HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Dem forced from congressi... » Reply #13

Response to gejohnston (Reply #12)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 03:42 PM

13. I was quoting your link

johnston: Bloomberg supported Scott Brown because of Wall Street regulations.

Well I dunno really, I was just going by the link YOU provided, which said this: Mr. Bloomberg, through a spokesman, said his endorsement was not about Wall Street at all, but about his desire to reward Mr. Brown for voting against his party and the National Rifle Association on a gun control measure.

So it appears a he said/he said, johnstons word vs bloombergs (as I said I dunno, bloomy could be playing coy; we might never know, sniff).

johnston: 1 One of Bloomberg's propaganda mailers in California falsely claimed that the candidate "supported convicted sex offenders and felons getting CCWs"
2 Since rape is a common sex offense, it is violent so is armed robbery. That made the claim false.

.. so that's it? you & the gun lobby pounce on semantics; the gun lobby apparently twisted what was written to the extreme case, the 'gunnut way'.
.. most sex offenses are misdemeanors not felonies, which rape is. Lumping in violent ex cons & felons is again exploiting the wording & does not disprove what the ad claimed, except when interpreted to the extreme absolute. As often as the nra & gun lobby transmogrify what guncontrol advocates say & write, it's another case of their double standard - OK when we do it but when you do it it's WRONG.
.. The candidate evidently DID support ccw for most ex felons & convicted sex offenders - I daresay almost all candidates rec'g an A grade from the nra, would.
I call the ad mostly true but could insert the word 'most' or 'some', but overall typical trumped up counter attack.

johnston: ... many countries allow non violent felons to legally own guns, Canada being one of them.

just curious what this international tack had to do with anything in this post?
.. the nra wants it both ways; in order to distinguish between the noble 'law abiding gun owner' the nra claims things like most violent crimes are done by people with past criminal records, but the nra has few qualms about distinguishing whether those past felons were non violent or violent, or simply misdemeanants. (Burglary & Larceny are considered non violent felonies, misdemeanors are getting drunk or urinating in public.)
.. (on edit) Then the nra simultaneously supports those non violent ex felons & misdemeanants when they try to get their 'gun right's back, after prison or the trial etc.. thus having it 'both ways'. Most crimes are done by ex criminals not Law Abiding Gun Owners, but we supported giving most of them ex criminals their gun rights back!

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 15 replies Author Time Post
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 OP
gejohnston Feb 2013 #1
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #3
gejohnston Feb 2013 #4
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #6
aquart Feb 2013 #2
gejohnston Feb 2013 #5
aquart Feb 2013 #7
iiibbb Feb 2013 #10
sarisataka Feb 2013 #8
SecularMotion Feb 2013 #9
jimmy the one Feb 2013 #11
gejohnston Feb 2013 #12
LineLineLineNew Reply I was quoting your link
jimmy the one Feb 2013 #13
DonP Feb 2013 #14
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #15
Please login to view edit histories.