Guns...Post here if you agree with my signature line

[KaraokeKarlton]

I'm curious how many DUers share my views on this issue.

[Cha]

1. Sounds about right! Is this an original from you or who

said it? :kick:

[KaraokeKarlton]

4. The words are mine

I just made this thread to prove a point that I am not the only person who posts here who feels that way. I am under the impression that at least one other member here believes that my view is rare. I know it isn't, but felt it was important to show this.

[Redneck Socialist]

2. Pretty much, yeah.

Gun control just kills us as democrats. If we could ever shed the image that we want to take everyone's guns away tons of voters would come back to the democratic party.

[KaraokeKarlton]

9. Absolutely

Clearly not all democrats want to ban guns, but a few anti-gun democrats have left a lasting impression on many gun owners, and trust is a HUGE issue. It's no different than when someone has valid concerns about some aspects of abortion and tries to discuss it with pro-choicers. There is no trust because of the radicals who freak people out with their nutty rants. And yes, the gun issue really hurts the democratic party significantly.

[blm]

11. The problem is that it's the NRA's image of Dems, not the truth.

Did Clinton take anyone's guns away? Was Gore planning to take guns away? Is it in the Democratic platform to take away legally obtained guns?

The NRA/GOP generated that horseshit that Democrats wanted to take legal guns away and many an idiot perpetuates that lie. It has NOTHING to do with legal gun ownership and EVERYTHING to do with promoting Republican politics.

[JohnKleeb]

13. Youre right about the NRA

btw my grandfather a gun owner doesnt based his party alligence on the gun issue, he will be a dem til the day he dies. Last I hear he supports Gephardt who along with Kucinich is introducing a bill about guns. Personally I hate the NRA for doing this with gun rights. I think I am pro gun control honestly, what happened to my uncle, no he wasnt murdered but he shot himself, I cant explain really but I think honestly I side with people more like Brady than Heston on gun issues. Thats just the way I look at it. I dont care for guns, and I think Clark has a neat view on it and I am far from the guy's candiate as they get.

[KaraokeKarlton]

15. No, you're not even reading my signature

I am explaining to people WHY gun owners don't trust democrats when they talk about gun control by comparing it to the way pro-choice supporters feel and think when the GOP starts talking about regulating abortion.

Can you not read or something?

[blm]

18. But, it's still based on NRA/GOP generated perception.

Why perpetuate it? The pro choicers know which Republicans are prochoice and which are not based on their own records. Are you saying gun owners cannot distinguish between fact and political fiction to the same degree?

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[Cha]

21. Good retort!

[blm]

23. Apparently you have no affinity for TRUTH.

.

[MrBenchley]

26. Anyone who was concerned with truth

wouldn't demand only responses from those who agree with him.

[beyurslf]

27. Excellent analogy!

I agree totally that is how people see the party. In the 2002 Gov election here, I went to Union meetings to speak and show supoprt for our candidate. I was asked about gun rights more than I was asked about union issues.

Do the shoe on the other foot test: If an anti-choice group came to talk about abortion, would you trust anything they said? My 100% support of abortion rights and the complete non-spport of anything to restrict it is derived from this very idea. I may not think 3rd trimester abortions are a good thing but I can't support any restrictions because I know the anti choice crazies wouldn't stop there.

[Redneck Socialist]

24. Unfortunately the truth doesn't matter that much.

I am a gun owner, I belong to a "gun club," I socialize with other gun owners and many of them share the perception, incorrect or not, that democrats are hostile to gun rights and by extension, gun owners. I doesn't matter if it is "horseshit" or not they sincerely believe it and it is a huge obstacle to getting them to vote for a democrat.

[1a2b3c]

33. No what Clinton and Gore did was try and pass the wrong laws

The Assault weapons ban, while it sounds good, it really isnt banning anything but the looks of a gun.

Gore talked about registrations and i think ballistic fingerprinting, which might sound good to some but definatly not good to a gun owner. BF is a waste of money and registration leads to confiscation.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

3. I'm licensed to carry a weapon.

Does that answer your question?

[KaraokeKarlton]

5. Yes, it does

thanks

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. Doesn't necessarily mean that I'm carrying right now, though.

Depends on the title of the thread.

[Cha]

12. Good for you...so is Mike Malloy!

I have no problem with responsible gun ownership!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

14. Listening right now.

Of course.


edit- Heard CodeNameD on earlier.

[Cha]

19. I need Malloy in my ear almost every night!

:)

[no name no slogan]

6. What I don't get is why

it's such a big issue in the first place?

If you're not a hunter (like most of the population), who the fuck cares? Why the hell do we need to lock up responsible hunters and firearms owners for owning guns? If they don't shoot their guns at anybody else, what's the big deal?

On the flipside, why does the NRA think it necessary for people in the US to have access to explosive-tipped bullets? Or plastic handguns? What the hell are you "hunting" with these? Some restrictions (like these) are sane and reasonable, and the NRA just paints themselves as wackos when they oppose common-sense gun regulation.

Hell, we license cars, we license drivers, why not guns and gun owners?

I'm somewhere in the middle-- sane regulation of dangerous weapons (like we regulate substances) at a federal level, but leave the enforcement up to the states.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

8. Well said.

[KaraokeKarlton]

10. Some people collect and go to firing ranges

And they just enjoy shooting a variety of guns. It's a sport. Gun control laws do nothing to stop gun crime. There's no way to end gun running and the black market, and if someone wants to kill someone, doing more to keep certain weapons out of their hands isn't going to stop them. Where there's a will to kill, people will find a way to do it. The background check and not allowing violent offenders to own guns makes sense. Not allowing guns at school and in court houses makes sense. Even that doesn't stop shootings that people set out to commit in those places, though. The thing with assault weapons is that it's a visual issue. There are some guns that look like a machine gun that are illegal that are actually LESS dangerous and deadly than some rifles that look like a typical hunting rifle. Just as some people collect salt shakers, beanie babies, stamps and coins, some people collect war memorabilia and guns. They don't typically even shoot these guns, they more often display them. Those are the people who oppose the assault weapon ban, and in most cases, the reasons are really innocent. I see the argument you are making, but I understand the flip side as well.

[Upfront]

16. Very True

I agree.

[pandatimothy]

17. I agree

Some Democrats really do want to ban guns (i.e. Carolyn McCarthy) but most are cool and supportive of gun ownership.

[fromthehip]

25. Gun banning Dems

Feinstein, Schumer, Feingold, Bill Clinton

There is only one well known Republican gun banner...John McCain

So, of course gun owners will generally support the Republicans more. In relation to gun ownership, the Republicans are generally far more liberal than the Democrats, who have a recent history of confiscatory policy.

The Democratic party would win a lot more if they came out solidly in favor of gun owners and stopped pushing for more laws. Instead, they should concentrate on enforcing the thousands of gun laws already on the books. Only when my party does that, will we gain and retain true power.

[solinvictus]

36. King George the 1st

He was no friend of gun owners. I voted for Perot over him for that reason. Clinton's 1994 ban motivated me to spend hard earned $$ on an SKS, a case of ammunition, load bearing gear, and a parts kit for it. Clinton was too cozy with Schumer and Feinstein on the gun issue and it kept me from supporting him.

[juancarlos]

41. Wow!

I didn't remember that stuff about George Bush! An SKS? Gotta get a SAR! Take care.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

22. Gun-Toting Liberals for Kerry

I will defend to your death my right to own guns.

[Township75]

28. 100% True.

Some lefties just don't understand that this is an important issue with much of America, both right, center and left.

[Liberal Classic]

29. Good one

Democrats talking about "gun control" to hunters and gun rights people is the equivalent of Republicans talking about "regulating abortion" to pro-choice people. It goes over about as well as an elephant pissing on a flat rock...and they DON'T TRUST YOU!

Intersting post, and I am inclined to agree. When ever anyone talks about "reasonable regulations" governing abortions, one has to wonder if they're going to stop. This slippery slope argument works equally well for abortion as it does guns. Of course, those on the right would disagree saying the right to the private ownership of arms is explicitly in the constitution whereas abortion is not. However, the view from the left would seem to be that abortion is about freedom but guns are about death. Being libertarian leaning, I think they're both wrong. Certianly, neither abortion nor arms are without risk, but people for the large part should be able to run their lives.

[Withergyld]

30. I agree with your

analysis of the issues.
:toast:

[Wcross]

31. Agree N/T

[1a2b3c]

32. Sounds good to me.

Welcome to DU.

[KaraokeKarlton]

34. Thanks for all the responses

I really think this is a critical issue. There are so many people who would vote Democrat if it weren't for this one issue. Although it's not a bad thing to have concerns about gun violence, just like it's not a bad thing to have concerns about abortions, people really need to learn to stand in the shoes of the other side of this argument and try to understand where they are coming from and respect the fact that their feelings and views are just as strong and important to them as yours are to you. There is nothing good in building these kinds of walls by refusing to consider opposing views and understanding the reasoning behind them. Most hunters are rural people who do value democratic values. It's such a shame that people who feel strongly about gun rights don't feel they can trust Democrats about this. Maybe it's time to do something to change that. I think Howard Dean is right that different states have different needs regarding gun control. Put the power in the hands of the people affected by the laws and let them make this decision. They know their needs better than anyone else does. Keep the current laws as they are and focus on enforcing those, then let the states sort out what they need individually. Let neighboring states form coalitions if both agree that's necessary due to border issues. This issue does not and should not divide voters who share essentially identical values except for this one issue.

[jame]

35. AMEN!!!!

FINALLY!!! I agree with you! (OK, 95% of it anyway. ;-)

During my brief visit here, I've not hidden what I am. I am a Conservative. An open minded conservative. I came to observe and (hopefully) discuss a few issues thay may not divide us as much as the dedicated far left/dedicated far right would have us believe. I want to know what you THINK and why. I welcome you to ask me same, as I will share opinion without inflammatory statement, durogatory remark, or name calling.
I believe in lower taxes and reduction in gov't spending. I have real problems with Republican stance on abortion. And I have real problems with the possiblity that Democrats may want to take my guns away. It's not a one issue deal for me, but it's the DECIDING issue.
Here's my take: I have a fire extinguisher to protect me from fire, because a Fireman wont stop a fire from hurting me. I have insurance, because I don't have a Lawyer riding with me. And I have a gun in my home and on my person, when legally allowed, because police can't stop bad guys from hurting me. (Notice how I'm law abiding? Ask the "tweakers" in my timber about that concept).
If Democrats HONESTLY do not want to take away my "fire extingisher", you really need to get the word out. If you're able to spread the word, and we can believe it, you might have a powerful ally. If not, we'll be forever at odds. I have to be able to defend myself and my family. Without that, all else is lost, IMHO.
(Thanks to the mods for not booting me yet. I hope I'm not to vociferous)

[Overkil]

37. Your Signature.......

Very well put - I agree.

[solinvictus]

38. (Thanks to the mods for not booting me yet. I hope I'm not to vociferous)

Nahh, this isn't Free Republic, which is certainly not "free" by any rational definition. Welcome to the DU!

[DoNotRefill]

39. Before you paint yourself with the "conservative brush"...

here are some good sides to the general Democratic ideals.

1. First and foremost: Abortion. If we could just get ALL Dems to look at guns the same way we almost all look at abortion, we'd be set. Abortion is a flat-out right, and like all rights, it shouldn't be needlessly infringed upon.

2. Fiscal responsibility: Being a Democrat doesn't necessarily mean that you're a "tax and spender". Sure, there still are some Tax and Spend Democrats, but I think you'll find more of them in the Republican ranks than you will in the Democratic ranks. I think of myself as a fiscally conservative Democrat. There are places we can cut the hell out of the Federal budget while leaving important things intact or even expanding them (like education...we need more resources for education, it's a straight-out investment in seed capital for the next generation that'll pay us back tenfold...we MUST MUST MUST reform the system and fully fund it!!!)

3. Civil rights. The Patriot Act is a fucking mess. ALL civil rights are of VITAL importance to maintaining a structured order of liberty. Abridging those rights is an INCREDIBLY serious matter, not to be entered into lightly. Unfortunately, the Republicans seem to be much more cavalier about giving up civil rights than the Democrats are. That's not to say that all Democrats are perfect on Civil Rights (they aren't), but the vast majority are a lot better on it than the Republicans are.

4. Protecting American workers. Here there's a bit of a dichotomy, with Democrats being generally much better at putting forth things to protect American workers. The Republicans are much more geared towards protecting multinational business interests, while the Democrats are better at looking out for the actual workers. It may be better for business to outsource to third world countries, but exporting those jobs HURTS America like you wouldn't believe. Without our workers making decent wages, our tax base shrinks, and tax rates will have to increase just to maintain current levels of spending and services. Americans need decent jobs much more than multinationals need to maximize profits at the expense of the people. After all, if the people are broke, the country is broke, too.

5. The environment. Dems beat the shit out of the Repubs on environmental interests. And face it...even Republicans need fresh air to breathe and fresh water to drink. We've made HUGE amounts of progress in the past 30 years on this issue, and it's good for ALL Americans. Please keep in mind, I'm not talking about the far-left tree-sitters/spikers here, some of them are completely nuts (like the guy who went up to wild bears, without so much as a can of pepper spray for protection, singing "I love you" over and over again until he and his girlfriend eventually got eaten by a grumpy bear that didn't believe him, or was put off by his advances). I'm talking about the mainstream environmentalists. Take the timbering of old-growth forests, for example. It's positively INSANE to timber old growth forests to make wood pulp for paper products, when there is plenty of relatively new-growth forest (generally pine, as opposed to hardwoods in the old growth) that could be used for that purpose. If you're going to use up resources like timber, make sure you extract the absolute most for the destruction you cause, and DAMMIT, REPLANT THE LAND. Natural conservation is at heart a Democratic ideal...

Anyway, I hope I've given you something to think about. All progressives are not crazed tinfoil-hat-wearing, bomb-throwing anarcho-communists looking to steal your cheese and throw you into re-education camps. Most of us are decent, sensible people. It's just that the cheese-stealers have a high profile because they're so nuts.

[KaraokeKarlton]

40. Well, I am glad you are here and responded to this

I don't care how "conservative" a person is, in most areas, we all want the same things for our country. We want our children to get a good education, health care for our family, we want a safety net to help us survive if we need it, we want to be safe and be able to protect ourselves and our loved ones, we don't want to have our rights infringed upon, we want a good economy, jobs, and to be able to pursue our own personal version of the American Dream. And damn it, we want our politicians to be honest with us and do a good job because that's what WE pay them to do. Bush is just awful. You might have gotten a meager tax cut, but you're most likely paying a hell of a lot more in property taxes now that the states have to follow all these new mandates and aren't getting the financial help federally to cover them. A lot of those tax cuts aren't even permanent and start phasing out in 2005, too. Personally, I think it's really good to have both the left and the right equally represented in Washington by electing a broad range of lawmakers. That makes sure everyone's voices get heard and it keeps them all honest, to an extent. But when it comes time to elect a president, you just have to go with someone who is pretty middle ground and common sense. I think Howard Dean is that guy this time. I'm curious what you think of him being that you're somewhat conservative. I'm guessing you like his position on guns. Many Democrats are really concerned about his support of Civil Unions. I don't think most people care as much about that as some seem to believe. As a Vermonter who was originally very bothered by Civil Unions, I've found that they haven't changed anything in a bad way here. I support them now. I think it's really important for liberals and conservatives to make the effort to understand and respect each other. They really aren't all that different in the long run. Everyone has strong feelings about their views and it is possible to disagree while still understanding and respecting opposing views.

[juancarlos]

42. I agree

Most of my gun owning friends would never listen to a Democrat on issues of gun control. We need to change our image to appeal more to the gun owners. We are supposed to be a "big tent" party, but we've left over fifty million people out in the cold.