Years ago I read that Barbara Fienstein had a carry permit… Wonder how many other Dems just signed up for self protection…? Perhaps all new gun owners should be required by stores to join the NRA or Uscca when they buy a gun.
100% NO! We do not want to make it any harder for anyone to exercise their Second Amendment rights. This is the time to welcome them and help them train so that they will be safe.
Remember, just because someone votes Democratic does not mean that they do not support the Second Amendment rights. People vote on different topics and I know a lot of people who tend to vote Democratic and are pro-2A.
So once the Democratic candidate they vote for gets elected, do they celebrate (potential) loss of their 2A rights, or do they go “oops, we didn’t expect this to happen!”
I am sorry @Dawn, but I don’t understand being pro-2A but voting anti-2A.
But it would be more than fair to say a plurality of Dems do not support the Second Amendment in the way it was drawn up in the Constitution and as it is supported by many here (no not 100% but a plurality).
A majority of them have fallen into wanting “common sense” gun control and have supported either actively or passively, those efforts.
To that end however, I hope that group does go out and makes gun purchases. I hope they get an education on the background check system of their particular States, I hope they get an education on the cost barriers to entry.
I hope their angst in feeling they need to purchase the gun gives them insight into the need to being able to protect one’s self vs the common cry of “you don’t need a gun, call the police.”
But I hope they go through the process and exercise their right (without requirement to join the NRA or to attend some kind of mandatory training).
Maybe going through it will help them see some of the fallacies that left typically spouts about gun purchases along with the challenges that those on the right have complained about during this time.
I hope they keep the weapon and practice vs in a year when their local municipality is offering a “gun by back” sell it to the Government or perhaps worse in an opportunity to virtue signal destroy it on video and post it to social media.
Let’s remember politicians don’t always do what they say or say what they’re going to do.
And people vote on other topics that are the most important to them. You can vote for someone who supports 60% of what you support instead of 25% of what you support and still be pro-Second Amendment.
I don’t know about you, but I never 100% agree with a politician. So I vote with the one who best fits my views - even though I don’t agree with their whole platform.
They’re not voting anti-2A they’re voting pro-something else.
I know a lot of Republicans and Independents who want “common sense” gun control.
IMO, we need to stop seeing this as a party line - that is what the politicians and media want. They want gun owners to be divided and pointing fingers. We need to welcome all who are interested in self-defense and firearms - no matter what their political party, economic situation, race or any other demographic. Until we do that, we’re playing into the politician’s and media’s agenda.
It is not a Democrat vs Republican thing. It is not a liberal vs conservative thing.
I dunno about Democrats, I think “Leftist” or “Liberal” would be a better term for the crazies. I too know Dem’s that are pro 2A at least for hunting and target shooting. They are also the “No need for an Assault Rifle” crowd because their over and under bird gun is not dangerous. “Heeeyyyy Joooe” That being said the political lines are so deeply divided that you can’t vote your conscious or constituents you have to vote the party way or face retribution. That played out in the VA legislature recently.
Of course we should, and I would not hope or dare to suggest they change their political affiliations, but facts are facts and we should not avoid speaking the truth to appear more welcoming, or else we will all lose our rights, not limited to 2A.
You are 100% right, we should not avoid speaking the truth. The truth is that not all liberals/democrats are anti-2A. The generalization is not the truth.
We should call the anti-2A people who they are - the anti-2A people.
But it is.
The Democratic Party…puts out a platform…the Republican Party…puts out a platform. Democratic Party platforms contain gun control Republican Party platforms do not. Just like the pro-Life and pro-Choice positions each party puts out.
I agree that every PERSON should be assessed on what they believe/support and do and that someone that is a Democrat can be pro-2A, just as someone who is a Republican can be anti-2A.
However I don’t think it’s unfair or inaccurate to say “in general” Dems support x, y and z…and Reps support a, b and c as long as one does not attempt to make it an “absolute.”
I didn’t say we didn’t in fact I said (or at least implied) the opposite.
Again, I disagree based on how our system is set up currently. They’ve set it up so that is very much divided along party lines. When was the last time a Democrat in the House voted against a gun control measure…or any number of other party platform items (abortion, impeachment etc).
If our elected representatives were to act differently and more independent from Party Platform dogma, then perhaps I’d have a different opinion. But it’s rare that they stray.
100% agree, that’s why one should not be an “absolutist.”
IMO, it is a political party thing that is used to divide people by party instead of uniting people by common ground.
Who has set it up? The politicians and media. Division is a tool to keep people from looking at the real situation or considering we are much more alike than we are different.
And we need to use the correct term for the people who are anti-2A… “anti-2A people”.
It is my job to make sure all who are here to learn feel welcome here. I know what you’re saying about Democratic politicians and party lines. I also know that those who vote Democratic are usually voting on a different topic than 2A. We all have issues we are passionate about - and for some, those issues are more important than 2A. And we cannot judge them for voting on other issues. It’s their right and we are for all rights, not just those we’re passionate for… right?
Correct, a political party thing…with the two major political parties being Reps/Dems…so it’s fair to generalize about each party’s platforms and past positions. Uniting people is not in the best interest of the Government.
I don’t know about the media in this case, but the politicians have definitely set it up (the media is probably more of an accomplice). but again…you have two Parties…they have general things they back, it’s fair to label them accordingly (again Parties, not people).
I may disagree with you on this. It is absolutely the right of people to believe and vote however they want to. But I have the right to “judge” them on things they are voting for (on 2A issue or any other issue), just as they have the right to “judge” me.
I have the right to “judge” that person who voted Democrat because they are very pro-Union (as was their candidate) and lead to a Democrat in that political seat that is now doing all kinds of damage to the 2nd amendment, because that voter helped put that person in place.
Just like it would be fair for someone to judge me for voting for a Republican because they were a pro 2A candidate and that lead to a Republican in that political seat who then started defunding a bunch of programs that supported the poor.
Side note - I used “judge” because you used it in your response, but I’m not a fan of anyone judging anyone and I try not to. I do evaluate however and encourage others to do likewise. Semantics perhaps.
You’re right, “judge” was a bad word choice… We must respect their right to vote for who they are more aligned with if we want them to respect our rights.
Ya’ll don’t want to know how I feel about this topic!
BTW, I plan on voting R come November. In the light of the news of two R senators (Burr and Loeffler) allegedly profiteering from insider trading on Coronavirus news, I am not sure I am not guilty of hypocrisy here
No hypocrisy - I don’t know anyone who 100% agrees with any political party or politician.
Yes, I agree that not all R issues are my preference, even though I tend to vote R. Same is true I’m sure for D’s. So your point about D’s being ok with 2a is reasonable.
@Alexander8 I dunno if they had better info than I did. I saw things going wonky in China (and looked at what was built there) then I saw it start to show up other places and I dumped all my stocks when the DOW was bumping up against $30K and poured it into metals. Thinking about jumping back in on Monday or not. I didn’t have intel other than the news and my spidey senses.
@Craig6, do you sit on the intelligence committee? From working in banking industry I can tell you that normally SEC will pounce on you like a tiger and with access to privileged info – good luck proving your innocence. Hindsight 20/20 rule applies!
I am sure the senators will find a reasonable explanation though.
@Alexander8 if the SEC wants to come looking at my paltry stock moves they can come right ahead. I can show them page and verse from published stories where I garnered my info from. I was talking with a couple stock guys about the time I pulled the trigger and 3 of the 4 have very happy clients right now. The last guy, not so much.
I didn’t mean you personally as a target for SEC, but the two senators are in trouble (provided they are subject to laws and regulations )