what is with all the gun grabbers lately

[FLAprogressive]

I've seen more Brady crap posted here at DU lately.....according to some them you can't be pro-RKBA and progressive/liberal at the same time.

What's with the extremism?

[BlooInBloo]

1. Totally. Because advocating for laws that make it easier for a 6 year old to shoot his 4 year old...

sister on accident is *moderate*.

[liberalhistorian]

3. Thanks, you beat

me to it. I'm so sick of these Guns Uber Alles people who never seem to get it no matter how many people are blown away going about their business shopping, working, in school, etc.

[BlooInBloo]

4. They get it. It's just not as important to them.

[Pavulon]

5. lazy, address root cause..

prohibition failed, it is failing now with drugs. So explain why Geneva where guns are accessable and legal and dc where they are banned have a small difference in crime rates.

look good feel good, beats real solutions for you.

[MrModerate]

7. It's looking you right in the face.

Drug prohibition doesn't work, and its failure ripples through other aspects of society. What's different between DC and Geneva? (Aside from culture, history, and weather) -- drug laws.

[Pavulon]

12. In geneva you have

access to medical care, low poverty, high education and reasonable DRUG and GUN laws. Swiss own guns and are allowed to use them with reasonable control.

Not to many drive by shootings in greenwich or fairfield ct either.

Gun control is just a lazy mans approach to a real problem.

[MrModerate]

15. Presumably you're not a lazy man . . .

So what's your solution?

[Pavulon]

18. Address root cause

of poverty, medical care, and drug law. Education, or lack of, put people in a position to live wasted lives.

This model works in switzerland, finland, canada.

Or you can just ban guns for anyone who makes less than 20k more than the median income of their home state. Poor people kill commit most crime. Not a fair solution, but focuses on where effort should go.

Makes more sense than banning anything. Isn't meth banned?

[hendo]

9. proper firearms saftey

is the only thing that will stop that.

Stop fearmongering.

[MrModerate]

13. And when RKBA zealots tell me that mandatory trigger guards . . .

Are an infringement of their rights, I'm supposed to think what?

[Pavulon]

17. I have never seen any weapon

other than a M2 machine gun with a butterfly trigger that did not have a guard. Just does not exist.

Want a crusade, go after people on the phone or texting while driving, they kill MANY more.

[MrModerate]

23. Perhaps I was sloppy with my terminology. I meant trigger locks. n/t

[Pavulon]

25. for a stored weapon

that is fine. For a carry weapon, pretty useless. Trigger locks are free and a common sense thing for guns not in a safe.

[X_Digger]

27. Also useless

.. for a self defense weapon kept in a nightstand or center console.

[Pavulon]

30. agree as long as common sense

regarding kids is applied. I carry a holstered weapon all over and have no problems. If I am out of town or go somewhere it cant, I lock it in a safe or trunk.

[X_Digger]

33. *nod*

We don't have kids, or go around kids. However, even as a kid, I was taught gun safety, so I was smart enough to treat all guns as if they were loaded, and leave them alone unless supervised.

Personally, I'd rather educate kids about gun safety than hobble everyone else. The whole 'my kid is a special snowflake' crap bothers me- everything seems to be "Oh teh children!" these days.

[hendo]

37. Yup

and thats all I was referring to.

A firearm should be respected. My dad had multiple shotguns when I was growing up, and he made sure that I knew they were not toys.

[akgirl]

73. I have no children...

No children come into my home unsupervised.
No one other than myself and partner have the key to the room where our firearms are stored.

Why exactly do you think you should have the right to tell me how to store my personal property again? I'm serious. Do I come into your home and tell you how to store your kitchen knives?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

41. Care to show an example of someone advocating for that.

[benEzra]

83. BS.

The gun issue in 2008 is about whether or not mentally competent adults with clean records should continue to be able to lawfully purchase and own currently legal non-automatic, non-sound-suppressed civilian firearms under .51 caliber.

If you know someone who wants to legalize the carrying of guns by 6-year-olds, I'd love for you to post a cite.

[MrModerate]

2. While I don't follow this forum very closely (not my biggest issue, happily) . . .

I hardly think being anti-RKBA is especially extreme.

Might not be the majority opinion even among all Americans, but a substantial number of persons (enough to swing elections, perhaps?) think a) the Founders didn't mean what pro-RKBA people think when they penned the 2nd Amendment and b) that if the Founders were confronted with a society where a weapon like an AK47 could be had for less than a day's pay, they'd rewrite that amendment tout d'suite.

[Pavulon]

6. I want that job,

ak sells for $15- 20,000. Thats an honest days wage...lots of ignorance on this topic. Now go finish banning drugs then when you get that right come back to the gun thing. see ya never.

[X_Digger]

8. You can't get an AK-47 for a day's pay (unless you're an investment banker)

An AK-47 is a fully automatic gun that is tightly regulated and will set you back $15k, plus a ton of paperwork, background check, fingerprinting, etc.

The last survey to address the issue found that about 1/2 of all households have at least one gun owner.

[MrModerate]

10. Not sure where you shop, but I know I've been offered "a deal"

(without all the bothersome paperwork) for less than $500. Didn't take 'em up on it -- not being interested in owning a gun and all -- and so I can't confirm that is wasn't just scrap metal.

Nevertheless.

[Pavulon]

14. That is a 10 year mandatory

sentence. If you took that deal. Probably less time than for rape or 2nd degree murder.

Legal NFA weapons are expensive and your deal could be an leo so smart to decline. I have never seen even a shit ak replica for that price. Maybe stolen.

[MrModerate]

16. Yeah. As I recall, there were a few other reasons I didn't take the guy up on his offer.

Others -- a lot of others -- are not so picky.

[Pavulon]

20. Lots of people commit rape

that makes them lousy bastards. Breaking federal law is a really bad idea. Selling machine guns will put you away for decades. People intent on using a weapon to kill will find a way to do the job.

So did you call batf to report that class b felony you saw?

[MrModerate]

29. I'm not sufficiently acquainted with federal law to have any clue . . .

Whether I had a legal obligation to report the incident. I told the guy "no thanks" and left it at that.

People intent on killing almost certainly make up a tiny fraction of those who actually kill someone with legal *or* illegal weapons. Intimidating, playing, feeling tough, feeling secure, being careless, being ignorant -- those are what people are up to when they kill someone with a gun.

[Pavulon]

34. Lots of stats disprove you

suicide (intent and preventable), drug related crime (intent and preventable) and domestic violence and random violence (small but harder to stop) make up violence. Accidents are not a majority of killings.

You have it backwards.

FACT: Suicide is still the leading cause of firearm death in the U.S., representing 55% of total 2005 gun deaths nationwide. In 2005, the U.S. firearm suicide total was 17,002, a 1.5% INCREASE from 2004 suicide deaths. The state of Illinois saw a nearly 10% INCREASE in gun suicides from 387 in 2004 to 424 in 2005. Most suicides in the U.S. are committed with firearms.
-Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2008.

[AtheistCrusader]

77. If he was selling a true NFA AK-47

You should have turned him in to the police.

[rl6214]

75. You do know

That wasn't a "true" ak47. It was an ak clone, semi auto not full auto. Those can be had for $500-$600.

[ValhallaChaser]

76. Too many people have fallen for....

This "Assault Weapon" misnomer. A semi-auto rifle is just that.

This is a good "watch":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbIIjIFKYYg

[Somawas]

19. Assuming that you are correct

why not just amend the Constitution?

Anti-RKBA is not compatible with the language of the Constitution.

[X_Digger]

22. I really wish..

I wish folks would replace RKBA with another enumerated right and see how well anti-'whatever' would fly.

[MrModerate]

31. Well, I'm not a constitutional scholar -- or even a serious student of gun laws . . .

like a lot of the pro-RKBA folks here.

But I'd certainly support a Constitutional amendment that put our laws more in line with the UK's.

[BlooInBloo]

32. A cute red herring...

Unless you think EVERY law that has a disagreeing group should be put through the amendment process.

Clever, but not smart. C+

[Somawas]

85. Don't think that at all.

The Supreme Court says that the RKBA is an individual right. The scope of that right has yet to be fleshed out. But it is certainly braod enough to allow one to possess a fully operational handgun in his or her own home.

So I suppose that if you want to abolish the RKBA as an individual right, you'll have to amend.

[BlooInBloo]

24. hahaha! It's SO much not my biggest issue that I had to google "RKBA"...

:rofl:

The asshole in me says: If the stupid hicks want to kill each other, fuck 'em.

The enlightened self-interest in me says: Wait a minute - those stupid hicks could kill *me* with their stupidity one day.

The morality in me says: Come on Bloo, you know it isn't right to let even stupid hicks kill themselves, no matter how stupid they are.


Two out of three wins. Reasonable gun control, plz.

[spin]

51. Stereotyping isn't a sign of an intelligent person...

I've known many very intelligent and well educated people who own firearms. Examples include doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers and preachers. Most of the regular shooters ate the range I shot at were middle to upper middle class professionals.

Of course there were some individuals who you might call "stupid hicks", who were only blue collar workers with a high school education. They were good honest people who enjoyed the shooting sport or owned weapons for self defense in the less than upscale neighborhoods they lived in. These are type of people the Democratic Party attempts to appeal to.

None of the gun owners I've ever known appeared to have any desire to kill other people. While they would use their weapons if truly necessary, they all avoided confrontation if possible.

The gun culture is broad and diverse. While it s true that it contains some people who aren't responsible enough to own weapons, the vast majority of gun owners are good citizens.

The people you describe appear to me to be the criminal element. They will ignore any reasonable gun control law you propose and will applaud your efforts as it makes their life easier.

[iverglas]

54. and disingenuousness isn't the sign

of an honest person.

Did you have some basis for inferring that the person to whom you are speaking was calling all firearms owners ignorant fucks?

Answer, just to help you out: no, you didn't.

You can delete your post now as being wholly irrelevant.

[BlooInBloo]

56. Heh indeedy. Most certainly not *all*. Just a plurality, or a majority....

Depending on which of the several demographic dimensions I mentioned it is that we're talking about.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

60. Come now Iverglas after she has admitted it surely you have something to say.

[BlooInBloo]

62. Dude. That's not even a sentence.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[BlooInBloo]

66. Indeed. You left out a few things tho. I was around when Jesus Christ had his moment...

of doubt and pain, I stood around St. Petersburg when they thought it was time for change, and - oh yah - I shouted out "Who killed the Kennedys" too. I get around.

Pleased to meet you.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

67. "I get around" I'll take your word for it, most people aren't that proud of it.

[BlooInBloo]

68. (facepalm)

EDIT: Well, I've had a good time here in crazyville - it looks like y'all are doin just fine here without any further assistance from me. Peace out!

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

69. Thought for sure you would find that funny.

[BlooInBloo]

55. Neither is making shit up for no purpose other than mollifying people with jackass views...

Psst... They'll ignore any reasonable gun control law proposed *no matter WHAT I, or you, say*. More than anything else in the world, they do what they do simply because it pisses us off. There is precisely *zero* point in reasoning with fundamentally unreasonable people; so there's no reason to be diplomatic and pussyfoot around with them. Rather like religious people, which, is no surprise, of course.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

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

[BlooInBloo]

64. Easy there, tiger. Don't shoot me.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

65. So, no answer, imagine that.

[Mojorabbit]

47. Well Jefferson did say this

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. You can debate if that is even doable in this day and time but the founding fathers did not put the second amendment in so that people could hunt.

[Redneck Socialist]

11. Typical DU backlash

President elect Obama's perceived anti-gun stance has been getting much press of late and with the NRA ginning up the fear machine the all too predictable "oh noes teh guns is bad" crowd is out in force.

This too shall pass.

[MrModerate]

21. Meaning that those of us who believe that the proliferation of guns in our society . . .

Has been an unmitigated and unmatched disaster will suddenly change our minds and stock up on guns 'n' ammo?

[Redneck Socialist]

26. No, meaning that DU reacts to the trends in the national news

Some other shiny object will pop up soon and we'll all go "Oooohhhhh!" for a bit until the next new thing comes along.

I'll be very surprised if we see any serious push for new anti-gun legislation. Obama and company have much bigger issues on their plate at the moment.

[BlooInBloo]

35. Oh wow - what happened?

[Redneck Socialist]

42. Nothing in particular.

The national press had a "oh my god, people are buying guns" moment and that has been reflected at DU. The NRA spent a bunch of money and time trying to convince people that Obama is going to take everyone's guns away, so, according to the national press there has been a significant up-tick in gun sales as people try and beat out any new anti-gun legislation.

Fear-mongering and hype in my opinion. <shrug>

[BlooInBloo]

43. Oh. Damn. I wanted to react to a trend. I fail. Sigh.

[Redneck Socialist]

44. Well, you could post a "guns are bad, mmmkayy" thread...

...or a "from my cold dead hands hands" thread and join in the fun. Really, everyone can play. :bounce:

[BlooInBloo]

48. I lol'd. :)

[Pavulon]

28. once you get all the drugs off the street

give a call. I will surrender my firearms on that day...

Suggest you put you time to a viable solution to crime. Fixing drug laws and poverty help.

[MrModerate]

36. Now we're getting closer. A huge proportion of crime occurs . . .

purely because personal intoxication choices are stupidly overregulated, thereby manufacturing crime. Being criminalized pretty much ruins your life, and the downward spiral starts. Multiply that by millions and you've got intractable poverty in what should be a uniformly well-off population (given the country's wealth).

On the other hand, life is hard, and complicated, and people vary wildly in their coping abilities. So poverty/crime will always be with us.

I just don't think that we can leave guns out of our calculations in addressing "a viable solution to crime."

[Pavulon]

38. They are downstream

fix the problem and our guns will be like the guns in zurich, used to shoot holes in paper and for hunting. Tiny murder rate

Use of guns becomes a non issue when the intent stops. We have lots of stuff to fix, gun law is not a real problem now.

[akgirl]

39. not to mention....

fix the education system, the health care system, the housing system, the transportation system....

Essentially, reestablish the social contract, because anything short of that is just feel-good-ism that does nothing to address the core issue. In the words of Gregory Bateson, banning guns because we have a societal problem that makes our society screwed up is "treating the symptom to make the world safe for the pathology."

[slackmaster]

71. If that doesn't change your mind, maybe this will

My gun collection is now worth about twice what I have invested in it. Unlike stocks and commodities, collectable firearms have been a truly counter-cyclical investment in this and every previous recession I've seen.

[doc03]

40. Two hunters were killed in West Virginia Monday

weapon Coleman lantern. You anti-constitutional rights people always bring up the firearms thing when some kid accidenaly gets shot, rather than accept it as an accident you blame the gun. By that logic shouldn't we ban Coleman camp lanterns. Oh there was another one killed on an ATV, as a matter fact there are far more people killed on ATVs than by firearm accidents.

[akgirl]

45. Coleman Lanterns.... heck, go after cars...

HR 1104
Making Our Motorvehicles More Intentionally Environmentally-friendly Act
To authorize the banning of dangerous motorvehicles and motorvehicle accessories from public use.

Summary

To authorize the banning of dangerous and pollution causing motorvehicles and motorvehicle accessories from public use.

Whereas in 2007, 41,000 Americans were killed in automobile accidents;

Whereas motorvehicle accidents are the number one cause of death in children;

Whereas more than 90,000 child passengers under the age of eight are injured or killed in automobile accidents annually;

Whereas 333 million tons of carbon dioxide are emitted from US automobiles per year causing untold health effects costing the United States millions each year;

Whereas the need to go faster than the nationally posted speed limit should be limited only to law enforcement officers, government officials and military personnel;

Whereas large capacity engines, tinted windows, chromed accessories, radios and other noise emitting devices are contributing factors to the dangerous nature of motorvehicles;

Whereas more acres are devoted to roads than to National Parks.

This Act seeks to ban the manufacture of any motorvehicle that:

- Has able to maintain a speed of more than 55 mph
- Has an engine capacity greater than 1000cc
- Has a gross vehicular weight of more than 1819lbs
- Has a wheelbase of more than 84.6 inches

This Act specifically bans certain automobiles by name

- Porsche, other than the Porsche 914
- All Chevrolet Corvettes
- All Bandini
- All Ferrari
- All Ford Mustangs
- All SUV/Pickup classes

This Act bans modifications to a vehicle that:

- Lower it's manufactured height
- Raise it's manufactured height
- Suspend anything for the center rear view mirror including fuzzy dice.
- Modify the color of the outside of the vehicle.
- 'Suicide' steering wheel adapters
- Glasspack mufflers
- Chromed grills, hubcaps, mirrors or accessories.
- Convertible tops.

The Act directs manufactures to apply the following modifications to all motorvehicles:

- The only lawful color shall now be day glow orange or florescent green.
- 4 point restraints shall be applied to all passenger seat and mandatory helmets must be also provided.
- All tires must have individual unique RF id tags embedded in them and that identification must be entered into NCIS.
- The exterior of the vehicle must match the body styling of an oversized metal tissue box.


..... feel free to add any ideas... work in progress....

[doc03]

50. What about motorcycles? I think you have about

20 times or greater probability of a fatal crash per mile driven as a person in a 4 wheeler. They need to be outlawed too. We could make a similar list of dangerous motorcycles, actually we should
just ban all two wheelers right down to the Vespa they're just too dangerous.

[apocalypsehow]

57. Lord Gawd, dip a toe into the swamp and see sig slime like "You can't rape a .38" dirty a toenail.

They need to come up with a "smilie" that connotes both total contempt & total disgust at the same time, something sorta like ( :eyes: ) + ( :puke: ) = ?

"..... feel free to add any ideas... work in progress...."

Hahahahaa - '?'

[jeepnstein]

70. Apples and Oranges.

You know it, too. Motor vehicles, or any other mode of transportation, are not protected under the Bill of Rights. Arms are protected, just like speech, freedom from an established religion, freedom from self-incrimination, and a few more but you get the idea. It's ridiculous to even compare owning a motor vehicle to a Constitutional Right, even though some people don't value their rights enough to even care.

I don't care to surrender any of my rights under the guise of "the greater good". There are laws against all the violent acts that people crow about while they are trying to strip me of my rights. Well, suicide isn't illegal but how could you prosecute it if it were? My point is that lawful citizens should not be stripped of their Constitutional Rights to accommodate criminals and their self-destructive lifestyles.

I don't care about other countries and their grand social policies. I do care about the freedoms that are clearly spelled out in our Constitution.

If you want to talk about crime, the causes of crime, and the total disintegration of a huge chunk of our population I'll be glad to put in my two cents worth. It's the persistent lawlessness of some that is the root of most of the violence and killings in our cities, towns, and counties.

[akgirl]

72. totally not the same things...

I do realize that the privilege of using an automobile is not enumerated in the Bill of Rights. In case the sarcasm didn't register, the title 'MOMMIE act' should be a tip off.

[iverglas]

49. "Accidentally shot"

I assume the trigger got pulled when, oh, it was struck by lightening.

I have yet to see circumstances in which a kid getting shot could honestly be termed an accident. Somebody does pull that trigger, right?


You anti-constitutional rights people ...

What does one call someone who talks like this?

PM me, and I'll tell you.

[doc03]

52. Yea and the gun didn't fire itself, I can lay a gun on my

kitchen table for years and it would never hurt anyone, a human has to pull the trigger. Accidents happen, if a drunk kills a kid with his car do we blame the car? Oh we have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms it's known as the 2nd Amendment. You just follow the ones you agree with I guess like Bush. PM you? You don't even have the intestinal fortitude to state your gender or even where you live.

[iverglas]

53. utterly laughable

if a drunk kills a kid with his car do we blame the car?

You do appear to be saying that someone has blamed a gun for something.

I keep waiting for somebody to give me directions to where someone did that.

Will you?

Or are you just another one of the



Adherents of the Repeated Meme?


Oh we have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms it's known as the 2nd Amendment. You just follow the ones you agree with I guess like Bush.

I don't follow any of them. Not only because individuals do not "follow" constitutions. Constitutions must be "followed" by governments.

PM you? You don't even have the intestinal fortitude to state your gender or even where you live.

These are somehow relevant to my opinion of people who spout the ignorant shit you spout?

I don't think so. I think it can be spotted for ignorant shit by a hermaphrodite on the moon.

[BlooInBloo]

59. Not to rub it in or anything...

But there's a lesson available to you to be learned from this little sub-branch.


EDIT: Clarified slightly.

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

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

[iverglas]

81. whooo

That's some big talk you got there, pardner. "You moran". Now, it wouldn't actually bother me much, if you had then proceeded to offer some moranic thing I had said, or some other evidence of my moranicity.

Not seein' it.


if a drunk kills a kid with a car you don't blame the car. Then in the next sentence you say to show you where you are blaming a gun for any crime. If that's the case why do want to take another persons right to own a gun from them.

My, my.

I understand that people with serious criminal convictions are ordinarily not permitted to own firearms.

I guess that means (hey, it's your logic) that society has blamed their gun for their crime. I can't make any other sense out of what you're saying.

If someone were blaming a gun for a crime, they wouldn't be trying to take guns away from anybody at all, would they? They'd be locking the gun up, surely. Maybe executing it. Would hanging work, do you think?


You don't want to take the cars away from us and there is no Constitutional Right to drive or own a car.

Ooooh, I do just love this one.

I'll bet that when the jack-booted thugs come to get the cars, there will be a few people asserting that they do indeed have a constitutional right to drive and own a car.

If nobody had a right to drive a car, why would anybody need a reason to take a driver's licence away from somebody? Hm?

Never mind. Cleverer clogs than you have failed to answer that question so far.


I do believe maybe you shouldn't be permitted to own a gun that sounds a Psycho to me. :wtf:

I do believe I do agree with you on part of that, anyhow. It sure do sound a psycho!

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

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

[ValhallaChaser]

74. I have FOUR loaded guns...

hanging on my wall in a rifle rack. They haven't hurt anybody or anything by themselves. They just lay there, ready for MY use.

[doc03]

46. I'm happy Obama is making centrist

appointments to his Administration. All anyone has to do is read this op to see why he is not appointing progressives (liberals) if they had their way we would lose the Congress in 2010 for sure. I'm happy my congressman is a Blue Dog, he can help keep the extremists at bay too.

[apocalypsehow]

58. "I'm happy my congressman is a Blue Dog, he can help keep the extremists at bay too"

LOL. Too. much. fun.

[jody]

78. Gun-grabbers believe Obama's win confirms their position when IMO many voters were sick of Bush and

his policies and like we Yellow Dog Democrats would "vote for a yellow dog if he ran on the Democratic ticket."

They wanted to believe Obama when he said "I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take your handgun away."

Like many others, gun-owners wanted to believe Obama did not support an assault weapons ban even though he did not specifically say he opposed the ban BEFORE THE ELECTION.

That bit of self-deception was destroyed when AFTER THE ELECTION Obama said he supported the assault weapons ban that would prohibit the most popular firearms used today. See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=190897&mesg_id=190897

If Dems in congress pass a bill like H.R. 1022 or S.2237, we could easily lose enough votes among 80+ million gun-owners to lose control of the House in 2010.

[doc03]

79. You have that right, these anti- gun nuts

are so thick headed you can't reason with them. Just like the one above that said to show him or her where they ever blamed a gun for a crime. He or she actually admits we are right that a gun never committed a crime then in the next sentence they want to take away our right to own a gun.:argh:

[Lasher]

84. If there is one thing I have learned from history, it is that we do not learn from it.

Congress passed the assault weapons ban on September 13, 1994 and Clinton signed it the same day. Two months later Republicans won majority control of Congress. Then it was goodbye to national health care and hello to the Republican grip on Congress that lasted until just 2 years ago.

Yet there are many who insist that we do exactly the same, never bothering to wonder if we might face an identical result after Obama's first 2 years as President.

[HillWilliam]

86. Exactly, and do we not have far bigger fish to fry

at the moment? PEBO isn't even in office yet, nor is the new Congress. The outgoing administration is busily scorching napalming the earth behind itself whilst stealing the silverware AND the good china AND the drapes right off the windows AND pissing in the corners. And we're diddling with what-if's.

IF the next Congress looks like it wants to get behind some idiocy like a revival of the AWB that cost us ten long years of complete marginalization and the rise of the Rule of the Moran, I'll walk to DC myself if I have to. Then. Right now I'm leaning on my sitting Rep about problems we've got. (On the Senate side, I've got lame-duck Dole and Burr. No help there.)

About the gun-grabbers, I've got another post I've been mulling all day.

[jody]

87. Welcome to DU’s Guns-Fortress where Democrats defend RKBA protected by the Second Amendment against

those who want to disarm “We the People” forcing us to submit to violent criminals.

If you are a loyal Democrat and pro-RKBA, join us in protecting the 2nd with facts and history that predates our Constitution.

SCOTUS says our defense is impregnable.

[HillWilliam]

88. Thank you!

It would be "welcome back" since I've managed to find my original handle and have asked the mods to go ahead and close my RedLetterRev account.

I'm a generations-deep Democrat, proudly Appalachian, 10-generations-deep American with direct ties to the NC Regulators, the Mecklenburg Resolve (the first Declaration of Independence) and the Constitution itself. I'm also a seeming incongruous mix of a gay man, a gun owner, and an ordained minister, comfortable in my skin. I've lived in 10 of the Lower Forty-Eight, spent time in 38 of them... not bad for a hick who started out in a holler in Appalachia.

I'm relieved that SCOTUS has recently opined that our RKBA is a personal right and I'm equally relieved that the man I supported in the primary and the general election agreed with and supported that decision.

Which brings me to the post I've been thinking about all day, and the one I promised above.

I was raised in the country and I live in the country now. Growing up, there were always guns around and we were taught respect and safety. I learned to shoot when I was 8. I learned to shoot well because we were so durned poor, even .22 for target practice was a big luxury. The first time you missed, the fun was over. So you learned not to miss.

When I grew up and left the holler, the military put me on a career path that took me to the biggest cities in the States. I never owned a gun during that time. I was raised never to fear any human walking and I still don't. Twenty-five years passed and I finally came back home to NC and in time I found a place way out in the country -- so far out, there's no cable, no DSL, hell, there's barely phone. But there are critters.

My partner and I have three dogs. The eldest is his service assistant, a seizure detector. He is disabled, with seizure disorder and several other health problems. The eldest dog is his freedom to move about in the world. We got her as a puppy, as a companion, and she volunteered the detection behavior. I trained her to do the assistance tasks (you can't train the detection behaviors -- either they do or they don't). Along with the other hoops you have to jump through to train for service work, all aggressive behaviors are redirected to something else. She really can't defend herself -- it's now all up to me. There are raccoons and coyotes about, along with a hundred other things that she has no knowledge of how to deal with.

We have far too much love, training, emotion, and dependence invested in her to lose her. It's not like service dogs grow on trees and seizure detectors simply cannot be trained for. They either do or they don't. If she has to potty at night, it's up to me to walk her with a pistol on my side. If anyone thinks I'm going to give up that right to defend her, I want to know how in hell they expect to replace my partner's freedom of mobility from if something happens to her?

Another thing. Our county is very rural. Our police department in town was just folded from lack of funds. The sheriff's department absorbed the 3 police officers, because the sheriff's department was already 6 positions short. Two left for the Highway Patrol and another sheriff's officer went to work for another county. So, our sheriff's office is still short-handed.

We have one wildlife officer for the entire county. If we have a poacher (which is often) or a trespass in-progress, we're usually on our own. I've already had one incident on my property this summer during August -- when NOTHING is in season. I had to follow the sheriff's office best advice -- bury 20ga target load in the ground after repeated orders for them to leave. (Quote: In the ground you can account for. In the air, you can't.) It took 12ga in the ground before they finally did leave. Wildlife never did show up and the sheriff's deputy finally could make it by much later. All they could do is make a note of which way the poachers went (back onto the gamelands which adjoin my property).

Give up my guns? I don't think so. No more than ANY of my rights. The first right that gets compromised is an invitation to compromise the rest.

[doc03]

89. Great reply, I live in a rural area in Ohio

our county covers over 534 square miles with a total population of around 70000 our biggest town is a little over 5000. At night we have 2 Deputies to cover the entire county, if you have a problem it can be over an hour before you get any help that is if they aren't tied up on another case. I'm with you, I have a right to bear arms and I am not giving up my rights. I was raised with guns, everyone has them here and we have the lowest crime rates in the US. When I was a kid we ate some kind of wild game at least a couple days each week, we rarely ever had beef my dad shot a deer every winter.
I am not giving up my gun because the big cities have a crime problem. Some of these people can't get it through their heads it's not the guns it's the criminal. Here we are we finally get a Democrat in the Whitehouse and we have an element in this party that has already started this AWB stuff. This is just the thing that ends up preventing us from ever making any kind of meaningful change. They start this crap again we lose Congress in 2010 and we have another failed Democratic Administration. To top it off they don't know what they are talking about a true military assult weopon has been illeagal unless you have a special permit since 1934.

[HillWilliam]

90. Wow, you live in the Big City

Our population is not quite 30000 and our county seat is about 2500. I'm separated from the gamelands by one property that has one house on it. Folks from here respect property lines and respect the laws. We tend to take care of one another. It's the fools from out of state you have to watch out for. There are two things I really don't care for: trespassing and poaching. When those two come together (as I recounted in my last post), I get right upsot.

I haven't tasted venison in years. There's a down-side of city life. I haven't hunted this year because I was blessed with an amazing harvest from my garden and my freezer is busting-full. The way I was raised, it's a sin to waste anything, to take anything from the land you won't use, so I won't be hunting this year. My partner and I are saving up for a real-sized chest freezer. With the way food prices are going, I pity city folks. I think a lot of minds are going to change about hunting and I think poaching will be a problem. A strong, Progressive gun lobby will have to have a seat at the table to prevent nonsensical, knee-jerk laws from going into place to "solve problems" that education should have prevented.

(PS: I did check out AHSA from the link on the other thread.)

I believe that at the bottom of every problem that ails our country at the moment, education would have been and still would be the answer. If people were informed about ANY of the Bill of Rights, certainly they wouldn't allow impingement on the 2nd. That dumbass Patriot Act should have caused mobs with pitchfoks in the streets. The loss of Habeas should rightly have caused lynch mobs. If we look back at our own American History, the same sort of actions by the British caused exactly that. I live not terribly far from where British lawyers were beaten and turned out of town for exactly what the *-crony Congress got away with. And the RW have the nerve to whine about single-party control after they crapped on our economy and wiped their ample backsides on the Constitution.

Two of my g's-granddads were present at the signing of the Mecklenburg Resolve; one of those was threatened with hanging by the British for his participation in the struggles for liberty. Two of my g's granddads were at the Battle of King's Mountain, at least one more at the Battle of Alamance and he was allegedly at Guilford Courthouse. More g's granddads and uncles fought all over the state for each and every one of the rights we have.

I'm not giving up one right -- because I know what's in that Bill, I know what those Amendments mean, I know where they came from, and I know what it cost to get them there. No, I resist giving up even ONE, because if you give up one, that gives permission to throw away the rest. Me, I don't defend any one any more or less staunchly than the rest. They are all precious, hard-fought-for, and our Founders and Framers expect us to hold them in stewardship.

Education. There ain't enough of it and that's our biggest problem. The next biggest problem is opportunity. When folks don't understand what rights they have and start throwing them away, the money zoomz right to the top. Despair sets in, reliably. There are centuries of human history behind that, yet we don't learn. When opportunity increases, crime decreases (the Zurich theorem -- was it this thread or another thread?). Again, centuries of human history bear that out.

I have high hopes for this upcoming Administration and Congress. But I will stay on them like stink on crap no less than I did the last. Democracy is a participatory system -- it is one's patriotic duty to remain involved.

[doc03]

91. If your part of the country is like ours

we have very little land to hunt on today therefore you have trespassing. When I was young we were surrounded by dairy farms and outside of one old fart up the road none of them had any problem with people hunting or fishing, they were surprised if you asked them for permission. The old timers would tell us no need to ask you can hunt anytime. Then 30 years or so back the government bought up all the dairy herds, after that all the farms around here were bought up by coal companies. Then after the coal companies finished with it people with money from Cleveland, Akron etc. bought it up just for hunting. A thought just occurred to me maybe the government bought up the dairy herds in order for the coal companies to get the land cheap, no that couldn't happen could it? So today I rarely go hunting, the private land is all posted so you have to drive 25 miles or so to a public hunting area. My dad went hunting down in WV for years on a relatives place, he owned 2500 acres and they had several thousand acres of surrounding properties to hunt on. What happened there a group of lawyers from DC bought the place up for $1 million just for a hunting camp, so my dads old hunting camp I thought I would be able to use is gone.

on edit: The absentee owners hunting camps with nobody allowed to hunt on but a few it's like game preserve the deer are nothing but pests, they're like rats it's a battle every year to keep them from destroying your property. The deer are so over populated they can't find adequate food in the woods so every winter they head for peoples lawns.

[HillWilliam]

93. We're very lucky

The county has set aside several large portions to remain wild. I know a couple in Guernsey County up there and they tell me what you're telling me. Down here, not quite a hundred years ago, a feller re-established wild turkey and the deer were never killed off here like they were in the western part of the state. The season is short enough, though, that deer do get to be a pest and we have to learn to get along with them out of season. I've come up with a few successful non-lethal strategies to keep them out of my gardens during growing season, but if they get really bad, it's possible to get a nuisance license. Right now, I don't have the need and they aren't that big a pest. Other folks haven't learned to manage as well, so they get pestered.

If you're going to live with nature, you have to learn Her rules. Me and the critters get along just fine. I just saw a deer not 10 minutes ago, but he was on his side of the woods line. The behavior modification seems to be working. My yard was 2 acres when I got here. That's mine. They've still got over 6 that's still theirs, still wild. I pay the mortgage and keep it up, but that's theirs to stay in and stay out of my garden. I give them the culls from my gardens and my dogs patrol THIS side. THAT side, they get treats on their trails from my leftover veggies and culls where it's "safe".

But next year, I know just where to hunt and I don't have to leave my property. If I get cold or tired, it's a five-minute trudge up the hill to home. I've got a fine spot where no bad shots will hit anything but trees or dirt. I've got one neighbor and if we decide to go down the hill together, there's plenty for both families. No waste, everyone gets along fine.

Most private land around here is posted, but there is more than plenty open hunting land. Again, it's the fools from out-of-state that don't respect signs or fences. They're the ones who give the rest of us a bad name, shooting at anything that moves. There are plenty of places that offer hunter safety courses for-damn-free, but do they bother? Dudn look like it. 99% of handling a firearm ought to be plain walking-around sense. You'd think. There again, it's that 1% that give the rest of us a bad name and you-know-who starts wanting to take all guns away, regardless. Again, I'd ask them to think about my partner and how the hell he's supposed to manage without his service partner if something attacks her. If you take something away from an animal, like her defenses, you assume responsibility to protect her. It's easy to sit in apartment in the city and talk about "you should...", not knowing the first thing about the situation out here or the first thing about dealing with a person's disabilities in the country.

It is not easy. We have to do for ourselves out here, in every way, shape and form. I believe I am where the Creator put me and I have been granted the brains, the skills, and the wherewithal to manage. We're doing just fine.

Right now I've got a couple of trees downed in a storm last summer I have to go clean up. Mama Nature gave me some nice maple and poplar for firewood for next year, but I have to go get it. I despise snakes and what's down in the holler now is a fine draw for them. While the weather's cool, the biting bugs aren't so bad. I'll blog y'all later.

Be Well and good Thanksgiving.

[doc03]

94. I'm in Belmont it boarders Guernsey

believe it or not one of the absentee buyers of a lot of property are the Amish. They are getting rich off us English they own the tourist traps up north and do most of the home building around here.

[rangersmith82]

92. But banning Assault Weapons are more important than...

Keeping control of congress or passing universal health care.

If we have to sacrifice control of Congress and Universal healthcare to save one life
from an evil assault Weapon it will be worth it!!!!!

I hope you can detect my sarcasm in my post....

[Lasher]

95. I can be real slow but I managed to pick up on it.

:fistbump:

[Tejas]

96. Heller has their heads scrambled pretty bad

and it will only get worse when Fenty and the rest get spanked again.