Skip to main content

One recurring, daft theme worthy of an ignoramus like Glen Beck is that there is something called a Gun Show Loop Hole.  Bullpucky.

 title=RKBA is a DKos group of second amendment supporters who also 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, we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections. We don't want a repeat of 1994. We are an inclusive group: if you see the Second Amendment as safeguarding our right to keep and bear arms individually, then come join us in our conversation. If you are against the right to keep and bear arms, come join our conversation. We look forward to seeing you, as long as you engage in a civil discussion.

RKBA stands for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

First I want to say the loss at Virginia Tech was horrific, but the way the school has pulled together and got back on it's feet is a testament to human resiliency.  Good for them.

I also think that making political points using that massacre is pretty low behavior, and both sides in the VA-11 race are doing it. I think those students memory deserves respect, and they are respected best by the truth. What is shown above is a bald lie.

Seung-Hui Cho bought two guns.  Neither one of them were purchased at a gun show. They were purchased because there was no legal bar to him owning them, because no report was made by the mental health facility where he was in outpatient treatment that would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.

He purchased one gun from an internet retailer.  When this is done, the buyer designates a FFL holder (licensed gun dealer) and the gun is shipped to that dealer, and the dealer must complete the background check and BATF paperwork before completing the transaction and delivering the gun. This was done. The second gun was purchased from a dealer in Roanoke, same procedure. He had both guns a month before the shootings. Please note, the video above says something entirely different. Major Lie #1.

The video above suggests there's a Gun Show Loop Hole though which criminals line up to buy guns. Let me be clear, this loop hole doesn't exist. Here's why there is no Gun Show Loop Hole.

Gun dealers, who bring almost all the guns and do almost all the sales at gun shows still have to observe the law at gun shows.  That means sales at a gun show are no different that sales done at their shop. Same laws, same background checks, and same waiting periods to get a handgun.

Why it's 'almost all guns' and 'almost all sales' is because private individuals talk to each other on the floor (and the guns shows I've been to only the dealers are allowed to sell on the floor - the dealers hate competition from private parties).  This is legal, a private citizen owns a gun, and without crossing a state line sells the gun to another private citizen - the federal law has nothing to say in the matter. Cross a state line, different matter and the BATF may want to talk to you if they find out. Private citizens are not required to do a background check before selling guns, and in fact by law are barred from using the system that does the checking - for good reason there's personal information available.

But this activity between two private citizens doesn't need to happen at gun shows, it could happen anywhere, anytime. It could happen at the gun counter of the local Walmart.  This is perfectly legal behavior. THIS is what is referred to as the Gun Show Loop Hole - private citizens doing things that are legal for private citizens to do. And it doesn't just happen at gun shows, it happens all over, all the time.  Major Lie #2.

I understand the Tea Party acts like this, but I would hope we would do better.  Please leave the lying hyperbole to the other side.  And think about this for a minute - the Republicans use gun rights to energize their base - there's more than just gun rights of course, there's Glen Beck and religion as well.  But if they were deprived of one of their major thrusts, how effective do you think they would be?

Originally posted to Mandell on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 02:46 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  You're right. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brecht, ER Doc

      The hole is in not connecting mentally disturbed people's documentation with the gun registration process.  They should be linked absolutely.  Anybody who goes around blasting innocent people has got to have a deep, deep mental disorder.  Hell, in southwest Asia there are tens of thousands of them.

      "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

      by dolfin66 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 08:50:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're Racism is showing! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldpunk

        So all Muslim countries are full of crazy people?

        And we should profile anyone that looks different now?

        That is a very dangerous post you make here sir!

        •  Actually, (0+ / 0-)

          there are millions of Muslims in SW Asia.  The selected ones are what we all are talking about.  You too.

          "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

          by dolfin66 on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 08:09:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Anyone from a Muslim Country should be suspect? (0+ / 0-)

            What "selected ones" are you talking about?

            It's clear you made a sly insult and assumption directed at Muslim Countries.

            Now you're directing it at me?

            •  I would never... (0+ / 0-)

              direct anything at you.  I've read your stuff.

              "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

              by dolfin66 on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 09:24:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Failure to Discuss and/or Explain! (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Crookshanks, KVoimakas

                You've never addressed what you meant by there being 10's of thousands of mentally ill people in South West Asia.

                Two separate occasions I've asked for clarification and you ignored them.

                Both times you've tried to imply that I've done or said something that brings into question my position and/or integrity, while never stating what it is.

                I do not believe that we should be racially profiling people as you've suggested that we should and my writings and diaries speak for themselves.

                Either answer the questions directly or stop wasting my time here.

                •  O.K. (0+ / 0-)

                  No, I'm not profiling.  I'll leave that to the poor Arizona law enforcement people.  I made an offhand remark about the people who go to church school to learn how and why killing Westerners is a good thing.

                  Do you have a problem with that truth?  No?  Good.

                  Good bye.

                  "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

                  by dolfin66 on Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 08:50:21 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  How does Arizona or church school come into this? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KVoimakas

                    You've now made completely different issues, none of which were brought up in the diary or the postings here.

                    If you'd like to discuss these off topic issues, please feel free to write your own diary on them.

                    While they are very good topics of discussion, they weren't mentioned here by anyone. So, how would you even know if I have a problem with issues not discussed?

                    Strawman argument destroyed...

                    Good day!

      •  What registration process? (5+ / 0-)

        Registration is based on state law. Some have it, some don't.

        (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

        by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:39:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The right has defense of marriage (14+ / 0-)

    The left has gun show loopholes.
    Sigh.

    saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

    by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 02:51:15 AM PDT

    •  So.. (13+ / 0-)

      then it's amazing that a gay guy with a gun isn't involved in a mass shooting every week in the US. He must be tired of being everyone's kickball. Probably can't decide who to shoot.

      •  You raise an interesting point (6+ / 0-)

        It's precisely because we have more oppression in our society than in some other societies that we might want stricter gun laws.  We're fortunate that more oppressed people don't lash out with gun violence.

        The most impressive thing about man [...] is the fact that he has invented the concept of that which does not exist--Glenn Gould

        by Rich in PA on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:54:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Gun violence? (15+ / 0-)

          What about bumper jack violence?
          Fist violence?
          Broken bottle violence?
          Car violence?
          Knife violence?
          Violence is violence. The instrument confers no distinction.

          saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

          by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:56:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Two things about that (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Brecht, Fabian, ER Doc, Tom Seaview, Mandell
            1. Guns are easier, at least to the extent that they take the limiting factor of bravery and physical strength out of the equation
            1. Guns have no alternative use--they're made to do bodily harm to some kind of organism.

            The most impressive thing about man [...] is the fact that he has invented the concept of that which does not exist--Glenn Gould

            by Rich in PA on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:58:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Dunno about the bravery part (10+ / 0-)

              but as to the physical harm part, all's I can say is that it's a rough ole world, evil people exist, and so do deer, btw...and I do like venison.

              You might be surprised to learn that I consider pacifists a more...oh.."top of mind", let's say... threat to my safety than criminals...if they get elected.
              Pacifists have the advantage of perceived good intent.

              saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

              by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:00:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yeah, those pacifists sure are sneaky (7+ / 0-)

                SOBs.

                Meh.

                GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:05:55 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  :) (13+ / 0-)

                  Again, they enjoy the advantage of perceived moral superiority.

                  If someone puts a gun to your head and pulls the trigger, you are going to die.  Laws, public opinion, ethics, ideals, treaties, or personal preferences will not prevent your death.

                  As a Buddhist sage observed, "If you understand, the world is the way it is; if you do not understand, the world is the way it is."

                  The way of the world is force. You may not like that. You may choose not to believe it.  But it is true.  The world is ruled by force.  

                  Public opinion is worthless.  It will not stop any weapon.  Law is nothing but rules you apply after you have subdued people by force.  Laws, without being backed up by more force, are not worth the ink they're written with.

                  Power and the will to use it are the only things standing between us and the grave.

                  People infected with pacifism are a threat to the physical safety of themselves and their fellow countrymen.

                  You can't depend on force, pacifists proclaim.  Actually, you can't depend on anything but force.  Diplomacy works only if it's backed by force.  Diplomacy itself is about force; the threat of force, the use of force, the direction of it.

                  saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                  by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:11:55 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  The Montgomery bus boycott succeeded through the (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    WI Deadhead, Fabian, carolus

                    persistent use of economic power, not firepower.

                    The British left India after Gandhi relied on his followers committing acts of non-violence with the specific purpose of setting a perfect contrast with the violence used by the British against them, in order to sway public opinion.

                    Pacifism can be an extremely effective political weapon.  To ignore this is to ignore 'reality' as well.  And you are right, pacifists do 'enjoy the advantage of perceived moral superiority'.

                    GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                    by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:30:31 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Is that pacifism qua pacifism (9+ / 0-)

                      or is it more properly described as pacifism as an approach to civil disobedience?

                      saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                      by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:31:43 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I don't carry a weapon as a proactive strategy (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Brecht, Fabian

                        to avoid confrontation in the first instance and to avoid escalation in the second instance should confrontation take place.  So far, it's been a successful strategy in my 50+ years.  

                        Call it pacifism in the micro or pacifism in the macro . . . it's all the same. It's effective and it has the advantage of being non-lethal.

                        GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                        by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:58:50 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  What is the difference (8+ / 0-)

                          in the confrontation avoidance algorithm between you not carrying a weapon and my carrying one that is completely concealed at all times?

                          saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                          by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:08:16 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  A pacifist could easily concealed carry (4+ / 0-)

                            It's all in your head - if you know you would never ever use a gun, then no gun is the same as a loaded gun.

                            I bet pacifists drive cars - machines that are absolutely capable of doing lethal damage to one or more people.

                            It's not the tools that make the man or woman, it's what's in their head.

                            Show me the POLICY!

                            by Fabian on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:46:27 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That (7+ / 0-)

                            makes a certain sense, except I'm trying to get my head around the idea of  a pacifist carrying a gun....

                            Hmmmm.

                            (Like the old joke about the shotgun-armed Quaker confronting a prowler:  “My friend, I wouldst not shoot thee, but thou standeth right where I am about to shoot!”)

                            Okay, just MAYBE....:)

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:07:23 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Quaker joke (9+ / 0-)

                            How dare you tell a joke about our esteemed Friends?

                            Okay, the one I heard had something to do with a recalicitrant mule who was told by his Quaker owner "Brother Mule, you know I believe in turning the other cheek, but if you kick me again, I'm going to give you to my Baptist nieghbor, Brother Jones, and he believes in axe-handles...

                            "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

                            by leftykook on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:44:39 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Political pacifists like MLK and Ghandi both (7+ / 0-)

                            spoke of the legitimacy of using defensive force. Pacifism is not an ideology, but a political strategy. And it's a good one.

                            It's the fool that considers a political strategy to be a useful mechanism for daily life. To impose that misuse on others is unconscionable.

                            Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                            by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 11:08:58 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I cannot remember the last time that a gun (0+ / 0-)

                            transported me to work or the grocery market.  The social value of automobiles far outweighs that of guns.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:45:40 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And that matters (6+ / 0-)

                            why?
                            And that "social value" asessment is subjective on your part, to some extent. You don't, like, legislate on subjective comparisons of social value.
                            Unless, of course....aw,never mind that. :)
                            Oh, two words:
                            Public transportation :)

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:49:11 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And what is the "social value" of a gun? (0+ / 0-)

                            Laws express the 'social values' of our society.  They are not too subjective and where they are the courts are generally used to sort it out.

                            NH has a very clear definition of the right to bear arms: ' [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.'  

                            If you need a gun to defend yourself from your fellow citizens then I'd look to how you're living your life as a first order-of-business.  Carrying a gun should be a last resort, not a default condition.

                            RE: public transportation - - The public transportation strategy in my neck of the woods is defined by two words:

                            Public road ;]

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 08:03:54 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  We have a clear (9+ / 0-)

                            definition of that here in Vermont too:

                            Article 16th. Right to bear arms; standing armies; military power subordinate to civil

                            That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State - and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.

                            But this:

                            If you need a gun to defend yourself from your fellow citizens then I'd look to how you're living your life as a first order-of-business.

                            I find haughty, slightly offensive, and indicative of a lollipops-and-rainbows mentality which is an example of why I regard pacifism as a threat.

                            When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

                            We might never need that automated external defibrillator on the wall at, oh, say, Wal-Mart, but it oughta be there.

                            You only need to need it once.

                            A gun is like a tourniquet: You may never need one, but if and when you DO, you need it real, real bad, and right the hell now.

                            By the way, I also have smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, and first aid kits.

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 08:55:03 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'll cop to the haughty and slightly offensive (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Fabian

                            description, but no one that knows me would accuse me of a 'lollipops-and-rainbow mentality'.  And if you 'regard pacifism as a threat' I'm guessing that you carry to defend yourself from that as well.

                            Now forgive me if I retire to lick on my lollipops and contemplate my rainbows.

                            Carry on.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 09:22:18 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The way you defend yourself from pacifism (7+ / 0-)

                            is by pointing out the obvious: that mean people exist. (And they also suck, by the way.)

                            "Nonviolence is fine as long as it works...t doesn't mean that I advocate violence, but at the same time, I am not against using violence in self-defense. I don't call it violence when it's self-defense, I call it intelligence" -Malcolm X

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:13:57 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This conversation arose from your assertion that (0+ / 0-)

                            'pacifism is a threat' . . . to whom is something I still haven't figured out from your comments.

                            I don't buy lottery tickets to secure my retirement years because the odds of winning are astronomically small. Lottery tickets might actually be viewed as a threat to a secure retirement if you buy enough of them.

                            I don't keep guns in the house to 'defend' it because the actual need is also very, very small to the point of being trivial.  Yet the chance of someone being killed by a gun in the house is non-trivial.

                            According to American Academy of Pediatrics:

                            Although for all firearms the leading motivation for ownership is recreational, nearly three quarters of handgun owners said self-protection was the primary reason for owning a gun. Research in several US urban areas indicates that a gun stored in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of homicide and a fivefold increase in the risk of suicide. The widely publicized estimates of the number of defensive gun uses in the millions each year are not credible. In fact, guns kept in the home are 43 times more likely to be used to kill someone known to the family than to be used to kill in self-defense.

                            I'm just not willing to risk someone dying at the end of one of my guns in the off chance that I could, possibly, maybe need (or want) it to resolve a home 'defense' scenario.  The actual risk is just too great for the theoretical benefit.

                            Call it 'pacifism' if you like; I call it 'risk analysis'.

                            Now, if you'll excuse me I need to get back to the lollipops and rainbows and that damned haughty attitude of mine.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:32:45 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  DOn't care who says this (5+ / 0-)

                            The widely publicized estimates of the number of defensive gun uses in the millions each year are not credible.

                            I don't blindly buy it.
                            And guess what? Anything that happens with any of my firearms is my responsibility and mine alone; and I'm acutely aware of that.
                            I am not a statistic.
                            (Go ahead, you know you want to...)
                            I am a responsible gun owner
                            Pacifists that advocate that I adopt their views and attempt to inflict them upon me through legislation are indeed a threat.

                            The actual risk is just too great for the theoretical benefit.

                            If that's the case with you, then your attention to safety and responsibility is negligent, and I hope you DON'T own a gun.

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:42:25 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Do you have children in the house (0+ / 0-)

                            and are your guns unloaded, in a safe, with the ammunition under lock and key in a different location?  If not, then we have a different definition of negligence and responsibility.  Good luck to you.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:53:17 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I do not require lectures (6+ / 0-)

                            from the anti-gun set on firearm safety, thank you very much.

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 11:58:13 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Please don't shoot me now. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            kestrel9000, KVoimakas

                            I may have to club you with my lollipop, here.

                            Happy hunting.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 12:06:51 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  :) (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, JimWilson

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 12:34:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So you think you're good with the guns? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            kestrel9000

                            Prove it. :]

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 12:45:24 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh, NOW I'm shocked. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JimWilson

                            I would have thought a lollipop-licking pacifist like you would have preferred NONLETHAL weapons.
                            Dear God! Think of the CHILDREN! >;)

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 12:54:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Let's 'net' it out . . . . (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            kestrel9000, KVoimakas, Mandell, Ana Thema

                             <div style="font-size:0.9em;">
                             Bugs Bunny Vs. Elmer Fudd Rap Battle - Watch more Music Videos at Vodpod.</div>

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 03:51:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're Authoritarian mentality is dangerous (5+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Shadan7, rockhound, Fabian, ER Doc, KVoimakas

                            to my well being.  While I don't own a gun today, if and when I purchase one, any children I have will learn to use them in a proper manner.

                            Education and exposure is the only proven method to prevent "accidental" deaths.

                            And "accidental" is not something I believe in, every gun "accident" is preventable with training!

                          •  No children for me. (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Shadan7, gerrilea, rockhound, ER Doc

                            Solved that problem with a vasectomy.

                            I do have all my firearms but my carry pistol locked up in a gun vault. I actually wrote a diary on it if you want to click on my name and read it (RKBA: Vaulting for Safety or some such.)

                            They are loaded in the vault.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:52:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Self defense is trivial? Wow! (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Shadan7, rockhound, KVoimakas, Mandell

                            I don't define "self defense" as being only against the civilian criminals that exist in our society, I include "Death By Government" as a very compelling argument put forth by RJ Rummel:

                               "Rummel observes that while library stacks have been written on the possible nature and consequences of nuclear war and how it might be avoided, the reality is that up to 360 million civilians have been slaughtered by their own governments just in the 20th Century! Yet, very few books have dealt with the overall human cost of "death by government" (The Black Book of Communism being one exception).

                               Just as criminals prefer unarmed victims, tyrants prefer disarmed citizens. A government that does not trust its citizens with weapons cannot be trusted with power.

                            To ignore and deny our most recent human history is dangerous. Heck denying human history is actually delusional, imo.  Billions of humans have died at the hands of their governments.

                            I don't want to repeat history or become another statistic in some history book, thank you very much!  Deal with this as you wish.

                          •  I agree. (0+ / 0-)

                            Quite a few citizens have died because their governments drafted them into military service.

                            Now frankly, you get a much higher death toll by counting up how many people governments have starved to death - which you don't need firearms to do, nor do firearms help much.  The Irish Potato Famine is a hellacious example.  Cholera in Haiti?  No guns needed.

                            Guns presuppose that your fellow human beings are a threat.  They may be, but what is most likely to kill you can't be defeated by a gun.  

                            In fact, the one thing you can do to sure your continued health and longevity is wash your hands.  

                            Lolz!

                            Show me the POLICY!

                            by Fabian on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:10:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think he meant... (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Shadan7, rockhound, KVoimakas

                            that it's a threat when imposed on someone against their will.  Just as is any philosophy.

                            At least, that's how I took it... YMMV.

                          •  The social value of a gun... (5+ / 0-)

                            is that the ultimate sanction of any state, including those holier-than-those European states, is violence. And since the dawn of civilization this has meant armed men, and since the 1700's armed men meant with guns.  That's why every nation's army and police are armed. So for the state, the value of the gun is clear, it is the physical embodiment of power.

                            We are one of the few societies that make that asymmetrical situation symmetrical.  We are governed by our consent, the proof of that is we have the right to own that same physical embodiment of power.

                            It's pretty clear that the small, weak society that had just completed the first successful revolution against the superpower of it's day had a good idea of this concept.  They had first hand experience of this asymmetry of power. So the second thing, after the freedom of speech, came the means to insure that freedom.

                            Beyond that, there is a human right of self defense. In this country I may wield a firearm in defense of myself, my family, or my community.  I'm not invulnerable doing so, I may be killed, arrested, or sued for any action I take, so in my case the use of a gun for a crime of property isn't likely, hell it's all insured. I'm not looking to shoot the burglar in the house, I just want protection until he leaves. But I have the right to self defense.

                          •  I can't remember the last time I used my truck (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound, buddabelly

                            to successfully kill a deer in a fashion where it was still edible.

                            The social value of firearms, due to their self defensive capabilities and their food providing capabilities, far outweighs private vehicles. My truck only moves me from point A to point B.

                            Though my motorcycle keeps me sane so...

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:42:47 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And the social cost of cars... (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound, buddabelly, KVoimakas

                            is far higher then that of guns.

                          •  It's like saying "I don't wear a seat belt as a (7+ / 0-)

                            proactive strategy to avoid vehicular mishaps in the first place". Yes, I suppose, a hyper-aware person could drive incredibly defensively. But then, they lose nothing by doing that and buckling up.

                            Sometimes things are outside one's ability to control.

                            Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                            by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:47:10 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Silly argument; cars are dangerous and accidents (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht

                            can happen.  I always wear seat-belts and I won't move the car unless everyone riding with me has their's secured as well. Seat-belts are intended to save lives rather than take them.

                            The better argument would have been "I don't drive a car as a proactive strategy to avoid vehicular mishaps in the first place".  

                            If a gun could transport me to the grocery, I might take one as well.  But it would be unloaded.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:52:17 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Life is dangerous; and attacks happen (8+ / 0-)

                            Saying "I avoid carrying a weapon as a strategy to avoid being attacked" is absurd - that's not something always under your control.

                            I personally don't carry, but the implication is that those who do are out there looking for trouble. That's insulting, and it's false.

                            Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                            by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 09:31:38 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  My firearms are all designed... (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound, buddabelly, KVoimakas

                            to save lives.

                            Mine, my neighbors, my family, my tribe, community and nation.

                        •  um... (9+ / 0-)

                          Avoiding confrontation, and avoiding escalation of conflict, are choices you can make regardless of whether you are armed or not.
                          Are you saying that someone might force you to use your gun against them, or that you might use the gun for emotional reasons to escalate a confrontation? If the former, your fears are unfounded; if the latter, I agree with your choice not to carry a firearm.

                          I have been carrying a concealed handgun for over five years. During that time, I have avoided creating confrontations, and refrained from escalating any minor confrontations that have occurred.

                          I also have a "proactive strategy" available in the event of unavoidable confrontation: I have the right, and the means, to protect myself and others in situations that would otherwise be beyond my abilities to remedy.
                          You may have the right (depending on where you live, and your background), but you lack the means.

                          I hope neither of us ever needs a weapon.
                          I don't want to need one because I really don't want to hurt anyone. I don't want you to need one because... well, if you ever do, you & yours are well and truly fucked.

                          "She's petite, extremely beautiful, and heavily armed." -1995 Michael Moore documentary Canadian Bacon

                          by Tom Seaview on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:46:23 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I've never needed a gun. And I'll wager that you (0+ / 0-)

                            have never needed a gun as well.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 08:06:05 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I did when I was 13 yrs old (10+ / 0-)

                            I'll repeat this story, yet again.

                            When I was 13, a gang of guys came "knocking" at our home, my parents were out at the store.  They tried to force their way into our home by breaking the windows on either side of the front door, then forced the door open.

                            I was waiting with my fathers gun (which I loaded while they were breaking in) and I gave the "leader" of the gang a choice: "take another step into the house and I will kill you." He looked like he and the gang didn't believe me, until my sister, who was standing behind me on the steps cocked the 12 gauge shotgun.

                            They ran.  Had we not been educated in the safe use of our fathers guns we would have been at their mercy.  They could have killed me and raped and killed my sister then lay in wait for my parents to come home.  Mind you both myself and my sister were trained in karate, she was a higher belt than me and we both knew we couldn't run or leave, we had no choice but to stand our ground.

                            Thank god we knew how.

                            So, while you may have never "needed" one, it doesn't change the reality that in life it can and does happen where people have needed them.  More so than you may like to believe, unfortunately.

                          •  And you cocked the 12 gauge after calling (0+ / 0-)

                            the police?  And yelling at the guys that the house wasn't empty and the cops were on the way?

                            There have been attempts to break into my home as well.  Getting the police involved solved the problem.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 09:08:39 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In many rural areas (8+ / 0-)

                            The police would arrive after the unarmed were dead, and the house looted.  No aspersions on the police, it's a simple matter of distance.

                          •  So how many times has this actually happened (0+ / 0-)

                            in your rural area?  A home invader commits murder.  Once in 10 years; twice a day?  Never?

                            I'll wager (a lot) more kids have been killed by the guns found in their home than have been rescued by them.

                            GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

                            by JimWilson on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:07:33 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I wasn't in a rural area, Binghamton NY sir! n/t (4+ / 0-)
                          •  you didn't tell me that happened in Bingo... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, KVoimakas

                            ... small eff'ing world this is.

                            Let me guess, it happened on the West side?

                            There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

                            by Crookshanks on Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 06:13:26 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, the West Side was really nice when (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rockhound, KVoimakas

                            I was growing up, upper middle class, beautifully kept homes...today it's a dump.

                            It' happened in Ely Park Townhouses (at the top of Glenwood hill), we moved there as they were building them.  Phase 1 & 1/2 of phase 2 were completed and we moved into a new townhouse.

                            I was 12, I believe, no maybe 10...damn it now I have to trace back my own life...LOL...

                            Ummm....I remember, I was going to be 11 when we moved in...LOL...

                          •  ah, ely park.... (0+ / 0-)

                            ... that explains it.

                            I had an appointment to look at a place there once upon a time and drove away without getting out of my car after I saw how the outside looked....

                            There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

                            by Crookshanks on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 10:41:48 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I can think of 7-10 in the last year or so here (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, KVoimakas

                            in the Tucson area.....also a lot more invaders, about the same amount dead, that had the tables turned on them by a armed homeowner who stopped the "Hot" burglary or home invasion......

                            Yet here also, face to face robberies whether armed or strongarm , muggings and those types of up close, personal crime are almost nonexistent here....

                            The occasional mugging or purse snatching is so rare that it makes the news when it happens.....Personally, I attribute that to the fact that anybody you encounter just might outgun you........ so as a crook, you either focus on auto theft or normal burglaries and such, or be willing to go whole hog and go the invasion route.....most crooks aren't that brave thank Ghu, as cowards at heart, usually they won't put themselves in that dangerous a position......

                            "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

                            by buddabelly on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 01:32:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  When seconds count (7+ / 0-)

                            the police are only minutes away.

                            saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

                            by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 01:41:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm sorry, I was supposed to yell at them? (6+ / 0-)

                            You can't be serious! But they knew I was home, because they did actually knock first. And silly, silly, silly, I must now tell even more details. I did call the police first and this was before 9-1-1, I called zero and told them to connect me with the police.  It took over an hour for the police to come, and then they actually took my fathers guns from the home and left!

                            I did not tell them about my father's prized 357 or the fact that is what I had used to stop them.  It took over 6 months for him to get the 4 firearms back they took.

                            That's the reality of the system we have.  Those idiots, and I mean that from the bottom of my heart, those damn idiots left myself and my sister defenseless and then left...not arresting anyone because "you didn't see exactly which one of the guys who broke into the house."  Even though I told them I did!  They ignored me because I didn't know the gang members names!

                            And that's when I learned that the police have no obligation to defend the individual. They can watch you being raped and killed and have no legal obligation to stop it or even report that it happened.

                            Oh, by the way, I loaded the 357 and went downstairs to see if they were actually going to force their way in after I told them not to.  My sister was right behind me with the 12 gauge still on the stairs when they broke the door open and started to walk in.

                          •  You have made a number of assumptions... (5+ / 0-)

                            about other people here.  So far, they have all been incorrect.

                            That really should be telling you something...  Hello?

                          •  wrong again (6+ / 0-)

                            I've been the victim of two violent attacks, and I really could have used a gun for both of them.

                            In the first, a random attacker smashed a quart of beer over my head from behind in a New York City park. He kicked me until I came to, asked me for a cigarette, and decided to let me go instead of killing me as I lay there regaining consciousness. My first thought upon waking up on the sidewalk, looking up at my attacker with the broken beer bottle in his hand, was "He's going to kill me now, and I can't stop him because I don't have a gun." The only reason I lived was because, for whatever reason, the guy just couldn't be bothered to finish killing me.

                            Fifteen years later in New Jersey, a girlfriend's violent ex-husband attacked her to draw me into a confrontation. When I tried to protect her, he broke my nose. He continued his attack, and he would have cheerfully beaten me to death -- he was much stronger and more violent than I've ever been, and we both knew it -- but neither of us were expecting what happened next: I suddenly became Popeye the Sailor Man, and beat the living shit out of him.

                            In either situation, a gun would have helped. In either situation, the shooting would have been ruled defensive, and no charges would have been filed... except that, in NJ and NYC, only the rich and famous are given concealed carry permits.
                            Now, I don't choose to live in such states, or walk around unarmed with misplaced faith that I will never need a gun. I've already needed one twice, and only survived by the luck and/or the determination of my sensei to make sure I could kick ass ten years after dropping out of his class with a white belt.

                            By the way, I have no interest in any re-interpretation you may wish to apply to the events described. I was there, you weren't, so spare me any "you didn't really need a gun" bullshit.

                            "She's petite, extremely beautiful, and heavily armed." -1995 Michael Moore documentary Canadian Bacon

                            by Tom Seaview on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:37:47 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Rofl. (6+ / 0-)

                            I suddenly became Popeye the Sailor Man, and beat the living shit out of him.

                            Who gave you the spinach?

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:55:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Gawd did (6+ / 0-)

                            I have always had a particular hatred for wifebeaters, and I had stored up quite a bit of frustration while I was dating this woman.

                            When that slimeball broke my nose, he loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword.

                            "She's petite, extremely beautiful, and heavily armed." -1995 Michael Moore documentary Canadian Bacon

                            by Tom Seaview on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:31:50 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Lol Tom and gerrilea... (6+ / 0-)

                            Are the wrong guys to cross on the self-defense issues.. both those guys carry..  :o)

                          •  Might want to amend that to (5+ / 0-)

                            Are the wrong guys to cross on the self-defense issues.. both those guys carry..due to prior conflict that a firearm could/did help them win  :o)

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:32:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Actually I don't own a gun.. (6+ / 0-)

                            When I did need one, it was nice to have it and know how to use it though.

                            And I'm a she, thanks for asking...ROFL...

                          •  I'm curious. (5+ / 0-)

                            Up here guys is used as generic for people. I've been told that isn't true in most places.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:58:20 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I always used it that way... (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound, ER Doc, KVoimakas

                            ...but my wife objects, so now I say "folks."

                            "She's petite, extremely beautiful, and heavily armed." -1995 Michael Moore documentary Canadian Bacon

                            by Tom Seaview on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:41:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So.... (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound, Tom Seaview

                            I am rolling on the floor.  When the hell were you going to tell us?  It's clear now you are a gay woman, and although I've loved everything you write you have written from such a male point a view I'm now like duh... it so figures.

                            Gerrilea, (even your name now makes sense) you are too damn much the poster child for this community, the community that has no doubts about the human right of self defense.  So come out of that damn closet! :o)

                          •  ROFL...no, I must admit, I'm a...drum role.... (5+ / 0-)

                            a male to female transsexual...

                            So, almost right...sort of right...technically by the "law" right...I'm still considered male...damn it all!

                            But thanks for the observation, I never thought I thought like a man...LMFAO...

                            I did "deal" with those ambiguous feelings in therapy though...

                            When I knew how to fix a car better than some of my boyfriends, I understood how to hunt and fish and be "rough and tumble"...

                            You know what my therapist said?  "So..."

                            She told me about the old pendulum and how it swings, either end are the extremes and most of humanity is in the center.

                            And it took me a while to accept "both sides" of my being, as it were. Today, I'm just me...and looking back, that's all I've ever been...

                            ;)

                          •  You are freaking amazing.... (5+ / 0-)

                            If you ever get within 150 miles of Detroit, I want to buy you and your fella dinner.

                          •  actually even the rich and famous can't get them (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, KVoimakas

                            in NJ.  You did accurately describe the situation in New York City though.

                            except that, in NJ and NYC, only the rich and famous are given concealed carry permits.

                            NJ (population: 8,700,000) has around 1,000-1,200 concealed carry permits issued statewide.  That total includes people who carry weapons for their job (security guards, armored truck drivers, etc.) so the actual number of citizens with such permits is even smaller.

                            There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

                            by Crookshanks on Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 06:18:07 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  That boycott was economic force (11+ / 0-)

                      So are strikes and walkouts.  Civil disobedience forces the opposition to expend effort and resources, or to capitulate, or to negotiate--none of which would have happened willingly if the civil disobedience wasn't used as a lever.  Force is force.

                    •  Ye the British themselves say that Gandhi (0+ / 0-)

                      had minimal impact.

                      link

                      (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                      by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:48:51 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Especially... (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea, kestrel9000, KVoimakas

                  ...the passive-aggressivists.

            •  see the problem with statement 2 is even one (8+ / 0-)

              that doesn't fit your preconception voids the "all" argument...Case in point a bench rest rifle and it's ammo.

              Still a rifle, usually a high powered one, but absolutely not designed to do anything but punch holes in paper...

              heavy, bulky, awkward and the ammo itself might just fall apart under jostling as the bullet is barely seated.....

              Most definitely not designed to kill anything living though it could be done......

              "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

              by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:35:44 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Excellent point . . . (5+ / 0-)

            I still have nightmares about that kid at Ohio State a few years back who went on that 3 day killing spree with a bumper jack - what was it? 29 dead and 13 badly wounded?

            If only somebody had had a gun to take this nutcase down in a timely fashion.

        •  most recent stats show 7% of violent (7+ / 0-)

          crime committed with a firearm.....

          Here in AZ where we issue a 1911 at birth, there's been a recent spate of stabbings, not shootings, stabbings, more than I can remember in recent years...

          And this is after heavy Liberalization of our gun laws so basically anyone not  PP can carry with very few restrictions.....yet they still stab each other....It ain't the gun, it's the culture.....

          "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

          by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:09:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  We could advocate gay shotgun weddings... (8+ / 0-)

      ...and piss both sides off.

  •  more guns = more deaths (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cee4, carolus

    It's too easy to obtain guns in the US - more control is required.

    Just one shop's activities.

    Also.

    I also think that making political points using that massacre is pretty low behavior

    ,

    which is exactly what this diary does.

    "What has happened down here is the wind have changed. Clouds roll in from the north and it started to rain"

    by senilebiker on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 02:54:23 AM PDT

    •  This position gives away votes (15+ / 0-)

      It's too easy to obtain guns in the US - more control is required.

      It is a losing proposition for the Democrats and a dynamite wedge issue for Republicans. In an ideal world, maybe, there would be no such thing as a gun or any other weapon, but this is not an ideal world. And when you have a society with as many guns as people, maybe more, you are not going to win votes, hearts or minds with such a position.  You might as well threaten to take their golf clubs.  Imagine the outcry if you threatened to control golf clubs because they are sometimes used in domestic violence incidents.  That is not hyperbole, because I just worked on a case where the enraged husband beat his wife to death with a golf club.

      Why give them freebie votes because of an idealistic theoretical issue that is not possible to implement?

      It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

      by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:05:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Don't (8+ / 0-)

      sit in a boarding lounge overseas holding citizenshiop in another country and snottily tell us what to do about our domestic policy, please.

      saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

      by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:10:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  But it's so rare... (10+ / 0-)

      Beats me why one way of dying prematurely (in a bomb blast) is so much more of a threat than every other way, especially since it is so rare.

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

      Go stuff your head in some oxygen, dude. Your brain isn't getting enough.

      It Takes A Village To Keep The Peace...(RKBA).......(-7.12, -5.54)

      by JayFromPA on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:12:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ahhh, kestrel beat me to it! eom. (8+ / 0-)

        It Takes A Village To Keep The Peace...(RKBA).......(-7.12, -5.54)

        by JayFromPA on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:13:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  10.000 firearm murders each year in US (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brecht, carolus

        equal to 3 times 911.

        And I need oxygen?  ROFLMAO

        "What has happened down here is the wind have changed. Clouds roll in from the north and it started to rain"

        by senilebiker on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:20:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  ROFLMAO yourself. (9+ / 0-)

          Car Crash Stats: There were nearly 6,420,000 auto accidents in the United States in 2005. The financial cost of these crashes is more than 230 Billion dollars. 2.9 million people were injured and 42,636 people killed. About 115 people die every day in vehicle crashes in the United States -- one death every 13 minutes.

          BAN CARS! BAN CARS!

          saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

          by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:23:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  We've been making cars and roads safer. (0+ / 0-)

            ....
            How about guns?

            Show me the POLICY!

            by Fabian on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:48:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Guns don't generally fire unless the (6+ / 0-)

              trigger is pulled. That's as safe as you can make them without rendering them ineffective.

              Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

              by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:52:20 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Actually... (0+ / 0-)

                ...technology in ammunition and so on are meant to make guns as lethally effective as possible.

                So...do guns kill people or are they just the delivery device for ammunition....?

                Hmmm...could be some interesting discussion there.

                Show me the POLICY!

                by Fabian on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:55:04 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  As lethally effective as possible? (6+ / 0-)

                  No, not really, unless you're talking about a hunting cartridge. These are the only ones designed to be as lethally effective as possible for a specific weight class of target.

                  Battle rifle (assault weapon in the language of the histrionic) cartridges are designed to still effectively incapacitate while minimizing cartridge volume and weight. Lethality is incidental.

                  Defensive ammunition is designed for stopping power, not lethality (the two are not the same). Lethality is again incidental.

                  "meant to make guns a lethally effective as possible" is wildly hyperbolic and more than a bit dishonest.

                  Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                  by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:01:31 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Safer.... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Shadan7, rockhound, KVoimakas

              Modern handguns have so many safety features now that they are beginning to interfere with function in some gun owner's opinion, however I feel it's all worthwhile so far.

              Originally, in the revolver era, safety was a single action, that is the gun must be cocked by hand before it will fire. That's still a good feature and a reason why all the old west type revolvers still sell so well. Next, the revolver was made double action, that is it could be fired the old way or by just pulling the trigger.  But the just pulling the trigger action was 3x harder trigger pull than the single action method, something that was a mechanical limitation but proved to be a great safety feature also, especially for small children - but bad for small women.  However, for 90 years over a lot of the world police carried double action revolvers safely. Double action revolvers with over a 12lb long trigger pull are very difficult for young children to fire, and in fact the hard trigger pull is law in some states.

              Starting about 1900, the automatic pistol started being perfected, and at first it was a pretty much like the revolver, that is it came in single or double action, but because of the easy trigger pull it came with a safety. All the effort here was trying to make the gun reliable and by WWII they were very reliable, but still not very safe.

              In the 1960's it was recognized widely that a dropped gun may accidentally discharge, and guns were changed rapidly to include systems that prevented accidental discharge due to a strike.  That is now the standard in almost all cases.

              For automatics, there began to appear additional features, the most important of which is the magazine safety, that is without a magazine in the gun will not fire. This was a problem for automatics since the magazine could be removed and the gun was not unloaded, there still might be one bullet in the chamber. Many automatics now include a indicator on the gun that can be seen and inform the holder if there is a bullet in the chamber in addition to the magazine safety.

              Finally and recently, all handguns sold must by federal law come with a lock. Some manufacturers provide an additional exterior lock for the gun, and some build them into the mechanism. This is to provide for safe storage of the weapon for people who aren't keeping them safely locked up. (A bad idea IMO, lock them up).

              That's the mechanical developments in gun safety, however IMO they aren't the most important advances. The most important gun safety advances are made in training the people who own them what safe gun handling is.  Just like the most important feature of car safety is driver education.

              •  magazine disconnect (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea, KVoimakas

                Modern handguns have so many safety features now that they are beginning to interfere with function in some gun owner's opinion, however I feel it's all worthwhile so far.

                California crossed that line when they mandated magazine disconnects.  Now you can't perform a tactical reload with a (legal) handgun in the State of California, unless you own an older model that was Grandfathered or are a LEO who is exempted from the requirement forced on everyone else.

                There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

                by Crookshanks on Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 06:28:42 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, yeah.... (5+ / 0-)

          you might back up your stat.
          Link or you're full of shite, matey.

          saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

          by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:23:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  glad to oblige (0+ / 0-)

            wikipedia

            As for the car comparison, register your guns, take out insurance, pass a governmment supervised test, have the gun checked yearly for conformity etc etc etc.

            Oh- and as for my standing in this debate - pull out your fucking bases from the mid East and Europe, and hide behind your border, and I will forego my right to comment.

            "What has happened down here is the wind have changed. Clouds roll in from the north and it started to rain"

            by senilebiker on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:29:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Apples and oranges. (7+ / 0-)

              Foreign policy is one thing, domestic policy is quite another, old chap.
              Would you blokes like to see my views on your domestic policy?

              (JayfromPA, weren't you looking for this?)

              A True Story
              You're sound asleep when you hear
              a thump outside your bedroom door.
              Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear,
              you hear muffled whispers.
              At least two people have broken into your
              house and are moving your way.
              With your heart pumping, you reach down
              beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.
              You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch
              toward the door and open it.                    
              In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

              One holds something that looks like a crowbar.
              When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike,
              you raise the shotgun and fire.
              The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.
              One writhes and screams while the second
              man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.
              As you pick up the telephone to call police,
              you know you're in trouble.

              In your country, most guns were outlawed years
              before, and the few that are privately owned
              are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.
              Yours was never registered.
              Police arrive and inform you                  
              that the second burglar has died.
              They arrest you for First Degree Murder
              and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.
              When you talk to your attorney, he tells
              you not to worry: authorities will probably
              plea the case down to manslaughter.

              "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

              "Only ten-to-twelve years,"
              he replies, as if that's nothing.
              "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

              The next day, the shooting is the lead
              story in the local newspaper.
              Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric
              vigilante while the two men you shot
              are represented as choirboys.
              Their friends and relatives can't find
              an unkind word to say about them..
              Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.
              But the next day's headline says it all:
              "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."
              The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters..
              As the days wear on, the story takes wings.
              The national media picks it up,
              then the international media.
              The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

              Your attorney says the thief is preparing
              to sue you, and he'll probably win.
              The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack
              of effort in apprehending the suspects.
              After the last break-in, you told your neighbor
              that you would be prepared next time.
              The District Attorney uses this to allege
              that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

              A few months later, you go to trial.
              The charges haven't been reduced,
              as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.
              When you take the stand, your anger at
              the injustice of it all works against you..
              Prosecutors paint a picture of you
              as a mean, vengeful man.
              It doesn't take long for the jury to convict
              you of all charges.

              The judge sentences you to life in prison.

              This case really happened.

              On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.
              In April, 2000, he was convicted
              and is now serving a life term..

              How did it become a crime to defend one's
              own life in the once great British Empire ?

              It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.
              This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns..

              Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of                    all shotguns.

              Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.
              When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

              The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

              Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

              For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

              During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as “vigilantism”.                    Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

              Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

              All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars..

              When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.
              Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.
              Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

              How did the authorities know who had handguns?
              The guns had been registered and licensed.
              Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

              saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

              by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:33:49 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Uniform Crime Report 2009 (8+ / 0-)

          Total murders in USA  13,636

          Firearm                9,146
          Knives or cutting      1,825
          Blunt object             611
          Personal (hands, feet)   801
          Poison                     6
          Explosives                 2
          Fire                      99
          Narcotics                 45
          Strangulation            121
          Asphyxiation              77
          Other, not stated        903

          It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

          by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:32:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks for the back up - ;-) n/t (0+ / 0-)

            "What has happened down here is the wind have changed. Clouds roll in from the north and it started to rain"

            by senilebiker on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:34:34 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That is not backing you up. (8+ / 0-)

              Firearms accounted for only 67% of the murders in the USA in 2009.  The other third were much more creative and generally more horrible than being shot.  

              I have statistics for all kinds of things, and can show that firearm deaths are not as much a problem as, for instance, drunk driving deaths.  Obviously any death is a problem, the time and energy devoted to ameliorating it should be based on a combination of practicality and feasibility.  It is relative.

              It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

              by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:40:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You confirmed my number (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                cee4

                or at least 91% of it in a a particular year. I guess earlier years would give higher numbers (demographics).

                That's backing me up.

                for comparison - firearm homicides in the UK - population 60 million are around 70 per year.

                "What has happened down here is the wind have changed. Clouds roll in from the north and it started to rain"

                by senilebiker on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:46:17 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No... (11+ / 0-)

                  How many of those murders were committed with legally purchased guns?

                  How many with guns that were not?

                  How many were gang/drug related?  How many were domestic violence?

                  There are reasons behind the figures.  Those point to the issues, and gun control isn't correcting those reasons, it's an example of linear thinking.

                  •  also (5+ / 0-)

                    the vast majority of gun deaths are suicides.

                    Die with your boots on. Gonna try? Well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

                    by Cedwyn on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:49:28 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Thats on top of the 9-10,000 murders (0+ / 0-)

                      You really want to go there?

                      "What has happened down here is the wind have changed. Clouds roll in from the north and it started to rain"

                      by senilebiker on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:47:28 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Which is truly ironic (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      gerrilea, Tom Seaview, Ana Thema

                      since gun laws are meant to keep them out of the hands of the mentally ill.

                      Obviously....the laws don't work.

                      Show me the POLICY!

                      by Fabian on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:51:32 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Not all mental illnesses are created equal (5+ / 0-)

                        Would you deprive someone suffering depression of their 1st amendment rights? Their 4th? Their 14th?

                        Then why their 2nd?

                        Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                        by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:54:19 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I dunno. (0+ / 0-)

                          Let me look up the murder/suicide rate here in Ohio.

                          Last one was the mother killing her 2 kids and herself.  September, I think.

                          Depression leads to more than just suicide.

                          Show me the POLICY!

                          by Fabian on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:57:28 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Why Robobagger is wrong (0+ / 0-)

                          Would you deprive someone suffering depression of their 1st amendment rights? Their 4th? Their 14th?

                          Then why their 2nd?

                          When the mentally ill are a danger to themselves and/others, it's completely legal to suspend these rights and many others.

                          While this sounds terrible, it's often far more cruel to permit a mentally ill person  to suffer the consequences of exceeding their rights.

                          For example, should we punish someone who is mentally ill for the crime of libel or copyright infringement the same as we would a healthy sane person? Is it right that we hold a mentally ill person accountable who signs a contract as we would someone who isn't mentally ill?

                          Should we hold the mentally ill accountable if they incriminate themselves in some criminal proceeding?

                          Just a few such questions.  There are many others.

                          In the case of the Sacond Amend., are we prepared to allow the mentally to suffer the same consequences as a sane person for misusing a gun?  Are we prepared to allow innocent parties to be killed or injured by allowing mentally ill people to exercise 2A rights?

                          •  Reaching the legal bar of criminally insane (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rockhound, Robobagpiper, KVoimakas

                            or using that as a legitimate defense is almost impossible here in the country.

                            http://definitions.uslegal.com/...

                            http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...

                            http://www.law.cornell.edu/...

                            http://www.law.cornell.edu/...

                            http://www.expertlaw.com/...

                            Now if you actually take the time and review the provided documentation, you'll find that there is a difference between mentally ill (retarded) and insane.

                            Being mentally retarded is not a crime and therefore one cannot be striped their rights.

                            Being insane is a whole other subject.  If the person has been adjudicated as mentally insane, they cannot own a gun or firearm.

                            And we still hold them legally responsible for their actions.  Most recently, as the documentation provided shows in Aktins V Virgina in 2002.

                            The first case that finally decided that we would not put to death someone who is mentally ill was Penry v. Lynaugh in 1989 and to meet these new "standards", many States have moved to replace their statutes with "Guilty but mentally ill", instead of "Innocent due to insanity".

                            So, it would appear, your argument, upon further investigation, is invalid.

                            We do hold them accountable.  So if one can be held accountable under the law, then their rights should still be intact, even though in practice, this is not the case.

                          •  Do you see where I wrote (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            "unless that diagnosis includes a clear and present danger to self or others"?

                            From your reading comprehension fail, I can conclude that you are either dishonest or stupid, or both.

                            The question was not whether someone with a finding of being an imminent danger can be so deprived; but if someone with a diagnosis of mere depression.

                            You're very eager to deprive people of their rights. There are countries where that is acceptable. Move to one.

                            Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                            by Robobagpiper on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 01:34:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I saw it but you still don't get it (0+ / 0-)

                            do you?

                            You couch your comment with the vague "mere depression" as if depression is a "one size, fits all" malady.

                            Furthermore, you neglect to mention, perhaps from ignorance or stupidity or dishonesty, that many medications used to treat the many and varied forms of depression are frequently accompanied by unpleasant side effects which include dizziness, mood swings and/or altered perceptions.

                            The obvious point, since it must be pointed out to you, is how best do we ensure public safety by making sure guns aren't being wielded by those with mental illnesses?  Your answer seems to be 'give guns to everyone and hope for the best.'

                            As to your charge that I wish to deprive people of rights, I can only chalk it up to your rhetorical hyperbole.

                          •  Seeing as you keep ignoring the threshold (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            that exists in law, that I keep citing, imminent danger, I can only conclude that you are a liar intent on misrepresenting my words. I have not said "give guns to everyone". I have said "do not deprive anyone of their constitutional rights unless they present an imminent danger to themselves or others; or as the penalty for commission of a crime". This applies equally well to speech, religion, and the quartering of soldiers in their homes.

                            And do look up the concept of "prior restraint".

                            Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

                            by Robobagpiper on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 08:49:58 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  While I rec'd your comment for the laugh (11+ / 0-)

                        I got out of it...seriously...but what I can't agree with here is the idea that all suicides done by mentally ill people.

                        Do we know how many of those suicides were because someone was dying of an incurable disease?

                        To me suicide isn't the State's business.  It's your body do with it as you chose.

                •  I have a suggestion (10+ / 0-)

                  Just go live in the UK or somewhere else besides the USA--find a place that has more restrictive gun laws than we do. I see in your profile you are European and are currently in the middle east, so maybe you are happier there. Just please do not try to throw sand into the issues that might help get more and better Democrats elected here in the USA.

                  It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

                  by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:08:53 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  10,000? (9+ / 0-)

          years ago I read an article in Time (or one of the other newsmagazines) that listed every firearm death for a one week period.  It changed my views on the subject.

          There were accidents, suicides, police shootings, gang shootings, ... you name it.  After carefully reading every story I came to the conclusion that this threat is over-hyped.

          Many of the suicides were elderly and deathly ill, if not a gun then probably pills.

          Several were police using their weapons in the line of duty.  No quarrel from me, other than holding them accountable for proper use of this awesome power we give them.

          Many were gang fights where they killed each other in vendettas or turf battles.  I doubt any gun control will eliminate the access to and abuse of guns by this cohort.

          Accidental shootings, either by children who didn't know what they had or by adults not careful enough and respectful enough of what they had.  A tragedy each and every time, but in numbers a drop in the bucket compared to drownings in pools, falls from a ladder, choking on a hot dog, medical mixups, accidental overdoses or deadly side effects from prescription drugs.

          A few were in defense of somebody... shooting a robber, rapist, assaulter or something else.  A small piece but also a death that even gun control people should see as a net good, even if it is an "illegal" weapon being used.

          Of the hundreds profiled, I think there were maybe 10 that seemed to be strong arguments for elimination of guns or requiring more stringent restrictions.  Innocent bystanders to the gang wars, small child getting a gun and having an accidental discharge, policeman killed by a criminal, teenage suicide during a temporary period of loneliness or anguish.

          But those were so few and far between that I started to rethink my position.  Now?  I favor easier concealed carry and easier access in general.  Should we have some restrictions and some control?  ABSOLUTELY.  Ban them?  That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

          www.dailykos.com is America's Blog of Record

          by WI Deadhead on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:03:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  No, that is NOT (11+ / 0-)

      what this diary does.
      Quite the opposite.
      It calls out those doing so on their bullshit.
      And I think you know that.
      You might try being slightly less disingenuous.

      saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

      by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:25:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not a Citizen, Not a Democrat, position held is (5+ / 0-)

      immaterial.....

      "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

      by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:12:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Typo in paragraph #3 under the video (8+ / 0-)

    "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

    by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:25:47 AM PDT

  •  Well, anyway, peoples (8+ / 0-)

    what I keep coming back to is; what happens if only the gendarmes and the military are allowed to carry weapons?

    That's the strongest RKBA argument right there.

    We live here in a country where people are allowed to carry weapons. If we're going to start restricting that, I want it to apply to the cops, too.

    That will NEVER go over.

    Just saying'.

    "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

    by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:33:31 AM PDT

    •  Answer: (10+ / 0-)

      what happens if only the gendarmes and the military are allowed to carry weapons?

      THe operative word is "allowed."
      What you then end up with is guns only in the hands of "the gendarmes and the military".......and CRIMINALS.

      saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

      by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:37:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Check Philly. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gerrilea, buddabelly, KVoimakas

      Philly cops come down hard on folks carrying there.

      There have been recording of cops threatening to "put two in the melon" and "drop you like a sack of meat", but the attitude that people who are legally licensed to carry in that city should not be allowed to do so never changes. It really is a situation of "Can't fight city hall".

      So, I haven't looked, but look into the way philly cops interact with the general public there. But the first hit on google was this: http://www.yaliberty.org/...

      In this week’s Citypaper, author Andrew Thompson writes about an incident that happened in Old City around Halloween in his article called "Who Polices the Police?  They Do.  That’s the Problem."  Michael Foley, an extremely intoxicated 25 year old who was being nothing more than a public nuisance (yelling, being loud, etc) was punched in the face, thrown to the ground, and hit with a baton several times, thrown into a newspaper stand, then thrown into a garbage can, all while screaming for help to the onlookers.  But whom do you call for help when something like this happens?  This article makes that point evident, and it also explains why police often get away with misconduct.

      In today’s Inquirer Daily News, the cover story again tells the story of more police brutality, this time happening to an unexpected target — a 63 year old grandmother attempting to ride an exercise bike at the gym.  Unaware of new rules at the health club, even when she inquired about them beforehand, Carroll Shannon hopped on an exercise bike.  After getting in a dispute with the supervisor, two Philadelphia police ended up "assaulting her and tossing her into a jail cell overnight."  This resulted in Shannon with a broken thumb, numerous bruises and pain caused by a cervical spine injury operation she had in 2008.

      What the frak! That's as bad as this story from Oklahoma:
      'Don't taze my granny!' American police accused of using a Taser on an 86-year-old, bed-ridden grandmother

      It Takes A Village To Keep The Peace...(RKBA).......(-7.12, -5.54)

      by JayFromPA on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 02:46:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  To answer the question from the quoted article (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        buddabelly, KVoimakas

        all while screaming for help to the onlookers.  But whom do you call for help when something like this happens?  

        We Do!

        Here's a list of court cases that actually give "we the people" the recognized right to stop police brutality.

        Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest

        "Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary." Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: "Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed."

        "One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance." (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

        There are many many more court cases at the link above.

        You'd be surprised to know how much authority we actually have.  Despite the misinformation that is taught to us.

        We have the right to stop the police, if we reasonably believe they are wrong.

  •  I haven't gotten past (13+ / 0-)

    that stuff in Michael Moore's film "Bowling For Columbine," where he points out that Canadians have more guns per capita than Americans, fewer murders, and also leave their doors unlocked.

    That sold me on the idea that it's not about guns. It's about fear, it's about gun cultures, it's about a lot of stuff.

    But it's not about the mere fact of there being guns available.

    I do believe that's a false meme.

    "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

    by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:43:59 AM PDT

    •  it's about poverty (5+ / 0-)

      Moore comes back to this in every one of his films:
      --He points out an apparent problem.
      --He debunks the simple answers.
      --He reveals that poverty is really the issue.

      Mr. Moore can do this dozens more times, and I'll still keep showing up at the theater to see it.

      "She's petite, extremely beautiful, and heavily armed." -1995 Michael Moore documentary Canadian Bacon

      by Tom Seaview on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:42:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What you've described seems legitimately... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brecht, Mandell

    ...summable-uppable as a "gun show loophole."  Gun shows are, after all, the only place where private citizens can go with a reasonable expectation of finding other private citizens to do private deals about firearms without prior arrangements.  By the prevailing standard it doesn't seem like a big misrepresentation to me.  If you're angry that the phrase does a lot of political damage to your side, join the club!  You know, that club you're already in as a Democrat.

    The most impressive thing about man [...] is the fact that he has invented the concept of that which does not exist--Glenn Gould

    by Rich in PA on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:52:32 AM PDT

    •  Yes... (9+ / 0-)

      but I know you've gone, and these things are hardly hotbeds of criminals filling their pockets with guns. Usually any private sale is some guy selling grandpa's 30-30 deer rifle. I've never heard any story related to a gun show sale that involved a handgun, and about 2 involving private sales of a rifle, and 50 that were straight ahead dealer sales with all legalities observed.

      But until someone changes our constitution, the so called loop hole is legal behavior, so calling it a loop hole is a lie by my lights. Repeal the 2nd, and then call it what you want.

    •  Ever hear of "classified ads"? (10+ / 0-)

      Back in the days before the internets, people would put them in the newspaper.

      Private firearm sales were advertised through them all the time.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:03:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  In NY State... (7+ / 0-)

      One can grow up to one hundred marijuana plants and law enforcement can only charge you with a misdemeanor.

      A couple of years age, I read  comment in the local paper from a county prosecutor who was annoyed that he could not bring felony charges against a guy who was caught growing 50 plants. "That's a loophole in the law." he complained.

      However, the legislature wrote that bill the way they did on purpose. They did not see cultivation of less that 100 plants to be worthy of felony charges. It was not a loophole by any means. Same with the laws on firearms sales. They were written the way the were for a reason. You may not like it, but that doesn't qualify the ability to conduct private sales as a "loophole".

      "I was so easy to defeat, I was so easy to control, I didn't even know there was a war." -9.75, -8.41

      by RonV on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:52:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  that DA was wrong (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, KVoimakas

        You most certainly can be charged with a felony in NYS if you possess that many plants.

        NYS has decriminalization for marijuana possession.  If you possess no more than 25 grams (0.88 ounces) and aren't smoking it in public then the charge is a simple 'violation' with a fine of no more than $100.

        Possess more than 25 grams and/or smoke in public and the charge is bumped up to a Class B Misdemeanor.

        Possess more than two ounces and the charge is bumped up to a Class A Misdemeanor.

        Possess more than eight ounces and the charge becomes a Class E Felony.

        More than sixteen ounces and the charge becomes a Class D Felony.

        More than ten pounds and the charge becomes a Class C felony.

        Review the laws for yourself if you doubt what I'm saying.  I would question whether or not that comment you read came from an actual DA.  If he did he was either an idiot or was trying to push a political agenda and hoping that people would believe his lie.

        There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

        by Crookshanks on Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 06:54:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Reasons Not To Keep Guns (10+ / 0-)
    1. You don't feel comfortable with learning to work with guns.
    1. You are moody to the extent that you think about suicide a lot.
    1. You drink or use other strong drugs a lot.
    1. You live in an environment with other persons who fit any of the the second and third criteria above.

    That's what I came up with off of the top of my head. Can any of you add to this?

    Serious question, and I would appreciate feedback.

    "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

    by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 03:53:03 AM PDT

  •  i wonder if VA Tech has any rights (5+ / 0-)

    regarding this ad?  having graduated from there, i find this ad absolutely appalling.

    Die with your boots on. Gonna try? Well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

    by Cedwyn on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:12:03 AM PDT

    •  I haven't even watched the ad (8+ / 0-)

      I just find this blogger group interesting.

      Should I watch the ad?

      "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

      by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:14:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Okay, I watched the ad (7+ / 0-)

      I am willing to agree that it wasn't very informative.

      "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

      by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:15:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  it was DISinformative. (8+ / 0-)

        it moves from truth to lie.
        The statement about Cho being able to acquire guns because of  a failure in Virginia's laws is basically true. He had been adjudicated as mentally ill.  

        HAd a state employee decided to forward that information to the NCIS, the purchase would have been stopped.
        But as that adjudication of mental illness did not, in that person's view, meet that STATE bar to block  firearm purchase, the information was not sent to the federal level.
        Call it, "failure to err on the safe side."

        So the ad equates that failure with a nonexistent strawman and then proceeds to make a political attack on that basis.

        saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

        by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:21:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My fix on it (8+ / 0-)

          was that it was a highly emotive and uninformative ad.

          Unfortunately, most ads are like that; most ads are forced to be that way.

          Advertising can be good, and even can be art. But that's not what's happening. What we're getting is corporate-run sound bites. Very pretty. But still sham.

          "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

          by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:25:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Not a failure in the law (7+ / 0-)

          A failure in the uniform enforcement thereof.

          The solution to the problem of non-uniform enforcement of existing law in a world of limited police and social services resources is not more restrictions, but fewer and smarter ones. And more resources.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:08:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I get seriously nervous when I hear this (6+ / 0-)

          Call it, "failure to err on the safe side."

          Having paid for therapy for years while dealing with my sexuality (in the 90's), had I done so when I was a teenager (in the 70's), it was still believed that if you were anything but heterosexual, you were considered a deviant and mentally "disturbed."

          Seriously, I do not trust the "business of psychiatry" today, they keep coming up with new disorders and drugs for everyone to buy.

          Besides, The damn CFR said recently that we are too obsessed with the constitution. That we should recognized how antiquated it is.

          http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/...

          And then I read the MIAC report that says anyone who is a Constitutionalist or a Libertarian or a Ron Paul supporter is a possible terrorist, I seriously wonder where this country is going.

          I don't like the idea that "to err on the side of safety" could be manipulated into denying everyone a right to bear arms.

          There has to be privacy between a doctor and their patient or we then start arguing for the same crap that the republicans have (think of abortion issue).

          •  I was diagnosed with depression when I was (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, rockhound, Mandell

            younger. Think middle school years. When I hit college, it came back a bit (high school was basically un-medicated.) After a while, I stopped taking the meds and started riding a motorcycle.

            My motorcycle is my mind altering drug. It relaxes, it releases stress, and it keep me sane. I haven't felt depressed in years.

            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

            by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:20:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  The ad is based on a total lie. (8+ / 0-)

      The shooter got his gun legally, at a licensed dealer and not a private purchase at a gun show. He did not show up on any registry, because he was not reported by his mental health treatment providers. They could not have anyway, because of HIPAA restrictions.  If they had tried to report him, they would have been subject to fines as high as $50,000 per incident.  

      As for Virginia Tech having any rights, I doubt it. The young people in the background photo were wearing VA logo sweatshirts, but that would come under fair use.  

      The ad is totally disingenuous.  

      It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

      by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:19:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  HIPAA leaves play (6+ / 0-)

        as I understand it because there had been an ADJUDICATION of a mental disorder prior.
        See my reply to Miep, and feel free - please - to correct any mistaken impression I may be laboring under.

        saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

        by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:22:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You need an identifiable threat (6+ / 0-)

          such as in the Tarasoff case in California.  

          There are only about three reasons a mental health professional can report and feel safe they will not run afoul of HIPAA.

          1. First, the person is a threat to others, such as Tarasoff. That is, threatening to harm a specific person or persons that you can identify.  
          1. Second, the person is a threat to self, threatening suicide.  
          1. Third, the person admits to child abuse.

          No mental health provider of my acquaintance would even think of sending a list of mentally ill patients to local or Federal law enforcement authorities.  

          It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

          by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:31:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  it shouldn't be up to the Dr's to report (5+ / 0-)

            the courts should do that at the time of adjudication....\

            I completely agree the DRs should have nothing to do with it.....I know I don't want my Dr spreading my info to anyone, Gvt included......

            "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

            by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:00:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Involuntary committment papers (6+ / 0-)

              are typically kept confidential and come under HIPAA, so there you are. This information is NOT going to get out. And how about the mentally ill that go into treatment voluntarily?  The new privacy laws under HIPAA make the penalties for release of confidential data so draconian that no professional is going to take a chance except in the most clear cut case.

              It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

              by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:06:11 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  and actually I agree completely with the idea of (6+ / 0-)

                HIPPA.  The Dr patient relationship should not be broken by requiring the DR to report...

                Seems like a fairly easy change to the law to have invol. commits. reported to the NICS system only and by the court that issued the sentence.....

                Now an observation as Cho was sentenced to is to me a huge grey area cause it's been misapplied so often in the past......

                "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

                by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:23:47 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  actually the more I thinmk about it, the less (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Otteray Scribe, KVoimakas

                comfortable I am with a 72 hour observation being considered as "adjudicated mentally defective" and do not think that just an observation should be reported.

                Now if after the initial period, the hospital recs commitment and the court agrees, at that point I think reporting should occur......and like everything, I think there should be an effective method of challenge.......or restoration of rights if applicable....

                "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

                by buddabelly on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 08:40:25 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Couldn't agree more here. What happens to those (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rockhound, buddabelly, KVoimakas

                  whom do not have the funds or resources to mount a defense against this?  Guilty due to ones poverty.  

                  It's an ugly reality we have, poor women, the mentally deficient (retarded), convicted felons, etc. up until 1986 were routinely sterilized and the last case that I'm aware of that is still the law of the land allows forced sterilization, as long as it's done uniformly is Skinner v. Oklahoma 1942.

                  Many of our rights have been abrogated under the guise of "mental instability" or the such.  So the more regulation/limitations of this the better.

      •  well, it's an ad (8+ / 0-)

        and it's not trying to be anything else but an ad.

        I've gotten crosswise with you at times here, OS, but that was then and this is now.

        It's an ad. We have to work as hard as we can to teach people not to take advertisements seriously. We have to work on teaching people, especially young people, to be able to see when they are being tricked.

        We HAVE to get out from underneath all of this corporate media thieving bullshit.

        "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

        by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:23:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Miep, I do not remember 'crosswise' with you (8+ / 0-)

          and at any rate would not want to go back there anyway.  I like you.

          As for the ad, of course it is 'just an ad,' but by definition, it is designed to sell something in a sound bite. One of my jobs working my way through college was writing advertising copy for radio, so I have a pretty good understanding of what works. Unfortunately, this ad works. It sells in a powerful way, but the message is an outright lie.  Josef Goebbels would be proud.

          "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it...."

          It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. - Ansel Adams

          by Otteray Scribe on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:43:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for the discussion, peoples (10+ / 0-)

    I've appreciated this.

    If I ever do decide I need to acquire a gun, I'll know where to go for advice.

    I already have a lot of that figured out, but new experiences so frequently require more advice.

    "Unlike every other nation in the world, the United States defines itself as a hypothesis and continues itself as an argument." - Lewis Lapham

    by Miep on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:33:31 AM PDT

  •  Well, I'll be darned (11+ / 0-)

    I really believed the gun hole loop hole.  Honestly.  Thanks for the diary.

  •  The Lying Might Decrease if You Included a Cite (4+ / 0-)

    Pick a state and post a store-waiting-period law & show how it applies to gun shows.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 05:25:54 AM PDT

    •  Sure... (7+ / 0-)

      My state has no wait on a handgun purchase, but you must have a license to buy a handgun.  To walk in a gun show and walk out with a handgun you must have the license before you go.  When the sale is made, there are 4 copies of the license - one stays with the dealer, one is the buyers copy, and two go to the license issuer (county sheriff or city police dept) one of which is kept by that dept and the other forwarded to the State Police. One License for one gun, you want another then you buy ($5) another license.

      Now when the dealer at the show processes the state license he also processes the federal forms and does a federal background check as well.

      Long guns aren't restricted by my state or the federal government, so you could walk in and walk out with one, but I'd point out you could do that at Walmart also.

    •  Not mainly a state issue, but (6+ / 0-)

      a federal one. Licensed FFL dealers are controlled by the BATF.

      States may have additional regulations, but the principal issue, that FFL dealers are FFL dealers wherever they sell, and private sellers are private sellers wherever they sell, and that gun shows are no different - that's universal.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:39:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  actually my state requires private party sales (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, KVoimakas

        at a gun show to get run through NICS.  So if you sell a gun to someone at a gun show without doing this background check you've broken the law.

        If you tell that person to meet you the next day at your house/grocery store/pizza hut/fill-in-the-blank you can sell him the weapon with no background check.

        Gotta love NYS.

        There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

        by Crookshanks on Mon Nov 01, 2010 at 07:00:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  It's so bizarre these don't make the reclist... (9+ / 0-)

    ...but whatever. Great diary. Thanks.

    it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses

    by Addison on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:00:42 AM PDT

    •  actually I know myself I only rec (7+ / 0-)

      if I see it before I get the email and that's just due to the way a few groups in the past handled that and some still do...

      I see reccing off of an email or tweet request as gaming the list.....

      So if it's good enough to rec which honestly for me isn't many, I only rec a couple a day but I tip Liberally.....

      This one gets one though as do a lot of ours, just not at the beginning where they're weighted higher.....

      "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

      by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:26:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It doesn't make the rec list (0+ / 1-)
      Recommended by:
      Hidden by:
      PavePusher

      Because these diaries are simply rehashes of NRA propaganda.  Most of the time, the premises are false--as is the case of this diary.

    •  A few have..... (7+ / 0-)

      but as a group member, I'm glad you liked Mandell's contribution.
      He justhappeend to hit one of MY pet peeves. I hate that "gun show loophole" shit like I hate "defense of marrige" or "partial birth abortion."

      saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

      by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:29:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Guess what (1+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Brecht
        Hidden by:
        Robobagpiper

        Every bill or issue is going to have a name.

        Patriot Act. TARP. Fairness Doctrine.

        Nobody is going to name a bill or issue they support something like "The Ever So Dreary and Complicated Tax Law That Doesn't Affect Hardly Anyone" Bill.

        But in the case of gun show loophole, we can easily see how prohibited buyers and sellers of firearms come together at gunshows.  It happens at every gunshow.  Pretending it doesn't exist is simply ludicrous.

        I understand you need to own guns for your own personal psyche.  But what baffles me is your bizarre insistence that criminals be given such easy opportunity to own guns.  If you are demanding that everyone should be allowed to own guns, regardless of their criminal histories or mental illnesses---say so.  Otherwise, you are engaging in the behavior you claim to abhor.

        •  Seriously here, none of us have ever claimed what (6+ / 0-)

          you're saying here, is this a lie on your part or just intentional misinformation.

          If you are demanding that everyone should be allowed to own guns, regardless of their criminal histories or mental illnesses---say so.  Otherwise, you are engaging in the behavior you claim to abhor.

          Do you think the "if" is actually genuine here? You've been in our diaries, intentionally misrepresenting the facts. You know we've told you that none of us believe that everyone should have guns, that "reasonable" controls are necessary.

          We've never propagated the idea that everyone..."regardless of their criminal histories or mental illnesses" should be allowed guns...If you continue these lies, I'll get all the posts and diaries where we've stated this, time and again AND specifically to you.

          And by the way; the biggest dealer in illegal guns is...the US Government...they knowingly sell our surplus firearms to the Mexican/South American "Governments" that they know 90% of them will get into the hands of drug gangs and criminals.

        •  You (5+ / 0-)

          I understand you need to own guns for your own personal psyche

          what huh?

          This comes perilously close to equating gun ownership with mental illness.

          Warning: I hiderate that.

          This:

          bizarre insistence that criminals be given such easy opportunity to own guns.

          is a lie, and lies are what I have come to expect from you.

          saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

          by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:01:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "Personal psyche" earned you that HR (6+ / 0-)

          And the lies about the RKBA position. No one is demanding a total lack of restrictions.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 07:09:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's true (0+ / 0-)

            Your need of guns is psychological.

            •  You're not advancing the discussion here; (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Shadan7, KVoimakas

              please just drop this point.

              The only way you could use this in valid way would be with studies pointing to a general trend among gun owners. Right now it just looks personal and doesn't support your larger argument.

              "Problems can't be solved by the same level of thinking that created them" Einstein

              by Brecht on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 12:12:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Brecht

                So, calling me a liar and other ad hominem attacks advance the discussion?

                I've stated the facts: in most states, you can go to a gunshow and buy firearms without a background check of any kind.

                I've noted the Mayor Bloomberg 'stings' that show FFLs willing to sell guns to customers who say they can't pass the background check.  I've also noted Timothy McVeigh worked in concert with gun sellers at gun shows to make straw purchases.  He's not the only one who did or does this.

                •  I don't endorse any ad hominems here, (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Shadan7, KVoimakas, Mandell

                  which is why I recced your response to the liar taunt.

                  I am merely advising you of strategic realities. You are playing to a crowd who disagree with you. But some here seem willing to debate fairly on the points. Look up above where other Kossacks have raised interesting points of contention, and have been met with mostly reasonable responses and some recs from the RKBA crowd.

                  I stepped in here because I think you have been somewhat picked on. But I don't think that's just because people won't listen to your arguments, I think it's partly in response to your tone.

                  And, yes, you're getting plenty of tone back. Then again, this is their diary. You'd get similar tone if you interloped into any community diary. Just try telling the pootiers what you really think of their religion. In this diary, given your previous altercations with this crowd, you are guilty until proven innocent.

                  Either you're just here to stir shit, or you're interested in meaningful debate. The only way you can achieve the latter, in this particular diary, is by sticking to the facts and reasonable arguments, and avoiding personal attacks. You will be ribbed, and if you can't just let it go and stick to your reasons, then you will get caught up in another fight you cannot win. Perhaps that isn't things should be, but it sure looks to me how things are.

                  "Problems can't be solved by the same level of thinking that created them" Einstein

                  by Brecht on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 02:22:01 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  See our previous diaries where this poster (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Shadan7, KVoimakas

                    ignores facts when presented, put words "in our mouths" and then comes back to repeat the bs.

                    That's trollish behavior.

                    •  That's the past - I'm looking to the future. (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Shadan7, gerrilea, KVoimakas

                      We all make mistakes, but most of us have learning curves.

                      For me it all comes down to this: Either carolus is just here to stir shit, or carolus is interested in meaningful debate. I know which you'd pick. But I'm guessing the answer, so far, is both. Is carolus willing and able to stick to meaningful debate in future? We'll see.

                      I have zero interest in digging up more history here. It does look like the points you raise below are reasonable, not personal, and deserve similar responses from carolus.

                      "Problems can't be solved by the same level of thinking that created them" Einstein

                      by Brecht on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:15:14 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  That's a reasonable approach, (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        gerrilea, rockhound, buddabelly, KVoimakas

                        and both of us have been around long enough to know that it will sometimes work.

                        But you can't ignore history - and this individual has repeatedly shown little willingness to actually engage in honest dialog; rather, they prefer to insult and outright lie - after a certain point, one stops giving them the benefit of the doubt.

                        Read or *listen to* my SF novel for free. (-7.13/-7.33)

                        by Shadan7 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 08:12:17 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  Thank you for this. nt (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Shadan7, gerrilea, Brecht

                    (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                    by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:26:05 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Thanks for that! (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Shadan7, gerrilea, Brecht, KVoimakas

                    We do try to answer and explain reasonably, it's a point of agreement most of us supporting RKBA seem to have.  We realize that DKos is reflexively opposed to gun rights, and we do think this is hurting the left.  So we come expecting to have to explain, over and over, the same points but knowing patience and tolerance is needed.

                    Then there seem to be a few that take it upon themselves to sabotage the discussion or offer a pretense of discussion with no intention to enter real discussion.

                  •  Arrow. Zing. Bullseye. n/t (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KVoimakas

                    Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

                    by Meteor Blades on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 05:18:29 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  You've ignored the response to these claims (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Shadan7, KVoimakas

                  And just keep repeating these distortions.

                  I asked for a link where you could prove this:

                  I've stated the facts: in most states, you can go to a gunshow and buy firearms without a background check of any kind.

                  You've ignored that legitimate request.  If it's a fact, please provide us with the information.

                  As for this:

                  I've noted the Mayor Bloomberg 'stings' that show FFLs willing to sell guns to customers who say they can't pass the background check.

                   

                  I provided the video of the press release, you did not.  I also commented on what it was he (Bloomberg and his "undercover sting") did.  

                  You've ignored this.

                  As for this:

                  I've also noted Timothy McVeigh worked in concert with gun sellers at gun shows to make straw purchases.  He's not the only one who did or does this.

                  I asked for a link, you did comply, but when pressed further on these falsities, you then changed the subject to "gosh, the FBI believes there's a gun show loophole".

                  In our last diary, I went point by point and you never responded.

                  Same thing here again, you make wild accusations and replies, when we actually confront you on the misinformation and disinformation you repeat continually...then you just ignore these facts.

                  You've made it clear you do not want to discuss these very important issues with us.

                  I've also noted Timothy McVeigh worked in concert with gun sellers at gun shows to make straw purchases.  He's not the only one who did or does this.

              •  See postings from this diary here: (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Shadan7, buddabelly, KVoimakas

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

                 *
                 

                  My, You are silly (0+ / 0-)

                     I don't believe you even understand what CAP laws are.

                     BTW, there's a recent incident in AZ where an 8 y.o. was out getting the "education and training and exposure" you demand.  She wound up shooting her 4 y.o. sister.

                     Somehow, I suspect her sister would still be alive if all she heard was a lie.

                     by carolus on Thu Oct 28, 2010 at 02:16:30 PM EDT
                     [ Parent | Reply to This ]

                         o
                            You still support the "murder" of children, wow! (2+ / 0-)

                           Recommended by:
                               KVoimakas, theatre goon

                           Without a link, no legitimate discussion can occur here...you making unfounded claims proves nothing.

                           And Failure to discuss the issues presented.

                           I do understand what CAP=Child Access Prevention laws.

                           Do you? Here in NY they wanted the device modified, they could have required gun cabinets or gun safes, they didn't.

                           And who was "teaching these children?" Without facts, one cannot make an honest assessment of who was responsible for it.

                           There are no "accidental deaths" by firearms!

                           Again, re-read the points I made in the diary, clearly you have not done so.

                           This makes no sense:

                               I suspect her sister would still be alive if all she heard was a lie.

                           - 7.62; -5.95

                           by gerrilea on Thu Oct 28, 2010 at 02:43:42 PM EDT

                           [ Parent | Reply to This ]
                         o
                            As the crickets I hear prove, Failure to discuss (2+ / 0-)

                           Recommended by:
                               KVoimakas, theatre goon

                           the topics presented.

                           - 7.62; -5.95

                           by gerrilea on Thu Oct 28, 2010 at 03:08:36 PM EDT

                           [ Parent | Reply to This ]
                   *
                        (0 / 0)

                     - 7.62; -5.95

                View Story | 662 comments | Edit Diary

                And here:

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

                 No (0+ / 0-)

                Lies don't kill.  Otherwise, you'd be responsible for genocide.

                What kills is the willingness of people to be duped or, at least, the failure to look at alternatives.  Kind of like your little group here.

                by carolus on Thu Oct 28, 2010 at 12:17:54 PM EDT

                [ Parent | Reply to This ]

                And here:

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

                #
                ROFL, "KV & his helpers"....You've ignored (5+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                   Shadan7, buddabelly, Robobagpiper, KVoimakas, theatre goon

                all of our positions and remarks:

                  1. Should that person you mention lose their unalienable right to bear arms?

                  2. As current law is written if they are a "repeat offender" they can.

                  3. I saw the video in question, but I must have missed the guy carrying a gun, I will review it again to be sure I just didn't see it.

                  4. After review of said video, I see no gun present, which had he done that act while in possession of a firearm, the charges would have increased in severity.

                  5. This would have included the perpetrator being forever banned from owning a gun upon conviction.

                This is were we seem to part ways, you want anyone who acts out, in any manner to be striped of their rights.  I do not.  You then took out your anger on how our "justice" system works.  I did give a suggestion on how to fix that, but that too has been ignored.

                "those goofs" should be prosecuted under the laws of their state and/or federal laws if applicable.

                And the issue is clear, the "re-defining" of what or whom is a Domestic Abuser from the one that commits assault is a huge step, legally.

                As outlined in this diary, if someone who commits an assault, even just once is then prosecuted in "Family Court" they lose even more rights...

                Please re-read the diary for the specifics, I've already mentioned there.

                So what's the problem here now? Are you satisfied with the answer you've been given yet?

                - 7.62; -5.95

                by gerrilea on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 04:34:35 PM EDT

                [ Parent | Reply to This ]


                This poster has not discussed anything with us.

            •  Your need to poke RKBAers (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Shadan7, gerrilea, buddabelly, PavePusher

              is psychological.

              Wait, maybe not? I'm not a psychiatrist or a psychologist.

              Guess I could be wrong.

              I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night..

              (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:40:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Do not make unlicensed, Fristian... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas

              ...diagnoses, please.

              Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

              by Meteor Blades on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 05:16:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  I saw you in an RKBA diary before, carolus, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          carolus

          and I saw how you were received.

          If you are going to come in here and argue with a crowd of committed opponents, I think you need to be even more careful with your aspersions (i.e. "I understand you need to own guns for your own personal psyche"), or you just look like a shit-stirrer.

          That said, this aspersion is too vague and minor to warrant an HR. And you never said "No one is demanding a total lack of restrictions." It's clear that people here are looking for the smallest technicality to punish you, when your comment is almost entirely based on reasonable argument.

          Please avoid the slightest ad hominem in future - it's pretty clear what you'll get if you don't.

          "Problems can't be solved by the same level of thinking that created them" Einstein

          by Brecht on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 09:01:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I do not use the word Liar lightly, in at least (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rockhound, KVoimakas

            2 previous diaries this commenter has flat lied about statements made and then twisted that lie to attempt to paint a member in the worst possible light.....

            A couple diaries back it was accusations of plagiarism flat out and repeated.....then it was attributing words to a poster never said then twisted again to paint the poster as some type of monster...Then they repeated the Plagiarism accusation.....

            So yes, this poster has lost any good will I had towards a fellow kossak and it will take a lot to return that respect/good will/blue sky.........

            "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

            by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 10:06:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  A simply fictitious diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brecht

    In many states, one can go to a gunshow and buy whatever firearm one wants.  

    With no questions asked beyond haggling over the price.

    What's more, at these same gun shows, one can easily purchase a weapon via straw purchase facilitated by the gun dealer.  Timothy McVeigh eked out a living doing exactly this.  He travel the gun show circuit, he had 'relationships' with various dealers.  If a gun customer expressed an interest in a gun which he was legally prohibited from purchasing--the dealer would refer him to McVeigh who would complete the purchase for a fee.

    Mayor Bloomberg has demonstrated time after time how the gun show loophole works. It's on videotape, for Chrissakes.

    •  Ahh yes, the Liar returns........ (5+ / 0-)

      "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

      by buddabelly on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:29:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And once again (5+ / 0-)

      in the only places you have the slightest knowledge of what you're talking about, you distort and prevaricate.
      Your previous posts show that you lack personal integrity and have no credibility to speak to this issue.
      You are a liar.
      kthxbai

      saw someone playing Farmville on FB that posted that they needed two boards and three nails. Commented, "Oh, for Christ's sake." They unfriended me.

      by kestrel9000 on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 06:34:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You seriously need to do some research on this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shadan7, Otteray Scribe, KVoimakas

      "In Search of John Doe No. 2: The Story the Feds Never Told About the Oklahoma City Bombing"

      And this comes by way of Democracy Now.  The FBI knew it was going to happen and allowed it or failed to stop it, sadly.

      We may never know the whole truth here.

      Do you have a list of the states where you make this claim?

      In many states, one can go to a gunshow and buy whatever firearm one wants.  

      And as I understand it he was a security guard.  I haven't been able to find any references like the one you make here:

      Timothy McVeigh eked out a living doing exactly this.

      He did present and pass out political flyers at many of those events, as per the FBI.

      So please provide links with these remarks so we can verify your claims.

      •  Read (0+ / 0-)

        American Terrorist by Lou Michel and Dan Herbeck.

        http://books.google.com/...

        •  Thanks for the link but it does not (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          buddabelly, Otteray Scribe, KVoimakas

          source the information claimed.  I could write a book on why I believe the moon is made of cheese, this doesn't make it truthful or accurate.

          I've never seen any FBI reports that proved McVeigh was a engaging in straw purchases to then give (or sell) to those not legally allowed.

          Under "The Firearms Owner's Protection Act of 1986" he would have been charged for these "straw" sales.

          He was not, funny how that works, break the law, get arrested.

          Credibility is key here.

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

          •  What? (0+ / 0-)

            It doesn't source the info?

            Seriously, are you crazy?

            I've never seen any FBI reports that proved McVeigh was a engaging in straw purchases to then give (or sell) to those not legally allowed.

            Gosh, the FBI believes there's a gun show loophole.

            •  Nice try at deflection here! (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Shadan7, KVoimakas

              You ignored the whole point. If the FBI had known McVeigh was buying guns for people that could not pass a background check then they should have arrested him long before the bombing. And guess what that might have actually stopped him.

              So, again, two separate issues here, the first, as stated above is what I was talking about.  NOT whether or not the FBI believes in a "gun show loophole" or not.

              So you are peddling disinformation!  I will not allow you to re-write history right before my eyes!

              The ad hominem attack calling me crazy is HR'able...but since it's now against me, I cannot do it.

              Keep talking you BS, I will report this the next time you do.

              •  You're still wrong (0+ / 0-)

                typically, in an investigation as visible and extensive as McVeigh and the OK City bombing, the FBI will go back and track a suspect's history.  This is what they did with McVeigh--they traced where he lived, who he associated with, what he did for a living, etc.

                Plus, we have McVeigh's own words in American Terrorist where he admitted to being a straw purchaser.

                The point is very clear.  The FBI and various law enforcement agencies did not have a real time idea that McVeigh was a straw purchaser.  But they were able to develop a history of McVeigh's travels and activities.

                BTW, the link I provided does provide the sources.  You were too lazy to check them out. So report away.

                •  Sorry, you can believe what you desire (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Shadan7, KVoimakas

                  As I pointed out in the Democracy Now interview, had you read the transcripts you'd know that in Court Testimony, the ATF and FBI knew weeks before the bombing by Carol Howe and this:

                  Then there’s a fourth informant, and this informant is not well known. This informant apparently reported through a nonprofit group, which in turn passed information on to the federal government. So there were four informants involved, in one way or another, in this situation, and they were all reporting before—not afterwards, before—this bombing took place.

                  They knew who and where and what, yet allowed it to happen or didn't act.  Your choice how you look at it.

                  And I couldn't find this:

                  BTW, the link I provided does provide the sources.

                  That's why I asked.

                  •  I see, a truther (0+ / 0-)

                    sooo, you really believe the FBI knew all about OK City but allowed it to happen.

                    M'kay.

                    Good to know.

                    •  Name calling doesn't work & failure to discuss. (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rockhound, buddabelly, KVoimakas, Mandell

                      I'm going to recommend that you be HR'd on site if you continue...

                      I never said I actually believed anything pro or con, there is clearly more to the Oklahoma City Bombing than we've been told...

                      Critical thought in everything, is my position.  Let the facts (if reliable and accurate) reveal themselves.  Let the story be told by the facts, not fear-mongering, or supposition based on intentional bias or a predetermined outcome.  As you appear to do here.

                      As the Democracy Now Interview establishes, there is a lot that was not revealed to the general public by the MSM...

                      If you have credible evidence that the attorney, JAMES RIDGEWAY, who has been investigating this, is not credible, please provide links or evidence.

                      Furthermore, it's not just this attorney:

                      http://www.democracynow.org/...

                      Danny Coulson, former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI, who was in charge of collecting evidence from the Murrah building in ’95. Coulson told the BBC in March of this year that he is calling for a federal grand jury investigation into the bombings, because he questions whether everyone involved was caught. He also says FBI headquarters prematurely shut down their investigation into the alleged links between a white supremacist community called Elohim City and the bombings.

                      So, we have revealed in one interview and article, an attorney, the former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI and the July/August issue of Mother's Jones' own reported facts.

                      And upon further research, these "concerns" are echoed in The Atlantic, too...

                      So, you now call Democracy Now, Mother Jones, The Atlantic and an attorney, "truthers"...along with myself.

                      This is mature legitimate conversation and debate?

                      •  It's truther talk (0+ / 0-)

                        Period.

                        What you fail to mention in your litany of 'sources' is that this whole conspiracy theory is advanced by folks like Alex Jones and World Nut Daily.  BTW, James Ridgeway is a centerpiece of the 911 truther website.

                        •  "Truther Talk"??? So the use of emotional (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Crookshanks, KVoimakas

                          labeling to shut down discussion. Bad argument technique.  

                          And you've not answered the questions posed or provided documentation for your claims.

                          Again, failure to discuss or address these issues.

                          And the "sources" like Democracy Now and Mother Jones, and The Atlantic are now equal to Alex Jones?

                          Lest we forget that included in the documentation that you call "truther" is Court Testimony and the former Asst. Deputy Director Of The FBI, so you're claims that the FBI says this or that is refuted by THE FBI.

                          Funny how that works.

                          And I'll pose this last question and remarks before I make the recommendation that you be HR'd on site (clearly you can't discuss or debate these issues):

                          When is a conspiracy actually a conspiracy, only if and when the government admits or is forced to release documentation that shows their actions?

                          You sound like Cass Sustein and his "truther brigade".  Stopping critical thought and discussion because it might make our government look bad.

                          Shameful, shameful, shameful.

                          •  No (0+ / 0-)

                            I never try to shut down discussion.  However, when you run up against people who are truthers, birthers, or religious zealots--you can't discuss anything with them because their reality is completely out of this galaxy.

                            The difficulty truthers and birthers have is that any conspiracy--especially of the magnitude of an event such as OK City or 9/11--requires the complicity of literally thousands of people.  IOW, your belief is that there are thousands of Americans who not only knew what McVeigh was going to do--they allowed it to happen and they proceeded to cover it up.  Plus, they all kept quiet about it.

                            Believe that and I have a bridge to sell.

                            Look, you can keep threatening to HR me "on site"--I think you mean "on sight"--go ahead.  It'll just confirm your inability to discuss issues.

                          •  You embody the Definition of an Internet Troll (4+ / 0-)


                            Examples of what an Internet Troll is:

                            Trolls use a wide variety of strategies, some of which are unique to the internet, here are just a few:

                            1. Make outrageous comments designed to distract or frustrate: An Alinsky tactic used to make people emotional, although less effective because of the impersonal nature of the web.
                            1. Pose as a supporter of the truth, then make comments that discredit the movement: We have seen this even on our own forums — trolls pose as supporters of the Liberty Movement, then post long, incoherent diatribes so as to appear either racist or insane. Here is a live example of this tactic in use on Yahoo! Answers.

                            The key to this tactic is to make references to common Liberty Movement arguments while at the same time babbling nonsense, so as to make those otherwise valid arguments seem ludicrous by association.
                            In extreme cases, these "Trojan Horse Trolls" have been known to make posts which incite violence — a technique obviously intended to solidify the false assertions of the notorious MIAC report and other ADL/SPLC publications which purport that constitutionalists should be feared as potential domestic terrorists.

                            1. Dominate Discussions: Trolls often interject themselves into productive web discussions in order to throw them off course and frustrate the people involved.
                            1. Prewritten Responses: Many trolls are supplied with a list or database with pre-planned talking points designed as generalized and deceptive responses to honest arguments. 9/11 "debunker" trolls are notorious for this.
                            1. False Association: This works hand in hand with item #2, by invoking the stereotypes established by the "Trojan Horse Troll."

                            For example: calling those against the Federal Reserve "conspiracy theorists" or "lunatics". Deliberately associating anti-globalist movements with big foot or alien enthusiasts, because of the inherent negative connotations. Using false associations to provoke biases and dissuade people from examining the evidence objectively.

                            1. False Moderation: Pretending to be the "voice of reason" in an argument with obvious and defined sides in an attempt to move people away from what is clearly true into a "grey area" where the truth becomes "relative."
                            1. Straw Man Arguments: A very common technique. The troll will accuse his opposition of subscribing to a certain point of view, even if he does not, and then attacks that point of view. Or, the troll will put words in the mouth of his opposition, and then rebut those specific words. For example: "9/11 truthers say that no planes hit the WTC towers, and that it was all just computer animation. What are they, crazy?"  

                            Sometimes, these strategies are used by average people with serious personality issues. However, if you see someone using these tactics often, or using many of them at the same time, you may be dealing with a paid internet troll.                

                            The only thing you haven't done yet is give us pre-written responses.

                            6 out of 7 identified behaviors of an INTERNET TROLL.

                            Now, that we've established this:

                            You shall be HR'd on this site when I see you.  I will refer them to the collection of postings you've made here as prima facia evidence of your intentions and actions HR worthy status.

                            Congratulations, after being here, at Daily Kos for over 4 yrs, I rarely if ever HR'd someone. You never wanted reasonable discussion. You've created strawmen arguments, made outlandish comments, tried to dominate and derail our diaries, made false accusations and have used emotional branding/labeling as your primary "discussion technique".

                            All of these things are my evidence, as well as, your written replies.
                             

                          •  Sorry (0+ / 0-)

                            that you can't support the argument you try to make.  Not my fault--yours.

                          •  Seriously NO! (4+ / 0-)

                            I made valid arguments in my RKBA diary this past Wednesday, addressing all of your strawman arguments and you never replied.  I repeated my interactions with you, you never replied.

                            I brought to this diary valid, researched news articles you branded me a "truther" and never discussed the issues or facts presented.

                            And here again, you now make a false claim against me that I "can't support the argument you try to make"...

                            All INTENTIONAL & Fallacious misrepresentations.

            •  "Are you crazy", is an ad hominem, not a question (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas

              So, who's slinging mud here?

    •  God, I had to do the work you refused to do (5+ / 0-)

      I just searched google for Bloomberg's press meeting back in 2009.

      Here's the video:

      Fast forward to 2:19 and on...He states that his "undercover agents" said while attempting to buy a gun from a private seller,they would specifically say to the private seller: "good, because I probably wouldn't pass the background check"..and he claims this is prima facia evidence that there is a "loophole" that is being exploited...funny, funny, funny....

      He then states the law, "prohibited [private sales] by federal law of selling to anyone, whom they suspect that may not be reasonable able to pass that background check."

      WOW, what double speak here.  So, they've witnessed a crime and didn't report it?

      •  And Bloomberg's "undercover agents" were, (5+ / 0-)

        to my understanding, committing felonies by misrepresenting themselves to sellers.

        Wasn't his jurisdiction to be doing a sting in. Bloomberg and his goons should be wearing orange jumpsuits right now.

        Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

        by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 11:23:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Absolutely not true. NT (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shadan7, buddabelly, KVoimakas

      Many said it loudly , yet it's still not true.

      by Abra Crabcakeya on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 01:39:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  10 guns in 1 hour at a gunshow. (0+ / 0-)

    Over the course of the hour, Samaha purchased 10 guns: three rifles, four shotguns, one handgun. He could have purchased many more handguns, but he wanted to abide by Virginia State law, which allows the purchase of one handgun per month, and two assault weapons.

    Samaha was never asked to fill out any type of background check. At one point he was asked to show identification. When Samaha said he didn't have any, the seller quickly relented, not wanting to lose a sale.

    "He's like, 'Give me $100 more and I'll let you go and take the risk.' I got two guns for $600 without any identification check," Samaha said.

    ABC News report

    "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

    by Wayward Son on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 08:14:20 AM PDT

    •  ABC lies by omission (5+ / 0-)

      By blurring the distinction between private sellers and FFL dealers.

      Those un-checked sales, being from private sellers, could have taken place anywhere.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 11:25:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But they did occur at a gun show. (0+ / 0-)

        That's where he went, because that's where the guns are.

        Very hard to find a person who isn't a gun dealer who also has 10 guns for sale, if you DON'T go to a gun show.

        "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

        by Wayward Son on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 02:59:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And private sales... (5+ / 0-)

          are actually forbidden, by federal law, from using the NICS system.

          Fix that, and then you'll have a legit talking point.  Until then, all is vapour in the wind.

          •  Private sales at a gun show.. (0+ / 0-)

            ..directed to the 'private sale' by dealers, set up as a process to promote sales outside the system that should, since they occur AT a gun show, go through the proper channels?

            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

            by Wayward Son on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 04:46:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Proper channels at a gun show are the same (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, Crookshanks

              (at least in my state) as the proper channels everywhere else (again, in my state.)

              I sell a rifle, at a gun show or otherwise, I must feel that this person can legally own the firearm. No background check, at the gun show or at one of my jobs.

              If I was an FFL, there'd need to be a background check run no matter where the transaction took place.

              (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 10:51:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Either your syntax, or my coffee level... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, Crookshanks, KVoimakas

              are not up to understanding what you are trying to say there.

              Can you clarify that, please?

              •  Did you read all three pages of the link? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                carolus

                Sometimes, folks like to respond without doing the proper research.. I'd like to be sure that's not the case, before restating my position.

                "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 05:32:29 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  P.S. Guns, and people who have 10 or more... (5+ / 0-)

          are all around you.

          Just because YOU don't know where to look, doesn't indicate an absence, except of critical thinking.

          •  10 or more guns *for sale*? (0+ / 0-)

            You have an annoying habit of changing a question in order to answer it the way you prefer.

            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

            by Wayward Son on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 04:44:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  depends, I know collectors who are always trading (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Crookshanks, KVoimakas

              and selling to buy more or different styles, types, whatever...

              It's perfectly legal unless you make a living or even a iirc "substantial portion" of your income...If you make money at it, you must be a licensed dealer or you are in violation of the law..... and if a licensed dealer every sale you make must comply with all the rules whether at a gun show, a store or on his kitchen table....

              You still fill out a 4473, they still run a NICS ck, any state law pertaining to waiting periods and such must be followed and every dealer must keep a bound book which logs in and logs out every firearm they purchase, or sell...If you have it or had it, it better be in your bound book......

              "Guess who's laughing while the world explodes, When we're all crybabies Who fight best among ourselves" John Joseph Lydon

              by buddabelly on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 09:02:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  ? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, Crookshanks

              For the right price, I could sell 10 of my 14 guns. It would have to be a helluva good price though...

              (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 10:53:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly. n/t (0+ / 0-)

                "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 03:45:22 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Exactly what? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea, rockhound

                  I know enough people who sell firearms they don't care for anymore that I could probably purchase over 30 guns from private sellers right now.

                  (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                  by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 04:13:17 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Aha, another attempt to change the question (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    carolus

                    The person I responded to had said "P.S. Guns, and people who have 10 or more are all around you."

                    You can certainly attempt to change it to include multiple sellers, but that is completely extraneous to the discussion at hand.  Nice try, though.

                    "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                    by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 05:35:29 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Notice how I said multiple people for more than (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      gerrilea, rockhound

                      ten purchases. 3x the amount of purchases.

                      If you limit me to ten, I can only think of two people selling that many right now. For 30, maybe 4 or 5.

                      (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                      by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 05:45:34 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Post the link.. (0+ / 0-)

                        ..I'm sure they'd appreciate the business.

                        "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                        by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 06:16:38 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  What link? (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          gerrilea, rockhound

                          They're private sellers so they don't have a storefront.

                          (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                          by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 06:25:50 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Newspaper classified? Craigslist? (0+ / 0-)

                            Gun owner forums?

                            Or do these people you can name all off the top of your head who are selling guns without a storefront expect people to randomly knock on their door and ask to buy a gun?

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 07:17:20 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hmm. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound

                            Newspaper classified costs money. Craigslist is idiotic and doesn't allow firearm sales.

                            Gun owner forums are a possibility. Though I was thinking of people I know locally.

                            No, they expect it to get around by word of mouth. The gun owning community up here is pretty close knit. A lot of people know the others, by face if not by name.

                            So Tony tells me he has a S&W 625JM for sale. Or he tells me that a friend has hit on hard times and needs to sell his collection (which is where BOTH of the people with 10 guns for sale [at least check] come in.)

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 07:35:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So they wouldn't sell 10 guns to a stranger? n/t (0+ / 0-)

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 07:54:19 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Depends on who you're talking about. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound

                            I've purchased firearms from people who don't know me. I personally don't SELL MY OWN to anyone unless I know them OR one of the few people I trust vouch for them.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 08:07:46 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'd say your first instinct was correct. (0+ / 0-)

                            Most private sellers who are looking to sell guns are going to do so through relationships, and friends referring and vouching for friends.

                            If you are someone without any contacts, who would like to purchase guns without a background check, you are most likely going to do so by visiting a gun show.  

                            I think that's a reasonable statement.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 08:19:56 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I would not argue your first line (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rockhound, Otteray Scribe

                            because I don't know. I've known both those who only sell to friends and those they know while I've also known those who don't give a shit who they sell to.

                            So I would reject the reasonable of your statement until I actually had a statistic to back it up.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 08:22:29 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're evaluating it from the wrong side. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            carolus

                            If you are someone without any contacts, who would like to purchase guns without a background check, you are most likely going to do so by visiting a gun show.

                            My comment was stated from the view of a potential buyer.  One that wants to purchase a large quantity of guns, but cannot pass a background check, and does not want to provide any ID.

                            If you disagree, then state where you think such a person would most likely go?   We've already established how difficult it would be to find a seller, as you have conclusively proven with your confirmation of a dearth of advertising resources.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 09:19:55 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You do realize that most sellers at gun shows (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, Brecht, Otteray Scribe

                            require ID even though it's not legally required?

                            The same place you get illegal drugs.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 09:45:22 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Not necessarily true (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht

                            it depends on the gunshow.

                            But the larger point is that an identification without a background check yields nothing.  IDs can be faked and even if a legit ID is produced, what does that tell the seller?

                          •  State of residence for one. (4+ / 0-)

                            So they know they're not doing a transfer to someone who's going over state lines.

                            Also, and this has been my experience with the very few firearms I've picked up from a seller I don't know, they take down all the information. Address, full name, and license number.

                            Then again, it's just my experience.

                            As to where people would get guns illegally: the same place they get all of their illegit items illegaly.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:25:11 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  State of Residence (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht

                            isn't necessarily known unless the seller know everyone in the state.

                            Let's assume the seller makes a photocopy of the ID; it still tells them absolutely noting about the buyer.

                            Criminals can get their firearms more cheaply at gun shows.  Additionally, they'll get a better selection with better quality.

                          •  Rofl. (5+ / 0-)

                            Your ID has your state of residence on it...

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:45:39 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Off the floor (0+ / 0-)

                            Actually, your ID has your state of residence at the time that you applied for the ID.

                            Due to the advent of various transportation modes (planes, trains, autos, horse and buggy), it is quite possible to change one's state of residence.

                          •  It depends on the sellers, not the gun show. nt (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, Brecht, Otteray Scribe

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:37:47 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Backwards (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht

                            A gun show can dictate the terms and conditions vendors must adhere to.

                            Of course, very few gun show operators will do this unless required to by law.

                          •  To a certain extent, yes. (5+ / 0-)

                            But how do you enforce private individuals ID everyone?

                            Laws and rules aren't the only thing that matters. Actually being able to enforce them is 1/2 the battle.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:46:28 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's not hard (0+ / 0-)

                            if you think about it.

                            There are several possible solutions: registration, licensing, mandatory insurance, etc.

                          •  Hello again carolus (and KVoimakas) (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            I am reccing several comments here, because I am pleased to see you arguing purely on points, and not getting caught up in any personal disparagement.

                            Keep up the good work!

                            "Problems can't be solved by the same level of thinking that created them" Einstein

                            by Brecht on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 02:09:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  See about "discussion", nothing can be (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            further from the truth, this carolus' very first comment on Daily Kos was in our diaries and it's been dishonest labeling and strawmen arguments...

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 08:22:37 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  should be "see above discussion", my fingers (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht, KVoimakas

                            and mind are in sync tonight...LOL...

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 08:52:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  At least in the 4 comments today, carolus seems (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, KVoimakas

                            to have improved. Though perhaps "It's not hard if you think about it" has a slightly condescending tone.

                            I have, however rashly, invested something in this whole exchange. So I will keep half an eye on carolus. If s/he goes too far for your liking, and you drop a donut, I will probably notice, and come see what happened.

                            Having presumed thus far already, the least I can do is commend carolus when s/he shows evidence of improvement.

                            "Problems can't be solved by the same level of thinking that created them" Einstein

                            by Brecht on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 11:38:50 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Which would be legal, not the actual purview (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht

                            of the gun show.

                            Which doesn't answer my question about what the people running the gun show can do.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 11:04:27 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  These days, many will also request... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            to see a carry permit, in the states that require one for whatever method.

                          •  I refer back to the specific story I linked (0+ / 0-)

                            While he was purchasing ten guns at a gun show, only one seller asked for ID.  When he said he didn't have any, the seller continued the deal, but asked for $100 more to 'cover it'.

                            So, no.. most private sales at gun shows do not involve ID, if the buyer doesn't want to show it.  

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:27:23 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Based on your one story. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, rockhound, Otteray Scribe

                            Fantastic.

                            My anecdote doesn't outweigh your anecdote.

                            It's not data.

                            Oh well.

                            You do realize that we're not really going anywhere with this conversation right?

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 10:28:35 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What's your anecdote? (0+ / 0-)

                            Have you been to a gun show, asked to buy a gun without ID, and been refused?

                            Repeatedly?  By at least half the folks selling?

                            If so, then you have an 'anecdote' that supports your statement "You do realize that most sellers at gun shows require ID even though it's not legally required?"

                            If not, then it's my proven, actual anecdote against your hastily-constructed imaginary one.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 12:13:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hastily constructed? (0+ / 0-)

                            Yes, I just imagined the whole thing...or not.

                            I've gone to many a gun show. I've seen what happens at the last three gun shows I've been to. I don't have to buy the gun to see a guy hand over his license and cash to purchase a firearm.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Tue Nov 02, 2010 at 11:05:37 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And what happened when they didn't hand over ID? (0+ / 0-)

                            Please, try to stay on point for once.. you've strayed to the immaterial 3 times now, and I have to waste a comment bringing you back to the actual topic.

                            If you have an anecdote that supports your declaration, it must involve private sales at a gun show where a buyer was repeatedly refused a sale due to his lack of ID.

                            For reference and comparison, my documented anecdote was 9 out of 10 that did not ask for ID, and 1 who did but allowed the sale anyway after charging an extra $100.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 03:32:28 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  They showed ID. I don't know what would've (0+ / 0-)

                            happened if they didn't.

                            The ones that I saw did show ID so.... But hey, let's keep this conversation going. It's so useful...

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 03:39:04 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It would probably have ended earlier, normally. (0+ / 0-)

                            But I always try to give a fair chance for someone to document their assertions, and clear up any logic flaws in their argument.

                            The record at this point is clear:  If you want to buy guns, can't pass a background check because of your past or undocumented status, and don't have friends willing to sell privately.. go to a gun show.  The dealers will refer you to a no-questions-asked private seller, and you will be able to buy as many guns as you can afford.

                            That is the 'gun show loophole'.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 04:09:24 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I completely disagree. (0+ / 0-)

                            It's not a loophole. A private sale is a private sale is a private sale.

                            But, we're not going to agree on this, so why bother to continue?

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 04:12:00 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This isn't a CNN political show.. (0+ / 0-)

                            ..just having an opinion isn't a valid argument.

                            The next time you go to a gun show, why not ask a few dealers if they know of a way for a person who can't pass a background check to get a good number of guns.  When they refuse to give you any information about private sellers at the show, then you'll have that anecdote you were missing earlier.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 04:24:01 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I sincerely doubt they'd answer seriously. (0+ / 0-)

                            Most of the dealers around here know me.

                            Here ya go, from wiki:

                            A loophole is a weakness or exception that allows a system, such as a law or security, to be circumvented or otherwise avoided. Loopholes are searched for and used strategically in a variety of circumstances, including taxes, elections, politics, the criminal justice system, or in breaches of security.

                            What is being circumvented? What is being avoided? A private sale at a gun show is the same as a private sale in a parking lot. FFLs still have to run a background check at a gunshow. Private sellers still don't. That applies EVERYWHERE in Michigan. That's not a loophole.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 04:27:25 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So, you've called for this discussion to stop.. (0+ / 0-)

                            ..twice, I believe.  And yet you continue to respond, almost as though you believe the last person to comment 'wins' the argument.

                            The truth is, of course, that your contributions to the discussion have been: (1) your opinion, which is irrelevant, and (2) helpful affirmations of how difficult it is to find private sellers without attending a gun show.  That last part is a fact I would have had difficulty supporting without your affirmation, and helped seal up the last crack in the story provided by ABC News.  Thanks.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 04:53:25 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hey, I'll keep commenting if you want to talk (0+ / 0-)

                            about it. I have no problems with that. It's not just us here, which is why I said our talks are basically getting us no where.

                            You didn't respond to my loophole definition either. My opinion is backed up by the very definition of loophole.

                            Have you ever visited The High Road? thehighroad.org

                            It has it's own section to buy/sell firearms. It takes a bit but you can usually find firearms without a background check (as long as your state doesn't require one for private transfers and it's not being shipped between states.)

                            I did point out that gun forums are a possibility back in my original comment.

                            You've refused to respond to my comment about criminals buying guns from the same place they get the rest of their illegally obtained 'stuff' like drugs.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 05:00:53 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ok, so I owe you two responses.. (0+ / 0-)

                            A loophole is a weakness or exception that allows a system, such as a law or security, to be circumvented or otherwise avoided.

                            The intent of the background check law is to ensure that people who have a certain background, whether felonious, terroristic, or for some other reason, should not be allowed to buy guns.  The exclusion of private sales was designed to avoid red tape for a transaction that would be difficult to monitor, not to allow those previously-excluded groups an alternative method to buy guns.  The fact that supposedly 'private' sales at a gun show are a sham, and began as rejected dealer transactions at gun shows, is a loophole.  The linked story, which you try very hard to avoid discussing, proves it happens.  It only has to happen once to be a loophole, although the fact that it happened 10 out of 10 times probably indicates it is a much larger problem.

                            You've refused to respond to my comment about criminals buying guns from the same place they get the rest of their illegally obtained 'stuff' like drugs.

                            I avoided mentioning it as a courtesy to you.  It is such an elementary logic flaw to say that since a law is not always followed, there's no reason to enforce the law at all.. I'd prefer to have saved you the embarassment of having it pointed out.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 08:10:22 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Responses: (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            buddabelly

                            The intent of the background check law is to ensure that people who have a certain background, whether felonious, terroristic, or for some other reason, should not be allowed to buy guns.  The exclusion of private sales was designed to avoid red tape for a transaction that would be difficult to monitor, not to allow those previously-excluded groups an alternative method to buy guns.  The fact that supposedly 'private' sales at a gun show are a sham, and began as rejected dealer transactions at gun shows, is a loophole.  The linked story, which you try very hard to avoid discussing, proves it happens.  It only has to happen once to be a loophole, although the fact that it happened 10 out of 10 times probably indicates it is a much larger problem.

                            What does this mean? "The fact that supposedly 'private' sales at a gun show are a sham, and began as rejected dealer transactions at gun shows, is a loophole." Private sales at a gun show or in the parking lot or somewhere else are still private sales. How are they a sham? I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm actually all for funding the appropriate law enforcement agencies to catch people who sell firearms illegally, whether they be private sellers or FFL dealers.

                            I avoided mentioning it as a courtesy to you.  It is such an elementary logic flaw to say that since a law is not always followed, there's no reason to enforce the law at all.. I'd prefer to have saved you the embarassment of having it pointed out.

                            You completely missed my point. You asked where criminals could get guns (barring a background check, etc.) My point was that criminals have a network of people who are fellow criminals. You need a firearm? A fellow criminal can sell you one. Drugs? Sure, that too. (Though I would debate the effectiveness of outlawing drugs.) Here's a statistic for you from a BJS report:

                            Source of gun          1997        1991
                                Total            100.0%      100.0%
                            Purchased from --      13.9        20.8
                            Retail store            8.3        14.7
                            Pawnshop                3.8         4.2
                            Flea market             1.0         1.3
                            Gun show                0.7         0.6
                            Friends or family      39.6        33.8
                            Street/illegal source  39.2        40.8

                            So yeah, I can see where HUGE amounts of firearms were purchased from a gun show.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 10:28:37 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Read. The. Story. (0+ / 0-)

                            You don't see how the gun show dealer -> "private seller" referral system is a sham?

                            If so, that's pure willful ignorance.

                            To your second point.. the relative frequency of the act is immaterial.  The fact that it happens, makes it a loophole.  The fact that it happens at gun shows, makes it a gun show loophole.

                            The diarist remains, even this late in the discussion, completely wrong.

                            "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well." Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg.

                            by Wayward Son on Fri Nov 05, 2010 at 04:35:17 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, this is a 'we can agree to disagree'.... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            moment. Guns, like everything else you own are private property. Sales between individuals, of things that are legal for people to own, and not just legal but in our nation governed by a constitution a fundamental right to possess, are not, repeat not subject to the governance of the federal government.

                            Even now, many anti-gun laws are probably unconstitutional. Call it a loophole, but it's legal behavior, and behavior that amazingly doesn't happen just at gun shows, but anywhere, anytime between two consenting adults. Our point, and thank you for continuously allowing us to make it since you have nothing to refute it, is the gun show loophole is invented bullshit.

                            The NICS system is closed to anyone not a federally licensed firearms sealer, because the information in it is personal and sensitive.  I might add that it is closed not by access, but by law - if you hacked into the database you would be violating laws not just of electronic intrusion, but specific laws that protect that unique database.

                            So although you might like to prevent two consenting adults from doing things that are perfectly legal, that would be authoritarian, intrusive, and in violation of a fundamental right. So I discover that at the heart of your intent is an assumption of guilt for the parties involved, a readiness to deny a fundamental right, and a smug self assurance that is is done in the name of the public good.

                            You sir, have ideas worthy of the Stasi. You missed your milieu, the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.

                          •  OK, I give up. You can have the last comment (0+ / 0-)

                            since we're basically talking at each other now. Mandell makes good points though in his response to you.

                            (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 08:35:08 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Word-of-mouth amongst friends... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            KVoimakas

                            or known acquaintences?  3"x5" cards on bulletin boards at shooting ranges and gun shops?  Relatives who've pestered them to sell them that Remington deer rifle for 5 years now?  Internet chat boards?  

                            Use the brain you were born with, fer fucks sake.

    •  If I had the money, I could do the same thing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shadan7, gerrilea, Otteray Scribe

      outside a gun show.

      Your point?

      (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 04:30:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site