mayors.

          The problem is that any group that wants to bring all people to the table and craft gun legislation that doesn't cross the Bill of Rights but still brings sanity gets the full NRA attack and slander method.

          No where in the B of R does it say that you can "Stand your ground" no matter what and shoot anyone who pisses you off. I know that the law doesn't say that but that is what it's has become.

          My hobby horses start with the Background Check. It needs to be modified so that a person who smokes pot is equal to someone who drinks, hell I'd rather be in a room full of armed pot heads than drunkards. And non violent felons should be treated differently, IMO.

          The second is a healthcare issue that relates to guns. We need to address mental illness like any other illness and  third we need to address domestic violence as a serious problem all the time, not just when it's in the news.

          It's not about sexy, its about getting past the NRA buzz saw.

          Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. They lie through their teeth with their head up their behind. You open up their hearts and here's what you'll find - Some humans ain't human some people ain't kind. John Prine

          by high uintas on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:56:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  thanks, I'd also like to see more (4+ / 0-)

            but thanks for starting!

          •  Apparently that's not what RKBA is about, though. (11+ / 0-)

            I hope what I'm posting here is the most updated "mission statement", but it says right here...

            Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a DKos group of second amendment supporters who have progressive and liberal values. We don't think that being a liberal means one has to be anti-gun. Some of us are extreme in our second amendment views (no licensing, no restrictions on small arms) and some of us are more moderate (licensing, restrictions on small arms.) Moderate or extreme or somewhere in between, we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections.
            Says right here that the one thing all members of RKBA believe is that more propositions for gun control = lost elections for Democrats. Is it not fair to say that the goal of RKBA is to dissuade Democrats from pursuing guns as an issue at all? After all, it's only going to lead to electoral losses, so we should just leave it alone, right?

            That's my problem with RKBA. I don't want to ban all guns, I know that plenty of liberals own guns and that's fine, I have no problem with that. But I do have a problem with a group whose stated intention is to convince Democrats that they can't run on anything to reform gun laws in this country, especially with the current state of the laws.

            RKBA doesn't want Democrats to talk about gun control, and screw that.

          •  You adore & agree w/ Gabby except on what she says (3+ / 0-)

            You write this:

            I adore Gabby Giffords and her husband
            IMO, we would agree on pretty much everything.
            But today you also write this:
            I'm at a loss on what the "gun show loophole" is, srsly. Are people concerned about private sales only if they are at gun shows?
            As ThatSinger wrote above, "I've been told on numerous occasions [by RKBA members] that there IS NO "gun show loophole."  

            Well, here's Gabby Giffords' official statement about the "gun show loophole." Srsly.

            Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly established a gun-safety organization, Americans for Responsible Solutions, that currently advocates two (and only 2) policy measures as solutions:
            1) Criminal Background Checks
            2) Stopping Gun Trafficking

            Click on the first one. After two short introductory paragraphs, the next two paragraphs are as follows:

            However, there is a gaping hole in our laws that allow criminals and others to go to “private sellers” at gun shows, on the internet, and elsewhere to buy guns with no background check, no questions asked. Commonly referred to as the private sales loophole or “gun show loophole,” [ahem, unitas?] this failure in our public safety policy has allowed up to 40 percent of all gun transfers to take place without a background check.
            In practice, this means that those wishing to purchase a gun have two easily available options – a federally licensed seller that will require a background check and an unlicensed seller that won’t. Not surprisingly, 80 percent of criminal inmates in a Department of Justice survey said they got their guns through private means – no background check necessary.
            Gabby and Mark's second solution, Stopping Gun Trafficking, doesn't mention the "loophole" by name, but it concludes:
            The number one thing we can do to stop gun trafficking is a universal background check system [which is point #1]. But Congress should also institute stiff penalties for straw purchasers and pass a clear federal statute that makes gun trafficking a serious crime.
            I'll grant you it takes time and effort to wade through the miasma of disinformation spewed out by the NRA, GOA, SAF, GOP, hundreds (thousands?) of other right-wing pro-gun oganizations, millions of gun-nut ideologues, and the media which regurgitates their talking-points. But on DailyKos, why should this burden be on members of RASA, Shut Down the NRA, and other Kossacks who are not involved in gun issues? If owning guns is important to you, why aren't you the one speaking up against irresponsible members in RKBA, learning what policy measures are supported by those you "adore and agree with," and lobbying in favor of these measures, yourself?
    •  It would be wonderful to see you all get control (7+ / 0-)

      of your own RKBA group. Why is it that the most radical RKBA people control the dialogue in that group? How come none of the moderate gun owners have done anything to curb that?

      Instead, it seems many of the reasonable people chime in on the side of the small but most vocal component of RKBA, which supports and defends the same exact gun ideology as the NRA.

      Why do you let them be the main voice even here?

      "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 Apr 07, 2014 at 10:40:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site