Skip to main content

Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association (NRA), speaks during a news conference in Washington December 21, 2012. NRA, the powerful U.S. gun rights lobby, went on the offensive on Friday arguing that schools should have ar
Wayne LaPierre and a pair of cold, dead hands
Vice President Joe Biden, who will present his recommendations for comprehensive gun violence legislation to President Obama next Tuesday, wasted his time on Thursday meeting with representatives of the National Rifle Association (NRA). Because while Biden's recommendations are:
... expected to address a number of angles and topics on gun policy, ranging from the availability of certain firearms and ammunition to data collection between federal and state law enforcement agencies ... a top priority would be to create a more thorough system of background checks to prevent those with criminal histories or mental illness from purchasing weapons.
... and:
... cracking down on sales that are already illegal. One possibility is tougher laws against straw purchasing with longer prison terms for those who buy guns for others.
The NRA's reaction to these common sense ideas was to issue a statement saying:
We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment. While claiming that no policy proposals would be “prejudged,” this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners - honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans.
Yup. Restricting access to assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, doing background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals or the mentally ill is an attack.

So what will the NRA do next?

... we will now take our commitment and meaningful contributions to members of congress of both parties who are interested in having an honest conversation about what works - and what does not.
Translation? They'll use money and threats to maintain their sweet, sweet relationship with "the $12-billion-a-year gun industry, made up of manufacturers and sellers of firearms, ammunition and related wares," rather than advocate for the "over 4 million moms and dads, daughters and sons" that the NRA claims to represent.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:15 PM PST.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA.

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

  •  Kids play the same videogames all over the world.. (28+ / 0-)

    and yet we seem to be the only country where they spark such aggressive, violent behavior with such devastating consequences...

    At least we know it's got nothing to do with the guns... thanks, Mr. LaPierre...

    /snark...

    Baby, where I come from...

    by ThatSinger on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:19:16 PM PST

  •  how about the WWE? Are they on board with (8+ / 0-)

    regulating them since it is violent "entertainment" ... but the NRA loves the McMahons

    They are also on board with a federal gubberment data base for all those who have mental problems, depression, etc.

    NO BIG GUBBERMENT THERE

    Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

    by Clytemnestra on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:21:16 PM PST

  •  gun violence is about everything but guns (11+ / 0-)

    isn't that obvious?

    What an insane organization.

    •  Yep, letting a few thousand dead people & kids (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wader, DSPS owl, RustyBrown

      get in the way of the American dream and inalienable right to pursue happiness, with life, liberty and a loaded .45 in one's back pocket, ever vigilant against whatever arbitrary forces of tyrannical kingdoms might yet besiege us, is just so petty a concern for those seeking 'reasonable' restrictions on the availability of guns and types of guns.  

      Now if the NRA was vociferously insisting that every American wanting to carry a handgun in public spend a weekend every month training in live-fire, stressful, high population urban scenarios, after an annual two or three week intensive training camp, similar to what law enforcement officers go through, where there is peer review as well as psychological assessment, then I'd be quite ready to concede they're working harder toward responsible gun ownership and making efforts towards preserving the rights, liberties and safety of all concerned. Rather than just appealing to base desires of perhaps 2% of our men (and some women) who crave having a deadly powerful weapon at one's disposal without taking the personal responsibility to invest in, and acquire and maintain real training as to what it means to be a wise and well-trained 'warrior' (meant in the deepest cultural manner), committed to defending one's community and all society (yep, defending liberals is included) and fully accountable to the law and law enforcement.  

      Many gun owners in our rural areas and families with long hunting traditions have been raised in families where traditions of safety, proper maintenance and usage are ingrained from youth. I'm not so worried about these gun owners whose focus is on safely hunting during seasons and in areas permitted by law.  I'm very worried about all newer gun-owners who lack that deep social context in which proper gun safety, training and usage has been ingrained, and who may feel they can now step into a hot situation and dispense hot-lead justice accurately, fairly and without harm to innocent life. Holding a gun doesn't entitle you to try to be 'the last man standing' in a chaotic situation. If there's any problem with our nation's 'entitlements' it's how we allow gun ownership without follow-up, accountability or life-time training and peer review--without provision for making gun-ownership include all the duties and obligations to participate amongst the 'well-regulated militia' -- society's group of gun owners. This community accountability obligation is what is missing and what needs implementing.

      You don't just buy a gun and take it home.  You take home an obligation to consider the safety of all around you and the only insurance that can help you meet that is to get and stay trained, and accept and follow some sort of organized community peer review. If you choose to carry a gun, you incur a moral debt, a huge obligation to your family, friends, co-workers, school-mates, your local community, to society, to all of America, to join the well-trained and well-regulated people entrusted with safeguarding all innocent life from your gun's lethal power, to remain in good standing, and to take on a vigilant concern for protecting life and liberty of all (especially those with whom you might disagree) whenever and wherever you might take it along.

      You incur a lasting obligation to continually invest in the training to handle it safely at all times, to keep it secure from any other wanna-be shooter, to maintain training assuring personal readiness, to be under some accountable and peer review, and then to only consider using it wisely under conditions of dire need to preserve innocent life.  

      You incur an obligation to help ensure fellow gun-owners also maintain training and exhibit competence in a community peer group setting (i.e. well-regulated). Embrace the full obligation and responsibilities or perhaps you ought not be wasting money so you can carry a gun, and instead pose a threat to the rest of us and our liberties and freedoms due to refusing to accept and promote the accountability and duty to life required.  When you take on the power to 'send someone to their Maker', make sure you are 'in the right', and also that be sure as hell accept and be cognizant of how that Maker choose to sacrificially allow criminals to go free in his/her place, and to die for all society's sins (or whatever other religious tradition's sacrificial values are to be upheld). If you do use deadly force, you are morally a killer, albeit possibly 'justified' and being justified is approximate at best, a putative compromise between a presumed worse outcome and what you did to alter that.  You will feel this mark, perhaps like a Mark of Cain, for life. And even as you approach the after-life, the need for forgiveness won't go away.  And it probably shouldn't go away.

      And you also incur the obligation to turn in the gun and ammo to a more responsible owner or agency if your own situation declines, be it health, status or other competency changes, etc.. Gun-ownership is a full life-cycle concern, and you need to handle any hand-off of the gun with responsibility and social accountability. That's why I am certainly for any exchange of weapons requiring a full background check.  Frankly, I don't think any prospective gun owner should take home any gun for which they haven't taken adequate time to train, to know how to field strip and maintain it, and operate as a responsible gun-owner within all applicable local and federal laws.

      When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

      by antirove on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 02:21:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  So asinine (5+ / 0-)

    Video Games, especially First-Person Shooters are freakin' ADVERTISEMENTS for the gun culture. They have the effect, whatever the programmer's intentions, of preparing underage users to think about acquiring collections of weapons as adults. The idea that the NRA somehow objects to this form of entertainment is ludicrous, to say nothing of hypocritical given their ivory tower position on the protections of the Second Amendment.

    •  Absolutely! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mythatsme

      Of course, there was my disappointment at finding out one couldn't actually get a plasma cannon anywhere. Or a gatling laser. Or a mini-nuke launcher. Or a multi-mini-nuke launcher. Or an EMP grenade. Or a gravity hammer. Or a chainsaw-bayonet.

      In fact, the only thing you can get relatively easily are shotguns, and everyone knows that shotguns generally suck, so who wants one of them?

      Or, and I might just be thinking crazy here, it might be that video games don't do that sort of thing at all.

      •  For some they don't (0+ / 0-)

        for others they do. There may just be explanations that pertain beyond "everybody just loves this game feature therefore it must be propagated again and again and again in every title in the genre."

      •  Notice (0+ / 0-)

        that more than half of the top first person shooters focus on real world weapons and not on the kind of fantasy arsenal you have seized upon. Nevertheless the result is the normalization of the idea of collection of weapons, which assuredly results in higher gun sales. You think devotees of paint ball don't fantasize about owning the real thing, and go on to acquire such?

        •  No, I think it's a stupid argument (0+ / 0-)

          I would lay good money that the vast majority of the people who collect those big arsenals aren't typically what one would consider a gamer demographic: they have their own reasons for doing so.

          (You think David Koresh was into first person shooters much?)

          Second, this type of behaviour long predates the increase of popularity of videogames. Survivalists had their own magazines for decades before gaming was considered a normal hobby, and a constant theme in that subculture was the collection of big arsenals. Note that this was common enough to appear in movies: Bert Gummer's "rec room" from Tremors is a good example. That movie came out in 1990 while Wolfenstein 3D, the daddy of the first person shooter genre, was released in 1992.

          Third, not all first person shooters, and some of the most popular ones, involve collecting an arsenal of weapons, and anyone who actually plays the games could tell you. In the majority of the games, especially the multiplayer ones, what you will find is that players tend to do the exact opposite: they get the one or two weapons they like and ignore the rest (unless they have no choice such as needing to do a specific level with a specific weapon for plot reasons).

          Incidentally, that list is bullshit. That's just some of the games released, which is not the games that large numbers of people actually play, and only showed up because it was at the top of the Google results. No Gears of War, no Halo, no Team Fortress 2? Yeah, right. Any list that claims to be listing the most popular games and doesn't have those is full of it.

          Third, will it nonetheless cause some people to get the idea? Sure. And so will watching movies and TV, or reading Mack Bolan novels, or because Uncle Bob does it or because the voice in their head told them to.

  •  So, NRA, you don't actually want to participate? (7+ / 0-)

    In the process, at all?
    Good to know.

    No, assholes, it's not your ball.  It's OUR ball, and we're still going to play.

    And why video games?  Are you guys just pissed off because the ones you made SUCK?

    I mean, REALLY suck.  Sound Design, guys, it helps a lot with the experience.  Hell, even at a real shooting range there's more entertaining sounds than you put in your games.

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

    by detroitmechworks on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:24:31 PM PST

  •  Those dummies dont they know (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ccasas, lyvwyr101, Iberian, wader

    Video Games don't kill people, people kill people.

  •  $12 billion really isn't that much (8+ / 0-)

    the government could pay them $12 billion/yr to stop manufacturing guns. That would make everyone a lot safer!

    Obama 2012...going to win it with our support!!!

    by mattinjersey on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:27:40 PM PST

  •  The gun lobby's participation is a fraud. (11+ / 0-)

    The NRA and other gun groups have no intention of acquiescing in even the most minimal and rational forms of gun regulation.  Like their paid servants in the Republican Party (and some in the Democratic Party), they are not negotiating in good faith.  Just as it is pointless to negotiate with the Republicans in Congress, it is pointless to negotiate with the NRA.

    The president and vice-president should move forward with additional regulation regardless of what the gun lobby wants.  The people who support the NRA and its positions aren't going to be voting for Democrats anyway, so Obama has very, very little to lose by offending them.  On the flip side, he has much to gain if he can do something about our epidemic of senseless gun violence.  This is an instance of "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead."

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

    by FogCityJohn on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:27:42 PM PST

  •  well I sure wouldn't refuse any help on (5+ / 0-)

    giving people in inner cities where most gun homicide occurs some jobs that pay middle class wages. Even if the people hired have been maybe convicted of a felony or done time or whatever.

    I'd also like their help on making it harder to discriminate in hiring people who have ever sought help for mental illness. Because getting help means not getting hired in the future.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:28:41 PM PST

    •  I totally support that (5+ / 0-)

      but this "Gun violence is about everything but guns" is getting asinine.

      But here's the deal: the NRA is full of shit on those issues, because NRA leadership is made up of the same conservative mentality that destroyed what mental health institutions and funding we had in this country, and they'd NEVER support paying or expanding those services because of government overreach or paying more taxes. They have inculcated disregard and disrespect when it comes to taking mental health seriously. So, frankly, I think any suggestions in that regard from NRA leadership is just blowing smoke up everyone's ass--because the rest of the conservative movement will walk in lockstep to prevent enacting those kinds of policies.

      When you can prove to me that the NRA is not led by people like Grover Norquist and Ted Nugent and Wayne LaPierre and a whole host of Who's Who on the right, then I'll take what they have to say seriously.

      But right now? We have years of evidence on NRA propaganda--especially over the last 4 years--that has created a culture of fear and paranoia and fueled people like James Yeager and other paramilitary types/preppers.

      •  Late last year on a party line vote the Republican (0+ / 0-)

        s voted against a bill the NRA had been working on for years. Things are not one way over on the other side. There are many factions and many of them disagree with each other,,, even at the NRA.

        Their response today after talking with Biden was typical NRA, what happens with them or the REpublican party tomorrow is anyone's guess.

        But if anyone wants a list of things to stop gun homicide that has nothing to do with any sort of restrictions those are at the top of my list. No one can say those things are restrictive.

        How big is your personal carbon footprint?

        by ban nock on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 07:31:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  How many people have been killed (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaywillie, lyvwyr101, Elizaveta, mythatsme

    with Playstation or X-Box controllers?

    I've played first-person shooter games and never had the urge to shoot up a school. But perhaps Mr. LaPierre has more experience interacting with people who have trouble separating their military fantasies from reality.

    •  It's actually the Wii controller, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TKO333

      when you don't put the strap around your wrist. Lethal.

      An unsuccessful shoe bomb attack resulted in nine years of inconvenience for every flier in the country. It would be nice to think [this diabolical act] might lead to some similar inconveniences. --mrblifil

      by Debby on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 10:05:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  There's lots of sex in movies too (5+ / 0-)

    but that never translated to me getting laid.

    I fail to see the correlation.

    If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

    by Major Kong on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:31:12 PM PST

  •  should we bring up the video games the NRA made? (5+ / 0-)

    http://www.businessinsider.com/...

    Because they sure as hell didn't have a problem using games to promote their love of guns. And gun manufacturers sure as hell didn't have a problem promoting themselves in-game with FPS's.

  •  "Video Games" are the new Dungeons & Dragons. (7+ / 0-)

    Dungeons & Dragons
    Heavy Metal music
    Rap music
    Movies

    Blame everything except the mass manufacture and sales of weapons.  

    The tent got so big it now stands for nothing.

    by Beelzebud on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:32:02 PM PST

  •  I'm guessing Biden met with them purely so he (9+ / 0-)

    could say he met with them.  No reasonable person could have really thought such a discussion with these lunatics could have actually been productive.

  •  These people are nuts. (5+ / 0-)

    You can buy guns and ammunition at Walmart, but not Sheryl Crow's album "Love is a Good Thing." They seem to be able to make these inconsonant distinctions without batting an eyelash.

    When Sheryl Crow released her self-titled album in September 1996, Wal-Mart objected to the following lyrics in the song "Love is a Good Thing": "Watch out sister/Watch out brother/Watch our children as they kill each other/with a gun they bought at the Wal-Mart discount stores." [snip] At the time, Crow and her supporters accused Wal-Mart of banning her album because it directly criticized its sale of guns.
    [snip]
    Company spokesman Dale Ingram quickly rejected that allegation. "Wal-Mart believes this is an unfair, untrue and totally irresponsible comment," Ingram said, according to a Sept. 10, 1996 Los Angeles Times article. He said the song insults both the chain, which he stressed strictly prohibits the selling of guns to minors, and many of its employees who work with children's charities. http://www.pbs.org/...
  •  No matter what--- (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla, PsychoSavannah

    it is never---ever---under any and all circumstances---ever---going to be about the GUNS!

    The Onion says----scholars have discovered---the Mayan word for "Apocalypse" in fact---translates more accurately as: "Time of pale obese gun monsters."

    by lyvwyr101 on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:35:37 PM PST

  •  meeting with Biden (4+ / 0-)

    3/4 of NRA members support background checks for all gun purchases. NRA members themselves seem stubbornly unaware that, although they may "be the NRA", the NRA is unapologetic-ally "not them".

    Meanwhile the NRA mouthpieces want to talk to Biden about their feelings and regulating HP in Super Mario Galaxy 3

    Oddly enough, I think the elusive alternative organization you seek is the NRA's own 'silent majority'.  You've got to pry Lapiere cold clammy hands from their pocket books and convince those members to abandon the devil they know (and to whom they've foolishly been paying tribute).

  •  Notice they say the exact same things always? (6+ / 0-)

    Regardless of context? Without the effort to acquire new knowledge?

    Keep the NRA at the table, but have them represented by a chatbot. The effect will be the same.

  •  Goon Control (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaywillie, S F Hippie

    "To beat the NRA, don’t focus on guns. Focus on keeping them away from dangerous people."

    That's according to an article in Slate by William Saletan which concludes

    "Let’s talk about how to keep guns away from the criminals and madmen. You NRA boys don’t have a problem with that, do you?"
    Seems like a good approach.

    If there is no cooperation from the NRA, then other remedies must be sought.  We can't continue to have blood on our streets.  

    It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

    by Radiowalla on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:42:07 PM PST

  •  What other countries don't have... (0+ / 0-)

    Many other countries don't have our extensive border with Mexico, and the Drug War, and the flood of drugs and guns coming into their countries at the rate they are flooding into ours.

    What other countries do have...

    Many other countries have much stronger social programs, including health care systems, than we do, which helps to divert children into appropriate care BEFORE they start shooting up their schools.

    Many other countries also have different school systems and different school environments from ours.    

    We can talk all day about what other countries do and don't have.  Without a thorough and comprehensive analysis, it's hard to tell what is making the real difference.  

    What I do know is that whatever legislation is passed, there will still be a huge number of guns in this country, and various ways and means for a determined person to get access to them, assault weapons and non-assault-weapons, and from all accounts, our high profile shooters are very determined people.

  •  There is NO viable input (4+ / 0-)

    from those who think guns that were turned in should be put back on the market, not destroyed.
    Look at from how far back you have to start. Impossible. NRA are wasting Joe's and everyone's time with their bullshit. Stall, obfuscate, spin.

    I ♥ President Obama. ~ Yes, we did. Again.
    NOW: Hands off SocSec, Medicare and Medicaid. NO Grand Bargain.
    Rich pay a bit more. DoD take a bit less. End war on Afghanistan sooner.

    by OleHippieChick on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:46:23 PM PST

  •  NRA thinks they'd get more gun nuts if... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OleHippieChick

    guys stopped playing video games and went out to a gun range.  

    President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:47:11 PM PST

  •  Shorter "we will now take our committment (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OleHippieChick, Debby, RustyBrown

    and meaningful contributions to members of congress of both parties..... blah blah blah"
    "We'll now go to congress and see who we can buy off."
    What a freaking insane monster.  
    As Morning Joe said this morning or yesterday, I forget, "This is not about the 2nd amendment or keeping kids safe, it's all about the MONEY!" This is nothing but protecting the firearms manufacturers.
    May Mr. La Pierre and his ilk ROT IN HELL>

    America is a COUNTRY, not a CORPORATION. She doesn't need a CEO. Vote Obama.

    by manneckdesign on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:55:29 PM PST

  •  nutz (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RustyBrown

    i live in Lancaster co. Pa. we have a neighbor down the road that fires a fully automatic weapon and other weapons,a couple of summers ago a ricochet hit our garage from the machine gun ,and this is about a 1/8 th mile away,a friend donwn the road also had a building hit.
    after reporting it ?.. they must have talked to them....but they still shoot almost every sunday morning
    you would think.......
    yeeeehaaaa

    In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted." Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)

    by lippythelion69 on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 01:58:42 PM PST

  •  I am not a fan of violent video games... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaywillie, aitchdee, Debby, RustyBrown

    ...however LaPierre is way off base here.

    The issue is not virtual guns, but real ones.

    The NRA is a cancer on this nation.  Strong words, I know, but that is how I feel.

    "Hidden in the idea of radical openness is an allegiance to machines instead of people." - Jaron Lanier

    by FDRDemocrat on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 02:00:54 PM PST

  •  I say good on Biden and Obama (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaywillie, aitchdee, Debby, RustyBrown

    and fuck the nuts at the NRA. There's so much in transition in our culture/attitudes right now - now is the time to push through regulation and the current administration gets that.

    The obligatory conversation has been had. Forward.

  •  I cannot control their guns, only the bearers can (0+ / 0-)

    control their guns.

    My novel take is to enforce the KEEP in the 2nd Amendment.  The bearers purchase a gun it is theirs until they properly transfer ownership.  This does not include, losing it, having it stolen, or giving it away.

    It is not for me to pick up the pieces when a gun owner says oopsie.  It is their gun and they should be criminally and civilly liable until they legally sever that responsibility.

    My petition is not perfect but please sign it as I think the concept is necessary for gun control to be the bearer's responsibility.  Society shouldn't have to pay.

    Sign my White House Petition Enforce the KEEP in the Second Amendment We don't have a problem with gun control, we have a problem with gun owners controlling their guns.

    by 88kathy on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 02:03:02 PM PST

  •  Uh... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stevej, aitchdee, Debby, RustyBrown

    ... so I guess they want to have restrictions on the types and ammo capacity of guns featured in video games, before doing the same with real guns?

    Yeah, that makes sense.

    There be no shelter, here. The front line is everywhere.

    by Wisewood on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 02:03:56 PM PST

  •  Whoa (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    madronagal

    The gun industry is worth $12 billion a year?  Why doesn't the video game have a lobby as powerful as the NRA, considering that industry is worth about $19 billion a year?

    "Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred." Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by djbender on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 02:09:06 PM PST

  •  Guns don't kill people (0+ / 0-)

    ...video games kill people!

  •  I am against any First Amendment (0+ / 0-)

    solution to this the problem of mental health issues.

  •  sure, (0+ / 0-)

    you can regulate my games when you pry them from my cold, dead hands...

  •  Call their bluff! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Debby

    Anybody who buys a violent video game is entered into a federal database, and would not be allowed to buy a gun for a certain period of time.

    •  I would also (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RustyBrown

      like to call their bluff on mental health services. Fully fund mental health on a universal/single-payer system NOW since they're so concerned about that.

      An unsuccessful shoe bomb attack resulted in nine years of inconvenience for every flier in the country. It would be nice to think [this diabolical act] might lead to some similar inconveniences. --mrblifil

      by Debby on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 10:12:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site