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: New policy discussion regarding individual and group insults [View all]gejohnston
(17,502 posts)87. actually there isn't
If you are one of those "both sides do it" centrists, maybe you don't really belong on DU after all. I happen to believe that there is a big difference between, for example, the people who publish global warming research in science journals, and the right-wingers who write for the National Review about how it's all a hoax. Along those lines, there's also a big difference between people who publish gun violence research in science journals, and right-wingers who blog about how it's all a hoax.
Actually that is a false equivalence. You ignore the peer reviewed research published in criminology publications, but then they don't send out press releases.
I would love to have a debate with an intelligent and progressive pro-gunner, if there is such a thing, but presumably this hypothetical pro-gun progressive would be able to make his or her case without resorting to links to FOXNews or WashingtonTimes or WorldNetDaily.
Does that include anti gunners who link to right wing Brit sources like the Daily Mail? Actually, there are couple of progressive pro gunners that have intelligent debates, and are a lot smarter than you. There is little intelligent debate coming from your side. Hoyt and bongbong are the norm. At least you attempt it once in awhile. The problem is trying to act superior and pretending to be expert at stuff you actually have no clue about (investigative reporting and how they get access to documents for example) does not help your cause.
Political bias exists equally. Any anti gun screed, no matter how poorly written or absurd, is going to make Think Progress as fact. Last year's "Al Qaida says you can buy machine guns at gun shows so it must be true" was a perfect example. Some magazine writer writes an article that shows all the signs of whistleblower retaliation, yet some progressives actually takes it seriously because it happens to be the ATF.
This is supposed to be a message board for Democrats and liberals, where we don't have to pretend that maybe the idiots who talk about "legitimate rape", or want to teach creationism in schools have a valid point. I don't see why we should tolerate right-wing gun propaganda either.
That doesn't have a fucking thing to do with anything. I will say that some of that crap comes from Rhodes Scholars like Bobby Jindal and David Vitter.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
108 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
I nominate the term "home invasion" for banning from discussion in this forum....
mike_c
Aug 2012
#2
The term "home invasion" is a term used by the courts, by the various state legislators, by the FBI
AnotherMcIntosh
Aug 2012
#78
If you're looking for good scholarship about the Second Amendment (and the Fourteenth) I would start
TPaine7
Aug 2012
#60
Basically you want a one sided argument and your opinions unchallenged?
Reasonable_Argument
Aug 2012
#27
I figure if there's a legitimate point to be made, you can find it from a legitimate source.
DanTex
Aug 2012
#39
Too bad that "study" you post is full of garbage pseudo-science and hoopla. nt
rDigital
Aug 2012
#53
When the peers are fellow anti-gun extremists, I call their impartiality into question.
rDigital
Aug 2012
#65
So the mainstream scientific establishment is now "anti-gun extremists". Hmm....
DanTex
Aug 2012
#69
Do you define a Democrat as only a member of the party that agrees with your personal views? ...
spin
Aug 2012
#91
It is often extremely difficult to find an acceptable "liberal" source that supports RKBA ...
spin
Sep 2012
#97
The problem with that is that it's not always crystal clear what constitutes a right-wing source
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#100
Without google dumps, the anti-gun nut population here would be cut in half
shadowrider
Aug 2012
#51
Well then, thank you for single handedly providing so much low hanging fruit for the pro gunners.
rDigital
Aug 2012
#83
The problem is, the juries are handling it, when it's a pro-gun post in question.
shadowrider
Sep 2012
#107
I vote "No" - no list of unacceptable terms, and no in-group punishment system
petronius
Aug 2012
#12
The issue seems incredibly simple to me, krispos42. It's argumentum ad hominem.
slackmaster
Sep 2012
#102
They feel free to shit on the RKBA forum because the juries rarely hide posts from antis.
rDigital
Aug 2012
#54
Censorship mostly unnecessary. But if you must, use of term "Responsible" for public carriers
Hoyt
Aug 2012
#55