Something our anti friends to ponder

[gejohnston]

Those who think that being for RKBA is an exclusively GOP cause and always has been. I mentioned at times, it serves the Republican's purposes for now but not always.
Oh yeah, did you know that Trent Lott voted for the AWB?

H.R. 6257:
Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008 was sponsored by Republican Mark Kirk (IL-10) all of the co sponsors were also Republicans.

http://www.bsalert.com/artsearch.php?fn=2&as=2471&dt=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6257


Scroll down to old-yankee on 24.05.2011 at 14:59 at this site:
http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/05/20/trumka-working-people-want-a-strong-independent-labor-movement/

[safeinOhio]

1. Something for our Obama hater RKBA friends

Obama signs into law 2 bills that support guns.

http://libertysblog.com/2010/08/obama-signs-pro-gun-bill-ron-paul-voted-against/

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2009/05/national_parks_gun_law_take_ef.html

[gejohnston]

3. True. Did you know..

Did you know that the Robertson in Pittman-Robertson act of 1937, was Theoretic Pat's dad?

[TheWraith]

7. You seem to be mistaken. DU's gun owners are no more likely to hate Obama than other DUers.

In fact, many of us recognize that he's very carefully avoided supporting any of the stupid and self-destructive nonsense going around, even when others in his administration like Clinton and Holder have pushed it. Obama's a smart man--he knows gun control is both unpopular and ineffective.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

42. +1

[ileus]

19. no one here hates Mr. Obama...supporting the 2nd isn't a R v L thing...

[eqfan592]

43. I can't be sure, but I don't believe...

...safe's intention was to imply that DU folks who also supported RTKBA hated Pres. Obama. Rather, I think he was just supplying info for us to counter those who try to vilify the President as some sort of anti-gun monstrosity of epic proportions.

Safe is welcome to correct me on this if I am wrong.

[jeepnstein]

44. He's said publicly that it's settled law.

Now, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. And the courts have settled that as the law of the land. In this country, we have a strong tradition of gun ownership that's handed from generation to generation. Hunting and shooting are part of our national heritage. And, in fact, my administration has not curtailed the rights of gun owners - it has expanded them, including allowing people to carry their guns in national parks and wildlife refuges. - B. Obama

[Hoyt]

2. See, even the evil Republicons know we'd be better off without friggin "assault" weapons.

Those that can't see living without a few, will adapt.

[TheWraith]

4. You have some amazingly selective ethics.

If anyone around here agreed with a pro-gun Republican bill, you would be the first one tarring them by association.

By the way, could you please define "assault weapons"?

[oneshooter]

12. He won't, because he can't

He just uses the term because he thinks it sounds "scary".

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[RSillsbee]

14. Any weapon designed to apppeal to your "baser" instincts NT

:sarcasm:

[Hoyt]

24. Good, you are starting to get it. Listen to that thought over and over every night. Then,

One day leave home without one. Then, notice that you return without issue. Just one day at a time.

[RSillsbee]

34. Or I run into another mugger

See Hoyt you are never going to convince me how miniscule the odds are because I've "won"that lottery.

"I never trust a man who's gun hand I can't see. I am wrong 99 times out of a hundred but, I'm right once in that same space and that pays me for my trouble"

James Butler Hickock

[Hoyt]

37. Christ man, I almost feel for you walking around on "ready" all day long. Sad.

[eqfan592]

46. Wow, you think it's sad for somebody to...

..maintain situational awareness when outside of the home? It's not sad, it's smart, even for those who choose not to carry a firearm. Keeping your situation awareness up is one of your best defenses for avoiding a bad situation before it even has a chance to develope.

Seriously, you just don't get it at all, do you? You think it's all about "fear" and that we need to set aside our "baser instincts" to become truly "civilized." Those instincts are what allowed our species to survive, and there is no need to just toss them all out the window just to conform to your particular brand of "civility."

[Hoyt]

54. Right -- you don't need to tote a gun if you maintain "situational awareness." But many of you do

feel the need to do both. So, leave em at home like 95% of us do without a thought. Peak around every corner or tree if you need to, but leave the guns at home where you can do just about whatever you want.

[eqfan592]

56. Hoyt, talking to you is clearly pointless.

You are not willing to be rational on the issue, but rather insist on being insulting and willfully ignorant of the topic at hand. That is your choice. Good day.

[Hoyt]

57. Like those who can't walk out of their house without one or two guns strapped to them are rational.

[gejohnston]

5. If you want to be on the same side as

Trent Lott and Bill Bennett.

Given Trent Lott and Richard Shelby were among the supporters, could their motivations be:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deacons_for_Defense_and_Justice

[spin]

9. I see no problem with "assault weapons" ...

The black evil looking semi-auto rifles that are crippled clones of true assault weapons have rarely been used to commit crime and the pistols with a magazine capacity of over ten rounds are commonly used in sporting events and are also used for legitimate self defense.

Basically firearms in the hands of honest law abiding citizens are not a serious problem and in fact do far more good than evil. Any firearm in the hands of a violent criminal is a threat to society and future gun control efforts should focus on the bad guys and those with severe mental issues more than the good guys.

Restricting firearm ownership for honest people merely enables the criminal element.

[Hoyt]

13. It's kind of like saying you see no problem with bombs. No need for the thing things and fact

anyone covets one is a pretty good indication of the problem guns symbolize. As I have said before, the fact that a gunner wants one is a good indication they have issues that should preclude them from having guns.

[GreenStormCloud]

15. Playing armchair psychiatrist again? N/T

[ManiacJoe]

16. I will ask the obvious question:

Hoyt, what makes "assault weapons" special that they need extra restrictions/bans where "normal" rifles do not need those restrictions/bans?

[Hoyt]

38. A "normal" rifle doesn't have all the BS that attracts you guys and fulfills your baser instincts.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

45. lol

funny definition.

[rl6214]

55. My AR15 has a pistol grip because it is more erogonomic

it's just more comfortable. It also has a collapsable stock because beside me shooting it, my wife shoots it and my sons shoot it and we don't all have the same length arms. I have one AR15 that has a full size stock. My wife and younger son cannot shoot it, it is too long. It's black but I also have one that is camo. Do those colors appeal to the baser instinct? It's got a flash suppressor so I don't momentarily blind myself in low light situations. Is that a baser instinct or better function?

What makes this sort of rifle anything different than "normal"?

[rl6214]

18. I don't "covet" one, never have and I doubt many do

But I do already own somewhere between 7-28 depending on what you call an "assault weapon"

[spin]

49. Oddly enough I actually do not own any assault weapons ...

I was one of the few regular shooters that didn't get the bug to buy a "evil black rifle" during the assault weapons ban mainly because the pistol range I shot at only allowed .22 cal rifles. At the time I lived in an urban neighborhood and saw no need to use a rifle for self defense.

I still live within city limits and own a 12 gauge double barreled coach gun and several handguns for self defense. If we move to a rural area, I may buy a AR-15 or an AR-10. I do own a bolt action Swedish Mauser.

The people that I knew who bought assault weapons all struck me as totally same and responsible. Many were police officers, ex-police or ex-military as well as doctors, engineers, business owners, bankers, carpenters, electricians, factory workers and technicians. Many had concealed weapons permits and therefore had a good background check.

The fact that you would make a statement like:

As I have said before, the fact that a gunner wants one is a good indication they have issues that should preclude them from having guns.

shows that you appear to be harboring unhealthy emotions and an irrational distrust of many of your fellow citizens and you yourself should consider counseling.

[PavePusher]

50. Since when do guns=bombs?

[X_Digger]

52. Yes, Hoyt, guns should be awkward, heavy, inaccurate, and unreliable.

Right?

*snort*

[rl6214]

17. "Those that can't see living without a few"

Why do you always post this drivel? No one has ever said they "can't see living without a few" or "can't leave home without them" like you enjoy claiming.

You keep posting the same BS and you will never be taken seriously.

Seriously.

[rrneck]

20. Republicans are AWESOME! nt

[damntexdem]

6. Republicans used to be more moderate. Now the Teabaggers rule.

And traitorous Dems dance to their tune.

[TheWraith]

8. Yes, how moderate and reasonable the Republicans were back in... 2008?

No, DTD. They wanted Democrats to jump on the bill and try to pass another AWB, which would have done us HUGE damage at the polls that November.

[gejohnston]

10. At the risk of sounding conspiratorial

I wonder if Dick Armey and crew pushed the teabaggers to show up armed just to scare the Dems into pushing a bill, which would have been total disaster.

:tinfoilhat:

[spin]

11. Draconian gun control is a wedge issue that the Republicans use to their advantage ...

to get gun owners who have a lot of money and time invested in their hobby to the polls to vote against Democrats, even those who support RKBA. I have talked to a lot of gun owners who agree with me on many issues that Democrats support but who will absolutely refuse to vote for any Democrat. They are one issue voters and that issue is to oppose any gun control measures that would restrict their rights to own and legally carry firearms. While many Democrats support restricting or disarming citizens, they do not have any money invested in the issue. They are less likely to show up to vote unless they have an unusually charismatic candidate to vote for. When you have thousands of dollars invested in a hobby which you enjoy, you are very likely to resist any politician who would threaten your investment and your hobby.

In close elections the gun control issue may often cause a Democrat who is on the side of the people to lose to a Republican who supports big business and large corporations.

One difference between the people in our nation and those in other nations is that Americans distrust their government. They value the ability to revolt against a government if it no longer represents the people but instead turns into a tyranny. Some people will argue that this is a foolish fantasy and it would be impossible to overthrow the government in today's society. I would point out that the people who live in a number of nations today have been successful in overthrowing their dictatorial governments without owning as many firearms as exist in our country today.

Perhaps the reason that Americans have never took to the streets to overthrow a tyranny is because of the First and Second Amendment. We have the longest lasting written constitution in the world today. Trusting the citizens and allowing them a free press and the right to own firearms is a deterrent to those who dream of establishing a dictatorship.

We face serious problems today as we have in the past. There are a few who feel that the time is ripe to "refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Those individuals are fools. At this point in time, our system of government is still functional. At some time in the far future, we may have a valid reason to revolt against a government that is truly oppressive and ignores the views of all citizens for the gain of the rulers. It would be wise in case a rebellion is ever truly necessary to have the right for all people to own and posses firearms and that includes Republicans, Democrats and Independents, . We will all want to resist a tyrant at that point.

Some will argue that the South lost the Civil War, but I will point out that the South did not wish to overthrow the existing government but to separate from it. They came very close to succeeding. If Lee would have not decided to engage Mead on the high ground at Gettysburg but instead had moved around the Union forces and headed towards Washington D.C. he might well have won the war. Overconfidence from Lee's many victories caused him to make a foolish mistake.

If Lee had had the opportunity to read Sun Tzu's The Art of War, he might not have made that mistake.

[DanTex]

21. What you fail to realize is that most voters are not obsessed with guns.

If you look at polls, gun control is not at all unpopular. I know that's hard for pro-gun people to believe, but that's what polls say. Now, I know that pro-gun people excel at denying reality, so I'm sure you have some way to explain the polls away.

Nevertheless, this idea that gun control is unpopular is a myth. The NRA is powerful, that's true. The reason that guns are a wedge issue is not that the general public opposes gun control, but that a powerful right-wing pro-gun lobby exists. This is the same as the reason we can't get taxes raised on the top 1%. The majority of voters is strongly in favor, but the top 1% is more politically connected.

[rrneck]

22. Know why excessive gun control is unpopular?

Do you have a firearm free self defense solution that works better?

That's why.

[DanTex]

23. My point is that it's not unpopular. The unpopularity is a pro-gun myth (one of many...)

On generic poll questions, the public is split. On certain provisions e.g. bans on high capacity magazines, popular opinion is strongly in favor.
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

Do pro-gun people care about data at all?

[rrneck]

25. I didn't

see a solution in your reply.

[petronius]

27. As I skim through that list, I notice that the ones that seem to support more gun control are

poorly-written, general, or vague questions.

The first on the list is a horribly constructed poll question, as is the one about high-capacity magazines. The 'should laws be stronger?' question can't be evaluated without knowing what the respondent knows about current laws. Likewise, the 'assault weapons' questions rely on the assumption that R knows what a (so-called) assault weapon is.

Conversely, the most specific question on the list - Should handguns be restricted to police? - shows a strong trend towards disapproval of increased restriction...

[DanTex]

29. I think people can understand the poll questions just fine.

Of course, I'm sure that you would like to be able to distribute pro-gun propaganda to people before they answer poll questions. Or change the phrasing to suit the pro-gun agenda.

That might be fun, but it's not how it's done. Typical pro-gun (and typical of right-wing causes in general), the numbers don't come out how you want and so you complain and insist that the rules should be changed in your favor. Anything to deny reality.

Believe me, if I were doing the polling, I could find much more pro-gun-control ways of phrasing the questions if I wanted. But that's why they have neutral, professional polling organizations.

But I guess it's all part of the "elite liberal anti-gun bias"...

[petronius]

30. Never mind, then. I thought you wanted to talk about the data you posted...

:shrug:

[rrneck]

33. There is a question pending in post #22.

I'm sure you just overlooked it.

[eqfan592]

48. Of course you do, Dan, because it supports your position.

Of course, you ignore the realities that over the last decade we have seen an almost universal relaxing of useless gun control laws nation wide. No, you think your handful of poorly worded polling questions trumps something the rest of us call "reality."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[X_Digger]

53. Yes, let's keep people ignorant so that they don't know what they're agreeing to.

That's just lovely.

You must ascribe to the Josh Sugarman school of gun control--

"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." — Josh Sugarman, 1988, Violence Policy Center.

[Abq_Sarah]

26. It's actually pretty disturbing to know

That to a lot of voters, the constitution is just a piece of paper that gets in the way of what they want.

[DanTex]

28. What's more disturbing is that supposed Democrats are aligning with a right-wing interpretation

of the bill of rights. Unless I am misunderstanding your post. (I sure hope so)

Because, wow. I have to say, I wouldn't expect such support for the constitutional interpretations of Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy on what would otherwise appear to be a liberal forum. Not sure what to think honestly.

Do you also agree with the Citizens United decision guaranteeing corporate personhood? I mean, it was the same five guys...

[gejohnston]

31. Actually Heller specifically was the five guys

The concept of it being an individual right outside of a milita was all nine and affirmed in the dissent. The difference being that DC did not ban all guns.

[DanTex]

32. Great! Looks like we liberals can all agree that a handgun ban doesn't violate 2A.

[gejohnston]

35. have bad news for you

the other four were not liberals, they were what was once mainstream Republicans. The nine also split the difference between the second and the ninth.

[PavePusher]

51. Wrong, thanks for playing. n/t

[beevul]

36. What " right-wing interpretation" of the bill of rights are you referring to?

Please explain.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

47. yes, I would like to see this explanation, also ....

because that statement is borderline offensive.

[Abq_Sarah]

40. The bill of rights

Grants no rights. It protects inalienable rights. I find it hard to believe any liberal would support the idea that free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, right to keep and bear arms, etc.. are rights that were given to us by a benevolent government. I consider myself a citizen, not a subject.

[spin]

41. The bottom line is who shows up at the polls to vote ...

In our country roughly 50% of the voters turn out for presidential elections and a lower percentage for local elections.

Let's compare a person who owns one or more firearms and a person who does not own any firearms and is in favor of stronger gun control laws.

The voter who opposes restrictive gun control will show up to vote because he see a threat to his enjoyment of the shooting sports and perhaps even more importantly to the money he has invested in his bobby. If he owns a firearm for self defense, the voter doesn't want to see his ability to protect himself or his family lost while the criminal element will continue to own firearms. One of the tactics employed by those who want to disarm America is the slow incremental approach of passing laws which gradually accomplish that goal. The gun owning voter is well aware of this tactic and will vote against any politician who is in favor of such laws. He will even hold his nose and vote for a politician whose views he opposes as long as that politician has a favorable rating for supporting gun ownership.

On the other hand, the average voter who does not own firearms may be in favor of new gun control laws but may not show up at the polls to vote especially in an off year election. The issue is not important enough for him to take the time and effort to vote. Even if he does, the gun control issue may not be so important to him to cause him to vote for a candidate whose other views he disagrees with.

To sum up, many gun owners are one issue voters and they vote.