Skip to main content

View Diary: Dear tea party, we are not your enemy (272 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Fair enough, let's get specific... (0+ / 0-)

    I want an ironclad guarantee that:

    1. There will be no restriction firearms and devices not covered by NFA.
    2. There will be no restriction on the purchasing of ammunition.
    3. There will be no restriction on the capacity of magazines.
    4. There will be no restriction on how I keep firearms in my own home, transport them in my vehicle, or carry them on my person.

    Gunowners already enjoy these freedoms in the vast majority of American jurisdictions.  They wish for things to stay that way, with the proviso their rights not be limited by such trivial things as relocating to another state or municipality.  Will the movement agree to these terms?  If so, you'll find a huge constituency willing to defer other disagreements until later.  If not...well, there you have it.

    •  Sorry, I'm your opposition (0+ / 0-)

      If that causes you to drop out of the progressive movement, I can live with having to recruit someone else... but for the record, we are not on the same side when it comes to your 4 "demands".

      Will we both vote for progressive candidates? I will be.

      •  I will vote for the progressive candidate... (0+ / 0-)

        ...who will protect my freedoms, or I will not vote at all.  And if you want to try and DeMint your way to success at the ballot, feel free.

        •  I will be voting for the progressive candidate (0+ / 0-)

          How you characterize that is not my concern.

          But if there was a candidate whose position on guns was yours, they would probably not get my vote.

          But I will also defend your right to stay at home and sit on your hands too.

          My point is that we do not agree on this issue... that much is obvious. So when I run for office, you are free to vote for my opponent. Until then, we can agree to disagree about candidate gets our vote and why.

          We don't want or need Wayne LaPierre's coalition to win elections, we have already demonstrated that. I have no personal or political interest in courting it either.

          In short, I personally reject your demands. But I am just one vote... there are LOTS AND LOTS of people here on DailyKos that disagree with me too. So maybe you are in the right place, maybe not.

          •  Couple of points... (0+ / 0-)

            1. Considering Way LaPierre's coalition has majorities in both Houses, I'd beg to differ.

            2. I think it's short sighted to throw away the gunowner vote, but at least we can agree that you shouldn't ask of me what you won't ask of yourself.  

            •  Back atcha. (0+ / 0-)

              1. I'm not a progressive because it is the majority position in any party, so um, yawn. Barack Obama (and my senators too) were elected without kissing his ass, so I am sure others can be too.

              2. If gun owners want to throw away their vote on Tea Party dominionists, because of some fetishistic fear of their guns being taken away, I'm ok with that, really. 'Twas ever thus. You don't have concessions from ME on this issue. But as I said, I'm not the candidate, I'm the constituent right now... so we don't have to support the same position to support the same candidate.

              I'm not sure what your other point is, other than some tangential condescension.

              •  Couple more points... (0+ / 0-)

                1. Helps when you have a financial crisis and a thoroughly discredit previous Administration.  None of which changes the fact that a bipartisan majority against further infringements on the rights of gunowners has elected to Congress every time since 1994.

                2. A good number of gunowners don't have to make that choice, and others can simply choose not to vote.  You yourself have threatened to withhold your vote for a gun rights champion.  Once again, don't ask of me what you won't ask of yourself.

                3. As for my point: this entire diary concerns reaching out to the Tea Party.  I suspect if progressives can't reach out to their own first, then Sumner's piece is nothing more than an exercise in wishful thinking.

                •  Perhaps (0+ / 0-)

                  But the nature of democracy means we all have to compromise on occasion.

                  From each of our perspectives, the other is an extremist position. I'm okay with that.

                  I am fairly certain that my choices will never come down to having to choose between two pro-gun extremists. At least to date, I have always had reasonable alternatives (I call them Democrats)... and I've never had to withhold my vote.

                  There are plenty of OTHER issues (abortion, economics, environment) that I can "reach out" to "my own" and get support for progressive candidates. If your only issue is an extremist gun rights position, we'll just have to let democracy decide if that is going to happen in the United States.

                  •  And you will learn to compromise... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...just as the national Democratic party has.

                    I have had the problem of choosing between an anti-gun extremist and a Republican, and when that situation arises I choose not to pull the lever.  The same goes for plenty of Democrats in my district and state who have reliably turned out to back progressives provided they protect their rights to keep and bear firearms.

                    Our track record for supporting democracy is unparalleled as evidenced by the solid majority securing our rights in Congress.  The question is will progressives leave money on the table due to some foolish squeamishness more appropriate for the 1 percent or will they embrace us as well?  Because if you can't stomach our demands, don't even waste your time with the Tea Party.

                    •  The answer is (0+ / 0-)

                      Some democrats will, and some won't.

                      Those of us in the pro gun-control camp don't waste our time on ultimatums from uncompromising extremists.

                      My state (Washington) is represented by 2 fabulous Democrats in the Senate that have gun positions that would probably  cause you to choose to stay home. Not me.

                      Your choice not to pull the lever? I can live with one less voting extremist.

                      If that means leaving money on the table in YOUR state, so  be it. Democrats have already proven to me that they can win in MY state (and nationally) without embracing your 4 rules.

                      •  Those of you in the anti-gun camp... (0+ / 0-)

                        ...tend to be the extremists, given the present political climate.

                        Democrats triumphed in 2008 largely because gun control was off the table.  There is little to no evidence the party will succeed in 2012 without the truce in place.  It's time to forge a permanent peace treaty and be done with this issue once and for all.

    •  See, but now... (0+ / 0-)

      you're asking for an absolutist position "no restrictions."

      I don't know if I can give you such a promise. I don't know what such a promise would be worth coming from anyone.

      And hey, I'm a gun owner. I'm already part of this constituency. Gun owners are not a monolithic group, nor do all of us think that all the things you stated above are absolute requirements.

      •  All I'm asking for is the status quo... (0+ / 0-)

        ...presently enjoyed by the vast majority of gunowners, with the additional request that the freedom extend to all states and municipalities. Is that so hard?

        You may be more flexible on the right to keep and bear arms, but the bipartisan majority that exists in Congress today is not.  It would be to the advantage of progressives if that bipartisan majority became an absolute consensus.  It presently isn't.  When it is, you'll have deprived the opposition of a significant pillar of support.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site