Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
66. Smith and Wesson is not a big corporation.
Fri Jun 29, 2012, 05:33 PM
Jun 2012

In fact, I doubt the all of the gun companies in US and Europe combined are "big corporations" on the level of BP or Koch.


Don't trick yourself. Guns are openly available now now because the oligarchs have everyone else beaten by a couple laps in the arms race, and also, they know how to manipulate an armed populace to work for them, or at least they believe so. For good reason, for even the most intelligent people can get tripped up in their propaganda.
Umm, no. Actually, look at the membership or donors of Brady and VPC. One foundation and a couple of million and billionaires. Even some right wing celebs like Sly Stallone. Some left leaning ones like Rosie O' Donnell too. What you don't see is a grassroots movement of any kind. Your problem is not the NRA, ALEC or any other boogeyman. Your problem is stringing together various logical fallacies and distortions and trying to make arguments out of it.

Besides, what does SYG have to do with armed rebellion against the oligarchy anyway? Nothing, except guns. The fact that the discussion one brings automatically chime in with the other tells me that you're more informed by dubious social theories and hypotheticals than any facts. If you're so numb to relevance, I don't think you can read a case or a law right even if you can cite it correctly.
How do you think most gun control laws were passed in the day? Europe, Canada, and Australia it was mostly the red scare in the 1920s. Before the 1960s, the south had the strictest gun laws other than New York. None of them were for what we would agree would be the right reasons.

Unless you can tell me why the oligarchs sell us so many guns when they don't want us to have them, and how SYG has anything to do with the class struggle against them, you're same level of credibility with me as Big Foot witnesses, Birthers, 9/11 revisionists and Scientologists. And I bet you think I'm a jerk because you're likely one of those, too.
Oligarchs might make them, but they are not selling them. None of them are bankers or oil companies. Read up on Blair Mountain and Haymarket riots and think about it.
No I'm not. What bigfoot witnesses have to do with it, I have no idea. New species are discovered all the time. I am not saying they do or do not exist. I am simply agnostic. As for your birther smear, that may be against the TOS. I'm not a Scientologist. My father was a Mormon (and went through the motions when I was a kid) and my daughter is a Wiccan, so I detest religious bigots on the left as much as I do the ones on the right.

Oh yeah, You can read them for yourself here.

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/256/335/case.html
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/158/550/



Better to be raped or murdered first and then let the legal system handle it. dkf Jun 2012 #1
You never hear about it because Gman Jun 2012 #2
+1 ellisonz Jun 2012 #31
Doesn't she have that right without SYG? HockeyMom Jun 2012 #3
SYG adds nothing new except the would-be victim is not required to retreat Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #4
Again, if homicide is not the last resort caseymoz Jun 2012 #9
Conversely, what is the first obligation? Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #15
I believe that was treated sufficiently with the law before caseymoz Jun 2012 #19
If more people are killed under SYG and no one is convicted Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #21
a thread-killer :) discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2012 #23
Then why does Corrections Corporation of America exist? BiggJawn Jun 2012 #28
It just bothers me. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2012 #33
Bothers me, too. BiggJawn Jun 2012 #38
I know what you mean. Not cool! discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2012 #39
I wasn't commenting on the rightness or wrongness of privately owned prisons Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #42
Except that it is true. AtheistCrusader Jun 2012 #29
True? For sure it is. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2012 #34
Your first obligation is to think. Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #40
You are confused about SYG. gejohnston Jun 2012 #41
You are the one who is not thinking and is seriously confused about SD and SYG ProgressiveProfessor Jun 2012 #67
No, gejohnston Jun 2012 #27
"Reasonable man" will not even be applied. caseymoz Jun 2012 #57
not even remotely true gejohnston Jun 2012 #58
Your example fails. GreenStormCloud Jun 2012 #50
Um, I didn't say the two situations were alike caseymoz Jun 2012 #52
Yes that is true ... spin Jun 2012 #5
Good points... OneTenthofOnePercent Jun 2012 #12
Of course she does. DanTex Jun 2012 #10
Should people be convicted if they resort to deadly force Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #14
Wrong. TPaine7 Jun 2012 #25
You're channeling Hoyt. PavePusher Jun 2012 #53
The standard for self defense has not changed hack89 Jun 2012 #55
Here's the difference: caseymoz Jun 2012 #6
"SYG stops investigations" Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #7
True in many other cases. caseymoz Jun 2012 #8
I provided an example; you provided wild, unfounded conjecture Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #11
I found your response to be insulting. caseymoz Jun 2012 #17
Saying something is demonstrably false and then providing an example is insulting? Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #20
"People's emotional attachment" to SYG exists because ... MicaelS Jun 2012 #18
Then I think they need general reform caseymoz Jun 2012 #47
"SYG stops investigations." PavePusher Jun 2012 #22
You are misinformed. caseymoz Jun 2012 #44
No, I'm not "misinformed". PavePusher Jun 2012 #54
Arrest and trial ARE punishment, if one hasn't actually done something wrong. PavePusher Jun 2012 #24
I agree, but that's not the assumption behind our laws. caseymoz Jun 2012 #45
I think I see the problem here. PavePusher Jun 2012 #56
If you insist on legally accurate terms caseymoz Jun 2012 #59
"Idiot"? Not at all. "Confused", maybe. Or possibly, by your own admission, "misleading". PavePusher Jun 2012 #60
As far as I know, there is no "right to kill" in self-defense. If you were to claim such a right TPaine7 Jun 2012 #26
As far as you know? caseymoz Jun 2012 #46
Yes, and as far as you know, and as far as anyone knows in US law. TPaine7 Jun 2012 #49
Oh, so you're nitpicking on my wording. caseymoz Jun 2012 #51
Errors. AtheistCrusader Jun 2012 #30
Um, no. Because your car keys aren't going to kill you. caseymoz Jun 2012 #48
'presentation' AtheistCrusader Jun 2012 #61
Short for now. caseymoz Jun 2012 #62
I don't know about the lady's defense lawyer gejohnston Jun 2012 #63
lol. Don't like the rest of us with guns? caseymoz Jun 2012 #65
Smith and Wesson is not a big corporation. gejohnston Jun 2012 #66
Most of the SYG laws in play are older than ALEC. AtheistCrusader Jun 2012 #64
How fast can you run? rrneck Jun 2012 #13
Plant throwdown skittles and tea on them. WingDinger Jun 2012 #16
We have been told here sarisataka Jun 2012 #32
I wonder if the poster would feel that a 100 pound woman ... spin Jun 2012 #35
It is good to be aware sarisataka Jun 2012 #36
Good point. (n/t) spin Jun 2012 #37
"Only the Sith deal in absolutes" - Obi Wan Glassunion Jun 2012 #43
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»"Legally allowing wo...»Reply #66