Have the Democrats lost the war on guns?

[Deacon51]

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video...alPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/

What do you guys think?

Some good stuff in this video.

 

[GNLaFrance]

Reasoned, thoughtful, serious discussion of the gun issue. What a breath of fresh air. Thanks, Deacon.

 

[novus collectus]

Have the Democrats lost the war on guns?

No, because if they adopt the opposing position they can claim to become pro-RKBA and then claim a victory. All we have to do in our party is to redefine "common sense gun laws" in terms of shall issue/right to carry and respecting the right to keep and bear arms in the broad sense.

This may have already started with the blue dog democrats voting for gun rights in COngress so far and the lessening of the anti gun voices in the Democratic party through attrition or a lack of reason to speak up due to the weakenning of the gun control lobby's campaign contributions and advertising support overall.

The more accurate question is "have the pro-gun-control Democrats lost the war on guns" and I would say the answer will be yes!

 

[Brychan]

Have they lost no, weaken some yes, now in the next election if we can show that we have the voting power to oust a few of pro-gun-control politicos and replace them with pro-gun or at least not anti-gun at both federal and state level we may have a chance to further the cause. Being able to carry in a Natl. park is a small step.
We do have to watch out for any federal end run at least until the next pres. election.

 

[BusDriver]

Do not believe this . They will find a way to take them .

 

[jpk1md]

Lets be honest about this issue folks, with the exception of literally a handful of people, the Democrat Party has shifted way far left in the last 30 years.....to put it succinctly the Democrat Party is controlled by Big Gov Liberals that are very happy to control your life with a myriad of rules and regulations that TELL you how to live your life, what you can do and what you can't do, our schools have been increasingly become State Run Indoctrination centers where children are taught one sided liberal drivel....increasingly our children are being told WHAT to thing instead of being TAUGHT HOW to think analytically.....increasingly emotions trump rational thought.

THIS is what the Democrat Party of today is about.

If you think the Democrat Leadership has dropped this issue you are sadly mistaken, they have just backed away from pushing forwards on it due to Heller and a couple of other recent decisions combined with the sale of many millions more guns since 11/4/09 along with Bah BILLIONS of rounds of ammo.

From where I sit, I am seeing the GOP trying to re-establish its roots in Conservatism and really try to distinguish itself once again from the the Liberal Left.

Sorry, but there no way you can effectively look at this as a single issue.

Lets be real folks, how many people here are Pro 2a and at the same time are in favor of Cap and Tax (trade) bigger government, more silly laws, more laws that prohibit you from cutting down a tree in your own yard, flush taxes, any a myriad of other nanny state laws?

More and more I keep going back to the analogy of the Democrat Party as the "Borg" like collective.

Don't get me wrong folks, Government has an important job to do, in particular national defense but the role of Government isn't to tell me
I can't cut down a tree on my own property or eat trans fats, or turn my thermostat above/below a certain temp or any number of other rediculous issues.

 

[Splitter]

As someone just said to me, watch Obama in his second term. Only then will he go after guns. It's too dangerous in the first term.

Most Dems have not changed their position on gun rights. They still don't want you to have firearms, but they are a bit scared to come after them right now. When a terrible, gun related incident happens, or when enough of the happen, the Dems will be back for your guns. This will only happen if they see it will not cost them needed votes.

Novus, I know that not all Dems are anti-gun. But between the two parties, they have the most anti-gunners by far. So don't take offense to my words here. The proper way to have phrased all of this may have been Libs vs. Conservative but....hell....that line is pretty blury nowadays too.

Splitter

 

[novus collectus]

As someone just said to me, watch Obama in his second term. Only then will he go after guns. It's too dangerous in the first term.

Most Dems have not changed their position on gun rights. They still don't want you to have firearms, but they are a bit scared to come after them right now. When a terrible, gun related incident happens, or when enough of the happen, the Dems will be back for your guns. This will only happen if they see it will not cost them needed votes.

Novus, I know that not all Dems are anti-gun. But between the two parties, they have the most anti-gunners by far. So don't take offense to my words here. The proper way to have phrased all of this may have been Libs vs. Conservative but....hell....that line is pretty blury nowadays too.

Splitter

I take no offense, it is still true the dem party has teh most anti gunners so far and will likely always will. However, I am relishing the thought that they are seeming to quickly become the minority in my party someday.
Even if we can all disagree with the politics of each other's position, we all have to agree the apparent shift in the Dem party more towards RKBA freedom is a good thing, especially if it continues.

By the way, libs vs. conservatives is still a hard one to use because it is not even all the hard left liberals who are anti RKBA and it is not all the hard right conservatives which are pro-RKBA. I think it is possible to change the attitudes of enough fellow liberals to make it seem as if the far left liberals are at the least RKBA neutral if not actually supporters..

 

[BusDriver]

The republicans will use the gun issue to try get back in power . The democrats will use the guns issue to try to stay in power . Which one do you trust ?

 

[GNLaFrance]

The republicans will use the gun issue to try get back in power . The democrats will use the guns issue to try to stay in power . Which one do you trust ?

C. None of the above.

 

[danielw]

I trust I can hit what I aim at

 

[Llyrin]

As Diance Feinstein said, she will bide her time and strike when she can have the most effect. So, no, they haven't lost, or at least not given up. They are just biding their time.

 

[boricuamaximus]

After 2012, is when we will see their true teeth (if any). They know that they're walking on egg shells and after the buttwhopping they took after Clinton they know better.

They will test the water after 2010 if they dont lose many seats and if BO doesnt lose the 2012 election they will try to pull some crap.

Off topic:
If anyone gets a chance to see China's Unnatural Dissaster on HBO. It's a good one. Not that I am sympathetic to chinese, but it's good to see how people try to voice their opinion and get forced into submission.

Basically, people protesting about their children that died in the quake a few months ago. As a parent its sad. As an American, it's infuriating. I kinda see why so many people hate RKBA.

 

[novus collectus]

The republicans will use the gun issue to try get back in power . The democrats will use the guns issue to try to stay in power . Which one do you trust ?

I am a Democrat so I generally trust the democrats more.

C. None of the above.

Yup, one party in complete control can be a dangerous thing regardless of if it is my party or not.
I would love to see Democrat party ideal advancements, but I am worried about abuses due to political shennaigans and any populist issues which may arise which are counter to the party purposes as they are now (except the gun control thing which is a current party purpose among a portion I hope to change).

Having a valid opposition or more than a few valid oposition parties present helps to keep any government more honest.

 

[Waterdoor]

I am a Democrat so I generally trust the democrats more.
Yup, one party in complete control can be a dangerous thing regardless of if it is my party or not.
I would love to see Democrat party ideal advancements, but I am worried about abuses due to political shennaigans and any populist issues which may arise which are counter to the party purposes as they are now (except the gun control thing which is a current party purpose among a portion I hope to change).

Having a valid opposition or more than a few valid oposition parties present helps to keep any government more honest.

Hopefully except Nancy Poolosi!! She, Fifi and McCarthy are not good for any party. I just wish the 2010 elections would get rid of some of the wacko far left liberals. New York has a few that need to lose as well.

It would not break my heart to see this guy lose either.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22703.html

 

[Brychan]

It does seem the liberal democrats are not happy but they are biding their time, maybe next election a few will get beaten.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20090524/US.Obama.Liberals/

 

[Todd v.]

So you guys think they will wait until after they might loose control of everything before they try and jam something big through? I say we might see a push before the 2010 election because after that they will have an even smaller chance at it.

It is however encouraging to see people standing up for their rights and making themselves heard. The wackos who do nothing but try to convince people what and how to think so they can control need to pay the price, and the people who truly "represent" the people should reap the reward.

 

[HoCoShooter]

As Diance Feinstein said, she will bide her time and strike when she can have the most effect. So, no, they haven't lost, or at least not given up. They are just biding their time.

Right, as have many others. Clinton said several times that he realized that the Democrats lost control of congress because of the assault weapon ban.

The main difference between elected Democrats and elected Republicans, in my opinion, is that most republicans truly believe in the right to keep and bear arms, while most of the democrats over history have only voted for 2a laws to save themselves. Rarely does a democrat stick his or her neck out for 2a. Republicans vote pro gun almost every single time. That's good enough for me.

 

[Waterdoor]

It does seem the liberal democrats are not happy but they are biding their time, maybe next election a few will get beaten.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20090524/US.Obama.Liberals/

There are some very interesting quotes in this article.

"We'll probably end up passing more gun bills" that expand owners' rights "than we did during the Republican administration," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., a leading gun control advocate. "That is what surprises me."

She placed less blame on the White House than on ordinary Americans and advocacy groups that are consistently outflanked by gun owners' groups, especially the National Rifle Association.

"Until the American people say enough is enough, and get active in it," Democratic control of Congress and the White House will not be enough to turn the tide, said McCarthy, whose husband was killed by a gunman in 1993.


McCarthy is just plain lost!! She is confused if she thinks that everyone has the same view as she has on guns. She could of been a great advocate for arming individuals with the loss of her husband, but instead she went the wrong route. The guy that shot her husband was just a very deranged man and nothing would of changed the outcome that day but a possible armed individual to step in and protect all of the sheep.



"People do not want to be on the wrong side of this particular cultural divide," said Rep. David Price, D-N.C., who supports tougher gun controls. "It's too bad there's not a more responsible national organization" to counteract the NRA, he said

Well the NRA just found a new candidate to back. Anyone that runs against this guy will probably be receiving donations.



Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California is another Democrat frustrated by the gun debate. When she asks colleagues why they don't support tougher restrictions, she said, they reply, "You just don't get it, Woolsey. You don't have our districts."

"It has to do with being afraid they'll lose their election if they stand up against guns," she said.

So yet again we have another Liberal Democrat who openly advises that Representatives ignore their constituents and vote the party line. How is it that California has so many clueless people elected to positions there? She openly admitted to it. Come on California stop making the rest of America be responsible for your mistakes! Stand up and do the right thing.

 

[Llyrin]

McCarthy's anger is misdirected and her view of passing laws is wrong. They cannot pass laws that expand owner's rights. What they can do is remove or limit restrictions on those rights. the 2A does not give us the right to keep and bear arms, it tells the government that they CANNOT infringe upon those rights.

The misdirected part of her anger, as Waterdoor alluded to, is that she became angry with EVERY gun owner after her husband was killed by Colin Ferguson on an LIRR commuter train. Sure, she was plenty enraged with Ferguson, but she channeled that anger in the wrong direction by going after legal gun owners.