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
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Sheriff's East L.A. station holding gun buyback today (funded by forfeiture $$$) [View all]BainsBane
(53,001 posts)27. Wikipedia has a map about concealed carry
I claim no knowledge in this area, but it does say everywhere doesn't have concealed carry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States I see that Illinois is the only no issue state but that other US territories and DC are no issue.
The reason I say "you" advocating for concealed carry is because of Friendly Iconoclast's thread calling for mobilization on the issue. By you I mean the gungeon rather than you in particular. I acknowledge that not everyone is going to think exactly alike. Some are more reasonable than others.
You mean meritless lawsuits that are based on SLAPP suits? Brady never won one. If gun manufactures are in fact negligent in their distribution, it would be a criminal case. If a manufacture sells to the wholesaler in compliance with all federal and state laws, that wholesaler does the same with the retailer etc. None of them are responsible, in any rational world, for what an individual does 15 years later. Using your theory, if I get run over by a car, I should be able to sue the manufacture and the dealership for selling a car to a drunk.
No, I don't mean meritless law suits. Meritless lawsuits don't succeed, and companies don't need special protection from them. I mean victims of gun violence having the same rights than other kinds of victims do. If their case has merits, they should be able to proceed. Car manufacturers do not have such protections, which is why they've worked so hard to make they products safe. This is a matter I have looked into, and courts have interpreted the law so broadly that companies are held exempt even when they knowingly provide weapons to illegal gun dealers. So no, you aren't talking AT ALL about what I mean.
So the answer to that question is that you do not support equal protection for American citizens. You support them for gun owners only. And obviously the First Amendment is irrelevant since you couldn't bother to comment on it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
81 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
Sheriff's East L.A. station holding gun buyback today (funded by forfeiture $$$) [View all]
petronius
Jun 2013
OP
Safes are not an "undue burden under the Second Amendment." Undue burdens are...
Eleanors38
Jun 2013
#34
I don't get it. Though not widespread, There is a drip-drip reminder that human resources...
Eleanors38
Jun 2013
#48
What group has a commitment to making concealed carry universal? Did you just make that up?
AnotherMcIntosh
Jun 2013
#44
And how many people involved in that shootout were legal gun owners?
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2013
#70
That's why I'm less supportive of public funds being used, and why this article
petronius
Jun 2013
#22
The story is questionable. They are going to destroy all of them and not keep any as "drop guns"?
AnotherMcIntosh
Jun 2013
#6
I wonder how anonymous this really is. And when will there be a buy-back in Westwood, Santa Monica?
NYC_SKP
Jun 2013
#47
"A good negro is contaminated by the possession of a weapon.... Disarm the Negro."
Eleanors38
Jun 2013
#50
It has been that way since the Lydians invented money in about 700 BCE.
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2013
#80
true but, even more so today as we have really moved away from hunting, farming, gathering,
Tuesday Afternoon
Jun 2013
#81