General Discussion

onenote

(46,147 posts)

104. Big sweeping statements like that by the OP aren't particularly helpful imo

Wed May 28, 2014, 05:46 PM

May 2014

I'll put my anti-gun credentials up against anyone here (among other things having having provided pro bono legal services to Handgun Control Inc when it was first established and having never permitted a gun in any residence I've ever called home).

But the fact is that most people know that guns were used to help win this country's independence; that guns were used to defeat the Confederacy and secure the abolition of slavery, that guns were used to defeat Hitler. In short, that guns sometimes are the mortal enemies of the mortal enemies of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

So broadly declaring that guns (and, implicitly their use) are antithetical to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness simply does not square with the historical reality that most people understand. And thus making such a broad declaration thus is unlikely to get people to listen to the compelling arguments for gun control.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

131 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Guns are the mortal enemies of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and if that is not [View all] Fred Sanders May 2014 OP

yes because all public policy shedevil69taz May 2014 #1

Silly deflection. Emotion makes us human. Most of us. Play the video, then re-comment. Fred Sanders May 2014 #2

Watch the video, why don't you? Hekate May 2014 #3

OK, I watched the video. What gun law would have prevented his son's death? badtoworse May 2014 #6

If there was a law that kept Mr. Rodger from legally obtaining a firearm shedevil69taz May 2014 #8

Cause and effect are not a gunlover's strong suits. I blame lead poisoning and the poison Fred Sanders May 2014 #10

So, you have nothing more than insults? IronGate May 2014 #24

I got a whole lot more than that, sir/madame, as you can see from the thread. Fred Sanders May 2014 #87

Let me clue you in, IronGate May 2014 #127

So, you agree with Joe the Plumber that our dead kids don't trump your right to play with your toys? baldguy May 2014 #7

So, the misdeeds of a tiny minority should be the basis for denying civil rights to millions... badtoworse May 2014 #14

Yes, so you do agree the tree of liberty needs regular watering....with innocent blood. Fred Sanders May 2014 #18

We are talking about guns, not something most people find Hoyt May 2014 #27

I'm sorry G_j May 2014 #48

So you feel relatively safe treestar May 2014 #55

how about the fugging right to life? n/t malaise May 2014 #60

What about it? badtoworse May 2014 #61

No, law-abiding gun owners Sweet Freedom May 2014 #65

"aligning oneself with murderers" - who's doing that? badtoworse May 2014 #72

Why not? Sweet Freedom May 2014 #93

My handguns are registered and I don't have more than a few hundred rounds badtoworse May 2014 #96

And which arguments are those? derby378 May 2014 #99

Stockpiling ammo hollowdweller May 2014 #116

You can sell the ammo to the tyranny fearing crowd? Fred Sanders May 2014 #121

"law abiding gun owners" mikeysnot May 2014 #84

How do you tell BEFORE one is shot who is law abiding? Fred Sanders May 2014 #86

People retain their rights until it's demonstrated they should not have them. badtoworse May 2014 #89

That's easy discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #90

Will citizens then be required to paper thier bodies with signs they are not responsible gun owners? Fred Sanders May 2014 #97

I doubt it n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #101

tiny minority? put all the gun-related crimes and accidents together and unblock May 2014 #103

What do you consider sensible? badtoworse May 2014 #117

i didn't make any specific proposals and i don't see how that burden is on me. unblock May 2014 #128

Terms like "sensible" gun laws get thrown around all the time on DU and elsewhere. badtoworse May 2014 #129

You know exactly what they are, and if you do not then you do not belong in this Fred Sanders May 2014 #130

Seriously? I see a broad spectrum of opinion on what is sensible gun control badtoworse May 2014 #131

That's pretty cold treestar May 2014 #56

As opposed to.. Sassysdad May 2014 #4

(facepalm) flvegan May 2014 #5

That makes perfect sense unless you consider movements like the French Resistance. Gravitycollapse May 2014 #9

The French Revolution took 70 years to play out, there WAS a tyranny, not a democratic government... Fred Sanders May 2014 #100

I'm going to give you a minute to go research the French Resistance and then get back to me. Gravitycollapse May 2014 #115

Did the parents file paperwork to involuntarily commit Rodger, Elliot? JJChambers May 2014 #11

So being certified insane is the only restriction on purchase? Good to know...... Fred Sanders May 2014 #12

I don't know what certified insane means JJChambers May 2014 #13

You answered your own question and did not answer mine..... Fred Sanders May 2014 #17

The answer to your quesiton is No JJChambers May 2014 #21

I'll answer your question for you ... oldhippie May 2014 #22

He was seeing a mental health professional for counseling. If anyone was going to commit him stevenleser May 2014 #95

What happens when guns save lives of innocents? JJChambers May 2014 #15

For real? Now you want to compare actual numbers of dead innocents, the thousands a year as Fred Sanders May 2014 #16

Numbers hollowdweller May 2014 #118

More guns in America than people, at some point saturation is reached and comparisons Fred Sanders May 2014 #120

"Why wasn't something done? It's outrageous" It is, and everytime a gunner shithead says alcibiades_mystery May 2014 #19

They are a mixture of not too smart and very gullible. Fred Sanders May 2014 #20

Jury results are in Major Nikon May 2014 #39

a righteous call. n/t defacto7 May 2014 #51

Good alcibiades_mystery May 2014 #58

Let's have a party, everyone! Gunners are perhaps maybe amenable to discussing UBC! Well, maybe. alcibiades_mystery May 2014 #82

What an erudite post. badtoworse May 2014 #59

One doesn't need erudition to describe the glaringly obvious alcibiades_mystery May 2014 #62

To describe it, no; but to make progress in dealing with the issue, it would help a lot. badtoworse May 2014 #63

Like racists and other delusional extremists, gun nut shitheads will never give an inch alcibiades_mystery May 2014 #66

As deserving as it was, I didn't alert on your post. I just thought it was infantile. badtoworse May 2014 #70

It's as if Rush Limbaugh wrote that while his oxys are wearing off friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #81

It's actually not worth... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #71

See Post No. 72. UBC's are an area I'd give on. badtoworse May 2014 #73

Odd that few/none of the pro-control folks... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #75

What Would Grady Do? Puzzledtraveller May 2014 #23

I'm not understanding how an inanimate object can be the enemy of anything. Llewlladdwr May 2014 #25

BECAUSE THE ONLY PURPOSE OF THAT INANIMATE OBJECT IS TO DESTROY HUMAN LIFE undeterred May 2014 #26

And hunting to feed families, and sport shooting The Straight Story May 2014 #28

I don't see pretending that a gun is nothing more than an inanimate object undeterred May 2014 #31

I'm not understanding how pretending a gun has magical evil powers... Llewlladdwr May 2014 #33

You don't want to understand. undeterred May 2014 #34

Perhaps you're not explaining well? nt Llewlladdwr May 2014 #36

You just want to insult and belittle gun owners. IronGate May 2014 #67

13.7 million people went hunting in 2011 The Straight Story May 2014 #37

And how many men hunted other people and gunned them down? undeterred May 2014 #38

13,000 out of 50,000,000+ The Straight Story May 2014 #40

Am I supposed to feel insulted by your repeated undeterred May 2014 #42

There is nothing progressive The Straight Story May 2014 #46

This message was self-deleted by its author undeterred May 2014 #42

So guns should be allowed to proliferate unopposed because doing so is bigotry? Major Nikon May 2014 #41

Nice try The Straight Story May 2014 #45

incivility =/ bigotry Major Nikon May 2014 #47

If that's true, it is still too much treestar May 2014 #57

The simple folk who love these weapons also think atomic bombs are inaminate and therefore harmless, Fred Sanders May 2014 #85

Sometimes inatimate objects are designed and engineered for evil. (nt) stone space May 2014 #29

How does one "design" an item for evil? Llewlladdwr May 2014 #30

What evidence did this guy provide to anybody reguarding using these guns for hunting? (nt) stone space May 2014 #32

None of which I'm aware. Llewlladdwr May 2014 #35

That's easy discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #78

Are you really that stupid or just naive? world wide wally May 2014 #50

No shopping carts are used to procure food upaloopa May 2014 #105

Food for thought Clayguy61 May 2014 #49

Add limits on open carry defacto7 May 2014 #52

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #54

Exactly which major crimes... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #76

Requiring insurance for a Constitutional right is asking for trouble derby378 May 2014 #92

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #53

If guns are the mortal enemies of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness... Dr. Strange May 2014 #64

Just listen to those crickets... n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #91

The thread has plenty of answers to that question, police have always had guns, they are registered Fred Sanders May 2014 #98

Clearly... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2014 #102

Okay, let's explore that concept a little bit... derby378 May 2014 #110

Why does anyone need a Kalashnikv assault rifle for in America? Not because of Fred Sanders May 2014 #111

My point exactly derby378 May 2014 #114

I don't know of any LE who have registered firearms. oneshooter May 2014 #119

If 99.99% of duers want stronger gun regulations... NCTraveler May 2014 #68

Some people just can't accept that not everyone is in lockstep with their view NutmegYankee May 2014 #108

"But...but...but...mah gun is m'fambly! Aristus May 2014 #69

So lets leave them in the hands who are best at taking those from us. dilby May 2014 #74

After all, that worked so well in Mexico - oh, wait... (n/t) derby378 May 2014 #77

Our casual attitude towards guns and violence. ZX86 May 2014 #79

For far too many, not all, firearms have become a fetish, the dictionary defintion. And they know it Fred Sanders May 2014 #88

Anti-RKBA DU members were full of hubris after the Sandy Hook massacre, too. aikoaiko May 2014 #80

Once again, the masks slip and the true faces are seen friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #83

You forgot the fourth type, the type that understand using 300 year old wording that ignores the Fred Sanders May 2014 #107

Too bad for you that *all* of the Supremes think there's an individual right friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #122

This keyboard warrior seems to draw a lot of flak....and individual rights is a general concept not Fred Sanders May 2014 #123

It's *not* a "special right", it's part and parcel of the Bill of Rights friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #124

My point is that there are a lot of Constitution protected individual rights, the dissents in Fred Sanders May 2014 #125

They do help draw a bright line on what is or is not permissable friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #126

America "exploited" 9/11 using emotional arguements to launch 2 wars, so that type of emotion Fred Sanders May 2014 #106

That was wrong too. At least the war in Iraq. aikoaiko May 2014 #109

The parallel is that there is no parallel. The emotions clearly exploited by America and the media Fred Sanders May 2014 #112

Some laws might lead to reduced violence, but some might not. aikoaiko May 2014 #113

We're on the same side on this issue, but I dont think anything will happen in the next 5 yrs or so. stevenleser May 2014 #94

Big sweeping statements like that by the OP aren't particularly helpful imo onenote May 2014 #104