He sure aint the NRA

[Katya Mullethov]

Where on Earth do the "mouth-breathing redneck racists" that make up the bulk of the NRA rolls possibly get their "paranoid gun grabbing fantasies " from ?


Simple observations , over time ,of the results of such policies . FUDs are food too , and some of them know it .


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/countryside/6677915/Shooters-complain-of-hysterical-police-response-to-legal-field-sports.html

[geckosfeet]

1. Gun companies have to drum up business somehow. They have been raking

it in the last year or two. Doing almost as good as the bankers - without the bailouts of course.

[SteveM]

5. Who needs a bailout when you have a government policy like this (nt)

[cabluedem]

40. but we all have to pay the price when these guns hit the streets.

[tburnsten]

42. The number of privately owned guns has nearly doubled over the last twenty years

While crime has dropped dramatically over the last ten to fifteen.

And in the same time period nationwide adoption of concealed carry licensing laws have become the norm, so in a way you could say that many guns have "hit the streets" since the mid-eighties and it has had no ill effect, and possibly a difficult to measure positive effect.

Continue to cry and wonder how you will ever be able to safely leave your house with all these monstrous carry permit holding citizens walking about.

[cabluedem]

44. they are not walking around in CA. we don't have thousands of numbskulls packing guns to school.

And we still have our ban on assault rifles. Please don't bring your illegal guns here unless you like prison food and sleeping in a cell with a bunkmate.

[X_Digger]

45. LOL.. psst..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x303945

[oneshooter]

46. There are California Legal "assault rifles.

They look kinda funky, but operate the same as any other semi-automatic weapon.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[cowman]

63. Ever notice

that when you call her on the so called CA assault weapons ban, she disappears or refuses to answer? I wonder why that is?

[jazzhound]

55. And the violent crime rate in California is sooooo much lower than the

states that allow for concealed carry. :eyes:

As always, your arguments are swiss cheese.

Final note --- as long as you feel authorized to speak for California, you might just want to make the herculean effort to purge yourself of your complete ignorance regarding "assault rifles".

[paulsby]

64. all my guns are legal in cali and i can carry in cali and i'm not even a resident

why?

because i'm a law enforcement officer and under the law, I can carry there on vacation

but residents of CA who aren't LEO's can't (unless they have political power enough to get a permit a la sean penn)

is this just?

hint: no

[Dogmudgeon]

2. They get their "paranoid gun grabbing fantasies " from England?

In the Name of the Second Amendment, arrest the Queen!

--d!

[SteveM]

6. Last I heard, the Internet was world-wide...

and many gun-controllers want to adopt the UK's approach to gun prohibition. Well, there it is.

[aikoaiko]

18. There are many people would like the US to follow the example of the UK regarding gun laws.

Its fair to look at the UK and worry for the US.

[spin]

31. The fact that our government trusts its citizens ...

enough to own and carry firearms says a lot.

[DissedByBush]

53. Historical relationship between a people and their government

The UK is a monarchy. The people have been historically ruled by their government. Sure they have a parliament and elections, but it's still in their thinking.

They are subjects.

The US was built on the idea that the government exists at the pleasure of the people, to serve the people as the people see fit. It's in our revolutionary thinking.

We are free citizens.

We don't need the government to trust us with guns.

We don't trust our government to exist without us having guns.

[spin]

61. Often people will point to the UK as a shinning example ...

of how we should control firearms.

The founding fathers must roll over in their graves.

[DonP]

73. On the other hand

The Founding Fathers might look at what the UK is doing to their citizens and say, "See, we told you so!"

[paulsby]

65. our govt. also trusts us with the free exchange of ideas, even hateful racist ideas, the UK doesn't

this is a common theme.

the UK also does not have a right to remain silent (it CAN be used against you)

or an automatic exclusionary rule

the UK is also a surveillance society

[cowman]

29. No

we get concerned when people like Eric Holder says the Obama Admin wants to make the AWB ban permanent, when Pres Obama's record as an IL sen. has a very anti-gun record or how about Dianne Feinstein who said that if she could have gotten 51 votes in the Sen. she would have confiscated all guns from americans. Now I know that the Obama Admin has backed off of gun control but I don't believe for a minute that he has gone pro-gun and before you call me a teabagger or a rethug, I voted for B. Obama

[firstnamefred]

3. Thank goodness we still haven't lost the right to defend and protect

our lives and property with firearms. I realize that not everyone has the right to protect themselves thusly - and that's
terrible and difficult to justify LOGICALLY and rationally. Who exactly was responsible for deciding that so many people
would no longer have the right to protect themselves?

[Walk away]

4. I wish their was a law protecting me from paranoid gun owners...

but especially from the lunatics who want to force their "guns for everyone" garbage on states and neighborhoods who don't want it. And please, not more "it's my right" BS. It used to be your right to own slaves....that changed and so should this.

You can't imagine how ludicrous it sounds to non-gun owners to listen to people whining about their rights to own as many death sticks as possible. It just make you sound like teabaggy rednecks to the rest of the world.

[virginia mountainman]

7. Who is forcing "guns for everyone"?!?!

Please show me.....

[east texas lib]

8. As opposed to sounding like a whiny little authoritarian/control freak...

And how many slaves do you think would've been brought to this country if the Africans had been armed with the most modern firearms of the era and simply killed the slavers the moment they stepped on the beach? Just a thought.

[shadowrider]

71. Probably not many. Chieftains made a lot of money selling their people.

It was a numbers game.

[one-eyed fat man]

74. There's a reason they didn't kill the slavers.

The slavers hardly went past the beach. They weren't running through the jungle with nets 'catching' slaves. The set up shop and bought from those who came to sell.

Tribal warfare was the norm. Hutus were still making war on Tutsis; Zulus were conquering the Matebe, etc etc. Rape, sack, loot, and pillage were reenlistment bonuses for ancient warriors. Making slaves of a conquered people goes back to antiquity. Warriors they didn't kill in battle and women too old or too ugly to rape became a salable commodity to sell to passing Arab caravans or to European ships. So when a Bantu chief showed up with some Mandinka captives, he bargained with the slavers for the best price; wished them well; and promised more captives for the next time the slavers came calling.

[Old Codger]

10. Try

You make a great impression when you call people names try reasonable discourse rather than lump sum rants, might actually get some dialogue out if it.

[SteveM]

11. Some common errors you have repeated, here. Let's look at them...

There is no law protecting you from "paranoid gun owners," or any gun-owners. Nor should there be; after all, it is bad public policy to pass laws based on some cryptic notion as paranoia. Can you define the term? Can you provide a list of examples? What kind of law would you make which would delineate between "paranoid" and those not "afflicted?"

"...force their "guns for everyone" garbage on states and neighborhoods who don't want it." Several problems, here. First, no one is advocating "guns for everyone." This is just more gun-controller hyper-ventilating. We already have laws (supported by gun-owners) which make it illegal for convicted felons and persons adjudicated as mentally incompetent to own firearms. Since the "guns for everyone" approach does not in fact exist, your "force" notion is not applicable. I would remind you, however, that no law can be passed which violates the Constitution; in fact, those localities (like Chicago) which ban firearms are in direct violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.

You must be corrected in no uncertain terms when you advocate "no more 'it's my right' B.S." The right to keep and bear arms is demonstrably evident. Concerning slaves, the first place slaves went to after rebelling and escaping the plantation was -- ready for this? -- hardware stores where there were guns. BTW, virtually all proposed and enacted gun-control laws have there antecedent in laws passed during the ante-bellum, Jim Crow, and early 20th century eras of the South. Want change? Seek to amend the Constitution.

You can't imagine the "ludicrous?" Then you cannot imagine how ludicrous it sounds when gun-controllers continue in a culture war which has only damaged progressive politics and the Democratic Party. I must point out that your reference to 2A advocates as "rednecks" reveals perhaps the real reason for your gun-control outlook. It ain't the guns. It's "us." Why the animosity toward millions of your fellow Americans? This is not a rhetorical question; I would suggest that you look deeply into the post-Civil Rights era and the rise of Second Wave Feminism which seemed to cast American white males as the default enemy upon which all manner of hatred and blame could be cast. If it weren't guns, what would it be?

Thank you for taking the time to read my response.

[east texas lib]

13. Excellent post! (nt)

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[SteveM]

15. Thank you. Happy New Year! (nt)

[GreenStormCloud]

12. It IS my right. Tough for you that you don't like it, but it is.

And ALL states and cities must obey the Constitution. You don't get to pick and choose those parts of it that you will or will not obey.

The first gun bans were to keep guns out of the hands of blacks, because of fear of a slave revolt, later fear of a race war.

Defending rights under the Constitution is a very progressive ideal.

It is you who are paranoid. Legal gun owners are rarely involved in any kind of gun crime. Sometimes it happens, but rarely. The gun crimes are committed by people who are criminals and for whom gun ownership is already forbidden. Taking my gun away from me does nothing about their guns. Yet you fear the law-abiding instead of the criminals.

[gorfle]

14. But it shouldn't.

I wish their was a law protecting me from paranoid gun owners...but especially from the lunatics who want to force their "guns for everyone" garbage on states and neighborhoods who don't want it.

I have been a firearm enthusiast for over 30 years. I can only think of one example where people have called for "forcing" people to own firearms. The city of Kennesaw, Georgia, had an ordnance that requires firearm ownership by the head of every household, but even that ordnance now allows for conscientious objectors.

I have never met a single person, online or in person, who advocated that everyone should be forced to own firearms. In fact, most people I have talked with on the subject hold the same opinion I do - that everyone who chooses to legally own a firearm should be allowed to do so.

Now I, and many other firearm-rights advocates, most certainly do believe that "states and neighborhoods" should not be able to contravene rights enumerated by the federal Constitution, just as states are not allowed to pick and choose whether or not to abide by other Constitutional civil rights laws.

And please, not more "it's my right" BS. It used to be your right to own slaves....that changed and so should this.

You have a right to your opinion, but you should know that you are in a very tiny minority that believes this. You should know that with the Heller decision it is now a settled matter of Constitutional law that the right to keep and bear arms conveys an individual right. All of the Supreme Court Justices, both liberal and conservative, unanimously agreed on this point.

If you desire to change this you will need to work for a Constitutional amendment. But given that President Obama's administration has notably retreated from the firearm issue altogether should give you some indication of what a monumental task that would be.

You can't imagine how ludicrous it sounds to non-gun owners to listen to people whining about their rights to own as many death sticks as possible. It just make you sound like teabaggy rednecks to the rest of the world.

Only to people who don't have a firm grasp of the history of our nation and Constitution, or to those who do but believe that we have reached the Nirvana of civilized society and that the people will never have need to defend themselves against tyranny ever again.

Such people are, frankly, ignorant and/or naive. I try not to get too worked up about what such people think other than to try to educate them where I can, and oppose their efforts elsewhere.

[taurus145]

16. Laws do not protect anyone or anything

Laws either prohibit or require actions and (usually) provide for punishments for failure to comply.

Protection comes from two points; fear of punishment by some that may break a law and the individual or group. You protect yourself by locking doors, safeguarding information and valuables, avoiding dangerous areas, learning self-defense techniques, arming yourself, etc.

The law permits the ownership of firearms in most of this country. Barring any sort of mishap, cases such as Heller, will once again guarantee that right nationwide.

Why are you so selective about our Constitutional rights? All are equally important. If you don't like any of them, work for change. When it comes to 2A, I'll work fervently against you. I like 2A. We need 2A.

[rd_kent]

17. "guns for everyone"? Perhaps you mean "guns for those legally allowed to posess them"?

Because THAT is what pro-2A people are advocating.

[OttavaKarhu]

19. "Death Sticks"!!!

Hilarious! A new one from the lay-back-and-enjoy-it crowd!

[east texas lib]

20. Oh hell, I thought he meant Marlboros...(nt)

:D

[paulsby]

66. it's very "army of darkness"

"THIS... IS MY BOOMSTICK!"

[proteus_lives]

24. Who is trying to force you to buy a gun?

This is going to be hilarious.

[Taitertots]

25. Don't let me interrupt your hallucinations

No one is for "guns for everyone". The NRA supports the vast majority of gun control laws.


Where in the constitution does it say slavery is a right?


You can't imagine how ludicrous you sound to the gun owning world. Like an ignorant child spewing obvious lies.

[cowman]

30. If you don't like the

2nd Amend then lobby to change it. Good luck with that as you would need 3/4 of the states to ratify a change to the BOR.

Let me know how well that works for you

[Callisto32]

38. Ah, your concept of rights is sadly shallow.

Nobody ever had a right to own a slave.

My view of rights is pretty well summed up here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=276337&mesg_id=276553

[cabluedem]

47. You need to adopt some of our gun laws here in CA. We don't allow every moron to pack a gun around

and the police confiscate weapons from
so called" law abiding gun owners "for many different reasons.

[east texas lib]

49. "We don't allow every moron to pack a gun around "

They are, however, allowed to be on the internet, evidently.:o

[cabluedem]

50. yes you certainly are. too bad, so sad for you.

[cowman]

51. Apparently

all but a few states don't agree with Kalifornia style gun laws and even those are about to be put to rest by the SCOTUS. So put that in your pipe and smoke it

[paulsby]

67. yes, you only allow politically connected morons

to carry guns (concealed/loaded) in california

and you are SO safe because of it.

lol

[cabluedem]

59. exactly. thier priviledge to own guns dwindles each passing year

[east texas lib]

9. There is our future... if we allow it.(nt)

[Katya Mullethov]

21. Like water on stone

Seemingly small and unrelated events , over a period of time .



Tibbs’ law makes it illegal to ‘fortify’ a private home

Oklahoma has a new law that makes it a crime to “fortify” a citizen’s home against possible entry by law enforcement.
State Rep. Sue Tibbs was one of the sponsors of a bill that makes it unlawful for “any person to willfully fortify an access point into any dwelling, structure, building or other place where a felony offense prohibited by the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act is being committed, or attempted, (See, we are only fucking those people "over there" )


and the fortification is for the purpose of preventing or delaying entry or access by a law enforcement officer, or to harm or injure a law enforcement officer in the performance of official duties.”The law took effect Nov. 1.



The law states that to “fortify an access point” means to willfully construct, install, position, use or hold any material or device designed to injure a person upon entry or to strengthen, defend, restrict or obstruct any door, window or other opening into a dwelling, structure, building or other place to any extent beyond the security provided by a commercial alarm system, lock or deadbolt, or a combination of alarm, lock or deadbolt.



The law carries punishment of imprisonment of not more than five years or by a fine up to $10,000 or by both .

http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=3269

[PavePusher]

22. I guess my security door would be illegal in Oklahoma.

Sue Tibbs can pound sand.

[Katya Mullethov]

23. Only if you're cooking crank , or growing weed

Or from what I've gather'n right here , in the last week , casting your own lead balls . Still burns your nose though dont it ?

[SteveM]

26. Junk legislation, fueled by WOD prohis. (nt)

[Katya Mullethov]

27. Drop by drop

This isn't new , they have been trying this every year for quite some time . It is an example of the masturbatory frenzy reached by unsupervised bureaucrats attempting to appear useful .


Government accused over deactivated gun ban (of being wankers )

The Home Secretary has been accused of "papering over the cracks" on gun crime by proposing a ban on old, deactivated firearms which only feature in a small number of offences.
The announcement by Jacqui Smith on guns deactivated before 1995 raised concerns that law-abiding people owning war keepsakes - such as a grandfather's service pistol - might find themselves in breach of the law.

However, the Home Office said it would consult on possible exemptions for legitimate collectors of antique guns and owners of mementos and insisted any new law bringing in a ban would be "proportionate".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575147/Government-accused-over-deactivated-gun-ban.html

[tburnsten]

36. Bullshit, it will be exactly like their "ban" on knives that resultedq

in warning signs being put up on tableware sets.

[Katya Mullethov]

28. Inch by inch

Action on crossbows expected


The Premier Colin Barnett says crossbows are a danger and should be treated the same as serious weapons such as guns.

Mr Barnett made the comments after the family of a 26 year old man killed with a crossbow claimed the state government was ignoring its calls to have the weapons banned.Yesterday, the Acting Police Minister John Day said he expects crossbows will be prohibited within months.This morning Mr Barnett would not commit to a deadline."It may well be able to be done by regulation or it might require a minor amendment to the act."The matter will come to cabinet and we'll that decision on advice."

Fatal shot

Christopher Halstead died after being shot in the chest at close range with a crossbow outside a Karratha house in February last year.28 year old Fraser Macaree stood trial accused of his murder but a Supreme Court jury instead found him guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.After the verdict Mr Halstead's mother, Yvonne, said her family was pushing for the state government to ban crossbows. Mrs Halstead said her son's family and friends were unlikely to ever fully recover from the ordeal.
"Chris had a zest for life, he had a sparkle about him, he was cheeky, he was funny and forever smiling. He was easy going and very caring and loving. "He made friends easily and they stayed friends because he was such a sharing person."

Macaree was remanded in custody and will be sentenced next month.

[jody]

32. Why do you classify a group of Democrats who belong to the NRA as "mouth-breathing redneck racists"?

[Katya Mullethov]

33. This predates the cry for civility

So I was paraphrasing . Hence the " rabbit ears" .
So slow down , this ain't a spending bill .

[jody]

34. OP is still open so I assume it's under the new rules of civility if they are uniformly applied. n/t

[Katya Mullethov]

37. Paraphrasing seems to be the word

That is causing so much confusion .

[jody]

39. Beats me. I'm beginning to miss the old days of posters with nothing but vituperation that I ignored

easily and still do under the premise that if one makes a bad smell and no one else smells it, then the source is the only one offended.

Like other pro-RKBA Democrats I believe "ignorance is a curable disease, stupidity is a terminal illness" and only the former is worth trying to educate.

My best friend remains

[jazzhound]

54. *CRY* for civility?

How about a CRY for equality? If you're going to ban abrasive terms, then you'd better be even-handed abut it. Anything unreasonable about expecting that?

[Katya Mullethov]

60. We are not equal

And no amount of deletions will ever make it even so much as appear to be so .

[jazzhound]

62. Not sure how to interpret this.

Perhaps I misunderstood your post re. the "cry" for civility.

[east texas lib]

68. An accurate assessment as always...

You's pretty good, bubba.

[shadowrider]

72. Might want to ask this one too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=362435&mesg_id=362799

[tburnsten]

35. I notice they don't allow comments

[spin]

41. Interesting, I wonder why. (n/t)

[tburnsten]

43. Isn't there a sarcasm icon we should have been using?

[spin]

48. Oops, forgot to add it. (n/t)

[tburnsten]

52. So did I, never bothered to learn the coding for them anyway N/T

[Katya Mullethov]

56. literary crutches

Profanitiy and smilies

[tburnsten]

58. Fantastic

My unit's Cadet uses that term frequently.

Though he's often talking about things like sleep, eating well, and fat chicks.

[Katya Mullethov]

57. .

.

[Katya Mullethov]

69. Day by day

Traveling man's gun arrest appealed to high court

Lower courts have thrown out his lawsuit. (lolz)

Revell was flying from Salt Lake City to Allentown, Pa., on March 31, 2005, with connections in Minneapolis and Newark, N.J. He had checked his Utah-licensed gun and ammunition with his luggage in Salt Lake City and asked airport officials to deliver them both with his luggage in Allentown.

But the flight from Minneapolis to Newark was late, so Revell missed his connection to Allentown. The airline wanted to bus its passengers to Allentown, but Revell realized that his luggage had not made it onto the bus and got off. After finding his luggage had been given a final destination of Newark by mistake, Revell missed the bus. He collected his luggage, including his gun and ammunition, and decided to wait in a nearby hotel with his stuff until the next flight in the morning.

When Revell tried to check in for the morning flight, he again informed the airline officials about his gun and ammunition to have them checked through to Allentown. He was reported to the TSA, and then arrested by Port Authority police for having a gun in New Jersey without a New Jersey license.


http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=14044083

[shadowrider]

70. LOL they'd go nuts where I live

Yesterday somebody, relatively close, was firing what sounded like a .22 and a large caliber weapon with probably a total of 125-150 rounds. There are 1000 empty acres across the street and people go there for shooting although I never have been. I prefer a range.

The guy on the other side of me fired off about 30 shots into a berm.

'Round these parts, ain't no big deal.