Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

Mosby

(17,494 posts) Thu Sep 1, 2016, 01:16 PM Sep 2016

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Mosby) on Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:03 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] Mosby Sep 2016 OP

The Devil's in the details. JonathanRackham Sep 2016 #1

Apparently all you have to do to is be a anti-gun preacher. oneshooter Sep 2016 #10

Yes, it's one of the exemptions. Straw Man Sep 2016 #11

Which version of "Universal Background Checks"? DonP Sep 2016 #2

OT: side question discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #3

Some of them already know the results they want before they draft the questions n/t DonP Sep 2016 #4

And, in addition... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #5

Create your own scary definition ... to support our prejudice. DonP Sep 2016 #6

The survey places I've worked for and been involved with... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #8

Add that registration will be a part of it (so called UBC) and see how it polls. beevul Sep 2016 #7

Correction. Straw Man Sep 2016 #9

how is it a myth? Mosby Sep 2016 #12

rhetorical shorthands are buzzwords are propaganda gejohnston Sep 2016 #13

"Weapons of war", "weapons meant for war", "weapons meant for the battlefield". beevul Sep 2016 #14

whats "assault-style weapons" Duckhunter935 Sep 2016 #16

They have no clue what a "weapon of war" is.. virginia mountainman Sep 2016 #17

not really Duckhunter935 Sep 2016 #15

Here's how. Straw Man Sep 2016 #18

so what? I couldn't care less about the way gun shows are percieved Mosby Sep 2016 #21

What evidence is there, that private sales are a problem in need of a solution? beevul Sep 2016 #24

you don't support background checks on principle? Mosby Sep 2016 #25

I support private property rights on principle, so I'll ask you again... beevul Sep 2016 #27

can't answer the question? Mosby Sep 2016 #28

I asked you first. beevul Sep 2016 #29

"who do you support?" beergood Sep 2016 #34

Would that support change if they tell you registration is included? N/T beevul Sep 2016 #35

i live in CA beergood Sep 2016 #36

Obviously. Straw Man Sep 2016 #30

"the "gun show loophole" language is rhetorical shorthand or private party to party gun sales." pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #19

I think gun shows should be banned in the US Mosby Sep 2016 #22

Actually, they aren't brave gejohnston Sep 2016 #23

Great suggestion mainstreetonce Sep 2016 #26

If only social policy was based on 'feelings' rather than *facts*?! pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #39

Why? Straw Man Sep 2016 #31

"I 'think' gun shows should be banned in the US." pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #32

less guns, less death. Mosby Sep 2016 #37

"less guns, less death." Unproven according to at least 3 liberal criminologists. pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #38

".......which is why I avoid it." pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #40

get a grip. Mosby Sep 2016 #41

I have a slightly different take on the issus you raise... Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #20

My nomination for Thread Winner. pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #33