Democrats rethink gun-control stance

Status
Not open for further replies.

Firefighter

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2003
Messages
51
Location
Alabama's Gulf Coast
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

Democrats rethink gun-control stance
By James G. Lakely
Published October 17,2003

The perception that Democrats are hostile to the rights of gun owners has damaged the party in the last two elections and will do so again in 2004 unless they change their ways, the Democratic Leadership Council said yesterday.

Al From, founder of the centrist DLC, and Democratic Sens. Evan Bayh of Indiana and Mark Pryor of Arkansas said the antigun image perpetuates the idea that Democrats are "cultural elites," alienating them from mainstream voters.

At a press conference titled "God, Guns and Guts: Seizing the Cultural Center," Mr. From said Democrats generally avoid speaking about gun rights and other cultural issues important in rural and suburban areas, leaving voters with the impression that Democrats "don't think like us."

In the 2000 presidential election, Republicans enjoyed big advantages among voters who own firearms, frequently attend church, serve in the military and are married with children, Mr. From said.

"We, at the DLC, believe it's important that Democratic leaders face up to tough issues, even ones they sometimes feel uncomfortable talking about," said Mr. From, who sponsored yesterday's press event along with Americans for Gun Safety. "We consider that our role as the party's reality therapists."

Mr. Bayh, chairman of the DLC, said Democrats "have a credibility problem" on guns and national security issues.

"We cannot be perceived as cultural elitists and weak on national security issues," Mr. Bayh said. "That's not a prescription for victory for the Democratic Party."

Democratic pollster Mark Penn, who was a key architect of Bill Clinton's winning message in two presidential elections, presented new research that showed that if Democrats don't talk about "gun safety and respect for the Second Amendment," voters presume they are antigun.

"It is very clear that silence is not golden for Democrats on the gun issue," Mr. Penn said, adding that Democratic Party pays a steep price for its antigun image while the Republicans' pro-gun image doesn't cost them any votes.

"The formula for Democrats is to say that they support the Second Amendment, but that they want tough laws that close loopholes" in current gun laws, Mr. Penn said, adding that polls show the term "gun safety" is received better than the more commonly used term "gun control."

If Democrats could neutralize Republicans' advantage with gun owners, Mr. Penn said, as much as 21 percent of swing voters would come their way.

"This is something [Democrats] can run on and win on," Mr. Penn said.

Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association, scoffed at the notion that a "poll-tested moniker" would make a difference in elections.

"They are underestimating the intelligence of voters," Mr. Arulanandam said. "What matters to NRA members and the tens of millions of gun owners is not rhetoric, but action. It's a dangerous gamble for these groups to assume they can pull one over on the voters."

Mr. Bayh and Mr. Pryor both defeated opponents who tried to cast them as being against the right to own firearms. At stump speeches, Mr. Pryor said he carried in his wallet a trump card: his hunting license.

But the two senators from rural states, both of which were won by President Bush in the 2000 election, said that strident antigun Democrats — especially Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Charles S. Schumer of New York and Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey — pose image problems. Those senators are in the forefront of battles to strengthen the ban on assault weapons, to defeat legislation that would protect gun dealers from some lawsuits, and to strictly regulate sales at weekend gun shows.
 
Gun Control or Gun Safety: What's the Difference?
Analysis By Jennifer Freeman

Old tricks. New phrases. Same agenda.

In the beginning, gun-ban organizations were very forthright in their intentions to ban the private ownership of firearms by U.S. citizens. It did not take long for gun-banners to figure out that the overwhelming majority of Americans understand and support the Second Amendment as an individual right and are not likely to support an all out ban of firearms ownership by private citizens.

The gun-ban movement was then forced to take a new approach. An approach known as "gun control." We don't want to ban guns; we just think there should be some level of control. The gun-ban organizations changed their names and their lexicon in order to support the new "gun control" approach. The "gun control" approach gave us a variety of restrictions on firearms ownership, most notably the Brady Ban (commonly referred to as the "Assault Weapons Ban" - "assault weapons" being an erroneous term, of course).

Americans have now grown tired of "gun control" as evidenced in many local, state, and federal elections. As such, the gun-ban obsessives are taking on yet another approach. An approach that appears more innocuous but is, in fact, more dangerous than ever before.

The newest term is "gun safety." We don't want to "control" guns; we just think people who own them should be safe and responsible.

In addition to "gun safety" they have nearly eliminated the term "ban" in favor of soundbite friendly words like: Sensible, safe, and common-sense. These words are appealing to the average American and are not likely to generate any resistance.

By employing a variety of innocuous terms designed to mislead, confuse, and lull the average American into a false sense of security, the gun-ban movement stands to restrict our rights even further, despite the fact that our Second Amendment is now weaker than has been in the history of this nation.

Be aware of gun-ban catch-phrases and their true meaning. Some examples are below:

GUN-BAN TRICK PHRASES TRANSLATED-



I'm not anti-gun:


I believe the police and the military should have firearms. Civilians should not.



All gun owners should be properly trained and licensed:


Once the licensing scheme is in place, the government should stop issuing licenses as is the case in Washington, DC today.



I believe in common-sense gun control:


I support the ban of various, if not all, semi-automatic rifles. I support licensing and registration of firearm owners, waiting periods, purchasing restrictions (1 firearm per month), etc.



I support the rights of hunters:


I support the ban of all firearms excluding relics from the 1800's that can be used for hunting. A firearm license and hunting license would be required, of course, along with a full background investigation.



I want to close the gun-show loophole:


I want to prevent people from engaging in free trade as it pertains to firearms. The government should be informed of each and every firearm transaction. We will need that information later when firearms are confiscated.



I support a ten-day waiting period:


People who have been threatened or are in immediate danger of violence (riots, natural disasters, terrorist attacks) are of no consequence to me. Why don't they just learn karate?
 
Interesting. It takes about a decade or so to mature as a karate student. This assumes that the student has good instruction, and practices RELIGIOUSLY, at least 5 to 6 days per week. And by the way, .32 ACP will beat Karate every time. What are liberals thinking? Apparently, they're not thinking. How many of the self described culturally elite Democrats have been training in martial arts (continuously, NOT on and off) for ten or even five years. I would venture to say few, if any.

The problem with the Democrats is that they just can't think in terms of real world scenarios. Sometimes reality sneaks up on one of these Democrats and they see the light, but this is an anomaly, not the norm.
 
"At stump speeches, Mr. Pryor said he carried in his wallet a trump card: his hunting license."

For me, Mr. Pryor, that's the card of defeat.
 
"The formula for Democrats is to say that they support the Second Amendment, but that they want tough laws that close loopholes" in current gun laws, Mr. Penn said, adding that polls show the term "gun safety" is received better than the more commonly used term "gun control."

I have news for Mr Penn, He still does not get it. Voters are not so stupid as to believe whatever rhetoric is being fed to them. Poloticians voting records are not a secret and it does not take too much digging to find out the truth about where a person stands.

His grand plan of lying about having the respect for the second ammendment then attacking it soon as they get into office is not a very good plan for success. I think most people out there realize that the loopholes they commonly refer too mean that people are still allowed to own guns!
 
Gee, its a good thing that I am a moron.
Obviously, they have me fooled...
I am sure that I will see the error of my ways and immediately cease voting for anyone other than Democrats.:rolleyes:
Jacka$$es...
 
Last year, Leon Uris published one more book than he should have. In it he outlines the Democrat strategy for total gun control- basically dummy up on the gun issue, get elected, then make a clean sweep once in power. The book had a number of problems and it appears that Mr Uris'mental capacity is pretty much gone.

It appears that the current crop of leftist hopefuls have read the book. -Get elected and then back to the same old cocktail party marxism that has been so popular since the 1930s.
 
Fortunately, America has outgrown both leftists and leftism.

Representatives of the Democratic (sic) party know leftist extremist so-called "gun control" cost Liar Gore the presidential election of 2000. Those who are shrewd are keeping their mouths shut on so-called "gun control," but many more aren't—and will pay the price in November, 2004. Leftist extremist so-called "gun safety" is doomed throughout most of the nation—unless, of course, representatives of the Democratic (sic) party think all the new shall issue laws were passed by simple accident.
 
They hope for electoral stupidity and for good reason- Bill Clinton got elected Twice and they almost managed to steal the last election for Algore.The main draw seems to be their ability to convince soccer moms to huff and puff and waddle down to the polls because the mean old Republicans are going to take away all their shopping money.

The used free cigarettes to get the wino vote in florida while fighting to keep the overseas -military ballots from being counted. Every election the great society welfare workers in the government housing projects herd free housing recipients in to vote Democratic.

Mental status evaluation:
" Do you know what year it is?"- 1960
"What would you do if your check stopped coming?" - duhhhh
"What town are you living in right now?" -you have to ask my daughter.
" Who is the President of the United States"-
They seldom know but there is always a voter registration card sitting on the government issue end table.

..sorry about the tirade
 
At stump speeches, Mr. Pryor said he carried in his wallet a trump card: his hunting license.

Just once, I want to see a Democrat address the 2A as a self defense issue, and not about hunting.

Just once, let me hear one say. "I support Americans' right to defend themselves against criminals by all means, including firearms." That is the day I will vote for a Democrat.

(and yes, I know the 2A is really about protection from govt. tyranny, but you are high if you think a candidate will go there!)
 
Let's hope they change and gun ownership/possession becomes a "non-issue" like it was before the GCA of '68. Back in the old days, it was "normal" to like & own guns and that's the way it should be. Then again, I still don't trust my senators.
 
Clinton appointed a local boy ambassador to Sweden. He told one of his cronies just before the Senate confirmation hearing " I'm ready for Jessie Helms- got my NRA card current."

When Anne Richards was governor of Texas, she used to go on one well-publicized dove hunt every year. " Gollll-leee! Ah shore hope I don't shoot anybody." Anti-gun the rest of the year.

the most recent Democrat candidate printed up a bunch of yard posterrs - "Sportsmen for Sanchez" and crowed about making more public land available for hunters. This was rich since there is almost no public land in Texas.
 
I have news for Mr Penn, He still does not get it. Voters are not so stupid as to believe whatever rhetoric is being fed to them.

Buzzzzzzzzz!

Sorry. Wrong answer. Too many voters are exactly that stupid.
 
Thank you, Mpayne. On the money.



Representatives of the Democratic (sic) party know leftist extremist so-called "gun control" cost Liar Gore the presidential election of 2000.


Yeah, and we had an overwhelming margin of victory, and we got a staunch Constiutionalist in the White House, didn't we?


Didn't we?


:(
 
If you tell the truth there is only one story you can tell, time and again, every time you are asked for years and years. If you lie you can say anything you want to say and change your stories whenever you want to. :rolleyes:
 
The meeting that underscored all of the above sentiments was held this past Saturday at the Wyndham Hotel in Atlanta. I was there and I got the feeling that it was Americans for Gun Safety who was calling the shots. The meeting was a gathering of elected Democratic politicians and select media types who were selectively invited and admitted.

The gist of the meeting was that they need to use better euphemisms and verbal disguises to advance their agenda because the public apparently believes that the Democrats want to confiscate and ban guns and that this is an image that they need to shake in order to regain what they lost under Bill Clinton's administration in the 1990's.

Nothing new, just a codified blueprint, in writing of what they need to do to win. I can fax it to anyone who wants a copy of the minutes of the meeting and their agenda. Preferably, someone who can scan it and disseminate it over the internet.
 
That's not the only thing the Democrats should re-think. Their positions on just about every issue are out of touch with the average American. I hate to admit that I was once a registered Democrat, but they abandoned me long before I changed my party affiliation. I believe that if the Democrats continue their leftward movement, they will continue to lose supporters. The recent California recall election is a case in point.
 
I have news for Mr Penn, He still does not get it. Voters are not so stupid as to believe whatever rhetoric is being fed to them.

Are these the folks we call "sheeple"? And you think they won't believe the new rhetoric?

The euphemism "Hook, line and sinker" comes to mind...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top