HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » If Democrats pursue an As...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:46 PM

If Democrats pursue an Assault Weapons Ban then they'll never win another election.

At least that's what the gun lobby would have you believe. They will tell you that the events since Sandy Hook have not changed even one person's mind on the gun violence issue. Not even one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=276722

Just another bullshit tactic from the gun manufacturer's lobby.

59 replies, 3607 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 59 replies Author Time Post
Reply If Democrats pursue an Assault Weapons Ban then they'll never win another election. (Original post)
Scuba Jan 2013 OP
TheCowsCameHome Jan 2013 #1
BlueCaliDem Jan 2013 #6
randome Jan 2013 #15
tularetom Jan 2013 #2
Robb Jan 2013 #18
Squinch Jan 2013 #29
upaloopa Jan 2013 #3
Undaunted Jan 2013 #7
upaloopa Jan 2013 #10
bluestate10 Jan 2013 #4
onehandle Jan 2013 #5
derby378 Jan 2013 #9
onehandle Jan 2013 #22
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #8
Robb Jan 2013 #20
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #32
Robb Jan 2013 #35
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #40
Robb Jan 2013 #44
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #45
Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #11
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #12
madville Jan 2013 #14
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #26
madville Jan 2013 #36
Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #37
Lizzie Poppet Jan 2013 #41
Recursion Jan 2013 #13
madville Jan 2013 #17
Recursion Jan 2013 #24
madville Jan 2013 #34
rustydog Jan 2013 #16
madville Jan 2013 #19
bongbong Jan 2013 #42
madville Jan 2013 #47
bongbong Jan 2013 #48
madville Jan 2013 #49
bongbong Jan 2013 #51
barbtries Jan 2013 #21
Marr Jan 2013 #23
Deep13 Jan 2013 #25
Freddie Stubbs Jan 2013 #27
1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #28
jambo101 Jan 2013 #30
liberal N proud Jan 2013 #31
regjoe Jan 2013 #33
bvar22 Jan 2013 #38
Rex Jan 2013 #39
davidn3600 Jan 2013 #43
Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #46
Xithras Jan 2013 #50
appleannie1 Jan 2013 #52
still_one Jan 2013 #53
libodem Jan 2013 #54
spin Jan 2013 #55
Scuba Jan 2013 #56
spin Jan 2013 #59
SecularMotion Jan 2013 #57
patrice Jan 2013 #58

Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:48 PM

1. I'll take that risk.

It's a horseshit argument, but some loonies believe that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:00 PM

6. + 1 eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:09 PM

15. And the loonies won't vote for Obama anyways so...no loss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:49 PM

2. Then why don't they just STFU and allow the Democrats to destroy themselves?

One would think they'd be overjoyed at the prospect of the Democrats never winning another election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:11 PM

18. This.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:28 PM

29. There's you proof that they believe the opposite.

Though it does seem to be the #1 disruption point on the NRA memo that must have gone out this morning. Everyone's pounding it like a half penny nail. (That's my father's expression. I'm not THAT old.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:50 PM

3. All gunner talking points involve fear in some way

Fear you'll lose elections, fear of revolution, fear fear fear just what motivates them not is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:03 PM

7. From what I've seen, they don't fear revolution, they want it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undaunted (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:05 PM

10. They want us to fear their revolution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:53 PM

4. Assault weapons should be limited to registered, monitored gun ranges that have the

infrastructure to support shooting of those weapons. People still should be allowed to own the guns, but they must be kept at the registered gun ranges in secure lockers, ammo should be kept there also. The federal government can be useful in setting up the gun ranges then holding a public auction to allow the public to bid on taking ownership of the ranges, at that point, the Feds and State should exit, except for monitoring and registration renewal inspections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:54 PM

5. Pre-12/14 thinking. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:04 PM

9. I'm seeing this meme a lot...

...and it reminds of of all those right-wing screeds of "pre-9/11 thinking" and how we have to do whatever Herr Decider said, no matter how outlandish or unconstitutional, because "9/11 changed everything."

If you're going to support a new ban, that's one thing, but let's not fall into that trap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:18 PM

22. It's an homage. The fact is that polls indicate a sea change.

And the NRA is the living embodiment of 'pre-12/14 thinking.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:04 PM

8. None of the state representatives from my county (all democrats)

support any kind of gun control legislation.

http://thedailyworld.com/sections/news/local/lawmakers-weigh-gun-legislation.html

Just sayin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:14 PM

20. "Four of the legislators are members of the National Rifle Association...."

Four of the legislators are members of the National Rifle Association ... During the recent election, the NRA gave each of them, along with non-member state Sen. Jim Hargrove, D-Hoquiam, an A+ rating, meaning they have an established record “to promote and defend the Second Amendment.” The NRA awarded a “B” grade to state Rep. Steve Tharinger, D-Sequim, calling him a “generally pro-gun candidate.


Your reps are in the fucking bag for the NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:44 PM

32. Yes. But they are also pro-union and otherwise decent democrats.

The alternative is republicans "in the fucking bag for the NRA".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #32)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:06 PM

35. Your first "otherwise decent democrat" is a goddamn bigot.

Gay rights measure rejected by Senate

OLYMPIA -- In a vote the Senate had managed to avoid for almost 30 years, 23 Republicans and two Democrats joined forces yesterday to kill a bill that would have banned discrimination against gay people.

... Sen. Jim Hargrove of Hoquiam was the other Democrat who voted no.

"I believe adultery is wrong, I believe sex outside marriage is wrong, I believe homosexuality is wrong. Therefore, I cannot give government protection to this behavior," Hargrove said.

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Gay-rights-measure-rejected-by-Senate-1171533.php#ixzz2IGFzb0Qs


I can only imagine how great the rest on your list are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #35)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:27 PM

40. "I can only imagine how great the rest on your list are."

You could do worse than to look up the definition of "bigotry". You're talking about the elected officials of one of the first states to actually allow same-sex marriage. Can your state say the same?

And it's also worth noting that you're singling out the only one on the list who is not a member of the NRA.

I disagree with these guys much of the time, but I'm pretty sure I'd disagree with their republican replacements all of the time.

The point of the original post is that in rural areas, legislators have a perceived need to be RKBA friendly. The former speaker of the house used to have a 17x22 photo of herself directly opposite her office's entry of her holding a shotgun at a skeet event.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #40)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:39 PM

44. *You* called them "otherwise decent democrats."

The first one I Googled turned out to be an anti-gay bigot.

I'm not impressed with your assessment of what "otherwise decent" means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #44)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:44 PM

45. I'm obviously not keen on his attitude toward the issue...

... but if your assessment is based solely on 20 seconds of googling, I think you should cut me a little slack Robb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:05 PM

11. I'll bookmark this for the midterms and hope you are right.

After there is some distance from the tragedy the polls will be more accurate which I think is human nature.
We just can't afford to lose the midterms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:05 PM

12. The ban existed before.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:08 PM

14. And wouldn't have prevented any of these events

There are way too many loopholes in what we know as the AWB at the federal level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #14)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:21 PM

26. And your solution to the problem?

I have asked this question repeatedly of those who dismiss any attempt at gun control.

I have yet to receive an answer. Plenty of rationalizations for not allowing any attempt to stop the slaughter, but no solutions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #26)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:12 PM

36. The only solution is an outright ban

Then numbers will decrease dramatically as law abiding citizens comply. It will decrease access for the criminals.

Anything short of that is PR/window dressing and in effective. The AWB as we know it is a joke because it doesn't really do anything. It's not always a pro gun position to acknowledge the laws they are lobbying for won't make hardly any difference because of all the holes in them people can get through.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #36)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:20 PM

37. ok

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:32 PM

41. And remember what happened after it was instituted?

The disastrous elections of 1994...

If what was proposed was some sort of sweeping action against handguns (that would somehow drastically reduce their possession by habitual criminals), it might actually be worth getting crushed in 2014 and losing the Senate. A big reduction in homicide would be worth paying that price. But to risk a GOP takeover for the sake of restricting weapons responsible for less than one percent of homicide? The disastrous economic implications for the poor of a GOP-dominated government could actually cause more loss of life than that (particularly if you consider that the drug trade* tends to thrive under conditions of economic injustice).

*which is implicated in a majority of US homicides, btw...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:07 PM

13. Why do we keep chasing this windmill? Ban semi-autos, or don't. Why is it so important to you ...

... what a legal rifle can look like?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:11 PM

17. It's actually pretty innovative and interesting

All the manufacturers get around the new laws and regulations each time something changes. People are very innovative as well, did you know it is perfectly legal to build a firearm for yourself at home, doesn't even need a serial number you just can't ever sell it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #17)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:20 PM

24. As long as it's not functionally a class 3 weapon (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #24)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:02 PM

34. Correct, should have added that. No full-auto manufacturing at home

And short barrels/suppressors need the correct paperwork and tax payment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:10 PM

16. Oh well, tough shit then. The RA doesn't have that kind of power

Every single gun nut I know disavow the NRA. They think it's bat shit crazy. The NRA represents manufacturers, not shooters.

There are people who sacrificed their lives to save friends, knowing they were facing death. if a Democrat is afraid of losing reelection (metaphorical death if you may) for doing what is RIGHT, they need to change their name to REPUBLICAN. We know they don't do what is right for America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustydog (Reply #16)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:14 PM

19. Most Gun people I know think the NRA is soft

They prefer the GOA. They think the NRA compromises too much and they really dislike the NRA endorsing and contributing to some Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #19)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:35 PM

42. eeek!

 

You're running around with domestic terrorists. I would stay away from them if I was you; they're very dangerous & deranged, and fear rules their lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #42)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:57 PM

47. I work for the federal government

Almost everyone at work is ex-military or reserves including me. I don't know anyone in the building that's antigun, some of the more liberal people here are also the best armed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #47)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 03:09 PM

48. Still eeek!

 

I didn't know those kinds of people were so fear-filled.

Fear and paranoia is what makes one buy a gun, if they aren't buying into CTs like "I gotta fight the gov't with my peashooter!" or "I'm gonna be acclaimed as a Mighty Warrior after I go Rambo on a Bad Guy!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #48)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 03:38 PM

49. It's not fear

We all just have extremely small genitalia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #49)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:03 PM

51. Well...

 

not so much small genitalia, but rather small self-esteem.

But mainly it's fear - HUGE amounts of fear & paranoia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:18 PM

21. yes they will.

and maybe some sanity will seep into the culture at the same time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:19 PM

23. Because gun nuts have been such reliable Democratic voters up to now.

I don't think the "personal arsenal" demographic has the political sway it once had.

What constituency they *do* have has been organized into a right-wing voting block for decades anyway. They've been campaigning against Democrats as the "party of gun confiscation" since at least the 80's. Well, now the chickens are coming home to roost. Even the most cynical, opportunist Democratic politician can now take a gun control stance, because it makes political sense.

They're not voting for you anyway, so you may as well secure the gun control vote by simply making the promises the NRA *claims* you have made already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:21 PM

25. Agreed, that is not true anymore.

In fact, due to Gerrymandering, Rs are spread pretty thin to have bare majorities on many districts. My feeling is those could flip D if Rs seem too reactionary. Once they lose that majority, the gerrymandered demographics would make it very difficult to ever get it back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:24 PM

27. Of course not. But some Democrats from districts/states with significant numbers of hunters will

probably lose unless they oppose it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:27 PM

28. LOL ...

Apparently, the NRA continues to have trouble interpreting the poll data AND projecting the demonstrated demographic shift occuring in America; so let me sumarize:

The American people support an assault weapons ban.

The demographic that is all in on fighting an assault weapons ban is sinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:35 PM

30. Hmmmm

End product of civil war,An America without Teabaggers,birthers,Gun nuts,FOX,Limbaugh and Beck and endless rightie whiners...... tantalizing concept

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:35 PM

31. Fear is all they have!

The NRA and gun lobby want to peddle fear to protect their precious guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:58 PM

33. If that's the case

 

clearly and logically define "assault weapons" and ban them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:22 PM

38. It depends on HOW the Democratic Party does this.

If they pursue policies that penalize responsible gun owners and hunters,
they WILL suffer in some states that have been reliably Blue for years.

Minnesota comes to mind. The outdoors, wilderness, camping, fishing....and Hunting and Guns are BIG in Minnesota. Most of these people WILL support sane regulation,
but will react strongly IF they perceive that they are being demonized or punished unfairly.
One or two percentage points will put Minnesota into the RED column at election time.

I chose Minnesota because I am personally familiar with that state,
but other Blue States are in the same situation,
especially recently Blue States where we have fought hard to gain enough % to flip them to Blue.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:26 PM

39. I think GWB was a weapon of mass destruction, so does most of the country.

That loser will keep the GOP out of office for a longtime imo. He did that much damage to the national psyche. The NRA is nothing more then gun lobbyist on Capitol Hill. Their agenda is death and profit. No wonder they get along with the BFEE so well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:36 PM

43. At this point, we are probably going to get killed in 2014

President's party almost always does poorly in the mid-terms anyway. Now the gun people and right-wing are all motivated to vote.

With Obama off the ballot, the turnout will not be in our favor the way it was in 2008 and 2012. It could be 2010 all over again.

Personally I think it's stupid to pursue this and waste political capital on this instead of fixing the #1 priority according to the vast majority of America....jobs, social security, medicare, debt, etc...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:46 PM

46. Congress should have a closed session to debate and vote on gun control...

 

That way it removes the influence of gun industry lobbyists and ignorant constituents.

If anyone can get in the ear of Congressional leadership, please get this in their ear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:02 PM

50. The original 1994 AWB started after another school massacre

In January 1989 a guy named Patrick Purdy walked onto a schoolyard in Stockton California with an assault rifle and fired well over a hundred bullets. By the time he was done, 35 young children and teachers were shot, and many of their lives ended on that playground. That massacre was the spark that created California's current comprehensive system of firearms regulations, helped to launch Dianne Feinstein into the Senate in 1992, and was one of the reasons that Feinstein fought so hard for the original AWB after she was elected.

It didn't matter. The blowback from the AWB handed the Republicans control of the House and Senate from the 1994 elections until the 2006 elections, excepting for a brief period from 2000-2002 when the Senate effectively had a dead tie. The blowback was so severe that it took 12 years for this nations voters to give control of Congress back to our party.

35 elementary school victims didn't convince America last time. What makes you think that things will be different this time around? I really don't see any difference between the Newtown shooting and the Cleveland School massacre OR how people are responding to them. People were furious last time too, but when it came time to vote, they voted for their guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:04 PM

52. It would just be one more reason for my family to vote Dem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:05 PM

53. If after to years unemployment is down to 6%, Americans

Will tell the NRA to go to hell

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:07 PM

54. I don't think so

I think it is a vocal minority and the NRA, not the majority of average, Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:36 PM

55. I don't feel that another Assault Weapons Ban will pass the Senate let alone the House. ...

Too many elected Democrats come from gun friendly states and they realize that their political career is on the line if they vote for an AWB.

Time will tell and we may see the results of the push for strong gun control as soon as the midterm elections.

I personally feel in order to have any chance of success an AWB would have to pass this year as next year is the run up to the midterms. If such a law does pass expect to see more Tea Party Republicans in office in the future. Since they don't believe in compromise they will drive the even further right than it is today.

The real elephant in the room is not the big bad NRA but instead the 80,000,000 gun owners and the voting age members of their families. Many Americans do not like firearms and would love to see more restrictions placed on them but they do not have the significant amount of money invested in a gun collection such as many gun owners have. Most gun owners who enjoy shooting as many do have a collection of five to ten firearms many which cost $500 each or well over. The ban under consideration might only involve a class of semi-automatic firearms but any attempt to ban anything will cause gun owners to worry that all their firearms will be threatened in the future.

I feel the gun control movement is overreaching once again. There are reasonable changes we can make to our current laws that will prove effective in reducing gun violence and many gun owners support those ideas. Unfortunately when the gun control movement mentions "bans" gun owners get very upset and support for any and all changes purposed by gun control advocates is resisted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:44 PM

56. Your post is full of NRA talking points, to wit ...

"Too many elected Democrats come from gun friendly states and they realize that their political career is on the line if they vote for an AWB. " Polls show overwhelming support for gun control across the nation.


"The real elephant in the room is not the big bad NRA but instead the 80,000,000 gun owners and the voting age members of their families." No, it's the NRA. Most of those 80 million gun owners are repulsed by the NRA. Those that place their guns above the lives of their fellow citizens don't vote Democratic anyway.


"I feel the gun control movement is overreaching once again. " You mean like when they banned all the guns? Oh, wait.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #56)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:06 PM

59. True. Polls show support for more gun control but gun control is a broad subject. ...

If a polling agency asked me if I supported gun control or improvements to our gun control laws I would reply, "Yes." For example I do support improvements to the NICS background check system and the expansion of this law to require a background check for all private sales of firearms.

I also currently support all 23 of Obama's executive actions on this issue although I haven't had the time to review them thoroughly enough to form a final opinion.

However if the polling agency asked me if I supported another AWB or a ban on magazines with a capacity of over ten rounds, I would reply, "No." I feel the time and effort to try to pass such laws would mean that some very important legislation that might help us recover from the Great Recession might be delayed. I feel that laws like this will accomplish very little as even if they pass they will so watered down that they will simply be a "feel good" effort to appease voters who are upset by our recent tragic shootings.

I do wish to see violent gun crime decrease and for mass murders to become extremely rare but I can't imagine how much good a law banning and even confiscating AR-15s and similar rifles would accomplish as handguns and shotguns can also be used by criminals and those with serious mental issues to maim and murder. Since firearms can also be used by honest responsible people for legitimate self defense I can't support banning all such weapons.

Of course you may reply that no one is talking about banning all firearms and at this time you are right but as a gun owner I believe that that is the eventual goal of some in the gun control movement.

I will support my view that passing any AWB will be a enormous task and back it up with these articles:


POLITICS -- January 16, 2013 at 12:51 PM EDT
President Outlines Executive Actions for Gun Control

BY: ALEX BRUNS

***snip***

Congressional support for a new gun control bill seems tepid at best. Last Friday, on Nevada Week in Review (a PBS program from KLVX in Las Vegas), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid acknowledged as much.

"In the Senate, we're going to do what we think can get through the House and I'm not going to go through a bunch of these gyrations just to say we've done something," Reid said. "Is something that can pass the Senate? Maybe. Is it something that can pass the House? I doubt it."
http://gawker.com/5976447/this-is-whats-in-president-obamas-gun-control-package


Rep. Steny Hoyer: House support for assault weapons ban remains unclear
Posted by Ed O'Keefe on January 15, 2013 at 1:16 pm

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) did little Tuesday to refute suggestions that there isn’t enough support in the House to ban high-capacity assault weapons.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) suggested in a weekend interview that there is little chance of passing an assault weapons ban in the Senate and that he is doubtful it could ever pass the House.

“Let’s be realistic,” Reid told PBS’ “Nevada Week in Review.” “In the Senate, we’re going to do what we think can get through the House, and I’m not going to go through a bunch of these gyrations just to say we’ve done something. If we’re really legislators, the purpose of it is to pass legislation.”

Hoyer told reporters at his weekly meeting with reporters that “I don’t have an assessment right now, I think that’s been the case based on past history.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/01/15/rep-steny-hoyer-house-support-for-assault-weapons-ban-remains-unclear/


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:52 PM

57. NRA myth - Democrats lost Congress in 1994 as a result of the AWB

It is hard to make a case that the assault weapons ban was decisive in 1994.

The law certainly enraged many N.R.A. members and might explain the loss of certain Democratic seats. However, there were other major factors in the Democrats’ 1994 loss, starting with perceived Democratic arrogance and corruption (overdrafts at the House bank came to symbolize that).

Add to that voter unhappiness with Mr. Clinton’s budget, his health care fiasco, the Republican Party’s success in recruiting appealing candidates, and that ingenious Republican vehicle for nationalizing the elections known as the “Contract With America.” The contract, by the way, did not mention guns.

Mr. Clinton’s successful 1996 re-election campaign actually stressed his gun control achievements. James and Sarah Brady spoke in prime time at the ’96 Democratic convention, and Clinton campaign ads trumpeted his role in enacting the assault weapons ban and the ’93 Brady law requiring background checks for gun buyers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/opinion/09sat4.html?_r=1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 05:02 PM

58. Domestic gun issues ARE being combined with international gun traffic that gets American TROOPS,

POLICEMEN TO THE WORLD at the behest of the NRA, KILLED and results in the deaths of millions of innocent people in foreign countries.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022193033

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread