Why is the DNC as a group so anti gun?

[steelerfan]

A lot of what you are saying XD is true but if Obama ever gets to appoint one more anti gun Justice to SCOTUS, you'll see how easily three anti gunners can wipe out our rights. And just like happened with his first two picks, all the dems, whether they claim to be pro gun or not, will rubber stamp it so as not to offend the anointed one and the power base of the party.

I agree completely,we can't let ourselves be lulled into a false sense of security,things couls change in a big hurry with the wrong people in charge

[Sandcut]

There's exceptions to everything but as a general rule, Gun Owners are Not thanking democrats for anything. Unless one likes a royal butt porking on everything from tax theft to gun control.

1. I never said that the majority of the DNC was pro-gun. Never even hinted at it.
2. The OP only addressed firearm related issues and not social programs, the economy or butt porking.

As such, I think it is entirely correct to respond to XD40 Coyote's original question about why the DNC remains so anti-gun. If you take an honest look at what has been happening Nationwide, the number of pro-gun Democrats has risen over the last two decades, especially on the state level.

Where once we had the assault weapons ban and gun-free school zones now we've got "shall issue" and "stand your ground" and consideration of National reciprocity. And like it or not, Democratic legislators helped to sponsor and approve these things.

Why is it so difficult for some of you to simply acknowledge this fact? Has the belief that all Democrats are heathen, gun-grabbing, baby-killing Socialists become such an article of faith that you cannot even give credit where credit may be due?

This "my way or the highway" attitude that is so pervasive throughout our political system is corrosive and accomplishes nothing. Maybe acknowledging that you may have common ground with someone from the other side of the aisle is a stepping off point for the exchange of other ideas. It seems to have worked for Knight0334 and his fiance.

[EZ1]

Because they'd rather not have anyone be able to defend themselves, just rely on them for all your needs.

[DrRansom]

...the number of pro-gun Democrats has risen over the last two decades, especially on the state level.

Yeah. Politicians commonly tell the proles whatever they think will make them get reelected. These days, "I'm pro-gun" helps. Voting records are much more descriptive than rhetoric, IMO.

Where once we had the assault weapons ban and gun-free school zones now we've got "shall issue" and "stand your ground" and consideration of National reciprocity. And like it or not, Democratic legislators helped to sponsor and approve these things.

Um, the AWB and Gun-free school zones are still in full force in many areas of the country....but you are correct, the Dems did help sponsor and approve them.

Why is it so difficult for some of you to simply acknowledge this fact? Has the belief that all Democrats are heathen, gun-grabbing, baby-killing Socialists become such an article of faith that you cannot even give credit where credit may be due?

They made their bed. Why is it so difficult for you to accept? Reference "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".

This "my way or the highway" attitude that is so pervasive throughout our political system is corrosive and accomplishes nothing. Maybe acknowledging that you may have common ground with someone from the other side of the aisle is a stepping off point for the exchange of other ideas. It seems to have worked for Knight0334 and his fiance.

No. It is not standing up for what you know is right, compromising with those who would lead you down slippery slopes, and pandering to fools that makes our system of govt. useless, inefficient, and overbearing. And though there may be very minute areas of common ground, that makes no difference with respect to major issues. And, there is no comparison between national politics and a relationship issue.

[Brick]

Feinstein and Shumer

But both Feinstein and Shumer have Pistol Licenses or Concealed Weapons Permits in their home jurisdictions! It isn't that they're anti-gun or anti-rights, they're just against your guns and your rights!

And yes there are some Democrats in the the PA Gen'l Ass'y that voted for HB 40. But don't forget right now there are 28 anti-gun bills sitting in the Assembly right now (14 ea. in Senate and House) and every one of them was submitted by a Democrat. I know because I posted every damn one of them in this forum when they were submitted.

Here is the Firearms section of the 2008 Democrat National Platform (AFAIK this was their last national statement of goals) find original at: http://www.democrats.org/about/party_platform

Firearms
We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact and enforce common- sense laws and improvements – like closing the gun show loophole, improving our background check system, and reinstating the assault weapons ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Acting responsibly and with respect for differing views on this issue, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.

Bold added. The way I read this they're saying we recognize the right but we'll infringe on it anyhow.

[bluedog46]

Hard to keep that to just liberals now, though, isn't it? Should we mention that our good friends the Republicans just voted themselves another load of imaginary money that our kids will have to pay for -- er, i mean, to raise the debt ceiling? The term "bifactional ruling party" has come up sort of recently. I find it to be fitting.

more democrats voted for it though and the Repubs did get some cuts and let obama know he is not in charge anymore the way he was when dems ruled the house.

[knight0334]

Yeah. Politicians commonly tell the proles whatever they think will make them get reelected. These days, "I'm pro-gun" helps. Voting records are much more descriptive than rhetoric, IMO.



Um, the AWB and Gun-free school zones are still in full force in many areas of the country....but you are correct, the Dems did help sponsor and approve them.



They made their bed. Why is it so difficult for you to accept? Reference "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".



No. It is not standing up for what you know is right, compromising with those who would lead you down slippery slopes, and pandering to fools that makes our system of govt. useless, inefficient, and overbearing. And though there may be very minute areas of common ground, that makes no difference with respect to major issues. And, there is no comparison between national politics and a relationship issue.

My example was given to point out the effects of fluoridated water on urbanites, and why they tend to be liberal or anti-gun.

[Sandcut]

Yeah. Politicians commonly tell the proles whatever they think will make them get reelected. These days, "I'm pro-gun" helps. Voting records are much more descriptive than rhetoric, IMO.

You are absolutely correct. Voting records do speak louder than do soundbites. The fact that 37 states are "shall issue" states didn't occur soley because of a Republican majority. The same can be said for HB 40 here in PA. But those things apparently count for nothing, right?

Um, the AWB and Gun-free school zones are still in full force in many areas of the country....but you are correct, the Dems did help sponsor and approve them.

And Republicans voted for them right along side the anti-gun Dems, too. This is the problem that I referred to above. The inability to give credit where credit is due and the flip-side to that is the ability to lay blame where it is due as well.

I never said ALL Democrats were pro-gun because that would be a damn fool thing to say. It does, however, appear that the number who are pro-gun is increasing. I fail to see how this can be a "cup half empty" situation.

They made their bed. Why is it so difficult for you to accept? Reference "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".

I have no comment on this because it doesn't make any sense.

No. It is not standing up for what you know is right, compromising with those who would lead you down slippery slopes, and pandering to fools that makes our system of govt. useless, inefficient, and overbearing. And though there may be very minute areas of common ground, that makes no difference with respect to major issues. And, there is no comparison between national politics and a relationship issue.

Who is talking about compromise? I never mentioned the word. I'm talking about having open-minded conversations with people by using facts and not emotional knee-jerk reactions and partisan hard-line responses. You can't change opinions unless you are conversing.

@ Knight0334. Sorry to take your post off on a tangent. It did appear (at least to me) that there were similarities between your post and the point I was trying to make.

But dude. Flouride? Really?

[knight0334]

You are absolutely correct. Voting records do speak louder than do soundbites. The fact that 37 states are "shall issue" states didn't occur soley because of a Republican majority. The same can be said for HB 40 here in PA. But those things apparently count for nothing, right?





And Republicans voted for them right along side the anti-gun Dems, too. This is the problem that I referred to above. The inability to give credit where credit is due and the flip-side to that is the ability to lay blame where it is due as well.

I never said ALL Democrats were pro-gun because that would be a damn fool thing to say. It does, however, appear that the number who are pro-gun is increasing. I fail to see how this can be a "cup half empty" situation.




I have no comment on this because it doesn't make any sense.




Who is talking about compromise? I never mentioned the word. I'm talking about having open-minded conversations with people by using facts and not emotional knee-jerk reactions and partisan hard-line responses. You can't change opinions unless you are conversing.

@ Knight0334. Sorry to take your post off on a tangent. It did appear (at least to me) that there were similarities between your post and the point I was trying to make.

But dude. Flouride? Really?

Yes. Seriously. Fluoride is good for the teeth, but bad for the brain. Its been used by tyrannical governments to soften people's brains. Teeth do not need as much as is pumped into water. The additional amount is put in for other reasons. ..to control the masses.

You ever wonder why the "rowdy" folks that are against the government are from rural areas? ...and why the herds of people who accept whatever Big Brother suggests is from the cities?

[Saber]

Yes. Seriously. Fluoride is good for the teeth, but bad for the brain. Its been used by tyrannical governments to soften people's brains. Teeth do not need as much as is pumped into water. The additional amount is put in for other reasons. ..to control the masses.

You ever wonder why the "rowdy" folks that are against the government are from rural areas? ...and why the herds of people who accept whatever Big Brother suggests is from the cities?

I remember in kindergarten getting Fluoride tabs. It sure kept us rowdy ankle biters at bay