Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumRemember those polls asking if we'd vote for a strict gun control candidate?
Remember those polls asking if we'd vote for a strict gun control candidate? And the authors of those polls, castigating us because some of us *might* not like voting for such a candidate?
I guess the shoe is on the other foot now, and they don't seem too shy about it. "Dealbreaker" because they're too "pro-gun".
See various threads in GD and this one, and please, enjoy it as much as I am:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12628819
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Double standard, somehow.
Guns
Sanders: Even though Sanders has an "F" rating from the NRA for his opposition to decreasing the waiting period for gun purchases and voted in favor of the 1994 assault-weapons ban, when it comes to gun control, his record is more complicated than the National Rifle Association's blanket disapproval may suggest. He voted against 1993's Brady Bill, likely the most substantial gun control law ever signed into law, as well as bills allowing firearms to be carried in checked bags on Amtrak trains and banning lawsuits against gun dealers and manufacturers for crimes committed by their customers.
Clinton: Clinton has long been an advocate of strong gun-control laws. In her book Living History, Clinton wrote that Congress's inability to pass meaningful gun-control legislation following the Columbine school shooting inspired her to run for Senate in the first place. "We have to rein in what has become almost article of faith, that anybody can own a gun anywhere, anytime," she said during a speech last year. "And I don’t believe that."
While in the Senate, Clinton voted against bills shielding gun vendors and manufacturers from liability on actions taken by their customers. She recently said that opponents of gun control regulations, like the universal background checks Congress was unable to enact following the Sandy Hook shootings, "hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people." During her 2000 Senate campaign, she favored a national licensing regimen for all firearms, but told debate moderator Tim Russert in 2008 that she had since backed off from the idea.
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/clinton-sanders-2016-issues/
beevul
(12,194 posts)Think about this for a minute.
Nra 'f' rated Bernie's votes on guns are a "dealbreaker" as far as some folks are concerned.
The "folks" in question, are the very ones that claim they just want "reasonable" restrictions.
Would folks that really just wanted reasonable restrictions, call Nra 'f' rated Bernie's votes on guns a dealbreaker?
I think not.
pablo_marmol
(2,375 posts)Quite telling, isn't it? Gary Kleck spends a few pages in his book 'Armed' (co-written by Don Kates) on tells such as this --- behavior that gives lie to the claim that all The Controllers want is "common sense" restrictions. LOL ---- such transparent f*ckwits.
ileus
(15,396 posts)Last edited Thu May 7, 2015, 07:05 AM - Edit history (1)
First a cop used a high powered assault pistol to extinguish a couple of "assault" rifle wielding upset at our first amendment rights scumbags.
Now the truly "progressive" folks are being told they should hate Bernie because he's to conservative.
DonP
(6,185 posts)Two regulars reassuring each other that they'd never vote for him.
virginia mountainman
(5,046 posts)LOL!!!!!!!!!!!
virginia mountainman
(5,046 posts)Between Bernie, and the 1'st Amendment "issue" for the "Draw Mohammad" event threads over the past few days. It has really exposed them for what they really are..Seems some "progressives" are rather extremely fearful of freedom of expression, no surprise they get all worked up over a few guns in someones coat closet.
Some very petulant individuals in those threads.
Response to beevul (Original post)
pablo_marmol This message was self-deleted by its author.
Puha Ekapi
(594 posts)GUN NUT
A legislator with not only an excellent voting record on all critical NRA issues, but who has also made a vigorous effort to promote and defend the Second Amendment.
GUN NUT
Solidly pro-gun candidate. A candidate who has supported NRA positions on key votes in elective office or a candidate with a demonstrated record of support on Second Amendment issues.
GUN NUT
A pro-gun candidate whose rating is based solely on the candidate's responses to the NRA-PVF Candidate Questionnaire and who does not have a voting record on Second Amendment issues.
GUN NUT
A generally pro-gun candidate. However, a "B" candidate may have opposed some pro-gun reform or supported some restrictive legislation in the past.
GUN NUT
A candidate with a mixed record or positions on gun related issues, who may oppose some pro-gun positions or support some restrictive legislation.
GUN NUT
An anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive gun control legislation and opposes pro-gun reforms. Regardless of public statements, can usually be counted on to vote against gun rights on key issues.
REASONABLE, COMMON-SENSE POLITICIAN
True enemy of gun owners' rights. A consistent anti-gun candidate who always opposes gun owners' rights and/or actively leads anti-gun legislative efforts, or sponsors anti-gun legislation.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,481 posts)Over 20 years ago the term "assault weapon" was coined as a term of convenience mostly to refer to rifles that had two or more of the designated features. (Mostly all of these features related to conflating civilian available rifles with either the US government issue M-16 or the Russian AK-47 assault rifles.) The rising tide of control happy folks conveniently latched onto it and provided objections and evil characterizations.
Here, today, we have again a hodgepodge of reasons, terms and, sometimes, just specifically named folks who don't fit the mind of pro-control as a 'regular politician'. I suggest that, for whatever reason... a vote in favor of something that pro-control was against or failing to vote against something that pro-control was against or maybe just some personal hobby that some controller doesn't like, these folks be referred to as ASSAULT CANDIDATES.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)MSM seems comfortable with distortion and inaccuracy, once sanctified by -- itself.
But I don't think it is a rising tide any longer.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,481 posts)Candidates are now being found objectionable due to some minor aspects of their records, statements or lack thereof with regard to guns. I simply think referring to the Dem candidates the controllers don't like for odd non-issues as ASSAULT CANDIDATES.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)I think some of the posters were trying to smear on some of that good ol' NRA shit, trying to stigmatize him as unprogressive.
It hasn't worked like they planned. A lot of posters seem to say what many in DU really believe: The "gun issue" is not a big thing to them, certainly not a deal-breaker. The extremists on gun control stood out pretty baldly. I am struck by what seems to be a rather centrist cast with the controllers.
