Who else feels the same

[malaise]

I am sick of the prayers, the hugs, the flowers, the candles
I am sick of hearing we can't discuss gun reform at this time
I am sick of politicians reading the NRA script
I am sick of hearing about acts of heroism
All I want to hear about is dealing with the fucking guns.

That is all - for now

[mainstreetonce]

1. Amen

It is time,

[daleanime]

2. Amen.....

[Hoyt]

3. Me too.

[Glorfindel]

4. I definitely feel the same

You said it just right, and thank you!

[johnp3907]

5. Long overdue.

[MoonRiver]

6. Agree 100%

SICK OF IT ALL

[Chiquitita]

7. With you 100%

Hey, I'd even be happy if we just got rid of all the bullets.

[Stargazer09]

8. Agreed

I am so sick and tired of ALL of the gun violence in this country.

[SoapBox]

9. Yes!

[jeff47]

10. But...But....Spoons can be deadly too!!!!

[George II]

84. Spoons don't kill people, people kill people. The best defense against a bad guy with a spoon...

....is a good guy with a spoon.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. It's the same every time.

Somebody decides to go out to a mall or a theatre or a school and shoot people. Everyone is horrified. There are vigils and statements of condemnation. If the shooter is still alive there might be a trial. Public officials express dismay. The NRA says something offensive about how it had nothing to do with guns. There are funerals. People leave flowers and teddy bears at the site of the shooting. And eventually after that we all go back to whatever we were doing, and there is another shooting and the same things happen again, and again, and again.

[mountain grammy]

12. and the teddy bears.. I'm sick of it too.

[malaise]

82. I forgot the teddy bears

Sick of them too

[calimary]

13. Me too, malaise. ENOUGH.

This has been how many mass shootings in how many WEEKS????

WHY can't we do something?????

All I want to hear about is dealing with the fucking guns! AMEN!!!

[femmocrat]

14. I fear that we are becoming too "used to" these events.

When the hell will the Congress grow a spine and DO something?!!!

And may the NRA rot in its own special corner of hell with all of the murderers.

[Boomerproud]

127. We're getting used to it because it happens every freaking month.

I just saw the headline on CNN's website with Jindal saying (so stoicly and bravely) "We will get through this." What he means is we will forget about it and it will happen over and over and over. Amen, Malaise, enough of the stuffed animals, the flags waving in the breeze (what the hell is that supposed to represent anyway-that we are the home of the crazy mass murderers?) and the people standing around "comforting" each other. ENOUGH!!!!!

[AllFieldsRequired]

15. I went to the movies the other day, and for the first time in my life I had it

in my mind to look around to see if anyone looked suspicious or acting unusual.

This deeply sick behaviour has finally seeped into our daily lives and caused us to change the way we go about normal daily routines.

[MisterP]

42. in violent countries you internalize this behavior: everyone keeps a certain distance from

people they don't immediately know, everyone has a certain time limit after which someone staring or standing around becomes suspicious, everyone has an eye on the bollards and engine blocks and building-corners they might have to duck behind once (not if) the firing begins

these countries feel sorry for us, BTW--to them, they're under the gun because they have a per-capita income of $500 a year: what's the US's excuse for letting a corporation or two have full liberum veto over things that even 70-90% of NRA members want?

[UTUSN]

16. R#36 & K for, wow did you ever read my mind and say it all!1 n/t

[onyourleft]

17. Agreed.

It is way past time for this to be addressed.

[RoccoR5955]

18. Arrgh and R'amen! n/t

[Fred Sanders]

19. NRA to malaise: why are you advancing policy while so emotional, that will not do!

Fuck the NRA and fuck the NRA political enablers. If the fuckers use mass propaganda and corruption then I see no problem us using emotion and truth.

Fire up the furnaces, light the bonfires, because there are 320 million inanimate objects of death that need melting, pronto.

We ARE coming for your guns because your fucking guns keep coming for us.

[marble falls]

20. Add me to your 'amen corner'. I am tired of the NRA narrative and apologizing for its stupity....

and trying to explain they don't even speak for a majority of whites let alone a majority of Americans. Their influence is way beyond their numbers.

[annabanana]

21. my Tin Foil Hat keeps whispering to me:

The NRA contacts every freshman Senator, every freshman Representative and says..

"If you EVER move on gun control, we will kill you and your children"

[sub.theory]

22. I think that's true politically

I don't think the NRA would literally kill a congressional rep, but I do think they clearly threaten to do so politically. They make it unmistakable that they will destroy anyone who crosses them. The NRA unquestionably has one of the most powerful and effective lobbies in Washington. It's astonishing just how powerful they are even compared to other powerful interests. They sort of remind me of an organized crime syndicate in that you either take their money and play along or they will destroy you.

[annabanana]

23. That's the difference between you and me. It's been shown that NRA

MEMBERS want reasonable gun control laws.

The governing body of that organization is (the tin foil whispers) capable of murder.

[sub.theory]

24. I think we can agree that

the NRA are some of the nastiest, dirtiest fighters in all of American politics and it's simply impossible to have a "debate" with them.

[Lizzie Poppet]

35. Precisely.

Although I'm not an NRA member (that organization's bankrolling of right-wing GOP candidates alone would prevent that, let alone its disgusting fearmongering), but I am a gun owner and competitive shooter. I strongly support multiple gun control measures, both existing and proposed. I'm far from unusual among gun owners in that respect. The NRA in no way represents gun owners like me.

[staggerleem]

59. That's correct, and it's because ...

... the bulk of the NRA's funding does NOT come from its gun-owning members.

It comes from the gun manufacturers, who want to be assured that every living American, no matter how batshit crazy they may be, can buy their death-dispensers.

[jeff47]

29. There's no need for murder.

A small portion of the population feels incredibly strongly that there should be no gun control.

That group can be used to remove politicians who do not toe the NRA line. For example, in CO several state legislators lost seats in recall elections after they passed gun control laws in the wake of the movie theater shooting there.

The people who wanted gun control didn't bother showing up for the recall election. But every single "cold dead hands" person did.

[Nevernose]

40. That's true with liberal policies in general

A majority of people favor liberal policies and then don't vote, vote against their own beliefs because Faux News told them to, or are so gerrymandered that their votes are irrelevant

[tazkcmo]

102. Yep.

One of those "unifying" issues, IMO. The majority of Americans are for increased, reasonable, effective gun control. As you say, VERY few are for no control at all, rural or urban residents, owners or non-owners.

[ananda]

25. I hear you!

..

[packman]

26. But-but

The Second Amendment!!!

[oldandhappy]

27. yes

[CrispyQ]

28. From 2012 & nothing's changed.

Sadly, I expect I will be able to recycle this cartoon in another 3-4 years, again.

[Agnosticsherbet]

30. Since the Brady Bill Gun Regulation has become the third rail of politics.

The NRA is the most effective group of political asswipes in the US

[fadedrose]

31. That about covers it for me too nt

[old guy]

32. What you said.

[Jack Rabbit]

33. K/R

[Jackilope]

34. Amen

[ChiciB1]

36. I'm Sick Too! But It Seems Too Many OTHERS

aren't or at the very least TOO UNWILLING to do anything about it! It's simple become a NORMAL way of life in our SO-CALLED Greatest Nation! I wonder when we'll be required to wear paper bags over our head AND be required to pay for the BAG!

Yeah, OUR GREAT DEMOCRACY! "Eyes Wide Shut!"

[SleeplessinSoCal]

37. Pretty sure Obama feels the same and says so here....

"Obama admits US gun laws are his 'biggest frustration"

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33646704

[freshwest]

43. Thanks. A sane voice drowned out by propagandists. n/t

[malaise]

86. I love how they turn around and blame him

They are fugging evil

[riversedge]

177. Yes.

[sgtbenobo]

38. All you fucking pussies have got this wrong!

I don't get why you don't understand us "gun-nuts." I luv me some guns! That's a fact. My knives too. They make me feel like I can solve everything. All I have to do is strap on my Glock 9mm, my WWII British commando dagger, my off-market AK-47, and my Remington sawed-off street sweeper and everything's going to be OK.

Unless, I decide to go to the movies.

Point is; Guns are porn for the weak. They call themselves "Sportsmen."


Carry on... but, very quietly, they know you're in here.

[Nevernose]

41. The p-word will get your post deleted

Although I agree with the sentiment

[sgtbenobo]

45. The reason why we cover our children's ears...

.... is because we know they are listening.

[Nevernose]

47. You can make the same point

Without using what is now sexist terminology.

It wasn't always sexist: it was just a shortened form of pusillanimous, but stupid people confused it with the nickname for a female cat, and sexism was born. Yay, ignorance!

[sgtbenobo]

51. Really?

Would you even have read my post if not for the epithet?

My ignorant cat likes you too.

[-none]

93. The p-word is now forbidden?

"Point"? Why?

[Taitertots]

80. Oh no. The resident Internet tough guy is going to lecture everyone

We better listen because he's using intentionally offense language and pretending to be the toughest guy in the universe.

[sgtbenobo]

149. Resident Internet tough guy....

....maybe I should be flattered. The point I was trying to make with my post is simply this; "they are crazy." Perhaps, I should have started by telling this story instead.

I was out of work and close to the streets. A friend said, "Hey, the couch is right over there." So, I put my stuff in storage and moved in. He has guns. Zillions. Everywhere. We are both former Army. To most soldiers weapons are tools that no one likes to clean. I get it. But, it's different with him. He thinks he needs them.

While I was trying to be a decent house-guest, an out of work house-guest, I decided I should clean. I shouted out from the bathroom, "Why is there a pistol on the toilet?" He answered, "What is it?" I replied, "A thirty-eight." He told me, "just put it under the sink."

We've moved on since then. I've gotten most of my life back together. He got married. His new bride made him put his "Collection" in the crawlspace, along with a ton of ammunition.

Now, they collect knives together. They have two beautiful little daughters.

Welcome to Montanistan.

Carry on.... but don't say too many bad words.

[Taitertots]

156. Oh, N=1. Let me just disregard your trivial anecdote

You joined an organization whose stated goal is killing people. Assuming you're not a WWII vet you joined an organization that killed millions of innocent people.

But you want to lecture us about how the non-criminal whose charity kept you from absolute poverty has a mental defect ("they are crazy&quot for having guns in his crawl space.

[Rhythm]

39. No kidding. n/t

[matt819]

44. You know what would be interesting

I think it would be interesting to see how the NRA would respond if there were a mass shooting at. . . ready for this? . . . the NRA.

[pnwmom]

46. Maybe everyone who agrees with you should mention this to Bernie Sanders

so he can re-think his position on gun control.

[aikoaiko]

48. Do mean when he voted for a universal background check?

[pnwmom]

49. He voted for a law that wiped out liability laws in 50 states that held

gun manufacturers and sellers responsible for their products.

He also voted against the Brady law after Brady and Reagan were shot. Among other pro-gun actions.

[aikoaiko]

57. You're overstating what PLCAA did. Dealers and manuf. can be sued for negligent actions.

See here for specific exceptions to the protections of the PLCAA:

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-industry-immunity-policy-summary/

There are six exceptions to the blanket civil immunity provided by the PLCAA:
(1) an action brought against someone convicted of “knowingly transfer[ing] a firearm, knowing that such firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence” by someone directly harmed by such unlawful conduct;
(2) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;
(3) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought;3
(4) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product;
(5) an action for death, physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner, except that where the discharge of the product was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense, then such act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death, personal injuries or property damage; or
(6) an action commenced by the Attorney General to enforce the Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act.4

And the Brady Bill passed. I guess it didn't prevent this latest mass shooting. Surprised?

Even though people try to paint him as in the pocket of the NRA, the truth is that he is a moderate who voted for universal background checks and magazine limits as well as some smart votes against gun control.

[pnwmom]

62. Does that mean you are for the PLCAA? Or are you just defending it because that's how Sanders voted?

Most Democrats did not take his position, especially the progressive ones.

"Smart votes against gun control." Right. Because he's so much smarter than other progressives about gun control.



Why is it not possible that Bernie is ever wrong about anything? Is it so important that he always be right?

Why can't a position that was okay for running for Senator of rural Vermont State be not so okay when running for President of the US?

[aikoaiko]

66. Of course I'm for the PLCAA. It prevented cynical attempts to bankrupt smaller companies.

Well, I'm not for magazine limits so I disagree with him there, if that makes you feel any better.

I don't think Bernie is right about everything, but I don't understand why DUers like you want to paint him as being opposed to gun control.

[pnwmom]

69. Oh yes. It was so cynical of those grieving parents in Connecticut to go after

the gun profiteers who helped kill their children.

Now, thanks to the PLCAA, the manufacturers and sellers are safe from those cynics.

[aikoaiko]

71. But that's the thing, the gun manufacturers didn't help Adam Lanza

The manufacturers sold a legal product to a legal dealer who sold it to a legal buyer (Adam Lanza's mother). He killed her and took her rifle.

I don't think parents were cynical, but the Brady Campaign that recruited them to file the suit was cynical. The Brady Bunch knew it was a loser and they went forward knowing the parents would be held accountable for the lawyer fees of the defendants which amounted to over $200,000. We should all be free of cynics like the Brady Bunch.

[pnwmom]

75. We don't know what the outcome would have been since that law prevented the parents from going forward

with their case. Maybe the sellers WERE negligent. They won't have to prove that in court now, thanks to the law that Sanders supported.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/01/14/169317524/lawmaker-plans-bill-to-lift-immunity-for-gun-manufacturers-and-dealers

Add this to the list of proposals to overhaul the gun industry: Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., says he will introduce legislation this week to roll back legal immunity for gun manufacturers and dealers.

Schiff tells NPR there's no need for the 2005 law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act to remain on the books. That law gave gun makers, gun dealers and trade groups immunity from most negligence and product liability lawsuits. "Good gun companies don't need special protection from the law," Schiff says, "Bad companies don't deserve it."

Schiff says his proposal would allow lawsuits to move through federal and state courts if plaintiffs could show that gun dealers or makers were negligent, for example, by failing to protect their stores of weapons and failing to keep customers who have felony convictions from getting their hands on guns. Schiff is working with the Brady Center, an organization that has pushed for greater accountability for the gun industry, on his legislation. Schiff and the Brady Center say courts have interpreted the 2005 law too broadly and have dismissed lawsuits by victims and their relatives.

"When someone makes a dangerous product or acts negligently, they ought to be held liable otherwise it encourages irresponsibility," Schiff says.

SNIP

[aikoaiko]

78. Fortunately, that won't go anywhere. And again, dealers and manuf. can be sued for negligence.

See here for specific exceptions to the protections of the PLCAA:
http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-industry-immunity-policy-summary/

There are six exceptions to the blanket civil immunity provided by the PLCAA:
(1) an action brought against someone convicted of “knowingly transfer a firearm, knowing that such firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence” by someone directly harmed by such unlawful conduct;
(2) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;
(3) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought;3
(4) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product;
(5) an action for death, physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner, except that where the discharge of the product was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense, then such act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death, personal injuries or property damage; or
(6) an action commenced by the Attorney General to enforce the Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act.4

[druidity33]

121. Should i be able to sue Honda

if someone driving a Civic intentionally drove into a loved one of mine?

I don't get your point here. Gun sellers should be held responsible if they didn't follow the law. Manufacturers should be held responsible if their product is DEFECTIVE and harms people. Why should someone be able to sue a gun manufacturer if their gun was used in a crime?

[beevul]

168. You'll never get an answer to that question, from the people that support such things.

Because its absurd on its face. The only way they can argue against the PLCAA, is by misrepresenting what it actually does, and why.

[Doctor_J]

130. I knew the hillarians would blame this on Sanders

You are getting more despicable by the day

[Doc_Technical]

50. Ban semi-automatic weapons.

Handguns, rifles, shotguns.

The Federal Government should buy them from their present rightful owners for a fair price.

[Taitertots]

77. Yeah, let's make it as hard to get a gun as it is to get bag of dope

Who defines the "fair market price" for an object that you just banned?

When it's a price that no one would willingly accept, how do you call it the "fair market price"?

[gademocrat7]

52. Totally agree with you.

[liberal N proud]

53. Don't call for any action - they will come after you with all those things

and the 2nd amendment too.

[valerief]

54. I'm with you 100%! nt

[SheilaT]

55. I'm happily in favor of outright gun confiscation.

It's an oddly unpopular stand, and I can't quite figure out why. Meanwhile, I'm getting to the point where I refuse to get worked up over yet another shooting. If the gunning down of 20 six and seven year olds doesn't lead to strict gun control, will the gunning down of 50 four-year olds do it? What will it take? Because so far mass slaughter is a blip in the news cycle, and then it's back to covering some celebrity's sex change, or the latest clown to run for President.

[Taitertots]

79. And when the police kick in YOUR door to make sure you don't have one?

Forced confiscation would be insane if you actually think about the practical implications.

[stevenleser]

89. Would they have probable cause to believe I have one or a warrant?

Police can kick in your door now if they have probable cause or a warrant for various things. Why would guns being illegal make that big of a difference? Due Process would apply.

[Fumesucker]

106. Considering current policing practices who is likely to get their door kicked in for guns?

The wealthy middle aged white man with a large gun collection or the poor young black man who may or may not have any gun at all?

As for "Due Process" I suspect Sandra Bland's ghost might have something to say about that.

The War On Guns will turn out just like the War On Drugs, aimed almost exclusively at minorities and poor whites.

[stevenleser]

142. As I said, what is different from now? Do you think that would result in more doors being kicked in?

I don't. If unscrupulous police or unscrupulous informants want to fabricate probable cause to kick someone's door in, they have a myriad of reasons at their disposal, drugs come to mind. They don't need guns for a reason and it won't add anything.

[Fumesucker]

144. The liberals at least seem to be losing their enthusiasm for the Drug War

Gotta have something to keep all those cops busy harassing the untermenschen with.

I just see the War on Guns as one more cure that will end up in the long run as worse than the disease it was meant to cure, God help us all.

At least guns make sense as being actually dangerous, unlike for instance cannabis where the government is finally after eighty something years getting around to telling us it has been lying about the dangers all along.

[Taitertots]

114. Lol, You still think that matters.... How quaint.

One uncorroborated snitch is all it takes to get a warrant.

A war on guns would be just as shitty as the war on drugs. Or do you actually think incarceration/violence based social control actually works?

[stevenleser]

141. And as I said, and what is different from now? You think it makes a difference to an unscrupulus

snitch whether he says someone has drugs or guns?

[SheilaT]

100. But of course, having

ten people die almost every day from guns is perfectly okay.

Look, I know I am stating an extreme position. Meanwhile the carnage continues, and I no longer tolerate any excuses for all the guns.

[Taitertots]

108. It's the most peaceful era in human history

Including all known data from before guns were invented.

I don't believe in the fantasy that people are going to stop killing each other if you pass draconian gun laws. Especially when we know people murdered each other at higher rates before guns existed.

[Doctor_J]

132. how many gunsters have used their weapons to save themselves from the police?

Around zero would be my guess

[Taitertots]

135. What?! That was a post about how innocent people would get hurt by forced confiscation

Your response appears non sequitur

[Gothmog]

56. Agreed

[steve2470]

58. It gives me no pleasure at all to say this but....

a lot more innocent children will have to die before anything significant is done.

20 innocent children died and nothing was done.

If we can't do anything to protect wonderful small children......

[aikoaiko]

61. I don't think any of the proposed legislation would have prevented that massacre.

[steve2470]

63. true but...

reasonable measures to address gun violence were not even passed. I'm not in the mood to devote 10 hours to debating reasonable. Absolutely zero was done. I'm not ok with living in a country where we read about these fucking massacres every month, every week. I'm not going to arm myself to the teeth and sit in a dark theater with my finger on my trigger just to watch a fucking movie.

Sorry, you didn't deserve that rant, but I'm just OVER these massacres.

[aikoaiko]

68. Fair enough. You're entitled to those frustrations.

[Moonwalk]

60. You left off two of the ones I'm sick of...

I'm sick of hearing that we have to do something about mental health (as that, not guns is the problem)...we do need to do something about mental health, but that doesn't top doing something about the guns. And nothing is going to be done about mental health either.

I'm sick (and this tops my list) of hearing that it wouldn't have happened if everyone in the ______________ (fill in the blank: theater, restaurant, school) had been armed.

[d_legendary1]

64. An ironic Amen to your post

I seriously doubt the body count means anything to the ammosexuals. I know some of us are responsible gun owners but there are some people who should not own guns period! A buddy of mine lost his son two years ago and hasn't gotten his piece back to this date. Though he's gotten the help needed to overcome his depressing situation until he's mentally able he's not getting his Taurus back.

Its good to have friends who got your back but not all of us have such good friends. How can we guarantee that none of us are gonna go ape sh*t and do something stupid with our weapons?

[Hekate]

65. Amen. There is a god called Gun

We'll get days of this massacre in the news, until the next one. And the next one, and the next one. There is a streak of insanity that runs through this country's character.

I'm kind of a polytheist. Hear me out. Sometimes people create a god in their own image and call it into being. There was Moloch, who demanded the sacrifice of the firstborn -- yes, actual human babies. There were in the ancient times quite a number of gods and goddesses who demanded human sacrifice.

So what do we have here? We do have one goddess, with an enormous statue devoted to her in NY Harbor, though she has been much neglected of late.

And we have, most assuredly, a god (not the only god; I'm a polytheist) who has grown mighty in our times. He is fed daily on the blood of our men, women, and children. His image is everywhere. He is worshipped mightily, and his worshippers demand that no god shall be before him, that he is the foundation of our nation and of all other gods. His altar can be constructed anywhere, and the sacrifice made anywhere: in our homes, our parks, our elementary schools and universities, our churches, our theaters.

And the blood runs and runs.

[Ineeda]

161. There is one other god that might beat your mighty god:

the almighty god of money. Bigger, stronger, more universally worshiped. Now, if we could only find a way to pit one against the other, our society might stand a chance.

[Hekate]

170. The one is the handmaiden of the other, for an enormous amount of money is made each year ...

...by gun manufacturers, gun sellers, and bullet manufacturers and sellers.

Alas.

[rhett o rick]

67. k & r. Thanks for posting. nm

[Cosmic Kitten]

70. MANDATOR MINIMUM for illegal gun posession

Was Hillary right about "tough on crime"?

Maybe we need to be "tough on Illegal gun possession"?

Do those in possession of illegal firearms belong behind bars?

If there was a MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCE
for illegal gun possession, would things change?

Since GUNS are for killing, shouldn't we treat
the possession of an illegal firearm same
as the intent to commit bodily harm?

It seems the only reasonable response it
to punish the offenders before they kill someone?

[mcar]

72. I'm not even reading about this latest shooting

I just can't anymore. Nothing will be done, nothing will change.

[lark]

73. Also sick of hearing about "good guy with a gun".

What that really means is more people dead and it's a total lie. Look at the number of people that died when a Marine based was targeted. There were plenty of people with guns and they still couldn't protect the others/themselves. Can't believe what a "death" society we have that thinks that every gun is sacrosanct, as long as it's used by white males. Guns in the hands of minorities or women often means they die. NRA don't care, they get paid by the gun companaies so there is no restraint that they would accept, no lives means more to them than the profit they make from their guns. Of course, there's also the loonies that have bought into this belief system. Even some people who are progressive about everything else froth at any attempt to keep guns out of the hands of anyone, even criminals, children.

[DinahMoeHum]

74. Amen. I can only think of one solution now. . .

. . .and unfortunately, it's not fit for public discussion.

[RKP5637]

76. Agree! Feel the same! n/t

[PufPuf23]

81. IMHO we should deal with frigging ammo too.

Ammo might be a fruitful front on addressing the problem of gun insanity.

The OP is correct in that there is a repeated ugly pattern.

Too many Americans have a stupid gun fetish.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

83. Like I said before. I'm old enough to remember when we talked about banning handguns.

[moondust]

85. Indeed.

Should have repealed or seriously limited the 2nd Amendment back when they started keeping a standing army for national defense--like 200 years ago.

[stevenleser]

87. I've long since given up on this. If Sandy Hook wasn't enough, I dont know what would be

Gun enthusiasts refuse to listen and there are far too many of them and they are supported by the NRA and other rich organizations.

[malaise]

88. Sandy Hook should have been the last straw

We all agree

[stevenleser]

92. Gun ownership here is a large death cult at this point. It's a religion. Many enthusiasts are more

into their guns than anything else including whatever deity they worship. They get more offended at perceived attacks on their right to own a gun than they do if their religion is attacked.

No amount of lives is too many to sacrifice in the furtherance of gun worship.

On Edit: Even the danger that a family member will accidentally shoot themselves or another family member has no effect on these folks.

The guns are more important than religious denomination
The guns are more important than family safety.

What else is it other than a large death cult?

[Hekate]

94. We clearly see it similarly: a death cult demanding daily human blood sacrifices. nt

[malaise]

136. Perfect

[PATRICK]

90. The media priesthood

unites us in victimology rituals and sets us back into angry divisiveness(or just good old jaded despair) on the issues. Never about the attacking the base problem no matter how obvious, never about accountability or reform. In fact if action is mentioned at all it defers to the same bent that creates our present corporate blathering. Emotional tripping sells news but avoids getting carried away into actual public service, no matter how obvious or simple or even publicly supported.

The media script leads, suddenly, a lot of the "civilized" anti-violent emotions and frames almost to keep it ineffectual and diverting from the open issues. If confrontation is raised it barely keeps pushing into a very quick repeat incident. Then you can almost make out the sound of screeching brakes drowning out the "civilized" public.

[restorefreedom]

91. yup

i heard someone say today that other modern countries do you not have this problem because they are not saddled with the language like having a militia, in other words the Second Amendment.

there's no denying that the US is different from other modern countries because of the Second Amendment. How that can be remedied without a full appeal I don't know. common sense gun-control would do it, but the nuts won't have it.

[Blanks]

96. Seriously...

I'd say interpreting the phrase 'well-regulated militia' literally would be how you'd remedy the insanity.

There's no need to appeal anything. The gun ownership of the national guard (aka 'the people' otherwise known as the states' militia) should not be infringed, and yet it should still be well-regulated. There is layer upon layer of controlling who has guns and for what reason even in the second amendment.

We need a couple more justices on the Supreme Court that know how to read. The other problem is that the modern day rebel without a clue that didn't have the guts to join the military wants to call himself and his drinking buddies a militia. They're not a militia, they're a gaggle of morons.

[restorefreedom]

97. completely agree

we already have a well regulated militia in my view, it's called the national guard. The NRA has convinced people that there is no middle ground. Either be able to have every weapon imaginable, or the government will take them all away. Unfortunately they've convinced a lot of crazies of this. But there's no denying that other countries that do not have a second amendment do not have the same issues. Doesn't mean it has to be repealed but as you said we need to get people in government with a brain and an ability to read.

[craigmatic]

95. Time to reform the 2nd amendment. We need to spell out what typexs of guns can and can't be owned.

[beevul]

107. Which should and shouldn't be able to be owned? N/T

[JoePhilly]

112. Create a graded license system like we do for driving ...

With a standard drivers license, I can drive passenger vehicles. I can't drive motorcycles, 18 wheelers, or other Commercial Vehicles.

You grade weapons, and ammo. You can own anything, so long as you pass profeciency tests, designed by, law enforcement, military and sure, even industry folks.

You license gun ranges to hold the classes. Do the tests.

You want a rocket launcher ... no problem ... pass the tests. Prove you can not only fire it, but maintain it safely.

This is not hard. And it would be a very nice industry in which gun enthusiasts could PROVE their abilities.

[beevul]

119. I've seen this before...

I've seen this before, and it was as flawed and misleading then, as it is now.

With a standard drivers license, I can drive passenger vehicles. I can't drive motorcycles, 18 wheelers, or other Commercial Vehicles.

The above license has nothing to do with ownership of any of the above vehicles. It has to do with public use of said vehicles.

Beyond that, YES YOU CAN drive motorcycles 18 wheelers and other commercial vehicles without a license. On private property.

A license to drive is simply a license to operate a vehicle in public.


An individual can OWN just about anything without a license. Cars, guns, planes, trains, busses, semis, etc etc.

You can own anything, so long as you pass profeciency tests, designed by, law enforcement, military and sure, even industry folks.

Its a false and flawed comparison, because "like we do for driving" does not pertain to ownership.


Beyond that...

License a constitutionally protected right? No. Just no.

I understand some might see this as extremist on my part, however, these would be the same people that want the right magically transformed into a privilege, which is far far more extreme than my position on guns and gun laws.

[Ineeda]

163. So do NOTHING?

Now there's a solution.

[beevul]

167. Well...

Thinking the only options are 'be super strict on guns to the point that the right becomes a very restricted privilege' OR 'do nothing'...

That's every bit as much a problem as anything else where this issue is concerned.

Gun rights supporters object to only one avenue. Turning the right into a privilege/gutting amendment 2 as a right.

The people that have a problem with that, are only interested in that single avenue, they tend to see it as only that avenue or 'do nothing'. Only one side of this argument sees the options limited to 'one or the other', and confirm it every time they project on to gun rights supporters 'they care more for their guns than dead kids'.

Nobody says 'do nothing', except those who believe its 'gun control or nothing', complaining that they're getting 'nothing'.

[Ineeda]

171. Right. Blah blah blah. I hear no proposal for an actual solution.

None. Zip. Nada.

[beevul]

172. I don't see you proving me wrong.

I don't see you proving me wrong. Everyone here on both sides of the gun issue who read this exchange, know that if you could, you would.

I hear no proposal for an actual solution.

I see no interest on your part in an actual solution.

None. Zip. Nada.

I see only an interest on your part in restricting guns, which will only apply to the people that generally aren't the problem in the first place.

[Ineeda]

173. Really? Show me where I said that.

I see only an interest on your part in restricting guns

Anyway I'm done. You know what they say about wrestling with a pig, and if the shoe fits...

[beevul]

174. I never claimed you said that.

It was an observation, and one which I'm quite familiar with and accustomed to, since the 90s.

People essentially interested exclusively in gun control.

With the rhetoric You lot use, 'military grade', you lot self-identify as being squarely and soundly in that camp.

[Dont call me Shirley]

98. Guns suck...

the life out of life.

[whathehell]

99. I feel exactly the same!

[Uncle Joe]

101. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, malaise.

[tblue]

103. The news needs to announce the number killed by guns

on a daily basis. Just like the casualties in Vietnam.

[Logical]

104. And I always ask, what is your solution? And if you say "collect all the guns" then you are not....

being realistic.

[madokie]

105. Long ago I came to this place in life

somewhere between the middle of June of '69 and the middle of October of '70. Closer to the June date than the October one.

[dreamnightwind]

109. Sadly, it's only one of MANY issues we need to focus on

and probably not the most urgent or important one. It's not that I'm diminishing its importance, it's that so many of other problems are incredibly important. But carry on with the gun issue, I support you in it, personally I think the climate issues and working to get our elected representatives and our regulatory systems free from corporate capture are much more urgent on a system-level

AFAIK, violent crime is not in any kind of rapid escalation, but climate issues and corporate capture problems are absolutely spiraling out of control and need tremendous energy from us to address, we're heading toward some truly disastrous tipping points, leading to gloabl environmental catastrophe and to oligarchy.. The corporate capture issue is a root issue, attacking it will enable many more reforms. Nothing will fix everything, we have to have many efforts on different issues.

I do applaud your concern about gun violence, it is nowhere near such a probem in other countries not named Somalia, or whatever example you want to go with.

Also I agree that I am sick of the prayers, hugs, the emotional exploitation aspect of it all by the media, the heroism stories, all empty of system analysis to get the roots of the problem and fix it.

Part of it is poverty, part of it is racism, part of it is our warrior mentality and militaristic culture, part of it is a large gun lobby, part of it is the lack of public funding of elections that encourages candidates and elected representatives to take money from groups like the NRA, and of course there's the cowboy frontier history we have that makes this country more receptive to gun ownership than most other places.

What do you see as the best place to attack this issue?

[Octafish]

110. License them all.

And find a way to make each bullet traceable to each gun's owner. Neutron activation analysis or some such shit.

[sgtbenobo]

152. Perhaps, Insure them all...

....if you want to keep a shotgun under your bed great. If your homeowners insurance will cover it. It is a risk after all. Want an AK47. Fine. Is it fully automatic? That is going to cost you. Maybe the insured should keep that under lock and key.

No one looses any "Right to bear arms," as long as they have the means to pay for the consequences of having them. In effect, people would have to take responsibility for what their shiny perfect things might do.

Carry on.

[hack89]

157. There is a reason a swimming pool or certain dogs will raise your home owners premium

But not owning guns. The insurance companies understand the actual risk - it is a bog part of their job.

[JoePhilly]

111. Your OP has an important bridge to the BLM protests.

Events like this make you narrow your focus to a very specific issue, guns.

Every time an unarmed African American is killed by police, the focus of many African Americans narrows to a very specific issue too, social justice.

And so when anyone dismisses their protest on that point, we should not be surprised if they get pissed.

I'm confident that few will disagree with your OP. No one should.

The BLM folks are saying the same thing ... All I want to hear about is social justice.

No one should be disagreeing with them either.

[malaise]

113. I want social justice as much as you

but I also want gun control.

[JoePhilly]

118. You missed my point.

I did not suggest that you were against social justice in any way.

I was simply saying your post is almost template for folks to understand where the BLM folks are.

You feel pain, now. And it narrows your focus.

That is exactly how they feel. Except their pain exists all the time.

I'm white. I have a 22 year old son.

And in the last 10 years (since he was 12), I have NEVER worried about whether a cop might kill him while he was out. I have never been terrified when he was late coming home.

Your OP, hits on something. I never worry about being killed at the movies, even right after one of these events. I'm not keeping my kids from going to the movies.

This is what I am talking about.

[malaise]

120. Got you

By the way I am a black woman

[JoePhilly]

123. Cool ... and btw ...

... I think I knew that, ... I've been reading your stuff (agreeing and also probably disagreeing too) ... although honestly, I did not think about that in this exchange.

Your OP was so simple in its statement of the pain. And that is what caught my attention.

[malaise]

134. LOL - that's how it should be

This is madness - word is there is another live shooting right now in LA.

[xocet]

115. K & R n/t

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

116. Preach it bro,....nt

[malaise]

117. Sister

[AngryOldDem]

122. Heartily agree.

Jindal pissed me off last night, as he was going on about guns. Talk to your party about that, Bobby -- they're a HUGE part of the problem.

And also very sick of being told to "pray" for every damn tragedy that happens -- like that's going to help anything, but it seems that's what most conservatives think is being proactive.

[smirkymonkey]

124. +1000

[restorefreedom]

125. if i hear gov jindahl say one more time

that we have to bury the dead before we can talk about gun control, I'm going to vomit.

[malaise]

128. He disgusts me

That's straight out of the NRA 'let us prey' book.

[restorefreedom]

129. amen. nt

[blm]

126. I am……with you.

.

[HereSince1628]

131. The shooter was clearly embittered by events that befell him. He acted criminally on that

when he destroyed his home as it was foreclosed.

This is, once again, as much about fucked up dealing with clear presentations of a person willing to do criminal behavior as it is about guns.

[malaise]

133. Remember though someone who did business with him said

he used to buy houses and flip them.

[HereSince1628]

143. And that usually included pouring concrete into sinks and toilets?

Somehow that just seems to exceed 'usual business practice'

I get the "if there was no gun this couldn't happen"

But I also get, "the clear signs of a problem were avoided"

[Leontius]

137. Yes I am ashamed for the people who won't ask the real question

Why is our society so filled with violence?

[malaise]

138. The problem is that when that is raised

foreign policy will come into play.

[Ineeda]

164. This country was founded in violence -- genocide, in fact,

and has only superficially evolved from there.

[KrazyinKS]

139. Okay have they thought this over?

First you deny them contraception, make them have too many kids-then you give them concealed carry permits, or open carry. Then you deny them benefits, then resources get strained. Then and of course after all that you deny them their benefits, health care, foods whatever then you sit back in your palace and think nothing is going to happen. Have they thought this over? I mean really.

[DrewFlorida]

140. I agree!

[Thespian2]

145. Thank you...

with the rising number of insane rwnutjobs, America is way behind in getting guns under control...

[UTUSN]

146. k

[GeorgeGist]

147. I am sick of the maiming and killing.

[Mira]

148. Came back just to recommend this again :)

[Initech]

150. Prayers aren't going to stop bullets. Plain and simple

[The Roux Comes First]

151. I'm With You But Would Add

Is that "dealing with the guns" also innately involves dealing with a huge lobby in the form of those who make money off munitions. From what I can tell, the NRA has devolved from being a sort of mom-and-pop gun-enthusiasts collective (that alone a bit disturbing)to a mega-lobby for the industry. The organization seems to have little real interest these days in individual gun-owners and their needs and concerns, just intent on riling up the usual narrow-bandwidth troops and routing lots of ka-ching to the folks selling those guns.

[malaise]

154. 100% correct

What needs to be done is to identify the gun manufacturers by name and call them out the same way people went after the cigarette manufacturers. The NRA is their mask.

[C Moon]

153. GUNS DO KILL!

[Vinca]

155. Exactly. We play this same tune over and over and over again.

I wondered to my husband why the media bothers reporting this in "breaking news," 24/7 breathlessness. It's not like it doesn't happen nearly every week. Same scene, different actors.

[sellitman]

158. Fuck the NRA

Every member has blood on their hands.

EVERY SINGLE STINKING ONE.

[raouldukelives]

159. K&R The only people with more blood on them are Wall St investors. nt

[Betty Karlson]

160. My sentiments exactly.

When the same words have been spoken too many times, the same grief has been expressed, the same coverage has been emitted via television, people want change.

Change isn't easy.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't make the effort.

[1StrongBlackMan]

162. ...

I am sick of the prayers, the hugs, the flowers, the candles
I am sick of hearing we can't discuss gun reform at this time
I am sick of politicians reading the NRA script
I am sick of hearing about acts of heroism and the "Amazing Grace" of the forgiving families
I am sick of hearing about histories of mental illness, social isolation (read: excuses)
All I want to hear about is dealing with the fucking guns.

[JohnnyRingo]

165. As long as they don't take mine.

Although as a law abiding citizen there's little reason to do so, the fact that gun ownership has no single party affiliation will stymie any attempt to restrict the right to buy and own one.

While everyone agrees that criminals should not have the right buy one, the process for weeding out future acts of violence is less than perfect. Certainly, while I believe background checks and restrictions for mentally at risk individuals is a good idea, an across the board ban is unacceptable. That leaves handgun opponents with the onus of finding a way to stop criminals while preserving the rights of everyone else, including a good sized bloc of democratic voters, and that isn't as simple a task as a short DU post would imply.

I think Michael Moore said it best: "Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people". As a people, we're globally unique in our callousness and willingness to reach for a firearm to resolve issues. I believe it's more of a red, white, and blue social problem than a matter of sheer numbers of guns.

[kelliekat44]

166. Feeling the same. We should go back to the grammar of the 2nd Amendment and use proper English

that the wacko's say entitles them to owning and carrying a gun...any gun, anytime, anywhere. It really doesn't say that and those who interpreted willfully suggest that it does knowing full well that it doesn't.

[beevul]

169. If you go down that road, you wont like what you find.

and those who interpreted willfully suggest that it does knowing full well that it doesn't.

Setting aside 'wackos' for a minute, since its subjective and pejorative...

Amendment 2 is a restriction on government. It grants no rights. It restricts government exercising power in a way that infringes on the rights of the people to keep and bear arms. The purpose of the bill of rights in general, is to protect and shield enumerated rights, from governmental interference, and amendment 2 is no different.

But don't take my word for it. Take the words the framers penned in the bill of rights itself:

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

http://billofrights.org


That first paragraph of the preamble above, says, in the language of that day, exactly what I said above.

[myrna minx]

175. amen.

[ileus]

176. You should be me...