assult automatic weapons....

[Corso]

The Dems in Congress mostly match their base's desires. The Republicans in Congress all match the demands of the NRA leadership, which is in lock-step with the gun manufacturers. So when it comes to weapons, there is a huge divide between what the bulk of Republican voters want and what the people they vote for give them.

I disagree: The Dems have millions of voters who support owning guns, but paint themselves anti gun, but that appears to be a big “wink wink” to their own left leaning gun folks.

Why didn’t Obama do something extreme to gun ownership when he had the house and senate? They did it to health care, but chose not to go after gun control.

It’s all propaganda. Let’s not kid ourselves, both parties suck up to the lobby. They just both choose to identify with what they think their base wan’t to hear.

[vertical_doug]

The former has been discussed since the beginning of this thread. The continued reduction in the barriers and hurdles to ownership is one of the NRA's prime missions. Their goal is legal, non-licensed carry in all states in essentially all places. Schools, churches, synagogues, banks, concerts, college campuses, bars, restaurants, etc. They want this to be as normal as wearing a shirt into these places.

Sorry Saab,

The 'We' I was collective American Government not Vsalon. The 'we' at the Vsalon will not solve this problem.

I think Corko has a point. The lobby is powerful because many Americans are a one issue pro-gun rights voter . Nothing else registers for them.

[Vancouverdave]

I have an old Rockwell lathe and do a little machining in the course of my work. I occasionally go to machinists' websites and chat rooms online--there is a ton of gunsmithing shit on machinists boards including silencer fabrication and full auto conversion. Scary.

[72gmc]

I disagree: The Dems have millions of voters who support owning guns, but paint themselves anti gun, but that appears to be a big “wink wink” to their own left leaning gun folks.

I last voted Democrat (presidential election), support owning guns, and own guns. I agree with your point. There must also be a lot like me who aren't anti-gun but anti-militant-pro-gun-argument. That position is not easy to explain or repeat at slogan level, so it doesn't work.

[ides1056]

I am a single issue voter: I am for the least bellicose candidate, because I am against the perpetual war that began when I was a kid during the Kennedy administration.

[ericpmoss]

This discussion is driving me nuts. Just one sub-topic...

1. The overwhelming majority of the public wants background checks expanded to include all gun sales. Do 9% of Americans support background checks for all gun sales? | PolitiFact Wisconsin

2. The NRA opposes all expansions of background checks. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checks-nics/

3. The NRA gets 98% of its funding from PACs (not sure how much is dark money), and puts 99% of its money into Republican candidates. National Rifle Assn: Total Contributions | OpenSecrets

4. Republican legislators run on "gun rights" platforms, and every vote on expanding background checks is nearly a party-line vote. You *know* which side the majority of Republican legislators are on, but here's one link to give a flavor: Checking on Background Checks - FactCheck.org

When one party gets 99% of the anti-background-check donations, and with few exceptions toes the anti-background-check line, in opposition to some 90% of the American public that's registered to vote, how can anyone think that it's anything other than legalized bribery?

[jacked]

Would be interesting to contrast these viewpoints with the Assault on the Unborn thread. Rights, and the responsibilities they demand, can be quite uncomfortable.

[ides1056]

This discussion is driving me nuts. Just one sub-topic...

1. The overwhelming majority of the public wants background checks expanded to include all gun sales. Do 9% of Americans support background checks for all gun sales? | PolitiFact Wisconsin

2. The NRA opposes all expansions of background checks. https://www.nraila.org/issues/background-checks-nics/

3. The NRA gets 98% of its funding from PACs (not sure how much is dark money), and puts 99% of its money into Republican candidates. National Rifle Assn: Total Contributions | OpenSecrets

4. Republican legislators run on "gun rights" platforms, and every vote on expanding background checks is nearly a party-line vote. You *know* which side the majority of Republican legislators are on, but here's one link to give a flavor: Checking on Background Checks - FactCheck.org

When one party gets 99% of the anti-background-check donations, and with few exceptions toes the anti-background-check line, in opposition to some 90% of the American public that's registered to vote, how can anyone think that it's anything other than legalized bribery?

spot on

[fiveller]

Would be interesting to contrast these viewpoints with the Assault on the Unborn thread. Rights, and the responsibilities they demand, can be quite uncomfortable.

When people going around making decisions for other pregnancies than their own, let me know. You know, like when someone's guns affect (masses of) other people.

Oh wait, some states are trying to do that already.

Make sure you as concerned with the living as the zygotes: Nearly 1,300 Kids Killed by Guns Each Year, Study Finds - NBC News

[Doug Fattic]

Canadian chiming in here, excuse my ignorance of the US constitution. It boggles my mind that owning a weapon is considered a right and not a privelage. I can't think of any other examples of possessions where irresponsible ownership that can lead to serious injury/death that are not a privelage that you can (should) lose in such cases.

The NRA (National Rifle Association) would certainly want everyone to believe that the US Constitution’s 2nd amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” is an ironclad declaration that insures every individual American citizen the right to own as many modern guns as they want. Of course when I read that statement, (written in the late 1700’s) I don’t believe that is what the founding fathers had in mind at all. The NRA has successfully shaped the narrative to make people believe that anybody can legally buy and own almost any kind of hand gun including those designed to kill as fast and easy and as long as possible. And they are working on removing any remaining restrictions (silencers, armer piercing bullets) so gun manufacturers can sell even more stuff. What the definition of “to keep and bear arms” and “a well regulated Militia” should still be open for debate to create sensible regulation and not a wording tool to make profit for gun manufacturers.

This latest shooting tragedy in Las Vegas sheds light again on the weaknesses of a democratic government. The well organized and funded NRA (National Rifle Association) can impose its extreme goals on the rest of us because it knows how to manipulate the democratic system legally. I was listening to Terry Gross on NPR (National Public Radio) interview a guy that had studied the NRA. Their members are very passionate (which is part of their strength) about pursuing their goals – which include having people be able to carry guns openly everywhere (schools, churches, bars, theaters) seem normal. This is to be consistent with their motto that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. So in other words my interpretation of their belief is that we are safest with as many guns as possible everywhere in circulation. That logic doesn’t work with me at all.

The NRA is ruthless to work against any politician in any government capacity if they don’t help them carry out the promotion of their agenda. The guest on Fresh Air gave an example of a representative in Tennessee that had an A+ NRA rating. However one time she voted against something the NRA wanted because of a local situation. The NRA wanted to make an example of her infidelity. For the primary election (for non Americans this is when the Republican and Democratic parties choose their candidates to run in the general election) they found and funded someone else (another Republican) even more to the right to run against her. They ran attack ads linking her to Obama even though there was no connection. As a result she lost. This is why Republicans try to maintain a high NRA grade so they don’t lose in the primaries. The guest on the show gave examples of how the lobbyists for the NRA were the ones that wrote the wording for the new laws expanding gun use in Florida.

It really bothers me is that the NRA is successful with their “slippery slope” philosophy that any tiny concession to gun control will eventually lead to gun confiscation. This was an especially powerful argument when an african american was president. Now that Trump is president they have to invent a new boogymen to inflame passions. Read what the CEO of the NRA Wayne LaPierre has recently said: “Right now we face a gathering of forces that are willing to use violence against us … some of the most radical political elements there are. Anarchists, Marxists, communists, and the whole rest of the left-wing socialist brigade. Make no mistake, if the violent left brings their terror … into our homes, they will be met with … full force of American freedom in the hands of the American people, and we will win.” Well in my opinion, that is the ravings of a madman (who is the head of the group that controls the Republican party that have a majority in all federal and most state branches of government). “Violent left brings their terror”?!. Maybe LaPierre is talking about non-hunting vegetarians wanting to make alternative healthy diet recommendations instead of eating meat.

[ides1056]

LaPierre sounds like a rabble rouser inciting a riot. I've witnessed several riots, and they are as controllable as the fires currently burning in California.

What motivated the guy in Las Vegas, I wonder?