Gun Control: 'Gored'? Not in '04( Bush lousy enforcement record)

[papau]

Gun Control: 'Gored'? Not in '04( Bush lousy enforcement record)

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3927028/

NewsweekJan. 19 issue –
In 2000, Al Gore proposed issuing federal licenses to gun owners. The idea didn't sit well in conservative Red States and, some say, it may have cost him the election. Now a new survey of presidential candidates suggests Democrats are moderating their stances. All six major contenders—Wes Clark, Howard Dean, John Edwards, Dick Gephardt, John Kerry and Joe Lieberman—oppose both the licensing of gun owners and the registration of handguns. (Dennis Kucinich and Carol Moseley Braun support both; Al Sharpton and President Bush didn't answer the survey.) While the six Dems favor restrictions like a renewal of the assault-weapons ban and background checks at gun shows, they also affirm their support for gun ownership. They "refused to be 'Gored'," says Jonathan Cowan, president of Americans for Gun Safety, which conducted the survey.

The shift to the middle could alter the gun debate this year. In 2000, candidate Bush attacked Gore for failing to enforce gun laws already on the books. Now the Dems in the survey hammer Bush for what they say is his own lousy enforcement record. <snip>

[MrBenchley]

1. Terrorists can buy guns at gun shows under Chimpy

without any problem, but better watch their asses if they go near the public library....

[Superfly]

2. Once again, your response makes absolutely zero sense

nt

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[davidinalameda]

12. LOL

sorry--but that's a good one

[el_gato]

3. gun control is a loser issue

and has cost us way too much

I'm glad people are starting to realize this

[pocoloco]

5. It proves you don't have to own a gun

to shoot yourself in the foot!!!

[CO Liberal]

6. Designed to Control Losers

By keeping guns away from them. I'm constantly amazed that pro-gunners object to measured designed to get the "bad apples" out of their group.

[Superfly]

7. I fully support porgrams like

Project Exile and Safe Neighborhoods...which are measured programs to "get the bad apples out of our group."

[MrBenchley]

8. Yeah, surrrrrrrrrrrrre......

By the way, from the DLC memo the RKBA crowd was waving around here like a bloody flag...

"--90% of Americans want to close the gun show loophole
--86% want increased penalties for gun trafficking, just like Charles Schumer proposes
--79% want background checks for ALL firearm transactions
--77% want an assault weapons ban....
--67% want ALL firearms registered"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=29642#29656

[DBoon]

9. Unfortunately

It seems the members of the minority that feel otherwise are a disproportionate percent of rural voters. Our electoral system (unfairly) gives an advantage, both in the presidential electoral college and in the senate.

Many rural gun owners by social and economic class should be Democrats. Many are (or were) union members and have been seriously hurt by Shrub's economic policies. I also think sportsmen (and women) are an untapped resource for environmentalists, and a group that should be cultivated (the threat to habitat is luxury development, not hunters).

I'm in favor of putting gun control aside in the interest of getting people back into the fold on economic issues.

I also think a progressive anti-crime agenda would emphasize good blue collar jobs for high-school graduates, programs to support families, and intervention to prevent child abuse (violent criminals start out this way). I think gun control pales in comparison to these as effective anti-crime measures.

Why alienate a group that feels strongly about this issue, otherwise should support us, and is a key vote in many rural states?

For the record, I don't own a gun and personally do find many gun "advocates" to be real creepy as people.

Now that I've pissed off everyone here....

[MrBenchley]

11. On the other hand

why alienate the large majority to pander to a small group....especially when there are so many more important issues?

The union members I know are a lot more worried about their jobs going overseas and their kids dying for Halliburton profits than whether they can get their hands on assault weapons...

[slackmaster]

13. I think you overstate the alienation factor

I have a real problem with MrBenchley's reasoning, and here's why:

Since neither the Republicans nor any of the third parties are selling the kind of strict gun controls you think a lot of people want - Licensing, registration, AW bans, etc.; what harm could come to Democrats for also NOT offering those measures? How many Democrats are so sold on "progressive" gun control with no defined limit that they are going to leave the party and vote for someone else if Democrats don't make a big fuss over it? And if they leave where will they go? Certainly not the GOP.

The "small group" of people who place a high priority on the RKBA want only to be left alone. If Democrats would stop threatening them with ever-tightening restrictions, diminished choices, infringements on the right to privacy, etc. and simply back off of gun control and focus on more important issues like jobs and education, it might make enough of a difference to tip the balance.

Skulduggery notwithstanding, the margin in the 2000 election was a fraction of the number of people who belong to the NRA. It may be a small group in terms of absolute numbers, but it carries a lot of potential leverage.