"No divisive group attacks" Hmmm, wonder if it applies to Democrat Gun owners on DU?

[DonP]

Per Skinner:

"No divisive group attacks
Do not smear, insult, vilify, bait, maliciously caricature, or give disrespectful nicknames to any groups of people that are part of the Democratic coalition, or that hold viewpoints commonly held by Democrats, or that support particular Democratic public figures. Do not imply that they are fake Democrats, fake progressives, conservatives, right-wingers, Republicans, or the like."

Now we'll all get to see if that applies to us or just the primary wars people. Or maybe it's just for show?

Calling us right wing, GOP/NRA shills, et. al. Hell, we have a thread with almost 500 group insults archived.

If it does apply to us, the poor gun control folks won't have much to say.

[hollysmom]

1. or pit bull vs nopit bulls

[Buzz cook]

2. So gun grabber would be right out

And Ammo sexual as well. Althouh I suppose either could be applied to non-members.

So Wayne Lapierre would still be an ammo sexual while a democrat that supports the right to bear arms would be.. well a democrat who supports the right to bear arms.

An official that confiscates or supports the confication of firearms would be a gun grabber, while a poster on DU that supports gun control would be.. well you get the idea.

Either that or its about the Bernie vs Hillary stuff.

[The Green Manalishi]

4. I think that's about right

I'm strongly pro RKBA myself, but no matter how much I might disagree with some Democratic politicians on this issue I should get the boot if I attack them personally. The same thing with other DU members; I might be angered, frightened or insulted by their opinions, but I've no right to cast aspersions on their character, nor they on mine, period, end of subject and boot in ass to anyone who can't get behind that, be they the most strident prohibitionist or ardent RKBA enthusiast.

My .02

[pablo_marmol]

3. Excellent question, Don -- this will be interesting to follow.

Not optimistic about even-handed enforcement of this rule. I suspect that we will continue to be demonized. After all, the enjoyment of target shooting and desire for self-defense is such a sin, right?

[DonP]

5. I could be wrong but .....

The personal attacks, the alert stalking, the name calling, the accusations that we are right wing/GOP shills, the running to ATA to demand we all be banned and all the rest of what characterized the ugly primary wars happens in the Gungeon on a regular basis.

I just think the control fans are so deep and dense in their hypocrisy that they actually don't see it as the "incivility" as Skinner has defined it.

They seem to see it, as our moral and ethical superiors, as their right and duty to attack everyone that disagrees with them on the 2nd amendment regardless of facts and reality.

[oneshooter]

6. I could name several who really should be carefull of what they say. n/t

[DonP]

7. My guess, they still figure on the jury system to cover their ass

It's become an easy way to "strike back" against any gun posts and stay anonymous.

[Eleanors38]

10. I expect little change. nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. Turns out, your expectations have been met:

Last edited Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:39 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016161906

[Eleanors38]

16. Change the rules all you want, but there is always special dispensation in DU.

[ileus]

8. 2A progressives along with believers will always be fair game.

[Duckhunter935]

9. We shall see how it goes

It will be interesting to see if the rules apply to all

[Press Virginia]

11. I had a post, I made here, hidden for using the word "grabber"

and it was in the general sense not referencing anyone specific


Meanwhile "gun humper" seems to be an acceptable term.

[oneshooter]

12. As does "ammosexual" n/t

[Eleanors38]

17. It will ALL be back, sticky floors and all.

[Puha Ekapi]

20. "Assault penis"

is another recent one...

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. Of course not- read the linked OP and comments- but not if you have high blood pressure:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016161906

[Duckhunter935]

15. I alerted on an attack directed at me

Called me a "delicate flower" jury let it stand sadly. I asked Skinner in ATA how this direct attack should stand and requested he override the jury. As usuall, do far no answer. Might try a PM to him too.

[Straw Man]

18. There's not much point in alerting.

I only do it for the most egregious and direct insults, but even then it's about 50-50. I'm thinking I won't bother in the future. In a way, it's a good exercise in self-control: to remain civil when people are heaping abuse on you.

I don't call people "grabbers." I prefer "prohibitionists" or "controllers," which I think are both accurate and neutral. But just for the record, even "grabbers" as a term pales next to "gun humpers" (and its variants), which suggests sexual acts, and "ammosexuals," with its added connotation of anti-gay bias.

[RME_SFC]

19. I've noticed a lot of "selective enforcement"

On 2A issues.

As in... Pro-2A are likely to selected for enforcement; anti-2A no so much.

I shall do my best to be on my best behavior.

[sarisataka]

21. Nope, business as usual

group smears, misogyny and homophobia are still a-ok as long as it is referring to gunz

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8020318
and about 17 other threads in just one day...

[Duckhunter935]

22. Skinner still refuses to answer

My ATA questions on this. I guess I will ask again for the third time.

[sarisataka]

24. There is a very

Lassez-faire management style.

What is surprising to see is how many egregious offenders have been FFR multiple times yet they are still here.

[Duckhunter935]

25. Yes, it is interesting

But it is his site. I just wish he would at least answer a PM

[DonP]

23. Agreed. But, it is a clear sign of their ongoing impotence

There is a direct relationship between their failure to get even a small win and their online rage.

The more they fail, the angrier they get.

Only online of course. To date, I still haven't seen a single one of the loudest mouths in GD describe a gun related protest they went to or petition they've started.

Plus the hypocrisy is strong in them. One, who is banned from this group, rants and spews every chance they get, but mentioned in a thread last week; "Well, they sold the high priced target handguns they inherited instead of turning them in to the police for destruction ... because they were expensive target pistols".

So profit comes first, principles when it's convenient.

Still easy and cheap to be an online gun control hero.

[Duckhunter935]

27. I saw that

He did not seem to care it was pointed out on how he sold weapons to keep them in the hands of ammosexual future murderers.

[Eko]

26. There are those of us who are gun owners

that also want more gun control.

[Marengo]

31. What type(s) of firearm do you own, and why?

[Eko]

32. A Pistol.

Handed down from my father, I keep it for protection also. I had two, gave one to my brother. Do I need it? not really.

[Duckhunter935]

33. Did you have a background check performed?

[Eko]

35. On what?

The guns or me?

[Duckhunter935]

37. That firearms transfer

[Eko]

40. Why would I do that?

[Duckhunter935]

41. Well it would probably be mandatory

With UBC. just curious.

[Eko]

42. Interesting.

Can you show me where this is?

[Duckhunter935]

43. Universal

Meaning all

[Eko]

44. Most people

who are for a UBC allow the exemption of a parent giving a firearm to a child. Most states that have UBC laws do the same, hence why I asked if you could show me where since that is not something that is common with UBC.

[Duckhunter935]

45. Yep, I tend to agree

Details in laws matter

[Eko]

46. So

You tried to set me up with something that is not true and when I pushed back against it you agree with me. Why would you do that?

[Duckhunter935]

47. Never tried to set you up

Just asked a question and you answered it, thanks

[Eko]

48. Ok.

[blm]

28. Democratic gun owners - many are here and have been for over a decade

without feeling abused and also believe in responsible gun ownership and common sense regulations and training.

[DonP]

29. Just hard to decide where that "common sense" line is for many people

One persons common sense is another persons infringement.

Another person's "reasonable regulation", isn't nearly enough "common sense" for the next guy.

Then we have the "Confiscate and melt 'em all down" crowd in GD.

Then there are the ones that don't want to even discuss the details of a law, call you names if you ask a question about what they mean, then get all pissed off when the "loopholes" they left in the law show up.

Maybe someday I'll finally understand the whole penis fixation too.

[Duckhunter935]

38. Let me know when you find out

about that last part. Sure is crazy about that fixation

[oneshooter]

30. No, it does not. n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

34. Such capriciousness shows they cannot be trusted to justly administer the laws they demand.

If you're not part of the right group they feel entitled to be vindictive and cruel.

[beevul]

36. "Vindictive and cruel" is a component of gun control...

Last edited Tue Jul 19, 2016, 01:37 PM - Edit history (1)

If you're not part of the right group they feel entitled to be vindictive and cruel.

And because of it, "Vindictive and cruel" is a component of gun control.

In fact, "vindictive and cruel" absolutely drips from most of their posts, and 'vindictive' is the reason they created their own forum and blocked most of us from countering their lies - some even for self deleted posts which the person pressing the block button never saw.

If that isn't vindictive, what is?

[Duckhunter935]

39. No, of course not

[Kang Colby]

49. May I ask a question?

Does it really matter what control proponents post on DU? I don't think so.

[pablo_marmol]

50. But....but....but.........

CALIFORNIA!!!