Kucinich packed heat after 1978 Mafia death plot

[goodhue]

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

Kucinich packed heat after 1978 Mafia death plot

Posted by Sabrina Eaton April 27, 2007 16:16PM

Cleveland Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich, who is drafting legislation to ban civilian ownership of handguns, kept a pistol in his house after police learned of a Mafia plot to kill him during his tumultous stint as Cleveland's mayor during the 1970s.

Now seeking the presidency, Kucinich was among five Democratic candidates who admitted during a Thursday night presidential debate that they'd kept guns in their houses during their adulthoods. The other gun-toting Democrats were former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

"Shotgun, not pistol," Biden volunteered during the MSNBC-sponsored debate in Orangeburg, South Carolina.

Kucinich spokesman Andy Juniewicz said the congressman kept a pistol at home long ago, after police learned that a Mafia hitman had planned to shoot Kucinich as he marched in an October 1978 parade. Kucinich ended up missing the parade because he was hospitalized with an ulcer, but police feared subsequent murder attempts so they recommended that he keep a gun in the house, Juniewicz said.

Details of that plot were publicized during a 1984 Senate inquiry into organized crime activities. News accounts at that time suggested that Cleveland organized crime figures were frustrated that some of Kucinich's mayoral initiatives were thwarting their money-making plans.

* * *



Read more: http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/04/kucinich_packed_heat_after_197.html

[Joanne98]

1. He was thwarting their money making plans. GO DENNIS!

[demnan]

2. This is such a non-issue

Dennis had reason to have need to defend himself in that situation, he was reforming the government of his city and that was probably a dangerous act, in retrospect. He never would have obtained a gun illegally and would have passed stringent psychological tests to obtain one.

[Irreverend IX]

24. Well, Dennis wants to ban handguns completely.

He isn't saying people should have to pass stringent psychological tests to own one, he isn't advocating registration, he wants to ban every single one despite the fact that he purchased one for self-defense. That's hypocrisy.

[MLFerrell]

35. "That's hypocrisy."

Indeed. Textbook case, I daresay.

[dansolo]

39. Just another reason why I don't like or trust Kucinich.

Just more evidence of his authoritarian nature. Either that, or he is pandering, which is nearly as bad.

[Truth2Tell]

44. I don't think Dennis is pandering

There is no evedence at all that he's acting out of anything other than sincere conviction. None.

Is he right? I don't think so. But an "authoritarian nature"? If this is "more evidence" of that, then what other evidence do you have?

[EFerrari]

47. Did you just call Dennis an authoritarian?

:rofl:

[yardwork]

76. Maybe he changed his mind. He carried a gun in 1978.

He's now in favor of banning handguns. Do you agree with everything you did in 1978?

[SayWhatYo]

81. That's a fair view, but....

Are you willing to hold that same opinion if it's in regards to some other politician in which you may not agree with. I don't know where you stand politically, but let's say Hillary Clinton(since so many seem to dislike her) was in a similar situation, would you give her a pass? Or perhaps a better test would be if it was a republican who you disagree with on everything, would you give him a pass?


I personally give him a pass for what he did in 1978. I however would also give anyone the same. People change and learn. However, I find many people are not willing to be fair with everyone, and only pick and choose who they give 'passes' to.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

40. Um...

and would have passed stringent psychological tests to obtain one.

Yes. I'm sure he'd pass with flying colors. Pretty colors! Ooh, shiny thing! Me want touch! :crazy:

[Kagemusha]

3. Even the most restrictive handgun regimes in the nation allow for this.

If you wanna find a legitimate reason for owning a handgun, under the laws that have existed to date - even the really restrictive ones, good lord, Kucinich had one there. I would be distinctly offended by anyone trying to claim he is a hypocrite with a double standard on this.

[iverglas]

58. even CANADA allows for it, fer chrissakes

Act: http://www.canlii.org/ca/as/1995/c39/whole.html

20. An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess restricted firearms or handguns referred to in subsection 12(6) (pre-February 14, 1995 handguns) may be authorized to possess a particular restricted firearm or handgun at a place other than the place at which it is authorized to be possessed if the individual needs the particular restricted firearm or handgun

(a) to protect the life of that individual or of other individuals; or

(b) for use in connection with his or her lawful profession or occupation.


Regulations: http://www.canlii.org/ca/regu/sor98-207/whole.html

2. For the purpose of section 20 of the Act, the circumstances in which an individual needs restricted firearms or prohibited handguns to protect the life of that individual or of other individuals are where

(a) the life of that individual, or other individuals, is in imminent danger from one or more other individuals;

(b) police protection is not sufficient in the circumstances; and

(c) the possession of a restricted firearm or prohibited handgun can reasonably be justified for protecting the individual or other individuals from death or grievous bodily harm.

[hughee99]

60. While even Canada may allow it, it sound like Dennis' own legislation may not.

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=62819

"Kucinich is currently drafting legislation that would ban the purchase, sale, transfer, or possession of handguns by civilians."

[iverglas]

63. oh goody, another shell game

The allegation on the table is that Kucinich is a hypocrite because
(a) he once possessed a handgun; and
(b) he now wants to prohibit hand gun possession.

Well, I once -- in fact, many times -- drove around the continent with no seatbelt on. Does that make me a hypocrite if I want seatbelts to be mandatory?

Why don't you just email him and ask him whether his proposal includes no possibility for someone against whom a powerful and determined and ruthless organized crime entity has made a direct and personal death threat to possess a handgun during the period when the threat level was high?

[hughee99]

66. As soon as he gets back to me, I'll let you know.

I like Dennis a lot, but I was a little disappointed to see his proposal to ban ALL handguns. From what I know of his legislation so far, I didn't see anything about banning all civilian handguns UNLESS someone really needs them for protection (like in the situation he found himself in 30 years ago), but I don't believe the bill is ready yet.

I will say this, Dennis felt he needed a gun for protection at one point in his life, and got one. I certainly don't fault him for that, but IF (and I don't know that he will) he introduces legislation that would prevent a person in those same circumstances today from getting one, it's hard for me to not see some hypocrisy there.

[colorado_ufo]

71. I'm practically reeling from the common sense here!

If we adopted some form of this, we would not have to seek a reinvention of the wheel.

[galileo3000]

70. He should have just called the cops if there was trouble.

[treelogger]

77. Bad idea

You suggest "He should have just called the cops if there was trouble."

You are aware that law enforcement is under no obligation to protect individuals? There are supreme court rulings that say exactly that. If you call the police because someone wants to off you, the police may come, or it may not. It doesn't have to. It might decide that it has more important things to do (examples abound, Watts riots, Rodney King riots). It might decide that you live in a war zone (those are more politely known as inner cities), and that protecting you would be too dangerous for them (examples abound, those are known as inner city slums). In neither case can you force them to protect you, nor can you claim damages if they fail to protect you. This is all apart from the fact that you'll be long dead anyway.

Furthermore, consider the reality of law enforcement today, with limited budgets. How long did it take in Virginia or Columbine for the police to actually arrive, arm themselves, prepare, and enter the building? By that point, dozens of people were dead.

We live on the edge of one of the richest, most developed areas in the world (Silicon Valley). Measured fire department response time to our house is between 20 and 25 minutes (among the neighbors and us we've had maybe a half dozen occasions to test this). Measured police response time was only measured once in a serious case (which involved a firearm and a dead person), and was about 45 minutes.

Claiming "should have called the cops" is laughable in this situation. It is actually worse than laughable, it is cynical and cruel. You might as well counsel people to just "go stand in a corner and die".

[seriousstan]

4. Dennis is a gun banning fool. Look at his website. He wants to ban all handguns.

"Kucinich is currently drafting legislation that would ban the purchase, sale, transfer, or possession of handguns by civilians. A gun buy-back provision will be included in the bill."

This is from his website.

[karlrschneider]

5. Not a single issue voter here but that one is a deal breaker. I won't ever give him any support

if that's part of his agenda.

[hollowdweller]

17. Yeah that's going to far for me he wouldn't get my vote I like Richardson!

[stimbox]

31. You can still have rifles and shotguns.

eom.

[seriousstan]

41. Well, thank you mommy Dennis.

:puke:

[michreject]

54. I have 36 handguns that I plan on keeping

I have a CCW as well.

Why didn't DK get a rifle or shotgun?

[stimbox]

68. why don't you ask him?

it was 29 years ago, who cares.

[karlrschneider]

6. So he's just another fucking hypocrite. What a shock.

As if he had a snowball's chance of ever being elected. The guy is a diminutive nutball in most other ways too.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. If I had a mafia threat against me I would probably keep a gun too.

I mean really, what the fuck, the guy was under a real threat to his life.

[karlrschneider]

9. He should have just waited for the cops to come

after being shot. That's how some DUers think, anyway. :eyes:

[lakeguy]

32. just because D-man had a gun....

doesn't mean he still wouldn't have ended up dead. there is no way he would have lived through a mafia hit just because he had a little pistol gun.

[karlrschneider]

46. If he tried to shoot a big one it would knock him over backward.

...

[brentspeak]

8. This is an extremely dumb proposal of Kucinich'

I'm not a fan of handguns, especially when they're carried around in public by people who can drive a car without almost causing an accident. But advocating that handguns be banned even from the home -- he might as well change his name to KOOK-i-nich.

[shenmue]

10. Whoa

:popcorn:

[shenmue]

11. Just a thought here...

If we would take the guns away from the Mafia, Dennis wouldn't need to pack a gun.

You gun-lovers are so concerned about getting everybody to have guns everywhere all the time. Jeemony.

Japan doesn't let this shit happen, and what's their murder rate? 100 a year? 150?

Grow up. Most people want to get rid of guns. It's only the NRA lunatics who keep them around. Get your foot off everyone's necks, and maybe the majority will actually be able to improve this country.

[karlrschneider]

12. Knock it off. Not all or even a majority of gun owners are in the NRA.

I have had guns for 56 years and NEVER joined that organization.
Japan's history is WAY different from ours. You should know that.

[Paladin]

34. What's Your Problem With The NRA? Not Extreme Enough?

n/t

[karlrschneider]

45. Very funny. BTW, you sure picked an odd username for a gun grabber.

:eyes:

[Paladin]

56. I Didn't Pick My Username To Confound D.U. Gun Militants

But the fact that it does on occasion, pleases me greatly.

By the way, Herr Schneider, I'm one of those "gun grabbers" who owns a number of firearms and knows how to use them. That doesn't keep me from advocating rigorous gun control in this country. Hope you lose some sleep over those circumstances.....

[AZ Criminal JD]

18. A thought that is wrong

Japan has about 1400 murders a year -- not 100 or 150 -- with a population about 1/3 ours. Not only that but Japan counts murder-suicides as suicides -- and their suicide rate is 50% greater than ours. The mayor of Nagasaki was just shot to death -- gun control really worked for him didn't it! I know no one, liberal or conservative, Democratic or Repug that wants to ban guns from houses. Where is this majority?

[Richard Steele]

23. Brilliant.

Not.

[progressoid]

25. Grow up? OK here's a grown up fact.

Many members of my family own guns. NONE of them are NRA lunatics. And most are lifelong liberal Democrats.

[madville]

26. Yeah because banning stuff always works

"If we would take the guns away from the Mafia, Dennis wouldn't need to pack a gun."


With that logic we should also ban the mafia, murder, theft, money laundering, tax evasion, etc and then there would be no mafia, problem solved. Hey wait a minute those things are already banned and they still do them anyway, my guess is they would still have their guns despite any new law.

The mafia would probably love to see all guns banned anyway because it would create a larger demand for black market firearms and give them a new more profitable niche in the smuggling and sale of black market firearms.

"Most people want to get rid of guns. It's only the NRA lunatics who keep them around"

There are around 80,000,000 law abiding gunowners in the US, there are about 4,000,000 NRA members. So only 5% of all firearms owners are NRA members.

[toopers]

51. Actually, Japan did let this happen . . .

the mayor of Nagasaki was gunned down in front of his house. I believe this happened within the last 30 days.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/18/asia/AS-GEN-Japan-Mayor-Shooting.php

I believe the first paragraph says it all. BTW, I chose this link because it was the first one that popped up when I googled the story.

"TOKYO: When Nagasaki's mayor was fatally shot in southern Japan, it was not much of a surprise that a gangster was arrested. In a country where regular citizens face strict gun laws, the mob does most of the shooting."

[Oglethorpe]

52. Taking guns from the mafia

And just how would you propose we take the guns from the mafia? Knock on their doors and politely request that they turn them over?

[treelogger]

78. And how do you want to do this?

You suggest "If we would take the guns away from the Mafia ..."

Do you have any constructive proposals on how to do this? Today, the inner city slums are rife with guns, the majority of which are possessed illegally. This is where the bulk of the murders in the US happen. Yet, nothing is either willing or able to do something about it. Are you suggested a house-to-house sweep in the slum, to look for illegal guns? Not going to fly, we have legal protections against such searches without probable cause.

By the way, stringent gun control laws don't address this. Germany has strict gun control laws; every common criminal can obtain guns there (on the black market, many fed from eastern europe, the joke is that it is the russian mafia that supplies them). Every Yakuza enforcer in Japan has a gun.

Face it: Guns exist. Many of them. Quite a few are in the hands of the wrong people. Wishing it not to be so doesn't make it go away. Please make a concrete proposal to address this.

[iamjoy]

13. Dennis, Dennis...Shame, Shame

Why didn't he try to reason with them? Or create an environment where they wouldn't want to kill anyone? As mayor, why didn't he form a department of citizenship to make peaceful resolutions a priority?

You know, it's not so much that he's looking to ban handguns, it's just when he's on the stump he makes it sound like he doesn't ever think violence is a solution.

[bluestateguy]

14. I guess Kucinich's logic must be that only powerful people have the right to defend themselves

That routinely seems to be the logic of the elitist gun control lobby.

[toopers]

57. Dennis and Rosie have the same logic . . .

do not let anyone have guns, except for our family.

[jody]

15. Kucinich is out of touch with mainstream voters. He's pandering to the gun-grabber clique who if

successful will lose another presidential election for we Democrats.

If Karl Rove didn't have people like the Scary Brady Bunch and prominent Democratic senators to lend their prestige to the gun-grabber agenda, he would have to create and budget several tens of millions of dollars to convince independent voters that we Democrats are determined to take their handguns they need for self-defense because government is not obligated to protect an individual unless she/he is in custody.

To quote that learned philosopher Pogo from my home area, "We have met the enemy and he is us"!

[stuartrida]

16. He flip flopped on choice too. He used to be totally pro-life before he ran for president.

I'd still hold my nose and vote for him if he was our nominee, but I hope he isn't.

[iverglas]

59. and that's a ... good thing? bad thing?

He flip flopped on choice too. He used to be totally pro-life before he ran for president.

Actually, he used to be totally anti-choice. Slip of the tongue I guess, eh?

I'd always thought that "flip-flop" required starting at point A, going to point B, and going back to point A. Otherwise you'd just have a flip. Or a flop.

In point of fact, Kucinich changed his mind. Not, I suspect, without a lot of bashing over the head. He came to understand that opposing reproductive choice is fascistic, and that the ability to exercise reproductive rights is fundamental to women's autonomy. But then I guess you've read his statements on the issue.

So anyhow, your point was ...?

[stimbox]

19. NRA smear job...

Don't buy into it.

I wish there was an unrecommend button.

[Mojorabbit]

21. It is on his website

it is not a smear job.

[stimbox]

30. It is?

Link?

[Mojorabbit]

37. Here

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=62819

[karlrschneider]

48. Crickets.

:D

[stimbox]

49. That's not it.

Thanks but that's not it.
I was referring to the Plains Dealer Blog NRA stooge written smear job.
A link to that is not on Kucinich's website.

[Mojorabbit]

53. I am not sure

what you are referring to but it is plain that he has introduced this legislation. This for me is a deal breaker. I believe in my second amendment rights. I love him otherwise but no way can I go along with this. I am liberal as hell but this is one area where I will not compromise. Call me crazy if you want but there it is.

My father was a Korean war vet. He bought me most of my guns. He believed women should be proficient in all types of skills. He taught me how to repair my car when I was a teen and how to do simple engine repair. He died in Jan and I treasure his gifts to me.I will not give them up. He was a big proponent of the second amendment due to what he saw in war. He taught me well. No, I will not give up his gifts to me.

This is why dems lose elections. They have no idea when it comes to this kind of thing. It totally sucks as I agree with most of his platform.

[stimbox]

67. hand guns only

you still have your 2nd amend rights. last i checked rifles and shotguns were arms!

[Mojorabbit]

72. I'll keep

my hand guns also thank you. My now deceased father bought them for me and I can handle them much easier than I can a rifle or shotgun.

[iverglas]

73. that's all very nice

I'll keep my hand guns also thank you. My now deceased father bought them for me and I can handle them much easier than I can a rifle or shotgun.

Situations like that are why we in Canada have a special licence for "collectors" which enables them to acquire and possess handguns.

The unfortunate thing has been how so many of these "collectors" have proved unwilling/unable to comply with the regulations governing how they store their collections, and several largish ones have been stolen. And some of the stolen firearms have been used to facilitate crimes and to commit homicides.

Goodness only knows, of course, why you need or want to "handle" firearms and specifically handguns.

Anyhow, maybe you should suggest that Kucinich consider a similar approach, that would allow for handgun possession the way Canada does -- where a proved need to protect against a proved direct and immediate threat is present, or for collecting purposes, or in the latter case even specifically collecting for historical/sentimental value reasons.

I would recommend against generalized "collector" licensing myself, based on the experiences described, and also against licences for sport shooting possession, the other permissible possession of handguns. The guy who shot up Dawson College in Montreal, killing only one person before police shot him, had one of those licences.

[cosmicdot]

20. there are consequences for impeaching Cheney

... 'swiftboating' ... a blog 'article' baiting anti-Kucinich sentiment, and getting the desired responses?


In the 2006 Democratic primary, the Cleveland Plain Dealer endorsed an unknown candidate running against DK (after first endorsing him) ... a person who had GOP support:

"Republicans for Ferris"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2585919



"The Plain Dealer...Good for wrapping dead fish, birdcage liner and similar uses." - DUer hobbit709


Another Plain Dealer hit piece against Kucinich re Cheney's impeachment
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3235546

[Alexander]

22. Hmm....

I don't like this.

[noamnety]

27. 30 years ago he held a different position on gun control

(if it even IS a different position - it's possible he felt/feels that if some people are allowed to have guns, ALL should be allowed, yet would prefer if nobody did.)

How's that compare to voting for Reagan 20 some years ago?

How's it compare to voting for the IWR 5 years ago?

Which of those things - owning a gun, voting for Reagan, voting for the Iraq War, has done more damage to our country?

[hippiechick]

28. Thank you.

It's not like anybody can ever change their stance on an issue over time, right?
Or are people going to hold DK to a standard that they refuse to apply to the other candidates?

If "no changes allowed" were the case, the stage would have pretty much been empty at the debate last week, because they've all modified, altered, "re-thunk" things over time.


Ahem. Cough.

[MonkeyFunk]

62. nope

I think changing positions is a good thing, and a sign of an open mind.

But...

Kucinich's switch on abortion appears to me to have come about due to political expediency, not a sincere moral conversion on the subject. There's no way, of course, to prove that, but the timing is awfully suspicious.

It's also relevant because his fans often state that he has no string attached, and is the only candidate brave enough to stand up for what he believes in. I believe he wasn't brave enough to stand up to the pro-choice democrats he hoped to appeal to.

[iverglas]

64. I get so confused ...

Kucinich's switch on abortion appears to me to have come about due to political expediency, not a sincere moral conversion on the subject.

So I assume you can quote, or at least cite, what he's actually said on the subject. And you know the date when his change of mind occurred. Right?

I believe he wasn't brave enough to stand up to the pro-choice democrats he hoped to appeal to.

Not brave enough to stand up for fascism. That's just odd, that is. I can understand not being 100% confident in the firmness of his convictions, but faulting him for expressing adherence to the principles in the US constitution, I really just dunno.

He seems to have been brave enough to stand up to the mealy-mouthed hypocrisy of people inventing reasons to fault someone for doing the right thing, anyhow.

[MonkeyFunk]

65. his change came in 2003

after a long career of being entirely anti-choice.

I'm just skeptical of a sincere moral conversion on the issue that so nicely coincided with his decision to run for President.

Am I glad he changed his position? Definitely. Do I think I think he did it for political reasons? Definitely.

And that's not a bad thing - but let's not pretend he's a moral avatar.

[AliceWonderland]

61. Thank you. n/t

[Zorra]

29. I'm a Kucinich supporter, and believe DK is dead wrong about

banning civilian ownership of handguns.

The founders of our country expressed the belief that citizens have the right to be armed in order to have some sort of chance to protect itself from the government if need be.

After our country's recent descent into near fascism, I definitely see the wisdom behind, and the necessity of, the 2nd Amendment.

[nannah]

50. i agree

it is a sad truth that handguns are useful in preventing crime in many cases; until we have a culture that diminishes the greed and desperation that fuels crimes against people, individuals have a need to proect themselves and handguns are a useful tool.

[tidy_bowl]

33. And then there is that pesky....

....Second Amendment that Dennis doesn't say how he will get around. But I let a far wiser man comment for me:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

George Washington
First President of the United States

[brentspeak]

36. That's a bogus quote; Washington never said it

http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndbog.html

[Stand and Fight]

43. Nonsense.

That's not too far from the quotes so often attributed to Lincoln. GW never said that. Period.

But I completely agree with the premise.

[govegan]

38. Kucinich is a politician, not a savior

I too believe that Kucinich is misguided on this issue if he truly wants to ban handgun ownership, but he is still the best candidate in the race at this time. This is politics. Sometimes one may propose or defend that which goes too far to voice the concerns of constituents. Sometimes one may propose or defend that which goes too far to initiate constructive dialogue and debate. I see no harm in this. Actually, he is likely not misguided, but he is far more likely playing his role as a representative of the people.

Neo-fascists and other shallow people will quickly jump on this to attack the man. What else is new?

Politicians are allowed to be wrong, are they not?

We are not voting for sainthood, priesthood or perfection. That just is not going to happen.

We are voting for leadership and service to the public will. No one will accomplish that better than Kucinich.

Here is some of his thought on guns:

I have friends who both hunt and shoot. These are good people, they are not criminals, and they lock up their guns when not using them. I support their right to their hobbies, and I support the right to bear arms. I have also talked with widows and children left fatherless due to the improper use of firearms, and I am committed to preventing such tragedies from happening.

While some believe that gun laws should reside at the state level, I respectfully disagree. In this mobile society, national control of guns just is necessary, just as it is with pollution. It is the right of Americans to keep and bear arms; however it is not the right of American felons to arm themselves.

In a time when homeland security is of utmost concern, it is perplexing why anyone would not wish to keep guns out of the hands of those who might do us harm. This is why I would support legislation to require background checks, identical to the background checks currently required for transfers by licensed gun dealers, for firearm transfers by unlicensed gun dealers at gun shows. Sensible laws to prevent guns from winding up in the wrong hands do not infringe on any constitutional rights.


Seriously, the constitution is in good hands with the Kooch. I seriously doubt that is so with most of the others from which we must choose. His intentions are honorable.

"I am asking you to leave the country of my body, my mind, if you have anything other than honorable intentions." Joy Harjo

[Alexander]

42. Many, including myself, don't care for Dennis's current desire to BAN handguns...

A ban?

Christ on a cracker, haven't we had enough Orwellian policymaking and banning things?

I don't ever see myself owning a handgun but I'll be damned if someone's going to tell me that I can't.

[Honeycombe8]

55. I agree. A gun is an equalizer to a woman. Without a gun....

many single women would be sitting ducks for any criminal who wanted to break into her home.

[LoZoccolo]

69. THAT MEANS HE HAS A TINY DICK!

Gun grabbers, stand by your favorite snarky argument now!

[treelogger]

74. Which implies that Mr. Kucinich validates the right to own and carry arms

It is good to know that Mr. Kucinich endorsed the idea that guns should be kept available for self-defense.

The hypocricy, elitism, and self-contradiction is obvious.

[yardwork]

75. Where was the effing Plain Dealer when Kucinich was mayor?

They were ripping Kucinich up one side and down the other, day after day after day. "Dennis the Menace." The "boy mayor."

Kucinich turned out to be absolutely right about all the things he got laughed at for doing back in the 1970s. I don't give a hoot what the Cleveland Plain Dealer has to say about him now. And I don't give a damn if he carries a gun or not.

[treelogger]

79. Good for you.

You say "And I don't give a damn if he carries a gun or not."

That's fine, I have no problem with that. You are perfectly free to support someone who is a hypocrite. You can even support people who are liars, thieves, and so on. This is a free country, and you have freedom of expression.

But if you pretend that he is not a hypocrite, you will get disagreement. That's the flipside of this being a free country: people with opinions that you don't like can also express themselves.

[iverglas]

80. and the Stating the Obvious award goes to ...

But if you pretend that he is not a hypocrite, you will get disagreement. That's the flipside of this being a free country: people with opinions that you don't like can also express themselves.

I'm not sure what need there was to point this out to the poster in question. I mean, sometimes it does need to be pointed out to people who do appear to object to being taken to task for the opinions they express, I just don't see that being the case here. I saw someone stating an opinion -- and as you say, people with opinions that you don't like can also express themselves.

As far as anyone "pretending" that someone isn't a hypocrite ... well, that isn't really an "opinion". That's an allegation. And unless you have some proof that the person in question is a hypocrite, to the knowledge of the person you're accusing of pretending that he isn't, well, you'd probably be well advised to keep your allegations to yourself.

That's just my opinion, y'know. Feel entirely free to disagree with it, if you actually don't think that someone making an allegation against someone else would be wise to substantiate it.

[joshcryer]

82. There are some things you cannot change your mind about.

OK, so you want to change your mind about homosexual marriage or about abortion rights, that's fine, if you have never had a homosexual relationship or an abortion, then you can change that opinion because it is "something you believe."

If, however, you have carried a gun in the past, you have shown that you felt that the gun was necessary for whatever reason. By then going and "changing your mind" you are essentially saying trying to change "something you've done." Actions speak a lot louder than words.

This *is* hypocrasy.