There are really just a handful here at DU that have the Leave my Guns Alone mentality.

[trumad]

Check out most of the gun threads and you'll easily spot the handful.

I'm fine with that....you can't expect 100 percent perfection on a site like this.

[Electric Monk]

1. The DU Admins do ban gun trolls for being gun trolls, when they can be bothered enough to care

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12628795#post9

[trumad]

3. They really do a great job in Mho

Seriously...we have a few that fly just under the radar but all in all...not many.

[GGJohn]

28. And they rebuke those that want to ban or close the GCRKBA group.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598508

[ellisonz]

49. That would be such a loss to DU...

...I don't know what we would do without the gun obsessed to kick around.

[GGJohn]

53. Awww, your little rant didn't work with skinner did it?

[ellisonz]

58. Rant?

[GGJohn]

60. Oooooh, a toon.

Well, I guess that ends the debate.

Yeah, a rant, you tried your best to get the GCRKBA group shut down and skinner rebuked you and you kept on whining until skinner finally, correctly, ignored you.

[ellisonz]

64. I'm just sick of people getting killed with guns in this country...

...and then the gun faction on DU trolling this website hard.

Enjoy your obsession.

[GGJohn]

67. And so are DU gun rights members.

Enjoy your faux outrage.

[ellisonz]

68. Which is why they want even more guns in circulation?

Enjoy your pathetic Gungeon.

[Straw Man]

76. Who wants that?

Which is why they want even more guns in circulation?

I haven't seen anybody advocating that. Do you have a cite? I, for one, would be very happy to see all illegally owned guns taken out of circulation. If we could do that without engaging in racially discriminatory policy like stop-and-frisk, there would be a significant improvement in public safety.

[hobbit709]

2. And they're quite vocal for their numbers.

[trumad]

4. The old vocal minority.

Pretty easy to spot though.

[Binkie The Clown]

5. Not everyone can be sane.

All the more reason for those of us who are to feel lucky.

[Crunchy Frog]

6. They're a big handful, and extremely vocal.

I've pretty much thrown in the towel on this issue. Gun saturation and gun fixation seems to be what the majority of this country wants. I just wish they wouldn't whine so much when the obvious consequences play themselves out.

[potone]

55. Yes, they are.

And for all of their trumpeting about the Second Amendment, they aren't very knowledgeable about the history of the Supreme Court rulings on the topic. But I disagree with you that the majority of the country wants gun saturation; all polls point to the opposite conclusion, but it comes down to the NRA and the power it wields over our Congressional representatives. Increasingly I feel that until we have a Constitutional Amendment overturning Citizens United and the absurd claims that corporations are entitled the rights of people and that money equals speech, we will not achieve any of the changes that our country so desperately needs.

[Dont call me Shirley]

7. One can't reason with the unreasonable.

[GGJohn]

29. Yeah, we know alllllll about that unreasonableness. eom.

[Yo_Mama]

8. I don't think so - most who doubt the utility of this probably don't discuss it.

I am an example. I have been reading this and mentally adding up the additional GOP voters, and I don't like it. I don't think it can possibly work, and I am old enough to believe that one should target one's efforts carefully.

But this is not something that is fairly argued on DU, so I don't bother to contribute. I'm just posting to say I suspect you are quite wrong.

[Decoy of Fenris]

10. There's far more of us than you'd think, Trumad.

-The critical thinkers don't want to get into it with the Controllers because a solid plan of action to reduce gun violence doesn't include "guns" at all. These people are shouted down as "gun-humpers."

-The average joes acknowledge gun violence as something that will never change. These people are accused of aiding and abetting murderers.

-The gun owners fight to protect not only the 2nd Amendment as a whole, but the Constitution as a body. These people are accused of being NRA plants.

-The casual readers just don't bother to get involved. These people... Well, just don't get involved, really. They only read.

-The right wing trolls lurking in the shadows just +1 every gun control post to get their post count up; it's a great way for them to build post count and "liberal cred". (Either that, or they flame out from the RKBA side of the argument with some over-the-top nonsense or another.) In either case, these people are trolls are do not constitute DU by any representation.

Are you noticing a pattern? Anyone who doesn't -immediately- say "Ban all guns" is marked for tombstoning and ridicule by the Kastle Krew. It reeks of a "no true Democrat" witchhunt, especially with recent calls to ban "The Gungeon" as a whole. Why, then, with acknowledged and widespread persecution (That's right, I said it, because that's what it is) would anyone stand up and dare to speak against extremist lunacy? When anyone who even remotely suggests approaching a topic that isn't "ban all guns", they're shouted down, ignored, Alerted on, insulted both passively and directly, minimized and marginalized, bullied and met with such unmitigated and raw -hatred- that it's sickening to anyone with a heartbeat and a conscience. You and the extremist Controller ilk make people fuckin' AFRAID, Trumad. They're afraid to say anything that -might- be construed as something even remotely "pro-gun" because if they do, DU marks them for "death." No wonder so few of us are active or vocal posters.


Tell you what. I'll make you a deal. I'll help you get almost every "Leave my guns alone" DUer on your side; every one of us, working towards the common goal of eliminating or drastically reducing both gun and non-gun violence, on one condition;

Never once mention guns.

I could elaborate, but I'm not going to yet. I want this to be in good faith and honesty. Consider this an olive branch; Will you put down your beatstick for a while, so we can actually discuss what to do to stop the culture of violence in America, or would you rather continue your fight against an inanimate object?


(On Edit: Edited an unwarrented personal attack out, also fixed Trumad's name from Truman. )

[Electric Monk]

11. The only part of what you wrote that isn't utter bullshit is the part about gun nuts being afraid

[Decoy of Fenris]

12. This. This right here is why we're so few in numbers.

No substance, no thought, and a call to actually -resolve- the issue both sensibly and amenably is only met with derision. Yeah, we stay quiet, because any time we try to have a discussion on how to seriously address the issue, this nonsense is what we're met with.

(On edit: And from a host of the GCRA group no less; no care for actually stopping the violence, but has every care when it comes to mocking others.)

[Electric Monk]

16. Jim Jefferies said it better than I can, so, here you go

[Egnever]

21. And said it so well

[Straw Man]

78. Yeah, doncha just love Jim Jefferies ...

So insightful. So articulate.

In his opening sequence  he claimed that when a man  put his fingers inside the vagina of an unconscious woman  it was not really rape. He  said women should be flattered to have their drinks spiked and be sexually violated. He criticised the women who challenge his misogyny, calling them "uptight (insert expletive word for female genitalia here) who can't take a joke". 

-- http://www.theage.com.au/comment/standup-comedian-jim-jefferies-misogynist-jokes-fall-flat-20150401-1mciqq.html

[Electric Monk]

83. Nice Ad Hominem. nt

[Straw Man]

84. Actually more of a Genetic Fallacy ...

... but you might want to choose your spokespeople a little more carefully.

[cherokeeprogressive]

14. The OP flatly stated that 100% perfection is only achievable with NO "leave my guns alone" thinkers.

Whose post was utter bullshit? Yours or DoF's? Yours.

[GGJohn]

30. Says the one who thinks posting toons is relevant. eom.

[Electric Monk]

74. I am "the one" now? Awesome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027226286

[Logical]

18. "The gun owners fight to protect not only the 2nd Amendment as a whole"

They are a lot more worried about the 2nd than the Constitution.

I have been to many gun shows. And 80% are right wing fucking GOP idiots.

Look at a majority of the NRA magazine covers. That is the group you are talking about.

[Electric Monk]

19. I love how they try and blow smoke up your ass and pretend, don't you? Nah, I'm sick of it. nt

[Logical]

20. It is pure bullshit. The are worried about freedom shit cracks me up. nt

[Hoyt]

69. 80% is quite generous, here in the South.

[graegoyle]

43. What kind of crap is this?

"Tell you what. I'll make you a deal. I'll help you get almost every "Leave my guns alone" DUer on your side; every one of us, working towards the common goal of eliminating or drastically reducing both gun and non-gun violence, on one condition;

Never once mention guns.

I could elaborate, but I'm not going to yet. I want this to be in good faith and honesty."

[ellisonz]

52. ...

Those poor gun lovers

[GGJohn]

56. Nope, more like those poor gun controllers/banners,

can't get what they want, so they go whining to the Admins and get slapped down there.

[Crunchy Frog]

77. Those poor dead and wounded.

I'm glad to see that you're so amused by it all.

[cantbeserious]

79. The Problem Comprises Both Guns And People - No Solution Without Addressing Both Elements

eom

[branford]

13. There are 80-100+ million gun owners in the USA.

More than one out of every three American adults own a firearm, many of them are Democrats, often in very contested purple states, and they tend to vote in large numbers.

If you're surprised that you see a large number of vocal pro-gun rights (along with other pro-Democratic positions) members of DU, you really need to take a long and thoughtful walk around our big tent.

Also, as I've indicated numerous time, I personally have never owned a firearm in my life. I have no guns to be left alone.

Lastly, for reference, I'll leave you with the excerpt from our Democratic Platform concerning firearms.

Firearms. We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements—like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole—so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform

[Mojorabbit]

45. +1000

There have been some thoughtful posts today but most are black and white thinking.

[Hoyt]

70. If they could leave it at 1 or 2 firearms, we'd be OK, especially if vast majority of gun fanciers

weren't right wing , callous, militia, racist types.

[snooper2]

15. I'm waiting on actual ideas that would pass congress

I've just got a shotgun for home protection, nothing else needed

[Logical]

24. My worry is nothing will pass congress. The GOP will not even allow study's on gun violence. nt

[Snobblevitch]

42. Harry Ried controls the senate bills.

[dumbcat]

62. He does?

[GGJohn]

63. Ummm, Reid is no longer Senate Majority Leader,

he's no longer in control of what goes to the floor for a vote.

[madinmaryland]

17. Excellent post, trumad...

We got to see what the new sn's of the formerly banned gun fanciers are.

[Comrade Grumpy]

22. But there are more than just a handful of Democrats and liberals who own guns.

22% of Democrats and 23% of liberals.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/15/the-demographics-and-politics-of-gun-owning-households/

[stevenleser]

23. Guns are a poison on American society. I'd like to see DU take the lead and make pro-gun arguments

against the TOS.

[GGJohn]

34. Ahhh, so you would ban those with an opposing view?

Isn't that what conservatives do?

[stevenleser]

36. The TOS bans all kinds of opposing views. Didnt you know that?

Is being a member of DU unacceptable to you now?

On Edit: Here you go...

Terms of Service
By registering a Democratic Underground account, you agree to abide by these terms. A single violation of any of these terms could result in your posting privileges being revoked without warning.

The Democratic Underground Administrators have a great deal of confidence in our system of citizen jurors and software tools, but we are well aware that trolls are constantly on the lookout for new ways to cause trouble and therefore on rare occasions it may necessary for us to revoke a member's posting privileges for reasons that are not covered by these Terms of Service. Because of this necessity, we retain the right to revoke any member's posting privileges at any time for any reason.

Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

No bigoted hate speech.
Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic. To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians; it also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel, advocating the destruction of the state of Israel, or arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood. In determining what constitutes bigotry, please be aware that we cannot know what is in anyone's heart, and we will give members the benefit of the doubt, when — and only when — such doubt exists.

Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.
Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accommodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances: First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech. In short, you take your chances.

Don't willfully and habitually infringe on others' copyrights.
To simplify compliance and enforcement of copyrights here on Democratic Underground, we ask that excerpts from other sources posted on Democratic Underground be limited to a maximum of four paragraphs, and we ask that the source of the content be clearly identified. Those who make a good-faith effort to respect the rights of copyright holders are unlikely to have any problems. But individuals who willfully and habitually infringe on others' copyrights risk being in violation of our Terms of Service.

Don't threaten anyone (including yourself).
Do not post anything which could be construed as a threat toward any person, on DU or elsewhere. Do not post messages threatening to harm yourself. (If you are having a personal crisis, call a crisis hotline for help. DU members are not qualified to give you the help you need.)

Respect people's privacy.
Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.

Don't post "shock content" or porn.
Do not post or link to extreme images of violence, gore, bodily functions, pain, or human suffering for no purpose other than to shock and disgust. Do not post or link to pornography.

No spammers.
Do not spam Democratic Underground with commercial advertising or promotions.

Don't do anything illegal.
Do not post messages which violate any U.S. laws (eg. linking to illegally-shared files, attempting to organize hacking or DOS attacks, libel/slander, etc.). Organizing civil disobedience with a legitimate political purpose is permitted.

Don't post malicious code or mess with the software.
Do not attempt to intentionally interfere with or exploit the operation of the Democratic Underground website or discussion forums (eg. by "post bombing" or using any other flooding techniques, by attempting to circumvent any restrictions placed on your account by the forum software, etc.) Do not post messages that contain software viruses, Trojan horses, worms, or any malware or computer code designed to disrupt, damage, or limit the functioning of any software or hardware.

Don't do anything else which is similarly disruptive.
Just because it isn't listed here, doesn't mean it's ok. If you post anything which is obviously disruptive, malicious, or repugnant to this community, its members, or its values, you risk being in violation of these Terms of Service.

One more thing: Don't push your luck.
The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

[GGJohn]

39. So how is any of that relevant to those of us who have an opposing view on firearms?

How is defending the right to keep and bear arms a TOS violation worthy of a ban?
Skinner has already addressed that BTW and, while he doesn't agree with the interpretation of the 2A, he's also cognizant of the fact that many Democrats do own firearms and support the 2A.

[pipoman]

65. How liberal and democratic if you...jeezuz what a joke

[romanic]

25. Well it's an open forum.

It would suck to outright ban somebody because they believe in something YOU don't believe in.

[Electric Monk]

26. What, like trickle down economics works, or that global warming is some commie conspiracy?

People do get banned from DU for believing and espousing stupid shit. Happens all the time.

[GGJohn]

27. And there are millions upon millions IRL who have that mentality. eom.

[LonePirate]

31. I think most of the gun rights advocates here on DU are responsible gun owners. However,

I would hope they eventually can think of the greater good for this country that will come once we enact some meaningful gun control and eventually repeal the 2A.

[stevenleser]

32. A second amendment repeal isn't really necessary. What we need is a ruling by a responsible SCOTUS

that says "Of course, the second amendment is meant to only guarantee gun ownership to folks in the militia, which in modern times means members of the armed forces and national guard who are the folks maintaining our national defense and securing the US as a free state."

Then the federal government and states will be free to pass whatever restrictions they would like on the folks not in the armed forces.

[GGJohn]

33. Repeal the 2A?

Even if your fairy tale did come true, it won't, but let's entertain that, it still wouldn't outlaw firearms, all the would happen is that it fall to the states to set their own firearms policies and in case you've been asleep for the last 20 years, more and more states are liberalizing their firearms laws, the majority of states are now shall issue permit for concealed carry, there are now 6 states that trust their citizens to CC without a permit, etc.

Repeal the 2A?

[stevenleser]

35. Yeah, I know, 800,000 dead Americans in the last 30 years is so funny.

Hahahaha, it's so great!

[GGJohn]

37. Of which 2/3rd's are suicides, which in itself is tragic,

but better mental health services would greatly reduce those numbers, as would ending the WOD.

Violent crime, including murders and killings, have been halved in the last 20 years, your safer today than 20 years ago.
And that's not an NRA talking point, that's straight from the FBI's UCR.

[stevenleser]

38. The simpler solution (discounting legislative/constitutional issues) is to get rid of the guns.

You can dance around that all you want to, but without guns, most of those 800,000 people would still be alive.

[GGJohn]

40. Ok, how do you "get rid of the guns"?

There are over 300 million firearms in this country, of which the vast majority aren't registered, the Govt has no idea who has what, where they are, and really have no firm idea of how many are actually in American citizen's hands.

So, what's your plan?

[pipoman]

66. Those who insist on the impossible are the problem

When there are so many actual possible things which could reduce these occurrences why do so many insist on the impossible? Getting rid of guns is your simple solution? Absolutely the stupidest statement I've read all day, and that is saying something...not to mention the complely ridiculous statement that absence of guns eliminates the desire to kill in murderers...

[jack_krass]

41. 1 more

I'm a long time lurker who was so offended by treatment of gun owners on here in the last couple days that it spurred me to finally sign up! (Lifelong shooter and gun owner)

-gun owners compared to terrorists,
-wishing for children of "gun nuts" to die
-collective punishment for all gum owners
-"banning" the NRA LOL (no, not a member )

What is it about this issue that causes otherwise smart people to become so irratiomal?

I wonder why other issues like DUI that kill simmilar amouts of people don't cause the same type of emotion and irrationality?

Why arent drinkers villified like gun owners?

[geomon666]

44. Welcome to DU

I don't vilify gun owners. I vilify the guns. I want your guns taken away. I feel our society cannot be trusted with the right to keep and bear arms any more.

[jack_krass]

50. Well

[blockquote. I want your guns taken away
You can try, and if you get your ban, I'd probably give mine up, rather than become an outlaw.

Actually, I'd happily give up my guns if I thought it would save *one* life, but I truly don't think it would. If outlawes, guns would be available on the black market just as drugs (which kill FAR more people than guns)

Do you drink? What if, after a horrible, public DUI crash with lots of carnage, somebody called for a ban on alcohol? Would you give up your beer?

[geomon666]

51. Well to be honest, I can't stand beer.

I enjoy rum. That being said, if things got so bad with DUI deaths to the point where we needed to have alcohol free zones and endless debates in Congress about adding new laws to obtain alcohol and days of mourning mass DUI deaths. Then yes, if a call was made to ban alcohol, I would agree with it.

The thing with me is, I don't think guns are the only problem. Probably not even the main problem. They're just the tool that's used by people to carry out murder. Take away the tool, mass murder becomes more difficult. And it buys us time to find a solution to the problem of why people choose to go on killing sprees.

[jack_krass]

71. Ok

things got so bad with DUI deaths

A moving car I'd by definition an alcohol free zone..if we go by bodycount, clearly it *is* that bad. There are more alcohol deaths than firearm draths, and prpbably, much much since many firearm deaths are suicide. So if you're consistent you'll be in favor of an alcohol ban.

[geomon666]

80. I would be...

if someone were to start using alcohol to murder people. If someone were to walk into a school with high capacity alcohol and killed 20 children I'm sure you could get that debate started. And yes, even I would probably be on board.

[Electric Monk]

54. Guns killed more Americans in 12 years than AIDS, war, terrorism & illegal drug overdoses combined

Thursday night, during an impassioned address about the shooting at Umpqua Community College, President Obama laid out a challenge to the media. "Have news organizations tally up the number of Americans who've been killed through terrorist attacks in the last decade and the number of Americans who've been killed by gun violence, and post those side by side on your news reports," he asked.

We've looked at those numbers a bit, but you can take this comparison even further: if you include all gun deaths (including homicides, suicides, and accidents), guns killed more Americans between 2001 and 2013 than terrorism, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, AIDS, and illegal drug overdoses combined:

more
http://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9446193/gun-deaths-aids-war-terrorism

GCRA thread on this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12629794

[Straw Man]

75. Sins of omission.

Guns killed more Americans in 12 years than AIDS, war, terrorism & illegal drug overdoses combined

But not as many as alcohol. Don't you think it's time to do something about that?

[rbrnmw]

86. Can you use alcohol in a public place to kill lots of people.

Within minutes intentionally?

[trumad]

47. Did you really ask what is it that piss people off about guns?

Really?

[jack_krass]

73. No, I didnt

I expressed outrage atl gun owners being stereotyped and villified on the board...

But I do question the usefulness of being pissed off at guns. A gun is an inanimate object. Why not be pissed off at the lunatics and criminals who misuse them.

[Puzzledtraveller]

46. Yeah, I think the attitudes here are good on guns.

I don't own a gun, don't want to. I support strict laws but not an all out ban. Am I wrong in that reflects the views of a majority of people?

[trumad]

48. This thread proves my point ...

Just a handful...thank god.

[GGJohn]

57. And millions upon millions IRL that support the RKBA.

Funny how you think DU reflects real life and funny how you left out that little tidbit.

[Iggo]

59. And boy are they a handful.

[GGJohn]

61. Yep, and we're not going away. eom.

[Generic Other]

72. I only see 24 anti-gun posts

So I must assume 50 gun fetishists' posts vanished. Not bad since I only started ignoring yesterday. DU is a whole lot less of a cesspool ever since.

[etherealtruth]

85. K and R