Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Bill Moyers beats the living daylights out of the NRA and makes it his personal biatch   (huffingtonpost.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, Bill Moyers, NRA, Andrews Air Force Base, midnight screenings, University of Colorado Hospital, TDKR, Air Force One, first floors  
•       •       •

7517 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Dec 2012 at 12:16 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



222 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-12-17 09:16:17 AM  
This is from July subby...
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-12-17 09:18:40 AM  

Nofun: This is from July subby...


It's almost as though it is relevant to something more recent.
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2012-12-17 09:46:14 AM  

Nofun: This is from July subby...


It's too soon to politicize this tragedy?
 
2012-12-17 09:53:30 AM  

vpb: Nofun: This is from July subby...

It's almost as though it is relevant to something more recent.


God that's tragic.
 
2012-12-17 10:18:27 AM  
FTFA: "we have become so gun loving, so blasé about home-grown violence that in my lifetime alone, far more Americans have been casualties of domestic gunfire than have died in all our wars combined.""

I.... uh....

So originally I thought "Well, that can't be right!" Then I looked up statistics. The only ones I could find for gun violence were from 1981-2010, where there were 985,008 deaths attributed to a firearm (accidental and intentional).

WWII had 416,800 casualties, Korean war had 36,940 casualties, Vietnam had 58,220 casualties, Persian Gulf had 294, Iraq + Afghanistan have 6,643 casualties, for a total of 518897 (yes, I know, I'm missing a few of the smaller conflicts).

Jesus Christ. Not only is he right, he's right by a HUGE margin.
 
2012-12-17 10:25:36 AM  
Oh, and if you read his thing to mean "All wars the U.S. has ever engaged in", it's still true.

Add in WWI (117,465), Spanish-American War (2,910), Civil War (~625,000), Mexican-American war (13,283), War of 1812 (15000), and you have a total U.S. death toll in all major wars (since founding) of ~1,292,000.

COnsidering that just in the last 30 years we've had almost one million, and he was born in 1934, he's very, very right.
 
2012-12-17 10:43:23 AM  
We're a violent people.
 
2012-12-17 10:51:29 AM  
I don't think the quote about walking into gun shows and purchasing a weapon without a background check is true. It certainly isn't true that you can do so without even showing an ID.
 
2012-12-17 11:17:39 AM  

coco ebert: We're a violent people.


That's the gist of it.

And that's what needs to change, IMHCO*. No amount of gun legislation will solve the issue until Americans stop thinking that they can resolve their problems by [ beating the ever-loving snot | killing ] the cause of their problem.

*In my humble Canadian Opinion.
 
2012-12-17 11:32:23 AM  
Position: the raw number of firearm deaths being larger than war casualties proves that how we view/manage/whatever firearms needs to change drastically.

My take: if the raw number of deaths is the ultimate measure of where we should focus our attention, then why the hell haven't we banned cars that nobody really NEEDS (like sports cars, giant SUVs, and tiny micro-death-traps) since more people die in car accidents every year than by firearms? The raw number of automotive deaths is way higher each year than anything to do with firearms and this has been true for decades but where's the Brady Campaign against 8-cylinder engines or Mothers against sports cars capable of going over the speed limit?

One might say "but we NEED cars, we don't need guns" in an attempt to reframe this debate, but I never tried to argue anything to do with the necessity of the item; it's irrelevant to my point.

Remember that the original position is that the *NUMBER* of deaths is a super-important indication that guns are bad and that we should seek change with all due vigor. All I'm doing is pointing out that gun control advocates don't have the same zeal for how to manage a different inanimate object (the automobile) that kills FAR more people than guns.

From that I must conclude that gun control advocates do not actually care about saving people's lives. They focus on (and parrot to anyone who will listen) statistics like what Bill Moyers dug up, but they ignore things that are both much deadlier than firearms and easier to control/manage (automobiles don't have constitutional protection or a powerful, moderately crazy (in my opinion) lobby).

I reiterate: your (or my) perception of the item's necessity is irrelevant because we're talking about the statistics as talking points and the lack of Bill Moyer beating the living daylights out of car companies and making them his personal biatch for producing vehicles known to be deadly when improperly used.

If you want my opinion on how to handle the situation, I think it's got to be about better mental health support. Sane people don't go on killing sprees (can't call them shooting sprees because crazy people do stuff with cars, knives, bombs, and all kinds of other stuff). If you identify and help mentally ill people, it won't matter what hunks of metal or plastic people have in their possession.
 
2012-12-17 11:49:27 AM  

Pfactor: The raw number of automotive deaths is way higher each year than anything to do with firearms and this has been true for decades but where's the Brady Campaign against 8-cylinder engines or Mothers against sports cars capable of going over the speed limit?


That's an incredibly silly argument, dude.

In 2010, 31,000 people were killed by firearms, while 35,000 were killed in accidents involving motor vehicles. Source. And somehow because the Brady Campaign focuses on the 31,000 deaths due to firearms and not the cause of death that's 11% higher, they're hypocrites who don't really want to protect people?

That's the same kind of weird fallacy that says that people trying to get rid of poverty in the United States are actually hypocrites because, well, look how many people there are in poverty in India! Gun advocates don't get up and say "Well, today I am going to try to reduce the statistically highest cause of death in the United States!"

Your "but... but.... cars!" argument is flawed at the heart. Cars have a higher mortality rate than guns because they have a higher use rate, not because they are inherently more dangerous than guns. Similarly, heart disease kills more people than AIDS, but are AIDS advocates hypocrites for working to cure that disease rather than working to cure heart disease?
 
2012-12-17 11:51:07 AM  

Pfactor: Position: the raw number of firearm deaths being larger than war casualties proves that how we view/manage/whatever firearms needs to change drastically.

My take: if the raw number of deaths is the ultimate measure of where we should focus our attention, then why the hell haven't we banned cars that nobody really NEEDS (like sports cars, giant SUVs, and tiny micro-death-traps) since more people die in car accidents every year than by firearms? The raw number of automotive deaths is way higher each year than anything to do with firearms and this has been true for decades but where's the Brady Campaign against 8-cylinder engines or Mothers against sports cars capable of going over the speed limit?

One might say "but we NEED cars, we don't need guns" in an attempt to reframe this debate, but I never tried to argue anything to do with the necessity of the item; it's irrelevant to my point.

Remember that the original position is that the *NUMBER* of deaths is a super-important indication that guns are bad and that we should seek change with all due vigor. All I'm doing is pointing out that gun control advocates don't have the same zeal for how to manage a different inanimate object (the automobile) that kills FAR more people than guns.

From that I must conclude that gun control advocates do not actually care about saving people's lives. They focus on (and parrot to anyone who will listen) statistics like what Bill Moyers dug up, but they ignore things that are both much deadlier than firearms and easier to control/manage (automobiles don't have constitutional protection or a powerful, moderately crazy (in my opinion) lobby).

I reiterate: your (or my) perception of the item's necessity is irrelevant because we're talking about the statistics as talking points and the lack of Bill Moyer beating the living daylights out of car companies and making them his personal biatch for producing vehicles known to be deadly when improperly used.

If you want my opinion on how to ...


How often do you use your car?

How often do you use your gun?

Try again.
 
2012-12-17 11:51:39 AM  

Rincewind53: FTFA: "we have become so gun loving, so blasé about home-grown violence that in my lifetime alone, far more Americans have been casualties of domestic gunfire than have died in all our wars combined.""

I.... uh....

So originally I thought "Well, that can't be right!" Then I looked up statistics. The only ones I could find for gun violence were from 1981-2010, where there were 985,008 deaths attributed to a firearm (accidental and intentional).


I am not sure where you got those numbers and if that is the right comparison.

IIRC about half of gun-related deaths are suicides so I wouldn't include those as "home-grown violence", nor would I include accidents.

Homicides is the right comparison since this is supposed to be about gun violence, isn't it?

That number has averaged around 9,500/year for the last 5 years and has been on a downward trend.
 
2012-12-17 11:54:31 AM  

Pfactor: My take: if the raw number of deaths is the ultimate measure of where we should focus our attention


Nice strawman argument, you got there.
 
2012-12-17 11:57:48 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: I am not sure where you got those numbers


I got them from the CDC:
WISQARS Fatal Injury Reports, National and Regional, 1999 - 2010
WISQARS Injury Mortality Reports, 1981-1998

I'll grant that it's not a question of homicide, but guns are inherently deadly weapons, so any use of them in a death is a violent action, even if it's suicide or like the kid two weeks ago who was playing with his dad's gun and killed himself.
 
2012-12-17 12:17:42 PM  
How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!
 
2012-12-17 12:18:11 PM  
GOP Rebuttal: But mah guns!
 
2012-12-17 12:18:49 PM  

coco ebert: We're a violent people.


I hope in the future Americans are thought of as a warlike, vicious people, because I bet a lot of high schools would pick 'Americans' as their mascot.
 
2012-12-17 12:20:18 PM  

Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!


Because, unfortunately, the former is enshrined in the Constitution and the latter is some radical liberal idea.
 
2012-12-17 12:22:39 PM  

coco ebert: We're a violent people.


and we're also allegedly a 'christian nation'. try resolving THAT paradox sometime....
 
2012-12-17 12:22:54 PM  

Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!


Because I don't expect you to pay for my gun while you expect me to pay for your healthcare.
 
2012-12-17 12:24:41 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: Because I don't expect you to pay for my gun while you expect me to pay for your healthcare.


Always the victim, no matter the situation.
 
2012-12-17 12:25:19 PM  

Weaver95: coco ebert: We're a violent people.

and we're also allegedly a 'christian nation'. try resolving THAT paradox sometime....


Obviously it's because we're not Christian enough.
 
2012-12-17 12:25:44 PM  

qorkfiend: Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!

Because, unfortunately, the former is enshrined in the Constitution and the latter is some radical liberal idea.


That is indeed an unfortunate set of priorities.
 
2012-12-17 12:28:22 PM  
Gun rights advocates have always welcomed debate. They've also been honest in their presentation of facts. However its guys like Moyer and the Brady campaign that have lied and twisted facts.

Gun control advocates have essentially pulled a 9/11 on this issue and argued purely on emotion. They've completely ignored that their plans ha e not worked and will not work. We have 50 years of experience in gun control in America and the gun control advocates have for the most part been completely wrong.
 
2012-12-17 12:28:44 PM  
want to carry a gun with you in public places because you have a hard-on for protectin' FREEEDOM and the constitushun??

be a COP

because thats the MINIMUM amount of training and screening i'd feel comfortable with to let people with guns amongst the general populace.

//you'd even get paid for it!
 
2012-12-17 12:28:53 PM  
how about we get some well-regulated militias?
 
2012-12-17 12:28:59 PM  
How DARE people politicize gun violence.

They should be reasonable and totally non-political like the NRA.
 
2012-12-17 12:29:25 PM  

Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!


Because... potato.

/also, see reply at 12:22:54
//redundant
 
2012-12-17 12:30:30 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!

Because I don't expect you to pay for my gun while you expect me to pay for your healthcare.


No, but you do expect people to go bankrupt paying for the medical care or funeral costs after your gun shoots.
 
2012-12-17 12:31:39 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!

Because I don't expect you to pay for my gun while you expect me to pay for your healthcare.


You expect us to pay to clean up the messes your guns leave, though. Police, jails, school shootings, thanks for dumping those costs onto the rest of us.
 
2012-12-17 12:31:42 PM  
I support the right to own a gun. I also, for the life of me, do not understand why people support the NRA. They're extremists and liars to boot.
 
2012-12-17 12:32:08 PM  

DeusMeh: want to carry a gun with you in public places because you have a hard-on for protectin' FREEEDOM and the constitushun??

be a COP

because thats the MINIMUM amount of training and screening i'd feel comfortable with to let people with guns amongst the general populace.

//you'd even get paid for it!


Despite the liberalizing of CCW, there's been no spike in violence or homicides. In fact, many places have seen a decrease in crime and gun homicides. After the Heller ruling, DC's crime rate continued to drop.

The myth of the wreckless CCW holder is just that... A myth.
 
2012-12-17 12:32:26 PM  
If you just dealt with the crazy people, everyone else could have guns. Canada does it just fine and they have more guns per person then the USA.

Perhaps it's because we let the mentally ill run wild in the streets, provide no avenues for affordable mental healthcare, and treat mental illness the same we treat love, something to to avoid admitting to or doing anything about.

You can treat the symptom or you can treat the cause.

Oh fark it. Who needs reason.

BAN ALL PROJECTILES!

GIVE EVERYONE PROJECTILES!

IF WE TAKE AWAY THE GUNS PEOPLE WILL HAVE ASSAULT SLINGSHOTS!

GIVE EVERYONE NUCLEAR BOMBS! MAD WILL KEEP US SAFE!

artfulwriter.com
 
2012-12-17 12:32:42 PM  

qorkfiend: Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!

Because, unfortunately, the former is enshrined in the Constitution and the latter is some radical liberal idea.


Which is obviously an argument for why written Constitutions always end up being a bad things overall - because instead of arguing about what is right and wrong, you end up arguing about what is Constitional or not.
 
2012-12-17 12:32:45 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!

Because I don't expect you to pay for my gun while you expect me to pay for your healthcare.


That's because one is a right and the other one shouldn't be. No, not that way around, the other way around.
 
2012-12-17 12:32:49 PM  

Mrbogey: Gun rights advocates have always welcomed debate. They've also been honest in their presentation of facts. However its guys like Moyer and the Brady campaign that have lied and twisted facts.

Gun control advocates have essentially pulled a 9/11 on this issue and argued purely on emotion. They've completely ignored that their plans ha e not worked and will not work. We have 50 years of experience in gun control in America and the gun control advocates have for the most part been completely wrong.


That's so true. The gun rights people never argue from emotions.

"You'll get my guns from my cold, dead, hands" is a simple logical statement of policy devoid of any call to emotion.
 
2012-12-17 12:32:54 PM  
While stricter gun control will not be a panacea, it will help -- however, it's really treating a symptom, not the cause -- instead, we should try focusing on mental health care.

Maybe it's time for Prozium after all....
 
2012-12-17 12:34:18 PM  
From a political standpoint I can understand attacking the NRA, they have demonstrated themselves as a republican shill org that isn't interested in actually furthering gun rights. Like others have mentioned the weird and random gun restrictions don't really work.
 
2012-12-17 12:34:51 PM  

jbc: Nofun: This is from July subby...

It's too soon to politicize this tragedy?


No. Its too late. That happened last week
 
2012-12-17 12:37:13 PM  
If you want to see someone getting ripped apart, check out Soledad O'Brian's interview, link is on the same page.
 
2012-12-17 12:37:37 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Rincewind53: FTFA: "we have become so gun loving, so blasé about home-grown violence that in my lifetime alone, far more Americans have been casualties of domestic gunfire than have died in all our wars combined.""

I.... uh....

So originally I thought "Well, that can't be right!" Then I looked up statistics. The only ones I could find for gun violence were from 1981-2010, where there were 985,008 deaths attributed to a firearm (accidental and intentional).

I am not sure where you got those numbers and if that is the right comparison.

IIRC about half of gun-related deaths are suicides so I wouldn't include those as "home-grown violence", nor would I include accidents.

Homicides is the right comparison since this is supposed to be about gun violence, isn't it?

That number has averaged around 9,500/year for the last 5 years and has been on a downward trend.


Obama can't even keep our Homicide rate up. Thanks Presidebt Fart.
 
2012-12-17 12:37:54 PM  

Carth: No, but you do expect people to go bankrupt paying for the medical care or funeral costs after your gun shoots.


I've never shot anyone with my gun. If I ever did I would expect the justice system to hold me responsible for the cost of my actions.
 
2012-12-17 12:39:03 PM  

qorkfiend: Mr. Eugenides: Carth: How is it the right to own a handgun is more important to some people than the right to healthcare? America, what a country!

Because I don't expect you to pay for my gun while you expect me to pay for your healthcare.

You expect us to pay to clean up the messes your guns leave, though. Police, jails, school shootings, thanks for dumping those costs onto the rest of us.



Oh really? His guns? I highly doubt that Mr. Eugenides has been involved in a shooting.

And for the record, my firearms have not added a single mess to society.
 
2012-12-17 12:39:07 PM  
Pfactor:

Cars are machines that are designed primarily for transportation.
Guns are machines that are designed primarily to injure or kill.

See the difference?
 
2012-12-17 12:39:36 PM  

jbc: Nofun: This is from July subby...

It's too soon to politicize this tragedy?


Okay then. This guy walks into a theatrical agent's office...
 
2012-12-17 12:40:29 PM  

Rincewind53: I'll grant that it's not a question of homicide, but guns are inherently deadly weapons, so any use of them in a death is a violent action, even if it's suicide or like the kid two weeks ago who was playing with his dad's gun and killed himself.


I don't know that I like that definition. It opens the door for ridiculousness like "aspirin violence" or "water violence."
 
2012-12-17 12:40:40 PM  

fluffy2097: Canada does it just fine and they have more guns per person then the USA.


[citation needed]
 
2012-12-17 12:40:55 PM  

Flab: coco ebert: We're a violent people.

That's the gist of it.

And that's what needs to change, IMHCO*. No amount of gun legislation will solve the issue until Americans stop thinking that they can resolve their problems by [ beating the ever-loving snot | killing ] the cause of their problem.

*In my humble Canadian Opinion.


Gun legislation will solve much of the issue. It's well established in the research community that

1) Where there is more gun ownership, there is more homicide

Link

2) Guns at home are the cause of most violent child deaths

Link

3) People with guns are more likely to be batterers and have road rage, and do harm

Link
Link

The numbers of those who are saved by guns is not even in the same order of magnitude as those who are killed. The point of the second amendment is to defend against tyranny, not home protection or hunting, and it is not even possible to argue that it is effective at that ever since government obtained tanks and planes and guided missiles and nuclear arms and... We need to come up with a modern solution to defend against tyranny (things like civillian participation in military command, decentralisation strategies that bring democratic involvement and deconcentrate decision making, etc.) rather than clutch an 18th century technological solution that is broken today and killing millions.
 
2012-12-17 12:41:12 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: Carth: No, but you do expect people to go bankrupt paying for the medical care or funeral costs after your gun shoots.

I've never shot anyone with my gun. If I ever did I would expect the justice system to hold me responsible for the cost of my actions.


what if you can't pay who picks up the tab?
 
Displayed 50 of 222 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report