Dem Leaders: Please curtail the gun control agenda so we can win for once!

[DaveSZ]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/985341.asp?0cl=c3

I'm a liberal who believes in the Bill of Rights!

Our party needs to embrace the Bill of Rights (all of it), and then we can regain the center of the country. The Democratic Party is the best at protecting civil rights, civil liberties, and the Constitution, so why not the 2nd Amendment? Even if you believe the 2nd is a collective state's right and not an individual right, most state constitutions provide for private ownership rights of firearms. The only way we can regain control of Washington, is by realizing and respecting that. I live in Texas, and I know how effective Republican attacks charging Democrats with wanting to confiscate your guns are. Let’s not give them any more “ammo” (so to speak) please.

Gun control cost us the House, and it cost Al Gore (along with other factors) West Virginia and his home state of Tennessee. My heart literally sank when I saw Kerry and Edwards voting for more gun control legislation.

It's not worth being a minority party to ban 19 firearms!

It's not worth letting our children suffer with crumbling schools to ban 19 firearms!

It's not worth letting 40 million Americans go without healthcare to ban 19 firearms!

It's not worth letting the Repubs trash our environment that is the sacred heritage of every American to ban 19 firearms!

It's not worth another 4 years of preemptive unilateral war to ban 19 firearms!

I mean Jesus, let's think of the bigger picture for christsake.

How many people will die and suffer from not having health insurance for themselves and their children vs. people who are killed from so-called "assault" weapons? The AWB is such an idiotic piece of legislation as well because all it mostly does is ban certain cosmetic features on various firearms like a bayonet mount.

Why the heck do we need a law to ban a bayonet mount?

That's idiotic.

How did Ben Chandler win in Kentucky? He had an "A" from the NRA, Sierra Club, and League of Conservation voters.

Outdoorsmen care about the environment too, and if we respect their rights to own firearms, they will also be in the pro-environment camp.

I want them desperately on our side.


P.S. Howard Dean, meggaditos on your ideas about guns buddy, and I hope your ideas become a part of the new platform.

[Democat]

1. meggaditos?

Why does that sound familiar? :(

[BlueCollar]

2. AMEN !!!

Well put...

[DaveSZ]

3. LOL

I hate Rush, he's an ass.

:P

[MadHound]

4. But the majority of people in this country want reasonable gun control

According to poll after poll, the majority of Americans want reasonable gun control measures on the book. Mandatory background checks, trigger locks, waiting periods, hell even in some states like New York, 59% of the folks want a ban on handguns. Why should Kerry abandon a position that the majority of people favor?

[billbuckhead]

5. Guns kill multiples more Americans than terrorists

America is the last major advanced nation with promiscuous gun laws and the murders to prove it.

[Turbineguy]

6. It's going to take more than laws

to change that.

The Neocons will be happy to co-opt the NRA to promote their plan.

[DaveSZ]

9. I keep hearing:

"Poll after poll..."

Let's start seeing some polls posted, because there is now a consensus within the Dem leadership that gun control costs us votes.

It's my own personal assessment that keeping Bush from turning over our National Parks to industry, and helping people who can't even afford to see a doctor takes precedent over banning bayonet mounts. But again, that's just my opinion.

If you read the article I posted, it mentioned that an estimated 3/4 of union households are gun-owning households. One of the main reasons why I am a Democrat is because I value individual civil liberties. I feel the Republicans are mostly radical, authoritarian, religious extremists with little regard for such things as freedom of speech (think Howard Stern), and freedom of religion. See here:

http://www.4religious-right.info/texas_gop.htm

I'm not denying that some gun laws do help reduce crime (the AWB is not one of them), but we have to respect the fundamental rights of law-abiding gun owners if we don't want to be merely a regional minority party in this country. We should instead focus our legislative and enforcement efforts on keeping guns out of the hands of felons, wife-beaters, and terrorists.

New York City and San Francisco are not representative of the US at large, and we all know that so let’s not kid ourselves. As Howard Dean has said, if NYC wants to ban guns, then let the people there vote on it and decide. But NYC’s gun laws simply DO NOT make sense for a place like Montana or Vermont. That’s the premise I’m trying to get across here. Ya dig?

Heh, wouldn’t it be ironic if our party were to be better at protecting state’s rights than the modern radical GOP? The Bush Admin has actually penalized states such as California for having stricter than average emissions standards for cars and industry.
Another glaring example of course would be the proposed Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage.

See here for more examples of Ashcroft, the avowed state’s rights advocate, shitting on the premise of federalism:

http://www.4religious-right.info/states_rights2.htm


I can recall reading an interview with Gore's campaign manager (I believe Donna Brazile). She was sitting on a plane, and overheard two men behind her discussing the upcoming election in what was then 2000.

One of them said, "The only problem with Gore is that he'll take our guns." That's when she knew the campaign was in trouble, and of course, it clearly was.

The key is for our party to take back the ideological center of the country, and that's how we will regain (at least) Congress.

We can't do that by following Ms. Feinstein's agenda. No fricken way.

As a civil libertarian, I also am fundamentally opposed to her agenda.

[MadHound]

16. OK, here you go

<http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/04/12/poll.guns/>
POLL
<http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm>
AFTER
<http://www.bmsg.org/content/EDK_gun_paper.pdf>
POLL
<http://www.saf.org/pub/rkba/hindsight/HS042000.htm>
AFTER
<http://www.dodgeglobe.com/stories/042100/nat_poll.shtml>
POLL

And while you like to point out that 75% of union households own guns, let me point out that only forty two percent of ALL households own guns <http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/5-3-00askeds.html>. So are you proposing that this country be held hostage by the minority of gun owners, or the even smaller minority of people who don't want gun control? That is mighty undemocratic of you there pal.

You may personally dislike it, but gun control is an issue that resonates with the vast majority of people in this country, including gun owners themselves. We should not have our public policy held hostage by special interest groups like the NRA and the gun manufacturers. Instead we should proudly and loudly advocate for those issues that the MAJORITY of people in this country are in favor of. That is the way democracy works.

[IrateCitizen]

17. This is a double-edged sword...

You may personally dislike it, but gun control is an issue that resonates with the vast majority of people in this country, including gun owners themselves.

I'm no longer a gun owner, but I grew up in a rural area and learned to handle firearms responsibly before I was 10 years old. Much of my family are still active hunters and own firearms. Personally, I don't have a problem with measures like trigger locks, background checks, waiting periods, etc. I don't believe that any of my gun-owning relatives do either.

On the other hand, I also VEHEMENTLY disagree with the likes of Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer on their approach to gun control, which really isn't too far off from seizing all firearms and melting them down. The Democratic Party needs to distance itself from this kind of message, even if it means marginalizing this extremist point of view.

Those of us in favor of gun control are often fond of criticizing gun rights advocates for not condemning the extremists in their midst. At the same time, WE need to condemn the extremists in OUR midst on this issue.

It's like Howard Dean said vis a vis the different gun control needs of NYC as compared to VT. This needs to be articulated clearly and repeatedly in order to denounce the "gun-grabbing Democrats" myth. And if necessary, we need to put a muzzle on Feinstein and Schumer in order to stop them from reinforcing the perception of Democrats as a bunch of gun-control extremists.

[MadHound]

18. Extremism on any policy is to be avoided, I agree

However I think that we have been subjected to the extremism and the tyranny of the minority and special interests in this country for far to long. An example: My state of Missouri had a CCW law come through Congress in 1998. It passed, but was vetoed by then Govenor Carnahan. The very next year, for the first(and likely last) time ever, the pro CCW forces decided to put the CCW issue before the voters via initiative petition. It failed handily(despite the overwhelming amount of money the NRA and others poured into the campaign), and we the people thought that since we had spoken, CCW would go away. Instead the gunnies waited until there was overwhelming Republican control of the state legislature, and rammed through CCW once more, over the plainly stated wishes of the populace. Govenor Holden vetoed it, but was overridden, so now, despite the will of the people, we are stuck with a goddamn CCW bill.

Is this democracy, is this fair or right? Hell no, this is tryanny of the minority. We the people of Missouri are being held hostage by the monied special interest groups, the NRA and the gun manufacturers. Talk about extremism, this is it.

And being a gun owner myself, I agree about Feinstein and Schumer. However I also think that we need to have a little extremism on our side, if for no other reason that to counteract the tyranny and extremism of the other side. Hopefully it will all balance out to a sane, sensible, DEMOCRATICLY OBTAINED, gun control policy.

[MrBenchley]

28. Even the DLC admits voters want gun control...

--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
(of course, being the DLC, they look at these numbers and conclude that we should side with the tiny minority who oppose these things)

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

"If you read the article I posted, it mentioned that an estimated 3/4 of union households are gun-owning households."
And how many unions ended up on the NRA enemies list? Most union members I know are a lot more worried about jobs and health care than popguns....and I don't know any who think it's a good idea to make it easier for anyone to get their sweaty shaky hands on an assualt rifle.

[Guaranteed]

23. Yeah, but other countries, like Canada, have just as

many guns per capita as we do, but only a fraction of the murders.

It's not the guns. It's our culture. I don't know if you saw Bowling For Columbine, but that was Michael Moore's point.

[coltman]

7. Gun control

When the repukes get done writing the gun control laws in this country as we are currently letting them do,only the wealthy will be able to afford one.I think we are almost there now.

[molly]

8. HD had an A rating from the NRA

and look what happened to him.

[blondeatlast]

10. I was about to say ... Thanks, Molly.

This is an issue the Democrats need to stand firm on, or they will lose this lifelong Democrat.

The people want gun control, the arrogant, hollering minority don't. I go with the people.

[DaveSZ]

11. .

The "arrogant hollering minority" (as you so describe those who believe in the Constitution) on DU, does not in any way translate into the minority of the population of such key states as West Virginia and Arkansas.

Furthermore this is one "arrogant hollering" individual who does not even own a firearm, yet respects other law-abiding citizen's rights to do so.

Let's look at it from another angle my dears Ms. Molly and Ms. Blonde:

Would you want some 50-year-old, male, Fred Phelps-style basket case being able to dictate control over your uterus?

Of course you wouldn't.

Gun ownership is a civil liberties and personal freedoms issue in the same vein as the right to choose.

WE ARE THE PARTY OF CIVIL LIBERTIES, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF CHOICE, FREEDOM, FREEDOM, FREEDOM!

Did I holler loud enough that time?

I hope so hehe. :P

[Guaranteed]

26. You're totally right

But no one's going to listen. Many have tried to get this point across before...it falls on deaf ears, in particular with regard to the older party members. I don't think they're planning on changing anytime soon.

[no name no slogan]

49. Sorry Dave, but that's not in the Constitution or Bill of Rights

The 2nd Amendment has never been interpreted by the courts to guarantee a right to gun ownership.

(see post #43 for details)...

[THUNDER HANDS]

12. yes, drop gun control and take up BULLET control

Let people have all the guns they want. Just criminalize bullets.

:)

I swear, if I never see a gun the rest of my life I'll be happy.

[DaveSZ]

14. ;)

I swear, if another child is never aborted, then the priest of my church and I will be happy.

That's why we must use the mechanisms of government to ban abortions!

Yep, it's that darn simple.

[molly]

33. Why don't you and your priest adopt some unwanted child?

[Trajan]

35. The Covenant, the Sword, and the Arm of the Lord ? ...

I didnt know you were a member of the christian identity movement ...

Are you ?? ..

[fujiyama]

15. Have you heard...

the Chris Rock joke -- price the bullets so high, criminals will think twice before shooting others!

[blondeatlast]

59. (Jumps from seat) CLAPCLAPCLAPCLAPCLAPCLAPCLAP!

I've had one in my face. Oddly, I didn't enjoy it.

And before anyone starts on the "self-defense" thing, I know my limits. I couldn't have pulled the trigger, even if it meant my life.

[cally]

13. I have come a long way

Getting rid of guns is, and has been, huge for me. Gun control was one of only three must have issues to get my vote. Few of the gun control laws have worked well. I want an America where you only get a gun when you want to hunt but I don't see a political way to that for awhile. I'm tired exhalting in very small victories that make Dems lose elections. So yes, I definitely think Dems should not fight this issue for awhile.

[DaveSZ]

19. .

I agree with Irate Citizen.

Feinstein and Schumer's view on guns really makes me sick, and that's the point of view that I consider an extremist viewpoint.

I hope John Kerry doesn't feel the same way as they do, but even if he doesn't, that picture of him giving a thumbs up with those same folks after voting for more gun control legislation could easily sink him.

I personally favor Dr. Dean's viewpoint, and I consider that to be a very sane, middle-of-the-road approach to the issue.

[MadHound]

22. So you would rather a tyranny of the minority rule the land

Than simply having simple sane gun control laws:eyes: How very Democratic of you. Sorry, but there are certain federal gun control laws that should be implemented. Things like a real assault weapons ban.

By the by, I noticed you haven't responded to my sources above. What's the matter, polls got your tongue?

[maxanne]

20. we can't divorce

the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights. Instead of blaming the guns, maybe we could try dealing with the root causes of gun violence. We blame the messenger. The gun is only the tool. The fear and anger that cause the violence will still be there when the guns are gone, and will only manifest themselves in some other violent outlet.

I have a gun - and I'm not giving it up, thanks. I'm as bleedingheard a liberal as you can find - but I'm armed. I don't fear terrorists, I fear "patriots."

[IrateCitizen]

21. Now, now, maxanne... we can't be bothered with root causes!

After all, such approaches would be the equivalent of conceding points to the "progressives" who propose we actually attack problems rather than nibble around the edges looking only at the symptoms.

And we can't have that kind of radicalism taking hold, especially not in an election year!

[DaveSZ]

24. That's what pisses me off too.

We have a constitutionally protected right to own firearms, and I don't care how much revisionist history garbage you give me, it's still the truth.

Yes I'm also as bleedinghearted, Dennis Kucinich-loving a liberal as you'll find. Hehe.

This is the only issue I disagree with Dennis on.

[maxanne]

27. oops, sorry

IrateCitizen - I lost my head!

[Guaranteed]

25. Me too...

I don't have a gun though. I think they're dangerous. But I'm totally with you on this issue.

[DaveSZ]

29. Oops

I also disagree with Dennis on pulling out our troops from Iraq right away because that would result in a radical Islamic state (breeding ground for terrorists) in the place of Saddam.

On most domestic issues though I agree with Dennis; especially scrapping NAFTA! The people on the US/Mexico border suffer so much because of NAFTA it's terrible really.

[no name no slogan]

47. That's not DK's position though...

DK advocates replacing a US-run presence with a multi-lateral, UN-mandated presence. US troops would only leave after the UN is present in Iraq. Otherwise, it very well would sink into chaos, since the current US policy favors radical Islamist clerics and religionists (both Sunni and Shia) over secular leaders of all faiths and backgrounds.

[doc03]

37. Agree, guns don't kill, people do

I could kill someone with a letter opener, a hammer, ink pen,
rock, etc. The best gun control is a good grip, sight picture, slow steady trigger pull and control of breathing.

[Fleshdancer]

30. Here's my solution:

only allow people to have the kind of guns that existed at the time the Bill of Rights was written. Drive by's would be much harder to do if you had to pour in the gun powder!

Seriously though, if we're not willing to change our laws based on the advances of firearms then maybe the only answer is to not have technological progress in that particular area.

[FeebMaster]

50. Wow, that's pure genius.

I'm sure someone who has no problem murdering someone from a car window will have no problem obeying your law.

[doc03]

31. It's electoral votes not the majority that count

Gun rights are a big issue in the red states. That issue alone probably lost little WV for Gore and the Presidency.

[Trajan]

32. Major shift in Liberal thinking ...

I have been PRO Gun Control most of my life ...

I think it a worthy cause to protect innocents from the consequences of today's modern weapons ...

But: .... Considering what has been happening in our country of late ... Perhaps I need a change of heart ?? ..

Perhaps what we need ... as Liberals ... is MORE assault weapons ?? ...

Perhaps, and Im just spit-balling here (Thank You Jack), perhaps WE should pursue a MASSIVE acquisition of military style weapons, IN FULL DISPLAY of the righties and GOP and the whole nation .... Putting the nation on notice that WE, Liberals, will now pursue a policy of mutual protection based on the possession of overwhelming firepower and potential destruction .... ??? ...

Perhaps: ..... and I am gathering this from the tenor of this thread: .. there will be a MASSIVE shift in party affiliation from these "Outdoors-men", who allegedly hold "Liberal positions' in most issues OTHER THAN gun issues ... right ? ..

So: .... IF we were to shift gears and become 'Assault Weapons consumers' .... and accumulate in full public view tens of millions of Assault Rifles .... You can guarantee a shift of 'liberal' gun 'aficionados' to the Democratic Party ? ...

Just for the hell of it: ... Provide a number of expected shifts from the GOP to the Democratic Party ....

I know one thing: ... IF we pursued such a change of heart, the GOP would STRONGLY consider placing limits on gun ownership ....

Think of it: .. Charlton Heston ripping up His GOP suck-ass card, and joining Clinton and Gore and Kerry and Carter on the Dais ... as ALL raise their AR15s ... to the tumultuous applause of the 'liberal' rabble ....

Wow ..... what a cool proposition ....

But: .. lets temper our enthusiasm for just a moment ... FIRST ? ... Give us a number representing those Americans who are BOTH 'Gun Nut', AND liberal ....

HOW many 'tens of millions' of current GOP supporting-hate the Democrats gun control policy gun 'aficionados' exist today ?? ..

Give a guess ....

Gentlepeople ? ...

LOCK AND LOAD ! ......

[ieoeja]

48. Personal Anecdote

Personal anecdotes suck, but I'm going to give one anyway. I live in a blue-collar neighborhood of Chicago. I work with the yuppies downtown. I grew up, and my family still resides, in southern Indiana. And just about every human being I personally know, in each of these locales, is pro-choice and pro-gun.

[w4rma]

34. I am in total agreement. (n/t)

[MrBenchley]

36. What a disgraceful suggestion...

Besides the fact that gun control is something a majority of voters want and is NEEDED...what sort of numbnuts is sitting around in 2004 thinking that the most important issue at hand is whether he can get his hands on an assault riufle (or avoid a background check at gun shows)?

[maxanne]

38. you miss the point

a lot of people who despise Bush don't want their guns taken away. You can argue with them all the doo da day - but in 2000, they knew that Al Gore was gonna take their guns away.

The Constitution is not a salad bar - we can't pick and choose what we want to put on our plates. We either stand behind ALL of it - or we change it.

This is a dumb issue for Democrats. It comes back to those darned root causes again. Canadians have a shitload of guns - but they don't kill each other. It isn't the guns that cause the violence. They're just a symptom.

[doc03]

39. Agree, I would be willing to bet that the states with the highest gun

ownership have the lowest gun violence. Just yesterday the FBI named my
area as having the second lowest crime rate in the nation, practically everyone here has multiple guns. Also Al Gore definitely lost this area because of the gun issue.

[MrBenchley]

40. Who but the lunatic fringe think somebody's going to grab their popguns?

"The Constitution is not a salad bar"
Thank you for that stunning insight...no wonder I can't find any ranch dressing or croutons (/sarcasm).

The plain FACT is that the Secocnd Amendment refers to state militias and nothing more...as the courts have affirmed over and over and over. All else is a deliberate LIE by one of the scummiest special interest groups around.

"This is a dumb issue for Democrats."
It shouldn't be an issue at all...look at the pieces of shit in politics who are spouting "gun rights": Pat Buchanan, Jeb Bush, David Duke, Ted Nugent, Larry Craig, Trent Lott, John AshKKKroft, Orrin Hatch, etc. What are the odds that they're right and John Kerry is wrong?

"Canadians have a shitload of guns - but they don't kill each other."
You want to register guns like the Canadians do? Sounds good to me. Canadians also don't have gun shows....nor do they let the corruptgun industry set public policy.

[IrateCitizen]

41. My uncle, who is an avid hunter, supported Clinton, is NRA...

... and is thoroughly convinced that there ARE Democrats out there who want to take away his right to own firearms.

If you believe that it is only a "lunatic fringe" that feels this way, then you obviously do not spend very much time in extremely rural areas. Having grown up in such an area, I am well aware that it is a misconception that must be dispelled, not ignored out of self-righteousness.

[MrBenchley]

44. I live in a rural area....

The idea of alienating the vast majority of voters so we can cozy up to the Randy Weaver wannabes is repellent.

Especially since almost all of them hate Jews, blacks, gays and uppity women as much as they love their guns and will never in a million years vote Democratic anyway

[IrateCitizen]

51. Strawmen, nothing but strawmen...

Especially since almost all of them hate Jews, blacks, gays and uppity women as much as they love their guns and will never in a million years vote Democratic anyway

It's always so comforting to see the politics of stereotyping and generalization at work on the left, because it helps reinforce the postulate that at our hearts we're really little more than pro-choice, pro-gay marriage freepers. :shrug:

We're not talking about "Randy Weaver wannabees". We're not talking about the posters that lurk in the J/PS forum who brag about CCW's and the like. We're talking about the f***ing SPORTSMEN who should be our natural allies on the environmental issue alone -- not to mention economic issues -- but who are turned off by what they PERCEIVE as an element within the Democratic Party who wants to take their firearms.

Your broadbrush characterizations and stubborn refusal to even consider another person's point of view only helps, in the end, to reinforce these false perceptions. And the end result is that these people either vote for Republicans or they don't vote -- and we ALL suffer because of it.

[MrBenchley]

54. Who are you trying to kid?

"We're talking about the f***ing SPORTSMEN"
And do you really think they're cowering in fear that Democrats are going to seize their popguns? I doubt that very many sane sportsemen are.....just as I doubt many feel their sporting experience is a pallid mockery because they can't have an assault weapon.

Here's a fact...fewer than 6% of the US population hunt....and that number is shrinking fast.

Here's another....almost every politician who is pro-gun is also anti-environment...big time.

[maxanne]

53. what an amazing job

of stereotyping, Mr. Benchley. I'm sure with that attitude you were real popular in rural areas.

I don't encounter what you describe in the rural areas of the north, but don't let that stand in the way of stereotyping. We like being stereotyped by soft handed city guys with combovers and pointy toed shoes, wearing too much cologne. :+

[MrBenchley]

55. Too too funny....

You want to portray rural folks as cowering in the root cellar, a-feared that any minute Hillary Clinton is going to arrive in a black helicopter to seize their guns...

I don't think there's very many sane ones who buy that crap.

[maxanne]

56. actually

that's more in keeping with your portrayal than mine. Nice try though, Mr. Benchley. You're the one who keeps insisting that the folks living in rural areas are less than sane. I'm sure your experience with living in a rural area was probably a suburb, with a nice little country club, and plenty of cookouts and cocktail parties - not someplace like the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont.

[MrBenchley]

60. Gee, I'm pretty sure you're the one who's been claiming

rural voters fear their guns will be taken away....

I think rural voters are sane...and I think the few who are twitching about "gun-grabbers" and lusting after assautl weapons are crazy pieces of shit who would never vote Democratic.

Next ask me what I think about the sanity of someone who has detailed fantasies about strangers' lifestyles on the basis of nothing but frustration...

[maxanne]

64. bwaaahahahaha

It's impossible for you to frustrate me. It's also very obvious that you know nothing about rural gun owners, at least in the north.

[MrBenchley]

67. I sure know gun nut horseshit

when I hear it...

[maxanne]

42. no need to get nasty with me

Mr. Benchley

Perhaps you should step out of whatever rarified air you're breathing and visit rural America. These are not people on the fringes - but they are people who have been brainwashed by relentless right wing propaganda. Hunting is a part of life here, and for some families it makes a difference in how well they eat for the rest of the year. We don't have gun crime here - and we have a lot of guns. Many of these people would be happy to vote against Republicans - BUT - they fear that the lunatic fringe of the Democratic party will take their guns away.

Do you really think that taking away guns will solve the problems of violence in the US?

[MrBenchley]

45. I live in a rural area and I've lived in urban areas

Again.... who in 2004 thinks the major issue is that there aren't enough assault weapons? Or that there's too many background checks before people get guns?

[Jane Austin]

69. Tennessee and Arkansas

People have been merciless in pointing out that Gore "couldn't even win his home state".

Having lived in Tennessee for a few years, I can just about guarantee you that the reason he didn't carry those states was gun control.

[no name no slogan]

43. You need a lesson on the 2nd Amendment, then

because you've bought into the NRA's line, hook line and sinker.

The 2nd Amendment DOES NOT give an individual a right to own firearms. It has NEVER been interpreted this way by the high court. ONLY the NRA and the pro-gun lobby have interpreted it this way.

To quote from an excellent piece at FAIR (emphasis mine):

The Amendment is only 27 words: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." While the NRA emphasizes only the last 14 words, the U.S. Supreme Court and appeals courts have focused on "well-regulated militia" and "security of a free State" to rule that Second Amendment rights are reserved to states and their militias – nowadays, the National Guards.

The truth is -- and one would hardly know it from the mass media -- that since the Supreme Court's unanimous Miller decision in 1939, all federal appeals courts, whether dominated by liberals or conservatives, have agreed that the Second Amendment does not confer gun rights on individuals. The NRA view, opposed even by such right-wing judges as Robert Bork, has been consistently rejected.

Unlike the average media consumer, Douglas Hickman knows this truth. In 1991, he invoked the Second Amendment in suing the City of Los Angeles after failing to get a permit for a concealed weapon. In keeping with dozens of cases since 1939, the Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously: "We follow our sister circuits in holding that the Second Amendment is a right held by the states and does not protect the possession of a weapon by a private citizen."




The constitution DOES NOT guarantee individual Americans the "right" to own firearms of any sort. What it does is provide for the states to maintain their own militias, which has been the National Guard since the late 1800s.

Unfortunately, the NRA has brainwashed the vast majority of the public into believing they are "defending the Bill of Rights", when what they're really trying to do is radically alter its meaning through lobbying and litigation.

You no more have a "right" to own a gun as you have a "right" to drive a car. Your gun ownership is a priviledge granted to you by the state government, like a driver's license.

[MrBenchley]

46. Exactly so...

Furthermore, the vast majorty of American voters WANT sensible gun control....

[Guaranteed]

58. So you're basically saying to just ignore those

last 14 words, which specifically say that the right of the PEOPLE will not be infringed upon.

[MrBenchley]

61. I'm saying that you swallow NRA lies at your own risk

[no name no slogan]

62. I'M not saying, the courts and constitution are

It is the law of the land, and has been consistently interpreted that way since 1939.

And likewise, the two clauses are NOT independent of each other-- why else would they be included in the same amendment if they were not? The amendment specifically states that the citizens are entitled to a "well-regulated militia", which has been the National Guard, since the late 1800s when the guards were created.

In other words, the right to bear arms should not be infringed upon if they are required for use in the militia.

Like I said, gun ownership is not a "right". It is a priviledge granted by the governments (federal, state, local). You no more have a "right" to own a gun than you have the "right" to drive a car on public roads, or to live in the White House for that matter.

[MrBenchley]

63. For all those people banging their gums about "root causes"

It's the politicians spouting this bogus "gun rights" rubbish, such as Orrin Hatch, Tom DeLay, John AshKKKroft, and the Bu$h brothers, who are doing their best to exacerbate those root causes...and those politicians who are for gun control, like Schumer, Feinstein, Kennedy, McCarthy, Clinton, Gore,, etc. who are also doing their best to alleviate them.

Which makes the bad faith on the "gun rights" side of the aisle glaringly obvious.

[maxanne]

65. really

Most of those politicians you mention roll over for the right wing agenda at every opportunity. Feinstein has become an embarassment. She voted for the glaringly awful Medicare bill - which will be a great help to the poor and unfortunate... drug companies.

Clinton paved the way for the media monopolies that exist today, which are one of the prime ways of spreading fear in our culture. Killer Bees!

Tell us, Mr. Benchley, about the non-violent utopia that will descend upon us the minute guns are gone. How will it work?

[MrBenchley]

68. Too TOO Funny!

Tell us, please...who is that pushing the "right wing agenda" you're sniveling about?

Oh that's right, it's the same corrupt right wing pieces of shit pushing that bogus "gun rights" crap in public. You know, turds like Trent Lott, Larry Craig, Tom DeLay, etc.

[FeebMaster]

52. Besides, everyone knows

that the Republicans are the ones who have passed all of the really bad gun control in the last 25 years.

[sandnsea]

57. And gays, race, abortion, the poor,

health care for all, college educations, fair trade agreements... what else do we need to curtail to win?

[Jane Austin]

66. I've been thinking the same thing.

Several of our Presidential candidates enjoy hunting, my husband likes target shooting, and I think there are, right now, much more pressing issues that we need to get to that will sink if we don't win back the White House.