Would you support the recall of politicians that infringe on your RKBA?

[guardian]

Around the country some politicians are either introducing/voting for extreme and draconian measures limiting your 2nd Amendment rights. Would you support a recall effort and try to replace them with someone new that isn't antigun?

There is already talk of recall efforts here in Colorado. I wouldn't want to see rethugs gain seats. And in many districts I don't think there is much of a risk in a rethug winning. Especially in some good Democratic rural districts that have a strong gun culture. But I would support replacing antigun politicians with Democrats that have a more moderate take on gun control.

What are people hearing saying in other states? There have been some pretty extreme antigun proposals put forward by certain individuals. Some have or may be made into law. Other proposals may never get out of committe or pass the legislature. But should these politicians that want to piss on RKBA be allowed to stay in office?

I'm waiting to see how all this plays out. But I for one am willing to spend money to replace an anti-RKBA pol with a good pro-gun Democrat.

[hlthe2b]

1. I support LONG prison sentences for those threatening violence towards->those supporting gun control

LONG!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

2. As does just about everyone

[Buzz Clik]

4. You want long prison sentences for those supporting gun control?

Is that your intent?

[hlthe2b]

5. Aparently you misunderstood, though PP had no problem doing so.

I support long prison sentences for those threatening violence towards those who support gun control (which was indicated by violence towards --> those supporting gun control (given the need to shorten in a subject line). LONG sentences (and a forfeiture of future gun ownership rights).

[Buzz Clik]

7. Your second edit was illustrative. Thank you.

... and whew!

[hlthe2b]

11. Sorrry for the confusion...

I'm a little defensive when posting in this forum, since some here take great pleasure in intentionally misrepresenting the views of those opposing. But yes, you and I are of similar mind on this.

[guardian]

6. Are you saying that recall elections = violence?

Or are you just taking a tangent that has nothing to do with the OP?

[hlthe2b]

9. Apparently, you are oblivious to multiple violent threats against gun control advocates

Perhaps you should try reading a newspaper---or forums on DU, other than the gungeon.

[guardian]

18. why are you needlessly

conflating two unrelated issues? I.e., the OP regarding legal and peaceful recall process, and incidents of people threating violence.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

12. What do you mean by long?

I would absolutely support a prison sentence for those who threaten violence towards anyone. (Gun control supporters are not a special group.) I would support a sentence of probably not less 1 nor more than 3 years for the conviction of threatening violence.

For those convicted of actual violence (assault, aggravated assault...) I support life with no parole.

[Buzz Clik]

3. Exactly the opposite.

It's time for the so-called RKBA adovocates to quit perverting the Constitution. We need rational gun laws in this country, and it starts with politicians having the stones to put them on the table.

[rdharma]

8. "recall of politicians that infringe on your RKBA"

What do you mean by "infringe"?

[sarisataka]

10. Yes, completely...

I call it the next election where I can view a candidate's overall record of voting and causes they support. If I agree with most I vote to re-elect, if I disagree with most, I vote in the primary for another.

If we tries to recall every pol every time they do something we do not like, we would vote so often that we might as well be a participatory democracy and just direct vote on everything.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

13. In a word, no.

I don't support recall for anything whatsoever.

What I do support is impeachment and conviction.

The Heller and MacDonald decisions have divided politicians into two groups. There is the group will write laws contrary to those decisions who deserve prison for violating their oaths of office. There is the group that consists of everyone else.

[upaloopa]

28. You don't give someone prison for doing what you don't like.

Another court with a different make up not one with a majority of right wing fringe judges will over turn those rulings soon.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

30. re: "Another court with a different make up..."

This doesn't change the situation today. The law is what it is. Allowing folks to do as they please in the hope that one day the law will change is ridiculous.

Today in my state pot is illegal. If you're arrested for buying, selling..., you're going to trial. If you're found guilty, you're going to prison. The fact that in 6 months or 6 years that law may be changed doesn't keep you out of court or out of prison.

[GreenStormCloud]

38. Stare Decisis. N/T

[upaloopa]

41. You need to study history. Every SCOTUS decision on the

2nd amendment before the recent ones said that there is no individual right to bear arms. They all said it was a collective right meaning militia.
The Supreme Court recently overturned 150 years of settled law to say corporations can give unlimited money to campaigns.
So your stare decisis argument is bull shit.

[gejohnston]

42. name one of those

decisions

[upaloopa]

43. You can look them up

I am not going to respond to gunner questions.
I am sick and tired of gunner games,

[gejohnston]

45. I have looked them up,

the number is zero.

[upaloopa]

47. Well you don't do very good research

[gejohnston]

48. well, don't expect me to do your homework for you

IOW, back up your claims.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

52. FYI, you're talking to someone who lacks...

...the courtesy to reply to questions and encourages others in the same rudeness.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=112835

[upaloopa]

63. It won't work. People are on to gunner tactics.

You're all about winning your little debate games. Call me what you want. It only shows you can't win.
I am using declarative statements you ask bull shit questions. It's time you guys get a new strategy

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

67. You're too late.

I can't speak for any others but I've already got a new strategy.

[LibertyFox]

83. You rascally gunners, asking for examples! I'm on to you!

I will not fall for your clever tricks! You will fall before my blind assertions! FALL I SAY!

Your puny research will not avail you, my reality comes from a higher plane!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

54. Nice to see you are acknowledging you defeat more and more often

Your position is based on feelings not facts. The honest thing would be to acknowledge that.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

77. Unlike in the skit...

...by Monty Python, they've come here for a non-argument:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=112879
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=112960

[GreenStormCloud]

44. You are wrong.

The SCOTUS has never before ruled on the question ofindividual vs. collective right of 2A. The few decisions that were made ruled on some other aspect of 2A.

I have read history and have several books on 2A on my bookshelf.

It is rare for a SCOTUS to go against Stare Decisis.

[Warren Stupidity]

14. define extreme and draconian.

[oneshooter]

19. Better yet, lets hear from you what you would consider"extreme and draconian" gun laws.

[Warren Stupidity]

21. No thanks. The op used the phrase, the op needs to define what he meant.

[oneshooter]

22. So you have no such definition? Any ban would be ok with you?

[Warren Stupidity]

23. Wtf. I didn't start this thread, the op did. He used the phrase, not me.

[oneshooter]

24. So I asked you a serious question and all you do is avoid it.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Go interrogate somebody else.

[upaloopa]

29. Good for you for not playing 20 questions with gunners. That's playing into their gome.

Gunners, get a new tactic. We are on to you!

[apocalypsehow]

85. That's exactly right - and since the *facts* are not on our "pro gun progressives"* side,

they resort to such silly little diversionary games every time they get into a debate with an actual progressive on DU. Or they just type "Ibid" over and over, like a spoiled brat.



*( )

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

35. FYI

You seem to be asking a member of a group famous for their ability to define "assault weapon" for definitions.

[oneshooter]

36. Most of them will not answer a simple question......

so that we can have a discussion about it. However they DEMAND answers to all of their questions, so that they can call them"NRA talking points" and dismiss them offhand.
I was not "interrogating" anybody. Just asking a simple question. One that he seems terrified of answering.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

37. Agreed

I was just wondering if you really expected an answer.

[oneshooter]

46. Yes, if for no other reason than politness.

Aparently one can not expect even this from that group.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

53. As a friend once said to me...

..."What do want from a pig, but a grunt."

[oneshooter]

55. Pork chops, sausage, ham, bacon, ribs, and chicharrones.

At least the pig can be put to good use.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

56. Yum

I can jest taste me sum bar-b-q now!

[petronius]

15. No. I will consider a candidate's gun control/RKBA position when I cast my primary vote,

but I'm generally not in favor of recalls. Unless a candidate politician in office goes completely off the rails in a broad sense or turns out to have thoroughly misrepresented him/herself, I suppose - for differences of policy opinion (especially if it's just one policy area), I'll wait for the election...

[ileus]

16. yes...it's easy to find progressive 2A democrats in my area.

[Bjorn Against]

17. No, but I would support a recall of NRA sponsored gun nuts

[derby378]

20. If Michael Bloomberg supports one primary candidate...

...chances are pretty good that my votes going to the other guy. Bloomberg has pretty much cast his lot with the Republicans; let him muck around with their primaries as much as he wants.

[rdharma]

26. "my votes (sic) going to the other guy"

No surprise there, derby!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. Some of us don't support 1%ers like Bloomie. It would appear you do

[rdharma]

34. Straw man?

Appears so.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

39. Not really

There is one serious Bloomie fan here...seeing if there were others

[upaloopa]

27. People walking around armed and dangerous in this modern society is draconian not gun restrictions.

No one is taking your guns away! No one is taking your rights away! Society has a right to protect itself.

Your argument is mute. We will have new gun restrictions. 60% of Americans support tougher gun laws. Get use to it!

[Gold_from_lead]

57. I beg to differ.

If that were true, legislation would be flying from Washington, and its not. Feinstein would not have had to throw a temper tantrum to get her own hearing (after whining about the first being to pro-gun) Which she stacked to her liking.

Pretty much all that is seen so far is that pro gun control states have gone more pro gun-control or at least are trying to, many have failed. So there very well may be 60% (doubtful) but it not making legislation. which is good because 99% of gun owners have nothing to do with the whack-jobs who shoot up malls, schools, etc...Why should they be punished? They did nothing.

It may make people feel better, let some politicians score some points, but in the end, on the ground it will do nothing, there still will be untreated mentally ill people, running around harming people and whats the good in that?

This whole thing is focused on the wrong issue entirely.

[uppityperson]

58. What is the right issue then? And welcome to posting, been a long time coming. nt

[uppityperson]

68. I've another question for you

HOW did you remember your password for 11 years? I am in awe.

Sorry to hear about the lay off. I've been there also and it sucks.

And I agree we need more affordable, accessible, non-stigmatic (meaning it's considered fine to use it, rather like changing the oil in your car is fine) mental health care. Yay Reagan and societal perceptions for helping keep that impossible.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

79. Adam Lanza did not use a pistol at Sandy Hook Elementary (other than on himself)

Stop peddling bullshit.

[jmg257]

80. Well- wrong on 2 out of 3. Aurora=M&P-15, Newtown=Bushmaster XM-15

Among others.

"None of the shooters Aurora, Newtown, or Giffords used a rifle. At Newtown and Aurora rifles were present but not used. Aurora was shot gun, Giffords was pistol, and Newtown was a pistol (s)."

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...wrong.

So - what else ya got?


ETA: proof just in case you were just simply mistaken.

"All 26 of Lanza's victims were shot with the .223-caliber semi-automatic rifle" CTSP Lt J Vance

"gunman threw two canisters emitting a gas or smoke, ..He then fired a 12-gauge Remington 870 Express Tactical shotgun..He also fired a Smith & Wesson M&P15 semi-automatic rifle with a 100-round drum magazine, which malfunctioned after reportedly firing fewer than 30 rounds" wiki, numerous reports.

[upaloopa]

62. We have time. There will be new laws.

[upaloopa]

66. You should repeat that to one of the family of some

1st grader shot in the head in CT.
There will be more mass killings and then more calls for gun control.
The attempts to just let this blow over won't work anymore.
One bill at a time. And though you don't think so this is important and we've learned to walk and chew gun at the same time. Gun control groups are growing every day.
You saw how Bloomberg destroyed the NRA candidate in Chicago last week. There are more to come.

[upaloopa]

70. I work in the fiscal department of a county

alcohol, drug and mental health dept.
I write grant applications, do grant reporting, and annual cost reports for mental health and alcohol and drug programs.
The funds for mental health come from Medicaid passed through the state to the counties, Medicare for eligible adults, Federal grants and state sales taxes and vehicle license fees, private insurance and co-pays. Who we can serve is determined by the revenue we get. Revenue is not increasing meaning every year we get less and serve less.
Saying we should do more mental health instead of gun control is obfuscation.
We can't cure mental illness nor can we afford more services.
We can try to do something about gun violence.
Stop using mental illness as a means to obfuscate gun control.

[upaloopa]

78. Well I showed you why we can't have more

mental health services because we can't pay for them. Yet you again call for mental health work and no gun restrictions.
You're not convincing me and you don't want anything but gunner talking points so we are wasting our time.
Right now pro gun legislation groups are increasing membership and funds. What happens happens no matter what we do here. Give some money to the NRA and I will give some money to the gun control groups.

[mwrguy]

31. Recalling Democrats is not exactly in keeping with the mission of this site.

And we all know who you think is infringing on your "rights".

[ProgressiveProfessor]

61. But primarying them are

[FamilyMan]

72. "Rights"

That "right" is clearly written in the Bill of Rights. And anyone who wants to argue that it somehow doesn't apply these days....then one could easily say that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to gays since there was no gay community in the new land back when the Constitution was first drafted. Apples to Apples.

[Eleanors38]

33. Pribably not. It would be like calling for Obama's impeachment because...

he continued much if the same Bush/Patriot Act policies.

[Paladin]

40. There Was A DU Gungeon Poll, Prior To The 2008 Election.

In that poll, 45% of the respondents indicated a willingness to vote Republican, on the basis of gun policy (another 3% said they would stay at home rather than vote Democratic, once again on the basis of gun policy).

So if there isn't a "good pro-gun Democrat" handy for replacement purposes, what are you prepared to do? Quite a few of your fellow DU gun activists have already indicated the lengths to which they are willing to go, to their everlasting discredit.

[locks]

50. Proud to be a Coloradan

Seven good bills sponsored by good Democrats are being voted on in committee at the capitol today and we are hoping they will pass the legislature and be signed by the governor. They are neither extreme or draconian, they do not limit anyone's rights. They will help to protect all Coloradans from the gun slaughter we have almost become accustomed to. Gabby Gifford's husband Mark Kelly, the sister of a teacher killed at Newtown, and survivors of Columbine and Aurora testified for these needed gun control laws and I want to thank them and all the great Democrats who have worked so hard to get these bills this far.

[gejohnston]

60. perhaps but

If I were a Coloradan, those same Democrats would hear from me about their sexist and illogical arguments against campus carry. When I read them, I had to double check to make sure these were in fact Democrats.

[Gothmog]

51. Recalls not allowed for Federal officeholders

The concept of recall has its place but not as to federal officeholders. Under the Constitution, one can not recall a US Senator or US Represntative.

[Remmah2]

64. We can change that law too.

nt

[Gothmog]

75. Only by amending the US Constitution

[FamilyMan]

71. YES

Yes. Obama made the mistake of thinking that most gun owners are 'southerners' or 'Republicans'....boy is he in for a rude awakening. FBI and DOJ stats all prove that Gun Control does not work and only helps criminals, since they never ever follow gun control laws. Criminals don't buy their rifles from a store or show that charges $1,200 per rifle and subject themselves to a background check and a recorded transaction. They buy from offshore arms dealers at ~$150 per rifle (seen it myself)...no law is going to stop that. The funniest thing is how the media tries to make it seem like they buy arms from gun shows that are all filled to the brim with off-duty and on-duty cops shopping around. I've been to many gun shows around the country and they are all legit and filled with older subtle folks...you won't see any baggy pants or cartel members at one like they would like you to believe.

FBI and DOJ facts prove gun control doesn't work and only helps criminals. Facts are against the anti-gunners, that's why they have to unsuccessfully try to pull at heart-strings to try to push their ineffective propaganda.

6 Senators are up for re-election in deep southern states next year where Obama got significantly less than 50% of the vote, another few are up in states that have large gun owning populations, not to mention it's a mid-term elction where our party never does well.

Our Democratic family is voting them all out...just like we did with Clinton...only this time there are over 40 million Democratic gun owners and we are united with Republicans on this issue.

[Skip Intro]

82. Yes I would. nt

[frebrd]

84. Absolutely!

Yes, I would.