GUNS IN THE NEWS - October 21, 2003

[CO Liberal]

Please try to adhere to the following guidelines:

1 - Feel free to add any CURRENT stories to this thread by replying to this message. In order to be considered current, stories should have been originally posted to the 'Net within the past 24 hours, or provide follow-up to a story that was previously posted on the J/PS board.

2 - Both pro-gun and anti-gun stories are welcome in this thread, as well as gun-related editorials.

3 - Do not change story titles. In other words, if the Oskosh Gazette's web site runs a story titled "Two Killed in Holdup", the title of your message should read "Two Killed in Holdup". Don't change it to "Gun Owner Kills Two People", or anything else that changes the meaning of the story.

4 - If it's not clear from the title where the story occurred, add the city, state, or country in parentheses after the title.

5 - Comment on a story by replying to that story.

[CO Liberal]

1. Families Hold Memorial For Gun Shot Victims (Utah)

Notice they're NOT talking about banning all guns ... just keeping them out of the wrong hands. I don't see how anyone could object to that. - Wayne

* * * * *

Families Hold Memorial For Gun Shot Victims

A new push is underway, in Utah to address the issue of Gun violence.

Melissa Owens lost her 12 year old brother Jake, a month ago, when a gun, he and a friend found in a neighbor's garage ... accidentally fired.

Today ... his sister helped plant 1000 Daffodils, at the Jordan International Peace Gardens ... to honor those, killed or injured by guns.

The Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah ... was part of today's event. It's goal, is ... not to RID the state of guns.

Toni Marie Sutliff/GVPC President: "WE SEEK JUST TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GUNS ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE WRONG PEOPLE."

<more>

http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?nid=39&sid=54153

[Man_in_the_Moon]

9. The wrong hands...

Like normal citizens?

Or maybe she just means poor inner-city hands?

[CO Liberal]

10. Like Criminals

Please don't try to paint this as class or race warfare, because it isn't.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

11. Well that phrase is tainted

Because it most certainly is 'code words' for a classist/racist policy.

I have to ask that question- which hands are the wrong hands (even if it is just in my own mind)- whenever someone uses the phrase 'we just want to keep guns out of the wrong hands', because the majority of the time when someone uses it they do mean either everybody but the military or the police, or any hand that is not wealthy or lily white.

[MrBenchley]

13. Too too funny

So a dishonest claim of "code words" is evidence of racism...but what ISN'T evidence of racism is:
--armed lunatics actually tooling around in Nazi uniforms in public at an RKBA event
--hate literature being handed out at gun shows
--racist statements and actions by the heads of the two largest gun rights groups
--an enemies list that includes just about every one with an agenda promoting toleranced
--the gun lobby's pet crackpot jumping up in public to claim Rush Limbaugh isn't racist...

Ri-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-ght. Gun nut logic...or whatever it is.

[CO Liberal]

14. In a Nutshell ......

If you're pro-gun, you're a good American, even if you're a Nazi.

If you're not pro-gun, you're a dirty, rotten, communist-socialist-pinko-treehugging-gungrabber.

[MrBenchley]

16. Emphasis on "nut"

And so we'll just have to stand alone with the 14 pages of other gun haters....which is pretty much every group of decent people anyone's ever heard of.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

19. Not even close.

But I do understand the need to vilefy those that disagree with your positions, when you cannot actually counter the position which those that disagree with you hold. I simply choose not to do so, and to ask them what their true motives are. I unlike SOME do not see the need to do so to other posters here. I think such tactics are beneath contenmpt, and I am shocked that you are engaging in them CO. I am disappointed.

[MrBenchley]

23. You mean like screaming "gun control is racist"

at the drop of a hat...and then pouting when it is pointed out accurately that nearly every racist around high or low supports the bogus "gun rights position."

Ah, that glorious RKBA consistency....

"Man_in_the_Moon (1000+ posts) Tue Oct-21-03 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Well that phrase is tainted
Because it most certainly is 'code words' for a classist/racist policy."

"Man_in_the_Moon (1000+ posts) Tue Oct-21-03 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Not even close.
But I do understand the need to vilefy those that disagree with your positions, when you cannot actually counter the position which those that disagree with you hold. I simply choose not to do so, and to ask them what their true motives are. I unlike SOME do not see the need to do so to other posters here. I think such tactics are beneath contenmpt..."

[demsrule4life]

25. Guess pro-gun is good

Nazis favored gun control figured you would like them. Communist and socialist governments favored gun control so I guess you would like them to. Gun owners and hunters have given more money (taxes and donations)towards conservation then the "tree huggers" ever have.

[MrBenchley]

27. Gee, dems, missed your guess again...

[demsrule4life]

31. Then your guess would be

Progun=bad
Nazis, Communist and Socialist Govts ban guns=good

[CO Liberal]

35. Gee Dems, You Must Be Very Tired ......

...after stretching logic as far as you just did.

:-)

[MrBenchley]

38. My guess would be

that absolutely nothing is too bizarre or dishonest for the RKBA crowd to suggest.....and obviously I'm right on the money.

Orr are we going to have another round of McCarthy-style red-baiting?

[iverglas]

46. relevance?

"Well that phrase is tainted
Because it most certainly is 'code words'
for a classist/racist policy."

Context just doesn't matter at all to some people, does it?

Here's the context in which the phrase was used in the story in question:

Melissa Owens lost her 12 year old brother Jake,
a month ago, when a gun, he and a friend found
in a neighbor's garage ... accidentally fired.

I haven't a clue what race or class this neighbour belonged to -- but his were obviously the wrong hands by virtue of him being a person who is irresponsible, negligent, stupid, criminal ... (take your pick, I can't tell which adjective applies -- but by definition, at least one does, since he so obviously failed to take the appropriate and/or legally required steps to prevent this kind of incident from occurring).

Of course, the 12-year-old's friend's hands were obviously the wrong hands, too. And I'm pretty sure that THOSE were the hands that the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah spokesperson was referring to when SHE said "We seek just to educate people about what happens when guns are in the hands of the wrong people". Unsupervised 12-year-olds would be "the wrong people" in this case, do you think?

So what your wailing and gnashing has to do with this story, dog knows.

You really need to stop flogging those straw folk ... or find another market for flogging your red herrings. Nobody with good sense and good faith is likely to be buying them here.


Now, I'm curious what one of the herring-floggers might find in the firearms control rules in Canada, the UK or Australia, for instance, that is "racist" or "classist".

Interestingly, in Canada, the restrictions that apply to firearms possession are relaxed for members of the First Nations (what you call "native Americans").

Aboriginal Peoples of Canada Adaptations Regulations (Firearms)

4. For the purposes of paragraph 117(u) of the Firearms Act, sections 5 to 20 of these Regulations concern the manner in which certain provisions of the Firearms Act and the regulations made under that Act apply to the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, and adapt those provisions for the purpose of that application.

For instance:

7. Sections 3, 8 and 9 of the Firearms Licences Regulations are adapted by adding the requirement that, if a chief firearms officer considers refusing to issue a licence to an Aboriginal applicant, the applicant shall be given an opportunity to submit to the chief firearms officer for consideration recommendations from an elder or leader of the applicant's Aboriginal community regarding the importance to the applicant of engaging in traditional hunting practices.

11. Subsection 8(3) of the Firearms Act is adapted such that an Aboriginal individual who is less than 12 years old is eligible to hold a licence authorizing the individual to possess, in accordance with the conditions attached to the licence, a firearm for the purpose of engaging in the traditional hunting practices of the individual's Aboriginal community.

13. With respect to an Aboriginal individual who is at least 18 years old, section 17 of the Firearms Licences Regulations is adapted such that, for the purposes of paragraph 7(4)(a) of the Firearms Act, as adapted by section 12 of these Regulations, the circumstances are that

(a) the individual is an elder; or

(b) the chief firearms officer has received a recommendation from an elder or leader of the individual's Aboriginal community indicating that, in their opinion, the individual has the requisite knowledge to be certified under paragraph 7(4)(a) of the Firearms Act, as adapted by section 12 of these Regulations, and the Canadian Firearms Safety Course or the tests that form part of that Course are not available

(i) to the individual within a time, after the individual has made the application for a licence, that is reasonable in the circumstances,

(ii) in the individual's community or at a location that can be reached from that community without undue cost or hardship to the individual, or

(iii) at a cost that is reasonable in the circumstances.

Seeing much racism there? Me, I'm seeing accommodation by exempting members of the First Nations from requirements that would interfere with their traditional cultural and economic practices.

Members of the First Nations in Canada are exempt from some restrictions on hunting (with firearms) that apply to non-aboriginal persons. The Aboriginal people of Australia are also granted some exemptions to allow for traditional hunting practices. Firearms control initiatives have obviously accommodated special needs and characteristics, and are applied in such a way as to grant more rights to people with those needs and characteristics -- based on their race -- not fewer.

It may be that there have been racist motivations for some firearms control initiatives in the US, in the past. That does not mean that firearms control is "racist", and it is simply parochial and disingenuous to say that it does. Motivations, let alone the motivations of a bygone century, are not the measure of the advisability of a policy. If they were, stupid people with good motivations would be wreaking a lot more havoc than they already do. There are a lot of good motivations behind things like the war on drugs, after all.

It may be that some firearms control initiatives have different impacts on different racial groups even where they are neutral on their face. As we've been over in the past, that does not necessarily make them "racist". Not unless we are going to call university tuition fee structures racist, food prices and rents racist, the high price of gas and cigarettes and booze racist, and so on and on. Everything that costs money is "discriminatorily" priced in the sense that the price is less payable by the economically disadvantaged group.

I just don't hear anybody shrieking "racism" about the prices associated with firearms saying the same about university accreditation and professional licensing fees, say. Surely those who can't afford a good education should be permitted to buy a lousy one, and then shouldn't have to pay prohibitive fees in order to, say, practise medicine. Eh? All those regulations just discriminate against racial minorities, obviously, and are meant to keep them from earning the big bucks.

Wot a lot of smelly fish.

When you have no defensible position and haven't any coherent argument against the opposing position, play the race card.

Too bad that so many of the people on behalf of whom you'd like us to think you're playing it just want nothing to do with you at all.

.

[MrBenchley]

48. You know, you'd think if this crap was even remotely true

that even one of the organizations devoted to fighting racism would be against gun control....but in fact almost all of them ended up on the NRA's idiotic enemies list.

Whereas try and find an actual racist group that isn't for gun rights...I've been looking for some weeks and can't find a one.

[RoeBear]

12. I'm glad THEY aren't...

...gun banners. Keeping them out of the wrong hands is a worthy goal I'd just like to hear their plan.

[DoNotRefill]

15. If the "wrong hands" don't belong to...

young male urban minorities, then who exactly ARE the wrong hands?

"the wrong hands" argument is just another example of racial profiling...

[CO Liberal]

17. Three Examples of "Wrong Hands"

1 - Convicted felons.

2 - Persons convicted of domestic violence.

3 - Persons judged to be mentally unfit.

Note that race does not define any of these categories. The notion that gun control is racist is pure unadulterated BULLSHIT, IMHO.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

20. Its a shame

That that definition of 'wrong hands' is not the same one as shared by the GVPC of Utah.

As to the racism inherent in gun control it is there, and anyone that denies it is not living in reality. It is quite clear if you look at the history and the language used by those that either pushed, or still push, gun control.

[DoNotRefill]

21. CO...it's already quite illegal...

for anybody in those three categories to possess a firearm. Since it's already illegal (with stiff penalties), passing another law to "keep guns out of the wrong hands" must be aimed at different "wrong hands" than you listed, since the law to keep guns out of the hands of felons, domestic abusers, and mental cases has been in force for over 35 years.

Or is this like "double secret probation"?

[CO Liberal]

34. I Look Upon Gun Control As Another Tool......

...to use against the people in those three categories - not as a toll to be used against additional categories of people.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

36. So your 'wrong hands' is different than

Toni Marie Sutliff's?

[CO Liberal]

37. Apparantly, Her Focus is a Bit Different Than Mine

From the referenced article:

The organization, wants to reduce gun violence in the state ... by addressing firearm suicide ... as well as access of firearms, to children ... and, the toll gun violence takes on families and communities.

She seems more focused on those who would use guns to commit suicide, leave their guns where children can access them, and those who would used a gun to commit a violent act.

[DoNotRefill]

58. So, you're for making it "double secret illegal"?

What happens when the laws you push to keep those three categories from getting guns have the unintended consequence of making it more difficult for the "right" people to get guns?

[CO Liberal]

60. If It Makes It A Little Longer To Prove You're One of the "Right" People..

...I don't see a problem. It's somewhat akin to the extra security precautions taken at airports. They may be a pain, but aren't they worth it if they filter out hijackers?

[Man_in_the_Moon]

61. If it makes it a little longer to prove you're one of the 'right' people

to VOTE, I wonder if you would hold the same view?

[MrBenchley]

62. Gee, how many dingdongs

REALLY think having a gun is as important as voting?

DO let us know next time a drive-by referendum kills some innocent bystander.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

63. I do.

I think owning and knowing how to responsibly use a gun, is just as important to liberty as voting responsibly.

[RoeBear]

65. And before anyone says...

...'voting never killed anyone', think back to November 2000.

[MrBenchley]

77. You mean back when Heston wanted to lynch Al Gore?

Yeah, let's ALL think of what the gun lobby did in November, 2000....

[CO Liberal]

68. And I Don't

:-)

[MrBenchley]

78. Plenty of tyrants have goons that can shoot

with guns

[a2birdcage]

69. Most people understand........

that individual ownership of firearms is what actually protects our right to vote. It is what protects our right to be a free people in control of our goverment rather the other way around (hence the 2nd Amendment. Duh!). Some people on this board have made it painfully clear that they would rather have the government control them and tell them what they can and cannot have. This my troubled friends is not democracy.

[CO Liberal]

70. Neither is Letting Any Fool Have a Gun Who Wants It

That's a recipe for anarchy. As far as I'm concerned, "well-regulated" in the Second Amendment MANDATES effective gun control.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

72. LOL

then how come the 'well-regulated' is before the word 'militia' and not before the word 'arms'?

[a2birdcage]

73. Well-regulated by whom?

It doesn't say the government is the regulator does it? What if I told you that twice a month I participate with 9 other people in what could be regarded as para-military exercises? We practice combat scenarios and survival techniques in sometimes very adverse conditions. We are very well regulated, confident, and proficient with all types of legal weapons. My question to you is are you opposed to people like myself owning assault rifles and other various military equipment? By definition we are a militia and like I said before we are very well-regulated. Don't we fit the exact description of the 2nd amendment?

[MrBenchley]

81. Not even close to true...

"Don't we fit the exact description of the 2nd amendment?"
Maybe in fantasy land....but not here.

[a2birdcage]

85. Explain then!

Provide an explanation why what we do doesn't fit the description of the 2nd amendment.

[MrBenchley]

88. Gee, you really need me to point out

your state already has a militia called the National Guard...which doesn't consist of a handful of nimrods playing in the woods?

If you have any doubt, I suggest you read the Federalist Papers.

[DoNotRefill]

97. Wait....if the National Guard is the State Militia....

then aren't the Governors of the States responsible for appointing the Officers according to the Constitution?

If that's the State Militia, isn't the Federal Government usurping powers delegated by the Constitution to the State Governors???

[MrBenchley]

99. IF?

Get a frigging clue..

[DoNotRefill]

101. Ah. Yet another substantive post from my good friend MrBenchley...

eom

[MrBenchley]

105. Don't need to say more than that

when responding to such a silly post.

[DoNotRefill]

109. Gee, Benchley...

were the pre-civil war gun control laws prohibiting freedmen from possessing firearms not racist?

[MrBenchley]

112. Who the hell are you trying to kid, refill?

Is it still 1867, do you suppose? On my calendar, it's 2003.

[DoNotRefill]

119. Well, you've kept saying that gun control laws aren't racist...

so I thought I'd bring up one that obviously was on it's face. As I expected, you didn't address the point. I'm not surprised.

[MrBenchley]

122. And I've kept pointing out that the gun rights crowd IS raccist

But keep spinning...it shows the utter dishonesty of your argument.

[Superfly]

You've painted yourself in all kinds of

"dishonesty", Bench, and it's you who sounds the most desparate.

[MrBenchley]

128. Gee,f ly, I'm not the one

trying to pretend that the NRA and Larry Pratt aren't racists....

"it's you who sounds the most desparate."
Yeah, I could tell from your self-portrait..

[Superfly]

129. Nice way of saying....

I'm rubber you're glue, eh Bench? How old are you, 6?

[MrBenchley]

131. Gee, fly....

You're the one posted your own self-portrait. Now go sulk about it to someone who cares.

[Superfly]

134. Bwahahahahaha

I think i hurt wittle Benchley's feelings. Kind of hurts to look youself in the ass...I mean face....doesn't it..

[MrBenchley]

142. Actually, fly...

I laughed and laughed at your self-portrait.....

[Superfly]

143. Try again....

not going to work....

[DoNotRefill]

126. get real...

you seem incapable of admitting ANY gun control law is racist, even when it's racist on it's face.

That makes it look like you're willing to accept racism in the law as long as it involves restrictions on firearms.

[Name removed]

130. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Superfly]

132. New Benchley logic, 101

All roses are flowers.

All flowers are not....scratch that....all flowers ARE roses.

[MrBenchley]

140. RKBA "logic" or whatever the hell it is...

David Duke, Ted Nugent, Larry Pratt and every other racist in America is for it, so it cannot be racist. But every group opposing racist is for it, which is proof that it is racist.

[Superfly]

141. Hey, check out the bottom reply

number 139 or 138, I think...

[DoNotRefill]

144. Please show me....

where I said I believe David Duke has changed. I never said that. You're deliberately distorting what I said, and trying to twist it 180 degrees. In fact, I said I DID NOT believe he's changed, just as I believe that the purpose behind gun control laws hasn't changed. If you have even an OUNCE of intestinal fortitude, much less common decency, you'll retract your statement. Don't worry, I'm not expecting you to do the right thing. In fact, I'd be shocked if you did. That comes from assessing your character by your posts.

I'm not the one who refuses to admit the truth, that gun control was racist in the past. And I'm not the one who still denys that current gun control laws are inherently racist. You're the one living in the past...pretending that it's not racist. If the people working for civil rights in the 1950s and 60s followed your path, there'd still be "colored" and "whites only" drinking fountains everywhere.

[MrBenchley]

147. Refill, who BUT you

even TRIED to pretend David Duke had changed?

"I'm not the one who refuses to admit the truth"
Yeah,, surrrrrrrre....that's why you're tryinng to pretend its still 1934...while trying to pretend that David Duke is for gun control.

"You're the one living in the past...pretending that it's not racist."
Tell it to the NAACP...you'll find them on the enemies list of those racist shits, the National Rifle Association.

[MrBenchley]

80. Exactly so...

The NRA has NEVER even tried to have any gun control law overturned on second amendment grounds....they know the difference between the truth and the lies they peddle to their ignorant members.

[MrBenchley]

79. What a pantload...

When did individual ownership of firrearrms EVER protect any of our rights? Even the Revolution was fought with our collective guns.

"Some people on this board have made it painfully clear that they would rather have the government control them"
Yeah? Who's that?

[a2birdcage]

84. Who are you trying to kid?

"When did individual ownership of firrearrms EVER protect any of our rights? Even the Revolution was fought with our collective guns."

It protected my right to life when I pointed it at a man who was set on hurting me.

You think that most of the guns used by the militias during the war of independence were provided to them by the government? What a friggin joke.

[MrBenchley]

90. Get a clue...

"You think that most of the guns used by the militias during the war of independence were provided to them by the government?"
Yeah.....and the history books back that up.

[CO Liberal]

67. Here In Colorado ...

...you'll have to show a picture ID at the polling place. If you don't, you'll be given a provisional ballot which may not be counted until 12 weeks after the election. If it helps reduce voter fraud, I have no problem with it.

But I DO have a problem with any Tom, Dick, or Harry walking in to a gun shop or gun show, plopping down some cash, and buying a gun no questions asked. To me, that's insanity.

[DoNotRefill]

114. that demonstrates...

that you don't know much about how gun sales are conducted.

[RoeBear]

66. Justice delayed is justice denied...

...and so the same could be said for the right to own a gun.

[a2birdcage]

22. Just like the KKK

stemmed from a racist idea and can never be looked at again without associating it with racism the same holds true for gun control. Remember if something is bread from hate then it can never ever be made to be good.

[MrBenchley]

24. The KKK boosts that idiotic "gun rights" rubbish...

"The so-called gun control bill enacted by the government is nothing but anti-self defense laws designed to disarm law abiding citizens. The right to own guns as guaranteed by the 2nd amendment to the United States Constitution must be protected. Gun ownership is NOT a privilege, it’s a CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHT!!! The Texas Knights work to completely restore the right of all law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms."

http://www.texaskkk.com/platform.htm

[a2birdcage]

30. You're still using.....

that tired old site. Your response had nothing to do with my statement but thanks for playing "What's my Racist Gun Control Fantasy".

[MrBenchley]

39. What isn't tired and old about that "gun rights" horseshit?

"Your response had nothing to do with my statement"
Sure it did, birdcage. It showed in spades what a pantload the "gun control is racist" claim really IS.

[iverglas]

50. this is logic??

"Just like the KKK
stemmed from a racist idea and can never be looked at again
without associating it with racism the same holds true for
gun control. Remember if something is bread from hate then
it can never ever be made to be good.

(How about if it is cake from hate? pie from hate?)

"The KKK" and "gun control", the intelligent among us might notice, are apples and oranges.

The KKK is a group of people dedicated to a program of action.

Firearms control is a program of action.

The program of action to which the KKK is dedicated is apparently to protect and enhance the social and economic status and benefits enjoyed exclusively or disproportionately by white people, by denying people of colour equality of status and opportunities in the society in which they live.

Firearms control is a program of action designed to reduce the harm caused by means of firearms.

I'm not seeing much that can be compared, between those two things.

Firearms control IS NOT a program of action designed to protect anyone's privileges by denying anyone else equality of status and opportunities in the society in which they live.

One of the ways in which the KKK's program of action may once have been carried out was to deny people of colour access to firearms, to ensure that white people had exclusive or disproportionate access to them. The goal was the to protect and enhance those privileges, not to reduce the harm caused by means of firearms; and the means of protecting those privileges was the denial of equal rights, not the restriction of access based on objective criteria rationally related to that goal.

And that does not make a program of action to reduce the harm caused by means of firearms, that involves restricting access to firearms based on racially neutral criteria, "racist". It just doesn't.



Try this one.

Prior to the 19th century or so in western societies, marriage was an institution designed as part of a program of action for achieving the goal of protecting and enhancing men's power and wealth, for which purpose it was necessary for men to control women's reproductive activities and to control women's property, and essentially to control every aspect of the lives of women and their children in whatever manner they chose. Which is exactly what marriage did.

Obviously, by your "logic", marriage is an evil institution that can never be reformed into something that benefits both men and women, and their children. (And certainly something that gay men and lesbians should determinedly eschew.) The goal of marriage was and is and always will be to oppress women and children.


Here's another one.

Laws that prevented women from working at certain jobs in certain unhealthy conditions (at a time when there were no equivalent protections for male workers) were part of a program of action for achieving the goal of protecting and enhancing men's power and wealth, for which purpose it was necessary to prevent women from competing in the labour market.

So obviously, by your logic, our modern occupational health and safety legislation is tainted by the sexism (hatred of women) at its origins, and can never be redeemed and be used as a tool for good. The goal of occupational health and safety legislation was and is and always will be to oppress women.


Anyone who says that the allegedly racist origins of firearms control mean that no firearms control can be acceptable would have to agree that the sexist origins of marriage and worker-protection legislation mean that marriage and worker-protection legislation can never be acceptable. And I'd have to find such a person either very dim or very disingenuous, or both.

You can call the denial of equal access to firearms by people of colour in the past "gun control" if you like, and pretend that this makes it the same thing as the modern program of action by that name. But calling an apple an orange doesn't make it citrus.

.

[a2birdcage]

53. That damn wind again!

[MrBenchley]

56. RKBA "logic"

"the KKK stemmed from a racist idea and can never be looked at again without associating it with racism"
Unless the KKK's "gun rights" argument is mentioned. The it's horribly unfair to associate it with racism.

"Anyone who says that the allegedly racist origins of firearms control mean that no firearms control can be acceptable would have to agree that the sexist origins of marriage and worker-protection legislation mean that marriage and worker-protection legislation can never be acceptable. And I'd have to find such a person either very dim or very disingenuous, or both."
Or utterly dishonest.

[DoNotRefill]

59. Ummmm, Iverglas...

If we're comparing apples to apples, wouldn't a more apt comparison be that the old, racist Klan makes us look at the "New and Improved, non-racist Klan" with healthy skepticism, and that the old, racist gun control laws make us look at the New and Improved, "non-racist" gun control laws in the same way?

I've never bought the line from the "new" Klan types like David Duke and the NAAWP that they've moved away from racism, just as I have a very hard time accepting that the "new, non-racist gun control laws" are any more than the old racist gun control laws that have been "gussied up" using PC terminology to push for the same exact thing that the old laws did, namely disarming minorities.

In both cases, it stinks.

[iverglas]

71. uh, no

"If we're comparing apples to apples, wouldn't a more apt comparison be that the old, racist Klan makes us look at the 'New and Improved, non-racist Klan' with healthy skepticism, and that the old, racist gun control laws make us look at the New and Improved, 'non-racist' gun control laws in the same way?"

I mean, I can explain that obvious answer, if you like.

Perhaps I was being a little hasty. Go ahead and apply your "healthy scepticism". (Do please forgive me for spelling it my way; I have no objection to you spelling it your way.) I don't care. Healthy scepticism is a fine thing.

But ALLEGATIONS of FACT are NOT "healthy scepticism". And allegations are what I hear hereabouts.


"I've never bought the line from the 'new' Klan types like David Duke and the NAAWP that they've moved away from racism, just as I have a very hard time accepting that the 'new, non-racist gun control laws' are any more than the old racist gun control laws that have been 'gussied up' using PC terminology to push for the same exact thing that the old laws did, namely disarming minorities."

What a dog's breakfast.

You're free not to buy any line you don't wish to own, but if you want to claim that it is *false*, you'd better have something to stand on.

Oh, and by the way: does David Duke support firearms control? I don't think anyone's answered that one yet. So, ew, allow me.

http://www.duke.org/writings/internet.html

The major Broadcast TV networks or the many Cable TV stations are owned and controlled by the enemies of our heritage. They push the entire liberal agenda including: gun control, affirmative action, forced-integration, taxpayer-financed welfare illegitimacy, massive immigration, racial miscegenation, and, of course, big government and the so-called New World Order.

http://www.davidduke.com/library/badguys/truthaboutKemp.html

Kemp has trouble with recognizing liberty and rights. He sometimes confuses them with special privileges and government managed spoils and treats, which he calls “empowerment.” Though the Second Amendment to our Constitution’s Bill of Rights could not be more clear — the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed — Kemp favors gun control.

Now I have to go wash my eyes. Where exactly is this "new" David Duke?? I see no evidence of it on his web site.


The same exact principle applies to your apparent claim that modern firearms control initiatives have the "same exact" aim as the old laws had. You can allege and assert and shout and carry on all you like. You and your pals are just making noise, and have nothing but some extremely fuzzy logic to stand on. So fuzzy that it's completely indistinguishable from that package-deal fallacy stuff someone was recently (and irrelevantly, in that case) on about.

Making claims that an apple is an orange is not healthy scepticism. It is just an unsubstantiated allegation.

In any event, I still don't see why you would suggest that a "comparison" between an organization composed of people and dedicated to a stated agenda and a program of action for a stated purpose is more "apt" than a comparison between programs of action such as I proposed.

"Controlling access to firearms" and "controlling conditions in the workplace" are apples and apples.

It may be that, in the past, or even in the present, someone advocated controlling access to firearms in order to disadvantage people of colour. It may be that, in the past, or even in the present, someone advocated controlling conditions in the workplace in order to disadvantage women.

Now, you see whether you can concoct a parallel using "the KKK" instead of "controlling access to firearms" or "controlling conditions in the workplace". I sure as hell can't. The latter two are programs of action designed to achieve specified ends: originally, to disadvantage people of colour (allegedly), and to disadvantage women; currently, to reduce the harm caused by means of firearms, and to reduce the harm caused by means of unsafe working conditions.

The élite in the northern US advocated the abolition of slavery in the mid-nineteenth century because slavery gave the southern US a huge competitive advantage and jeopardized the northern élite's profit-making capacity. Did that élite's selfish, anti-southern motivations make slavery good?

The élite in the US may have advocated the restriction of access to firearms after that era because unrestricted access to firearms apparently jeopardized their position of power. Does that élite's selfish, anti-African American motivations make unrestricted access to firearms good?

You remember Aristotle:

Aristotle is a man.
All men are mortal.
Therefore Aristotle is mortal.

You are giving us:

Some advocates of firearms control are racists.
Some racists are advocates of firearms control.
Therefore firearms control is racist.

It just doesn't fly.

Not least because I have yet to see anyone offer a single racist who advocates firearms control. Which I believe is Benchley's usual point.

We know that Aristotle is a man and that all men are mortal. We don't actually know that some advocates of firearms control are racists, let alone that some racists are advocates of firearms control.

Once again, all I can do is recommend that you folks pull your heads out of the 18th and 19th centuries, and take a look around you. You are flailing at straw racists who have been dead and buried for decades.

Some people advocate the wearing of school uniforms because they want to squash all the individualism and independent thought out of children. Some people advocate the wearing of school uniforms because they want to protect disadvantaged children from bullying and ridicule.

Some people advocate that the state not run lotteries because they don't like the idea of the poor getting rich. Some people advocate that the state not run lotteries because they don't like the idea of the poor getting ripped off.

Some people advocate abolishing affirmative action programs because they don't like the idea of racial and other minorities having access to equal status and opportunities. Some people advocate abolishing affirmative action programs because they believe that such programs operate against equal status and opportunities.

Some people advocate freedom of reproductive choice because they believe in women's right to self-determination. Some people advocate freedom of reproductive choice because they don't want to have to contribute to the supports that women with dependent children often need.

Many people advocate restricting access to firearms because they want to reduce the harm caused by means of firearms. Maybe some people advocate restricting access to firearms because they do not want racial minorities to have equal status and opportunities in society. Forgive me if I think that people with that goal -- to deny members of racial minorities equal status and opportunities in society -- generally manage to find much more effective ways of achieving it. I mean, unless somebody can do a better job of providing actual evidence that firearms control measures have significant impacts on racial minorities' access to equal status and opportunities ... say, as much impact as inadequate school funding ... let alone that anyone who advocates firearms control is actually motivated by a desire to have that impact.

I'm just not seeing any such evidence, I'm afraid. And if you want to infer such intentions from the actual facts -- to say that pricing structures, for instance, are racially motivated -- they you are just going to have to apply that logic to any other pricing structure, for any other good or service or permission, that has an adverse impact on racial minorities. And I'm not seeing anybody doing that, either.

I just think that anyone genuinely concerned about disparity of status and opportunity between racial groups is going to be much more worried, and much more vocal, about the many disparities that affect far more people in far more adverse ways than the price of firearms licences does.

.

[DoNotRefill]

83. Do you get paid by the word?

FACT: Gun control in the US has historically been motivated by racism prior to the 1950's. Do you need proof of this?

FACT: Gun control today seems to be geared towards the exact same agenda that it had prior to the 1950's. Do you need proof of this?

Please keep your response to under 500 words.

[MrBenchley]

92. Who are you trying to kid, refill?

"FACT: Gun control today seems to be geared towards the exact same agenda that it had prior to the 1950's."
Yeah, sure....that's why all those neoNazis, klansmen, and other racists are opposed to it.

[Withergyld]

93. That was a convincing rebuttal

NOT. Try again without using a fallacy.

[MrBenchley]

95. All that was needed...

Nothing more required for a claim so obviously full of crap..

[Withergyld]

96. If there was any valid argument to refute what is posted

then I could get a staright answer from gun control advocates and not have to deal with all the rude replies and other tactics employed to avoid answering the questions posed.

[MrBenchley]

100. Who are you trying to kid, with?

"then I could get a staright answer from gun control advocates"
You got nothing but...and the answer is that the claim is horseshit...in fact, just the opposite....racists are pretty much universally opposed to gun control and actively spout that "gun rights" horseshit. Racists head the two largest "gun rights" organization, without so much as a murmur of opposition from their members. Name a racist in America and the odds are good you've fingered an ACTIVE member of the RKBA crowd.

[Superfly]

102. How do you know so much about racists?

You must have the inside track on racism...never saw somebody so well versed in racism.

[MrBenchley]

107. Sure see enough of them spouting gun rights crap

Practice makes perfect.

[Superfly]

108. "Practice makes perfect."

So, you do have experience in racism. Still "practicing"?

[MrBenchley]

111. Yeah, I see a lot of racists spouting off about gun rights

I think anyone who's come in contact with the inbred shits of the NRA gets direct experience in what racism REALLY is.

[Superfly]

115. And for you, it's

"monkey see, monkey do."

[MrBenchley]

120. No, for me, it's racists spout gun rights horseshit

and then try to hide behind bogus cries thatt it's gun control that's racist..

But they're not fooling anyone except themselves.

[Superfly]

121. "Swoooooosh"

- The sound of the painfully obvious zooming past Benchly's grasp of reality.

[MrBenchley]

133. Sounds more like fly

looking ridiculous in public again.

[Superfly]

135. Try again, bubba

that sinking feeling your experiencing right now? Well, that's you...sinking.

[DoNotRefill]

104. Why would racists support gun control?

After all, under the current laws, minorities are already largely disarmed. Racists oppose gun control because RACISTS want to still have guns, along with having disarmed victims. That's the whole "right hands" and "wrong hands" argument in a nutshell.

[MrBenchley]

110. Well DUH....

Of course they wouldn't...because there's nothing racist about gun control.

"That's the whole "right hands" and "wrong hands" argument in a nutshell."
You mean there's someone pretending that the Klan is the "right hands?" Why don't you tell us who THAT is, refill?

[Superfly]

113. Bench...what do you see here

Look like somebody you know in the first person?

[MrBenchley]

123. Nice self-portrait, fly

We'd know you anywhere....

[Superfly]

125. Jeeez, Bench

I've got to say, that I'e never met a more dense object than you....

[MrBenchley]

136. Gee fly...

I'm not the dummy who posted a picture of a horse's ass and invited others to guess who it was...then flew into a rage because he got the obvious answer.

But then I'm also not so stupid that I'd claim the KKK's stand isn't racist and the NAACP's is.

[Superfly]

138. Ummm.no rage here.

just pleasant satisfaction watch you dig yourself into a large hole...

[MrBenchley]

145. Yeah, I can tell....

Tell me, what hole do you imagine I've dug...the "hole" from you letting me call your horse's ass picture YOUR self portrait....or the "hole" where I accurately pointed out what sort of racist scum push that bogus "gun rights" horseshit?

[Superfly]

146. Horseshit...

another term with which you are intimately familiar. I think I hit the nail on the head posting the picture of your hindquarters....

[DoNotRefill]

116. The "right hands" seems to be predominantly rural caucasian males....

and the "wrong hands" seems to be predominantly urban minorities.

Which group has the larger percentage of Klan supporters in it?

I'm not the one advocating keeping guns out of the "wrong hands", Benchley, YOU are.

[MrBenchley]

127. Gee, sez you and the rest of the RKBA crowd....

"The "right hands" seems to be predominantly rural caucasian males...."
Sez you...but then I've made no such claim.

So in other words, you're all for arming the Klan and similar loonies....thanks for clearing that up.

[DoNotRefill]

137. Actually, no.

I've never been into the "right hands" "wrong hands" position, that's something left exclusively for the gun control crowd. They typically couch it in phrases like "I'm a hunter, I don't want to take away your hunting guns, I just want to keep guns out of the wrong hands." Translated, that means guns for rural whites, no guns for urban blacks.

I support guns for just about EVERYBODY.

[MrBenchley]

148. Who the hell are you trying to kid?

"I support guns for just about EVERYBODY."
Funny, so does the Klan...they know that this gun rights crap makes a useful code word for racism.

[MrBenchley]

86. A good question is

WHO but those desperately trying to pretend David Duke is NOT racist ever "bought the line from the 'new' Klan types like David Duke and the NAAWP that they've moved away from racism"?

I sure don't recall anybody here trying to pretend any such thing...except for the "enthusiast" a week or so ago trying to argue that the Klan was not racist.

Certainly in the circles I move in no-one's ever said "Oh, that David Duke...he's sure not a racist piece of shit anymore..."

[MrBenchley]

82. WHAT non-racist Klan?

Who the hell are you trying to kid?

"I've never bought the line from the "new" Klan types like David Duke and the NAAWP that they've moved away from racism, just as I have a very hard time accepting that the "new, non-racist gun control laws" are any more than the old racist gun control laws that have been "gussied up" "
Gee funny that David Duke is opposed to those laws then, isn''t it? In fact, he peddles the same idiotic gun rights rubbish as plain old fashioned racists like Larry Pratt.

[DoNotRefill]

89. The Klan's always been racist...

and probably always will be, regardless of how many times they say they aren't.

Gun control laws have always been racist, and to be honest, I don't see that changing, either.

[MrBenchley]

94. Gee, refill...

So why were you pretending anyone was fooled by David Duke?

By the way, if gun control is racist, how come David Duke OPPOSES it? How come every racist one can find OPPOSES it? How come just about everybody OPPOSED TO RACISM ends up on the NRA's idiotic enemies list?

Answerr.....your claim is the sheerest hooey.

[DoNotRefill]

98. Why should they support it?

the way the "non-racist" gun control laws currently work, a large part of the minority community is already disbarred the use of arms. Duke's fighting for the right of WHITES to stay armed.

Duke doesn't want HIS followers disarmed....he already knows that lots of the opposition are already disarmed, and I'm sure he likes that just like you do. People on your side of this argument have made things BETTER for Duke and his type. I'm sure your mother is proud...

[MrBenchley]

103. Well, DUH...

Of COURSE racist shits like Duke don't support gun control, because gun control is NOT RACIST. What they support is the horseshit gun rights argument.

"People on your side of this argument have made things BETTER for Duke and his type."
What a fucking pantload.

[DoNotRefill]

106. How about....

that Florida Supreme Court decision that said that gun control laws didn't apply to whites, only to minorities? Remember that? Wasn't that law BLATANTLY racist? Does the law have to have the "N word" in it for you to believe it's racist? I doubt even if it did that you'd oppose the law...You've probably never met a gun control law you wouldn't support...

[MrBenchley]

117. Refill, who the hell are you trying to kid?

"didn't apply to whites, only to minorities?"
Are you trying to pretend that such decisions were made ONLY about gun control, and not about ANYTHING else?

"You've probably never met a gun control law you wouldn't support..."
Maybe..but I KNOW I've never met a racist asswipe who didn't spout this dishonest "gun rights" horseshit....

[Superfly]

118. Once again...

Prime example of the pot calling the kettle black.

[DoNotRefill]

124. Ah. So we're back to your experience with racists again....

Why do you keep hanging out with them?

The Florida case was indeed just about gun control. It involved a white convicted of illegally carrying a concealed weapon. It was overturned by the Florida Supreme Court because they said the law didn't apply to whites, only minorities.

[MrBenchley]

150. Gee, refill....

Do you REALLY want to pretend that it's only the two or three racist shitheels I've run into lately spouting this gun rights horseshit? It's every racist in America, high and low.

[MrBenchley]

26. You will also notice that in most states

Those folks can walk into any gun show and buy guns without a background check, thanks to the GOP and the corrupt gun industry.

[a2birdcage]

32. You will also notice that.......

in any state folks can pick up a classified news section and do the same. In fact, I just did it last weekend. Got myself a nice hardly used Ruger Mk II. Being as this gun resembles the Luger 9mm used by the Nazi party this automatically qualifies me as a Nazi, right Bench?

[MrBenchley]

40. So what are you doing to close that loophole?

"Being as this gun resembles the Luger 9mm used by the Nazi party this automatically qualifies me as a Nazi, right Bench? "
I wouldn't presume to speak for YOUR fantasy life.

[a2birdcage]

54. Why not you speak for everyone else's

[iverglas]

47. and in this instance ...

(I mean, after all, the comment was made in the context of the story you posted.)


... the "wrong people" would appear to be:

- unsupervised 12-year-olds;

- people who handle their firearms in such a way that unsupervised 12-year-olds have access to them.

I just thought that was awfully damned obvious. Didn't you?

.

[CO Liberal]

55. I Didn't Think It Had To Be Spelled Out, Iverglas

Looks like I was mistaken.......

[RoeBear]

49. I don't expect you to recognize...

...the inherent racism in gun control laws. You don't even recognize yourself as a gun grabber.

[MrBenchley]

51. Gee, roe...

don't expect anyone sane to pretend gun control is racist...you lost that one long ago.

[MrBenchley]

28. By the way...

"The organization, wants to reduce gun violence in the state ... by addressing firearm suicide ... as well as access of firearms, to children ... and, the toll gun violence takes on families and communities. "
Yeah, sure sounds like David Duke's sort of rhetoric.....NOT..

[CO Liberal]

2. Hempstead Woman Held on Gun Charge (Long Island, NY)

<1>Are we dealing with a Second Amendment Sister here? - Wayne

* * * * *

Hempstead Woman Held on Gun Charge

A Hempstead woman was being held on $10,000 bail yesterday after being arrested last week on weapons charges. Police said that shortly after she picked up her daughter from an elementary school Wednesday, she began fighting with the mother of another student and pulled out a handgun.

Iesha M. Haigler, 22, of 95 Wellesley St., was waiting for her daughter, who is about 5, outside the Jackson School Annex in Hempstead, when she exchanged words with Tanika Lyles, 28, of Hempstead, according to both Nassau County and Hempstead Village police. Haigler has been dating Lyles' estranged husband and the two women have had prior spats, police said.

After their daughters were released from school, Haigler and Lyles continued to fight in front of both children and other parents. Less than a block from the school, Lyles saw Haigler reach into her pocket and pull out a small white gun, police said. Lyles grabbed Haigler's arm and pushed her up against a car.

Haigler tried to turn the gun toward Lyles as they struggled, said Hempstead Village police Det. Lt. Joseph Wing. The gun fell under the car. A school security guard managed to separate the women. Haigler and her daughter began to walk away, but Lyles held Haigler until Hempstead police arrived.

<more>

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/crime/ny-ligun173503791oct21,0,1645380.story?coll=ny-licrime-headlines

[DoNotRefill]

18. do you have ANYTHING...

to suggest that she belonged to SAS, or are you just pulling the MMM kind of libel thing like what happened in Maine?

[MrBenchley]

29. Gee, refill....

How horrible that a crazed bunch of hate-filled loonies like the SAS should get slandered....

I feel your pain.

[DoNotRefill]

33. Hey, it's all fun and games...

until somebody gets sued... ;-)

[MrBenchley]

41. Hahahahahahahahaha!!

[DoNotRefill]

45. link:

http://www.iansa.org/oldsite/news/2001/sep_01/maine_gun.htm

[MrBenchley]

52. Gee, threats from a gun nut

who is surprised?

Wonder what happened to the lawsuit? Bet it was laughed out of court. The group's website is down.

[iverglas]

57. ah yes, libel chill

Oops, bite my tongue. It isn't libel chill; the libel-criers say it ain't, and who be I to say nay?

He said the lawsuit is not an effort to silence opponents. "This suit shouldn't cause a chilling effect, because if people are going to speak the truth, they aren't going to be sued," he said.

No, this isn't an effort to suppress dissent. It isn't a way for a bunch of people with very deep pockets (and friends with very very deep pockets ... oops, I didn't say that, either) to intimidate an adversary ... and anyone who might be watching ... into remaining silent about important public issues.

No sirree. It isn't a situation in which an unsupported allegation of libel is made in a lawsuit that the defendant can't afford to defend, no matter how false the allegation.

Not so, said Whittenburg: "All I can say is that I am flabbergasted and dumbfounded and I am not prepared to talk to the press at this time." But she added, "I guarantee the allegations against me are false."

Hey, that's just her word that the allegations of libel are false. Why take her word, or bother with the facts, when you can just sue her and not have to worry about proving your case until many thousands of her dollars down the line?

And anyhow, what libel would that be?

The dispute goes back to July, when the society was holding its annual extravaganza. Whittenburg was quoted in a July 21 Bangor Daily News story as saying that she had planned to protest the event, but decided not to after receiving an obscenity-laced e-mail.

The story said that "the message was not a threat against her life, she said, but it was serious enough to have local Million Moms change their plans about protesting in Dover-Foxcroft. The hate mail's sender is connected with the machine-gun event, the e-mail said."

Hmm, it looks like it was a statement that whoever sent a message meant to intimidate and cause fear said that s/he was connected with the gun-nuts' party. I'm not seeing anything even potentially libelous in that; assuming that it's accurate (and even if it isn't), quoting someone (or even making up a quote) as saying that s/he is connected with an event organized by a group just is not libel of the group. Beep, sorry.

(I mean, is it libelling Republicans to say that George W. Bush is a Republican?? or even that Saddam Hussein is?)

But heck, why not sue her anyway? Teach her a damned good lesson, that would. Not only do you get nasty e-mails when you object to these gun-nuts' activities, you get sued for telling the press about them, and you get to either retract what you said in the exercise of your freedom of speech, or go bankrupt defending yourself against the false characterization of what you said.

In the la-a-a-and of the free-e-e-ee ...

First they came for her freedom of speech, but I didn't care because I had lots of guns and lots of money.
Then they came for my guns ...

... but hey! I'm the one who's gunning for freedom of speech, so I guess I don't have to worry about "them" coming for my guns after all ... 'cause I'm "them".


Oh, and to the actual point. If CO's question:

"Are we dealing with a Second Amendment Sister here?"

... is "libel", I can think of a lot of people, none of them very far away from here, whom I seem to be needing to sue.

But no, suggesting that his question was libellous, when it is so far from being any such thing that it's on the dark side of the moon ... that ain't libel chill either. Nope, that isn't an attempt to suppress dissent, to silence an adversary ... . No sirree. And I didn't say it was.

.

[RoeBear]

64. It took you all that...

...to say "I don't think that qualifies as libel". I'm speechless (something I doubt you ever are).

[iverglas]

76. speechless ...

... or clueless?


"... to say 'I don't think that qualifies as libel' ..."

If you genuinely think that this is what I was saying, then the answer must be "clueless".


If you're pretending not to have noticed what I was really saying -- which was that libel chill is a very effective weapon used by the wealthy and powerful (and hey, white) to protect their wealth and power ... and that I'm not at all surprised to see it being used by the organization and/or individuals in issue in that story -- well, you draw your own conclusions. I won't expect you to tell me what they are.

Here's a source that's local to me, talking about instances I'm familiar with; you should have no trouble finding your own examples.

http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~shallit/libel3.html

<Recently defeated Ontario Tory> Environment Minister Tony Clement is suing Liberal leader Dalton McGuinty for remarks he made in a CBC radio interview. Jacques Parizeau and Lucien Bouchard <former Quebec premier and cabinet minister> are suing investment adviser Richard Lafferty for his comments in a 1993 financial newsletter. In 1997, former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney sued the Federal Government, asking $50 million in damages, over a letter naming him as a suspect in the Airbus case <allegations of bribery and corruption>.

What gives these powerful politicians the ability to shut down criticism and criminal investigations? The answer is Canadian libel law.

... The impact on freedom of expression, a core value of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is severe. There's even a term for it: "libel chill". Libel chill means that people are afraid to criticize powerful people who might bankrupt them with a costly suit. It means that commentators have to think twice before needling public figures --- as cartoonist Josh Beutel learned when he was sued by controversial New Brunswick <anti-semitic> school teacher Malcolm Ross <see cartoons here, a pro-Ross site undoubtedly violating copyright>. Ever wonder why there's so little investigative journalism in Canada? The reason is simple: libel chill.

That author omitted the practice of the super-rich, super-right wing Conrad Black (owner of the London Telegraph and Jerusalem Post and Canada's National Post) of sending out threats of libel action pretty much every time anyone mentioned his name in print.

Libel actions, and the threat of libel actions, are used by the rich and powerful (and white) to suppress dissent. Gosh, I'd expect to see the champions of the poor and downtrodden (and black) being just a tad more concerned about it.

Of course, that would mean acknowledging that the rich and powerful (and white, I'll betcha) folk in this scenario, the story that is the subject of this discussion, are the RKBA fans. And we wouldn't want anyone having to admit what's in front of their faces, would we now?


Now, if you were being genuinely clueless about what I was saying, all my apologies, of course, for writing so many big words that you just didn't get it.

.

[DoNotRefill]

87. Heh...

"Of course, that would mean acknowledging that the rich and powerful (and white, I'll betcha) folk in this scenario, the story that is the subject of this discussion, are the RKBA fans. And we wouldn't want anyone having to admit what's in front of their faces, would we now?"

FYI, ALL parties in the suit were white. As for being rich and powerful, well, do you have some evidence of that?

[MrBenchley]

3. Shooting victim found in Costco parking lot

"A Costco employee discovered a dead man sitting in the driver's seat of a running Cadillac parked in the store's parking lot Saturday night.
The man, 29-year-old Kendrick L. Boyland, was shot multiple times in the upper body while sitting in the car, according to police.
Police have no suspects at this time. "

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=10349819&BRD=1947&PAG=461&dept_id=168657&rfi=6

[MrBenchley]

4. Teen imprisoned 38 years for shooting Churchland woman

"PORTSMOUTH -- A teenager who pleaded guilty to shooting a woman in front of her house was sentenced Monday to serve 38 years in prison.
On Friday, Depaola's mother and father testified that the boy had lived a troubled life. He had attended at least four treatment centers and had been diagnosed with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, his mother, Julie Harb told the court.
Depaola had been convicted of burglary in juvenile court, had violated probation at least twice and had been committed to custody in the juvenile justice system at least twice, prosecutor William H. Swan III said in court. "

http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=61261&ran=203820


Thanks to the GOP and the corrupt gun industry, he could have strolled into any gun show in the state and bought a gunn without a background check.

[MrBenchley]

5. Local Man Accused Of Shooting Spree Threats

"PITTSBURGH -- A man accused of threatening a shooting spree at the University of Maryland appeared at a detention hearing in Pittsburgh Monday.
Police arrested Jeffrey Wilinski in Ohio Township last week.
Police raided his Brookline home Friday and found 30 guns and ammunition, including an AR-15, a Bushmaster, a Tech-9, a Mac-10, as well as French and British sniper-style rifles."

http://www.wpxi.com/news/2566103/detail.html

[MrBenchley]

6. Woodruff Shooting Leaves One Dead

"Few details are available, but the Spartanburg County coroner's office told WYFF News 4 that Chad Shelton, 22, was shot on Sharpe Street.
Shelton was taken to Spartanburg Regional Medical Center, where he later died. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ibsys/20031021/lo_wyff/1839479

[MrBenchley]

7. Gun activist accused of threatening judge

"Rick Stanley, 49, was being held without bond Monday at Adams County Jail on a police hold from Thornton. He faces two felony counts of attempting to influence a public official.
"He was armed at the time of the arrest," said Teresa Garcia, spokeswoman for Denver police. "He was arrested after a short chase. He did try to elude the officers."
"He was carrying a loaded .357 revolver openly on his hip at our Harvestfest, which is held at the Thornton Community Park," said Matt Barnes, spokesman for Thornton police.
According to the arrest affidavit, the note demanded that Stanley's conviction be overturned, and that a $1,500 bond and Stanley's gun be returned to him.
If the demands were not met, Stanley said Rose was to be charged with treason for not upholding the state constitution and that a warrant from the Mutual Defense Pact Militia would be issued against Rose."

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_2363922,00.html

You might recall this yutz was one of the ugly blowhards threatening to help the McLooney family in Michigan shoot the building inspector over those trailers....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=9332&mesg_id=9332

http://lylebarkley.blogspot.com/

[MrBenchley]

8. Purple Heart recipient who helped save Jessica Lynch slain at home

"LONG BEACH Family members, friends and fellow Marines gathered Monday to mourn the death of a decorated Marine who survived a land mine explosion during Operation Iraqi Freedom only to be shot dead while on a weekend leave in Long Beach.
Lance Cpl. Sok Khak Ung, a 22-year-old combat engineer who participated in the rescue operation of Army Pfc. Jessica Lynch in April and was awarded the Purple Heart for taking shrapnel to the leg two weeks later, died early Sunday after a gunman opened fire as he and several friends were barbecuing oysters behind his father's home.
"It's a real shame to think that he went to hell and back in Iraq and sacrificed so much only to come back here and get killed like this,' said Gunnery Sgt. Graham Hilson, who served alongside Ung in Iraq. "It just goes to show you that sometimes it's more dangerous over here than it is in war.' "

http://www.presstelegram.com/Stories/0,1413,204~21474~1712373,00.html

[MrBenchley]

42. Woman Inside House Wounded In Overnight Shooting

"Pittsburgh Police are investigating an overnight shooting that sent dozens of bullets into a Lawrenceville home.
It happened shortly before midnight on Cabinet Way.
A door and a wall of the home were riddled with bullet holes, reportedly from a 9 mm handgun.
A woman inside was shot several times in the leg. "

http://www.wpxi.com/news/2565426/detail.html

[MrBenchley]

43. Police Seek Suspect In Piedmont Double Shooting

"PIEDMONT, Ala. -- An East Alabama couple is shot - leaving the husband dead and his wife in serious condition in the hospital.
Piedmont police found Eddie Parris shot to death inside his Calhoun County home on Arrowhead Road early yesterday morning.
His wife Frances was shot as well...but she was still alive and able to call 911. Since then, though, she hasn't been coherent enough to talk to investigators. This morning, neighbors want to know how this could happen."

http://www.nbc13.com/news/2566649/detail.html

[MrBenchley]

44. Masked Man Fires Shot, Holds Up Bank

"Police are looking for a man who robbed a bank at gunpoint Tuesday morning.
Miami-Dade police said just before noon a masked man walked into the Unibank on Bird Road and Southwest 92 Avenue carrying a gun.
Once inside the bank, the man fired a warning shot, and demanded money from the tellers. Employees gave him two bags of money. Witnesses said the man was bilingual and spoke English and Spanish. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ibsys/20031021/lo_wplg/1840714

[Superfly]

74. Breaking Guns in the News Story...

No link just yet.

AP - For the umpteenth day, Superfly's guns have stayed in his closet and not killed anybody. More to follow as events unfold.

[demsrule4life]

75. Hopefully on thursday

Mine will kill some paper targets. Also a good time to get some updated pics for the DU gallery.

[MrBenchley]

91. This just in...

RKBA crowd looks ridiculous in public again; turns desperate

[Superfly]

139. Hey, Benchley....

You want to can this flamefest and start another one tomorrow? It's getting late here and I could sure use some rest. How about we pick up tomorrow in another thread? Hmmmm?

B

[FlashHarry]

149. Good idea. Locking

FlashHarry
DU Moderator