Slog Comments

 

Comments (23) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Will in Seattle 1
There is never a good time to discuss societal insanity and refusal to deal with real problems.

Butter tomorrow.

Butter yesterday.

But never butter today.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 14, 2012 at 2:22 PM · Report this
2
The best article yet on this issue, Dom.
Posted by sarah70 on December 14, 2012 at 2:33 PM · Report this
Eastpike 3
Can gun control advocates count on the pro-life movement among their voice in this fight? Since they're all anti-murder and stuff?
Posted by Eastpike on December 14, 2012 at 2:36 PM · Report this
4
I'm a fan of Greg Sargent's approach
“As a country we have been through this too many times,” Obama added. “We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics.”

Let’s believe he means it, while simultaneously insisting he prove it. Obama’s statement rose to the occasion emotionally, but the unique horror of today’s events demands that Obama and other public officials rise to the occasion politically.
Emphasis mine.

This response is totally appropriate and more pragmatic than we're used to being. But maybe we should be pragmatic. Just this once...so as to solve a problem.

Or as Van Jones put it: When the President screws up, you should treat him like you might treat your cousin when he screws up...Hold him...But hold him accountable.

If liberals are serious about solutions, none of this has to devolve into hostage-taking.
Posted by stating the obvious on December 14, 2012 at 2:39 PM · Report this
5
Really well put. This is our work to do, not the President's. We put him in charge of playing the long game, and there's shit on his desk right now where if he addresses gun control today some of that other business is going to take the hit.

He may be wrong in his calculations, he certainly has been before, but it's his call to make of what's worth fighting and when and how.

We are under no such constraints. The people have a power to shake the entire legislative agenda overnight if we care to marshal it. Sure, we'll probably as usual fritter it away with online petitions (and blog comments, ahem), but that doesn't mean the fault lies in our stars rather than ourselves.
Posted by gloomy gus on December 14, 2012 at 2:45 PM · Report this
Fnarf 6
If the Federal Government passes any meaningful legislation in the next twelve months, I'll let Cascadian Bacon shoot me through the hand.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 14, 2012 at 2:52 PM · Report this
MacCrocodile 7
Remember, if that teacher and the children had bricks...

God, can't one of our regular trolls finish that for me?
Posted by MacCrocodile http://maccrocodile.com/ on December 14, 2012 at 3:10 PM · Report this
quix 8
The President may not have used the words "gun control" but I don't think his call for "meaningful action...regardless of politics" constitutes silence. As gus notes above, the man has a lot on his plate--including not letting the economy be run back off the rails by those who place tax cuts for the rich above the good of the nation--that can take a major hit if he were to get up in front of the White House press corps and outline a 15 point plan for enacting effective gun control legislation.

There is also the likelihood that he chooses not to fixate on gun control right out of the gate because there's more at work here than just easy access to guns (although that is clearly a factor in incidents like this). This is a President who understands and embraces complexity and nuance, and this means that you won't always get instantaneous single-issue focused soundbites out of him.

In the meantime, the more effective path would be for gun control advocates to come together to form a single, cohesive lobbying organization to counter the NRA. If you want to effect change, organize, mobilize and make it politically dangerous to ignore you. Moaning on the internet won't cut it.

Finally, if you want to have a debate on this (or any) subject, you need to be genuinely open to debate. Shrieking "GUNS ARE EVIL" at the top of your lungs will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and writing off those who disagree with you as trigger-happy crazies will nip debate in the bud. If you're not ready and willing to listen to and try to understand other viewpoints, the discussion is never going to go anywhere.
Posted by quix on December 14, 2012 at 3:12 PM · Report this
quix 9
He may not have used the words "gun control," but I wouldn't call Obama's call for "meaningful action...regardless of politics" silence.

I couldn't agree more with @5 more. If you want change, whining on the internet isn't going to cut it. Organize, mobilize, and make yourself a political force to be reckoned with. Gun control advocates could form their own lobbying organization to stand up to the NRA or they could even organize to join the NRA en masse and, when they've reached critical mass within the organization, vote to change its policies and mission.

And more importantly, if y'all genuinely want a debate, you'll have to be genuinely open to debate. That means being willing to listen to the viewpoints of others and working to understand where they're coming from. Shrieking "GUNS ARE EVIL" at the top of your lungs will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and treating all gun owners like trigger-happy crazies will nip debate in the bud.
Posted by quix on December 14, 2012 at 3:27 PM · Report this
quix 10
Sorry for the double post--SLOG appeared to eat the first one (hence the second).
Posted by quix on December 14, 2012 at 3:49 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 11
@6

Why would I want to shoot you through the hand?

I guess I appreciate the offer or whateves but unnecessary violence isn't really my thing.

Besides wouldn't stabbing you in the hand be more appropriate?

Gun control legislation is political suicide, it cost the dems the house for the first time in 60 years after the Clinton ban of 94 and also contributed to Gore's defeat in 2000. All for a ban that had ZERO effect on crime. Alienating gun owners alienates nearly 50% of the population on both sides of the political aisle.

The political climate of gun owners is very different than 1994, back then rifles like the AR15 were oddities that few people owned, the ban actually increased their popularity. Now an most gun owners own an AR, andn if not they own an AK. The AR15 is the best selling firearm in America and for many people it is their only rifle. It will not be banned anytime soon.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on December 14, 2012 at 4:17 PM · Report this
COMTE 12
@11:

I don't think an outright ban of certain weapons is necessary, and, as your comment makes clear, it's certainly not practical.

But we CAN do a number of things RIGHT NOW, that would at least make it more difficult for crooks and crazies to get their hands on guns:

1. Close the "gun show loophole". Require that EVERY transaction wherein a gun is bought or sold, including private sales, be accompanied by a background check and waiting period. NO EXCEPTIONS.

2. Create a National Felony Offenders Database and require ALL gun sellers, including those at gun shows and private parties, have access and use it, to ensure that no one convicted of a felony gets their hand on a weapon sold through legal channels.

3. Create a National Gun Registry in order to trace ownership/possession and sales of guns, including through private channels. Anyone caught selling an unregistered firearm or selling to anyone on a "no sell" list (see 2. & 5) would be subject to stiff penalties and possible jail-time.

4. Increase the penalties for crimes committed with guns to automatic Life Sentence; again, NO EXCEPTIONS.

5. Increase funding for mental health screenings & services and create a National Mental Health Registry, so that people diagnosed with mental illnesses can be identified by gun sellers BEFORE they are able to purchase guns, and lengthen the waiting period for these individuals to two weeks, so that their mental stability can be fully established.
Posted by COMTE on December 14, 2012 at 4:43 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 13
@12
I agree with all of the above with the exception of 3 as registration leads to confiscation, but I would begrudgingly accept #1 if it meant no further restrictions.

#2, #4, #5 need to be implemented ASAP.

No one wants to sell a gun to a Felon, many gun owners, including myself request a concealed pistol license for private sales to ensure the buyer is legally able to purchase a firearm.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on December 14, 2012 at 4:53 PM · Report this
rob! 14
Imagine a creepy band of warriors/fuckwits who pledged to perpetrate a motiveless mass shooting every two weeks in randomly chosen gatherings of people across the U.S. (big cities, small towns, malls, concerts, churches, bowling alleys, schools, block parties, beaches, pride parades, what-have-you), thereby achieving a slightly higher rate of carnage than we are currently experiencing. No one not already incarcerated could consider themselves immune.

Do you think the regularity of those events, with no way to predict locations or prevent them and the deaths of hundreds per year an empirical certainty, might lead to a change in priorities or behavior among the citizenry?
Posted by rob! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBdUceCL5U on December 14, 2012 at 4:58 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 17
@15/16
The paranoia tends to come from people screaming to take your rights away over an emotional reaction. Also contributing is the rising tide of a top heavy federal government that wants to increasingly spy on and control it's citizens. Things like the patriot act make paranoia reasonable.

Also it is already illegal to ship guns or ammo through the mail, guns can only be shipped to a Federal Firearms License holder. Ammo can be shipped via UPS which beats paying local scalpers prices when you shoot a large volume.

I also compliment you on being one of the most reasonable posters here regardless of topic.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on December 14, 2012 at 8:28 PM · Report this
18
@15, a "higher level of scrutiny"? Just who's going to provide that scrutiny and what would it consist of? Calling them weekly to see if they've killed anyone lately?

Good god, you people who are afraid of pissing off gun owners make the silliest suggestions.
Posted by sarah70 on December 14, 2012 at 8:57 PM · Report this
venomlash 20
@13: Registration leads to confiscation? So I suppose you're also against car license plates, because Uncle Sam is totally going to come take away anything he knows we have.
Try sticking your head outside your paranoid little bubble and get some air.
Posted by venomlash on December 15, 2012 at 1:58 AM · Report this
El Matardillo 22
Want my guns? Come and take them. You won't.
Posted by El Matardillo on December 15, 2012 at 12:43 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 23
@20
Are you familiar with the term "impound lot."

Also vehicle registration is not required for vehicle ownership, it is only required to operate a vehicle on public roads. There is also an argument as to weather it is required at all for a non commercial vehicle, but it tends to be easier to pay a sticker rather than pull out a pile of case law documents when you get pulled over.

The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." - Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/ri…
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on December 15, 2012 at 6:03 PM · Report this
24
Safe storage laws, like those in Great Brittan, should be implemented as soon as possible. It's a win for manufacturers, it's a win for keeping guns off the streets, and most importantly, it's a win for gun safety, not gun control.
Posted by kbatku on December 15, 2012 at 8:02 PM · Report this
25
I'd sure hate to be the one to tell all those Newtown, Connecticut parents that their kids, who simply went to school on Friday along with several teachers and other adults, are now dead because of yet another crazed gunman.

How do we ensure the rightful gun ownership of responsible people WITHOUT firearms getting into the wrong hands? Whatever happened to the Brady Bill, implemented by the wife of Reagan aide, James Brady, left paralyzed after getting shot by would-be presidential assassin and rabid Jodie Foster stalker, John Hinckley?

I'm not being paranoid, here. I just feel stupified by all this senseless killing.

Posted by auntie grizelda on December 15, 2012 at 11:21 PM · Report this
26
Mr. Bacon I wish you would not spreading this nonsense about not needing a driver's license to drive. I've stood next to clients as they have been taken to jail for not having one because they believed the sort of nonsense you are pedaling. The right to travel does exist but it is like every other constitutional right in that it has limits. You need a drivers license to drive on public roads and anyone who tells you otherwise is a huckster or a fool. Selective quotes from random court cases don't mean anything. One has to read the entire case and understand the quotes in context.
Posted by veggiemoto on December 16, 2012 at 7:51 PM · Report this
27
Let's get real about gun control. Remember Humpty Dumpty when he fell off the wall? All the King's horses and all the King's men could not put Humpty Dumpty together again. With over 300 million guns and millions more of all shapes and sizes unregistered in the USA today, does anyone in their right mind think that gun control will ever work? Once a cancer spreads there is little hope. Congress, the NRA and the total co-opting of the Second Amendment by a gun crazed public (mostly men), stand your ground state policies--all would doom any attempt to place restrictions, past, present or in the future impossible. Sad but true. If we can't stop the guns, maybe we can attempt to slow down or even halt the purchase of all and any ammo.
Posted by Vox Populi on December 17, 2012 at 7:40 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Commenting on this item is available only to registered commenters.