Skip to main content

A sign, flag and flowers are seen outside a home honoring victims who died in the December 14 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Newtown, Connecticut December 19, 2012. Six more victims of the Newtown school shooting will be honored at funerals and remembrances on Wednesday, including the school principal who was killed with 20 of her students and five other staff members at the Sandy Hook Elementary School.   REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton (UNITED STATES - Tags: CRIME LAW EDUCATION)
attribution: Reuters
It's about guns.
On January 29, 1979, a 16-year-old San Diego girl took the gun that her father had just given her for Christmas and opened fire at the school across from which she lived. The school's principal was killed, while trying to protect the children. Another adult was killed while trying to rescue the principal. Eight students and a police officer were wounded before the girl was taken into custody. When asked why she had done it, she said, "I don't like Mondays; this livens up the day." Bob Geldof of the first wave New Wave band The Boomtown Rats was inspired to write the song "I Don't Like Mondays," which spent a month atop the British charts that summer, and for years San Diego radio stations understandably refused to play it. Its opening lines:
And the silicon chip inside her head
Got switched to overload
No one knows what causes someone to take a gun and start shooting people. No one ever will. Every time there is a mass shooting, news reporters dig into the personal history of the murderer, as if something in the biography will provide a clue. It never does. Mental illness, abusive childhoods, collapsed relationships, setbacks at school or work, and any number of other factors often are found, but none provides the answer. Hundreds of millions of people have suffered from mental illness, abusive childhoods, collapsed relationships, setbacks at school or work, and every other form of stress or trauma without deciding to kill people. Why do these individuals become killers? Bob Geldof's answer remains the best explanation, because there is no explanation.

The one thing all mass shooters have in common is guns. That's it. Mental illness, abusive childhoods, collapsed relationships, setbacks at school or work, and every other form of stress or trauma take place in every nation in the world, but of all the developed democracies only in the United States do we have more than 10,000 gun-related deaths each year. Every other developed democracy has some form of effective gun control. The United States doesn't. Those looking for other explanations have reasons for looking for other explanations. People in the other developed democracies watch the same movies and play the same video games, but they don't shoot each other at anything even approaching the rate that Americans do. It's about guns. When that silicon chip inside the head of people in other developed democracies gets switched to overload, they can't just go grab a gun and start shooting. People in the United States can.

(Continue reading below the fold.)

We will have effective gun control in this country. Maybe it finally will come in the aftermath of the latest shooting massacre, and maybe this time we still will get only partial and inadequate measures, and maybe it will take more shooting massacres, but it will happen. It is inevitable. The tide of history shows that as nations develop and democratize they also come to regulate guns, and their incidents of gun violence dramatically diminish. We are an anomaly in that we don't have effective gun regulation, but we are not an anomaly in that when we do have effective gun regulation we will enjoy the same results enjoyed by those nations that already have it. This country will catch up to the rest of the developed democratic world. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

The Second Amendment is an excuse. The Second does not say what those who cling to it want it to say, and only in the last few years have any courts interpreted as saying what those who cling to it want it to say. Courts are political, and judges mostly appointed by right-wing Republicans have interpreted the Second in unprecedented ways, but that's how our judiciary works. Political pendulums swing, and for now they have swung in one direction, but it is inevitable that they eventually will swing in the other direction. One way or another future courts will rule differently, and the Second Amendment no longer will be available to block effective gun regulation. History is on the side of gun control advocates. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

I've never been a fan of Original Intent, and however people want to interpret the meaning of the Second, and the meaning of well regulated and the meaning of Militia and the meaning of Security of a free State and the meaning of infringed, the original intent of the framers of the Constitution ultimately is irrelevant. This is about us, not them. The framers could not have imagined the destructive power of modern arms and they also could not have imagined the destructive power of modern armaments. But more importantly, the framers lived in an era that in so many ways to us now seems not only archaic but barbaric. Some of the framers were monarchists. Some were openly racist slave-owners. None seemed to think that women should be allowed to participate in governance. We the People was an exclusive club that excluded a good many and perhaps even a majority of the people. Constitutional literalism is only marginally more relevant to the modern world than is Biblical literalism. We have to define what sort of nation we want based on modern values and modern realities not on the values and realities of some smart but profoundly flawed men who lived more than two centuries ago. We will catch up with the rest of the developed democratic world. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

The grief over the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, has been emotionally overwhelming to millions of people who live nowhere near and know no one who lives anywhere near Newtown, Connecticut. And yet, something like this latest massacre was inevitable. Just days before, a jammed gun prevented what almost certainly would have been another massacre, at a shopping mall, near Portland, Oregon. And even despite that unlikely good luck, two people who were out innocently holiday shopping were shot dead, and a third— a teenaged girl— was seriously wounded. And every day, all across this nation, innocent people are shot dead, because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, their lives as precious as every vicitim of Newtown, and their deaths as devastating to those who knew and loved them as every death in Newtown. The excuses don't fly. Guns don't kill people, but people with guns do. At a rate that had stunned us into numbness but now or eventually will stun us into consciousness. It's the guns. It cannot continue, and it won't continue. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

The demographics of gun ownership are changing. This is a fact. Gun owners are more likely to be Republican than Democrat, and the Republican Party is an increasingly marginalized demographic. Gun ownership is decreasing, even as the number of guns in circulation is increasing, which means that a smaller number of people is owning a greater number of guns. That is not politically sustainable. The most rapidly growing demographic groups are less likely to own guns and more supportive of gun control. History is moving forward and it is and always has been only a matter of time until the politics catches up. The current trend among conservative judges is the death throes, just as the Republican Party's occasional political successes are but death throes. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

There are hunters in nations that have strict gun control. The vast majority of medal winners in shooting events at the 2012 Summer Olympics were from nations that have strict gun control, and the country that ranked first on the medal table has among the most strict. There is no reason that responsible gun owners need fear strict gun control. It will be a hassle for them, and there will be more and higher hoops for them to jump through in order to enjoy their firearms passion, but when gun sales soar in the aftermath of the Newtown horror, and even after President Obama's reelection, it does not inspire confidence in the values, judgment or even basic human decency of a certain cohort of this nation's gun owners.

We will have gun control in this country. History, demographics, and the accumulated and accumulating evidence that it works elsewhere make it inevitable. The accumulated evidence that our archaic lack of gun control does not work also makes it inevitable. The political pendulum will swing, as it already is swinging, and courts and legislatures inevitably will follow public sentiment. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives. How far that pendulum swings also is a matter of time and needlessly lost lives. Because the worse things get, the more people are massacred, the more people are killed in the less headline-grabbing daily accumulation of gun-related violent abominations, the farther that pendulum will swing. Those who fight against effective gun control will, in the end, have done more to assure the more severity of gun control, when gun control inevitably happens, than all the consistent gun control advocates put together. Because gun control will happen in this country. It will be effective. It will work as it works in every other developed democracy. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:00 AM PST.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA and Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA).

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

  •  My local Gun Shop is mobbed (50+ / 0-)

    It seems like some type of mass hysteria is going on.

    "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

    by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:07:47 AM PST

  •  Exactly right (9+ / 0-)

    We need to abandon the assumption that somehow we can predict what people will do, or even know what their character contains.

    The fundamental assumption of the American legal system is that it judges people, and punishes them for what they are, instead of judging and punishing the acts they have committed.

    Once we accept that our ability to predict the future and ability to read minds is naturally limited, we can accept the kind of rational thinking this post represents.

    Until then, the nattering classes will make their laughable comments, and the guns will still be out there.

    In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

    by Noziglia on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:07:59 AM PST

  •  You said it better than I could (23+ / 0-)

    There is a democrat on facebook that just went on a rant about how we blame an inanimate object rather than the people/society (read: other causes).  I pointed out that those inanimate objects allow people to the highest velocity, largest clips and fastest delivery of anywhere in the world.  Why should we allow such efficient killing systems to be bought by anyone with a beef?

    "I watch Fox News for my comedy, and Comedy Central for my news." - Facebook Group

    by Sychotic1 on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:08:17 AM PST

  •  I believe it is about guns. nt (17+ / 0-)

    Expose the lies. Fight for the truth. Push progressive politics. Save our planet. Health care is a right, not a privilege.

    by lighttheway on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:08:18 AM PST

  •  I find the current focus is wrong (3+ / 0-)

    Clip sizes and assault weapons bans are not as good as a licensing system and background checks for all gun sales. And they're less popular to boot.

    I've seen a lot of people on Kos talking about "make guns like cars" but nary a word from anyone on Capitol Hill.

    •  I don't think that's true (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Amber6541, GoGoGoEverton

      You're saying licensing is more popular that limiting clip sizes.

      I have a hard time believing that.

      And if there are polls that show that, I still question whether that wouldn't changed after people started calling for a licensing system.

      I am in favor of strict licensing systems.  But, from my experience, that proposal is exactly what would have gun owners screaming bloody murder.

      Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

      by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:18:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Clip sizes are also useless to boot (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ParaHammer

        Clips stack, and they take a few seconds to change(at most).

        There are broad law enforcement uses for licensing and tagging systems. Clip sizes would have little to impact on anything.

        The assault weapon's ban is not going to happen so long as we have a Republican House and people already have their minds made up on that. We've won a clear majority, but it will never exceed 2-1 support.

        Part of the battle should be a strategic one. Where do want the conversation to move? Where we've already won but can't get anything done, or open up new fronts so our opponents have to defend more ground?

        We'd be staking out a strong position at a time when the wind is at our backs. This is the perfect time to introduce new policy, instead of getting into old fights that people are already settled on. Few people who opposed assault weapons bans will change their minds now. But they aren't entrenched on licensing.

    •  publicly available (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      greengemini, Laconic Lib

      lists of "registered gun owners" might also help the rest of us make informed decisions about where we want to live, for example.

      Hey, if I'd been in a position to purchase property in say, Newtown, CN, I'd have appreciated knowing how many registered gun owners were living there.

      •  About half of all Americans own guns (9+ / 0-)

        So just bear that in mind:

        http://www.gallup.com/...

        Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

        by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:57:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So it's a big list. I'd still like to have it. nt (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Calamity Jean
        •  and actually, sounds like you're citing households (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lyvwyr101

          not actual gun owners:

          your source confirms that gun owners constitute a  minority of Americans

           

          Gallup finds that 34% of all Americans personally own a gun.
          And I don't understand why the rest of us get to pay the price for allowing this 34% the freedom to own a gun.
          •  Okay, so it's your neighbors next door (5+ / 0-)

            or else across the street. Statistically speaking.

            So where will you move?

            Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

            by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:16:44 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  that's my decision to make. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Laconic Lib

              I just think it's information that should be publicly available--ultimately, it could (and imo should) have an impact on property values, etc.

              I also think it's important to keep pointing out that the MAJORITY of Americans are not gun owners. They simply are not. So if it ever comes down to it, well, then let the majority rule and let the minority live with the outcome.

              Wow. For the first time in my life in this country, I am actually in a majority. Fat lot a good that does, eh?

              It's purely hypothetical in my case anyway because I am an incredibly happy homeowner and would not want to live anywhere else on the planet.

              •  How many of your neighbors right now (5+ / 0-)

                are gun owners?

                Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:40:39 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  too many. And most of them are not "registered" (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Laconic Lib

                  But it ain't about me. It's about what I consider good public policy.

                  After reading the NYT article about the gun issues in Newton, including the preponderance of shooting range in the area, etc., I thought about that....would I want my kids to be attending school in an area where there are that many registered gun owners? No, I wouldn't. And in my case, had I been looking at property in the area, that would have been a deal breaker.

                  I was also shocked to notice, in passing, how little some of these folks knew/know about their own neighbors in that community.

                  I know my neighbors.  I know what I signed up for, and made sure I knew that before I bought the house. I talked to my neighbors many times before I even considered putting a bid on the house.

                  And I think everyone ought to have that option.

              •  you've been in that majority for (4+ / 0-)

                quite a while.

                "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

                by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:12:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Ok but 47% of households own a gun. That means (3+ / 0-)

                that if a wife owns a gun and it's in her name, her husband might still possess it at times and shoot it...but would not be counted in the statistics.  Most likely he supports the gun in the house and is fully aware that is is there.  

                My guns were all in my name until very recently when my husband bought one on a trip, he took by himself....but my husband uses all of them, hunts with them, and possesses them at times but wouldn't be considered a "gun owner" on paper or for a poll.  

                One half of any neighborhood you consider, in this country, will statistically have gun owners inside them....at least one of them, while either one might use them at times.

                If you move down south....make that 80 to 90 percent.  

          •  I want a list of everyone who has thong underwear. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fuzzyguy, ban nock, oldpunk, FrankRose

            This will be useful information indeed.

          •  I don't understand why you want to take (0+ / 0-)

            Liberties from people whom have done nothing wrong, for your feeling of perceived security.

            The difference between your statement and mine?
            You are the one that wants to punish the non-guilty.

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 06:33:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Not quite true, nearly half of households have a (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Laconic Lib

          person that owns a firearm, but that does not mean that half of all Americans own guns.  As far as I can tell, gun owners are somewhere between 30-35% of the population.  Sure the NRA uses statistics like that to push the meme that "nearly a majority" are gun owners and that any regulations on the rights of the majority are unacceptable.

          Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

          by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:56:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't have a clue what the NRA says (6+ / 0-)

            since I don't read them beyond what's posted here on this site. I've amended my comment upthread on these already. 1 in 3 Americans, on average, are then gun owners to total almost half of American households (since most households are comprised of more than one person, this makes sense). That still means that if you have three neighbors, one on each side of you and one across the street, it is likely that one owns a gun.

            My point is that if we vilify these people, our neighbors, we are not going to advance the conversation. Most probably have reasonable views on gun control compared to what one might guess from reading this site, which is flatly reactionary. Frankly, Sandy Hook is a horrific tragedy, but if people are concerned about gun violence, why weren't they discussing it for the past ten years in the vast majority of diaries here? It's not as if the numbers have really budged. They've remained about steady, with plenty of gun-related homicides, about 50% related to our drug policy. Where is the outcry about this from this site? Why has it not been present? My initial read was that we wanted to end mass murders. Now, I'm seeing other issues come up. Fine. But then we must deal with the root causes of these as well. I think you would agree with that, would you not?

            Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

            by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:03:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Most people on this site (6+ / 0-)

              are seemingly unaware that somewhere around 35% of Democrats are gun owners, not to mention a similar number of those independents that swing so many elections.

              Some folks need to get out more.

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

              by happy camper on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:00:59 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Interestingly, the Gallup poll shows (5+ / 0-)

                that the number of Democratic gun owners has sharply increased in the last couple of years..

                "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

                by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:17:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Interesting (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  fuzzyguy, happy camper

                  I wonder what the reason is?

                  I'm being sincere. Anyone know?

                  Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:25:21 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't know (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mahakali overdrive, fuzzyguy

                    but all groups apparently have shown an increase over the same period.

                    "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:32:40 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Well, especially interesting (3+ / 0-)

                      because gun homicides have not gone up? That's what kyril posted recently. I should find the posts. They were very comprehensive with tons of interesting citations. I thought for sure they had gone up, but after reading that, it didn't look like they had at all.

                      Of course, I still feel like one death is too many deaths. That's just me though. I'm a raging humanist that way.

                      Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                      by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:43:16 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  My guess (0+ / 0-)

                    is many finally got over the AWB of '94 & were convinced that the Dems had learned their lesson.

                    Granted my little corner of life isn't emblematic of everywhere.
                    However,
                    1) My father was ready to go back to the Dem fold (after leaving because of the AWB). That's not happening now.
                    2) My friend, whom doesn't own any guns, voted D for the first time last election. It appears it was his last time now.
                    3) Another 2 friends, not politically active, but voted D last presidential election will, at best, stay home. And likely vote R
                    4) Another friend said he will defiantly stay home.
                    5) Myself, a strait Dem voter in every election since I turned 18 (except Nader in 2000), will, depending on the proposal, stay home.
                    6) My wife, whom only voted because I insisted, will not be pushed out the door next time.

                    I don't talk politics with friends nor family, and neither do they, but they felt the need to share that info with me.
                    It seems that treating innocent people like criminals has that effect on people.

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 06:51:39 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  and my point is that we need to make gun (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              lyvwyr101

              ownership as socially unacceptable as we've made cigarette smoking.

              A registered owner list is not something I suggest putting "on the table." That would be lunacy and counterproductive, but it is an idea worth considering for its own sake. It was more an off-the-cuff remark. More useful than a list of gun owners perhaps, would be number of guns registered to the addresses in the area.Again, not a serious proposal, just a thought.

              Whether it's Columbine, or Newtown, or Aurora, let's call it "sleepy town". It's  not a place that would have appealed to me for other reasons, but let's just say I have a change of heart,decide to have kids, and want to move to a place where they will be "safer" than they would be in the urban environment where I now live happily?

              Let's say I go visit sleepy town, it looks like a nice place, folks seem friendly enough, find a property within my budget, etc. Move there, commuting into the city daily to my job, but leaving my child to attend school in sleepy town, where it's 'safe'.  X months/years later, my child is one of the 20.

              I consider it reasonable to  take gun ownership in the vicinity into account in deciding where I want to live, especially if I intend to purchase property there, and if I had my druthers, it would be one of the matters of "due diligence" I would want to take into account before making any such decision.

              On the subject of guns/gun laws/2A: I've reached the point where--as a compromise--I could live with a ban on assault weapons/ammo, proper registration and training, background checks, etc., but I started out as an all-in "repeal or amend the 2nd amendment".

              I found Larry Allen Burns' LATimes oped convincing, and compelling. Yeah, I could live with that. Quite a shocker: I don't think I've ever agreed with any republican ever!

              It doesn't change my opinion that the language of the 2nd does NOT afford the right for every cLATimesof this country to own a gun, but if the best compromise we can get is an assault weapons ban with "teeth" and applying possession as well as sales--I could live with that.

              Any additional measures put in place, esp targeted at manufacturers and sellers, not just owners/consumers--liability insurance requirement, taxes, boycotts, public exposure/protest (ala campaigns against other big business such as WalMart, the banks, etc.), and of course shutting down the NRA--which could be done by having any remaining "responsible" gun owners in their ranks terminate membership and, if so desired, form a new organization along more reasonable lines.

              •  I'm smoking right now (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FrankRose

                I'm not kidding.

                I love smoking! I'm writing. It helps me write. I don't always smoke, but I do when I'm writing.

                I'm also drinking a bloody mary. I need to not spill this one, oi vey. I find this funny in context of your response! ;)

                All that aside, Newtown was rated the fifth safest town in the US before this incident, so the stats aren't necessarily too helpful. They'd never had a mass murder before, so it would have been really hard to predict.

                Is there an area in the US that you believe has far less guns? I'm not aware of such an area. I live in the California Bay Area, a liberal bastion if ever there were one. I'd guesstimate that in my town, gun ownership were around 70% or so? This is due to the coyotes, I believe, and the livestock. In urban environments, I presume it's lower in wealthier parts and less so in economically disadvantaged places, although I'm not sure about that. So that may be a situation of financial privilege?

                You could probably find out about previous homicide and violent crime stats easily through any local area city council or police station. They have to report that information already. It's already largely online.

                I'm all for shutting down the NRA. The question is how do we do that? I am for the build a better mousetrap model there, as you suggest. I already don't support Walmart or Big Boxes whatsoever, so fuck them. Local is my mantra.

                What makes sense to me is to try some of what the President has proposed: some of these have not previously been proposed. They're smart ideas. Let's see how much political will there is surrounding this.

                Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 04:53:53 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I should add that we have an exceptionally (0+ / 0-)

                  low homicide rate other than due to police violence.

                  We've had something like one shooting death in two years, and it was a domestic dispute. At least, I think that's correct. It's very low at any rate. I've never even heard of anyone get shot here.  

                  Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 04:55:33 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  whew. The assumptions you seem to be (0+ / 0-)

                  making (about me) are kind of mind-boggling.

                  Feels like we're talking very much at cross-purposes.

                  Chuckling, I'll leave you to more of your own conclusions.

                  •  Not following you here (0+ / 0-)

                    Which assumptions do you mean? Be specific please. Otherwise, it's hard to respond.

                    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                    by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 05:25:33 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The first assumption (0+ / 0-)

                      was that it’s “all about me” and protecting my own interests. I’ve already clarified that for you.

                      Second assumption, and maybe this is just a function of speed-reading, or trying to read and write at the same time? Dunno.

                      But you write:

                      you've already screened all of your immediate neighbors to determine whether they owned guns or not prior to placing a bid on your house?
                      I never said that. I said I "talked to my neighbors." When I bought this house, I was pretty sure this would be the last house I bought—so I wanted to be sure that these immediate neighbors were people I’d want to spend the rest of my life living with. They are. The fact that you extrapolate from that statement "screening my neighbors" says more about you and assumptions you make about me than it does about me. So call me a weirdo: um, I'm not paranoid enough to feel like I have to "screen" human beings.

                      You assume that my suggestion to have a list of registered gun owners would be part of a campaign to “vilify these people, our neighbors”. It wasn’t, and wouldn’t be.

                      Maybe you were asking me, hoping I might have an answer to this question:

                      why weren't they discussing it for the past ten years in the vast majority of diaries here? … Where is the outcry about this from this site? Why has it not been present?
                      I apologize if that was the case. In context, however, it sounded more like you were implying that I somehow belong to a category of people who are only now addressing the issue of gun violence. I don’t. Admittedly, I haven’t done a lot of talking about guns and gun violence on this site, but I believe my first published piece addressing gun violence dates back to the early 90s.

                      You furthermore assume that I’m too stupid to know that crime statistics and homicide rates in my neighborhood (any neighborhood) are readily available online, through my local city council, or the police department. Of course. For me, that’s just a matter of the “due diligence” I mentioned in the comment that preceded your statement.

                      But it’s not about the crime statistics. It’s about where the guns are. Maybe it’s about what kind of guns are there. But, since it is generally people who use guns to kill other people, then it’s also about the neighbors; that is, the gun owners.

                      But here’s the money quote, actually. You write:

                      All that aside, Newtown was rated the fifth safest town in the US before this incident, so the stats aren't necessarily too helpful. They'd never had a mass murder before, so it would have been really hard to predict.
                      Precisely that is my point.  I don’t know your source on the “fifth safest town” bit—but the meme is definitely “safest place in the world” (in my words, “Sleepy Town”). Sure, that’s the image they project, and that’s part of what makes things like this so “hard to predict”. But, um, this NYT articlealone tells me personally that it’s not a place I would want to live, with or without children. This is where a statistical report on violence and homicides is useless, but where a list of registered firearms might come in handy for potential homebuyers because it might allow them to see beyond the Safe-Little-Sleepy-Town HYPE and steer clear of the area.

                      It’s not about moral judgments over other people’s lives. It’s about giving individuals the information needed to make informed decisions about theirs. Maybe it's about "red flags": in the case of Newtown, a list of registered guns/gun owners might have revealed multiple households with inordinate "supplies" of firearms that, for me at least, would have functioned as a huge red flag--a red flag with no other consequence than to tell me, "Nope. This isn't the place."

                      I’ve already explained to you that I don’t think proposing a list of registered gun owners is necessarily a policy that should be promoted at this time. There certainly are others who would promote that. In my case, it was an “off-the-cuff” remark.

      •  No; that raises so many privacy issues (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PavePusher, fuzzyguy

        and slippery-slope problems that this would be a book-length comment to flesh them all out.

        The Mayans knew about Chained CPI!!!!

        by GoGoGoEverton on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:21:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Every gun owner would be unworkable (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          grumpelstillchen, Calamity Jean

          and unnecessary, but I would like to see a more reasonable threshold, like, say, 5 or more guns. Perhaps a better metric for rooting out potentially unstable gun owners would be to have an ammunition registry. If some guy is buying thousands of rounds, it seems to me like that might be a pretty accurate litmus test for potential trouble.

      •  he he joining those secessionists are we? (0+ / 0-)

        pay your taxes on the way out to live with your fellow free thinkers from Texas.

        How big is your personal carbon footprint?

        by ban nock on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 02:55:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I disagree. (16+ / 0-)

      This should not be either/or but both/and.

      Yes, we need a good licensing system and background checks for all gun sales.

      But guns are not always stored safely, no matter what the penalties are for not doing so. Also, guns get stolen, borrowed, etc.

      Furthermore, mental illness isn't easy to track, and sometimes the sickest people are the ones who are not in any "system."

      Assault weapons -- and super-sized clips -- do not need to be in circulation, period. Nobody outside of civilian law enforcement or the military needs them.  They are mass killing machines, and do not belong in civilized, civilian society.

      For the life of me, I do not understand why we think we're so different from the rest of the world. So special. So lawless that millions of people need "protection" in their nightstands.

      While many people apparently think the only reason someone isn't breaking into their house on a regular basis is because the potential intruder is scared to death of the big man with the big gun inside -- maybe no one is breaking into that house because there's just no one who really wants to do that.

      I'm sick of the United States of the Wild, Wild West, where the big gun stands in for the big dick.

      "I think in America, the opposite of poverty is justice." Bryan Stevenson

      by gfre on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:33:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm talking about the next few weeks/months (0+ / 0-)

        Assault weapons bans are not going to pass the House. So, that can wait till 2014/16 etc. If we go fight old fights that we know we can't get passed, going in, we're wasting an opportunity.

        We can also expect every single thing to a be a fight within and of itself. So which thing offers us the best result for the amount of time we spend on it?

        •  maybe... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tobendaro, Calamity Jean

          but I'd like to see the Senate pass something and make the House look bad for those next few months.

          THE PEOPLE WANT THIS. Make everyone see that the Republicans in the House DO NOT REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUENTS. If we never go on record trying to do the right thing because "we don't have the votes" -- we can't be surprised if 2014 doesn't go our way.

          I, for one, want Democrats in Congress to get the blood off their hands. There will be more mass shootings committed by people with these killing machines, and I want Democrats to be able to point their fingers away from their bodies.

          "I think in America, the opposite of poverty is justice." Bryan Stevenson

          by gfre on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:13:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I Had to Get a License For My Canoe (19+ / 0-)

      ...and you know how often those are used to hold up convenience stores.

      There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

      by bernardpliers on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:42:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  They're not mutually exclusive. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laconic Lib

      "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

      by JesseCW on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:41:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The NRA, as run by Wayne LaPierre, needs to (32+ / 0-)

    become a pariah organization, on a level with NAMBLA or the Aryan Nations. Gun fetishists are perverts and need to be called out as such.

    The rank and file of the NRA are not nearly as extreme, but they support this perversion by belonging to the organization.

  •  I like your optimism but am not quite as (8+ / 0-)

    confident as you that we'll move toward more gun regulation. And I must admit, what you said about the tend toward more guns and fewer owners is actually terrifying -- not because I think more people should own guns but because of the extremism and craziness of some gun owners. I suspect that the ones with the most firearms are the most extreme.

    We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

    by Tamar on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:10:04 AM PST

  •  Paranoia strikes deep (11+ / 0-)

    2006 NRA brochure "Freedom in Peril"

    It's inevitable that terrorists will infest America for generations to come. It's also inevitable that an anti-gun president will occupy the White House, and anti-gun forces will control the U.S. House and Senate. This is when the alchemy explodes, never to be contained again. When these two certainties intersect, America's anti-gun agenda will emerge in full force masquerading as an anti-terrorist agenda. Unless we are well-financed to face that moment, the final disarmament of law-abiding Americans will occur beneath the shroud of anti-terrorism legislation. […]

    Hobbs: "How come we play war and not peace?" Calvin: "Too few role models."

    by BOHICA on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:11:24 AM PST

  •  They're talking about trimming hangnails... (9+ / 0-)

    when the foot has gangrene.

    I want a BAN on most weapons.  

    When guns are banned, the police will have no excuse to have weapons capable of fighting a war.

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:12:45 AM PST

    •  You assume (4+ / 0-)

      that the criminal elements of our society will voluntarily turn in their weapons.

      "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

      by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:15:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nope, I assume that a ban... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RadGal70, greengemini, Laconic Lib

        will have the same force as we currently go after drugs.

        I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

        by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:17:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The Drug War (7+ / 0-)

          has been a disaster for decades,

          "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

          by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:18:25 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  ah, well, that's not such a great precedent. (0+ / 0-)

          You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

          by Cartoon Peril on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:37:09 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  So you admit it will be a complete disaster? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fuzzyguy

          Leading to even more death and destruction once it becomes a commodity that only criminals and the mafia will be able to generate, like during Prohibition and now during our decades old Drug War?

          I can just about forgive the Brits for starting our revolutionary war and burning DC to the ground during the war of 1812 for giving us Led Zeppelin.

          by Pager on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:12:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  So, what are they going to do? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Laconic Lib

            Carry around their badge of criminality?  Basically scream to the world, I AM A CRIMINAL!  LOOK AT MY GUN!!!

            The only reason that guns and drugs are associated are do to the illegality of manufacturing drugs and the legality of the manufacture of weapons.

            The drug war is violent because of the need to defend the product.  It's idiotic, but the only reason the violence exists is because of the ease of acquiring weapons to carry it out.

            In Australia they've already solved the problem with guns despite a major gun culture.  It has been done, and it can be done.

            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:28:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sorry, I don't agree. (0+ / 0-)

              I find approach both naive and simplistic. And completely unworkable. Your all or nothing approach accomplishes nothing and I am SICK of people dying on the backs of nothing. I'm SICK of people taking their ball and going home because they can't have every single thing they want on this issue. There is common ground here and literally dozens of things we can do to address this issue while still remain realistic.

              As to your moronic "what are they going to do? Carry around a badge of criminality?" ; well, how the fuck do you think people find drug dealers? What world do you live in? How did the mob find moonshiners? How do people purchase illegal substances and weapons they shouldn't be able to get their hands on right now?

              Come on, man. Let's have a real conversation here, shall we?

              I can just about forgive the Brits for starting our revolutionary war and burning DC to the ground during the war of 1812 for giving us Led Zeppelin.

              by Pager on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:37:41 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I am tired of negotiating on this. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laconic Lib, lyvwyr101

                My initial position was this:
                No guns with a magazine of more than 6 rounds.
                Licensing of all guns.
                Enforced buy back.

                It is now clear to me that even these extremely reasonable restrictions are far too much for the folks who want to keep their weapons.

                The immediate response has been "CRIMINALS"!  People will break the law. You can't disarm people, because the criminals will have guns anyway!  (Insert random NRA talking points here)  It's all made under the assumption that people will break the law to make a profit.  If we as a society were concerned about this, there'd be a hell of a lot of wall street in jail.

                As a result, I now feel that the only solution is to completely ban guns, except for extremely limited and specific licenses.

                There's my REAL conversation.  When one side pushes, I push back.  We need people screaming for gun bans just as hard as we have people screaming for more guns.  Being reasonable on this one just ensures that I'll be steamrollered.

                I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:44:41 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well, I respect where you are coming in. (2+ / 0-)

                  I just don't happen to agree, won't support it and won't work for it.  In fact, I'll actively work against completely banning guns. It's unrealistic and still doesn't address the core issues. And it is not remotely realistic or doable.

                  I'd rather expend my energy making a difference than hoping for the impossible and accomplishing nothing.

                  That said, I know that your heart is in the right place, even if we disagree.

                  I can just about forgive the Brits for starting our revolutionary war and burning DC to the ground during the war of 1812 for giving us Led Zeppelin.

                  by Pager on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:53:39 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Fair enough, and I appreciate your honest... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Pager

                    opposition.

                    I disagree, but you already know that.  I'm just tired of dancing around trying to be reasonable on the subject when I know what I believe.  

                    Here's to a solution being found, and fewer dead, period.

                    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                    by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:02:01 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

      •  where do the criminal elements get their guns? (15+ / 0-)

        Every gun in the hands of every criminal was made legally in a factory.

        So dry up the supply. Criminals can't get weapons that are never manufactured in the first place.

        •  Like the drug war (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ringer, annieli, fuzzyguy

          The key is to eliminate demand.  Then the supply dries up.  We need a cultural change away from violence.

          "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

          by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:25:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You can't brew guns in a Basement. (7+ / 0-)

            Manufacturing weapons requires steel forging, exact tolerances, and a much heavier industry base than cooking up Meth.

            This is one we CAN shut down at the source.

            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:28:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The manage in import Heroin all the way from (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fuzzyguy

              Afghanisan, whats to keep them same elements from importing $40 saturday night specials.

              "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

              by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:32:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The fact that WE MAKE THEM. (8+ / 0-)

                Legally, in this country. And export them everywhere.

                I have no doubt that someone with motivation will be able to go to extreme lengths to import a hand forged AK-47 from Pakistan.

                They can also do it in Japan and Great Britain, countries with serious gun control... and interestingly enough, they don't tend to use them.

                Honestly, I find the odds of some schmuck taking the time to import a weapon, having the ability to do so, and the inclination for a mass shooting is somebody who is an extremely unique individual

                I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:37:17 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Lots of handguns are imported (0+ / 0-)

                  Glock, Walther, HK etc.  I think only Smith&Wesson and Sig manufacture here.  

                  "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                  by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:39:54 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  They can bring in a 10 pound bad of weed (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  fuzzyguy

                  Should have no problem smuggling in a $800 Glock.  Stop the demand and the supply will wither.

                  "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                  by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:41:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  In other words... give up. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Miggles, Laconic Lib, lyvwyr101

                    We can't stop criminals, so therefore we must not make laws.

                    because some people will use their cars as a battering ram, it's clear that we shouldn't have speed limits?

                    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                    by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:47:43 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Write as many laws as you want (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      fuzzyguy

                      But you can't disarm the police because guns are illegal.

                      "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                      by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:51:02 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Police violence in this country is a disgrace. (3+ / 0-)

                        The only reason they have so many weapons, and there are so many shootings with the police involved is due to the proliferation of weapons.

                        Ban the guns, and the amount of force "Needed" will be nowhere near the current paradigm.

                        Our militarized police is a disgrace and the force they employ needs to be dialed down considerably.

                        Countries with gun control do not need police forces armed to the teeth.

                        I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                        by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:55:31 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Do some research (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          fuzzyguy, FrankRose

                          Korea, Israel,  Mexico and many others have very strict gun control laws and their police are armed to the teeth.

                          "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                          by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:57:03 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Japan, Great Britain and Germany (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            Have very strict gun control laws and their police are not armed to the teeth.

                            The places you cite are declared or undeclared war zones.

                            Just like the US.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:00:19 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Just like the US ? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fuzzyguy, FrankRose

                            The the US police should be armed to the teeth. When I flew to Munich German police were very visible and armed to the teeth.

                            "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                            by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:01:41 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Right because German police use SO many guns... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            Oh wait, no they don't.

                            Number of bullets fired in Germany.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:04:23 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You fail to understand the difference (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fuzzyguy, FrankRose

                            between being armed and firing bullets.

                            "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                            by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:05:27 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, I find it interesting... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            That the largest weapon in standard use in a German  police department is a submachine gun.

                            That is not armed to the teeth.  Our police forces have access and regularly use assault rifles, flash bangs, sniper rifles and other weapons that are military in nature.

                            And we USE them.  The German Police do not.  

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:08:52 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't see US beat cops (0+ / 0-)

                            carrying assault rifles.  Do you?
                            Do you know the difference between a submachine gun and an asaault rifle?

                            "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                            by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:10:36 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes. A SMG uses pistol rounds. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            Our police forces regularly have assault rifles in their vehicles.  This is a response to the North Hollywood shootout, in which police weapons could not penetrate the perpetrators body armor.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:13:53 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Would you disarm cops (0+ / 0-)

                            and have them go thru another North Hollywood scenario.

                            "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                            by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:17:17 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, because there would be no North Hollywood... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            When there are no assault weapons freely available to the American public.

                            North Hollywood was an example of why we need to BAN guns, not ramp up our war on criminals because "Criminals are better armed, so the police must be better armed".

                            That's just LaPierre Logic.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:19:26 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  When they are not freely available (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            annieli

                            The criminals will still have them.  Got to go have a nice day.

                            "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                            by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:21:18 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In other words, Bad Guys will always have guns. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            Once again, you're parroting NRA talking points.  Clearly the solution is to give the "Good Guys" more guns.

                            This is not a solution.  It's some horrible spasm.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:30:33 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The issue in parts of Hollywood (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            detroitmechworks, annieli

                            is drug-related crime, more or less.

                            Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                            by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:39:26 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hell, I'm for drug legalization... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mahakali overdrive, Laconic Lib

                            If I've come across as supporting the drug war, I just want to make that clear.  

                            Drugs don't hurt anybody but the user.  Guns hurt everybody except the user.  (Unless the user specifically decides to harm him or herself with the gun)

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:46:38 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In our current legal climate, sadly (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            detroitmechworks, rockhound

                            drugs hurt more than the user :/ Thus the stupid shoot outs, burglaries involved with drugs and their manufacture, killing of narcs, gang violence, cops armed to the gills, on and on and on.

                            That's my issue with our drug laws: they create a violent culture and death for absolutely innocent people who may just live in a neighborhood with a high number of drug traffickers or makers. This absolutely includes kids. Here in Northern California, we see a lot of this with meth labs and marijuana growers.

                            It is shameful that people aren't even discussing this right now when they're talking about how angry they are about gun violence! Those who are angry about gun violence in general need to look at these issues too: we know damned well where some of it comes from. Our drug policies are a HUGE known place, and very much an issue that should be on any Progressives' agenda.

                            Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                            by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:52:45 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  We have created this. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib

                            Nobody cares when a gang shoots each other over a little piece of territory, because of the choice they have of working for peanuts or killing each other for a shot at the big bucks.

                            Yes, the drug policies are ludicrous.  So are the policies of class warfare and government slashing the benefits of the poor to enhance the rich.

                            Guns are a known factor, and one of many that we can fight.  It does not diminish the need to address the other factors, but it also does not call for a moderating of the stance on guns due to "The other factors which we need to address."

                            Ban em, legalize drugs, and end the war on the poor.

                            That's be a good... start.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:57:28 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Except no one is calling to legalize drugs (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rockhound

                            I see not one diary that has even recently touched this and no current legislation being proposed for this.

                            Hm...

                            Some commitment to ending gun violence.

                            Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                            by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:04:53 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Tough on drugs is a political winner. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laconic Lib, a2nite

                            Unfortunately, despite the legalization of Marijuana in 2 states, we still are demonizing drug users federally.

                            Perhaps I should write the diary.  Course, If I did, I'd still emphasize that we need to ban guns as much as we need to eliminate the "Need" for them.

                            I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                            by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:09:24 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  You seem to have a penchant for false equivalence (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Laconic Lib

                    10 lbs of weed is how many nickel and dime bags? Even more to the point, what's the value of the 1 lb of heroin you mention above?

                    Now tell me that someone is going to spend the same effort illegally importing a single $800 Glock, or squeeze thousands of Glocks into a single 1 lb bag that's easily hidden.

                    I suspect you really think people are going to put AK-47s in condoms and swallow a bunch of them, just like they do with illegal drugs.

                    Maybe you should think about why that wouldn't work.

                    In Soviet Russia, you rob bank. In America, bank robs you.

                    by badger on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:58:59 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  A Glock is smaller than a 1 pound bag. (0+ / 0-)

                      How many can you fit on a shipping container.  When there is a proofit to be made folks will find a way.

                      "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

                      by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:03:10 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  AK-47 Made From Shovel (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  annieli, fuzzyguy

                  This guy wanted a challenge so he made an AK out of a shovel blade and he used the handle for the stock. Rather entertaining.

                  http://www.northeastshooters.com/...!

                  There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

                  by bernardpliers on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:51:15 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  That will not be true for long. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              incognita

              Check out the Rachel Maddow segment on 3D printers.

              "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

              by nosleep4u on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:36:10 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Guns and drugs aren't the same (2+ / 0-)

            One gets you high and the other kills animals (design criteria).

            Drugs are probably more like sex than guns.

            Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

            by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:29:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  How many gun murders (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              annieli, mahakali overdrive, fuzzyguy

              are drug related?  Or drug induced?

              "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

              by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:33:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It doesn't appear that any of the (3+ / 0-)

                school, movie theater, or shopping mall mass murders in this country were drug-related.

                They were all gun-related, though.

                In Soviet Russia, you rob bank. In America, bank robs you.

                by badger on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:01:20 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  well, they were all psychotropic drug related /nt (0+ / 0-)

                  yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

                  by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:30:28 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I strongly disagree (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    annieli

                    The only evidence I've found for that was provided by InfoWars.

                    See my comment above about drug policy and gun violence. It's a place to consider working on. Clearly a problem with both our drug policy, criminalizing drugs, and also having a police force armed to the teeth. And crack makes people violent, as does speed (ugh, don't ask me to detail this either... just ugh). Heroin, not so much other than very occasionally due to hallucinations or withdrawal, but our policies there definitely wind up resulting in violence.

                    I believe in legalizing most drugs and ending the entire war on drugs crap.

                    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                    by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:38:28 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Okay, but these are the outliers (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  annieli, fuzzyguy

                  About half of all gun-related homicides in the United States are, in fact, related to our drug laws, as cited here:

                  http://www.theatlantic.com/...

                  Just the facts.

                  I see that many people here really and truly and deeply care about stopping gun violence. That's evident. And I also see that many don't quite understand guns or gun violence and where it's coming from. I hope that people who care to stop gun violence do take some time to educate themselves about the statistical reasons why gun death is so prevalent in the United States. It's important to do for those who don't just want to rail against some evil genie, but for those who want to know how to focus their energies toward appropriate reform.

                  Here. Fix this problem and that's half of all gun homicides in the United States.

                  Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:34:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Sex kills animals? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              detroitmechworks, fuzzyguy

              I'm doing something wrong...

              Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

              by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:28:48 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  the difference is (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Laconic Lib

            I can grow pot or cook meth in my bedroom.

            I can't manufacture my own AR-15s.

            •  Can you grow Opium Poppies and make heroin. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fuzzyguy

              Most of the illegal weapons would be cheap overseas imports.
              Eliminate the demand.

              "In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets. " James Webb, Sep 02

              by ParaHammer on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:34:47 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  can you make an AR-15? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laconic Lib
                Most of the illegal weapons would be cheap overseas imports.
                As opposed to expensive US domestics . . . ? Most of the world's guns are US-made.

                How many petty criminals do you know that have the capacity to import a Chinese pistol, rather than stealing a Glock from someone's bedroom?

              •  Yes, you can (0+ / 0-)

                Poppies are pretty much poppies, although the yield of opiates probably varies.

                The poppies in your grandmother's garden or the poppy seeds on your dinner roll contain the opiate building blocks for heroin or morphine.

                It just takes a lot of them - that's why there are huge fields of them in Afghanistan. Of course in the form of heroin, the active chemicals are condensed into a small space, so that a few pounds that can be hidden/smuggled is worth tens of thousands of dollars or more.

                Tens of thousands of dollars of even cheap off-shore-manufactured weapons is in the truckload/container-load category - not quite so easy to conceal. Although pushing the price of illegal weapons up the price of heroin - pound for pound - isn't a bad idea.

                In Soviet Russia, you rob bank. In America, bank robs you.

                by badger on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:09:24 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Yet!!!! The plans are now on the 'net. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              annieli

              If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything - unknown

              by incognita on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:22:38 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  From legal guns that are sold and then re-sold so (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Laconic Lib

          that there is no connection to a "legal" gun dealer, sure there are some that are stolen, but that is a small amount.

          This is just like the issue of how do the Mexican cartels have so many semi-automatic weapons, they buy them legally in the US and transfer them across a very porous border.

          It's called straw purchases.

          Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

          by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:07:06 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Hold manufacturers responsible for their (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Laconic Lib

          distribution system.  How about the gun manufacturer in MA whose guns went walking out the door with employees because they didn't have a high end security system!  And they hired felons, too.  sigh

    •  There are 310 million firearms in America. Ban (4+ / 0-)

      them all and then what?  A door to door search?  

      •  Sort of like pharoah would do /nt (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        annieli, mahakali overdrive, fuzzyguy

        Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

        by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:23:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  or something more recent - (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fuzzyguy
          The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been "disarmed" with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.

          yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

          by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:39:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

            •  not really --if the jackboot fits...see BillO /nt (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fuzzyguy

              yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

              by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:10:49 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Not when it's a salient point (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              annieli, mahakali overdrive, fuzzyguy

              to the conversation.

              I can just about forgive the Brits for starting our revolutionary war and burning DC to the ground during the war of 1812 for giving us Led Zeppelin.

              by Pager on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:10:51 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's a good point (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laconic Lib, emelyn

                In that it shows the utter paranoia of the gun apologists.

                Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

                by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:52:46 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  not really, Liberal misuse of state power is no (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rockhound, fuzzyguy, a2nite

                  different than the 'baggers we have to fight

                  yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

                  by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:54:23 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Liberals (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Laconic Lib

                    Haven't flooded the country with massively deadly weapons.  It's called overkill, but you guys sound pretty worried about the slippery slope.

                    Gosh, if AR-15's are illegal, then what's next?  Deer rifles?  Six shooters?

                    The NRA gives you cover.  You just don't want to come out and say it.  Being reasonable or productive in regulating the equipment isn't much your concern apparently.

                    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

                    by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:57:55 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  and your concern doesn't include reading things (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rockhound, fuzzyguy, a2nite

                      I post apparently. Try it first before resorting to your own fallacies

                      Being reasonable or productive in regulating the equipment isn't much your concern apparently.
                      The association fallacy is an informal version of the fallacious argument known as affirming the consequent.

                      yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

                      by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:01:59 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Liberals (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Laconic Lib

                    Have not flooded the country with massively deadly weapons.

                    Look, the discussion is presumably outlawing AR-15's and large clips, and the gun lover crowd is worried about what exactly???

                    Why don't you just come out and say.  If the discussion is gun regulation, you and your kind will monkey-wrench because you think it's a slippery slope, right?  You're so paranoid about that very thing, you actually go Godwin on it.

                    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

                    by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:00:46 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Sorry, for the dupe (0+ / 0-)

                    I thought it lost the first one, so I had to paraphrase the 2nd time.  :-)

                    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

                    by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:01:24 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  "dupe" is appropriate for your ad hominems /nt (0+ / 0-)

                      yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

                      by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:02:46 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Haha, good one (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Laconic Lib

                        Watch out for Hitler.  He'll look more like Bush though than liberal abuse of state power.

                        Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

                        by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:05:10 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  no Godwin pie for you (0+ / 0-)
                          Machine Gun Pie
                          by Biker Billy
                          When you bike into this pie, You’ll hear the rat tat tat of machine gun fire, which sounds just like a straight-piped Hog racing up an alley. It is a favorite of mine when I want something Italian but not pasta. This recipe is a variation on a classic ratatouille baked into a pie that will make veggie lover’s pizzas look anemic.

                          1/2-cup sun-dried tomatoes
                          1/2 cup boiling water
                          1/4-cup extra virgin olive oil
                          1 medium-size onion, cut into matchsticks
                          4 canned chipotle peppers packed in adobo sauce, minced
                          2 tablespoons chopped garlic
                          1 medium-size eggplant, cut into 1-inch cubes
                          2 medium-size zucchini, trimmed, halved lengthwise, and cut into 1-inch slices
                          3 cups small brown mushrooms, cut in half
                          1 medium-size yellow bell pepper, seeded and cut into 1-inch squares
                          One 29-ounce can whole peeled tomatoes, quartered, with their juice
                          2 tablespoons dried parsley
                          2 tablespoons dried basil
                          1 teaspoon dried oregano
                          1 1/2 teaspoons salt
                          1 teaspoon black pepper
                          1 box piecrust mix, prepared for two 9-inch deep-dish pies
                          4 cups shredded mozzarella cheese

                          1. Place the sun-dried tomatoes in a small heatproof bowl and cover with the boiling water. Allow to cool to room temperature. Remove the tomatoes from the water, reserving the liquid. Coarsely chop the tomatoes and return to the liquid.
                          2. Heat the olive oil in a large skillet over high heat. Add the onion and chipotles, stir well to coat with oil, and cook, stirring, until the onions begin to brown, 5 to 7 minutes. Reduce the heat to medium, add the garlic, eggplant, zucchini, mushrooms, and bell pepper, and cook, stirring a few times, until the vegetables are just tender, 5 to 7 minutes. Raise the heat to high, add the sun-dried tomatoes with their liquid, the peeled tomatoes, parsley, basil, oregano, salt, and black pepper, and cook, stirring a few times, until the sauce just thickens, 5 to 7 minutes. Remove from the heat and allow to cool to room temperature.
                          3. Preheat the oven to 450° F. Divide the filling between the two piecrusts. Cover the top of each evenly with the mozzarella. Bake until the cheese and crusts are golden brown, 12 to 15 minutes. Remove from the oven and serve immediately.

                          Makes two 9-inch pies

                          yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

                          by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:09:03 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

      •  So, clearly we need to keep making MORE? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nosleep4u, Laconic Lib, lyvwyr101

        At a certain point, don't we have ENOUGH guns?

        if the manufacturing and sale of guns is prohibited, strict rules are set up for when and where guns are owned and used, and legal penalties are in place for violation, I t would be a STEP in the right direction.

        Banning assault weapons and large clips is masturbating.  Makes us feel good but in the long run is a waste of effort and time.

        I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

        by detroitmechworks on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:24:55 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  so if we already got 310 million firearms (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Anne was here, Laconic Lib, lyvwyr101

        why do we need to keep manufacturing more?

        How many guns per person is "enough"? How many more do we need to have?

      •  So your answer is to give up. (0+ / 0-)

        That'll help!

        "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

        by nosleep4u on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:37:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Note that none of your replies (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        annieli, Bailey2001, fuzzyguy

        answer your question.

      •  I will answer you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Laconic Lib

        We have a gun buy back program as was done in Australia when they outlawed guns. After the buy back period there will be no need for a search, if you bring your illegal gun out of your home and it is seen you are now a criminal. Law abiding citizens should have no problems as a law abiding citizen would turn in the gun once it is illegal.

        •  Ok...let's see 310 million firearms times lets say (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mahakali overdrive, fuzzyguy

          300 dollars apiece equals how many billions?  And that's if you only give 300 dollars, when at the point of a ban...the same gun would be worth triple or quadruple on the streets and underground black market.  

          Ok, criminals would keep their guns and then increase their own criminal behavior by running the guns.

          Half of gun owners who are law abiding owners now, would indeed still keep theirs.....I am law abiding and am not sure I would turn them over.   I know my husband wouldn't.

          I would require changing the Constitution and most likely political suicide for whoever choose to sign off on a complete ban.  We can talk about sensible gun laws but when you start talking complete ban in America, it would simply make gun shop owners millionaires.

  •  "original intent" (15+ / 0-)

    The "original intent" of the Founding Fathers was that much of the population would live in slavery, and only white male property-owners (about 5% of the population) could vote.  And even then, the President and the Senate were not elected by popular vote anyway.

    They've been dead for 200 years.  No one today should give a rat's ass what they thought about anything.

    •  and you were supposed to be secure in your (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laconic Lib

      property and possesions but now they are microwave scanning you in airports and everybody thinks it makes them safer.

      not only could the writers of the constitution not have imagined ak-47s they also couldn't have imagined the modern surveillance state.

      something that should make the 4th amendment the most important amendment at this point in time.

      keeping the govt out of your business unless they have a really good reason to be all up in your shit, means that you don't get to be paranoid and think you need a gun to protect your "freedoms".

      as if the gun nuts would actually win their glorious little war for freedom against the US army.  idiots.

      big badda boom : GRB 090423

      by squarewheel on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:16:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  2nd amendment (7+ / 0-)

    Frankly, I think the likelihood of "effective gun control" in the United States is nigh impossible unless the 2nd amendment is repealed or modified. Even if, by chance, there ever is another liberal-leaning Supreme Court that understands what "well regulated" truly means, it will be followed by a conservative court that will undo any interpretation of the 2nd the right wing dislikes.

  •  Why are some lives worth more than others (19+ / 0-)

    A question I've heard asked a several times; effectively on The West Wing and elsewhere.

    We've focused on the tragedy in Connecticut

    In the time since, there have been 146 deaths to gun violence.   146 deaths.

    Domestic disputes settled.  Robberies gone wrong.  Shootouts with police officers - including one near me I blogged where two officers were killed; wholesale slaughter.

    We focus on Connecticut because the horror is unthinkable.. small children killed.

    Small children have died since too..

    http://fox4kc.com/...

    A 4 year old child in Kansas City killed in a drive by.

    http://m.news9.com/...

    A 3 year old in an accident.

    A father, a child, a daughter, a friend.   146 people are dead.  

    Why do some lives mean more than others?  I don't know, but apparently for fans of guns, the person holding a gun has a life that matters most.

    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle

    by Chris Reeves on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:15:59 AM PST

  •  Why is everybody shocked and upset? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101

    The tragedy in Connecticut is just one of a long series of similar shootings.  Everybody knows this is part of life in a country that guarantees the "right to bear arms" while at the same time, glorifying violence.  

    There is no fix to this problem.  It will continue and probably get worse.  

    If the Second Amendment was repealed today -- there still would be more guns than people in the U.S. and crazy, sick people who would do terrible things are produced daily in industrial quantities by our media.

    The genie is out of the bottle.  There;s lots of guns and lots of crazy, sick people who would just love to use them.

    Gnash your teeth and beat your breast -- we're all responsible for these events because of our permissive attitudes toward gun ownership and the continued production of the kinds of people who would use them to harm others.

    The fix is to change ourselves and that's not going to happen.

    •  Buy back programs (11+ / 0-)

      One that pays the market value of the gun. No questions asked. A buy back of ammo as well.

      And a ban on some kinds of ammo and guns, in conjunction with the buy back. After the buy back finishes, licensing and registration, with big fines and jail time for anyone found with those guns or ammo.

      You want to buy a hunting gun? Fine, show a valid hunting license and a gun license, with proof of training on that weapon.

      You want a handgun? You can have one per adult in the household, a limited amount of ammo, and again, you have show proof of training. Maybe require a permit as well.

      Restrictions on manufacture of some guns, some kind of tracking device required to be an integral part of all handguns, and some others.

      There are lots of things we can do. We just have to do it.

      And guns DO kill people. Their only purpose is to kill or injure living things, including people.

      •  I think the buy back was key to Australia's (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        glorificus, Laconic Lib

        success in eradicating the gun insanity over there.

        •  They also have a smaller population without (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lyvwyr101

          the desensitizing effect of mass murder occurring every week unnoticed in Chicago or other large American cities.

          They may have more of a sense of community there also.

          **Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behavior does** h/t Clytemnestra/Victoria Jackson

          by glorificus on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:53:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No sense of communitiy (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rockhound, mahakali overdrive

            in the land of fiercely independent Randian Reaganites. We've got a whole country where nearly every citizen walls themselves in and isolates themselves from their neighbors and community. With a global population of over 7 billion we are lonely, lost, and angry. The internet further erodes that sense of actual community since it is infinitely easier to find people to socialize with via blocks of text than to find people of like or not quite like minds to socialize with on the block.

            I think that may have quite a bit more to do with American social angst and general rage issues. The whole nation has been having a "me party" since the 80's. The loss of any sort of social safety net and increasing wealth disparity doesn't help either.

  •  They know it's inevitable. Sensible gun control (22+ / 0-)

    legislation is coming and they won't be able to buy their precious semi automatic assault weapons and extended magazines anymore. So they're stocking up.  It's a sickness in this country. They know damn good and well these types of guns aren't for hunting (at least  not for hunting animals) and they aren't buying them for self defense. They're buying them because for almost 10 years (another thing to thank Bush & Cheney for) they could and the NRA has done one hell of a marketing job along with the gun manufacturers.

    And it took the massacre of 20 little kids to bring down the psychosis of the NRA. Oh, they'll fight it tooth and nail, but so will we.

    "On this train, dreams will not be thwarted, on this train faith will be rewarded" The Boss

    by mindara on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:17:53 AM PST

    •  It's the same mentality, (7+ / 0-)

      in part, that puts over-sized trucks and Humvees on the road - often driven by people who have no need for that much horsepower or 4-wheel drive or whatever it is that Humvees are supposed to provide. Bigger trucks, bigger houses, bigger guns. So it's not all about protection - it's also about projection (false self-image) and compensation for a small mind. I'd say compensation for other body parts, too, but far too many women buy into this mentality. I think, judging by the few women I know who are like this, to give the appearance of being tough, one of the guys. Maybe that makes them feel safer.

    •  But that is abusive of responsible gun owners! The (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      incognita, mindara, Laconic Lib

      rights of the minority cannot be subject to the will of the majority, right? Don't you know that the right of those gun owners to buy whatever firearm they want, take it wherever they want, and use it in a "responsible" manner is way more important than anyone's life?

      Snark aside, I sure hope you are right that legislation is coming.  I hope it will be meaningful legislation; sure they will pass an assault weapons ban, they must in the face of this latest carnage - even with all the NRA money/pressure, but my fear is that it will be a symbolic ban that does not address firearms that fire way too many rounds in just 1-2 seconds and the bullets/magazines/clips/kits (the NRA will probably even write the bill or at least many of the amendments that end up in it).  

      Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:22:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  What I can't figure out is WHY they think they (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laconic Lib, lyvwyr101

      need so many guns. What, they wear out????

      I would BET that most of these folks don't really do much with their arsenal other than hoard it.

      202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

      by cany on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:06:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  the NRA argues that "the problem" is criminals (12+ / 0-)

    with guns, but neglects to mention that the legal gun industry (the one the NRA bends over backwards to protect) is the sole and only source of guns for criminals. Every gun in the hands of every criminal was made legally in a factory somewhere.

    So if we want to control the guns supply for criminals, we need to dry up the supply at the source---by regulating (and if needs be banning) the manufacture of weapons.

    Anything else is just arm-waving.

  •  The 2nd Amendment (14+ / 0-)

    is just that - an amendment. The Constitution wasn't carved in stone. It's meant to work as a living document that can be changed as our culture changes - giving women the right to vote and people of all races equal opportunities, for instance.

    Doesn't surprise me that people who tend toward literal interpretations of the Bible while cherry-picking which passages make the most sense for their current cause also treat the Constitution like scripture and focus so intently and disturbingly on the 2nd Amendment.

    Agree that the similarity in all these shootings is access to  weapons - and in most cases, weapons that no individual has any reason to own.

    There needs to be more education and around responsible gun ownership for those who do own guns. Look at the accidental deaths, in some cases caused by kids too young to know what they were doing.

  •  Good diary. I appreciate that (16+ / 0-)

    you equated the original intent of the Constitution with the literal interpretation of the Bible.  Both have caused irreparable harm, by clinging to the notion that human beings, our body of knowledge and our circumstances have remained fixed in time, rather than evolving.  In both cases, these rigid views have resulted in deaths beyond measure.

    “If we, citizens, do not support our artists, then we sacrifice our imagination on the altar of crude reality and we end up believing in nothing and having worthless dreams.” ~ Yann Martel

    by SottoVoce on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:22:14 AM PST

  •  What mass shootings have in common is ammo clips (17+ / 0-)

    that hold many rounds.

    Make it a felony to possess any clip with more than 6 rounds and mass shootings will become less "mass": every time the guy has to reload is a chance for the good guys to get him.

  •  its about the MIC that supports manufacturers (6+ / 0-)

    of small arms

    U.S. sales of arms overseas totaled more than 3/4 of the global weapons market in 2011

    yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:25:41 AM PST

  •  I wish we could quit focussing only (8+ / 0-)

    on "mass shootings" and focus instead on shootings/gun violence period.

    The fact is, despite their sensationalism, despite the fact that the media (and the American public) gets more bang for the buck on this type of shooting, these events are relatively rare--and, frankly, most often involve a limited (white suburban, less-than-poverty-stricken) demographic.

    I am much more concerned every day incidence of gun violence on the streets of our cities.

    •  Yup, any compromise has to take into account how (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laconic Lib

      many gun deaths happen and how many are allowable vis a vis the rights expressed in the Second Amendment.  This is not a zero sum game and we will have to live with some deaths, but how many annual deaths are allowable before some regulations are put on gun ownership that are meaningful and stop the proliferation.  Clearly the present level of over 30k annual deaths (with children making up close to 10% of the total) has not proven to be enough and the outrage in the face of mass shootings usually subsides so that we are numbed into accepting that nearly 100 firearm deaths EVERY SINGLE DAY is just normal.

      If the outrage over the mass shootings gets Congress to do something (and even the most recent outrage will fade with very little, if anything done, by our lawmakers) then maybe the families of all the dead can take some solace in that the deaths of their loved ones were not completely meaningless.

      Sadly I think you are wrong about how rare mass shootings are and, even worse, how common they are going to be going forward if sensible regulations are not passed by Congress.

      Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:39:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Make the NRA an offer they can’t refuse. (3+ / 0-)

    Give them all the data available about every mass shooter since, say the Texas Tower incident.

    From this data, they are to construct screening criteria for persons who should not have guns. Said criteria subject to expert evaluation, of course. As soon as they come up with criteria, everyone meeting the standard for safe gun ownership can have a gun.

    Until they come up with it, a moratorium, just a temporary moratorium on all sales of guns and ammunition, except for police and military.

    Reality ? What has that to do with Opera ?

    by greatferm on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:26:56 AM PST

  •  On 'Reliable Sources' there was an argument about (0+ / 0-)

    whether or not the 'press' should be out in front on this issue.......Why bother now.

  •  Our Gun Culture (10+ / 0-)

    I'm a dyed in the wool liberal Democrat. I support strong gun laws. And like many others at DK, I own guns. My anecdotal observation, based on the past few years I've spent on the fringe of America's gun culture, is that there are fundamentally two different kinds of gun owners. The first is more traditional and generally older. They own shotguns and bolt-action long guns for hunting. They may or may not also own a handgun. You are unlikely to find weapons of war aside from collectors who might have a WW1 or WW2 rifle (bolt action, not semiauto). These gun owners are not nearly as vocal as the next group.

    The second group is generally younger. They possess and cherish large collections including guns of military derivation and "Dirty Harry'inspired" handguns. They are much more likely to stockpile ammunition and to belong to the Tea Party.

    Like all generalizations, mine may be attacked, but this is my take on things. There is absolutely nothing wrong, in my view, with imposing regulations on gun ownership and transfer that are at least as comprehensive as required for automobiles. There is no justification for private ownership of large ammunition clips. Although an AR-15 is a poor choice for hunting, it could theoretically be used for that purpose. Hunting rifles generally carry only five rounds (and few hunters ever need to fire more than one or two rounds when hunting large game). So why the need for big ammo magazines?

    If a gun owner wants to play army like a child, except with real guns, then join the Army. Or join law enforcement.

    While some here want to ban guns altogether, that is not even remotely realistic. Frankly, it seems to be the mirror image of (and just as unserious) as the gun nuts' "arm everybody" mantra. Guns are omnipresent in American history, but have not always been as deadly as in the past few decades. While individuals might be responsible, as a group we have not shown ourselves to deserve unfettered access. Some rules must be laid down and our legislators must have the spine to do so. (Fat chance.)

    •  There is a third type: the competitor (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fuzzyguy, rockhound

      Trap
      Skeet
      Sporting Clays
      Long range (5 major types)
      Modern 3- gun
      Western 3-gun (actually 4 guns, 3 different types)
      Bullseye
      IPSC
      USPSA
      IDPA

      There are more.

      These folks shoot millions of rounds per weekend and are by far  at least the second largest consumers of retail ammunition and the largest reloaders of ammunition in the USA.

      Fatalities in these sports is virtually unknown.

      These people "do not play army"...however, if there ever was a need for a militia, they have the most training and practice of any civilians.

      They don't necessarily get on blogs on weekends to debate the issue.  Many of them are out there shooting.

      But, they are staunch advocates of the right to own any firearm, since they use many of them.

  •  Americans more murderous? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jck, lyvwyr101

    Just the other day, several DKos posters were arguing that the American populace is more murderous by nature than Europeans, etc, and limiting guns wouldn't stop the daily violence. I don't buy that, but it appears many do.

  •  With all due respect, mental illness is an issue (5+ / 0-)

    I agree with the priority on getting guns under control.  This time, the shooter was a youth who was in the early stages of mental illness and therefore not in the MHMR system.   There is a commonality with a number of other high profile cases.

    Guns and, of course, the insanely high powered, mass kill capability weapons should not be readily available.  

    No question.  Anything we can do to sustain a drumbeat and keep the focus on that point is obviously important.

    But I happen to have had the intense experience of seeing someone close to me fall into mental illness while in high school and seeing the system utterly fail.  Utterly.

    Budget cutting has really hurt the ability of school systems to do their job.  We should not be talking about whether armed guards are a good idea.

    We should be talking about putting whatever support we can behind teachers, school counselors and nurses, and mental health professionals who can really bring some help to bear.

    The early development of mental illness, particularly in a school setting, is primarily about education and the ability of someone to get over a crisis and function as an adult.  

    If teachers can be punished for pointing out to parents that a child may have symptoms that should bring in more specialized help, this is a problem.  It can be solved by putting teachers more in the driver's seat.  A referral is only a referral.  Evaluation should be mandated, not avoided.  Then there can be some appropriate help given.  

    This is the point at which the system fails.  Schools don't have the resources.  Parents who haven't come across this before go into denial and don't know what to do except hide the problem.  Kids certainly have no ability to make decisions about something like that.  Once kids are out of school, there are way fewer resources available and it may be too late, considering development.  

    We need to deal with gun control.  But I hope that focus does not cause the need for better support for schools in dealing with the onset of metal illness to be pushed aside and forgotten.  

    hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

    by Stuart Heady on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:31:16 AM PST

  •  You can't understand the why of shootings (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greengemini, incognita, Stuart Heady

    just by studying the history of the shooter. You also have to study all the non-shooters and determine why the non-shooters did not become shooters.

    The media cannot perform studies that answer why. The stories of the childhood of the shooters and the capacities - mental and emotional - are nothing except prurient gossip. Once Gerald Laughner shot everyone in Tucson, it became clear he was a shooter, but how would you predict it? The same is true for Adam Lanza.

    There are a lot of people with mental and emotional problems who never get noticed because they do NOT go shoot up a school or a parking lot. In fact, people with such problems are statistically less likely to commit such acts.

    The NRA's Wayne La Pierre is, himself, probably more certifiable than either Lanza or Laughner, but he's doing his murders at a distance through his insane and self-centered rhetoric. He just lays the firearms out for anyone who decides to kill to pick up and use. But La Pierre has been hired by the sales people of the gun manufacturers, importers, and sales people to expand the otherwise declining market for small arms in the most massive small arms market in the world - the United States.

    They "why" of the shootings cannot be predicted. That means we have to focus on the "how." The "how" centers on too damned many firearms in the hands of too damn many people who have no need or training in their use.

    I became an NRA life member in about 1970. It was what you did in those days to learn how to handle small arms. I was professional military and it was a professional expense. Then when the government slowed purchases of small arms for the military a couple of decades ago the manufacturers and sales people took over the NRA and installed crazies like La Pierre.

    When you hear the number "4 million members" of the NRA, remember that life members do not pay further dues! Those idiots get nothing from me, and they send me the magazine for the rest of my life by contract. I am draining them of funds. There's a lot of us doing this. I'm not doing nearly as good a job draining the NRA of funds as Wayne La Pierre is.

    The US Supreme Court has by its actions and rhetoric has ceased to be legitimate. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot - over

    by Rick B on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:31:17 AM PST

    •  But there is a common variable (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Boris49, mahakali overdrive, Rick B

      In the mass shootings in Newtown, in Aurora, in Tucson, at Virginia Tech and at Columbine, there have been some variable to look at which should require serious discussion.  

      One of the commonalities is that schools do not have the ability to mandate any interventions when a young person begins to show the signs and symptoms of serious mental illness.  All too often, parents are on their own to deal with it and usually do not know how to cope, except to go into denial.  

      If everyone else goes into denial about this, whatever sort of solutions might be available continue to be out of reach.  

      An associated problem is that once kids graduate from high school, there are a lot fewer resources available at the community level.

      We can't ignore the need to analyze what has been happening and its connection to the absolutely terrible way we deal with mental illness in this country.

      hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

      by Stuart Heady on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:44:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not saying don't analyze the situation (0+ / 0-)

        What I am saying is that to simply study shooters means you will NEVER understand why one person becomes a shooter and another in the same condition and circumstances does not.

        It's like trying to study how to stop teenage pregnancy. If all you study is pregnant teenagers you will never have any clue why they got pregnant when so many others did not.

        That's why the idea of a database of mentally ill people is simply stupid. Most people will suffer from emotional or cognitive problems at some time during a life time. Very few of those people will ever become violent or kill someone. But the database will become a list of second-class people from the very beginning.

        Go look at the DSM-IV-TR. Dig into it and figure out what it says means you have a mental illness. Often a diagnosis requires that you have, say, five characteristic symptoms out of eight or nine and that the symptoms significantly affect your life.

        There is absolutely nothing in that form of diagnosis which would reliably predict who might become a shooter or killer of some kind. If the diagnosis says you have to have five characteristics to be diagnosed and you only have four, then you are normal, right?

        The TR in the title means that it has been 18 years since the DSM-III-R was revised. The new DSM-V is due out Spring of 2013. Whole categories previously defined as mentally ill are being dropped, but it took this long to decide what to do with them. And that's just categorizing the diagnosis!

        You will not find anything in the book that predicts shooters reliably. Before or after the next revision comes out. And if all you look at is shooter, you NEVER will know why they became shooters!

        But we can prevent people with killing ideation  from getting access to tools that allow them to kill from a safe distance from their victims. We simply have to require everyone with a firearm to belong to an organization that trains and approves their use of such weapons, makes the records public and auditable, and we have to collect the unregistered firearms and destroy them.

        We can't reliably predict who has the killing ideation and we never will be able to. But we can prevent the killing tools from being where they can be mis-used - in most situations. That's why even in high threat situations to military issues ammunition and still makes you put tape on the magazine above the rounds so that you can't go off half-cocked or accidentally shoot someone.

        And yes, the gun-sellers and gun-manufacturers will hate this reduction of the market they can ramp up just by scaring people. It will cost them a lot of money. They'll buy as much media time to spread their fear and lies as they can, just as the oil and coal companies have don't to stop efforts to slow climate change.

        The US Supreme Court has by its actions and rhetoric has ceased to be legitimate. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot - over

        by Rick B on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 03:03:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You are right about guns, but you can't ignore (0+ / 0-)

          the issue of mental illness.  

          I happen to have had to deal with a close relative who became mentally ill in high school and then lived with a chronic condition for forty years afterwards.  

          At one point, as he continued living with the parents for several years, they thought it smoothed him out to get a gun and do some target practice.  

          I think any parents would do anything that might seem to help, given total frustration that there is something that can.

          I had to intervene in this and steal the gun lest it become a tragedy.

          The thing is that while you cannot create a database of people who are mentally ill, because there aren't clear descriptors that deserve to be in a database, you can tell when someone is in trouble and has become someone whose judgement you cannot trust.  

          That is, however, not necessarily about trying to predict who is likely to take a step over the line into becoming a shooter.
          It is about trying to locate those who need help at the earliest moment so that they educational system and the health care system can have the best chance of giving somebody a functional life.

          If we are more concerned about education we will prevent more people from going over the edge and being lost.  We have the science to know how to do this.  We just aren't doing it.  

          hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

          by Stuart Heady on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:08:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't disagree with what you have written (0+ / 0-)

            In fact the state of health care for the mentally ill is a disaster and really needs to be taken care of. But I was writing about government policy towards gun safety and gun control. The issue of mental illness is completely useless as far as government policy towards protecting people from the misuse of guns is concerned.

            The issue of mental illness is, in fact, a completely useless distraction if your intention is to protect the public from the misuse of small arms. That's why Wayne La Pierre brought it up along with the equally distracting issue of violence in the media.

            Government control of the availability of firearms is the only practical way of protecting people from misuse of firearms, either in intentional killings or accidental ones.

            Mental illness is a completely separate issue from the point of view of government policy. It is also not dealt with at all well. But dealing with mental illness will not protect people from the misuse of firearms.

            In fact, I think that the oversupply of easily available firearms is the main reason why America is the most violent society on earth after Yemen. Since mental health professional cannot determine who is likely to commit firearm killings, the problems of mental health are not a reasonable consideration for government policy intended to reduce gun deaths either intentional or accidental.

            Based on my recent experience, for example, people with Alzheimer's and dementia can often be identified as dangerous driving a vehicle and should be stopped. That turns out to be an issue for government policy - but more so for medical and healthcare policy. But such people - who have a mental illness -  are less likely to kill someone with a firearm intentionally than your next door neighbor, or you for that matter.

            The US Supreme Court has by its actions and rhetoric has ceased to be legitimate. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot - over

            by Rick B on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 02:13:21 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Boy, do I disagree that "no one knows what causes (3+ / 0-)

    someone to take a gun and start shooting people."

    Want just one reason?

    Take a young man who has always been anxious and lonely, can't relate to other human beings and therefore can't feel their suffering, and was never allowed to express anger except in inappropriate and destructive ways.

    Add to that: the fact that nobody ever cared about this person enough to do anything about it.

    That person just might fit the profile of "someone" who might "take a gun and start shooting people."

    "They come, they come To build a wall between us We know they won't win."--Crowded House, "Don't Dream It's Over."

    by Wildthumb on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:31:48 AM PST

  •  Insurance, taxes, liability. (12+ / 0-)

    I have to have insurance on my car - if I have more than one car, I have to have insurance on all of my cars.  I have to license and register my car,  if I don't license it, if I don't have insurance the state can impound it until I obey the law.

    Require insurance on every single gun.  If a gun is not insured, it can be impounded until it is insured, and there will be a storage fee to be paid to get it back.  If you have one gun, you pay insurance on one gun, if you have 30 guns you pay insurance on 30 guns.  If a gun is stolen and it was not properly secured anyone injured by that gun should be able to sue the original owner.

    Tax ammunition - at something like 50% and use the proceeds for mental health programs.  

    As Lawrence says, we may not be able to stop people from owning guns, but we can make the barriers much higher.

  •  Over 50% of all mass murderers were diagnosed (9+ / 0-)

    with certain forms of mental illness prior to their killing sprees. That number is according to Ezra Klein citing Mother Jones' recent look. A more extensive survey can be found in an article which I recently cited from a criminologist who looked at this from the turn of the century onward. His name briefly escapes me, but I could find it again if needed. Kyril drew my attention to it. It shows that prior to the 1960's, there was a demographic distinction in who committed mass murders as well as who was killed which strikes me as noteworthy.

    Additionally, another study which I was looking at, which was a comprehensive study, showed that schizophrenics were twenty times more likely to commit homicides than other groups of people, particularly with co-morbidities like substance abuse. The study did not, unfortunately, indicate whether these were treated or untreated folks. I presume untreated, but that is a presumption only.

    I agree strongly that we need to reform our gun laws and also that we need to do so comprehensively, and I would argue that we need to do so perhaps more comprehensively than has been yet proposed. For example, the question of how guns should be stored has been left open-ended for "responsible" gun owners to figure out. Yet in the absence of specific legal guidelines, it's difficult to make this suggestion and make it stick.

    On the other hand, I see no reason to argue that we don't need stronger mental health access in the U.S., which is really a simple part of all health access for all people, which is a Progressive value, period. And I don't see why we don't push for this now. I'm not talking about data bases a la LaPierre. That's sick. I'm talking about things like screening tests in vulnerable populations, social supports where we lack these, having a separate number for mental health support compared with police support, educational campaigns to destigmatize mental health issues and to provide the facts (we've done this with AIDS) about different psychiatric diseases, to create in-patient care which isn't barbaric and isn't a prison setting either, which is where many mentally ill people wind up these days (especially those with a subset of illnesses), and to do other things like individually strengthen our societies so that we feel comfortable enough talking to each other and offering one another real and humane support when a loved one or ones' own self is struggling rather than isolating oneself. We value social isolationism and legal intervention in such a way that does no justice to any of these people.

    And to say "It's about guns" misses a huge point of fact.

    To which I would add to the two I have stated that it's also "about" a paramilitaristic police force who sets an inappropriate template for society.

    And that it's "about" our drug laws which foster a good deal of gun violence, plain and simple.  

    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

    by mahakali overdrive on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:42:22 AM PST

  •  You may take a look at our gun laws here in (9+ / 0-)

    Ireland. Each owner of a gun(s) must re-register each year, it cost roughly 6 dollars per gun. Simple and to the point; needless to say we don't have assault  rifles, everyone knows where the guns are and gun deaths are limited to a few per year, mainly between Limerick & Dublin drug dealers.

    •  did the IRA give up all their guns /nt (0+ / 0-)

      yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

      by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:47:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Most of them, yes. There are still some nuts at (5+ / 0-)

        large, but that's not the issue at hand here.

        •  in the US context it is (0+ / 0-)
          There is a wealth of knowledge out there for long-term storage of firearms, as many folks did it in the 90′s during the Ban craze then.  I already posted on how/where to hid things in your house or on your property, and talked about PVC tubes, but that was in reference to hiding various things, this is just about guns.
          The reasoning for caching your weapons is to keep them from any confiscation plans that might be had, but there are a few steps you need to take first.

          yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

          by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:06:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Admit It; We're Dumb! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RadGal70, incognita, Laconic Lib, a2nite

    "...every other form of stress or trauma take place in every nation in the world, but of all the developed democracies only in the United States do we have more than 10,000 gun-related deaths each year."

    But how many people in this country get this fact?  Not many, I'm afraid.  Contrary to what some people want to believe, the United States is NOT the sharpest chisel on the workbench.  We have seen some beautiful examples of this fact in the last few months -- the recent presidential campaign (don't forget Romney's binders full of women) and the NRA "news conference" of last Friday.

    Now some of this is honest stupidity, but a lot of it is elective stupidity.  The truth conflicts with the facts as we want to see them, so we play dumb and pretend that we don't get it.  Wayne LaPierre is a good example of this.  Either he gets it and doesn't WANT to get it, or else he is flat-out batshit stupid.

    And, unfortunately, I do not know any cure for stupid.  If it is inherent in a person, then nothing can cure it.  And if it is a matter of willful choice, then only a brain transplant will get the job done.

  •  I am one of the oldest geezers at Daily Kos. (7+ / 0-)

    I went to school in the 40s and 50s.  In the 40s, we worried about being bombed and had drills in school for that reason.  When I went to high school,  WWII was long over and forgotten by kids my age.  We never, ever worried about someone coming into the schools and killing our classmates.  The school doors were never locked until every student and teacher and administrators went home safely for the day, weekend or whatever.  Why was this so?  Because there were no assault weapons and 30 or more shot clips in the good old days.
    Homo sapiens sapiens has had deranged and evil members since the beginning of our species.  We are a warlike, aggressive species.  But, until the 20th century, we never had the means for individuals to own weapons and ammunition designed solely to kill large numbers of people.  And only in the good old USA and a few other violence prone countries, are these allowed among the general population.
    I am the original Mistress of Doom and Gloom.  I do not believe any meaningful legislation will be enacted to stop the insanity.  Sure, they will try to blame it all on the mentally ill, not the weapons that the mentally ill can buy, just as any so-called normal person can.  It is NOT the mentally ill.  It is the high capacity assault guns and the ammunition they require.  Unless and until our esteemed legislators finally admit this and resolve to change, we can expect this carnage to continue and be worse in the future.  Someone should turn off the silicon chip in Wayne LaPierre's head permanently.  He is both deranged and evil.  If there was a god, the gun industry would slither off into the night forever.
    Oh, by the way, my family has been impacted forever by the accidental death by gun of someone very dear to us.  It does not matter that it was an accident.  He died at 19 years of age.  He died 30 years ago this past September.

    If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything - unknown

    by incognita on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:54:57 AM PST

  •  My best friend, a 44 yr old Republican male, (9+ / 0-)

    talked about reasonable gun control with me on Friday. He has a Conceal and Carry, he hunts, he owns several guns and is a member of the NRA. He also thinks reinstating the ban on assault weapons and reducing access to magazine clips that hold 30 to 100 rounds is a reasonable control to put in place.

    So...there are areas where reasonable people can find common ground. All or nothing never works. It never has. It never will. And it won't work here.

    This is a great diary focusing on a specific issue. Now, if only I would see more diaries discussing mental health being re-funded and revamped, more discussions involving why our country has been culturally violent since its founding. At some point, we DO need to have that conversation. The US is uniquely immersed in a culture of violence. We watch the same movies, same video games but we react differently.

    And why the fuck aren't we talking about why it is that 72% of mass shooters are young, white males? If 72% of mass shooters were one armed lesbians, don't you think that would at least generate one diary on this blog?

    I can just about forgive the Brits for starting our revolutionary war and burning DC to the ground during the war of 1812 for giving us Led Zeppelin.

    by Pager on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:56:41 AM PST

  •  Other developed democracies (0+ / 0-)

    "Every other developed democracy has some form of effective gun control."

    Or, there is always Switzerland, a fairly developed democracy, last I looked. Maybe we should emulate the Swiss and satisfy those who think that the first clause of the 2nd Amendment has been neglected by arms proponents. Very simply, we place everyone 20-30 into militias and give them militia training, after which we require them to keep a gun at home (surely the commerce clause will cover this obligation). The Swiss now keep a tight lid on ammo, but I daresay we can adapt.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

  •  La Pierre makes $1 million annually as NRA head (8+ / 0-)

    "It is difficult to get a man to understand something , when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" Upton Sinclair

    •  I'm ashamed to say (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      incognita, annieli, lyvwyr101

      listening to Wayne Lapierre makes me want to smack him. To that extent he has a point.

      God be with you, Occupiers. God IS with you.

      by Hohenzollern on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:32:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I wanted to rip his face off and I claim to be (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        annieli, Hohenzollern, a2nite, lyvwyr101

        an  unrelenting liberal.

        If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything - unknown

        by incognita on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:37:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  the crust on the corner of his mouth made him (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          incognita, Hohenzollern

          seem even more deranged on MTP. Looked like some pasty residue from the green room

          Machine Gun Pie
          by Biker Billy

          When you bike into this pie, You’ll hear the rat tat tat of machine gun fire, which sounds just like a straight-piped Hog racing up an alley. It is a favorite of mine when I want something Italian but not pasta. This recipe is a variation on a classic ratatouille baked into a pie that will make veggie lover’s pizzas look anemic.

          1/2-cup sun-dried tomatoes
          1/2 cup boiling water
          1/4-cup extra virgin olive oil
          1 medium-size onion, cut into matchsticks
          4 canned chipotle peppers packed in adobo sauce, minced
          2 tablespoons chopped garlic
          1 medium-size eggplant, cut into 1-inch cubes
          2 medium-size zucchini, trimmed, halved lengthwise, and cut into 1-inch slices
          3 cups small brown mushrooms, cut in half
          1 medium-size yellow bell pepper, seeded and cut into 1-inch squares
          One 29-ounce can whole peeled tomatoes, quartered, with their juice
          2 tablespoons dried parsley
          2 tablespoons dried basil
          1 teaspoon dried oregano
          1 1/2 teaspoons salt
          1 teaspoon black pepper
          1 box piecrust mix, prepared for two 9-inch deep-dish pies
          4 cups shredded mozzarella cheese

          1. Place the sun-dried tomatoes in a small heatproof bowl and cover with the boiling water. Allow to cool to room temperature. Remove the tomatoes from the water, reserving the liquid. Coarsely chop the tomatoes and return to the liquid.
          2. Heat the olive oil in a large skillet over high heat. Add the onion and chipotles, stir well to coat with oil, and cook, stirring, until the onions begin to brown, 5 to 7 minutes. Reduce the heat to medium, add the garlic, eggplant, zucchini, mushrooms, and bell pepper, and cook, stirring a few times, until the vegetables are just tender, 5 to 7 minutes. Raise the heat to high, add the sun-dried tomatoes with their liquid, the peeled tomatoes, parsley, basil, oregano, salt, and black pepper, and cook, stirring a few times, until the sauce just thickens, 5 to 7 minutes. Remove from the heat and allow to cool to room temperature.
          3. Preheat the oven to 450° F. Divide the filling between the two piecrusts. Cover the top of each evenly with the mozzarella. Bake until the cheese and crusts are golden brown, 12 to 15 minutes. Remove from the oven and serve immediately.

          Makes two 9-inch pies

          yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

          by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:39:15 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  The one thing all mass MURDERERS (0+ / 0-)

    have in common is that they are mentally disturbed.
    I find it curious that you say "hundreds of millions of people with mental illness without deciding to kill people" when you are pushing for infringing on the Rights of hundreds of millions of Americans that have committed no crime.
    "2nd Amendment is an excuse"
    It is a right.  Or do you find the 4th simply an 'excuse' as well?
    This is the same 'sacrificing liberty for percieved security' the right-wing used to justify warrantless wiretaps, torture, Gitmo, etc.......but I suppose the amendments that protect against those are 'simply excuses' as well.

    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

    by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:22:45 AM PST

    •  How do we know that all mass murderers (0+ / 0-)

      are mentally disturbed? The response often given is, one would have to be mentally disturbed to commit mass murder. That's begging the question / circular logic. And it gets us nowhere, because if the only evidence that a person is disturbed is that they committed mass murder, that doesn't help us prevent those murders.

      "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

      by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:19:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  the second (0+ / 0-)

      is open to wide interpretation. the courts and the politics will follow the public.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:34:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not anymore than any other Amendment. (0+ / 0-)

        Sacrificing Constitutional liberties for percieved safety is the same regaurdless of which amendment

        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

        by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 03:36:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  again (0+ / 0-)

          it is sacrificng nothing. it is putting the emphasis back on "well regulated" and "Militias."

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 03:44:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "well regulated" refers to a "milita" (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fuzzyguy, rockhound

            "Shall not be infringed" refers to the "Right of the people to keep an bear arms"
            And you are willing to sacrifice something that is a liberty people have now....and you are doing it for percieved security.
             The right-wing did the same to the 4th with warrantless wiretaps.
            I reject both instances of sacrificing constitutional liberties for percieved safety.

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 03:52:17 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  the individual right (0+ / 0-)

              is a new development, for the courts. but more importantly, the fourth refers to a right that is universally recognized. however one wants to intepret the second, it is archaic. this country will catch up to the rest of the developed democratic world, just as it did on other once protected but archaic "rights." it will happen. we will not forever remain a historical anomaly.

              The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

              by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 03:58:47 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I find your clairvoyance (0+ / 0-)

                less than convincing.
                Constitutional rights are not archaic as a result of your say-so.
                Your dismissiveness of Constitutinal Liberties is something I have already heard out of the right-wing.
                I rejected it then & I reject it now.

                Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 04:05:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  the constitution (0+ / 0-)

                  once legalized slavery. it evolves as people evolve. the demographic shifts speak for themselves. the country is changing for the better, and it will catch up to the rest of the developed world.

                  The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                  by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 04:10:25 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Rejecting slavery was expanding liberty. (0+ / 0-)

                    Gun Control is contracting liberty.
                    "demographic shifts speak for themselves"
                    Demographic shifts are generally for the expansion of liberty.
                    Further, Constitutional Rights exist specifically to protect the Rights of the minority (a significant minority, in this case)....your blase attitude towards the Rights of people you find to be 'other', notwithstanding.

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 05:50:49 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  you do realize (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Val

                      that a lot of people thought rejecting slavery infringed on their liberty. they went to war over it. but now as then real liberty will prevail. because as the rest of the developed world has figured out, gun control is about expanding liberty. the liberty to live in peace.

                      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 05:56:13 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  "a lot people" (0+ / 0-)

                        A lot of people were wrong.
                        'Liberty' has a meaning
                        "NOUN: 1)The condition of being free from restriction or control.
                                     2)Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.
                                      3)A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference: the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights."

                        You don't get to hijack the definition of 'liberty', because you are uncomfortable infringing upon it.

                        "liberty to live in peace"
                        1) The GOP gave this argument when pushing for Warrantless Wiretaps, Gitmo & torture.
                        I rejected that argument then, and I do now.
                        2) Hence, murder, assault etc is illegal.
                        I am surrounded by people with firearms, and they don't infringe on my rights....it is you attempting to infringe on Constitutional Liberties for your perceived security.

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 07:13:49 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  sorry (0+ / 0-)

                          but over the course of human history the overwhelming consensus agrees with my interpretation. the people of europe and japan and korea and australia do not consider their liberties infringed by their gun laws. there is near universal recognition of what constitutes liberty and rights, and gun ownership is not part of it. your interpretation is an anomaly and an archaicism. it will not prevail forever in this country. we will catch up with the rest of the developed democratic world. it is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.

                          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                          by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 08:19:58 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  They don't have a Constitution. (0+ / 0-)

                            Again, your clairvoyance, although entertaining, isn't convincing.

                            You want to inhibit the Constitutional Liberties of innocent people for perceived security.
                            The right-wing agreed with you in the wake of 9/11.
                            I disagree in both instances.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 08:25:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  *A constitution that protects the right to keep (0+ / 0-)

                            and bear arms.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 08:26:45 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  and ours is open to interpretation (0+ / 0-)

                            heller was an anomaly over the course of our own history. we will not always have extremist right wing courts.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 08:41:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  "extremist" (0+ / 0-)

                            Says the person wanting to limit personal liberty for perceived security.
                            But, please, do tell, what do you want to 'change back', if the current interpretation of the 2nd is 'an anomaly'.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 08:49:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  you don't get it (0+ / 0-)

                            the overwhelming majority of people in the developed democratic world does not accept your view that gun ownership constitutes personal liberty. the overwhelming majority of people in the developed democratic world agrees with my view that it does not. a large majority of americans already supports much more gun control, and both the demographics of gun ownership and the demographics of gun control are moving steadily toward more gun control. so who is the extremist?

                            i expect a future court, that isn't controlled by wingnuts such as roberts, alito, scalia and thomas to overturn heller and rule that there is no individual right. given public opinion and demographics it is inevitable.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:09:11 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  the overwhelming majority of people in (0+ / 0-)

                            the developed world isn't American, doesn't live under the constitution, nor participates in our democratic process. Their opinions are irrelevant to this discussion.

                            "demographics of gun control are steadily moving towards more gun control"
                            Factually Incorrect

                            "i expect...."
                            sigh
                            I'll focus on the US past & present, the Constitution, Liberty & reality.
                            I'll let you handle the rest.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:48:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  enjoy your delusions (0+ / 0-)

                            and check the polls markos posted, and the polls on latino and asian american opinion. we will catch up to the rest of the modern world. it's already happening.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:52:38 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Uh-huh. (0+ / 0-)

                            There's a reason I have posted links to polls, the text of the 2nd, & the definition of the word 'liberty'.......and you have stuck with clairvoyance.

                            One of these attempts to 'prove' a point of view, is an example of 'delusions'.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 10:59:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  cry liberty all you want (0+ / 0-)

                            outside of your echo chamber, no one hears it. read the latest polls. read the demographics. believe what you want. history is moving forward.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 12:06:04 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I never 'cried liberty' (0+ / 0-)

                            I was forced to 'define liberty'.
                            "read the latest polls"
                            I linked the latest trends.
                            "read the demographics"
                            Read the Bill of Rights.
                            "believe what you want"
                            I don't need your permission to do 'believe what I want'....because it is my RIGHT.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 01:43:20 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  the rights of the majority (0+ / 0-)

                            will prevail. history moves forward.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 02:37:14 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Constitutional Rights exist to protect the Rights (0+ / 0-)

                            of the minority.
                            But an interesting (and blatantly unAmerican) take on what 'rights' entail.
                            Rights are not subject to popularity votes.....however, elections are.
                            I will not support infringements on Constitutional liberties, nor will I vote for those that do.
                            "History moves forward"
                            And meaningless slogans are repeated.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 03:41:14 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  try yelling "fire" in a crowded theater (0+ / 0-)

                            and thank you for so well representing why gun control is inevitable.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 04:37:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Non Sequitur (0+ / 0-)

                            and you're welcome for the actual facts provided to you.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 04:47:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  yes (0+ / 0-)

                            personal facts, demographic fantasies. thanks again.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 05:27:25 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What "personal facts"? (0+ / 0-)

                            Certainly not the definition of 'liberty'--that was the dictionary's
                            Can't be the text of the 2nd Amendment--that was the founding father's.
                            Couldn't be the long term trend of support for the 2nd Amendment--that was Pew Research Center's.

                            A 'personal fact' would be something more akin to saying "history moves forward", as some sort of justification for infringing on Constitutional liberties for perceived security.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 08:46:07 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  sorry (0+ / 0-)

                            read the polls i linked. and as i wrote, the founders are irrelevant. you may enjoy the 18th century, but this is the 21st

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 10:08:48 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What the founders created isn't irrelevent. (0+ / 0-)

                            But you are now coming out in support of sacrificing liberty, while poo-pooing the Bill of Rights and those that created it.
                            An interesting tactic.
                            Good luck with that.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 10:50:21 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i know this is hard (0+ / 0-)

                            but my definition of liberty is different than yours. mine is in line with that of the mass of modern humanity. yours isn't. mine is in line with that of the demographic trends in this country. yours isn't.

                            but do keep it up. when the backlash comes, and heller is overturned, and gun control turns out to be much more strict than people like me now advocate, you will have no one to blame but yourself. and no one will care.

                            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 10:58:25 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Your definition of liberty is different (0+ / 0-)

                            than Miriam-Webster's.
                            "demographic trends"
                            Like this one?
                            "when the backlash comes"
                            It is. 2014. But I don't think the backlash will be what you think it is.
                            "you will have no one to blame but yourself and no one will care"
                            Clairvoyance again. Super.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 11:11:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

  •  Did some research.., (4+ / 0-)

    ...about the australian massacre at Port Arthur where the shooter killed 35 and wounded 24 and provoked the crackdown on weapons in Australia.

    The shooter was from New Town.

    Rule #7...If you supported the Iraq war, you don't get to complain about the national debt.

    by suspiciousmind on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:30:11 AM PST

  •  Nicely done diary. (5+ / 0-)

    I'm sick to death of the pro-gun fetish nuts dictating the terms of not only the public policy, but also the public debate about the public policy.

    Fuck the pro-gun lobby.  They can claim some love for the 2nd Amendment til the cows come home.  But it's becoming clearer and clearer, the hyper-aggressive pro-gun fetish nuts are just f'ing nuts.

    Screw 'em.  The NRA is irrelevant.  Anyone who stands with the NRA should be treated with the same contempt and should be considered equally irrelevant.

    "The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." ~ Steven Biko

    by Marjmar on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:32:00 AM PST

  •  I hope you're right, and sooner rather than (6+ / 0-)

    later.

    Four years and counting since a murderer invaded my hometown and my university, killing six people and wounding numerous others, and no one did a Gods-damned thing. In fact, a stupid Federal court insists now my state must allow gun nuts to carry their weapons concealed, making sure that tragedies like NIU are MORE likely to happen.

    Fuck this "oh the NRA's too powerful" bull. No, they're not. We went up against the Koch machine last election and we won. We can win on this and we must. I'm tired of the constant shooting deaths in Chicago every weekend. I'm tired of looking at every mass shooting and wondering where the next one will be. At another Unitarian Universalist church, like Knoxville? Perhaps another university. How about another mall, or movie theater, or even a busy highway?

    This shit has to stop. And we have to stop it, because no one else will. They haven't, and our children, and friends, and neighbors, and fellow Americans, keep dying needlessly or suffering from gunshot wounds. Hell, a Representative being shot and people dying all around her wasn't enough to make people get up and do something.

    So we have to. All of us.

  •  I never made the connection (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis

    between that shooting and that song. I guess I never really listened to the lyrics, and I was kind of young when it all happened. I do remember the shooting though, and how shocked and frightened people became.

    "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

    by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:36:33 AM PST

  •  Lizzy Borden took an Ax and gave her mother (11+ / 0-)

    40 whacks.

    And then when that was done, she gave her father 41.

    She did not, however, go down to the local school house and murder 25 more people.

    Because that's really, really fucking hard to do with an Ax.

    "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

    by JesseCW on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:39:31 AM PST

    •  nearby SWAT teams are now more ready for (0+ / 0-)

      drive by axings

      Behold! The Johnston, Rhode Island SWAT team and their gear. According to providencejournal.com, taxpayer largesse has equipped Johnston’s paramilitary-style police with two Freightliner tractor-trailers, twelve Humvees; 30 M-16 rifles and conversion parts to transform them into M-4 weapons; 599 M-16 magazines containing about 18,000 rounds; a sniper targeting calculator; night vision equipment, 44 bayonets for ceremonial purposes; five generators from M1 tanks; and 23 snow blowers.

      yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

      by annieli on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:50:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oy. (4+ / 0-)

    Watching the rerun of Meet the Press on MSNBC now.  Wayne LaPierre refused to budge an inch on anything.  To his credit, David Gregory did ask good questions, and brought up how there was an armed guard at Columbine and Virginia Tech.  LaPierre simply dismissed anything that didn't fit into his worldview.  Gregory pointed this out as well, that LaPierre had just said that, per his armed guards in schools position, that every little bit helps. But then when other gun regulation issues were brought up, even if only marginally effective (i.e., still helps a little bit), LaPierre didn't care.

    Wow.  And then of course, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) also refused to budge on the issue.

  •  Impressed Lately How Much The Self-Defense Fantasy (3+ / 0-)

    is tied into the opposition to gun control. It is the rare person who owns a gun who will ever use it for self defense. More likely to be have the gun be involved in a Trayvon Martin like disaster or an accidental shooting. Let's accept that one takes comfort in the self defense aspect.  Do you need an assault weapon or a 30 round clip? That is really taking on a belief in rather stark societal breakdown. Or maybe one has a personality that they feel can inspire dozens to want inflict violent destruction on you. Maybe that's it.

    •  You have citations for your obviously biased (0+ / 0-)

      claims?

      I don't think so.

      •  Gary Kleck Is The Global Warming Denying (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Laconic Lib, annieli

        scientist for the NRA. They often cite his studies that show millions of uses of guns for self defense each year. He's full of shit..

        Then there is this.
        Guns at home more likely to be used stupidly than in self-defense

        •  Leo. The only real statistic I have on this is (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fuzzyguy

          personal.  In all the years that I've been married (41 now), we've only had one attempt at a home invasion at our household.

          I wasn't home at the time, but my wife was successful in repelling the break in, with gun in hand.  No shots fired.

          So, for the only statistic that really counts, it helped my wife.

          •  I Am Sorry Your Wife Had To Experience That (0+ / 0-)

            So I can understand it is personal with you and you get frustrated with people like me who have never owned or fired a gun who seem to be casting aspersions on gun owners.  I can understand the feeling of security that owning can give and you give personal testimony to it. I think we agree on limits on high volume clips and properly categorized assault weapons. Know you must resent when the people who agree with you on a liberal site like seem to attack gun owners in general.

            One of the reasons I have respect for what your wife went through and one of the reasons I haven't considered guns for self defense is earthquakes. I have lived through major ones in California and tried to yell at family members to get in the doorway. My voice did not sound assertive at all. More like a cross between a dog whimpering loudly and bad hing squeaking.  Don't even think I pronounced my words.

  •  Gunophilia is a serious mental disorder (3+ / 0-)

    or at least a strong symptom.
    Why hasn't the APA addressed this?

  •  Are African Americans "gun nuts"? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ParaHammer, fuzzyguy

    It's a legitimate question isn't it?  I see a lot of cites to the number of gun homicides in the US.

    Total homicides were 15, 094 in 2010.  Of that total,  5770 (38%) where black offenders.  African Americans represent about 14% to 15% of the population.  So, if any group is more responsible, demographically for gun crime,  if you have to FEAR anyone, it appears obvious who the perpetrators are more likely to be, doesn't it?

    Now, that is not racially sensitive...and I am not a bigot.  I pretty much grew up in multi-cultural communities across the US and served with many races in the service.  

    But, it is obvious that no one is really looking at the facts.  The fear is emotional.

    There is a lot of knowledge that can be gleaned from the FBI crime statistics, particularly the FBI expanded homicide data.

    If you want to know gender, age, weapon used, circumstance and race, it is all available HERE

    I don't find arguments about gun control to be very useful, because most people are ignorant but feel free to bloviate.

  •  We need to have this conversation. (2+ / 0-)

    And we will have this conversation, as a site, as Progressives, Democrats, and as a nation.

    No matter how often it sends the usual suspects to the fainting couch.

    Fuck you, I put on pants yesterday.

    by MBNYC on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:15:30 PM PST

  •  Beautiful, inspiring diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cany, Laurence Lewis

    Thank you, Laurence.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:40:19 PM PST

  •  Can't understand? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cany, Pluto

    I think you are making a lot of unwarranted assumptions where you say we can't know why people would want to mow down others.  Just because you and the people you hang out with can't come up with answers doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of people that do know.

    Other than that I liked this post. It basically comes down to how easy we make it to kill here in the US. Guns kill as easily as pressing a button.

    •  actually (0+ / 0-)

      we never will. people don't like that there are things beyond comprehension and control, but there are. people with nearly identical biographies as the shooters don't start shooting, and there are countless more of them.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:31:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's NOT about guns, Lawrance (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Laurence Lewis

    It's about a lobbying group that has managed to enforce its will on Congress (both houses) by contested primaries for non conformers.  

    This is about a well financed and mobilized group that had their response ready when the Newtown tragedy occurred and as a strategic move went dark for a week, effectively stopping debate (their facebook went dark) among their supporters until they fine tuned their talking points, gave their supporters  (the zealot faithful) marching orders and waited for the first furor to die down to go on the attack.  

    To the NRA, this is only a battle in the continuing war to enforce their will on Congress.   That is what this is about.

    We will not achieve success until the frame is changed.  They are ready for banning high capacity clips, military style weapons built for firepower, and assault weapon ban.

    We are responding to a bouncing ball on a tilted playing field, we need to change the playing field.  

    Possible frame changers:

    A) Follow the Constitution: Require all gun owners to be members of the State Militia (i.e National Guard), subject to their rules.

    B) Redefine 'arms': Reclassify assault weapons or all semiautomatic weapons as WMD or limited WMD, regulate accordingly.

    Until the frame is changed to neuter the NRA's arguments and threats, then this debate is another exercise in futility.  But, before anything else, the playing field of '2nd amendment rights' must be addressed and re-framed to support a more reasonable point of view.

    Otherwise, we will continue to see the firearms fringe (for lack of a better descriptor) contest primaries and have their supporters elected to positions of responsibility.  Resulting in an even more radicalized Congress

    ... the watchword of true patriotism: "Our country - when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right." - Carl Schurz; Oct. 17, 1899

    by NevDem on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 12:53:16 PM PST

  •  Peel the onion down to the core, Turkana (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fuzzyguy, Laurence Lewis, annieli
    This country will catch up to the rest of the developed democratic world. It is only a matter of time and needlessly lost lives.
    The American Culture would not exist without guns. It never has. Guns are how they came to seize and exploit this continent. Guns have been the survival of non-indigenous Americans for as long as they have existed as a culture. Guns are what the United States does for a living. More than half of all tax revenues subsidize their development, and the extended defense industry represents the lion's share of our GDP.

    I promise you, the only way you will see your vision is when the US is broken up into several independent sovereign nations. And, that is only a matter of time.



    They are "War Rations."
    Can we please call food stamps by their proper name?

    by Pluto on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:29:30 PM PST

  •  I don't believe this. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mahakali overdrive
    Every time there is a mass shooting, news reporters dig into the personal history of the murderer, as if something in the biography will provide a clue. It never does. [...] Bob Geldof's answer remains the best explanation, because there is no explanation.
    I appreciate the sentiment, the trying to distance all ourselves from the event, to look at the events as if it's something that Martians from outer space did.  But that seems to me to be too convenient.  

    We run into the same problem when trying to understand even worse phenomena, like genocide, labeling it as incomprehensible, some weird thing that happened that nobody can ever understand and still remain human.

    I think more honest and less comforting appraisals are needed than that.  If you don't try to understand it, you can't do anything about it.  Yeah, let's control the weapons and who gets them, but we still HAVE to understand what makes these things happen, no matter how uncomfortable it makes us feel.

  •  Not true (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mahakali overdrive, fuzzyguy
    No one knows what causes someone to take a gun and start shooting people. No one ever will.
    Here's an account by someone who had the same feelings as Adam Lanza when he was a teenager.

    Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity. -- Alvy Ray Smith

    by John Q on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 01:35:15 PM PST

  •  Why gun owners are going to Hell (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, lyvwyr101

    Not all gun owners.  

    I was not raised in a militarized society, and do not want my children raised that way.  In a militarized society, might makes right.  The one's with the guns will always win.  However, I do not believe Jesus Christ nor our Founding Fathers advocated a militarized America.

    Senators, Representatives, Governors...Many of them have semi-automatic weapons.  The do not want to give them up.  How vain, selfish, and narcissistic they cling to their little "gun toys" while 4 and 5 and 6 year olds are dying.  
    It's mainly the same Senators, Representatives, and Governors who cling to their little "tax cuts" while America goes over the cliff.
    It's also mainly the same Senators, Representatives, and Governors who tell us we should have God in our churches, schools, and women's uterii.  Force childbirth and then mow them down...!?!?!?!?

    If they don't go to Hell for their vanity, selfishness, and narcissism, they will be their for their hypocricy...!!!!    

  •  Guns, violence and the Judeo-Christian Bible (0+ / 0-)

    This article from Alternet is an excellent treatise regarding America's acceptance by many fundamentalist Christians, who embrace a literal interpretation of the Bible, also embrace a literal interpretation of the Second amendment, willfully accepting violence and the modern tools of violence, guns:

    "Our peculiar hierarchy of priorities may be due in part to the influence of Abrahamic religion on Western Civilization and the unique standing accorded to the Bible in American Christianity, specifically. The Bible amalgamates the mythology and legal codes of a specific kind of culture: a clan-based tribal society in which herdsmen struggling for survival in an arid and increasingly denuded environment. Males competed to control females and territory while maintaining the purity of bloodlines and inheritance; gods that were modeled on warlords competed for fealty. Consequently, while codes governing sexuality and blasphemy were strict, codes governing violence were complicated.
    Yahweh (GOD) himself originated as a war god. Non-Hebrews were regarded with hostility and indeed, much of the founding story of the Israelite people comprises tales of triumphal genocide. The violence in the Bible is so extreme that it defines vast portions of the book:

    [Edmund Leach] looked at the Bible through the eyes of a communications engineer and asked: what message are these authors trying to get through to the reader? The answer, Leach thought, was that they were trying to obscure the fact that mankind began through incest (Adam and Eve) and so the strategy was to compile a list of atrocities so heinous that, in the end, the original incest would come to look like a harmless act."

  •  You are focusing on the wrong statistic. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rockhound, FrankRose

    The goal is to reduce the number of deaths, not the number of deaths by gun.  It doesn't matter what tool the murders are using, what matters is the societal factors that cause people to commit murder and the rate of those murders.  You need to focus on the cause not the tool.

    When considering the intentional homicide rates it is quite clear that ready access to firearms in the US is NOT the problem since our rate is middle of the road.  Banning the guns won't save anyone, it will merely change the tool that is being used.

  •  Try this (0+ / 0-)

    on for size. Try not to wretch

    There is nothing more exciting than the truth. - Richard P. Feynman

    by pastol on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 11:48:47 PM PST

  •  follow the money, folks (0+ / 0-)

    the NRA is a strawman.....ask yourselves who profits from the sale of weapons?????????????? I believe many of our congress are influenced by lobbyists from these gun/weapons manufacturing. So why not outlaw the manufacture of these weapons????? Can't cut into profits, now, can we?

Caipirinha, Pat K California, Angie in WA State, jo fish, vicki, filkertom, daninoah, badger, Debby, chuco35, exNYinTX, RubDMC, rasbobbo, stevej, Chrisfs, Brit, Dube, Steven Payne, Sychotic1, Diana in NoVa, xyz, lyvwyr101, rogue5, historys mysteries, marina, democracy inaction, stitchmd, Burned, komogo, Phil S 33, kaliope, aaronburr, Pluto, mightymouse, Asinus Asinum Fricat, noweasels, Over the Edge, redcedar, BachFan, Captain Sham, Debbie in ME, 417els, Gorette, jpw, Magnifico, arlene, luckydog, blueoasis, twigg, gpoutney, The Hindsight Times, Pager, middleagedhousewife, MBNYC, suspiciousmind, kurt, lynneinfla, shaharazade, Friend of the court, ZenTrainer, Tamar, john07801, BeninSC, DWG, newpioneer, HCKAD, jayden, jnhobbs, kdnla, TomP, rogerdaddy, Hanging Up My Tusks, temptxan, luckylizard, Uncle Bob, statsone, cadfile, greengemini, tari, shopkeeper, CamillesDad1, DefendOurConstitution, ringer, UnaSpenser, elziax, dskoe, Dark UltraValia, MichiganChet, stevenwag, vadasz, DaNang65, hamsisu, Nannyberry, nocynicism, FogCityJohn, flitedocnm, Lady Libertine, elginblt, Publius2008, cocinero, Anne was here, StatDoc, indubitably, translatorpro, no way lack of brain, annieli, cedar163, Tommye, La Gitane, RedlandsDem, lighttheway, deeproots, NegaJoules, dull knife, mrsgoo, Hohenzollern, incognita, BarackStarObama, Tommy Aces, ratcityreprobate, weinerschnauzer, mudfud27, allergywoman, Azazello, deltadoc, Porterhouse, i saw an old tree today, lurkyloo, David54, tb92, a2nite, martinjedlicka, This old man, oldflowerchild, wxorknot, AverageJoe42, Glen The Plumber, artmanfromcanuckistan, Marjmar, Upie, Blue Bell Bookworm, alpaca farmer, ericf, nolagrl, Late Again, remembrance, dear occupant, DustBunny, aresea, Urban Owl, Yo Bubba, vapidamerica, Jeff Murdoch, mindara, ohbalto, LaraJones, bob152, the oklahoma kid, furrfu, CJ WIHorse, Demeter Rising, BubbaNerdus, geonello, chicklet, rottnjohn, Baileymama, mailman27, ConfusedSkyes, sparkysgal, The Marti, gourmandmama, Blackhawks

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site