Highlighting less than progressive positions on gun control which Sen. Sanders appears to welcome
Today we saw the airing of an ad by a pro-O'Malley group pointing to a Sanders vote against the Brady bill (a position which he reversed a year after the massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., in 2012) and a vote against holding gun manufacturers responsible for gun violence.
The charge behind the ad is that Sen. Sanders's position on guns isn't as progressive as Martin O'Malley's own unapologetic support of gun legislation he helped pass in Maryland, making his state the strictest in the nation on gun control. The laws he shepherded through the Md. legislature and signed include:
- Ban on magazines (an ammunition storage and feeding device) that hold more than 10 bullets;
- Ban on 45 types of semiautomatic (weapons that reload automatically but fire only once when the trigger is pulled) rifles, classifying them as assault weapons;
- Requirement that people seeking to buy any gun other than a hunting rifle or shotgun to obtain a license, submit fingerprints to police, undergo a background check and pass classroom and firing-range training;
- Ban on any rifle that has two of three characteristics — 1) Folding stock, which makes the weapon more compact for storage or transport; 2) Grenade launcher; or 3) Flash suppressor, which protects the eyesight of the shooter in low-light shooting conditions.
While there's a good argument that this might not be as politically advantageous a move as the O'Malley group might think, it's not an untrue argument. Most of the responses to the ad today point to wide support from second-amendment hawks who don't represent or support efforts made by liberals in Congress and elsewhere to limit the ownership of assault weapons.
Sanders has also voted against forcing states to respect concealed-carry permits issued by other states - to allow people to carry hidden guns around without a permit.
Indeed, in Sander's own state of Vermont, in gaining his first seat in the House, the senator once used his less than liberal record on gun control as a wedge against Peter Smith, the Republican incumbent he defeated, who supported a ban on assault weapons.
Although Sanders recently sided with the Obama administration, voting for federal bans on assault weapons and high-capacity clips, his rhetoric on the issue contradicts the sentiment behind such legislation. In 2013 Sanders was making an argument similar to the one he made in an NPR interview which aired on the same day as the ad by the pro-O'Malley pac where he stated that, “If you passed the strongest gun control legislation tomorrow, I don’t think it will have a profound effect on the tragedies we have seen.”
He echoed that ambivalence to gun control in the NPR interview, stating, "I think that urban America has got to respect what rural America is about, where 99 percent of the people in my state who hunt are law abiding people."
"If anyone thinks that gun control itself is going to solve the problem of violence in this country, you're terribly mistaken. So, obviously, we need strong, sensible gun control and I will support it. But some people think it's going to solve all of our problems. It is not," he said.
"I can understand that if some Democrats or Republicans represent an urban area where people don't hunt, don't do target practice; they're not into guns. But, in my state, people go hunting and people do target practice. Talking about cultural divides in this country, you know, it is important for people in urban America to understand that families go out together and kids go out with their parents and they hunt and they enjoy the outdoors and that is a lifestyle that should not be condemned."
Those comments were obviously aimed at the stance Gov. O'Malley had taken in the wake of the Charleston shooting where he declared how "pissed" he was at "special interests like the NRA." His statement was a courageous reflection of his successful effort to address the issue of gun violence in his own state:
I'm pissed that we’re actually asking ourselves the horrific question of, what will it take? How many senseless acts of violence in our streets or tragedies in our communities will it take to get our nation to stop caving to special interests like the NRA when people are dying?
I'm pissed that after working hard in the state of Maryland to pass real gun control—laws that banned high-magazine weapons, increased licensing standards, and required fingerprinting for handgun purchasers—Congress continues to drop the ball.
It's time we called this what it is: a national crisis.
I proudly hold an F rating from the NRA, and when I worked to pass gun control in Maryland, the NRA threatened me with legal action, but I never backed down.
So now, I'm doubling down, and I need your help. What we did in Maryland should be the first step of what we do as a nation. The NRA is already blaming the victims of yesterday's shooting for their own deaths, saying they too should have been armed. Let's put an end to this madness and finally stand up to them. Here are some steps we should be taking:
1. A national assault weapons ban.
2. Stricter background checks.
3. Efforts to reduce straw-buying, like fingerprint requirements.
Not one of the GOP presidential candidates comes even close to being right on this issue—and some actually believe that things like background checks are excessive, or that high-capacity magazines are a basic right. Well, I believe we all have a basic right to safe schools, safe places to worship, and safe streets.
Bernie Sanders' response is basically a strawman, suggesting that 'urban' advocates of gun control, like O'Malley' are somehow against responsible gun ownership and use. Nothing in the O'Malley gun control stance and record indicates anything of the sort. Nowhere has he 'condemned' gun owners for 'hunting' or 'target practice' as Sanders insinuated.
Moreover, the line Bernie Sanders is attempting to draw between his own equivocation on gun control and liberal efforts over the years isn't progressive, it's more of a libertarian view; something which is more in line with his 'independent' status in Congress, rather than the Democratic banner he's running under in this campaign (his position on guns being more libertarian than Democratic - libertarian being more in line with an independent status than a Democratic one; in effect, straddling that fence on this issue of gun control). That may well be accommodating to moderate and conservative views on gun control, but it's hardly a progressive stance' - well out of line with his supporters' insistence that his politics are unabashedly progressive. It's not only fair game to highlight his less progressive position on gun control, it's a wedge argument which Bernie Sanders appears to welcome in this campaign.
watch the commercial:
= new reply since forum marked as read
The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) is an international treaty that prohibits the use, transfer and stockpile of cluster bombs, a type of explosive weapon which scatters submunitions ("bomblets"
over an area.
So cluster bombing isn't exactly progressive is it?
Meanwhile Cluster bombing is illegal right?
I could've sworn DU was almost unanimously against "Citizens United."
But now, we let the PACs tell us what to think, and support them? 
...and ignoring Bernie's own pushback on gun control on that liberal 
media outlet which is NPR.
You're doing their work for them, and you don't even realize it 
mean breaking any laws.
It was still a rancid attack ad. I know Sanders will not run those. He may criticize strongly and even attack his opponents on their positions. But this type of hit piece calling a candidate a gun nut? No thanks. He can criticize and attack Sanders strongly without resorting to this type of bullshit attack. I doubt he will disavow it. 
some of my posts on Obama and gun control:
Obama, Guns, and Jesus
February 04, 2008
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4364078
Do we really need a photo of President Obama with a gun to reassure enthusiasts?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022273227
White House Releases Letters From Kids Pleading For Pres. Obama To Act On Guns
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022200849
Pres. Obama: "Shame on us if we've forgotten. I haven't forgotten those Newtown kids."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022579262
In the last 5 months there have been at least 71 kids killed by guns. Average just under 6 years old
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022828523
Wapo:
"In recent days, as he's been asked about his record on guns, Sanders has pointed out that he has a D- grade from the National Rifle Association/"
...like I pointed out above, if you're relying on the NRA to define our candidates' stances on gun control, you're not going to get a fair opinion on what's a progressive position, or even a correct one.
What can we say . . . and can we even believe ourselves anymore
. . .when we vow to prevent this? I don't trust anything, right now.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021977873 (my post from 2012)
A boy comforted by adult at scene of Connecticut school shooting, via @TheMatthewKeys. pic.twitter.com/wzcraXqm
or take guns out of the hands of a single lawful owner. What's the problem with his proposals?
