Looking for ideas

How do we educate non gun Dems (or even turn a few Prohbis on the side)?
Also, how do we reach out to single issue voters that agree with us on most things but have been sold the "all Dems are gun grabbing city slickers"? In short, how do we elect pro 2A Dems and take a wedge issue away from the right-wing?

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

people who have no training in firearm use, and who have a violent criminal record, should not have a firearm. There, fixed your stereotype for you.

How about this guy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/03/us/03yuma.html

There was an order of protection against him. That would have made him ineligible to own firearms. Not a legal gun owner: no points for you.

That doesn't seem very realistic at all.

Better not to have guns in the hands of the public to begin with.

to the range.

It works.

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

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

"I do not wish to be "educated" by my enemies."

Rather than work with us you would rather call us "enemies". How progressive of you.

Stop letting the NRA leadership use this scare tactic as a fundraiser?

In both elections Democrats were slaughtered at the polls. The 2010 election was worse for us than 1994. In both election pro-gun candidates did extremely well. in 2010 almost every congressional and senatorial candidate who was replaced was replaced with someone with an equal or higher NA rating. Over half of the House and almost half of the Senate now has an NRA rating of "A". And you want the Democrats to try to take on that kind of electoral tornado.

Guns had NOTHING to do with the 2010 election. The dems who got slaughtered in 2010 were almost to a man 'blue dogs' - and if you haven't noticed, being pro-gun is a cornerstone of the "I'm more conservative than you" blue dogs.

Talk about single-issue voters.

In those cases in which the Republican had a lower NRA rating than the Democrat the higher NRA rating won. Guns were very important in 2010. Democrats may be anti-gun at our electoral peril.

gun enthusiasts (which is a misnomer, but nevermind) would know or care about relative NRA ratings - and i guarantee you, 95 of 100 voters neither knew nor cared.

I believe - without having the comparitive listings - that you are just making shit up. I didn't hear ONE campaign ad that focused on guns. Not a fucking one. If nobody was running on it, how did it get so important?

And haven't you figured out (obviously not) that this is not the NRA of your father? This is the NRA that George Fucking Bush quit because it was so irratioinal - it is a far-right political organization that doesn't really give a flying fuck about you or your guns - just about your votes for THEIR favored candidates.

You're being had, son.

Calm down

Over half of the House has NRA ratings of "A". Almost half of the Senate has NRA ratings of "A". If it wasn't important, and if nobody knew then how did so many NRA "A" rated candidates get elected? The NRA is a single issue organization, guns only. They take no stand on any other issue.

87,940,148 voters voted in the 2010 midterms. The NRA has about 4.5 million members. That alone is more than 5% of active voters. When you consider that there is often only one NRA membership in a household but that member influences their spouse and some friends who have guns then we rapidly reach well above your 5%. The NRA is very sophisticated in being able to target their ads. They don't waste money on people who are anti-gun, as you obviously are, so it isn't surprising that you didn't hear anything about guns.

I don't need to make stuff up. We are winning. Have you noticed all the pro-gun bills that have been passed in state legislatures so far this year?

Definately this is not the old NRA of 40 years ago. This is an NRA that is very agressive and effective in promoting gun rights.

The media is agenda driven and is willing to distort and lie about the issue of firearms.

Firearms are not rocket science or almost impossible to understand like our complex economic policy. Often I have talked to people who favor another assault weapons ban and they ask me why I would need a fully automatic weapon to hunt a deer. I enjoy pointing out to them that the rifles that the assault weapons ban applied to were basically the same semi-auto firearms as other very common hunting weapons and that fully automatic firearms are tightly regulated under firearm law and cost an absolute fortune for the average civilian to purchase.

I often direct them to this video by a police officer which explains the difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB8gNCnLDZI

I suspect you would prefer that your fellow citizens would remain ignorant of the facts as it helps you push for draconian gun control. I simply want people to have enough basic knowledge about firearms that they are able to make rational decisions on the issue. They still might favor strong gun control laws and even bans or confiscations but at least they will have the knowledge to understand both sides.

Interestingly enough, when many people understand how they have been deceived they become angry at the gun control groups. Perhaps that is why organizations like the Brady Campaign are losing supporters.

If your side is so weak that it can't win when people understand the subject, I suggest you are on the wrong side of the issue.

IMO we are awash with unreasonable gun controls already that do nothing but penalize the law abiding.

How about stop pushing anti gun nonsense? You have been "educated" you your enemies, check out the party affiliations of your leaders at Brady and VPC.

and the sooner you accept that the better off you will be

looking in my bedroom door, "society" was not there to defend me or my wife, or my baby. It was just me and my 9mm.

When I was attacked by 3 car jackers, "society" was no where to be found but my .380 immediately came to my defense.

In both cases I did not have to fire a shot to stop the life threatening situations. In both cases what may or may not be good for "society" never crossed my mind.

Fact is if it were not for guns there would be no "society" to be concerned about.

Semper Fi,

And only so long as that threat remains stronger than the threat of force from those who would disolve that society.

Reality hurts their brains.

Oooooo, scary.....

And seriously, "re-education camps"?! WTF is going on inside your head?

stop calling them childish names "Prohbis" how old are you?

afix labels to everyone you disagree with?

gun safety advocates. Do you label?

I don't label

...is wrong with a label?

A label is not necessarily a pejorative.

One of the reasons why law and medical students took Latin was that the vocabulary offered by the Latin language allowed the same concepts to be expressed in fewer words. Thinking in a language that offers a superior vocabulary, after becoming sufficiently skilled with it, offers precision of thought.

Would you be against that as well?




P.S. - I hate to break this to you but if you use words like "Americans", "Republicans" and "Democrats" you do label.

just the ones you disagree with?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=423965&mesg_id=424016

of the so called assault weapon ban.

Second. Support firearms education in public schools.

but we also need to improve the NICS background check system so the the names of violent criminals and people legally adjudged of having severe mental problems are placed on the list in a timely fashion. We should also open this database up for private purchases.

Of course we need to enforce existing laws and find a method of discouraging the straw purchase of firearms. I favor charging anyone who has been involved in the straw purchase of a firearm as an accessory to any crime committed by that firearm.

It would also help if we admitted our War on Drugs is a total failure and legalized some drugs. The would take a lot of the profit motive out of dealing drugs and might gun down on the gun violence committed by the drug gangs.

Just fuckin with ya ! AHahahahaha

to walking around in public like a cowboy from the 19th century.

I'm leaning towards going " Full Gurkha" on their ass .

The Eddie Eagle program would be a good place to start. Then progress on to hunter safety courses and maybe trap/skeet and silhouette at the high school level. I'm not even going to touch your straw man statement.

I don't wear a cowboy hat or spurs. Most of the time I am wearing shorts but during the cooler months I do wear jeans. My gun in concealed in a fannypack when I am wearing shorts or a Fobus holster when wearing jeans and a jacket. In no way do I look like a cowboy. You need to grow up and quit making things up about people. My firearm is just fine for society. No one sees it as it is concealed.

I really don't care where you or anyone else carries those things. And I don't care if you are dressed like Lady GaGa, you are still playing cowboy in modern society in my mind.

n/t

If you guys could keep it cool and not want more and more guns in public that are made to kill lots of people, there wouldn't be that much concern. But, no . . . . . .you guys keep promoting gun proliferation. Many of you even make money of it.

Probably without a licence...

but "cowboy" is an honorable (though obsolete, but their heyday was pretty short-lived) profession and as a sub culture is not related in any way to the Southern redneck. Nothing wrong with rednecks, but there is a difference. The southern variety has more in common with rural African Americans and had more in common with them than the white oligarchs (never mind they would never admit it). The western cowboy has a more Spanish origin from California and the southwest.
Besides, the only differences between modern society and 19th century society has more to do with technology and population growth. Attitudes and moral concepts change every eighty years or so. In other words, the more things change the more they remain the same.

Moral concepts need to change with respect to guns in public.

Who said anything about hero wannabes? What on earth is a hero wannabe? Sounds like a slight disdain for certain subcultures. You use terms associated with an inaccurate view of 19th century west and use it as a negative, and equally inaccurate, description of those of us who have different life choices or heritage. That would be kind of like saying all SUV driving suburbanites were all shallow mall dwellers with delusions of ruggedness. Out of curiosity, were Kitty Genovese's neighbors the model of a civil society, where one just stands around waiting for the cops to show up while a murder is being committed.
Gun slinger is simply a romantic way of describing a 19th century contract killer who happened to be in the west. Their urban counter parts were no different and no less common, just did not get PR from the likes of Ned Buntline.
It seems that your issue with guns have less to do with safe streets and is more analogous with the anti intellectual who puts down bookish types.
What I find amusing is that people who want to leave AZ or Wyoming their lax gun laws and say "I'm going to Vermont" or leave gun loving USA and move to Switzerland or Norway. That tells as much about their knowledge of the world and the US as it does their attitude towards guns.

edited for added digressions.

and some quite progressive. It is not regressive either. I still like the good old fashioned term liberal.
Do you always take things out of context or distort what is being said?

Most "bookish" people don't waste time on preparing their guns for public toting. Maybe some -- but the Tbaggers I see packing, not so much.

And later many of them buy guns. A person doesn't stop reading just because they aren't in a university any more. Further, you never know who is and is not carrying concealed. If you met me on the street you would think I wasn't armed.

Most bigots are too stupid to know they're bigots. Probably because they don't, or can't, read.

I bet you thank Gawd every day for voice recognition software.

But you've got my vote.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

abiding citizens. I hope you are able to cope with it and adapt. If not, you should seek out mental health care services.

and Management?
Are you saying Finland and Norway are in decay while South Africa and Costa Rica are progressive and peaceful?

Did you know that there are scary black rifles that are not for sale in the US but are on the civilian market in Canada?
http://www.canadaammo.com/product.php?productid=12&cat=0&page=1

and they are laxer than many US cities.

And guns are registered in ways that would make you guys really whine. You have to have a permit to even buy bullets. And, like I said, none of you guys could tote there.

You're whining enough for everyone.

their murder rate is about half of gun free Japan's. Here, the objection is less about permit systems as it is how a local government could misuse or turn it into a de facto ban like DC or Chicago. Besides, their streets were safe before and after, so what's your point? Their illegal gun use comes from the heroin trade routes and are more likely to use automatic weapons than in the US.

I commented that they don't allow much carrying there.

Now you make some point apparently that their culture doesn't produce as many violent crime. Yep, good reason to put the brakes on those here who think promoting guns in public common will make us a better country. It won't, such thoughts are regressive.

because the two have nothing to do with each other. By your logic, DC should have a lower per captia murder rate than Mesa.

Are you responsible?

I assume that you keeps some bombs at home as well, since you have equated responsible gun ownership with "responsible bomb ownership."

that assure we keep the rest of our freedoms...


Somehow we have to start electing democrats that actually believe in the 2nd and not just play games to get elected.

My BIL is an elected democrat in our county and he's a huge 2nd supporter, I could easily see him running for State congress but his views wouldn't fit in with the national agenda our party had adopted towards firearms freedom.

not suprisingly. However, I would like to thank you for your attempt at opening the conversation on this topic.