Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why You Will NOT See Any National Gun-Control Bills Passed.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 12:50 PM
Original message
Why You Will NOT See Any National Gun-Control Bills Passed.
U.S. Senate

19 of NRA-PVF's 25 endorsed U.S. Senate candidates won. This marks a pro-gun upgrade of eight Senate seats.

In the 111th Congress, there were 43 A-rated and 34 F-rated Senators. The 112th Congress contains 50 "A" rated (+7) and 33 "F" rated Senators (-1).

The NRA has effective control of the U.S. Senate. Like it or not, that is a fact.



U.S. House

Of the 262 candidates endorsed by the NRA-PVF for the U.S. House, 225 were victorious, for an 85% winning percentage. In every case but one where an NRA-PVF endorsed candidate lost, a pro-gun challenger replaced him.

In the 111th Congress, there were 226 A-rated and 151 F-rated Representatives. The 112th Congress contains 258 "A" rated (+32) and 133 "F" rated (- 18 ) Members.

There were pro-gun election upgrades in 27 House districts.

The NRA has overwhelming control of the U.S. House. Like it or not, that is a fact.


President:

Obama is strongly anti-gun, but he will do nothing. He knows he would only spend political capital for a defeat. He is smart enough not to do that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, we understand the moral cowardice in Congress....
your post underscores that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. So standing up for constitutional rights and freedoms is moral cowardice in your opinion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. so being lackeys to a rightwing special interest group like NRA is "legislating" in your opinion?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
27. No, put supporting Consitutional rights and freedoms is
Heller is exactly on point here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Well, your guys Scalia and Thomas certainly thought so
Edited on Mon Jan-10-11 02:09 PM by villager
Thanks for making explicit, though, the NRA ties to the court's ruling on that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #29
41. As did three other judges
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. Yes, there *is* a right-leaning 5-4 majority on the bench.
Glad we can agree on something! :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Those people hold those positions because the voters elected them to.
There were anti-gun candidates in many of those elections and they lost. It isn't moral cowardice to stand by one's convictions. It simply means that they have convictions that are different from yours with respect to guns.

For that matter, I and my wife own guns and we both have Concealed Handgun Licenses and we both carry guns on our persons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. You're right. I don't like it. Such a tragedy. Now carry on dying y'all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
39. Puff! the majic dragon lives by the sea...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. NRA with 4+ million members does not speak for the 80+ million voters who own firearms. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. You are in denial. Look at those numbers with "A" ratings.
While it is true that most gun owners are not members of the NRA, that does not mean that they are opposed to the NRA, as you seem to wish. It simply means that they aren't dues paying members. In fact, the majority will be sympathetic to the NRA because they have invested money in their guns. This is proven by the fact that they have managed to elect so many "A" rated people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Please provide a credible source supporting your claim 80+ million gun owning voters support NRA.
A believable claim would be that the NRA supports 80+ million gun owners who acknowledge the natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, a pre-existing right that SCOTUS said does not depend upon our Constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. OK, You stated it better but the cash value is the same. N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Thanks for admitting you were wrong. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
7. You say "Obama is strongly anti-gun" but Obama said "I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in
people's lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take your handgun away."

Either you or Obama is not telling the truth. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Obama RECORD on guns.
FACT: Supported ban on concealed carry; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-4jqZSEo0Q

FACT: He voted for 2005 Kennedy Amendment Intended by Kennedy to ban all common center-fire rifle ammo. Kennedy, in his speech named the .30-30, first made in the mid 1890s, as a cop-killer to be banned. The .30-30 is one of the most common hunting rounds in America. Reference to Kennedy’s speech, Congressional Record: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgibin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S1634&position=all


“Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers’ armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating. It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.”


A ban on the .30-30 would have banned ALL common hunting ammunition. Since Kennedy wrote the amendment, and since he specifically named the .30-30, then we must assume that he did intend to ban the .30-30, and ALL hunting ammo.

Obama voted FOR the amendment.


FACT: Obama voted AGAINST the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005

FACT Obama supported a ban in Illinois on semi-auto guns

FACT: As a state senator he voted against a bill that would have given amnesty for a person who used a gun in self-defense, even if it was illegal for them to have the gun. In New York, Goetz was about to be mugged by four young men. He shot them all, none fatally. The jury accepted his claim of self-defense (The evidence was overwhelming.) but he was also charged with having a concealed weapon illegally and was convicted of that. The Illinois bill would have granted amnesty for gun possession if the gun was used in genuine self-defense. Obama said, “NO”.

FACT: On his website he supported permanent reinstatement of the so-called Assault Weapons Ban.

FACT: Obama said that he believed the DC gun ban was a good example of constitutional local control of guns before the Heller decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. OK, you claim you tell the truth and Obama is untruthful. Glad you cleared that up. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Obama's votes as a legislator are public record.
I gave a link to Obama's statement on concealed carry.

His campaign website is probably archived somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Below is the link to Obama's statement I quoted above. Either you or Obama is not telling the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. Simple explanation.
Obama believes in the collectivist-militia interpretation of the second. He said he supported DC's gun ban prior to the Heller decision.

I won't try to find the video, but he said that he won't take away any guns because he would not have the political strength to do it. So he is smart enough not to try such a losing effort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Are you saying Obama did not tell the truth in his statement I quoted? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. He chose his words very carefully.
His understanding of the second is not the same as ours.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wu9jE1MnAE Notice that he nods and says, "Right" when the interviewer says that he supports the D.C. gun ban.

His votes and comments are public record.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Why do you evade answering a "yes" or "no" question? Did Obama tell the truth? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. That depends upon what the maning of "Is" is. Remember that statement?
Truth depends first upon the definitions of the words we use. So he chose words carefully nuanced that could be understood as supporting positions that he personally did not take, yet could be defended as being "truthful". Listen carefully to his response to the DC gun ban question. Instead of talking about the DC gun ban which was a TOTAL ban on handguns, he shifts to talking about illegal guns, sliding by the fact that the gun ban made any handgun illegal for anybody. Most people listening to his phrase "illegal guns" would think of criminals guns, but in the context of the DC ban it meant ALL handguns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. What frightens you, are you afraid to say Obama did not tell the truth? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Because I understand the use of rhetoric.
He used words that using his definitions were truthful but still conveyed a different impression to those who don't take the time to pharse what he is saying. He is a lawyer. It is what lawyers do.

What about Obama's votes. Those did come down to Yes or No. He voted anti-gun, except on the disaster bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. You are afraid, really afraid! Do you believe the SS aka Secret Service will track you down and
extraordinary rendition will be your fate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Glassunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Yes! Uncle... I can't take it any more. Yes! Yes he did... Uncle... UNCLE!!!
:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. ROFL did GreenStormCloud send you in as the designated poster? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
22. Self-delete. Posted in wrong spot. N/T
Edited on Mon Jan-10-11 01:34 PM by GreenStormCloud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Are you saying Obama did not tell the truth in his statement I quoted? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flyboy_451 Donating Member (116 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #24
38. I will answer...
While others may not want to display an opinion that disparages our president, I have no qualms about saying that I believe that Obama was conscientiously and blatantly lying in that particular statement. His voting record has clearly shown that he is not of o the opinion that the second amendment protects an individual right. Taking his political voting and support history into account, there are only two possibilities. He is either lying or he has reversed his opinion. I find it exceedingly difficult to by into the idea that he has changed his views. I think it is far more likely that, like any other politician, he is willing to engage in lies when it forwards his agenda or has the possibility of bolstering his popularity.

His record on firearms is, in my pinion, more reliable than a single statement made in the course of an interview or speech. just my two cents...

JW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
9. Since I am pro-RKBA ...
I'm glad that so many elected officials are also pro-RKBA. The fact that many of these politicians are Democrats is even better.

One thing we do not need is another assault weapons ban. All that accomplished was to take a class of firearms that was relatively uncommon and turn it into the best selling firearms in the country.



Gun dealers say assault rifles popular
By Walt Frank, wfrank@altoonamirror.com
March 18, 2009


The AK-47 and AR-15 models are quite popular locally, gun dealers said.

''We sell more of them than hunting rifles. We can't keep them in stock because they sell so fast,'' said John Patton, manager at East Coast Gun Sales, Duncansville. ''We order them by the dozen from manufacturers or distributors. Most people just buy one.''

''They are the hottest-selling guns in the U.S. right now,'' said Chuck Ahearn, co-owner of Allegheny Trade Co., Duncansville.
http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/517137.html?nav=742
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
john donathon Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. why
Is it when one nut job goes crazy and pulls out a gun, everyone wants congress to take all the guns or pass more strict gun control. Last i checked this is america, and owning a gun is one of the rights i possess by living here. Why is it everyone is so quick to turn to banning guns when an incident happens. Should nobody be aloud to own a dog since micheal vick did what he did to the dogs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. People often use guns to defend themselves against criminals. N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #16
30. How's the moral panic going? Getting any traction yet?
Substitute "gays" for "gun culture", and you would be indistinguishable from Fred Phelps:

"Our nation is dying and you gun pushers will be blamed by history"

That was you, was it not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #16
35. Thousands of incidents like the Arizona massacre have been caused by crazy gun owners ...
I think you will have a hard time coming up with that list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #16
42. Ah, but you are wrong again...
You referenced "gun nut" without defining such. Is the "gun nut" someone who is bent on assassination and/or mass murder? If so, then there are not "thousands," even if you take history back several decades. Are you referencing the common thug/home-invader? If so, how does being a "gun nut" relevant to someone who likes mayhem, be it knife or baseball bat? Here, you will come up with thousands of thugs and crims.

Now, pay attention to this, dear: Do you have the wherewithal to define "gun nut," differentiating such from violent thugs, assassins, and mass-murders? Please note: "gun nut" is not smiled upon by the moderators because it is a hateful, bigoted smear, esp. when used by gun-controllers/prohibitionists to condemn others in a culture war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. Your interlocutor has left the building.. *sniff*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowrider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #16
46. Sure. I want a list that'll document thousands of incidents of gun owners going crazy
So I think that'll take you a while.

Remember, it's thousands, not 5 or 6 with a note of "now are you satisfied"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
40. Same reason why crack cocaine laws came about....
a few people died from the drug, some others shot people over the drug. Prohibition is like that: it grabs hold of a few incidents, then demands laws which will stop those incidents. The result is billions wasted, people in jail learning to be REAL criminals, and the election of a lotta loud-mouthed reactionaries. And I guess a lot of people "feel good" over all that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
20. I'm pro-2nd Amendment
It would be sad to see people so willingly to give up their Constitutional rights due to one incident. I'm glad to see the majority of member of Congress are pro-Constitutional rights.

FYI: I'm not a member of the NRA, nor do I own a gun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
john donathon Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
21. no
I do not need a list of gun violence i do realize that there is violence in america, but that doesn't mean that we should disarm the entire country. But every time something bad happens and you want to eliminate the problem, one day you will wake up in George Orwell's 1984. We will all have to be watched at all moments to ensure that nobody is planning anything violent? Is this what you want to see in the USA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #21
43. ...and Orwell was a strong advocate of arming British civilians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC