by people who used a car to smash through into his store, and said FFL immediate contacted and has totally cooperate with authorities, while the government agencies together with evil gun-rights groups like the NSSF have offered a significant reward for information leading to the recovery of the weapons and arrest of those responsible.

What exactly is the point of the story other than providing some local news from Hickory, NC?

Are you impliedly suggesting that all gun stores must now be located underground in fortified concrete bunkers surrounded by moats filled with alligators and under constant government surveillance?

Just another day in the death-spewing business.

criminal activities by lawful gun owners or FFL's, self-defense, firearm accidents, or much else that's relevant.

You apparently believe any story the mentions firearms or the NRA is somehow pertinent to the gun rights debate in the country. It is not, and you weaken your position by repeatedly posting odd, atypical, and at best, highly tangential stories where, as here between the BAFTE and NSSF, both sides of the firearm debate are in agreement and cooperating in a story about an unusual and violent robbery.

Of course, as I mentioned in my prior post, you could be impliedly suggesting some reform to stop criminals from smashing into stores with their cars for the purposes of theft, of firearms or otherwise. However, as you offered no actual opinion or comment on your OP, no less suggested a purpose relevant to the SOP of the forum, as is your habit, we are left to speculate.

Simply, illegal theft of stores owned by law-abiding FFL's is not part of the "death-spewing business." Unless you somehow wish to use this story to argue for the prohibition and confiscation of all firearms in the country, the sale of firearms is legal, and aggravated is already a serious crime. Such crime is even opposed by your dreaded nemesis, the NRA. You apparently have something in common.

Your attempts to narrow the focus of this group are laughable.

And who are you speaking for with - "we are left to speculate"? Have you been appointed spokesman for the anti-gun regulation contingent on DU?

or your own actual viewpoints, I would suggest offering substantive comments and opinions in your own threads, rather than posting your daily Google news dumps, no less kicking your own posts and resurrecting dead threats, also without comment.

However, you apparently, and sadly, believe that criticism of you and your posts are not part of Gun Control & RKBA's SOP or are otherwise forbidden or inappropriate. This is simply not true. You're obviously confusing it with Gun Control Reform Activism, a group you host, where true discussion, no less dissent, is not tolerated under any circumstances.

I really don't understand the rabid reactions of some gungeon members.

and since you're a host of another firearm-related forum, you purportedly understand the value of offering your own point or perspective and actually engaging in discussion, particularly on such a divisive topic that you claim interests you immensely and involves life or death concerns. Google news dumps do not remotely accomplish such goals. Other than vanity, hubris or ignorance, I cannot imagine what you claim the value is to your habit of kicking your own threads in this forum, no less when they have been totally inactive for weeks, months, or longer.

Despite what you may believe, this forum does not concern any story that may somehow mention firearms or the NRA, any more than your own GCRA. When you offer a story that is little more than a interesting local robbery, your surprise about criticism is either disingenuous or oblivious.

As before, I still nevertheless welcome an explanation on how your OP fits within the SOP of this forum, and far more importantly, your own expressed thoughts on the very story you raised in the OP (other than complaining about the SOP or other totally unrelated matters). Again, a kick or posting a link to yet another story does not constitute offering your viewpoints or participating in a discussion, to say nothing of actually defending your ideas.

Again, if my posts bother you so much, please use ignore. If you refuse to use ignore, please use alert if you feel necessary and please don't disrupt threads that may be of interest to other DU members.

However, I similarly owe you nothing.

Accordingly, you're not immune from ample criticism for any number of reasons, including your regular abuse the SOP of the forum, failure to engage in actual discussions or debates about firearm issues, the fact that the stories you post that actually involve the topics of the forum are usually little more than intellectually lazy and easily debunked editorials, cartoons and talking points (which is ironic as you and other complain about the infamous "NRA Talking Points&quot , and the fact that your behavior demonstrates a startling hypocrisy and obstinacy given that you're expressly aware of the purposes of these forums and need for debate as an actual hosts for GCRA, the other gun issue forum, where you and the other hosts tolerate absolutely no dissent and rule with an iron fist. Well, GC & RKBA is not GCRA.

Absent far more egregious conduct, I have absolutely no intention of alerting on your posts or ignoring you. I want anyone and everyone who comes to this forum to read your posts, my posts, and all others, and judge for themselves. The laziness, nastiness, and lack of persuasiveness by you and those like you is readily apparent, and I will simply add some obvious commentary. I would be insane to try to hide you, for you are the face of gun control in America, and America is clearly not impressed!

I support gun rights, among many other classically liberal and progressive values contained in our Bill of Rights and elsewhere, and people like you are doing my political job for me. I can sit back and watch Pew and Gallup continue to show increased support for gun rights while you tilt at windmills with your Google dumps and barely-active gun control echo chamber in GCRA.

You put down in those words just how I feel.

I count at least 3.

I'm going to put a note in the suggestion box to include that information in member's profiles.

observing me so closely. Kind of creepy though.

Do what ever floats your boat.

The admins may tolerate these views on DU, but I'm not obligated to discuss right wing opinions on DU.

Also, I don't understand your ongoing campaign against GCRA, considering that you're not even blocked from the group.

you can not block him until he posts there. Let me link to the epic horrible sop violation that I was blocked for.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1262&pid=1458

I especially like the block for the one self deleted post that was posted in the wrong group by mistake,

even if I don't necessarily agree with them. DU is a private forum, I'm a guest, and I intend to act respectfully, particularly since even with the occasional argument concerning guns or otherwise, most everyone here agrees with the totality of my liberal views far more often than not.

The forum you host is an echo chamber, although it has so little activity that it's virtually silent. I certainly have no objection to a forum dedicated to "gun control reform activism," but I've seen precious few posts explaining how to realistically actually enact gun control, reform gun laws or culture, or really much organization to achieve such goals. The "activism" usually consists of posting old cartoons and cross-posts with threads here and GD, largely complaining about us "ammosexuals" and "gun humpers" (although since I've never owned any firearms, nor have a desire to do so, I'm not quite sure how I'm defined; maybe I'm a "closet ammosexual" or just "ammo-curious?&quot .

My point has always been the importance of relatively civil discourse. You are certainly free to have any positions about guns, self-defense, crime, or anything else. Whether I agree is irrelevant. If you believe strongly in gun control and related matters, or the stories, editorials and cartoons you routinely post here, often multiple times per day, I believe it's hardly unreasonable to expect you to have the courtesy, confidence, and conviction to engage in debate with your Democratic Party peers. If you can't have a discussion with us, how do you expect to ever convince anyone else? If you are comfortable with your positions, and have the evidence to back them up, I don't see why you would hesitate for the briefest moment to truly and fully join the discussion. The water's warm, come on in...

I additionally find it interesting that you claim to know the positions concerning firearms and similar topics among all here on DU, and imply the views expressed here are outside the mainstream of our party. Let's look at the most recent Democratic Party Platform concerning firearms,

Right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation

We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.

We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious.

We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms.

We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements--like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole--so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking

Respectfully, as I read the Platform, neither you nor many gun rights proponents who regularly post here fully embrace all the Democratic Party positions, although there's a great deal of common ground for those who aren't ideologues and are willing to compromise. However, unlike you, both gun rights advocates and opponents who substantively share their views at least implicitly acknowledge that the only way any consensus can reached or systemic improvements be made is with "an honest, open national conversation about firearms."

That actually makes sense, if you're standing 30 miles to the left of the party platform, which you are. Its a stretch to claim that most DUers are too though.

The pro-gun people who post here regularly are as a group, as close to the party platform as you anti-gun folks are, as a group. Perhaps even closer. We have no regular counterparts to your 'ban them all contingent', after all. And if we did, you'd just scream 'extremist' all day while pretending that the 'ban them all' folks don't exist.

No thanks, we aren't having any. We're allergic:

"discuss" in the SOP like this group has?


And once again how does that Google dump meet the SOP of this group? Bet you are afraid to answer and all I get back are crickets.

Asking a simple question about the SOP and how you seem to be in violation is not disrupting. Does not seem like anyone is reallly interested in it, more like making fun of your funny Google dump.

I rarely alert as I prefer open discussion. There is at least one that alert stalked me in the past and I do not do that either.

Just another post confirming what was already pretty well known:

Your 'death spewers' are ok, but everyone elses aren't. Elitist hypocrisy, Check.

In your mind it isn't the criminal actors in this story that are the problem, its the people in business selling firearms. You comment oh so venomously about the firearms business, but didn't waste so much as a cross word about the people who drove a vehicle through a building in order to steal those same firearms.

Another holder of the false premise that its the guns that are the problem, Check. I can not help but wonder, what kind of situationally ethical elitist hypocritical underpinnings one must have, to believe in that premise while being a gun owner and ffl holder. I'd say I was shocked, but then again, I've heard of josh sugermann (and the vpc) who coincidentally, feel the guns are the problem rather than the misusers, just like you.

You might repeatedly use the word 'reasonable' when describing your chosen wants legislatively, but it can be safely deduced from these inconvenient facts, that your intentions are anything but.

But hey, at least you can drop the pretense now, right?

Silly beevul, don't you know only legal gun owners and dealers have agency?
Criminals are mere helpless pawns of these deadly objects.

The blame lies with the death-spewer dealer who let a critical mass of gun rays emanate from their store. Much the same thing happens with computers. It's not the fault of those who collect
pictures of nekkid kids or steal other's identities-the responsibility lies with Best Buy, Apple,
Tiger Direct, and those who insist that these infernal machines remain freely available
to anyone who wants to buy one.

<SARCASM MODE> switched to <OFF>

If they're death spewers....you're doing it wrong, firearms are designed to save/protect life.



Anyway.....Who was it that always said "death spewers" several years back???

I always got the biggest kick out of that.

"Guns and bullets in the hands of civilians is a bad thing."


LOL....

Is celebrating a success.

Funny how a by-name callout of the host of this group is not only allowed to stand, though completely outsideo of group SOP but actually sees the hosts bumping it.

...in order to get attention.