HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » New NRA Talking Point: Ba...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:54 AM

New NRA Talking Point: Banning Assault Weapons Is Just Like Racial Discrimination

Former National Rifle Association president Marion Hammer compared a proposal by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to ban assault weapons to racial discrimination. According to Hammer, "banning people and things because of the way they look went out a long time ago. But here they are again. The color of a gun. The way it looks. It's just bad politics."

Hammer's comparison came during a discussion on NRA News about Sen. Feinstein's plans to introduce legislation to ban assault weapons during the new Congress. Hammer warned that the United States government could engage in firearm confiscation "in order to control the masses."

Host Ginny Simone's claim that the proposed ban is about "banning the ugliest guns" is plainly false. According to Sen. Feinstein, the impetus for the ban is the capability of assault weapons, explaining in a December 17 press release that her legislation would target "the most dangerous guns":

The NRA has not shied away from comparing gun regulations to past instances of discrimination. In August, the NRA issued a press release that compared a decision by the University of Colorado to house students who wish to carry guns on campus in their own dormitory to the infamous 1896 Supreme Court decision Plessy v. Ferguson, which laid the groundwork for racist "separate but equal" laws. NRA News host Cam Edwards struck a similar tone on his show regarding the University of Colorado policy, stating, "We are back to segregation now."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/01/04/new-nra-talking-point-banning-assault-weapons-i/192021

24 replies, 1439 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply New NRA Talking Point: Banning Assault Weapons Is Just Like Racial Discrimination (Original post)
spanone Jan 2013 OP
marmar Jan 2013 #1
Frustratedlady Jan 2013 #2
spanone Jan 2013 #3
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #4
99Forever Jan 2013 #5
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #6
99Forever Jan 2013 #7
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #8
99Forever Jan 2013 #11
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #16
99Forever Jan 2013 #21
Progressive dog Jan 2013 #9
Robb Jan 2013 #10
etherealtruth Jan 2013 #12
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #15
etherealtruth Jan 2013 #17
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #18
etherealtruth Jan 2013 #19
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #22
Hoyt Jan 2013 #14
Hoyt Jan 2013 #13
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #20
DearHeart Jan 2013 #23
billbailey19448jj Jan 2013 #24

Response to spanone (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 08:58 AM

1. There are no depths to which they will not sink.


nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:02 AM

2. How could they look at those 20 beautiful faces and say that?

Not to mention the 400+ who have been killed since Sandy Hook?

They are scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with that ridiculous point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Frustratedlady (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:16 AM

3. motivated by desperation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:17 AM

4. Its true that Hammer's allusion to racial discrimination is preposterous, but Mediamatter is wrong..


... on something much more important.

Host Ginny Simone's claim that the proposed ban is about "banning the ugliest guns" is plainly false. According to Sen. Feinstein, the impetus for the ban is the capability of assault weapons, explaining in a December 17 press release that her legislation would target "the most dangerous guns":

I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation," Feinstein added. "It will be carefully focused on the most dangerous guns that have killed so many people over the years while protecting the rights of gun owners by exempting hundreds of weapons that fall outside the bill's scope. We must take these dangerous weapons of war off our streets."


Its very clear that so-called "assault weapons" are not used in a majority of homicides. Typically there are committed with handguns of smaller caliber.

FBI stats
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:35 AM

5. Here we go.

The usual Delicate Flower attempt to derail the thread into minutia and gunz porn.

I saw what you did there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:46 AM

6. I figured you wouldn't like me exposing a false premise of AWB attempts.


You have to admit that most homicides aren't happening with ARs, semi-auto AKs, or similar rifles or other firearms listed AWB legilslation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #6)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 09:54 AM

7. Doubling down on..

.. the lame attempt to derail the thread, are you?


Oh my, you are so extra slick!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:11 AM

8. Discussion of a key premise to legislation is not derailing a thread.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #8)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:31 AM

11. Super.

Thanks for making a great argument as to why semi-automatic rifles, high capacity magazines AND handguns should ALL be banned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #11)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 12:05 PM

16. Maybe revolvers and and pump actions, too.


But we both know that the more you reach for, the less likely you are to succeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #16)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:57 PM

21. "We both know."

So now you speak for me too? I guess you can just make all of my posts for me from here on out, eh?

Do you use a crystal ball, Tarot Cards, or what? I'm ALWAYS impressed by people that can decide what someone they have never met is thinking across the net. Do you have a magic monitor?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:12 AM

9. another clueless NRA argument-guns don't kill, people do stopped working

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:14 AM

10. "Preposterous."

You exhibit a generosity of spirit there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:34 AM

12. The OP seems to be about the ridiculous and offensive language employed by the NRA

I would be ever so happy to discuss this. Though, your subject line seems (on its face) to disagree the body of your text appears to attempt to divert attention from the point of the OP (the point being the vile rhetoric often employed by the NRA and its representatives)

From the link:

The NRA has not shied away from comparing gun regulations to past instances of discrimination. In August, the NRA issued a press release that compared a decision by the University of Colorado to house students who wish to carry guns on campus in their own dormitory to the infamous 1896 Supreme Court decision Plessy v. Ferguson, which laid the groundwork for racist "separate but equal" laws. NRA News host Cam Edwards struck a similar tone on his show regarding the University of Colorado policy, stating, "We are back to segregation now."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to etherealtruth (Reply #12)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 12:01 PM

15. Yes, I agreed with the OP that comparing gun laws to racial discrimination is absurd.


When then I clicked on the link that the OP provided I found an error by mediamatters and I talked about that too.

Its a discussion forum.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #15)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:20 PM

17. So what do you think is the motivation behind using such vile comparisons?

Are they effective with those that generally support NRA views? Are they reflective of the views of the NRA membership?

It is a discussion board and we can discuss the topic at hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to etherealtruth (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:27 PM

18. Beginning in the 1970s gun control debate turned hyperbolic


Outrageousness, absurdity, distortions and even lies became an rhetoric arms race.

Mostly because good data was and in some cases is still hard to come by and it's just plain easier to go for the cheap shot.

I don't think Feinsteins AWB is do arable to racism, but I also don't think my desire to buy an AR rifle is motivated by racism and I get to read that often at DU.

Hyperbole, dostortions, and lies are the status quo in gun control discussions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:53 PM

19. I agree that hyperbole was utilized during the "arms" race, but I don't equate private gun ownership

... to the arms race.

I think spell check played hell with your last couple of sentences (it happens).

My greater question remains: Does this particular type of rhetoric play well to the NRA's membership? I liken it to some of PETAs campaigns ... the rhetoric brings negative attention to the group (though it plays well within the group) and diminishes the message they are trying to send out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to etherealtruth (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:14 PM

22. Please allow me to start over because fast typing and autocorrect did not serve me well


When I referred to the arms race I meant the metaphorical arms race of words between the NRA and anti-gun organizations. It seemed to begin after the Gun Control Act of 1968 but the war of words seemed to really take off in the 1990s (when Wayne LaPierrre rose to power in the NRA) and continues to this day.

Hammer's allusion to racial discrimination when describing the AWB is absurd. But on the other hand, on DU there are multiple calls to call NRA a terrorist organization and ban NRA members from DU. Code Pink held up banners during the NRA press conference saying "NRA killing our kids".

You asked if the NRA's rhetoric plays well to NRA's membership? To some, perhaps. Most of the NRA members I know think its over the top. I am not happy with their hyperbole. I've talked to a Board Member personally about it and how it makes the organization look bad. He agreed but said organizational change is slow. I think the membership tolerates it because NRA tactics appeared to be working since the mid 1990s.

I honestly believe the era of Wayne LaPierre type rhetoric (Hammer being a protege) is coming to an end. But as with any metaphorical arms race it is difficult to not go for the cheap shot when the other side is slinging its own hyperbole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:50 AM

14. But the assault weapons -- including semi-auto handguns -- are what turn the yahoos on.


We have millions of people drooling over these weapons, buying/accumulating multiple units, not giving a crap about society, etc. Time to take action against people who apparently can't or won't help themselves and society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:47 AM

13. Gungeoneers right here on DU have compared their poor, pitiful gun plight to civil rights movemement


I think they are full of crap, and should be ashamed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #13)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 01:56 PM

20. But, but, but..you're attacking my precious!!!!

See, it even smiles.



Yes, they have...but can't say I am surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:15 PM

23. These people are utterly disgusting and pathetic!

There is no comparison! They need help...they seem to be massively paranoid people. They need handguns, semi-automatics, large clips, tons of ammunition to "protect" their families. Really? All of that? Are there that many bands of marauders roaming the country?? I can understand a hangun and a shotgun, but I can't see the need for all the rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 03:20 PM

24. The NRA just keeps on getting more and more pathetic day by day

 

They'll do just about anything to ensure that their tools of death and destruction ensure the daily incidences of bloodshed in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread