Skip to main content

Gads, it has been nearly 2 years since I have published a diary.  My narcissistic self says WTF.

At any rate, please read my bias...and my opinions...in the body of this diary.

Please understand that I have no axe to grind re my fellow Dems who are vehemently anti-gun.  Everyone of us is vehemently against the outrages of psychopathic killers who have unfortunately dominated the news in recent times.  I say, vehemently and strongly, let us forever keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who are psychologically incapable of responsible gun ownership.

Before I present my opinions re gun ownership, please allow me to offer my gun owner advocate bonafides, as biased as they most certainly are.

I wish to speak as an official old fart...I am 66 years old...a Vietnam vet who has been shot at and ...mostly...missed and shit at and...mostly...hit, a husband of a beautiful wife of 40 plus years, a father of two so successful and independent children and a gun owner.

I grew up in rural Iowa in a family that was fiercely independent...and poor.  I know hunger and deprivation from having no money and no food in the house.  I do know that my family depended upon and enjoyed the protein provided by fall, winter and spring hunting.  Probably, because of my relative economic success and because of my aversion to violence that was borne of my Vietnam adventure, I refrained from hunting after my exit from Vietnam in 1970 until about three years ago when I decided to start hunting again.  I hunt small game and deer with a good degree of success.  I wish to state that I would never harvest any game that I did not plan to utilize...translate that as eat.  To me, this is very much more honest  a way to harvest animal protein than buying blister packed meat at the supermarket.  For my PETA friends who I very much respect, I only wish to point out that today, most wild game has no natural predators and that to avoid the harsh die off that occurs when a given animal exceeds the carrying capacity of its habitat, we must rely upon responsible hunters.  A biologist could elaborate upon this, but most certainly would support this statement.

Be that as it may, I would ask my anti-gun Democratic colleagues  and partners to be a little more tolerant of those of us who strongly believe in the Second Amendment.  After all, we as progressive/liberal Democrats want to bring supporters into the fold and not to alienate otherwise kindred spirits by disparaging what I believe are legitimate beliefs about firearm ownership.

Originally posted to Randolph the red nosed reindeer on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 05:50 PM PST.

Also republished by Right to Keep and Bear Arms and Hunting and Fishing Kos.

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

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

?

More Tagging tips:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comment Preferences

  •  Please re-phrase this bit.... (11+ / 0-)
    Everyone of us is vehemently against the outrages of psychopathic killers who have unfortunately dominated the news in recent times.
    That sounds like something a Republican would say.  You still got a tip and a rec from me, because I appreciate the attempt at a dialogue and agree with everything else you say, it's just that this statement just rubs me the wrong way.

    Every single mass shooter that I'm aware of has been mentally ill.  Every single one of them would have been a productive member of society if they had received treatment.  They're not psychopaths, they're ill, and they deserve no more scorn than one would apply to a rabid dog.

    Put simply, it's not their fault.  We failed them.  As a consequence a whole bunch of innocent lives are ended, dozens more lives are ruined, and the mentally ill individual ends up dead, or with a one-way ticket to death-row/life in solitary, which might as well be the same thing.

    There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box and ammo box. Use in that order.

    by Crookshanks on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 06:13:30 PM PST

  •  If you have to shoot a deer to survive (5+ / 0-)

    that's understandable. And you may be right that it is better to shoot wild game than it is to support factory farming. But in the end you don't shoot these beautiful, defenseless animals because you have to, and you don't reluctantly shoot them for the greater good. You actually like the act of killing them, which I find difficult to relate to. You take away all of their tomorrows, and enjoy yourself while doing so.

  •  Comments (9+ / 0-)

    Nobody seriously advocates disarming hunters.  (Taking down a deer with a .30-06 is a hell of a lot more humane than having me involuntarily do it in my expensive new car -- the deer walked away and likely spent the last hours of its life in extreme pain.  And I had a $4000 repair job on my hands.)

    •  Rec'd for conversation and the reality you (8+ / 0-)

      bring up.  As a Rental Car Agent, here in Buffalo, we have hundreds of vehicles that either hit deer or get hit by deer.  And yes, deer, once they're running don't stop, even if you are.  I personally had a deer clip my front bumper, after I came to a full stop when I saw it running up the embankment.  

      That said, legitimate and lawful hunters are the ones whom will be paying the price with the various gun control pushes throughout the nation.

      Democrat Pascrell in NJ wants to tax guns at 20% and ammo at 50%.

      Here in New York, our "SAFE Act", only effects hunter if they use a specific guns, rifles:

      http://woodtrekker.blogspot.com/...

      To summarize, if you hunt with a centerfire rifle or a shotgun, the hunting regulations already limit the rounds to below what the NY SAFE Act requires. In that sense you should not be effected. If you hunt with a .22 or .17 rimfire rifle, then you will be effected in that you can only use a maximum 10 round magazine, and it can in turn only be loaded with 7 rounds.

      As for the psychological restrictions/aspects that are being pushed, that effects everyone but has done nothing notable here in New York.

      A year after SAFE Act, is New York safer?

      Since the major provisions of the law took effect in March, a total of 1,291 charges had been issued under the SAFE Act through Dec. 17, according to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services. Of those, 1,155 were for felony possession of an illegal firearm, which had been a misdemeanor prior to the new gun laws.

      -cut-

      The SAFE Act statistics show the vast majority of charges — a total of 1,078 — came in New York City.

      FYI, this is the part of the law that bothers me more than anything: New York's, SAFE Act:
      Allows law enforcement officials to pre-emptively seize one's firearms without a warrant or court order when there is probable cause the individual is mentally unstable or intends to use the weapons to commit a crime.

      -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 Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:38:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  back when I was a kid in rural Pennsylvania, (6+ / 0-)

    I hunted too.  Not for sport--my family was dirt poor (we had an outhouse in the first two houses I lived in). The day I turned 12 I was given a shotgun for my birthday; within months I was expected to do my part to put meat in the spaghetti sauce. I learned to shoot by popping groundhogs at 200 yards with my dad's bolt-action .222 . I didn't miss very often, because when I missed, we had no meat in the spaghetti sauce.

    So i remember those ole days when the NRA was primarily a group focused on hunters and hunter safety.

    Alas, those days are long gone.  Hunting itself is no longer what it used to be. I gave up hunting as soon as I didn't need it for food, though I kept up target-shooting, have always owned a gun ever since I was 12, and still enjoy punching holes in paper.

    The hunting community, though, continued to shrink. And as that "hunters" source of income began to dry up and disappear, the gun manufacturers (and therefore the NRA) turned away from sporting and hunting firearms, and towards "self-defense". Killing deer is no longer their business--killing "bad guys" is. What they sell now, in effect, is "paranoia", the idea that everyone everywhere at any time is THISSSS close to being robbed or killed by some homicidal stranger, unless you're always armed and can shoot back. And that was even before the NRA was captured by lunatic rightwingnuts who have seen "Red Dawn" too many times. I find the whole paranoid "self-defense" delusion to be laughably silly, particularly in a time when the crime rate has been steadily dropping for decades. The wingnuts are using "fear" to sell guns, just as they use fear to sell the "war on terror" and the "war on drugs" and every other "war on society" that they wage--including the war on government itself. Indeed, in their addled minds, the very PURPOSE of the 2nd Amendment is so we can overthrow the elected government with our firearms.

    The NRA of old was something I could support happily.

    The NRA today is a group of lunatics.  Heavily armed paranoid lunatics. And alas, so also are way too many gun owners.

    Sad to see.

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 06:45:53 PM PST

    •  Um, where did the diarist say anything about (7+ / 0-)

      the "good old days" or the NRA?

      So, you've created a strawman to attack and have done so very well, congrats.

      The discussion was about hunting to put food on the table and how said keeps big game populations under control so they don't overrun their own habitat like deer are doing.  

      The diarist did mention tolerance.

      Is this your definition of said?

      The NRA today is a group of lunatics.  Heavily armed paranoid lunatics. And alas, so also are way too many gun owners.
      So, let me get this straight.  If you're a gun owner today you are more likely than not, a paranoid lunatic.

      Is this honest discussion?

      -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 Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:05:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  thanks for missing my point and (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Glen The Plumber

        picking a fight instead.

        (sigh)

        In the end, reality always wins.

        by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:10:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Apologies, please explain your point more clearly (9+ / 0-)

          and could you do so without the broad strokes that demonize the majority of gun owners?

          I'd love for us to have an honest discussion on this topic, we've been slinging shit at each other for over a year and have gotten no closer to reducing violence, including gun violence in this society.

          I had no intentions of "picking a fight" with you, just pointing out how your phrasing is not helping any of us.

          Yes, the NRA was once a good organization that set the standards for gun safety throughout this nation.  Today, they are what they are.

          You then falsely equated most gun owners to "NRA lunatics".

          If I've missed something, please correct my misunderstandings.

          -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 Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:48:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  you can begin by reading what's there, instead of (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Glen The Plumber

            what you want to see there:

            You then falsely equated most gun owners to "NRA lunatics".
            I said no such thing.  But of course you saw what you wanted to see, not what was actually there.

            I am, remember, a gun owner.

            In the end, reality always wins.

            by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:54:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  um, okay.... (6+ / 0-)
              The NRA today is a group of lunatics.  Heavily armed paranoid lunatics. And alas, so also are way too many gun owners.

              -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 Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:05:34 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  um, okay . . . (0+ / 0-)
                The NRA today is a group of lunatics.  Heavily armed paranoid lunatics. And alas, so also are way too many gun owners.
                You then falsely equated most gun owners to "NRA lunatics".
                Your reading teacher should be sued for malpractice. Unless of course you are still just seeing what you want to see, instead of what's actually there.

                So is someone gonna HR me for this, now . . . .? (sigh)

                This is why all the happy talk about "honest discussion" is generally just bullshit. "Honest discussion" means simply "agree with me".

                In the end, reality always wins.

                by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:16:17 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  ROFL, "my reading teacher", dammit... (4+ / 0-)

                  You owe me a new laptop!

                  :)

                  "way too many" versus "most gun owners"...sorry, I got lost in all the labeling and derogatory framing you employed:

                  Killing deer is no longer their business--killing "bad guys" is. What they sell now, in effect, is "paranoia",
                  even before the NRA was captured by lunatic rightwingnuts who have seen "Red Dawn" too many times.
                  I find the whole paranoid "self-defense" delusion to be laughably silly
                  The wingnuts are using "fear" to sell guns,
                  Indeed, in their addled minds, the very PURPOSE of the 2nd Amendment is so we can overthrow the elected government with our firearms.
                  Seriously, did you need to go to this length to get your point across?

                  Surprisingly, there are a couple of things you did say, that I actually agreed with:

                  particularly in a time when the crime rate has been steadily dropping for decades.
                  If crime rates are going down, why the damn push for gun control again???

                  And this:

                  just as they use fear to sell the "war on terror" and the "war on drugs" and every other "war on society" that they wage
                  The only qualification I'd make to your statement, it isn't the RW nutjobs doing this, it's our entire fracking government pushing fear to strip our rights away.

                  The rest, let's move on and get something done, together...let's end the racist war on drugs, release all non-violent (and stable) prisoners, let's rebuild our roads, bridges, schools...let's rebuild our society, let's rebuild the American Dream.

                  We've wasted enough time bickering with one another.

                  -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 Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:31:11 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  all of these statements: (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Glen The Plumber
                    Killing deer is no longer their business--killing "bad guys" is. What they sell now, in effect, is "paranoia",

                    even before the NRA was captured by lunatic rightwingnuts who have seen "Red Dawn" too many times.

                    I find the whole paranoid "self-defense" delusion to be laughably silly

                    The wingnuts are using "fear" to sell guns,

                    Indeed, in their addled minds, the very PURPOSE of the 2nd Amendment is so we can overthrow the elected government with our firearms.

                    are true.  The NRA and the rightwingnnuts do all of them.  Do you disagree?

                    Or are you once again seeing what you want to see, instead of what is actually there.

                    In the end, reality always wins.

                    by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:34:09 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  ps--it is not a matter of "if": (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ER Doc
                    If crime rates are going down
                    They are.  Period. That is not a matter of opinion.
                    We've wasted enough time bickering with one another.
                    Apparently we haven't.  (shrug)

                    In the end, reality always wins.

                    by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:39:06 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

        •  Picking a fight... (6+ / 0-)

          says the guy calling others crazy people...

          "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

          by happy camper on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 05:52:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  You have defended my position better than I could. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea, Crookshanks, ER Doc, FrankRose

        Thank you.

        "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

        by Randolph the red nosed reindeer on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:11:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I am so appreciative of all of these comments. (10+ / 0-)

    One of the things that I love about Daily Kos is that good or bad, agree or disagree, people feel free to state their opinions.

    Thank you for all of the positive comments re my diary.  Thank you for all of the negative comments also, my psyche will heal...lol.

    I speak as an atheist when I say may your God bless you and each and everyone of us.

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

    by Randolph the red nosed reindeer on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 07:16:57 PM PST

  •  republished to Hunting and Fishing Kos (7+ / 0-)

    I've heard that the only effective curb on whitetail populations after the megafauna extinction in the Americas is the human being. Pre 1492 that is. The lack of predators in North America for the past few thousand years created the opportunity for the whitetail to flourish, then with interbreeding with the black tail,,, we got mulies.

    In any case I envy you all those corn fed ones.

    Thanks for writing and good hunting.

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:06:47 PM PST

    •  yes indeed, we are now the top predator (5+ / 0-)

      The ONLY one, in most areas.

      So it is incumbent upon us to either fulfill that necessary ecological role, or to return those species that did before we eliminated them.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:10:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thank you, my friend. (6+ / 0-)

      I respect our wildlife.

      My back to nature child. an extremely successful young man, has moved from Chicago several years ago and bought a 35 acre farmette in Iowa.  There he keeps horses that are the love of his life, a few sheep and for monetary purposes, heirloom turkeys.  

      He fed out one bovine steer who was strictly grass fed and had him butchered after about two years.  This steer was well cared for, humanely treated and lived in a low stress environment prior to being butchered.  

      In my mind, this steer, who was tame as a dog and was nurtured and indulged, had a better life than any factory farmed beef extant.

      I abhor factory farming and the cruelty that it entails.  I understand prudent hunting harvesting and humane raising of domesticated animals that are humanely harvested.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

      by Randolph the red nosed reindeer on Mon Jan 13, 2014 at 08:19:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  a couple of things... (0+ / 0-)

    ...as someone who finds it horrendous that there are large numbers of people in our society who simply enjoy killing things for fun, using guns or any other weapon of violence, if there are people who actually must hunt to eat...well...they must do what they have to do (although, people who make that argument never provide any proof whatsoever that there are large numbers of people who have to hunt to survive in this country). Something that doesn't make sense to me is this: if they find it necessary to hunt to be able to provide them and their family with meat...don't they actually have to spend a lot of money on their equipment and ammunition...all of which could just as easily be spent on...food?

    Another point: Those who love guns ask us for "compassion' and to have some feeling for them. People like myself do. However, there are very few people in this country, myself included, least of all any elected officials who have ever proposed "taking guns away" from responsible citizens. Nobody has. All of these straw man arguments...that...oh...those poor, oppressed gun owners who are on the verge of having all of their guns taken away from them: It's all a bunch of hooey. Nobody wants to take guns away from responsible gun owners. No elected official anywhere has ever proposed such a thing. Folks like myself who don't like guns or anything about them don't want to take guns away from you or anyone else who is acting legally and responsibly. It's just a bogus, straw-man argument.

    Just because some of us find it personally offensive that large numbers of people simply enjoy killing living things for the fun of it...doesn't mean that we all want to make all forms of hunting illegal.

    •  It depends. I have rifles older than my dad. (4+ / 0-)

      Two were gifted to me.

      So if you have a .30-30 rifle that's been in the family for years, passed down, you just buy a license and a box of shells. Significantly cheaper per pound than hamburger.
      ----
      I don't think this user ever mentioned that there are people out there who are pushing to ban all firearms. There are people out there who propose banning some firearms.

      •  yes...but the victim card's (0+ / 0-)

        seems to be being played here...the same type of...oh...woe on all of us poor hunters......that these gun owners are some kind of "victims," an "oppressed" group of people. They aren't...and never have been.

        As far as how many people hunt for meat out of economic necessity...it's an argument that keeps getting raised...and yet...nobody has ever provided any information whatsoever that any sizeable number of these folks are so hard-pressed that they have to hunt to eat. It's a disingenuous sounding argument to me. Most hunters known to me hunt because they want to, not because they have to. Why can't they just admit that they like killing animals? (Perhaps they don't want to admit it?)

    •  Somebody has proposed taking guns away from (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      theatre goon, gerrilea

      responsible gun owners.  It was the same Senator that introduced the gun ban to a vote in the Senate earlier this year:

      "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it"--Dianne Feinstein

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 11:02:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The desires are clear as day for me. (0+ / 0-)

      What is preached on the street corner and then what our elected officials actually do.

      The NYS SAFE Act grants our police arbitrary powers, without charges, judge or jury the authority to strip private property from people.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      Allows law enforcement officials to pre-emptively seize one's firearms without a warrant or court order when there is probable cause the individual is mentally unstable or intends to use the weapons to commit a crime.

      Hell, they can't even take my vehicle if I'm arrested for a DUI....but they can, without warrant, take a firearm???

      As this article points out, a year later and nothing has been accomplished but automatically denying thousands the right to keep and bear arms by making them into felons.

      The cards are on the table, so to speak.  This article points out what "gun control advocates" goals really are.

      Since I've never owned a firearm, the debate for me is constitutional law, are the measures an attempt a de facto ban?  Is that their goal?

      It seems clear to me it is.  Restrict those "allowed" to fewer and fewer people.  

      -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 Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 11:06:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site