They're real.

And lots of Dems--me for example--support the 2nd Amendment but not at the expense of the other 9.

See post #129
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=43403

but a "gun porn group" might make a handy kill zone.

and there is that new Intersectionality group, so maybe...

Who wonders why the RKBA people don't have a medieval arms and unconventional weapons forum. I mean hey, they're arms, right? The 2nd amendment guarantees my right to a Conan-style battle axe if I want one!

although there are those who will say swords and maces belong in Outdoor Life and Sports along with muskets and ARs.

Or, how about a group for martial artists? As a longtime martial artist, I can attest that the field is full of Ayn Rand-style libertarians. I'd love to meet fellow gun owners and martial artists from a progressive/liberal political bent.

stabbing spear and shield. Was fun then, but I am a little long in the tooth for it now.

Oneshooter

When you put a gun next to a spiked flail, a zip gun, and some pungi sticks and say "these are my second amendment," it serves as a nice reminder to the gun folks that they're talking about a tool designed to inflict injury and death upon a living being. Which is, in my experience, a perspective that is sorely lacking from "gun culture."

But there was a time when gentlemen went about armed with swords, and they knew how to use them. Serfs, not so much. Equality of opportunity is a good thing. Let everyone of majority age who desires, and is not a convicted violent felon, be armed.

I would also add those not adjudicated legally insane, but otherwise, I say a bit "Amen" to everything you wrote.

A Danish war axe ought not to weigh more than five or six pounds, tops. A good sword ought not weigh more than three.

To me, the RKBA is not just about those guns that get some people's panties in a wad. It's about anything from a switchblade to a fencing foil to a broadsword and a battleaxe.

As a kung fu student, I regularly take my kwan dao, dai pa, gim or dan dao to one of Florida's many beautiful parks to practice. I love Florida's lenient weapons laws because in other states where I've lived, I'd be committing a felony to quietly engage in my chosen sport and exercise in a park I support with my tax dollars.

I don't know why not. It's not like those "thumb studs" are any slouch on getting a folder open in a hurry.

Leftover relic of some lawmaker getting frightened by watching "West Side Story" too many times back in the 50's...

"Rebel Without a Cause" and High School Confidential"

And unlike firearms, you don't even need a license to forge one yourself if you have the talent or inclination....

to an axe. ~3 feet of steel pointed at someone is extremely intimidating.

Having young children has consigned the shotgun to secure storage with the sword taking its place in the closet. I keep a pistol in a rapid access vault near by but like to have options.

A compact war hammer or battleaxe would offer comparable cutting power while being more agile. Plus either offer more utility when taken hiking...




That also satisfies the "sporting purpose" clause for certain DU'ers....

my 9 mm. Otherwise, for really tight quarters, a kerambit.

LOL...

...I put rails, vertical grip, holographic sight, and a light on my tomahawk.

Maybe a bayonet lug

I'd leave off the Eotech

What kind of damage multiplier does that give?

Easy to maneuver, double edged, good for point or edge.

Oneshooter

But some are available.

I should note that I don't own this sword although I may buy own for my collection at some time in the future.

For anyone interested this Gladius is available at http://kultofathena.com/product.asp?item=500598

I may have to add to my home defense arsenal.

as movies are totally unrealistic.

This video might be educational

will indeed impress and even scare a person...


something that's never happened to me with a firearm.

about weapons used in crimes and what the perceived threat is.
Guns, of course, ranked high as everyone understands they are lethal. Swords however were ranked #1 as most intimidating. A person can see exactly what is coming at the and imagine the damage it can do to their body.

As an aside, my post was entirely serious. It is a strong blade with a good thrusting point. I will have the pistol on my person and the sword in my hand if I have to check the house; that would be likely as the bedrooms are spread out so I have no one defensive point.

While I mainly bought it to add to my knife and sword collection, it can be handy as I have a bad hip that I should get replaced as well as degenerative disc disease.

If I hear a really unusual noise during the night I slip a .38 cal snub nosed revolver into my pants pocket, grab the cane and leave my bedroom to check things out. (Yes, I know that playing Wyatt Earp is a poor tactic, but there are other family members in this big old house that I feel responsible for.)

Of course the noise is usually caused by our clumsy Boston Terrier (who is totally worthless as a watch dog) or an innocent visitor or family member. Using a cane when you have a bad limp is not intimidating so I don't unnecessarily scare the crap out of someone who is just visiting.

The sword cane could easily be a very effective weapon if absolutely necessary. It could also convince an intruder to leave in a hurry.

as my knees deteriorate. As it is I am on crutches for six weeks recovering from my latest rebuild. i can't get a replacement until I reach 60

take care, stay safe

Just to be clear, I support 2A, just not the RW SCOTUS interpretation of it. Many Dems support 2A and a few Dems support CC. There are even a handful who support the NRA. None of that has anything to do with infiltration of DU by wingnuts and their favorite entry point - the Gungeon. An easy place to hide, rack up a post count and create some good old pre-election havoc.

But if you want to know where to find them, you might start looking through the poll results. I spotted about 10 good candidates in the YES column, none in the NO column.

Are you unaware of that the Gungeon has always been a haven for RW trolls? You may be Green, but not that green. Visit Boot Hill and browse the tombstones. You'll find a lot of old friends there from the Gungeon.

who were trolls. Some on my side were were baited by the greatest troll of them all, iverglas.

Iverglas wasn't a RW troll. She may have been disruptive, but no way was she RW. She also caught plenty of RW trolls here. I don't think they were on your side or my side. She provided a great service ridding us of some truly disgusting individuals.

Was recently mentioned in another thread as being an anti-gun troll. There are several trolls on your side of the debate. Maybe not the RW type but trolls that are disruptive nonetheless.


Funny, pretty sure iverglas being removed was a great service to DU as a whole...

Read what was written: recently mentioned in another thread. Now try again.

I said she was a troll. Read the accepted definition according to Wikipedia. Once in awhile she added to the conversation in a reasonable manner and made valid points, but much of the time she was ummmmmmmmmm less than coherent.
The guys you mention were busted mostly because she baited them into saying that they felt Holder is less than honest about F&F. She used those posts and tattled to the mods about "conspiracy nuts." Some of us, including me, saw through it and saw her efforts for what it was. Her goal was to suppress another point of view, no more no less. That is no different than a targeting someone with only a few posts and accusing them of being "zombies" based on little or nothing. Same goal, different tactic. I am guessing that is what inspired this OP.
While I agree that the few individuals were overzealous(fucking nuts) for both of our tastes when it comes to use of force and citizen's arrest, that makes them authoritarian but necessarily RW as far as loving supply side economics or hating unions go. Not all authoritarians are RW. Diane Fienstien is authoritarian, but progressive (once you get past pro death penalty, pro Iraq war, pro PATRIOT ACT, and a few other things that puts her to the right of me). Does that really make her a progressive or a centrist? I digress.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Dianne_Feinstein

To her anyone that supports the 2A is a Reagan voting goober.

I have my list, but I keep it to myself. You aren't on it btw. I've seen the lists of other members too and several names coincide. It's always interesting to see who was right.

(didn't J.Edgar have a list also? But I digress) let me tell you a little about myself. I'm pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro defense, pro RKBA, Hell, I'm just pro this and pro that.

More like a mental list of party poopers. I'm pro all those things too except the "B" part of RKBA, unless there is a good reason, and then I'm all for it.

and apologies for the J. Edgar comment.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=100133

you're just fearmongeting.

tacky beyond belief. The little group is exposing themselves though.

I bet not one of them knows what "conservative" actually means, yet they love slinging it around for dramatic effect.

I think most regulars on DU have their mental lists of possible trolls. Some of those trolls are RW trolls, probably a small percentage, but they often come to the Gungeon. It's a natural playpen for them and they can establish high post counts very easily, because most Gungeon denizens are very pro-gun and pro-carry. They share a lot of values and the smart ones don't get PPR'd until they've sucked in a number of DUers and then they create havoc. "What's My Problem" comes to mind. I'm sure DUers in different fora have wondered if I might be a troll of some kind. But I know I'm not, while you can only wonder. It would be naive to think members don't PM each other about their suspicions, though it has been extremely rare ime. Right now I have one probable and one maybe and I don't communicate with them or about them. I am aware of our recently departed member's list. I think there are two current members on it and I don't think that either one is a troll. So, if that's fear mongering to you, then so be it. I call it honesty. If I think someone steps over the line I may alert, as might you. Nothing to have fear of.

I just don't bother to keep up with it. Whoever shows up, I just deal with it.

that because I support RKBA that I am and others like me are RW trolls. I'm new here, so let me introduce myself - I'm pro-choice on abortion, pro-drug legalization, pro-single-payer healthcare, pro-labor and anti-Iraq War.

And I'm pro-gun-owners rights.

Be sure to put (NT) or some variation thereof at the end of a reply title so people don't click the post to see past the title.

And be sure to check out the DU Thesaurus so you get caught up on the lingo round here.

However, it is a fact that this group is regularly infiltrated by RW trolls. Stick around, you'll see them. They usually identify by claiming their "right" to carry their guns wherever and whenever they want trumps public safety, and every other Constitutional Amendment, including 1A. They support shooting thieves in the back. Some here support shooting people for breaking windows. One of our illustrious members, who swears he is a Dem., supports holding kids at gunpoint if they have toilet paper in the trunk of their car. Most Dems support gun ownership and using guns for home defense. Very few support the NRA, SYG laws and the insane proliferation and endorsement of indiscriminate concealed carry.

But I do think RKBA is as absolute as the rest of the Constitution.

I don't support shooting people for breaking windows or carrying toilet paper. That's excessive force.

I do support SYG and concealed carry.

I'm opposed to the NRA. I think they're more concerned about electing repubs than looking out for gun owners' rights. Their rhetoric can be summed up Liberal/Democrat = Gun Grabber while RW/repub = Supports RKBA. I resent being thrown in with anti-gun types because of my party affiliation. I also think they let anti-gun repubs off the hook with that rhetoric.

If the NRA would focus more on gun-owners rights and less on Democrat vs. repub, I might reconsider and join them.

You will find quite a few here who agree with you. I believe most of them to be fellow Dems. I take them at their word until they demonstrate otherwise. It isn't a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but rather a RW Libertarian/Social Conservative vs. Social Liberal/Public Safety issue. It's also about progressive vs. regressive and mass hysteria vs public health.

it is more complex than that. Progressive or regressive is relative. Sometimes when you move forward, you also move back because they go in cycles like bell bottoms or US navy wearing beards.
I miss the social conservative angle to it. They usually care about the other two Gs.

Otherwise you'll get dinged no matter how strong your argument may be if someone ends up offended and whines about a post you made.

But the numbers don't lie, 90% of the NRA's political donations go to Republicans.

I ask this seriously because I've never considered PP a political organization but using your logic it seems that they would be considered a left wing political org because as far as I can tell 99% of their political donations go to Dems.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00314617&cycle=2008

Most of the anti SYG posts I read in GD etc. really didn't understand SYG laws in general, and Florida's law in particlar. They basiclly repeated misinformation without looking up the law for themselves. While they may not support Florida's, even if they read it, they may support Oregon's or Illinois'.
Same with Castle Doctrine. Those who don't support Texas' would most likely support Wyoming's.

or any other Constitutional amendment. I have NEVER supported shooting thieves in the back or posted anything of the sort. I have NEVER supported shooting people for breaking windows or posted anything of the sort or supported holding kids at gunpoint if they have toilet paper in the trunk of their car. I have never expressed any support for the nra although I have laughed at a number of people for calling them the boogie man and claiming everything they have said or done is some big conspiracy theory. Most here are not like that but some here will will paint everyone with the same broad brush.

You see, being pro-gun-anything automatically earns you the badge of "RW gun-religionist troll". In fact, since you failed to insult one of the regulars here, that also makes you a troll.




Welcome to the Gungeon. May your hide be tough.

your words and give those accused a chance to face an open and honest debate. Instead of trying to debate some nebulous shadow of some "list". This List talk Smacks of 50'S era McCarthyism at its worst and yet they have the gall to think they are not using some of the worst RW tactics in history.

I am appalled at what I am seeing happen in this thread.

Before you can resent being called a troll....LOL

(The decade joke comes from being here a while)


Welcome to the Dump.

"How about you listen to me because I've been here 10 years and I know what this group is about..."


wait - are you supposed to put quote marks around a paraphrase? lolz

Queen troll and any POV not hers was unacceptable. If you didn't toe the line you were a RW troll.

"I've been here a decade, google my name, I'm extra special." Now she talks to herself at a new forum where she's the only member....lolz

At least every one of her at her new forum thinks she's as important as she thinks she is. lolz!

Realize that if you support RKBA, posting in the Gungeon will be far more difficult and challenging than posting on conservative boards where everybody agrees with you. This is a very liberal and Progressive site and you may well face the best arguments that those who oppose gun rights can throw at you.

You may well find yourself questioning your core belief about the issue of gun control and that can be positive. If your arguments can't stand up to face a strong attack, perhaps you should reconsider them.

On the other hand you may be forced to do research to support your views and it will enable you to be able to argue for gun rights in a far more effective manner.

Realize that both sides of the issue have excellent arguments to support their views. Be fair and carefully consider what your opponents may say. Always be polite as SOME will attempt to get you to respond with a counter insult to their insults. You may support gun rights but the Gungeon is not your home field. It's somewhat like the Steelers playing the Browns in Cleveland. The "Dog Pound" may harass the hell out of you.



That's entirely fair as when the Browns visit the Steelers they face the Terrible Towels.



If a person who supports strong gun control posts on a conservative site he may well get a far worse response then you will by fairly presenting your personal views here.

But just as the Steelers have been the better team than the Browns in recent years, you have the advantage of having facts and statistics on your side. If you get insulted, you merely have to realize that you are winning the argument. Insults can be a compliment.

One major advantage of posting here is that you will not feel like you need to take a shower after you post as you might if you participate on a more conservative site. While I agree with many of the posts dealing with gun control on such sites, the posts on other many issues disgust me. If it is true that you are "pro-choice on abortion, pro-drug legalization, pro-single-payer healthcare, pro-labor and anti-Iraq War" you may find DU a very friendly site where you venture from the Gungeon to other forums or groups you will find many who agree with your views.

I have learned a lot by posting here and my views have changed but I consider that positive as you should learn and adapt your views as you age. Refusing to question your views and to carefully consider the views of others is foolish and immature. Wisdom can come with age and experience, but being set in your ways will hamper the process.

You learn far more if you carefully consider and respect the viewpoint of those who disagree with you, but if you insult the other individual it interferes with the process.

The correct definition is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

It seems, please correct me if I'm wrong, that some people define "troll" as someone who does not agree with accuser on one issue. In this case, some here feel that real Democrats hate guns and the gun culture.

The RW trolls that come here, come to subvert and cause dissent among fellow Dems. They post outrageous comments in an effort to divide us. We have a current member who has made many such comments, yet continues to pose as a liberal progressive Dem.. His comments include shooting people in the back, killing thieves or would be thieves by shooting or lynching, without trial, killing people for breaking windows. This is classic RW troll behavior. He establishes himself as "one of the guys", then when he comes out with shit like that, he wants his new "buddies" to back him up. The irony is, I actually don't think he knows he's a RW troll. Just extremely confused.

when they post?

Can't provide links from here (which is viewable by anyone) to Meta (which is hidden to non-members) as that could be considered calling out.

but feel free to send links via PM

I don't have the advanced search function available to star members so this might take me a bit to find them.

...had openly advocated for the removal of this group from DU. You've seen the posts so being obtuse about it isn't helping you any.

Yeah, that has been thrown around for a while. I don't think it's going to happen. My take on it is that the Admins would wish it would go away, but they realize there are a number of Dems, even liberal Dems, who are gun owners and some of those support Concealed Carry. So, they created this group as a place where they could congregate and discuss the issues of RKBA and Gun Control. Apart from gun owners, very few members give a damn about guns and very few gun owners would ever consider carrying their guns in public for purported self defense.
Hence, this group, the "Gungeon" has become a place most DUers avoid like the plague, which makes it very "gun heavy", which in turn leads to discussions like this.
If the group becomes a place for gun porn afficionados then it will lose the handful of members who advocate for more gun control and put an end any constructive debate.

You see. Most of the members here are not the type that post "gun porn". Also, the handful of members who advocate for more gun control need to police themselves considerably better when seeking constructive debate. They are not helping.

I don't advocate for gun control. I advocate for people to control their baser impulses.

Don't know why either. Baser impulse getting the better of you maybe?

You may not have noticed yet, but this group is one of the most engaging on DU. That's why I am here. If you want it to be a circle jerk for gun enthusiasts, that's called subversion of the SOP. The group is about how guns relate to Justice & Public Safety, not about who has the biggest gun or latest ammo. Feel free to post that stuff in Outdoor Living or propose a new group. It's the internet, real estate is cheap. There's no need to destroy an existing group to satisfy your wants. Ask the members of the Feminist Groups if they want pictures of porn posted in their groups.

...and the proposed changes will do nothing to alter that. According to some this group is already a gun enthusiast circle jerk, or haven't you noticed? Sorry, but the fears of this group turning into what you think it will is purely without basis. I for one focus on very technical topics covering engineering trends and ballistics. Far outside the scope of casual enthusiasts and the handful of anti-gun enthusiasts...

#1 post. Always wants a total ban.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117242893#post1

Most of them no longer post here.

Oneshooter

Never seen him in the gungeon before and, as you say, any others didn't stay long. There really isn't much point posting here, if one maintains a rigid position on either end of the spectrum.

I remember one poster who only answered in meme's for about a month. The poster is almost always disruptive and rude. Yet I've never seen any of his posts hidden. I'd be happy to name the individual but I think that would be breaking the rules and considered a "call out".

I mean the poster even defended breaking the law if you could some how imprison a gun owner, and no one said anything to him but me. Why the double standard? If where going to call out the RW trolls we should call out the anti trolls as well. Wouldn't that make sense?

Conservatives and Republicans tend to be more exclusive.

Getting Democrats to totally agree on many issues is like herding cats. Many Democrats are pro-RKBA but support many other views of the Democratic Party.

The unfortunate fact is that many gun owners truly believe that the Democratic Party is opposed to gun ownership and wish to eliminate the Second Amendment. While they totally agree with our party on many issues they absolutely refuse to vote for any Democrat as they have a considerable amount of money invested in a hobby that they enjoy.

They show up at the polls and their influence has cost us many close elections.

Recent statistics have shown that honest and responsible gun owners are not a significant cause of gun violence in our nation. Even Obama agrees despite the fact that the NRA portrays him as a "gun grabber".

Perhaps those Democrats who feel that 'true" Democrats can't support gun rights should read the entire article and carefully consider what Obama, who is the leader of our party, said. Perhaps gun owners who feel that Obama wants to ban and confiscate all firearms should do the same.

to understand that some liberal and progressive Democrats can support RKBA.

People have different backgrounds and experiences. A person who was raised in the high crime area of a major urban area may have far different views of gun ownership than a person raised in a rural area where hunting is common.

Some have unfortunately suffered from a personal tragedy in their life caused by the criminal or irresponsible use of a firearm. Obviously they may well develop an intense dislike of firearms for that reason.

I support RKBA although I fully realize just how dangerous firearms can be. That doesn't automatically mean that I support most other conservative causes.

What disturbs me is that I know many gun owners who while they agree with me on important issues that the Democratic Party supports, will tell me that they could never vote for a Democrat. They are single issue voters who have a considerable amount of money invested in their shooting hobby. They fear regulations that would cause it to be far more difficult to continue to own their weapons and fear Democrats would try to pass such laws.

I will agree that the Gungeon can attract RW trolls. However it is foolish to automatically assume that an individual is a conservative based solely on the fact that he supports RKBA.

I say a big "Amen" to everything you said.

I can relate to this graph, too.

"What disturbs me is that I know many gun owners who while they agree with me on important issues that the Democratic Party supports, will tell me that they could never vote for a Democrat. They are single issue voters who have a considerable amount of money invested in their shooting hobby. They fear regulations that would cause it to be far more difficult to continue to own their weapons and fear Democrats would try to pass such laws."

I've caught shit from many of my gun-owner friends because I've voted for many people whose views on gun ownership and RKBA conflict with mine. But I'm simply not a one-issue voter. I look at the candidate whose views are most in line with mine on the most topics. Almost always, that's been a Democrat.

Reality is often unfortunate, but you always bring a thoughtful voice to the discussion. We'll survive without the single issue voters.

...it's about the extremist interpretation thereof. Those who try to divide it that simply are wrong. I support the Second Amendment, I support the Constitution, I don't support your right to carry a .50 caliber rifle with an extended clip into a school board meeting. That's an extremist position.

Last edited Wed Jun 6, 2012, 01:12 AM - Edit history (1)

and we wish to do our best to insure that firearms are in the hands of honest, sane and responsible people.

Unfortunately in our nation today both sides of many important arguments have their feet firmly planted in concrete and refuse to budge and compromise on the issues. With the rowers on the left side of the boat rowing as hard as they can and those on the right refusing to row, we will only end up going in circles and will never get anywhere.

I find this especially true in the debate over gun control. There was a time frame when those who opposed firearm ownership enjoyed great success and were able to impose many restrictions and even pass the "assault weapons" ban. They were looking forward to greatly restricting or banning handgun ownership and some hoped to eventually ban and confiscate all firearms although most would have been satisfied with only licensed hunters and target shooters owning rifles or shotguns. An incremental approach to accomplishing their goal was proving successful. They believed that one small step at a time would eventually result in gun laws similar to those in Canada or even possibly the United Kingdom.

But the pro-RKBA group began to win victories in states like Florida with the passage of "Shall Issue" concealed carry. At that time, I was a Floridian who owned a number of handguns and enjoyed target shooting but I feared that the law might well prove to be a disaster. "Shall Issue" concealed carry proved far more successful than I anticipated.

Other states decided to pass "Shall Issue" after seeing that it worked well in Florida and it rapidly spread across the nation. While it didn't always cause the crime rate to fall, it did convince many people that allowing honest citizens to own and even carry firearms does not lead to a return to the "Wild West" with shootouts at every intersection and at High Noon on Main Street as warned by those who opposed gun ownership. Many of my co-workers obtained carry permits. Nothing hurts the stereotype often projected by anti-RKBA groups that gun owners are all illiterate, beer drinking rednecks who are born again Christians than working side by side in a white collar environment with a college educated atheistic individual who enjoys shooting and carries a legally concealed handgun while not at work.

The pro-RKBA group decided that they would oppose any and all proposed future restrictions on firearms (even if reasonable) as they believed that if they allowed the camel to put his nose nose under the walls of the tent soon the entire camel would be inside. There is some logic to this idea but it stops progress on the issue of gun control which might actually prove productive in reducing gun violence.

Another factor which hurt gun control was a tendency to exaggerate. For example when the Glock handgun was introduced it was viewed by the anti-RKBA crowd as a "plastic pistol" which could slip through metal detectors and be used to hijack aircraft.

Despite considerable support from the main stream media, gun control advocates have been unable to stop the spread of laws such as Castle Doctrine, "Take Your Gun to Work", and "Stand Your Ground" in many states. In fact the media ruined its reputation to a great extent by showing an obvious bias on the issue of gun control. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand firearms and when the media portrays a firearm that is a semiautomatic weapon as a machine gun, knowledgeable people tend to question their reporting on far more complicated issues such as economics. Recent Supreme Court decisions from a conservative court have also hurt the anti-RKBA cause.

However I believe that it is possible that the pro-RKBA groups such as the NRA may overplay their current advantage and find that the pendulum swings in two directions. I feel that some restrictions are very reasonable and removing such limits may lead to a number of preventable tragedies. Time will tell.

I think that we can improve our current firearm laws but in order to do so both sides of the issue have to compromise. Perhaps the NRA and other pro-RKBA organizations could propose ideas that would help to insure that only rational, sane and responsible people can buy firearms from dealers and private individuals. Gun right groups such as the NRA are riding high in the saddle right now and the effort might not only be successful but might prevent avoidable tragedies that could endanger existing gun rights. The anti-RKBA groups could accept that firearm ownership is a fact of American society and is unlikely to go away. They might, for example, agree that training all high school students in firearm safety in a nation that has more than 300 million firearms is a rational idea. While it is true that such courses might interest some in the shooting sports, it might well prevent unnecessary accidents. Both groups could work together to combat criminal activity and insure that police departments pro actively fight crime and criminal drug gangs. Perhaps rational people on both sides of the issue could realize that we have lost the War on Drugs and we would be better off to legalize some drugs such as marijuana as all we are currently accomplishing is to enable violent criminal gangs to profit off the sale of not only fairly harmless drugs such as marijuana but far more dangerous drugs like Meth or concoctions such as K2 or bath salts.

I doubt that this will happen but I can dream.

Of course I will admit that firearms are inherently dangerous and even well trained and responsible people may do extremely foolish things with a gun especially if they are under the influence of alcohol. Firearms also make committing suicide much easier. It's far too easy to grab a firearm when you are suffering from a a bout of depression or in an intense argument while you are inebriated especially when the weapon is not properly secured.

Firearms may provide you with an excellent and challenging life long hobby. They may provide food for your family table. You may enjoy collecting firearms and they can prove to be an excellent investment if you are knowledgeable. They may enable you to stop a violent home invader or a mugger who intends to harm you on the street.

However they can take your life or the life of another person in an instant. A firearm is an inanimate but lethal object.

I often read posts here in the Gungeon that insinuate that those who support RKBA want every citizen in the United States to own a firearm. That might be true of a small minority but many feel as I do that guns are NOT for everybody.

I personally try to discourage gun ownership when asked by an individual who while interested in purchasing one is inexperienced with firearms. I point out that the chances that he/she might have a reason to use one for self defense are far less than the possibility that owning one might cause a tragedy. I will point out that I lost a close family member because she mixed alcohol with handling a firearm despite the fact that she was well trained in firearm safety and was an experienced shooter. If the person fails to listen to my reasoning, I ask them to take a firearm safety course and to actively engage in the shooting sports by visiting a range on a regular basis.

I though we can only be emotional and not actually think.

Seriously you put the whole issue out very succinctly and well spoken. I wish I could have written it so well myself.
Hats off to you.

Not I. By the time I'm out of bed the East Coasters have been at it for three hours.

But seriously, who cares? It doesn't matter how many posts someone has, whether they have a star, how many or which groups they post in, or where they fall on the gun control/rights spectrum. As long as they don't overtly break the TOS there's no harm, and when someone crosses that line they can be PPRed. This incessant troll-sleuthing is more disruptive and detrimental to DU than the vast majority of trolls will ever be...

harass and harangue and in the process have actually been detrimental to the election of Democrats in Rural areas of the USA.

Here's a small sample of right-wing trolls who have posted extremist pro-gun viewpoints in here in the last few months:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=282593
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=281673
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=284667
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=279309
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=261701
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=279277
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=282871
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=272321
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=278984
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=279756
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=279515
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=279465
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=279608
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=272973
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=276566
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=280170
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=210641

Does anyone really think that's it? That all the trolls have been PPRed, and none of them are back under new usernames? That "this time is different", and the current crop of pro-gun extremists is troll-free?

Of that list I saw 5 that were somewhat 2A regulars (and that counts 41mag a real short timer)


In the whole list AH1 is the only one I'd like to see returned to active duty. He/She was a good poster that let his/her temper get the best of them while being trolled by that girl from Canada.