"I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms.

[jody]

I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take your handgun away."

Candidate Obama's promise to pro-RKBA Democrats and others who voted for him.

Obama delivered on his promise to the GLBT community perhaps 4% of the voting community.

Will Obama keep his promise to the pro-RKBA community which is perhaps 60-70% of the voters?

[bluerum]

1. nonsensical drivel

on edit - putting this du member on ignore

[jody]

6. Why is President Obama's promise " nonsensical drivel"? n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

42. That's exactly what my freeper co-workers say every time Obama opens his mouth.

Uncanny.

[enough]

2. Have you seen any indication that Barack Obama intends to do anything to take

your guns away?

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. What makes you think he won't stand by his words?

Is there something you know that others don't?

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Wrong forum

Unrec and alerted.

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. Nonsense

DU doesn't have a Paranioa forum.

[jody]

8. Are you suggesting those who oppose RKBA are paranoid? Doesn't that violate DU's rules? n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. Certainly not.

[jody]

13. Then are you suggesting those who support RKBA are paranoid? n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

14. Certainly not.

[jody]

17. Then what is the meaning of your #5? n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

24. Can you take anything at face value?

[jody]

27. Have a pleasant afternoon. n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

29. Try to do the same.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluestateguy]

9. He has signed bills to let people carry guns in national parks and on Amtrak

And except for appointing a crappy person to head up the ATF, I'd say he has been satisfactory on the 2nd amendment issue.

[Bold Lib]

21. Correction.

The new rules for guns now allow them in checked baggage, bring them in line with airplanes.

[jody]

23. Agree "satisfactory on the 2nd amendment issue" but pressure from anti-RKBA groups representing a

small minority will push to pass laws that limit RKBA.

Obama succeeded in changing his anti-gun image into a pro-RKBA candidate and made himself palatable to pro-RKBA, independent voters who had had a belly full of Bush and Cheney lies, etc.

It will be interesting to see how Obama's advisers help him position himself between the anti-RKBA and pro-RKBA camps for the next election.

[billh58]

11. I would be

interested in seeing the stats that show that "60-70% of the voters" are "pro-RKBA," and what the breakdown is between Democrats and Republicans.

Not disagreeing with you, but I have never seen those numbers before. With just over 25% of the US population estimated to be gun owners, that seems like an awfully high number of pro-RKBA advocates who are eligible to vote.

[X_Digger]

12. Gallup polling hits some of the numbers..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/117361/recent-shootings-gun-control-support-fading.aspx



http://www.gallup.com/poll/108394/Americans-Agreement-Supreme-Court-Gun-Rights.aspx

[jody]

15. Now X_Digger, it's not nice to use facts when discussing RKBA. n/t

[safeinOhio]

19. Also nice to skip the next graph

that shows 49% want laws that are more strict, 41% want laws kept as they are and less than 20% want less strict laws.

Please go to the link to get the whole story.

[X_Digger]

20. We're talking about handguns, and general 'pro-rkba' positions of the public..

But nice dodge.

And since you asked, it's dropped since gallup's poll..

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-08/politics/gun.control.poll_1_gun-laws-gun-owner-rights-people?

Now, a recent poll reveals a sudden drop -- only 39 percent of Americans now favor stricter gun laws, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.

[billh58]

25. Any info on

the breakdown of Democrats vs. Republicans who vote based on the RKBA issue? Just asking.

[X_Digger]

28. Hit that first link, it has a political breakdown..

[billh58]

31. Thanks again... n/t

[billh58]

22. Thanks for the

information. I still wonder, however, if affirming a Constitutional guarantee equates to "pro-RKBA" in the sense that it would influence a voter's choice of candidates. I believe, that like myself, a majority of Americans are not clamoring to take away anyone's guns, but we also have no problem with the reasonable regulation of firearms.

I realize that for single-issue voters the specter of any form of gun regulation may influence their vote, but I'm not convinced that 2A regulation (or de-regulation) is a substantial factor for the vast majority of voters in today's overall political and economic environment.

[X_Digger]

26. It is a hot-button issue, regardless of actual vote impact..

You have a 4,000,000 voter block from the NRA, and another 75,000,000 block of non-NRA gun owners.

Which is not to say that they vote en bloc one way or another, but it is a contentious issue.

[billh58]

30. I totally agree

that it's a contentious issue, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. I don't believe, however, that RKBA regulation (especially pertaining to public carry) is an overall voter deal-breaker for most national politicians.

I have never heard a "serious" politician call for the removal of firearms from the home, and I am led to believe that is where most of the 80+ million American gun owners keep their weapons (except for hunting and range practice).

[X_Digger]

32. There has been a substantial rise in concealed carry licensing..

It's estimated that some 6,000,000 folks have a concealed carry license nationwide.

Just this month, Iowa became 'shall issue' w/r/t concealed carry licensing. It may not be a mainstream topic of interest, but many gun owners keep abreast of developments in local / state law, federal cases, and federal legislation (real or proposed.)

[billh58]

33. Although I have no

particular dog in this fight, I believe that this rapid increase in public carry, and the open display of weapons at non-traditional venues (political rallies, public gathering places, etc.) is what is driving the increasing calls for more gun regulation.

CCW may be the answer, as no one knows for sure exactly who is carrying. Or, from another perspective, ignorance is bliss...;-)

[X_Digger]

34. Out of sight usually is out of mind.

At least for the majority of folks.

[benEzra]

36. The problem is that the gun-control lobby defines "reasonable regulation"

as banning the most popular civilian firearms, and sharply reducing the number of lawful owners who currently own them.

I am not opposed to reasonable regulation, but most of what the gun-control lobby proposes is IMO not reasonable. Reasonable laws are mostly reflected in the consensus that is already on the books.

[billh58]

40. I suspect that the

definition of "reasonable" remains highly dependent on the views of the definer, and will always be subjective for the most part (much like the "reasonable man" test for legal issues). I also believe that the terms "RKBA Fanatic," and "Anti-Gun Lobby" are disingenuous, and do not add anything of value to the discussion for those of us somewhere in the moderate middle (which is where most controversial issues are eventually decided).

Those combative terms sound more like groups with ideological, political, and/or financial, motives rather than a sincere interest in the meaningful interpretation of the Second Amendment, or in addressing whatever concerns the 220+ million Americans who do not own firearms may have.

Incidents like the one in Tucson yesterday will fan the flames of antagonism from both the extreme-pro and the extreme-con advocates of American gun rights. It will also rightfully place a spotlight on the need for finding solutions to the vitriolic atmosphere which is being artificially injected into the American dialog by the likes of Limbaugh, Palin, Beck, Hannity, and other irresponsible public figures.

And that's a good thing...

[X_Digger]

43. It's kind of hard to meet in the middle when your opponent is standing on your toes.

If you look at the history of gun control, from 1968 to about 2000, it was almost all in one direction. The trend was toward more control, more restrictions, more things banned, etc. If gun control were a slider on a sound board, it would have been quite high on the 'control' side.

From 2000 to now, the dial has taken small increments away from control- 2004's expiration of the AWB, 2005's Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, various states moving to 'shall issue' concealed carry licensing, Heller, McDonald, etc.

Today's advocates for control don't want to meet in the middle, they want to move the slider from 75% back to 80%- a step backward. Moving that dial back is going to be damned difficult at this point.

As I said elsewhere, compromise isn't, "We'll only take half what we want now, and the rest sometime later." I haven't heard a single control advocate tell me what they'd be willing to give in exchange for a restriction they want- all take, no give.

[benEzra]

46. In my opinion, attempting to ban the most popular guns on the market

is "unreasonable" a priori, particularly when misuse is quite rare. It would be like calling a proposal to ban the top five New York Times bestsellers "reasonable restrictions" on books.

[billh58]

48. Like I said earlier,

the terms "reasonable" and "unreasonable" are highly subjective. For instance, your analogy of banning NYT best selling books is a bit biased don't you think? Far more Americans buy "the most popular books" and read them, than buy "the most popular guns" and carry them.

I agree with your premise, however, and that is why it is so very important to find some middle ground. No right (implied or enumerated) is absolute. Having said that, I am 100% behind your right to own a firearm for the protection of your home and loved ones, but I have reservations about you (and millions of fellow citizens) carrying one in a crowded public venue.

[benEzra]

49. The number of people who own "assault weapons" is around the 20 million mark,

taking H.R.1022 as the operative definition, compared to only 13-16 million (and falling) who hunt. Probably 40 or 50 million own >10-round guns, and magazines are consumable components.

Since merely raising prices on >10-round magazines (without banning them) and requiring minor cosmetic and ergonomic changes to AR's and AK's (also without banning them) in 1994 was a political disaster that resonated for a decade, and far more voters own those guns now than then, I don't see it as politically feasible even if it made rational sense from a violence prevention standpoint (which IMO it doesn't).

As to carry licensure, to obtain a CHL here in NC, I had to pass a Federal background check, state background check, mental health records check, FBI fingerprint check, take a state-certified class on self-defense law, and demonstrate competence with a handgun via live fire. I have over 20 years' experience as a shooter, know more about firearms and self-defense law than most law enforcement, and shoot USPSA matches against the clock using my carry gun. I understand your qualms, but IMO they are misplaced. Certainly there can be debate on what the content of CHL classes should be, etc. (particularly in an environment friendly to statuatory licensure), but statistically you are much more likely to be shot by a police officer in a case of mistaken identity than you are to be shot by a CHL holder, even though there are more CH licensees nationwide than police officers. I'm not saying CHL holders are perfect by any means, but statistically we have a very, very good track record, better than the police in most states.

[safeinOhio]

16. Will the NRA keep it's promise to be

nonpartisan and give Obama a B- rating as he has now taken actions to protect 2nd Amendment rights, not only making that promise and signing two bills that just do that.
Will they take away John Kasich's B- now that he has appointed an anti RKBA person as head of the Ohio State Police. He did vote for the AWB when in congress. He made statements about supporting RKBA, just like Obama, only he has taken action now that does not.

or is the NRA really a Republican front group that is against any President that is half Irish?

[jody]

18. NRA with 4+ million members does not speak for the 80+ million voters who own firearms. n/t

[Katya Mullethov]

35. "They bring a knife , we bring a gun

“Get in Their Faces!” and “Punish your enemies” as a Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat” .

Do continue . I have been listening .

[jazzhound]

37. I find it quite amusing that so-called progressives who

have no problem with an "in your face" approach w/respect to protesting for gay rights, womens rights, or minority rights have a HUGE problem with the in-your-face approach used by RKBA advocates in demonstrating for the civil right of self-defense.

Absolutely blind hypocrisy.

Right wingers who have a problem with gay pride parades -------- FUCK 'EM!!

RKBA advocates who demonstrate (for example) with open-carry gatherings ---------- FUCK 'EM!!

Sorry friends ------ but you just can't have it both ways.

[LAGC]

38. What's so bad about open carry?

Would you prefer everyone concealed-carried instead? Wouldn't you rather know who had the guns if you were concerned about them? Or is ignorance bliss?

[badtoworse]

39. My personal preference would be for concealed carry only

I live in NJ, a may issue state in which getting a CCW permit is difficult, so I have no experience actually carrying a weapon. From a self defense standpoint, I don't see any tactical advantage in having your weapon out in the open (unless you are a uniformed LEO and in that case, everyone expects that you'll be armed anyway). If there was an advantage, plain clothes LEO 's would carry openly, but they don't. It seems logical to me that letting a criminal know who's armed and who isn't would make his job easier - a point in favor of concealed carry. I can also see how open carry might make some people uncomfortable, so if there's no advantage why do it? I have no evidence, but my gut tells me that a lot of people who carry openly are just trying to make a statement. There may be times when that's appropriate, but I would say that is the exception.


I legally own a few handguns and I like to go to the range once in a while to practice. I'm not sure if I'd personally carry even if I could - it's a great deal of responsibility. I do strongly support an individual's right to carry provided he's qualified (i.e. sane, not a criminal and properly trained).

[oneshooter]

41. Good luck on concealed carry in NJ! n/t

[Hoyt]

44. If he wants to do something for society, he'd go after guns Monday.

But neither he nor any other politician, has the guts to listen to those who feel they need a gun tucked down their pants to walk out the door whine. Nor, does he have the guts to go after those who couldn't live without the latest assault weapon technology.

That's not so much a criticism of Obama, but a fact. The NRA crowd would whine themselves into a tizzy at the thought of losing their right to carry a gun in public or caress the latest killing technology in bed.

[jazzhound]

45. So what you're saying is that if our Pres wants to do

something for society, he'll turn over power to the R's. Gotcha. :silly:

Good thing for us, voices of reason will prevail.

[billh58]

47. I agree that

turning over "power to the Rs" is a scary thought, but in post #28 of this forum the poll shows that Democrats and "Independents" favor stricter gun laws almost 3-1 over Republicans.