Anyone perplexed by opposition to war in Syria from gun proponents?

[BainsBane]

I must say I don't get it. They obviously have no problem with bloodshed with guns on American soil. More Americans have died from gun violence since 1968 than in all the wars in US history. Tell them that and they immediately trivialize those deaths. So why would they care about military intervention and bombing?

[JustAnotherGen]

1. Yep - I sure am

Kind of showing their asses here - aren't they?

[wild bird]

2. I'm not perplexed at all.

If I were one of those gun nuts, I would be opposed also, this proposed military action against Syria has the real possibility of spinning out of control and becoming a worldwide conflagration, anybody, whether they be a gun nut or not, should be opposed to this.

[BainsBane]

4. but why would spinning out of control be problem for them?

I see it as problematic because of the value I place on human life. Gun proponents do not appear to have that same concern. The thread about "my rights trump your dead" in the Gungeon highlighted that clearly. More Americans have died from gun violence since 1968 than in all the wars in US history. Gun violence has long been out of control, and they aren't troubled by it.

[wild bird]

6. Gun violence may be out of control, that's an ongoing, raging debate,

but the world marching towards what may become a world war would kill many many more that the ongoing gun violence in this country and despite what many may think of gun nuts, they probably don't want that anymore than you or I.

[BainsBane]

7. but it doesn't kill many more

Civilian use of guns kill more.

[wild bird]

9. Another world war wouldn't kill more?

WWII was responsible for over 50 million dead, the majority of them civilians, think how many would die with the improved killing machines and then through in the possibility of nuclear weapons being used.

Nobody in their right mind wants that, and that's why I am of the opinion that gun nuts oppose a Syrian military strike.

[billh58]

15. Are you actually

suggesting that gun nuts are "in their right mind?" I suspect that the real reason that these wannabe soldiers are against any military action is that they, like Ted Nugent, are cowards.

Your comparison of the Syria situation with WWII is a flawed analogy at best, with a touch of hyperbole thrown in. You sound familiar...

[wild bird]

17. I don't know any gun nuts, so I don't know if they're in their right minds.

Probably not.
I guess the Syrian situation could be more compared to the lead up to WWI, where the slightest miscalculation could be the spark to ignite the flames.
A modern world war would consume many more civilian lives than the civilian deaths by gun violence in this country, or every other country.

[billh58]

19. The Syrian situation

can not be compared to WWII in any shape, form, or fashion. Apples and oranges. The Syrian situation is a civil war where a family of dictators who have been in power for decades, is being challenged by a group of rebels intent on overthrowing their brutal dictatorship.

WWII, on the other hand, was an unprovoked war of aggression by Germany and Japan in an attempt to seize land and resources from legitimate governments through the use of military force. The only "miscalculation" was made by the Axis powers about the resolve of the Americans and their Allies. The Allies intervened to oppose territorial aggression, and won decisively.

The war of aggression on the American people by the NRA and its supporters has claimed more American lives than all wars that Americans have been involved in. Gun deaths in America have exceeded our war deaths:

" More American citizens have died since 1968 (1,384,171) than U.S. soldiers killed in ALL wars combined (1,171,177)."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jan/18/mark-shields/pbs-commentator-mark-shields-says-more-killed-guns/

WWII claimed 60 million total deaths (both Axis and Allies) of which 400,000 were Americans. Am I advocating war? No, definitely not because I have seen war close up and personal and can testify to its horrors. I agree with the statement that war is the result of a failure of diplomacy.

[wild bird]

20. Great post.

I too have experienced war up close and personal, I am totally opposed to this idea of a strike on Syria, all I can see coming out of this is more strife, death, and destruction.
My feeling is that this is more akin to the lead up to WWI, where the slightest miscalculation could be the spark that ignites global conflict and if that happens, it's game, set, and match.

[wild bird]

18. I sound familiar....?

I don't know why, so tell me why I sound familiar.

Thanks for the welcome by the way.

[billh58]

36. Let's see...

Because you are a Troll, and formerly know as tumtum? Now that you have been PPR'd, you will have more time to attend those NRA meetings won't you?

[DanTex]

37. Interesting. Nicely spotted.

[BainsBane]

22. I'm saying more people die from gun violence than from war

Many more. They obviously aren't concerned about that. Why should they care about war casualties? Also it's not like not intervening will prevent people from dying. 100,000 have died already.

[Mojorabbit]

3. No. One thing has nothing to do with the other. nt

[BainsBane]

5. human life

both war and gun violence involve the loss of human life. Of course they are related.

[Glaug-Eldare]

23. Yup.

This is kinda silly.

[daa]

8. No its all about self defense nt

[BainsBane]

10. So then they shouldn't oppose arming the Syrian opposition

so they can defend themselves against Assad.

[blueridge3210]

11. Their current proposal in Congress is not to arm the Syrian opposition

The current proposal is to conduct air strikes against the Syrian government and military. You seem to confuse the fact that some people do not agree with your proposals regarding gun use and ownership with a lack of concern about gun violence. One can oppose the current "War on Drugs" and still care about drug abuse. One can believe that MADD is overreaching in it's campaign against drunk driving and still care about the impact drunk driving has on society. One can oppose the government monitoring phone calls without first getting a warrant and be opposed to terrorism.

[BainsBane]

13. If someone calims to be concerned about drunk driving

but works to make sure drunks and teens have access to alcohol, I don't believe they give a fuck about drunk driving.

[billh58]

16. One can also

disrupt a Group without appearing to do so.

[Starboard Tack]

12. No. It isn't that simple

I'm not sure what you mean by "gun proponents". There are gun owners and there are those who do not own guns, but support the right to own them. Then there are those who think it is OK to walk around in public with guns. The first are not a problem. The latter are a huge problem.
That said, I doubt that either group would support a war, especially the latter, who tend to be more fearful than most.

[BainsBane]

14. I'm talking about people who oppose all gun control reforms

work to get guns in the hands of more people and worry more about guns being "rehomed" than the people killed by them. I find it strange you even have to ask about that, unless you never read any gun threads on this site.

[Starboard Tack]

21. OK, then you are talking about a fringe element, especially here on DU

Remember, empty vessels make more noise. Those who do not see the folly of gun proliferation and unrestricted access are fools and they demonstrate their lack of ability to solve prolems by inflaming bad situations. Most so-called "pro-gunners" are more concerned with their sense of vulnerability. Ironically, they think they can fix their fears by carrying the very thing they are afraid of.
Regarding Syria, I don't think these folk give a damn about the civilians gasse by the Assad regime, but rather project their own fear of escalation by disturbing the beast. IOW, they are driven by fear, so there is no contradiction.

[DanTex]

24. Being able to ignore gun violence is a prerequisite for being a gun rights advocate.

It just doesn't register with them. They explain it away, or else just accept it as the "cost of freedom".

[Paladin]

25. "My rights trump your deaths."

That's a quote from a recorded speech made by a gun rights advocate, which is now circulating around the pro-gun community. It's been discussed in both of the DU gun groups. Kind of says it all, about our opposition.....

[BainsBane]

32. I will never forget that

and how they exclaimed it was the best pro-2A speech they'd seen. They complain when we accuse them of not caring about dead children, while they applaud a speech that says exactly that.

[Paladin]

34. Whenever there's a mass shooting, they care about 2 things:

1.) The make and caliber of the firearm(s) used; and

2.) How the media failed to describe the guns in accord with their hyper-precise standards.

They can't afford to show any sympathy for the victims; they feel it weakens their pro-gun stance. That explains their tiresome griping about our "emotionalism." (As if the pro-gun militancy movement is emotion-free.)

[BlueToTheBone]

26. 2 words.

President Obama.

[BainsBane]

33. meaning they hate him?

so they oppose the war because he is pushing for it? Is that what you are saying?

[BlueToTheBone]

35. Yes. Crazy as that sounds, yes..

McCain supported him in private and then in public denounced him. The reps wouldn't even bother to come to work to discuss it before their vacations ended and then denounced him for the "wasted time."

[Niceguy1]

27. maybe because

Being pro 2a doesn't mean one is pro violence..

[billh58]

28. There is a big

difference between being "pro 2A" and being a gun nut like Ted Nugent and many of DU's Gungeoneers.

[Niceguy1]

29. from what I have seen here

Many think that just owning a firearm manes one a gun nut.

[billh58]

30. That's the NRA

lie that says that they (and many of DU's Gungeoneers) speak for ALL 80 million American Gun owners. They do not. Most American gun owners support more stringent gun control measures, and agree that the "gun culture" espoused by the NRA and its supporters is the main reason for this country's gun violence problem. Current gun laws enacted by corrupt NRA-purchased politicians in many parts of the country enable and directly contribute to the highest gun death rate in the Western World.

The opposition to gun nuts that you see in this Group is aimed at the "cold dead hands" contingent of NRA apologists who sincerely believe that the Second Amendment gives them carte blanche to own as many guns as they want, of any type, and carry them anywhere they choose. This is the "my gun rights trump your right to life" crowd, and they proliferate on many Internet discussion boards such as DU. They are neither Democrats, nor Liberals, but are rather right-wing Libertarian-leaning Paulites.

Just to recap: owning a firearm does not make one a "gun nut." Owning an arsenal of firearms, obsessing about them on the Internet, and carrying them in public "just in case," is one definition of a gun nut.

[Paladin]

31. Well said. (nt)

[HALO141]

38. If your belief structure

does not allow for the existence of the observable facts then your belief structure must, by definition, be flawed.

[BainsBane]

39. You rose from hibernation to say that?

Seems so anticlimactic.

[HALO141]

40. I've been busy.

.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

41. Just playing devil's advocate...

...for one: arming the Taliban against the Soviets 30 years ago didn't work out too well.
For another: who would profit from that? Would the rebels join the NRA?
Finally, why should folks that work for maintaining and expanding the RKBA in the US expend any energy over a foreign civil war?

There's a quote: "You know who's going to inherit the Earth? Arms dealers. Because everyone else is too busy killing each other. That's the secret to survival. Never go to war. Especially with yourself."

[BainsBane]

42. They love arms dealers who sell to private citizens

but not nations?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

43. "Arms dealers"...

...who sell to private citizens are sometimes just "private citizens".

[BainsBane]

44. right, those are the unlicensed ones who don't do background checks

and sell to criminals. They belong in prison.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

45. Hmm