Skip to main content

I wandered over to  the FreeRepublic site and got an eyeful of responses to a posting which borders on treason as the poster advocates a rising up against the federal government if gun restrictions become too onerous.  Apparently Thomas Jefferson was all in against government tyranny.  etc....

Frankly, I am now very wary of doing anything to restrict the second amendment because of the backlash of said Free Republic gun devotees for they will provoke an incident such as Ruby Ridge or Waco to put the feds in a bad light and then they will try to start a revolution.

At this point in time, I do not want to travel or live in states that have  gone completely pro-gun crazy.I do not believe Bloomberg's monied campaign is going to get traction on ammo magazines, assault rifle bans, background checks on all gun sales or transfers.  Common sense does not rule in the gun culture.  Paranoia does.

And now, apparently there are up to 15 U.S. Senators that will filibuster gun control bills in the Senate.  

I feel that we, sane citizens who want sensible gun control legislation, are being held hostage to those who fear tyranny by the federal government if such legislation is passed.  These Senators would side with those "citizen patriots" who would provoke a Ruby Ridge or Waco event if robust gun legislation were enacted.  

Originally posted to virginia dare on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 02:39 PM PDT.

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

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

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

?

More Tagging tips:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comment Preferences

  •  Fear not (16+ / 0-)
    Frankly, I am now very wary of doing anything to restrict the second amendment because of the backlash of said Free Republic gun devotees for they will provoke an incident such as Ruby Ridge or Waco to put the feds in a bad light and then they will try to start a revolution.

    At this point in time, I do not want to travel or live in states that have  gone completely pro-gun crazy.I do not believe Bloomberg's monied campaign is going to get traction on ammo magazines, assault rifle bans, background checks on all gun sales or transfers.  Common sense does not rule in the gun culture.  Paranoia does.

    We can't let the overheated blatherings of the extreme dictate public policy.  If any of them grow the gonads to actually act upon their fevered ramblings they will be put down and shunned by the greater society as lone wolf nutcases.  There is real cause for concern about such events, as several attacks by extremists have already occurred.  But that doesn't mean we should just cower in fear of doing the right thing.

    As for traveling to states with largely pro gun populations, I for one would welcome a gun safety march thru Selma Alabama.  I couldn't cross country to participate probably and the state I'm in if far less extreme in general so any march here would have far less impact.  But marching and openly advocating for the right is a tried and true tactic in the American experience.  

    I am the neo-con nightmare, I am a liberal with the facts.

    by bhfrik on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 02:49:42 PM PDT

    •  Ah, a non-violent protest (6+ / 0-)

      I like it.  

      Some states such as Conn, Ill and New York with strict gun control laws who would like to control the type of guns and purchasers in their states, I wonder if they could sue pro-gun states if it could be proven these non-background checked guns are getting into their jurisdictions.

      It seems without federally backed gun purchase background checks have to be in every state to be effective in stopping killing in the major cities.

      •  Um, no, they could not sue. (0+ / 0-)

        I'm not aware of any state suing another, and even if they could, they have no case to make as there is no requirement that one state following another state's laws.

        "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

        by Neuroptimalian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:34:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I agree (6+ / 0-)
      We can't let the overheated blatherings of the extreme dictate public policy.
      I could not agree more. However, I'm probably thinking of a different group of people than you.
      •  If background checks/magazine limits and (3+ / 0-)

        other sensible safety measures are "the extreme" in your book just remember that is a reflection of your opinion of vast majorities of the American people.

        I am the neo-con nightmare, I am a liberal with the facts.

        by bhfrik on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:33:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Shamash, overheated blatherings of the extreme (4+ / 0-)

        refer to the scary Free Republic gun devotees and the 15 Republican senators who are threatening to filibuster any gun control legislation that sane common sense citizens would like to see enacted.

        You must agree that the illegal gun market which underpins all of the illegal guns coming into big cities like Chicago and new York could be greatly controlled by background checks on all weapon purchases or transfers in all states.

        Therefore the only guns available to criminals would those that would be stolen or already in the hands of thugs or gangbangers.

        Therefore, it follows that homicides would go down in these major cities if you care at all about that.

        •  One thing that background checks will do is change (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bhfrik, wilderness voice, ciganka

          the level of responsibility of a lot of gun owners/dealers. It will change their attitude regarding guns.
          To really change the violence in this country is going to require a new attitude about guns.

          You can't make this stuff up.

          by David54 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 04:15:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  No, I do not have to agree (6+ / 0-)

          Virginia, I'm guessing that you are both pro-choice and have never been called a "baby murderer" by DKos members.

          That's the sort of treatment that liberal gun owners here at Kos deal with on a daily basis. The sort of language used about non-liberal gun owners is even worse. So forgive me if I think people should be careful about tossing around terms like "overheated blathering of the extreme".

          Extremes exist on both sides of the political spectrum. There is an extreme here that is just as verbally vicious as those found on the right.

          I'm in favor of background check reform and competency-based licensing with a national standard rather than patchwork state laws. But there is a negative historical correlation in the availability of "assault weapons" and mass shootings. So, as a member of the "reality-based community", I oppose "assault weapon" bans as useless feel-good legislation and would prefer the effort, money and political capital went to better and/or targeted enforcement, as was done in Hartford, CT, an effort with a demonstrated track record of success and which could be expanded and funded at a national level for an easily affordable cost.

          •  It is GOOD to hear from reponsible (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shamash

            gun owners what type of solutions they believe are necessary.   I believe you ahve offered some sane arguments.

            I'm progressive and I don't want to see guns baned, but there does need to be a reasonable discussion.  The NRA clearly does NOT represent the 'reponsible' gun owner.

            My argument w/ the membership of the NRA as well as christians is this:  YOU have allowed the crazies to represent you.

            I live in a rural area with many responsible gun owners - but they remain silent - all we read about are the uninformed crazies and their boat load of conspiracy theories.

        •  Apparently, not enough people know that ... (0+ / 0-)

          felons who are prevented from buying guns frequently send in their girlfriends and wives to make purchases for them.

          "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

          by Neuroptimalian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:35:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Those 15 senators threatening to filibuster aren't (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          libnewsie, Glen The Plumber

          impressive. For one thing it takes 40...which they will likely get because they filibuster everything
          We are really dysfunctional
          sort of sick really.
          The extreme holds sway on way too many things
          Well the extreme and the extremely rich.

    •  People talk tough on the internet. The number who (6+ / 0-)

      would actually do something is small.

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 04:12:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I live in the a very red area of the Deep South. (19+ / 0-)

    I assure you, it is all hot air. These people want to try and scare progress away with bluster because frankly, they don't have much else.

    Guns are never the principle in the commission of a crime, but they are usually an accomplice

    by MadGeorgiaDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:01:08 PM PDT

  •  Why give up when we haven't gotten started; (4+ / 0-)

    The evil RW extremists are loud(er) & have the evil NRA & evil rich people & the evil RW media behind them. We have more people on our side. It is discouraging because evil has been winning for so long.  We have righteousness on our side.

    •  I don't know if this love of the gun (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      viral, Glen The Plumber

      in some states can be overcome by righteous people.

      If background checks on ALL gun purchases or transfers in ALL states can't pass in the Senate due to filibuster by Republican senators, there is no chance to curtail the inflow of illegal guns into Chicago or New York.

      The vicious cycle of gun violence continues unabated.

      More gun crimes and homicides leads to more gun purchases by criminals and law-abiding citizens alike.

      It seems like the NRA likes it that way.

    •  Oh for pete's sake.... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Neo Control, bogbud, noway2, andalusi

      You get a hobbit, I will get a ring & we'll take care of this.

      "Evil, evil, evil, evil, evil....."
      Honestly....

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:52:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I can tell you from living down here (12+ / 0-)

    the so called gun nuts are the biggest cowards there are. It's why they need guns. To keep from wetting themselves.

    GOP- Fact Free since 1981!

    by KingGeorgetheTurd on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:20:43 PM PDT

  •  Freepers and TEA Party, many of the same people nt (9+ / 0-)

    *Austerity is the opposite of Prosperity*

    by josmndsn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:27:35 PM PDT

  •  There are more Patriots than Gun Worshippers. (4+ / 0-)

    So I wouldn't worry about it. I think they have watched too many movies from Dirty Harry to Die Hard 5, and love to speak those lines that make them a legend in their own minds.

    The blustering isn't really worth considering in light of the thousands of deaths from guns since Sandy Hook. Could it get worse? Yes, but only if we do nothing about background checks. At the moment, we just need to not take counsel of our fears.

    Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

    by OregonOak on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 04:02:49 PM PDT

  •  They're nuts alright. (4+ / 0-)

    But the government will crush them like bugs if they make good on their threats.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 04:20:56 PM PDT

    •  See... here's where I think you're a bit off: (0+ / 0-)

      Look at this.

      See there? If only only 5% of gun owners jumped on the bandwagon, they would outgun the entirety of all forms of government in this country.

      Sure, there would be tanks and drones and planes and nukes, but tell me how well those are working out in Afghanistan- where there is very little accountability for their use.

      A revolution is not something that should be encouraged, because it would be utterly devastating. Hardly the fly to be swatted you are making it out to be.

  •  My Dear One, who fought in WW II, believed gun (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    notrouble, a2nite

    registration could result in the "authorities" coming to confiscate all guns, i.e. as the Nazis did in the countries they occupied.  However he was totally against unregulated sales of big-magazine guns.

    Do you-all remember the movie Key Largo, starring Bogart, Bacall, Edward G. Robertson, Lionel Barrymore, etc.?  

    My Dear One did a very amusing send-up of Edward G, Robinson as a gangster type shooting ducks with a machine gun.  This was mocking those non-sportsmen who could not score game with a simple shotgun or rifle, etc.

    Fiscal conservative: a Republican ready to spend $5 to save a dime--especially if that dime is helping a non-donor.

    by Mayfly on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 05:40:25 PM PDT

  •  Just keep your adblock on (0+ / 0-)

    So they aren't getting any revenue counts against your attendance.

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

    by Chris Reeves on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 05:49:43 PM PDT

  •  As it is with the GOP of late, the craziest ones (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coquiero, YucatanMan

    get a disproportionate amount of attention, including those in office.  Even the right wing extremist I am presently living with wants to see a ban on assault weapons, thinking our streets are no place for this type of weaponry.   Of course I used to think reason would prevail, but latelyam not so sure.

    "They love the founding fathers so much they will destroy everything they created and remake it in Rush Limbaughs image." MinistryofTruth, 9/29/11

    by AnnieR on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:29:08 PM PDT

    •  Gun control isn't a left/right issue. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Neo Control, notrouble, noway2

      It is a rural/urban one. The fact that it is the Democratic party pushing for gun control isn't because of liberalism (after all, 'liberal' gun laws would mean individual choice), it is because of geography.
      Most Democrats are urban. Urban people, comparatively don't have as much exposure to firearms as rural people. As such, the only time they hear about guns are in the news.

      I am curious, are you in an urban area?

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:58:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  a majority of rural americans (6+ / 0-)

        supports background checks, an assault weapons ban, and a ban on high capacity magazines.

        http://www.quinnipiac.edu/...

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

        by Laurence Lewis on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:55:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Be careful citing that poll (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose, noway2

          Did you look carefully at the results?

          55% of rural respondents oppose gun control laws, yet:

          rural respondents approve of banning assault weapons, high capacity magazines and background checks, yet:

          55% of rural respondents believe background checks will lead to confiscation.

          Something is wrong if the same respondents can give those conflicting answers to those questions.  How did Quinnepac poll  people that could answer yes and then no to practically the same question?  

          To carry this whole thing even further, overall, men oppose gun control laws, but overwhelmingly support  background checks, but believe that background checks will lead to confiscation.  See what I mean about a disconnect within the answers given?

          •  the only thing wrong (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Glen The Plumber, a2nite

            is the idea that "gun control" means anything. it's a trope. people don't like the idea of government control, but they do like specific measures. it suggests that they don't consider those measures to be gun control. it suggests that even if they fear confiscation (which, as meteor blades keeps pointing out, is ridiculous, given the decades over which machine guns have required registration, and have never been confiscated), they're still willing to take the risk on background checks.

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

            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 12:07:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not only that (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Laurence Lewis

              In the decades since machine guns have been heavily regulated there haven't been too many instances of someone shooting up a bank with a Thompson or a B.A.R. (Clyde Barrow's weapon of choice).

              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 Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:41:17 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Yet a majority oppose 'gun control' (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          noway2

          As per the most recent CBS & CNN polls.

          And more oppose gun control today than they did in 1994.

          And independents trust the least popular congress in history more than Obama when it comes to guns.

          They don't trust your intents, Laurence.....and rightly so.

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:55:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  still spamming the cbs poll (5+ / 0-)

            even though you have been told repeatedly that you are cherry-picking. and lying. as per meteor blades:

            You continue to make this claim... (26+ / 0-)

            ...based on a link that is not to the entire CBS Poll, but only to the part that backs up your claim. Lying by omission is what my priest used to call that.

            You also fail to note that two other polls released in the past two days by Marist and Quinnipiac show a solid majority in favor of stricter gun regulations. So, even on the generic question, your claim is bogus. You can see the results of all those questions here.

            you spam zombie lies, no matter how many times they are debunked. lies. and you continue to ignore the very simple fact that "gun control" is a meaningless trope. it means nothing. specific measures enjoy wide support.

            keep it up.

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

            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 12:11:27 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It isn't a 'lie'. It is specifically what the poll (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              noway2

              says.
              The CNN poll concurs.

              "specific measures enjoy wide support"
              But they don't trust those that are pushing for them. Independents trust the chucklefucks in congress more than the president by a wide margin on this.
              Perhaps they think that gun controllers simply want to use those 'specific measures' to further their agenda of.......say......"Repealing the 2nd Amendment."

              Your fantasy of infringing on the liberties of innocent Americans is failing spectacularly.

              And there are going to be electoral consequences.

              Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

              by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 12:23:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  actually (4+ / 0-)

                it is specifically what you cherry-pick. lying by omission. lies.

                Since you want to discuss the CNN/ORC poll, here's the question from THAT poll which puts the kibosh on your bogus claim:

                Which of the following statements comes closest to your view:

                March 15-17, 2013
                There should be no restrictions on owning guns: 17%
                There should be some restrictions on owning guns: 70%
                All guns should be illegal for everyone
                except police and authorized personnel: 12%

                Dec. 17-18, 2012

                No restrictions: 13%
                Some restrictions: 71%
                Illegal for everyone except cops: 15%

                Keeping in mind that the margin of error is ±3, please show me the huge change from poll taken right after Newton until mid-March.

                The distortion being injected into the discussion by your selective use of the CBS and CNN polls is the sign of the fabricator. It's just like several of your other transparent attempts to distort the facts in polling discussions with Greg Dworkin and in distorting the results of a poll in which you claim (falsely) that Obama was "trounced" on the trust issue around handling gun regulations by Congress.

                You ignore evidence you don't like, and you cite selectively, even after being patiently shown how distorting this technique is. Lying by omission is a mild description of your actual game. There are honest debaters here who oppose all or almost all the federally proposed gun legislation. But they don't stoop to distorting the evidence. You should emulate them.

                and despite that, you continue to spam the same lies. no matter how many times you are called on them. lies.

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

                by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 12:39:05 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Losing 9% of support for major restrictions (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  noway2

                  isn't a lie.
                  Nor is CBS's question about supporting gun control losing 10% a lie.
                  And both of those polls are measureing only the past 3 months, the 20 yr trend is even more stark.
                  You seem to have confused the definition of the word 'lie' with 'inconvenient fact'.

                  The world doesn't stop and start on your say-so Laurence.

                  Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                  by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:39:03 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You continue to ignore... (5+ / 0-)

                    • the Center for American Progress's evaluation of the worth of responses to generic gun-regulation questions vs. specific questions.

                    • the fact that the Quinnipiac Poll taken the first week of April shows 53 percent in favor of stricter controls and 42 percent not in favor.

                    • the Marist Poll taken the last week of March showing 60 percent in favor of stricter laws vs. 38 percent wanting to keep them as is or less strict.

                    • the Washington Post poll taken the second week of March showing 52 percent vs. 45 percent. (A drop of just 2 percent in support since December, with a margin of error of 3.5 percent).

                    You cherry-pick polls. You ignore the fact that Americans still support specific new gun regulations with the exception, in some polls, of the assault weapons ban.

                    This creates a false picture of the real situation.

                    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

                    by Meteor Blades on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:18:36 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Check the original comment in this thread. (0+ / 1-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Hidden by:
                      indycam

                      How is LL's statement any less of an example of what you refer to as 'cherry picking' than mine?
                      If I am 'cherry picking' then I have a lot of company.

                      You don't include the CNN & CBS polls of the past 3 months, nor the polls showing 20 year trend of declining support for gun control in every comment & diary.

                      Would you categorize your statements that don't include those polls as 'cherry-picking'?
                       I certainly wouldn't.

                      The polls I cite are accurate, credible & relevant.
                      Polls that suggest the contrary was already presented by LL, why do you insist that I must present polls already cited?
                      I have shown a number of polls suggesting that the question of gun control isn't as cut&dry as LL is suggesting, that isn't 'cherry picking' that is 'responding'.

                      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                      by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 10:55:00 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  the world stops and starts on facts (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    coquiero, YucatanMan

                    which you lie about, ignore, and distort. repeatedly.

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

                    by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 10:07:54 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I haven't lied, ignored nor distorted. (0+ / 0-)

                      I have honestly presented polls which you ignore.

                      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                      by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 10:56:36 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  lies (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        coquiero, reflectionsv37, YucatanMan

                        it has been explained to you on countless occasions why your cherry-picking is dishonest, why the polls you cite are meaningless, and that the specific proposals enjoy wide support. but like nigel tufnel, you just keep repeating that your polls go to eleven. the difference of course being that nigel tufnel was just a harmless idiot. you're no idiot. nor are you harmless.

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

                        by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 11:00:58 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Oh, please. An accusation of cherry picking (0+ / 1-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Hidden by:
                          indycam

                          from you?
                          Bill Clinton's estimation of what gun control cost the Dems in 1994.
                          1994 itself.
                          AWB expiring with nary a peep.
                          CNN & CBS polls showing a 10% & 9% erosion on a poll question about gun control.
                          20 year trend of increasing support for gun rights.
                          20 year trend of erosion of support for gun control.
                          Up to a dozen Dem Senators not onboard with AWB.

                          I don't expect you to include any of these valid points when presenting your argument. The very idea is absurd. During presidential debates do you insist that the Dem has to present evidence supporting the GOP nominee?

                          Tell you what, I will present my argument with supporting evidence.
                          You present your argument with supporting evidence.
                          The loser of the debate has to incessantly whine about the winner not presenting the loser's supporting evidence for him.

                          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                          by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 11:31:30 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  we've been over those spam talking points (4+ / 0-)

                            countless times. the polls show wide support for specific gun measures. that's the reality you continue to ignore, distort, and flat out lie about.

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

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 12:02:24 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh? Quote where I said a 'flat out lie'. (0+ / 1-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hidden by:
                            indycam

                            As for the rest of your laughable whining, let me know when you live up to your own standards.
                            Until that time I will continue to present supporting evidence for my position & it will be your job--not mine--to do the same for your position.
                            If you feel that both your position & your supporting evidence is strong, then this should be no problem for you.
                            If not....then just keep whining about me not making your argument for you.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 12:12:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Bill Clinton and his campaign actually touted his (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Laurence Lewis, Glen The Plumber

                            gun control efforts in his 1996 campaign.  The Brady Bill was praised at the convention itself in prime time, and assault weapons ban featured in campaign advertisements.

                            Since you have seen links to the video of those advertisements and links to the convention content, what you are saying about Bill Clinton re: gun control is tantamount to a flat out lie by omission.

                            Simply attributing the 1994 effect (which political scientists have proven wrong - and you have seen the links) while not mentioning that Bill Clinton WON in 1996 WHILE touting gun control efforts of his campaign, sometimes specifically on that item alone in campaign advertisements is not telling the whole truth.

                            And you are guilty of that: not telling the whole truth. Sorry.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 03:07:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  not only that (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            YucatanMan, Glen The Plumber

                            but as he has been told repeatedly, actual analysis of 1994, by paul waldman, citing clinton's own pollster, attributed that election to the health care debacle.

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

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:41:03 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Bill Clinton disagrees. (0+ / 0-)

                            You will notice we aren't debating how many elections gun control has won.

                            Winners have results.
                            Losers have excuses.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:47:20 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  there's no such thing (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            YucatanMan, Glen The Plumber

                            as "gun control"- there are specific measures. and we won the last two congressional races where gun measures or nra support were key issues. and while you always appeal to authority, because of one anecdote clinton once made, actual analysis by clinton's own pollster refuted it. do keep spamming.

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

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:50:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  "no such thing as gun control". (0+ / 0-)

                            Better tell Miriam-Webster.
                            "Gun Control: (1964)  regulation of the selling, owning, and use of guns."

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:47:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i see (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            YucatanMan, Glen The Plumber

                            so you oppose regulation of the selling, owning and use of machine guns? cannons? armaments? or are you one of those evil infringing on liberties types?

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

                            by Laurence Lewis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:10:01 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yet Bill Clinton disagrees (0+ / 0-)

                            There is a reason why we aren't debating how many votes gun control won.

                            Winners have results.
                            Losers have excuses.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:45:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Broken record. Broken record. Broken record. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Glen The Plumber

                            Your statements are simply incorrect.
                            That has been shown to you.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:35:43 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Which part? (0+ / 0-)

                            Bill Clinton attributing AWB to losing 20 House seats? (True, it's in his autobiography).
                            Are we debating how many votes gun control won? (No. 1994 was a disaster)
                            Are you claiming that losers have results & winners have excuses? (Technically half-right....after all, gun control did have a result, albeit a bad one)

                            I answer the questions/statements presented.
                            It isn't my fault I see constant repeats of the same question/statement, or in your case a strange accusation of basic facts being incorrect.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 08:55:01 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  "Trolling defined" (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Glen The Plumber

                            http://www.dkosopedia.com/...

                            Proven-false information, conspiracy theories, or debunked talking points.

                            Drop the name-calling MB 2/4/11 + Please try to use ratings properly! Kos 9/9/11

                            by indycam on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 09:47:21 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Quote where I did any of those. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            andalusi

                            'Debunk' doesn't mean 'disagree'.

                            Don't forget a link to prove your laughable accusation.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 01:31:18 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

          •  I don't know too many independents (0+ / 0-)

            Most so-called independents I meet are just Republicans who don't want to admit it for some reason.

            "I don't belong to any party, I vote for the most qualified person (who just so happens to always always always be the Republican)"

            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 Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 03:37:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Huh? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Glen The Plumber, coquiero

        I respond to a writer who goes to a rabid r/w site and finds what those rabid right wingers are saying as disturbing, trying to point out what a small percentage of the population hold these views and you respond with a geographical lesson?  

        "They love the founding fathers so much they will destroy everything they created and remake it in Rush Limbaughs image." MinistryofTruth, 9/29/11

        by AnnieR on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:58:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, most Americans are urban (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Glen The Plumber, coquiero

        that's the way the demographics shake out these days.

        More people live in New York City than in Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas - combined.

        Some guy in Tuscaloosa being able to get a 30-round magazine for his favorite plinker isn't all that high on my list of concerns.

        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 Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 03:34:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And infringing on the liberties of innocent (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          noway2

          Americans isn't high on my list of concerns.

          The states you focused on aren't the right ones. Both the coasts and the southern states you mentioned are solidly blue and red. Gun control will have a negligible effect for them.
          It is Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Carolina (and red states with Dems in House/senate/state) that this will have an effect on.
          And you can bet that it will.

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:48:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks a lot. I just wasted about 30 minutes of (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    virginia dare, Glen The Plumber

    my life reading some crap over there.

  •  Don't let them scare you into inaction (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Glen The Plumber

    If their ranting causes you to do nothing, they will win.

    The sad thing is that while they will go on like that, they also think there should be checks so ex-cons can't get guns,,,

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site