Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Stupid People With Guns

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:03 AM
Original message
Stupid People With Guns
An audio version of this article is available here: http://www.truthout.org/stupid-people-with-guns58294



(Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: Mini D, D Sharon Pruitt)

Stupid People With Guns
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

Monday 05 April 2010

I'm sitting inside my dark little office on a sunny day to write this, and believe me, it's a sacrifice. We got more than 14 inches of rain here in Boston during the month of March, and it has reached the point that people have forgotten what the sun is. They're outside right now sacrificing goats and Pekingese dogs to the Yellow Orb God so the harvest will be good. Well, no, not really, but you get the idea. If it had been snow all through this last month, we'd all be dead, and now it's nice out for the first time in five months and I'm inside writing.

Why?

Because I've stopped being appalled and aghast and unsettled by all these brain-donor right-wingers who have been making threats and breaking windows and running people off the road. I've stopped being appalled, and now I'm just pissed. I have had enough of these blowhards, these false heroes, these empty patriots, these bigots and liars and doomed fools. It is enough.

I'm also pissed at myself, because at least a small part of the problem is my fault, too. The more attention these wingnut gasbags get, the more their profile gets raised, and that's no good for any of us. I mean, come on, all the networks show Sarah Palin on a daily basis for the same reason they show car accidents and people stuck sideways on amusement rides (that one occupied a fair portion of CNN's afternoon broadcast the other day). It's the spectacle of it all, the sad and sorry spectacle, and as a writer, it's hard to resist. When someone shows up at a health care town hall meeting and starts shrieking, "Keep your damn government hands off my Medicare," well, the die is cast. Every picture I see of these Tea Party gatherings looks like the monthly meeting of the There But By The Grace Of God Go I Society, and laying off them has proven exceedingly difficult.

Well, no more. This last time will have to pay for all, because I am done paying mind to that which is wholeheartedly, proudly and oh-so-conspicuously mindless. I'm missing out on a beautiful day so I can let these people know what I really think of them, their whole agenda, and what exactly they can do with it, one final time.

I know plenty of people, liberal and conservative, who are politically angry and not shy about sharing their opinions. My conservative friends are up in arms about what they perceive as an unacceptable expansion of government power - who, because they have integrity, also felt the same during the Bush years when George and the boys were piloting one of the largest federal expansions in modern American history - and my liberal friends are furious about the decision to open offshore drilling, about the public option head-fake, about the escalation in Afghanistan, and about any number of other things.

They're mad, but they're not stupid.

Really, that's the thing here.

There are right-wing people who are angry, and there are right wing people who are angry and stupid, and that turns out to be a pretty ridiculous combination, especially when these angry stupids also happen to own firearms.

The most recent example of this, of course, is this Hutaree group in Michigan. Long story short, a bunch of Taliban-style, Biblical, absolutist bucketheads who were armed to the teeth decided the End Times had arrived, and were gearing up to go to war against the Antichrist. As it turned out, however, His Satanic Majesty was booked elsewhere that week, and these Hutaree people found themselves in need of a new target. They found one: cops. Their plan was to go kill some cops, and then attack the funerals of the cops they killed so they could kill more cops, along, presumably, with cop wives and cop kids and cop parents and cop friends. Fortunately, they got busted, and are now going away.

Why did Hutaree think the seven bowls were in the process of being spilled? Funny you should ask, because it's pretty damned funny. Apparently, at some point, they received a chain email about a bill before the house called H.R. 1388. The text of the email read:

Something happened ... H.R. 1388 was passed yesterday, behind our backs. You may want to read about it. It wasn't mentioned on the news ... just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen. Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA. This is the news that didn't make the headlines.

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza. The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States, was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.

Doubtful? To verify this for yourself: www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488 PLEASE PASS THIS ON ... AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW. WE are losing this country at a rapid pace.


Doubtful? You'd better be, because this is gold-medal-winning gibberish from soup to nuts. H.R. 1388 was a bill that expanded AmericaCorps and other federal aid programs dramatically, which the geniuses from Hutaree could have found out for themselves in about 12 seconds, had they bothered to look the bill up ... and never mind the fact that this email describes a House bill and an executive order in the same breath, as if they were the same thing.

The stupid ... it burns ...

Of course, another breathless accusation leveled by another chain email claimed that H.R. 1388 was establishing a required stint of public service for all Americans, which wasn't true either, but that wasn't juicy enough for Hutaree. No, they got an email from Somewhere Out There saying that Hamas was moving in down the block thanks to the president; they didn't bother to look the thing up for themselves, and boom, it was cocked-and-locked-let's-find-a-cop time.

Obama is bringing Hamas to America? Jesus wept.

This miraculous breed of pure stupid has managed to dig itself in pretty deep with a certain subset of American humanity, to the point that black-letter history itself is up for review and redaction. Steven Thomma, writing recently for McClatchy, nails it to the shed:

In articles and speeches, on radio and TV, conservatives are working to redefine major turning points and influential figures in American history, often to slam liberals, promote Republicans and reinforce their positions in today's politics.

The Jamestown settlers? Socialists. Founding Father Alexander Hamilton? Ill-informed professors made up all that bunk about him advocating a strong central government. Theodore Roosevelt? Another socialist. Franklin D. Roosevelt? Not only did he not end the Great Depression, he also created it. Joe McCarthy? Liberals lied about him. He was a hero.

Some conservatives say it's a long-overdue swing of the pendulum after years of liberal efforts to define history on their terms in classrooms and in popular culture. "We are adding balance," Texas school board member Don McLeroy said. "History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left."

"History in the popular world is always a political football," said Alan Brinkley, a historian at Columbia University. "The right is unusually mobilized at the moment."


Unusually mobilized? Sure. That's what happens when stupid people get lied to IN A VERY LOUD VOICE.

Who do you blame for this phenomenon? I suppose the fact that America's education system has been getting bled year after year to support an unimaginably overblown and overpriced "national defense" arsenal should bear some of the burden. Sure, certain dark corners of Christianity have had their hateful and demented effect. The media can take a big bite of the blame apple, either for aggrandizing the demonstrably idiotic, or for taking the worst aspects of it and flashing it across the sky with klieg lights.

Oh, and don't forget the Republican Party, which considers these bozos their "useful idiots" and uses them to great effect, but not before getting them to vacuum up quarters from between the couch cushions to fund RNC efforts toward preventing Hillary Clinton from mandating abortions for all pregnant Christian girls in the land. The GOP got these people all worked up while picking their pamphlet-filled pockets all the while, and the funny part is they're now as afraid of their own base as Bart Stupak is.

What we have here is nothing more or less than stupid people with guns, and you know what? I'm fine with guns. I believe Americans should have them if they want them. I believe in reasonable limitations on being able to purchase assault weapons and bazookas because, well, the words "well-regulated" are right there in the Amendment next to "militia." I believe in background checks to make sure you're not buying a gun because your medication ran out. But I've come to believe that being able to buy and own a gun should also involve passing a fairly difficult civics exam. Before someone goes out to buy a gun in defense of their country and their liberty, we should have some kind of metric to determine if that person actually knows anything about the country, and knows anything about the roots and truths of the liberty they claim to cherish.

If we can't or won't cure the stupid, at least we can disarm it.

In the meantime, I have one last comment I wish to address specifically to those of whom I speak. You, sir or madam, are a small fraction of a person. Your hate has overtaken your higher faculties, and that makes you pathetic beyond words. You are not a hero or a patriot. You are watching the world pass you by, and that scares the cheese out of you. For you, stupid is a defense mechanism, a comfortable blanket wrapped around your head to drown out that which you fear, hate and misunderstand. It is not too late for you, but I'm through waiting to see if you are capable of anything beyond the low behavior and sorry spectacle you have displayed to date. This is America, and you have a right to your grandiose, willful stupidity, but I choose to exercise my right to tune you out. You are a fart in the wind, and I have more important things to do than truck with the likes of you.

Screw these people. I'm going outside.

http://www.truthout.org/stupid-people-with-guns58294
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
2. Get Ready For The Gun Luvvers To Pile On
Good stuff, bro. Hope you had a nice holiday!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Same to you!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. Of course they will. If he's mocking the gun culture, then he wants to ban all guns.
And maybe even impose the metric system!

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Metal Donating Member (94 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
23. NOT TEH METRIC SYSTEM!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
24. ah, the "gun lovers" insult/canard
didn't take long

are pro-choice people "abortion lovers?"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #24
48. I Luv Abortion
I start every day with an abortion.

In fact, I believe the govt should force everyone to have abortions on a random basis thru the fourth trimester.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #24
52. Yeah, I don't like that term.
I prefer "gun nuts". Makes clear what one's talking about is the extremist fringe. Those that think a safety lock regulation means THE NWO IS GONNA GRAB OUR GUNS!!!111!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #52
68. repecting RKBA does not make one a "gun lover"
i don't love guns. they aren't particularly interesting to me, frankly.

i defend RIGHTs related to carry, and self defense (regardless of weapon used)

i also support choice. i do not "love abortions"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. You didn't really read my post, did you?
I said I don't like the term. Too broad-brushy and doesn't capture the nuttiness of the extremists, as opposed to people who simply are in favor of RKBA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. i did
but my point was that the campus carry movement is not defined by "gun nuts" any more than any movement is defined by the fringe.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shedevil69taz Donating Member (222 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
62. Eh I don't really LURVE my guns...
but I am kinda fond of the second ammendment. Nothing he wrote here contains many specifics that pro-2nd ammendment types like myself would really throw a fit about.

Well except the part about the civic exam. While I could pass it easily, I don't think litmus tests for exercising a civil right is really the path that we should go down. I could easily argue the same thing about the 1st ammendment as it could be argued that the pen really is mightier than the sword.


Not knowing the authors idea's of what reasonable regulation entails, and I would more than love to hear from him in another thread about that, I like most everything he had to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. Interesting article. k&r n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
5. Righteous rant, Mr. Pitt! Rec'd! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. "But I've come to believe that being able to buy and own a gun should also involve passing a fairly"
Edited on Mon Apr-05-10 10:32 AM by Statistical
I thought the article was good other than a minor confusion on the made up term "assault weapons".

Assault rifles = automatic military grade hardware which has already been severely restricted for more than four decades now. "Assault weapons" = made up term for scary LOOKING rifles that are no more or less dangerous than less scary (traditional looking) ones. The close term was intentionally chosen to mislead the public. The ban was purely political & useless as so called assault weapons are almost never used in crime.

Still that term is commonly messed up (was done so intentionally to increase support for bill by confusing public on difference between scary looking and military weapons. Many people on DU today still claim that AWB banned automatic weapons.

Since it is commonly confused I had no problem with article until:
"But I've come to believe that being able to buy and own a gun should also involve passing a fairly difficult civics exam".

Really? Since 2A is a fundamental right does this also apply to other fundamental rights? Would the same author advocate passing fairly difficult civics exam in order to vote? I think not. I even would go so far as to believe the author would call someone a fascist for restricting fundamental rights (like voting) through use of a "fairly difficult civics exam".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlbertCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. Would the same author advocate passing fairly difficult civics exam in order to vote?
Only if your personal vote itself could kill people.

Again the usual gun lover false equivalency. A gun is not a vote... or a car ("They kill people too!") or a kitchen knife or a rock or a stick. When are gun lovers gonna realize a gun is a weapon, meant for killing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. when will you realize a right is a right.
They is no such thing as lesser rights or unimportant rights.

If (and no such power exists) a civics test could be mandated for gun ownership and found Constitutional the same would equally be Constitutional for right to vote, or practice religion, or provide information (press).

"gun is a weapon, meant for killing"
Even if we ignore the legitimate non-lethal uses of firearms for the sake of argument so what?

The right exists. Obviously the framers were aware of the potential dangers of firearms. When are you going to realize the 2nd isn't some "lesser amendment". It is equal to any other amendment in the Bill of rights.

The right to keep and bear arms exists and can't be restricted based on a civics test. Read up on "strict scrutiny".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #30
42. All rights - no responsibilities?
No well-regulated militias for you, huh? After all duh gubmint would wright & enforce the regulations, wouldn't they? An' we all no we cannit trust duh gubmint! SARAH PALIN & GLENN BECK SAYS SO!

And just what are the imagined non-lethal uses for firearms that exist in your fantasy world? Just for arguments' sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #42
60. Most defensive gun uses are non-lethal.
The NCJS gov't study, as well as numerous pro- and anti- studies all seem to agree that the most likely defensive use of a gun does not involve it being fired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 05:30 AM
Response to Reply #60
74. The *DISPLAY* of the gun is what's important.
It's a tool of intimidation. Therefor carrying a gun is an explicit threat by the gun holder to those around him.


Sounds like a crime to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #74
76. So you keep claiming however law disagrees with you.
Bradishing a firearm is a crime. Holstered firearm is no threat.

By your "logic" Law Enforcement Officers should be forced to conceal weapons because it is a threat and they are committing a crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #74
77. So you admit that the idea of non-lethal uses of a gun isn't "fantasy"?
http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/165476.pdf

Have a read. Just as actually firing a gun for defensive purposes isn't a crime, neither is pulling the gun and pointing it at a potential perpetrator, if lethal force were justified. You really should take a look at various states' laws.

What's you major malfunction? In most defensive gun uses, no crime is completed, no gun is fired. Would you rather the person become a victim of crime, or would you prefer the criminal were shot? Seems to be the best possible outcome is also the most common.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #77
81. I'm sorry, I'm confused.
Are you saying that the display of a gun is explicitly a threat, intentionally (and criminally) intimidating & therefor non-lethal uses of a gun are not fantasies?

or

is the mere display of a gun totally nonthreatening, it must be used to be effective & there are therefor no non-lethal uses of a gun?

---------------------------------------

One or the other, you can't have both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #81
82. Your disconnect seems to be..
the holster.

The difference between what (without legal justification) would be 'brandishing' and open carry is having the gun in your hand, out of the holster.

Is a gun on someone's hip, absent criminal action, or in furtherance of a crime, a threat? No.

Is a gun in someone's hand, being pointed at someone in a manner calculated to cause alarm, a threat? Yes. If there is not justification for the use of deadly force, a crime (brandishing) is being committed.

As many courts in open carry states have established, merely carrying a holstered firearm on the hip is not brandishing, no more than simply possessing male genitalia makes one threatening rape.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #82
87. So, you *DO* want it but ways.
Why am I not surprised?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. There is no "both ways".
You are very confused about the definition of "display of a gun".

While a gun might be visible while in a holster, legally it is not on display for the purpose of intimidation, otherwise known as "brandishing".

When the gun is outside the holster (in the hand), it is either (1) being used or prepared for use, or (2) displayed for the purpose of intimidation (brandishing).

There is no "both ways" since the two options (in the holster or in the hand) here are mutually exclusive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #87
93. I feel like I'm arguing with a toddler.
As I indicated in post 77, you really should familiarize yourself with state laws on brandishing in an open carry state like Arizona, Virginia, New Mexico, Washington, Pennysylvania, Ohio, or Oregon.

Your false dichotomy has been noted and shot down (pun intended). Spin the wheel, again. Maybe Vanna will let you buy a clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. Irony is lost.
I wasn't serious.

Jesus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrCory Donating Member (862 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #25
45. By Extension, It Just Might...
"Only if your personal vote itself could kill people."

Those killed by Reagan's foreign policies/operation etc. might consider the votes for him as a weapon.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #25
55. The equivalency is a right = a right. And it's not false.
Unless you want to say that some pigs are more equal than others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
7. You're on, Will.
The last three or four pieces of yours have been head and shoulders, writing-wise, above anything you've done for years.

Content aside -- and you're spot on today -- your voice is in great tune lately. Pleasure to read. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. Thanks!
That was awfully nice. :) :hug: :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unpossibles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
8. great post. recommended. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
9. I agree with you so long as we require "difficult civics exams" before voting or freely speaking too
Edited on Mon Apr-05-10 10:31 AM by OneTenthofOnePercent
IMO, stupid people voting is WAY more harmful/dangerous to us than stupid people with guns.
Free speech too... Stupid people planting seeds of stupid into others' minds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Nope, sorry
Voting and free speech are rightly off limits. Stupid does have rights, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leftist Agitator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. " Stupid does have rights, too. "
The right to be rounded up and herded into Obama FEMA concentration camps and then systematically exterminated?

(And because some humorless drone will cry foul if I don't... :sarcasm:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Your candidate sucks.
And your quarterback is going to jail.

*ducking, fleeing, giggling*

;)

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leftist Agitator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. "Your candidate sucks."
My candidate?

:shrug:

You lost me there.

"And your quarterback is going to jail."

Yes, probably. And if he's guilty, rightly so.

Besides, the Steelers could do with a QB who isn't a total egomaniac.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. "Your candidate sucks"
...is how I pretend to pick fights with people here. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Exactly. Stupid has rights. Including the right to keep & bear arms.
A right protected (not granted) by the 2nd amendment of the United States Constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. ...


Even hypocrites are entiled to their rights, I suppose. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. The right exists.
At the time of the revolution the power of the press was also much more limited. The ability of an individual to express themselves was a tiny fraction of what is available now.

Women & Blacks getting the right to vote weren't tweaked amendments were added to the Constitution to expressly guarantee those rights. If you feel the 2nd is no longer applicable then at least be honest and push for an amendment to "tweak" that protection.

Until amendmended the 2nd stands. There is a right to keep and bear arms and it is not (nor should it ever be) limited to those who can pass a civics test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
37. "Well Regulated Militia" you are right, until it's ammended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. One 'm'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #41
89. darn it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #37
47. Well Regulated as in well equipped, effective ...
The militia is well equipped and effective if citizens have the right to keep and bear arms.


"The Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
- DC v. Heller (2008)

Until repealed or the extremely unlikely event that Heller is overturned the 2A protects an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT to own weapon. BTW: All 9 Justices agreed upon that point.

The "militia collective right" nonsense has been totally debunked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madamesilverspurs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
10. Whoa, wish I'd said that!
Well done, and I'm sending this on to everyone (well, maybe not everyone) on my list. K and R, too.


-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freebrew Donating Member (478 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
14. Mr. Pitt, right as always...
good article. Now enjoy some of that sunshine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robyn66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
18. GREAT ARTICLE WILL!!!
As always!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mopar151 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
21. Testify, Brother Will, Testify!
"But these fuckin morons have been waiting all their lives for SOMEBODY to be scared of them. What the FBI and BATF did at Ruby Ridge and Waco was incredibly stupid - incompetence like that should have resulted in prision terms. But loot at how the recent case of tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown was handled, and we are seeing a new model - same thing with the Hutaree.

Listen, you stooopid bastids! It does'nt matter how many cops you murder, how many innocents you slaughter. You will not advance your cause in any way, you will not get to be boss!

The people who enslave you are not in the White House, they don't come near smelly fools like you. They ride in executive helicopters and private jets, and they are using the threat of you to delay the day they have to pay their fair share of taxes, or get on the same airplane as you. If it takes killing 10 of your children to make their lawn greener, they are fine with that. You are being set up to be their goon squads, their mine police, their Klan - to make war on unions, on liberal churches, on social workers, on educated professionals and skilled craftsmen, on miners and millhands - for the security of the rich, to grind us "back where we belong" - begging for work at starving wages, building castles for the rich while our world falls apart."

A post of mine from last Friday, which sank at the end of a long thread. But dude, you are so right. My "true conservative" friends and relatives are aghast at recent turns of events. The liberals are getting whiplash from shaking their heads at "teh stupid". And yes, I'm headed out the door soon. We had a nice Easter at Mom's yesterday, got caught up on all the family and hometown gossip, ate way too much homegrown food.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike K Donating Member (539 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
28. Please direct us -
They found one: cops. Their plan was to go kill some cops, and then attack the funerals of the cops they killed so they could kill more cops, along, presumably, with cop wives and cop kids and cop parents and cop friends. Fortunately, they got busted, and are now going away.

- to the source of the evidence which has convinced you that such a plan was actually formulated.

I, for one, am seriously interested in knowing specifically what that evidence is so I can determine whether this raid and the arrests are justified in accordance with the Constitution and the Common Law.

The reason for my concern is the fact that the Constitution and the Common Law protects me as well as those Hutaree yokels and I am interested in seeing them preserved.

Thank you.


"Whoever would make his own liberty secure must guard even his most despised countryman from oppression by government, for if he ignores this sacred duty he thus establishes a precedent which someday will surely reach to himself." (Thomas Paine)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
31. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dyedinthewoolliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
34. Great article Will,
problem is, those to whom you speak will never know about it, let alone read it. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
35. I hear you, but there's a nagging question...
Who's going to author the civics test? No matter who gets nominated, you can expect people to howl "Bias!" from either the left, the right, or the middle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AuntPatsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
36. I hope some do not focus on the title because as a card carrying gun owner all I
come away with after reading this article is the thought that "Thank God" someone has the 'guns' to say what needs to be said and with intelligence and unchecked honesty, so rare these days to find that combination..one of your best articles to date...a pleasure to read such on Du considering present day DU.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
38. thank you Will...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rage Inc. Donating Member (429 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
39. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
40. Wow, all glowing responses for Will Pitt!
K&R infinity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wizard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
43. Moonshine, ignorance, fear
bigotry, media control, guns and Republicans: A recipe for insurrection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
44. Stupid people vote, and fuck. Both things that could be easier regulated.
in the past both have. They used to have poll taxes to prevent certain people from voting. They were quite effective at their goals, no blacks. They had eugenics, they were also able to sterilize and lock up people who were deemed to stupid to be part of society. This targeted poor people of all races.

There are plenty of valid points you have, stupid people are the source of many problems. However messing with gun control the FASTEST way to get tossed out of power is not going to help that problem.

Let that issue die, it was a bamboozle in the 90's and is still one now. Concentrate on the message they present and dont get distracted by the disaster that is gun control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
46. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Homer Wells Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
49. K and Freakin R!!!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
50. Obviously the biggest problem with the post is the "fairly difficult" civics exam ...
it might well discriminate against the poorest segments of our society who often suffer the most from a broken educational system. People who would have a hard time with the test often live in crime ridden neighborhoods and have far more reason to own a firearm for self defense than the better off class of people who have the advantage of living in upscale neighborhoods and better schooling.

In fact such a test might be considered racist and would be likely to be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court with good reason. A similar requirement to pass a civics exam before being allowed to vote would also fail legal scrutiny, even though it might be a good idea as many people today lack basic knowledge of how our government works.

But then the object of extreme gun control is to make sure that "those people" can't legally own firearms.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #50
58. The SCOTUS has ruled on a number of restrictions on rights..
Edited on Mon Apr-05-10 10:05 PM by X_Digger
Cantwell v. Connecticut

In 1940, in Connecticut, a solicitor of any stripe was required to obtain a license before going door to door, whether to sell vacuum cleaners, encyclopedias, or their particular flavor of religion.

Newton Cantwell and two of his sons were proselytizing in a heavily catholic neighborhood. The trio were arrested for soliciting without a license.

Connecticut courts sided with the state. The SCOTUS disagreed-

to condition the solicitation of aid for the perpetuation of religious views or systems upon a license, the grant of which rests in the exercise of a determination by state authority as to what is a religious cause, is to lay a forbidden burden upon the exercise of liberty protected by the Constitution.


Now, if we imagined this as a gun case against registration, would this be an analogous case? Maybe, but it's a stretch. It definitely sounds as though it would make a good analogue against 'may issue' CHL licensing, as the core problem seems to be the "determination by the state" on non-concrete grounds (in this case determination about what is or isn't a valid religion, but in 'may issue' states, the language in various state laws about a 'justified reason', or 'reputation of the licensee' sounds just as vague.)

Or how about this one..

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections

In 1966 (two years after passage of the twenty-fourth amendment's prohibition on poll taxes in federal elections) Annie E. Harper was refused voter registration in Virginia. The SCOTUS ruled on Harper's side, saying in part,

a state violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth.


Now, could this be analogous to registration fees and CHL fees for guns and gun owners? Possibly. The salient point I see is the last line.. paraphrasing for this context, "exercise of a constitutional right has no relation to wealth." Courts have found reasonable fees for demonstration permits acceptable, sure, but to require a fee to stand on a soap box on a corner? Nope.

One more..

Talley v. California

A Los Angeles city ordinance prohibited the distribution of flyers without the writer's name and address (among other things.) Talley was arrested and the case eventually made it's way to the SCOTUS. The court ruled in Talley's favor, saying-

We have recently had occasion to hold in two cases that there are times and circumstances when States may not compel members of groups engaged in the dissemination of ideas to be publicly identified. Bates v. Little Rock, 361 U.S. 516; N. A. A. C. P. v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 462. The reason for those holdings was that identification and fear of reprisal might deter perfectly peaceful discussions of public matters of importance. This broad Los Angeles ordinance is subject to the same infirmity. We hold that it, like the Griffin, Georgia, ordinance, is void on its face.


Bear with me on this one. If the intent- the reason- for the second amendment is to allow the citizens of the United States to be armed, as a counter to federal power (remember, standing armies were loathed at the time of the second amendment's passage), then might registration of firearm owners not serve a similar purpose: (paraphrased) "identification and fear of reprisal might deter perfectly peaceful exercise of the people's right to keep and bear arms"? Anonymous firearms ownership is something that I think the drafters of the second amendment would agree with.

So those are some cases that I think might shed some light on what may happen once the second amendment is incorporated against the states (and assuming we get a level of scrutiny set fairly high.)

If poll taxes, registration of publishers, 'determinations' about religions by the state have all found to be verbotten by the state against incorporated rights, then a 'civics test' for gun ownership stands little chance.

eta: formatting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #58
83. A test for gun safety knowledge would make more sense by far...
I often thought that a requirement to pass a gun safety course similar to a hunter safety course should be a requirement prior to purchasing a firearm.

I've seen people come to the range with a semi-auto handgun and show it to the range master who would ask, "Is it loaded?" They would reply, "I'm not sure."

Sad.

Many states do have a requirement for a concealed carry class before an individual can get a license to carry.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #83
84. Well, yes and no..
.. the hunter safety course is required before they allow you out and about in public with a gun to hunt, same as for concealed carry.

I wouldn't mandate training, as that could be subverted by officials or might disproportionately affect those not able to take time off work or afford the class, but I do recommend it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. After I thought about it, I reached the same conclusion ...
Edited on Tue Apr-06-10 02:43 PM by spin
Also the states would set up the requirements for the course and some states would make the class lengthy, expensive and difficult to pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
51. Obvious answer: Be smart and armed, instead.
The smart guy who shows up with a nerf bat to a knife fight is, well, not very smart at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tucsonlib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
53. Not To Worry, William!
I own several firearms. I keep them for home defense and for target shooting. It's a sport, basically. It's fun. And with it come certain responsibilities which I take very seriously. Many of my close friends also shoot. Only a couple are hunters. Politically we are, each and every one of us, left-wing, progressive, liberal, socialist old hippies. And damn proud of it.
We're all in favor of reasonable gun control. Not one of us believes for a minute that Obama (or anyone else) wants to "take away our guns". We're also under no illusion that "an armed citizenry" is capable in this day and age of preventing a determined gang of despots from seizing power. Bush/Cheney made this abundantly clear.
I believe my friends and I represent the views of a large percentage of gun owners in the U.S. We may even represent the majority. But we keep a low profile. We'd never be so rude and disrespectful as those ignorant baggers - exploiting and distorting our Constitutional right just to intimidate others. Like a bunch a schoolyard bullies. And to threaten violence! Not against some evil overlords, but against democratically elected representatives!

Well, I've got a little news for all you ignorant, pistol-packin' yahoos: We've been stockpiling weapons and ammo, too. Not to use against some imaginary fleet of black helicopters, but to defend ourselves, our families and our country from you and the violence you threaten to wreak. And keep in mind - Since, as you know, we're "elitists", we can afford the very latest, state-of-the-art weaponry. And more of it. And since none of us have ever had to work a real job - living as we do off the public teat, we have more free time than you have to spend honing our marksmanship skills.
We're watching you. We're your neighbors. And I know I speak for all the others when I promise you this: If I should ever see you threaten to physically harm any American because you don't agree with their politics, I'll do whatever is necessary to stop you. If warranted, I'll even SHOOT YOU FUCKING DEAD, YOU TREASONOUS WEASEL!

Just sayin'. Meantime,

Love 'n' Peace :hippie:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
54. But... but unrestricted, unregulated guns are an extension of the civil rights movement.
Edited on Mon Apr-05-10 10:28 PM by onehandle
According to our resident Rosa Parks-ions.

It's all about the little people, not middle-aged white dudes who get off by firing machine guns in the woods and brandishing hard steel at the grocery store.

Guns 'rights' are a liberal priority. Right?

Martin Luther Teabagger, Jr. fighting for his freedom to threaten a sitting black President:




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. Do you remember what happened when the Black Panthers
started showing up in public, practicing their constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Oh yeah, White America - the very same patriots screaming about their own gun rights - went apeshit crazy and screamed "Armed sedition!". In fact the FBI and other govt organs soon came down on the BP, killing their leaders in their beds and doing everything they could to make the BP go away.

Guns are part of the civil rights movement? You bet your ass. They always will be, if you have a care about being a free people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #56
63. So hands off the exploding militia movement. Got it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. No, make sure you're not caught with your pants down.
That seems like a no brainer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #54
59. Whats your priority? Fooling the ignorant.
hey look we passed a law capping magazines at 10 rounds, did we fix your shit neighborhood (nope, fuck you), did we change the drug laws that motivate violent crime (nope, fuck you again), did we give you access to mental health care, over 50% of gun crime is suicide (nope fuck you thrice),

Gun control is a giant fuck you to the people who actually suffer gun violence here in the US. It is a bamboozle to fool poor people into thinking something is being done.

White dudes who drop 20,000 US for a legal machine gun arent the problem friend. However pissing on peoples rights are a very quick way to loose political power.

You have a better chance of bringing back segregation than passing more restrictive gun control. Deal with it, and move on, fix root cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #59
65. Gun control = segregation. Got it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. Nope, people in power fooling people with none
gun control like most laws is dependent on how much money you have. Your shit is done, move on. It will NEVER come back, no many how many bodies you stand on to trumpet it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
57. I cannot believe this thread didn't...take off...like the shuttle.
Good piece of writing, though.

Just odd that there aren't more folks convulsing on the floor in rage over this.

Or maybe they are, hence the lack of...liftoff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #57
67. Or convulsing in laughter. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
61. Who gets to write the civics exam?
do the "the roots and truths of the liberty" change with different administrations? Do you think Sara Palin's or Dick Chaney's "truths" or their vision of those worthy to exercise civil right are identical to yours?

I am sure nothing bad could possibly come from this. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quickesst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
71.  Your endorsement of responsible gun ownership was "thoughtful"
Beetwasher: "Get Ready For The Gun Luvvers To Pile On"

The OP: "What we have here is nothing more or less than stupid people with guns, and you know what? I'm fine with guns. I believe Americans should have them if they want them."

Perhaps you should clarifiy your op in more simplistic, and at the same time "deep" terms. I'm convinced you have the skill, but can you, with your perception of the human pschyce convey to some the difference between your op subjects and those responsible, Democratic, liberal/progressive gun owners that inhabit this particular message board and the millions who share their values? I really would like to see someone who has the time, insight, intelligence, and patience to put this issue into it's proper perspective. I'm nearing 60 (not old-old) so I still have time to hope. I'm thinking that if I retire early at 62 I might take a shot at it, unless someone steps up before then.
Just a thought, but a fact. Guns have been here, guns are here, and guns will be here. When it comes to gun owner-ship, who do you think should have the upper hand? Thanks.
quickesst

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
72. It's all they have
Their willful stupidity (they're proud of it,) and their guns (penis extenders, or The Solution to Everything, depending on whom you ask). It's all about Protecting Themselves from Teh Gays/Teh non-Whites/Teh Smart People/Teh non-Christians. After all, we're to blame for everything, aren't we?

:sarcasm:

It's all about the fact that everyone who isn't exactly like them doesn't have the right to live.

:sarcasm:

Great essay.
-MV
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 01:06 AM
Response to Original message
73. What I dont get is how gun sales are through the roof right now...
...when Obama himself has NEVER, not once ever mentioned his policy on guns. I don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #73
78. Here are a few links..
http://www.issues2000.org/celeb/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

In his own words (2004) (regarding a federal ban on concealed carry)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-4jqZSEo0Q
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mopar151 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 05:30 AM
Response to Original message
75. What if "the civics exam" was about gun laws?
When do you have a reasonable basis to shoot someone? What are your obligations as a gun owner? When is it not appropriate to display ("open carry") a weapon? Where is it legal to discharge a firearm? Who may legally own a firearm?

Most hunters and target shooters could recite this, chapter and verse. Many of the cretins who want to pack sidearms in a public place could'nt score 50%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #75
80. The requirements for a CHL are generally much more strict than those for a hunting license.
I hold an NC CHL, FWIW.

It would be nice if people advocating new gun restrictions bothered to familiarize themselves with the issues and extant laws, though. I suppose that's too much to hope for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mopar151 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #80
86. Definitely not the case everywhere in the US n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #86
91. True for the most part, though.
In my case, I had to pass a mental health records check, Federal and state background checks, FBI fingerprint check, 8-hour refresher class on self-defense law, and live-fire competency check. Not much different from when I lived in Florida and obtained a Florida CHL, although we didn't actually have to shoot there.

When I got a hunting license once, though, I filled out a form, paid some money, and was handed a license and a copy of the regulations. Definitely no background checks, no mental health checks, and a lot less background.

In my observation, most people who go through the trouble to obtain CHL's are of above-average knowledge and competence, due to selection bias; the apathetic and the incompetent don't typically bother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
79. There ARE reasonable restrictions on automatic weapons and bazookas...
and have been for, oh, 75 years now. Those things are irrelevant to the gun-control debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kgnu_fan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
90. America is just looking into its own shodow and becomes one with it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kgnu_fan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
92. New Christian Churches like guns as well
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC