Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SecularMotion

(7,981 posts)
46. The Deadly Myth of Gun Control in Electoral Politics
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 05:30 AM
Sep 2012
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
Who needs Congress? Executive order and some good judges can do what's necessary. Loudly Sep 2012 #1
Consequences will be the same Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #2
so how would you vote? . . . who would you send your $$$ to? . . . who would you make calls for? DrDan Sep 2012 #3
how would you label Jerry Brown? gejohnston Sep 2012 #6
Well Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #7
Voters can't do shit about what judges want. ileus Sep 2012 #21
Sorry glacierbay Sep 2012 #4
Because some people are using high-capacity... Deep13 Sep 2012 #5
Ditto 1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #8
Well Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #9
Always with the nasty tone 1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #15
I am trying to understand but, I am sorry - I do not see the nasty tone in that post Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #17
Perhaps a more civil tone here... MercutioATC Sep 2012 #19
Thank you. That was very pretty. 1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #20
You RegieRocker Sep 2012 #42
Yes, that's correct 1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #43
And I am impressed. Don't let us put you off here in the gun forum, TPaine7 Sep 2012 #44
Is Reasonable Argument a member of the NRA? Marengo Sep 2012 #25
If by "nasty tone" you mean truth and uncomfortable facts, then yeah, maybe so. PavePusher Sep 2012 #28
assault rifles have been tightly regulated and registered since the 1930s gejohnston Sep 2012 #12
You mean rifles like this one? oneshooter Sep 2012 #22
I'm thinking of the 34-rd. Glock magazines... Deep13 Sep 2012 #23
What is the difference between those and the one shown? oneshooter Sep 2012 #24
I'm guessing 10-20 rounds. nt Deep13 Sep 2012 #35
So it is ONLY the ammunition capacity that you care about? oneshooter Sep 2012 #48
Mostly, and concealability. Deep13 Sep 2012 #50
The "regulation" you refer to is related to the militia, not the people when outside the militia. PavePusher Sep 2012 #52
The "people's right" is the right to insure regulated, state security. Deep13 Sep 2012 #55
Take a look at what actually happened in real life. GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #53
Why Glock? gejohnston Sep 2012 #26
You mean the Five-Seven? Deep13 Sep 2012 #34
You can get 30 round mags for the five seven gejohnston Sep 2012 #36
I've got 20-rounders for my Beretta carbine. Deep13 Sep 2012 #40
I believe the long magazines were built for the full-auto Glock 18 krispos42 Sep 2012 #45
They're great in the G19 at the range. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #57
Collapsible stocks? They only shorten the weapon by 4.72 inches on an M4 type rifle. That's not rDigital Sep 2012 #27
I know it's not the manufacturer's purpose. Deep13 Sep 2012 #30
he didn't use an AK gejohnston Sep 2012 #32
I see. Deep13 Sep 2012 #41
The Batman shooter used an M&P-15 (AR-15), a Remington 870 shotgun and a Glock 22. No AK in sight. rDigital Sep 2012 #37
"collapsible, concealable stocks" PavePusher Sep 2012 #29
I realize the buffer tube limits the collapsability Deep13 Sep 2012 #31
with a 14 inch barrel, gejohnston Sep 2012 #33
A fixed flash-suppresor counts as part of the barrel length. (welded or pinned) PavePusher Sep 2012 #39
Sigh. PavePusher Sep 2012 #38
Some people are also using fertilizer and fuel oil to commit mass murder. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #58
John Kasich proved you wrong. safeinOhio Sep 2012 #10
This was discussed in another post Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #11
All the excuses in the world do not safeinOhio Sep 2012 #14
McCain was never all that popular with gun owners. ... spin Sep 2012 #54
How much was due to high tech ballot stuffing? gejohnston Sep 2012 #13
Clinton's anti-gun stance was enough for me to not vote for him! Yavapai Sep 2012 #16
it is the Democratic Party, has been since Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans gejohnston Sep 2012 #18
The Deadly Myth of Gun Control in Electoral Politics SecularMotion Sep 2012 #46
I agree with that analysis Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #47
So why, exactly, are you crusading for a revival of the 1993 issue? AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #49
Yeah, let's just the NRA run the entire show. MotherPetrie Sep 2012 #51
Why do you equate private gun ownership with the NRA? MercutioATC Sep 2012 #56
You make a damn good point. ... spin Sep 2012 #59
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»So for the anti-gunners, ...»Reply #46