There are more registered Democrats in the NRA then there are Brady Campaign 'members'

[friendly_iconoclast]

In other words, the NRA represents more actual Democrats than the Brady Campaign does


The balance tilts about 2 to 1 in the NRA's favor, if you're being generous as the BC counts anybody who ever donated anything

as a 'member' (which is how I became a Brady Campaign 'member'). Which group should we listen to? What would be the democratic

response?


(Thanks to DUer Jpak, who brought up the idea. Heh.)

[gejohnston]

1. why did you send them money?

[friendly_iconoclast]

4. Lost a bet. The pearl-clutching propaganda I get in the mail is worth the price.

They're working the 'assault clip' meme as hard as they can, but they don't seem to be getting anywhere with it.

[Katya Mullethov]

17. I got some mail from the Barrel Shroud lady Saturday

"Assault clips" was in red italics .

[eqfan592]

23. Is it just me...

...or does the phrase "assault clips" just make you want to laugh and punch a wall all at the same time? It's so stupid that it's funny, but so many people buy into it that it's maddening!

And seriously, IT'S A MAGAZINE, DAMN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

[jpak]

2. Why do you fear them - are you bitter????

:D

[spin]

3. Why would anyone "fear" the Brady Campaign?

They seem relatively toothless at this point.

[friendly_iconoclast]

7. I don't fear them. I merely note that the NRA has more *actual Democrats* in it than they do

The democratic thing to do would be to listen to the larger group of Democrats, would it not?

Of course, if you would rather grind an ideological ax than win elections, you might not care for this notion....

[damntexdem]

5. Well, I'm neither. But thanks for the post -- I'll think about joining the Brady Campaign.

C'mon, DUers, let's balance the equation. ;-)

And: JPAK rocks!!!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

9. Well, I'm neither. But thanks for the post -- I'll think about joining the NRA.

C'mon, DUers, let's balance the equation. ;)

And: JPAK spams!!!

[friendly_iconoclast]

12. If each BC member recruits 7 new members, they would be 1/10th the size of the NRA

Looks like you'd better get busy!

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[eqfan592]

24. Posts like this...

...make my choice to join the NRA that much easier to make. If you are going to support a right wing org that will limit our rights, I will support one that aids us in keeping them, and does a HELL of a lot more in terms of saving children's lives by offering low cost safety programs than the Brady Campaign and their "Gun Free Zones" could even hope to match.

[ergot]

26. I echo that...I've owned guns for 60 years and up until 2009 was never a member.

I am now.

[pnwmom]

6. Why would Brady campaign members belong to the NRA? n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

8. Why would Democrats join the Brady Campaign? Half the upper management are Pubbies.

Cui bono?

[pnwmom]

18. Probably because you don't have to be a Repub to support better gun control. n/t

[ergot]

25. I'm all for better gun control. I rarely miss what I aim at.

...

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[friendly_iconoclast]

36. Ah, but I *do* support tougher legislation. Probably not the ones you do, however.

Make committing a crime with a gun, or being a felon in possession of a firearm good for five years Federal time upon

conviction, in addition to any state sentences. No plea downs, no continuation without finding. The Brady Campaign AND

the NRA both supported this, it was called Operation Exile.


Open the NICS system to private sellers, with privacy safeguards in place. Make use of the NICS an affirmative defense against

the charge of selling a gun to an inelegible person.


Vigorously prosecute straw buyers. As of now, the Feds rarely prosecute.

[slackmaster]

14. To get one of the magazines, or be on one of various mailing lists

Read The Art of War by Sun Tzu.

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. Most of that crowd prefers the 'deliberate ignorance' approach.

95+% of the time, if someone here complains about the NRA, they will not include a link to an NRA site.


OTOH, I've posted excerpts from various begging letters from the Brady Campaign here (and everything I've gotten from them

includes a request for money, just like the NRA.)

[Starboard Tack]

19. I was wondering the same thing.

[RSillsbee]

10. There are more registered Democrats

in Podunk Arkansas that in the Brady Campaign. Why is this news?

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. It was a response to the claimed 'popularity' of gun control amongst Democrats.

It seems that Democrats, if they think about the issue at all, prefer the NRA.


I wouldn't to leave people with an inaccurate idea of what Democrats really think.

Others might not be so scrupulous....

[pnwmom]

27. Democrats are less likely to own guns than Rethugs.

But maybe the Democrats who do own are more likely to be adamant NRA members.

[Maine_Nurse]

28. Guess that depends a lot on where you live.

[pnwmom]

35. Gun ownership also varies widely by region of the country.

[cleanhippie]

29. Can you cite a source for that claim?

Seriously. I have heard that before but have never seen it as an actual statistic. Would love to know how you "know" that to be true.

[Maine_Nurse]

30. Nope, no stats but I live...

In northern Maine. Lots of democrats and even more firearms. Just a fact of life in rural areas. We hand them down in families a lot and they never leave. I have them from 3 generations ago to modern. My particular town is pretty much dem and I doubt you'll find too many homes that have less than 5 or 6 firearms and many with 15 or more. It is not a political issue here at all, but an issue of how you were raised and where you live.

[cleanhippie]

31. Thanks, but I was hoping for an answer from pnwmom, who made that claim.

[pnwmom]

34. The Gallup poll has studied those numbers.

You could have found them anytime by googling "demographics gun ownership Republican Democrat."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/20098/gun-ownership-use-america.aspx

SNIP


Certain groups of Americans -- men, older Americans, Midwesterners, Southerners, Republicans, and whites -- are more likely than other groups to say they personally own a gun.

Nearly half of men (47%) report personal ownership, compared with just 13% of women.

Americans aged 18 to 29 are slightly less likely than those who are older to be gun owners. Only one in five 18- to 29-year-olds (21%) say they own a gun, while 32% of 30- to 49-year-olds and 31% of those aged 50 and older report ownership.

Roughly one in three Americans who live in the Midwest (34%) and the South (36%) say they personally own a gun. Ownership is lower among those residing in the East (22%) and the West (23%).

Forty-one percent of Republicans say they own a gun, compared with 27% of independents and 23% of Democrats.

SNIP

[cleanhippie]

40. Thanks. I find it interesting that more Dems use a gun for personal protection.

But it is a poll, not a study. Interesting info, but hardly enlightening. What do you think this proves, if anything? How does this help either side of the debate?

[classof56]

11. I keep getting NRA pleas for donations.

Actually, they're addressed to my late brother, who passed away two years ago, after which I settled his estate. Clearly, he and I were on the opposite ends of the political spectrum, which probably isn't why he hadn't spoken to me in 20 years, but that's a long story. Anyway, I have notified NRA several times to remove my brother's name from their list, cramming the return envelopes with as much stuff as possible to add to their postage due. So--the other day I tried again, asking in effect, what part of deceased don't you understand? I don't actually read all the rhetoric they spew, but may give it closer attention next time (I'm sure they'll be a next time) in an attempt to inform myself about the reasons Dems might be supporting NRA.

Will be interested in the democratic response when/if it happens.

Tired Old Cynic

[gejohnston]

16. Is there a better alternative? Other than SAF,

they are kind of the only game in town. It is not like the Liberal Gun Club has much of a lobbying or education.

[rl6214]

22. Why would someone ever break ties with a brother over political

ideologies?

Blood is thicker than water and regardless of our political differences, we leave that at the door.

[classof56]

41. As I said in my post, political ideologies had nothing to do with it.

I would never have broken ties with my brother, nor would my parents, for any reason, but he chose to do so. It's complicated, and the springboard for his decision was, it seems, a religious organization with which he was involved. I'd have left that at the door, too, for my parents' sake if nothing else, but he chose not to walk through it. It wasn't until recently, as I was dealing with his estate, that I discovered how far to the right he had swung. Sorry if you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm as anti-NRA as he was pro, sending them money and all that, and I simply wish they'd take him off their mailing list, perhaps because of the emotions their propaganda evokes. That's all.

Peace

[DanTex]

32. More misleading numbers from the pro-gun side

A similar right-wing argument I've heard is that more Dems watch Fox than MSNBC. I'm not sure if either is true, but they both might be. Regardless, neither the NRA nor Fox represent Dems. Its just that NRA/Fox has more members/watchers, versus Brady/MSNBC.

What you need to look at is proportions: most Fox watchers are Republicans, most NRA members are Republicans.

You can also look at what they are saying: Fox supports Republicans almost exclusively; NRA supports Republicans almost exclusively.

The fact of the matter is that, for any bizarre right-wing viewpoint, you can find a certain fraction of Dems that support it.

-Some Dems support the NRA.
-Some Dems oppose gay marriage.
-Some Dems believe global warming is a hoax.
-Some Dems support tax cuts for the top 1%.
-Some Dems believe the "death panels" lie.
-etc.

None of these are particularly popular positions among sane, liberal people. But, if you look at polls, you rarely even get above 80-90% on the liberal side of these or many other issues among Democrats. Typically you get between 60% and 80%.

[friendly_iconoclast]

33. Elitism, poisoning the well, and associational fallacy

neither the NRA nor Fox represent Dems.

Except for those Dems that join the NRA, or accept an NRA endorsement. Are you purporting to vet the ideological

suitabilty of Democrats?

None of these are particularly popular positions among sane, liberal people.

Let me be so churlish as to point out that NRA membership, at least, is demonstrably more popular

amongst Democrats than membership in all gun control orgs combined. The Bradys can't scrape up 2% of the NRAs

membership, a rather embarrasing statistic for such a 'popular' stance.


You've failed with the public at large, and you are failing with Democrats.



Yours is a left-wing version of Teabaggerism- You claim to have Received Truth on your side, you demand the party at large conform to

your version of ideological purity, and the general populace rejects you like they rejected Sharron Angle and

Christine O'Donnell.


And you wonder why gun control is losing ground....

[eqfan592]

37. You hit the nail right on the head. nt

[DanTex]

39. Nevertheless, a substantial majority of Dems support gun control.

As far as the "ideology purity" charge, I'm not sure where this came up. I'm not saying Dems who watch Fox/join the NRA should be tossed out of the party. I was actually pointing out that many Democrats do hold some right-wing views, and gun control is not at all unique in this way. But let me be clear, I don't want to kick any group out of the party. Not the NRA people, not those who oppose gay marriage, not the global warming deniers, not the supply-siders, not the "death panel" believers, etc. I believe that the Dems should include all people with a generally liberal outlook, even if they have a few right-wing views.

Now, I personally would find it a bit odd for Democrat to, say, oppose gay marriage. But polls show that the fraction of Dems that oppose gay marriage is about the same as the fraction that opposes gun control. Which makes sense, because opposition to gay marriage and supporting the NRA are about equally illogical views for a liberal to hold.

Of course, the anti-gay-marriage Dems will surely object to being lumped in with the pro-gun Dems, and vice-versa. Which is fair enough, and I respect both groups equally, even though I strongly object to their particular views on a single issue. The fact of the matter is that non-negligible minorities of Dems hold each of these positions and I don't intend in any way to kick them out of the party. In fact, even if you oppose both gun control and gay marriage, I still wouldn't want to kick you out.


As for losing ground to the right over the last few decades, you may have noticed it's not just gun control. Yes, it's true that the NRA is so powerful that we can't even enact common-sense measures like banning high-capacity magazines (which polls around 70-30 in favor among the general population). But there are other places where organized pressure from a minority on the right has overcome the will if the people as a whole. For example, the wealth inequality has become obscene, yet congress insists on cutting taxes for the rich. The public option was removed from HCR despite the fact that it also polled around 70-30 in favor. Etc.

This is bad stuff, but I'm not disheartened, nor am I going to give up. Moreover, in many cases, the rest of the industrialized world is in general saner than the US, which provides some encouragement:
--They have more progressive taxation and less inequality.
--They have universal healthcare which provides comparable or superior care for much lest cost.
--They have stricter gun laws and far less homicide and gun violence.
--etc.

So go ahead, rub the right-wing victories on guns in my face if you so desire. Just as I'm sure the "death panels" faction of the Democratic party celebrated the demise of the public option. And believe me, I have plenty of teabagger friends who have been doing much celebrating on many different issues. But liberals are not going to give up on anything. And I do believe that ultimately the liberals will prevail, though as always it will be a struggle.

[friendly_iconoclast]

43. I thank you for replying in a civilized manner, even though I still disagree with you

I'd observe that there are two groups that conflate support with gun control with being a Democrat: Gun control advocates

and right wing Republicans. The former, I think, because they believe in it and would like it to be the default position

of Democrats in general. The latter, because they don't believe in it, and feel (with no small amount of evidence)

that to proclaim that is so is a great way to win a general election. Frankly, I think both are wrong, and I'll reiterate

why:


I will stipulate jpak's assertion that there are 72 million registered Democrats. If support for gun control is, indeed,

the natural position for Democrats to hold, why do they not show this support in any substantial fashion?

The Brady campaign has 50K members, if we're being generous. I'll go so far as to say most of their members are Democrats

(though not the upper management, which is a rather interesing story in itself). The NRA, in contrast, has 4 million.

Let's say only 5% are registered Democrats- that's 200,000 people, four times as many people as the entire Brady Campaign-

and they vote. They vote ferociously. Yet their POV gets pissed on here on a regular basis, while the Bradys are

exalted by some. Claiming that the minority position should naturally take precedence over the majority isn't very democratic.


As for your other assertions:

...we can't even enact common-sense measures like banning high-capacity magazines..

Claiming the mantle of reason is poisoning the well. Further, what you proclaim as 'common-sense' turns out not to be

so when we look at the historical record. I'd point out that two notorious spree shooters (the fellow in Colorado

who turned out to be the first 'postal' postal employee, and Cho at Virginia Tech, both managed to kill and injure more

people than Jared Loughner did- and they both used 'standard-capacity' magazines.


This is the same mindset that gave us the farcial 1994 Assault Weapon Ban. Bayonet mounts were regarded as dangerous, remember?



You then go on to make a few points that I both agree with and have worked to enact. Unfortunately, we then get this:

--They have stricter gun laws and far less homicide and gun violence.

Some places are like this. But it's not their gun laws that make them so- look at Mexico, Jamaica, and Russia.


Sara Brady might approve of their gun laws- but she might not dig their Gothic levels of murder and violent crime or

their Dickensian levels of income inequality.

[Hoopla Phil]

38. Crap! My ham handed fingers hit the unrec by mistake. Sorry.

At least I can kick the thread.

[cleanhippie]

42. Rec'ed for you.