General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCongratulations Mike Bloomberg one day at a time closer to a Gun-Free America
Bloomberg and Ms. Kelly won big in CHicago.
Biggest loser-the NRA
The NRA backed Democratic candidate lost big time.
as Queen (c) sang
Another one bites the dust
and another falls
and another falls
another one bites the dust
Mike Bloomberg and IMHO a Gun-Free America forever.
(and the best thing is, Mike's mom lived to 102. So time is on his side as the Stones sang.
and May Meek Mayor Mike continue to finance EVERY SINGLE primary and every single general election for ANY anti-gun, anti-NRA candidate.
The NRA is dead. They just don't know it yet.
Their days of blackmail and terror are coming to an end.
It is why Wayne LaCrazyPierrer is the one ranting and raving.
No one will do his bigging.
The opposite of old days is going to happen.
All those who used to be scared, now have someone watching their back
(and of course, watch, the Bloomberg haters will continue to be Bloomberg haters.
to the haters- don't forget Bloomberg backed President Obama twice. In 2008 and 2012.
but only one 12 ounce cup is needed.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)It was in a column by Gail Collins / NYTimes.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)I would welcome Mossad like security on every train/bus/movie theatre/supermarket
After all, terrorists blew up the train system in England
Bus have been attacked worldwide
and in the good old USA, we can't have our 1st amendment right of peaceful assembly anymore
in a movie theatre, supermarket or anywhere thanks to guns and bullets and the
reason is legal guns block the stopping of illegal guns
so all guns need to be removed from the street
collectors can keep their guns in the house
one can go to shooting galleries, like mini-golf and have a gun there (and you don't need real bullets anyhow)
and one can hunt with a bow and arrow like the Native Americans used to do before the settlers brought guns into America
just a tweak and some new democratic candidates and soon a new SCOTUS (thanks Ralph Nader for the rightwing court that is around now)
working one day closer to a gun free America.
By 2020, it will happen.
Especially if state by state, insurance companies also get involved.
90% of people used to smoke. Now 90% of the public (at least in NYC) do not.
Used to be allowed to smoke in airplanes
Used to be allowed to have terrorists blow up airplanes
Used to be allowed to have cars/trucks with bombs go into office buildings
But to quote Neil Diamond (c)
But used to be's don't count anymore
They just lay on the floor
'Til we sweep them away
God bless Michael Bloomberg! The Great Equalizer.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Why don't you just commit a major felony and get yourself locked up in prison.
You are what Franklin talked about when he made his comment about those willing to give up essential liberties.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)pipoman
(16,038 posts)Yes..good luck with that.
Surely you aren't favoring big insurance making up statistical data to over charge for insurance?
Strange bed partners and all that..1%ers and insurance companies..the saviors of good dems everywhere..
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)or do you want Rudy G. Mr.911 back in office?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)For someone who was so upset about Nader's third party bid you sure seem to love Bloomberg who also is an independent candidate who runs against Democrats. In fact even worse, Bloomberg once joined the Republican Party so he could defeat the Democrats, Nader never did that.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)And the police under Bloomberg carried out racist policy on many levels. Sorry if you don't like hearing it, facts are not up for debate.
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #62)
Cork Message auto-removed
Squinch
(50,774 posts)But if he is busy with gun control, it keeps him out of our hair, right?
Can't wait till November.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)I wish he'd spend it all there. Unfortunately being occupied with gun control isn't keeping him from simultaneously waging war on public education with his money. Cheers to November!
Squinch
(50,774 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Whats_that
(33 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)No matter how much stuff you post that has nothing to do with Guns and the NRA.
Bloomberg, Meek Mayor Mike, has shot down the NRA, the old fashioned way
He has put one dollar more than the NRA has and will continue to do it
And another one bites the dust(NRA candidates).
Again, take your other issues to a different thread.
Ding Dong The NRA is Dead is going to be sung from sea to shining sea.
paraphrasing the (c)Harold Arlen song.
The curtain has revealed Wayne LaPierre to be a total terrorristic rightwing nut job.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Congress, Oregon, Minnesota to name a few.
Perhaps the issue is not the NRA but the America electorate.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)until ALL guns are banned from the street, another person will die in the streets
so there are two issues.
The NRA needs to be called the terror organization it is, freeze their assets like they do to
AlQueda and get rid of their tax free status. Also, they need to be allowed to be sued for being collaterally involved in every single gun death.
Without the NRA blackmail, the entire elected office holders will be different.
And soon, With President Hillary Clinton the nail in the coffin will be written, once the court
becomes 8 to 1 or 7 to 2, or can we hope 9 to 0.
By 2020 and President Obama being nominated and placed on the US Supreme Court leading the way, the 2nd will either be shot down or totally reinterpreted (being that it goes without saying, private citizens cannot have shoulder to air missiles or bunker busting bombs.
Besides, attempting to overthrow a government is treason and not allowed.
As Ben Franklin said "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" And banning guns from the streets will give us an ounce of prevention.
The day is coming, one day at a time.
It will take a village of better congressional anti-NRA(free of the NRA blackmail) to change
the attitude.
Guns kill. And people now are into wellness.
Working for a gun-free America, one day at a time.
hack89
(39,171 posts)politicians care about voters. There are many pro-gun voters. There will never be a gun free America.
geckosfeet
(9,644 posts)other citizen gun owners.
They don't want to see their armies and law enforcement agencies disarmed.
And remember, they don't really mean they want to get rid of all the guns or repeal the 2A. It just appears that way. Because, you know, we are nut bags.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)good luck going to the gangs and asking them to politely hand their guns over.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)270 is all that is needed
Hillary/Napolitano will win close to 450 electoral votes
and the congress will again be democratic and the senate will hold.
and one by one, the governors will again be democratic
MORE IMPORTANT
the SCOTUS will be 7 to 2 or 8 to 1 or even 9 to 0 in the next 12 years by the end of the second Hillary/Napolitano term.
Working for a gun-free nation(except for law enforcement, and then only while on duty.
Cops will need to leave their guns in the office, secured, at the end of each shift, with a few tweaks of the law).
imho
and the NRA and gun groupies are sweating. The handwriting is on the wall.
hack89
(39,171 posts)to see where you are wrong.
And then look at all the Senate Dems up for reelection in 2014 that come from pro-gun conservative states. Why do you think Harry Reid refuses to touch gun control?
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)http://www.ontheissues.org/Cabinet/Janet_Napolitano_Gun_Control.htm
I don't think she supports your gun free America
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)the day is coming.
and it matters little what anyone said in the past.
a new day has risen and the past is yesterday.
As President Obama says "FORWARD". no looking back
And of course all candidates in the past were blackmailed into saying pro-gun words
because no one had their back
NOW, Meek Mike has people's backs, and the NRA curtain has been exposed and there is nothing standing on the other side of the curtain. With proper financing, finally the NRA has been defeated. And with the NRA fully exposed to be part and parcel of the republican party,
losing has become easy for the republicans and one by one, step by step, inch by inch
like a domino set, they all tumble down
And no candidate need to say the words I say (I am a nobody not running for any office).
All they have to do is win.
Then kabowweeee in unison, the numbers will be there, the courts will change
and the interpretation of the 2nd will evolve. Nuanced you might say.
hack89
(39,171 posts)time will tell.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)Roe v. Wade-esque..the opposition that is...No, it will take longer than either of us have on this planet to make any change to the 70 year old SCOTUS standard of, "in common use for lawful purposes", when determining which weapons can and which cannot be more heavily restricted. Fantasy is fun when it is acknowledged as fantasy...when it is believed to be truth...well...that's called something else..
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas , Jan 15, 2008
jmg257
(11,996 posts)Could be Hillary and MANY others who 'believe in the 2nd amendment' have their own take on it.
hack89
(39,171 posts)which defines the 2A as an individual right.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)In all the prior years, the NRA had blackmail powers
Now, the NRA is without those monopoly powers on the press
and there are more people (especially women) concerned about the safety of their children
than about some bad interpretation of the law
again, as President Obama says "FORWARD"
used to be 90% of the public smoke and the cigarette industry blackmailed the candidates
that too changed to now 90% of the public does not smoke (and no one took cigarettes away, it don't have to be made illegal to get people to change).
Of course, in civilized places, one can no longer smoke on airplanes, in restaurants, in office buildings, and yet it still is legal.
Simple tweaks of the law can keep guns legal, but off the streets
all it takes are new people in office, new tweaks of laws, and a brand new court, led in 2018 and after by President Obama soon to be Justice Obama.
and you can have your 2nd amendment, but there is no person alive that thinks every person
should be armed with bunker busting bombs or shoulder to air missles, or a jacket that a suicide bombber wears
and you can have your 1st amendment, yet, you cannot yell fire in a theatre that is not burning.
But MY 1st amendment rights of free assembly, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are taken away by a wrong interpretation of private citizens and guns.
militias=national guard anyhow, or the US Armed forces, or the federal,state,local law enforcement.
You can name it and claim it, but it will be done.
And a tip of my hat to mayor Bloomberg, Meek Mayor Mike. The great Equalizer.
David down the Goliath NRA
hack89
(39,171 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)actually, a President does not have the abiltiy to do what the house, senate, governors does.
All that is needed is the President to want a good SCOTUS and everything can fall into place.
but this has nothing to do with the topic.
Bloomberg, private citizen has far more power
(and if reports are true, soon Bloomberg will be the new owner, after he leaves office,
of the NY Times).
hack89
(39,171 posts)through spending vast amounts of money?
I take then that you support Citizens United?
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)I do understand why the NRA hates him.
The giant hated Jack too.
Goliath hated David.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Bloomberg is no David. It was Goliath vs Goliath.
derby378
(30,252 posts)Maybe you stumped him?
Left2Tackle
(64 posts)By 2020, President Obama could be finishing up his third term, and hopefully by then our presidents won't be restricted to four year terms. He will have nominated enough justices to the Supreme Court that he could just merge the Executive and Judicial branches and simplify things.
Seriously though, are you willing to throw freedom and liberty away for what "might" provide safety? I understand we need more checks and in some cases restrictions. But talk of "gun-free America" is only going to give the NRA more um... ammo.
I agree with this blogger:
"In the end, the main point is that casting gun violence as an American problem or an American phenomenon is a cop out. Reducing gun violence in the U.S. is going to require the same changes as will reducing gun violence in the Philippines. And these changes have a lot more to do with people's faith in the honesty and fairness of their government and legal systems -- and the respect for these institutions show for individual rights -- than they do with guns."
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/marni-soupcoff/gun-violence-us-philippines_b_2528902.html
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)I'm going to call that shit. Deal with it. Your "Great Equalizer" is a piece of shit serving the rich and powerful. (And fuck the NRA right along with Bloomberg, they're both toxic hypocritical pawns in the GOP game against the American people.)
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Wayne La Nut Job is a rightwing terroristic type extremist.
Guns need to be banned from the street. ALL OF THEM.
And it matters little what anyone thinks about soon to be private citizen Meek Mayor Mike.
He is WINNING
the NRA is dead, they just don't know it yet
as for your other issues, take your debate to next mayor Christine Quinn.
IN a few months, she will be mayor and Meek Mike won't be running for elective office again.
(Though of course, if his name was on the democratic ticket, I would indeed vote for him.
And Bloomberg backed President Obama two times.
And I am sure he will back Hillary Clinton/Janet Napolitano in 2016 and 2020.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Explain how it is liberal and Democratic (I take it you meant the proper noun?) to do that shit and say that shit. Stop dodging and pretending and say if you're okay with his stances. We already know you think DU is mean to 1%ers and that you argued for raising the SS retirement age. Do you at all disagree with what Bloomberg is doing to unions, education, minorities, the middle class, etc?
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Take your issues to other threads, not this.
this has nothing to do with the NRA and guns.
And I love his wellness programs.
the other things are not on this thread.
BTW, have you congratulated DEMOCRATIC WINNER Kelly yet?
This thread is about Ms. Kelly and the Chicago Election and how the NRA was again taken
down.
One notch at a time.
one day at a time.
wellness rules.
to quote the old song
"Chickaboom
chickaboom
dontcha just love it"
(C)Daddy Dewdrop 1971
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Noted.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)or John Kerry
"liberal"
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)I don't praise right wing politicians. How about you?
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)I have more balls than the typical internet chair occupant.
Oh, and one against Dick Cheney
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Of course, all we can go by is what we see people say here, on DU. Right? So maybe "reckoning" about people we don't know is a tad pointless, is the point. I judge people's politics by what they say here, which is all I need.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)same as I wanted cigarettes banned in offices, planes, bowling alleys, stadiums, and even outside buildings that I had to go buy.
And I like wellness plans. No one needs 780 calorie cups of sodas to drink in 60 to 120 minutes with a refill of another 780 calories.
As people should consume less than 2000 calories a day, wasting 1560 just on a large refilled soda is ludacrist, wouldn't you say
you can keep your gun in your home, but not in the street.
and the NRA not agreeing to anything has made it going to happen a lot sooner than it would.
because the NRA are not reasonable nor do they want anything reasonable.
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)EastKYLiberal
(429 posts)I hope his influence is felt far and wide in 2014 and aims to primary any Democrat that doesn't tow the new party stance on gun safety.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I think gun control is going to be an uphill battle and the chances of it actually happening are very slim. There needs to be a breakthrough in terms of making progress before the gun control issue fades into the background.
RedstDem
(1,239 posts)but will not be sad to see him leave the political stage, either...
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Plutocrat-hawk-quasi independents not so much.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)You note, Bloomy did NOT run independent, though he could have.
He 100% supported President Obama.
NO to third party presidential runs.
Ask George Wallace, ralph nader, Ron Paul, John Anderson- all tried to throw races or did throw races to the republican party
and YES to the defeat of all pro-nra, pro-gun candidates no matter what party to the anti-nra, anti-gun democratic candidate.
No longer does the NRA have blackmail power.
The nation's #1 super pac lobby group.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Just say NO to third party runs
(BTW, I would vote for Ralph Nader if he was the DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.
It is nothing personal against him, but his throwing the 2000 election to the republicans I was against.
HOWEVER, never a 3rd party candidate for president.
But for presidential runs ONLY Democratic candidates.
My 100% support in 2016 is for Hillary Clinton, if not her, Janet Napolitano, then Deval Patrick, Kathy Sebilus, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren(who is prime example of someone who can do more for what her one issue is as Senate than as President, where she would need to find another Eliz. Warren) in that order.
Unless of course Michelle Obama ran, which would elevate her to the 2nd choice, but I think Michelle will run in 2024 and 2028 after being Senator in Illinois.
BTW, wellness rules.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)You probably can't grasp the depravity of your party-based philosophy.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)BTW, I welcome the republican candidates to be anti-gun, anti-NRA
because guns are not a political issue.
guns kill republicans and democratic people and 3rd party people.
Guns killing are the great equalizer, matter little rich or poor, young or old, black or white,
democratic, republican guns and bullets kill.
But corporate personhood was given to the world thanks to Ralph Nader and 2000.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Yet you claim you'd vote for him if he puts a (D) after his name.
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,483 posts)I still think this is some kind of Andy Kaufmanesque character you're playing here. But just case you're actually serious about the word salads you plaster all over this board. Then I'd recommend you pick up a fucking book once in a while. The concept of corporate personhood has been around since the 1800s.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)You know who was responsible for a Dem not winning that one? Not some fucking Green, but Mike Bloomberg, a Republican.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)He/she is like a fresh catch, flopping all over the deck of the boat.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)and btw, I live in NJ now, so I don't vote in NYC.
I would not have voted for him had I lived in NYC.Same as I was a big David Dinkins fan and voted for him over Giuliana(who is 10000000 times worse than Bloomy you must admit).
I only vote for Democratic candidates.
And try as you might to catch me, his view on Guns/NRA has nothing to do with his role as Mayor.
It has everything to do with wanting a gun free America. Which is bipartisian want.
But Bloomy is a Boston Liberal far to the left of say Elizabeth Warren or Alan Grayson(who is just as rich as Bloomy btw, possibly richer).
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)and he's not even in the top ten wealthiest Congress Members. Getting the very basic and rather obvious facts in line is important when attempting to carry water for a guy like Bloomberg who is a conservative way to the right of Mr Grayson or even of Ms Warren.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)funny how little people know of the candidates they want to be on a national ticket.
Bloomberg is not nor ever was, running for national office.
He was a lowly mayor not a congressman or senator or VP or President.
99.999999% of America is not 1 millionth of what Alan Grayson personally has.
Grayson is richer than the 1% are. He is one of the richest people in the nation.
I have nothing against that, so it don't bother me any.
but his groupies whomever they are, should do a simple look-see.
If you are looking for a candidate who was dirt poor, that would be Barack Obama and Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. All had less money than any President before 42.
But what does this have to do with guns and the NRA and the anti-NRA candidate winning in Chicago?
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)pipoman
(16,038 posts)why would you wish to disrupt a perfect fantasy with reality?
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)you can with your 1st amendment right call him anything you want
you could even call him Maybe
but his first amendment right allows him to defeat any and all NRA candidates by one upping the NRA
dontchajustlove it?
I do.
Feel free to call him anything you want.
THough he is not required to answer a collect call.
the groovy thing is- Meek Mike is not running for any office.
So it matters little if someone calls him a name.
derby378
(30,252 posts)...who has claimed that anyone who owns a gun and supports the Second Amendment hates gays and anyone who isn't white. And just because he hasn't been held accountable for his hate speech, he goes around gloating like O.J. Simpson at the golf course searching for the "killer or killers" of his wife, Nicole.
No, you are definitely not the yapping gnat I spoke of earlier. But please stop shilling for Bloomberg; he's more Republican than Democrat, and we don't need him sticking his nose in our party primaries.
Response to derby378 (Reply #84)
Cork Message auto-removed
Upton
(9,709 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)But he is an honored general who got McNamara'd.
And more important he supported President Obama both in 2008 and 2012
and his endorsement was a seal the dealer.
Forward.
I don't go backward.
FORWARD.
But what does this have to do with the NRA and guns?
Guess one can't argue guns so will go personal against Bloomberg, which matters little, as he isn't running for any office.
So it's meaningless.
Bloomberg won another won. Another notch on his holster.
Meek Mike the david slew Goliath the giant.
In fact, Mike just pushed the giant over the cliff, and unlike a bumble, the dragon don't bounce
Upton
(9,709 posts)your worshiping of Bloomberg and Powell is creepy to say the least..
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Have a nice day. Waking up and finding Ms. Kelly won by a big margin made my day, which is rainy and cold outside, sunny and 85degrees
Dr. Strange
(25,898 posts)You chose to congratulate the Republican/Independent or whatever he thinks he is nowadays.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)I mean the unbelievable lovefest in this thread, combined with the admiration of his ability to manipulate politics and act like virtually every other 1%er is just too much..
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)there are always 2 choices
the NRA or an NRA free society.
I know which side I am on.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)TheKentuckian
(24,949 posts)swooping in and buying up our primaries.
I wonder what other positions the beneficiaries of his largess will hold? What favors will be owed? What allegiances will be built?
This is why the wealthy always come out ahead, they own the process. Before a vote is made, the choices are decided by fatcats dedicated to the principle of one dollar one vote.
The greater perversion is that scores of people have stood up to support a wealthy, fascist, little dictator buying the Democratic primaries as well.
Sellout motherfuckers. Give it all to our Lords and Masters! Hail the Masters of the Universe!!! Cash is King! All praise holy Mammon!!!
Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #75)
Cork Message auto-removed
dairydog91
(951 posts)I'm not sure why anyone thinks of him as either a Republican or a Democrat.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)to a gun free (by private citizen) America
Meek Mike, on the side of common sense. bipartisian on an issue that is not political.
no wonder the NRA hates him.
And has since day one.
If he was what his haters think, he would be pro-nra, pro-gun.
That he isn't tells me all I need to go.
But then some for some reason hated Lincoln too
dairydog91
(951 posts)Ms. Kelly won the primary for the 2nd Congressional District. That's an urban (And deep, deep blue) district in Chicago. A pro-gun politician was never going to win a seat there, any more than a rabidly anti-gun politician could win a Congressional District in Western Idaho.
Sissyk
(12,665 posts)He's having such a great sunny 85degree day cheering on a 1%er republican. Don't bust his bubble yet, k?
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Is this because Prohibition worked so well?
And the War on Drugs?
Just my opinion, but I don't think we're ever going to see a "gun free America".
And...before anyone jumps in to accuse me of being a gun-loving Freeper type in bed with the NRA...
I think the NRA is a terrorist organization. Or close to it, anyway. They are sick, sick people.
What I am saying is that outlawing all guns isn't going to "take them off the streets". In fact, it will probably make them more likely to be ON the streets as people who are determined to have them will get them however they can.
I don't know what all the answers are here. But I do know...or highly suspect, anyway...that making guns illegal (just like booze was, and just like a lot of drugs still are) won't make them disappear.
Determined people will still get them.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Guns don't need to be illegal to be off the streets. Streets that are gun free can be achieved.
All it takes is keeping them out of the street and in a home.
Once the court changes, the people in office change, new laws can be written.
A private citizen can't bring a tank in the street with out attracting attention, and a private citizen cannot land a plane on a public street without attracting attention
There are ways to secure the streets and make them safe.
That is what law enforment (state,local,federal) is for.
Why would any sane person need a gun in a bar?
another example-
the KKK is still by 1st amendment legally allowed to march.
However, tactics used by the KKK in the past are not legally allowed
and in 2013, the public is legally allowed to spit on them when they do march
Bringing insurance into the argument (like car insurance) can go far
Making anyone with a gun feel ostrazied could change things (like smokers are).
So guns don't have to be illegal at all to be out of the streets(or locations accessed from a street).
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)being what it is...
People are choosing not to smoke. They're not being told they can't.
If cigarettes were made illegal, there would still be people out there smoking, only they would be getting their cigarettes illegally.
Making the cigarettes illegal wouldn't end the problem of smoking. It would only drive people to obtain their cigarettes in some illegal way.
The way I see it, making guns illegal and expecting never to see another gun in America again is pretty similar to the RW hope that making abortion illegal would stop all abortions from happening.
Their stand doesn't make sense.
The idea that ostracism of gun owners will cause them to give up their guns doesn't make a lot of sense to me, either.
How would social ostracism affect people who are intent on owning guns? I doubt they're going to care what others think of them.
Insurance...how is that going to get guns off the streets?
It just seems to me that measures like mandatory insurance...social ostracism...etc., may or may not work on the general law-abiding population, but will do absolutely nothing to completely remove guns from our society.
Not when criminals can, and will, manage to get their hands on them.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)and yes, one can remove things from the street.
After the laws and all.
I have gone to concerts at Madison Square Garden forever.
Starting in the 1970s, one is frisked/searched
If one doesn' like it, too bad. All are.
Same thing could be applied in general, with major differences.
One puts a ring around it, like vaccines do for epidemics.
they can be legal in the home and illegal in the street.
People haven't hijacked a plane to take into a building since 9-11.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)I can see people getting frisked upon going into a concert venue.
But in order to keep guns off the streets, the police would need to be able to stop and frisk anyone they even suspect might be carrying a weapon.
Don't the police have enough to do as it is?
And is this really what people want?
A virtual police state?
CTyankee
(63,771 posts)And it never will.
We have to have the will to change. We can do this and the OP has pointed to some changes we can make. We are a constitutional democracy. We can take steps to stop the slaughter of our citizenry. We can't NOT try, despite the dithering that is going on here with the naysayers.
It's ridiculous to compare this to Prohibition. The vast majority of the people didn't want Prohibition. The vast majority now wants gun safety and that means controlling guns. Enough is enough.
It's time to pull up our socks and stop whining "oh, dear me, it'll never work...!"
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)who did, or didn't, want prohibition wasn't my point.
Of course we can't not try.
But there are too many people who think that this one idea...making guns illegal...will solve the problem.
It won't.
I don't care if 95% of the country want guns to be outlawed.
There will still be 5% who don't.
So let's say 95% of the population don't like guns. The population of the US in 2012 was nearly 313 million.
Let's say 200 million are old enough to buy a gun.
The 5% of 200 million who do want guns makes, what... 10 million?
The only way we'll outlaw guns in the US will be if 100% of the population wants them made illegal.
So it's not the numbers of people who don't want something...it's the number of people who do, and will do anything to get hold of what they want...by whatever means they can.
And if a community like DU can't even agree on this issue, how can anyone expect a country of over 300 million to agree?
Make something illegal, and you open up a whole other can of worms...like illegal gun traffickers.
I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone here would like to see gun cartels similar to the drug cartels in Mexico. Gangs with no conscience. Killing police...men...women...children.
Anyone who gets in their way. And the drugs keep coming over the border.
I don't think that's fatalistic. I think it's realistic.
CTyankee
(63,771 posts)People accepted that folks get drunk and drive and sanctions at the time weren't strong enough to stop a lot of it. So we passed tougher laws and we stopped a lot of it. Not all of it, but enough to make a real difference in the numbers of incidents of drunk driving. It was done along with public education and education of kids. Sure, it was a big process. Sure, it was difficult. But it sure did work.
aikoaiko
(34,127 posts)You should be congratulating the people of district, no?
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)This thread was a different one than someone else put up.
My focus is on the NRA and Guns.
nice try. Top of the morning to ya.
Response to graham4anything (Reply #87)
Cork Message auto-removed
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)again name calling but I am not against the NRA's money
I was against the NRA not having having any competition
Money don't bother me
good money and bad money
nra-bad money
bloomberg's anti-gun org.=good money
Money is not the root of all evil you know.
Bad money is
Good money is good money
nice try though
Top of the morning to ya. It's a glorious day, sunny and 80, even though outside is
chilly and rainy.
wellness rules
Response to graham4anything (Reply #91)
Cork Message auto-removed
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)and NO golf club or golf ball needs to be in the streets
I can get one just fine at the mini golf place.
Thanks for making my point.
You do not need to carry a gun on the street to get to the range.
They can lend you one.
Guns kill
mini golf balls don't
aikoaiko
(34,127 posts)You're the OP of this thread.
And I welcome a link to your yesterday's thread on the topic.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)the rest is a diversion. matters little.
Bloomberg WON this race
Bloomberg won the california race
two pro-nra candidates lost
the one in Los Angeles was a long time incumbent who bit the dust
That is the only thing important
the NRA candidates are dropping like flies hit to the inept NY Met outfield.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)CTyankee
(63,771 posts)side arguments that are meant to distract us. I admire how skillfully you handled each and every one of those distracting arguments. They are meant to wear you down and you wouldn't let that happen. You beat them at their own game each time they tried!
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)But I'm glad you think that killing public education and unions are mere "distractions." You're lonely in that view, though.
CTyankee
(63,771 posts)I think the OP has tried to separate the bad from the good with Bloomberg and I did not see him nor will you ever see me tear down unions or education. The mayor is doing some good with his power and his money and I can't fault him for that Some here are using some of the mayor's faults to further the gun agenda, IMO, not in furtherance of good social values.
Robb
(39,665 posts)If we can give Christie credit for responding well to disaster, surely we can credit Bloomberg for standing up to the NRA.
The disingenuousness of the gun lobby, and it's "progressive" defenders on DU, is without limit.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Should anyone be exclusively praising a 1%er racist right winger for the single issue he isn't DEAD WRONG on, without even slightly acknowledging those wrongs?
Robb
(39,665 posts)Would you like to pull the other leg? Maybe you'll have better luck.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)are the integrity muscles of those hopping into bed with pieces of human shit like Bloomberg, excusing his monsterous policies because of the one they like. Again, there are liberal gun control advocates out there, but some choose Republican lizard people for their praises.
Robb
(39,665 posts)"Pulled their integrity muscle."
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Again, I am not against money.
I don't begrudge money.
So why not start a thread and ask why other mega rich aren't doing their fair share.
Zucky from facebook just had a big fundraiser in thanks to Chris Christie.
Why not petitition Zucky to donate to this cause.
You could ask Alan Grayson why he doesn't do the same thing, as he is mega rich
Politics works fine when lots of individuals get together and do their own specific thing best suited.
Sort of like boxing someone in. That is the NRA and other rightwing items.
You get someone on each issue, specific.
Elizabeth Warren for instance fights the big banks.
everyone is working on the same side.
If your analogy would have been correct, billionaire Mike would have backed billionaire Mitt,
however, he didn't.
And, BTW, if you didn't know, Bernie Sanders got his senate seat with much money from
Charles Schumer (a lifetime friend (and fellow Brooklynite) heavily backing Sanders in his race.
Why would you want the NRA to continue with no one against them?
Why begrudge anyone who fights them?
After all, they are around, they still have their tax free money, and are heavily backed by the republican party.
So other people can also contribute (and Mike's Mayors against guns groups have dozens and dozens of members nationwide of other mayors).
Guns and bullets are the problem.
Which is why I say Mike is the Great Equalizer.
(and no one has to like him on any other issue, OR can like him on other issues, but all that is irrelevant).
former9thward
(31,805 posts)Kelly's main opponent was Toni Hutchison who dropped out and had an A rating from the NRA. She endorsed Kelly. Just admit you have no clue about this district. Being of fan of 1%er Mike does not help your cause. Kelly in her campaign appearances downplayed the gun issue and said the election was about jobs and the economy.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)That was the day Kelly won.
Isn't life great today? I think it is.
one day at a time, one candidate at a time. One day closer.
and the beauty of bloomberg is, it doesn't expend capital from either President Obama or President to be Clinton. Both can personally stay away from the issue
former9thward
(31,805 posts)In a 95% Democratic district? Show me where your 1%er Bloomberg who is surrounded by guns 24/7 defeats an incumbent gun rights person and replaces them with an anti-rights person.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)a new soundbyte from the NRA
Did Wayne LeNutJob text these out himself???
anti-rights candidates
former9thward
(31,805 posts)BTW check out your avatar's position on the 2nd amendment -- you may have to remove it.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)hughee99
(16,113 posts)and people would be cheering for it.
I guess as long as the circumstances are right, almost anything is possible.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Only a very small % hate all money
Most people here didn't mind that FDR had millions and spent it on issues he liked
That Joseph Kennedy had billions and his sons spent it on issues important to them
and that Bernie Sanders was given mega money from Charlie Schumer and the democratic party to win his seat he still has
It reminds me of the selctiveness of people that say they don't like dynasties
but are only talking about the Clinton's (or on the other side the Bush's).
and forget that the Kennedys, Al Gore, FDR, John Quincy Adams and thousands of others like the immortal Jerry Brown(my fave!!!) had relatives come before them.
(If no relative could run, Jerry would never have been able to be elected).
This is about guns and bullets.
some people kowtow to the NRA blackmail
other candidates are happy to have that cloud removed from them, and the freedom to go against them.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)I'll bet I wouldn't have found any DUers who needed more information before deciding that I was PROBABLY talking about the Kochs, and that this sort of money in politics is bad.
I'll bet that 6 months from now, it will be the same story as well.
A very large % hate all money, at least until you give them example of where it worked TOWARD someone they like, and examples on the Dem side are few and far between.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Should you wish to start a separate thread about money, I will answer you there
(provided it is not in the gun section of the board, which I no longer frequent after fighting mostly alone for months, now that I can fight against guns and the NRA right here in the general discussion area).
The only thing wrong with the Koch brothers is they work for the other side.
George Soros is great and he works for the democratic side.
john Kerry is mega rich and he is a democratic candidate.
Money is only bad if its used for diabolical things.
Money is good if used for good things.
Al Gore is one of the richest people now in America. Al is good, isn't he?
but guns and the NRA are the topic of this thread. Feel free to start one from a different viewpoint.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)how can this NOT be related to money? That's what links Bloomberg to the election. It's not the position on gun control. A lot of people, even wealth ones, hold a similar position. It's that Bloomberg put his money where his mouth is.
But fair enough, if you want to "eat your steak" in peace in this thread and not talk about where it comes from, I can understand that.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I don't recall any of these gun fanatics getting upset about any of the FOX News or Washington Times editorials that get posted in the gungeon, but now all of a sudden celebrating the fact that a centrist billionaire is serving as a counterweight to the far-right wing NRA is an outrage!
Robb
(39,665 posts)is that they operate thinking everyone else is as gullible as they are.
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)You may not like it, you may not believe it, but we will always have guns in America, and law-abiding citizens will still have and exercise their right to own them.
As for the rest of your post, screw the idiots in the NRA, screw the idiot Bloomberg, and congratulations to Ms. Kelly.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)And never say never.
One day Justice Scalia will retire. So will Clarence Thomas. So will Alito and Roberts.
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)But even so, concealed carry is not going away anytime soon.
And even if--in your dreams--it does, there will still be criminals walking around with guns and shooting other people.