Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SecularMotion

(7,981 posts)
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 04:53 PM Jul 2014

How to Beat the NRA In 7 (Not-So-Easy) Steps

The NRA remains one of the most formidable forces in American political life. But it is not bulletproof. Since the massacres in Aurora and Newtown, states from New York and Maryland to Colorado and California have made modest progress against the gun lobby, passing a raft of new laws aimed at reducing gun violence. There are sharp lessons to be learned from these victories, and even more important ones to be gleaned from the playbook of the NRA itself. The seven strategies below can empower gun-control advocates to stop bemoaning their helplessness, and start carrying the day.

1. Commit to a Generation-Long Battle

The NRA is engaged in a long war. Americans committed to combating gun violence must be also.

By and large, the NRA doesn't win with flashy, high profile political fights. The gun lobby wins like the Baltimore Ravens of the Ray Lewis era, marrying competent offensive execution to a punishing defense that keeps opponents out of the red zone.

This approach has enabled the NRA to grind out national victories, state by state, often without the need for federal legislation. Consider concealed-carry law. There's no national standard. But thanks to the NRA's relentless efforts, Illinois last year became the 50th state to pass legislation allowing its residents to pack heat. Likewise, the radical redefinition of self-defense embodied in "stand your ground," has quietly been made law in more than two dozen states.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-to-beat-the-nra-in-7-not-so-easy-steps-20140714
138 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How to Beat the NRA In 7 (Not-So-Easy) Steps (Original Post) SecularMotion Jul 2014 OP
And like flies on shit mikeysnot Jul 2014 #1
It's not nice to refer to SM as "Shit" DonP Jul 2014 #3
please post links to all of this name calling Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #5
Good luck with that. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #7
I know Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #8
no - i've been called names defending gun control - but i didn't samsingh Jul 2014 #28
a link to a post here in DU would be nice to see Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #33
A crude, pop-Biblical allusion? Projection? Both? Eleanors38 Jul 2014 #10
It seems it's your side of the aisle that does that much more often IronGate Jul 2014 #11
So, are you going to respond to this post with links IronGate Jul 2014 #15
^^^^^ See what I mean ^^^^^^ mikeysnot Jul 2014 #18
Often talk to yourself? nt. IronGate Jul 2014 #19
Really? mikeysnot Jul 2014 #22
Well, you finally got something right in this thread. nt. IronGate Jul 2014 #23
Really again mikeysnot Jul 2014 #24
Back atcha buddy. IronGate Jul 2014 #25
Projection mikeysnot Jul 2014 #26
wow, you got him Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #27
If that what helps you have confidence in yourself, IronGate Jul 2014 #32
"1. Commit to a Generation-Long Battle" - Well, there's your first problem, right there DonP Jul 2014 #2
But, I'm constantly being told blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #4
you just wait Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #9
"Culture war" krispos42 Jul 2014 #6
"Making a political issue of the tiny coffins of dead children in the wake of a school shooting..." NYC_SKP Jul 2014 #12
The constant belief that it's a hardware problem is rather astonishing krispos42 Jul 2014 #13
"does not see self-defense as a valid...reason" ^^^ Eleanors38 Jul 2014 #14
And, "Cops are Pigs" out of the same mouths as "Call 911".... NYC_SKP Jul 2014 #17
You have to believe in the Titanic or not. Eleanors38 Jul 2014 #20
Here's a little mood music... Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2014 #51
other industrial countries that put controls on guns have lower gun violence samsingh Jul 2014 #30
You mean the same countries that have great social services? krispos42 Jul 2014 #35
i don't think anything will be gained by going after guns - might as well accept them for this samsingh Jul 2014 #39
I think they've worked themselves into a froth over the issue krispos42 Jul 2014 #42
it's ironic that questions from the gun control crowd whose samsingh Jul 2014 #47
If you are not hearing any solutions other than more guns then you are not listening. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #50
"I never hear anything of a solution to gun violence (accept more guns)" Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #52
The gun-control movement works through government krispos42 Jul 2014 #57
and the NRA doesn't? samsingh Jul 2014 #67
SYG does not make it mandatory to do so. krispos42 Jul 2014 #89
'NOBODY', have you never heard about the attempts at passing legislation samsingh Jul 2014 #93
I addressed that. krispos42 Jul 2014 #95
what do you mean of late? this has been tried in larger cities not small towns. samsingh Jul 2014 #96
The ones I've heard about... krispos42 Jul 2014 #110
Why the NRA wins in 1 easy number sarisataka Jul 2014 #16
Poor SM. He can't even get the other group to post on this one. n/t oneshooter Jul 2014 #21
probably blocked everyone nt Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #29
good post that makes good points samsingh Jul 2014 #31
I like this one Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #34
Step 1. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #36
just about right nt Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #37
I'm open to suggestions for improvements. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #38
step 2 - you can't make that argument samsingh Jul 2014 #40
Certainly I can make the argument. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #41
let's focus on step 3 samsingh Jul 2014 #44
Yes, according to the evidence introduced at trial. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #46
way to go in making up evidence. why am i wasting my time talking to you? done. samsingh Jul 2014 #48
Run away, since you cannot handle the truth. (nt) blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #49
run away? i'm disgusted with you samsingh Jul 2014 #59
Why? blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #62
an innocent teenage boy was slaughtered because zimmerman accousted him - that's the fact samsingh Jul 2014 #64
well thats what the jury found Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #53
Can't make an omelette w/o breaking a few eggs. (nt) blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #54
how perceptive samsingh Jul 2014 #66
i guess you think every jury decision has been accurate? load of crap samsingh Jul 2014 #60
Certainly not every one. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #63
i don't have trouble accepting facts but you seem to make them up samsingh Jul 2014 #65
What have I made up? blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #68
obviously you believe that samsingh Jul 2014 #72
What facts, besides your's, were made up? IronGate Jul 2014 #69
your acceptance of the killing of an unarmed teenager leads me to samsingh Jul 2014 #73
Any killing is tragic, IronGate Jul 2014 #75
i disagree samsingh Jul 2014 #78
LOL. IronGate Jul 2014 #80
It's clear that denial is not just a river in Egypt. (nt) blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #81
i'm impressed you know that samsingh Jul 2014 #83
stay deluded samsingh Jul 2014 #82
Deluded? blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #85
what facts were made up, please post them for us Duckhunter935 Jul 2014 #97
None, of course. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #98
Making up evidence? IronGate Jul 2014 #55
very selective and dishonest reasoning - what happened prior to that ? samsingh Jul 2014 #74
If the facts were the same at the trial, IronGate Jul 2014 #76
i think martin should have been given life in prison - i read the facts samsingh Jul 2014 #77
If that's what you think, IronGate Jul 2014 #79
did both and i go back to my prevous comment about you. samsingh Jul 2014 #84
No, you didn't. IronGate Jul 2014 #86
at least i mourn the killing of a teenager instead of being an appologist of his killer samsingh Jul 2014 #99
Who said anything about not mourning? gejohnston Jul 2014 #100
sadly, hardly. samsingh Jul 2014 #101
go back and reread the response samsingh Jul 2014 #125
Apologist? How is stating facts being an apologist? NT. IronGate Jul 2014 #103
It's not. blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #112
Martin should have been given life in prison? I read the facts? IronGate Jul 2014 #130
yes i meant zimmerman - you know typing at work samsingh Jul 2014 #132
The facts, evidence and jury disagree with you. nt. IronGate Jul 2014 #133
the facts don't disagree with me, neither does the evidence samsingh Jul 2014 #135
The facts, evidence and jury disagrees with you. IronGate Jul 2014 #136
the two are nothing alike gejohnston Jul 2014 #138
how so? gejohnston Jul 2014 #43
so you think that punkish moron that killed Trayvon Martin tried to retreat and was acting legally? samsingh Jul 2014 #45
I don't think. I know. gejohnston Jul 2014 #56
not only do you twist the second amendment, but now you can justify the killing of an samsingh Jul 2014 #61
That's not true either gejohnston Jul 2014 #70
Trayvon attacked without being provoked? unbelievable. stop selling me lies samsingh Jul 2014 #71
I really don't care if you find it unbelievable or not gejohnston Jul 2014 #90
you should no emotion towards innocents being slaughtered by guns samsingh Jul 2014 #92
We each mourn in our own way gejohnston Jul 2014 #109
gun control facts from all around the world are not myths and false images samsingh Jul 2014 #124
because they don't have half their population on gejohnston Jul 2014 #126
Where is your proof that half the population is on psychotropic drugs and that is the samsingh Jul 2014 #127
OK maybe not literally half the population gejohnston Jul 2014 #129
really? if gun control evidence was this spotty you'd turn it away samsingh Jul 2014 #131
Actually, gun control evidence is even more spotty gejohnston Jul 2014 #137
Your problem is not so much the NRA as it is ... spin Jul 2014 #58
Over at a liberal website politicusa an article about a judge overturning DC's gun ban kimbutgar Jul 2014 #87
Nice rant there. IronGate Jul 2014 #88
"Guns are evil, used for evil purposes" So you believe that firearms are inherently evil? oneshooter Jul 2014 #91
Gun prohibition advocacy has its share of animists friendly_iconoclast Jul 2014 #94
Yes guns are evil. Nothing good comes from the firing of a gun kimbutgar Jul 2014 #102
Then don't own a firearm, IronGate Jul 2014 #104
Yes I don't give a damn what you think either. bahhhhh! kimbutgar Jul 2014 #105
Good, then we're in agreement. nt. IronGate Jul 2014 #106
Now you're just flailing DonP Jul 2014 #107
Yes guns are evil and I think they are icky OK!!!! kimbutgar Jul 2014 #108
Thanks for the honesty DonP Jul 2014 #113
So on a public forum I am not allowed to give my opinion kimbutgar Jul 2014 #114
Who said you're not allowed to express your opinion here? IronGate Jul 2014 #115
No I know more about guns then I want to know kimbutgar Jul 2014 #116
No, you don't and sticking your fingers in your ears IronGate Jul 2014 #117
There is no lalala when you are looking at a dead gunshot victim kimbutgar Jul 2014 #118
I've seen alot more dead people than you, IronGate Jul 2014 #120
This message was self-deleted by its author kimbutgar Jul 2014 #121
Where do you see that? DonP Jul 2014 #119
My neighbor committed suicide and I found him kimbutgar Jul 2014 #122
If you actually think getting rid of guns will change that dynamic, I suggest you look at Japan DonP Jul 2014 #123
actually i think guns are cool but i think controls are needed samsingh Jul 2014 #128
Now that I have a moment sarisataka Jul 2014 #111
Your pandemic of propaganda won't convince persons with integrity pablo_marmol Jul 2014 #134

mikeysnot

(4,755 posts)
1. And like flies on shit
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 05:10 PM
Jul 2014

they will swarm all over you and come at you with name calling, logical fallacies, and projections....

 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
5. please post links to all of this name calling
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 07:51 PM
Jul 2014

I am calling you on it, lets see all of this name calling you say is so prevalent.

The only name calling here is from the ones that require a safe haven that stifles any point of view that the hosts do not like over there.

All we do here is ask the poster polity not to spam this group and make comments as part of a discussion that is in the group SOP. When you post in excess of 500 posts with no comment that is spamming in my opinion. The OP as a host should be polite enough to follow the groups SOP he so strictly enforces in his group.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
28. no - i've been called names defending gun control - but i didn't
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:10 PM
Jul 2014

store the emails - trying to live life - busy - and all that.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
10. A crude, pop-Biblical allusion? Projection? Both?
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 08:48 PM
Jul 2014

Liberals are at their best when they are liberal, esp. regarding the enumerated individual rights. Who wants to spend "a generation" trying to whittle away at any of them? Bad form.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
11. It seems it's your side of the aisle that does that much more often
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 09:02 PM
Jul 2014

than the pro 2A side of the aisle.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
15. So, are you going to respond to this post with links
Sat Jul 26, 2014, 12:54 PM
Jul 2014

proving what you say is true?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172149484#post5

Or are you just another one that likes to post flame posts and then run away?

mikeysnot

(4,755 posts)
22. Really?
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 12:12 PM
Jul 2014

I need to explain to you why I responded to my own post....?

Oh wait... that was an attempt at snark.

mikeysnot

(4,755 posts)
24. Really again
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:02 PM
Jul 2014

with childish attempts at put downs, what were one of your buds stating earlier, is that all you got....

you've got nothing.. nothing.

mikeysnot

(4,755 posts)
26. Projection
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:07 PM
Jul 2014

check...

I've been right about nothing and correct about everything.. especially when it comes to you.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
32. If that what helps you have confidence in yourself,
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:17 PM
Jul 2014

or helps you sleep at night, then you go ahead and keep believing that.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
2. "1. Commit to a Generation-Long Battle" - Well, there's your first problem, right there
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 05:22 PM
Jul 2014

You can't even keep your hard core gun control people on DU committed to participating in your own "Activism" safe haven for more than a few days at a time. Then it's; "Ooh look, a squirrel" and they're gone for a month or two..

At the two recent Niles Illinois town hall meetings on a new gun store and range I attended, the pro 2nd people outnumbered the bought and paid for Moms Demand Action by at least 5 to 1. And I've seen many of them at other Town Halls on firearm related issues all over the Northern part of the state.

Maybe Shannon Watts should just go back to telling people that GMO foods are good for their children, the way she used to at Monsanto?

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
12. "Making a political issue of the tiny coffins of dead children in the wake of a school shooting..."
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 11:16 PM
Jul 2014

From the article!

Well, at least that part is honest.

This isn't complicated: Making a political issue of the tiny coffins of dead children in the wake of a school shooting isn't just a thing that helps pass strong gun-control, it's practically the only thing in the last quarter century that's moved the needle on anti-gun-violence laws. Recall that the catalyst for the 1994 assault weapons ban was a 1989 school shooting in Stockton, California, that killed five kids and wounded 29 other children.

It's not distasteful to act in the name of victims of gun violence. What's distasteful to squander the burning anger and intense political focus that such senseless bloodshed inspires. There's nothing dishonorable in taking the swift and necessary action to prevent other children from being massacred by an idiot with a war rifle.


I'm embarrassed for the gun nuts who'll stoop this low to treat their gun fetish.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
13. The constant belief that it's a hardware problem is rather astonishing
Wed Jul 23, 2014, 11:36 PM
Jul 2014

Or rather, that the solution is to try to deny "assault weapons" to everybody, so that when that one-in-ten-million psychopath snaps, his weapon is politically correct.

I think, fundamentally, the pro-control side does not see self-defense as a valid or reasonable reason to own a gun. After all, any gun that is optimized for self-defense is also optimized for offense!

From that standpoint, it logically flows that guns optimized for, or have little functionality beyond, self-defense should not be allowed. This would mean a blanket prohibition against all semiautomatic long-guns and all handguns.

When combined with the perception that owning guns is a privilege granted by the government instead of a right, then you get a situation where you need to make the case you need to own a gun for a legitimate purpose before you can get one. Hunting, predator control, sport shooting. And you may not be able to get multiple guns! The government grants you a permit to own ONE gun.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
14. "does not see self-defense as a valid...reason" ^^^
Sat Jul 26, 2014, 12:10 PM
Jul 2014

This is the crux. A gross miss-reading of Gandhi, MLK, and anti-war sentiments of the 60s, overlaid by lavalamp incense-burning, Dervish-twirling, Om-m-m-m chanting homages to Aquarius.

Jesus! I remember marching in anti-war demos during the morning, then grabbing the 870 for a bit of dove hunting that same evening. Frankly, the modern gun-control movement came about not from kids getting shot in schools, but from blacks rioting in the ghettos.

I believe some controller-banners still see it that way.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
17. And, "Cops are Pigs" out of the same mouths as "Call 911"....
Sat Jul 26, 2014, 01:16 PM
Jul 2014

And, "Don't trust the government" out of the same mouths as "Your National Guard is your Militia".

Crazy, right?

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
35. You mean the same countries that have great social services?
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:53 PM
Jul 2014

That don't have a prison-industrial complex? Free or cheap university or technical colleges? Progressive income taxes? Low Gini indexes? Homogeneous populations with a strong sense of nationally and common heritage?

Those countries?




Look, Colorado has proven that the way to deal with this problem is to make other changes.

Warring on guns, a durable good, is the least effective and slowest way to lower the crime rate.

Colorado has had a sharp decrease in crime since pot was legalized. NOT since they banned 16+ mags for guns. And the social situation will only improve as, during the next generation, far fewer kids will become victims of the Drug War and the justice system.

A campaign against durable hardware would take a strong, unwavering, multi-decade, and national effort to significantly reduce the number of guns on this country to the point where criminals have a hard time finding them. Do you foresee that being possible?

Do you foresee anti-gun Democrats having that kind of power?



samsingh

(17,571 posts)
39. i don't think anything will be gained by going after guns - might as well accept them for this
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 04:52 PM
Jul 2014

generation.

I have a question for you.

Gun control advocates are accused of being too emotional and speaking hypothetically. What do you think of gun supporters who scream that the government is coming after their guns at the slightest sign that there is some type of control being considered?

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
42. I think they've worked themselves into a froth over the issue
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 05:08 PM
Jul 2014

The gun-control proponents continually challenge them to explain WHY they have guns, and this has resulted in a lot of strange and somewhat scary answers.

Answers like "to take out the gubmint if it gets to uppity", and other such "Turner Diaries" fantasies. Or to defend themselves against armed intruders, or civil disorder, or the collapse of civilization, etc.

Simply saying "it is my right" isn't enough nowadays.



And, of, course, the post-9/11 government has become so intrusive that their resistance to things like registration and universal background checks isn't as paranoid as it might have once seemed. A cursory glance at a Snowden-related thread will prove this in light of the surveillance excesses, and a look at the Pvt. Manning and Jose Padilla cases will set an example of how the justice process will work for them.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
47. it's ironic that questions from the gun control crowd whose
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 08:42 PM
Jul 2014

more vocal members probably know someone who was killed using a gun can scare the gun supporters so much that they are frothy - yet they are the ones with the weapons. they are the ones that support open-carry - so that people have to be in a restaurant where any nut can come in shooting, or worse in a bar.

I have the right to free speech. why can I yell fire in a crowded theatre when there is no fire? And above all, why would any American who cares about other Americans not take a well rounded approach towards gun ownership that reduces massacres and murders.

I also remember the gun loving arguments well before 2001, so that was definitely an instigator for anything.

I never hear anything of a solution to gun violence (accept more guns). Only an attack on the people already victimized or those who fear for future victims.

Gun lovers clearly love their guns more than people.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
50. If you are not hearing any solutions other than more guns then you are not listening.
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 08:56 PM
Jul 2014

Several posters on this site have promoted universal background checks via opening the NICS system to private sellers.

Also propose is better Mental Health services and more stringent enforcement of the gun laws already on the books.

 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
52. "I never hear anything of a solution to gun violence (accept more guns)"
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 09:44 PM
Jul 2014

with all due respect, you are not reading the posts or listening to the RKBA side on DU. There have been hundreds of posts by the firearms owners here with many many ideas that have not a thing to do with more guns.

Most are UBC, open NICS for private sales, licensing and training requirements, better health care, better information to the NICS.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
57. The gun-control movement works through government
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 11:50 PM
Jul 2014

If the gun-control movement did not try to pass laws (through government) to make gun ownership onerous, expensive, and intrusive, or to outlaw certain kinds of guns (or guns with certain arbitrary features), then gun owners would not feel that their rights are being threatened.

If the gun-control movement was strictly a social movement, if the members of the gun-control movement limited themselves to advertisements, public demonstrations and rallies, and door-to-door conversations, then the situation would not be what it is.

But the gun-control movement works through the power of government. Their goals are legislative. They want to "cure" America from guns by changing society through government law and policy and taxes and procedures. While the gun-rights movement does not use the power of government to put guns in people hands, the gun-control movement DOES use the power of government to limit and in some cases take guns out of people's hands. Are you really telling me that, as a gun owner, I should have no fear of winding up in the sights of the DoJ? And that I should not be angry at the emotional, fearful people that are siccing the government on me?

Would you tell a whistleblower to not fear the government? How about a Muslim? An Occupy Wall Street member? A peace activist? An environmental activist? How is Private Manning doing nowadays? Jose Padilla?

they are the ones that support open-carry - so that people have to be in a restaurant where any nut can come in shooting, or worse in a bar.


There is nothing at any restaurant or bar that is keeping a nut from going in shooting in the first place.

I personally think that concealed carry permits should be issued and open-carry outlawed except in a few select circumstances, such as outdoor recreation (hunting/fishing/hiking/etc.). While I don't take any special note the few times I've seen people open-carrying (even here in Connecticut I saw it once, in a Wal-Mart) I agree it's needlessly inflammatory and counter-productive both tactically and politically.



I also remember the gun loving arguments well before 2001, so that was definitely an instigator for anything.


Yeah, except now it's mainstream. It WAS a fringe of anti-government lunatics in Texan and Idaho and Michigan. Now it's, if not mainstream Republican viewpoint, certainly a common one. And I'm talking federal and state level elected Republicans, Representatives and Senators and Governors and such. Sharon "Second Amendment Remedy" Angle comes to mind. Those clueless tools in Nevada supporting longtime welfare fraudster Cliven Bundy are prime examples, too.



Gun lovers clearly love their guns more than people.


The Right specializes in saying that liberals clearly love their privacy and their speech and their due process than people; how many times have we been told that reigning in the NSA will allow terrorism attacks to succeed? Or trying people in a court of law? Or that criticizing the President during a time of war will cost lives?

I'm not going down that rabbit hole, and you shouldn't either.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
89. SYG does not make it mandatory to do so.
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 12:26 PM
Jul 2014

Nobody is trying, through government policy or law, to make people buy guns, carry guns, use lethal force in self-defense, etc.


Well, you get the occasional town council in rural wherever that mandates all residents own a gun, but that's such a tiny speck on the radar as to be effectively zero.


Nobody is telling you to own a gun or face arrest and trial. The NRA is not trying to get society to change to a gun-lover's paradise by mandating gun ownership, making non-gun-owners pay extra taxes and fees, or file reams of paperwork to NOT own a gun.



I believe most of the laws proposed by the pro-control side are more about expressing Very Official Disapproval of the idea of private gun ownership, or at minimum the idea of owning guns optimized for self-defense. After Newtown, for example, the gun-control movement moved very swiftly and vocally for a ***NEW*** ban on assault weapons... a ban that would be much broader than the old one. Of course, the rifle used at Newtown was a legally bought and possessed rifle that was not, according to Connecticut's laws, an "assault weapon". Connecticut did have a ban on the books at the time of purchase; it was the old Federal ban from 1994-2004. The ***NEW*** ban would have retroactively made the rifle used at Newtown an "assault weapon".

Some states have the ***NEW*** ban (or something very much like it) already on the books... and gun makers are making AR-15s and such that are compliant with the new laws. AR-15s with sporting-style stocks, for example.

Here's a NY-complaint, post-SAFE-Act AR-15




And somebody out there is making a pump-action AR-15 that, because it is a pump-action, you can have all the pistol grips, flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, and folding/telescoping stocks on it you can fit on it.




See how "scary" it looks? It's a pump-action rifle, functionally identical to this Remington. Make it all black, put on a big magazine, a folding stock, and a pistol grip, and all of a sudden.... "how can that not be an assault weapon????"




I think universal-background checks are a no-brainer and would actually help somewhat, but for some reason the GC movement likes to froth over protruding pistol grips ("assault weapons&quot and magazine capacities.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
93. 'NOBODY', have you never heard about the attempts at passing legislation
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 01:14 PM
Jul 2014

where people were, by law, required to purchase firearms??????

'stand your ground' is legislation that was lobbied by the nra and I believe they were jubilant when bush won 'saying something like they could run operations right out of the white house'.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
95. I addressed that.
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 02:54 PM
Jul 2014

There have been one or two instances of late where a very small, rural town tried to pull that. Notice it hasn't gone anywhere.


And SYG is not the government forcing you to "fix bayonets" and hold your ground until death or victory. It's not requiring people to carry a gun, use a gun to defend themselves, or anything like that. It covers people that defend themselves in public areas from immediate, deadly threats. It does not preclude retreat, nor does is preclude surrender.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
110. The ones I've heard about...
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 11:16 PM
Jul 2014

...are tiny backwater places. In any event, the ratio of people trying to remove guns from the hands of Americans through various applications of the law is orders of magnitude larger than the inverse, so it's not even worth discussion.

sarisataka

(18,197 posts)
16. Why the NRA wins in 1 easy number
Sat Jul 26, 2014, 01:09 PM
Jul 2014

Replies to the same OP in Gun Control Reform Activism- 0

When an activist group can always come out with name calling and broadbrush insults but can't be bothered to agree with, or disagree with-never mind having a discussion- an outline to counter NRA political activities, you have a serious root problem.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
31. good post that makes good points
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:15 PM
Jul 2014

it is going to be a generational effort as the current one is too flush with guns and propaganda to allow meaningful gun control. it's like someone who's trying to lose weight to refrain from sugar cola but told to eat donuts and then told see we tried to cut sugar in your drinks but you haven't lost weight.

 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
34. I like this one
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 01:21 PM
Jul 2014
3. Politicize Disaster, Unabashedly
This may make some progressives queasy. But if you don't have the stomach for hardball politics, just accept that you're going to be steamrolled by the NRA — which shamelessly stokes the emotional power of national tragedies like 9/11, Katrina, and Superstorm Sandy to convince Americans that social collapse is around the corner, and you really should be buying that AR-15.

This isn't complicated: Making a political issue of the tiny coffins of dead children in the wake of a school shooting isn't just a thing that helps pass strong gun-control, it's practically the only thing in the last quarter century that's moved the needle on anti-gun-violence laws. Recall that the catalyst for the 1994 assault weapons ban was a 1989 school shooting in Stockton, California, that killed five kids and wounded 29 other children.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
36. Step 1.
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 02:44 PM
Jul 2014

Go to a Billionaire for funds to establish an Astroturf "Gun Safety" organization.

Step 2. Lobby for passage of meaningless gun legislation that does nothing to address criminal misuse of firearms.

Step 3. Watch nothing happen regarding criminal misuse of firearms.

Step 4. Watch legislation be overturned by the courts as unconstitutional.

Step 5. Watch legislators that passed the meaningless legislation get voted out of office.

Step 6. Watch the rights of people to own and carry firearms continue to expand across the country.

Step 7. Whine and complain about how the "will of the people" is being thwarted by the evil NRA.


Lather, rinse, repeat.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
40. step 2 - you can't make that argument
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 04:55 PM
Jul 2014

gun legislation is made meaningless by gun lovers.

step 3 - the nra's support for the passage of stand your ground laws has made it more difficult to address the criminal misuse of firearms.

step 4 - only by stupid activist judges

step 5 - because of the money the nra has



 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
41. Certainly I can make the argument.
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 05:05 PM
Jul 2014

Step 2. Gun legislation made meaningless because it only addresses the actions of legal gun owners not criminals (magazine capacity).

Step 3. Stand Your Ground legislation only says that if deadly force is justified one does not have to retreat first. Again, this only affects people already behaving legally; criminals enjoy no such protection.

Step 4. "Activist Judges", a meaningless phrase only used by those to describe a judicial opinion with which they disagree.

Step 5. The funds available to the NRA are from membership dues from several million engaged and motivated gun owners; these people vote and the politicians know it. The "power" behind the NRA money is that is represents people who will actually vote. Look to Colorado; two democratic state senators voted out after more meaningless gun laws are passed even though the NRA was outspent by Bloomberg 20:1. There's a reason gun control has been described as a movement that is 5 miles wide and 1 inch deep.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
44. let's focus on step 3
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 08:36 PM
Jul 2014

so you think that punkish moron that killed Trayvon Martin tried to retreat and was acting legally? what utter bullcrap

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
46. Yes, according to the evidence introduced at trial.
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 08:41 PM
Jul 2014

Martin was on top of Zimmerman and seen pounding his head into the ground. At that point Zimmerman had no ability to retreat at all; even under a "duty to retreat" standard his action would have been legal.

I understand the facts of the case do not support the meme of "racist stalks black teenager and shoots him for no reason at all", but that's the way it goes.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
62. Why?
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 09:44 AM
Jul 2014

Because I point out facts that disagree with your narrative? You are entitled to your own opinion; you are not entitled to your own facts. The evidence introduced at trial demonstrated multiple witnesses that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman pounding his head into the ground; Zimmerman had injuries consistent with this. Sorry you cannot handle the truth.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
64. an innocent teenage boy was slaughtered because zimmerman accousted him - that's the fact
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 09:49 AM
Jul 2014

if Zimmerman had not followed Martin nothing would have happened. that's the fact. the rest if a theory of the defense which I don't believe for a second - and Zimmerman's actions before and after the trial show that he's a complete hothead.

and if you think that what happens after the trial doesn't matter - you should be outraged that OJ Simpson is in jail for a minor incident at a hotel.

I WOULD NEVER HIDE FROM POSTERS WHO ARE OKAY THAT INNOCENTS GET SLAUGHTERED. YOU MIGHT HIDE FROM THE TRUTH.

but there's no point in talking to your distortion of events and since you don't even seem to have sorrow that a young male was slaughtered then we have absolutely NOTHING in common.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
63. Certainly not every one.
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 09:47 AM
Jul 2014

But given the level of media coverage this case received the jury decision is consistent with the facts introduced as evidence. Again, I'm sorry you have trouble accepting the facts regarding this case.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
69. What facts, besides your's, were made up?
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:09 AM
Jul 2014

The jury reached the only logical verdict based on the facts and evidence given at the trial.
Given that you can't seem to grasp that leads one to believe that you didn't even watch the trial like many of us did.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
73. your acceptance of the killing of an unarmed teenager leads me to
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:25 AM
Jul 2014

believe that you don't understand the facts.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
75. Any killing is tragic,
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:27 AM
Jul 2014

but I watched the trial from beginning to end and the evidence just doesn't fit your "facts".
You're the one here who doesn't understand the facts of the case.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
78. i disagree
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:36 AM
Jul 2014

I think your love of guns and vigilante justice clouds your ability to understand the facts

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
80. LOL.
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:37 AM
Jul 2014

The last desperate gasp of someone who's lost the debate and has to resort to insults.
Thanks for playing.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
85. Deluded?
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:57 AM
Jul 2014

I'm not sure you know what that word means. To date your posts on this issue are the functional equivalent of you running around with your fingers in your ears hollering "I can't hear you"!. You have introduced no evidence to support your claims and accuse others of lying with no evidence. That would be a textbook definition of delusion.

 

blueridge3210

(1,401 posts)
98. None, of course.
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 07:28 PM
Jul 2014

That's why he won't respond when challenged. He's used to an echo chamber where no one challenges his assertions; when someone disagrees or asks for proof he's lost.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
55. Making up evidence?
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 10:47 PM
Jul 2014

2 witnesses testified that they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman pounding his head into the pavement.

The only one making things up here is you.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
74. very selective and dishonest reasoning - what happened prior to that ?
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:26 AM
Jul 2014

if Martin had a gun and shot Zimmerman it would have been interesting to hear what you would have argued at that point.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
76. If the facts were the same at the trial,
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:29 AM
Jul 2014

I would have reached the same conclusion, Martin would have been justified.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
86. No, you didn't.
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:59 AM
Jul 2014

and I could care less what you think of me, I have the facts on my side while you have bullshit on your side.
Again, thanks for playing.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
99. at least i mourn the killing of a teenager instead of being an appologist of his killer
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 07:47 PM
Jul 2014

to defend my love of guns.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
125. go back and reread the response
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 12:39 PM
Jul 2014

I get more emotion out of gun lovers in the hypothetical, near impossible situation where they won't have their guns rather than gun slaughters.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
130. Martin should have been given life in prison? I read the facts?
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 08:13 PM
Jul 2014

You can't even get the right person correct.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
132. yes i meant zimmerman - you know typing at work
Wed Jul 30, 2014, 01:47 AM
Jul 2014

but ha ha ha - an innocent teenager was brutally murdered by Zimmerman .

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
135. the facts don't disagree with me, neither does the evidence
Wed Jul 30, 2014, 09:26 AM
Jul 2014

I guess you were okay with the jury's verdict in the first oj simpson trial.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
138. the two are nothing alike
Wed Jul 30, 2014, 11:08 AM
Jul 2014

In Zimmerman's case, I knew what was going to happen as soon as the State rested their case because the State had no case. All of the prosecution witnesses became defense witnesses and demolished the racist/stalker/wanabe cop/innocent teenager bullshit put out by the various haters and profiteers I explained before. Everything claimed on TYT, MSNBC etc turned out to be a complete crock of shit.

In OJ's case, I was OK with it. I think he did it, but there was reasonable doubt, so I would have voted to acquit.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
43. how so?
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 05:10 PM
Jul 2014
step 3 - the nra's support for the passage of stand your ground laws has made it more difficult to address the criminal misuse of firearms.
the same basic principles of self defense are still in place. Can you give an example other than media hype and bullshit? The opposite of SYG is duty to retreat, which would apply if and only if you can do so safely without putting yourself in equal or greater harm.
http://lawofselfdefense.com/the-five-principles-of-the-law-of-self-defense-in-a-nutshell/

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
45. so you think that punkish moron that killed Trayvon Martin tried to retreat and was acting legally?
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 08:36 PM
Jul 2014

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
56. I don't think. I know.
Sun Jul 27, 2014, 10:52 PM
Jul 2014

But first, a word about Bowe Bergdahl. The myths, lies, speculation pushed by various Obama haters, ideologues, and charlatans that have been spread is just that. Yeah there were the people in his unit on Fox talking shit about him, convincing Fox viewers that a court marital and desertion charges were just around the corner. It is one thing for these young troops to talk shit on TV, another to be cross examined by a defense lawyer in a general court martial. It is one thing for Rush and Sean to make shit up on flimsy rumors, and another for some JAG prosecutor having to prove it to a jury, convincing five or nine people that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. CID completed their investigation. The lawyers looked it over. There will be no court martial, no Article 32 hearing, nothing because there is no evidence any of that shit was true. Eventually, the right wingers who cling to the myths and lies have to face reality and the truth even if it conflicts with their ideology. The objective reality is objective reality.
What does that have to do with Zimmerman?
I watched the whole trial. He had no ability to retreat because Trayvon was straddling him and pounding his head in the sidewalk. Two eye witnesses saw it. Forensics proved it. Two eye witnesses saw Zimmerman screaming for help and struggling to escape before he fired. Trayvon's father told the cops and the court under oath that it was not Trayvon screaming. Every witness the prosecution brought on, backed up the defense's story. It was so bad that the prosecution's closing arguments were reduced to John Guy saying to ignore the evidence, "just follow your heart." Even Martin family lawyer Daryl Parks accepted the truth when he told Piers Morgan that Zimmerman should have endured Martin's beating until the cops got there.

All of the bullshit about "wantabe cop", racist, "stalked", cops told him to stay in the car were exposed as the lies they are. Lies and and rumors created by a greedy lawyer pushed by a different of set of haters, charlatans, and ideologues.
It is public record, you can watch it on You Tube. You can accept the truth or cling to the bullshit and lies. That's up to you. As for me, if I'm going to look at myself in the mirror and say that I'm part of the "reality based community", I have to accept the objective reality based on empirical evidence. Yes, he acted legally.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
61. not only do you twist the second amendment, but now you can justify the killing of an
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 09:44 AM
Jul 2014

innocent teenage boy who at the very minimum was minding his own business before being accousted by Zimmerman.

this confirms my views of how gun lovers have no sense of reality and will lie and twist events to justify their love of guns.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
70. That's not true either
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 10:16 AM
Jul 2014

Prove I'm lying using the trial transcripts or You Tube trial clips. You won't be able to.
Trayvon was casing houses, ran when he saw Zimmerman. Zimmerman followed and then started walking back to his car to wait for the cops. Trayvon ran to his dad's girlfriend's house, doubled back and attacked without being provoked. The fact that you did not attempt to provide any evidence shows that some gun haters are still being deluded by the charlatans (Al Sharpton, who is also racist), anti Hispanic racists (In Florida, many African Americans are anti Hispanic racists), ideologues, liars, and incompetent fools like Sunny Hostin.
Here is John Guy's closing argument where he says to ignore the evidence and "go with your heart" but never uttering the words "we proved"


Parks telling Morgan that Zimmerman should have waited for the cops to rescue him

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
90. I really don't care if you find it unbelievable or not
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 12:35 PM
Jul 2014

what matters is what is proven, and what I saw before my eyes in a court room. I basically thought the same as you until I saw the truth come out before my eyes.
The 12 year old kid in the Holister shirt was not TM, or not recently.
Everything I though I knew was exposed to be lies. Lies created by self serving ideologues, hucksters, and racists.
You can cling to the myths and lies if you want, that's your business. You called me a liar, but offered no evidence to back it up. I backed up what I said. I don't waste my time with dishonesty and name calling.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
92. you should no emotion towards innocents being slaughtered by guns
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 01:12 PM
Jul 2014

by saying that lies are being told to me (you may believe them to be true that does not make you a liar) seems to get an emotional response.

I think you need a check on your 'humanity' meter.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
124. gun control facts from all around the world are not myths and false images
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 12:17 PM
Jul 2014

if you choose to parse and parse information until you get what you want, then you are lying to yourself.

The only thing I have heard from gun supporters after a massacre that could be deemed an attempt at a solution was the laughable nra proposition for more guns and arming teachers and principals. The fact that no where in the civilized modern world is this deemed a solution might be an indication that you are wrong.

but you can't see that.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
126. because they don't have half their population on
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 02:43 PM
Jul 2014

psychotropic drugs like we stuff ourselves with. Laughable? The only people I heard laughing were people who are unqualified to make opinions about security, and pretty much everything else like Piers Morgan.
If respected and qualified security experts were laughing with him, I would have a better chance of agreeing with you.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
127. Where is your proof that half the population is on psychotropic drugs and that is the
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 07:17 PM
Jul 2014

direct link to gun violence?

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
129. OK maybe not literally half the population
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 07:52 PM
Jul 2014

but school shootings and psychotropic drugs, evidence:
http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/

everyday robberies and gang hits is another issue.

spin

(17,493 posts)
58. Your problem is not so much the NRA as it is ...
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 03:38 AM
Jul 2014

the 80,000,000 gun owners and members of their families that use the owner's firearms for target shooting, hunting and self defense.

The NRA probably has only 5,000,000 members.

However I do understand that it helps to have a big bad boogie man to blame for your inability to pass strong gun control laws at the national level if you are a gun control advocate.

I know a good number of gun owners who refuse to join the NRA despite the fact that a yearly membership costs less than a couple of boxes of ammo. I also know a number of gun owners who joined the NRA and dropped their membership because of the constant mailings and phone calls asking for donations. Most gun owners are also smart enough to realize that much of what the NRA says is sheer propaganda in order to encourage donations. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the chances of truly draconian gun laws passing is slim to none when the attempt to renew the assault weapons ban couldn't even pass in the Senate which was controlled by the Democratic Party.

However the majority of these people do not wish to see another assault weapons ban or other strong gun control laws such as national firearm registration pass. Many are single issue voters and will vote against any politician who runs on a gun control platform. This might not make much difference in the more liberal areas of our nation but can cost a candidate a close election in a red state.

That's the main reason we haven't seen a strong push for new gun control laws in Congress this year. Such an effort by Democrats would almost certainly guarantee that the Republicans would take control of the Senate after the midterm elections.

The sad part is that many gun owners do favor truly reasonable improvements to our federal gun laws. If the more liberal members of the Democratic Party would simply ban the use of the word "ban" we might actually see such laws pass. Of course this will not happen overnight as once again the Democratic Party has gained the reputation as the gun control party. Gun owners have long memories and will not forget the futile attempt to pass the assault weapons ban renewal through Congress for a good number of years.

kimbutgar

(20,871 posts)
87. Over at a liberal website politicusa an article about a judge overturning DC's gun ban
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 11:39 AM
Jul 2014

It became a release the krackens of gun nuts who attacked any poster who made reasonable comments about gun control. Obviously the NRA is watching our sliberal/ progressives and attacking those who advocate for reasonable gun laws. I know we have some DUers who are in that group.

This was a comment I wrote and got attacked:

Obviously the NRA was alerted to this essay and sent their gun lovers over here to show us a thing or two. Sorry gun lovers I will never be a gun lover. And someday that gun you so love will kill you or be used against you or you will kill someone you love in anger. Guns never come led to anything good. Guns are evil, used for evil purposes. We don't live in the wild west nor we have to hunt for food, just go to your local supermarket.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
91. "Guns are evil, used for evil purposes" So you believe that firearms are inherently evil?
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 12:59 PM
Jul 2014

That they cause those who gaze upon them or touch them to be possessed by the evil within the object?

If that is so then you must believe that all LEO's are possessed and controlled by the firearms they carry.


Sad, so very sad.

kimbutgar

(20,871 posts)
102. Yes guns are evil. Nothing good comes from the firing of a gun
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 08:35 PM
Jul 2014

Guns take more lives than they save.

That is my opinion. I'm sure you disagree but that is how I feel. And that is why I will never own a gun.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
107. Now you're just flailing
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 09:19 PM
Jul 2014

"Guns take more lives than they save." Sure they do - in your imagination.

Feel free to check out the 2013 CDC study, authorized by the President.

They found that there are from 60,000 to as high as 1.5 million defensive gun uses (DGU) every year. Many don't involve a shot being fired. The appearance of a gun in the hand of a potential victim sends the criminal looking for easier pickings, you know, unarmed citizens like you.

Now the hard question.

Is 60,000 (the low end of their DGU estimate) more ... or less than 9,000? (The number of actual gun murders last year - 2012 FBI/UCR)

You do know that violent crime is at a 40 year low, right? Even after 4 years of record high firearm sales. But that's those lieing SOB's in Holder's FBI.

Or are you a fact free "Guns are just icky" gun control fan?

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
113. Thanks for the honesty
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 10:03 AM
Jul 2014

Good to know you form your opinions just like the climate deniers and fundies do.

"Don't bother me with any actual facts and or your so called reality, I KNOW the truth."

You must be so proud.

No wonder gun control can't get jack or shit done with brilliant support like that.

kimbutgar

(20,871 posts)
114. So on a public forum I am not allowed to give my opinion
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:14 AM
Jul 2014

So now DU is like China?

The facts are guns kill people and nothing good comes from a barrel of a gun.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
115. Who said you're not allowed to express your opinion here?
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:21 AM
Jul 2014

The problem is that your opinion on this issue is rooted in nonsense, you've very obviously never even studied the issue and have a closed mind and aren't willing to listen or learn from well informed members here.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
117. No, you don't and sticking your fingers in your ears
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:25 AM
Jul 2014

and saying Lalalala I can't hear you is not the way to have a conversation. Why not instead, try having a conversation?

kimbutgar

(20,871 posts)
118. There is no lalala when you are looking at a dead gunshot victim
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:27 AM
Jul 2014

Something I have seen. A memory I wish I never saw in my life.

The awful sight of someone who committed suicide. A blood splattered room. And the young man shot by a drive by shooting. Blood pouring into the street.

 

IronGate

(2,186 posts)
120. I've seen alot more dead people than you,
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:33 AM
Jul 2014

matter of fact, I'm responsible for some of those deaths, but I'm still willing to listen and learn despite my experiences with firearms, something you would be better off doing, but if you want to go through life with a closed mind, be my guest, it's your life and how you choose to live it.

Response to IronGate (Reply #120)

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
119. Where do you see that?
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:28 AM
Jul 2014

I love hearing from people like you.

By all means, keep posting your feelings about guns and gun owners, it's so enlightening and adds so much to the overall discussion.

So, 60,000+ CDC documented defensive gun uses are "nothing good"? Got it.

The people who saved themselves and loved ones from a crime might disagree with you on that. But to heck with them anyway, they own guns so they can't be too smart.

kimbutgar

(20,871 posts)
122. My neighbor committed suicide and I found him
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 11:42 AM
Jul 2014

But I know I will not change my mind about guns nor yours so I'll leave it at that.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
123. If you actually think getting rid of guns will change that dynamic, I suggest you look at Japan
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 12:14 PM
Jul 2014

They have some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world and the highest suicide rate at the same time.

Better mental health resources, available on a broad basis, addresses both the suicide and much of the violent crime issue. But that's been labeled NRA Talking Points on DU.

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
128. actually i think guns are cool but i think controls are needed
Tue Jul 29, 2014, 07:21 PM
Jul 2014

to ensure that they are not used to commit destruction

sarisataka

(18,197 posts)
111. Now that I have a moment
Mon Jul 28, 2014, 11:43 PM
Jul 2014

Let's look at this recipe:

1. Commit to a Generation-Long Battle
-that is how the NRA does it and -to give the devil his due- they are masters at the game. It took three decades but succeeded beyond all belief- all 50 states have a legal carry open to citizens and most of them are shall-issue

2. Think Federally. Act Locally.
-to use a sport analogy, the GC movement plays to hit home runs while the NRA is happy to get a bunch of base hits. Rather than trying the sweeping change from Washington they go state by state, and are merely content to block action in D.C. It is rare to make a big play at the Federal level but when they do, they go in prepared to win.

3. Politicize Disaster, Unabashedly
-of all of these steps, this one is the most morally bankrupt. Basically it says to wish for mass shootings to push legislation to prevent mass shootings. Can you imagine the FAA saying we want better safety regulations so lets wait for a plane crash to have the best chance to get them enacted? If the support for the legislation s not there, absent a horrible tragedy, maybe the legislation should be looked at.

4. Act, Don't Dither
-another poorly thought out point. It takes no account of the grief of survivors or their families, but wishes to drag the bloodstained clothes solely to push an agenda. Also the rapid action has a tendency to backfire- see Feinstein's push for an new AWB post Sandy Hook that poisoned the potential of laws which could have made an actual difference. Also NY SAFE laws which did an end around on the legislative progress, turned out poor laws, many already overturned, and politicians embarrassingly admitting they had no idea what they voted on when side effects like a no LEO exemption were pointed out.

5. Bring Big Money to the Table
-money does grease the wheels but it is not the be-all-end-all. Bloomberg has easily outspent the NRA without using more than pocket change, yet his list of successes is very small. A single large donor is only one vote and only in his jurisdiction. Many small donors imply many votes which speaks at the polls

6. Think Bigger than Mayors, Moms, and Martyrs
-the admission that there is little broad based support. It is focused on a few select groups and has made little effort to expand to others. Yes, they have ads that tell you how they want you to vote but do not make much effort to make the average Joe/Jane feel a kin ship. The NRA has a major advantage in that every gun owner has some small stake in their position. Instead of trying to pull the moderate gun owners in, having the double effect of reducing NRA power while adding to their strength, the Mayors and Moms (I do not include the victims as they really have no separate group pushing legislation) speak about respecting the individual right to own firearms then talk down to and assign group guilt to every firearm owner

7. Prepare for Setbacks — and for Payback
-saddest point of all. It shows that even the author really doesn't think this will work. In addition any push will result in the loss of seats which will make other progressive legislation more difficult.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»How to Beat the NRA In 7 ...