Skip to main content

So. I have some friends in an Internet chat room. It's a fairly close knit group, and I enjoy going there.

Well, at least, I used to. The woman who runs the chatroom and the subsequent forum is a lady I've known for years. I love her dearly, and almost view her as a second mom.

However, she's...an extreme conservative, as are several others in the room.

I haven't visited there ever since before the Sandy Hook shooting. I was even less inclined to visit after it happened, because I knew what I would hear. In spite of the fact that twenty children and six adults were massacred in a horrifying way, I knew that they would all be discussing it. I knew that they would stand in defense of gun rights. I knew they would in all likelihood agree with arming teachers to the teeth in the schools, since the only way to prevent government fascism is to have a well-armed populace.  And of course, Obama's going to take away everyone's guns and leave us all defenseless. Or something to that effect.

The honest truth is this.

I don't want to hear it.

I don't care to hear it.

I don't want to listen to their paranoia when I am sick of hearing of innocent people being shot to hell at least once a month or more in the national news, or of hearing of an abusive boyfriend on my local news who shot and killed his ex girlfriend and her toddler in cold blood, which is a story that's sadly all too common.

I'm tired of being mocked for my liberal beliefs, or of hearing Obama trashed while Romney's held up as some kind of job creating saint. I'm tired of being silenced and shut down at every turn. I'm tired of feeling like I'm the only sane voice of reason in a sea of blind stupidity. I'm tired of being told I'm a sheep because I voted for and supported Obama. I'm tired of being talked down to and dismissed.

I've put up with such things from them for awhile while biting my tongue, however...I think this might be the final straw for me. I'm done. There's no way I'm going to listen to a bunch of right wing supporters shriek at me about gun rights when twenty children lie cold in their graves, leaving grieving parents and shattered lives behind that may never be put back together. I don't want to hear them try to justify their position to me when I suggest that we need reasonable regulations and tell them that no, Obama isn't going to take away all the guns and melt them into scrap metal, and how there is no damn good reason for civilians outside of the military to have access to extremely high-powered fire arms. And perhaps there'd be fewer shootings if there were fewer guns. I also don't want to hear the excuse about how it's not guns that kill people, it's crazy people that kill people. While yes that may technically be true, I think we could go a long way in keeping the public safer by taking steps to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of the mentally deranged. This is where background checks could be extremely effective, as well, might I add.

However, if you still stand in defense of the second amendment rights and the NRA even as the body count continues to climb because of madmen with machine guns, then I only have this to say in closing.

I don't want to hear it.

11:55 PM PT: EDIT: Holy crap, Rec list? I'm amazed and flattered. Thank you! I never expected this!

Originally posted to Liberal Heretic on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 11:44 PM PST.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

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

  •  Tip Jar (172+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    worldlotus, blueoasis, chantedor, DeadHead, yet another liberal, Free Jazz at High Noon, Lefty Coaster, cany, dear occupant, elwior, Demi Moaned, Jane Lew, Miniaussiefan, buckstop, Over the Edge, FloridaSNMOM, CwV, avsp, cyeko, annrose, Anne was here, 88kathy, Quilldriver, Homer177, Sailorben, Sembtex, chicagobleu, rb608, WSComn, terrybuck, Dobber, janmtairy, DSC on the Plateau, The Marti, newpioneer, RUNDOWN, DRo, Elizaveta, Ex Con, pioneer111, Apost8, cybersaur, Lilyvt, CoExistNow, tin woodswoman, Eric Twocents, thenekkidtruth, Lying eyes, Lovo, a2nite, allensl, cassandraX, opinionated, collardgreens, Only Needs a Beat, liz dexic, zerelda, eeff, gulfgal98, DeathDlr73, Mickquinas, Its a New Day, thomask, Yo Bubba, mamamorgaine, yawnimawke, Pescadero Bill, i saw an old tree today, Shotput8, JKTownsend, hooktool, jck, bnasley, poco, jaywillie, Daulphin, gramofsam1, JVolvo, Calamity Jean, arizonablue, frisco, Hedwig, detroitmechworks, Velocity, commonmass, radarlady, tofumagoo, MadRuth, Mr Stagger Lee, HoundDog, The Hindsight Times, chicagoblueohio, splashy, mamamedusa, agincour, sodalis, oldpotsmuggler, prettygirlxoxoxo, dotsright, Killer of Sacred Cows, Sychotic1, Truza, cassandracarolina, DWG, FindingMyVoice, Eowyn9, spooks51, greycat, Smoh, sujigu, petulans, Joy of Fishes, Bry, wintergreen8694, HeyMikey, emelyn, DarkLadyNyara, Yamara, eru, kevinpdx, Amayi, ladybug53, Renee, mofembot, wbr, FogCityJohn, Mark Mywurtz, DianeNYS, Shockwave, Paulie200, Lorikeet, sidnora, zukesgirl64, Chaddiwicker, 3goldens, Late Again, ATFILLINOIS, NonnyO, glorificus, 417els, litoralis, bluesheep, wader, 1Nic Ven, Dirtandiron, davidincleveland, steamed rice, soarbird, nominalize, elginblt, Vetwife, third Party please, rlochow, pitbullgirl65, corvaire, mskitty, Syoho, JDRhoades, Purple Priestess, burana, pragmaticidealist, Lonely Texan, Most Awesome Nana, twigg, WearyIdealist, DuzT, salustra, bontemps2012, Ed in Montana, lost my ocean, stormicats, radical simplicity

    "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

    by Liberal Heretic on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 11:42:10 PM PST

  •  This here is one humongous internet chat room (42+ / 0-)

    And for certain the extreme conservatives are not in charge.   So you're two steps ahead already.  But don't be surprised when you also find yourself hearing here, that which you don't want to hear.

  •  I don't blame you for not wanting to hear it (36+ / 0-)

    Engaging these people on this topic will likely lead to a substantial loss of time and energy.

    Some people can be enlightened, others are set in their ways. There are people on this site who regularly, and intentionally, engage with these types of people, on FaceBook mostly, in an effort to "chip-away," at them, so to speak. They've even made progress with a few of the easier-to-reach ones.

    It's not a task to take on lightly, and requires a keen sense of knowing which battles to fight and which ones to pass over.

    And a shitload of patience and irrefutable facts ready on-demand.

    That's not to say echo chambers are healthy either. You need dissent, but the stress of trying to convert people so set in their ways can be more than a person can bear.

    That's my take on it, FWIW.

    And venting is good. ;)




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
    ~ Jerry Garcia

    by DeadHead on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 12:41:50 AM PST

    •  Agreed! (11+ / 0-)
      Engaging these people on this topic will likely lead to a substantial loss of time and energy.
      How true, so I don't waste my efforts.  If one knows the truth then one should further explore that truth and leave the rest behind.  

      Darwin was right:  With evolution, over time some species advance, others fall by the way-side.  And some might consider closed-minded Fox News loving conservatives their own separate species.  I know I can't personally relate to them any more than I can have an intelligent conversation with a Lemur.

      Let 'em fall by the wayside.  

      "Please don't dominate the rap Jack, if you got nothing new to say." - Robert Hunter

      by WSComn on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 07:41:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I used to hang out on a forum (12+ / 0-)

        that was populated by probably 5 to 1 conservatives, and the conservatives were much farther to the right than the progressives were to the left.  It also happens that gun rights was the "pet issue" of many of the conservatives on there.  It was IMPOSSIBLE to have a sane discussion on that forum about guns.  Terrifying bunch, really--they want to see everyone and anyone armed.  NO gun law was ever considered reasonable by this group.  

        I tried and tried to make a sane case, but finally it clicked, "What the fuck am I doing here, wasting my time with these braindead teabaggers????"  

        I made sure a few choice idiots knew what I thought of them, then I got off of there forever.  Like LH, I checked in after Sandy Hook, hoping desperately that I would see evidence that some sort of sanity and humanity had set in.....and was sadly disappointed but not surprised.  This tragedy is making them cling even harder to their guns and hatred of Obama.  

        This generation of "conservatives" in America is completely lost.  They've swallowed the koolaid.  They are of no use to civilized society.  

        Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

        by Mark Mywurtz on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 01:09:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  You're simply deaf. (7+ / 0-)

      Ending the Drug War would make the bulk gun violence disappear practically overnight, but I bet you don't want to hear that either.

      I trust my gun-owning neighbors far more than I trust the police, who have no legal obligation to protect you or your family.

      I trust the woman with a concealed carry on the train more than I trust sith-like servants of plutocracy like Diane Feinstein or Lamar Smith.

      I even trust the redneck with an arsenal more than I trust a President and Congress who are willing and eager to turn the FBI on Occupy protestors.

      The entire Bill of Rights has been systematically torn to shreds by this moral crusade or that senseless tragedy; by emotions running high on both sides of the partisan charade.

      I don't want to hear it. . .

      . . . is the same sweeping judgement and twisted denial brought us the devastation of the War on Drugs, with hundreds of thousands dead, destroyed neighborhoods and communities and millions behind bars - the largest prison population the world. Larger than China and larger than Russia.

      I don't want to hear it. . .

      . . . brought us SWAT teams kicking down doors, shooting dogs and killing law-abiding citizens, then seizing private property without warrant or trial.

      I don't want to hear it . . .

      . . . has cordoned us in "Free Speech Zones" and the FBI aiding autocratic Mayors in shutting down all but the most ineffective protests.

      I don't want to hear it. . . .

      . . . has given us a government the right to detain and kill United States citizens without trial or warrant, anywhere and at any time.

      I don't want to hear it. . .

      . . . has allowed the super-wealthy to buy out our government that gives them whatever they want and absolves them of punishment in the faces of fraud and aiding the same murderers that our government is claiming to protect us from.

      I don't want to hear it. . .

      No, you really don't, do you?

      I hope you get better.

      The whole decade needs an asterisk.

      by James Kresnik on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:42:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

        •  I'm with you! (17+ / 0-)

          After all, there are plenty of "responsible" gun owners that end up killing their ex's, spouses, and anyone around them when they decide they want to kill themselves afterward.

          All a person has to do is pay a little bit of attention to the news.

          Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

          by splashy on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 10:04:59 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  There are no responsible gun owners (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Paulie200, estreya, sockpuppet, lgmcp, 1Nic Ven

            ...only lucky ones.  Lucky, in that their guns have not yet been used to murder anyone.

            It is the height of arrogance to own machines designed to kill people, and to say that somehow makes us all more safe!

            •  Excuse me? (6+ / 0-)

              That my weapon has never harmed anyone is no matter of luck. It is the prudence that I use when I store and carry it, the judgement that I display in not advertising that I am armed to those around me, and the morals that I hold in not choosing to use my weapon for any illegal purpose.

              Luck indeed. Your condeceding tone, and the tone of those similar, is the reason that even here- where people agree on at least 75% of ALL the things, a productive and reasonable discussion on guns and their role in society is not possible.

              •  There is no role for guns in society (0+ / 0-)

                That's my opinion.  I see no role for guns in society.  Guns are the tools of soldiers.  I have no desire to live in a war zone, when we are not at war.  

                In what way does that make me condescending?

                •  Must not live in a rural area. n/t (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  bontemps2012, Neo Control

                  "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." -Will Rogers

                  by mlbx2 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 04:28:19 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well, *I* live in a rural area. (6+ / 0-)

                    I don't have a gun.
                    I don't want a gun.
                    I have no use for a gun.

                    I understand that most of my neighbors feel otherwise, but that doesn't make my point of view any less valid.

                    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                    by UntimelyRippd on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 04:31:03 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I don't (0+ / 0-)

                      argue your points. Your are entirely entitled to them. What I have a problem with is the "I see no role for guns in society" idea.  The poster doesn't know what I and other people have to deal with on a semi-regular basis.  And I am not refering to hunting/home defense or anything else human related. Cost of living in the woods, I guess.

                      "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." -Will Rogers

                      by mlbx2 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 04:47:48 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Good for you. (0+ / 0-)

                      "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012

                      by bontemps2012 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:26:16 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  What is condescending (4+ / 0-)

                  is your insinuation that I and others like me are fools, merely lucky that we haven't been harmed by the items that we treat with great care and have a great deal of experience with.

                  As for the role of guns in society... Is there no violent crime? Is hunting not a legitimate pursuit? Is not the burden upon you to show that there is no reason to excercise 2nd Ammendment rights?

                  •  I don't think you're fools (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JVolvo, shigeru, UntimelyRippd

                    I think you're dangerous.  And your hostility does nothing to counter that impression.

                    •  Hostility? (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      high uintas, Bailey2001, cris0000

                      I've been direct, but perfectly polite towards everyone here. I am dangerous, potentially, but the potential to inflict harm does not make a person predisposed to do so.

                      •  You made a mistake and spoke the truth (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        bontemps2012

                        it gets you in trouble. The fact that you have gone thru your life as a gun owner and haven't harmed anyone, most likely never will, is intruding on their fantasies.

                        "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                        by high uintas on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:58:21 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yeah. Speaking of intruding, have you seen (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Paulie200, shigeru

                          The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                          by JVolvo on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 10:02:40 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Very sad to read. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            cris0000, high uintas

                            Is there an argument that you'd like to make, or did you just come here to Appeal to Emotion?

                          •  What happened in Newtown is one (0+ / 0-)

                            of the most horrific things I can think of. It broke my heart, it hit home as mr.u works in a school and I am a mother, shit! it hit home because I'm a human being.

                            I remember clearly the day that JFK was shot, MLK, and RFK too. I was an ardent gun control supporter. I didn't want to control them I wanted to ban them. I was pissed every time I saw someone with one, then I realized that I was trying to punish every gun owner for the actions of a few.

                            Millions of people own guns, go about their lives and do no harm but you are mad at them and want to punish them for what happened. It is irrational, emotion driven and would not solve the problem you seek to fix, but you are bent on punishment and that's all there is to it.

                            You believe in magical thinking: if you ban guns they will go away. Just as if you ban booze or drugs they will go away. If you put onerous controls on them people will obey them and their will be no black market.

                            You know, alcohol killed my entire paternal family, grandparents, father, his only sister, my half brother and damn near me. It doesn't piss me off if you have a beer, I don't want to see you suffer. See the difference? (And don't even tell me that alcohol only hurts those who drink it, come on let's hang on to a vestige of reality based.)

                            "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                            by high uintas on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:11:36 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Nobody gives a fuck about *punishing* the (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            eru, splashy, JVolvo

                            millions of "responsible" gun owners. This isn't about spite, it's about dead children.

                            And it is you who believes in magical thinking. I recommend you to this comment of mine from yesterday:

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

                            which discusses the bizarre magical thinking of the gun rights crowd.

                            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                            by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:33:47 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I read your comment yesterday (0+ / 0-)

                            and believe it or not I do get at what you are talking about. But, the bottom line is that we either live in the world that is and try our best to fix the problems or rant, rave and yell while doing nothing practical. We have to work together with gun owners to craft laws that will be effective.

                            And, people do want to punish gun owners, I've read comments here that at the very least border on outright punishment. They believe that every gun owner is a potential villain, just one hair away from doing something dangerous and stupid.

                            They want them to insure their guns against what someone might do with them, making them responsible for the acts of criminals. If you own a gun and it is stolen and you report it, are you then responsible for a crime committed with it? What if someone stole your butcher knife and killed your neighbor, or tampered with your gas line and blew up half your block?

                            You insure a car, but that doesn't cover what a thief might do with it, even if he drove it into a crowd and killed dozens, it only compensates your loss. Homeowner's ins. covers your gun in the same way.

                            I've read comments that refer to people as nuts or fetishists for just owning one gun or rifle. If spittle could come through a screen I'm sure it would be flying everywhere. They have driven Kitsap to want to leave and others to shut up, I've seen MB insulted and others like myself who don't own guns treated like shit.

                            The bottom line for me is that we have stood back and allowed our rights to be eroded in the name of security far too much. I have screamed over the infringements on the 1st and the disappearance of the 4th as much as I support the 2nd. But people believe that it has no value to them so just fuck it, let it go.

                            If you believe that guns can be banned in America and that will be better for all of us and if you believe that insulting every gun owner as if they caused you harm will help fix this, then yes I think you engage in magical thinking. As much as the prohibitionist believed in their cause as moral it ended up causing much more harm than good.

                            "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                            by high uintas on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 10:15:13 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  As a matter of fact, in many (and possibly all) (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JVolvo

                            states, if a thief steals your car, you are liable for whatever damage it does -- not criminally, but civilly. But cars aren't guns, either, and I'm sick to fucking death of any argument based on the barracks-room lawyer false equivalency that tries to apologize for one based on the status of the other.

                            I don't actually believe there's one goddamned fucking thing that can be done to "fix this", because the gun rights crowd are absolutely intransigent. There could be a school massacre every Thursday, and they'd still be saying, "Yeah, well, but it wasn't my gun, so why should I be punished," as if anyone gives a fucking rats ass about them. Here's why they should be "punished": Because "punishing" them (by making guns and ammunition difficult and expensive to manufacture, sell, keep, carry, and use) will save lives and make all the rest of us happier, healthier and more secure. Fuck them, the selfish fucks.

                            I'm not in here trying to change their minds, I'm in here venting my absolute fucking hatred for them and their pissant picayune self-rationalizations. Fuck them. Fuck the asshole who says it's my responsibility to tell him to keep off my property with his fucking murder machine. I mean, fuck him. He's not my friend, he's not my ally, he's not my neighbor, he's not my kindred fucking spirit, he's not my comrade, he's a fucking asshole. You wouldn't smoke a fucking cigarette in my house without asking, but you think it's incumbent on me to tell you that your guns aren't welcome in my home? Fuck that. He's not going to change his mind about any fucking thing, because somehow, in his twisted, fevered little peabrain, his need to have a false -- and oh, boy is it false -- sense of security predicated on having a gun in his pocket is the most important fucking thing in the world to him. What a fucking selfish stupid blind self-rationalizing arrogant foolilsh fucking fuck. FUCK HIM.

                            If I thought like they do, I would assert that it is my right, if I notice someone with a gun in my house, to sneak up behind him and stick a butcher knife in his back, on the grounds that he presents a clear, real, and imminent danger to me and my family.

                            If we ever get the kind of legislation that will actually attenuate the epidemic of gun violence in this country, it is not going to happen with the buy-in of the gun-rights crowd, because they don't fucking care and they aren't going to buy in. Fucking ever. Not if we piled the children's corpses on their front fucking lawns and billeted the children's parents in their fucking basements. So fuck them.

                            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                            by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 01:32:32 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  My goodness (0+ / 0-)

                            here we are, two people who don't own guns and you can't even have a simple conversation. You can't justify your arguments so you resort to saying "Fuck" a lot. You ascribe opinions to me that I have never expressed and pretend to know the future. If your goal is to never get anything done, you're doing it right.

                            "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

                            by high uintas on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 02:36:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I haven't ascribed any opinions to you. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JVolvo

                            The only place I used the 2nd person in that rant was in the colloquial american usage equivalent to the formal British 3rd-person "one". Of course I can "justify" my arguments -- but not to people who simply put their desire to have unlimited access to firearms above any and all other social imperatives.

                            I gave up on the gun rights crowd years ago. I simply accepted, as the price of ever having democrats in office, the pile of bodies that the freedom-to-endanger-everyone-around-me gang implicitly demands in tribute to their "rights". I still accept it. We're not going to get meaningful gun legislation in this country until we can elect 240 Democrats to the House and 60 Democrats to the Senate without getting the vote of one single person who thinks concealed carry is a good idea. I don't seriously advocate any sort of gun control at all -- I just recognize that the price of having food/shelter/medicine for the bottom 50% is 30,000 dead Americans per year.

                            But since I'm not allowed -- due to the pragmatic need to have Democrats in power -- to seriously advocate any sort of gun control at all, I reserve the right to explicitly, impolitely, violently, viciously, nastily, and very, very, very sincerely tell the cold-dead-hands folks exactly how much I despise them. That's the price I demand for acquiescing to their misguided and fetishistic gun lust.

                            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                            by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:11:56 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Newsflash: Its Not About You. Wierd how that is (0+ / 0-)

                            often the default bullshit argument used re guns.  UR, I and many other sane people Don't Give A Fuck About Gun Owner's Feelings about this.

                            Kids in CT are DEAD.  Firefighters in NY are DEAD.  Church-goers in WI are DEAD.  Movie-goers in CO are DEAD.

                            So, yeah.  Fuck the gun owner who expects others to bow to his mutated, narcissistic, imaginary version of the 2nd Amendment.

                            The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                            by JVolvo on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 02:11:12 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  How many assault rifles do you own? Nothing wrong (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    bontemps2012, Mighty Ike

                    a bolt action single shot or a 12 gauge, but an M4 is worthless for home defense as you likely kill more neighbors and family than the criminal would. It's use in hunting would be slaughter and would obviate the pretense that hunting is a sport.

                    I learned to shoot at 7, had a 22 through high school, went to VN as a LRP and MI specialist. Unlike some of my team mates, I have not touched a weapon since. For me nothing like seeing the end result of weaponry upon the enemy, innocents, and team members to make me decide that I had enough blood, cold metal and death.

                    If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. ~Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobediance, 1849

                    by shigeru on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 01:10:02 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Tell that to a woman escaping an abusive husband. (0+ / 0-)

                  Tell that to a person who is about to be assaulted for no reason at all.

                  Tell that to a person surrounded by armed gangs, who have no respect for what society says.

                  Tell that to the Lybians and Syrians and other groups fighting for their freedom from tyranny.

                  Tell that to the Jews disarmed before the Nazis took their weapons.

                  I'm glad to hear that the state can and will provide and protect you at all times, but some people aren't so lucky.

                  The whole decade needs an asterisk.

                  by James Kresnik on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:56:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  What about tazers? (0+ / 0-)

                    Baseball bats, dogs, or any number of other options besides guns?

                    Why does it always have to be a gun to protect yourself?

                    Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

                    by splashy on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:33:57 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Because guns are the most effective... (0+ / 0-)

                      ...and subject me to the least risk.

                      Tazers can only engages a single target. Bats are ineffective until you're close enough to be overpowered in spite, and aren't easily portable. A dog trained to effectively defend you is a huge liability risk, and cannot be taken with you off of your property for that reason.

                      Guns are the best option availible to me, and the only option explicitly protected by the Constitution.

              •  The reason a productive and reasonable discussion (4+ / 0-)

                on guns and their role in society is not possible is because because you cannot give me one single reason I should be exposed to the risk of allowing surreptitiously or openly self-armed people to wander around in ordinary social circumstances, other than your desire to be so self-armed.

                You want reasonable? Debate this point: Since people who wander around with guns do so for their own protection -- not having any authority whatsoever to do so on the behalf of anyone else -- why not have a law that says anyone who draws a firearm at any time outside of his home or a shooting range, or while hunting, other than to immediately defend himself and only himself, shall be shot in the kneecap with his own gun?

                Less absurdly (indeed, not at all absurdly, I think), having such faith in your own responsibility, would you be willing to accept something along these lines: If your gun is used in a crime, you are fully responsible, both civilly and criminally, exactly as if you had wielded the weapon yourself. Right down to the death penalty.

                Do you think the latter unreasonable? Because it seems eminently reasonable to me.

                To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                by UntimelyRippd on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 04:29:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Welcome to Arizona !! (0+ / 0-)

                  Bad joke. Sorry. Running around armed to the teeth is a local aberration, has been for decades.

                  "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012

                  by bontemps2012 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:30:59 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Unfortunately, (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Liberal Heretic

                    A. Running around armed to the teeth is becoming less of an aberration all the time.

                    B. We have no way of knowing whether we are surrounded by people who are armed to the teeth.

                    Somehow, my right to know that the screaming jackass parent in the stands at my kid's soccer match might actually shoot somebody if anybody calls him out on his behavior is trumped by his right to put everybody around him at risk. How we've managed to arrive at this exceptionally demented view of risk and responsibility is anybody's guess.

                    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                    by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:30:31 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  firearms (7+ / 0-)

                You shouldn't take it personally.

                Perhaps the poster you reply to is aware that gun owners in one study were over 4 times more likely to be injured or killed by a gun compared to non-owners.  Perhaps the poster is also aware that the gun owners who actually had a chance to use their gun against an assailant were over 5 times more likely to come to harm themselves.

                Or perhaps the poster was referring to suicidal teenagers preferring firearms about 43 percent of the time.

                Or maybe the poster saw this bold claim:  A 1997 study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk of homicide increased more than three times.

                Basically, people who oppose the proliferation of arms in our culture are concerned about the collateral damage.  People are going to make harmful choices and mistakes.  We'd just like those bad choices to not be so easy to carry out without planning and effort.  Too many gun owners, sellers, manufacturers and advocates, the people most able to do something about reducing gun violence, are unable or unwilling to address their part, collectively, in the problem.  

                Perhaps that's because the little research that happens despite the NRA's best efforts, all point to a high correlation between availability and misuse, which inevitably leads us to consider making guns generally less available.  

                For my part, I'd like to see, at a minimum:

                (1) All gun sales including between private parties should require a background check, a 30 day waiting period, and a license.

                (2) License would require training, and perhaps a medical/psych evaluation.  License required for the purchase of ammunition.  License expires periodically and must be renewed, with training as a requirement.

                (2) A minimum age for a license somewhere above 25, as the murder rate is highest among 18-24 year olds.

                Yes I know there will be flouting of the law.  The point is that many of us, including gun owners, prefer a nation of laws over the alternative.

                •  I would be perfectly ok with most of that... (0+ / 0-)

                  The waiting period is onerous, though. But licensing of the individual is something I would actually prefer, provided that registration of the firearm is not required.

                  This would ensure that the person is fit, without enabling future confiscation of arms.

                  •  Onerous? Why? What's the big rush? (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Paulie200, shigeru, splashy

                    Want a house?  Mortgage application, approval and closing takes time.  Anyone protesting that?  Why are guns so importantly different?

                    ...

                    The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                    by JVolvo on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 10:05:45 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Because there is no reason to make me wait... (0+ / 0-)

                      Especially since, as I already own a weapon, the purchase obviously has nothing to do with committing a crime of passion.

                      •  The controls aren't aimed at you personally but (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        JVolvo, Liberal Heretic, splashy

                        at the truly dangerous, such as members of terrorist groups, right wing militia, psychotics and other mentally ill folks. Anyone truly interested in the preservation of civil society would be happy to wait a month to get a firearm, to mandate safe storage of same, and mental health checks. Given the terrible state of mental health services in the US and the fact that most of these mass shootings are by the deranged and damaged some real controls are needed.

                        If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. ~Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobediance, 1849

                        by shigeru on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 01:18:35 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yep. Notice how they often default to "Me Me I I" (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          UntimelyRippd, splashy

                          when we just want the gun killings to stop.  

                          It's. Not. About. You.

                          The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                          by JVolvo on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 05:34:25 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  These laws would affect me, (0+ / 0-)

                            I have every right to consider their impact upon me and other law abiding individuals, and contrast that to the affect they may have on crime.

                            If I find that scale to be out of balance, I would be foolish not to protest.

                          •  Yeah. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JVolvo

                            You'll be affected.

                            Boo fucking hoo.

                            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                            by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:37:34 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Boo fucking hoo? (0+ / 0-)

                            That's your response when someone points out that they don't want to be punished for something they didn't do?

                            You are the reason a calm discourse on this issue is almost impossible here.

                          •  Every law and regulation that restricts my (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Liberal Heretic, splashy, JVolvo

                            freedom to act on the basis of what might happen rather than what I intend to happen "punishes" me for something I didn't do.

                            Generally, such laws and regulations are in place exactly because a rather small percentage of the population needs to be restrained from behaving with extreme stupidity and/or selfishness. That's how civilization works, unfortunately.

                            Grownups understand that.

                            Adolescent boys do not. Adolescent boys instead talk about being unfairly punished. Adolescent boys think speed limits are unfair -- why should they punished just because some lame-o can't control his car at 100mph. Adolescent boys think DUI is unfair. "I didn't hit anything. Why should I be punished because somebody else killed someone while drunk?" Et fucking cetera. Clue to adolescent boys: The universe is neither just nor fair. The universe doesn't care about you. It isn't structured to ensure that you get what you "deserve". The universe only "is". Deal with it.

                            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                            by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:43:45 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  But, (0+ / 0-)

                          The controls, as I've mentioned in the past, would not effect those people- at best it would inconvenience them, and they would simply purchase privately.

                          It is not worth the burden that it would place upon law abiding citizens. There are limits to what I accept as a reasonable barrier to the obtaining a firearm, and waiting for a month is one of those limits.

                          •  We should also control private, gun show, and (0+ / 0-)

                            Internet gun sales. And sorry, but if one wants more than 1 revolver, bolt action rifle, or 12 gauge one should be required to store them off-site and securely. Hell even in the army, except in combat zones one must lock up one's weapons in an armory. Reasons are that the army knows that the risks of guns in the hands of non-combat zone soldiers greatly outweigh the potential benefits. Such things as potential for theft, use in fights and use by drunk soldiers really add to the risks in non-combat areas. Sorry, but IMAO there is no useful reason for assault weapons, 50 cal sniper rifles and the like in home storage facilities or in airports, banks, schools, hospitals or bars.

                            If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. ~Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobediance, 1849

                            by shigeru on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 01:19:19 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  "onerous" (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    splashy

                    Because heaven knows, actually waiting a few weeks for a gun is a deprivation no human ought to suffer.

                    It is exactly this kind of "what I want, when I want it, and fuck the children" thinking that makes it impossible to find common ground on this issue.

                    Jesus.

                    It's a fucking gun. If you're in a hurry to get one, then you've got a bigger problem than a waiting period.

                    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                    by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:36:54 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  What if there is a bigger problem? (0+ / 0-)

                      What if the gun is being purchased by a woman who has a violent ex-boyfriend who keeps calling and driving by the house?

                      What if the gun is purchased by a father who owns the house next to one that was just targeted for a burglary?

                      What if good people get hurt because people like you, in your ignorance, didn't think there was any viable reason for them to obtain a weapon quickly?

                      As to the "fuck the children" crock: This is a not a zero-sum game. The options are not "Neo Control does not get to purchase a weapon in a timely manner OR lots of children die."

                      First of all, a waiting period wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook. Period. Second, my obtaining a weapon in a timely manner does not increase the risk to any child anywhere, and until you can show that I am a potential danger (that burden is upon you) I oppose any effort to make it more difficult to purchase a weapon than it already is.

                      •  Yeah!!! (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        splashy

                        Oh, and also: what if the terrorist knows where the ticking time bomb is? Can we torture him then, huh, huh, can we can we huh?

                        Like I said, if you're in a hurry to buy a gun, you've got a bigger problem than being in a hurry to buy a gun. This remark by you is a full-on exhibition of the fantasy that each of us can reasonably claim full responsibility for application of deadly force in pursuit of our own personal safety. You think it's perfectly reasonable for a frightened woman with no weapons training, never mind tactical security training, to bring home a gun under the illusory impression that doing so makes her safer. It's a fantasy, dude, and the fact that you entertain it tells me that, in fact, you are not nearly as careful, stable and responsible as you think you are. Comment by comment, your arrogant self-assurance with respect to your capabilities and capacities reveals that you are precisely the sort of person I do not want to be keeping and bearing arms.

                        "Until you can show that I am a potential danger ..." (Emphasis mine).

                        Right there, you contradict your "not a zero-sum game" statement. You've made it clear. False positives are worse than false negatives, and you're willing to sacrifice any number of your fellow-citizens to that principle.

                        To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                        by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:35:07 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Ooookay... (0+ / 0-)
                          Oh, and also: what if the terrorist knows where the ticking time bomb is? Can we torture him then, huh, huh, can we can we huh?
                          You just compared purchasing a gun to torture. Think about that for a moment...
                          Like I said, if you're in a hurry to buy a gun, you've got a bigger problem than being in a hurry to buy a gun. This remark by you is a full-on exhibition of the fantasy that each of us can reasonably claim full responsibility for application of deadly force in pursuit of our own personal safety.
                          Not all of us, but the vast, vast majority of us. And it's a pursuit that very rarely results in harm.
                          You think it's perfectly reasonable for a frightened woman with no weapons training, never mind tactical security training, to bring home a gun under the illusory impression that doing so makes her safer. It's a fantasy, dude, and the fact that you entertain it tells me that, in fact, you are not nearly as careful, stable and responsible as you think you are. Comment by comment, your arrogant self-assurance with respect to your capabilities and capacities reveals that you are precisely the sort of person I do not want to be keeping and bearing arms.
                          I think the woman should obtain training as soon as possible, but yes, I think that the prospect of staring down an armed woman would give a girlfriend-beater some pause. The use of the weapon is often not necessary, as you can deter a cowardly attacker through  it's mere presentation- which is the ideal way to resolve an issue where a gun is needed.

                          As to my confidence with firearms, I'm a veteran. I've fired literally thousands of rounds in training, and I have carried concealed overseas during deployments. I have had to deescalate a situation where two parties were armed and angry at one another. I know what I'm doing. You seem to think that knowing what you're doing isn't possible, and I find it ironic you think cops and troopers should have guns then...

                          "Until you can show that I am a potential danger ..." (Emphasis mine).

                          Right there, you contradict your "not a zero-sum game" statement. You've made it clear. False positives are worse than false negatives, and you're willing to sacrifice any number of your fellow-citizens to that principle.

                          Who said anything about sacrificing others to a principle? I said that until I was shown to be unfit to hold a weapon, I should be allowed to do so. It is incumbent upon others (to include the government) to evaluate the individual's fitness, and not merely ban possession based upon the unfitness of the few. Determining what fitness is I am up for debating, but we have the capability to do so, and so long as that is the case I will not accept your ignorance of my abilities as a reason to disarm.

                          I was saying that you should not paint with a broad brush, especially when you're using the wrong color.  

            •  That's silly. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mlbx2

              If you live way out in the country, a rifle is part of the tool kit for running your farm or tree farm or simply managing some forest.

              I'd keep a rifle just to be able to put an injured or severely ill animal out of its misery.

              And hunting is a natural human activity. How you think people ate before they invented supermarkets ???

              "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012

              by bontemps2012 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:25:37 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  If I may (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                splashy, bontemps2012

                clarify a bit: I am not, by any means, an advocate for banning all guns, everywhere. Just the ones that are meant to kill a lot of people in a matter of seconds.

                I grew up in a rural area, so I recognize the necessity for a rifle to protect one's livestock from roving wildlife, or putting some poor creature out of its misery.

                Also, I recognize the need for hunting because in a lot of areas, deer run rampant. So I'm by no means anti-hunter, although I'm morally opposed to trophy hunting, but...that's a whole other can of worms.

                I just think that if you're going to be allowed to possess a shot gun or a hand gun, then you should pass certain requirements to have one in your possession, among them background checks and testing to see that you can handle it competently, responsibly, and safely.

                "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

                by Liberal Heretic on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 11:39:59 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  He got me at sith-like (8+ / 0-)
        •  Elegantly put. (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          stevej, DeadHead, Paulie200, sockpuppet, JVolvo

          Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

          by Smoh on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 11:36:59 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WB Reeves, DeadHead

          Completely.

          I grew up in the south surrounded by rednecks, too.

          I take it that James Kresnik didn't have to grow up fearing a drunk neighbor with a shot gun would fire a stray bullet at him.

          Oh, I've heard it all. Believe me, I have. My entire life.

          The reason why I don't want to hear it is because I'm bloody fucking sick of having to LISTEN to it.

          "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

          by Liberal Heretic on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 11:34:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Police killings: 400 per year. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Liberal Heretic

          Suicides: 20,000 per year.

          Civilian homicides: 11,000 per year.

          Accident: 850.

          Fear of "jack-booted government thugs" has been a long standing element in the paranoid constructs offered by the Lyndon LaRouche and NRA propaganda agencies.

          In most all police killings, however, the deceased are observed armed and in the act of armed assault or committing a felony or  threatening (often insanely) to kill family members. That is more than 95% of police killings year after year.

          Yes, believing that police are to be feared is not justified statistically. But no, there's not much counter to the propaganda mills that push the LaRouche/NRA dishonesties.

          "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012

          by bontemps2012 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:20:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  wow that's a leap (13+ / 0-)

        I doubt I can pull the string on that one.

        human error never fails = : )

        by i saw an old tree today on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:58:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  yet, somehow, although the country is awash (33+ / 0-)

        in military-grade weaponry, all of those abuses of our rights have happened anyway.

        huh.

        whaddayaknow about that?

        To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

        by UntimelyRippd on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:31:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Wow. I remember appreciating you point-of- (17+ / 0-)

        view on other topics and respecting (as well as possible for an anonymous collection of pixels on the Intertoobes) your intelligence.

        Seeing this post, I conclude that I must have made a mistake.

        Teh Topic is lock-step RWers and their immovable passion for deadly weapons, regardless of this week's* massacre with a semi-auto weapon.

        Not all that other stuff.  "Trust some other guy with a weapon b/c the police bla blah."  Wow.

        * Left non-specific b/c we're now having more than I can bear to keep track of.

        The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

        by JVolvo on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:36:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  More specifically (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sockpuppet, blueoasis, JVolvo

          The topic, as I understand it, is right-wingers who regurgitate the same points so often that they might as well be chatbots.

          •  And those religiously opposed to (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            high uintas

            gun ownership are any different?

            •  I'M FUCKING OPPOSED TO BUTCHERED KIDS (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Paulie200, Liberal Heretic, DeadHead

              I'm opposed to any fuckhead being able to order 6,000 rounds on the web, no problem.

              I'm opposed to any fuckhead skipping the background check (wink-wink) at a gunshow.

              I'm opposed to easy access to semi-autos where any fuckhead can spray bullets faster than kids can think.

              Does he speak for you?

              Did you get a tingle?

              The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

              by JVolvo on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:55:26 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You only prove my point: (0+ / 0-)

                You hold up a boogeyman, point to two problems that aren't part of the problem, and finish by projecting.

                FFA sales still require the check, even at gun shows- privates sales don't regardless of location. Which means that closing the "gun show loophole" is impossible. The small percentage of non-FFA sales at shows will stop, and will simply be conducted in the parking lot instead. Law abiding citizens inconvenienced, criminals not deterred.

                Buying large quantities of ammunition is a non-issue. A mass murderer cannot carry more than a couple hundred rounds at any one time. I carried a combat load overseas, and that was 180 rounds- heavy as hell.

                Easy access does not need to conflict with safe access, and the vast majority of the time it doesn't. Making things hard for the people who just want to obey the law will at best inconvenience good people, and at worst push them into newly created criminal activities because of distrust or expense.

                And frankly, Cold Dead Hands was a masterful line.

                •  "Masterful"?? Thanks for proving my point. (0+ / 0-)

                  Guns over dead kids.  We get it.

                  Lock and Load!!

                  The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                  by JVolvo on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 05:30:57 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Any suggestions after reading this: (0+ / 0-)

                  ...

                  The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                  by JVolvo on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 05:45:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, (0+ / 0-)

                    Stop being fascinated by scary black guns, and large clips, because they weren't necessary to perpetrate any of those.

                    •  "weren't necessary"??? Actually used is now (0+ / 0-)

                      irrelevant?  The new argument is "weren't necessary"?  

                      Stunning.  Next tell me grape pixie sticks could have been used to the same deadly effect and toss in a "supporting" claim about people who drive faster than the lawful speed limits ergo we shouldn't impose any onerous restrictions on semi-autos.

                      You are fucking amazing.  And I don't mean that in a good way...

                      Lock and Load!!   Blam Blam!

                      The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                      by JVolvo on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 02:23:17 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  Trust the redneck (9+ / 0-)

        to beat his wife
        to be a bigot
        to pollute the environment
        to hold shit-ass views

        To hug his killing machine.  Fuck you.

      •  Your frustration is misplaced (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Purple Priestess

        But thank you for your well wishes, all the same.




        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
        ~ Jerry Garcia

        by DeadHead on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 12:44:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  "I trust my gun-owning neighbors..." (6+ / 0-)

        Nancy Lanza and her son Adam?

        Jerod Lee Laughner?

        ... etc etc etc, ad nauseum

        •  That is exactly the point (6+ / 0-)

          The rightwing nuts talk about how the people should have the right to own guns, but not the mentally ill, but no one really knows who is about to go off and what they will do.  Most of the time when something happens, the neighbors say, "He seemed like a nice guy, I would never have expected this!"  Exactly why guns need to be turned into plowshares.

          We should not be fighting about equal pay for equal work and access to birth control in 2012. Elizabeth Warren

          by Leftleaner on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 02:28:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with most of what you say (0+ / 0-)

        except for the gun owning neighbors.  I don't see too many of them rushing to protect their neighbors.

        "I have to go... There are two gay men knocking on my door asking me if I need any abortions or marijuana. Diary, this may be my last entry" Facebook hysteria after 2012 election

        by pitbullgirl65 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 07:09:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  honor culture (3+ / 0-)

        I read an interesting idea today.  The writer suggested that something he called "honor culture" is responsible for the murder rate.  He noted that in the US, high murder rates are clustered in southern states and areas that have had a high influx of southern immigrants.  He claimed this "honor culture" is evident in the US in areas that have a high level of gun ownership, where the ante-bellum idea of harming someone who offends your honor still has some currency; where corporal punishment of children is the norm; where there is a me-against-the-world mentality with respect to property and family rights.

        Pretty much in line with my experience growing up in North Florida, and later, listening to my brother-in-law talk about his slave owning ancestors.

        We could be about cooperation and mutual aid.  It only takes a couple of generations of not beating the shit out of the kids, I believe.

      •  Your gun owning neighbors will be next to (0+ / 0-)

        worthless in a crime, when the "darkies" try to take control or when the black helicopters come. In fact the great notion many have of standing up to the government (the real reason many want assault rifles) is virtually worthless. The fifth generation ar 15 is no match for the modern weapons and small and large unit training of the us military. Granted some may be trained ex special forces or ex lrp, like me, but most are out of shape, semi trained people who would not be able to stand up to drones, modern search and destroy tactics, stealth technology and on and on.

        For home protection anything other than one bolt action, single shot or a two barrell 12 gauge is overkill. For hunting anything other than a single shot rifle is not hunting, but slaughter.

        If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. ~Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobediance, 1849

        by shigeru on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 12:57:26 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Every word is true (4+ / 0-)
      Engaging these people on this topic will likely lead to a substantial loss of time and energy.

      Some people can be enlightened, others are set in their ways. There are people on this site who regularly, and intentionally, engage with these types of people, on FaceBook mostly, in an effort to "chip-away," at them, so to speak. They've even made progress with a few of the easier-to-reach ones.

      It's not a task to take on lightly, and requires a keen sense of knowing which battles to fight and which ones to pass over.

      And a shitload of patience and irrefutable facts ready on-demand.

      I cannot agree more. The trick is, I am looking at it from the "gun owner" side of the issue.

      I have been in discussions here where proudly defiant ignorance of all things having to do with guns (guns, laws, history, etc.) is seen as a benefit. My suggestion that knowledge was better than a lack of knowledge was mocked, met with outright hostility and called "arrogant".

      A woman recently replied to one of my comments by saying they did not want or need or see any reason to know anything about guns, and this did not in any way prevent them from being able to suggest sound policy or laws about guns.

      I refrained from asking her how she would feel if her state or federal legislators stood up and said that they had no knowledge of or desire to learn anything about women, conception, pregnancy or fetal development, but were sure this deliberate and abject ignorance would not keep them from passing good legislation regarding abortion.

      So yes, I agree with everything you said. But from a different point of view.

      •  Terrible analogy (9+ / 0-)

        Women are people. A lot of right wing authoritarians don't believe that.

        Guns are designed to project pieces of metal at high speeds into targets, including living beings, with intent to destroy them.

        Assault weapons are designed to kill people efficiently.  There is no reason for civilians to have access to them.  No. Reason. At. All.

        Gun rights people love to play the distraction game arguing over stock type and bullet caliber and magazine vs clip vs drum.  It's irrelevant when the issue is not having dangerous assault weapons available to anyone who wants them.  It's irrelevant when a former gun owners association turns into a gun manufacturers lobby and threatens lawmakers who try to stop the insane availability of guns and ammo.  It's irrelevant when a liberal website has gun worshipers interfering with discussion on how to fix the ridiculous availability of WEAPONS OF MASS MURDER.

        •  Thought experiment (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DeadHead

          Pretend you have gone to a conservative web site and made a post suggesting that people try to understand the pro-choice position and learn about the subject so that they can make more informed comments and opinions.

          And you are met with name-calling like "baby murderer", mocked, met with open hostility and called arrogant for suggesting knowledge is better than ignorance.

          And when you point out this attitude, the first response you get is in the form of

          Abortions are designed to kill babies. There is no reason for anyone to have access to them. No. Reason. At. All.
          What would you think about the quality of opinions and people who frequented that site and recommended those comments?
          •  There are relevant facts and irrelevant facts (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shamash

            It is relevant to a debate over mass shootings to know that some weapons can shoot multiple rounds per second. And that some guns can shoot thirty or more rounds before needing to be reloaded. And that some guns, when they do need to be reloaded, can be reloaded in bulk versus inserting fresh bullets one at a time.
            It is not relevant that some bullet holding devices are, for whatever reason, called clips, others are called magazines, and still others are called drums. Dismissing an argument because your interlocutor is not part of an ingroup speech community is avoiding the debate.  
            Same with women's issue debates. If somebody thinks that women who are "legitimately" raped cannot get pregnant, that is a problem that makes debate fruitless. But not knowing technical terms for anatomy is not.
            So you have to distinguish between whether someone is refusing to understand relevant details or whether you are just dismissing them for not knowing how to talk like you.

    •  I would be ecstatically happy... (4+ / 0-)

      ... if any of those yahoos knew there are actually TWO parts to the Second Amendment, AND if they knew something about the historical context in which it was written which would lead to knowing WHY it was phrased the way it is:

      Amendment II
      A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
      Without the elementary understanding of the late 18th century and its history, the second half is meaningless, in spite of the fanaticism surrounding the presumed and assumed meaning which they have all wrong.

      The more appropriate question nowadays should be:  "WHY shall the right of the people to keep and bear Arms not be infringed?"  There is no correct modern answer to that question without knowing the historical context in which the Second Amendment was written.  Context is everything.

      I had ancestors who fought in the Revolutionary War (and military engagements before that because they belonged to local Militias clear back to the landing of the Mayflower).  Over fifty years of genealogy research, I've had to learn about the historical periods in which my ancestors lived and the history surrounding their lives.

      Knowledge of history matters..., and when it comes to the Second Amendment, it has everything to do with understanding why and how the Second Amendment became part of the Bill of Rights and why it was worded the way it is.  [And the Third Amendment, for that matter.]

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      PBS:  Liberty!
      http://www.pbs.org/...
      PBS:  Timeline of the Revolution [part of the Liberty! web site]
      http://www.pbs.org/...

      The Documentary Site [on YouTube] has put Liberty! online.  [Episode 4 intro talks about Burgoyne.]
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      Liberty: The American Revolution - Episode 1 of 6 - The Reluctant Revolutionaries
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      Liberty: The American Revolution - Episode 2 of 6 - Blows Must Decide
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      Liberty: The American Revolution - Episode 3 of 6 - The Times That Try Men's Souls
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      Liberty: The American Revolution - Episode 4 of 6 - Oh Fatal Ambition
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      Liberty: The American Revolution - Episode 5 of 6 - The World Turned Upside Down
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      Liberty: The American Revolution - Episode 6 of 6 - Are We to be a Nation
      http://www.youtube.com/...
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      The last two episodes of Revolution (below) are more a review of the first eleven episodes.

      The HistoryFeed didn't post [or deleted] the first video from the series.  Someone else put it online in three parts.  This link gets you the second through thirteenth videos in chronological order on a playlist..., or click each link below in chronological order.
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      01 The Revolution- Boston, Bloody Boston
      1 TheRevolutionBostonBloodyBoston.m4v
      http://www.youtube.com/...
      2 Boston Bloody Boston pt. 2.m4v
      http://www.youtube.com/...
      3 Boston Bloody Boston pt 3.m4v
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      02 The Revolution- Rebelling To Revolution
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      03 The Revolution- Declaring Independence
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      04 The Revolution- American Crisis
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      05 The Revolution- Path To World War
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      06 The Revolution- Forging An Army
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      07 The Revolution- Treason & Betrayal
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      08 The Revolution- The War Heads South
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      09 The Revolution- Hornet's Nest
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      10 The Revolution- The End Game
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      11 The Revolution- Becoming A Nation
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      12 The Revolution- Road To The Presidency
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      13 The Revolution- A President and His Revolution
      http://www.youtube.com/...

      The Revolution
      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      "Boston, Bloody Boston."
          The controversies and conflicts leading to war, including the Stamp Act, the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, and the Battles of Lexington and Concord.
      "Rebellion to Revolution."
          The Revolutionaries lay siege to Boston; the formation of the Continental Army and the conscription of slaves by both sides.
      "Declaring Independence."
          Dark and devastating struggles challenge the dreams for independence in 1776.
      "American Crisis."
          General George Washington gambles on a brilliant yet dangerously daring stroke to save his army and America.
      "Path to World War."
          Benjamin Franklin tries to convince the French to join the fight against Britain; Philadelphia falls to the British; the Americans win a stunning victory at Saratoga and gain a new ally.
      "Forging an Army."
          Washington struggles to sustain and rebuild his Army at Valley Forge.
      "Treason & Betrayal."
          General Benedict Arnold betrays the revolution.
      "The War Heads South."
          The British lay siege to Charleston.
      "Hornet's Nest."
          War erupts in the Southern Colonies.
      "The End Game."
          The struggle for independence reaches its climax as both sides are tired of the war.
      "Becoming a Nation."
          King George III is forced by the parliament to sue for peace and Washington disbands the Continental Army
      "Road to the Presidency."
          The War is over, but Washington is enlisted for another duty.
      "A President and His Revolution."
          While Washington is on his way to be inaugurated as the first US president, he looks back at some defining moments in the revolution.

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 01:54:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, I do (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DeadHead

      have patience. Lots of it. I can put up with quite a bit. I've got near saint like patience.

      However, when people act willfully stupid, then even my patience can wear thin, and my frustration with them wins out. I'm only human, and my patience only goes so far and can take so much.

      I've tried to shove cold, hard facts under their noses, encouraged them to think, to read. Lectured at them, even. Dismantled every single of their weak arguments. Countered them in a cool, calm manner.

      ...And yet, they pat my head and tell me that I've bought into that evil "liberal bias."

      sigh

      I do appreciate your insightful comment though, DeadHead. I grew up on Grateful Dead music, haha.

      "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

      by Liberal Heretic on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 12:41:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Doesn't surprise me, your "GD upbringing"... (0+ / 0-)

        Your comment sounded almost exactly like something I would have written... Done the same thing, am the same type of patient person, until....

        :)

        Don't let 'em get ya down...




        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
        ~ Jerry Garcia

        by DeadHead on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 01:50:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Your diary reminded me of a Minor Threat song (20+ / 0-)

    that got me through HS. One of numerous mixtapes.

    Called, naturally, "I Don't Want to Hear It"

    You keep talking
    Talking everyday
    First you're telling stories
    Then you're telling lies
    When the f*ck
    Are you gonna realize

    I don't want to hear it
    Your bullsh*t

    LH: this diary asks an important question (as DeadHead expands upon above): how do we marshal our energies? How and when do we pick our battles?

    While, at the same time, continuing to challenge our own perceptions?

    These battles --large and small-- I would posit, are what make us progressives. Keep it fresh, keep it relevant. Keep it real. Remember the past; study it.

    **

    The biosphere may well be in slow motion collapse.

    Hard fact has been obscured by infotainment, masquerading as journalism.

    But we continue to look for the truth. We are willing to question these truths. But we are not willing to trade our basic decency and empathy for a temporary security based upon appeals to our basest fears.

    Nah. We testify. And when so doing: let's multiply.

    Think globally, and act locally. - John Lennon
  •  A small suggestion for both sides of the debate (12+ / 0-)

    would be to be precise in your language.  For example, "assault weapon" has been popularized so as to include a very broad class of guns.  From my perspective it is more productive to discuss weapons separately as details may vary as to the potentials of each weapon
    Another small suggestion is to be aware of past and current court decisions.  These show that Obama cannot confiscate your Sunset Carson cap pistol if he wanted to.  Also be aware of current laws and regulations about the sale and transfer of weapons; it saves time in any discussion and prevents someone from carping on how you can buy a fully functioning Abrams tank or TOW and have it shipped to you COD.

    The more informed your argument, the more likely you are to convince others in a civil discourse and that is why we are here, right?

  •  No more mister nice guy! (13+ / 0-)

    Which is hard when you're a nice guy. Afghans have been shooting at our government's forces for 10 years. Afghanistan is about the same size and population as Texas. Yet Obama is going to take all of America's guns away? How the f**k is he going to do that?

    It isn't nice to call people stupid, yet maybe it's time. I'm just about ready. Almost.

    We're fools whether we dance or not, so we might as well dance.

    by PowWowPollock on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 04:38:02 AM PST

    •  Maybe they've been shooting at us (0+ / 0-)

      because we invaded their country?!  And continue to murder them with drones?
      Obama can save his tears for the Newton victims: it's different when it's little white suburban kids vs. brown Afghani children. Fucking hyprocrite.

      "I have to go... There are two gay men knocking on my door asking me if I need any abortions or marijuana. Diary, this may be my last entry" Facebook hysteria after 2012 election

      by pitbullgirl65 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 07:21:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The only way I've ever found to influence others (6+ / 0-)

    with my views is to first open up enough to being influenced by theirs.

    Is there any part of their argument that you might be willing to consider as having merit? If not it's probably not productive to have discussions with them.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 06:03:32 AM PST

    •  That's exactly the problem. (19+ / 0-)

      It's not that some of what conservatives say doesn't have merit, it's the fact that anything even considered left-wing is utterly dismissed and not even discussed.

      These people expect us to bend over backwards for them, but are as flexible as an uncooked noodle when it comes to our side of the story.

      I write a series called 'My Life as an Aspie', documenting my experiences before and after my A.S. diagnosis as a way to help fellow Aspies and parents of Aspies and spread awareness. If I help just one person by doing this, then I've served a purpose.

      by Homer177 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 07:27:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, exactly (0+ / 0-)

        Heaven forbid anyone takes a reasonable position on something, and you'll get these morons screaming "LIBRUL BIAS! MAH GUNS! MAH GUNS!"

        It's always us Liberals who have to be the nice ones. The mature ones. The patient ones. The ones who give ground and defer to them.

        Well, I'm sick of having to be tactful with a bunch of trigger happy whackaloons. Fuck that noise.

        Sandy Hook is the straw that broke the camel's back for a lot of us, I know.

        "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

        by Liberal Heretic on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:53:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Since their position here on dKos that "I would (3+ / 0-)

      never do such a thing, so shut up," is quite possibly true they see NO reason for any changes.

      Just let the blood flow. I in no way want to suggest they are glad these things happen as proof of "FREEDOM", but they don't care enough to even consider any changes, i.e. limiting magazine sizes or requiring registration for private sales.

      They'd rather argue terminology rather than prevent killing.

      And NOT having discussions with them is useless, and will allow more innocents to die.

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

      by glorificus on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 02:35:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Sometimes there really is no part of an argument (0+ / 0-)

      that has merit. Being willing to consider the possibility is one thing, but that's different from credulously falling for some ridiculous equivalence arguments.

  •  The amount of trouble we are all having on FB, (6+ / 0-)

    wouldn't it be nice if we all friended each other.  I am tempted to do that.  I have one friend, I don't know as an actual person, I agree with.  The rest are little kids or crazy in-laws of my daughter.  

    So is it worth it?  I don't know.  I mean I like everyone on kos but do I want to see vacation pictures of 100,000 people?  That was a big problem when I was working and someone would hand me a big stack of pictures.  After looking at them for a time, I would realize I had no idea where I started and could spend eternity shuffling through them.  At least on FB you get to mark them, like.

    FB is getting some better settings.  My SIL is on unsubscribe.  I would unfriend him if he wasn't my SIL.  He has the crazy ass ideas and thinks there is a silent majority that supports him.  He is good to my daughter and fine in most areas of his life.  But I am so glad I found the unsubscribe button.

    I know what you mean.  I just don't want to hear the same old whiny assed pap.  My gun was stolen by the bad guys and I need amnesty for any crime they might use it in.  That is particularly annoying to me.

  •  I hear ya. (9+ / 0-)

    I "unfriended" one FB friend the day after Newtown.  I didn't want to hear it.

    "It is not, you fucking liberal prick." ..My RW friend Dave's last words to me.

    by rb608 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 07:29:54 AM PST

    •  well.... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rb608, JVolvo, splashy, Smoh, DarkLadyNyara

      I haven't unfriended a person on Facebook yet, but his posts are stupidly tiresome in their gun happy rhetoric, and they''re getting worse.  What doesn't he get that so many innocent people are dead for NO reason.  The answer isn't more guns, it's less guns and much stricter regulations.
      Just trying to figure out what the aphrodisiac of a gun is.  It's a weapon, not a teddy bear.

      I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

      by Lilyvt on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:14:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's a precision machine that makes loud noises (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rb608

        Think hotrodders.

        Also think history buffs.

        That's not all the reasons for emotional responses to guns, but it proves that there are some who are not foaming at the mouth.

        Notice, please, that I'm answering the question about why guns appeal to people and not stating the points above as arguments in favor of lenient gun laws.

  •  One week before the shooting I had a convo with (11+ / 0-)

    my old boss.  He's a total gun nut.  I remember him telling me about all the guns he has in this arsenal that he's never even used.  He collects them like baseball cards.  It's perverse.

    Anyways, he sent me this e-mail forward about how Obama is going to use his second term to disarm America.  As usual, I completely debunked his e-mail (thank you Snopes!) and got him to admit that Obama has shown now propensity to start an conversation on gun control.

    Then Sandy Hook happened.  I KNOW he must be itching to discuss this ("see, I TOLD you they're going to take my guns!"), but he has had the decency not to send an e-mail....yet.  I think my response, when he inevitably does bring it up, will be something along the lines of "I don't want to hear it.  It's long past time that this country had a rational discussion about sensible gun regulation.  Sorry if you're hobby is slightly perturbed."

    "Give to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." - Robert G. Ingersoll

    by Apost8 on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:03:39 AM PST

  •  Unfortunately, I think we need to keep hearing it (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, JVolvo, Smoh

    from the right or at least relying on places like DK to get reports on what's going on out there - otherwise, we lose touch with what's percolating on the right, so aren't able to address critical issues or fight the good fight. I hope that makes sense.  

    Some people will never change and are stupidly belligerent on issues, but there are always fence-sitters lurking out there who may fall to one side or the other when they hear solid, common sense arguments (granted there won't be many of those sorts of arguments to the right of the fence, but there are always people around who can sell anything).

    Many of my friends and colleagues isolate themselves from the less than left portion of our community and so end up seeing the world through rose-colored glasses - making a bigger deal of what feels like change than it really is. I'm not able to make that separation, so I come across as cynical, but I'm really just pointing up that there's still lots of work to do.

    I totally agree with getting out out of chat rooms and kicking people off your Facebook or other social media channels when you've had enough of them. Facebook  is free toy and/or a powerful tool, depending on you use it. As the election drew closer, I took politics off my Facebook - stopped posting or responding to that sort of content. Removed one person who was simply an ass and disagreed with me for the sake of disagreeing.

    We also need places to go - even on the internet - that are fun and relaxing - just a place to be with our friends. And not hear it.

    •  Understand their fears (0+ / 0-)

      and address them.

      •  Please specify. They fear their guns will be (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paulie200, Liberal Heretic

        taken?

        If they are so stupid as to have not noticed recent events including Supreme Court rulings why in hell would they listen to anyone else?

        They fear FEMA camps? People that stupid should NOT have guns?

        It's in the Constitution? Yeah, how is all that promoting "the general welfare" thing working out for Trayvon Martin and the 20 kids in Connecticut?

        They are spoiled with their toys, and don't want anything to change.

        You are just mouthing words with no meaning.

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

        by glorificus on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 02:41:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Sadly, you are going to hear it anyway. (5+ / 0-)

    There is a very active and vocal gun-rights posse here at DK.

    Welcome to the club (in advance).

    Trickle-down theory; the less than elegant metaphor that if one feeds the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows. - J.K. Galbraith

    by Eric Twocents on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:17:43 AM PST

    •  I know. (0+ / 0-)

      Trust me. I've seen them around while lurking on comment threads.

      I...generally don't engage with them. I know it'd be an exercise in futility.

      I also see they'd rather discuss semantics than gun control.

      I just wanted to kvetch and rant.

      "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

      by Liberal Heretic on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 11:47:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Been there for many years now (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Smoh

    The most they'll get from me is, "my online alias is 'thenekkidtruth'.  I have respect for the truth, and I insist on this bare minimum in the people I associate with.

    Take a truth pill, then get back to me.  In the meantime, go away."

    All your Supremes are belong to us. For Great Justices!

    by thenekkidtruth on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:22:35 AM PST

  •  Sorry, but I disagree. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Elizaveta, glorificus, lgmcp, Shamash

    I want to hear "it." And I want to contest it. Where ever and when ever this far right-wing dreck is spewed.

    If you don't stand up for your side, the other side wins. Silence isn't golden, it's a retreat from the battlefield.

    If you say, "I disagree" and present logical, persuasive arguments, yes, you'll have to take some flak. You might even lose a friend. But is such a friend really worth having?

    And you might, just might, make one of these people start to wonder.

    The trick is to not get emotional. The trick is to refute the argument, not slam the person making it.

    "Bad men win because good men remain silent."  

    True.

    Freedom has two enemies: Those who want to control everyone around them...and those who feel no need to control themselves.

    by Sirenus on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 08:25:02 AM PST

    •  fair enough (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Liberal Heretic

      but sometimes you gotta em give the rope to hang themselves

      there's a saying I learned many years ago, recoil in order to spring further (thanks Phil)

      human error never fails = : )

      by i saw an old tree today on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:02:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, I've tried. (0+ / 0-)

      I've tried to counter their arguments. I've held up facts and article links. I've lectured at them. I've disproven their claims and told them that they were being paranoid. I've deconstructed each and every one of their arguments.

      And no matter what, it's evil "liberal bias." It's what Obama wants me to think. Or something equally ridiculous.

      But there comes a point where you get burned out listening to them. You get exhausted, frustrated, and fed up. And sometimes you have to throw your hands in the air and give up. So be it. Let them cling to their delusions. Let them be blind bloody fools as they cling to their outdated rhetoric and ideologies. I'm going to move forward in progression with the rest of the sane people.

      To use the horse and water analogy, you can present a person with the facts, but you can't make them think critically.

      "Freedom comes at the price of eternal vigilance."

      by Liberal Heretic on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 01:52:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Agreed thanks (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JVolvo, Smoh
  •  I looked at your other diary, you deserve a medal (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JVolvo, Smoh

    Lose facebook, I did. Did you know it takes 2 weeks to close your account. That's creepy.

    human error never fails = : )

    by i saw an old tree today on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:08:01 AM PST

  •  Idk if anyone has said this but if the mother (6+ / 0-)

    DIDN'T have the weapons in her house & wasn't a gun nut, would the son have still been able to get to access to the guns as easily & murder her? My point being that it may have been convenience that this kid did what he did. The access was easy, he wanted to do it, so why not. I know he could have gotten the guns another way (from someone else) but he didn't want to jump through those hoops.

    I just think that because guns are SO EASY to get, that the people who do these things are more inclined to go that route because, why not. They have a problem and hey, it can be resolved by killing someone or multiple people, in their minds.

    Earth: Mostly harmless ~ The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (revised entry)

    by yawnimawke on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:24:43 AM PST

    •  Sorry, but your argument is Teh FAIL, and (12+ / 0-)

      this is why: "If they want to get guns they'll get them." I know that this is true, because I have heard it so many times it must be true. Guns are special, you see. Unlike every other thing that any particular human being might or might not want to obtain at any given moment in during the course of said human's long existence of transient impulses and frustrated material desires, guns have the magical property that anybody who wants one -- and one of arbitrary firepower, no less -- at any time, wants one badly enough to do whatever it takes, for however long it takes, to obtain one.

      Take for example that sociopathic kid who talked one of his friends into setting up an ambush outside their middle school several years ago. The kid used his grandpa's guns. Now, because you're just a dumbass libtard, you probably think, hmm, maybe if his grandpa had kept his guns under lock and key down at the gun club, where his sociopathic grandson couldn't get at them, then a bunch of kids wouldn't have gotten shot that day.

      But see, you're wrong, you silly-ass libtard. I know you're wrong, because the kid's grand-dad said so. I'm not sure of the exact quote, but it was something like this: "If they want to get guns they'll get them." Now, being a silly-ass libtard, you might be surprised to discover that the magical properties of guns are so potent that even twelve-year old children cannot be prevented from obtaining semi-automatic weapons with which to shoot their schoolmates, but I guess that's how it is.

      While I'm at it, I'll let you in on another magical property of guns: Guns' special effectiveness for injuring human beings is only functional when guns are being used for self-defense. If somebody wants to kill a lot of people, then any weapon will do: knife, baseball bat, banana-cream pie. However, if somebody wants to defend his family from a home-invader, well hell, you don't expect him to use a knife to fend off a rampaging sociopath, do you? I mean, what if the sociopath is carrying a legally-obtained banana-cream pie?

      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

      by UntimelyRippd on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:50:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is particularly likely with suicides. (6+ / 0-)

      Rage/depression/insert strong emotion comes in waves.  When riding the top of the wave, action is particularly likely.  If there's a gun around, makes it very easy.  Impulsivity also defines these actions.

      Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

      by Smoh on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 12:01:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The argument is always: (23+ / 0-)

    We have enough laws, enforce the ones we have.

    Except, you know actually enforcing the laws requires unreasonable amounts of guvmint interference.  

    And you know people are gonna break the law anyway, so really we don't need the laws.

    So really it becomes a case where gun defenders simultaneously believe two sets of facts.

    1.  Gun laws work, therefore we don't need any more of them, and just need to enforce the ones we have.  But of course we can't actually have a crackdown or anything similar because it's not the weapons, it's the people using them.

    2. Gun Laws DON'T work, therefore we should get rid of them and arm the populace.  Because it's not the weapons, it's the people using them, and people will always break the law.

    Whichever side you take, they can conveniently switch to the other tactic.   And your evidence is always "Unverified" if it's not a government source, and "Biased" if it is.

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

    by detroitmechworks on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 09:43:22 AM PST

  •  since (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Smoh, Shockwave, Liberal Heretic

    when do right wing extremists have nuanced intelligent discussions?  To me its like persuading a nazi not to turn on the gas while all of us are sitting in an economic gas chamber.

    "It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge." - Adolf Hitler

    "History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance." -James Madison

    by FreeTradeIsYourEpitaph on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 10:14:51 AM PST

  •  Yogi Berra Week: Another Germane Yogi-ism (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paulie200, Mathazar, Purple Priestess

    Referring to past Republican intransigence on the debt ceiling, and current Republican intransigence on the fiscal cliff, last night our President quoted the immortal Yogi Berra:

    This is deja-vu, all over again.
    Your chat room story reminds me of another Yogi-ism:
    There are some people who, if they don't already know, you can't tell 'em.
    If you're wondering why Republicans in Congress are such intransigent buttheads, it's because the people who vote for them are intransigent buttheads.

    “Americans are fighters. We're tough, resourceful and creative, and if we have the chance to fight on a level playing field, where everyone pays a fair share and everyone has a real shot, then no one - no one - can stop us. ”-- Elizabeth Warren

    by Positronicus on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 11:38:23 AM PST

  •  Oh I can totally relate. thats why I tell (4+ / 0-)

    everybody who asks, I am a proud Progressive Democrat....PROUD I say!

  •  Somewhere between the free for all we have now... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, mlbx2, high uintas

    ...and zero guns there is a rational middle ground.  

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 01:16:07 PM PST

  •  How many "isolated incidents" will it take ? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Purple Priestess

    Here in Australia, it only took one.
    And a conservative PM with a conservative Parliament swiftly passed strong gun control, with full support of the people.

     But I don't think that Aussies ever had a prevalence or of guns in our culture the way America has for over three centuries.

    Old habits are hard to break.

    you don't believe in evolution, you understand it. you believe in the FSM.

    by Mathazar on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 03:03:56 PM PST

  •  I heard a 26 yr old girl bemoan (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Purple Priestess, stormicats

    "oh there go our gun laws"  in a conversation about Newtown. I refused to let that ignorance go unchallenged so I asked if she knew (on that day) that almost 200 people had been murdered by guns since Sandy Hook. (It's almost 300 now) She looked surprised. Then I asked her how many kindergarteners she was willing to sacrifice in lieu of tighter gun laws. She shut up after that.

    As of this morning November 7, 2012 the Includers are ascendant, and the Excluders are in the minority. [samsoneyes]

    by FlamingoGrrl on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 03:07:32 PM PST

  •  People got upset when he originally mentioned (3+ / 0-)

    clinging to their guns in the first campaign.

    Hit too close to home, because they felt threatened.  Paranoid idiots.

    "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

    by wader on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 03:16:31 PM PST

  •  You Should Take Care of Yourself (0+ / 0-)

    and that might include staying away from that site for a time or as you see fit.  I also think we must listen, engage and explain our positions to people who won't like them.  
    Reason may prevail and some new and sensible gun regulation that can be supported by many of us may emerge in this manner.  I would like to speak with people who see things differently on this issue since I speak to mostly the choir of KOS  and I mostly like that.  In America we are polarized on many issues and guns is just more of the same.  Now, however the game has shifted, because of the mourning engulfing many hearts.  But we must not threaten people with our sense of grief, they will only batter us back.  It is time to draw many into dialogue and speak calmly and sensitivly when possible.  I could take a dose of this medicine, too.  And I will try especially with this issue of guns since it is so explosive and I feel so sorrowful about the Newtown and death toll happening every day in America from gun shots.

  •  I'm with you. I'm tired of it (3+ / 0-)

    I don't know if banning all the guns is the solution (well, a practical solution; it is the case that eliminating guns would eliminate most gun violence). But before we even come up with a solution, we have to do the first things first:  We must accept that our country has a serious problem with our guns.  We have to come clean with ourselves as a society.  

    But we can never have that frank and honest cleansing, because the NRA and its parroters sling excuse after excuse to squelch the conversation before it even begins.  I think it's because they know that if we have the debate, they'll lose.  That's exactly why we have to push forward and address our national illness.

    I for one am tired of this country refusing to admit it has a problem with guns, because some of us are afraid that the solution to that problem might infringe on their lifestyle.  

    And all we hear are the same lame excuses we've been hearing the last thirty years.  Yes they are lame excuses (disclosure: that is a link to my diary.  But the number of fallacious and paranoid excuses is so long there's little point going through them comment by comment.)  These tired lines have never been very believable, since they range from the nearly coherent except for the facts, to the pathetic straw-grasping straw man.  We only put up with them because of the power of the NRA over our politicians.  

    The NRA has mistaken America's silence for consent.  They wouldn't be the first conservatives to do that, and they won't be the last.  Oh well.  But know this, whatever the solution is,  the Newtown gun massacre was the crack that broke the dam, and you can't put the water back in the reservoir.   I'm all ears for people with something substantial to offer (many of the diaries on this site have).   I'm just tired of people trying to stall with these excuses.  

    Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

    by nominalize on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 05:29:01 PM PST

    •  Once upon a time NRA was relatively sane. (0+ / 0-)

      Then the Lyndon LaRouche cult and this Gun Owners of America paranoia-pack started making inroads attracting the gun-sucking crazies.

      "Jack-booted government thugs" is famous for use in 1995 by NRA. But it was used first by the LaRouchies.

      Follow the money.

      They are competing at generating paranoid fantasies. The crazier, the better.

      It's all about money.

      Sensible public policy ??? That can be damned. And killing children is AOK so long as the dues and fees keep rolling in.

      "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012

      by bontemps2012 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:38:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  My wife is at odds with much of my family for (3+ / 0-)

    countering their psycho drivel on Facebook. I warned her to get off of it when she constantly told me how often she was hurt and infuriated by it.

    Too late. Now there's this odd, quiet, simmering feud going on which hopefully sometime we can get past. But because my wife comes first, they've gone over the line and pissed me off, too. My wife is my "first" family, and I'll show my fangs against anybody who disrespects her in any way.  

    "Family" gives, and it takes away too, I've found. "Family" can be vastly overrated. I'll hang out with my progressive and Democratic friends, thank you. (Kossacks I deem part of this bunch, but even then they can piss me off, too. :) )

    "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 Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 06:50:55 PM PST

    •  You are a GREAT husband. (0+ / 0-)

      Whatever you got, if you could bottle it then every wife in the country would buy it by the pint.

      "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012

      by bontemps2012 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:43:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

CathiefromCanada, MadRuth, Shockwave, eeff, emelyn, Paulie200, opinionated, 88kathy, wonkydonkey, annrose, splashy, sidnora, Chrisfs, wader, Lilyvt, liz dexic, Kentucky DeanDemocrat, jaywillie, agincour, ybruti, Sembtex, radarlady, 3goldens, Independent Musings, Lying eyes, 1Nic Ven, Dobber, eru, Beetwasher, Yamara, wbr, Shotput8, xaxnar, third Party please, poco, esquimaux, detroitmechworks, cybersaur, 417els, HoundDog, mskitty, arlene, Lefty Coaster, blueoasis, twigg, The Hindsight Times, JVolvo, Pilgrim X, onionjim, thenekkidtruth, lost my ocean, Hedwig, DWG, bnasley, Killer of Sacred Cows, Mighty Ike, bkamr, mamamedusa, Art Tric, Mr Stagger Lee, elwior, Calamity Jean, tofumagoo, mofembot, petulans, shigeru, Quilldriver, WearyIdealist, Purple Priestess, Ellid, prettygirlxoxoxo, Ran3dy, litoralis, janmtairy, GreenMtnState, kevinpdx, Keith Pickering, schnecke21, nocynicism, collardgreens, cassandraX, mamamorgaine, FogCityJohn, estreya, gramofsam1, ATFILLINOIS, gulfgal98, elginblt, tgrshark13, spooks51, jm214, hooktool, swale44, kiwiheart, CoExistNow, boomerchick, zukesgirl64, thomask, awsdirector, worldlotus, wintergreen8694, corvaire, Daulphin, stevie avebury, Apost8, Jerry056, longtalldrink, Mathazar, Only Needs a Beat, i saw an old tree today, stormicats, a2nite, FloridaSNMOM, chicagobleu, Free Jazz at High Noon, Syoho, Buckeye54, cassandracarolina, oldpotsmuggler, avsp, arizonablue, DarkLadyNyara, ShoshannaD, allensl, Eric Twocents, Late Again, glorificus, poopdogcomedy, Yo Bubba, Homer177, Smoh, pragmaticidealist, bontemps2012, Gardener in PA, Mark Mywurtz, The Marti, RUNDOWN, richardvjohnson, Bry, Elizaveta

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site