How many gun control bill has the GOP actually created?

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Does anyone have a rough estimate or some kind of data that can speak to how many anti-gun bills a Republican has actually created? Not signed, not agreed with after it was created, but actually made the first move and created the bill first.

EDIT: let's say, the past 25 years. A frame of time most adults can remember. I'm asking about the modern GOP.

 

[Titan6]

Your question is pretty open ended. Could go back quite aways. Sure you don't want to limit it a little. After all the repubs have been a party for almost 150 years.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Depends on how you define "first". If a bill is offered by a Democrat three years in a row and goes nowhere; and then is offered (with identical text) by a Republican (cough*Mike Castle*cough) then is it first?

 

[El Tejon]

Do you want federal and state?

How about actual actions, not just proposed bills: George Herbert Walker Bush and Morality Tsar Billy "Come on 7" Bennett gave us the import ban of 1989 wherein dozens of then legal guns were deemed "unsporting" and thus by the SSA of '68 illegal to import. This lead to the import buidling ban of 1990 and the AWB of 1994.

 

[Titan6]

Just a warm up read

What a good idea this post is!

from 2000.

Don’t Blame Liberals for Gun Control
by Richard Poe

NEWSMAX.COM - Anti-gun crusaders seem worried about the advent of a Republican administration. Heaven knows why. Republicans, in recent years, have managed to do nearly as much damage to the Second Amendment as Democrats.
In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. "Guns are an abomination," Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."
It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."
It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.
Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay."
One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.
Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation’s strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.
Gun control crusaders argue that the Republicans are simply yielding to grassroots pressure, to gain political advantage. But polls show little evidence of such pressure.
A Gallup/CNN/USA Today survey taken in June 1999 – only two months after the Littleton massacre – showed that the number of Americans who favored stricter gun laws had declined by 20 percent since 1990.
Public support for gun control has dwindled even further since then. An Associated Press poll released on the one-year anniversary of the Littleton shootings shows that Americans favor strict enforcement of existing laws over new gun laws – the exact position of the National Rifle Association (NRA) – by 42 to 33 percent.
That same month, a survey by the Pew Research Center showed that only 6 percent of Americans believed that tougher gun laws would prevent future school shootings.
Meanwhile, a Tarrance Group poll has shown that only 5 percent of Americans want gunmakers and gun dealers held responsible for misuse of firearms.
Clearly, the pressure for gun control is not coming from the grassroots. It comes from those layers of society that the left calls the "ruling classes" – academics, Hollywood stars, Washington insiders and multibillion-dollar media conglomerates.
The latter are particularly influential in pushing anti-gun propaganda. A study by the Media Research Center released in January 2000 showed that television news stories calling for stricter gun laws outnumbered those opposing such laws by a ratio of 10 to 1.
The blame for this media bias is traditionally assigned to "liberal journalists." And, indeed, most journalists do hold left-of-center views. A 1996 survey of working journalists by the Roper Center and the Freedom Forum showed that 89 percent had voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only 4 percent identified themselves as Republicans and only 2 percent as conservatives.
Yet, their "liberal" views probably have less impact on the media’s anti-gun bias than most people assume. Rank-and-file reporters have little power to influence the political spin even of their own stories.
When I worked at the New York Post in the mid-1980s, I found the newsroom filled with liberals. They grumbled constantly about the paper’s conservative slant. But they went along with it, because it was company policy.
Liberal news organizations are no different. Political bias comes from the top. Rank-and-file reporters simply do what they are told.
Those of us who cherish our Second Amendment rights are keeping our fingers crossed about George W. Bush. But the monolithic commitment America’s "ruling classes" have shown toward gun control makes one wonder whether even a president is free to buck the current.

Go ahead and work out assorted apologies and denials....

 

[Titan6]

Here is another small taste from the GOP much more to follow.

This is pure stroke of genius on Taurus's part. I only wish I could have thought of it first....

You might have to close this thread due to lack of bandwidth....


Christie Whitman and Republican Legislators Push for New Handgun Ban
by
Gun Owners of New Jersey
New Jersey gun owners remembering back to 1991 should recall the overwhelming success of their efforts against the political followers of Jim Florio. Gun owners, outraged over the 1990 Democratic semi-auto ban (passed by the one critical vote of Republican Senator Bill Gormley), reverted control of both the N.J. Senate and Assembly back to Republicans with strong veto proof margins. In return, Republicans made a symbolic showing to overturn the Florio gun ban, with Republican Senate President Donald DiFrancesco ultimately orchestrating its final defeat in the Senate. (Read the expose "Floriogate")
In 1993, gun owners once again presented intense opposition to entrenched Governor Florio, electing Christine Whitman on her promise to legislatively review the 1990 gun ban, and to support the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding firearms owners. Gun owners contributed massive campaigning efforts on behalf of Whitman, including phone banks, fax networks, donations, and personal sacrifice well beyond any other group.
If Only They Saw It Coming! Since taking full control of the New Jersey Legislature and Governor's office, Republicans have also taken an active and aggressive (though quiet) lead in destroying your 2nd Amendment rights, as well as other freedoms. Confidently aware that you currently have no other political alternatives, still strongly supported by NRA and the state's major "pro-gun" groups, and arguing that you are better to support anti-gun Republicans over anti-gun Democrats, Republicans have been consciously moving toward a gun free state for the past 6 years.
Legislation authored in 1993 by Republican Steve Corodemus proposed to automatically revoke the Firearms ID Card and forfeit all firearms of anyone committing a crime as minor as bouncing a check. Republican Assembly Speaker Chuck Haytaian proposed a mandatory life prison sentence for anyone even thinking of privately selling 10 or more guns over their lifetime without a N.J. State firearms dealers license; later aligning with rabid Democratic gun grabber Frank Lautenberg in support of Clinton's 1994 federal semi-auto ban.
In fact, since their election into the majority, Republicans have found no shortage of sponsors for their various gun bans and assorted other criminal attacks upon your rights-- clearly becoming more driven toward this goal in recent years.
NRA "A" rated Republican Alan Augustine authored a de-facto bullet ban in a proposal to outlaw all bullets which "fragment, expand, or deform." Republican Tom Smith proposed a ban on all "easily concealable handguns." Responding to the complaints of gun owners forced to pay illegal and exorbitant permit application fees to police and municipalities, Republican Walter Kavanaugh proposed a statewide, unconstitutional, 750% permit fee increase. Republican Kavanaugh even misused the N.J. State Police in an attempt to squash GONJ's criticism of his actions-- filing charges which would be later found fraudulent and absurd.
Republican Dick Zimmer campaigned for the support of gun owners during his many years in the NJ legislature-- arguing against the Florio gun ban, and raking in both campaign cash and countless volunteers. After gun owners elected him to Congress, Zimmer first repaid gun owners for their efforts by voting the unconstitutional Brady Bill into law. Then, when heavy pressure from gun owners across the country weakened Republican support for Clinton's 1994 semi-auto ban, it was exclusively the efforts of Zimmer and his Megan's Law amendment which not only revived the near dead legislation, but helped ensure the extra two Republican votes that Clinton and Congressman Schumer desperately needed to get it passed.
Republicans helped pass both the state and federal versions of the now infamous Lautenberg domestic violence gun ban-- legislation which mandates the confiscation of all one's firearms for the slightest marital argument, and which has actually brought dozens of machine-gun carrying police SWAT teams to the doors of N.J. gun owners who allowed a verbal family dispute to go beyond household walls.
Republican Nick Felice sponsored legislation which would have effectively banned all gunpowder used in reloading. Republicans also proposed mandating criminal penalties for anyone not storing their firearms under lock and key at all times-- effectively eliminating the right of self defense. In 1997, Republicans passed "Gun Trafficking" legislation authored by the state's most anti-gun Democrats. Yet, even after it was documented to threaten law-abiding gun owners with 20 years mandatory prison terms for the most minor paperwork errors, Republicans refused to correct it.
Having lived for over 30 years under the most restrictive gun permit system in the U.S., gun owners of New Jersey have again been assaulted with a new layer of paperwork following Governor Whitman's executive order mandating a new $15 state fee for a currently free federal background check. Violating existing N.J. Statutes, Whitman firmly insisted on placing instant check authority with the N.J. State Police, rather than allow firearms dealers to approve gun purchases with the FBI at no additional cost, and over more extended business hours.
Yet, Governor Whitman's recent push for the not even available, so-called "smart gun technology" offers the greatest threat to firearm ownership we have seen. Having already been unanimously approved and recommend for a full vote by NRA "A" rated Republicans Kosco, Cafiero, and Bucco, this legislation authorizes a commission headed by the anti-gun attorney general's office to determine what type, model and caliber handguns may be sold in this state. Exploiting the emotional argument of child safety, and ignoring the most basic fundamentals of gun safety already practiced by most lawful firearms owners, this legislation will totally ban the sale of all handguns not equipped with a safety feature not available, nor yet even invented. In this latest example of treachery, Kosco and the Republicans have assisted New Jersey's most despicable gun grabber, DEMOCRATIC Senator Codey, in moving his long sought handgun ban legislation closer to reality.
Interestingly enough, Governor Whitman's best friend, confidant, and former campaign manager, Hazel Gluck, is now the lobbyist for those same gun control organizations pushing this new gun ban legislation. This is, of course, the same personal friend and lobbyist that helped Whitman arm twist Republicans to vote for her now infamous car confiscation law-- a connection which firmly places Republican Christie Whitman in bed with some of the most vehement gun grabbers in the entire country.



Come on I want to hear some excuses and apologies from the GOP. Anyone??? Tell me how it is better to make nice-nice with the repubs ao they throw me a bone...

 

[xd9fan]

Does anyone have a rough estimate or some kind of data that can speak to how many anti-gun bills a Republican has actually created? Not signed, not agreed with after it was created, but actually made the first move and created the bill first.

So this is the standard for the GOP voter? ....they can vote for every other gun bill and help make it law (and they HAVE!!)....BUT by God just so everyone knows they didn't introduce it. wow

What does it matter? If they sign it and agree to it.......does this make them ...better??

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

You know xd, i went and reread my post and I can't for the life of me find where I actually said anything like this "they can vote for every other gun bill and help make it law (and they HAVE!!)....BUT by God just so everyone knows they didn't introduce it"

Care to point out where I said that?

 

[MrTuffPaws]

Thanks for the articles. I would usually do a big for anything from Newsmax, but it looks like they might have ID'ed the current republicans for what they really are on this on.

 

[Titan6]

Here is an easy target but we all know this already

For example, Giuliani's campaign staff specified that he also supports handgun licensing and a national registry of handguns. As mayor, Giuliani signed legislation requiring trigger locks whenever guns are sold in the city and outlawing the sale of toy guns that resemble real guns.
Giuliani also supported the federal assault weapons ban signed by then President Bill Clinton and supports Hillary Clinton's proposal for background checks at gun shows.
Rudy Giuliana on Gun Control:
Archives of the Mayor's Press Office
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: Tuesday, June 20, 2000
MAYOR GIULIANI AND SPEAKER VALLONE ANNOUNCE CITY LAWSUIT AGAINST GUN INDUSTRY
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and City Council Speaker Peter F. Vallone, joined by Corporation Counsel Michael Hess, today announced that the City of New York has filed a lawsuit against two dozen major gun manufacturers and distributors. The suit alleges a number of illegal practices conducted by the gun industry, including:
Deliberately manufacturing many more firearms than can be bought for legitimate purposes such as hunting and law enforcement, and knowingly targeting these excess guns to criminals, youths and other persons unqualified to buy firearms;
Deliberately undermining New York City's gun control laws by flooding markets with looser gun laws with firearms that the manufacturers know are destined to be illegally resold in New York City;
Ignoring the illegal practices of gun distributors, many of whom openly engage in the above practices;
Refusing to manufacture safer guns, with such features as trigger locks and "personalization" measures that allow only authorized persons to fire the weapon.
"This is an industry that is profiting from the suffering of innocent people," Mayor Giuliani said. "What's worse, its profits rest on a number of illegal and immoral practices. This lawsuit is meant to end the free pass that the gun industry has so long enjoyed."
Council Speaker Vallone said, "More than 30,000 people, including 4,200 children, die every year in the U.S. from firearms-more people than in any other country in the world. I join with the Mayor in this lawsuit to send a message to gun manufacturers that New York City will hold them accountable for their reckless and irresponsible practices."
The suit seeks an as yet unspecified amount of damages for the many ways in which these illegal practices and illegal guns harm New York City and its residents-including, for instance, the $17 million per year spent by the City Health and Hospitals Corporation treating gunshot wounds.
Defendants named in the suit include most major gun manufacturers, distributors and dealers currently operating the United States, or who export large numbers of guns to the United States.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are the City of New York, Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, City Council Speaker Peter F. Vallone, and the Health and Hospitals Corporation. The suit was filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of New York

They left out that craziness where he wants to make all gun owners pass a 'test' to be allowed to keep a gun. I am thinking if you vote for him you probably are not smart enough to pass though...

And you want someone who supports the 2A to vote for this guy because he will 'owe something to his conservative element'?

Want more? The supply is almost inexhaustable just in the last 25 years..... You want proposals and affirmations from GOP candidates for president? State? Local? You want the broken promises? the sell outs? You have but to wish for it I will send it.... standing by.....

We are talking about more than legislation anyway. Some repubs are not brazen enough to propose crazy laws so they choose other means...

 

[Titan6]

It's a bird! It's a plane! no wait it's John McCain...

Feb 2001
While a Flurry of New Gun Bills Descends upon Capitol Hill...

(Friday, February 9, 2001) -- .
But one bill deserves your attention right now. Earlier, GOA heard whispers on the Hill about a proposed bill being crafted by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT). Well, those whispers are no longer mere speculation.
Roll Call, one of the newspapers that covers events and legislation on Capitol Hill, announced yesterday that both Senators were working on a gun control "compromise" aimed at putting heat upon the new President, as well as the Republican leadership. (See an excerpt of the story below.) While it still has yet to be introduced, the McCain-Lieberman bill:
* Would slam the door on private sales at gun shows unless the buyer submits to a registration background check;
* Would force gun owners to purchase "lock up your safety" devices; and
* Even more troubling, would force federal agents to increase efforts at arresting and convicting honest gun owners who, in many cases, may inadvertently violate one of the many federal anti-gun laws which punish mere technicalities, such as gun possession.
A gun owner who travels with a gun through a school zone or who uses one of the family handguns to go target shooting with a 15-year old son (when the son does not have written permission to handle the firearm) could find Project Exile sending him or her to prison. And an individual who uses a gun for self-defense in a way that a court subsequently finds to be inappropriate could be sent to prison for a MANDATORY MINIMUM of five years.

McCain has spent the last few years trying to become a "media darling," but in doing so, he has compromised the very freedoms he fought for years ago. McCain's voting record has dipped to a C- in recent years, and gun owners in Oregon and Colorado will remember that he even used TV ads to push gun control referendums in their states right before the November elections last year.

----- Pre-written message -----
Dear Senator McCain:
I was greatly dismayed to see the Roll Call article (2/8/01) which reported on the gun control "compromise" that you and Joe Lieberman are fashioning. I would hope that you would CEASE and DESIST immediately from selling out gun owners' rights.
The Second Amendment states that the people have a right to keep and bear arms that "shall not be infringed." What part of "not infringed" don't you understand? All of the proposals you are pushing will chip away at the rights of decent, law-abiding citizens.
Should you succeed -- and I will do everything in my power to oppose your efforts -- I want you to know that you will greatly undermine the freedoms that Americans now enjoy. Furthermore, I should inform you that I will never support a candidate who consistently tries to undermine the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Yours for the Second Amendment,
--------------------------------------------------------------------
McCain Planning Gun Control Bill
By Mark Preston of Roll Call
http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/2001/02/news0208c.html
Seizing on Congress' failure to reach a bipartisan agreement on gun safety legislation, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) are quietly working together to draft an alternative compromise that both parties can support.
The discussions between McCain and Lieberman are still in the infant stages, but the bill is likely to include a reworked version of the controversial gun show loophole, trigger locks and more funds and support for the law enforcement community, aides to both Senators said.
Some of McCain's GOP colleagues believe that the Arizonan's interest in the gun issue and other hot topics, such as HMO reform, is an attempt to undercut President Bush's agenda.
"[McCain] is just trying to set the presidential agenda, and there is a discomfort with that," griped a GOP Senator close to the Republican leadership team....
Staffers for both McCain and Lieberman have been talking about a compromise gun bill since late last year; however, the two Senators were able to discuss the issue in greater depth during their official visit to Munich, Germany, this past weekend.
"This is not done," a source close to McCain cautioned. "But we are working on it."
A spokesman for Lieberman acknowledged that the Connecticut Democrat is eager to work with the Arizona Republican, whom he "deeply respects."
"This would be an opportunity to chart a third way on stopping gun crime by dedicating more resources to enforcing existing gun laws while also fixing some of the loopholes that persist in those laws," Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein said....
"With Senator McCain joining Senator Lieberman on this debate, you are all but guaranteed it is going to register on the public's radar screen," said a senior Senate Democratic aide, who noted that the Senate Democratic leaders would likely embrace Lieberman's efforts to pass a gun safety bill.


It is like one of those special 'fact finding tours' Go ahead and try to change the facts if they don't suit your purposes though....

 

[Titan6]

If it worked for one mayor....

Gun Control Lessons for Bloomberg
By JOHN R. LOTT JR.
January 9, 2006
Mayor Bloomberg wants to take New York City's gun control regulations nationwide. At his swearing in ceremony earlier this month, Mr. Bloomberg announced his top priority for the next four years: a nationwide fight across America for more gun control, from Washington, D.C., to individual statehouses.
The current push for more gun control stems from the tragic murders of two New York City police officers last year, following in the wake of two officers killed in 2003 and 2004. Mr. Bloomberg has long supported every gun regulation possible, even banning off-duty or retired police officers carrying guns near city hall. He is already pushing for tougher gun control in New York state, claiming that otherwise law-abiding New York gun-owners - who already pass all the local, state, and federal gun control regulations - are an important way his city's criminals obtain guns. Those same motivations are behind the program that he now wants to take nationwide.
Everyone wants to prevent criminals from getting guns. But the experience in other countries, even island nations that have gone so far as banning guns and where borders are relatively easy to monitor, should give Mr. Bloomberg and his supporters some pause. The regulations seem to have only kept law-abiding citizens from getting guns.
Not only didn't violent crime and homicide decline as promised, but they actually increased.



Let us not let this one get too far down the list....

 

[Duncan223]

This should be a wake-up call for all those that vote (R) regardless of anything else considered. If a candidate is willing to dismiss one of the Rights protected under the Constitution, what's to stop them from dismissing other Rights?

While some people may not believe that gun ownership is a "big deal", I'm pretty sure they would consider not having the ability to own or purchase a gun the day after they were robbed, raped or beat within an inch of death, a "big deal".

 

[xd9fan]

You know xd, i went and reread my post and I can't for the life of me find where I actually said anything like this "they can vote for every other gun bill and help make it law (and they HAVE!!)....BUT by God just so everyone knows they didn't introduce it"

Care to point out where I said that?

Those are my words big guy......not implying that you said them.

Again what is the point of this thread?

What does it matter? If the GOP sign anti gun bills into law and they agree with Gun control.......does this make them ...better.....for not introducing the bills??

Help me out here.....

 

[Lone_Gunman]

This thread is all about splitting hairs, and trying to demonstrate big differences between the Republican Party and the Democrats, even though the real differences are actually rather small.

As far as introducing anti-gun bills, I believe there have been Republican co-sponsors to almost every piece of anti-gun legislation ever proposed, and I would say that qualifies as "introducing" it. So, the answer, in my opinion, is that Republicans have been involved in the introduction of almost all anti-gun laws.

I expect to see more of this kind of "hair splitting" by the Republican Party as they continue to flounder, lose ground, and move further away from their conservative base. Its a good tactic, and the average voter may not notice they are being manipulated. Republicans need to make it look like there is a big difference between them and Democrats, even though the differences seem to be shrinking with each passing day. Republicans used to support the 2nd Amendment pretty consistently; now we have our major republican presidential candidates supporting the AWB. They are OK with banning guns, they just don't want to ban as many as the Democrats, and are trying to project that as somehow "pro-gun".

 

[LAR-15]

Democrats authored and introduced every major piece of US anti gun legislation in the 20th Century.

National Firearms Act
Federal Firearms Act
Gun Control Act
Armor Piercing Ammunition Ban
Brady Bill
Guns in Schools
1994 Semi Automatic Ban

 

[Dan from MI]

One look at the GOA ratings show the difference between MOST Democrats and Republicans on firearms.

If you look at the leadership of the parties, it is even more profound. The committee chairs. Kennedy? Conyers? Pelosi? "Pro-gun" Harry Reid voted for the gun show ban. Schumer? Feinstein? Leahy?

The last big vote was the .30-30 ban. ONE Republican voted for that - and he got fired in November. 34 Democrats voted for the 30-30 ban.

 

[Zundfolge]

If indeed there is "no difference between the Republicans and Democrats" ... if the Republicans are truly "just as bad as Democrats" then its time to stop posting here and time to "feed the hogs" because we'll have moved passed Claire Wolfe's line.



The fact that many in this forum believe that Republicans want gun control just as bad as Democrats is one example of why the fight is already lost.


Also, to those Democrat apologists out there, for every anti-gun Republican politician I bet we could dig up a hundred anti-gun Democrats (if not more) ... clearly the GOP isn't perfect on this issue, but the chances of more gun control under Republican rule is SIGNIFICANTLY SLIMMER than under DNC rule. That's just a fact you're going to have to live with.


So the LP types and Dem apologists will drag out the 1st amendment as evidence that the GOP doesn't want freedom of speech/religion so they are just as bad ... well if you take an honest look at the GOP you'll see that there is MORE internal battle over issues of censorship and religious freedom then there is internal battle over gun control within the ranks of the DNC. The overwhelming majority of the DNC leadership believes you should not be armed. Period. There are still plenty of libertarian minded Republicans in the party apparatus.


Now I'll sit here and wait to be accused of saying "No Republican EVER votes for gun control!" (which is clearly not what I'm saying).

 

[Prince Yamato]

+1 Zundfolge

 

[Lone_Gunman]

There is still a difference between Republicans and Democrats, but the difference is shrinking. 30 yrs ago, it was easy to see. Now it takes a binoculars... in a few more years i am afraid we will need a microscope to see the difference.

Looking at the gun issue, the most likely piece of new legislation will be a new Assault Weapons Ban. All major contenders for President in both parties support a new ban, with the exception of John McCain, who proposed closing the gun show loop hole. Its just hard to find a lot of difference of opinion on the issue. Yes there are extremists in the Democratic party who would ban all guns, but there are some of these people in the Republican party also. These people have experienced a decrease in power in the Democratic Party over the years. They are still a force to be prepared for, but the anti-gunners are weaker now than any time in the last 30 yrs.

I was a lifelong Republican till Bush came along, and I have seen the Republican party propose a lot of things that a conservative part should not support. The picture is bigger than just guns. A lot of gun owners are one issue voters. Its easy to see why, because guns are a real, tangible thing. Its easy to tell when your guns are taken away. But over the last eight years we have seen a variety of other rights limited. Its more difficult to tell when the First and Fourth Amendments are compromised.

I would also add that the Republican party no longer represents small government and fiscal conservatism. These were core Republican principals thirty years ago. Now they are forgotten. Our government is bigger and more intrusive than ever, spending is out of control, and beauracracy is at an all time high.. We have created entire new Departments of do-nothings under the Bush Administration.

At one point, Ronald Reagan was a Democrat. The Democrats became more liberal and he left them. His quote was something to the effect of " I didn't leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me."

Thats about how I feel about Republicans now. Given how far the Republicans have strayed for conservatism, I think we are just as well for Democrats to be in charge, and just keep so much pressure on them they won't pass any gun legislation for fear of reprisals in the next election.

 

[Titan6]

Lone Gunman

That is a very reasoned argument that I completely identify and agree with.

I did not leave them either, they left me.

There are a few, darn few repubs left who still support my values. And even fewer dems. When our best hope for freedom and liberty in this country is a gulf coast congressman from Texas that almost no one has ever heard of I know we live in troubled times.

 

[xd9fan]

very good posts Lone_Gunman. As the GOP moves to the middle......the hair spliting will continue.

Democrats authored and introduced every major piece of US anti gun legislation in the 20th Century.

National Firearms Act
Federal Firearms Act
Gun Control Act
Armor Piercing Ammunition Ban
Brady Bill
Guns in Schools
1994 Semi Automatic Ban

Every one of these laws had GOP votes all over them. And to further my problem with the myth of the GOP being "pro-gun".......when they had control of each branch of Govt (regardless of margins)....if they so love liberty and freedom....and gun rights......repeals of these laws.....should have happened and if not....shut the place down until they get what they want.....in other words......(win....and play like the Dems).

"common sense compromise" lead to each and every gun law listed above..........now they will continue this behavior....in the name of security....in the war on terror.......

Dont forget Bush openly stated he would renew the AW ban......words mean things boys.....If Bush is a principled man (I believe he is) and If he believed in the 2Amendment.......why give the Ban verbal support.
Its Just other reason why he is NOT a Conservative.

The GOP will sacrifice the base to win the middle......and in the end....loose their original identity. I say original because its clear they have no desire to embrace conservatives again. They want the dependent "middle" vote (Thats why even in the war on terror....national sovereignty on the southern border is NOT enforced)