Skip to main content

View Diary: If government is full of tyranny, why arm it to the teeth? (239 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  OK, well, I get the 37% number from the (0+ / 0-)

    DKos gun club's DKos page.

    So if only 37% of voters are gun owners and only 40% of Dems are gun owners, then you've got about 17% or so Dem voters who own guns. About 99% of those support UBC and about 80% support AWB. That leaves you and the DKos gun club, about 1% of all Dem gun owners or about .1% of the Dem electorate.

    •  ok, what? If you have that many gun owners in (0+ / 0-)

      any have gun owners who are also voters.  Hence the point I was making.  I assure you that is is way beyond 1%.

      Where do you get that only 37% of voters are gun owners?  What poll shows that?

      Exit polls from 2012 showed 42 to 47% depending on the poll for a national average and it can be as high as 60% and  in some states.  Again, these numbers are those who did in fact answer "yes" when asked.

      •  Jeez, Bailey, your RKVB, or whatever the acronym, (0+ / 0-)

        is for the DKos gun club, would be disappointed to know that you don't even read your club's very own propaganda docs.

        The Mark Penn video that RKVB posts on its DKos group page is where I got the 37% number - your people.

        •  Ok, well it's wrong. I have never seen the video. (0+ / 0-)

          I look at actual polls.

          •  So you join the RKBA DKos group without knowing (0+ / 0-)

            what it believes/stands for? That video is the intellectual basis for the group. Why'd you join if you haven't seen the video? And that video is based on polls, by the way.

            •  I know what it stands for, still have never seen (0+ / 0-)

              the video.

               That number is wrong...don't care what it says.  Please cite the polls.

              That video is the intellectual basis for the group.
              Really now?  You think that our wishing to protect part of the Bill of Rights is not a valid intellectual basis....but a video would be?
              •  Go to the RKBA group site and read it for yourself (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                the stated common core belief of the group is that supporting gun safety leads to Dems losing elections. So, regardless of whether you think supporting gun safety is the right thing to do or not - it does not matter.

                The RKBA page does not say the common core belief of the group is to safeguard the Bill of Rights.

                The group page says it was formed to save Dems from electoral defeat.

                Fairly cynical group if you ask me.

                •  That is true as well. It has been proven numerous (0+ / 0-)

                  times.  However, a video is not the intellectual basis behind the group.

                  •  Really? That video was presented at (0+ / 0-)

                    Net Roots Nation - was that just for kicks? The group was formed in 2011 and to introduce themselves to DKos they chose to use that video at Net Roots Nation in 2011.

                    About losing elections - so, then, you agree that Dems who don't agree with you, should just ditch their convictions for political expediency (for the moment, let's say RKBA is right about that)?

                    •  ummm no. I think that I support the entire Bill (0+ / 0-)

                      of Rights and will fight to preserve all of them.  I am not alone. That is my view and why I feel the 2A is just as valid as all of the other ones and why I fight to make certain it is not infringed upon.  I do the same with each of my eyes, they are equal.  There are a lot of Democrats and Progressives who feel exactly as I do.

                      You should do as you consensus tells you to do, and I would presume to tell you how to fight or how to campaign for your that is what being a progressive is all it not?

                      •  OK, so dodge the question about the reason for (0+ / 0-)

                        RKBA's existence. Seems to be it's mostly a major concern troll group.

                        But yes, you should not compromise on your convictions, you have to take a risk to get a reward.

                        Of course, supporting something that 90% of Americans support is really no risk at all.

                        •  I support UBC, as long as there is no registry. (0+ / 0-)
                          •  Of course you do. You support a meaningless (0+ / 0-)

                            "safe" bill so that you can say that you support gun safety legislation and that you're being reasonable, just like the GOP does. So they can go in front of the cameras and claim they "doing something" - it feels good, doesn't it?

                            I prefer the Connecticut Effect, a tough, sensible, comprehensive bi-partisan bill that takes a lot of risks in order to get a lot of rewards. And a bill that includes a real compromise on the part of many Sandy Hook families:

                            "There were some who said the 'Connecticut effect' would wear off — that it would wear off in Connecticut and it would wear off across the country," Senate President Pro Tempore Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, said at an evening press conference in the Capitol flanked by five other legislative leaders.

                            "What they didn't know was that Democrats and Republicans would come together and work to put together the strongest and most comprehensive bill in the United States to fight gun violence, to strengthen the security at our schools, and to provide the mental health services that are necessary," he said.

                            The bipartisan deal would strengthen the state's existing ban on semiautomatic assault rifles to include weapons such as the Bushmaster AR-15 used by Adam Lanza to kill 20 first-graders and six women at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. Current law defines an assault rifle as having two military-style characteristics on a list of several, such as a pistol grip and a flash suppressor. The new bill would require only one such characteristic. It also lists more than 160 firearms by name as assault weapons.

                            People could keep the banned rifles that they already own if they submit to new registration procedures. But future sales of the rifles would be prohibited. An existing owner could bequeath an assault rifle to a family member, but could sell it only to a licensed firearms dealer who would have to sell it outside Connecticut.

                            Magazines Disputed

                            The bill stepped back from an outright ban on large-capacity magazines containing more than 10 cartridges, such as the 30-round magazines that Lanza used. Instead, it would allow owners of large-capacity magazines to keep them if they make an official declaration by Jan. 1 of how many they own and submit to restrictions on their use. The magazines could only be loaded with 10 or fewer rounds, except in their owners' homes or at a shooting range, where they can be fully loaded.

                            Buying, selling, importing or transferring high-capacity magazines would be a Class D felony, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

                            Parents of Sandy Hook victims said Monday that they wanted those high-capacity magazines taken away from owners, not "grandfathered in" under the new bill. They called for an up or down vote on that issue.

                          •  I do not support the Connecticut bill. This is (0+ / 0-)

                            the type of legislation in which you will find that 90% fall dramatically.

                            UBC are the thing we are deabting and you said that 90% are backing you up on that and so then I say, okay I'll stand behind you and support it....but now that's not good enough. Hmmm....

                          •  Did you know the firearms industry is huge in (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            Connecticut? So, the Dem and GOP elected representatives are voting to impact a major industry in the state.

                            They are bucking the gun lobby, just like New York and Colorado.

                            Do you think you know the electorates of those states better than the politicians do?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site