Discussion: The Second Amendment V

[Kelly]

Legit news source or some right wing blog(ie I wouldn't put to much stock into anything coming out of "the Blaze" or breitbart.com)?



You know Acorn doesn't exist anymore(circa 2010) and is nothing more then a Republican boogieman

The Blaze actually has done some pretty good work of late, as has breitbart at times, I wouldn't totally write off a site simply because it doesn't follow your ideology. As far as my ACORN comment, true....NOW, that is not to say that that is the way I want Planned Parenthood to go, I think they have a legitimate reason for being. I do not think my tax dollars of ANY amount should go to them as long as they are dealers of abortions. Please do not tell me that they do not "do" abortions. They don't "do" the abortions, but they are a large "dealer" when it comes to abortion clinic clients...and I do not want any of my tax dollars going to even that...let it be private funding, or the woman/family, whatever can pay for her own choices, I shouldn't have to. ALSO...ACORN is not around under that title, most of their offices, reorganized, fired the corruption, but still do much of what ACORN did at the community level. I would have no problem with Planned Parenthood doing the same.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

NY's new gun laws may have now made certain entertainment productions who use prop guns possible criminals. Looks like the NY Senate acted so fast that they didn't consider all the nuances of guns and gun usage in the state.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/n...-laws-could-hamper-film-production.html?_r=1&

 

[wiegeabo]

government writing a bad gun law? You don't say?!

 

[Hotwire]

http://news.yahoo.com/5-old-boy-shoots-2-old-sister-ky-161229579.html

I didn't even know they made these.

I was coming here to post this myself. I can't fathom any good reason to give a 5 year old access to a gun. These parents are some of the most irresponsible people I've ever seen. They've paid a heavy price for their stupidity and so has their son.

I also can't quite get my head around why responsible gun manufacturers would even make a gun for someone that young.

Here's the website for the gun manufacturer.

 

[Grievous]

I don't see how someone can blame guns in this 5 year old story, blame the parents for not keeping a better eye on them. Also 5 is way to young to start someone on a gun IMO.

 

[wiegeabo]

I had a rifle when I was about that age. So did my mom and my sister. (In fact, we still have them.)

But we were taught to respect them, to never play with them, how to handle them safely, and, most importantly, they were always locked up and unloaded until we were actually going to use them.

And if we did anything against that, we got our butts whooped.

 

[Hotwire]

I don't see how someone can blame guns in this 5 year old story, blame the parents for not keeping a better eye on them. Also 5 is way to young to start someone on a gun IMO.

Oh, I'm blaming the parents, alright! They need to be put in prison and the boy needs to be put in a home with more responsible parents.

I also partially blame the gun manufacturer for making lethal weapons for little kids to use. We are FAR too obsessed with guns in this country!

 

[SV Fan]

The Blaze actually has done some pretty good work of late, as has breitbart at times, I wouldn't totally write off a site simply because it doesn't follow your ideology.

If you read an article with information that only seems to come from right wing blog sites, I do think the source of the article is fair to question. Now if the article is pointing to a legit news source there might be something to it. In the case of plan parenthood knowing about the abortion doctor I would love to see the news source first before I start believing what it says(if I had to take a guess it probably was one person at planned parenthood that might have had a clue and the entire organization gets targeted in a hit piece as being all for what the guy did)

To many times with these right wing blog sites it seems to will take any piece of information that supports it agenda and not put to much effort to verify the sources. A few times over the past year articles that were written for satirical blogs/websites, got picked up by the right wing blogs as legit news. Another thing I see in the right wing media world is bad information get picked up by a right wing blog then people who I would expect to have a little more credibility(such as people on Fox News or members of Congress) start saying stuff like "word out is Planned parenthood knew about this" according to sources(and the sources being the bad blogs)

I think the funniest story of such a incident was a reporter jokingly made a comment that Chuck Hagel being linked to "Friends of Hamas" that was written clearly as a joke. Right wing blogs like breitbart.com picked up on this as legit news and then Ted Cruz actually brought up this information at a Senate hearing for Chuck Hagel and looked like a complete fool(well except to people who read right wing blogs who probably still think the "Friends of Hamas" is a legit group)

Here is Ted Cruz doing his best impression of Joe McCarthy based on "information" he got from breitbart.com

 

[Kelly]

If you read an article with information that only seems to come from right wing blog sites, I do think the source of the article is fair to question. Now if the article is pointing to a legit news source there might be something to it. In the case of plan parenthood knowing about the abortion doctor I would love to see the news source first before I start believing what it says(if I had to take a guess it probably was one person at planned parenthood that might have had a clue and the entire organization gets targeted in a hit piece as being all for what the guy did)

To many times with these right wing blog sites it seems to will take any piece of information that supports it agenda and not put to much effort to verify the sources. A few times over the past year articles that were written for satirical blogs/websites, got picked up by the right wing blogs as legit news. Another thing I see in the right wing media world is bad information get picked up by a right wing blog then people who I would expect to have a little more credibility(such as people on Fox News or members of Congress) start saying stuff like "word out is Planned parenthood knew about this" according to sources(and the sources being the bad blogs)

I think the funniest story of such a incident was a reporter jokingly made a comment that Chuck Hagel being linked to "Friends of Hamas" that was written clearly as a joke. Right wing blogs like breitbart.com picked up on this as legit news and then Ted Cruz actually brought up this information at a Senate hearing for Chuck Hagel and looked like a complete fool(well except to people who read right wing blogs who probably still think the "Friends of Hamas" is a legit group)

Here is Ted Cruz doing his best impression of Joe McCarthy based on "information" he got from breitbart.com

Oh, heck yeah.....question, hell I question all media. But, don't write it off simply because it is right or left. Hell even The Enquirer gets it right every once in awhile.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Oh, heck yeah.....question, hell I question all media. But, don't right it off simply because it is right or left. Hell even The Enquirer gets it right every once in awhile.

John Edwards' lovechild for example.

 

[Kelly]

Webfoot, you need to correct my spelling before you quote me....lol

 

[Hotwire]

Webfoot, you need to correct my spelling before you quote me....lol

This is funny coming from a teacher!

 

[Kelly]

This is funny coming from a teacher!

I'm not an English teacher, give me a break...

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Webfoot, you need to correct my spelling before you quote me....lol

There was a spelling error? I didn't even notice it.

 

[Kelly]

There was a spelling error? I didn't even notice it.

OMG, I have got to get some rest this weekend....no I was thinking you quoted the post where I wrote "right" and should have written "write", but that one was quoted by SV Fan.

*shakes head* it has been a loooooooooooooooong two weeks of testing.

 

[SV Fan]

So the NRA is having a Gunapalooza in Houston this week and all the speakers look like they just borrowed from the CPAC roster. In all honesty if the NRA wants to give itself some credibility they probably best not to have people like Sarah Palin, Rick Perry and Glen Beck(among the host of other right wing radicals) be spokespeople for their vision of gun regulations. The more the NRA links itself with extremists like that the more the NRA will lose credibility with independents(which I don't think is a bad thing since the NRA should be knocked down a few pegs and then they might be a more responsible Gun Organization like they used to be)

 

[Kelly]

So the NRA is having a Gunapalooza in Houston this week and all the speakers look like they just borrowed from the CPAC roster. In all honesty if the NRA wants to give itself some credibility they probably best not to have people like Sarah Palin, Rick Perry and Glen Beck(among the host of other right wing radicals) be spokespeople for their vision of gun regulations. The more the NRA links itself with extremists like that the more the NRA will lose credibility with independents(which I don't think is a bad thing since the NRA should be knocked down a few pegs and then they might be a more responsible Gun Organization like they used to be)

Honestly, I don't think the NRA gives a **** if they have credibility with far left of center...yeah, I could see that it would have been nice to have had Joe Manchin as a speaker, sure...and he would have been a good one, but I can assure you "their audience" which is who this is for, will love those speakers...so why wouldn't they have them?

Should a Gay Rights Convention in Massachusetts not have Barney Frank speak??? because he's controversial???? The audience there would love to have him speak at that convention, so of course they would have him speak. They have done just fine without that credibility.

Should President Obama not have started his Senatorial Campaign at the house of a known 60's domestic terrorist??? The audience he was reaching out to thought that choice was fine, and therefore not a problem, and apparently not much of a problem going forward.

You look at your audience and go from there....at this point I only see Manchin as a possibility for the NRA Convention, and they aren't exactly happy with him right now. But hey, the other side will be heard, they are already down there screaming their lungs out outside... ; ) Hell, I'm sure we will have the WBC here yelling that EVERYONE IS GOING TO HELL..... : )


Bottom line SV is that it would make it more credible for you and those that have the same ideology as you, but honestly I don't think they care if you find them credible....just reality.

 

[SV Fan]

Bottom line SV is that it would make it more credible for you and those that have the same ideology as you, but honestly I don't think they care if you find them credible....just reality.

I think the problem is associating yourself with the Becks and Palins of the world screams to many people that the NRA is nothing more then a far right group and could potentially turn off more independent voters who might not have strong views one way or another about gun rights. As the old saying goes give somebody enough rope to hang themselves. It's a basic case (I believe) the Palins and Becks will be painted as the face of pro gun rights and do more damage to the cause of gun rights then good.

For years the strength of the NRA was keeping moderate Republicans and Democrats in check but if you link yourself with the extreme parts of the right it all of a sudden will start giving those moderates an out to go against the NRA when it isn't politically good for somebody's campaign(ie. hey I am not in the Palin wing of the Republicans).

 

[Fading]

Oh, I'm blaming the parents, alright! They need to be put in prison and the boy needs to be put in a home with more responsible parents.

I also partially blame the gun manufacturer for making lethal weapons for little kids to use. We are FAR too obsessed with guns in this country!

Agreed. Like with a lot of gun issues, it's touchy. It's definitely, at least partially, the parents fault. They bought the gun for their child, and apparently didn't check if it was loaded or unloaded properly before giving it to him (the article states they didn't think it was loaded). They also apparently didn't supervise him correctly. I'm not trying to be totally cold towards the parents, as they did lose a child in the accident, and I feel sorry for them on that part. It's just that their behavior permitted the incident to even be able to happen.


However I do think the gun manufacturer has some responsibility as well. The article said they mainly design guns for kids. It's like developing a high in sugar drink kids love, and acting surprised when a kid becomes diabetic from drinking it all of the time. If you develop guns for 5 year olds, you have to expect at some point one of them is going to shoot themselves, or another with your weapon...they're children, and children aren't always the most coordinated, or responsible of humans.


That said, like I was saying, it's touchy. I shot a gun as a child as well, and like said by wiegeabo, i was taught to respect it. My parents closely watched every action I made while I had the gun, and were in a position to stop me if I ever posed a danger to myself, or another. The gun manufacturer also has the right to produce those products, just as US citizens have a right to purchase them.

However, IMO, there has to be a point where we take personal responsibility. If you, as a parent, don't think you, or your child, is capable of taking every precaution to prevent an accident, you shouldn't be buying your child a gun. Just as, as a manufacturer, you should be every bit as prepared when you sell something meant to take a life, to someone who is still learning the alphabet. Just like any other gun related issue, it comes down to, "How do we make sure responsible owners can still come to own this legal product, while making sure irresponsible, or mentally unstable people don't come to own them". Which continues to be the million dollar question that skirts personal freedom vs potentially saving lives.

 

[Kelly]

I think the problem is associating yourself with the Becks and Palins of the world screams to many people that the NRA is nothing more then a far right group and could potentially turn off more independent voters who might not have strong views one way or another about gun rights. As the old saying goes give somebody enough rope to hang themselves. It's a basic case (I believe) the Palins and Becks will be painted as the face of pro gun rights and do more damage to the cause of gun rights then good.

For years the strength of the NRA was keeping moderate Republicans and Democrats in check but if you link yourself with the extreme parts of the right it all of a sudden will start giving those moderates an out to go against the NRA when it isn't politically good for somebody's campaign(ie. hey I am not in the Palin wing of the Republicans).

Um SV....it is a far right group, where have you been? They keep them in check by their $$$$$$$ not who they associate with. As an Independent, I don't need to join the NRA to own a gun.

Hell, if who you associate with kept you out of important positions Obama wouldn't be President...

 

[SV Fan]

Um SV....it is a far right group, where have you been?

Well I think they did a better job in previous years of not acting like one

 

[Kelly]

In my 3+ decades of following politics, I've never seen them as anything else but a right wing political entity....

 

[SV Fan]

In my 3+ decades of following politics, I've never seen them as anything else but a right wing political entity....

As I said they have their share of very moderate Democrats or "Red Dogs" under their thumb. I just think they have done a much better job the past 20 years trying to act more moderate then they have the past few months

 

[Kelly]

As I said they have their share of very moderate Democrats or "Red Dogs" under their thumb. I just think they have done a much better job the past 20 years trying to act more moderate then they have the past few months

Here's the thing Bluedog Democrats like Manchin will do what they need to do to get the NRA backing in their state. He will still their backing even with his bill....
Moderate Republicans are considered moderate because of their stand on things like gun-control, and do not care about the backing of the NRA, they have never had it, and never will.

They are for or against the NRA because they are for or against HEAVY gun control, not because of who the NRA has speaking at its convention.

Moderate Republicans are also not well liked by the Tea Party, so do they care that Beck was such a big backer of that group? No, they could careless.

Now, should the NRA have had Manchin speak? Oh yes, that is a definite, but only to really be able to explain his bill, rather than have the media totally screw it up in their reporting.

 

[enterthemadness]

Soooo...mixed feelings on this...since I listen/watch Adam Kokesh at times..



http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/05/1965191/open-carry-washington-march/?mobile=nc


Gun Protesters plan loaded march on D.C., 900 RSVP, needs 10,000 to go through with it. And before you panic, there are safety guidelines as noted but still....Adam is forcing a issues here to some end.

This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.
There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
​