Skip to main content

cartoon about use of murder weapons (guns have no other use)
graphic by Lunchbreath, with permission
Email your senators, asking them to pass the gun safety proposals outlined by President Obama

* * * * *

Remarks by the President at Presentation of 2012 Presidential Citizens Medals:

And then when Dawn Hochsprung, and Mary Sherlach, Vicki Soto, Lauren Rousseau, Rachel D’Avino, Anne Marie Murphy -- when they showed up for work at Sandy Hook Elementary on December 14th of last year, they expected a day like any other -- doing what was right for their kids; spent a chilly morning readying classrooms and welcoming young students -- they had no idea that evil was about to strike.  And when it did, they could have taken shelter by themselves.  They could have focused on their own safety, on their own wellbeing.  But they didn’t.  They gave their lives to protect the precious children in their care.  They gave all they had for the most innocent and helpless among us.  

And that's what we honor today -- the courageous heart, the selfless spirit, the inspiring actions of extraordinary Americans, extraordinary citizens.

When I think of Newtown, I think of the courage of those teachers, and the heroism and pain of the first responders on 12/14. And because of them and because of 20 first graders, I believe Newtown changed everything.

Even before the grieving is over (because that will take years), the question is what can we do so that others don't need to be awarded medals that their families never asked for and would trade in a heartbeat to get their loved ones back?

As it happens, we can do a lot. But we may need to do it one piece at a time.

Greg Sargent reports:

The bipartisan group of four Senators who are negotiating over a proposal to expand the gun background check system privately met this week to discuss where things stand, according to sources familiar with ongoing talks. One source tells me the four Senators are “95 percent of the way there.”
That's great news, because law enforcement officials and experts, and gun owners and advocates for change all agree that if there's one thing that would make a difference, it's this. Nothing is certain, and even background checks are controversial (everything about this topic is), but they are not only popular with law enforcement, they are popular with the public.
As the White House continues its campaign to build support for stronger national gun laws, a new poll shows that the overwhelming majority of Americans - 92 percent - support the idea of background checks for all gun buyers.

The Quinnipiac University poll, conducted among 1,772 registered voters from Jan. 30-Feb. 4, showed that support among those living in a gun-owning household was almost equally high: 91 percent of those voters said they support universal background checks.

"There is no significant voter opposition to requiring background checks for gun buyers," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, in a statement. "And there is support for banning high volume ammunition clips and assault weapons, with the issue pretty much falling along party lines." The poll echoes similar findings in a CBS News/New York Times poll taken last month.

And when the bill reaches the Senate, the families of Newtown deserve a simple vote.


More on what needs to happen below the fold.

Opposition to any kind of legislation to promote gun violence reduction is led by the NRA. Their position is running into opposition all over the country. This, for example, is an editorial from Manitowoc County, WI:

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told lawmakers it would be ineffective to require background checks for all gun purchases because the Obama administration isn’t doing enough to enforce the law.

That reasoning is irresponsible and foolish, words that are more and more often associated with the NRA since LaPierre has taken the national stage on the issue in the wake of the shooting of 20 kids and six adults in December at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

And there are other important parts of the proposed approach. They include bans on straw man sales. They include high capacity magazine sales. And, not least, they include a reinstitution of an assault weapons ban, this time not one written by the gun manufacturers.

Now, everything proposed won't happen. But a lot of it will. And if only background checks pass, that's a crack in the dam, a Rubicon that's been crossed. It's a loss for the NRA. And once that happens, there's no going back.

It's for that reason, the NRA is fighting it tooth and nail... that, and their fear of a primary a leadership challenge from their right flank.

tabloids on LaPierre
Images by Greg Dworkin via Newseum
And understand something the way the NRA understands it:
Which brings us to the demographic profile of a gun owner. According to a recent Gallup study, the highest rate of gun ownership was among white, southern, married men at 64 percent.  Fifty percent of white men say they own a gun. More than one-third of Americans between the ages of 50 and 64 have a gun in the home.

The lowest rate of gun ownership was among non-married women at 13 percent. Just 21 percent of African Americans, 18 percent of Hispanics and 20 percent of 18-29 year olds say they own a gun.

In other words, the political profile of a gun owner looks a whole lot like the profile of a traditional Republican voter, while that of a non-gun owner looks a lot like a Democratic voter.

What’s more, those gun owners/Republicans don’t trust the federal government when it comes to the issue of gun ownership...

Just like everything else in DC these days, Republicans will vote their district rather than vote for what's good for the country. But background checks are universally popular, so there's no excuse not to pass them.

This, and the other proposals deserve a vote. We won't get everything. But if we get that vote, we'll get something. And chances are, it'll be something meaningful.

I'm from Newtown. We deserve a vote.
@DemFromCT via Twitter for iPhone

Email your senators, asking them to pass the gun safety proposals outlined by President Obama

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:00 AM PST.

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

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

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

?

More Tagging tips:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comment Preferences

  •  a searing article about 12/14 from the Courant (64+ / 0-)
    Raising Adam Lanza

    Who Was Adam Lanza, And What Was The Nature Of His Relationship With His Mother?

    http://www.courant.com/...

    There'll be a PBS frontline special on Tuesday.

    In a six-minute rampage, armed with a Glock, a SIG Sauer and a Bushmaster rifle, he killed six women, 20 first-graders and, eventually, himself.

    Before he drove to the school, he killed his mother, shooting her in the head at close range four times as she lay in bed at their home.

    A stunned state and confounded nation mourned. Memorial after memorial recalled the lives of precious little ones taken too soon, and the courageous acts of their educators on that horrific school day.

    There was sympathy from around the world for grieving loved ones, including an emotional visit to Newtown from President Barack Obama just days after the massacre.

    There, as the nation listened, the president remembered the slain educators and children during a service at Newtown High School, saying each of the names of those who were murdered.

    But there was one name the president never mentioned — Nancy Lanza.

    Throughout the town, there were memorials: 26 candles, 26 angels, 26 handprints like leaves on a tree.

    But the question of his first victim that day was far more complicated.

    I wrote about that 26 vs 27 (never 28)  last month:
    Here's another issue to be aware of, and Newtowners struggle with it. Is the number memorialized 20 (the children), 26 (killed at the school), 27 (the victims, including Nancy Lanza)? It's never 28, though that's the number of deaths we recorded on 12/14. I promise you, the answer to that question is not an easy one to answer, though 26 is the most commonly seen number. There were 27 victims, 26 at Sandy Hook School.

    Whatever the number, whatever the expression of grief, it wil be a long, long time before we get over it.

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 05:07:59 AM PST

  •  Greg, thank you for (36+ / 0-)

    your continuing voice on the issue of guns and on the events of 12/14. It must be painful to you, and I want you to know your perspective is appreciated and your efforts are highly honored.

    Peace is never simply the absence of war, it is the active presence of justice. It has to do with human fulfillment, with liberation, with wholeness, with a meaningful life and well-being, not only for the individual, but for the community as a whole.

    by left rev on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:08:11 AM PST

  •  Keep fighting and do it loudly! (20+ / 0-)

    The time is now Greg. It is going to happen.

    There has been too much lost for it not to happen. The NRA is backed into a corner and it knows it. Every time they open their mouths it makes people cringe even more. I still hear those die hard gun lovers pining for us to leave them alone. But they haven't taken care of their toys so it's time the adults in the country started making new rules.

    I am saddened it took this much death and loss for this to finally occur. But I think about the children that won't have to die and the parents that won't have to grieve tomorrow. And that makes me just a little bit satisfied.

    Keep it up!

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:11:33 AM PST

  •  We're also confronting a respect thing. (15+ / 0-)

    Per the Cook Report cited in Greg's diary:

    A Democratic consultant who works with conservative Democratic candidates told me that “rural gun owners think national Democrats look down their noses at gun owners.”
    So it's one's own sense of self-worth that we're challenging. That is the hardest of all to confront because it's a motivator, not a reason.

    2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

    by TRPChicago on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:25:15 AM PST

  •  The American Academy (16+ / 0-)

    of Pediatricians supports asking children if there are guns in their homes.

    I understand this has been their position for a while.

    Mayan Word For 'Apocalypse' Actually Translates More Accurately As "Time Of Pale Obese Gun Monsters."......the Onion

    by lyvwyr101 on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:25:36 AM PST

    •  yes it has, since 2000 and note the date: (19+ / 0-)
      AAP renews its support for strict gun control
      Publish date: NOV 01, 2012

      By: Contemporary Pediatrics Staff
      Removing firearms from homes and restricting the sale of handguns in communities will help to counter the destructive effects of gun violence on the lives of children, says the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in a new policy statement.

      The announcement reaffirms AAP's commitment to the regulation of firearms and their manufacture and to the education of parents and caregivers about the risks to children when guns are present in the home.

      The AAP advises child health care professionals to advocate for the "strongest possible" legislation and regulation of gun sales and permits and to support law enforcement efforts to keep guns out of the hands of minors. Pediatricians should counsel parents about the dangers of allowing children to have access to guns in the home; recommend the use of trigger locks, gun safes, and locking storage boxes to keep firearms away from children; and advise parents to remove guns from the home if their children or adolescents have mood disorders, substance abuse problems, or a history of suicide attempts.

      The AAP also supports restoration of the ban on the sale of high-powered assault weapons to the general public.

      Firearm-related deaths, including those from homicide, suicide, and unintentional injury, are rated as 1 of the top 3 causes of mortality among US children aged from birth to 19 years.

      Council on Injury, Violence, and Poison Prevention Executive Committee. Firearm-related injuries affecting the pediatric population. Pediatrics. 2012. Epub ahead of print.

      http://contemporarypediatrics.modernmedicine.com/...

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:34:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  full policy (8+ / 0-)

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:36:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  and state legislators (9+ / 0-)

      in many states have filed bills to make those questions illegal.  First amendment be damned, apparently.

      If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

      by marykk on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:41:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  If you, or anyone else wants to know something (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hangpilot, theboz

        about my business, my legal business, you ask me directly.  You don't go around asking a 3 year old who lacks the wisdom to know what is off limits and what is not questions behind my back.  Quite frankly until such time as pediatricians become trained and qualified to discuss guns and gun safety they can keep their yaps shut, not to mention the whole issue of probing into areas that are not their concern.  

        •  OK, I'll ask (12+ / 0-)

          Got small children at home?  Got a gun?

          If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

          by marykk on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:51:13 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

            •  Well then it's not your kids at risk (11+ / 0-)

              I suggest that perhaps what pediatricians ask their patients is none of your business.

              If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

              by marykk on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:16:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hey if you want some goon asking your kids (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Hangpilot

                questions behind your back, more power to you.  That is none of my business.  However, it is my business, when they try to do it to my kids and knowing that idiots are pushing them to do so means that I would never give them the chance and God help them if they ever tried.

                •  And the fact that you would categorize (17+ / 0-)

                  pediatricians as "goons"  and public health professionals as "idiots" says all I need to know about you.  May I strongly encourage you NEVER to procreate.

                  If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

                  by marykk on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:26:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Wait, aren't you in favor of making gun education (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  marykk, a2nite, lyvwyr101, vcmvo2

                  ... part of the classroom experience?

                  •  In reality, I think that this could be beneficial (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    high uintas, DavidMS, Kickemout, Hangpilot

                    Handled properly and safely, education might be a good thing.  Amongst other things it would help to:
                    1) take the mystery out of guns.  Nothing is more enticing than something that is taboo.
                    2) educate kids on how to respond in an unsafe situation.  For example, if they are at a friends house and the friend shows them their parents gun.  The rule that they should follow is, "stop. don't touch. get an adult".  

                    How many parents, especially those who don't have guns in the home would even think to teach number 2 and number 1 could help to ensure that they understand the purpose behind number 2 as well as resist the mystery temptation.

                    •  Right, so you don't think pediatricians should... (11+ / 0-)

                      ... talk to kids about guns, but you'd favor a giant, smiling eagle talking to kids a bout guns.

                      "Look kids! Guns are dangerous! But look at my big, smiling eagle head! Guns are fun!"

                      •  If the pediatrician is qualified, then yes (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        noway2

                        Most are not and don't have the time or knowledge to teach a firearms safety class.  It also out of scope.  Should a pediatrician mention that there are good cheap safes and gun locks?  Yes.  Provide a brochure on it?  Yes.  Mention that a cable lock that goes through the action can be had for less than $10 and a decent RSC can be had for >$200? Yes.

                        But provide specific gun safety training?  No, not unless like Kyle they have a instructor's certification.  They don't have the qualifications for it.  

                        I am an IT professional.  I can tell you the basics on securing a network or removing malware from a computer.  Even set up AD authentication and secure file shares.  Design and implement an Oracle database?  It would be malpractice.  

                        Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

                        by DavidMS on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:09:04 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  um.... (6+ / 0-)
                          Should a pediatrician mention that there are good cheap safes and gun locks?  Yes.  Provide a brochure on it?  Yes.  Mention that a cable lock that goes through the action can be had for less than $10 and a decent RSC can be had for >$200? Yes.
                          That's the point and the practice, not anything else.

                          Gun locks, by the way, are often available for free at your local police station. just ask and see if it's the case where you live. it is where I live.

                          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                          by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:18:00 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Gun locks. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            noway2, Otteray Scribe

                            I have two.  One came with the pistol when I bought it and the other was given to me.  

                            I think we are then on the same page.  

                            Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

                            by DavidMS on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:28:11 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i think so (6+ / 0-)

                            it was not the intent to imply pediatricians = gun instructors. We want to ask about their presence and supply a brochure on locks and safes. And ask if removing them from the home is viable (for many, answer is no). if not, lock 'em where children are concerned.

                            if i have parents of kids with asthma who smoke, i ask them to stop. if not, i ask them to try and smoke outside. No one made a law to prevent me, but maybe in FL they would.... I have had plenty of parents who told me they couldn't stop or that they'd try but never  "it's none of your business trying to treat my kid when I brought them to you to treat".

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:33:53 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I agree with that, Greg. (11+ / 0-)

                            However, there are far too many household risk factors for a physician to go down the whole list during an office visit.  As we both know, there are many more risk factors around the typical household than just firearms.  The CDC says the leading cause of death for children of all ages are accidents.  When I am consulted by an attorney on a child custody case, I do ask about firearms.  Actually, I have a list of high risk items I go over with the parents involved, and sometimes it takes me a full hour or more just to explore the list.  A sampling:

                            Do you have a motorcycle and does the child ride with you.  (If yes, ask about leathers and helmet)

                            Does the child skateboard.  (If yes, ask about pads and helmet).

                            There is a whole list.  Boats or other watercraft.  Airplanes.  Convertible cars, seat belts, child car seats, child proof cabinet locks where chemicals might be kept.  Medications out of reach. Stair gates. Fenced yard.  Dogs or other pets that might bite. Horses.  Yard and garden tools and chemical in a locked shed or barn.  Sharp tools or power tools and how are they secured.  My list goes on for several typewritten pages.

                            Guns are just one blip on that radar.  There is no particular reason to single out firearms, when stuff under the kitchen sink may actually present more hazard, according to epidemiological data.  My son is an ER physician.  He was really upset the other evening.  Somebody had mixed up the baby's medicine with another family member's antipsychotic meds.  Giving a toddler an adult dose of Chlorpromazine is not good for an ER doc's blood pressure. I have not heard him that angry in a long time.

                            My recommendation is that every family practitioner and pediatrician ought to have brochures in the waiting room covering these items, including firearm security.  Many waiting rooms now have televisions with non-stop medical information and news.  It would be easy enough to incorporate that information in the public service announcements.

                            The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand. - Sun Tzu

                            by Otteray Scribe on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:31:37 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  yes I posted elsewhere on this page (5+ / 0-)
                            Not all docs are happy about this battle, and some want the right but not the obligation to ask (adding 10 minutes for every patient adds up over the week and obligation implies penalty if you don't ask). And want to be paid for their time (there's no code for gun counseling, there's no procedure to bill for and 2500 extra minutes a week every week of unbilled time is daunting).
                            But docs also do not want to be told "you cannot ask".

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:37:40 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Asking is one thing. Going around the parents by (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hangpilot, PavePusher

                            asking the children is another.  The parents have every right to tell you none of your business too.  A child won't understand that.

                          •  where did you ever get the idea (7+ / 0-)

                            it was going around the parents? where? document please.

                            The case in Florida I posted and detailed was no such thing nor was there ever a suggestion otherwise.

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:49:40 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  As I said in another post (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Bob Johnson, Hangpilot, PavePusher
                            The American Academy of Pediatricians supports asking children if there are guns in their homes.
                            Asking CHILDREN, not the parents.  Children should not be the ones with the guns.  The parents also have every right to tell you none of your business.  The child doesn't understand this.
                          •  Edit the above (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PavePusher

                            I wasn't the quote who made the statement it quotes.  That was from another comment.

                          •  I found it (0+ / 0-)

                            the comment is wrong.

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 01:03:45 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Then I appologize for jumping to the wrong (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Greg Dworkin, PavePusher

                            conclusion.  The implications inherent in comments like that sew a lot of seeds of distrust that is not easily gotten past.

                          •  I agree with that. (5+ / 0-)

                            It annoys hell out of me when our licensing board tells me what kind of sign I "must" have on my office door.  I usually just ignore that kind of thing and do what I do anyway.  If I suspect a risk factor, I ask about it.  I like nothing better than a good fight.  Screw 'em.  

                            The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand. - Sun Tzu

                            by Otteray Scribe on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:43:40 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ;-) n/t (4+ / 0-)

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:50:28 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That is not what was being discussed or suggested (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hangpilot

                            What was being said is that pediatricians should be subverting the parents by asking the children about guns in the home.  The obvious implication is that they think the parents will simply say no and they will get "the truth" from the mouths of babes.

                          •  My pont was that there are literally (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            OMwordTHRUdaFOG, 43north, PavePusher

                            too many risk items to address in a normal office visit. I believe Dr. Dworkin pointed out that going into those issues would cut into time seeing patients who are sick.  That is why the kid is in the office in the first place.  

                            Guns are not the highest risk factor in the typical household.  It is chemicals and medications, as well as falls and auto safety.  I am much more interested in the issue of whether daddy or mommy drinks alcohol and if they do, do they ever take you out in the car.  Grilling a kid on that would really light the fuse to the dynamite.

                            The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand. - Sun Tzu

                            by Otteray Scribe on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:51:11 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm sorry I missed that (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            43north, noway2, marykk
                            pediatricians should be subverting the parents by asking the children about guns in the home.
                            I get that would annoy you or anyone but where was that said?

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 11:00:29 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This comment was the basis of it (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PavePusher

                            comment link here

                            Like I said, if you want to talk about something be above board with it.  I keep getting the impression this Pediatric Society wants it done in an underhanded manner as this is not the first time I have heard about this.  Usually the discussions come up because someone did just this.

                            While you may view it is looking out for peoples well being, I see it as I am paying your for a service, not to play societies' protector and that there are boundaries to our service contract.  It is much like the gun rights debate in general as it is about personal liberty in general.

                          •  oh, please (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Otteray Scribe

                            1. I've posted the official policy.. it's counseling parents, not talking to children without the parent.

                            2. I've get that you've legitimately seen it written otherwise, and are not making it up but what you have seen is wrong. That's verified by looking at the actual policy.

                            3. Pediatricians are obligated in most states to report things you'd possibly object to, such as suspicion of child abuse. It is the way it has to be, and you don't have to like it. We are society's protector when it comes to kids.

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 01:07:54 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  What is the fear here? (6+ / 0-)

                          That, somehow, pediatricians are spies for the government or something?

                          I'm trying to understand how a pediatrician asking if there are guns in a home and, if so, if those guns are secured, is somehow a bad thing.

                          •  Its not fear (7+ / 0-)

                            Its stepping out of your bubble and learning to meet people where they are.  

                            There is a big difference  between "if you happen to own a gun, here is how to secure it and teach your kids the 4 safety rules" and "Do you own a gun?"

                            Most gun owners don't broadcast it.  Both because there are plenty people who might resolve into hysterics or get a case of the stupids (I have seen it).  I tell people I like target shooting and leave it at that.  

                            Your doctor may ask if you are sexually active and suggest you take proper precautions against STIs and unwanted pregnancy.  They won't flip you a pamphlet on the proper way to have wild, kinky sex.  You want to look up an expert like Jay Wiseman as your GP probably won't have good advise on some of the activities and practices you will be engaged in.  

                            Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

                            by DavidMS on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:37:42 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Got it. (7+ / 0-)

                            I ran some numbers yesterday.

                            According to the Census Bureau, there are 114,761,359 households in the U.S.

                            The number of guns in the U.S., according to reports, is 310,000,000

                            So if 35% of U.S. households have a gun in them, according to surveys, that means that 310,000,000 guns are in 40,166,476 households.

                            That means that the average gun-owning household owns 7.72 guns.

                            Let's assume that a large number of households with guns have one gun or perhaps two, whether someone in the household purchased the gun or inherited it. (That's an assumption.)

                            That means that a large number of weapons are concentrated in relatively few hands in this country.

                            I also found this from the National Institutes of Health:

                            One-third of all families in America that have children also have guns, and more than 40 percent of them don't keep their guns locked up. Children younger than eight can't tell the difference between a real gun and a toy, and 3-year-olds are strong enough to pull the trigger on a real gun. Children and teens commit more than half of all unintentional shootings.
                            So maybe asking the question of whether or not the child has seen a gun in the home is valuable, given the fact that 40% of gun-owning families with kids don't lock up their guns.

                            Just making the argument.

                          •  Its how you ask. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, PavePusher

                            Its not if you ask the question its how you ask the question.  

                            There is a big difference between Borat with his marriage sack and asking your girlfriend of 18 months to marry you on one knee.  

                            Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

                            by DavidMS on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:11:00 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sure. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            a2nite, marykk

                            But, for example, what about asking a child if s/he has ever seen a gun in a friend's home?

                            Given that a third of homes with children have guns and that 40% of those homes don't have the guns secured, is that a fair question for a pediatrician to ask, and wouldn't the parents of this child want to know such information?

                          •  You are moving the goal posts (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            gerrilea, PavePusher

                            NT

                            Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

                            by DavidMS on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:37:44 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, I'm asking a question. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            a2nite

                            What would you think about a pediatrician asking the question I posed, above?

                          •  If the parent of the child wishes to know these (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PavePusher

                            things, can't they ask their neighbors?

                            Do pediatricians ask children how many times they've seen Mommy & Daddy having sex? Or if Daddy touched them?

                            Our group debated this topic well over a year ago.

                            What is the role of "doctor" in our society today?  Agent of the State.  Legally obligated in many places to report to the police any "suspicious" activity leading them to believe the child's life is in danger.

                            Get an overzealous anti-gun doctor and school nurse and this happens:

                            Father arrested, strip-searched after 4-year-old draws ‘man with gun’

                            This IS a problem.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:39:06 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  actually (0+ / 0-)
                            Child Abuse in America

                            Children are suffering from a hidden epidemic of child abuse and neglect. Every year 3.3 million reports of child abuse are made in the United States involving nearly 6 million children (a report can include multiple children). The United States has the worst record in the industrialized nation – losing five children every day due to abuse-related deaths. 1

                            http://www.childhelp.org/...

                            That's the bigger picture.

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:14:40 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Greg, thank you, I've used the exact same (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Greg Dworkin

                            statistics in my most recent diary. Most of those 5 children a day are already in the care of the State.  

                            The bigger picture, most Americans don't want to know what I experienced at the hands of CPS.

                            The Murder of Nancy Schaefer & CPS

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:31:21 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  Now you implying things that I didn't say, nt (0+ / 0-)
                    •  That is pretty much how it is handled (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      orlbucfan, noway2, Joy of Fishes

                      here. Kids grow up around guns, family hunting trips that go from babe in arms to grandma are common. Gun safety starts early. Sadly, that does not weed out the idiots who don't do that and sometimes...well you all know. But, among the people who have a tradition with guns teaching gun safety starts very early.

                      "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 08:33:17 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  "Take the mystery out of guns" ?! (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      marykk, Laconic Lib

                      What mystery? Guns are EVERY where in our culture and have been forever.  Even an old fart like me had probably seen a couple of thousand people shot dead on TV by the time I was 10. Westerns were the TV fad of the day and I grew up with a
                      bunch of little boys with holsters and toy guns slung around their hips.  

                      Now of course, it's only more graphic and then there's the video games...we live in a gun infused society and there's no mystery about what guns can do.

                      "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                      by StellaRay on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:37:33 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You know what I mean (0+ / 0-)

                        TV and video games aren't the same.   Finding something in mom or dad's closet or dresser drawers.  It is hidden.  It is forbidden. They know they are not supposed to be there, they are not supposed to touch it, they are not supposed to play with it.  This makes it enticing.  They know what it is and know they shouldn't play with it.  

                        How many stories do you read that go along the lines of: "they were playing with a gun in the closet when it went off (new speak for they pulled the trigger)"?  

                •  You write/sound like an idiot. I'm also (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  marykk, lyvwyr101

                  no as have no kids, yes as have a gun in my house. My old man is registered in the wild, wild west aka Florida. His piece is unloaded and hidden.

                  Some people make u want to change species! --ulookarmless, quoted w/his permission: RIP good man.

                  by orlbucfan on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:53:52 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Doctors are goons asking kids questions, WTF so (11+ / 0-)

                  I supposed guidance counselors and social workers are also goons as they ask kids questions all of the time too..and some teachers as well.

                  Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

                  by wishingwell on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:02:19 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Some 'goon'? (8+ / 0-)

                  If I hadn't just replied to one of your comments, I'd HR that RW talking point.

        •  got kids in the home? (16+ / 0-)

          it's our concern.

          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

          by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:05:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You think it is your concern (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theboz

            Fixed that for ya.

            •  the courts say it is (12+ / 0-)

              fixed that for ya.

              Following has been previously posted:

              follow-up on physician duties from yesterday's show (a doc discharged a patient because the patient refused to discuss guns and gun safety in FL):

              In recent months, there has been media attention surrounding an incident in Ocala, Florida, where, during a routine doctor’s visit, a pediatrician asked a patient’s mother whether there were firearms in the home.  When the mother refused to answer, the doctor advised her that she had 30 days to find a new pediatrician.

              The doctor stated that he asked all of his patients the same question in an effort to provide safety advice in the event there was a firearm in the home.

              He further stated that he asked similar questions about whether there was a pool at the home, and whether teenage drivers use their cell phone while driving for similar reasons – to give safety advice to patients.  The mother, however, felt that the question invaded her privacy.

              This incident has led many to question whether it should be an accepted practice for a doctor to inquire about a patient’s firearm ownership.

              Many? You mean the NRA. But see the following 4 points.

              1. physician duty to treat:

              Physician Duty to Treat

              A physician assumes a duty to treat a particular person when he or she agrees to do so or is expected to do so as a condition of employment. For example, if a mother brings her child to see a physician in private practice, the physician assumes responsibilities toward that child by seeing the child, conducting a history, physical examination, and so on. If that same mother takes her very sick child to a hospital, the physicians in the emergency department assume the responsibility to care for that child as a patient until such time as any life-threatening condition is brought under control or the child is transferred to other appropriate care.

              Both physicians and healthcare institutions can bring relationships – and their duties – to an end. Suppose a patient consistently fails to appear for appointments, fails to comply with recommended treatment, and fails to pay the physician. Under these circumstances, a physician can provide advance notice to the patient that he or she will not longer see and treat the patient. Patients can also be turned away for being unable to pay if physicians make efforts to ensure that the patient is not abandoned with regard to needed critical care. Healthcare institutions can take similar steps. In both cases, however, patients may not be abandoned at times of critical need.

              Broken appointments and fights between parents over management of their kids are pretty common and on rare occasion engender severance of relations. But yes, the doctor can do so, so long as the pt is not abandoned without care. But the doc, and not just the pt. can end the relationship. Also, if you have not seen or contacted the doc in three years (or so), the relationship ends. You can't call a doc and say "I haven't seen you in six years, you have to see me right now for x,y or z". The idea that the doc can fire you and not the other way around rarely occurs to patients.

              2. there is a process for it and 30 days is typical. Here is a how-to guide for the doc.

              Either offer to provide the patient with assistance in finding a new physician, or provide some suggestions directly in the letter, such as advising the patient to contact his or her insurer for names of nearby physicians who are panel providers. Provide the patient with a clear timetable for discharge, indicating that you will continue to see him or her for a specified period of time (i.e., 30 days) for any acute problems until he or she has had the opportunity to establish a relationship with another care provider.
              3. AAP has counseled inquiring about firearms since 2000. This news story (subscription wall) was from Oct 2012:
              The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) today released a policy statement urging pediatricians to counsel parents about the dangers of allowing children and adolescents access to guns. The statement, an update of a position paper first published in 2000 and reaffirmed in 2004, was published online today in Pediatrics and will appear in the November print edition of the journal.
              The full text is here (Firearm-Related Injuries Affecting the Pediatric Population).

              4. Public reaction via Carl Hiaasen (Florida loses another ridiculous legal battle):

              Written by the National Rifle Association, the so-called Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act would have prevented concerned physicians from asking patients about guns kept in their houses. It’s a reasonable query in domestic situations in which children might be at risk [and you can't know the risk until you make the inquiry — ed.].

              But the GOP-controlled Legislature wants doctors to shut up about guns and stick to lecturing women about their abortion decisions. So much for privacy.

              By necessity, doctors ask lots of personal questions. Are you using any illegal drugs? How much alcohol do you drink in a week? Do you smoke cigarettes? Do you suffer from depression?

              We’ve all filled out the checklists while sitting in the waiting room. And, on the examination table, we’ve all heard doctors and nurses ask things we wouldn’t post on Facebook.

              Say, have you noticed if your urine is changing color?

              Uh, no.

              Not all docs are happy about this battle, and some want the right but not the obligation to ask (adding 10 minutes for every patient adds up over the week and obligation implies penalty if you don't ask). And want to be paid for their time (there's no code for gun counseling, there's no procedure to bill for and 2500 extra minutes a week every week of unbilled time is daunting).

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:32:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  This subject has come up in other forums a lot (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Hangpilot

                I've made the determination that the answer to the "do you have guns" question, along with a whole list of others is going to be a simple no.  This will be the answer to any such question that I as the individual paying for your services deem is inappropriate or none of your business.  

                •  oh, you can answer any way you want (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  emelyn, Bisbonian

                  your prerogative.

                  But you will, as Hiaasen points out, get asked a lot of other personal questions, too. Part of the visit.

                  "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                  by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 11:13:34 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  In my view, asking about guns is quite different (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hangpilot

                    than asking:

                    Are you using any illegal drugs? How much alcohol do you drink in a week? Do you smoke cigarettes? Do you suffer from depression?
                    I view it along with asking if I have drain cleaner or a chain saw in the house.  The above questions are health related and could impact or rather interact with prescribed medications.  

                    The biggest problem I have with this is that I see it as nothing more than an anti-gun agenda being pushed by an anti-gun group that unless it has direct bearing on the nature of my visit, which as I pointed out I am paying for, should not be part of the discussion.  

                    •  I accept you think that way (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Bisbonian

                      but it is acceptable by society and the courts to think my way.

                      That's why in the FL case the pediatrician fired the patient. it'd be okay for you to leave and find someone else, works both ways.

                      The courts upheld the pediatrician's right to ask.

                      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 01:11:52 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

        •  Pediatricians are concerned about the health and (7+ / 0-)

          wellbeing of their patients. So I have no problem at all about them asking children questions that can impact their health and wellbeing. And I think everyone who works with kids in any capacity, I believe, has every right to ask the children if they feel safe at home and encourage kids to talk about their home life. Because of doctors and guidance counselors and teachers talking to kids who appear to be upset, troubled, stressed, child abuse has been reported and kids in danger have been rescued from such homes.  Granted, I am talking child abuse here but I have seen the intervention of caregivers of kids including medical professionals help children and listen to kids and because of that, help the children.  

          Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

          by wishingwell on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:01:18 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  'Off limits'. Ie, you reserve the right to lie. (8+ / 0-)

          Pediatricians are using proven scientific evidence to measure the danger that 3 year old is in in a given household.  Allowing you the right to lie about it merely screws up the actual outcomes, and results in more dead 3 year olds.

          •  So now your trying to intimidate by throwing out (0+ / 0-)

            the term scientific evidence?  Great way to impress, not.  Doctors aren't the only ones who have made a profession out of science.  Go tell it to someone who thinks your the God that you've come to see yourselves as.

            Let me also make something very clear.  You, nor anyone else neither grants nor allows me to tell you anything; lie, truth, or indifferent.  I don't need your permission and I really don't give a rat's hat whether you like it or not.  If I don't think it is any of your business I won't answer and because your community has demonstrated that it can't be trusted in my view I am simply going to feed you the most innocuous answer possible, the one that keeps my information out of your databases.

        •  What makes you think (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          marykk

          They are not trained and qualified to discuss guns and gun safety?  Plenty of doctors own and shoot guns.  Does having an MD immediately disqualify you to discuss guns and gun safety with a 3 year old, whose responsible gun owner parents may well NOT be doing that?

      •  overturned in FL as it turns out n/t (7+ / 0-)

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:55:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hallelujah for that! (9+ / 0-)

          Guns make regular appearances in the reports from child fatality review teams.

          Child Death Review, New Mexico, 2012
          Homicide       Key Findings
          1) There were 44 child homicides in 2009-2011and the majority of victims were male.
          2) Infants had a higher death rate than did older children, and American Indians had a slightly higher death rate than children of other racial/ethnic groups.
          3) A firearm was used in 36% of child homicides.
          4) The Child Abuse and Neglect Panel reviewed 24 homicides of children and found that 92% of them were committed by their primary caregiver.
          5) Twelve children whose cases were reviewed by the CAN Panel were found to have abusive head trauma that caused or contributed to the death.

          If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

          by marykk on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:03:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  You say, The American Academy of Pediatricians (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      noway2, theboz

      supports asking children if there are guns in their homes."

      I'll make a deal with any Pediatrician, you see my kids for a regular visit whenever they need to see the doctor and accept their insurance as provided under CHP+ and we can go ahead and chat about guns. You can go ahead and ask me in front of my kids, and see how an adult handles a person in power asking personal questions that are maybe outside their knowledge base. And remember, I get to ask questions back about why docs need to make so much money that they are priced beyond the reach of average Americans.

      Don't even get me started.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 11:34:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  hmmm... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ban nock

        I like your deal. We see the kids and accept your insurance, we ask questions about their health and safety.

        people have a bizarre idea of what's outside our knowledge base. Or what 'asking about guns' means.

        This is a long diary with lots of comments, and it's covered elsewhere. but do you know what the reference is to? A presence of guns, pamphlets about gun locks and safes, info (in my toen) that free locks are available at the police station, and that's about it.

        pediatricians don't make what other docs do, but they have to fund an office, electronic records, as well as malpractice insurance.

        And, of course, if you don't accept the deal, we don't talk about guns, smoking or anything else.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 12:06:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'd listen to about anything if my kids could have (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Greg Dworkin

          seen a pediatrician over the past 10 years. I figure with ACA a regular doc will be fine.

          I'm real sorry about your town, I have a 10 and an 8 year old.

          In my 10 year old's class one of the moms has two kids in the same class, don't ask me how that's biologically possible. Last week I got an email from the teacher saying the cancer is back and through her body. We collected up $900, because she can't afford gas, and other moms bring food and stuff. They will lose their house and their mom will die. It has happened many times since we came here. People collect money and people die from disease that early diagnosis and health insurance might have cured.

          Things cost too  much for us, and we are just a normal town.

          A lot of people here have guns but mostly no one chooses that option.

          How big is your personal carbon footprint?

          by ban nock on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 01:15:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  agree that's why we needed ACA (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Whatithink

            and why I was a proponent even if it is not single payer. Life insn't fair, we can't fix everything but we can and should try to make things better.

            That's what ACA is, that's also in the end (making things better)  the topic of this diary.

            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 01:21:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  But parents might lie that is why it is important (0+ / 0-)

          to ask the children when they are alone.

          You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

          by Throw The Bums Out on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:05:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  A national gun registry would also be great (17+ / 0-)

    because it would allow us to track the chain of ownership of weapons used in crimes.

    The NRA screams it would allow us to take their guns away eventually, except they are the only ones talking about taking guns away.

    Guns are dangerous.  Just like we need solid research on the effects and causes of gun violence, research the NRA has caused the federal government to ban, we also need to know who bought the gun used to murder a teenager on the street, who manufactured it, who sold it to the teenager who eventually pulled the trigger.

    Background checks are a good start.  They are not enough.

    When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

    by litho on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:27:22 AM PST

    •  Huh? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      noway2, Hangpilot, theboz

      The NRA screams it would allow us to take their guns away eventually, except they are the only ones talking about taking guns away.

      NYT reported Andrew Cuomo talking about confiscation.

      So, no, the NRA are not the only ones talking about it.

      ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
      My Blog
      My wife's woodblock prints

      by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:45:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nice. He's talking specifically there about (14+ / 0-)

        assault weapons.

        In the interview, Mr. Cuomo did not offer specifics about the measures he might propose, but, while discussing assault weapons, he said: “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”
        Just prior to that statement, he said this:
        “I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’ ” he said. At the same time, he noted that he owns a shotgun that he has used for hunting, and said, “There is a balance here — I understand the rights of gun owners; I understand the rights of hunters.”
        Are you defending the rights of Americans to possess weapons of mass murder?  Speak clearly now.

        When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

        by litho on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:56:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  see comment directly below (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        vcmvo2

        I can't figure what Cuomo is doing. best way to lose broad support.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:58:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, there are a lot of people (13+ / 0-)

        who have guns, who shouldn't. So confiscation of some guns SHOULD be in the cards. A lot of criminals have guns. People with restraining orders have guns. People with mental illness problems have guns.
        Those people should be disarmed.
        Or do you support THEIR "right" to own lethal firepower?
        Without registration, background checks can't be enforced, because there is no record of the transfer of ownership, so no trigger for the BC in private sales.
        All guns should be titled and registered, just like cars are and that registration kept up to date. Gun owners/handlers should also be licensed, just like drivers, including periodic relicensing vision tests, competence tests...
        And guns should be taxed as property just like cars are.
        You wanna keep going?
        Keep making excuses for slaughter and I'll keep pushing for more stringent controls on weapons.

        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

        by CwV on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:11:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  But... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Whatithink

          Some say no one wants to confiscate guns, right? That's what I hear when people object to registering guns. "No one want to take your guns away. Why be so paranoid?"

          "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 08:44:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I find it interesting that a number of folks here (7+ / 0-)

            ... from the RKBA group will declare that none of the "ban" legislation has a chance-in-hell at passage (calling such legislation a "distraction") while simultaneously dropping the "fear-of-confiscation" card ("Cuomo said it!").

            Seems like a number of folks want to have it both ways.

            So what's your position, high uintas?

            Do you think legislation like AWB has a chance to pass, and, therefore, confiscation is realistically on the table? Is that why you wrote what you wrote?

            •  You call it interesting, I call it genius! Nothing (4+ / 0-)

              will ever work, and all of its variants, so quickly becomes you are trying to take away all my rights and confiscate my gun!  No transition, not reasoning, it is certainly amazing just how quickly they get to "destroying the Constitution/rights" and "confiscating all my weapons."

              Some of them must be injured by the whiplash of such quick turns.

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

              by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:54:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Damn, I hate to play predictor in chief (5+ / 0-)

              I doubt that it would happen now, as I've said in the past. People like Cuomo make me nervous because you can never underestimate what a pol will do if he thinks he can get some votes out of it, but no again I don't believe it is realistically on the table.

              I do no think the AWB will make it through both houses.

              Why did I write what I wrote? Because I keep getting comments like "no one has suggested confiscating guns" when that is patently untrue. People bring it up all the time, happily they are not elected officials for the most part.

              The sentiment is out there tho and if you are sensitive to it you will hear it. That is the thing that gets to me, there are lots of gun owners now who feel demonized because of the actions of flat out criminal and crazy people. They are sensitive to what is being tossed around.

              The other day I had on MSNBC, every show in the prime block went on about guns to the point where I just shut it off. The constant drum beat unnerves me. I've told you what I would like to see come out of this by way of laws, but I don't believe we will solve all of this if guns are the only focus.

              I went on there, but I hope I answered your question.

              "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 10:05:39 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I understand. (6+ / 0-)

                My point is that if you know that confiscation of weapons like the AR-15 is unrealistic, then flogging the meme that confiscation is a possibility (whether Cuomo said it or anyone else said it) is either disingenuous or paranoid.

                Plus, it supports the NRA and Wayne LaPierre's fear-driven narrative that "the government is coming for our guns."

                I understand how you feel uncomfortable and not at all happy about the way gun owners have been painted, but separating fact from fiction is important.

                No one is coming for guns, not even the AR-15.

                As I note elsewhere is this diary, maxomai noted that the AWB was dead yet just upthread, he was suggesting that guns could, in fact, be confiscated because Cuomo said confiscation was "on the table."

                So I see members of RKBA trying to play both sides of this issue for the benefit of their argument.

                That's disingenuous.

                •  I do see your point (3+ / 0-)

                  I'm really not talking about the larger world, but rather this smaller audience of people here who are also disingenuous in claiming that "no one is talking about it" and then turn around and talk about it as an ultimate goal.

                  I don't fear it actually happening at this point, but wish people would understand that when they talk it up they are feeding same people that the NRA wants to come home to them.

                  "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 10:27:59 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Somewhere between no confiscation (status quo) (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Laconic Lib, teabaggerssuckbalz

                    and confiscate all guns, there has to be a break.
                    It's unrealistic to consider confiscating all 300 million guns in this country. That just aint gonna happen. And I wouldn't advocate for it, I don't think anyone else here is either.
                    But something has to be done about the guns that are currently in the hands of people who should not have them.
                    You do agree that there are such people, correct?
                    And that some of them already have guns. And that too many of them have easy access to guns, right?
                    Those are the people that I'm talking about.
                    People with legitimate ownership should have no problem with registration.
                    But people who can't pass a background check WOULD have a problem.
                    And the only way I see to ensure that background checks are performed is to register ownership of guns. Otherwise, guns will be bought and sold without any authority having any way to know about it. That leaves a superhighway around the background check for criminals.
                    Unless you have a different idea that can make sure that private gun sales are done legitimately, but I don't see how to prevent people from cheating. There's no record of who owns the gun so no record of it's transfer of ownership so no event that triggers the background check and no penalty for the seller because there's no way to know that (s)he owned the gun in the first place.

                    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                    by CwV on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 11:18:35 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Prohibition (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      andalusi

                      of anything is problematic and brings on many unintended consequences. I am not saying "do nothing", what I am saying is be smart. I don't pretend to know all the answers but I know that guns are part of but not all of the problem.

                      "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 12:21:22 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  "..guns are part of but not all of the problem." (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Bisbonian

                        Agreed.
                        They are, however, an addressable part of the problem. They are hardware, manufactured goods, regulatable.
                        If a product has a potential for injury, it is taken off the market, redesigned or scrapped and a new solution is invented. The slightest amount of lead in a tiny drop of paint on a kid's toy is grounds for removing that toy from the market, recalling and confiscating existing stocks and punishing the manufacturer. We have several federal agencies and each state does, too, to enforce this protection.
                        Unless the product is a gun. Then, basically, there is no consumer protection. No public protection.
                        In fact, guns are a singularity.
                        Many guns cost more than my car is worth and people own dozens of them. I have to pay property tax on my car, but my neighbor doesn't pay property tax on his arsenal.
                        Because my car is dangerous to me and to other people, my car has to be registered, inspected and insured and I have to be licensed, renewing that license periodically, passing a vision test, et cetera.
                        No such safeguards on guns.
                        The fact that there is so little regulation of these clearly dangerous items is completely illogical and more than a bit insane.
                        And we pay, in blood, for that insanity.

                        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                        by CwV on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 01:18:47 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Cars are a privilege (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Greg Dworkin, andalusi, Whatithink

                          Guns are a right. You wouldn't think of taxing free speech yet you would try to tax your right to keep and bear arms.

                          Guns are a singularity because they are afforded a special place in the Constitution. There is no right to own a horse and buggy or even a coat, the the object with which to defend yourself and property is.

                          I believe that guns are a piece of our problem because if you look at the places where gun violence mostly occur (not mass shootings which are rare when compared to the over-all gun incidents), you see that they are concentrated in areas where there is also a lot of other crime, gangs, hopelessness, poverty, let's just say the list is long.

                          I believe we have work to do that goes beyond dealing with assault weapons, especially since they cause very little problems compared to hand guns.

                          I am not being flippant about this, believe me I have spent a lot of time thinking about this subject. My desire to protect all of the Bill of Rights insists that I take it seriously. The fact that I'm not a gun owner does not free me from responsibility to my country and my fellow citizens.

                          "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 02:57:13 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  i agree that the presence of the 2nd amendment (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            high uintas, Bisbonian

                            changes the equation. But the right to regulate is also built in to the 2nd amendment, and SCOTUS agrees with that (even if they got Heller wrong).

                            For the past 30 years, the Second Amendment has been defined by the most radical elements of the gun-rights movement. They argue not only that the Second Amendment guarantees individuals the right to own guns—a view that represents, in my view, the best understanding of our history and tradition—but, more importantly, that nearly any restriction on the manufacture, ownership, or use of firearms infringes this sacred right.

                            This radical vision of the Second Amendment is remarkable mainly for having so little basis in Supreme Court case law, the text of the Constitution, and American history.

                            http://www.thedailybeast.com/...

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 03:01:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Agree that there is room for regulation (0+ / 0-)

                            at the same time, we have to be careful when we start messing with with those amendments. The fourth is damn near gone because we didn't defend it. It's important we move forward with great care.

                            "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 03:09:19 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  can't argue with that n/t (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            high uintas

                            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                            by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 03:12:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  WRONG. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Bisbonian

                            I do not buy that argument that there is a Constitutional right for unregulated private ownership of firearms. And certainly not one that negates the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which gunshot wounds tend to do. If you take the Bill of Rights seriously then you should understand what it says.
                            The FIRST line of the 2nd amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," is very clear. Those firearms necessary for defense of the state by civilians called into a militia to be "well regulated" that is, controlled.
                            It doesn't say anything about target shooting, it doesn't say anything about hunting, it doesn't even say anything about self defense. It is for the defense of the State. PERIOD. (And not defense AGAINST the State, either.)
                            Ignore that and you are now in indefensible territory, enabling the proliferation of deadly force and access to it by the very criminals that you blame for the carnage.
                            And the more that that dodge is used the more likely that it will be either dismantled by the courts or trigger a repeal of said amendment. There are already quite a few determined people working that direction.
                            Yes, there are a lot of factors but those factors exist in places where guns are less available and their murder/gun violence rates are consequently, MUCH lower. The presence of guns increases the bloodshed EVERY TIME.
                            As for slaughter weapons Vs. handguns, control them both. Register ALL guns and control who owns them. Military style, high kill rate mass slaughter weapons ban should be a no brainer. There is absolutely no reason for those to be available to civilians. And the ones that are already out on the street should be removed from the streets.
                            As you correctly point out, handguns are still the real problem and the restriction of their proliferation definitely needs to be addressed.
                            Again, the only way that we can get any kind of handle on this is through registration of ALL firearms, otherwise there is an easy blackmarket that will supply the criminal demand.
                            Yes, there has to be work done on other factors as well. Ending the War on Drugs will cut way back on street crime. Getting our economy back to work, creating decent paying jobs, reducing poverty and desperation, would make a huge difference. Increased access to health care including mental health would help. Better education and wider access to quality education would help. A certain amount of self-restraint in the entertainment industry would be a good idea (though that would not be something for government to address as much as it needs to be a social movement, a shaming process).
                            And violence reduction needs to reach all the way up to the drone program and our country's international penchant for violence.
                            And many of us are working toward those goals, too.
                            But the clearest, closest element in gun violence is the guns.
                            Start there.

                            If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                            by CwV on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 03:47:21 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Notice how I yelled at you? In all caps? (0+ / 0-)

                            Notice how I misquoted you?

                            My state has the loosest gun laws in the nation, guns all over yet our stats per capita are 34th out of 50, and that's only because we had a couple of recent incidents that twisted the data.

                            Never mind, you like arguing with your straw man and yelling at someone who was being polite and engaging with you.

                            Go on with your bad self.

                            Oh, and don't quote the amendment to me until you've thought it through. It doesn't waffle or waver. "Shall not be infringed."

                            "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 05:39:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  "shall not be infringed" (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Bisbonian

                            you interpret as free license for anyone and everyone to own any kind of weapon they want?
                            Not even the Rightwing nutjobs on the Supreme Court are that radical. That's the position of the NRA and gangbangers coast to coast.
                            How did I misquote you?
                            If you want yelling, I can do that too, but that was not it. When I explain thing repeatedly and find that it hasn't sunk in, I guess I try to emphasize my point. My bad, you either can't or wont get it. I guess I shouldn't bother, right? So much for engagement.
                            Speaking of strawmen, you came in attacking non-existent gun confiscators, and when it was pointed out to you that that was not the position that people here take, you oh so politely insinuate that we're a bunch of liars. You have dodged every question and the points you make are familiar from every gunloon commentary and NRA pamphlet.
                            BTW the loose gun laws in your state are why the tight gun laws in my state are failing to keep guns out of the hands of thugs here. Gun laws need to be federalized so that the flow of guns across state borders doesn't continually undercut efforts to check the slaughter. And that slaughter has passed 1500 since 12/14. Are you OK with that? Because you are enabling that.
                            I've been on the ugly end of a gun several times in my life. It's a horrible, terrifying experience. And in each instance, it would have done me no good to have a gun of my own, in fact it would probably have gotten me killed. All the bravado about having a gun for self defense is delusional bullsh!t. The best defense against having to experience that again is to cut down the number of guns in bad hands.
                            I used to give gun owners the benefit of the doubt, that they were responsible, et cetera. But since 12/14 and the diaries and comments here, I have come to believe that the pool of responsible gun owners is a vanishingly small subset of the people who own guns. The paranoid delusions, the bully behavior, the dishonesty, makes me realize that there are a lot of people out there that really shouldn't be armed.
                            And if that means confiscating their guns, so be it.

                            If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

                            by CwV on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:10:17 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  First I never said that (0+ / 0-)
                            "I do not buy that argument that there is a Constitutional right for unregulated private ownership of firearms."
                            Where did I say that? Where? In fact if you read my comments you can see that I allow for regulation. You just took that and ran.

                            My position on the amendment is this. The first part,

                            "A well regulated milita, being necessary to the security of a free state,"
                            the role of police and army were given over to the states. The need for men who were experienced with and competent with firearms was vital for that militia to be well regulated.
                            "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
                            Because the need was laid out in the first part the framers acknowledged the right to keep and bear arms.

                            And if you think about it, unless you were privileged and protected if you took the arms from people you were almost literally sentencing them to death. They could not hunt, could not defend themselves. Many people were on the edge of the frontier. They couldn't go to Costco. I know people right now who subsidize their diet with small game.

                            I do not know where you live but every state surrounding ours is close to as liberal with their gun laws as ours. I seriously doubt they are smuggling guns from my state to yours. I have never heard of it being an issue, or read about it. Do you want to show me the operation running out of Utah? I think a link is in order.

                            I still give gun owners the benefit of the doubt, the numbers don't lie, the vast majority of people who are gun owners just live their lives and cause you no harm. You are paranoid. You are the bully, trying in infringe on their rights, and where did "dishonesty" come from?

                            Then you end your comment with the very thing I keep saying people throw out all the time. BTW, I attacked no one, Bob and I have been going back and forth about this for awhile. I tell him that people say just what you just said all the time, and sure enough...

                            Gun violence is awful, but if you make something illegal it doesn't go away. People need to find the answers and it won't happen if everyone yells at each other all the time.

                            "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 09:03:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  BTW (0+ / 0-)

                            I have dodged no question. You just don't like my answers.

                            "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 09:04:11 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Exhibit A (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    a2nite, Laconic Lib

                    Classic.

                    maxomai did the same thing in this diary.

                    •  Um Bob (0+ / 0-)

                      You are now blaming maxomai for something SpamNunn said which by the way, wasn't all that contradictory.

                      Some people do want to take guns.

                      It won't happen.

                      I don't see a problem with those two sentiments.

                      "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 12:15:37 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No, I'm saying they both made the same argument. (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        a2nite, high uintas, Laconic Lib

                        They both said that the AWB was dead. SpamNunn even said a gun ban and confiscation would NEVER happen. Yet both flog the NRA meme that the government is coming for guns.

                        You wrote upthread that, realistically, that is not the case.

                        "Some people do want to take guns."

                        So what? What are their chances of succeeding?

                        Some people want to do a lot of things, but if those things are not realistically going to happen, so what?

                        Like I noted upthread, this is either paranoia or disingenuousness.

                        Either it's real possibility or it's not. Sure, some people may be arguing for confiscation, but there is no likelihood of any such efforts succeeding, now or for the foreseeable future.

                    •  Oops, sorry (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Bob Johnson

                      I misread your comment.

                      "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 12:21:55 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Its equally disingenuous to suggest (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  theboz

                  To suggest that legitimate gun owners have nothing to fear, when there are many people that would gladly abolish the right to own guns completely.

                  The truth is that the right to own a gun exists because there are people and organizations tirelessly devoted to defending it.

                  •  "Many people" (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    a2nite

                    with no realistic chance of achieving such a ban now or in the foreseeable future, as a number of members of RKBA members have noted in the comments section of this diary.

                    You get to have it both ways!

                    •  What is having it both ways? (0+ / 0-)

                      Acknowledging that people want to ban guns, but are unable to due to strong resistance?

                      •  I find it humorous that at least two posters here (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        a2nite

                        ... claim that any bans or confiscations are dead (with one proclaiming that such an event will "never" happen) while, at the same time, stoking the NRA/Wayne LaPierre paranoid hyperbole of "They're coming for our guns!"

                        No one is coming for oyur guns. Not now and not in the foreseeable future.

                        But keep playing the "They're-coming-for-our-guns!" card.

                        It's either paranoid or disingenuous. Take your pick.

              •  I agree with you about Cuomo (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                high uintas

                I do not trust him at all.

                "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:24:13 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  gun registry a bad idea (4+ / 0-)
      One thing that still needs to be resolved is how to ensure that an expanded background check does not create some kind of national gun registry — again, in order to mollify gun rights lawmakers. The law as currently configured explicitly forbids the creation of any such registry, and it requires that any data collected during a legal gun transfer be destroyed within 24 hours. Despite this, the four Senators are discussing ways to write in new legislative language that would add additional safeguards against any data collection.
      from the Sargent link

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:56:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, I read that in Sargent (10+ / 0-)

        and I don't agree with it.  I think it's a compromise with Second Amendment extremists that would tie our hands in the real battle to get control over the epidemic of gun violence plaguing our society.

        The registry would provide law enforcement with valuable data to trace the chain of ownership of weapons used in crimes, as I said above.  Data is a good thing.  The more we have, the better we understand the phenomenon we are confronting.

        When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

        by litho on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:59:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  we must eventually have paperwork that goes with (11+ / 0-)

        every gun throughout its lifetime. We do it with cars. Every time you sell a car (whether at a dealer or privately), the transaction is recorded, the paperwork goes with the car, and the car can always be traced back to its owner. So when Joe Bankrobber gets caught with a gun with X serial number that is supposed to belong to a grandmother in Peoria, he'd better be able to explain why he has it instead of her. Or he goes to jail for having an unregistered gun. And if Grandma reports her gun as stolen, that's another charge tacked on.

        Track the gun from cradle to grave.  Easy to do, since every illegal gun was legally manufactured in a factory at some time and has a serial number on it. Use it. The ONLY way to reduce the number of illegal guns is to dry up their supply line to the legal guns.

        But alas, the NRA would rather defend the right of criminals everywhere to have as many untraceable illegal guns as they want, rather than allow the coming oppressive communist socialist government (snicker) to maybe someday in the future think about taking away their hunting shotguns.  (sigh)

        •  Guns aren't cars. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          high uintas

          That aside, they're also huge and much harder to hide, both pre- and post- crime. Do you think registration would've stopped the Newton tragedy?

          I see what you did there.

          by GoGoGoEverton on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:38:21 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  lemons aren't watermelons either (shrug) (9+ / 0-)

            So what?

            Do you think registration would've stopped the Newton tragedy?
            Do you think laws against murder would have stopped the Newtown tragedy?

            If not, why bother having laws against murder?

            Or bank robbery?

            Or jaywalking?

            Why bother having any laws at all?  None of them---not a single solitary one of them---prevent all crimes from being committed.

            (shrug)

          •  No. So what? (9+ / 0-)

            30000 dead Americans a year, and only 26 of them were Newtown.

            How is it that the only tragedy worth preventing is Newtown?

            Why can't we prevent a few of the non-Newtown tragedies that would be prevented by such policy?

            •  competely agree (6+ / 0-)

              though I think a ban on high capacity magazines would have let more kids get a way.

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:35:13 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, but this 'there can always be less' (0+ / 0-)

              mentality has us trying to stop evrything bad...choking, food born illness, electrical shocks, car accidents. We should do what we can through education, but no amount of laws gets rid of bad things. When does it end? Til we are all holed up in some box because there are so many laws we can't function. We already can't decide for ouselves what to feed our kids for lunch, the school board did that for us, etc. When does this stop, when bad things are zero? Are we trying to outlaw mother nature's evil, sadistic, greedy side of humanity? More laws aren't always the solution. Just crious what the goal is here. Can we agree if we get background checks and AWB we will be happy? I doubt it...there is always more.

              •  actually... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                a2nite, Joy of Fishes
                Some news outlets are getting this flat wrong. If background checks pass, that is the central element of Obama's gun proposal.
                @ThePlumLineGS via web

                But understand that the goal is less dead people. New and stronger gun laws are a means to that end.

                "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:23:04 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  the whole argument "laws can't prevent every (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laconic Lib

                instance of X happening, therefore we should have no laws against X", has to be the single most idiotic argument I have ever heard from any supposedly coherent human being in all my life.

                I can only shake my head in wonder at it, and comfort myself with the fact that at least we don't allow such morans to own lethal weapons.

                Oh, wait a sec . . . . . . . . . . .

                •  That is not what I am saying... (0+ / 0-)

                  What I am saying is when will one be too many? We can take away all liberties on guns and maybe get down to zero deaths (not possible, but hear me out). Or we can take away some liberties and get gun violence down, which is what you are arguing. My question is, at what point of giving up gun liberties are we satisfied. IOW what is the end goal? Because without that being defined, makes advocates for the second amendment very nervous. It always starts out with X law, but then something other tragedy occurs and then its Y law, then Z, etc. How do we keep these liberties from eroding to save lives. It is the same argument with the Patriot Act. We could argue that the loss of liberty from the Patriot Act is worth the lives it is saving. If not, why not? The same applies here. I just would like to know what the end goal is or liberties keep getting chopped and chopped until we reach zero deaths. We'll be safer, but without liberties too!

                  •  as I noted before . . . . (0+ / 0-)

                    the whole gun "debate" isn't really about guns at all.  It's one group of people yelling "you can't tell me what to do !!!!" and another group saying "oh yes we can".

                    That's why the "debate" ALWAYS devolves into "Second Amendment !!!blah blah blah Rights !!!! blah blah blah Liberties !!!! blah blah blah Tyranny !!!! blah blah blah."

                    The whole libertarian looniness reminds me of the teenage boy who is told to clean his room by his mom, and angrily stomps his feet and shouts "it's a free country !!! you can't make me !!!!".

                    Um, yes we can.  (shrug)

                    I find your silly "liberties !!!!" argument roughly akin to the equally silly "the commie socialist government is coming to get us so we need to be able to shoot them !!!" argument.  I laugh at them both.

                  •  ps---the basic problem with your NRA talking point (0+ / 0-)

                    "slippery slope" argument is that when you treat every single proposed gun law no matter what it is as the "end of the world hair on fire next they'll be grabbing my guns omigod tyranny where's my bug-out bag aaaaahhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", you just sound like a histrionic idiot with no sense of reality.  And then people stop listening to you. When you oppose absolutely EVERYTHING, nobody will care about your opinion on ANYTHING.

                    No one is taking your goddamn guns.  So take a deep breath and relax yourself.

                    Geez.

            •  'So what' is exactly the right answer. (0+ / 0-)

              Guns are nothing like cars, physically or legally.

              I see what you did there.

              by GoGoGoEverton on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:09:13 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  But they kill as many people as cars every year.nt (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Laconic Lib

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

            by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:56:48 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Too logical - hold the owners accountable for what (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      litho, a2nite, ChurchofBruce, Laconic Lib

      is done with their guns.  The vocal "responsible" gun owners that we usually hear from will never support such a thing.

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

      by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:47:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The NRA doesn't even believe its own claptrap. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      litho, a2nite, tytalus, Laconic Lib

      You have to wonder...if the NRA believes so fervently in its own approach to keeping American safe" (or free or whatever), by arming everybody with opposable thumbs and a pulse, why doesn't it support studies on these very issues?  Why does it suppress the ATF's annual reports on what guns were used in what crimes?  Why does it push pols to defund these types of studies?  

      I mean really.

  •  We need such a reminder. . . (4+ / 0-)

    always. Thanks for this diary. Now if only the dunderhead running the NRA's misled audience gets to read this and the advocates for sophisticated weaponry and all the wing nuts that have taken one amendment too far the other way. As I said. . .if only!

    Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

    by richholtzin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:29:22 AM PST

  •  The effort must be step-by-step and sustained (13+ / 0-)

    Even when (ever the optimist) measures a passed, the result will not be an immediate, significant reduction in casualties (likely to take decades depending what is done) so there will be a push-back from opponents trying to use that as proof these measures won't work and needlessly infringe their "freedoms".

    Therefore, what will be very important is sustained public education and visibility of the issues including positive PR on the benefits to society.

    My humble proposal is for the people who stand on the front line of dealing with gun related casualties and those responsible to protect the public particularly children, to make public information campaigns talking about the importance to them and the public in simple terms, and repeat daily. This could include first-responders such as police, firefighters, ER doctors and medical service providers, teachers, mayors, Congressmen, Presidents and even entertainers and sports figures.

    "It gets better".

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:33:24 AM PST

  •  Where do those gun ownership statistics come from? (0+ / 0-)

    It's hard for me to believe that they reflect places like the Austin and Englewood neighborhoods in Chicago, where I would bet gun ownership is considerably higher.  Maybe not legal guns. Maybe not guns anybody knows about, but guns.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:39:30 AM PST

    •  polling, of course (4+ / 0-)

      ownership is self reported form surveys. Like CDC does to ascertain % of cell phones.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:43:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  examples (YMMV between polls) (4+ / 0-)
      Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993

      Majority of men, Republicans, and Southerners report having a gun in their households

      http://www.gallup.com/...
      Men, Married, Southerners Most Likely to Be Gun Owners

      Nearly two-thirds of Southern married men own guns

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

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:45:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hmmm. I'm a bettin' people don't self report (0+ / 0-)

        very many illegally owned guns.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:03:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  surveys don't ask how you got them (7+ / 0-)

          they are bound to be off a bit, but not by huge amounts. They only get accused of that when you don't like the results (see political polling).

          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

          by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:07:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Two problems: (0+ / 0-)

            1. You can't know how far off you are when the guns are illegal because people who aren't reporting the guns aren't likely to give you the access needed to verify what you aren't being told.

            2. There are places, my friend, where people are suspicious and tend not to answer surveys.

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:58:48 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  so much so ,we know who was going to win (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tytalus, Terri, a2nite

              in November.

              paranoia about data is no substitute for data. And I especially like the argument that "data doesn't match my prejudice therefore data must be wrong" ;-)

              But I accept the data is "the best we can currently measure" rather than an absolute number.

              In any case, you asked where the data came from. I answered. Now you know.

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:39:12 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Oh my, we are ever the optimist! (0+ / 0-)

                There is a big difference between telling somebody who you like for President and that you have an illegal firearm with which you either intend to commit crimes or protect yourself from people in the neighborhood who might try to commit crimes -- including coming to steal your gun.

                LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                by dinotrac on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:44:46 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  and different still for STDs and where you got it (0+ / 0-)

                  we do surveys for that, too. And trust but verify by checking treatment data.

                  "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                  by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:56:09 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So I guess somebody's checking that gun data by (0+ / 0-)

                    ...hmmm.

                    Not a whole lot to check that against, is there?

                    Not surprising as that is one of the points of closing registration loopholes.

                    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                    by dinotrac on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:40:55 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

  •  Like with many other issues, politicians do not (5+ / 0-)

    want to vote because it will mean they have to take a public stand.  If they do that we, as voters, can hold them accountable on the issues we consider important.  Unfortunately, this is not a partisan trait.  Many Democrats and Republicans alike exhibit cowardly reluctance to take a stand on any issue that the public considers important.

    We, as voters, need a way to easily find out where our representatives stand and more importantly how they vote on these issues.

  •  Target shooting is nothing (0+ / 0-)

    Hunting is nothing.
    Self defense is nothing.

    Got it.

    Talk to me when the Kool Aid has worn off.

    ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
    My Blog
    My wife's woodblock prints

    by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:41:28 AM PST

    •  If you need an AR-15 or similar to hunt, (16+ / 0-)

      your hunting privileges should be revoked.

      Signed,
      Someone who, as a kid, used to go hunting with people who needed one shot to kill a deer or elk.

      ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

      by TFinSF on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:59:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Depends (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Norm in Chicago, high uintas

        An AR-15 in .300 blackout with a five round magazine is actually perfect for deer. Elk, not so much.

        But, I agree, I don't need a 30 round magazine for that. Nor should I have one - in most states, that's poaching.

        ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
        My Blog
        My wife's woodblock prints

        by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:38:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  See max, when you start off with that tone, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Norm in Chicago, a2nite, high uintas

        it debases the entire conversation and you get similarly-rash responses.

        I see what you did there.

        by GoGoGoEverton on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:40:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  A five round AR-15 is a deer hunting rifle (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theboz

        I'm not sure I believe you've ever been deer hunting.  I haven't been either, but at least I know that an AR-15 fires a .223 Remington, which is a typical deer hunting round.  An AR-15 is a deer hunting rifle, and as a semi-auto, fires one bullet at a time.

        Now you are correct that deer hunters don't need 30 round mags.  A 5 round clip is fine.  But an AR-15 with a 5 round clip is a typical deer hunting rifle, firing the exact same bullet.

        Focus on the magazine limits, not on nonsense differentiations between guns.  The AR-15 is NOT more lethal because it's black.

        •  I've been deer hunting. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DefendOurConstitution

          Whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. None of the people (my dad, uncle, grandpa) who hunted required a 5 round clip to fell a deer or elk.

          Again, your inexperience with deer hunting is irrelevant to me, as is your disbelief that I have been.  I've even shot the 30-06 and .308 rifles they used for hunting! (Here's another opportunity to call me a liar -- don't pass it up!)

          ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

          by TFinSF on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:31:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Then limit the police to bolt action rifles (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            theboz

            Here's what makes me not trust your intentions. If a deer hunter only needs one shot to fell a deer, then surely the police only need one shot to take down a suspect, right?  Especially give the suspect is almost always outnumbered.

            I will accept a ban on all semi auto rifles with clips if you apply that ban equally to EVERYONE who is not active duty military. But you won't, so there is little left to discuss.

            •  My point was limited to the need for (0+ / 0-)

              a high capacity gun to hunt deer.  Whether the police need high capacity rifles -- I honestly don't know.  You may be right about that.  But it is a fact that if one needs five or more rapid shots to kill a deer, one is really not a very good shot, and should maybe go to the range and improve before trying to kill something.

              ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

              by TFinSF on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:51:24 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  5 rounds is not high capacity. (0+ / 0-)

                If a five round revolver is "high capacity" then so is a 6 round revolver. In that case, bust the cops down to single shot pistols as well.

                Having 5 rounds in a clip does not require them to all be shot at one deer.  I would think you would know that.  My wife's uncle deer hunts, and brings home two deer each time. 5 rounds may be all he used in the entire weekend. If he only brings 5 rounds, but they're in one clip, so what?  His "assault rifle" is still less deadly than any handgun.

                What is it really that you're arguing for?

    •  hard to talk to people when they are (19+ / 0-)

      unreasonable. And insulting. And dismissive.

      Gives your side a bad name. And i think there's a lot of good that has come form pushback from gun owners.

      No one said hunting is nothing.
      No one said self defense is nothing.

      Just saying.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:00:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  the reference is to the graphic (4+ / 0-)

        you don't need a Bushmaster for either.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:02:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yup, I don't call anyone a gun nut, tired of being (5+ / 0-)

        Called names. I had one bad interaction with one person about this issue, here, and I don't argue about it because they have talking points, but I don't.

        To me this is a public health problem, like communicable diseases.

        Where are the
        ER docs
        Trauma surgeons
        Neurosurgeons
        Nurses
        Hospital administrators

        All of this death and destruction cost a lot of money and the wrong people are paying for it.

        The public is at risk. More guns and arming children & teachers and police in schools and arming every person in
        America ain't the answer.

        Tired of this nonsense.

      •  Greg (0+ / 0-)

        You're the one being dismissive, not me. There are perfectly good use cases for some of the "assault rifles" that Feinstein and company want to ban. Hunting, target shooting and self-defense are three of them. I can't say that for all such weapons - certainly not the handguns in the proposed ban. But when you say that about everything in Feinstein's proposal, you speak from a position of ignorance.

        ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
        My Blog
        My wife's woodblock prints

        by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:43:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  They aren't necessary for any of those things. (5+ / 0-)

          By your reasoning we could say a fully automatic weapon is also as useful and yet those were banned decades ago and the world keep turning without them in the hands of law abiding citizens or others.

          What about my Daughter's future?

          by koNko on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:58:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  if it turns out that people use them for mass (6+ / 0-)

          school shootings or knocking off firefighters, maybe they should be regulated more than they are?

          maybe there are better choices of weapons for those activities? maybe "because I want to use them" isn't the best compromise in a  civilized society?

          ultimately, it's good discussion to have. thanks for bringing up those points.

          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

          by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:43:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  So... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Greg Dworkin

            I agree that all firearms should be more regulated than they are. I don't agree that "assault weapons" should be an exception here either way.

            I agree, also, that "I want to use them" and "it's my right to use them" are poor reasons. They're not reasons, really, at all. OTOH I'm hard pressed to find a better choice for home defense in a SHTF situation than an AR-15, or for varminting than a Ruger 10/22. There are other options, but they simply don't measure up.

            ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
            My Blog
            My wife's woodblock prints

            by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:38:16 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  if kids and others didn't die at the other end (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DefendOurConstitution, tytalus

              I'd be okay as is.

              but, as it happens, and in my town...

              well,  more agreement than disagreement.  get done what you can get done, and agree to disagree about the rest.

              don't see it as rant material, or reason to insult anyone.

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:47:52 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  as a fellow gun owner . . . . (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, DefendOurConstitution

      would you please sit down and be quiet?  You're not helping any.

      Thanks.

    •  It is you who needs to lay off the KoolAid, pal. (7+ / 0-)

      You are presenting as an apologist for the Gun Makers and their lobby.

      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

      by CwV on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:13:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Is the Constitution also nothing? (0+ / 0-)

      And just saying, if self-defense is nothing, then the cops don't need guns either.  The cops don't need guns to save their own lives, or to save yours.

    •  Then again. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, Laconic Lib

      Though it can be used for hunting, the AR-15 isn’t really a hunting rifle.  I'm sure you'd agree that the world would be a better, safer place without AR15 hunters spraying bullets all over the countryside.  In terms of repelling a home invasion—which is what most people mean when they talk about home defense—an AR-15-style rifle is probably less useful than a handgun. The AR-15 is a long gun, and can be tough to maneuver in tight quarters. When you shoot it, it’ll overpenetrate—sending bullets through the walls of your house and possibly into the walls of your neighbor’s house—unless you purchase the sort of ammunition that fragments on impact. (This is true for other guns, as well, but, again, the thing with the AR-15 is that it lets you fire more rounds faster.)

      AR-15-style rifles are very useful, however, if what you’re trying to do is sell guns. The gun making industry's money’s not coming from selling shotguns and bolt-action rifles to pheasant hunters.  The commercial modern sporting rifle market is growing at an exponential rate.

      http://www.slate.com/...

  •  Recommended just for the succinct graphic! (7+ / 0-)

    Yeah, I get a kick out of these nuts arguing that "all guns, all the time" are necessary for self-defense, then the demographic stockpiling the weapons (old, rural white guys) are among the least likely to be crime victims whether they are armed or not.

    Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

    by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:42:19 AM PST

  •  so little (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nance, CwV, orlbucfan

    The response to 9/14 is wrong by both parties.  We shouldn't just get background checks and limit some, but not all, assault weapons--we need to outlaw home storage of all guns--from hand held "specials" to assault AK-47 rifles.  Our urban dwellers are in much more danger from the smaller weapons--and get almost no press.

    Focusing on Sandy Hook is understandable--unless you're one of the thousands who lose loved ones every year to hand gun violence.  Make it a criminal offense--with mandatory jail time--if a weapon is not registered, insured, and locked up at a secure government facility.  Imprint some sort of bar code on the barrel of the gun which marks the bullets.  The hunting weapon can be retrieved with one day's notice.

    This won't pass--sadly--but this is the starting point in negotiations.  Again, our party is trying to curry favor, and votes, which just doesn't work!!  How stupid to go down that road--insane people do not get sane by confronting weakness.

    Apres Bush, le deluge.

    by melvynny on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:42:35 AM PST

    •  Kinda sorta (7+ / 0-)

      First of all, I agree 100% that the plague of street violence has been ignored by the media.

      I do not agree that the solutions proposed will be ineffective.

      In particular, universal background checks with other anti-trafficking measures will do just that - clamp down on the flow of guns from FFLs through legal purchasers to the black market. I believe that, if properly implemented, this will go a long way towards cutting urban violence down to a fraction of what it is now. I'm pissed at the NRA for choosing to be spoiled children on this issue. If I want to hand my rifles down to my kids, why shouldn't they have to undergo a background check? But, apparently, this is where they have chosen to fight. So be it.

      If anything, the proposed solutions have been completely inadequate to address situations like Sandy Hook. Sure, there's been a proposed AWB and magazine ban, but those are security theater. There's been some discussion of additional police, but communities are cutting police funding at the same time. There's been some discussion of mental health reform but not much action. And there has been no national conversation - desperately needed - on what drives men to do these things. Without these, it's just a matter of time before the next loser with a wounded pride commits mass murder.

      ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
      My Blog
      My wife's woodblock prints

      by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:56:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  see, i told you (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, wishingwell

        when you stop ranting, you start talking sense.   ;-)

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:09:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  not enough (0+ / 0-)

        How about the government buy's domestic gun manufacturers and closes them down?  How about banning import of weaponry except for police and the military?  How about realizing that background checks are kinda useless--I worked in the Bronx, ex cons had their girl friends buy them the guns they wanted?
        A solution will be long time from now, any step forward is an improvement--but, the smaller the steps, the longer the wait for weapon sanity.  Put another way, your proposals won't help alleviate  the problem substantially in your lifetime--check out how Australia dealt with this issue--and see the results.

        Apres Bush, le deluge.

        by melvynny on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:48:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So, several thoughts here (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a2nite, orlbucfan

          First of all, there are constitutional and national security reasons why shutting down domestic production and importing our firearms for police and military only will never happen. Between Heller and McDonald, civilian ownership of handguns is protected. And shutting down domestic weapons production makes us vulnerable in case of war, or should the dollar collapse.

          Second, pre-Sandy Hook, we couldn't have prosecuted those girlfriends for selling guns to their ex-con boyfriends without proving that the girlfriends knew about their boyfriends' records. Hopefully, once the dust settles, we'll be able to throw those girlfriends in the slammer. It's unfortunate that they'll have to go through that, but a few examples to others, combined with PSAs, should make it much harder for ex-con boyfriends to convince girlfriends.

          ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
          My Blog
          My wife's woodblock prints

          by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:59:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks that makes sense nt (0+ / 0-)
          •  not clear (0+ / 0-)

            I meant shutting down production of weaponry made for retail sales.  If private ownership remains--a government rep needs to be premises at all times.

            Again--you propose nothing that will prevent hand guns, and their bullets, from being bought--you are not proposing anything to make inner city residents safe.  BTW, this is sort of a racial issue--so much street crime is Black ob Black.

            Finally, when you bargain, you ask for the moon--and settle for less.  When you start out asking for less, you get much less, or nothing at all.

            Apres Bush, le deluge.

            by melvynny on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:41:59 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Honestly? (0+ / 0-)

              Asking for the AWB is asking for the moon. It's dead in the US House. D E A D. So, in all likelihood, is the magazine ban. If we can get universal background checks and other anti-trafficking measures, that should be cheered.

              ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
              My Blog
              My wife's woodblock prints

              by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:10:23 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Classic. AWB is dead! Long live AWB! (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                a2nite, tytalus, melvynny, Laconic Lib

                You like it both ways, don't you?

                Here, you declare that AWB is dead. Yet just upthread, you stoke the "confiscation" meme in consecutive comments:

                Huh?
                The NRA screams it would allow us to take their guns away eventually, except they are the only ones talking about taking guns away.
                NYT reported Andrew Cuomo talking about confiscation.

                So, no, the NRA are not the only ones talking about it.

                ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
                My Blog
                My wife's woodblock prints

                by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:45:47 AM CST

                and
                Cute (1+ / 0-)

                So he's not talking about confiscating ALL guns, just the guns that are unpopular right now. Well, that makes it not confiscation then, somehow.

                "Heads I win, tails you lose!"
                •  Indeed (0+ / 0-)

                  Here's a little lesson in logic for you, Bob Johnson.

                  Just because something is dead on arrival in the legislature, doesn't mean people aren't having serious discussions about it.

                  In fact, if it wasn't for the GOP majority in the House, AWB would be quite alive right now. And I fully count on the Democrats, both on a Federal level and in state legislatures, to keep pushing this.

                  In fact, if you're following the debate, you know damn well that I'm right on both counts. And if you're not, well then, you're just in this to throw bombs, which means we should ignore you.

                  ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
                  My Blog
                  My wife's woodblock prints

                  by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 11:32:15 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  I like using the exit polling with it's filters (0+ / 0-)

    over at the dimpled chad Mostly I like them because they tell me what I want to know. Bad news is never appreciated ;-)

    I wish they had their vast data base for the 12 election is most of my complaint.

    The demographic I used was white males gun in the household  and I got what you'd think 31/68 Obama McCain. When I add income less than 30K the results changed. A lot. 43/56 Obama McCain.

    It's those rich gun owners. I have to bite my tongue to keep from making the suggestion of taking guns away from those making more than a certain amount. And their body guards, and their gated communities.

    Of course the numbers are four years old and they only reflect those states exit polled, etc. There was no way to cull by region.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:45:01 AM PST

  •  For some reason the NRA wants to promote the idea (14+ / 0-)

    of a country where you are taking your life in your hands to walk out the door unless armed.  I can see the ideal now - swaggering out the door in the early morning, two Glocks - one on each hip, a AR-15 in your manly (or womanly in the tradition of Bonnie Parker) hands, your ammo clips dangling from a bandoleer over your shoulder, your eyes slits as you scan for signs of bad guys with guns.  Add a white Stetson to separate you from the black-hats, and cowboy boots and you are ready to kick ass.  You have also greened the palms of both gun manufactures and the holy NRA. Now profit does sound like the most likely reason.

    Now I know of some instances where responsibly owning a gun or two would be necessary - border areas along Mexico for example or in some cases in an inner city.  However, in most instances having a gun in the house is more dangerous than not having a gun.  I have been told that I am an aberration in that during my 70 years I have never felt the need to get a gun for protection, and admittedly the border area where I grew up was less dangerous then, but I have walked the streets of Nogales, San Luis Rio Colorado, Mexicali, Monterrey, Guanajuato, La Paz, Mulege,  Tapachula, Port of Spain, St. Augustine in Trinidad, San Juan, Isabella, Mayaguez, all in Puerto Rico, as well as hiking alone in the Pajarito Mountains of Arizona near the border.  I have walked in downtown Cleveland at night, I have spent a bit of time in Washington, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Seattle, Knoxville, Tampa, Gainesville, Atlanta, and many others. At no time did I feel the need for a gun, although I was careful not to walk at night in Washington.  Still not wishing for a gun, the most generally afraid I ever felt was in Miami, and that was somehow just the atmosphere of the place.  Miami feels creepy to me for some reason.

    Actually my worst incident was when two plain clothes policeman stopped me in an East Texas city, apparently under the impression I was a local thug, and had me assume the position.  As soon as they realized their mistake they jumped in the car and left muttering a rough apology. But for a while I was scared!  A gun in my possession would have been a big mistake!

    •  Not sure how we'll get any work done (7+ / 0-)

      if we're spending all our time fighting off urban gangs, marauding looters, or government thugs (pick one) every time we step out of the house.

      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 Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:15:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  By the way I am only commenting on ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, orlbucfan

      guns used for defense, not hunting guns.  I have no problem with them, but I do think that we need to be careful who we allow to have guns - not felons or really unstable people- and not have large clips available. I've shot guns before - used to do target practice many years ago, but I've never felt the need to carry and I don't currently own a gun.  If I did, I'd still feel the same.

      •  How about amending that to "violent felons" (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        orlbucfan, Desert Scientist, andalusi

        or have some kind of screening program that weeds out those who went for minor drug infractions during the last "OMG! We have to make laws because rock cocaine of something!!!!" freak out?

        Remove pot smokers and those who use medical marijuana from the prohibited list. As a sober alcoholic I would much rather stand on a corner and hand guns to people who answer "yes" to the question of pot smoking than to people who drink too much, but....

        "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 Feb 17, 2013 at 08:55:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm for legalizing marijuana and decriminalizing.. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          high uintas, Laconic Lib

          the rest.  The drug war is a disaster.  I do not like drugs, but putting someone in jail for growing a few marijuana plants. But your point is well taken.  I am fully aware that such laws will not solve the problem, but we should not just hand known violent felons and the insane weapons like an AR-15.  

  •  That's right, Greg. (7+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, hulibow, marykk, Nance, Sylv, vcmvo2, Terri

    Thank you for bringing us back to this once again.

  •  About the murder weapon cartoon... (7+ / 0-)

    Gee, I'm in a more dangerous business than I realized. Splitting mauls, chain saws, and wood chippers. Not to mention the fact I'm around hunters all the time. If you go to a logging site, they could have every one of those objects at hand, perhaps even including the assault rifle.

    All these years, I've been worrying about the wrong things: cliffs, hypothermia, rattlesnakes, bears, and Bigfoot.

    Snark above; point of cartoon is well taken.

  •  Conservative Recon Marine Gunnery Sgt says (9+ / 0-)

    - background checks for ALL

    - many people too wide in theor interp of the 2nd Amend

    - and that's beside the point: one doesn't need an arsenal.

    - especially if you don't even know how to use A gun properly, therefore

    - training program(s) of some sort can't hurt.

    I'd like to see some counter-information program be launched to challenge NRA propaganda and claims about the overall usefulness of people's guns.

    I don't believe in banning them outright but I think people should have a less-romantic and dramatic assessment of 'guns' before the choose to take on the responsibilities of owning them.

    On the other hand, if one did wants to ban irresponsible people from gun ownership, youtube's filled with people to go visit.

    I think a good rule would be that anybody who even accidentally shoots themselves should have guns taken away pending a waiting period and training course. Like this dumbass

    An 18-year-old man reportedly shot himself in the penis and testicles at a party last Thursday in Port St. Lucie, Florida while he was cleaning a recently purchased gun.

    Michael Smeriglio initially told police that he had been shot by someone while walking down the street, but police said he changed his story after questioning, according to WKMG Local 6.

    Accidentally shooting another person? Oh-oh: loss of right to own guns; can be appealed after a period of time and after training (like DUI). Case by case.

    This protects the right to own guns while ratcheting up public safety by quickly removing guns from people with 'responsibility lapses'. I imagine implementation of this would re-double the whole focus on responsibility among a number of people whom we would like to get the message.

    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 Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:53:35 AM PST

  •  The argument to own an assault rifle (8+ / 0-)

    "because 2nd Amendment" seems pretty shallow in the face of that graphic. I have asked on numerous occasions what an assault rifle is for & the answer I get is usually a mix of fun at the range and it's my right to own one. Not good enough.
    Rachel Maddow did a most excellent summary w/Chris Hayes of the why surrounding Wayne LaPierre's increasingly crazy rants & how it is all geared toward the small pocket of folks who own many, many guns & are willing to buy more. The gun manufacturers use fear based marketing techniques to sell more guns to the usual suspects and Wayne is trying to capitalize & reinforce that message.  
    Thanks Greg - as I said before you are in a unique position as a Newtown resident & pediatrician, with a powerful voice and a platform to send the message. Thanks for including the awards ceremony - I don't know how those family members held it together.
    Rachel link:
    http://www.nbcnews.com/...
    4:00 minute mark, but the whole segment is good.

    Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up. A. A. Milne

    by hulibow on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:56:16 AM PST

    •  Agreed (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kleinzeit, andalusi

      "Just because" is a stupid reason to own any firearm. Every firearm should have a specific reason to own it. If it doesn't, it's little better than an expensive, dangerous magic charm.

      That said, I think the real reason that this conversation, about why we own guns, is not being had, is because, in reality, nobody on the anti-gun side wants to hear it. If I talk about self-defense then I'm a coward without a dick. If I talk about hunting then I'm cruel to animals and without a dick. If I talk about target shooting then I'm engaging in Rambo fantasies and without a dick. So why bother with that conversation when the most perfectly adequate answer to the anti-gun crowd is "fuck you, Second Amendment?"

      ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
      My Blog
      My wife's woodblock prints

      by maxomai on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:28:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well you aren't hearing that talk from me (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite

        No reason to be disrespectful on either side of this issue - we all have points and questions and opinions. Too bad some have to belittle others.

        Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up. A. A. Milne

        by hulibow on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:10:26 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  If you keep ranting and repeating that (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, high uintas, Laconic Lib

        Often enough, you might succeed in convincing me those suggestions have merit, although the only people that seem to be repeating those NRA fear-mogering talking points seem to be people like yourself.

        What about my Daughter's future?

        by koNko on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:15:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  like I said, this whole "debate" isn't about guns (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, Laconic Lib

        It's about one side yelling "You can't tell me what to do !!!!" and the other side saying "oh yes we can !!!"

        Which is it ALWAYS ALWAYS devolves into a shouting match over "SECOND AMENDMENT so FUCK YOU !!!!!!!!!"

        Thanks for illustrating that so clearly.

        PS-- the Second Amendment is no more absolute than the other twenty-six amendments are.  Sorry about that.  (shrug)

    •  My preference is not to rely on graphics (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      high uintas, sviscusi

      for public policy.

      I see what you did there.

      by GoGoGoEverton on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:43:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You include the police in that, right? (0+ / 0-)

      The graphic says the alternae uses for an assault rifle besides murder is nothing.  So why do the cops still have them?  So they can murder innocent civilians and shoot up cars with 50 bullets like the LAPD?

      Let me be very blunt.  If you want to stop gun manufacturers from making assault rifles, then you need to ban them from EVERYONE, including the police.  Everytime I see someone here say the police get to keep assault rifles, I know they are not serious about gun control.

      The LAPD proved that the only use for assault police rifles is to try and assassinate US citizens in the street.  If you accept that, you have to accept Newton as well.

  •  Ugh (0+ / 0-)

    This morning on a local show, host Colleen Marshall asked in her most concern troll voice "Republicans have said that the President got what he wanted, he got some tax hikes and he doesn't seem willing to talk about spending cuts.  And the Republicans are saying without spending cuts there's really no solution to the economic crisis."

    My Congresswoman Joyce Beatty (D, supposedly) "And you're right, but I think there is a solution.  I think we all have to give a little more, and I think we're going to see that."

    Too bad that Boehner didn't include any cuts in the 98% of what he wanted that he got, and that the report here yesterday of the pay freeze for Federal employees was incorrect.  Yep, no cuts here, move along.

    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it kind, is it true, is it necessary. Does it improve the silence. (Courtesy Kos)

    by Scioto on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:19:30 AM PST

  •  The Point Counter-Point of Wayne LePetomaine (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Faito

    Wayne LePetomaine:Second Amendment
    Us:Wrong DC vs Heller Scalia

    Wayne LePetomaine:Good Guy with a Gun
    Us:#Gunfail  NYPD 18% bullet accuracy

    WP:Tyranny
    Us:Hellfire-Result Splinters and goo

    WP:Sandy Looters
    Sandy Victims:F U Wayne

    Your Move Wayne........

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:33:01 AM PST

  •  add handguns to the cartoon (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laconic Lib

    in the same class as the assault rifle.

    They do far more damage because there are so many of them around.

    "The only person sure of himself is the man who wishes to leave things as they are, and he dreams of an impossibility" -George M. Wrong.

    by statsone on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:39:44 AM PST

  •  You do indeed deserve a vote! (0+ / 0-)

    And reasonable measures also suggested by this President should be passed.

    It is long past time. Newtown was a turning point- enough is enough!

    In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God ~RFK

    by vcmvo2 on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:43:27 AM PST

  •  Poor graphic. Good demagoguery. (3+ / 0-)
    Murder:  The crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
    There are many alternate, legal uses for firearms, besides murder.   To be fair, most involve do killing something.  That's what that particular implement is made for.

    PS:   They can ban "assault weapons", but if they use the old statutory definition for an "assault weapon", people can still buy and own a semi-automatic rifle that kills just as well, so what's the point, besides a feel good response?

    Many hands make light work, but light hearts make heavy work the lightest of all.

    by SpamNunn on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:44:00 AM PST

  •  We must drive change on guns (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Laconic Lib

    Sadly, very little has changed in the political establishment in terms of gun control since Newtown. That leaves it up to the people of America to push for change. The Constitution says citizens have a right to arms via a "well-regulated militia." Well, nothing about our current system of gun laws is "well-regulated" or under the auspices of official organizations. We need a change to prevent future horrors like Sandy Hook. Our founding fathers said nothing about the Gog-given right to own cannons, and that is essentially what these modern assault weapons are. Citizens on American streets have no right to be better armed than our own military.  -  progressive

  •  Not wanting to let my only comment to be a (0+ / 0-)

    statistical question:

    I agree with those who believe it good to take the money and run, so to speak.

    There is a real opportunity now to do things that make a difference.  

    Will they solve the problem?

    No.

    But that's never been the test for doing things.

    Doctors can't cure all the cancer out there.
    Cops can't stop all the drunk drivers.

    But they keep trying, and the lives they save matter.

    Get done what can be done now and move on.
    Get to jobs and the economy.
    Get to providing opportunity.

    Betcha see even more of that gun violence go down as people have viable alternatives to crime, reasons not to be despondant, etc.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:02:58 AM PST

  •  The graphic would make a good Facebook meme (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marykk

    Especially since the hunting rifle is on there. Disarm that "Obama wants to yank away all your guns" straw man. (A stupid one at that, though consider the source.)

    And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

    by Pale Jenova on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 08:22:50 AM PST

  •  Hell, I'm from DeKalb, IL, and we deserve a vote, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Greg Dworkin, a2nite, Pithy Cherub

    too.

    Same sort of thing happened to us five years ago. Same thing happens every weekend in Chicago. More parents grieving, more death, more innocent kids dying. Sometimes it makes me wonder, if more people cared about what happened to us, would Newtown have happened? Could I have done more to change things?

    This is the first non-bad thing I've heard of "my" senator Kirk doing, co-sponsoring a registry. I'm calling his office Monday to encourage him to do more for us.

  •  Grief never ceases. It is what it (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Greg Dworkin, Faito, a2nite

    metamorphs into that matters most.  

    All of America deserves a simple vote.  From every hamlet to every hilltop, this nation mourns the travesty of gun violence.  We, along with Newtown & the Pendleton families, deserve a simple precious vote.

    Every time history repeats itself, the price goes up...East Wing Rules

    by Pithy Cherub on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 09:19:47 AM PST

  •  Has anyone actually been murdered by a chainsaw? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bob Johnson, Faito

    Or a chipper?   I think some people watch too many movies.   I actually use boat and think it would be quite difficult to murder somebody with either.   You aren't going to be sneaking up on anybody with a chainsaw, nor are you going to do much running after your victim.

    Advice you will never need:  If you are attacked by somebody with a chainsaw, throw a jacket or blanket at them.   The fibers will jam the saw (protective gear works on that principle.)

    Maybe I prefer not to know...

  •  So based on this post and other (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kickemout

    lately, am I to understand that being against the second amendment is the new litmus test for the 'True Progressive'? And if not, what is the goal of this opposition, so I know when we meet it.

  •  Thank you Greg for your diary. How many more (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Faito

    must be sacrificed at the altar of the gun Cult before we take Congress back from the NRA so that they pass laws that reduce the number of people getting shot?

    Clearly having one person shot every 5 minutes (even though "only" 32k die from getting shot, over 70k are treated at ERs every year for GSWs) is not enough, but I am hoping that the outrage after 12/14 makes it clear to people that they must rise and demand that their Congress-critters free themselves from the NRA.  Many of the mass-killings and the "normal" daily carnage should have been enough, but if Newtown does not make everyone realize that this situation is untenable then I don't know what will.

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

    by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 10:09:19 AM PST

  •  There's an error on the comic at the top (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Faito

    The item in the bottom right does have a purpose:  Killing humans.

  •  There's something I don't get... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    ... about the 2nd Amendment.

    One of the tests the Supreme Court uses when they are assessing free speech is "clear and present danger".  

    As in:  "Is there, from someone's speech, a clear and present danger that there could be violence or tragedy?" If there is, then that speech can be restricted.

    This is the old 'can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater' deal.  Or so-called "fighting words".  Some freedom of speech limitations are about public safety.  The public interest, like national security or personal safety, can override freedom of speech.

    Seems to me that the public interest (personal safety) is being trampled by nuts with easy access to WMDs and unlimited stockpiles of ammo.  Crazies with high powered weapons present a clear and present danger to unarmed civilians.   The clear and present danger in America has become the gun lobby (not to mention some unhinged "Right to Insurrection" types, whose numbers are growing) which is pushing its product and its agenda, regardless of what the consequences are for the nation as a whole.  

  •  Partridge Lane, Newtown, Ct is where we lived (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Greg Dworkin, a2nite

    When our kids were born and eventually started school. It's a beautiful, huge, rural suburb, about 1 1/2 hours from NYC.

     After moving away from Newtown, we were the victims of gun stupidity where while practice shooting our neighbors shot out our windows, sent the bullets flying through the length of our home nearly killing some of us.

    As far as I'm concerned........ Keep your guns out of my schools and keep your bullets out of my home. I think that my family has earned a vote!

    "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Matthew 5:11

    by parsonsbeach on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 06:35:43 PM PST

    •  right around the corner from me (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite

      Head O'Meadow district.

      Beautiful place.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 at 07:18:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site