Gun Nuts aren't very smart

You probably heard about the huge pro-gun rally in Richmond, Virginia last week.
What you probably didn't hear about was that the catalyst for this march was a stupid, baseless konspiracy theory.

Virginia’s only socialist state legislator said he has been the target of multiple death threats over a bill that pro-gun activists misinterpreted as a potential threat to their rights.

The legislation introduced by Lee Carter, a 32-year-old Bernie Sanders-endorsed socialist, would allow public school teachers to strike without being fired, and has in fact nothing to do with guns. But some gun rights activists wrongly interpreted it as an attempt to fire law enforcement officials who might refuse to comply with gun control laws introduced by Virginia’s new Democratic legislative majority.

The result, Carter said, has been a torrent of threats and abuse on social media, from promises to vote him out of office, to claims that “this is tyranny and you know what we do to tyrants,” to explicit threats of murder, like, “I’m going to make sure you don’t live through this legislative session” or “I’m going to kill this guy, y’all make sure you don’t forget my name.”

Carter, a gun-owner and former Marine, has had to go into hiding.
It appears that some disingenuous people were stirring up the ignorant rabble.

While a gun rights YouTube channel had appeared to be central to spreading the misreading of his bill to a wide audience, Carter said that some of the misinformation about his bill appeared to be fueled by police unions, and even by a fellow Republican state lawmaker – all people, he said, who should be able to accurately read legislation.

The truly ironic thing is that Carter was the guy trying to prevent this whole thing from happening. Carter is the voice of reason.

“[The extreme right] has been saying for years that an assault weapon ban is going to be their excuse to start killing people,” Carter said. “I tried to have this conversation with my colleagues, but, frankly, a lot of my colleagues don’t want to believe that that’s out there.”

“I won’t even say it’s like a landmine, because a landmine you can’t see. There’s a big button on the ground that says, ‘If you step here, it will explode’ and Democrats just stomped on it, because they didn’t want to believe that it exists.”

The gun nuts at this rally threw out so many threats that they've actually managed to strengthen the resolve of the Democrats looking to ban assault weapons.

BTW, I'm a gun owner.

Share
up
30 users have voted.

Comments

Pricknick's picture

So few take the time to read and comrehend anymore.
This is sane legislation.
Also a gun owner. Them damned rabbits are hard with a bow.

up
9 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

@Pricknick
in your opinion?

All of it? Or the three bills that were passed?

Or the proposed assault weapons ban, which was withdrawn?

up
2 users have voted.
The Liberal Moonbat's picture

up
5 users have voted.

In the Land of the Blind, the one-eyed man is declared insane when he speaks of colors.

Dawn's Meta's picture

I had more fun talking with RW folks about guns and shooting. It was a way to get talking without going to our corners.

Once after a year of work chats, a fellow offered to get me into the NRA. I replied..."haven't you figured out that I'm a flaming liberal? Thanks, but, no thanks.

We remained work buddies.

OT: going past a desk of a design support person one day, I saw his screen-saver was the concentration camp gates with the famous 'Arbeit macht Frei' over the portal.

I asked him if he knew what it meant, then explained it to him as he didn't seem willing to take it down. As a middle manager I knew I could call HR on him, so I told him to take it down while I watched. He did. We were never work buddies.

up
9 users have voted.

A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.

Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.

@Dawn's Meta

that the "Arbeit macht Frei" guy was condoning or sympathizing with the people running the concentration camp.

Did it occur to you that he may instead, probably ironically, have been identifying with the inmates and associating the work environment with that of the camp?

up
5 users have voted.
Dawn's Meta's picture

@Blue Republic He was very clear and was unfortunately typical of a kind of intense hatred without knowledge. We had worked on projects and his belief system was evident.

I can see his dark short hair and closely clipped mustasch and beard to this day.

up
7 users have voted.

A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.

Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.

@Dawn's Meta

thanks for clarifying

up
0 users have voted.

my Great-Great-Great-Great-Great-Grandfather
Edward Polly (1758-1845) a private soldier of Virginia
(possibly also a Gun Nut)

BTW - who are these "Gun Nuts" of which you speak?

On Daily Kos that would be about anyone who would admit to wanting/having any gun beyond granddad's bolt action .22 or a high end Italian shotgun to shoot trap with Obama. Are you implying that all or most of the people attending the Richmond rally "are not very smart"? Dupes?

While the threats to the legislator that occurred are not acceptable - and appear to be somewhat misplaced - you don't offer anything to support your implication that this was something supported by any significant number of rally participants.

"The gun nuts at this rally threw out so many threats that they've actually managed to strengthen the resolve of the Democrats looking to ban assault weapons."

For one thing, the article you link to there says nothing at all about strengthening the resolve to ban "assault" (actually most semi-auto) weapons - unless you mean they are expressing their resolve by withdrawing the proposal (Senate Bill 16).

For another, if there were lots of threats being made at the rally I imagine the MSM would running them ad nauseum whereas they ended up having to work to hide their disappointment that instead of being able to report on bloody atrocities carried out by Nazi-sympathizing White Supremacists...

They were instead reduced to giving perfunctory coverage to a peaceful, multi-gender, multi-ethnic, multi-orientation and *very* well-attended event.

Have to agree with the Socialist legislator - when he says that
Democrats (voice of reason Blue Dogs excepted) in aggressively pushing gun restrictions in Virginia:

“I won’t even say it’s like a landmine, because a landmine you can’t see. There’s a big button on the ground that says, ‘If you step here, it will explode’ and Democrats just stomped on it, because they didn’t want to believe that it exists.”

Well, if any misguided yahoos do try to follow through on threats to this guy...at least he has guns and is competent to use them to defend himself.

Thanks, in no small part, to the past contributions of folks like Edward Polly and the present-day ones of contemporary folks who realize that to not stand up for fundamental freedoms is to lose them.

Edward Polly grave.jpg

up
6 users have voted.

@Blue Republic
Good question. Here's your answer.

They’ve been encouraged by conspiracy theorists like Infowars’ Alex Jones, who said on January 8 that he and others from Infowars plan to attend the Richmond rally because “we’ve had two revolutionary wars basically start in Virginia, and it looks like one may start again.” He’s claimed that any violence that takes place at the rally will be a “false flag,” and in an interview with white nationalist Richard Spencer — who helped organize 2017’s Unite the Right rally — Jones invited Spencer to attend the rally.

The rally has also attracted attention from the ultra-violent neo-Nazi network the Base, an accelerationist white nationalist group that believes in using violence to overthrow the US government, foment a race war, and create a white ethnostate. The Base intends to operate internationally, with cells in multiple countries to evade detection by authorities. The group holds so-called “hate camps” where members receive paramilitary training and meet other members, including those from other countries.

One of the men arrested by the FBI earlier this week was a Canadian Army Reserve active combat engineer who, according to an investigation by the Winnipeg Free Press, “spoke on multiple occasions about committing acts of racially motivated violence and sabotage” in interviews with a reporter embedded in the terrorist group.

Obviously, the vast majority of gun owners are just regular people.
But if you don't recognize that there is a group of "gun nuts" then you are in denial.

So what qualifies as a gun nut?
If you open carry in churches and grocery stores then you are a gun nut.
If your solution to mass shootings is always more guns then you are a gun nut.
If you think there is a real danger of the government grabbing your guns then you are a gun nut.
If you own guns because of freedom but don't know most of the Bill of Rights then you are a gun nut.

I could go on.

up
9 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

If you think there is a real danger of the government grabbing your guns then you are a gun nut.

That one is not far-fetched. There are plenty of politicians advocating that. With compensation, of course.

OFC, if you think the government wants your guns so that they can throw you into a forced-labor detention camp... "You may be a gun nut"
If you think you can defeat the US Army with your AR-15, "You may be a gun nut" Certainly you are a lunatic that's never actually fought in a war.

Apologies to Jeff Foxworthy

up
3 users have voted.

Tulsi Gabbard 2020 !

@The Voice In the Wilderness
gun laws generally keep getting more relaxed.

up
3 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

up
2 users have voted.

Tulsi Gabbard 2020 !

@gjohnsit for his lack of anti-gun bona fides. Vermont is one of the least restrictive states for gun laws, and for some reason Vermonters just don't reach for a gun every time they get pissed off and kill each other. Maybe it's the 6 month winter makes for a long cooling off period.

up
3 users have voted.

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit @gjohnsit
qualifies as a gun nut?

Lessee...

If you open carry in churches and grocery stores then you are a gun nut.

Hmm. Are you less of a gun nut if you carry concealed in such places? Don't know about grocery stores, but there don't seem to be any shortage of shootings at Walmarts, for example. Nor at mosques, temples, churches , churches and churches.

If you are going to carry a weapon for defense at all, those places don't seem especially unreasonable places to do so. I've experienced violent unprovoked attack in a supermarket parking lot myself.

If your solution to mass shootings is always more guns then you are a gun nut.

Fair enough, but that attitude is no more irrational than denying that armed citizens intervening has prevented attacks from being far more deadly than they were - as happened in each of the church attacks linked to above.

As far as that goes, if the aim is reducing gun violence
then the emphasis on mass shootings and long guns is misplaced since the most gun homicides are committed with handguns - and disproportionately by a narrow gender/race/age demographic. But that is not the kind of identity politics most Democrats are comfortable with.

Statistically, Americans have a higher chance of being stabbed or beaten to death with a blunt object than of being killed by any sort of long gun.

As has been pointed out by others, mass shootings are a relatively tiny subset of all gun homicides, and a closer look at specific "mass shootings" reveals that many, if not most, don't fit the Columbine or El Paso Walmart shooter profile, but are over more mundane domestic or workplace issues, gang conflicts, drug deals gone bad, and the like.

Longer term, a whole lot fewer psych drugs and higher levels of social capital are key in reducing violence.

If you think there is a real danger of the government grabbing your guns then you are a gun nut.

If you think that this is not a danger you are exhibiting an ignorance of history as well as failure to not what is going on at present in the US.

Authoritarians *always* try to disarm the people. Could a Spanish or Polish or French or Russian or Japanese peasant pack a sword? No, that was reserved for gentry and nobles.
Soviets? Took the weapons. Chinese communists, Nazis, Khmer Rouge same-same.

Closer to home and the present, Hawaii, Connecticut, New York and California have all banned and/or required registration of "assault weapons" the main result has been to turn hundreds of thousands of socially responsible people into instant felons.

Extending the right to keep and bear arms to all citizens - and elevating militias and and an armed and trained citizenry as an alternative to standing military was genius and it's unfortunate we've gotten away from the latter part of that equation.

If you own guns because of freedom but don't know most of the Bill of Rights then you are a gun nut.

Not knowing and recognizing the importance of fundamental rights - and accepting responsibility
for helping to maintain them for all is a surefire
route to losing them. Whatever your opinion on guns.

Speaking of things to know, how many people who think gun rights are actually just privileges have ever read the relevant bits of their state constitution?

From my own state, Oregon:

Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.

(always liked that they put that bit first)

and:

Section 27. Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power. The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power.

If there's language in there about hunting and target shooting someone please point it out to me.

poster_hand_over_weapons1_0.jpg

up
1 user has voted.

@Blue Republic

Hmm. Are you less of a gun nut if you carry concealed in such places? Don't know about grocery stores, but there don't seem to be any shortage of shootings at Walmarts, for example. Nor at mosques, temples, churches , churches and churches.

If you are going to carry a weapon for defense at all, those places don't seem especially unreasonable places to do so. I've experienced violent unprovoked attack in a supermarket parking lot myself.

And I assume you drew your gun on this person?
Your reasoning leads directly to "more guns, all the time the better".
We are the most heavily armed nation on Earth. How come we aren't also the safest?

As far as that goes, if the aim is reducing gun violence
then the emphasis on mass shootings and long guns is misplaced since the most gun homicides are committed with handguns - and disproportionately by a narrow gender/race/age demographic. But that is not the kind of identity politics most Democrats are comfortable with.

And what would you do about this group?

Longer term, a whole lot fewer psych drugs and higher levels of social capital are key in reducing violence.

That may be true, but I never see any gun groups actively campaigning for more mental health services.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

If you think there is a real danger of the government grabbing your guns then you are a gun nut.

If you think that this is not a danger you are exhibiting an ignorance of history as well as failure to not what is going on at present in the US.

No, I'm not. Gun laws are looser today than they were a generation ago in many states.

Extending the right to keep and bear arms to all citizens - and elevating militias and and an armed and trained citizenry as an alternative to standing military was genius and it's unfortunate we've gotten away from the latter part of that equation.

That much I agree with.

Not knowing and recognizing the importance of fundamental rights - and accepting responsibility for helping to maintain them for all is a surefire
route to losing them. Whatever your opinion on guns.

But gun nuts think that rights come from bullets. Put into their words "The second amendment protects all of the other rights."
Only power comes from bullets. Your guns aren't doing shit for my rights.
The 2nd Amendment is there for a last resort, only after everything else has failed.

up
1 user has voted.

but I never heard mention of anything to do with teachers or arresting cops. I think you are looking at a pretty far fetched CT.

I stop by the Liberal Gun Club about once every 2 months, and so missed any discussion of Virginia, so I just went to take a look, and it's kind of as I suspected. https://theliberalgunclub.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=55110

A ban on all semi autos had people most worried, it didn't pass but was attempted, and with my party in control of both houses and the executive and the antis being all het up it was a realistic possibility. Also magazine restrictions. As is often the case the concerns of liberal 2A supporters reflect the vast majority of conservative 2A supporters. Not the fringe, just that eighty to ninety percent that are the middle.

Also,, calling people gun nuts and calling semi autos such as the AR platform "assault weapons" is kind of the language of the antis. Claiming to own a firearm and therefore not being an inti is the "some of my best friends are black/gun owners/gay etc. The chances are extremely high that whatever type of firearm you own, is used in a lot more assaults in the US, than any combination of AK, AR etc.

Think Bernie and Joe Rogan, how many votes are we willing to lose by useless vilifying.

up
8 users have voted.
Lily O Lady's picture

@ban nock

day of the rally. The FBI arrested several members of a militant group calling itself “the base” including three here in Georgia (the state, not the country). Virginia State Representative Lee Carter spent the day in a safe house due to death threats against him and his family from some less than solid citizens (see dcist.com Jan. 16, 2020) Articles regarding the rally appeared in The Washington Post and the facts cited by gjohnsit are easily confirmed.

I found the tone of the pro-gun people to be a tad strident and I don’t think death threats against Lee Carter and his family were appropriate. I think gjohnsit wanted to distinguish between those he calls “gun nuts” and responsible gun owners.

up
10 users have voted.

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

@Lily O Lady link1

But just outside the legions of police barricades, twice that number of people roamed the streets of Richmond bearing a bristling mass of rifles, from AR-15s to massive Barrett sniper rifles. Some wore skull masks; others waved Confederate flags. Members of hate groups like the League of the South and the American Guard, as well as the Proud Boys, mingled openly; some of the latter were wearing patches that said “RWDS”—an acronym for “Right-Wing Death Squad.” Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones gave a speech from a Terradyne battle tank. Adding to the bellicose mood, some attendees paraded with a massive guillotine as a prop, and others held up an effigy strung on a noose, emblazoned with the slogan, “Thus always to tyrants.”
...
A federal motion for detention released Tuesday revealed that three members of neo-Nazi terror group The Base had planned to attend Monday’s rally in Virginia, kitted out with a home-built, functioning fully-automatic rifle capable of firing several rounds at a time; survival gear; and 1,500 rounds of ammunition. They had planned to open fire into the crowd.

According to the affidavit, one of the men had postulated that there were enough “radicalized” individuals slated to be in Richmond that “all you gotta do is start making things go wrong and Virginia can spiral out to fucking full blown civil war.” Their goal, one of the men stated in a video, was to “bring the collapse…If you want the white race to survive, you’re going to have to do your fucking part.”
...
For all their loud objection to “tyranny,” the purpose of the armed crowd was to thwart the will of an electorate that had outvoted them. Virginians’ overall enthusiasm for gun control measures has not waned since last year’s election; a poll conducted in December revealed that Virginia voters strongly support requiring background checks on all gun sales, 86% to 13%, and passing a “red flag” law to remove guns from someone who may harm someone, 73% to 23%. A majority, 54% to 44%, support banning assault-style weapons.

link2

Two more Virginia delegates say they're skipping public appearances because of death threats related to Monday's massive pro-gun rally coming to Richmond.

link3

Immediately following the rally, pro-gun media and pro-Trump figures on Twitter mocked the safety concerns, calling it “alarmist hysteria” and stating that the media actually wanted violence.
up
9 users have voted.

@gjohnsit
I think the general public is thinking "machine gun". "Style" can mean that the gun looks like a military weapon. I'll go with an automatic weapons ban, but not just a gun that looks like an automatic weapon. In proposed legislation here, having a sling would be banned, having a front pistol grip would be banned, having a folding stock would be banned. These are just cosmetic features.

To the point, does anyone have comparative statistics on criminal shootings between Illinois and Alabama? Or Chicago vs Birmingham? Lookout? I don't have a clue but suspect there is no substantive difference. The dangerous part of a gun is the nut holding the trigger.

up
1 user has voted.

Tulsi Gabbard 2020 !

@The Voice In the Wilderness @The Voice In the Wilderness Looks like handguns account for 65% of firearm homicides and long guns around 6% (see BBC article). Firearm suicides are about twice as frequent as murders; I suspect most of these are from handguns. So, banning all long guns isn't going to make a dent in firearm deaths by murder or suicide.

However, I think a ban on semiautomatic guns with large or detachable magazines would probably reduce the body count in mass shootings. Guns in mass shootings with high cap magazines caused twice as many deaths as other guns and five times as many people were shot (source). Of course, the number of deaths in mass shootings is a small part of the homicide total; however, I think mass shootings have a higher psychological impact on the general population.

up
3 users have voted.

@MinuteMan
But say pump shotguns with large magazines are OK. Or lever action rifles? If you ban the semiautomatics, manufacturers will switch to another existing system. A revolver can be fired very fast also.

As you admit, the total count of deaths will be only minimally reduced. And how about the Las Vegas shooter? He just had a bunch of rifles.

I can see an argument for having only single shot rifles AND pistols, except for police and military.

up
0 users have voted.

Tulsi Gabbard 2020 !

@The Voice In the Wilderness

Here is an interesting piece on the distribution of homicides in Virginia...

Just two metropolitan areas - with a bit over 1/3 of the population account for over half of the homicides, over
three hundred VA towns and cities with populations up to 44,000 had zero homicides (in the most recent year stats were available).

up
1 user has voted.

@Blue Republic
are cities and really isolated areas.

I suspect a U shaped distribution with population density, i.e. there is an ideal density, dense enough to feel community, not so dense that people feel crowded.

up
1 user has voted.

Tulsi Gabbard 2020 !

@ban nock @ban nock

Claiming to own a firearm and therefore not being an inti is the "some of my best friends are black/gun owners/gay etc.

Right.

Think Bernie and Joe Rogan, how many votes are we willing to lose by useless vilifying.

There is a world of difference between gun owners and gun nuts. Gun nuts are never going to vote D.

up
7 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

"There is a world of difference between gun owners and gun nuts. Gun nuts are never going to vote D."

My, but we are given to Sweeping Statements.

Sorry, but I have to point out the existence of at least a couple of exceptions to your assertion.

One being myself, since I apparently meet at least some of your criteria for "Gun Nut" status, another being Jim Webb, who I was fully prepared to vote for in 2016 (and who would have readily beaten Trump) just as I'm prepared to vote for Tulsi Gabbard this time.

And I doubt it's just Webb and myself out there.

up
1 user has voted.

@ban nock

Good points. I think I remember you as a voice of reason re: gun issues on DK.

One of my posts that contributed to my getting booted from there was posting the following video in response to some meltdown or other that had to do with open carry.

People saying they'd never visit a state that allowed it, that they'd leave immediately anyplace someone was open-carrying, that anyone who wanted a gun was a knuckle-dragging cretin... The usual.

So, to illustrate that such things were essentially No Big Deal to people outside the Blue Zone in what they regard as flyover country I posted this young guy's open carry video (he has done a whole series of them in various towns in Oregon) that happened to have been shot in a small town near my own hometown.

In which (Spoiler alert) Nothing Happens!

Boy, did I get chewed out. Especially for giving the location as "occupied State of Jefferson" which, I was informed was verboten CT (conspiracy theory) even though SOJ is an active political movement that has been around for eighty years.

Those triggered by nothing happening should probably not watch this.

up
3 users have voted.

@Blue Republic A guy walks into a school, or a liquor store or a bank carrying a gun. How do you know what the moment will be when the good guy with a gun turns into a killer? You've got seconds to decide.

up
5 users have voted.

@Snode

Well, you don't know.

As I don't know whether any of the "good guys with a car" is going to turn homicidal with it as I'm driving home and try and take me out.

But, watching videos of holdups, home invasions and the like, the perpetrators are just about always either a) openly displaying a weapon in a threatening manner and being vocal about it or b) have their weapon concealed and only draw it when they think they are in the most advantageous position to do so.

Neither of the above is consistent with the usual demeanor of responsible weapon-bearing citizens.

up
2 users have voted.
Lily O Lady's picture

@Blue Republic

That is their purpose. Guns are meant to kill. That is their purpose. So this is a false equivalency.

up
2 users have voted.

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

@Blue Republic A firearm as designed is a weapon, invented to kill from a distance. Sitting on a shelf it has as much in common with a bag of pliers as anything. You pick up a pair of pliers and it's one thing, pick up a gun it's another.

There's some guy banging on your front door pissed off because you gave his greasy spoon a bad review on Facebook. What's the case if he's banging on your front door cursing you out and he's got a gun on his hip? Who is he going to be when I open the door? Honorable aggrieved 2nd amendment citizen within his rights or some nut with a gun? What to do?

If I was a cop, the answer is yell drop your gun, wait anywhere from 1 to 20 seconds and if there is no compliance empty my weapon and possibly reload and empty it again depending on how afraid I am for my life. What about the rest of us?

So with an automobile I expect a driver to do certain things, call it obey the rules of the road. Not drive on the sidewalk, or throw it into reverse on a one way street doing 40 mph. I haven't hear of anyone vowing that their VW Jetta will have to be pried from their cold dead hands.

I don't think we have that any more with firearms The NRA has Foxfrenzied weapons into a multi billion dollar industry. As long as you don't directly threaten anyone with a firearm, you can hold one and wish harm and death on someone you're in confrontation with.

In hunting season it's nothing to be getting a coffee and have the person next to you wearing orange or red plaid woolies sporting a side arm. Once, though, same doughnut place was a sketchy looking guy with a pistol under his coat in his waistband. Nothing happened but I still have the question of when is the right time to be afraid? You may only have a couple of seconds to make a decision, and you don't know when those seconds will occur.

up
4 users have voted.

@Snode
My adult grandson was having a very vocal argument with his mother in Central Alabama. Not hitting or threatening to hit. Maybe with fists clenched, he does that a lot. He doesn't raise them, just clenches while shouting redfaced.
Some off-duty Barney Fife deputy sheriff drew his pistol and threatened to shoot. it was all my daughter could do to keep him from killing her first-born.
Told this to my Korean War vet buddy who is a gun collector, concealed carry, assault rifle, the whole bit. He shook his head saying the deputy violated the first of two rules the military taught him.
1. Never point your weapon at something you don't want to shoot
2. Never shoot at something you don't intend to kill.

All these Barney fifes think they are the Lone Ranger.

up
3 users have voted.

Tulsi Gabbard 2020 !

Situational Lefty's picture

I never asked for it. It was given to me by a buddy of mine who served in the United States Army just before the Berlin Air Lift. I keep it. I still have it. I have never fired it and I don't know if the original owner ever fired it. But I guess it makes me a gun owner.

I'm for stricter gun ownership laws in the United States. If someone so disinterested from the debate as I am ends up owning a gun, then there are too few gun laws in this country. I never wanted a gun and yet I own one, unregistered.

up
5 users have voted.

"He is the truest friend; he has the farthest vision; he is the greatest man I have ever known." --Winston Churchill on Franklin Delano Roosevelt

@Situational Lefty

- without a background check, would be illegal under one of the laws just passed in Virginia or in a number of other states.

So would my father, when he was too poor to afford his own deer rifle, have been acting illegally on the few occasions he borrowed one from a friend (as would the friend have been) if such laws had been in effect sixty or so years ago.

I don't see any compelling reason for the federal government to be the arbiter of such interactions.

You say gun ownership laws should be stricter.

Well, stricter how? And by whose moral or legal authority?

up
2 users have voted.
fakenews's picture

What happens to grandad's gun collection once he gets old or dies? As a senior gets older he looses track of his collection, his friends, relatives come along and help themselves to his treasures. The thugs in the neighborhood realize his vulnerability and break-ins occur. Guns very seldom get just "thrown away" - they just accumulate. Seniors should have a will that states what weapons they are leaving behind and who is responsible for them.

Peace

FN

up
1 user has voted.

"Democracy is technique and the ability of power not to be understood as oppressor. Capitalism is the boss and democracy is its spokesperson." Peace - FN