Could Gun Rights Opinions Change This Quickly?

Status
Not open for further replies.
After staying on the sidelines and letting the discussion play out I guess I'll step in and clarify my original post. I suppose you would have to have lived in SC for a while to understand that for many years the Confederate flag has been the third rail of SC politics. Gubernatorial challenger Vincent Shaheen proved that during the last election cycle. He was trailing in the polls and in a last ditch effort he brought up the issue of removing the flag from the State House grounds. His poll numbers dropped precipitously and he lost the election. Fast forward to just over a week ago and all of a sudden everyone seems to be on board with not only bringing the flag down but erasing it from store shelves and television screens. That was an almost over night 180 degree turnaround by nearly every politician in the state and a very large chunk of the citizenry.

Back to guns. While I fully acknowledge that flags and guns serve different purposes I still find it disturbing that one idiot with a gun and a chip on his shoulder changed so many attitudes on supposedly strongly held beliefs overnight. If attitudes can change that quickly on the flag they could just as easily change on guns. I don't see that as an "ill-logical" comparison as one of our commenters put it. And with one target successfully down the anti crowd will be emboldened and all too eager to move on to the next target.

That's my take and that was the point of my original post.
 
"To go with the comparison in the OP, the debate on the battle flag being on the Mississippi state flag is absolutely on fire here, it's on every local newscast, every day."
Flags are a lot cheaper than guns, so fewer people care to defend the issue. Everyone involved knows they are simply out for a few cheap, symbolic victories, and won't be able to affect anything meaningful.

"The flag discussion is relevant just as Trump being fired from the network and Miss Universe being canceled on another."
Case in point, two other issues hardly anyone cares about enough to defend.

Gun rights are seeing the strongest support they've had, probably since at least the Bonus Army days if not the Civil War, for cryin' out loud. Even if the SCOTUS is presented with another trillion-dollar bill that is too big to fail (the price of our judiciary, it seems), this time regarding gun control, they'll be hard pressed to do anything but neuter it.

"As far as I'm concerned we are treading on new ground, I think recent SCOTUS decisions will only help to embolden those who wish to force this minority view change upon us all."
True, but opinion is still opinion outside the digital sphere, at the end of the day, and it doesn't change as much as we all pretend. You might see 'sweeping' regulations passed, but they won't be enforced outside the usual places. All that will happen is the gradual delegitimization of governance as we all become criminals out of reach of an impotent State. Power stems from the consent of the governed, and so long as this truth is known, the problem is ultimately self-regulating.

I still don't see anything short of a very high-profile assassination causing anything of this sort, and our fearless leaders are too paranoid at this point to let that befall them.

"Fast forward to just over a week ago and all of a sudden everyone seems to be on board with not only bringing the flag down but erasing it from store shelves and television screens"
Is that 'everyone' actually located in South Carolina? I've seen an awful lot of condemnation from folks who literally have no skin in the game, whatsoever, and are simply belching from a thousand miles north or farther. I'm in Texas, and think the flag is in bad taste, but assume that it probably carries some measure of legitimate significance over in the seat of the Confederacy if it garnered the kind of political support it has until recently (not unlike the Alamo, which is a very insensitive symbol of a Mexican war crime and ultimate defeat). The only change is by politicians pandering to that national audience, with visions of broader appeal and the higher office it represents tantalizing their senses (Haley)

TCB
 
Last edited:
barnbwt said:
"To go with the comparison in the OP, the debate on the battle flag being on the Mississippi state flag is absolutely on fire here, it's on every local newscast, every day."
Flags are a lot cheaper than guns, so fewer people care to defend the issue. Everyone involved knows they are simply out for a few cheap, symbolic victories, and won't be able to affect anything meaningful.

"The flag discussion is relevant just as Trump being fired from the network and Miss Universe being canceled on another."
Case in point, two other issues hardly anyone cares about enough to defend.

Gun rights are seeing the strongest support they've had, probably since at least the Bonus Army days if not the Civil War, for cryin' out loud. Even if the SCOTUS is presented with another trillion-dollar bill that is too big to fail (the price of our judiciary, it seems), this time regarding gun control, they'll be hard pressed to do anything but neuter it.

"As far as I'm concerned we are treading on new ground, I think recent SCOTUS decisions will only help to embolden those who wish to force this minority view change upon us all."
True, but opinion is still opinion outside the digital sphere, at the end of the day, and it doesn't change as much as we all pretend. You might see 'sweeping' regulations passed, but they won't be enforced outside the usual places. All that will happen is the gradual delegitimization of governance as we all become criminals out of reach of an impotent State. Power stems from the consent of the governed, and so long as this truth is known, the problem is ultimately self-regulating.

I still don't see anything short of a very high-profile assassination causing anything of this sort, and our fearless leaders are too paranoid at this point to let that befall them.

"Fast forward to just over a week ago and all of a sudden everyone seems to be on board with not only bringing the flag down but erasing it from store shelves and television screens"
Is that 'everyone' actually located in South Carolina? I've seen an awful lot of condemnation from folks who literally have no skin in the game, whatsoever, and are simply belching from a thousand miles north or farther. I'm in Texas, and think the flag is in bad taste, but assume that it probably carries some measure of legitimate significance over in the seat of the Confederacy if it garnered the kind of political support it has until recently (not unlike the Alamo, which is a very insensitive symbol of a Mexican war crime and ultimate defeat). The only change is by politicians pandering to that national audience, with visions of broader appeal and the higher office it represents tantalizing their senses (Haley)

TCB
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you understand the significance of the battle flag in Mississippi lol. This issue could easily lead to a killin' or two, can swing elections. Not only is the "Rebel" flag flown everywhere the state flag is (it's after all a major part of it), there are Confederate memorials on most if not all of the county courthouse lawns in the state. Judging from the general atmosphere of the debate I think it will be taken off the flag at some point...and the parallels to the gun issue are very close. You don't have to convince 50% or even 25%of the population to switch their support on issues this contentious; a 10% swing could lead to very real difficulties for 2A folks. While there is no doubt we are in better shape than even five years ago, I have no illusions that it couldn't change very radically and much faster than most expect. This change wouldn't come at the state level (in most states) but at the federal, if the right SCOTUS judge unexpectedly died tonight the issue could be up for grabs again IMO.
 
"I'm not sure you understand the significance of the battle flag in Mississippi lol."
Read it again, nice n slow. "Not unlike the Alamo" --I understand it just fine.

"This issue could easily lead to a killin' or two, can swing elections"
So do tennis shoes. And mere promises & rumors swing elections.

"and the parallels to the gun issue are very close."
Except for the fact that there are heaps of gun owners who stand to lose a great deal financially in the event of any kind of significant gun control. To say nothing of the very clear, very strong, and very real appreciation massive numbers of gun owners now carry for the 2nd Amendment. There were no diligent protests in favor of the flag in the news before this event, and only infrequent mention of anti-flag protests; it was never a forefront issue. The 2nd Amendment issue is far more enmeshed in a number of other rights, and very practical considerations for law & enforcement that something like a flag simply doesn't have to contend with, which makes it an easier and less defended target.

"a 10% swing could lead to very real difficulties for 2A folks."
Yeah, that's the same of every contentious issue. The difference is that it took a good ten years for gun rights to shift our direction, I have every confidence that --barring an unopposed train of tragic events such as we saw in the 60's through the 80's-- it will take at least as long to shift back again. How many years did it take for the battle flag to morph from a political symbol created for segregation in the '60's into the more positive philosophical role it has today? Twenty or so years, right?

I agree that reliance upon ultimate court victory was always a stupid strategy. A simple look at the backgrounds of our judge pool shows we should expect no mercy from them in the end. Why, it's almost as though the proper tactic is to get Congress to start throwing up walls between our rights and those who would destroy them, but gun owners are notoriously distrustful (with some reason) of any legislative moves on guns, whatsoever. A lot of us would even oppose a straight appeal of the NFA for fear of some poison pill amendment slipped in secretly.

TCB
 
All of a sudden I'm seeing confederate flags where I never saw flags before. I could care less if the confederate flag was taken down on SC government buildings.
Click to expand...
Like the 3x5 on my front porch? I have never owned a Confederate flag until this week.

Birmingham is removing a Confederate monument. They are in debt out the rear.
Calls to remove the flag from Stone Mountain are intensifying but they have not yet caved.
Calls to rename Fort Rucker have been dismissed...so far.

Walk outside or drive to the store. Absolutely NOTHING has changed unless you watch the Liberal Media.
 
I don't see gun rights and the flag as even close to similar issues.

Gun rights is a contentious issue, but gun ownership is still a right that can be exercised and valued by anyone, anywhere, of any heritage in this country. Individual gun owners actively support others in exercising that right and welcome new people when we can. The flag obviously mostly appeals to people of a certain heritage and ethnicity, and it's unlikely that anyone from another group would ever support it. Support for the flag isn't as widespread.

In addition, there is some money in the gun industry. A political attack on a gun manufacturer that employs hundreds or thousands in a state will meet resistance on that front from employees, families, local businesses that benefit, and lawmakers. OTOH, in the flag debate, businesses may very well stand in opposition and pressure legislators to make a change with the veiled threat of moving their jobs elsewhere. Basically, the money in the gun debate is at least on both sides, but in the flag debate, the money is almost certainly "against" it.

I've got my own opinions on the flag - I can see both sides. But it's not appropriate to get too into that here I guess.
 
I understand the differences in the two and agree to take THR but we also need to understand that the political forces that are attacking the Confederate flag are the same that are attacking our gun rights. I don't mean the "man on the street" but the Media and politicians are generally the same. If a governor in Alabama will order the flag taken down because he is a lame duck don't you think he can also make like minded decisions regarding guns.
As I stated earlier, I have never owned a Confederate flag before last week. Two years ago we saw a surge in people buying their first guns because of the threats caused after SH. If you think these, and other issues, are totally different then I think you are mistaken. Thank God the gun issue is a Constitutional Right or we would have restrictions on gun ownership in this country! Right?
 
OK, US News and World Report has published an article on gun control that calls the recent event "The tipping point" in favor of gun control.
At the risk of being derided as a pessimist I still think the gun control advocates are gaining ground against us on the national media front and that will mean the political front soon enough.
 
"OK, US News and World Report has published an article on gun control that calls the recent event "The tipping point" in favor of gun control. "

Cite/link? And what's their basis for that? The polling that I have seen indicates that while 40-45% really want more gun control, the majority don't. USN&WR can declare a "tipping point" if they want - the question is what proof do they have? Their subjective feelings (or the feelings of their columnist) aren't proof.
 
There's a pattern from the left, which is who primarily make up the anti's, of pushing their agenda legislatively and when that fails through the courts. Last week's decisions regarding Obamacare and Gay Marriage are the last 2 examples. From a strictly legal sense, there's no way they should have ruled the way they did the last 2 times regarding Obamacare, but they completely disregarded the law and fabricated reasons to rule the way they did. Gay Marriage was denied in 40 states and was then pushed through using the judiciary to create law. My point is not to argue the merits of either of these 2 issues, but to point out that they will continue to use the same tactics to attack gun rights. The recent lawsuit against Luckygunner, which fortunately failed, is one of the latest examples. All they need is the right judge to rule in their favor and for things to work their way up to the Supreme Court and anything can happen. Public opinion will not matter at that point, as evidenced by the ongoing unpopularity but rulings in favor of Obamacare.
 
Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to why SCOTUS rules the way it does. Only SCOTUS knows for sure and even though they try to explain it, a lot of people still prefer their own opinion. Of course, often with 5-4 decisions, slightly less than half the Court often feels the same way as everyone else.
 
JRH6856 said:
Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to why SCOTUS rules the way it does. Only SCOTUS knows for sure and even though they try to explain it, a lot of people still prefer their own opinion. Of course, often with 5-4 decisions, slightly less than half the Court often feels the same way as everyone else.
Click to expand...
While we may not know everything that the justices are thinking, they do write opinions when deciding cases. When their decisions as well as the opinions they write are clearly in contrast to the law as well as the Constitution, there's a problem. They do decide many cases where the law can honestly be interpreted different ways. The Obamacare decisions were not such cases.

My point is not to enter into a political debate, as this is not the forum to do so, but that a shift in public opinion may not be necessary for us to lose our rights as gun owners, as the courts have demonstrated to anyone objectively looking at recent decisions that the law currently does not mean much if enough political pressure is put on the justices.
 
ATLDave said:
"OK, US News and World Report has published an article on gun control that calls the recent event "The tipping point" in favor of gun control. "

Cite/link? And what's their basis for that? The polling that I have seen indicates that while 40-45% really want more gun control, the majority don't. USN&WR can declare a "tipping point" if they want - the question is what proof do they have? Their subjective feelings (or the feelings of their columnist) aren't proof.
Click to expand...

The other thing is that many people don't even know what we already do when we sell guns. Of course they wouldn't know about current efforts - they've never bought a gun, so how could they? All they know is that CNN says guns are running amok and crime is rampant, so the world must be on fire, right?

Point them to actual FBI UCR statistics that show an overall downward trend in crime and watch their jaws drop. Then take them to a dealer and have them fill the form out and pass a background check... turns out we're already trying that too. We even do handgun registration in my home state - doesn't matter really and didn't stop a publicized shooting in Philly a couple weeks ago - but we register them and pretend it somehow helps.
 
Boy, people who have not had any legal training sure get turned around on stuff. "State's rights" means the rights of states to enact laws to restrict individuals. The argument of, say, NY in support of its SAFE Act is a state's right's argument... a claim that they, as a state, have the right to enact regulations regarding firearms.
Click to expand...

And that is being challenged by 22 states and is going to appeal in 2nd district.

I think you may have taken a wrong turn somewhere. Your definition of states rights is only half right. States rights deal with what the voters of that state want if the fed gov't and BOR is silent on an issue. There is nothing in 2A that says you have a right to arm yourself with whatever you feel you need. All it says is you have a right to bear arms. Doesn't even clarify a firearm. Many people of that period carried a long blade of some sort and by even today's standard you are armed with a weapon. By most interpretations 2A meant a firearm though.

If voters of a state want to restrict people from bearing arms then they have a right to a point under 10A. An outright ban is unconstitutional and keeps being upheld by the courts. Still some states and cities keep pushing the limit (NYC) hard but generally most have fallen in line.

States rights is also a state like AZ saying you can carry anyway you please with no AR-15/mag restrictions. Nothing in Fed code says otherwise as long as you adhere to fed firearms laws. That's the other side of states rights you forgot to mention.

I'm not going to argue with a bunch of yahoos in CA or NJ if they want to restrict AR-15's It's their state and they can do whatever they please. They voted that carp in and they can live with it. If you happen to live in a progressive liberal state and object to their laws, become politically active or just move out. States rights.

We don't need anymore brilliant AWB's coming out of congress or SC interpretations on the 2A. They are going to roll with what's politically popular nationally at any given time and my rights are going to get kicked in the crotch, again.
 
Last edited:
Shanghai McCoy said:
OK, US News and World Report has published an article on gun control that calls the recent event "The tipping point" in favor of gun control.
Click to expand...

And that (gun issue) is precisely the reason I dropped my subscription years ago. I subscribed for many years until MY tipping point. I even get offers for totally free subscriptions now; don't want them.
 
TomJ said:
While we may not know everything that the justices are thinking, they do write opinions when deciding cases. When their decisions as well as the opinions they write are clearly in contrast to the law as well as the Constitution, there's a problem. They do decide many cases where the law can honestly be interpreted different ways. The Obamacare decisions were not such cases.

My point is not to enter into a political debate, as this is not the forum to do so, but that a shift in public opinion may not be necessary for us to lose our rights as gun owners, as the courts have demonstrated to anyone objectively looking at recent decisions that the law currently does not mean much if enough political pressure is put on the justices.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. I see nothing in your response that contradicts what I wrote.
 
JRH6856 said:
Hmmm. I see nothing in your response that contradicts what I wrote.
Click to expand...
That wasn't my intent. The point I was trying to clarify is that some of the recent decisions by SCOTUS fly in the face of the law. If enough political pressure is placed on them, public opinion or the law won't stop them from trampling gun owner's rights.
 
Hunting and other sporting purpose gun sales are dropping off in my store. I think that's a major change.
Click to expand...
It's July.
People are thinking vacations and beaches
Hunting sales will pick back up about September
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
They love their guns in South Carolina
Replies
2
Views
473
Robert Hairless
R
D
  • Locked
Rebel flag, guns not wanted at battle event
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
3K
johnsonrlp
J
D
  • Locked
SC:Cheap Gun Opportunity in Sumter, Turn in (buyback) 10 August, 2013
Replies
2
Views
507
weagle99
W
A
  • Locked
  • Poll
How will our gun rights change in the 21st century?
Replies
7
Views
628
armed85
A
R
  • Locked
  • Poll
Could Gun Restrictions Cause Civil Unrest or Revolt?
Replies
19
Views
1K
Jorg Nysgerrig
J
Back
Top