Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumProgressives attack Mitch McConnell again on guns
Source: Yahoo! News
By Rachel Rose Hartman, Yahoo! News | The Ticket 3 hrs ago
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is on the wrong side of an assault weapons ban, a progressive group argues Monday in a new attack ad released in the congressmans home state of Kentucky.
Gary Nutt, a Vietnam veteran and hunter from Cub Run, Ky., says in the commercial, paid for by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), that last season he killed one deer with one shot. "Id be a pretty bad hunter if I needed an assault rifle to shoot that buck, Nutt said.
The ad hits out at McConnell, up for re-election in 2014, for taking money from the gun industry. The ad debuts ahead of a Senate hearing this week on an assault weapons bansomething President Barack Obama's administration wants after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The committee believes McConnell's opposition to a ban could lead to loss of votes for him this year.
The ad is set to run on broadcast and cable in Lexington, Louisville, Bowling Green and rural Paducah markets and has an initial buy of $25,000, according to the committee. Monday's ad brings the total spent by the PCCC on McConnell to $100,000.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/progressives-attack-mitch-mcconnell-again-guns-115854943--election.html
jmg257
(11,996 posts)Hate when they cloud valid issues with stupidity.
And bringing out the Fudds does not help....only galvanizes the gunners all the more. These guys never heard of Jim Zumbo?
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)There are differing opinions, but they are used in target matches as well. The second amendment isn't about hunting or trap. The quote sounds scripted like the actors in ads.
frylock
(34,825 posts)he didn't need jungle-taped 30 rd mags to bag that deer. and yeh, we get it. the 2A is there so that folks can stave off Obama's Black Death Squads.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)magazines for hunting. I know Wyoming and Florida does. I thought it was to stave off Bush's Neo Con squads.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)"Assault weapons" won't be banned for the simple expedient they can't be creditably defined, and pols now know this.
Even if some pols resurrect a Feinsteinian "tail fins-on-a-semi-auto carbine" ban, the fins & chrome will be dropped, and a new Medusa will emerge. And other pols know this as well.
2A is not about hunting. You should know that.
frylock
(34,825 posts)in your opinion, is 2A for overthrowing OUR govt, or defending our shores from the tyrannical govt of the british empire?
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)If a criminal is attacking me with an AR-15 he will probably have a standard magazine in his weapon. Why should I be required to have fewer rounds in my magazine than he does?
Admittedly the chance of my ever being attacked by a individual armed with an AR-15 is less than the chance that I will win the Florida Lottery. Also at this time I do not own a AR-15 as I see little use for it as a self defense weapon in the small town where I live. If I move to a rural area, I may decided to buy one for hog hunting on my property as well as self defense.
frylock
(34,825 posts)you watch too many movies. under what circumstance do you believe that a criminal will attack you with an AR-15? Are you a drug dealer? You may as well use the zombie apocalypse as an excuse. But let's entertain for a moment the ridiculous assumption that a criminal will attack you with an AR-15. What precautions have taken to ensure that you don't harm your neighbors when staving off this hypothetical criminal with an AR-15?
spin
(17,493 posts)I covered the points you mentioned in this part.
Admittedly the chance of my ever being attacked by a individual armed with an AR-15 is less than the chance that I will win the Florida Lottery. Also at this time I do not own a AR-15 as I see little use for it as a self defense weapon in the small town where I live. If I move to a rural area, I may decide to buy one for hog hunting on my property as well as self defense.
Because I live in a small town I have a double barreled 12 gauge coach gun for serous home defense. (Note: I would never fire warning shots into the air as our Vice President recently suggested. That might land me in jail in Florida. (Ref: http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/11/justice/florida-stand-ground-sentencing)
Also I don't believe I've watched one movie in the last month. I mainly watch news, history and science programs I occasionally like the watch a realistic action film but unfortunately they are few and far between.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)may differ with my self-defense choices, and if the culture of gang/home invasion changes, I will most certainly upgrade to a magazine as fat as a jook box collection. Frankly, such a ban would not at this time affect me personally, and would not do a thing to prevent mass shootings (I believe that the "informal" memo to President Obama admitted as much). But politically, it is a scalp to be hung over the fireplace by controllers.
If I were hunting feral hogs, I would like plenty of rounds in a semi-auto rifle; the AR 15 is now the weapon of choice for clearing feral hogs in many areas. And as before, the RKBA is not based on "needs."
Don't you think these proposals would be more effective?
1) Federally-funded school security measures whereby a school could choose to "harden" facilities, provide armed security, etc. (I don't think we need to go "NRA on steroids" as with Barbara Boxer's proposal.);
2) Mandatory jail time for felons using guns;
3) Some sort of universal NICS test with appropriate funding.
Not accusing you of such, but "extremism" dominates both sides of the debate, and meaningful (though not perfect) measures are once again falling by the wayside. One side wants no more regulation; the other really does want to ban & confiscate.
ileus
(15,396 posts)It's this kind of ignorance we need to combat.
rdharma
(6,057 posts)Wrong, gejohnston. Look again.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)In fact, I like them more than semis for most things. But I'm betting they hired actors instead of finding a real fudd, which is why I didn't pay attention to the video.
rdharma
(6,057 posts)But you still posted a pic of a Browning BAR (not the military BAR folks) ......and your point with that was........?
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)if you missed that point, can't help you. You can rapid fire with a lever action as well.
frylock
(34,825 posts)great news! you've just made the argument that you DON'T need a semi-auto with a 30 rd mag. now tell us how useless a ban on large cap mags are because criminals can reload a revolver just as quickly as they can squeeze the trigger of a semi-auto.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/murder-charges-laid-in-toronto-bbq-mass-shooting-1.1029580
I'm sure these fine gentlemen had restricted PALs, and had only ten round magazines for their registered pistols. I'm sure the RCMP gave them an ATT to take them to the party too.
I don't think I made any such argument.
Pullo
(594 posts)to appeal to gun owners. This type of ad will just be laughed at.
When I saw this, I thought "Oh yeah, i'm sure his pro gun stance will hurt him in Kentucky".
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)The gun Prohis seem to not understand that there are very few Fudds left that would buy this kind
of tin-eared nonsense- most people with old-school firearms now realize that their "dangerous sniper rifles"
would be next up on the chopping block if the antis get any traction...
Pullo
(594 posts)so they must go too!
madville
(7,412 posts)Voted 61-38, Mittens over Obama. The same Kentucky where 42% of Democrats voted uncommitted in the 2012 primary against the President who was the only one on the ticket. Uh huh, they're gonna be all anti-gun up in there lol.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)Still, I've voted Obama three times now, twice in the general and in the 2008 primary. President Obama did not earn my primary vote in 2012 and I was not alone. I also know folks that would be derided as "gun nuts" who voted for him all four times.
The essence remains that the ground is not very fertile but the why isn't discerning. Some of the most liberal folks I know are gun owners and it sure as hell isn't all about double barrel shotguns. I know plenty of Rush listening, talking point spewing, chickenhawk, tax dodging folks that wouldn't willingly be anywhere near a gun.
Kentuckians would probably be ok with some measures, background checks and perhaps moderate capacity limits come to mind but it goes only so far because I tend to believe that most folks regardless of politics, even if they personally hate firearms believe in the individual right to them. In fact, I believe this is probably the case nationwide which is the Achilles heel for prohibitionists. They are limited in their ability to push because they know that at the roots of the debate they are in a small minority so reality dictates nibbling and if they are to be seen as "serious" cede the fundamental rhetorically (while not in fact) which leads to a debate between the unhinged but consistent and reasoned but shifty and strident and the status quo takes the pole position.
ileus
(15,396 posts)As progressives the word "ban" when it comes to firearms shouldn't be in our vocabulary.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Only 20% of gun owners hunt.
*As a 'lawful purposes', hunting is as protected an expression of the right protected by the second as LOLCats and tweeting pictures of your lunch are protected expressions of the right protected by the first.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 27, 2013, 05:48 PM - Edit history (1)
and will drag that odor around with them when trying to effect other more meaningful changes. So typical
of many groups associated with progressive causes.