Cult of firearms incites disobedience

[SecularMotion]

With the arrival this past week of the deadline for registering military style weapons in New York, our gun-carrying comrades appear to be more tightly bound to the code of the gun than to the laws that bind the rest of us in a civilized society.

How startling to find that the cult of the firearm should monopolize the passions of this group over their responsibility to uphold and follow the law, the same as all others in society do — their wives and children, neighbors and friends and community leaders.

How discouraging to hear various police chiefs and sheriffs declare they will not enforce the law to arrest those who fail to register their firearms. And how odd it is, as Christian churches prepare for Easter week celebrations with messages of mercy and forgiveness, that the gun lobbies grow more rowdy, preaching defiance and aggression instead.

How sad to read that police officers, city councilmen and county and state legislators are willing to stand opposed to the law, contrary to the oaths they swore when they took office. New York's SAFE Act was designed as the strongest measure in the country to keep illegal guns off the street, make us all feel safer, and keep guns out of the hands of violence-prone individuals. How wrong for the head of the N.Y. Pistol and Rifle Association to turn this into a political campaign when members of both parties in the state Legislature voted for passage of the SAFE Act in January 2013.

http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Cult-of-firearms-incites-disobedience-5413625.php

[rrneck]

1. A law is a codification of popular consent. nt

[intaglio]

2. But they need guns because criminal have guns

You know criminals like them.

[Duckhunter935]

3. Secular's favorite group is not the one he hosts?

That is funny, would you care to discuss your cut and pastes as our SOP requires? From the public profile.

Member since: Sun Jan 14, 2007, 12:51 PM
Number of posts: 4,631
Number of posts, last 90 days: 774
Favorite forum: General Discussion, 159 posts in the last 90 days (21% of total posts)
Favorite group: Gun Control & RKBA, 464 posts in the last 90 days (60% of total posts)
Last post: Sat Apr 19, 2014, 10:18 AM

Jury
Willing to serve on Juries: Yes
Eligible to serve on Juries: Yes
Chance of serving on Juries: 100% (explain)
Number of times served on Juries: 371

Hosting
Gun Control Reform Activism

[DonP]

4. That's pretty sad

But talking to yourself, then waiting for echo that may never come must be a downer.

What a depressing way to spend the wee small hours, desperately Googling for violent stories that may (or often may not) be relevant to gun control and RKBA.

Maybe a nice hobby would help? Needlepoint? Scrapbooking?

[The Straight Story]

7. I think the poster is fun, at least for me they are

They don't argue/discuss back generally (which means they probably agree with me in this case) and they make it easy to address common issues that come up regarding the absolute hatred/stupidity of people who want to control the lives of many others based on the few (as I have noted before these are the same type folks who think the idea of blaming all muslims for what a few do is logical and they prefer to spread fear and ignorance to get others to feel the same).

Saves me having to track down all the silly things people are saying about guns and such but leaves me a place to discuss just what I wanted to anyway.

So hopefully they will continue to help bring exposure to the cause of allowing fellow human beings to have the freedom to own something without fear of government throwing them into already over crowded prisons (especially when the thing they want to throw them in jail for is just a tool).

[rrneck]

6. I think the idea might be to claim turf.

GCRA is behind a sizeable wall so the next step is to spam RKBA. Why this seems to be necessary is beyond me. Maybe the idea is to make this group look like a purely anti gun group if people just glance at the subject lines. Maybe it's just spite. Maybe it's to incite secret trolls to reveal themselves through persistent irritation. Who knows. He certainly isn't posting here to discuss the issue. It's not like this is a discussion board or anything.

The fire hydrant won't be the worse for wear from it's abuse.

[Duckhunter935]

8. you very well may be right

I do not call for blocks but his continued disregard for the SOP and possible spam might make me change my mind. It would be different if he just would discuss what he is posting.

Maybe a 30 day block with a warning?

[rrneck]

9. It's not worth it to me.

Discussions about guns here always end the same just like those that happen in GD. There is always two winners and two losers. The anti gun poster wins the emotional debate and the loses the factual side of it. The pro gunner wins with the facts and loses in the partisan popularity contest. Been doing it for years.

[SecularMotion]

10. I'll just refer you to this post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=142272

[gejohnston]

13. define harassment

Do you define "harassment" as not blindly accepting the validity of the views or logic behind them?
You views are not actually liberal. They may or may not be progressive, but I can certainly make an argument that they are regressive. When the KKK lobbied MI state leg for their gun purchase permit (a form of UBC) it certainly was not for humanitarian or liberal reasons, nor UK and much of Europe in the 1920s during the red scare. Come to think of it, until 50 years ago, the south generally had stricter laws than the rest of the US other than NY and Michigan (one being an organized crime stronghold and the other being the largest Klan strong hold in the north). Canada's laws started because of anti immigrant fears.
Your views are shared with much of the political and economic elite, which I would not define as left wing. Your view of guns are closer to Nixon's than Jerry Brown's.

[Duckhunter935]

17. I had a nice discussion with the host

and we agreed on how it is now and I look forward to thoughtful discussion in this group unlike you allow in your group. I think this shows us to be on the high ground as far as open discussion and allowing different viewpoints. I do find it interesting that you host that other group but this one is your favorite.

[SecularMotion]

18. DU is a website for liberals.

You might find a right wing website to be more agreeable to your "different viewpoints."

[gejohnston]

19. DU is for Democrats

the ToS does not specify that one has to have any particular view on guns. Who are you to define for others what "liberal" is? Is it based on something you were told to think or is it based on a logically consistent philosophy that you worked out for yourself?

Since breed specific legislation is popular in UK, San Francisco, and LA County, is that supposed to be the "liberal view on dogs" simply because it is more popular in those places than in places like Texas? f so, how can you defend a law that is based in hysteria, ignorance, misinformation, and apathy? Since breed and race are biologically the same thing, just like autopsy and necropsy refer to the same medical procedure, that makes pit bull ban supporters racist as well. Labels like "liberal" and "conservative" work only to a small degree, and even then only among those who prefer not to have their own ideas.

[SecularMotion]

21. Who do you think you're fooling?

You don't think it's obvious to everyone that you're promoting right wing views on DU?

[Duckhunter935]

22. it must drive you crazy

not being able to block a poster that has different views than you.

[SecularMotion]

23. You again?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=142272

[Duckhunter935]

25. yes, I am here

how are you doing this fine day?

And please feel free to use ATA to ask Skinner to ban posts that you fail to agree with. I will look forward to his response and will look forward to a "question asked by SecularMotion"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1259

The host here has spoken by not taking any action but you are still free to ask him also. But You can PM him I am sure.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=188886

[gejohnston]

24. I promote the truth

and the chips fall where they may. I bought into a narrative that turned out to be proven false in front of my eyes and ears. I had to change my "view" to conform to the proven reality. It is a good way to prevent cognitive dissonance. What I do promote is truth before dogma, and principle before party. If the "truth" is empirically proven, it is simply reality. The ends never justify the means. MSNBC's dishonesty equals Fox's dishonesty. Lawrance O'Donnell's bigotry equals Glen Beck's bigotry. Pia Glenn's racism equals Rush Limbaugh's.
Like I said, your views on guns are not liberal and have more in common with Richard Nixon than Jerry Brown.

The difference for me is who tells the truth at least 51 percent of the time.

[Duckhunter935]

20. so now we need to

take a purity test to be liberal and post here? Do you get to make it up? That is very offensive as I have been voting democratic for the last 30+ years. You are the one posting in the RKBA group. You block any discussion in the other group that is an echo chamber.

Please do not accuse me of being a troll any more or provide proof and alert.

[Lizzie Poppet]

26. Feel free to prove our views aren't liberal.

Good luck with that...

[Lizzie Poppet]

43. *sound of crickets chirping*

Quelle surprise!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

42. The definition of liberal is more open, more free, generous.

It is NOT adherence to invasive authoritarianism.

[The Straight Story]

5. Is that like a cult of abortion? Or a cult of civil rights?

Funny how people lazily label something a cult when they don't like something.

[spin]

11. It was widely predicted that many gun owners in New York State would refuse to register ...

their firearms. No surprise there.

Law enforcement has its hands full dealing with dangerous criminals. The street cop is not all that interested in arresting honest citizens who fail to comply with what they may view as a useless law.
Apparently some police chiefs and sheriffs in New York State also feel this way.

Some states such as Florida forbid registration of firearms.

The 2013 Florida Statutes
Chapter 790
WEAPONS AND FIREARMS

***snip***

The Legislature finds and declares that:
1. The right of individuals to keep and bear arms is guaranteed under both the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and s. 8, Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. A list, record, or registry of legally owned firearms or law-abiding firearm owners is not a law enforcement tool and can become an instrument for profiling, harassing, or abusing law-abiding citizens based on their choice to own a firearm and exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed under the United States Constitution. Further, such a list, record, or registry has the potential to fall into the wrong hands and become a shopping list for thieves.
3. A list, record, or registry of legally owned firearms or law-abiding firearm owners is not a tool for fighting terrorism, but rather is an instrument that can be used as a means to profile innocent citizens and to harass and abuse American citizens based solely on their choice to own firearms and exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed under the United States Constitution....emphasis added
4. Law-abiding firearm owners whose names have been illegally recorded in a list, record, or registry are entitled to redress.
(b) The Legislature intends through the provisions of this section to:
1. Protect the right of individuals to keep and bear arms as guaranteed under both the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and s. 8, Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. Protect the privacy rights of law-abiding firearm owners.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.335.html

The really sad part to this is that many New York State voters may vote against good Democrats over this issue and their vote may make the difference in close elections. The effort to register firearms in New York State may also cause Democrats to lose or not get seats in other states.

Many if not most gun owners believe that registration is the first step to confiscation. Little the gun control advocates can say will convince them otherwise.

[krispos42]

12. Because, of course, we should never question whether the laws need to be changed.

Or if implementing the laws in the first place was a good idea. Or if listening to the people affected by the laws should be a factor in legislating.


Can I assume that you are a supporter of Wall Street, SecularMotion? Did you support OWS protestors being beaten and arrested for disobeying NYPD orders?

[SecularMotion]

15. Do you also question the need for "Stand your Ground" laws?

Did Florida legislators speak to Trayvon Martin before passing the laws?

[gejohnston]

16. Florida was stand your ground by common law before hand

as were about 30 other states including California and Illinois. Most of the 24 with specific laws simply codified what was already common law. Georgia and Florida are both examples of this.
Since Zimmerman had no ability to escape, as proven by two eye witnesses and physical evidence, SYG isn't relevant. The fact that Zimmerman screamed for help for 40 seconds (while getting his head beat in the sidewalk) and not able to escape canceled out any duty to retreat even if there wasn't SYG.

The fact that greedy ambulance chasers and a antisemitic race baiter hired a PR firm to bullshit the country in believing otherwise doesn't count. If you want to continue buying into the false narrative that smears a moderate Democrat by a dishonest and bigoted POS like Sharpton, be my guest but count me out.

While there are conservative and liberal views, there is only one reality. Often that reality pisses on both views.

[flamin lib]

27. Zimmerman had no ability to escape?

Thats so full of shit. The 911 dispatcher told him not to follow. That was an opportunity to escape. Travon says, 'You got a problem?' That was an opportunity to escape.

No. Zimmerman had a gun. He was fearless. He didn't WANT to escape. He had been fantasizing for months about using his gun to enforce justice.

You know it, I know it.

[gejohnston]

33. I once believed that too

I even took the time to watch the trial while it was being streamed in my office, and caught side hearings on You Tube. As I watched, the more I realized that I had been lied to. Of course, I could have "ignore the evidence and follow my heart", which is what prosecutor asked the jury to do in his closing argument. I don't play that game. The complete "racist vigilante" was a complete lie and was as dishonest as the photo of the 12 year old kid in the Hollister shirt. I don't like being lied to.

Thats so full of shit. The 911 dispatcher told him not to follow. That was an opportunity to escape.

It wasn't a 911, it was non emergency operator. He did not tell Zimmerman to do anything, because they are not allowed to tell anyone to do anything. The evidence indicates that the attack happened while Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle to wait for the cops. Besides, it isn't legally relevant anyway.

Travon says, 'You got a problem?' That was an opportunity to escape.

I couldn't out run a 6'3" football player, but the rest of the exchange was something like "no" then came the "you do now" and the sucker punch, which knocked him to the ground. Trayvon straddled him and started pounding his head in the sidewalk. Why? According to the data dump from his phone, he was that kind of guy.
Even the lawyers Trayvon's parents hired acknowledge that is a fact and said as much on Piers Morgan (Daryl Parks told Morgan that Zimmerman should be held liable because the cops would have rescued him in a minute or two.)

No. Zimmerman had a gun. He was fearless. He didn't WANT to escape. He had been fantasizing for months about using his gun to enforce justice.

You read minds, or is that some fool like Cenk Uyger said without even meeting him? We were told to think that by a PR firm hired by a greedy ambulance chaser.

You know it, I know it.

no I don't know that. I know some lying POS demonized a fellow Democrat to get us to "know" that.
Jeralyn Merritt at Talk Left explained it this way:

The legacy of this case will be that the media never gets it right, and worse, that a group of lawyers, with the aid of a public relations team, who had a financial stake in the outcome of pending and anticipated civil litigation, were allowed to commandeer control of Florida's criminal justice system, in pursuit of a divisive, personal agenda.

Their transformation of a tragic but spontaneous shooting into the crime of the century, and their relentless demonization of the person they deemed responsible, not for a tragic killing, but for "cold-blooded murder," has called into question the political motives and ethics of the officials serving in the Executive branch of Florida's government, ruined the career of other public officials, turned the lives of the Zimmerman family, who are as innocent as their grieving clients, into a nightmare, and along the way, set back any chance of a rational discussion of the very cause they were promoting, probably for years.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/7/14/145748/759/Colo_News/The-Legacy-of-the-George-Zimmerman-Trial
For Ben Crump and Daryl Parks, it was about money. Others piled either to make a buck or ideology (or in the case of Al Sharpton, both).
It is one thing to honestly believe that an injustice had been done. It is another to cling to a false narrative to save face, which is the case of the media. What Crump's law firm, Sharpton, and Rick Scott did was beyond despicable. I detest them all equally. Politics and political pressure have no place in the justice system.
I have a simple core value: reason before dogma, principle before party. I'm also kind of priggish when it comes to dishonesty and bigotry. I have zero tolerance for it. I don't care who is spouting it, who the "other" is, the race/religion/politics of either is; I detest and call it out equally. That means I defend Mormons from the likes of Larry O'Donnell just like I call out Glen Beck's anti Muslim bullshit. That is "the way I roll" and that is how I expect anyone calling themselves a liberal to act.

[flamin lib]

34. Nope, still full of shit.

I watched most of the trial too.

It was a 911 call. The dispatcher asked "Are you following him?". Zimmerman said " Yes". Dispatcher said "We don't need you to do that.".

Can't outrun a football player? Why try when you'd train as a boxer? Sucker punch? So Travon hit Zimmerman after he turned away?

No, Zimmerman carried a gun so he could someday act out the fantasy of every vigilante. It doesn't take a mind reader to know that.

Then there's the great character he displayed after he got away with murder, abusing his wife and then his girlfriend.

Live in your fantasy world. Me? I'll stay in the reality based world.

[gejohnston]

35. sorry,

I watched most of the trial too.

I watched the entire thing, including the hearing, including Trayvon's phone that showed him bragging about beating the shit out of people at school and trying to illegally buy a pistol. I also read legal blogs that explained it. Did you catch the closing arguments? What do you think of the prosecution not once saying "we proved" but instead of appealed to emotion and basically said ignore the evidence? What do you think of the defense, even though they had no responsibility to, pointed out what they proved.

It was a 911 call. The dispatcher asked "Are you following him?". Zimmerman said " Yes". Dispatcher said "We don't need you to do that.".

No it wasn't, it was a non emergency number. If you paid attention, you would have found that he Trayvon was out of sight when he stopped running. The background noise showed that Zimmerman stopped running. There is no evidence that Zimmerman continued any pursuit. There is evidence of Trayvon doubled back to attack. If you remember, RJ said Trayvon said he got to his dad's girl friend's house (about 70 yards from where the attack happened) and then later said that saw Zimmerman again.

Can't outrun a football player? Why try when you'd train as a boxer? Sucker punch? So Travon hit Zimmerman after he turned away?

He didn't train as a boxer, he did MMA aerobics to lose weight. Sucker punch was still an unprovoked attack, it doesn't matter if he turned away or not. In any DTR or SYG case, the first strike, or threat of, starts the clock. Nothing before is relevant. Since we have eye witnesses saying they saw Trayvon pounding Zimmerman's head in the sidewalk, the physical evidence including a photo taken in the back of the cop car, and the sounds of him screaming for help (which Tracy Martin told the cops and the court wasn't Trayvon, so it had to be Zimmerman)

No, Zimmerman carried a gun so he could someday act out the fantasy of every vigilante. It doesn't take a mind reader to know that.

Sorry, there is no evidence of that either. That was a fiction of ideologues and race bating douches like Crump and Sharpton.

Then there's the great character he displayed after he got away with murder, abusing his wife and then his girlfriend.

Sorry, that was proven to be false. Wife had to retract when the cops wanted to see the in house surveillance tape. The tape proved that she lied to the cops. That is why the charges were dropped. As for the girlfriend, listen to the 911 call. At no time did she say George attacked her. She is on the phone and Zimmerman is in the background asking her to chill out. A few days before then, investigators found that she tried to sell her story to a tabloid. No evidence of abuse, just a gold digger hoping to cash in on a law suit with NBC. Since there was no evidence of violence on his part, there were no charges. If there was no evidence, it didn't happen that way.

Live in your fantasy world. Me? I'll stay in the reality based world.

People who live in fantasy world think they are in the real world. Confirmation bias does not equal "reality based". Read the coverage in Talk Left archives. If facing the truth makes you feel like less of a liberal, it shouldn't. That is others define you. Assholes like Rush and Cenk do not define me.
The facts are the facts. The truth is the truth. The facts are that in this case, not only did Corey fail to prove any guilt, the defense actually proved his innocence. That is hard to do. That is the reality.

[flamin lib]

38. Well, we agree on one thing.

You were lied to, only thing is you chose to believe the liar. Because, uh guns. And liberty.

[gejohnston]

39. We were both lied to

the only thing is that I choose to see the truth instead of clinging on to a false narrative created by a racist greedy lawyer (yes, I'm calling Ben Crump a racist as well as being an unethical lawyer.) Not because of guns and liberty, but because that is what came out in trial and and proven beyond any doubt, plus every working legal scholar left and right put it in context explained it that way.
If you want to believe the lie "because of guns" then that is your right. I refuse to pretend that MSNBC isn't as much as a cesspool of dishonesty and bigotry as Fox. They are equally despicable.
I watched the entire thing live as though it were on CSPAN without some talking head telling me what they thought happened or wanted me to think happened.

[HALO141]

45. So you're psychic, too?

Whoda thunk?

[krispos42]

28. Well, considering the laws were passed long before he was killed...

...I would guess not.

Unless you meant during the recent re-visitation of the SYG laws. Then, I suppose, they would have needed to use a medium or an Ouija board or something. Too bad Miss Cleo isn't available.

Of course, the Zimmerman trial seems to have been a poster case for revisiting the Florida jury-selection process and trial process as well as the law itself.

Are you willing to re-think the SAFE Act?

[SecularMotion]

29. I'd re-think the SAFE Act if it enabled the murders of innocent youth

[Duckhunter935]

30. sure made some ugly rifles

so glad they are no longer assault rifles.

[blueridge3210]

31. Magazine capacity and cosmetic feature bans

Don't seem to be preventing any murders.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. "Just following orders" is where most problems start.

[SQUEE]

32. Amen to this..

I can not ever truly state the vehemence in which I agree on this ...

[NYC_SKP]

36. Not sad, not discouraging.

One may as well expect more of this push back when stupid emotional laws are passed at the expense of sane strategies to reduce gun violence.

This is good thing.

Prepare to see more and more of it.

It's part of how the system works, we are not blind and obedient frogs in a pot.

Much as some would like us to be.

[gejohnston]

37. You either support civil disobedience in principle or you don’t.

Supporting the specific cause is a different matter.

[flamin lib]

41. It would be civil disobedience if they marched and demonstrated out in

public. To hide and simply not obey the law is no different than tax evasion.

To claim otherwise is intellectual dishonesty.

[gejohnston]

44. marching and demonstrating is legal

Civil disobedience is by definition illegal and can involve tax evasion, see David Henry Thoreau.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/civil-disobedience
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil%20disobedience

[flamin lib]

46. I'll juat declare victory now as this is going nowhere.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018585263

[gejohnston]

47. there are a couple of smilies for that

notice I didn't say anything about the specific cause.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

40. The oath...

..."I do hereby pledge and declare that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the
constitution of the State of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the
position of..."

...and what to do when the laws conflict with those constitutions...