12minutes into the latest debate

^^^^
Surprise, surprise, surprise...
I "came of age" a long time ago and it sure ain't gotten better over the years.

Is it the usual stuff about gunshow loopholes flooding the streets with ghost assault weapons or are they talking Australia?

I am not surprised. You have a stronger stomach than I do though. I don't think I could watch that without losing my lunch.

This is just plain crazy.

Probably has more to do with an attempt by Hillary to hit back at Sanders, who is viewed by some to have a chink in his armor when it comes to gun issues.

that has alot to do with that but if Sanders is countering it by attempting to outdo her there is no 'safer choice' anymore.

The mods are lobbing softballs to Hildabeast, and actually arguing with Sandets. Liberals are so laughable!

MErl, I think Sanders has to toe the party line. He can't afford to look weak (in Democrat terms) on this issue, so I'm not surprised if he tries to out-liberal her on hot-button issues, no matter what she says. Well, anything short of suggesting overturning the 2A and taking 'executive action' to confiscate firearms nationwide. But neither of them is that stupid, especially when they have the example of a lame-duck president who didn't start a popular anti-2A revolt with lesser measures.

There is no doubt that "gun control" is one of the primary planks in the Democrat platform both nationally and locally. The Dems do feel like we are at a point where they can not only be open about their support for additional restrictions on firearms but they can aggressively support such measures.

Here in SC one of our State Representatives (Democrat) has introduced a Bill that would require positive affirmation through NICS before a gun purchase is permitted removing the current standard of being automatically approved if not denied within three days. The are calling this the "Charleston Loophole".

Not too long the City of Columbia Police Chief asked City Council for a temporary ban on carrying "weapons" within 250 feet of State House grounds. The request was approved and only one person challenged it. I never heard what the results were of that challenge but the precedent has now been set so City Councils and County Councils across the state can pretty much act at will with total disregard to constituent opinion and due process.

To keep this thread gun focused and not politically focused I will add that I predict another shelf clearing run on guns and ammo if a Democrat is elected President and the Republicans lose leverage in either the House or the Senate.

Plan2Live said:

To keep this thread gun focused and not politically focused I will add that I predict another shelf clearing run on guns and ammo if a Democrat is elected President and the Republicans lose leverage in either the House or the Senate.

Click to expand...

And I will once again/continue to predict that the panic will be uncalled for and there will be no new federal gun control legislation.

R.W.Dale said:

And the democratic candidates are trying to outdo each other about who stands in opposition to 2a issues the most.

12minutes

...

Click to expand...

Gun control advocates (mostly, but not all dems) are very sure in themselves that anyone who wants a gun is up to no good. They can only focus on legal gun owners as the originator of their woes as illegal gun owners are very prevalent, but completely "hidden".

Anti-2A politicians lost seats in moderate and somewhat conservative areas and of the county over the last few years. Some were even recalled directly because of a specific anti-2A vote. Nonetheless, the Democratic party is embracing gun control and is taking the ball and running with it in this election.

Probably has more to do with an attempt by Hillary to hit back at Sanders, who is viewed by some to have a chink in his armor when it comes to gun issues.

Click to expand...

His "weakness" is the fact he only got a D- NRA rating while the other two got F.

I think that while gun control is safe issue for state or district offices in anti-gun states and districts, it is a major losing issue nationally. They keep getting burned on it as a national issue.

Any panic will be uncalled for. But I believe the gun shooting public is settling down now and accepting the Dems word for things - they are openly and rabidly anti gun.

But what can they do about it? Nada. While some say that the potential is worse than ever, the reality is that restrictions on firearms have been dialed back more than ever.

Let's not forget a significant fact: this is all pre election campaign rhetoric. It's hot air. Meadow muffins. The current administration promised to close GTMO and pull us out of the Mid East, hasn't happened. Despite all the bluster, threats, and lecturing (OMG the endless lecturing, the man IS a Constitutional lecturer) what did we get? Empty jawboning. Hot air. Talk.

The latest Executive Suggestions aren't even orders. Fears of confiscation are being balanced by objective assessment - "they" can't even attempt to round up all the guns. It would take years. There are more guns in the hands of the people - and ammo - than the military. And the Government can't begin to finance buying them all back. There are 330 million guns - at current "buyback" prices of $100 each that's 33 BILLION dollars. Congress won't vote for it, we won't allow being taxed for the money.

Ask YOUR candidate why they not only want to give you only $100 for your gun but tax you $132 to do it. Please, get your cell phones out, hit the calculator app, and do the math. We either borrow the money from the Chinese to buy them back, or tax ourselves to do it.

Challenge them on the details - where's the money going to come from for National Confiscation? Really?

These debates are excellent for showing how little the candidates actually have thought thru the details of their pet anti gun schemes. If they want to spend $33 Billion to buy back guns - or whatever realistic amount you come up with - then what are they going to cut? And why? Not asking is missing an opportunity to point out how hollow and unthinking they are being.

As for taking our guns away, not even. Two recent incidents locally have highlighted it, in each case a suspect was hiding in a home and considered armed. After talking them out over a 24 hour period, the local PD then gave up trying to find where the guns might be hidden in the attic or crawlspace. It was remarked that it would take too much time and result in the house being dismantled to the point of being uninhabitable.

They can't tear down our homes to find every gun. It's impossible - what are "they" going to do, start at the corner and bulldoze each one, setting them on fire? There would STILL be guns hidden away.

It Ain't Going To Happen.

They are not omnipotent all powerful rulers with extra terrestrial powers and we need to concentrate on fixing more important issues. The anti gun rhetoric is a smoke screen to hide other items on their agenda.

We can do a lot. Start by becoming a one issue voter. Study the candidates and vote for the one with the best record and historical statements on guns.

Then keep talking to everyone on the subject and be super friendly to new shooters. Introduce as many people as possible to shooting.

OilyPablo said:

We can do a lot. Start by becoming a one issue voter. Study the candidates and vote for the one with the best record and historical statements on guns.

Click to expand...

To each their own, but if I was to be a one issue voter (I'm not), it wouldn't be for guns.

These primary debates are all about jockeying for position with the party base. They can't get elected as president without winning in the primaries, so the debates are always skewed to get votes.

That does not mean we should trust any of these candidates from either party on anything. They will lie out both sides of their mouths to get elected and it will not bother them one bit. Some of them even seem to prefer lying to the truth.

clearly the party has decided that an openly anti 2a stance is a winning proposal outweighing any downside.

R.W.Dale, I wasn't trying to imply otherwise. Their method of attack changes. I agree with steerlerdude99's point here:

They can only focus on legal gun owners as the originator of their woes as illegal gun owners are very prevalent, but completely "hidden".

Legislation such as the AWB didn't last and its lapse didn't cause an overall upsurge of gun deaths. In fact the opposite happened, although I do not argue that one is the cause of the other.

I suspect the talking points for anti-2A going forward will not rely on the public will to support legislation restricting gun ownership. That hasn't worked for them. Instead it will be focused on "public health" issues and trying to hammer home the idea that the public just isn't responsible enough to own guns without oversight; that legislation should come about in the same way that we legislate the safety of drugs or food or cars. They'll focus more on the industry (i.e. smart gun initiatives). They will continue to try to include the word "violence" in every sentence that contains the word "gun."

And, just in time, here are the "they can't do anything" apologists.

I'd rather the Democrats "can't do anything" because they are not in power, and I didn't vote for them.

OilyPablo said:

We can do a lot. Start by becoming a one issue voter. Study the candidates and vote for the one with the best record and historical statements on guns.

Click to expand...

OilyPablo said:

Then keep talking to everyone on the subject and be super friendly to new shooters. Introduce as many people as possible to shooting.

Click to expand...

A two for one deal on OilyPablo's posts. To start off, I am pretty much in agreement with OilyPablo's posts.

I am not a one issue voter. HOWEVER, I see gun-rights is a "looking glass" into how a politician sees their role as a public servant. It is especially true of representatives, e.g. local, state and US. They are there to represent your view. It is NOT their job to manage and shape your view. Write them when you see import issues introduced. Even a "canned letter" is better than none. Executive branch positions, e.g. mayor, governor and president, are a slightly different. Letters and e-mails are unlikely to get through, but it does not hurt to try.

I agree 100% in showing "on the fence" folks what the shooting sports is all about. Fear and ignorance drive the anti-gun message.

chuck

I understand that the Left is now shifting the terminology from "gun control" to "common sense gun safety." Different language, same intention... Very Orwellian.

.

Yes. Maybe I should clarify. I am a one issue screener. Candidates need to pass that hurdle first. Then we will talk.