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, Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association (NRA)
The latest New York Times/CBS News poll shows almost unheard of levels of support for the general background checks for gun purchasers as included in President Obama's executive orders (those orders are here).
Just about everyone agrees with the idea—about 9 in 10 gun owners favor background checks as do people with no firearms in their home. Independents (95 percent), Democrats (93 percent) and Republicans (89 percent) all support a background check for those trying to buy firearms. No matter where people live: in the South, the Northeast, in big cities, in small towns. Even members of the National Rifle Association favor background checks. Only 7 percent of all adults in the survey, conducted Friday though Tuesday, oppose background checks for prospective gun customers.
The poll also finds strong agreement with one NRA proposal, with "three-quarters of those surveyed said more police and armed security guards would help prevent mass shootings." So the NRA has that going for them at the moment. Their continued over-the-top tactics, like their latest ad focusing on the president's children, could very well end any of that support. After universal condemnation for the ad, the organization remains belligerent and defiant.
For its part, the National Rifle Association isn’t backing down one bit. In an interview on “TODAY” with NBC’s Savannah Guthrie, the NRA’s David Keene opposed the kind of universal background checks Obama is calling for. Keene also argued that limiting gun magazines to just 10 rounds doesn’t do much to stop a mass shooter. (“It takes a second to change the magazine,” he said.) And he defended its web video that injected the Obama daughters into the gun-violence debate. (“It wasn’t about the president’s daughters,” Keene said about the web video. “It’s about how to keep children safe.”) It was curious to hear Keene’s answer on the magazine—if it’s not that big of a deal then passing the legislation shouldn’t be a problem, right?
That's the kind of logic dominating the debate from the gun lobby side.  Passing the legislation will be a problem if Congress, and particularly Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, drags their heels on bringing it to the floor.

Please send an email to your member of the House of Representatives demanding s/he support President Obama's proposals for improving gun safety.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:07 AM PST.

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

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

  •  I sent my email yesterday. (10+ / 0-)

    One thing the Republicans will not accept is, these proposals aren't radical in the least, they're very common sense, basic measures. People get it, even if the NRA doesn't.

    "Let us never forget that doing the impossible is the history of this nation....It's how we are as Americans...It's how this country was built"- Michelle Obama

    by blueoregon on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:13:19 AM PST

  •  Some people, when they are losing... (6+ / 0-)

    double their bet on the next hand.  The idea is that they'll win back everything!

    Of course, some people are idiots.

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

    by detroitmechworks on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:18:22 AM PST

  •  It would be a shame if once again (8+ / 0-)

    a minute, but vocal minority were given the power to drive the action on this issue.

    It is good to see that the large majority of Americans see the 2nd Amendment right through the lens of also it coming with a responsibility to preserving a civil and safe society.

  •  This is a good time to break the back of that (13+ / 0-)

    organization, and I've been looking for this for a long time.

    Unfortunately, as usual, it takes some sort of a tipping-point crisis.

    Let's hope over time for their eventual marginalization.

    "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 Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:20:03 AM PST

    •  If 20 dead (6+ / 0-)

      6 and 7 year olds isn't a tipping point, then what is?

      If the NRA wants guards in schools (then we'll also need guards for playgrounds, before and after school activies, sporting evens, on school buses and outings, etc, etc, etc) then let them pay for it.  

      Taxes and annual registration fees on all guns, taxes on all ammo purchases, taxes and annual inspection fees on all gun manufacturers, importers and stores selling guns.  Annual inspection fees on all gun ranges.  

      Hunting rifles and shotguns would be exempt (except for the ammunition).  

      Then I might support guards in every school, otherwise...not so sure.

      The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

      by jaf49 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:33:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  and GOP w/them (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wildthumb

      When you say it is "common sense" what you are really saying is "I don't have any evidence to back up my argument", because it is quite often neither common nor sense.

      by kaminpdx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:55:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Screaming for gun bans isn't going to break (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hangpilot

        the NRA.  Their numbers of have swelled in the last month.   This is undoubtedly part of why congress is refusing to take up the debate.  As of yesterday they have 250,000 new members in the last month and it is a hell of a lot of (additional) people making their opinion heard.  Each one of these new members is a citizen of this country who believes, rightfully or wrongfully, that the govt wants to take away their rights and is joining a political lobby organization to try to do something about it.  

        •  1. My comment isn't "screaming." I sound (0+ / 0-)

          downright rational. Their response is paranoia, which IS NOT
          rational.
          2. There is some evidence out there that all this new membership is because they heavily discounted joining.
          3. There are causes and there are causes. Many causes "rightfully or wrongfully" find people "joining a political lobby organization to try to do something about it." Some causes are just damned reactionary, towards a direction that doesn't further human progress, and I just can't support because of the essential irrational nature of the cause.

          This really noisy minority is vastly outnumbered by those that want a reasonable response to the wild west ambience in this country which is taking us all off the rails.

          "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 Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 03:17:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  And... (6+ / 0-)
    Ninety-two percent of Americans favor background checks for all potential gun buyers, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll.
    and in the same poll
    Seventy-four percent of Americans, meanwhile, said that more armed security guards would help prevent mass shootings in public places. Thirty-five percent said armed guards would help a lot in places like schools, movie theatres and malls, and another 39 percent said they would help some. One in four said they would not help.
    Excluding that doesn't make it go away that although we have disdain for LaPierre - that the vast majority of AMerican also belive that having guards at schools would help prevent Newtown type shootings as well.

    The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

    by ctexrep on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:20:17 AM PST

    •  the 74% are imagining secret serivce levels of (9+ / 0-)

      armed security guards

      What they are getting is mall cops with brain blasters.

      Heaven help us.

      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 Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:28:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The belief that armed security guards (6+ / 0-)

      would help to prevent mass shootings was noted in the diary above.

      I don't really think that's much of an issue.  The reality is that this country has been well trained primarily in the Bush years to accept this theory of security.  Many schools and other public gathering places already have armed security personnel, anyway.

      The main thing that gun safety advocates have to continue to stress is what we can do that is new or different from what we've been doing because that's where the problems are coming from.  Even if Newtown had had a security guard, the speed at which the shooter's weapon discharged rounds would have still left a lot of people dead that day.  At the theater in Aurora, 30 people had already been shot within 30 seconds.  An armed guard would not have prevented that carnage.

      •  I agree with you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sneakers563

        100%.

        I don't think anything stops a crazy person.  The mere fact that millions of killing weapons exist and millions of high capacity magazines exist (Most of that we have no clue of where they are and who owns them) makes passing a law to prevent this just as effective as the guard - which is little or none.

        If passing a law kept guns off the streets - maybe we should pass them for cocaine and crystal meth....ooppps - they already exist.  ;-)

        The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

        by ctexrep on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:05:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, we aren't enforcing the laws we already (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          noway2, Buckeye54

          have and we don't have certain laws and systems that we do need.  It will be a long term project trying to clean up the illegal trafficking for instance.  I think that there are many things we can do to take the lawlessness down a few notches.

        •  I kind of agree with your reasoning (4+ / 0-)

          But I think the problem is that the widespread availability of these kinds of weapons and magazines is a result of not restricting them earlier.  After all, virtually every gun used in committing a crime was purchased legally at some point.  These types of weapons were not always present in such large numbers.  Had we banned them at that time, they would not be readily available now, and these shootings would be perpetrated by people armed with revolvers.

          So I think you're right that the cat's out of the bag.  Nonetheless, you need to step in at some point and say that further evolution of these weapons is unacceptable.  Who knows what "assault-style" weapons and high capacity magazines will be like in 20 years?  I worry that in 2032 we'll be sitting around saying, "Well, it's too late now, but if we had banned these weapons in 2012 we wouldn't be facing them now".  Rather than addressing the current weapon supply, I think these laws are aimed at holding the line, and preventing us from having to face even more deadly weapons in the future.

          To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

          by sneakers563 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:40:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Machine guns were banned. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sneakers563

            We don't see those making appearances all over the country anymore.

            Your point is absolutely correct in the sense that we've basically gone to a model of zero safety regulation which is just too extreme and, frankly, ridiculous.  And where we do still have some legal framework in place, the laws are often not enforced.

            The lack of enforcement of existing law is sort of like if the police and prosecutors decided to just not pursue a high percentage of people who commit murder.  Eventually, the murder rate would go up because more people would feel they could get away with it.

            I really think that this country is on the precipice of becoming one of those countries in which life is cheap - or we could choose not to be - but it is a choice - it isn't something that "just happens" for no reason, IMO.

          •  There is a little issue called in Common Use (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ctexrep, sneakers563, Hangpilot

            Per the SCOTUS ruling United States v. Miller,

            the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time”
            The AR 15 and semiautomatic handguns containing between 11 and 19 rounds are amongst the most commonly carried by police and civilians for the purpose of defense.  It is also important to note that these are NOT military weapons designed for the battlefield.  They are civilian models that cosmetically resemble those for the battlefield.

            At a minimum without legislative action and based upon the above I think without at least a SCOTUS ruling (not just legislation), a ban is a non starter.

            If at some point in such as in 2032, the (civilian) police carry phasers or plasma rifles, then according to the present rules these would also be justifiable for carry by the citizens.

          •  Your point is well taken (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sneakers563

            The technology and efficiency of weaponry has taken off - and it's time to try and reel it in.

            My concern with laws and the false sense of security they can create takes people off guard.

            Of the ~32K deaths that result from firearms each year - more than half are suicide.

            Studies have shown that over 90% of people who die from suicide have one or more psychiatric disorders at the time of their death. Luckily, there are ways to treat and control these disorders and potentially prevent suicide.
            Here's the link.

            Stonger background checks - eliminating loopholes in the B/G check process - can prevent a lot of these people from having access to guns.  Now there are other ways to commit suicide - but a gun seems to be quick and convenient.  It's too bad data isn't kept on the total number of suicides and of those committed, how many had access to guns used them vs some other form (hanging, medication etc).  Considering many who commit suicide don't really want to die - making it less convenient for those who suffer from mental illness not only protects them from themselves, but to others as well.

            This doesn't exactly address the Newtown type shooter - since the systems worked - he was just psychotic - and I have strong doubts that a person such as Lanza can be stopped by gun laws - we don't know all the facts of this persons mental state - drugs he may have been taking, if he had violent tendencies.

            I'm all for strick background checks (I think even the NRA is) - I'm for eliminating high capacity clips - I don't think tht a style of weapon is all that relevent.  If you ban assault syle weapon with limiting clip size - gun mfg will just produce larger clips for semi-auto hunting rifles - or rifles will be designed to get around the assault ban yet have the same capabilities.

            This isn't going to be easy - and really it shouldn't.  People have a legitimate right to own a firearm - that has to be balanced with everyones expectation of security and welfare regardless of gun ownership.

            The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

            by ctexrep on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:33:26 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Laws won't stop a crazy person. Neither will (0+ / 0-)

          having AN armed guard or two roaming around the school.  In events like these, the response needs to be immediate.  It truly is a matter when seconds do count.  Arming the teachers may not be the answer, but they sure as hell need a better option than cowering while praying, "please don't see me."

          •  Teachers want to protect their students (0+ / 0-)

            Obviously, no teacher (or anyone) would want to face what the teachers in Newtown had to deal with - even pepper spray or mace could have made a difference - it wouldn't have eliminated the carnage but it could have limited it - like you said cowering and praying aren't exactly good options.

            The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

            by ctexrep on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:45:06 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  No, an armed guard would not have prevented (0+ / 0-)

        that carnage.  What we do know is that he stopped when he was confronted.  We also don't know if had he encountered immediate and forceful resistance if he would have stopped sooner.  Nor do we know if anyone would have been able to stop him sooner.  Is there a reason he chose that theater and was it because it was the only one in the immediate vicinity that banned licensed people from being armed?

        There are too many unknowns.

        •  IIRC the shooter at the theater's weapon (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          amsterdam

          jammed after about 70+ rounds (out of 100) and that's when people around him were able to subdue him.

          Ironically, I think that he may be the only person in the room that night who would have standing to bring a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the gun and/or ammo magazine.  One of the few things you can sue the manufacturers for is malfunction.  Isn't that ironic.

          Anyway, in the case of every one of the recent shootings, the moment where a reload or switch to another weapon has been the moment where people have been stopped.  The moments before have offered carnage consistent with the number of available rounds and the speed of the weapons in discharging those rounds.  It is fair to make the speed of the weapons and the high capacity magazines a focus for safety changes.

  •  I realize it's easy to send an email (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaf49, 417els

    but you really should be telling people to call their representatives, and supplying contact information, such as the Congressional switchboard number.  We all know how easy it is to send email to a spam folder or to delete it.

    "But the problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence." - President Clinton

    by anonevent on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:20:22 AM PST

  •  Gabby Gifford's shooter was stopped cause he (17+ / 0-)

    had to reload.

    10 is generous.

    If you can't kill game in 3 shots stick to the supermarket

    As the Elites Come Together to Rise Above to Find a Third Way to do Rude things to the 99%

    by JML9999 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:21:15 AM PST

    •  I'm glad you posted this. (5+ / 0-)

      Many gun nuts continue to say magazine size doesn't matter, because they can be switched out so quickly.

      The point that they're missing is that these mass killers can drop the magazine on the sidewalk and allow heroes a brief second to subdue the killer, as was done in the Gifford's shooting you mentioned.

      And, why the hell do the gun advocates need high capacity magazines anyhow?  Purpose?

      "If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." Charles Darwin

      by Rockydog on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:40:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Purpose? To fend off the Jackbooted stormtroopers (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rockydog, sethtriggs, cocinero, Buckeye54

        in their Black Helicopters... I wish I was snarking......

        As the Elites Come Together to Rise Above to Find a Third Way to do Rude things to the 99%

        by JML9999 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:44:59 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Define high capacity (0+ / 0-)
        And, why the hell do the gun advocates need high capacity magazines anyhow?  Purpose?
        How many attackers is one going to face?  How many men does it take to gang rape a woman in a back ally?  What's more, how many rounds does it take to stop the threat?  

        Collected information on 'stopping' power shows that on average the answer is at least two solid hits.  Someone who is drugged up may take a lot more because they won't feel the pain and unless you hit something vital that either causes enough drop in blood pressure or breaks a bone they can keep on coming.  Add to that in an extreme stress situation fine motor skills will go down the toilet.  This means that the ability to actually aim and deliver a bullet into a particular body part is almost nil. I have read that in 2005, the NYC police hit rate was 17.4%.  

        So, lets say you have 3 attackers, which doesn't seem unreasonable.  At least two bullets each to stop them, with a hit rate of 17% (3 * 2 / .17) ~ 35 bullets to get the job done.  So who needs a "high capacity" magazine?  How about you, your wife, your sister, your daughter?

        •  Sure, but what if there aren't 3 attackers. (0+ / 0-)

          What if there are 6 attackers?!  Then, you'll need 70 bullets by your numbers.  Holy cannoli, Batman!  So we really need to legalize fully automatic submachine guns.  A wussy semi-automatic won't do.  But, an Uzie only holds 50 rounds.  Oh no!  An Oozie won't do by your numbers. Ahhh!

          But, what if there are 9 attackers?  Then, we'll need 105 round magazines.  Sure, a fully automatic machine gun might work. But, what if it doesn't and they're so damn heavy and what if there are MORE attackers?  My gosh, golly, gee, mister.  We'll need frag grenades!  I really don't see how a true man can protect his family without frag grenades. I mean come on, you pussies.  If you don't want to legalize frag grenades, you're a whiney little bitch.

          This study from the New England Journal of Medicine clearly concludes having a gun in the home is much more likely to kill a friend or family member ie. your wife, sister or daughter than a bad guy.  But, man who gives a shit about "studies," "facts," and "research," when you can drift off into NRA fantasy world?

          "If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." Charles Darwin

          by Rockydog on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 05:38:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Hah! (0+ / 0-)

          So this bad guy is going to continue his attack after your sister has blown his two buddies away?

          Yeah, right.

          Do what Jesus would do if he were rich.

          by jestbill on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 05:40:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hopefully not (0+ / 0-)

            As long as there are multiple attackers, you have clear disparity of force which is strong justification for the use of lethal force.  Once your down to one on one, unless there is a size, gender, or some other obvious difference, you no longer have disparity which changes the dynamics and they better represent a lethal threat (meet the AOJ principles) in some other way.

            Seriously, carrying a gun is not like it is depicted on TV, which goes a long way to explaining many of the perceptions I keep seeing.

  •  Angry Old White Men (6+ / 0-)

    Keene and LaPierre are truly the fringe extremist minority.

  •  Silly and self-defeating comments (13+ / 0-)

    Silly and self-defeating. It takes a "second" to change the magazine --- then, why, does anyone need a larger capacity magazine at all?

    The fact remains that when you have a gun firing bullets many times PER SECOND, that second when that person would change the magazine means fucking everything.

    We're also talking about highly mobile killers here. The chance of some guy bringing 10 separate magazines instead of 1 giant one seems kind of like something worth caring about to me.

  •  The guy's an idiot about reloading not mattering (17+ / 0-)

    In the Tuscon shooting, the shooter was tackled by people in the crowd when he stopped to reload. It's some ugly math, but smaller magazines do in fact make a difference.

    Conservatives believe evil comes from violating rules. Liberals believe evil comes from violating each other.

    by tcorse on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:23:49 AM PST

  •  NRA has child's blood on its hands (7+ / 0-)

     In 1994, a ban went into effect that made semi-auto assault style and big magazines illegal.  In 2004, the NRA successful killed that law.

      So the weapons ans clips used in Sandy Hook were there because the NRA wanted them there.  They have at least some direct responsibility for that massacre.

    "We borrow this Earth from our Grandchildren."

    by Arizona Mike on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:26:11 AM PST

    •  What's our goal-1 less tiny coffin nt (4+ / 0-)

      As the Elites Come Together to Rise Above to Find a Third Way to do Rude things to the 99%

      by JML9999 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:29:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  1997 North Hollywood shootout (0+ / 0-)

      North Hollywood Wiki

      The North Hollywood shootout was an armed confrontation between two heavily armed and armored bank robbers and officers of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) in the North Hollywood district of Los Angeles on February 28, 1997. Both robbers were killed, eleven police officers and seven civilians were injured, and numerous vehicles and other property were damaged or destroyed by the nearly 2,000 rounds of ammunition fired by the robbers and the police.[2]
      The bad guys had all sorts of illegal stuff including body armor. The cops at the time were totally outgunned until a firearms dealer brought them something with some stump.

      Sure it's a wild exception, but where there is a criminal intent, criminals are going to do things.

      Amazing that with 2000 rounds of ammo only the bad guys ended up buying the farm.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:46:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You're wrong on that. The bushmaster (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sneakers563

      used was not banned by the so called assault weapon ban, so the NRA, by killing that law (however they could have done that as they have no vote) did not affect at all what was used in Sandy Hook. I hate & despise the NRA as well, but when you make claims like you just did you should at least know what you're talking about.

      •  Weren't the high capacity magazines banned? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kentucky Kid

        From the Bushmaster site:

        With the "Sunset" of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban on Sept. 13th, 2004, Bushmaster can again offer features on the AR15 type rifle that had been deemed illegal for those 10 years - such as flash suppressors, bayonet lugs, collapsing telescopic stocks and high capacity magazines.

        To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

        by sneakers563 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:52:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, new high cap magazines were banned from (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sneakers563

          being sold/made. Existing ones were grandfathered in though, so it would've depended on when (or maybe how) she procurred the mags' as to if hers in particular would have been legal or not today if the AWB was still in affect.

          The gun itself though could still be manufactured & sold, minus a couple of the "black objects" accessories that are included with them now.

  •  get my gun Linda Sue (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    88kathy, shoeless, cocinero

    i been watching that french fella on fox and he been tellin us that our nazi fedral goverment gonna take all our guns.
    next thing you know, they be takin our trailer and my dodge ram.

    this gonna be a war

    hey babe, get me another brew and stop your yappin

    People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think. -George Carlin

    by downtownLALife on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:26:46 AM PST

  •  Keene is a liar. (6+ / 0-)

    He knows full well that the gunman who shot Gabby Gifford was subdued whie changing magazines.

    When someone tells you they are lying, you should believe them.

    by shoeless on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:30:59 AM PST

  •  Americans are demanding improved Gun Control (5+ / 0-)

     AND  legalization of marijuana.

    Republicans stand against all of that with a thick foam in their mouths.

    Guns kill - buy all you want.

    Marijuana doesn't kill - touch it and you're doomed.

    Upside down laws and the GOP are at the exact center of the problem(s).

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:31:12 AM PST

  •  It's time to stop giving mass killers (6+ / 0-)

    everything they could ever hope for in guns, magazine capacity, and background checks.

    "If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." Charles Darwin

    by Rockydog on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:31:15 AM PST

    •  And night vision goggles (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rockydog, wonderful world, sethtriggs

      and body armor, like the Aurora, Colorado cinema killer had should also be banned.

      The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

      by jaf49 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:37:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Body armor - yes (0+ / 0-)

        Night vision - NO.

        2 words: night hunting.

        I am just about to get into this.

        The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

        by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:39:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And while night hunting (0+ / 0-)

          how do you distinguish the body heat display of an animal vs the body heat display of another hunter, or someone at a campsite or a lost hiker?

          Can you?  

          If you can't aren't you going to just shoot?

          Can't agree xxdr.

          The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

          by jaf49 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:59:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  night vision goggles allow you to (0+ / 0-)

            see actual things.  Infrared equipment goes off body heat. Goggles use ambient light. So he could tell what he us shooting.

            When you say it is "common sense" what you are really saying is "I don't have any evidence to back up my argument", because it is quite often neither common nor sense.

            by kaminpdx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:14:16 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yup. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Rockydog

              The night vision scopes are really expensive: I may start with a cheap laser designator, sort of a glorified flashlight that lights things up nicely but doesn't impact one's natural night vision.

              It may be awhile before I totally get into it. I enjoy this stuff but I am hardly OCD about it. 'I'll get around to it' versus being driven with a frothy fervor.

              The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

              by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:34:30 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  IR is really expensive. (0+ / 0-)

              The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

              by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:35:18 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  I really love it when people who clearly (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Diane dp

            don't know what they are talking about want to press me to the wall about something they don't understand but just don't like.

            LMAO.

            The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

            by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:32:06 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  the aurora shooter was not wearing (0+ / 0-)

        Body armor. He was wearing a "tactical vest"... basically black nylon with a lot of pockets.

        --Shannon

        "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
        "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

        by Leftie Gunner on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:18:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Start with mental health checks at the NRA (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaf49, wonderful world, cocinero

    Given the NRA's insane actions recently, including dragging the President's kids into the NRA's PR activity on behalf of the gun manufacturers, and that wild-eyed photo of Wayne LaPierre, a productive place to start administering mental health checks as a conditon for gun ownership would be at the NRA headquarters.  

  •  just had an interesting conversation with an NRA (5+ / 0-)

    member at work.

    he asked me what i thought about all this "obama anti-gun b.s" ..
    since i am the designated "liberal" in my office, he wanted to know what my view was.

    disclosure - i am not a typical liberal..

    i told him that i think that the national conversation on guns is typically based on conventional wisdom, as-in false choices.

    my view is that any citizen has the right to own anything they want, including (in my opinion) insane weapons, as long as they are "well regulated", background checked, licenced and registered.

    further more, i told him that i think the right to own 'arms' should be limited to a persons private property and other designated weapon zones (hunting grounds and shooting ranges).

    this would exlude any public zones!

    just like the 1st amendment has limitations, so should the 2nd.

    to my surprise, he totaly agreed with me.

    so you see, not all NRA members are insane.
    :)

    "teabaggers say: i want my country back. well, i say: i want my country forward! ... " (bill.maher)

    by CoEcoCe on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:33:16 AM PST

    •  Wow, your suggestions would be more effective (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CoEcoCe, cocinero

      than what is being floated right now. However, unless the 2nd amendment is changed, conceal carry in public is going to be law. The courts just forced Illinois (the last state without concealed carry) to make it legal.

      Also, registering all weapons would be hugely effective, but most gun owners simply won't tolerate it--I don't think a single one of our RKBA crowd would accept registration. I was compared to the Nazis and Taliban for suggesting it.

      With those obstacles in place, I think it is more prudent to limit access to the most dangerous weapons. It seems that is all the courts will allow.

      I would agree with your opinion here wholeheartedly if it were a possibility.

      "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

      by ranger995 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:50:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  btw, ive been thinking a lot about this since (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ranger995

        hearing Thom Hartmann's explanation of the origin of the 2nd amendment, as a way to ensure the southern militias had the right to enforce contrtol over slaves.

        seems clear, to me, that this has nothing to do with the right to personally own guns, but given the contemporary interpritation of the constitution we could focus how to enforce a responsible application (where guns can be carried), based on well regulation and personal responsibility (the right wing loves that term! dont they).. well, lets see how serious they are about it.

        "teabaggers say: i want my country back. well, i say: i want my country forward! ... " (bill.maher)

        by CoEcoCe on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:00:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Words never spoken by any mass killer ever: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sethtriggs, cocinero, Diane dp

    "Boy, I wish this 30 rounds mag only held 7 rounds."

    "If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." Charles Darwin

    by Rockydog on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:34:14 AM PST

  •  The reason they fear the Gun registry (0+ / 0-)

    ... is largely because of what would inevitably come after it: regulation.

    If the federal government planned to only use the registry for the tracking of fire arms, for ensuring all were purchased legally, keeping them out of the hands of known criminals, and  linking those used in violent acts with their owners/sellers ... I don't think the NRA would have as much of a problem.

    The problem is when the FED uses that list for things other then those listed above, once they know where all the guns are.  'Gun insurance', weapon bans, and other unpopular forms of regulation can only be enacted and enforced if they know where all the guns are, and this is why the NRA fights so hard against something that seems relatively benign for law-abiding gun owners.

    •  They fear the DELUSION of a federal 'gun grab'. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ranger995, jaf49, cocinero

      Which I don't believe will ever happen.

      We have to register out cars: when was the last car grab?

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:40:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't believe it will happen either (0+ / 0-)

        ... but it would only be possible once a federal registry was compiled.  And honestly, a lot of folks on the left are perfectly fine with 'gun grabs', enforced buy-back plans, forced gun-ownership insurance, etc.

        In this case, I'd be for the registry, but against these uses of it.  Personally, I'd bet that with an accurate list compiled though, policies like these are profoundly more likely.

    •  Illinois requires registration and they have not (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jaf49, sethtriggs, cocinero, Diane dp

      used it to collect any guns.

      They do use it to catch people who are buying guns legally and selling them to people who are not allowed to purchase.

      Unfortunately, Illinois, and Chicago in particular, are very close to Indiana which has very loose gun restrictions. For example, someone from Illinois can get a UTAH permit via the mail, then go to Indiana, who honors the Utah permit, and buy guns without registering them. Then, they can drive back home and sell them.

      If all guns had to be registered, then it would be much easier to catch people who were illegally selling them.

      "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

      by ranger995 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:53:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I prepare income tax returns for a living. (7+ / 0-)

    When I applied for a Preparers Identification Number (PIN) and an Electronic Filing Identification Number (EFIN) I had to submit a set of fingerprints along with proper identification to, I was told, the FBI.  I got the fingerprints from the local Sheriffs office after receiving the blank form in the mail.  After a criminal background check, my applications were accepted and both my PIN and EFIN numbers were assigned to me.

    When I purchased my shotgun at a flea market I just had to present the dealer with cash money and I got my shotgun.

    Perfectly logical.

    "With all due respect, that's a bunch of malarky". - V.P. Joe Biden

    by Taxmancometh on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:38:47 AM PST

  •  Concerning the magazine/clips (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vote4Obamain2012, cocinero, Diane dp

    Yes, a 10 round magazine can be changed just as quickly as a 30 round magazine, but when you have to change it 3 times to 1, yeah it can make a difference.  Those one or two seconds (or more if they've got to continually fish around their pocket to pull out the next clip) can mean the difference between a person or two making it out a door or around a corner to safety.  Those one or two seconds per 10 rounds are 3 more chances for someone to tackle the shooter or to get away.

    These "it won't make a difference, so why bother" shitlicks are pathetic.  

    http://www.ljpimages.smugmug.com

    by abbysomething on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:40:09 AM PST

  •  The times they are a-changing (5+ / 0-)

    The NRA is in panic-mode. They know they are already losing this fight and don't have a clue how to stop the slide so they keep making PR blunder after blunder.

    The 'Obamas' security' ad was just the latest.

    A weapon that is also a treasure is certain to be used.

    by wonderful world on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:40:29 AM PST

  •  Machine Rifle ban (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Diane dp

    I was listening last night the a story on the machine rifle ban on All Things Considered. It was interesting that it was passed in liberal congress, but not opposed by the NRA because of tax previously imposed made such guns very unpopular.

    As far as I can tell the fee for a background check is only like $30.  It makes me think of the huge amount of taxpayer money that is being wasted to build and maintain these databases of people who should not have guns.

    You know even when I buy a car from an individual for my private use I have to pay taxes on the price that the state thinks i should have paid for the car.  When a car is given to me I still have to pay a fee.

    So why can't we do this thing that was considered perfectly legal and rational 50 years ago.  Certainly we do not think less of the second amendment now that we did when everyone was running around with machine pistols?

    Tax all gun and gun accessories transfers at up to 1000%.  Use that money to build the databases .

    And if anyone objects, then consider the drug laws which kill as many people as guns.  These laws strip suspects of their right to a best defense, by removing assets and their right to due process by mandating sentence.  It is clear that conservatives believe that ignoring the constitution is void if it costs lives.

  •  HAHAHA (0+ / 0-)

    "three-quarters of those surveyed said more police and armed security guards would help prevent mass shootings."

    So we need a police state so we can have guns.

    bangs head on desk ,head asplode

    Just a guy made of dots and lines.

    by BobX on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:42:25 AM PST

  •  The NRA guy was right about one thing: (0+ / 0-)

    While limiting magazines to less rounds is good because it makes it more difficult to carry tons of rounds (a lot easier to carry around three 30-round magazines than nine 10-round magazines), if they don't do something about how easy it is to change magazines the law won't be that effective.

    "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

    by ranger995 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:45:05 AM PST

  •  Shorter Wayne LaPierre: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaf49, cocinero

    Americans don't get to decide what they want.  That's MY job!  I, and my NRA, shall decide what Americans want!

    Proponents of gun violence own guns. Opponents of gun violence do not own guns. What part of this do you not understand?

    by Liberal Panzer on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:46:20 AM PST

  •  The NRA is not denying reality (0+ / 0-)

    They are doing what all corporate/right wing propagandists do. They are creating their own parallel reality.
    Government takeover of healthcare, victory mosque on ground zero, death panels, Obamaphones, Taj Mahal vacation, Kenyan Muslim, etc... and now, "King Obama is going to take away your guns"...."He must be impeached!!!!'
    There has never been any factual basis for any of these "shocking revelations". But, there is a faction of people in this country who just want to be fed information to justify their prejudices or emotions. Facts don't matter.

  •  This is an argument for US, not THEM! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaf49
    Keene also argued that limiting gun magazines to just 10 rounds doesn’t do much to stop a mass shooter. (“It takes a second to change the magazine,” he said.)
    "OK, since--as you say--it doesn't take long to change the magazine, then there's no harm done in banning them, right?"

    "Push the button, Max!" Jack Lemmon as Professor Fate, The Great Race

    by bartcopfan on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:52:29 AM PST

  •  gun violence and attitudes (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero

    What should be taking place at this point is a general public expression of horror and censure over gun violence. Legislators act as leaders in this process, in part by passing even token legislation.  Judging from Australia, this kind of public attitude has a strong deterrent effect that even filters down to the violent psychos among us. Tragically, the NRA, along with redneck legislators and a complicit media (which thrives on 'controversy')  seriously undermine this kind of public expression.  The message becomes "well, too bad about those kids in Newtown, but we got to have them assault rifles or America will fall".  Yeah.

  •  That Today Show Interview - sheesh! (0+ / 0-)

    Even in the realm of lightweight morning television, the Today Show should be embarrassed to have aired that interview with Keene this morning. Savannah Guthrie, who I am sure is a wonderful person, gave one of the least substantive interview in the history of media. Basically she read a list of questions, let Keene answer, never challenged his assumptions or demanded he provide statistics, and then thanked him for his time. If Sarah Palin had only faced that level of scrutiny, she would have had multiple opportunities to resign from the VP's office by now.

    A government that denies gay men the right to bridal registry is a facist state - Margaret Cho

    by CPT Doom on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:55:18 AM PST

  •  Just buyers? Or users? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Batya the Toon, cocinero, Diane dp

    It seems to me that it will still be easy for the wrong people to get their hands on guns if they happen to be family members of someone who is allowed to buy guns--perhaps even friends.

    If you own a car, you can let someone else drive it as long as that person has a valid license.

    I like the suggestion that others have made of requiring insurance coverage. If one's premiums go up sharply if a gun is used improperly, then the insured gun owner would have reason to exercise prudence before letting anyone else use the gun. It doesn't prevent all problems, as a gun owner may well have complete (but ill-founded) trust in a family member.

  •  Keep shooting off your mouth, LaPierre (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero

    Every time you do, you "kill off" more supporters. It's wonderful to have an obvious crackpot like Wayne as the face of the NRA. Helps our cause.

  •  And when some of these paranoid barrel-buffers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero, Diane dp

    start really believing every person walking by their house or up their drive is a commie fascist gun grabber and opens fire, who's the NRA going to blame?

    1. The government.
    2. The black guy who runs the government.
    3. The people who voted for the black guy who runs the government.
    4. The liberal media who mind-control the people who voted for the black guy who runs the government.
    5. Companies who make video games and probably have some association with George Soros, FEMA and Agenda 21.
    6. God-hating liberals who own the companies who make video games and probably have some association with George Soros, FEMA and Agenda 21.
    7. Every gun control organization and law that ever existed including all those the NRA lobbied, bribed, threatened or awarded politicians to shut down.
    8. Hollywood.
    9. Chemtrails.
    10. The people who were assassinated in cold blood because they weren't sufficiently armed.

    And that's just for starters.

    ...and after we get your guns, we're coming for your dildos.

    by here4tehbeer on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:07:41 AM PST

  •  Expected from 2-year old throwing a tantrum... (0+ / 0-)
  •  This was the part that blew my mind: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Diane dp
    Independents (95 percent), Democrats (93 percent) and Republicans (89 percent) all support a background check for those trying to buy firearms.
    Just ... holy crap.  The lowest number there is 89%.

    When was the last time 89% of the country agreed on anything?

  •  Koch brothers have told their congress critters (0+ / 0-)

    to back off on the debt ceiling and focus on the March sequester. Following from Financial Times quoted by Naked Capitalism.

       A conservative activist group backed by the industrialist Koch brothers is urging Republicans to show restraint during US debt ceiling negotiations, representing a shift in position by the usually hardline Americans for Prosperity.

     The move by the influential group underscores concern that a political stand-off over extending the US’s borrowing limit, which many Republicans are pushing for at the end of February, would diminish public support for sharp cuts in government spending, AFP’s stated goal. AFP opposed an agreement that raised the debt ceiling in 2011 because it said the deal did not go far enough to cut spending.

        “We’re saying calibrate your message. Focus on overspending instead of long-term debt,” said Tim Phillips, president of AFP. “Focusing on [the debt ceiling] makes the messaging more difficult.”

    Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/...

    The frog jumped/ into the old pond/ plop! (Basho)

    by Wolf10 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:42:18 AM PST

  •  RKBA here and totally agree (0+ / 0-)

    I'm all for universal background checks for any gun sold, whether it's from a dealer or individual.  This is a great example of why I despise the NRA.  They are so far to the extreme on these issues.  I also thing that this would have a fighting chance of passing Congress.  

    "I'm a progressive man and I like progressive people" Peter Tosh

    by Texas Lefty on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:46:53 AM PST

  •  NRA has only one goal: (0+ / 0-)

    They want to retain greater capability to kill people they don't like.  It is totally illogical to try curb arms in Iran and North Korea while ignoring the greater terrorist threat at home.  We simply cannot allow moral vomit like the NRA dictate our laws.

  •  Response from Mr. Miller of Florida (0+ / 0-)

    In response to the recent tragedies, there has been much discussion regarding gun control, gun free zones, and the reintroduction of the assault weapons ban. Under President Obama's direction, Vice President Biden is leading efforts to end gun-related violence through policies, including an assault weapons ban. Senator Dianne Feinstein, a long time advocate for gun-control and author of the 1994 assault weapons ban, has pledged to reintroduce and pass her assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.  

    It is important to keep in mind that far too often, we see attention paid to the firearm and not the criminal.  It has been proven that infringing on the rights of innocent Americans, as shown as a result of the prior semiautomatic firearm ban that expired in September 2004, will not end violent crime and put an end to all evil.  It is my hope that within these discussions, all factors that play a role in criminal activity is taken into consideration.

    I am a firm believer in protecting the longstanding American right to keep and bear arms.  Rest assured, I will continue to work hard with my colleagues in Congress to see that this fundamental right is not infringed upon and will remain opposed to any action that would infringe upon, revoke, or limit that right in any way.  

  •  NRA Board of Directors (0+ / 0-)

    http://www.meetthenra.org/

    Interesting to review this list. Includes Grover Norquist, Ted Nugent, Tom Selleck, Larry Craig, John Bolton, Chuck Norris, Oliver North, etc

  •  it's not about criminals (0+ / 0-)

    the shooters weren't criminals. It's not about the criminals. It's about seemingly normal people being normal right up until they slip over some edge we don't see. And guns all around. And violence both heightened and downgraded at the same time. So we either learn how to see who''s “normal”, on a continuing basis, or we decide that the choices available to “normal” people are perhaps too broad.

    Many gun fans point out that Britain, without guns, has a higher crime rate. Our gun homicide rate is 90 times higher. (http://en.wikipedia.org/...) Our crimes must be special – maybe guns? And much of that so-called crime - pickpockets and street fights- I don't care about. Heck, I don't care about our gang shootings; I consider them all volunteers.

    I care about crazed people that desire public punishment and subsequent notoriety. I'll be magnanimous here and say that gun owners and crazy aren't the same thing, but we, as a society, can't let them overlap. So the availability, the trade and commerce of guns deemed dangerous must be difficult. For seemingly normal people. Reaching out for these guns MUST attract notice in proper areas.

    By outlawing all sales of certain guns, we freeze the market. Owners own, but are stuck with what they have. Since I don’t believe pasty-white young gameBOYS have good links to an underground gun market, they will not be able to find many guns. I bet we can identify misfits through their efforts to find theses guns – since they start as misfits within a secure society and try to delve into the hastily created underground.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site