Happiness is a warm gun

[buttslinger]

I believe I told the story here before about a guy I worked with a couple of years who one day casually remarked that he had earned three silver stars in three different wars. To get a silver star you basically have to storm a machine gun nest. But his remark about THE ARMY is probably right about everything else: The are rules and regulations for every thing, and exceptions for every rule and regulation.
Even Bernie Sanders argues with the NRA sometimes because Vermont has so many hunters. And I would say, at it's essence, the Constitution is all about Individual Rights. Everybody knows (70%) that any gun that shoots more than 6 shells is not needed for hunting or home defense. Congress could enact a law right now that would make AR-15s regulated into non-existence. But as I have said a hundred times before on several topics, IT"S THE REPUBLICAN'S FAULT!!! They will never give up an issue that would cost them heavily at the voting booth.
If Congress and the Political shows ever focus on the National Debt, and admit what we need to do to fix it, the whole country will put a gun to it's head. Who cares about moral decay when you're dying of cancer?

[broncofan]

I suppose it is an odd situation where a small lobby appears to have such extensive support in Congress, more so than many worthy causes. I looked up referendum US to see if it can be done, and although there is no provision for a nationwide referendum on a single issue, the 21st Amendment that repealed the 18th (Prohibition) in 1933 was the outcome of what I think is called a 'state ratifying convention'. It raises the question, if the repeal of the 2nd Amendment was put to 50 states in a special convention, would the overall vote be for repeal or retain? I don't expect it to happen, but it seems to me that as the 2nd Amendment is at the core of the argument on gun ownership there can not be a proper national debate if the arguments are only presented by the NRA and some Democrat politicians. The argument needs to be addressed more broadly across American society, for otherwise how can anyone know what the average American thinks about the issue?

In order to propose an amendment 2/3 of both houses of congress or 2/3 of the state legislatures have to support it. That's is unlikely but at least within the realm of possibility. But in order to ratify an amendment that has been proposed, 3/4 of the state legislatures need to support it. That's just never going to happen given that there are more red states than blue and the second amendment as a general matter has more support than the NRA. I would analogize second amendment proponents to the NRA as follows: like comparing those who are pro-life to those who think that women who seek an abortion should be locked up. The latter is a more extreme and probably far less numerous group than the former.

The NRA as you have said elsewhere is an extremist organization that supports the sale of silencing devices for guns and the continued use of assault weapons and many other things we can legally ban without doing away with the second amendment. Someone correct me but I think they even fought against making bump stocks illegal which is an absolute disgrace.

I myself am not convinced that the second amendment belongs with the other rights it is classed with but procedurally it is too difficult to get rid of and culturally we have an attachment to anything numbered among the first ten amendments. I do think the second amendment is a legitimate obstacle to gun control but the primary obstacle now is put up by those who interpret it as being broader than even the Supreme Court's broad construction. There are some who think it means no limits whatsoever can be placed on gun ownership, which it has never meant.

[broncofan]

The argument needs to be addressed more broadly across American society, for otherwise how can anyone know what the average American thinks about the issue?

This is really important to find out because it's easy for positions here to be polarized. I'm sure there are a lot of gun enthusiasts who, if the issue were framed in an honest way, would consider gun control measures. I believe it is a testament to the effectiveness of the NRA that the issue is always framed in the most hysterical terms and never sensitive to what they are actually doing. One would not know from the broader rhetoric of the NRA that they are fighting against the effectiveness of mental health regulations and the prohibition of devices to convert weapons into de-facto machine guns or to silence a gun which really only has use as a tool of assassination. It would be nice to get some sense of where people stand without the distorting effect of the NRA.

[Stavros]

Further to the above is this perceptive comment in the NYT about the positive and negative aspects of the issue in elections:

In recent years, both major parties have honored something of a nonaggression pact. As the Republican Party’s moderates thinned out, few Republicans strayed from the gun-rights line, and Democrats in competitive regions deliberately avoided making guns central, fearing that it was far more of a voting issue for gun advocates than gun control supporters. In Congress and in most states, gun policy was largely kept off the legislative agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/u...T.nav=top-news

The dilemma now appears to be affecting both parties as they woo the voters -but is it a 'tipping point' and a 'game changer'? Should candidates be fearless or pragmatic? This may be the only way to get a better sense of what Americans want with regard to gun law. But there does seem to be a turn against the NRA.

[Stavros]

A week used to be a long time in politics, now two days makes it. Thus, on Wednesday the world was in shock as the President appeared to endorse tougher measures on gun ownership, by Thursday the NRA appeared to have changed his mind-

The top lobbyist for the National Rifle Association claimed late Thursday that President Trump had retreated from his surprising support a day earlier for gun control measures after a meeting with N.R.A. officials and Vice President Mike Pence in the Oval Office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/u...T.nav=top-news

One suspects that the President has never really had much grasp of policy, and can be persuaded to change his mind depending on who is in the room at the time. But does it look good on TV? Maybe that it is the key to what he says and does.

[trish]

One suspects that the President has never really had much grasp of policy, and can be persuaded to change his mind depending on who is in the room at the time. But does it look good on TV? Maybe that it is the key to what he says and does.

I don’t think he ever changed his mind. One on one he is aways affable and nods in agreement at what you say. We saw this when he met with Pelosi and Schumer on DACA. We just witnessed this behavior again with the Parkland survivors on the issue of gun regulation.

Here’s what I think the base sees: The President was emotionally overwhelmed by the first person testimony of the children he met with. He took Congress to task for being afraid to take on the NRA and tells them that the NRA isn’t difficult to deal with. Donald strong. Congress weak. NRA good. A brief time later he gets past the tragedy, sees through the tears and stands by the Second Amendment.

[buttslinger]

Listen, I wouldn't put it past this prick to casually mention a steel tariff on-mike so his insider golf buddies can make a ton of cash on the stock market. Trump's insane tweets can make the markets go crazy with a guessing game on AR-15s. Scare everyone into selling, then BUY right before he signs a Govt Contract to arm teachers.
Conservative Media lately is headed for the psychiatrist's couch. Messing with the NRA is something they draw the line on, Trump or no Trump.
Stay tuned til the next episode..............Are we fools to stay on the edge of our seats for this Reality Show President? Why can't we fast forward to the part where he goes to Leavenworth? I love a Happy Ending, a feel good story.

[Stavros]

Listen, I wouldn't put it past this prick to casually mention a steel tariff on-mike so his insider golf buddies can make a ton of cash on the stock market.

I assume you are not referring to his buddy Carl Icahn-

A week before President Trump announced his intention to impose a 25 percent tariff on steel imports, his longtime confidant and one-time adviser Carl Icahn had already cut almost 1 million shares of Wisconsin-based crane manufacturer Manitowoc Company Inc., ThinkProgress reports. The timing of Icahn's $31.3 million dump is suspect, because Manitowoc is a heavily steel-dependent company.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/758686...iff-talk-began

Anyone for tennis? Bring your own racquets.

[dreamon]

This is really important to find out because it's easy for positions here to be polarized. I'm sure there are a lot of gun enthusiasts who, if the issue were framed in an honest way, would consider gun control measures. I believe it is a testament to the effectiveness of the NRA that the issue is always framed in the most hysterical terms and never sensitive to what they are actually doing. One would not know from the broader rhetoric of the NRA that they are fighting against the effectiveness of mental health regulations and the prohibition of devices to convert weapons into de-facto machine guns or to silence a gun which really only has use as a tool of assassination. It would be nice to get some sense of where people stand without the distorting effect of the NRA.

The reason the NRA has to take such a hard stance is that every time gun control is passed, it is never enough for those that oppose Second Amendment Rights. Every time pro gun rights legislators compromise, that compromise becomes tomorrow's "loopholes".

They actually came out with a fantastic video earlier this week that covers this.



In all honesty, I don't support the NRA as a whole and am no longer a member. But that has to do with their foray into lobbying for topics other than the Second Amendment, which I find to be unacceptable. But when it comes to protecting our Second Amendment rights, they are still fighting hard.

[dreamon]

...there are now stores that will not sell kitchen knives to under-18 year olds and the law may get tougher...

That is fantastic. I can't imagine living in a country where the government has that much power over your daily life. Our government isn't perfect, but at least we believe in civil rights.