Moms Demand Action hits home

[SecularMotion]

There was Virginia Tech, then NIU where my daughter now studies, and when the Sandy Hook Massacre happened in 2012, I said ‘Enough is enough!’ It’s time to do something about this.”

This was the answer Annie Craig of Aurora gave when I asked her why she had gone to Indianapolis recently to attend a gathering of the group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.

Why Indianapolis? Because that’s where the National Rifle Association was holding its annual meeting.

“We wanted to go calmly, quietly, and unarmed to protest their leadership and the extremism they are promoting,” said Craig.

http://beaconnews.suntimes.com/news/27451793-418/moms-demand-action-hits-home.html#.U3iUmd_RGmg

[xchrom]

1. du rec.

[hack89]

2. Perhaps something good will come of this group

I think it will depend how prominent a role Bloomberg decides to take. The public face of a grass roots movement should not be a billionaire with an authoritarian streak.

[mwrguy]

7. He should definitely stay in the background

And downplay his relationship with the moms.

[Duckhunter935]

8. not real grassroots when the founder was a PR executive

who passes herself off as just a stay at home mom.

Freelance Senior Consultant/Counselor
Fleishman-Hillard

Public Company; 1001-5000 employees; OMC; Public Relations and Communications industry

November 2010 – June 2012 (1 year 8 months)

Freelance consultant/counselor for clients of Fleishman-Hillard.
Founder and President
VoxPop Public Relations

December 2008 – June 2012 (3 years 7 months) Indianapolis, Indiana Area

Self-employed by start-up strategic public relations agency created to help individuals, companies and organizations accelerate their growth, profitability, reputation and market presence through media relations, product launches, new media, events and promotions, messaging and media training, and issues management.

Vice President, Corporate Communications
WellPoint

Public Company; 10,001+ employees; WLP; Insurance industry

December 2005 – December 2008 (3 years 1 month)

Led communications team for the country’s largest health benefits company and provided communications support for the country’s highest ranking female chief executive officer. Responsible for enterprise-wide media relations, including investor relations.

Director, Global Communications
GE Healthcare

Public Company; 10,001+ employees; GE; Hospital & Health Care industry

2004 – 2006 (2 years)

Led ten-member communication team for $14 billion healthcare (medical diagnostics and devices) business within General Electric, a Fortune 100 company

Director, Global Public and Corporate Affairs
Monsanto

Public Company; 10,001+ employees; MON; Biotechnology industry

2001 – 2004 (3 years)

Provided corporate communications strategy and support for Fortune 500 life sciences and agricultural company.

Vice President, Corporate and Public Affairs
Fleishman-Hillard

Public Company; 1001-5000 employees; OMC; Public Relations and Communications industry

1998 – 2001 (3 years)

Directed seven-member team that identified and managed issues and crises for clients, including Monsanto Company, BP Amoco, Bayer Corporation, Firestone, McDonald’s, Applebee’s, Purdue Pharma, Osco, BASF, and Hallmark, Inc.

Public Affairs Officer
Missouri State Government

1993 – 1998 (5 years) Jefferson City, Missouri

Worked for the administration of Governor Mel Carnahan, the Missouri House of Representatives, and the Missouri Department of Economic Development.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannontroughton

[groundloop]

10. If you can't attack the message then attack the messenger.

[Duckhunter935]

14. truth hurts sometimes

I am all for UBC. Open NICS to the public. I do not have a big issue with limiting magazine size. Depends on the number and should not just be an arbitrary number with no reason. All of these should also apply to police and retired law enforcement, no special clauses for them. I am not for a cosmetic based AWB.





Those darn bayonet lugs and pistol grips must kill thousands. More issues with handguns than rifles of any kind.

[ChazInAz]

114. How profound.

What does this have to do with the original post?

[Duckhunter935]

117. how stupid it is for the group

to once again ban weapons on some group of cosmetic features. This will always cause the bill to fail as it will not work. Look at the NY SAFE act compliant rifles. They are functionally the same weapons that were "BANNED"

"They also want a ban on assault weapons" is part of the OPs article.

[A Simple Game]

118. It doesn't make much difference does it? So why would it upset you so much?

Is it because it's a foot in the door, and once implemented people are going to see that the world isn't falling apart and more homes aren't being invaded by the hordes? And the door is now opened for more and better changes.

I think that is what worries you, but that is just my opinion.

[canuckledragger]

49. It's a tactic Duckhunter uses often.

And doesn't like it pointed out.

[laundry_queen]

76. +1.

It's obvious.

[Duckhunter935]

119. can you answer my question posed in 108?

I guess you could not or I am sure you would have by now.

and what tactic is that I use so often? Posting links to prove my point?

I see your post calling a shill was hidden, I did not alert but I think the jury result was correct.

[intaglio]

51. Well, Duckhunter935 what is it that upsets you?

Maybe it is the fact that a woman has a life outside the gunhugging world to which you object. Or maybe it is envy that she is, probably better educated and has a higher paying job than you will ever have that gets your goat.

Perhaps, Duckie (I can call you Duckie can't I?) you found the sites of the NRA/Manufacturer sponsored dirt diggers hard to use and so you wasted all of 10 minutes or was it that you had to open your e-mail to get the alert from the NRA/Manufacturer front groups.

How if we did a similar background check on you, Duckie? Would we find you are completely independent and not in any way receiving a quid pro quo from the NRA and/or gun manufacturers? Or, to follow the same jeu d'esprit, does your partner object to the oil-stained sheets and underwear?

[Duckhunter935]

75. Wow are we not nice

Nothing really upsets me and I am glad you are supporting the head PR person from Wellpoint and Monsanto who passes herself off as just a stay at mom. She would bee much more believable to all if she was a stay at home mom and did not sell out to Bloomberg just as she had to release her donor list.

And please do not call me Duckie as my username does mean something that I am sure you are unable to understand.

I have had numerous background checks to include federal state and local done by our sheriff. Passed all with no issues at all. I have to have a security clearance for my job so I have also had background checks for that also.

and you would be wrong on the accusation of "receiving a quid pro quo from the NRA and/or gun manufacturers"

I do not even know what you mean by that last line in your diatribe. Next will be some kind of penis reference, I would expect.

[Eleanors38]

77. Intel's last line: A most peculiar fixation with odors Down There.

[intaglio]

78. Oh, you are upset that she has a life outside the home

My my Duckhunter, You think no-one else in the world has heard of Mossberg? How - insular of you.

No, I was not talking about a gun background check but a personal one as you seem to have a direct line to the NRA/manufacturers attack publicity departments.

As to the last line, how typical of a "manly man" to assume it was a sexual reference; try it as a reference to Ted Nugent another well known - hunter.

[Duckhunter935]

88. Were did I say your last line was a sexual reference?

I truly just did not know what that bullshit line was about. Check all you want, I own a few firearms and have no contact with any weapons manufacturer, PR departments of them or the NRA. I do not hunt and I just shoot some paper targets about once or twice a month as I have to go two hours round trip to a safe legal range. My weapons are all locked in a safe and most are bolt action rifles that average 60 years old. Going to try my new one this week. Bought it over the internet and had to have it shipped to an FFL and have another background check performed.

I could care less what she does outside the home, be proud you are a PR executive and a female one at that. Do not try and hide that fact. She should use that fact as a role model not just a stay at home mom.

Sounds like you are getting kind of worked up about this, you might want to get some air.

[intaglio]

110. By it's proximity to the reference to penis

As for getting worked up you seem to be quite exercised by the doubts several people are casting about your claimed independence.

It does seem strange that you get such rapid access to information about the employment background of a gun control advocate and that you so rapidly show up to spread what you see as "dirt". Then there are the very professional graphics that you use to decry any form of assault weapon ban. I don't truly think you are being paid to spread doubt and confussion but you should investigate the possibility.

By the way, why use a "semi"-automatic weapon for hunting duck? Why not use a simple o&u, is your marksmanship that bad?

[Duckhunter935]

116. I dont hunt

that is not what my username is about.

I can use the Google machine like anyone else to help research subjects

[intaglio]

120. But I'm sure it helps to have guidance doing those searches

So you like the Mossberg but you don't hunt, hmmm

Well you don't shoot skeet in the Olympic style

So you must either be using it for live role-play, shooting targets pretending they're real and perhaps using faked up streets and rooms, or do you just shoot cans?

[Duckhunter935]

121. Mossberg?

What are you talking about.

I have several WWII bolt action rifles and a 1926 Mosin that I enjoy shooting paper targets. My username is Duckhuunter as I spent 20+ years in the Army as an Air Defense Artillery NCO. That's what a Duckhunter is. The mascot is the infamous Oozlefinch.

The birth and beginnings of this fabulous bird were humble, almost inconsequential, and extremely vague. But, in true Horatio Alger fashion, this ancient, ageless bit of improbability has risen to a position of high honor. The Oozlefinch has focused his benevolent gaze over the men of the guided missiles. He is at once the confidant of generals, the protector of Very Important Persons, and above all, the guardian, patron, and monstrous mentor of modern missilemen.

The first recorded history of the Oozlefinch came through the somewhat rambling mumblings of a Captain H. M. Merriam of Fort Monroe, Virginia. Presumably a raconteur of no mean talents, the captain must be given the credit for discovering the bird about 1905. He apparently was the only man who had seen the creature, and he was loathe to describe appearance, habits, or habitat. One physical characteristic he did emphasize, however:the great bird's eyes. These eyes, as vividly described by the captain, remain today as the outstanding physical mark of the Oozlefinch.

These eyes are large, all-seeing, unshaded by eyelids or eyebrows, and rather seriously blood-shot. just why the eyes are so prominent and red, no one seems sure. But being all-seeing, the bird can gather more information in a shorter period of time than mere mortals who have conventional sight. Because his eyes were unshaded by eyelids or eyebrows, the bird is forced to move tail foremost to protect his powers of observation, but also, he can turn them 180 degrees to gaze inwardly when he desires the maximum value from self-contemplation.

http://ed-thelen.org/oozlefinch.html
I do shoot cans or water bottles at times but normally just round targets or paper plates.

Are you going somewhere with this?

[calimary]

80. I would say - all the better!

This is someone who clearly understands the in's & out's of public relations, knows what she's doing, how it's done, and how to get it done. I would think this campaign might have a better chance than most. Yes, OUR SIDE needs shrewd and canny PR, too.

[Duckhunter935]

3. background checks are not a problem to me

I do have issues with banning weapons due to cosmetic features and internet sales have to already be shipped to an FFL and background check completed. I have done this type of transaction twice.

Moms Demand Action promised a big turn-out in Indianapolis for the NRA’s convention and annual meetings.
Bloomberg paid 120 people to attend. Their dedication was so high that over half didn’t bother to show up after he paid them!
Here’s what they managed to turn out.

That’s about 75,000 fewer people than the number who attended the NRA convention.

The group said that more than 100 mothers and 20 survivors of gun violence will arrive in Indianapolis on Friday. Everytown is covering the cost of the mothers’ hotels in Indianapolis, and paying the travel and lodging expenses for a group of 20 survivors to be in Indianapolis this weekend, an Everytown spokesperson told BuzzFeed.

Everytown would not disclose how much it was spending on the weekend, but said funds are from a combination of group’s money and fundraising efforts leading up to the convention.

Too bad Bloomberg now runs this group

[canuckledragger]

4. There isn't a gun thread

that you won't try to undermine in one way or another, is there?

[Duckhunter935]

6. Can't be a gun thread

it is in GD and gun threads are not allowed and I do not see what really big news would be the exception.

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.

Status of "big news" exceptions:

There are currently no special exceptions.

I do like the fact that you are now the purity police and are policing what others opinions can be posted.
I posted my thoughts on the subject. I know that must just burn you up that I am allowed to do this, sorry.

[canuckledragger]

48. Just pointing out your constant defense

of ANY gun related thread that even hints at putting guns in a negative light.

I am far from being the 'purity police', but it's nice to know you feel threatened and the need to ridicule those that point out your obsession.

I know it must burn you up to have this constantly pointed out to you, sorry 'bout that.

Get used to it. I'm not the only one that notices.

And trying to smear Moms Demand Action is just beyond pathetic.

[Eleanors38]

65. "Gun thread" (your term) in GD? Who'd thunk?

[Duckhunter935]

68. not smearing anybody

just pointing out some facts that the other side likes to gloss over or worse, hide.

And I do not feel threatened at all. I like discussion unlike the other side of the issue which requires a safe haven they to go run and hide in.

I just wish the hosts/admins would update the GD SOP as one side seems to ignore it and post these threads. They have not and it is their call so I will live with the anti-gun threads in GD and will make my comments with your permission of course. The other side tends to respect the SOP and does not post gun treads in GD. This is why GD threads seem so one sided.

[canuckledragger]

79. And when pointing out your obvious smear tactics

You ALWAYS get hot and bothered and that and attempt to take the heat off by bringing up your interpretation of the 'rules'

And you don't bring up facts, you bring up material unrelated to the original posts and attempt to change the subject to another NRA type talking point.

Your tactics are fairly obvious to all that read your posts.

And why do you persist in smearing Moms Demand Action anyway? ANY discussion about sensible gun regulations is welcome.

[Duckhunter935]

84. I have and support sensible regulations

I just do not support stupid ones that will have no effect and hurt the chances of getting regulations that will help.

I do not stoop to the low level some have to to make the case.

Do you have a link to those NRA talking points or is it any point you fail to agree with? That seems to be the case with most on the gun control side.

I am not hot and bothered, I am nice and comfortable thank you and thanks to Skinner for allowing some of us firearms owners to express our point of view. We do not require a safe haven as we can handle discussion even we disagree with. Seems some of you on your side do not want any disagreement.

[DanTex]

91. You sure do a lot of complaining for a "nice and comfortable" person.

Seems to me you have some kind of axe to grind...

[Duckhunter935]

92. so anyone you do not agree with is complaining?

nope, no axe to grind here

[DanTex]

93. Not at all. But you are...

[Duckhunter935]

94. I guess if you say so

Have a great day

[canuckledragger]

95. There is always room for disagreement.

But that's not what you do.

You jump on most threads mentioning guns, attempting to smear the groups involved, belittling anybody else that questions you and your talking points, sometimes rebutting with completely unrelated material that pushes other NRA talking points. And when you find too many are questioning your behaviour you again try to dodge by bringing up your interpretation of forum rules to try and hide any thread that makes yourself and your NRA masters look bad.

You are WAY too defensive when questioned to believe you just want a 'discussion'.

No...YOU definitely don't want any disagreement of your talking points.

[Duckhunter935]

104. fine if thats how you see it

but I do not. Have you been called a future murderer on the board? We disagree and that is fine. I have not smeared anyone other than just say the leader was a very high paid PR executive prior to this. She never seems to mention that and it is a fact not a smear. It is also a fact that she joined with Bloomberg just as she would have had to release her donor list, another fact not a smear. You may not like them but they are facts. I disagree yes and you will disagree with me but facts are still facts. If you feel that strongly the alert button is right there for you to use and give the post over to a jury. I guess your idea of disagreement is if I just never respond to another posters point. But alas if I do do that I am complaining or just spewing some mythical NRA talking point that nobody ever can produce. I have seen some talking points though.

http://www.progressivemajorityaction.org/gun_messaging

[Duckhunter935]

108. so now you are calling me a "shill"

A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.

Do you have any proof? I will await your apology. We may not agree but name calling like that is really not called for.

You do realize you have to resort to name calling when your argument is failing.

Please post my exact quote where I smeared Moms Demand Action.

[awoke_in_2003]

102. I wish I could rec your post. nt

[GeorgeGist]

113. Still waiting for responsible gun owners ...

to stand up to the fascist NRA.

[ChazInAz]

115. Even more apropos!

Stop trying to hijack the grown-ups discussion.

[LittleBlue]

5. I don't agree with banning online sales

Online commerce is the way forward. That just seems like an overreaction.

[aikoaiko]

9. Bloomberg Pays for Action.

They should stick to background checks because advocating for an AWB (and by the way the rifle used in the Sandy Hook massacre was compliant with the Connecticut AWB) will only hurt them.

[DanTex]

11. It's always funny when the NRAers complain about Bloomberg's involvement with gun control...

while standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Ted Nugent and Grover Norquist and Sarah Palin. But, but, Bloomberg!1!!

[hack89]

12. Considering most of us have views the NRA opposes

Perhaps not. But in your black and white world I guess it makes some sense.

[DanTex]

13. Hmm. That's an odd thing to say, considering that you are an NRA member...

You certainly don't seem very vocal about your supposed "anti-NRA" views. Wonder why that might be? LOL

[hack89]

15. I vote for gun control Dems.

I support all proposed gun control laws with two exceptions. My views on gun control are closer to yours then they are to the NRAs.

You will need gun owners like me to support the laws you want. I will be here to talk with you when you decide to move past the moral purity stage and decide to actually accomplish something.

[DanTex]

17. Of course! You're a huge gun control advocate!

How silly of me to have been confused by the fact that 100% of your DU posts involve advocating for guns and attacking gun control advocates. Really, you're just here to help, and give friendly advice! Your NRA membership is just an undercover operation...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1262314

[hack89]

26. Like I said, when you want to actually accomplish something let me know

In the meantime, let's enjoy the give and take. That's what makes discussion boards fun. I hope you appreciate that it is not personal to me - I will tweak you now and then but that is my nature.

[DanTex]

27. Like I said, I find it hilarious when pro-gunners insist they are really just trying

to help accomplish the very things that they spend 100% of their DU posts railing against.

[hack89]

29. Entertainment is what DU is all about

I am glad you get as much pleasure here as I do.

[Duckhunter935]

16. I will say all of those are idiots and I do not support them as they are extreme

I do not support the political NRA side of the NRA but I do support the firearm safety programs that have been developed and trained by the NRA for around a hundred years.

Like Hack said life is not all black and white like you must live in

[DanTex]

19. Yes, the leaders of the gun rights movement are all right-wing nutjobs.

As are the overwhelming majority of the members of the gun rights movement. That's what makes it so ironic that DU's NRAers focus so single-mindedly on their hatred for Bloomberg (whose views on gun control and some other social issues like LGBT rights are identical to Bill DeBlasio and any other liberal Democrat).

[Duckhunter935]

21. Who said I hated Bloomberg?

He is a multi-billionaire that can do what he wants. Do not have to agree with all he does though. Does not mean I hate the man either.

[DanTex]

22. I did. It's obvious from your posts that you have a single-minded obsession with the man.

[Duckhunter935]

24. And you would be wrong again

[Duckhunter935]

18. Bloomberg can do whatever he wants, I do not care

Just do not try and pass it off as grassroots when you pay people for the events and to travel to them.

[DanTex]

20. Umm, evidently, yes, you do care.

It doesn't bother you when the Koch Brothers and ALEC fund pro-gun campaigns, nor does it bother that gun manufacturers who actually profit from gun violence make contributions to the NRA. But as soon as a wealthy donor enters the fray on the progressive side of the issue, heads explode...

[Duckhunter935]

23. how do the gun manufacturers profit from gun violence?

They make more on the threat of another AWB. Depends on the legislation if I am for or against. My views are well known and I have posted them many times.

[DanTex]

25. Umm, the same way that arms manufacturers profit from wars...

[Duckhunter935]

31. so no proof

I understand, it must be tough. It is illegal to sell to criminals but they sure sell a lot to law abiding citizens when talk of another AWB or other restrictions are proposed.

The FBI has released new statistics on NICS background checks showing 2013 gun sales hit a new record. The total number of background checks conducted for gun sales last year add up to 21,093,273, beating the previous 2012 record of 19,592,303 by 1,500,970. Texas conducted the most background checks with 1,633,278. Kentucky came is second with 1,578,331 background checks conducted.

These significant numbers came during a year when Democrats and the White House attempted multiple times to push through new gun control measures. In 2013, President Obama released a number of executive actions on gun control and wasted no time in 2014 doing the same. States that implemented more gun control measures in 2013 saw a spike in gun sales, especially in relation to population. Gun sales in Maryland doubled, going from 136,604 in 2012 to 231,361 in 2013. In 2012, Colorado conducted 414,838 checks, in 2013, there were 514,658. In Connecticut, 237,496 checks were conducted in 2012 and in 2013, 294,338 went through the system. Background checks in New York, home of the S.A.F.E. Act, also went up in 2013.

So who's buying these guns? According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation and NBC news, women are the fastest growing demographic of gun owners.

[DanTex]

37. Proof that gun manufactures make money by selling guns?

Yes, that's a tough one. :facpalm:

[Duckhunter935]

39. you forgot the gun violence part

Those goalposts must be hard to move.

how many of the millions sold are not used for gun violence? Get back to me when most of the firearms the manufacturers sell are.

[DanTex]

40. Umm, it's pretty hard to forget about gun violence when living in the US...

People in Western Europe might be able to forget about it, given that it's some 10x less prevalent there than here, but of course that requires gun control laws that would seriously cut into the profits of gun manufacturers.

[Duckhunter935]

45. so how many of the 300 million are not

used in gun violence?

[hack89]

28. But there is no direct link is there?

Or how could you explain soaring profits as gun violence steadily declines? I think the threat of gun control is what they really profit from.

[DanTex]

30. Of course there's a direct link.

The last thing gun manufacturers want is western-europe style gun laws that would save thousands of lives per year but also cut majorly into their profits.

And gun violence isn't steadily declining. We've been over this enough times now that you know this already.

[hack89]

32. So gun violence is not significantly less than it was 20 years ago?

You really want to go there? Because you know what the FBI data will show.

[DanTex]

34. Lower than 50 years ago, no.

There was a big spike in crime during the 80s/early 90s, so obviously you are going to choose the very peak of the 80s/90s crime wave as the point of comparison.

But over the last decade, the drop in gun homicide rates is attributable to greater rates of survival from gunshot wounds due to better emergency medicine.

Of course, we're still far higher than any other advanced Democracy, which is the way that the NRA and the gun manufacturers want it.

[hack89]

36. Perhaps we should go back to the gun control laws of the 1960s?

They apparently worked just fine in keeping levels of gun violence down.

[DanTex]

38. Hmm, "down" is an odd choice of words to describe by far the highest rates of gun violence

of any advanced democracy. And I wouldn't call that "fine" either.

I say we go for Western Europe, where gun violence rates are some 10x lower than here. For all their flaws, they've certainly have gun policy pretty well figured out.

[hack89]

42. Yes, however we should aim for a reality based solution

So perhaps incremental steps in tune with America cultural and legal reality are in order.

Basic stuff. Since two thirds of gun deaths are sucides, let's push for mental health care reform. Let's fund the ATF so they can crack down on illegal gun trafficking. Let's end the idiotic war on drugs and remove the incentive for drug related violence. Let's pass UBCs.

Sound reasonable to you?

[Duckhunter935]

46. of couse not

it does not ban some kind of gun

[DanTex]

53. Mental health reform and ending the drug war are going to be tough, politically.

And UBC failed to get through the senate. As long as the GOP controls congress, not much is going to happen on the progressive side of any issue.

As far as what should be done, one good idea would be regulating handguns and semi-automatic long guns along the lines of NFA -- registration, comprehensive background check, etc.

[hack89]

61. I agree with the ACLU about registration

How about as a compromise we mandate a Firearm Owners ID card like some states do? You would need one to own or purchase guns and ammo. It would also be a vehicle for background checks on all gun owners plus you can make mandatory safety training part of the application process.

[DanTex]

63. Hmm, I didn't realize the ACLU wanted to dismantle the NFA registry.

As for the compromise, any step in the right direction is a good thing. Basically, the tighter the laws, the fewer people end up getting killed.

[hack89]

72. They opposed gun registration on privacy grounds

It came up during the post Sandy Hook debacle.

[DanTex]

74. I must have missed the part where they wanted to dismantle the NFA registry.

It seems to me that NFA is working pretty well for the guns it covers. Wonder what the ACLU is thinking on that. Maybe it was the same guy who decided the ACLU should support the Citizens United decision.

[hack89]

82. They don't oppose existing the NFA registry

They oppose the massive expansion of registration you are proposing. They are thinking that one should not have to give up their privacy to exercise a basic constitutional right.

[DanTex]

85. Very bizarre thinking. I didn't realize the ACLU had veered way over to the right on certain issues.

But apparently some people in there are channeling Scalia.

[hack89]

86. I know - personal privacy is such a RW value

No place for it on a liberal discussion board.

[DanTex]

87. Privacy is important, but I don't know a single progressive who buys into that prepostersous

"logic" of opposing gun registration on "privacy" grounds. Can you think of a single one?

"Registering guns violates my rights" is way out in Ted Nugentville.

[hack89]

89. It is none of the government's business what I own or do in the privacy of my home

It is not complicated.

[DanTex]

90. I guess that's a "no", you can't think of any progressives who buy into it.

I'm not surprised -- my guess is that the same ACLU guy who agreed that money is free speech is the one who came up with it.

[hack89]

96. I know - the ACLU is a bunch of RWrs

Don't they understand that fighting against government intrusion into the private live's of Americans is ok except when it is not? Moral consistency is so RW.

[DanTex]

97. So that's the second "no" in a row. Still can't name a single progressive that buys into

the NRA's logic. Wanna go for three in a row?

It's also great to see that you are such a huge fan of the Citizens United decision. I think a picture is starting to emerge...

[hack89]

99. Are you for real?

The ACLU now = the NRA. You will twist your self in knots to attack gun owners. Amazing.

[DanTex]

100. Are you? I guess ignoring my posts is the only strategy you've got, giving that you

can't actually respond with a single progressive you shares your right-wing views on gun registration or campaign finance reform.

Incidentally, I googled ACLU and gun control, and they don't seem to be quite as far to the right as you are. Seems they disagree with you and Scalia about the Heller decision, for one. Hmmm...
https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment

[hack89]

101. I know the ACLU is antigun

Which makes their opposition to gun registration even more compelling.

So tell me - is the ACLU 's position on gun control a progressive one? Do you agree with it?

[DanTex]

103. Your position on gun registration is clearly right-wing.

If, as you claim, the ACLU actually agrees with you, then their position is a right-wing one also (that's still an "if", because I don't know if or how much you are stretching the ACLU's actual opinion).

As I've pointed out, the ACLU also took the right-wing of the Citizens United decision, so it's not without precedent for them to support right-wing positions.

[hack89]

107. But their position on the 2A is a progressive one, correct?

So here we have a progressive organization agreeing with me.

[DanTex]

109. What are you talking about?

The ACLU has some liberal views, some conservative ones. And, apparently they don't agree with you about the second amendment after all...

[hack89]

111. I have never thought they agreed with me on the 2A

Just like with Citizens United they go off the rails occasionally.

But I do know they are consistent when it come to privacy.

I have to run for awhile to take my kids to the range. My youngest has a new upper for his AR-15 he wants to try out. Have a good evening.

[DanTex]

112. OK. Have fun.

[Duckhunter935]

43. so you are for gun confiscation?

how do you get rid of the 300 or so million that are out in private hands?

Of course now things like this will make things more interesting

#t=43

[DanTex]

55. Huh? Confiscation?

How about regulating handguns and semi-autos under NFA -- registration, extensive background check, and so on.

[Duckhunter935]

64. and the millions all ready out in civilian hands?

Do not forget we do have the 2nd amendment of the US constitution that might be just a little problem in your plan.

[DanTex]

67. They should be registered under NFA.

I'm pretty sure the second amendment doesn't prevent gun registration. Even after Scalia and the other right-wing justices re-interpreted it, there is still ample room for regulation. After all, Washington DC still requires handguns to be registered.

[Duckhunter935]

33. so the DOJ is wrong?

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2013
HTTP://WWW.BJS.GOV/

WASHINGTON–Firearm-related homicides declined 39 percent and nonfatal firearm crimes declined 69 percent from 1993 to 2011, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. Firearm-related homicides dropped from 18,253 homicides in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011, and nonfatal firearm crimes dropped from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011.

For both fatal and nonfatal firearm victimizations, the majority of the decline occurred during the 10-year period from 1993 to 2002. The number of firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006 and then declined through 2011. Nonfatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004 before fluctuating in the mid- to late 2000s.

In 2011, about 70 percent of all homicides and eight percent of all nonfatal violent victimizations (rape, sexual assault, robbery and aggravated assault) were committed with a firearm, mainly a handgun. A handgun was used in about 7 in 10 firearm homicides and about 9 in 10 nonfatal firearm violent crimes in 2011. In the same year, about 26 percent of robberies and 31 percent of aggravated assaults involved a firearm, such as handguns, shotguns or rifles.

In 2007-11, about one percent of victims in all nonfatal violent crimes reported using a firearm to defend themselves during the incident. A small number of property crime victims also used a firearm in self-defense—about 0.1 percent of all property victimizations.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/fv9311pr.cfm

[DanTex]

35. Gun assaults have increased over the last decade.

But the survival rate has also increased due to improvements in emergency medicine, which means more people getting shot but less people getting killed.

[groundloop]

41. I'm sure those graphs are a huge comfort to parents of all the children who've been murdered

This entire damned thread has turned stupid as hell. Bottom line - what the hell can we do to prevent gun deaths, and especially gun deaths of innocent victims? I don't give a damn about all this petty bickering, nit-picking, and so on. What can we do to prevent gun deaths? The NRA and all the other pro-gun people in this country need to quit dancing around semantics and help come up with a solution.

[hack89]

44. Mental health care reform should be the first step

Two thirds of gun deaths are sucides. Fund the ATF so they can crack down on illegal gun trafficking. Legalize drugs and remove the cause of drug related violence. Pass universal background checks so every gun sale requies a background check.

[Duckhunter935]

47. and many gun owners here have put up many good ideas

they are all mostly dismissed for gun control ideas that would have made no difference in the murders.

The Virginia tech shooter had legal firearms and standard magazines. Sandy Hook weapon was not an assault weapon and was legal in in a very restrictive state.

Lets do a good UBC with mental health and domestic violence data included in the NICS check. But the details will cause issues with some. Lets open NICS to all private transactions. Let FFL dealers provide free NICS/background checks. lets spend more on mental health and spend what is needed to enforce laws already on the books.

I know all NRA talking points that will be dismissed without thought.

[jeff47]

125. Why?

The NRA and all the other pro-gun people in this country need to quit dancing around semantics and help come up with a solution.

Why? They like the status quo.

The NRA loves it, since their real supporters (gun manufacturers) make a fortune off the status quo.

"Pro-gun people" who oppose every attempt at regulation do so out of fear their guns will be regulated away. That's why they're busy whining about cosmetic features instead of helping to create laws that work better.

Sure, they're gonna wander off with distractions like mental health care, but won't stop the vast majority of shootings. Those efforts are designed to cut down on the big, splashy shootings that results in gun control laws.

So don't hold your breath about help from the NRA and "other pro-gun people". They prefer all the death.

[NutmegYankee]

50. You support free speech, Rush Limbaugh supports free speech, therefore...

You stand shoulder to shoulder with Rush Limbaugh. It's a Goddamn fallacy - a recognized error in logic! And yet you keep using it.

I challenge you to find posts by DUers that support and endorse the personal actions of Nugent, Norquist, or Palin. You won't find them. But you will find posts happily supporting the actions of Bloomberg, a man responsible for rampant racial profiling (stop and frisk) on NYC streets.

[DanTex]

52. Right, that's my point, sort of.

The NRAers who stand shoulder to shoulder with Ted Nugent and Sarah Palin suddenly go all "guilt by association" when Bloomberg enters the fray on the progressive side of the issue. A great example of this is you talking about stop-and-frisk in gun control thread.

[NutmegYankee]

54. Not really.

There has been some support or promotion of Bloomberg, whereas no DUers promote Nugent or Palin.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017187323
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014781372#post3

The reality is any person can be smeared with guilt by association. Even the most evil person many can think of -Hitler- held views most progressives would support like a social safety net for elderly people. But some issues are very emotional and people just go swinging at each other.

[DanTex]

56. Yes, really.

There's been support of Bloomberg's gun control advocacy. I'm not sure how that translates to support for stop-and-frisk, though.

In the same way that the pro-NRA DUers don't support Ted Nugent's racism, or Grover Norquist's economic policies. At least they don't do it openly -- a lot of the NRAers seem to only care about and post about guns, so who knows how they feel about other issues.

[NutmegYankee]

57. It comes down to advocating or promoting what a person says.

I do not know of DUers who advocate or promote Nugent or Norquist. Some DUers may find some level of agreement on an issue with such persons, but that alone means little if they do not promote or advocate support for such individual. Even the most evil person many can think of -Hitler- held views most progressives would support like a social safety net for elderly people. But support for a social safety net doesn't mean support for such an evil person.

I brought up stop and frisk to highlight that I consider Bloomberg to be of the same class as Nugent, Norquist, or Palin, and think they should receive ZERO support on a liberal board.

[DanTex]

59. ...and people who are in bed with Ted Nugent should be especially reluctant to play

the guilt-by-association card. The thing is, the pro-gun movement pretty much has zero prominent leaders who aren't off-the-charts right-wing crazies.

Conversely, gun control advocates are mainly liberals Democrats. For example, Bill DeBlasio's views on gun control are basically the same as Bloomberg's, and in fact he is part of Bloomberg's gun control coalition.

All of which makes the guilt-by-Bloomberg-association thing even more absurd, coming from NRAers.

[NutmegYankee]

62. The choice of "in bed" betrays your viewpoint.

Which is what I'm pointing out. Belief in exercising the right of gun ownership doesn't make one "in bed" with some nut job who may hold a similar view. It's no different than my belief in freedom of speech not putting me "in bed" with the Westboro Baptist Church protestors. Bloomberg comes out as a response by one side to the use of some nutjob saying something about guns and that then being applied to any DUer who owns them.

Part of the reason I hold back from these discussions is I find them to be so emotional that they always devolve into a smear fest - every time.

[DanTex]

66. Yes, the "guilt by Bloomberg association" smear-fest does seem to show up every time.

The odd thing is that you are defending it. And that instead of responding to the NRAers who actually played the guilt-by-association card, instead you are taking issue with me for pointing out the irony. I mean, seriously, NRA supporters complaining about the leadership of the gun control movement? Could there be anything more hypocritical?

[NutmegYankee]

69. Both sides of the gun debate do it on DU.

Bloomberg vs Nugent for instance in this subthread. I don't defend it from either side as it just makes meaningful discussion impossible. But if neither side will recognize that they use it, it will never stop.

[DanTex]

71. Ah, the old "both sides do it" card.

Of course, because on one side we have a right-wing organization that whose leadership is exclusively comprised of right-wing nuts, and on the other we have a centrist independent who has liberal positions on a number of social issues, heading up a coalition of mostly liberal Democrats. Obviously, it's a "both sides are the same" type situation.

Even so, it's odd that you would take issue with me, rather than the people who actually played the "guilt by association" card in this thread, don't you think?

[NutmegYankee]

73. I could have spent my lunch talking to a brick wall...

And gotten farther along in understanding. *sigh*

Enjoy your Sunday.

[aikoaiko]

58. I know Bloomberg is a your great right hope for gun restrictions.

Having said that I hate that Ted, Grover, and Sarah and other similar asinine teapartiers are involved with the NRA.

Still, you have to wonder about the efficacy of the anti-gun movement when the NRA has such idiots on their team but still kick anti-gunner legislation to the curb.

[DanTex]

60. Well, he's certainly making an effort, which is a good thing.

But I certainly agree that pro-gunners are almost exclusively right-wing crazies.

The thing is, there are a lot of right-wing crazies in this country. If right-wing crazies had no political clout, not only would we have sensible gun laws, but we'd also have meaningful climate policies, a higher minimum wage, etc. I'm definitely not denying that right-wing idiots are capable of effective political campaigns.

[Duckhunter935]

70. What's a pro-gunner

you definition please

[DanTex]

81. Umm, yeah, "pro-gunner", it's pretty complicated.

Or maybe a pro-gunner is just someone who doesn't think that "real moms" are supposed to have careers outside the home...

[Duckhunter935]

122. I am glad she did

Wish she would have been somewhere other than Wellpoint and Monsanto but it is what it is.

She should be a role model and advertise it rather than say she was just a stay at home mom. She should not try and hide it.

Who We Are

Moms Demand Action was founded by stay-at-home mom Shannon Watts on December 15, 2012, in response to the devastating shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. The organization quickly flourished into a leading force for gun violence prevention, with chapters in all 50 states and a powerful grassroots network of moms that has successfully effected change at the local, state and national level. In December 2013, Moms Demand Action partnered with Mayors Against Illegal Guns to unite a nationwide movement of millions of Americans working together to change the game and end the epidemic of gun violence that affects every community.

http://www.momsdemandaction.org/about/

She must not be proud of her career to not even mention it. I wish she would.

I think "real moms" should do what ever they want, so I guess I do not meet your convoluted definition of a "pro-gunner". Thats good to know, thanks.

[DanTex]

123. Umm... looks like your NRA handler got this one wrong.

Apparently she has been a stay-at-home mom for the last 5 years. You know, like, sometimes people work for a while and then stop working in order to raise their kids. Shocking, I know.

What I don't understand is why the NRA people feeding you your talking points haven't actually bothered to google Shannon Watts...

Shannon Watts is a 42-year-old mother of five children (two step-daughters, 23 and 19; two daughters, 17 and 16; and a 12-year-old son). For the past five years, Ms. Watts has been a stay-at-home mom in Zionsville, a suburb of Indianapolis, Indiana. Prior to that, she had a 15-year career as a communications executive for both public relations agencies and Fortune 500 corporations. Ms. Watts was not an activist or involved in gun issues prior to the shootings at Sandy Hook on Dec. 14, 2012. The day after the tragedy, she started a Facebook page called Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. Since then, Moms Demand Action has become a nonprofit organization with tens of thousands of members and more than 80 local chapters across the country. Ms. Watts’ goal is for Moms Demand Action to become the Mothers Against Drunk Driving of safe gun laws.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shannon-watts/

[Duckhunter935]

124. If you cared to go to the link provided

It was from her site. Why would she neglect to put that on her own site? Curious is it not. I would think she would be proud of her high corporate profession, don't you?

I do not need an NRA handler, whatever that is. I can form my own opinions from reading many different sources. Yes I have used the Google machine, that is how I found her Linkedin profile that provided her past PR jobs she left out on the Moms Demand Action site as she passes herself off as just a stay at home mom.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannontroughton

[DanTex]

126. Sorry, buddy, but she is a stay at home mom.

What it says there is 100% accurate. It's not really unusual for people to leave their careers in order to become stay at home parents. Again, I'm not sure why you are having such a hard time with this.

I know you desperately want to find a way to smear anyone who dares to stick up for any kind of progressive principles, but this one just isn't sticking. You and the NRA are the only people on the planet who thinks she's trying to hide something.

[Duckhunter935]

127. and we will disagree

Too bad she does not want people to know how accomplished she was during her career. Nice role model, not that a stay at home mom is bad either.

Hope you have a great night

[DanTex]

128. Wrong again...

She does want people to know what she accomplished during her career. For example, that's why she listed it all on her HuffingtonPost bio.

I think there's some kind of cultural disconnect here. When someone tells me they are a stay-at-home parent, I don't automatically assume they never had a career. In fact, everyone full time parent I know is someone who took time out of a career to focus on raising kids. It's also not unusual for people to go back to their careers after being a stay-at-home parent for a while.

Maybe in your neck of the woods this kind of thing doesn't happen much.

[UTUSN]

83. R#40 & K n/t

Last edited Sat May 24, 2014, 10:40 AM - Edit history (2)

[billh58]

98. K&R

Gandhi once said, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” If this is true, then Moms Demand Action is well on its way to victory.

[aikoaiko]

106. I don't know...some of us have been laughing at the Brady Campaign's and VPC's efforts to ban guns..

...for a long time and they are still losing.

[Skip Intro]

129. Bloomberg front group exploiting tragedy, selling propaganda. n/t

[blkmusclmachine]

130. Never

Really

Accountable