NRA Should Embrace Gun Control or Accept Complicity in Aurora

[SecularMotion]

As new details surface about the mental health of Aurora shooting suspect James Holmes, pro-gun groups attempt to reconcile their support of lax gun laws and the role of guns in yet another tragedy. However, the only legitimate avenue available to these groups to distance themselves from such tragedy is to embrace — not rail against — gun regulations. They can’t have it both ways.

A few scenarios of why, off the top of my head: Some nutcase with legally purchased weapons shoots up a movie theater, some guy stands his ground by chasing and shooting a boy in a hoodie, a congresswoman is put in the hospital and six others killed or injured by an armed man, some other deranged individual decides to kill his college classmates.

Guns are a complicated aspect of our society. They are intricate, often beautifully crafted, precise pieces of engineering technology that require skilled handling. They have become a part of our history and our culture. They provide our soldiers with a lethal edge over our enemies and provide our cops with deterrent power that complements moral authority. They are a multibillion dollar business, they often save innocent lives, and often end them.

As I walk around some streets in Mexico, as I have for a few weeks, watching the Federal Police patrol in armored pickup trucks carrying shotguns and assault rifles, I think of all the societal repercussions of the gun.

http://politic365.com/2012/08/02/nra-should-embrace-gun-control-or-accept-complicity-in-aurora/

[SlimJimmy]

1. The usual anti-ramblings of someone without a clue.

Don’t let folks confuse you with “right to bear arms” ramblings. Go and read the actual amendment. There are a couple of key components conveniently dismissed by those who fail to take guns seriously: the right to firearms within the context of a militia, and the verbatim requirement that the right to bear arms be “well regulated.”

[krispos42]

2. I guess the ACLU should accept warrantless wiretapping

and stop-and-frisk laws, too, otherwise they're to blame.

[Remmah2]

8. Can you imagine all the illegal gun deals that would be stopped?

This might be a grand idea.

[DonP]

9. Embrace the Patriot Act if you love America - or "they" win

I'm fascinated by the brain dead types that are perfectly willing and happy to give up constitutional rights to everything from privacy, to the 1st amendment, to 5th amendment search and seizure laws and embrace fascist megalomaniacs like Bloomberg, Rahm and even Scott Walker ... as long as they think it will hinder gun sales a little.

At least they started banning the threads telling any gun owner that they had "blood on their hands".

They're the same ones that feel that facts/actual data = NRA talking points.

I've noticed how that's become the latest brainless meme for the new group of gun ban fans. Anything you say that reflects reality or the actual law or facts about guns like the FBI UCR are, by their definition, "NRA talking points".

[rDigital]

23. The "talking points" meme is a straw man, and a poorly crafted one at that. nt

[Mojorabbit]

28. It is scary isn't it? nt

[4th law of robotics]

13. If we could only round muslims up in to camps 9/11 never would have happened

the ACLU and other civil-rights extremists have blood on their hands.

If the police were able to randomly search homes and detain people on a suspicion the Aurora and Sikh temple shooters may have been stopped in advance.

When will Americans realize that their "rights" don't trump my right to feel safe via feel-good fascism!?!?!?

[GreenStormCloud]

3. Be glad that he chose to use a gun instead of other, more lethal, cheaper means.

A few years ago 87 people were killed in a night club by a guy with gasoline and a match.

If he had used a bomb he could have wiped out most of the theater. Explosives are cheap and easy to make.

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. "Be glad that he chose a gun instead of another, more lethal, cheaper means ."

That's pretty sick, even coming from the gungeon.

I find nothing to be glad about Aurora.

[gejohnston]

5. there would be more dead

fewer wounded, but more dead. 12 vs 87, that could be bright side.

[Hoyt]

7. Holmes clearly could have used a bomb -- he still chose his friggin guns.

[Remmah2]

11. Though I's waste my time and respond to this frivolous post.

NOT

[Hoyt]

16. Of course it's frivolous to you -- otherwise, it might threaten your access to more guns.

[4th law of robotics]

14. He chose to dye his hair red and call himself the joker too

it's possible that he wasn't making the best decisions at that point.

[Hoyt]

17. Exactly, and guns made the choice of weapons easy for him, as it did Zimmerman and every jerk

that uses a gun to intimidate his wife.

[4th law of robotics]

18. And if he'd been disarmed he would have been as harmless as McVeigh.

[friendly_iconoclast]

24. ...or Julio Gonzalez.

[Reasonable_Argument]

19. That's a weak argument to strip people of their rights

Look, I understand we'll never agree on gun rights because of how you view society but trying to claim that right should be limited because of what people might use to threaten someone's wife is a poor argument. Also, I think Zimmerman made some poor choices but didn't break the law and should be set free. That's an entirely different discussion though.

[4th law of robotics]

22. Only if you assume their goal is safety

rather than stripping us of our rights.

[Hoyt]

31. Not "rights" -- friggin guns. There's a big difference.

Zimmerman didn't break the law -- give me a break? I'm sure that's what free republic and Stormfront lovers say, but he broke the law, spirit of the law, and made a bunch of bigoted gun owners happy.

[Ashgrey77]

35. what a bigoted response, stay classy.............

[rl6214]

39. That's typical hoyt, you'll get used to it.

Welcome to DU.

[Remmah2]

44. Apparently Zimmerman made a lot of anti-gun biggots happy as well.

They're still dancing at their prom.

[GreenStormCloud]

20. He killed fewer people with guns than he would have with 20 pounds of high explosive in a backpack.

Bath Township, Michigan, on May 18, 1927 was bombed, 38 children killed. That's worse than any school shooting the U.S. has had.

[Hoyt]

32. Is that another reason for you and gun nuts everywhere to buy and carry another gun?

[TheCowsCameHome]

34. You know that for a fact?

Please cite your source here [ ________________ ]

[shadowrider]

40. According to Hoyt, some things are so obvious they don't need to be proven n/t

[gejohnston]

42. history is usually a good guide

History repeats itself. During the battle of Kha San, Westmoreland sat around reading histories about Dien Bien Phu.

[Remmah2]

10. Does offense to the truth manifest itself into denial?

The truth is the truth. Both situations are sickening, none the less either could be true.

[TheCowsCameHome]

33. Could?

Or did?

Imagining what could have been worse doesn't cut it.

A fucking coward with a fucking gun(s) chose to ruin the lives of innocents.

That's the only story here, not what "could have been".

[HALO141]

37. But if he hadn't used a gun

you wouldn't give a shit.


Disgraceful.

[shadowrider]

41. Oh snap n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

43. Another stupid assumption,

but if that's all you've got, that's the way it goes sometimes.

[HALO141]

47. Oh, there's so much more.

But it's already been said over and over. You controllers swarm over a tragedy like ants on a dead bug. You scream and cry and threaten and insult and name-call in a vain attempt to cow your opposition. You quote agenda-driven ideologues as if they preach gospel and cite dubious (at best) studies and opinion pieces presented as fact. When your so-called "facts" are challenged with verifiable evidence you claim such evidence is immaterial or fantasy. You go to great lengths to construct red herrings, straw men, guilt-by-association and ad hominem attacks. You accuse others of the worst sort of bigotry while failing to recognize your own. When pinned down on a point you strike off on other tangents sometimes not even at all connected with your original arguments. Then, when all else fails, you decry your opposition as the unwashed rabble, turn up your nose and prance away muttering something about the futility of arguing with those who refuse to acquiesce to your obvious superiority. It's all very old and very tired and very predictable.


But please, by all means... Tell us more about how stupid, inept, uneducated and dull we all are.

[TheCowsCameHome]

48. And

you just can't stand the thought of not having that smooth, cold steel against your body.

You weep for the thought of losing your guns, not one iota for the victims of these heinous acts.

Disgraceful indeed.

[HALO141]

49. Thank you for proving my previous points. n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

50. Still no sympathy for the victims?

So predictable.

[HALO141]

51. My sympathies are, frankly, none of your business.

And I will not cheapen them by putting them on display for you.


You get a "C" for effort trying to side step everything that came before in this conversation. As I said... Very old, tired and predictable.

[TheCowsCameHome]

53. Good dodge.

But then, I'd expect nothing less.

[HALO141]

57. This, from you, while in the act of dodging everything I've said previously.

Again, you prove my point.

[gejohnston]

52. everyone expresses it in different ways

To some people, me included, using them for propaganda is not being sympathetic.

[TheCowsCameHome]

54. Stocking upon ammo and weaponry usually does it,

for some of the weaker minded

[gejohnston]

55. that is a reaction to "it can happen to anyone"

the weak minded confuses op eds with news.

[HALO141]

58. "the weak minded confuses op eds with news."

They confuse it with fact as well.

[Equate]

59. Wow

You just did exactly what he wrote. You just proved his point.

[Reasonable_Argument]

15. People should be glad

He didn't have basic firearm or military training and didn't know what to do when his gun jammed. S.P.O.R.T.S anyone?

[rDigital]

25. From the beginning, I've been thankful for the shooter's ignorance. nt

[petronius]

6. 'Argument by guilt trip' rarely adds anything useful to a discussion

[ileus]

12. Yes it's the NRA's fault....

[aikoaiko]

21. A good example of the impotence of the anti-gun movement.

They have no clue how to reach their goals. The old methods of blaming "lax" gun laws just doesn't work any more.

They can no longer exploit the violent actions of criminals to convince voters to restrict firearms to law abiding US residents.

[rDigital]

27. It's more of a "foaming at the mouth and stomping of the feet thing" right now. nt

[4th law of robotics]

30. They're in a tight spot

all of their predictions have been false (tougher gun laws will reduce crime . . . except they don't. Laxer gun laws will lead to blood running in the streets . . . except it didn't).

And like all fanatics do when confronted with the fact that their faith is misplaced they double down, become more aggressive, and fervently deny all evidence to the contrary.

[rDigital]

26. People are responsible for their own actions.

You wouldn't blame Ford & Budweiser for a drunk driver.

You wouldn't blame a paintbrush for a work of art.

Spoons are not responsible for obesity.

Fertilizer companies are not responsible for bomb makers.

Gun makers and the NRA are not responsible for those who misuse their products.

[phantom power]

29. Unlikely to happen, but the NRA could use some competition

They've become captured and radicalized by the gun industry. Gun owners would benefit from some alternatives. Kind of analogous to how people are abandoning the banksters in favor of credit unions.

We need a "credit union" for gun organizations.

[GreenStormCloud]

36. You are wrong.

There is an annual NRA convention at which members vote.

Prior to 1977 the NRA was accommodating to gun controllers and help write some of the gun control legislation. In 1977 the membership, lead by harlon Carter, revolted against the old NRA leaders and voted to become politically active. Once the NRA began to agressively defend gun rights the membership greatly increased.

Remember, membership in the NRA is purely voluntary. The NRA is the way it is because the membership wants that kind of organization. The NRA does have competition (Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America) but they are more radical than the NRA.

Since the NRA is run by the membership it is a "credit union" organization.

[rDigital]

38. The premise of this

entire article is a "false dilemma" (or false choice, if you will), one of the most juvenile of logical fallacies. It failed before it started. Black and white thinking at it's worst.

[Simo 1939_1940]

45. I yield the floor to Jon Stewart to smack down this assinine idea:

Scroll to the 7:00 mark in the vid.......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/19/jon-stewart-mosque_n_688546.html

[Jenoch]

46. "NRA Should Embrace Gun Control"

Using your logic, Planned Parenthood should embrace severe limits on the availability of abortion services.

[janlyn]

56. Republican mindset

WOW,this argument is so out in left field,it is ludicrous...

If outlawing guns lowers violent crimes ,why does England with a ban on guns,have one of the highest violent crime rates?

I'm sure that the ban on guns made my Nana feel ever so much better when her home was robbed twice by men armed with a cricket bat and a rake handle.

And, yes I know that if they had a gun it could of been worse,however the threat was just as real regardless of the weapon either one could kill her.

See, criminals and mentally ill people will find a way to commit their acts irregardless of any laws on the books.