Ah, yes, I remember that. Close, but still not quite as direct as it could be, and he was speaking to a friendly audience.
Not strict enough, apparently.
What do you think a lawmaker should say to a father who wants alcohol banned because his son was killed by a drunk driver, or a woman who wants beer banned because her boyfriend gets drunk and beats her?
They should say, “But guns are way more dangerous and we don’t do anything about them. Oh, and swimming pools.”
Or, they might say “I’m very sorry about your loss, but there are millions of people who responsibly use and enjoy alcohol safely, and so despite the fact that there are people who abuse it, and the horrible consequences of that abuse, I can’t support restrictions on alcohol consumption beyond those already in place.”
“Filth”? :dubious:
Fortunately, for much the same reason that animals rights protesters don’t target leather-wearing bikers, gun banners can’t do much more than make rude noises at people who own guns.
Once again I say, guns make people stupid. So, yes, does alcohol, but alcohol is not made with the intent of killing anything other than maybe some bacteria or banana slugs.
Without guns people are smart? I don’t see that here.
Or they might say “The solution is more alcohol. If there had been a good guy with an alcohol, this could have been prevented.”
Perhaps that lawmaker could point out that, in response to issues with alcohol and drunk driving, we’ve collectively passed many new laws and regulations imposing tighter limits and restrictions on driving while impaired. Perhaps that lawmaker would mention how the limits for driving while impaired have been lowered over the years in an attempt to address the issue. Perhaps that lawmaker would point out the numerous studies performed in an attempt to understand the issue, including significant work by the CDC (which is forbidden from performing equivalent research on gun violence). Perhaps that lawmaker would point out all the proactive attempts at minimizing driving while impaired, including checkpoints and DUI taskforces. Perhaps that lawmaker would point out that deaths per year related to driving while impaired have been reduced as a result of these efforts. Perhaps that lawmaker would note that, while too many deaths still occur, that recent results reveal that improvements can be made and the number of deaths reduced, if we’re willing to at least discuss the issue and consider making changes.
Perhaps . . .
Or maybe that lawmaker would shrug and say “Eh, things happen, just like gun violence. But there’s nothing we can do about it.”
Maybe if radicalized Muslims start buying “long guns” legally and use them against nice, white Americans, we’ll start actually passing some gun regulations.
Nope, the answer is always more guns.
You feel good about yourself when you have thoughts like this? I guess when you think of yourself as one of the good people, though, you can rationalize anything.
No, it’s not a nice thought. It’s fucked up. I don’t want any of this shit to happen. But I can’t help but wonder how the Republican party’s fetishized love of guns and irrational fear of/hatred for Muslims & brown people will play out if the evil Islamic nutcrackers start buying guns in our unregulated market and using them against us.
How are Republican politicians who currently love guns as much as they fear Muslims going to explain this away if these were radicalized nutjobs in California who bought these “long guns” legally? More guns? Easier access to guns? Bigger guns on the market for Jesus-fearing 'Mericans to buy? Locking up all Muslims? Making it illegal for anyone who isn’t white and doesn’t profess their Christianity to own guns? More good thoughts expressed on Twitter? More prayers?
Or how about listening to this country’s local leaders and passing common-sense gun control?
And now a brief interlude on lawn darts:
A few thousand injuries and a tiny number of deaths got lawn darts banned in the US.
Fucking lawn darts.
They can have my lawn darts when they pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Whatever wakes Congress up to passing common sense gun control laws. Obviously, crazy white guys shooting up movie theaters, elementary schools, high schools, colleges, shopping malls, women’s health organizations, etc. don’t move these assholes to act like human beings.
Maybe crazy Muslims shooting up a center for developmentally disabled people will. Whether these asshole shooters were radicalized or disgruntled or mentally ill, it doesn’t really matter. Republicans are *terrified *of Muslims, after all. Maybe their terror will now allow them to pass some gun control legislation. Or maybe it’ll just drive them further into Right-Wing Nutjobville.
It seems pretty clear what the problem is: Not enough guns. Let’s support whichever Presidential candidate offers a free gun to every American.
This story seems kind of stupid: police officer participating in a chase lays down spike strip, gets word that chase has changed direction, packs up spike strip and heads off in pursuit, bag with gun falls out of car as he leaves. The bag was not there when he went back for it, surprise, surprise. Police are hoping someone will turn it in. Optimism is low.
I know so little about guns. Is that what’s called an assault rifle? Semi-automatic?
The TV reporter seemed concerned that the gun might be “in the wrong hands.” Does “wrong” here mean black? I thought U.S. white men were encouraged or even required to have weapons, to conform with the 2nd Amerdement; what’s this about “wrong hands”? Are the libtards back to trying to ban “assault rifles” again?