Ed Schultz "Democrats did themselves NO favors last night.

[virginia mountainman]

I agree with Ed for the most part on this. These debates are played nationwide, not just in New York, and Chicago... And it looked baaaaaaad when it comes to guns.

[mwrguy]

2. Fuck Ed Schultz

Most Americans want common sense safety laws, and they know that the NRA is blocking them.

[virginia mountainman]

3. To bad "common sense" laws, are an individual standard

That everyone has a differing view of what's common sense...or not..

Everyone wants common sense reforms, I would like to see nationwide CCW reciprocity! That is a common sense reform to me.

[Decoy of Fenris]

5. Obviously they don't. n/t

[GGJohn]

6. When people like you, with your past posts on firearms,

say common sense laws, the hairs on the back of my neck tend to rise with alarm.

[Duckhunter935]

15. I know, right

[stone space]

16. You need MOAR GUNZ!

the hairs on the back of my neck tend to rise with alarm

That will help you deal with your fears and insecurities.

[GGJohn]

17. What is "MOAR GUNZ"?

I don't even know what that means.

[stone space]

18. They will help you deal with your fears. (nt)

[GGJohn]

19. Again, what is "MOAR GUNZ"?

Are those even words?

[DonP]

20. Maybe English is not his first language?

Or his spell check is wonky.

[Straw Man]

23. It's called "eye dialect."

"MOAR GUNZ"

In literary terms, it mean an attempt to convey the impression that the quoted speaker is uneducated by using incorrect spellings that are phonetically identical (or very similar) to the words being quoted. The suggestion is that the speaker is semi-literate and would spell the word that way if he or she were to write it. A common example is the use of "wuz" for "was."

It's a clumsy device and is usually avoided in literature now because of its connotations of class bias.

[DonP]

29. But, but he's "edumacated"...

... or so he keeps claiming.

But it is a fair impression of Cletus from the Simpsons, all he needs to do is call out "Brandine!" to complete it.

The level of ignorance displayed is compounded by his rote responses to questions on how he'd know someone was carrying.

For instance, how does he know who is carrying when he goes to the grocery store to buy more tofu and organic vegetables?

I have noticed in his latest incarnation, he's reduced himself to one liners, "n/t" posts. I think he hopes to minimize his chances of his mouth getting him quickly "vacationed" for a 3rd time.

[virginia mountainman]

46. He has been sent to "time out"... again....

[GGJohn]

47. And flagged for review.

I guess if you're gonna go, might as well go out with a bang.

[DonP]

48. No! Damn that was fast ... again

Certainly not for being rude to people in this Group.

Did he piss off the Religion guys again?

[GGJohn]

49. No, he got 2 hides in one say, which automatically puts you on review,

now he has a 3rd hide in this thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=178269

[DonP]

51. Wonder who he'll be in his reincarnation?

He thinks way too much of himself to not share his "wisdom" and "insight" with the rest of us "stupid" gun owners.

He's gonna try and find a more gun grabber friendly sight first, maybe Kos or Discussionist. Get thrown off them a few times and come back as a new character.

I'm thinkin' he'll be pretty obvious though.

[GGJohn]

53. He's already been on time outs at Discussionist, I won't say his user name over there as

that might be considered a call out, but here's a clue, it's an herb.

[Duckhunter935]

50. 3 hides here

He is now up to 7, is he trying for some kind of record?

[DonP]

52. All in one thread and all with the same basic post!

That has gotta be some kind of record for mental density and not learning a lesson.

[Duckhunter935]

56. he survived one of those 6-1

I still alerted and as it already had been adjudicated it just sent a message of the alert to the admins.

[cherokeeprogressive]

54. It's a hoytism. nt

[GGJohn]

55. Come to think of it,

you're right, that's classic Hoytism.

[Thinkingabout]

4. Would it be possible for groups like this to work towards preventing gun from being in the hands of

those incapable of possessing a weapon? I don't consider gun owners as criminals, own guns myself but I also recognize we have a problem here in the US. We see straw buyers purchasing guns and passing them into the hands of people who are into capable of controlling themselves from shooting innocent people. I come from a family of hunters, love to partake of the game bagged but please let us work together to resolve the gun violence. We can do this. It will take greater input into mental health and perhaps Ed Schultz is not aware Clinton is proposing changes in the mental health treatment and also with strengthening the background checks for gun buyers.

[Lurks Often]

21. To address some of your comments

1. We have laws against straw purchases, however the Federal and state law enforcement agencies and prosecutors rarely try to prosecute a straw buyer.

2. Any firearm that is purchased from FFL or crosses state lines requires a background check under Federal law. State laws vary from state to state in regard to private party sales between two residents of the same state. A bill that private sales require a Federal background check is unlikely to pass Congress, in part because both sides start attaching amendments to the bill that the other side finds objectionable and in part because many of the politicians in more rural areas recognize that their constituents don't want such a law passed.

Additionally, even if such a bill passed through Congress and was signed by whoever is President, it is extremely likely that the law would be challenged by numerous states contending that the Federal government is in violation of the 10th Amendment. I would expect such a court case to reach the Supreme Court. A court case that involved the limits of the 10th Amendment would almost certainly have broad implications on any number of things unrelated to firearms.

[Warpy]

7. Yeah, if all you care about in your life is your GUN

Most people care about a lot more than that. For the majority, it was a breath of fresh air, that 95% of the debate that WAS NOT ABOUT GUNS.

[GGJohn]

8. It was a great debate, and I'm grateful they didn't dwell too long on gun control. eom.

[Warpy]

10. Thanks, me too

Sanders spoke for the more rural states, especially ones where bears and cougars inhabit the boonies outside the cities. Long guns are a necessity in a lot of rural areas in the country.

[GGJohn]

11. Agreed.

We live in a very rural part of AZ, own and run a small farm, we have different rifles for different uses, I use a .308 for hunting deer, elk, etc, a .410 shotgun for game birds, Turkeys, dove, etc, a .223 for predators, coyotes, bobcats, etc that go after our livestock, and a .243 for hog hunting.

Firearms are a big part of rural life and Sanders knows this, being from a rural state.

[stone space]

22. Not on guns he didn't.

Sanders spoke for the more rural states

He certainly didn't speak for this Iowan.

And my state is considered as pretty rural by many. It gets referred to as "flyover country" quite a lot.

[Lurks Often]

33. And you don't speak for all Iowans

Especially since Iowa has shall issue CCW and 42.9% of Iowans own guns.

One has to wonder how many of those 42.9% Iowa gun owners will vote Republican in 2016 if the Democratic nominee chooses to make gun control a major part of their campaign.

[Lurks Often]

35. Most Iowans support the law and due process, which YOU don't

Too bad you would rather support the criminals and prevent the ability of the potential victims to be protect themselves.

Too bad 42.9% of Iowans own guns and don't agree with you.

[stone space]

36. Unlike you, most Iowans do not support Zimmerman. We do not support murder.

Note to jurors:

Yes, Zimmermann broke no current laws, acted reasonably and Florida laws relating to any of his actions need no changes.

7 (47%)

oneshooter, virginia mountainman, Big_Mike, 57_TomCat, backwoodsbob, blueridge3210, Lurks Often

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172166391

[Lurks Often]

39. Since you don't understand the legal definition of murder

you seem to be lying about posters again. Something that has gotten you, at last count, two time outs for insulting and lying about other DU posters

[stone space]

40. You support Zimmerman. You support murder.

Since you don't understand the legal definition of murder you seem to be lying about posters again. Something that has gotten you, at last count, two time outs for insulting and lying about other DU posters

There is no lie here.

Note to jurors:

Yes, Zimmermann broke no current laws, acted reasonably and Florida laws relating to any of his actions need no changes.

7 (47%)

oneshooter, virginia mountainman, Big_Mike, 57_TomCat, backwoodsbob, blueridge3210, Lurks Often

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172166391

[Lurks Often]

41. More lies, how pathetic

[eggplant]

43. I suspect this one will get hidden next.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Thu Oct 15, 2015, 07:58 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

You support Zimmerman. You support murder.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=178261

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Offensive personal insult saying someone supports murder. Just because some posters followed the trial and felt there wasn't enough evidence for a guilty plea isn't supporting Zimmerman

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Oct 15, 2015, 08:10 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This entire subthread is just "yes, you do" "no, I don't" bickering. Since both parties continued to bicker after this one, it seems silly to hide just this one.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Support for one really is tantamount to support for the other.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Lurks Often]

44. He'll be back on Nov 3rd, when the TWO timeouts from Aug 3rd come off his hide record

[Duckhunter935]

45. And another time out

[beardown]

32. Short guns too

I ride alone in the mountains and prefer not to carry a long gun as I'm not hunting. Want to deter things that want to eat me, my horse, or my dog or think any one of the three of us have a cute mouth and want us to squeal like a pig.

[msongs]

9. people with mentally ill obsession with guns arent voting for democrats under any circumstances nt

[Straw Man]

12. What? nt

[Eleanors38]

24. So pro-2A Democrats are "mentally ill?" Sweet. Spread that around.

[beardown]

31. I agree.

I assume that mentally ill folks with an obsession for guns probably have a dozen or more of hard core right wing driven obsessions, such as christian nation, no abortions, no gay weddings, no ban on marrying your sister, etc.

On the other hand, there are probably a few hundred thousand (I have no hard numbers for this estimate) voters that lean towards the democratic party that are essentially single issue voters and their single issue is gun rights.

If 2,000 had voted Gore in Florida in 2000 we wouldn't have to put up with the frequent 'Nader Sucks' postings around here and Bush the Stupid would just be another mentally ill obsession about guns former Texas governor.

[stone space]

38. Just an FYI: The person who wrote the OP is a Zimmerman supporter.

Note to Jurors:

Yes, Zimmermann broke no current laws, acted reasonably and Florida laws relating to any of his actions need no changes.

7 (47%)

oneshooter, virginia mountainman, Big_Mike, 57_TomCat, backwoodsbob, blueridge3210, Lurks Often

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172166391

[Kalidurga]

13. I think he is right.

No one wants guns to be used against other human beings except the nuts that do it. No one wants schools shot up from elementary schools to university schools. No one wants Buddhist Temples shot up or even a group of people out hunting to be shot up. No one wants two kids playing cops and robbers to suffer a fatality due to a gun in the house not being properly secured. And no one wants to bury a toddler that got a gun off of a coffee table.

But, the issue is bigger than all of that. People hunt, target shoot (I don't care if they only do it for fun, it's their right), and some people live alone and this is part of their security.

I don't think gun grabbing is the answer and I don't think mental health services being more comprehensive is the answer either. We need to do something about our culture of violence. That is going to take a whole lot more work. Educated people are less violent so there is one thing that can be done like right now.

[pablo_marmol]

14. Ed is speaking to my greatest fear here.

I've given a good deal of money to Bernie's campaign, and I've been debating on giving him more. Listening to the BS he rattled off pertaining to gun violence from various clips has made my decision easy. I can't give any more money to a pol that's just going to piss it away as he pisses away his political capital.

If Hillary gets the nomination the Republicans will be out in force to take her down, while Democratic voter turnout may be limp. That's when issues like "assault weapon" bans can really jump up to KILL us. What I'm desperately fearing here is another Gore v Bush scenario.

AFAIC ---- Ed NAILS IT here. What confuses me a bit is that I've heard him say some really stupid stuff on the gun violence issue.

[Eleanors38]

25. At times I think controller/banners would rather lose elections.

[virginia mountainman]

26. I don't think that...

I know that.. Been watching it happen for 20 years, Repeatedly.

If our leaders will not learn, they don't deserve to lead.

[Eleanors38]

27. I don't fear my guns "will be taken away." I fear the Democratic Party's increasing irrelevancy.

[virginia mountainman]

28. Yep..

Irrelevant, is a great word to use...

[pablo_marmol]

57. This gun-related hysteria comes at a horrible time.

The public is getting front-row seats watching the Republicans as they fail to manage themselves --- while they're simultaneously reminded that Democrats can't see straight by virtue of their gun hate. Talk about f*cking up a wining hand!

It would be amusing if the consequences weren't so f*cking tragic.

[Eleanors38]

60. Central to all this is the role of MSM. It favors both...

1). Hillary Clinton

2). Gun control/bans

As I predicted several months ago, it is no surprise that MSM is going all in to coverage of gun crime and Hillary's statements favoring gun control; they sure don't want Sanders for a host of reasons, and they want to ride high again on an issue they built up 30 - 40 yrs ago, only to have their ass handed to them. This is really about corporate centrism and how to keep it in power. I also believe the locus of gun control is with corporate centrism; the left is ambivalent on guns, and in any case an outlier since LBJ with little influence except through Sanders. And NO ONE in the elites, be it the Democratic Party, MSM, or the financial sector wants a popular Left to succeed.

[DonP]

30. The last two mid terms tell a story too

But the control minded swear that gun control has either no impact, or it's an electoral winner, in spite of the evidence in their faces.

Once upon a time you could say, "let the states do it" as far as gun control goes, but now the GOP controls the majority of those state legislatures.

[pablo_marmol]

58. Suggestion for an interesting experiment:

Cross-post this in GD, and watch all of the folks who love Ed Shultz turn on him like rabid pitbulls.

[DonP]

59. That is a standard pattern re: Gun issues

&quot Fill in the blank) personality is great, wonderful, insightful and the best thing out there speaking for progressives."

Then they say something even vaguely friendly to the 2nd amendment or gun owners and suddenly they are; "stupid, and out of touch" or a "Tool of the NRA".

How many on DU were furious when Ed lost his show? I bet many of the same folks will condemn him for even suggesting this.