Political parties and your right to bear arms

[WhiteFeather]

I think some of you will be surprised by this one.

MAKE sure you read the answers to #5. After being screwed over by politics, we up the antis and went for it all or nothing on federal parks law changes, since the park bill was stuck as an amendment to a wasteful spending bill we got all including OC in states where it legal.

Far too many people think in terms of only R & D, not of the individual people that support the Constitution and our Freedoms over parties affiliations (works that way in PA as well)

Firearm Owners Against Crime (FOAC) doesn't play the R & D games like other groups do when they recomend Pro-Gun candiates, maybe you consider joining with them to keep our rights. http://www.foac-pac.org/

Make sure you read and understand the closer statement, some thing we should all try to support elected officials that support our rights, not the big parties that don't support US.



http://www.examiner.com/x-5619-Atlan...t-to-bear-arms

Political parties and your right to bear arms

Let's play a little game called Name That Party

Choose the political party to which the following people belong:

1) The original sponsor/author of the bill that repealed Alaska’s license to carry requirements : Dem or Rep?

2) In response to the repeal of Alaska’s licensing requirement, what is the political party of the person who said the following: "I am a strong gun advocate and very concerned that every time someone misuses a gun, particularly a handgun, we lose in the court of public opinion": Dem or Rep?

3) What is the political affiliation of the group wrote the following in their DC v. Heller Amicus Brief: “the individual right guaranteed by the Second Amendment is subject to reasonable restrictions and important exceptions”: Dem or Rep?

4) What party is the state Attorney General who did the following:

i. Was the floor leader that passed a bill that ended the prohibition against concealed carry in Georgia and allowed unlicensed individuals to possess firearms in their car
ii. Signed an amicus brief in the Heller case asserting the right of Georgians to carry firearms in DC safe from arrest and harassment when the case was at the appellate court stage and only twelve other states' attorneys general participated?

5) What was the political party of a majority in Congress that for the first time repealed a gun ban?

6) The party that put Sonya Sotomayer on the Supreme Court of the United States?

The answers follow below.

Questions 1 and 2:

In 2003, Alaska repealed its requirement to have a license to carry concealed within the state. In doing so, it eliminated both its licensing and training requirements.

The author/sponsor the bill was Democrat - Rep. Eric Croft of Anchorage. He sponsored the bill out of frustration with continually fine-tuning the state’s gun laws.

Republican Sen. Con Bunde, also of Anchorage voted against the bill and explained his vote with the quote: “I am a strong gun advocate and very concerned that every time someone misuses a gun, particularly a handgun, we lose in the court of public opinion"

http://www.peninsulaclarion.com/stor...la005001.shtml

Question 3:

President George W. Bush’s Justice Department filed a brief in support of DC’s gun ban.

The brief made the claim that “shall not be infringed” means the right to keep and bear arms is subject to regulation and guns can be banned, then it went on to defend every federal gun law and the ability for Congress to ban guns.

http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/pa...itedStates.pdf

Question 4:
Democrat – Thurbert Baker. Attorney General Baker has also joined in a letter to the Obama administration's attorney general, warning him that no more federal gun laws are needed and that an "assault weapons" ban serves no law enforcement purpose.

Question 5:

The Democrats the current Congress repealed the Ronald Reagan ban on carrying in National Parks. In fairness to Republicans, this was a Republican bill by Oklahoma Senator Colburn but notice that he only got traction for this bill when the Republicans were in the minority.

Also, few have noticed that this bill goes much further than the Bush administrative rule change last year that required all firearms to be concealed, all carriers to have a license, and implicated state criminal law pertaining to carry in parks. The bill that passed, and goes into effect in February, allows for openly carried firearms and does not demand a license if the park is located in a state where a license is not required to carry, which is the majority of states for openly carried firearms.

Question 6:

This was a trick question, but the answer is Republicans.

Republicans could have stopped this nomination at the committee level and on the floor of the Senate. They chose not too.

During the last two election cycles, Democrats have found victory with pro-gun candidates such as Virginia’s Senator Webb and Montana’s Senator Tester. During this time, we’ve seen Republicans argue in front of the Supreme Court that “shall not be infringed” means the government can regulate and ban guns, confirm anti-gun Supreme Court nominees, and oppose any attempt to repeal any federal gun law.

As much as Democrats want our vote, many Republicans are embarrassed by it. Over the next year, gun owners should evaluate whether their loyalty to the Republicans is being rewarded or being taken for granted, and explore ways to make sure that you select representatives that will represent your interest in liberty generally and the right to bear arms specifically. This does not always mean merely selecting the candidate with an R or a D in beside the name on the ballot.

[whoshisface]

I agree. your link is broken...

[kunsunoke]

You guys kill me. The new-found affection for the Second Amendment is nothing more than pure strategy on the part of the DNC.

Because their enthusiasm for gun control once cost them elections like this one.

Cynically, they've (at least on paper) dumped that platform. For now. But for how long?

You understand, this also indicates pure cognitive dissonance on your parts. Because this party's leadership is dedicated to gun-snatching, and if they can't take the guns themselves they can certainly tax the living shit out of them or make them unusable (ID stamping on ammo, anyone?). Maybe this is right up your alley, but I'm personally not looking forward to the day when a box of Blazer in .40 costs me over a hundred dollars, with eighty of that going straight to the feds.

The DNC has a lot to live down. Because when you check into every piece of major anti-gun legislation that's ever gone down in the last hundred years their party's initials are tattooed to the bills.

With a stated goal of reducing crime and homicide, the Democratic Party has introduced various gun control measures over the last hundred years. The most notable of these were the National Firearms Act of 1934 and 1939 Gun Control Act (signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt), the Gun Control Act of 1968 (introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd and endorsed by Sen. Edward Kennedy), the Brady Bill of 1993 and Crime Control Act of 1994 (signed by President Bill Clinton).

Remember this one? Slick gave us the Federal (not actually) Assault Weapons Ban when he was President.

Back to present day - they didn't support Thune's bill. And Thune is with what party, again?

Who was responsible for pushing the national parks amendment again? Was that Barack Obama? What party gave that amendment OVERWHELMING SUPPORT? And what party membership did those in opposition have?

Speaking of which, the Big Kahuna himself has a very BAD, BAD record of siding with the gun snatchers.

Blaming the GOP for Sotomayor is hilarious. What party's POTUS nominated that shithead, anyway? What party had overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate, guaranteeing that she'd be approved, regardless of what the opposition party did?

Here's another way to look at it.

Since we're playing the "guess what party game" - Guess what Party's POTUS nominated THIS GUN SNATCHER to be AG-USA?

Yes, there are some pro-gun Democrats out there, and there are some gun-snatching GOP members as well. The difference is that GOP members who get caught supporting gun control measures tend to get fired. Democrats tend to get promoted.

[MTechnik]

Yes, there are some pro-gun Democrats out there, and there are some gun-snatching GOP members as well. The difference is that GOP members who get caught supporting gun control measures tend to get fired. Democrats tend to get promoted.

I dunno, I remember a whole lot of representatives that voted for the Clinton ban were voted out. Is it shocking that some actually learned that guns and rights around them matter to the constituents, and have paid attention since then?

Then again, why let facts get in the way of a good emotional argument.

[kunsunoke]

I dunno, I remember a whole lot of representatives that voted for the Clinton ban were voted out. Is it shocking that some actually learned that guns and rights around them matter to the constituents, and have paid attention since then?

It's not shocking at all. IMHO it's being done for cynical, political reasons at the local level. At the leadership level there's still plenty of enthusiasm for gun control, as I documented above.

Then again, why let facts get in the way of a good emotional argument.

Oh, the supporting information was attached.

Then again, why let clicking on some links get in the way of good cognitive dissonance?

[whoshisface]

There are more gun owners that are democrats.

I can't remember exactly the ratio but something like 58% of NRA members are democrats.

However, the bulk of terrible legislation does come from the democrats

[wa3ra]

Sorry. #5 didn't happen.

The original AWB had an expiration, and was simply allowed to die naturally.

[LittleRedToyota]

Sorry. #5 didn't happen.

The original AWB had an expiration, and was simply allowed to die naturally.

#5 isn't about the AWB. (read the answers section of whitefeather's post.)

[MTechnik]

It's not shocking at all. IMHO it's being done for cynical, political reasons at the local level. At the leadership level there's still plenty of enthusiasm for gun control, as I documented above.

More the OP's argument, it is important to let whoever the representatives are know your view, and examine their voting record to make sure they are upholding YOUR opinion, not that of their party's leadership. This was exhibited when a ton of dems got voted out following clinton's ban, and it reminds all of the creatures in DC who they should be working for.

You call that reminder, and their following it, "cynical, political reasons at the local level", I just call that a system of representatives.

Oh, the supporting information was attached.

Then again, why let clicking on some links get in the way of good cognitive dissonance?

Because most of them are old f'in news we've all danced around a thousand times already?

[Philbert]

More the OP's argument, it is important to let whoever the representatives are know your view, and examine their voting record to make sure they are upholding YOUR opinion, not that of their party's leadership. This was exhibited when a ton of dems got voted out following clinton's ban, and it reminds all of the creatures in DC who they should be working for.

You call that reminder, and their following it, "cynical, political reasons at the local level", I just call that a system of representatives.

Quite. Democracy is all about making politicians understand that if they screw with us we will have their jobs. It's naive to think that any political party operates out of altruism.

The point of the OP is not to convince people to adopt Democrats as the new party for gun rights. It's to convince people that they need to look beyond party labels. It's a mistake to blindly vote for any party or to get any party too used to the fact that they can count on our votes. That just leads to them taking us for granted.