Equating MADD with "mothers against guns"

Equating MADD with "mothers against guns"

This is a discussion on Equating MADD with "mothers against guns" within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; OK, disclaimer time: I listen to NPR in the morning. I've got some good credibility filters, so I usually know if what I'm hearing is ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43
Like Tree30Likes

Thread: Equating MADD with "mothers against guns"

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    10,772

    Equating MADD with "mothers against guns"

    OK, disclaimer time: I listen to NPR in the morning. I've got some good credibility filters, so I usually know if what I'm hearing is slanted. But let me proceed.

    This morning I heard a female voice on NPR saying "we need to work against gun violence like MADD worked against drunk drivers."

    I thought about that for a few moments before concluding that that's a pretty good idea. Let's look at what MADD achieved:

    - In nearly all states, the MADD influence reduced the threshhold of intoxication from 0.01% BAL to 0.08%.

    - Penalties for DUI/DWI have generally become more harsh.

    - There are fewer "get out of jail free" cards for first-time offenders.

    - Many states make DUI/DWI offenses felonies now, not just misdemeanors.

    - My gut feeling is that there are more people finding Designated Drivers or cab rides home after a night of partying with alcohol.

    So here's my take on that, and how we need to be aware of what MADD achieved and how they achieved it:

    - There were no pre-emptory or statutory confiscations of automobiles based on size, weight, or horsepower.

    - No bars or restaurants (= sources for alcohol consumption) were denied their right to conduct business; there were no limits placed on an individual's alcohol consumption.

    - No liquor stores had their sales recorded, and purchases were not limited in any way.

    - No legal limits were placed on how much alcohol an individual could possess at home, nor were storage requirements mandated.

    Thus all the gains with which MADD succeeded were based on actual behaviors, not a "chance" or "possibility" or a restriction based on a "potential" danger to society.

    And a lot of MADD's success was based on drawing attention to the problems with drunk drivers, not alcohol sales.

    Would not the same approach be beneficial in our cause? MADD addressed the behaviors and not the substance. Nationwide, we've got over 20,000 gun laws, but it turns out that few are actually enforced. Gun charges are frequently hard to prove and are near the top of the list to be plea-bargained down to lesser offenses. That's the type of situation we need to highlight!

    I welcome your thoughts on the subject.
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,396
    Outstanding analytical thought process, and you're SPOT ON!!!
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  3. #3
    Member Array WINTEJER000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Spokane, Wa, USA
    Posts
    321
    very well thought out
    “But now,” he said, “take your money and a traveler’s bag. And if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!” Luke 22:36 (NLT)

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,396
    Notice MADD wasn't "Mothers Against Alcohol" it was "Mothers Against Drunk Drivers." Not ALL drivers, not cars, and not booze...but Drunk Drivers.

    So why would they equate this to "Mothers Against Guns?" Shouldn't it be more like, "Mothers Against Violent Criminals?"
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  5. #5
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,967
    Yep, they should focus on all violence since gun violence is such a small portion of it all.
    Last edited by phreddy; January 23rd, 2013 at 10:30 AM.

  6. #6
    VIP Member
    Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,331
    PACK

    Parents
    Against
    Child
    Killers
    KBSR and mulle46 like this.
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,335
    Spot on. MADD went after the crime, detection and ways to deter. Anti-gunners go after the tool. While no group is perfect and I don't agree with all things MADD has pushed for, anti-gunners could learn much from MADD on rational response to practical change in a free society we intend to remain free.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  8. #8
    Member
    Array RoadKill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Southern Middle Tennessee
    Posts
    225
    How about PACMUG--People Against Criminal and Mentally Unstable Having Guns
    mano3 likes this.
    If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd taken better care of myself when I was younger

  9. #9
    Distinguished Member Array kapnketel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Northern Kentucky
    Posts
    1,709
    One thing they did that was very effective was to have representatives sit in courtrooms during proceedings related to drunk driving. They then reported and got the word out on lenient sentencing by judges. The judges responded to the pressure. Something like this would work well in cases involving violent crime.
    gasmitty likes this.
    I'd rather be lucky than good any day

    There's nothing that will change someone's moral outlook quicker than cash in large sums.

    Majority rule only works if you're also considering individual rights. Because you can't have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper.

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,045
    "Hear hear!"
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,716
    Excellent and insightful. It has to be about going after the illegal possession, felon in possession, and
    others appropriately prohibited in ways that will actually prohibit or deter.

    However, as a one time active (activist) member of our local MADD, I found I had to quit because many
    wanted to impose procedures and penalties which either stepped on individual rights or punished excessively.

    The goal was worthy but the methods some pushed were unworthy.

    So, e.g., MADD supports (or has supported in the past ) sobriety check points. Would anyone here want illegal gun
    random check points? Just pull cars over, check the car for weapons and check that the driver may have them?

    I sort of doubt that is how we would want to do things, though I know there are many states which do allow
    sobriety checkpoints and some which have played with general stop and frisk law enforcement.

    Would we want harsh penalties for minor infractions? In many instances MADD has cheered on such practices
    as charging a person with drunk driving simply because they were found sleeping it off behind the wheel-- but not
    actually driving the vehicle. IT makes a certain sense to do it, but it isn't always right because sometimes it punishes
    someone who is actually trying to do the right thing.

    So you've been pulled over and ordered to do the sobriety check; do we want our hands swabbed for gun powder
    after a traffic infraction?

    The best thing MADD has done is publicize the problem and urge people to behave properly--- including bar tenders
    and restaurant workers who serve alcohol.

    Can we get gun buyers to act responsibly in terms of what they purchase, how much they purchase, how they store it all,
    and can we get gun stores to act responsibly in terms of denial of sales to some, NICS results notwithstanding?

    Conceptually I think Gasmitty is on to something. But, just as MADD ran into that fine line separating personal
    freedom and rights from legitimate law enforcement, we would run into that as well. In fact, that point in legal space
    is the intersect of much of our inability to deal with the nuts and the druggies and the gang members.
    Doghandler and gasmitty like this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  12. #12
    Senior Member Array GeorgiaDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,153
    Nice analysis and comparison. I'm fine, overall, with what MADD has done to help reduce drunk driving. The focus needs to be on the criminals, not the objects they use to commit crimes.
    "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9

    “The purpose of the law is not to prevent a future offense, but to punish the one actually committed” - Ayn Rand

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,480
    If only the antis would "... work against gun violence like MADD worked against drunk drivers." MADD worked by demonizing the action, the actor, but not the means.

    The antis don't do that. If they did we might have a better chance. They go against the means.

    And MADD is such a clever name... MAD. Everyone should be MAD about drunk drivers. Then they had an offshoot... SADD... Students Against Drunk Drivers. Who isn't SAD about the loss of life caused by drunk drivers?

    The names WORK.

    I'm PACKed about gun violence.... errrr, no... I'm PACMUGed over the senseless loss of life.... (And really, I'm not disparaging the attempt at coining an acronym). And just to be fair... MAIG (Mayors against Illegal Guns) and its DAP (Demand A Plan)... don't fall trippingly off the tongue, either. But you have to admit that "Demand A Plan" the statement, is pretty darned good.

    But I am hoping to point out that we need PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS folks to work our campaign. We have spent the money with the NRA the GOA, and all the rest... They have the same goals we do... And, they need to team up and hire the best and the brightest to make slogans. To present a concise, catchy, "clean" message for our constitutional rights.

    Our "brave new world" is one of sound bites, and twitter which used to limit you to 140 characters, and HOPE and CHANGE, and FORWARD....

    What do we got?

    "Shall Not Be Infringed." Well, it's concise. But. it's old. I love it.... but it doesn't "compute."

    We've got

    "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
    Well, that works, a bit... But one sentence that says "gun," twice = too many guns.

    Maybe most of us don't SEE our problem in the same way I do... And my frustration right now, is that I can't think of any way to get our message out, so that it seems a "no brainer." And believe me, when dealing with the antis, we need a "no brainer."
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  14. #14
    Senior Member Array KBSR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Gulf Coast, MS
    Posts
    653
    It's not the TOOL, it's the FOOL. HAHA Interesting post, with a lot of possibilities. Now if we could convince someone to take it and run with it, right? Maybe the OP could tailor a letter to the NRA and/or GOA to get them thinking along the same lines, in case they aren't.
    " But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself... Baa." Col. Dave Grossman on Sheep and Sheepdogs.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,480
    Quote Originally Posted by KBSR View Post
    It's not the TOOL, it's the FOOL. ...
    Now, that works... pretty well... take the "gangsta" out of it and make it fit the mainstream...

    And, no, I don't mean "It isn't the implement, it's the idiot."
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

how can you join moms against guns
,
mad mothers against guns usa
,
moms against guns
,
mother against guns forum
,

mothers against guns

,
mothers against guns fort worth
,
where do i join mom against guns
Click on a term to search for related topics.