A Democratic Pro-Gun Suggestion for 2008

After this disaster, I'd like to offer a suggestion. I think all progressive Dems should try to draft my former Congressman, Ted Strickland, serving Ohio's 6th District. Check out his page at www.house.gov/strickland/

He's a former minister, a psychology PhD, he's from Ohio....and he has a B rating from Gun Owners of America. I don't need to tell anyone how important being from Ohio is as far as electoral votes are concerned. The 6th District was represented by Clarence Miller for around 30 years. Miller was a hard core Republican in the Jesse Helms mold. Strickland won by being three things:

1. A former minister who isn't afraid or ashamed of his faith;
2. An articulate guy who connects with voters a la Bill Clinton;
3. He's very pro-Second Amendment..probably the most pro-gun Dem in Congress today. That's important when trying to win over a few "red states" where gun ownership is sacrosanct.

Just a thought.

You're covering a lot of bases, hope our dem party is thinking same as you. We won't cheat, so we gotta run sure things.

Gun control in cities and none in the rural areas makes a lot of sense.

not authoritarians.

"... and none in the rural areas makes a lot of sense.

Yeah. Especially to all the rural women who are terrorized, and killed, by their firearms-wielding intimate partners.

I couldn't find whatever is being referred to regarding Strickland's rural/urban distinction proposal. But I do know this stuff.

http://community.palouse.net/atvp/Articles/RuralIssues.html

Rural Victims and Violence

17% of all homicides take place in rural areas between intimate partners

Intimate homicides make up a larger proportion of murders in rural areas than in suburban or urban areas

8 per 1,000 women in rural areas were victims of intimate partner violence between 1993-1998

A woman is battered every 9 seconds in the United States

(United States Department of Justice: Special Report 2002)

Isolation

Rural locations are often deliberately chosen by an abusive partner in order to increase the isolation and maintain control over their spouse or partner. By moving their partner to an isolated location, the abuser can reduce ties their partner may have had to friends and family, which may also prevent the victim from getting help. Abuse in rural areas is hidden more easily than in urban areas where the victim may be seen or heard during an abusive incident. Seclusion from neighbors and friends plays a significant role in the abuser maintaining control, as domestic violence is more easily kept under wraps when there is no one nearby to serve as a witness.

Poverty

17% of rural households live at or below the poverty level. Rural women have few economic options, and often lack employment of their own. If they do have a job, it's normally low paying, and therefore barely enough to survive on apart from the inclusion of the wage contributed by their partner.

http://www.users.qwest.net/~wyomingcoalition/aware/aw-ls201.pdf

There is a rural/urban difference in intimate homicides. While the rate has declined in cities, it has increased in rural areas. Intimate homicides made up a larger proportion of murders in
rural areas than in suburban or urban areas

"Gun control" can mean many things -- not just prohibitions on possession.

Registration of ownership of firearms is one measure that can enhance women's safety, since women at risk could request that their partners' firearms be forfeited while the risk persists (the highest risk period being when women are leaving abusive relationships), or permanently in the case of men who systematically use their firearms to intimidate and terrorize, or who abuse their partners and families while intoxicated with firearms in the home.

(Of course, this works only if there is no ready access to firearms off-registry, i.e. where private sales do not require registration or from the large stock of firearms already in illegal circulation in the US. So there's no point in even starting/trying; I know the words to the song.)

The decline of intimate homicides in urban areas in the US, while the rate rises in rural areas, is interesting. Urban areas are where firearms control measures are more likely to be in place, right?



Say ... they gots some fine Democrats in that Ohio.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/keyraces98/stories/groundzero110598.htm

Lucas was the most aggressive Democrat in the region, if not the entire country, in asserting his conservative credentials. He boasted that he is a "compassionate conservative: pro-life, pro-gun and pro-business." By stressing his rightward stands on social issues and by contrasting his own military experience with the fact that Williams dropped out of the U.S. Naval Academy, Lucas could absorb the closing attack conducted by the Williams campaign and the national Republican Party.

Along similar lines, Rep. Ted Strickland (D-Ohio) fended off a challenge by Lt. Governor Nancy Hollister (R), who was backed up by nearly $1 million channeled by national GOP committees.

Strickland, running in a rural district where the Democratic label is a liability, ran ads declaring he "voted to ban partial-birth abortion" and cosponsored legislation protecting "Christians from persecution around the world," ... .

http://www.issues2000.org/OH/Ted_Strickland_Abortion.htm

Rated 30% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life <sic> voting record.

http://www.issues2000.org/OH/Ted_Strickland_Gun_Control.htm

Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights <sic> voting record.

I've always wondered; with Democrats like them, who needs ...?

I've always wondered; with Democrats like them, who needs ...?

Ted Strickland is much closer to where the national Democratic party needs to be to win national elections than John Kerry is.

Ken Lucas is a good man as well. With Lucas retiring, the Republicans won that seat in northern Kentucky by a comfortable margin. We've lost that seat for the foreseeable future.

So, why don't you answer your own rhetorical question? Should we be Democrats? Or should we write the Democratic party off the way you apparently want to write us off? How many elections can the Democratic party win without us?

We're just conceding the turf. We shouldn't. There must be lots of dem gun owners, hunters and fishing folks out there.

Are there dem gun organizations? There certainly are Repub ones - the foremost of which is the NRA.

Fight the effort to reduce some of the sillier gun control measures? Not going to happen from gun owners. At least not this one.

The AWB is a perfect example of rediculous gun control and I am glad its gone.

is dems and registered gun owners (for hunting and eating, we live in the woods). I think this is an issue that is not so staunch for dems anymore, and the rethugs just use it against us.

is a good man and is exactly the type of candidate the national Democratic Party needs. Heck, he's the type of candidate the Ohio Democratic Party needs! We keep running terrible candidates for governor (e.g., Hagan) and U.S. senator (e.g., Fingerhut).

He's my mom's congressman (She's in Steubenville.) I look stuff up for her on the web all the time and have been to his site many times. She thinks he's the greatest. He's nice lookin' too! :P

If a democrat runs that will perform the following tasks, and really believes strongly in doing the following things I will vote for them, as would many others!

1. Undo all executive orders that involve firearms, including but not limited to the importation ban of 1989, and the Chinese ban of 1994, etc......

2. Push for a Repeal the 1986 MG ban

3. Push for a Repeal the 1968 Gun Control Act

4. Push for a Repeal the NFA laws.

And not only would they need to push for these unconstitutional laws to be removed just once only to have them stay, they would need to keep pushing until they are finally removed!

both have next to no chance of happening

i dont know of any republicans who are pushing that hard.. i don't think a republican politician like that could even carry his whole party with that stance

to tar our party with the gun-ban label. That cost Gore the election and was a factor in Kerry's loss.

Our party has given lip service to the issue by changing our platform to read:
QUOTE
We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do.
UNQUOTE
Democratic Party Platform 2004

As you point out, it's time to stop talking and start working to eliminate the gun-grabber label from our party.

I personally wouldn't want a gun, and I have never held one period. The first time I will ever in my life be in close proximity to a firearm will be basic training when I eventually go after highschool.

I consider myself to be a good democrat, but I just don't see the arm in law abiding citizens bareing arms. I am really pro ACLU, and I think they should take an NRA stance on the second amendment. Of course crimminals shouldn't have guns, but law abiding citizens sure.

...I'd run as far away as I could from a pro-gun former minister.