The Democratic Plot that Deceives Gun Owners.

[k_dawg]

The Democrats can easily prove to me they are serious by taking the following actions:

1) pass a federal reciprocity for all concealed carry permits, including DC, NYC and Chicago
2) open the Class III registration to new firearms, and have a tax cut to $1 per stamp.
3) pass a federal maximum waiting period of 3 days, with a "shall issue" should no disqualifications show up during that time.

 

[bg]

A snake is a snake is a snake..Trust it and get bit.

 

[benEzra]

That is a rehash of an old article (pre-2004) written by AGS (part of the ban-more-guns lobby), not by the Democratic party. They were trying to make the case that Dems could talk up hunting while fighting to ban nonhunting guns, and if they made their support for hunting loud and clear, they'd defuse the gun issue and would be rolling in gun-owner votes, while still giving the prohibitionists everything they wanted.

Didn't turn out that way; 2004 was a DISASTER for the Dems on the gun issue. After getting burned by the ban-more-guns lobby again, the party leadership largely realized they'd been had by AGS and the Bradyites, and started backpedaling.

I don't think an AGS press release originally written a few years ago says a whole lot about what the party at large is going to do in the future. Yes, there are ban-more-guns zealots in the party (most of them DLC corporatist types like Feinstein, though there are some old-guard liberals in the ban-guns camp as well), but I think there is a growing realization that the issue is a loser, and pushing for bans only hands the issue to the repubs.

 

[JLelli]

"Renewing assault weapons ban (71% all, 67% gun owners)"

That part bothers me if its true. I realize THR is kind of one end of the spectrum, but I thought that the AWB was generally disliked. Is this a product of the demographic of gun owners who possibly hunt, or shoot trap only and feel their sports are safe? Just wondering.

You'll be glad to know it isn't true. According to a Gallup poll taken from October 11-14, 2004, 50% of the general public supports the assualt weapons ban, 46% opposes it, and 4% are not sure. From this, we can reasonably infer that the majority of gun owners oppose the ban. Now, what makes the Gallup poll different from all those polls that show 70%+ public support for the now-dead AWB? Unlike those other polls, the Gallup Poll correctly identifies the "assault weapons" as semiautomatic guns. Funny how once you peel away all the Brady bull****, nearly half the population (and probably a majority of the voting population) shares the RKBA view on Clinton's gun ban.

"Are you for or against a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles?"

.

For Against No
Opinion
% % %
10/11-14/04 50 46 4

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

 

[QuestionEverything]

Like benEzra said, this document has been kicking around for years. It didn't come from any member of Congress, but from a lobbying group. Pro-gun Dems have known about AGS and their gun-grabbing ways for a long time now. The fact is, there are no gun ban proposals anywhere near becoming law. There's one "gun show loophole" bill that will probably die in committee or earlier and a few other one-sponsor bills that some Congress critters wrote out of vanity. Gun control is going nowhere in this country.

 

[Dan from MI]

AGS - nothing more than a front group for the DLC. I read a nearly identical hitpiece from Mark Mellman. (Pollster for the DLC) The Democrat Leadership Council - where much of the Democrat money comes from.

This is all an attempt to be a 2nd amendment chamelion to fool gun owners.

 

[Caimlas]

Voters don’t define enforcement of existing gun laws, closing the gun
show loophole or renewing the assault weapons ban as gun control.

Like hell we don't. If it's not an attempt to control firearms, then what is it? People control? Because it is a measure of governmental control via restriction.

 

[Kentak]

As much as it pains me to say it, the article lays out what could be an effective strategy. I have to agree with much of what it says about a great many moderate gun owners and non-gun owners. If they can be convinced that the Democratic Party does, in fact, supports the notion of gun rights--along with the need for "reasonable" restrictions, they could mine a substantial number of votes.

I think it's too early to say if they will adopt this strategy, or if it will be effective, but it's something to keep a close eye on.

K

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

They might get the gunshow thing, but it would become a background check necessity.

As to the anything else, it isn't likely with things as they currently stand, not that there aren't those that would love such a law.

But, we still need to be carefull. I've already figured out that guns are largely a state issue for the time being. Dems want more restrictions, Republicans less. Except for a few states like West Virginia, and Mississippi.

 

[CNYCacher]

Is it just my interpretation. . . or could this document accurately be titled "How to lie to voters"?

 

[benEzra]

As much as it pains me to say it, the article lays out what could be an effective strategy. I have to agree with much of what it says about a great many moderate gun owners and non-gun owners. If they can be convinced that the Democratic Party does, in fact, supports the notion of gun rights--along with the need for "reasonable" restrictions, they could mine a substantial number of votes.

They tried this EXACT strategy in 2000 and 2004, and it didn't work (in fact, it backfired). The same people (then working for "Americans for Gun Safety" instead of this Third Way outfit) managed to sucker the party leadership into trying that idiotic strategy not once, but twice. They're going for a third.

There's a saying about people doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. There are indications that some in the party leadership, at least, recognize just how idiotic that strategy was...

 

[mblat]

• By a margin of 77-21%, voters support renewing the assault weapons ban
(66-32% among gun owners).

as somebody here already posted that bothers me. 66-32 support??????????

and that is scariest document I've for a while. It REALLY can work....

 

[QuestionEverything]

AGS - nothing more than a front group for the DLC. I read a nearly identical hitpiece from Mark Mellman. (Pollster for the DLC) The Democrat Leadership Council - where much of the Democrat money comes from.

The DLC does provide a lot of Democratic funds, but what many people don't know is that it's a group that's been attempting what amounts to a hostile takeover of the Democratic party. They're basically the Dems' version of the neocons; servants of an ideology alien to traditional Democratic values who are trying to hijack the party on behalf of the rich and powerful.

The DLC has been instrumental in shifting the party's focus away from worker's rights, health care, etc. to win support from corporations and have tried to compensate for this by promoting nanny-state issues like gun bans and restrictions on violent video games and explicit music lyrics. The liberal wing of the party was never so concerned with that stuff, and they've been more and more marginalized over the last few years. However, the 2006 victory marked a move away from DLC strategies.

Many people here don't seem to understand this division within the Democrats, so it's worth keeping in mind that the party is being pulled in different directions by different political groups. With the emergence of the "Western Democrats," the party is heading in a more pro-RKBA direction.

 

[nemoaz]

The DLC does provide a lot of Democratic funds, but what many people don't know is that it's a group that's been attempting what amounts to a hostile takeover of the Democratic party. They're basically the Dems' version of the neocons; servants of an ideology alien to traditional Democratic values

Hmmmmm. I (not a Democrat) would argue that centrist or even conservative values are traditional Democratic values and the hippies and special interests that took over the Democratic party in 1968 are the aliens.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

I fail to see where I accused you of anything.

My post came after yours, but I wasn't referring to you. An earlier post suggested that I think people are stupid. I should have quoted them to eliminate any confusion.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Ahh the evil "gun show loophole" kinda like the "assault weapon", the rampant "gun violence", and "cop killer bullets". I don't know who is paid to coin these phrases for journalists and politicians with which to sprinkle their propoganda. Places where US gun shows are held are still in the USA, so Federal laws still apply to FFL dealers selling firearms. So whats the loophole? Private citizens that are not held to Fed law selling or trading their guns.

 

[Mojo-jo-jo]

Ahh the evil "gun show loophole" kinda like the "assault weapon", the rampant "gun violence", and "cop killer bullets".

Funny story...
I have a good friend whose father and mother are dedicated liberal anti-gunners. They are 'older' and his mother is big into quilting--she is part owner in a quilt making business.

There is a local, very large exhibit hall (North Atlanta Trade Center) here that frequently holds many shows, many concurrently in separate 'rooms' (more like 'caverns'), some of them being the largest gun shows in the area.

Well, my friend and I were planning to go to the gun show one weekend, and he told his mother (he likes to irritate his anti-gun parents) that he was going to the gun show at NATC. Well, his mother had a table at the quilting show that was also being held there that weekend.

Ready for this?!?! Since she found out that there was an "evil gun show" with all those "gang members" with "illegal" guns, she canceled her table at the quilt show!!!

HA!!

Another good one...
When I was "discussing" gun ownership with my friend's father once, he told me that "Assault weapons are military machine guns, and now they are legal and flooding the streets." I corrected him on the fact that so-called "assault weapons" were semi-automatic and full autos were actually regulated by the NFA of 1934. His eyes narrowed, he turned red, and his response was:

"Take off the blinders of that Fox News/NRA/Republican PROPAGANDA!!!"

Heh... Don't try to confuse a liberal with facts.

 

[Liberal Gun Nut]

So they want to be moderates on gun control but don't want to change any of their objectives. If they want anyone to believe them they need to drop all support for the AWB, and make a clear statement like, "I support the 2nd amend. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The right is subject to regulation, but policies such as an AWB are an infringement of that right and I will do everything in my power to defeat an AWB should one be introduced while I am in office. Furthermore, I will support efforts to pass reasonable shall-issue CCW legislation in the remaining states, and review other gun control policies such as 922(o) and the NFA." Yeah when I hear that, as an official on-record statement, then I'll buy it and I might even vote for it.

 

[Beagle-zebub]

If the gun owners polled knew what the Democratic definition of "Assault Weapon" is, and that it covers the M1 carbines that they bought from the NRA three or four decades ago, I don't think that they would be nearly as supportive of an AWB.

What is this centrist BS? The only votes that Democrats would lose by taking a freedom-friendly stance on guns would be in states from which they can easily afford to lose votes. Also, Democrats have their constituents by the tail already with issues like socialism and keeping abortion legal, so very few hardcore Dems are going to stay home or vote for Nader, especially after 2000 and the two Bush terms. How many single-issue anti-gunners are there, honestly? Some, but nowhere near as many as their pro-gun counterparts. The people who want to save humanity from the freedom to bear arms are the same people who want to save humanity from "affluenza," save the whales, feed the poor, socialize medicine, tax the bejeezus out of cigarettes, and otherwise do for everyone what some don't know is good for them.

How dumb do Democrats think we are? All they are proposing are changes in rhetoric! I think they actually believe that their other voters are swayed by their rhetoric and not simply by the purchasing of votes with federal largesse. Croike, I can't believe I used to be a Dem.

 

[Liberal Gun Nut]

Single-issue anti-gunners are the issue. There are very very few. Single-issue pro-gun voters: Millions. Your logic is absolutely correct. Gee the Dems are going to carry NY and NJ and CA no matter who or what they run. Might as well run someone who will also be able to win gun owner votes. They could do it! He would have to make a very strong and explicit statement, especially a statement denouncing the AWB.

 

[QuestionEverything]

Hmmmmm. I (not a Democrat) would argue that centrist or even conservative values are traditional Democratic values and the hippies and special interests that took over the Democratic party in 1968 are the aliens.

Corporatism has never been a Democratic value; they've traditionally stood for common people, populism and workers' rights, hence "Democratic." The DLC decided that these principles should be abandoned for the sake of corporate cash, so they started going after soccer mom social issues to maintain their image of doing good for the masses. "Music with bad words is destroying America!"

 

[Henry Bowman]

My post came after yours, but I wasn't referring to you. An earlier post suggested that I think people are stupid. I should have quoted them to eliminate any confusion.

And my post meant to ask whether the Democrats think we are this stupid. You are being insightful in your analysis for identifying this evil plot.

 

[Justin]

My post came after yours, but I wasn't referring to you. An earlier post suggested that I think people are stupid. I should have quoted them to eliminate any confusion.

Ah. That explains it. I had gone back and re-read your original posts and couldn't figure out where I was in disagreement.

 

[HiroProX]

Seriously, who do they think they're fooling? Gun owners have been the object of Democrat abuse and scorn for a long time, and mere words are not going to change our preceptions of them.

 

[History Prof]

I just found this thread. Wow. Thanks for the info DTOM. One of the things I like about THR is that a large number of people here seem to go to the same "tin foil" hat maker that I do. I cringed every time I read "but they're pro-rkba Democrats" after the election. Folks, just pretend that ROSIE O'DONNEL is their chief spokesperson on the issue, then you'll see where they are ALL headed. I think DTOM's finding this info is just a ton of evidence in that direction.