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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
We're a largely anti-gun website, so I'm not sure who you're addressing. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2016 #1
There are plenty here who are pro-gun and who are apologists for private citizens owning Squinch Jun 2016 #2
Thank you. n/t. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #30
. Squinch Jun 2016 #35
making lists of people for whom rights will be denied is a very bad idea tk2kewl Jun 2016 #131
Complain to the families of 9/11 about your due process BlackLivesMatter Jun 2016 #3
With No-Fly extending to No-Buy, indeed it has "not stopped." Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #154
Indeed RobertEarl Jun 2016 #4
Link please sarisataka Jun 2016 #6
Link XRubicon Jun 2016 #40
Any link sarisataka Jun 2016 #50
Wait a minute .... Straw Man Jun 2016 #100
There may indeed be folks on DU claiming that "everyone and anyone who wants to bear arms be allowed TeddyR Jun 2016 #65
then we need lancer78 Jun 2016 #93
Yeah, fuck due process! linuxman Jun 2016 #5
Fuck the NRA! RobertEarl Jun 2016 #8
The NRA wrote the fifth ammendment?! COOL! linuxman Jun 2016 #11
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #113
The NRA didnt write the Bill of Rights davidn3600 Jun 2016 #16
As I understand it, the Feinstein bill called for anyone on the No-Fly list any time within the calimary Jun 2016 #54
I thought Mateen was on some other super-secret government list TeddyR Jun 2016 #66
I wonder what percentage of people on the list are Muslim? jmg257 Jun 2016 #84
He wasn't on the no-fly list n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2016 #138
Yes. You're correct. He wasn't on the no-fly list at the time of the massacre. calimary Jun 2016 #139
No, he had not SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2016 #140
Okay, then...how about being part of the solution? lapislzi Jun 2016 #120
A locked gun safe would have stopped Adam Lanza. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #161
Well, we (DU) already support the extrajudicial killing of American citizens on the POTUS' say-so, TransitJohn Jun 2016 #122
It is completely undemocratic to advocate for unconstitutional pipoman Jun 2016 #7
You don't know the 2nd, or laws RobertEarl Jun 2016 #9
Why are you arguing from the losing side then? pipoman Jun 2016 #12
Fuck the NRA RobertEarl Jun 2016 #21
Complete silliness to apply so much credence to such a relatively small amount of money pipoman Jun 2016 #23
None of the laws currently being proposed would have prevented Mateen TeddyR Jun 2016 #67
Good post Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #74
On what planet? RobertEarl Jun 2016 #89
Have you studied law? Where did you receive your degree? Marengo Jun 2016 #43
Probably from the 'Close cover before striking' School of Law. nt COLGATE4 Jun 2016 #153
What is wrong sarisataka Jun 2016 #10
Doesn't apply to people we don't like REP Jun 2016 #13
Those who give up freedom for security will lose both davidn3600 Jun 2016 #14
"Stop misquoting me on the internet." -- Ben Franklin Orrex Jun 2016 #114
I guess that depends on what you consider a "minor restriction" Abq_Sarah Jun 2016 #145
Yeah, gun advocates are fond of hyperbolic slipery-slope thinking Orrex Jun 2016 #146
Well, we "slipped" from No-Fly to No-Buy with fluid-drive ease. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #155
Remember this for-sure 100% guaranteed terrorist? REP Jun 2016 #15
First shadowrider Jun 2016 #17
First RobertEarl Jun 2016 #19
Fluff. beevul Jun 2016 #149
I NEED not to be singled out as someone who doesn't have the same rights everyone else does. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #18
Who says no trials? RobertEarl Jun 2016 #20
The Watch List says. Straw Man Jun 2016 #101
Due Process is very over-rated, especially for suspicios people. CHicago PD has a great list, jmg257 Jun 2016 #22
If they have proof, then they can get warrants to arrest them REP Jun 2016 #24
Proof? FBI doesn't need any proof, or even evidence. Reasonable suspicion is plenty. jmg257 Jun 2016 #26
Gotcha REP Jun 2016 #28
Nah - Fuck your Police State. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #25
Ok Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #27
^^THIS^^ +1000! nt jonno99 Jun 2016 #56
So losing your assault weapons is equivalent to being locked up in Gitmo? Crunchy Frog Jun 2016 #68
what is good lancer78 Jun 2016 #94
Due process only applies to issues I care about Democat Jun 2016 #104
This due process shit didn't come up about the no fly list The_Casual_Observer Jun 2016 #29
It came up many times and has been opposed by many. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #31
Here's the best post I could find: friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #33
There has to be thousands of threads on DU2. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #38
No, your claim is bullshit. This was posted years *after* you joined: friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #36
I don't care what was posted here I'm talking about The_Casual_Observer Jun 2016 #37
That doesn't make it any better, or less odious friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #39
Maybe you just didn't notice Scootaloo Jun 2016 #41
Wrong. Straw Man Jun 2016 #102
Mass-shooting victims deserve due process, too. But they're dead. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #32
Fuck that police-state cheerleading. Here's how DU *used* to feel about attitudes like that: friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #34
History. It's what's for dinner. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #157
So their feelings trump constitutional protections of civil rights? hack89 Jun 2016 #42
Not ALL civil rights: just assault semi-automatics. So, yes . You have no right to deprive people of lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #44
So who gets to choose what civil rights don't deserve due process? hack89 Jun 2016 #45
Representatives. And americans overwhelmingly want semi-automatics banned. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #47
No they don't hack89 Jun 2016 #52
Yes they do geomon666 Jun 2016 #55
54% support is not overwhelming. hack89 Jun 2016 #60
Don't bother. Ignore. Goodbye. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #61
Way to have a civil discussion Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #82
Wow... TipTok Jun 2016 #87
No, I wouldn't say. geomon666 Jun 2016 #64
My bolt action rifle is more a weapon if war than my AR Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #83
The AR-15 is just a modified M16 geomon666 Jun 2016 #92
Semi-auto vs. full-auto Straw Man Jun 2016 #103
Yes, modified Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #107
Not according to the poll the poster gave me. nt hack89 Jun 2016 #108
You're on the losing side of this argument anigbrowl Jun 2016 #124
I have heard that particular song and dance for 20 years now hack89 Jun 2016 #130
From your link ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #78
It is what it is. geomon666 Jun 2016 #91
Yes, it is. Straw Man Jun 2016 #96
Who gives a fuck about a mandate? geomon666 Jun 2016 #97
The person you were defending when you entered this thread. Straw Man Jun 2016 #98
Fuck that. Say it with me.. CON-STI-TU-SHUN. 5th, and 14th. X_Digger Jun 2016 #57
So a couple of thoughts TeddyR Jun 2016 #71
Umm ... no, they don't. Straw Man Jun 2016 #76
Oh, no, no. Fundamental misunderstanding of a constitutional democracy! Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #158
That's how it starts (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #46
"It" being your paranoia. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #48
Would you feel the same way? LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #62
Not having an assault weapon is the equivalent of being deported? Crunchy Frog Jun 2016 #73
Once the precedent is set, it won't matter. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #106
I beg your paranoia? Skittles Jun 2016 #51
LOL, the NRA slippery slope excuse Skittles Jun 2016 #95
Actually ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #99
Not in my case; I apply it across the board LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #116
LOL Skittles Jun 2016 #142
It's simple, add due process to the bill. geomon666 Jun 2016 #49
The Cornyn bill had due process in it. Straw Man Jun 2016 #79
Wait, were either of them on the no-fly list? X_Digger Jun 2016 #53
No, they were not Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #59
Well let's look at some fact for a second Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #58
What the hell are you talking about? geomon666 Jun 2016 #63
Connecticut had an assault weapons ban in place Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #69
Not according to Connectcut law oneshooter Jun 2016 #72
I think the point being the xm-15 "assault weapon" was perfectly legal jmg257 Jun 2016 #75
Exactly. nt BootinUp Jun 2016 #70
Your bickering over details doesn't bring those beautiful children back. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #77
So you think our legal system should ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #80
1 more time: Keep laws, eliminate semi automatic assault weapons. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #85
What laws? Straw Man Jun 2016 #86
"...another gun lover on ignore" because he/she put-paid to your argument? Understandable. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #159
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #125
Unfortunately in the real world, details matter Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #81
This bill is about gesture politics, not about saving lives. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #118
Every time people defend our current gun situation, SheilaT Jun 2016 #88
Your 'conclusions' are merely an old political tactic currently known as Lovejoying: friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #90
Where you are completely wrong... anigbrowl Jun 2016 #127
A lot of children were (and still are) harmed by their families' alcohol use friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #132
Every time people defend due process Democat Jun 2016 #105
What exactly is the violation of due process? Orrex Jun 2016 #109
Using a secret government list to take away rights Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #110
So you'd be ok if there were an appeals process? Orrex Jun 2016 #111
Yes, I would be ok with an appeals process Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #112
That seems reasonable. (nt) Orrex Jun 2016 #115
All I can figure out is that SheilaT Jun 2016 #123
You keep making statements about how you "know" what your opponents really care about friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #133
If people were valued over guns, then many more people SheilaT Jun 2016 #135
I value *all* of the Constitution. In your own words, are there any other parts of it that... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #137
No reply? Ok then:Your stance is a moral-panic fuelled special pleading friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #148
^^^^^THIS^^^^^ lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #143
Correction: No mass murders in the U.S. have occurred using "automatic assault rifles" (redundant). Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #160
Goodbye. Ignore. The list gets longer. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #162
Extremist prohibitionism will not help solve anything. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #164
Maybe we do care and we want to see something done. Something that works to save lives. Kang Colby Jun 2016 #144
I know that most gun deaths in this country are suicides. SheilaT Jun 2016 #163
+1000 smirkymonkey Jun 2016 #156
Due process is not so important that you should expect others to be willing to die for it anigbrowl Jun 2016 #128
Agreed, and they are wiling to give their own lives treestar Jun 2016 #136
Where was little Dylan's right to due process? n/t leeroysphitz Jun 2016 #117
NRA: "Due process" only applies to gun holders, not gun victims. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #119
Really? Give a link to them saying that friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #134
ACLU on proposed gun legislation sarisataka Jun 2016 #121
Moot point SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2016 #126
Neither of those murders were on the no fly list, were they? I don't understand the point here. uppityperson Jun 2016 #129
Complain to the supporters of the Patriot Act. L. Coyote Jun 2016 #141
Which, if the polls were correct, includes far more people than will admit it now (nt) LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #151
Why? They really nothing to do with protection of rights. TheKentuckian Jun 2016 #147
Banning assault weapons would not have anything to do with due process and they know it. Rex Jun 2016 #150
The "where were the rights of the victim?" argument has often been used to defend abuses of LongtimeAZDem Jun 2016 #152
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Complain to the families ...»Reply #154