Any of you gun people open carry?

[xbuzzerx]

Wait -- how does your position prove anything about Feinstein, Schumer, or any other loudmouth proponents? That's what I addressed.

Except that's exactly what the leading "gun control" proponents in the country say they mean to do -- step by step, take away all guns.

I'm a gun control proponent.

So basically you're responding to 100% of people who feel gun regulation needs to be reexamined because of these shootings and basing the entire response around 3 people you feel "lead" the movement, when they don't represent any plurality of the viewpoint.

Hence "irrational slippery slope."

 

[Benvolio]

The slippery slope argument is not irrational because it is based on experience. Compromising with Dems is like paying a blackmailer. It does not settle anything. He just comes back for more. It is irrational to keep paying. It is also why the tax issue is so hard. Any tax raise today is just a step for the Dems. Two years fron now they will be right back demanding more. That is exactly what Clinton did. And every environmental compromise is just a step to be followed by, another, then another.

 

[xbuzzerx]

The slippery slope argument is not irrational because it is based on experience. Compromising with Dems is like paying a blackmailer. It does not settle anything. He just comes back for more. It is irrational to keep paying. It is also why the tax issue is so hard. Any tax raise today is just a step for the Dems. Two years fron now they will be right back demanding more. That is exactly what Clinton did. And every environmental compromise is just a step to be followed by, another, then another.

I do not and will continue to not take this idea remotely seriously given the actions of the GOP since Obama took office. Nor should anyone paying the least bit of attention.

 

[Benvolio]

I did however, have a constructive suggestion. Agree upon a compromise to be embodied in a Constitutional amendment, so it willl be binding and meaningful..

 

[JayHawk]

In East Bum Fuck, yes, but this display happened in our largest city. He was making a statement, not blending in.

Oh I agree it was making a statement and quite ill advised. However if the argument was going to float around rural or gi-normous city for open carry then that really doesn't apply to even the largest city in Maine. He got the public notice he desired.

 

[andysayshi]

I did however, have a constructive suggestion. Agree upon a compromise to be embodied in a Constitutional amendment, so it willl be binding and meaningful..

Despite the fact that the majority of Americans favour tighter gun restrictions, better gun law enforcement, better screening processes and restriction of ammunition clip sizes, the NRA and the politicians the NRA own will fight any amendment of law or the constitution tooth and nail. It will not happen.

 

[JayHawk]

Yeah there is no gut on the right or the left for an amendment and then even if it had a chance in hell passing out of our congress currently a majority of states are ENTIRELY controlled by republicans so it would never be ratified.

 

[maxpowr9]

MA has a concealed weapon which I plan on obtaining as a little birthday gift to myself in April.

 

[Kulindahr]

The slippery slope argument is not irrational because it is based on experience. Compromising with Dems is like paying a blackmailer. It does not settle anything. He just comes back for more. It is irrational to keep paying. It is also why the tax issue is so hard. Any tax raise today is just a step for the Dems. Two years fron now they will be right back demanding more. That is exactly what Clinton did. And every environmental compromise is just a step to be followed by, another, then another.

Now you've changed your tune -- and you're wrong. Ever hear of a group called the "Blue Steel Democrats"? Their position on this is pretty darned close to mine. So far they've been applauding the Supreme Court for getting it right with Heller, etc.

 

[Kulindahr]

Despite the fact that the majority of Americans favour tighter gun restrictions, better gun law enforcement, better screening processes and restriction of ammunition clip sizes, the NRA and the politicians the NRA own will fight any amendment of law or the constitution tooth and nail. It will not happen.

At the moment the NRA has a higher approval rating than Obama.

Not sure what that signifies -- maybe people approve of actually taking a stand?

 

[JayHawk]

The slippery slope argument is not irrational because it is based on experience. Compromising with Dems is like paying a blackmailer. It does not settle anything. He just comes back for more. It is irrational to keep paying. It is also why the tax issue is so hard. Any tax raise today is just a step for the Dems. Two years fron now they will be right back demanding more. That is exactly what Clinton did. And every environmental compromise is just a step to be followed by, another, then another.

Holy Shit really? So like democrats and republicans will continue to pursue their agendas? Republicans to destroy the environment and the middle class to protect the rich and democrats to level the tax policy and protect the environment.... fucking weird. I cannot believe each party would stick to their core ideas....

 

[andysayshi]

At the moment the NRA has a higher approval rating than Obama.

Not sure what that signifies -- maybe people approve of actually taking a stand?

I'm not so sure about that. Obama's approval rating is currently hovering around the 50% mark or above, depending on the poll. (53.4% average)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

The Pew poll in my link above says that 36% of Americans think the NRA have too much power, while only 28% believe they have the right amount, and 19% think they have too little. Even if you combine the latter two they come to under 50%.

Addressing "approval" more directly, Gallup have found the NRA currently has a 54% approval rating - pretty much the same as the President. But note that the same poll found 58% support tougher gun restrictions in the US.

 

[Kulindahr]

I'm not so sure about that. Obama's approval rating is currently hovering around the 50% mark or above, depending on the poll. (53.4% average)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

The Pew poll in my link above says that 36% of Americans think the NRA have too much power, while only 28% believe they have the right amount, and 19% think they have too little. Even if you combine the latter two they come to under 50%.

Addressing "approval" more directly, Gallup have found the NRA currently has a 54% approval rating - pretty much the same as the President. But note that the same poll found 58% support tougher gun restrictions in the US.

If you examine the matter closely, you'll find that that "tougher restriction" attitude means making it harder for dangerous people to get guns, and limiting huge magazines. It doesn't extend at all to Feinstein's fantasy about "assault weapons".

In there is a reason I hope limitations can be imposed as I've suggested, working within the Second Amendment concept of militia instead of attacking it head on, can be achieved: people seem to be more aware of some of the basics now.

 

[xbuzzerx]

At the moment the NRA has a higher approval rating than Obama.

Not sure what that signifies -- maybe people approve of actually taking a stand?

With whom, its own members? lol.

 

[medic1]

With whom, its own members? lol.

Oh my.........................

 

[Kulindahr]

With whom, its own members? lol.

The general public. It's from a Gallup poll.

I'd be willing to bet that if a poll were taken of NRA members on approval of Obama and of Wayne Lapierre, it would be quite close. That man has to go.

 

[andysayshi]

Well, as I pointed out, Obama and the NRA have the basically the same 54% approval in polls. My guess is that Mr LaPierre would rate much lower.

My earlier point was that simply asking "do you approve" is a fairly broad brush question. When you break down what the US population want (according to polls) it's tougher gun restrictions: much tougher background checks, limited magazine capacity, limiting of automatic weapons etc.

But the NRA are against all these things. So a tacit "approval" of the NRA may indeed be 54%, but the reality behind that figure is the people of the US want much broader gun controls than the NRA is likely to support.

 

[Kulindahr]

Well, as I pointed out, Obama and the NRA have the basically the same 54% approval in polls. My guess is that Mr LaPierre would rate much lower.

My earlier point was that simply asking "do you approve" is a fairly broad brush question. When you break down what the US population want (according to polls) it's tougher gun restrictions: much tougher background checks, limited magazine capacity, limiting of automatic weapons etc.

But the NRA are against all these things. So a tacit "approval" of the NRA may indeed be 54%, but the reality behind that figure is the people of the US want much broader gun controls than the NRA is likely to support.

The public doesn't support Feinstein's foolishness. And the only people who want "limiting of automatic weapons" are the ignorant, because those are already extremely limited, as I've explained several times.

Dodging the LaPierre lobby is why I say we stay within the Second Amendment instead of attacking it, and go with Congress' authority to "organize and discipline" the militia. If it can be explained that requiring people to keep their large magazines at an approved gun club or shooting range falls within the concept of militia from the Second Amendment, a lot of LaPierre's steam is going to be chilled.

In fact if someone could get me the full NRA mailing list and fund a newsletter, I'll take him on for the heart and soul of the NRA.

 

[Benvolio]

Holy Shit really? So like democrats and republicans will continue to pursue their agendas? Republicans to destroy the environment and the middle class to protect the rich and democrats to level the tax policy and protect the environment.... fucking weird. I cannot believe each party would stick to their core ideas....

So, you agree with me. A compromise with a Democrat does not solve a problem. It it is just a step down the slippery slope. The blackmailer will be back soon for more, each time squealing that the Republicans won't compromise.

 

[xbuzzerx]

So, you agree with me. A compromise with a Democrat does not solve a problem. It it is just a step down the slippery slope. The blackmailer will be back soon for more, each time squealing that the Republicans won't compromise.

Care to actually name anything Republicans 'caved on' where Dems came back and demanded more? Let's see... healthcare? Nope. Don't Ask Don't Tell? Nope.

The behavior you're describing best fits Republicans. Look at how many times "emergency funding" was re-passed for the Iraq War under Bush.