The Clinton Gun control agenda

TurtleDude said:

any "stereotype" I may have has come from 40+ years of listening to the same tired and dishonest leftwing nonsense about guns. and since most of the gun banners don't understand guns, they often lie about guns

Click to expand...

Anytime you ask anyone about a nasty stereotype that they hold, they're answer is going to be "well I believe that stereotype because it's true!". I don't think stereotypes become more true just because you've held them longer.

But also, where did this "banning gunshows" thing come from? I've honestly never heard this from Hillary. Was this something she said a long time ago and just doesn't mention anymore?

roughdraft274 said:

Anytime you ask anyone about a nasty stereotype that they hold, they're answer is going to be "well I believe that stereotype because it's true!". I don't think stereotypes become more true just because you've held them longer.

But also, where did this "banning gunshows" thing come from? I've honestly never heard this from Hillary. Was this something she said a long time ago and just doesn't mention anymore?

Click to expand...

I will have to check on that--I know she has said it but I will try to find that.

edit-it came from her saying local communities can ban the sales of guns in their jurisdiction like DC did

And most of the anti gun politicians are motivated by politics though you have probably seen the videos of some anti gun politician claiming some "ghost gun" can shoot 300 bullets in a second or other crap like that

TurtleDude said:

I will have to check on that--I know she has said it but I will try to find that.

edit-it came from her saying local communities can ban the sales of guns in their jurisdiction like DC did

And most of the anti gun politicians are motivated by politics though you have probably seen the videos of some anti gun politician claiming some "ghost gun" can shoot 300 bullets in a second or other crap like that

Click to expand...

Well, that's not an advocacy of an outright gunshow ban. Hopefully you'd agree with me that a "gunshow ban" sounds like a ban on any and all gunshows through out the country and what you have shown is best described as "supports local communities abilities to decide for themselves regarding the ban of gun sales in general."

Though I will say that either position seems to be go directly against the spirit and intent of the 2nd amendment.

When you say "anti-gun politicians are motivated by politics" that's just another blanket assertion that is thrown at will by many people at any group of politicians that disagrees with them. Democrats get the black vote, therefor they are accused of courting the black vote for the sake of politics. Anti-gay marriage politicians are motivated by politics. pro-voter ID law politicians are motivated by politics. Anti-voter ID law politicians are motivated by politics. It's almost a meaningless assertion at this point since it's a baseless assertion that can be thrown by anyone at anyone. And if politicians that are pro-gun control get facts wrong, that isn't proof that they are simply playing politics. Imo, the politicians that support gun control are probably doing so because they think it's best for the country and the politicians that don't support gun control are doing so probably because they think it's best for the country, with the possible exception of a handful on either side.

roughdraft274 said:

Well, that's not an advocacy of an outright gunshow ban. Hopefully you'd agree with me that a "gunshow ban" sounds like a ban on any and all gunshows through out the country and what you have shown is best described as "supports local communities abilities to decide for themselves regarding the ban of gun sales in general."

Though I will say that either position seems to be go directly against the spirit and intent of the 2nd amendment.

When you say "anti-gun politicians are motivated by politics" that's just another blanket assertion that is thrown at will by many people at any group of politicians that disagrees with them. Democrats get the black vote, therefor they are accused of courting the black vote for the sake of politics. Anti-gay marriage politicians are motivated by politics. pro-voter ID law politicians are motivated by politics. Anti-voter ID law politicians are motivated by politics. It's almost a meaningless assertion at this point since it's a baseless assertion that can be thrown by anyone at anyone. And if politicians that are pro-gun control get facts wrong, that isn't proof that they are simply playing politics. Imo, the politicians that support gun control are probably doing so because they think it's best for the country and the politicians that don't support gun control are doing so probably because they think it's best for the country, with the possible exception of a handful on either side.

Click to expand...

In the 60s , when the DNC held all three branches of government, Nixon, and others, played on the belief that many middle class-usually white, Americans, thought the Dems were soft on crime. The Dems fought back by adopting gun control as a way of pretending they were doing something about crime without pissing off a major constituency group by joining GOP calls for getting tough on (mainly black) street crime.

So the first adoption of GC in recent memory was to stave off Nixon's attacks rather than to really do something about crime. However, this shield against GOP attacks was itself attacked by pro gun groups including and led by the recently politicized NRA.

Right now, its fairly obvious that most of what gun control politicians do is to pander to people who "want something done" about every massacre or tragedy involving guns. For example, after Sandy Hook we had people in office screaming for gun laws that wouldn't have done squat-the gun was legally purchased after a background check etc. Even worse was Cuomo in NY screaming for 7 round limits (after NY had a 10 round limit) when a CONVICTED MURDERER used an AR 15 with already BANNED IN NY 30 round mags to shoot two firefighters

The second obvious goal of the gun control leaders is to weaken the political power of the NRA- when the Clinton gun ban was passed, Schumer was bragging right afterwards that the gun ban was just the first step and the NRA was going to see far worse.

The election is more about the Supreme Court than the President, and the Democrats and MSM know it.

American said:

The election is more about the Supreme Court than the President, and the Democrats and MSM know it.

Click to expand...

a key strategy for the Democrats is to make the shooting sports and owning guns more and more a burden so many middle and lower middle class people will be deterred from doing so. With that waning, less people will join gun clubs and groups like the NRA meaning the NRA and similar groups (many gun clubs are NRA affiliates with membership in the NRA required) will face loss of revenue

and that is what the Democrats want-less NRA opposition to their left wing candidates. It has nothing to do with controlling criminals (who generally are the product of Democrat supporting families) other than being a way Democrat politicians can pander to the public and pretend crime control is the reason for gun bans

TurtleDude said:

a key strategy for the Democrats is to make the shooting sports and owning guns more and more a burden so many middle and lower middle class people will be deterred from doing so. With that waning, less people will join gun clubs and groups like the NRA meaning the NRA and similar groups (many gun clubs are NRA affiliates with membership in the NRA required) will face loss of revenue

and that is what the Democrats want-less NRA opposition to their left wing candidates. It has nothing to do with controlling criminals (who generally are the product of Democrat supporting families) other than being a way Democrat politicians can pander to the public and pretend crime control is the reason for gun bans

Click to expand...

No doubt about the Left hating with a passion, the NRA.

TurtleDude said:

you have hit on what the Democrat party's goals are. They know that the second amendment was intended to be a blanket restriction on government interference but they want to make that restriction subject to whatever encroachments they can pass through congress or state legislatures. In other words, they don't believe there is any constitutional right but rather, gun ownership is subject to the whims of whatever the legislature and governor/president can pass.

Click to expand...

That only applies for militia purposes. The federal government has police power in the federal districts.

American said:

No doubt about the Left hating with a passion, the NRA.

Click to expand...

True-the two goals of Democrat party gun haters is

1) To pander to bed wetting hysterics who demand someone come up with a solution for say the Sandy Hook massacre

2) to try to eliminate the NRA as a lobbying force against Leftwing politicians

danielpalos said:

That only applies for militia purposes. The federal government has police power in the federal districts.

Click to expand...

Absolutely not true the militia are only required to guarantee freedom.

Crimefree said:

Absolutely not true the militia are only required to guarantee freedom.

Click to expand...

Not if it applies to the militia instead of natural rights; they are mutually exclusive; one is collective and the other is Individual.

danielpalos said:

Not if it applies to the militia instead of natural rights; they are mutually exclusive; one is collective and the other is Individual.

Click to expand...

It has to apply to the militia as they are responsible for a state of freedom. Nothing is exclusive or mutual as the militia are the able bodied people.

If you are referring to the right of the people it is an individual right. It cannot be collective other than every member of the people has this right.

Crimefree said:

It has to apply to the militia as they are responsible for a state of freedom. Nothing is exclusive or mutual as the militia are the able bodied people.

If you are referring to the right of the people it is an individual right. It cannot be collective other than every member of the people has this right.

Click to expand...

Thank you for finally recognizing some of the concept. I thought you would never get it, simply because you are on the fantastical, right wing.

You are missing the point and the argument about exclusivity. All able bodied people are the militia. Well regulated able bodied people who are the militia since they are the People, are necessary to the security of a free State, not all of the other able bodied persons of the People as Individuals and unorganized militia.