Idealogical purity on guns regardless of party affiliation?

[beevul]

"NRA Dems are just as bad as any other NRAer's or freepers"

That statement was made in another forum here at DU, in the context of an nra endorsed Democrat. Namely Doctor Dean. I thought it would be interesting to see what the folks "down here" in the gungeon think of it. Honestly, it made me pretty angry. This is exactly the kind of shit that turns voters away, IMO. I can just imagine how those inclined to paint ALL Dems as gun grabbers could run with it. How can this party get past the "idealogically pure on guns or your a freeper/nra'er/gun-nut" crowd?

What is the potential cost of attitudes like that and the statements they birth like the above, and how can we get them to see the potential damage it causes from both infighting within and attacks from outside?

Is there any hope?

[WildEyedLiberal]

1. I think blanket statements usually

And I DO find it interesting that so many people who excuse Dean's NRA ties somehow manage to condemn other Dems for similiar single issues or votes. It's a tad hypocritical to me.

(Edited for clarity.)

[billbuckhead]

2. Name some likeable NRA Dems? Zell Miller maybe?

BTW, where were all these NRA Dems when Dean managed to lose New Hampshire and Iowa?

[WildEyedLiberal]

5. Sorry I didn't make myself clear

I do NOT approve of Dean's NRA pandering. In fact, I think it's highly disturbing. I was trying to point of the hypocrisy of SOME DUers who think it's perfectly okay to abandon their liberal principles about gun control to support Howard Dean, and yet make reckless blanket statements about other Dems (like Steny Hoyer for example) and call them DINOs for *one vote*.

Sorry I confused you. The speeches you linked to were good, also; appreciate it.

[benEzra]

10. Most of our state offices here in NC...

were won easily by NRA-endorsed, pro-gun Democrats, from the governor on down. (This being the same state that Kerry/Edwards lost 45%/55%, despite the fact that this is Edwards' own home state.) Most of said Democrats were NRA-endorsed over NRA A-rated repubs.

[beevul]

35. "Name some likeable NRA Dems?"

Ok, you asked for it...


Heres a bunch of NRA Endorsed Democrats..."Bush-DeLay Brownshirts" :eyes: This is only 36 states worth. They all Zell wannabees?

(D) Howard Dean (D) Mark L. Doumit,(D) Jim Hargrove, (D) Jean Berkey, (D)Brian Hatfield, (D) Brian Blake, (D) William 'Ike' Eickmeyer, (D) Joe Baca, (D) Mike Schneider, (D) Barbara Buckley, (D)Genie Ohrenschall,(D) Ellen Koivisto, (D) John Oceguera, (D) Jerry D. Claborn, (D)Richard D. Perkins, (D) Mo Denis, (D) David Parks, (D) James Alexander, (D) Gino White, (D)Wendy Jaquet, (D) Mike McGrath, (D) Jim Elliott, (D) Lane L. Larson, (D) Kim Gillan, (D) Paul Clark, (D)Brennan Ryan,(D)George Golie, (D) Bill Wilson, (D) John W. Parker,(D) Margarett H. Campbell, (D) Ralph L. Lenhart, (D) Gary Matthews, (D) Monica J. Lindeen, (D)Gary L. Forrester, (D) Jayne Mockler, (D) Larry Caller, (D) Keith Goodenough, (D) Ross Diercks, (D)George W. Bagby,(D)Marty Martin, (D)Ann Robinson,(D) *Mary Meyer Gilmore, (D) Bill Thompson, (D) Jim Matheson, (D)Mike Dmitrich, (D) Eli H. Anderson,(D)Laren "Larry" C. Livingston, (D) Carl Duckworth, (D) Brad King, (D)Linda Aguirre, (D) Marsha Arzberger, (D)Pete Campos, (D)Shannon Robinson, (D)Mary Kay Papen, (D)Phil Griego,(D)Patricia Lundstrom, (D)Dona Irwin, (D)Andrew Nunez, (D) Joseph Cervantes, (D)Pauline Ponce, (D)Thomas Swisstack, (D)Bob Hagedorn,(D)Lois Tochtrop, (D) Liane "Buffie" McFadyen, (D)Max Sandlin, (D)Nick Lampson, (D) Henry Cuellar, (D) Mark Homer, (D) Chuck Hopson, (D) Jim McReynolds, (D) Robby Cook, (D) Dan Ellis, (D)Patrick M. Rose, (D) John Mabry, (D) David Farabee, (D) James "Pete" Laney, (D) Mike Villarreal, (D) Kevin Bailey, (D) Dan Boren, (D) Jim Wilson, (D) *Jeff Rabon, (D)Richard Lerblance, (D)Susan Paddack, (D) Charlie Laster, (D) Mike Morgan, (D) Jerry Ellis, (D)Glen "Bud" Smithson, (D)Neil Brannon, (D) Mike Brown, (D)Joe Eddins, (D) Ben Sherrer, (D)Barbara Staggs, (D)Ray Miller,(D) Terry Harrison, (D)Paul Roan, (D) John Carey, (D) Dale Turner,(D) Bob Plunk, (D) John Young, (D) Danny Morgan, (D) Joe Sweeden,(D) Terry Hyman, (D) Raymond McCarter, (D)David Braddock, (D) James Covey, (D) Purcy Walker, (D) Abe Deutschendorf, (D) Roy "Butch" Hooper, (D) *Joe Dorman, (D)Lucky Lamons, (D) Darrell Gilbert, (D) John Auffet, (D) *Debbie Blackburn, (D)Rebecca Hamilton, (D)Al Lindley, (D) Mark Gilstrap, (D)Chris Steineger, (D) Jim Barone,(D) Anthony Hensley, (D) Henry Helgerson, (D) Doug Gatewood, (D)Robert Grant, (D) Bill Feuerborn, (D) Jerry Williams, (D) James Miller,(D) Bonnie Sharp, (D) Tom Burroughs, (D) Margaret Long, (D)Candy Ruff,
(D) Harold Lane, (D) Jerry Henry, (D) Sid Regnier, (D) Jim Ward, (D) Janice Pauls, (D) Dennis Mckinney, (D)Stephanie Herseth, (D)Jim Peterson, (D) Gil Koetzle, (D) Garry Moore, (D) Frank Kloucek, (D) David Sigdestad, (D) Dawn Jaeger, (D) Gerald Lange, (D) Richard Engels, (D) Mary Glenski, (D) Gary Stodelmon, (D) Dale Hargens, (D) Paul Valandra, (D) Thomas James Van Norman, (D) Mike Wilson, (D) David O'Connell, (D) Larry Robinson, (D)Joel Heitkamp, (D) Dorvan Solberg, (D) Lyle Hanson, (D)Joe Kroeber, (D) Ole Aarsvold, (D)Ralph Metcalf, (D) Arden Anderson, (D) Bill Amerman, (D)Pam Gulleson, (D) Collin Peterson, (DFL) Kent Eken, (DFL) Loren A. Solberg, (DFL) Tom Rukavina, (DFl) Anthony "Tony" Setich, (DFL) David Dill, (DFL) Paul Marquart, (DFL) Mary Ellen Otremba, (DFL) Al Juhnke, (DFL) Lyle Koenen, (D) Leonard Boswell, (D) John Kibbie, (D)Dick Dearden, (D)Eugene Fraise, (D) Michael Gronstal, (D) Greg Stevens, (D) Marcella Frevert, (D) Dolores Mertz, (D) Roger Thomas, (D) Dick Taylor, (D) Geri Huser, (D) Jim Lykam, (D) Philip Wise, (D) Kurt Swaim, (D) Paul Shomshor, (D) Ike Skelton, (D) Victor Callahan, (D) Jim Whorton, (D) Rachel Bringer, (D)Wes Shoemyer, (D)Terry Witte, (D) Wayne Henke, (D) Thomas Green, (D) Gary Kelly, (D) Mike Sager, (D) Terry Young, (D) Ray Salva, (d)Paul LeVota, (D) Curt Dougherty, (D) Al Liese, (D) Allen Icet, (D) Tim Meadows, (D) Ron Casey, (D) Wes Wagner,(D) Harold Selby, (D) Belinda Harris, (D) Frank Barnitz, (D) J.C. Kuessner, (D) Terry Swinger, (D) Mike Ross, (D) Randy Laverty, (D) Jack Crichter,
(D)Jim Hill, (D) Jimmy Jeffres, (D)Gene Jeffress, (D) Percy Malone,
(D) Ken Cowling, (D) Robert Jeffrey, (D)Randy Rankin, (D) Lenville Evans, (D) Jay Bradford, (D)Scott Sullivan, (D) Dewayne Mack, (D)Bob Mathis,(D) Dawn Creekmore, (D) Dwight Fite, (D) Janet Johnson, (D) Sandra Prater, (D) Jeff Wood, (D)Will Bond, (D) Preston Scroggin,
(D)David Evans, (D) David Dunn, (D) Wayne Nichols,(D)Leroy Dangeau,
(D) Bill Stovall, (D) Charles Ormond, (D) Travis Boyd, (D) Dave Obey,
(D)Roger Breske, (D )Robert W. Wirch, (D) Julie Lassa, (D) Terry Van Akkeren, (D) John P. Steinbrink, (D ) Amy Sue Vruwink, (D) Marlin D. Schneider, (D)Barbara Gronemus, (D) Jerry Costello, (D) Pat Welch,
(D)William Haine, (D)Gary Forby, (D) Jack Franks, (D) Mike Boland,
(D)Patrick Verschoore, (D)Careen Gordon,(D)Frank Mautino, (D)Lisa Dugan, (D) Michael Smith, (D) Gary Hannig, (D) Robert Flider, (D) Kurt Granberg, (D) Bill Grunloh, (D)Steve Davis,(D)Jay Hoffman, (D) Thomas Holbrook, (D) Dan Reitz, (D) John Bradley, (D) Brandon Phelps,
(D)Gene Taylor, (D) Bud Cramer, (D) Sanford Bishop, (D) Tim Golden,
(D)Michael S. Meyer Von Bremen, (D) Steve Thompson, (D) Valencia Seay, (D)Steve Henson, (D) Mike Snow, (D) Barbara Massey Reece, (D) Buddy Childers, (D) Bill Cummings, (D) Jeanette Jamieson, (D) Don Wix, (D) *Stephanie Stuckey Benfield, (D) Hugh Floyd, (D) R. M. Channell, (D) Curtis S. Jenkins, (D) Lee Howell, (D) Robert F. Ray, (D) Bobby Eugene Parham, (D) Jimmy Lord, (D) Dubose Porter, (D) Johnny W. Floyd, (D) Greg Morris, (D) Penny Houston, (D) Ellis Black, (D) Ron Borders, (D) Jay Shaw, (D) Hinson Mosley, (D) Allen Boyd,
(D) Will S. Kendrick, (D) Dwight Stansel, (D) Sheri Mcinvale, (D) Lincoln Davis, (D) Jim Cooper, (D) Bart Gordon, (D) John Tanner, (D ) Tommy Kilby, (D ) Jerry W. Cooper , (D ) Jo Ann Graves, (D ) Rosalind Kurita,(D) Roy Herron, (D ) John S. Wilder, Sr., (D ) Harry Tindell, (D) Dennis Ferguson, (D ) Jim Hackworth, (D ) George Fraley, (D ) Frank Buck, (D ) John Mark Windle, (D ) Jere L. Hargrove, (D ) Charles Curtiss, (D ) Mike McDonald, (D) Stratton Bone, (D) Michael L. Turner, (D ) Ben West, Jr., (D ) Curt Cobb, (D ) Joe Fowlkes,(D) Eugene E. (Gene) Davidson, (D) David A. Shepard, (D) John C. Tidwell, (D ) Willie (Butch) Borchert, (D) Mark L. Maddox, (D) Phillip Pinion, (D) Craig Fitzhugh, (D) Ben Chandler, (D) Dennis L. Null, (D) Joey Pendleton, (D) Walter "Doc" Blevins, (D) Johnny Ray Turner, (D) Ray S. JonesII, (D) Denise Harper Angel,
(D ) Charles Geveden, (D) Fred Nesler, (D) Frank Rasche, (D) Mike Cherry, (D) *J.R. Gray, (D) *John A. Arnold JR., (D) *James E. Bruce, (D) *Joseph E. "EDDIE" Ballard, (D) Gross Clay Lindsay, (D) *Jim Gooch JR, (D)Tommy Thompson, (D) Brent Yonts, (D) Dottie J. Sims, (D) Jody Richards, (D) Rogers Thomas, (D) Rob Wilkey, (D) Jimmie Lee, (D) James H. Thompson, (D) Steve Riggs, (D) Perry B. Clark, (D) Robert R. Damron, (D) Rick W. Rand, (D) Royce W. Adams,(D) Charlie Hoffman, (D) Arnold R. Simpson, (D) Mitchel B. "Mike" Denham, (D) John Will Stacy, (D) Carolyn Belcher, (D) Don Pasley, (D) Adrian K. Arnold,(D)Susan Westrom, (D) Harry Moberly JR, (D) Rick Nelson, (D) Ted "TEDDY" Edmonds,(D)Ancel Smith, (D) W. Keith Hall, (D) Charles "CHUCK" Meade, (D) Robin L. Webb, (D) Hubert Collins , (D) Tanya Pullin, (D) Rocky Adkins, (D) Baron Hill , (D) Craig Fry, (D) Patrick Bauer, (D) Thomas Kromkowski, (D) Scott Pelath, (D) Dan Stevenson, (D) Chester Dobis, (D) Robert Kuzman, (D) Joe Micon, (D) Sheila Klinker, (D) Ron Herrell, (D) Ron Liggett, (D) Tiny Adams, (D) Terri Jo Austin, (D) Scott Reske, (D) Dale Grubb, (D) Clyde Kersey, (D) Alan Chowning, (D) Phil Pflum, (D) Peggy Welch, (D) Jerry Denbo, (D) Dave Crooks, (D) John Gregory Frenz A, (D) Terry Goodin, (D) Robert Bischoff, (D) Markt Lytle, (D) Paul Robertson, (D) James Bottorff, (D) William Cochran, (D) Dennie Oxley, (D) Russ Stilwell, (D) Dennis Avery, (D) Trent VanHaaften, (D) Win Moses Jr., (D) Ted Strickland, (D) Kimberly Zurz, (D) Charlie Wilson (D) Marc Dann, (D) Kenneth Carano, (D) John Boccieri, (D) William Hartnett, (D) Derrick Seaver, (D) Todd Book, (D) John Domenick, (D) L. George Distel, (D) John Dingell, (D) John J. Gleason, (D) Doug Bennett, (D) Jennifer Elkins, (D) Matt Gillard, (D) Stephen Adamini, (D) Rich Brown,

[billbuckhead]

36. Any link to this

I've only heard of a couple of these people. I know our previous Georgia Governor Roy Barnes was endorsed by the NRA but the Confederate flag nuts and the crooked voting machines got him.

[beevul]

41. The horses mouth...

I went to the NRA to see what Democrats they were they were endorsing.

www.nrapvf.com

I know the NRA is not usually considered a credible source, but its them doing the endorsing, so I figured I would go right to the source.

The folks I listed were endorsed in 2004. Again, those are only 36 states worth.

[beevul]

43. The rest of them...

The other 16 states worth.


(D) John W. Drummond, (D) Glenn Reese, (D) Linda H. Short, (D) Thomas L. Moore, (D) NikkiI Setzler, (D) Gerald Molloy, (D) Kent Williams, (D) John Yancey Mcgill, (D) John C. Land III, (D) *E. Dewitt Mccraw,
(D) *Olin R. Phillips, (D) Walt Mcleod, (D) Mike Anthony, (D) Herb Kirsh, (D) Douglas Jennings, JR., (D) Denny W. Neilson, (D) James A. "JIM" Battle, JR., (D) C. Alex Harvin III, (D) Jimmy C. Bales, (D) Thomas N. Rhoad, (D) Harry L. Ott, JR., (D) Bill Bowers, (D) Mike Easley, (D) Beverly Perdue, (D) Roy Cooper,(D) Mike Mcintyre, (D) Marc Basnight, (D) Scott Thomas, (D) Clark Jenkins, (D) Robert Holloman, (D) Cecil Hargett, JR., (D) R. C. Soles, JR., (D) Charles Albertson, (D) A. B. Swindell, (D) Tony Rand, (D) Daniel Clodfelter,
(D) David Hoyle, (D) Walter Dalton, (D) Joe Queen, (D) Martin Nesbitt, (D) Bill Owens, JR, (D) Bill Culpepper, III, (D)Alice Underhill, (D) Russell Tucker, (D) Arthur Williams, III, (D) Edith Warren, (D) Marian Mclawhorn, (D) William Wainwright, (D) Dewey Hill, (D) Edd Nye, (D) Joe Tolson, (D) Jim Crawford, (D) Marvin W Lucas,
(D) Douglas Yongue, (D) Ronnie Sutton, (D) Lucy Allen, (D) Earl Jones, (D) Alice Bordsen, (D) Pryor Gibson,(D) Lorene Coates, (D) Hugh Holliman, (D) Walt Church, (D) Jim Harrell, (D) James Black, (D) Bob England,(D)D. Bruce Goforth, (D) Rick Boucher, (D ) Joe Manchin, III, (D ) Darrell McGraw, (D) Alan Mollohan, (D) Nick Rahall, (D) Jeffrey V. Kessler, (D) Robert H. "Bob" Plymale, (D) John Pat Fanning , (D) Earl Ray Tomblin, (D ) Billy Wayne Bailey, Jr., (D) Anita Skeens Caldwell, (D) Shirley Love, (D) Bill Sharpe, (D) Roman W. Prezioso, Jr. (D)Jon Blair Hunter, (D) Mike Ross , (D ) Joe DeLong, (D) Randy Swartzmiller, (D) Tim Ennis, (D) Kenneth D. Tucker, (D) Scott G. Varner, (D) Dave Pethtel, (D) J.D. Beane, (D) Brady R. Paxton, (D ) Kevin J. Craig, (D) Jim Morgan, (D) Don Perdue, (D ) Joe C. Ferrell , (D ) K. Steven Kominar, (D ) Harry Keith White, (D) Richard Browning, (D) W. Richard "Rick" Staton, (D) Eustace Frederick , (D) Marshall Long, (D) Gerald L. Crosier,
(D) *Virginia Mann, (D) *Robert S. Kiss, (D) Ron Thompson, (D) Thomas W. Campbell, (D ) Tom Louisos, (D) David G. Perry, (D) John Pino , (D) Sharon Spencer, (D)Jon Amores , (D) Mark Hunt, (D ) William F. "Bill" Stemple, (D) Brent Boggs, (D) Sam Argento, (D) Joe Talbott, (D ) Bill Hartman, (D) Bill Proudfoot, (D) Doug Stalnaker, (D) Mary M. Poling, (D) Samuel J. "Sam" Cann, (D) Robert "Bob" Beach, (D) Larry A. Williams, (D)Stan Shaver, (D) Harold Michael, (D) Jerry L. Mezzatesta, (D) Bob Tabb, (D) Paul Kanjorski, (D) John Murtha,(D)Tim Holden, (D) Vincent Fumo, (D) Michael O'Pake, (D) Tom Scrimenti, (D) Joseph Markosek, (D) Frank Dermody, (D) Victor Lescovitz, (D) Timothy Solobay, (D) Peter Daley, (D) Lawrence Roberts, (D) James Shaner,(D) Joseph Petrarca, (D) James Casorio, (D) Thomas Tangretti, (D) Edward Wojnaroski, (D) Thomas Yewcic,
(D) Camille "Bud" George, (D) Michael Hanna, (D) Robert Belfanti, (D) James Wansacz, (D) Todd Eachus,(D)Kevin Blaum, (D) Neal Goodman, (D) Richard Grucela, (D) William T. Stachowski, (D) Ginny A. Fields,
(D) Robert K. Sweeney, (D) Aileen M. Gunther, (D) Bill Magee, (D) Darrel J. Aubertine, (D) Francine DelMonte,(D)Robin Schimminger, (D) William L. Parment, (D) Michael Michaud, (D) Bruce Bryant, (D) Christopher Hall,(D) John Martin, (D) Troy Jackson, (D) Rosaire Paradis, (D) Jeremy Fischer, (D) Raymond Wotton, (D) George Bunker, (D) John Wakin, (D) Edward Dugay, (D) Thomas Watson, (D) John Richardson, (D) Sonya Sampson, (D) Rodney Jennings, (D) Susanne Ketterer, (D) Janet Mills, (D) John Patrick, (D) Robert Duplessie, (D) Timothy Driscoll, (D) Elizabeth Ready, (D) Jeb Spaulding, (D) Dick Sears, (D) James Leddy, (D) Virginia Lyons, (D) Robert Starr, (D) Sara Kittell, (D) Richard Mazza, (D) Susan Bartlett, (D) Mark Macdonald, (D) Ann Cummings,(D) John Campbell, (D) Matt Dunne, (D) Peter Welch, (D) Alice Miller, (D) Jim Mccullough, (D) Mark Larson,
(D) John Patrick Tracy, (D) Albert Audette, (D) George Allard, (D) Richard Howrigan, (D) Avis Gervais,(D) Kathleen Keenan, (D) Albert Perry, (D) Floyd Nease, (D) Shap Smith, (D) John Rodgers, (D) Maxine Grad,(D) Harry Monti, (D) Tony Klein, (D) Michael Obuchowski, (D) Carolyn Partridge, (D) Steve Darrow, (D) Alice Emmons, (D) Jim Masland, (D) Alice Nitka, (D) Daniel Adams Eaton, (D) Roland J. Lefebvre, (D) Claire D. Clarke, (D) Robert E. Martel, (D) Dominick J. Ruggerio, (D) Frank A. Ciccone III, (D) Walter S. Felag Jr.,
(D) John F. McBurney III, (D) Joseph A. Montalbano, (D) Michael J. Damiani, (D) Roger Badeau, (D) Marc A. Cote, (D) John J. Tassoni Jr., (D) Joseph M. Polisena, (D) Beatrice A. Lanzi, (D) Michael J. McCaffrey,(D) Stephen D. Alves, (D) Leonidas P. Raptakis, (D) Peter G. Palumbo, (D) Robert B. Jacquard, (D) Matthew J. McHugh, (D) Brian Patrick Kennedy, (D) Stephen R. Ucci, (D) Joseph J. Voccola, (D) Peter J. Petrarca,(D) Roger A. Picard, (D) Arthur J. Corvese, (D) William San Bento Jr., (D) Jan Malik, (D) Michael B. Forte Jr.,
(D) Robert O'Leary, (D) Marc Pacheco, (D) Stephen Brewer, (D) Richard Moore, (D) William "Smitty" Pignatelli,(D)Stephen Kulik, (D) Daniel Keenan, (D) Peter Kocot, (D) Geoffrey Hall, (D) Patricia Walrath, (D) Stephen LeDuc, (D) William Greene, Jr., (D) Bruce Ayers, (D) William Galvin, (D) Garrett Bradley, (D) Christine Canavan,(D) Thomas O'Brien, (D) Brian Knuuttila, (D) Anne Gobi, (D) Harold Naughton, Jr., (D) John Fresolo, (D) Biagio "Billy" Ciotto, (D) Joan V. Hartley, (D) Tom Colapietro, (D) Antonio "Tony" Guerrera, (D) Brian J. O'Connor,(D)Edward E. Moukawsher, (D) Steven T. Mikutel, (D) Jack Malone, (D) Linda A. Orange, (D) Michael J. Cardin,(D)Stephen M. Jarmoc, (D) Peggy Sayers, (D) George M. Wilber, (D) Reginald G. Beamon, (D)Jeffrey J. Berger,(D) Roger Michele, (D) Kosta Diamantis, (D) John "Corky" Mazurek, (D) Emil "Buddy" Altobello, (D) Peter J. Panaroni Jr., (D) Stephen Dargan, (D) Louis Esposito Jr., (D) James Amann, (D) Richard Roy, (D) Terry Backer,(D) Kevin Ryan, (D) Ruth Ann Minner, (D) Anthony Deluca, (D) Robert Venables, SR , (D) Bethany Hall-Long,(D)John Vansant, (D) Michael Mulrooney, (D) John Viola,(D) Bruce Ennis.

[billbuckhead]

3. John Kerry said "Our party will never be the choice of the NRA"

"And courage means standing up for gun safety, not retreating from the issue out of political fear or trying to have it both ways. I’m a hunter and I believe in the Second Amendment but I’ve never gone hunting with an AK-47. Our party will never be the choice of the NRA -- and I’m not looking to be the candidate of the NRA. "

John Kerry from his announcement speech for president.

<http://64.177.207.201/pages/8_401.html>

And here's Michael Moore about what Wes Clark told the NRA

"On the issue of gun control, this hunter and gun owner will close the gun show loophole (which would have helped prevent the massacre at Columbine) and he will sign into law a bill to create a federal ballistics fingerprinting database for every gun in America (the DC sniper, who bought his rifle in his own name, would have been identified after the FIRST day of his killing spree). He is not afraid, as many Democrats are, of the NRA. His message to them: "You like to fire assault weapons? I have a place for you. It's not in the homes and streets of America. It's called the Army, and you can join any time!"

<http://clark04.com/moore/>

[benEzra]

11. The Army doesn't use "assault weapons"...

they use actual automatic weapons, which are NFA Class III restricted for ordinary civilians, unlike the **CIVILIAN** guns covered by the AWB.

No military on this planet uses civilian AK-47 lookalikes that work like ordinary self-loading hunting rifles. No military on the planet uses non-automatic-capable AR-15's. Sheesh.

As far as I know, the ONLY significant firearm used by the Army that was affected by the AWB was the Beretta M9 pistol, which was and is a civilian handgun to start with, and ONLY because of its 15-round magazine. (The AWB jacked up the price on full-capacity replacement Beretta magazines by 400% to 500%.) OK, maybe the SIG handgun too (M11/civilian P226?)

It was precisely statements like Clark's that make some leading Democrats look like gun-ignorant pawns of the prohibitionist lobby.

[rbaham]

57. The Army doesn't use "assault weapons"...

Actually, the army does use assault weapons. The term "assault weapon" refers to any weapon in an intermediate caliber. That is a caliber larger that a common pistol caliber and smaller than a rifle caliber. Also an "assault weapon" would be defined as being but not restricted to having a select fire capability. The term "assault weapon" has somehow taken on the meaning of any weapon that is black or looks scary.

Not meant to flame. Just trying to help people understand. I agree with what you stated about Clark. People should educate themselves about the subject of which they speak. I believe this is why it is so hard to believe what you read.

[Krinkov]

67. nope, thats an 'assault RIFLE'

an 'assault WEAPON' is a made up term by the anti gunners which includes many specific firearms from different categories (pistol on up).

assault RIFLES (which were invented by the germans to fill the gap between the puny submachinegun and the powerful, long distance battle rifle) are also select fire.

[benEzra]

71. "Assault weapons" are civilian-only firearms...

You are thinking of the term "assault rifle," from the German sturmgewehr (literally "storm rifle" or "assault rifle", a term first used to describe the German MP43 chambered in 7.92mm Kurz). Actual M16's and AK-47's and so on, as used by militaries around the world, are indeed assault rifles. By definition, they are selective-fire firearms chambered for intermediate calibers (i.e., reduced power rifle cartridges). Military Uzi's and such are not assault rifles, of course, but are submachine guns. All assault rifles and submachine guns are heavily restricted by the National Firearms Act of 1934.

"Assault weapon" is a term popularized by the anti-gun lobby to refer to NON-automatic, CIVILIAN-ONLY guns that hold more than 10 rounds or that have certain ergonomic or styling features that the prohibitionists find distasteful, like a rifle stock with a protruding handgrip. Whenever any politician talks about banning "assault weapons," they are talking about exclusively NON-military firearms, e.g. non-NFA-Class-III-restricted firearms.

A LOT of people confuse the two and think that the "assault weapons ban" covered things like military AK-47's, military Uzi's, and so on. Actually, it did the following:

--outlawed the manufacture, but not the sale, of all firearms holding over 10 rounds, with a few inconsequential exceptions (in practice, this mainly affected handguns, since pre-1994 magazines were exempt);

--outlawed the manufacture, but not the sale, of all self-loading civilian firearms with two or more of a list of cosmetic or ergonomic features, like a rifle with the stock shaped a certain way (pre-1994 firearms exempt);

--decreed that 19 scary names may not be used when marketing firearms to non-LEO civilians (pre-1994 firearms exempt).

[Romulus]

15. good thing Clark dropped out (and the NC Dems ignored this "advice")

On the issue of gun control, this hunter and gun owner will close the gun show loophole (which would have helped prevent the massacre at Columbine)

Those were straw purchases by two different people, but this point has some merit.


and he will sign into law a bill to create a federal ballistics fingerprinting database for every gun in America

As about as effective as Ford taking tire prints from all cars as they come off the assemby line and trying to use those tire print reocrds to match crime scene tire tracks to a spectific car.

(the DC sniper, who bought his rifle in his own name, would have been identified after the FIRST day of his killing spree).

The SniperGuys stole the rifle they used, so there was no "name" to trace.


He is not afraid, as many Democrats are, of the NRA. His message to them: "You like to fire assault weapons? I have a place for you. It's not in the homes and streets of America. It's called the Army, and you can join any time!"

Too too funny. Does he feel the same way about people who own Ruger Mini-14's and Remington 7400's? More "thrusts per squeeze," you know.

[billbuckhead]

16. I'll take a hero like Wes Clark over NRA scum like Tom DeLay

Dick(i own 30 machineguns) Cheney, Grover Norquist, Zell Miller, Ted Nugent, Rick Perry, etc

[Township75]

20. I'll take Dean over Clark

NRA endorsements and all.

[billbuckhead]

21. Clark actually won a red state primary, something Dean

fell way short of. Heck, Dean couldn't even win the neighboring rural state of New Hampshire. I guess they knew Howie too well.

[Township75]

22. How important that is now...

Pro Gun Dean is the head of our party....what's Clark up to?

[billbuckhead]

25. It proves the superiority of Clark vs Dean

Clark has seen firsthand the damage weapons do vs Dean the alcoholic ski bum who caters to bigots with Confederate flags on their pickups.

Here's the real Dean<http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/133177p-118729c.html>

For his soon-to-be-published campaign manifesto, "Winning Back America," Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean takes a confessional approach. He describes his privileged preppie upbringing, his youthful drunken behavior and his occasional adventures in petty theft.

"Although I was born in New York and went to school in the city until I was 13," writes the former Vermont governor, who recently claimed to be a farmer, "I really grew up in East Hampton. ... Once in a while, we'd sneak a potato or two out of a farmer's field, just to say we'd done it."

--------------------snip-----------------------------

[Township75]

26. Republican wedge issue talking points if I've ever heard them.

just like the guy in Post 19 said.

[billbuckhead]

27. Quoting from Dean's own book is Republican talking points?

Maybe this guy Dean shouldn't be the Chair?

[Township75]

28. Your words: Dean the alcoholic ski bum who caters to bigots with Confedera

"Dean the alcoholic ski bum who caters to bigots with Confederate flags on their pickups."

Did he write that in his book, or are you just using Republican talking points?

The person of post 19 is probably really pissed with you

[billbuckhead]

29. Dean said he wanted to be the candidate of the guy with a

Confederate flag on his pickup truck. I find that despicable. Dean said in his own book that he had problems in his past with drinking and even theft. I'm just going over what Dean himself says. Once again, Deans own words.

These"progun Dems" using the Masschussetts dinner party meme makes me not think they'not real Democrats, maybe Zell Miller Democrats but not real Democrats.

[Township75]

30. Dean said...

he wanted to be their candidate by offering them health care, better schools and by not taking away their guns...I guess that is despicable by your point of view.

These "gun control" Dems bashing our parties leader makes me think they are not real Democrats...even if you not think they not Democrats.:)

[billbuckhead]

31. Anyone who stands with the Confederate flag is antiAmerican

By definition. These Confederate flag worshippers no more believe in the Bill of Rights than Al Queda does.

[Township75]

32. Jeez, I thought it was war protesters who were anti American

sure is nice to have people around that will tell us who is and is not American.

[billbuckhead]

33. Confederates declared war on America and American values .................

and many are still fighting that war. I guess that why these anti-Americans need all these assault rifles, sniper riles, machine guns and WMD's.

[davepc]

38. Actually...

Lincoln and his congress declared war on them, not the other way around....

But, you keep going with this train of thought. Your "write off the south" strategy you endorse has done REAL good job of getting Democrats elected to national offices.

[billbuckhead]

39. The South is writing itself off through bad decisions of Southerners.

Isn't lowering standards soft bigotry? The rest of the world is moving on. If Southerners really feel that George Bush and guns will protect them from the future, they deserve the bad outcomes their getting. I have more faith in someone like Andres Manuel Lopez Abrador changing the United States than all the NRA fearing, Confederate flag appeasing, bible whoring, women's right to choose dissing mealy mouths like Howard Dean put together. How pathetic that we're scared that cowardly inbred homophobic racist fundies with contempt for education and other cultures won't vote for us. I'm with Janeane Garofolo, let's NOT build bridges to the Confederate flag crowd. Let's put this crowd on trial for being antiAmerican, they need to be challenged not coddeled. Let's face it, RBKA extremists and their fellow travelers like Tom DeLay and the Bush crime family killand terrorize more Americans than Al Queda, that's why they want all these guns.

[davepc]

44. Broad generalzations and sterotypes!

Yup, lets keep on telling a full 1/2 of a America to go fuck themselves! A stunning way to keep the Democratic party relevant! We'll just win election after election after election, and then we can push forward a broad based progressive agenda!

And what the hell does the Mayor of Mexico City have to do with anything?

[billbuckhead]

46. It's not a stereotype that Alabama has declared a war on dildos

It's a fact. I guess Dems and liberals should never have pushed for civil rights cause it's telling half of America to go fuck themselves. I tired of Democrats not having the balls to stand up for what is right because we might hurt some bigot's feelings. That's why I despise Howard Dean's pandering to the Confederate flaggers and the NRA.

[beevul]

65. Would that be...

every citizen in alabama?

What was said about broad generalizations and stereotypes is absolutely in the ten ring.

Should EVERY Democrat be stereotyped by what Zell does/says?

Should EVERY Democrat be stereotyped by what Chuck Schumer does/says?

Should EVERY antigunner be stereotyped by the actions of the likes of Barbara Graham?

Should EVERY African American be stereotyped by an African American who is convicted of a crime, and every Caucasian stereotyped by the actions of the chimperor?

That appears to be the logic I am seeing here.

Tell ya what... are you caucasian?

If so, should everyone stereotype YOU by what ted nugent says/does?
After all, hes caucasian too.

Come on Bill, I have seen many of your posts on other topics. I KNOW you are better than that.

"I tired of Democrats not having the balls to stand up for what is right"

Perhaps on guns, other than the AWB, Doctor Dean IS standing up for whats right, as is Mr. Feingold of Wisconsin (a no vote on AWB, and patriot act), as well as those NRA endorsed Democrats listed near the top of the thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that thought had not occured to you.

[_RKBA_Dem]

108. Great ideas

I am glad the NRA is fighting for my 2nd Amendment, if somebody wants to put a Dukes of Hazard flag in their window that's fine because that is protected by the first, I don't believe people should have sex with bibles let along pay for it, and I do I believe in a woman's right to choose even though I personally have a problem with it...but let's just call everyone who likes guns a whacko and paint them as terrorists and murderers. We don't need a party that is relavant to so many members of the US.

[DavidMS]

42. I don't know about you...

I took the "Confederate Flag" comment to mean that Dean wanted rednecks/poor white southerners to vote their class, not their region.

[billbuckhead]

56. The Confederate flag has little to do with class

and increasing little to do with region, it's about bigotry, white supremecy, fascism, etc.

[Krinkov]

68. i don't have a problem with it

i'm mixed (black and white), and northern (ny and mass), but i know quite a few people down south who love that battle flag. They are cool folks and not racist.

For a hell of a lot of people it isn't about racism, slavery, the KKK, etc.. (though some who use it are racists) but about regional pride, a war their ancestors fought in, and most importantly - rebellion against tyranny. The civil war had many more causes than slavery and it really was about the right to leave the union if they wanted to and not be forced to stay in.

Add to this the devastation, from which the south has never truly recovered, that's made it a symbol of 'beaten but not conquered.'

I had to talk a SHARP (skinheads against racial prejudice) friend of mine out of putting it on his jacket because up here in mass, it would cause him more grief and misunderstanding than if he hadn't. He's from Atlanta and wanted to represent, since he's one of the only suth'ners for miles around. He knew it would raise some eyebrows, but i told him with his looks (shaved head, bracers, etc.) he was asking for trouble from the same people he was hoping to be cool with and look out for..

I don't have a problem with it at all, but of course it depends on who's using it and in what context..

[IronHorseman]

113. I`m quite proud of my southern roots

And of the Confederate battle flag hanging in my living room.

[enfield collector]

34. I thought the DC "sniper" stole his rifle. also if ballistic

fingerprinting is so good then why has MD dropped it?

[Carolab]

111. For the record, here is Dean's stance on gun control

http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Howard_Dean_Gun_Control.htm

Different states need different gun laws
Q: Don't you think your stance that gun control laws should vary state by state ignores the fact that guns can easily travel across state lines and be used in crimes in states different from where they were purchased?
A: I come from a rural state with a very low homicide state and no gun control other than the federal laws. I support those federal laws vigorously. Hunters don't need AK-47s to shoot deer and most hunters I know don't believe that it should be easier for criminals to get their hands on guns, but I know that states like California and New Jersey want more gun control than that. I believe that they should be allowed to pass what gun controls they think they need, but that it is unreasonable to apply laws that may be necessary in California to rural states like Montana or Vermont. The cross border issue has been resolved in one case: Virginia now limits the availability of gun purchases because so many Virginia guns were turning up in New York City illegally.

Source: Concord Monitor / WashingtonPost.com on-line Q&A Nov 6, 2003

Background checks for gun shows
Q: What's your position on guns?
A: I support the assault weapons ban. I do not support the elimination of liability for gun owners. I support background checks. And I support background checks for people who buy guns at gun shows. I come from a rural state where people hunt. We have the lowest homicide rate in America. So my attitude is, let's have those federal laws and enforce them. And then let every state make additional gun control as they see fit.

Source: CNN "Rock The Vote" Democratic Debate Nov 5, 2003

Endorsed by NRA eight times as VT governor
John Kerry criticized Dean's 1992 statement to the National Rifle Association that he opposed any restriction on private ownership of assault weapons. "Howard Dean's opposition to sensible gun safety measures is indefensible," Kerry said. "It explains why he has been endorsed by the NRA eight times. I believe we must put the safety of our children and families ahead of special interests like the NRA."
Dean responded, "I come from a rural state with a very low homicide rate. We had five homicides one year. It's a state where hunting is a part of our life. I understand that's not the traditional Democratic position." Dean said "when you're running for governor, they ask you what you would do in your state." Dean aides said the opposition to restrictions on assault weapons that Dean expressed on the signed 1992 NRA questionnaire applied only to a state ban, defined broadly enough to also apply to shotguns commonly used by hunters in Vermont.

Source: Associated Press in Minneapolis Star-Tribune Oct 31, 2003

Leading Dems distance themselves from divisive gun debate
Democratic presidential candidates are distancing themselves from tough gun control, reversing a decade of rhetoric and advocacy by the Democratic Party in favor of federal regulation of firearms.
Howard Dean proudly tells audiences that the NRA endorsed him as governor of Vermont, and that he would leave most gun laws to the states. Dick Gephardt, a longtime gun control advocate, is careful to highlight his support for law-abiding gun owners. John Edwards says, "Guns are about independence. They don't want people messing with that."

As a result, Democratic strategists predict the debate over gun laws in this campaign will be less divisive. Democrats might fight for narrow proposals to make guns safer and more difficult for children and criminals to obtain, they said, yet voters are likely to hear as much about enforcing existing gun laws as creating new ones-a position Republicans and the NRA have pushed for years.

Source: Jim VandeHei, Washington Post, p. A1 Oct 26, 2003

Supports assault weapons ban and Brady bill
In response to a question on where he stands on gun control, he said he supports the assault weapons ban and Brady bill, but that gun control means different things in different regions and should be left up to the states.
When you say 'gun control' in New York, they think it's taking away Uzis on the street, he said. "When you say 'gun control' in Wyoming, it means they're going to take away the squirrel rifle that your grandfather gave you."

Source: Lincoln Anderson, The Villager Apr 10, 2003

Get guns off the national radar screen: no new federal laws
If I thought gun control would save lives in Vermont, I would support it. If you say "gun control" in Vermont or Tennessee, people think you want to take away their hunting rifle. If you say "gun control" New York or L.A., people are happy to see Uzi's or illegal handguns taken off the streets. I think Vermont ought to be able to have a different set of laws than California. Let's keep and enforce the federal gun laws we have, close the gun show loophole using Insta-check, and then let the states decide for themselves what if any gun control laws they want. We need to get guns off the national radar screen if Democrats are ever going to win again in the South and the West. Just as we resist attempts by President Bush to dictate to the states how we run our school systems and what kind of welfare programs to have, we need to resist attempts to tell states how to deal with guns beyond existing Federal law.
Source: Campaign web site, DeanForAmerica.com, "On the Issues" Nov 30, 2002

No more federal gun laws; leave them to states
Dean brags that he has an A rating from the National Rifle Association. Dean favors the existing federal gun-control laws but believes that any further gun control is best left to individual states.

[benEzra]

112. AK-47's are restricted by the National Firearms Act...

whoever advised him to jump on the "assault weapon" bandwagon should have studied what is and isn't legal a bit more...to Dean's credit, he seems to have backed away from the AWB issue since the election, perhaps because of the flak the party was taking over this particular bait-and-switch...

...and also the realization that only one in five gun owners is a hunter, so who the heck cares if a civilian AK lookalike can be used for deer hunting (though one most certainly can be)...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=97165&mesg_id=97165

[vpigrad]

4. Considering Dean said...

he is against any and all additional federal gun laws to protect our safety, I'd say his ridiculous and reckless blanket statement makes any blanket statement anyone throws back at him ok. The NRA has given Dean an A rating. If they support the man, what further proof do you need that he is pro-gun and bad for this country?

[WildEyedLiberal]

6. Hey

Personally, I agree. Sorry I didn't make myself clear - I DO disapprove of Dean's NRA pandering. I think it's disgusting. I was trying to criticize the hypocrisy of DUers who think Dean's right-wing gun nut pandering is okay, but who also call someone like Steny Hoyer a DINO for one vote.

I obviously worded myself poorly, since two people misunderstood me. My apologies.

[queeg]

7. WTF is wrong with guns

I got 'em, and I even bought some at gun shows.

Just because you have enough firepower in the closet to hold off the ATF does not make you a bad person, or a repubican.

[vpigrad]

8. Why do you feel the need to hold-off the BATF?

What exactly are you doing that would make them want to enter your home?

[_RKBA_Dem]

13. Having enough... and wanting to...don't equal

Just because someone HAS enough to hold off the BATF, doesn't mean they WANT to. It was an example of the number of guns owned...i.e. a lot...not the intent of having those guns.

I hope to have a large collection someday. Right now I only have 5 and that isn't nearly enough.

[jody]

9. I believe Dean’s position is consistent with the Democratic Party Platform

that says “We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do.”

If you disagree with the party platform on one or more planks, then you may be a democrat but are you a member of the Democratic Party?

[_RKBA_Dem]

14. So what am I?

I am a democrat who doesn't support the AWB and closing the non-existant gun show loopholes. I don't own guns for hunting. I don't like hunting. I like shooting. Tin cans, old bowling pins, clay pigeons and paper plates fear me!!!! :D I want my party to just leave me alone to plink away at my targets and stop trying to ban all the cool looking guns because they are "scary" to some ignorant people who have no idea of their capabilities.

[billbuckhead]

18. What do you say to the thousands of families ripped apart

by gun tragedy? At least they were killed by "cool" looking NRA approved guns? God Bless Tom DeLay.

[_RKBA_Dem]

50. Well we haven't spoken

I don't know thousands of families that have been ripped apart, literally or metaphorically, by gun tragedy, but I imagine if I was to speak with them I would say the same thing I would say to the millions of families ripped apart by car tragedy or train tragedy or tsunami tragedy.

I am sorry for your loss. What else can I say? I am really more of a supportive listener.

The thing is when a drunk kills someone with a car, I don't want to ban cars. I'm not any more concerned about banning alcohol. No one is talking about banning assualt planes with over so many gallons of jet fuel even after 9/11.

Actually, I did have a recent gun tragedy. I had to trade my very first pistol in for a new one. It was an agonizing decision and I hope that I don't regret it. No one should have to go through that, but with a limited budget, I didn't have much choice.

[billbuckhead]

55. Ireland and Sweden are such gulags

Europe and Japan don't have these huge numbers. This is preventable with laws and law enforcement. Ireland, Japan, Sweden, etc. prove this.

[iverglas]

58. and your point?

The thing is when a drunk kills someone with a car, I don't want to ban cars.

What might this have been à propos of?

[billbuckhead]

62. Leading nations show that less murder is possible

They all have stronger gun laws than the USA, even Switzerland. Deny reality, the endless statistics don't lie in the reality based community.

[beevul]

66. Now all you have to do...

is show that it is BECAUSE of those "stronger gun laws" that those "Leading nations" have less murder.

I wont hold my breath though.

Somehow, statements like:

"More thrusts per squeeze" "Weapons of mass destruction" "the .223 round that goes forever" "...can shoot down a satellite" "bunker buster" "penis substitute" "tools of terror"

and all other similar rhetoric, do not reflect any relation to any "reality based community".

[billbuckhead]

77. Every Euro nation has stronger gun regulation

and less murder by guns. 20 nations are doing it one way and get good results and one nation is doing it another way and getting the worst results. it's obvious and no amount of sophistry can explain it away. These are huge differences in results. These differences aren't just statistics, they're tens of thousands of fellow Americans dead, maimed or terrorized so that gunwackos can say they have cool guns. Selfishness unparalleled.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[billbuckhead]

72. So your basically saying Americans aren't as good as Euros or Aussies?

Typical retreat from reason from those for no limits on weapons. The blood of tens of thousands of innocents, billions of dollars in damages and the general terror factor of unlimited guns is on gun enthusiasts hands.

BTW, are you defending the NRA? Tom DeLay, Zell Miller, Dick Cheney are OK?

[_RKBA_Dem]

69. My point

That would be in regards to the post I was replying to of course.

I don't support the banning of guns because of the way they are used by criminals nor do I support the banning of cars because of the way drunks use them.

[iverglas]

79. yassss ...

That would be in regards to the post I was replying to of course.

Mm hmm. And the post you were replying to said:

What do you say to the thousands of families ripped apart by gun tragedy? At least they were killed by "cool" looking NRA approved guns? God Bless Tom DeLay.

So I'm still wondering.

Perhaps you wanted to portray the person who wrote that post as having said the equivalent of "drunks kill people with cars, therefore we should ban cars"?

Doesn't look quite that way to me.

I don't support the banning of guns because of the way they are used by criminals nor do I support the banning of cars because of the way drunks use them.

Yes, that's nice. Still wondering what it's à propos of.

[_RKBA_Dem]

81. I don't know why it is so confusing

Maybe you're not even talking to me and I'm the one confused, but you're quoting me so I just don't get it.

I said I don't like people trying to ban weapons because of their appearance.

BB used an emotional argument that was really off the subject. Maybe I should have asked what his statement was in regards to.

I responded anyway to his query that I would say "I'm sorry" to the "thousand of families torn apart by gun tragedy" if I ever had a reason to speak with them and they were still upset about it in response to that statement and reiterated my opinion that I don't want to ban guns because of their appearance or their use by criminals. I added to this and example of also not wanting to ban cars because of what drunks do with them. In fact, even if terrorists loaded cars with bombs and blew them up I wouldn't consider banning them. If people get very angry and commit acts of road rage, or drove into a pre-school, ran over thousands of children, and then used the exhaust fumes to commit suicide I still can't see how banning cars is the solution.

Banning guns because of their appearance isn't a good enough reason for me.

Banning guns because some criminals use them to commit criminal activities isn't a good enough reason for me.

You can replace guns with cars or clothing or whatever.

If someone doesn't think cars or even certain cars should be banned because they are used by criminals to do bad things, how is it someone could argue that guns should be banned for the very same reason. My suspicion is that they don't care about guns or even hate guns.

Perhaps you wanted to portray the person who wrote that post as having said the equivalent of "drunks kill people with cars, therefore we should ban cars"?

I wanted to show the emotional argument for what it was. I said I don't like the AWB2, and I got an emotional response of what equated to 'you are heartless and don't care about the people killed by "assault" weapons.' That isn't a quote, but I feel the intention was very clear. If you take guns out of the argument and replace it with cars, the argument starts to sound kind of silly. There is a reason for that...it is silly. It is JUST as silly to argue we should ban guns because the way criminals use them as it is to argue we should ban cars because the way criminals use them.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[billbuckhead]

17. The NRA are the mouthbreathing hicks who bragged about

putting George W Bush, Tom DeLay, Dick Cheney and their fascist corrupt friends in power. How freeping smart are they? What have they gained? Every other advanced nation has strong gun regulation and less murder and less people in prison.

BTW, the real reason the Dems didn't win was voter fraud, not our positions on issues. When the NRA starts talking about doing away with Black box voting then we'll listen to them.

[billbuckhead]

19. "still in vogue with the New England dinner party crew"

Republican wedge issue talking points if I've ever heard them. Could use this slur against gay rights, women's rights, most liberal positions, it just happens in this instance to be slurring those fighting promiscuous terrorism enabling gun laws.

[iverglas]

23. oh no, paco!

Isnt it illogical to be flexible on Jesus and civil liberties ... but still {support?} gun control because it's still in vogue with the New England dinner party crew?

It's the limousine liberals again! I'll bet they're limp-wristed/lesbo limousine liberals at that.

Not to mention a fine straw fella. I have no idea what "flexible on Jesus" means, but flexible on civil liberties (the Patriot Act)?

Who here approves of any Democrats' flexibility on such things? Who here would not say that the Democratic Party should not support the Patriot Act, or the invasion/occupation of Iraq, for instance? Who here would say that the Democratic Party should support such things simply because that's more likely to attract votes?

just dont expect votes from relatively conservative Southern Democratic gun owners.

Me, if I wanted to belong to a "relatively conservative" political party, I'd go find one. And if I already belonged to, say, a "relatively liberal" political party, I'd tell somebody who was a "relatively conservative" member/supporter of my party that s/he had obviously taken a wrong turn somewhere.

Telling everybody else that they're wrong and you're right just isn't generally persuasive.

Of course, sometimes everybody else actually is wrong.

If that's the case, it might just be worth trying to persuade them of why they're wrong, instead of just expecting them to change their minds to make you happy.

"You're wrong because people won't vote for you" isn't a particularly intelligible thought. And if it were a useful basis for party policy, well, there wouldn't be much need for parties at all, would there?


We arent the mouth breathing hicks that you think we are

Funny how someone who would so resist the (alleged/imputed) stereotyping of his/her own group finds it so easy to emit stuff like the New England dinner party crew when talking about others ...

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThumperDumper]

37. They're good questions,

and discussing the gun issue among us liberals should be different than what I see on the gun forums, should it not?

What we need is a Pro-gun Democrat that will be a LEADER on the issue! The country NEEDS leadership on the issue and I propose they WANT it as well.

There IS NO leadership on the gun issue in the republican party because there's nothing to lead. The have no gun policy. They say they do, but they're lying.

There IS NO leadership on the gun issue in the NRA because their idea of leadership is whoever can say "NO!" the loudest.


Democrats lose on this issue because, as usual, they allow the spread of disinformation. The right and the NRA have managed to convince the country that the Democrats mean to take everyone's guns away and it's simply not true. There just isn't the broad-based support for a complete ban within the party. What we DO have is are people who THINK about it and support various levels of rights vs. restrictions. Depending on the PARTICULAR issue, Democrats all vary a little where they draw the line. But the point is, and what separates us from the Republicans and the NRA is that we DO draw a line SOMEWHERE. THIS is why we need leadership on the issue.

We need somebody who'll stand up and say, s/he supports the 2nd Amendment and then draws a line in the sand: background checks, gunshow loophole, assault weapons... and say EXACTLY what and who s/he thinks should be restricted.

Democrats get in trouble on the gun issue because they skimp on the details when taking about the issues. This leaves people having to fill in the blanks, and since they've been taught to assume the worst, they assume the worst. With that in mind, back to our Pro-gun Democratic leader...

S/He needs to ALSO lay out what s/he thinks SHOULDN'T be restricted. Be compelling and detailed! For example: "I think a father should be able to walk into a gun shop the day before opening season and purchase shotguns for himself and son and daughter and only having to wait 15 minutes for a background check to go through." "I believe responsible citizens with a clean record should be encouraged to attend defensive training schools and apply for a carry permit."

I believe that MOST people in the country lie somewhere between the NRA's "Just say NO to everything" policy and what they BELIEVE to be the Democrat's intentions to BAN. If we have a LEADER who will ignore the NRA and draw some lines in the sand America won't care very much if the line is a little this way or that from where the stand - they'll be glad SOMEBODY had the guts to draw the line.

Here are your Second Amendment Rights. We support them.
(line)-------------------------------------------(line)
This is criminal activity/These people shouldn't own guns.

[billbuckhead]

40. Actually Al Gore and John Kerry did this. Roy Barnes even got embedded

with the NRA but he lost anyway because the reichwing mobilized the Confederate flag brigades against him and used Black Box voting. The real problem in the South isn't gun regulation, it's racial and gender bigotry. The real question is who are all these guns going to be used against? The answer is blacks, Mexicans, homos, socialists, Arabs, Jews, etc, basically the rest of the world.

[davepc]

45. hah

The real question is who are all these guns going to be used against? The answer is blacks, Mexicans, homos, socialists, Arabs, Jews, etc, basically the rest of the world.

Actually, gun control was invented after the Civil War so the Klan could terrorize the freed slaves without worrying that the freed slaves could shoot back.

Those who keep pushing for it are supporting a long line of terrorism and bigotry.

Real freedom includes having the ability to face down people who would mean to oppress you with equal strength of arms.

Armed Blacks, Mexicans, "Homos" (your word), Socialists, Arabs, and Jews are the biggest threat to the culture you hate so much. Instead of ensuring these groups of people have the ability to exercise their Conditionally protected right to arm themselves, Democrats work to take guns away from them, leaving them helpless and exposed.

Know whats the worst fear of a gay basher? a gay with a gun. The worst fear of a Klansman, is a black person with a gun. The worst fear of a Neo-Nazi is a Jew with a gun.

Self-defense is an inherit RIGHT of free peoples. I will not support legislation that seeks to disarm law abiding people and make them un-armed victims of attacks.

[billbuckhead]

47. Gun control has been around since guns

The best defense aginst guns is no guns for everybody. Look at Japan. Almost no guns=almost no gun murder. But then Japan has a homogeneous society, the dead aren't blacks, Mexicans, Arabs..........

[davepc]

48. Sounds like utopia

Only the naturally larger and stronger can pray upon the naturally weaker.

I guess those who didn't want to be victims of criminalization should just hit the gym or hire a bodyguard.

Disarming the weakest and most vulnerable, sounds like a winning plan!

[beevul]

52. What is the suicide rate in Japan?

Higher or lower than the USA?

"Gun control has been around since guns"

Right, just like drug-control has been around since drugs.

[billbuckhead]

53. What does the suicide rate in Japan have to do with the murder rate?

Drugs have been around as long as man, guns are recent.

[beevul]

64. Similarly, what do guns or laws have to do with the murder rate?

Whenever an anti-gunner brings up guns and murder, suicides seem to somehow get added into the numbers regularly, so I thought I'd just make sure that doesn't happen here, by singling out suicides, touching on them briefly, and eliminating them from the discussion.

In doing so, I was also pointing out that japan has a higher suicide rate than the USA, even though they are not "awash in guns" and do not have "promiscuous gun laws". More people die committing suicide in japan in spite of the fact that such so called "quick and irreversible" means are not readily available, than do here in the USA. Same shit, different implement. No causal effect there. Its been said and cited before, ad nauseum.


That being said, feel free to bring murder numbers, and ONLY murder numbers into this discussion any old time you like. Then, try to your hearts content to show some...ANY causal effect of guns on murder rate, laws effect on murder rate, or any combination thereof, if you really wish to. Keep in mind, however, corrolation does not equal causation.

"Drugs have been around as long as man, guns are recent."


When was gun powder invented? Refresh my memory. Somewheres around 1040 AD wasn't it? Suppose they used it strictly for fireworks until the 1700's do you? I guess it all hinges on that relative term
"recent", and what you meant by it. I would imagine early alchemy produced rudimentary versions of both.

I would say that weapons have been around just about as long as man, and LONGER than drugs, with guns being one of the most advanced variety of weapons. I know,I know, you don't want to talk weapons, just one particular type. The "evil" gun.


Just one question for you:

What CAUSES murder?

[billbuckhead]

73. Guns are criminals top choice, terrorists like them too.

for the same reason they are suicides victims top choice, they are very effective. Look how many assassinations are done with guns. Lincoln to McKinley to the Archduke to Kennedy to King to Kennedy again to Malcom to Wallace to Medgar Evers to Vernon Jordan to Flynt to Sadat to Rabin to Tupac to coming to a neighborhood near you.

[beevul]

74. So ban...

criminals, terrorists, and assassins then. Leave people who are not part of the problem alone for fucks sake.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot...Hows about answers to these questions...unless the answers compromise your position. Do they?

What do guns or laws have to do with the murder rate?

What causes murder?

[billbuckhead]

75. You can't ban criminal activity but you can make violence multipliers

You can't ban criminal activity but you can make violence multipliers hard to get. The rest of the advanced world's experience proves it. Japan has almost no guns and almost no gun murder,. Ireland has almost no guns and almost no gun murder... even idiots can figure it out... we know for sure that few guns =few murders with guns. We also know for sure that no other weapon makes murder easier than guns.

[beevul]

80. Well then...

"Japan has almost no guns and almost no gun murder. Ireland has almost no guns and almost no gun murder"


Switzerland has a full on ASSAULT RIFLE in pretty much every home. Israel too.

Hows the gun-murder rate by citizens of those places, in those places?

Lower than USA? Japan? Ireland?

I'll be waiting for you to push for an ASSAULT RIFLE in every home.

"even idiots can figure it out"

AKA anyone who doesn't agree can't "figured it out" and is therefore something less than an idiot. AKA the "sensible" strategy.

Boy-o-boy, another hail-mary right out of the brady playbook. The words change, but the rhetoric remains the same.

[billbuckhead]

82. Not even close to true

Israel is in the middle of a war for intents and purposes. Not every Swiss home has an assault rifle, that's a TomDeLay/NRA fabrication, plus pistols are hard to get and they're working on even stronger gun laws in Switzerland as well. What about the the 300 million EU residents?

[Billy Ruffian]

83. Prove it

Get us cites on the actual Swiss firearms laws and ownership situation.

[billbuckhead]

84. Only 13% of swiss homes have military assault rifles

Every home in Switzerland has an assault rifle! Sounds like a gunporn wet dream but once again the gun "enthusiasts" "exagerrate". Sure is farfetcheded! And it is. Here's a link that says only 13% of Swiss homes have military assault rifles

YTH: People in Switzerland are heavily armed. There is an assault weapon in every Swiss home.
TRUTH: It's true that Swiss soldiers are required to keep their assault rifles at home. How big is the Swiss Army? 400,000 (source). There are about 3 million Swiss households (source).400,000/3,000,000= 0.133. Therefore, there is a military assault rifle in about 13% of Swiss homes. Switzerland also has rather strict gun control laws.

<http://www.guninformation.org/>

[deadcenter]

85. broken links

both links in that "article" you posted return file not found errors.

"Around 560,000 Swiss soldiers currently keep a rifle or pistol at home. Under the country's militia system, troops have to be ready for action at the drop of a hat."

Excerpted from: http://www.nzz.ch/2005/03/11/eng/article5596045.html

Note, that article makes no mention of other, non-military issue guns stored in the home. However, this article does state that the rifles kept in the home have been modified to only fire in semi-automatic mode, at least that is the implication. The new rifles they have the option of keeping appear to be disabled, while it is unclear if the older versions are similarly disabled.

for what it's worth, this website: http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html

puts households with a firearm in switzerland at 27%, in the us at 41%.

[billbuckhead]

89. Your own article says the guns must be disabled& registered!

Troops pay to keep latest assault rifle at home

Soldiers who have completed military service can hold on to the army's latest assault rifle from April 1, but they will have to pay for the pleasure.

The government says the weapons must first have their fully automatic capability disabled ? and owners have to foot the bill.

<http://www.nzz.ch/2005/03/11/eng/article5596045.html>

So much for Switzerland for being a gunwack paradise and BTW, much stronger regulations are on the way.

[davepc]

92. Your total ignorance of the Swiss militia system rears its head again

Every Swiss male from age 20 is required to complete a three and a half month basic training. Following that most perform about 300 days of every day military service.

After that period they are released from daily service but are still considered "active duty" and take part in regular training (normally about 3 weeks a year, sometimes more depending). During this time the swiss "active duty" soldier is ISSUED and required to keep a FULLY AUTOMATIC rifle in their place of residence. In Switzerland today that rifle is a SIG-90.

Its important to note that these "active duty" soldiers are not the same as the STANDING ARMY which is about 500,000 strong. The standing Army trains full time, and is equipped about as any military in Western Europe.

When an "active duty" soldier is switched to a reservist (usually around age 35) previously they were allowed to keep their rifles as a gift from the government. The rifle had its full-automatic capability removed.

Now, instead of the reservist being given the rifle as a gift, they are required to pay an extremely modest sum (about $80 for a rifle that retails in Switzerland itself for $2500) to retain possession of it.

"Every swiss household has an assault rifle" is a false statement. "Almost every single Swiss household that includes a male age 20-35 has an fully automatic assault rifle" is a true statement.

It is estimated that at least 16 out of every 100 civilians own a firearm. In addition, there are 560,000 weapons in the hands of the military.

Researchers believe there are at least 1.2 million privately owned weapons in Switzerland.

The Federal Police Office says the actual figure is probably much higher, nearer three million.

(sidebar)
http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=111&sid=5596045

Population:
7,450,867 (July 2004 est.)

Age structure:
0-14 years: 16.8% (male 647,362; female 602,333)
15-64 years: 67.9% (male 2,555,089; female 2,503,331)
65 years and over: 15.3% (male 466,615; female 676,137) (2004 est.)

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sz.html

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

103. I agree with your astute observations! n/t

[billbuckhead]

95. I tried these links on 3 different computers with 3 different operating sy

I tried these links on 3 different computers, hooked up to 3 different internet service providers with 3 different operating systems with 3 different browsers and it worked everytime. i hope you have better luck with guns than computers.

[deadcenter]

100. i've usually

been able to hit what I'm aiming at. But with a computer, I confess to being much less capable. Maybe by the time I have 3,900 posts I'll have achieved your level of skill.

deadcenter

[Billy Ruffian]

101. the guninformation link works, but

The first link in the paragraph about the Swiss is a 404 not found.

http://www.mmvsgogr.ch/Others/Swiss_Transportation_Troops.htm

ditto the second.

http://www.statistik.admin.ch/stat_ch/ber01/eu0105.htm

But I only tested it on one system, one OS, one browser.

[beevul]

86. Interesting...

"Israel is in the middle of a war for intents and purposes."

Perhaps you can explain how this makes any difference. That is, if the trend of being long on rhetoric and short on explanation is to change. Perhaps you believe that folks who would otherwise be criminals, murderers, and terrorists COLLECTIVELY (a word I am quite certain you are familiar with) put everything on hold until war ends? You in not so many words have made a veiled assertion that its the GUNS that have some sort of causal effect on crime and murder. To quote you, "any idiot" can see that. You pass off all your statistics as more than corrolation. Thats causation in my book. Israel, and the degree to which its citizens are armed DESTROYS that entire concept.

Whatever the case, yours is one "poster position" why gunowners seem not to be voting Democrat en mass, like they used to, which happens to be exactly where the subject of this thread was going. Thanks for showing up, showing your colors, and proving my point about the divisiveness and infighting. Thankfully, yours is also a position that appears to be rapidly disappearing among people that call themselves Democrats, especially the ones that want to win national elections, if acceptance of gun owners at DU is ANY measure of acceptance by Democrats at all.

"Not every Swiss home has an assault rifle"

Well, I guess I was incorrect, though the degree of which is still debatable. I am a big enough person to admit it. I have lost the "battle of switzerland". Woe is me. The thing is, we, the pro-gunners, are WINNING the war. CCW is continually becoming more accepted, and more widely implemented. The AWB is gone. There is no such thing as an assault weapon anymore, just rifles. The million mom march has practically been reduced to 3 moms and a pizza. Non-firearm people are educating themselves about firearms, and becoming insulated from the misinformation and outright lies spread by the few ramaining anti-gun chickenlittles like brady/vpc/hci/csgv/ags. Beliefs that the AWB was about automatic weapons are a dying breed, and increasingly rare compared to a year ago, or 2 or 3. The firearms community appears to be growing, not shrinking as some would prefer. We have excellent potential national presedential candidates in pro-gun Doctor Dean, and Russ Feingold. And its ALL happening NOW, in spite of all the brady/vpc/hci/csgv/ags fearmongering and dis/mis-information/ambulance chasing.

If I were on the other side of the gun issue, my feelings would be...well, pissing into the wind is the saying that comes to mind.

[billbuckhead]

90. The gun nuts will reel backward when DeLay and the neocons

are defeated. You're losing in the whole rest of the world even in your gun paradise of Switzerland. You gun guys always brag up Switzerland as the only place with lotsa guns that doesn't have problems and it turns out they are switching to the EU model and they have to have the militia assault rifles disabled.

For someone so wrongly mistaken about your assertions about Switizerland, I would pause before I called anyone a liar.
Any proof whatsoever that "The firearms community appears to be growing, not shrinking as some would prefer."

BTW, Dean lost badly in rural states to NRA haters Kerry and Clark where the gun issue was allegedly so important.

[beevul]

91. Proof indeed..*shakes head*

"For someone so wrongly mistaken about your assertions about Switizerland, I would pause before I called anyone a liar."

I dunno...the difference between "near every home in switzerland has an assault weapon" versus say..."Every person flying a plane IS at risk", is that the poster of one of those statements admitted and acknowledged he was incorrect, and the poster of the other statement did not. Heh, when people neither back up their assertions, retract them, or admit they are wrong after many invitations/opportunities to do any of the above, noone needs to be called anything, by anyone else. And that's because people can and will judge for themselves who is attempting to discuss an issue in good faith and who is not. So there just isn't anything to be pausing about at this point, I'm afraid. Nope. No pauses at all.

"Any proof whatsoever that "The firearms community appears to be growing, not shrinking as some would prefer."

Ya know, I had a whole paragraph typed up, but then I decided to just erase the damn thing. You make all sorts of "prohibitionist" type wild-eyed claims about all sorts of guns. You get called on it, asked to substantiate your claims, and move right on to the next one without blinking.

Yet you have the nerve to ask for proof.

No,I dont think so. Answering a request for proof, to a poster who does not seem to be interested in reciprocating...well, nope. It is not in the best interests of a good faith discussion. I just am not interested, sorry.


"BTW, Dean lost badly in rural states to NRA haters Kerry and Clark where the gun issue was allegedly so important."

Well, the word sabotage has been used to describe what happened to Dean, but then, thats common knowledge.

[billbuckhead]

97. Like Gore and Kerry weren't sabotaged?

What a one way of looking at the world gun nuts have. The whole world revolves around their gun. I wouldn't care except gun nuts are always leading the charge for the OTHER side or ruining the neighborhood.. I don't trust gun nuts. The NRA are gun nuts and fascists, are you NRA?

Don't believe me that gun nuts are always leading the charge for the other side? One name, TOM FREEPING DELAY!

[beevul]

102. Not from within their own party, they weren't

Not from within, they weren't. Unlike Dean, whom many believe WAS sabotaged from within...that is to say...by an element within HIS OWN PARTY.

I am sitting here after recognizing a difference between internal and external sabotage, and reflecting on the fact that you did not, and it really makes me wonder...who has a "one way of looking at the world" again?

"The whole world revolves around their gun"



Clearly, you just don't get it. There are those who will vote based on many issues, with gun rights being one pre-requisite. You know it, I know it, and the people who run for public office know it. We are talking numbers Bill, far larger numbers than the 4 plus million the NRA claims as members. What is it...1 in 5 gun owners are hunters? Thats 80 percent of gun owners who don't hunt. Lets say theres 40 million gun owners total in the USA. I believe its more like 80-90 million, but lets say 40 million. 80 percent of that 40 million is 32 million. 32 million who don't hunt. A good portion of that 32 million are owners of Firearms of the kind most hunters don't use. Handguns, large caliber target rifles, and rifles that function just like hunting rifles but LOOK military. Sure, some folks have grandpas heirloom over-under 22/.410 in the closet, or fit a similar mold, but how many? 1 in 5? I doubt it, but ok. 6.4 million people have "grandpas relic blunderbuss". That leaves 25.6 million people with non "traditional hunting" firearms. How many of those 25.6 million do you suppose decided not to vote Democrat because of guns?You can paint them any color you like, gun-nuts ,freepers, repukes, rambo-wannabees...whatever. The fact still remains, they have large numerical advantage over anti-gunners. The NRA claims 4 million members plus...How many showed up at the last million mom march? The NRA has LOTS of pull politically. How much do brady/hci/vpc/million mom march and all the rest of the anti-gun proponents COMBINED have? Not very damned much, because if they did, they would cancel out the NRA, which they don't. How many folks have ever LOST a seat in the house or senate because they were pro-gun/voted pro-gun? And how many folks have ever LOST a seat in the house or senate because they were anti-gun/voted anti-gun? Dispute that.

"The whole world revolves around their gun"

Yep...The whole world...just like pro-choice women, the whole world revolves around thier uteruses...those uterus nuts :eyes:

Knowing that alot of voters have gun rights as a pre-requisite for their vote, what does it say about the intelligence of deciding to ignore that fact and provoke them? Where is the wisdom in that?
Hoping/expecting/believing they will drop the "pro-gun prerequisite" because of interests conflicting with it when they vote, versus giving of a hearty helping of "fuck you for pitting my pro-gun pre-requisite against some of my other interests, then asking me to choose between them" to this party - with their vote. Thats what it amounts to, and it hasn't been working.

"I wouldn't care except gun nuts are always leading the charge for the OTHER side"

And I wonder what kind of stances,attitudes,statements,voting-records, and rhetoric, from Democrats on the gun issue, might make them decide to lead the charge for the OTHER side. Any guesses?

"Don't believe me that gun nuts are always leading the charge for the other side?"

On the the contrary, I do believe you that gun nuts are always
"leading the charge for the other side." The thing is though, Bill, I see you bitching about it, but I highly doubt you would have it any other way. Maybe I'm wrong about that. Lets find out...


Would you be willing to support a change in this party designed to attract non-hunter gun owners other than the "grandpas relic blunderbuss owners" variety?

Would you be willing to support a change in this party designed to make firearms a non-issue in national elections?

Do tell.

[billbuckhead]

105. So you support the NRA? You defend Zell Miller? Tom DeLay?

Every poll says a majority of Americans are for drastic restrictions on assault weapons? Every major poll says liberals, minorities and women are far more for gun regulation than the majority population. Liberals, women and minorities are the Democratic base. All the successful liberal democracies around the world have strong gun regulations. My empathy lies with the tens of thousand of firearms casualties in America's culture wars and not with some loser looking for the next cool gun to stoke their troubled egos.

[beevul]

106. I support disempowering them...

from haveing much effect on Democrats in national elections. It has nothing to do with like or dislike. I acknowledge and respect the power the NRA wields and would prefer it not be wielded against the Democratic party. I support taking the gun issue away from the opposition, disarming them, so to speak. I support not empowering or energizing the NRA to contribute to the election of republicans, because doing otherwise (as another poster so eloquently put it):


"Maybe because that MEANS SOMETHING -- like maybe a few thousand more murdered Iraqis, a few million more USAmericans without basic health care, a few million more USAmericans trapped in poverty or prison, and a few thousand more things like that"

But you go ahead and keep harping on the guns. And bitching about the NRA and gun vote going republican. And not offering up any sort of support of changing that, or indication that you would have it any other way.

It makes for enlightening reading.



"Every poll says a majority of Americans are for drastic restrictions on assault weapons?"

Theres no longer any such thing as an assault weapon, other than in a tiny handful of states, so I am not sure what you're getting at.

"Every major poll says liberals, minorities and women are far more for gun regulation than the majority population."

And if those were the only votes the Democratic party needed to win, your anti-gun cause would be in great shape. They aren't, and they aren't. You do not seem interested in votes from gun owners in that "majority population", yet you sure seem happy to complain about them voting for the opposition. Like I said, I believe you wouldn't have it any other way. Your unwillingness to say anything to the contrary...well, once again, people can and will judge for themselves.


"My empathy lies with the tens of thousand of firearms casualties in America's culture wars and not with some loser looking for the next cool gun to stoke their troubled egos."

Yeah, so you say, but you just don't seem to have enough empathy to
support curbing any of those tens of thousands of firearms casualties by doing things like getting back Democratic controlled government and attacking the root causes of violence, that is, unless going after guns is also included and right at the top of the list to be treated as one of the causes.

And thats where the divide is between the Democratic Party, and MILLIONS of gun owners. Because gun owners perception of the Democratic Party is a mirror of your position by and large. And again, you seem uninterested in having it any other way.


Again, you go ahead and keep harping on the guns. And bitching about the NRA and gun vote going republican. And not offering up any sort of support of changing that, or indication that you would have it any other way.


The more you do, the more you make my point Bill.

Idealogical purity on guns regardless of party affiliation sure looks to be accurately describing your position, to these eyes, which again, is the topic of this thread.

Thanks for popping in and being an example of this threads topic.

[billbuckhead]

109. The real reason the elections were lost were crooked voting machines

and disinfranchisement of minority voters. Every poll I've ever seen has strong majorities for regulation of assault rifles and many other weapons. Every other advanced nation in the world has much stronger gun regulations and less murder and people in prison.

I guess if I was so against the historic tide of progressive democracies, I'd want to hide behind a powerful weapon too. Proving American gunwackos wrong every day are France, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Portugal, Norway, Denmark, Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York and coming soon to Switzerland.

[beevul]

110. Thats a great theory...

let everyone know when you get proof enough to get any changes made in that regard. (my opinion is, whether vote fraud was widespread enough to be effective or not, that it makes for a convenient means for denying problems that need adressing within the Democratic party by those intolerant enough of guns to say things like "NRA Dems are just as bad as any other NRAer's or freepers".)


It doesn't account for congress this election, or the 2 before it. It also doesn't account for NRA endorsed Democrats winning elections over republicans and unendorsed candidates of all stripes, in large numbers.

Were the votes fixxed for them too? If you say they were, then you believe that republicans rigged the vote counts so HUNDREDS of Democrats with an NRA endorsement would win. If you say they weren't, then you believe a bunch of NRA endorsed Democrats won on their own.

Your choice of argument needs work. But hey, we have a first amendment and you have every right to argue either of those should you so desire to, no matter how it might make you look.



"Every poll I've ever seen has strong majorities for regulation of assault rifles and many other weapons."

And there already IS (as you have been repeatedly informed) regulation on assault rifles.



"Every other advanced nation in the world has much stronger gun regulations and less murder and people in prison."

Now if you could just show some connection between the 2...

Like...show how less people in prison has anything to do with guns.
Or that murder frequency has some causal relation to the implements readily available in any society.

I know, you can't, or else you would be flooding the forums with "See? I told you guns CAUSE...", instead of repeating the same old tired mantra showing a corrolation and passing it off as causation.


"I guess if I was so against the historic tide of progressive democracies, I'd want to hide behind a powerful weapon too. Proving American gunwackos wrong every day are France, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Portugal, Norway, Denmark, Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York and coming soon to Switzerland."

I guess if I was so against guns that I couldn't tell the difference between corrolation and causation, and misrepresented automatic weapons as not being highly regulated after being correctly informed
otherwise in multiples, I would hide behind countries without a second amendment, and I'd want to hide behind powerful rhetoric too. Progressive Democracies just aren't the poster children for the kind of stomping of rights of people under government foot that banning guns would be in THIS country, no matter what words you use, or what order you say them in.

[benEzra]

96. "have to have the militia assault rifles disabled"

I believe just the capability of the assault rifle to fire automatically is disabled, yes? Meaning they become simply self-loading rifles incapable of automatic fire, e.g. semiautomatic mode only. Which is what you would classify as an "assault weapon" if it were in an American, rather than a Swiss, home, yes?

[deadcenter]

76. actually

If you want to look at the earliest control's on ranged weapons, because that is what a gun is, you'll have to look to the crossbow which was banned from private ownership almost the instant it was invented. The noble lords and monarchs didn't like the idea of a weapon that took very little training but effectively leveled the field between the noble and the peasant, in the hands of said peasant.

When firearms started to become prevalent enough and inexpensive enough that a private citizen could afford one, the same controls were placed on them, because the nobles and monarchs really didn't like the idea of an armed population. These limited private citizens from owning, in most countries, most firearms with the exception of fowling pieces (large shotguns for bird hunting).

The founders recognized that the only way to keep the government from becoming oppressive (patriot act/patriot act 2, anyone?) was for the government to fear an armed populace.

If you don't like gun crimes, make the punishment for commiting a crime with a gun prohibitive. The criminals will get the message and the law abiding citizen gets to exercise his costitutional rights.

deadcenter

[jody]

87. You say "If you don't like gun crimes, make the punishment

for committing a crime with a gun prohibitive."

As you already know, current laws are not being enforced and judges are not punishing the guilty. The biggest weakness is at the federal level where only about one hundred criminals are prosecuted and sentenced for violations of federal firearms laws. That's true under both Republican and Democratic administrations. :shrug:

[iverglas]

94. shrug indeed

And what might all that talk of "federal firearms laws" have to do with the post being responded to -- which was about COMMITTING A CRIME WITH A GUN?

Oh, I wonder. Perhaps someone was pretending to think that when someone else says "gun crimes", s/he is referring to offences under "federal firearms laws" ... even though the whole world uses that expression to refer to CRIMES COMMITTED WITH GUNS.

Not that the initial point was really worth much anyway:

make the punishment for committing a crime with a gun prohibitive.

What punishment might that be? Death? Hasn't worked too well for homicide in the US, as far as I've seen.

I just love how some folks seem to think that people contemplating committing, oh, armed robbery sit down and tot up the pros and cons on each side of the ledger.


On the plus side, I'll get lots of money.

On the minus side, I might get in trouble and maybe go to jail, maybe for even longer if I use a gun.

Oh dear, I'd better go get a job instead. Maybe a university degree would help my chances of acquiring lots of money. Perhaps mummy and daddy will let me take an advance on my trust fund in the meantime.

Yeah. That's how it goes.


Me, I kind of think it tends to go:

I need/want money. Think I'll go rob somebody.

Hmm. If I don't use a gun, nobody's too likely to hand over too much money to me.

Guess I'll use a gun.


Rocket scientists they aren't, and rocket science this ain't.

[deadcenter]

99. and where

pray tell, did I in any way, shape or form imply,

"What punishment might that be? Death? Hasn't worked too well for homicide in the US, as far as I've seen."

deadcenter

[iverglas]

104. and why, pray tell ...

and where
pray tell, did I in any way, shape or form imply,
"What punishment might that be? Death?
Hasn't worked too well for homicide
in the US, as far as I've seen."

... do you ask?

Your question doesn't even make sense. How could you have implied a question?

You said:

... make the punishment for committing a crime
with a gun prohibitive.

I asked what punishment might be prohibitive.

The most extreme punishment available in the US is death.

Has even the possibility of an offender incurring the death penalty made any significant difference to the homicide rate? Not that I've noticed.

If the death penalty itself does not function as an effective deterrent, what punishment might it be that would function as an effective deterrent to the commission of crimes with firearms?

The entire concept of the specific deterrent function of potential sentences rests on the assumptions that

(a) the potential offenders are acting rationally;
and
(b) it is irrational for those potential offenders to commit the offences in question.

Both assumptions are ill-advised.

People who commit crimes are overwhelmingly

(a) lacking in the skills required to predict and appreciate the consequences of their actions and to assess and appreciate the risk that they will incur those consequences, and overwhelmingly more likely to act on impulse and/or on a faulty assessment of consequences and risks (the adolescent feeling of invincibility, and also lack of concern for others, that persists into adulthood in many people);

and

(b) living in situations where it is arguably rational for them to commit the crimes, since the risks of apprehension are low and/or the benefits to be gained outweigh the risks, for them, and/or they have no alternative course of action.

Passing laws that provide for harsh treatment, even all the way up to life imprisonment in solitary confinement, for committing robbery with a firearm might make a lot of people feel all warm and fuzzy and righteous and proud of a job well done, but it should be apparent from quite a few centuries of human history that the severity of potential sentences is not an effective deterrent for a large proportion of potential offenders.

Perhaps, in a society with full employment, a 100% literate population and a just distribution of resources, nobody would want to rob other people. Since everyone would have other options for acquiring at least an adequate supply of what they wanted, most people might then regard the risks as too high for the potential benefit. Maybe you have a timetable for when this utopia on earth will be coming about. (And maybe someone can explain how voting against the Democratic Party in the US is likely to achieve that, even if voting for the Democratic Party isn't terribly likely to bring it about this decade.)

In the meantime, maybe everybody should be trying to think of other ways to prevent the commission of crimes with firearms, since it is perfectly obvious that it is not possible to "make the punishment for committing a crime with a gun prohibitive".

It is possible to do things that will make it more difficult to commit a crime with a firearm ... for instance, by making it more difficult to lay hold of the firearm to commit it with.

[deadcenter]

98. true

I should have made it clear that the prosecuters are not using the laws already on the books, my bad.

deadcenter

[ThumperDumper]

60. There are still school rampages...

There are still school rampages in Japan. They just do it with swords.


Seriously.

[billbuckhead]

61. Swords have been used in the UK, Germany and Japan

Lethal as swords are, guns are far more dangerous, that's why y'all love them so much.

[ThumperDumper]

63. Wow.

That was insulting.

I've never killed anything with a gun. Poked holes in lots of paper and some tin cans...

They're actually mechanical marvels. There's a lot of pride and satisfaction in handloading your own ammo that's more accurate than you can buy.

[benEzra]

49. No one I'm aware of thinks even the most hardcore prohibitionists...

want to outlaw ALL guns. ALL guns aren't even banned in the UK (which most U.S. gun owners would consider gun-prohibition hell).

Al Gore in 2000 and Senator Kerry in 2004 made it abundantly clear that they fully supported the right of hunters to own guns to hunt with. The reason that didn't help them much is that four out of five gun owners are NOT HUNTERS. And that 80% of us who don't hunt don't particularly CARE if a politician will "allow" us to own a heavy-gauge shotgun to blast ducks with, or a high-powered rifle for perforating Bambi at long range.

My wife and I don't own a single hunting firearm. We DO own several firearms that hold over 10 rounds or have modern-looking styling (aka "assault weapons") and we are not happy when politicians promise to fight to ban the guns we own.

The issue in 2000 and 2004 wasn't hunting guns, it was so-called "assault weapons." Too few politicians bothered to look past the loaded term to examine what the ban actually covered--zero military weapons, but a huge array of popular civilian firearms.

[ThumperDumper]

51. They weren't very good

leaders on the gun issue then, were they?

A pro-gun Democrat leader needs to SAY that they support guns for defensive use. If they don't, they're going to lose.

I haven't met a Democrat that could lead on the issue YET. (Except me, of course. :) )

[billbuckhead]

54. Which Republican are good leaders on this issue?

George Bush said he "wanted" to sign the AWB.

[ThumperDumper]

59. None...

That's part of my point. Go a few posts back. ;)

[billbuckhead]

78. John McCain has taken a lead over at Americans for Gun Safety

"I'm John McCain with some straight talk. Convicted felons have been able to buy and sell thousands of guns at gun shows because of a loophole in the law. Many were later used in crimes. That's wrong.

Here in Colorado, Amendment 22 will close this dangerous loophole by requiring criminal background checks by unlicensed dealers at gun shows.

I believe law-abiding citizens have the right to own guns. But with rights come responsibilities. Close the loophole. Vote Yes on Amendment 22."

<http://www.campaignadvantage.com/services/websites/archive/ags/ad_mccain.html>

[benEzra]

88. Ah, Americans for Gun Safety...

the anti-gun lobbying group that convinced the Democratic party leadership that if they vocally supported hunting, they could demonize owners of nonhunting-style guns without alienating gun owners as a bloc. We see how well that worked, now, don't we?

I am not opposed in principle to background checks on private sales, but I don't care for the demonization of gun shows, or for the fiction that the private sale issue is really a "gun show loophole."

[_RKBA_Dem]

107. What is a freeper?

Just curious if anyone knows.