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
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What I Fear, What Made Me Drag my Feet on Gun Control: Brady-Style Gun Control [View all]baldguy
(36,649 posts)12. No, of course not. Lets have a few million more.
Insanity: Doing the same thing over & over, and expecting different outcome each time.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
97 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
What I Fear, What Made Me Drag my Feet on Gun Control: Brady-Style Gun Control [View all]
TPaine7
Dec 2012
OP
Alas, when I hear terms like “reasonable” “common sense” and “sensible” coming out of the mouths of
villager
Dec 2012
#2
And a defense of unchecked gun proliferation, at this point, is about as historically astute
villager
Dec 2012
#26
By your own admission, those "rights" were never intended to apply to self defense
Major Nikon
Dec 2012
#25
The guys I cited WROTE the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment is constitutionally correct
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#46
There is no need to ignore anything, and Scalia wasn't born when the Framer's wrote the 14th
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#50
So anyone who disagrees with Scalia is equivelant to a climate change denier?
Major Nikon
Dec 2012
#66
"or modification." I haven't really thought the details through, but modification of the Second
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#81
No, solutions must be rooted in reality. Amending the Constitiution would actually achieve your
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#90
The founders meant militias, nor people. So you want original intent, that's what they meant
RantinRavin
Dec 2012
#13
I thought Democrats—Democrats on DU at least—were not rooted, intellectually speaking,
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#55
the poster hasn't 'screamed' or 'pounced' at all. he gave a well-grounded calm argument.
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#69
Gun control laws should be common. "No discharge of weapons in town" (except in legitimate defense)
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#44
1934 laws are beside the point, the point being laws of the founding era—the era of Thomas Paine nt
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#71
So when Occupy decides to carry openly their weapons, you will finally take them seriously.
madinmaryland
Dec 2012
#19
It seems to me that the strongest gun rights supporters were most eager to give up other rights
Fumesucker
Dec 2012
#20
Ok then, you are properly grouped with those who think the pre-Heller DC legal regime
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#74
Excellent post to point out this aspect of guns. I'm a woman living alone. I know. nt
Honeycombe8
Dec 2012
#27
Why is it nearly always the barely literate that invariably insist that their interpretation of
Egalitarian Thug
Dec 2012
#29
Is your question rhetorical, or are you going to explain the thinking of the barely literate to
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#35
I don't think so. Machine guns can be heavily regulated and even banned per Heller.
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#42
Yes, I believe in magic. And shooting guns out of someone's hand was the subject of the OP. nt
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#40
Are you a Brady absolutist? Do you believe that DC's gun laws were too permissive for an "A"? nt
TPaine7
Dec 2012
#41
What some people want is for mass shootings or home invasions to never happen.
Jennicut
Dec 2012
#52
yes, the devil's always in the details. one reason i'm leary of new regulations is because so
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#68