Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democratic Lawmakers Urge Obama to Veto (stupid GOP/NRA/moran) Gun Measure

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 07:36 PM
Original message
Democratic Lawmakers Urge Obama to Veto (stupid GOP/NRA/moran) Gun Measure
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/democrati... /

Two lawmakers are calling on President Obama to issue a veto threat against gun legislation working its way through Congress that would make it easier for people to carry concealed handguns across state lines, signifying growing concern among Democrats that the measure may reach the presidents desk.

Senator Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey and Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York sent a letter to President Obama on Wednesday calling the legislation a dangerous measure and saying its passage would weaken state gun laws.
Passage of such a law would start a race to the bottom on gun safety with each state forced to follow another states laws on gun ownership, the lawmakers said in the letter.

The handgun bill, known as the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, would require states that allow their own residents to carry concealed handguns in public to extend the right to out-of-state visitors as long as the nonresidents carry with them the permit issued in another state. States that do not allow residents to carry concealed weapons would be exempt.

The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee approved the bill in October, with one Republican, Representative Dan Lungren of California, joining committee Democrats in voting against it, and the full House is expected to take up and pass the measure as early as Tuesday.

<more>

GOP/NRA = bags of douche

yup
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. I predict Obama will sign it
And the NRA will be completely ungrateful and continue to demonize him and drum up conspiracy theories about the impending Obama Gun Ban.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. Democrats in action
Always nice to see in the Guns forum at Democratic Underground.

A refreshing change ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
doc03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds like a sensible bill to me, I hope he signs. The US
should have uniform standards for CCW and reciprocal agreements among the states that alow CCW. I took a trip last month through WV, PA, MA and VA. Every state has different laws PA doesn't recognise Ohio, WV does, MD don't and VA does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. has it been voted in the full house?
Edited on Thu Nov-10-11 08:11 PM by gejohnston
I picture a poison pill amendment.

Passage of such a law would start a race to the bottom on gun safety with each state forced to follow another states laws on gun ownership,
concealed carry rules are not the same as ownership. Hardly the race to the bottom. While it would force New York to recognized Utah's, it would also force Wyoming to recognize ones issued by New York, Mass, and California. Wyoming does not for some reason (email the state AG for the correct answer)
One thing I would like to see, even though I am not a fan of unrelated riders, is a single payer amendment attached to it (like Medicare for all) or the CCW attached to a single payer bill. I would like to see how hard of a choice it would be for some of the congress members.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. permit to carry is predicated on lawful ownership ...
Shall I post the dirt about local jurisdictions completely failing to file reports of information (in particular criminal convictions) that theoretically disqualifies someone from both ownership and permission to carry, but completely fails to prevent them from doing either if nobody knows about it?

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/special_rep...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. read it
but I was speaking in general. For example, if I just show up in New York with a pistol without a CCW from anywhere, their ownership rules would apply instead of the CCW.
There are always flaws and cracks to fall through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
That's really all I needed to read
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. want to name us some of the Republicans behind the bill?
and tell us what you think of them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
24. I think they're authoritarian asses
Just like Lautenberg
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #24
30. Frank R Lautenberg on the issues
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Frank_Lautenberg.htm

Selecting things of interest ...

Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
(I don't necessarily agree with the 100% from the votes shown, but about as good as you get down there)

Voted YES on modifying bankruptcy rules to avoid mortgage foreclosures. (May 2009)
Reform mortgage rules to prevent foreclosure & bankruptcy. (Feb 2008)
Ban abusive credit practices & enhance consumer disclosure. (Feb 2009)

Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 100% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
(see the details in the list; nothing I can quibble with there)

Rated 26% by the US COC, indicating an anti-business voting record. (Dec 2003)

Voted NO on mandatory prison terms for crimes involving firearms. (May 1994)
Voted NO on rejecting racial statistics in death penalty appeals. (May 1994)
Voted NO on limiting death penalty appeals. (Apr 1996)
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program. (Jan 2007)
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance. (Mar 2007)

Voted NO on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999)
Voted NO on spending international development funds on drug control. (Jul 1996)

Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
(and again, see details)

Voted NO on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. (Apr 2011)
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence. (Dec 2006)
Sign on to UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. (Jan 2007)
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness. (Nov 2007)
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards. (Jan 2008)

Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes. (Dec 2003)

Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record. (Dec 2003)
(I just love how they word that)

Voted YES on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba. (Mar 1996)
Voted NO on ending Vietnam embargo. (Jan 1994)
(I'd want to see whether he's learned anything in 15 years)
Monitor human rights in Uganda-Sudan crisis. (Aug 2004)
Implement Darfur Peace Agreement with UN peacekeeping force. (Feb 2008)

Extend trade restrictions on Burma to promote democracy. (Jun 2007)
Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru. (Dec 2007)
Voted NO on free trade agreement with Oman. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)

Voted YES on providing a US House seat for the District of Columbia. (Feb 2009)
Voted NO on requiring photo ID to vote in federal elections. (Jul 2007)
Voted YES on funding for National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)

Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
(with lots of details)

Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record. (Dec 2003)
Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell, and reinstate discharged gays. (Mar 2010)
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror. (Jun 2007)
Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's roving wiretaps. (Feb 2011)
(and again lots more, possibly some that rile you)

(on immigration) Rated 0% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance. (Dec 2006)

Rated 100% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003)

Voted with Democratic Party 96.9% of 322 votes. (Sep 2007)
Voted YES on confirming of Sonia Sotomayor to Supreme Court. (Aug 2009)
Voted NO on confirming Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice. (Jan 2006)
Voted NO on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (Sep 2005)

Rated 90% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
Reject privatization; don't raise the retirement age. (Aug 2010)

Rated 20% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation. (Dec 2006)

Voted NO on welfare overhaul. (Sep 1995)
(omg, he voted against the welfare "reform" that Clinton caved on?)

and, drum roll,

No guns for domestic abusers. (Aug 2008)
Voted NO on allowing firearms in checked baggage on Amtrak trains. (Apr 2009)
Voted NO on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)
Sponsored bill to close the Gun Show Loophole. (May 2009)


So after reading that page, I'm just not quite getting what I'm supposed to be seeing that prompts you to say:

I think they're <Republicans are> authoritarian asses
Posted by RSillsbee
Just like Lautenberg


Can you help me out?


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. Can you help me out?
Read every thing after "drum roll" again and get back to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #32
41. argument by private definition
Fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NewMoonTherian Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-16-11 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #41
72. The question posed to him...
was on his opinion. He even said "I think". How can you answer that without a private definition?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-16-11 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #72
73. look who's back
"I think they're authoritarian asses.
Just like Lautenberg."

Yes, he did say "I think".

I thought maybe he actually had!

Having considered Lautenberg's track record carefully, I can't see any evidence of any thought having gone into the statement that he's an authoritarian ass.

There actually are real definitions.

And we actually don't all get to make up our own definitions for words that really and truly mean something and then use them in sentences to mean something else.

That isn't what he was doing, of course.

He was just making an unsupportable claim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Yea, he kind of sticks out next to all those TBaggers and right wingers behind more guns in public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Yes he does.
Isn't he the one who loves the Bush era secret no fly lists?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. He is- and so is Dianne Feinstein. Then again, DiFi liked those from the start.
Lautenberg only got religion when the prospect of using those lists to restrict legal firearms access came up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. any Republicans on your blacklist?
Any at all?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Certainly
The idiot who started the Patriot Act is on my shitlist. But you kind of expect idiots to do idiot things. It's those who railed against the Patriot Act and pointed out its myriad shortcomings but turn around and want to use certain features to hound people they hate.

Stupidity is easier to overlook than hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. ah, so right-wingery is explained by "stupidity"
And stupidity is better than hypocrisy.

Neat little equation you have going there.

Forgive me, but ... the unavoidable conclusion appears to be "Republicans are better than Democrats".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #28
38. Clever, by half
then you are inferring that Democrats are, by nature, hypocrites?

Your equation, not mine, Xanthippe.

Lautenberg both argued and voted against the Patriot Act, but he wants to use to club people he does not like.

I am pretty much against unconstitutional abuses of power by anyone. Any stupid enough to give an extralegal power to "their guy" should not be surprised when the worm turns and they get beat up by that same power when it gets abused by the "other guy."

Of all the abusive power grabs by the executive branch that Obama the candidate railed against has Obama the President abdicated?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. close but no cigar
then you are inferring that Democrats are, by nature, hypocrites?

I did indeed INFER that you were SAYING that certain Democrats are hypocrites, given that it is what you said.

You may want to look up the real meaning of "infer".

I did not, of course, IMPLY anything. I drew the logical inference from what you said.

Republicans are stupid, the Democrats whereof you speak are hypocrites.

Just strikes me as a strange kindliness to Republicans.


Lautenberg both argued and voted against the Patriot Act, but he wants to use to club people he does not like.

Do you demand perfection of Republicans?

Is there one single other thing (i.e. accepting your characterization on the issue in question for the sake of argument) in the long record shown at ontheissues, apart from someone's idiosyncratic objections to his votes on firearms issues, that qualifies this man as hypocrite or any other unsavoury thing?

I know nothing about him myself, but that record looks to be about as progressive as any Democrat's I've ever seen.


Of all the abusive power grabs by the executive branch that Obama the candidate railed against has Obama the President abdicated?

Well, I guess we're talking about Obama now. We do jump around!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #42
46. So then
Lautenberg is progressive on many issues, but he is a hypocrite on guns and the Patriot Act. The facts are that the Patriot Act was an ill-advised bit of lunacy and he was right to be against it.

I see it just as hypocritical for some Senator to be railing against the repeal of DADT to get nabbed trolling for sex in airport restrooms.

It also troubles me that the PRESENT Administration is embracing and expanding things like secret no-fly lists, military tribunals, and on and on. It only reinforces the perception that all the excesses of the executive branch that every candidate rails against are jealously guarded when the candidate becomes president. There has never been one to give up a "power."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225492/ns/politics-white_... /

Despite President Barack Obama's vow to open government more than ever, the Justice Department is defending Bush administration decisions to keep secret many documents about domestic wiretapping, data collection on travelers and U.S. citizens, and interrogation of suspected terrorists.

In half a dozen lawsuits, Justice lawyers have opposed formal motions or spurned out-of-court offers to delay court action until the new administration rewrites Freedom of Information Act guidelines and decides whether the new rules might allow the public to see more.


It is the "that's different" justification that most infuriates me. Secret watch lists are a bad idea when the right wing decides who's on the list, but great idea when the left wing picks who's on it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. nah
It is the "that's different" justification that most infuriates me. Secret watch lists are a bad idea when the right wing decides who's on the list, but great idea when the left wing picks who's on it.

It's actually just fun watching how far a certain element will go to try to discredit anyone, Democrat or Republican, who opposes their agenda.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #19
33. Carolynn McCarthy? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #33
43. perhaps the spelling was intentional
and you didn't just call Carolyn McCarthy a Republican.

http://www.issues2000.org/NY/Carolyn_McCarthy.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #43
48. Did she somehow change just because she put a "D" behind her name?
Carolyn McCarthy was a republican right up to the time she had to be a Democrat to get elected
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. she's been an elected Democrat since 1996, ffs
and she "had to be a Democrat" when she ran in order to defeat a gun militant toady Republican.

I thought I was just being lectured here last week about how much more admirable it was to become a "liberal" than to be born one ...

Given that all politicians, like all people, have their good and bad points, I don't see much to complain about in her record, by US standards; a whole load of those people fell for the Iraq thing, didn't they? And hell, Hilary Clinton was spouting the lie about one of the 9/11 attackers getting in through Canada years later. Pro-choice, pro-healthcare ... generally what you'd expect to see from somebody on the left of the narrow US political spectrum.

You just don't like her for your own private reasons. Oh well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. she never changed her views on anything
other than (maybe, maybe not) the gun issue only because of personal tragity. I have no idea what her views were before hand. That being the case, she did not became more liberal.
Some other things she supported that I disagree with:
the Iraq invasion and the Gramm Leach Bliley Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. I didn't actually say she did,
since I don't know what her views were beforehand either. If they were the same as those recorded at ontheissues, she was an extreeemely "liberal" Republican. She was more "liberal" than other Democrats I could easily name. Her record on reproductive rights, and her approval ratings by organizations that count on every available issue, say it all.

Voted YES on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)

Now there's a real Republican for ya.

Exactly how many of your beastiess actually voted against the invasion of Iraq?

How's the record of all the gun militant toadies on that then?

If they voted for it, which I expect they did to a one, I think you might want to stop offering it up as a reason for the hate you have on for Carolyn McCarthy. It's completely irrelevant and you know it and I know it and we all know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. I'm glad she did
she sounds like an Eisenhower Republican from the 1950s, typical of the Northeast. Investigating and impeaching Bush should not be a partisan thing, that should be a bi partisan US thing.
Beasties?
How about some of the control militant? Most likely the same degree
I do not have a "hate on" for anyone. It comes relevant only because you over simplify beyond the narrow issue of this forum. How any of these people vote beyond that is irrelevant. So, you are being kind of hypocritical.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #51
56. You just don't like her for your own private reasons. Oh well.
My reasons are fairlty public

1. She's anti frredom

2. She has no problem lying to pass her antigun agenda
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
9. It won't make it to his desk....as much as we'd like to have this pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. "we"?
:wtf:

Evidently you don't mean "Democrats" ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Perhaps by "we" the poster means Americans...
not folks who live in Canada or Italy..but real live Americans..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. or perhaps they mean residents of the United States
... all people of the Americas being Americans.

I dunno, I sure wouldn't presume to speak for Canadians, but maybe Canadians just aren't presumptuous.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #23
35. Canadians are wanna be Americans anyway. So, they count
kinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. WE as in super progressives...those that love life, liberty, and freedom
Of course some are hostile (R's and D's) to freedoms provided by the Second. As a true progressive I believe in the right to remain, to protect and keep my family safe. Yes gun rights are our most important right and it's worth fighting for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. words to live by
"gun rights are our most important right"

Sometimes, you just gotta :eyes:.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #20
34. You must really be out of ammunition
Since you appear to have been reduced to attacking posters on their status as progressives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #34
44. mirror, mirror on the wall
You must really be out of ammunition
Posted by RSillsbee
Since you appear to have been reduced to attacking posters on their status as progressives.


Whoopsie. Whom do you see doing the attacking?

I merely pointed out that whoever this "we" is, it is not Democrats, since the views expressed do not reflect the majority view among Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. I'm not sure about that
Given that according to several polls just at or just over half of DUers own firearms.

All elephants are gray but not all gray things are elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #47
52. ah, the twists and turns
Given that according to several polls just at or just over half of DUers own firearms.

(a) So?

(b) Hahaha. Right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #20
40. we as in us
many of the folks in the gungeon. All are Dems, (NDP is honorary Dem).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #40
45. "All are Dems"
That's as may be, isn't it? Three tombstones this week that I've noticed, two of them long-time "folks in the gungeon". We all "are" what we say we are. I say I'm Canadian. Who knows? Maybe I spend my time laughing up my sleeve at gullible Guns posters who take that claim at face value and launch into their ridiculous rants based it.

I don't think many in the NDP would be grateful for the honourary mention. There is little similarity between the two parties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tejas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-15-11 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #20
66. "we" - ie: Americans (not Canadians)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-15-11 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. really
"Americans" would like to have this pass.

Well, I guess "Americans" held an election and appointed ileus as their leader and spokesperson.

I do watch CNN, and I hadn't caught that news.

See how foolish you make yourself look when you let blind ethnocentrism and xenophobia be your guide?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-15-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #20
68. I think he means American Citizens.
I'm pretty sure lots of foreign citizens either don't care or don't have my best interest at heart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-15-11 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. do see post 67
I mean, I'd hate to see an opportunity for ethnocentricism and xenophobia squandered, but this actually wasn't one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-16-11 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #69
70. Ethnocentrism? Xenophobia?
You're just calling names. The fact is Americans have rights unlike anywhere else on Earth. We like it that way. And that bothers people who would take our rights away so we can be just like them. But somehow we are the ones engaging in ethnocentrism? I'm not buying that one at all.

Anyone is free to join this weird and wonderful system if they wish. If anything my only gripe right now is our rather futile immigration policy that creates a class of workers who can be easily exploited.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-16-11 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #70
71. "rights unlike anywhere else on Earth"
Really?

You have the right to own gunz. Of course, so do I.

But somehow we are the ones engaging in ethnocentrism?

There's that odd "we" again.

I wasn't talking to "Americans", actually.

I leave that to Rick Mercer. He's very good at it. You think I'm rude ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-16-11 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #71
74. Yes, yes I do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-16-11 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #74
75. well you need to check out Rick
Talk about yer freedumb. :rofl:

Talking to Americans
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #9
37. I think it will make it to his desk.
The Thune Amendment had 59 votes in the Senate which was one short of what was needed to break a fillibuster. This Senate is more gun friendly than the previous Senate. Obama is on record as being against CCW so he will likely veto it if it isn't attached to something that he badly wants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
doc03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. Why not just make a federal CCW permit then that way we
would have uniform laws among the states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. omg
So it would be okay for the big bad feds to stick their noses into gun stuff in this case, but not when it came to, oh, tracking multiple purchases of semi-automatic firearms ... ?

Oh, I guess this bill and the kudos for it all over this forum means that it's okay for the feds to stick their noses in anyhow.

But only when it serves the gun militant agenda.

Not when it serves to reduce the risk of firearms being used for murder and mayhem ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Oneka Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. Lanny? Is that you?
So it would be okay for the big bad feds to stick their noses into gun stuff in this case, but not when it came to, oh, tracking multiple purchases of semi-automatic firearms ... ?

The FEDS already track multiple sales of both handguns, and semi auto rifles,in border states. in some cases without statutory authority.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #21
31. yeah
I look like I just had no idea what I was talking about, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
13. Despite the fact that the violent crime rate is decreasing...
...despite (or because of, or irrespective of) vast increases in both states that allow concealed-carry AND the number of concealed-carry permitees, this is still called "a race to the bottom on gun safety".

:rofl:


And of course, this wouldn't be an issue if a number of states would reciprocate with other states that meet their standards. But they don't. Ten states, including California, New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, only recognize their own concealed-carry permits. So even permitees from states that meets, say, New Jersey's standards for CCW permits, wouldn't be able to carry legally in NJ.

But I guess McCarthy and Lautenberg just can't see that little bit of hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. how about permit holders from Michigan?
Why, the world should see the obvious wisdom of reciprocating with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. I addressed that in other replies to your posts
In fact, you're probably hammering out a reply to one of them as I type... :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-11 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. They haven't fix HR 218 for law enforcement & you think this will work
Obama signed a revision earlier this year and cops still can be locked up for CCW....and it has happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #14
36. If I can't carry anywhere
why should a retired cop be able to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. The point is its taken years and the law is still broken.....states rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #39
50. I think the point is, if this is signed into law, cops can get a state issued CCW
and not worry about it anymore. I see it as a win, win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-14-11 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #39
60. States have powers, not rights. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-14-11 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. blah blah blah
I try to educate ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

and my subsequent posts in the subthread, for anyone who doesn't know what's in their constitution.

Ew, creepy feeling, surrounded by tombstones like that there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-14-11 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Isn't that
why you whistle while walking by grave yards? Don't do Halloween much do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-14-11 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #62
63. never had a graveyard near enough to whistle past!
But I'll keep that in mind for future excursions back into the haunted halls of the Guns forum past. ;)

Hallowe'en where I'm at just means getting your porch pumpkin smashed on the road. So we switched to an electric pumpkin in the window. Enough years of being up to yer armpits in cold slime were enough, anyhow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-14-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. used to live next to one
on Okinawa. Hard to make pumpkin pie out of the electric one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-14-11 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. my mother recently sent me an email funny
google "how pumpkin pie is made" and check the images ... my sentiments about pumpkin pie exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
29. Every state in the Union except one now has CCW. Uniformity is next.
Every state in the Union now has concealed carry, except for Illinois, and they will fall soon.

Now that the battle to allow CCW has been won, it is time to get some uniformity in the requirements and reciprocity between the states.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
53. Don't hold your breath.
Reciprocity between the states regarding driver's licenses has been going on for ages, but traffic laws among the states are still not uniform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-12-11 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. I'm OK with that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-11 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
58. Unfortunately, Frank and Carolyn don't have much credibility in the area of useful gun control laws.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jul 29th 2014, 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC