Does a person who votes democrat have the right to say they support gun ownership

N

N.H. Yankee

New member
I hear some from the left claim they support the NRA ( I have even seen hats saying I vote democrat and support the NRA, DUH!) and gunownership, I see this as hypocracy because the very people they vote for are the ones either limiting gun ownership, banning gun ownership and or concealed carry and passing laws to make it so hard to purchase a gun and ammunition that people cant do it. The same people also say they support the military but vote for the very people who loath the military such as Bill Clinton. To me its like saying I support community safety and then going to the town meeting and voting for a paroled serial killer for police chief. I realize a paroled serial killer cannot be a law enforcement officer it is just a comparision. I see it like when Kerry had his big photo/ press op for his bird hunting fiasco in I believe it was Ohio or Iowa, I also remember Clinton duck hunting to proof he was a friend of the hunter and gunowner, and what did he do to benifit the gun community! I am sorry for the rant but I am fedup with these people and thier either ignorance or hypocracy, I guess I am fired up over Robert Byrd calling republicans Nazis, if that were a republican calling Dems nazis and he is defended by the left and media with people saying he is passionate or freedom of speech it would be called hate speech and they would demand he be removed from the senate, look at what they did to Gingrich and Trent Lott,its just the typical left wing hypocracy.
 
Harry Reid- the new Senate Minority Leader for the Democrats after the defeat of Daschle is pro-gun. NRA actually gave him a letter thanking him for his support and contributed significantly to his campaign. Also is against abortion rights. I might get hit with stones around here, but I'm a Harry Reid type Democrat. But in New York if I tell another Democrat that they hate me just as much as a Republican.

The election of Reid signals the Democrats attempt to move to the right a little on some issues for 08' (of course this suggestion will be blown out of the water if they nominate Hillary).
 
Sadly, most people's views do not coincide perfectly with one party or another. Gun rights are an important issue to many people, but very few people consider them the only issue. If a person agrees with the Democratic party's platform on every issue except gun control, there's nothing wrong with them voting Democrat. This isn't a perfect world.

So in answer to the title question, yes.
 
democrats & guns

If a voter is pro gun, of good morals, character, and not a pain in the rear to be around, I find political leanings unimportant as far as shooting and association go.
 
Yep, gun rights activism is just one issue. However, my family was historically Democrats since the party's creation and I (we) switched over, not due to 2nd ammendment atrocities by the Dems, but because of issues with Honor and Morality - it seems the Democrat leadership has none. I won't support such people.

And now - too late for them. Even if they fixed those problems (bravo, Reid!) we'd stay put until the Republicans become something we couldn't stomach either... (And that's closer than many think too!)
 
What BCannell said was right on. A friend of mine voted for Kerry :barf: (I guess I still like her!), even though she mostly agreed with Bush's policies. The one she happened not to agree with Bush's stance, which was obviously more important to her, was abortion.

I saw something like that when I was in the military during the 90's. The 96 election, one of the guys I was working with said he was going to vote for Klinton. My first question to him was (and he was a careerist), "Why would you vote for someone who wants to get rid of your job???" That reason alone was enough for me to vote Republican (I would've anyways!)
 
I don't know what to think on the issue. That's like the Union (I'm not a member, just work for them) that will vote democrate here in Oregon but it's the democrates that are taking the jobs away from them (timber, construction, etc..) because of the enviromentalist. Colt and Winchester (I think) are unionized also (I don't know if they sponsor democrate or not) and in the union paper they have a "buy union" section each year and lists these companies, but, they still vote or sponsor democrates who are trying to put these companies out of business with gun laws.

I think that the democratic party lost it when they moved toward the gun control issues. They wanted to "play" to the safety (soccor(sp)) moms and to the African American communities by offering them fake safety. Yet, after 911, these folks have started to move toward "personal safety" moms and such.

I think (and yes, it hurts :D ) that except in places like NY, MA, CT, HI, CA and other non defense states that the gun issue is going to dictate alot of the votes. That pro-gun dems will win in the majority of dem controled states.

Take Oregon (please! :D ) for example. The state is as blue as you can get in the cities but as red as ever in the rural areas. We are the split state, at about 49 (blue) to 51 (red). In portland, Ginny Burdick is pushing her gun control laws, once again. She is our answer to the boxers and feinsteins of CA :(. Yet the eastern dems and even one here in Eugene (DeFazio) try to distance themselves as far as possible from her because they know that it's a major issue for the "rednecks" of the state.

Here in Eugene, I am being begged by the national MMM chapters to run a chapter here just because I was one of the only ones to sign up for their meets (to view the enemy, not to join in their thinking).

Even Vicki Weaver (no relation) is luke-warm on the issue. She does sign on to the bills of ginny but she goes about it half-hearted and it's not one of her prime fights.

Wayne

*I'm probably the only one that can talk so much on a simple yes, no question :eek:
 
The current Democrat party position(s) taken to its/their logical conclusion result in a person's absolute dependence upon the state for their healthcare/housing/safety/etc.

A person who is dependent upon the state from cradle to grave might think that they need or want a gun, but those same guns left in the hands of those of us who must be robbed in order to pay for cradle to grave entitlements would pose a serious threat to the collectivists in charge of said robbery; ergo under no circumstances could the Demonrats leave firearms in the hands of ordinary people.

So the answer isn't so much no, as it is hell no.
 
I suppose one could claim they support "gun rights" while voting democrat, just as someone could say they support "the environment" while voting Republican.

For some people, a specific issue isn't high on their list of priorities and they don't take time to write letters to their congress-critters about it. They may write dozens of letters about education, road conditions, the price of milk and other things more important to them.

If someone tells me they vote Democrat and support gun rights, my touchstone is to ask them if they have done anything to support gun rights. Just joining the NRA/GOA isn't enough. Have they written letters? Made phone calls? Have they done anything to educate other Democrats that "gun control" is a losing proposition?
 
That question is about the same as asking a libertarian leaning Republican like me if (s)he supports legislating morality (which I don't). It is entirely possible for an individual to strongly disagree with portions of a party's platform, and yet agree with the majority part of it, enough so that (s)he still has to reluctantly support that party anyway. It all depends on what is most important to the individual in question.

In the case of the Democrat, the individual may be, let's say, a Union member or a Medicare/Social Security dependent Senior, and are therefore predisposed to be Democrats. And yet, either of them may also be quite active supporters of RKBA. In fact, I'd say that those are more effective supporters of RKBA than Republicans, since they are members of the Democrat constituency, are part of the Democrat's base of power. The Democrats have to listen to them.

So, let us 'Pubbies be careful not to alienate those supporters in the Democrat tent, while we may not see eye to eye on most political issues, they are still our ideological allies on the RKBA front.
 
USP45usp:

"Take Oregon (please! ) for example. The state is as blue as you can get in the cities but as red as ever in the rural areas. We are the split state, at about 49 (blue) to 51 (red). In portland, Ginny Burdick is pushing her gun control laws, once again. She is our answer to the boxers and feinsteins of CA . Yet the eastern dems and even one here in Eugene (DeFazio) try to distance themselves as far as possible from her because they know that it's a major issue for the "rednecks" of the state."

I've even seen the same sort of thing in states that are much more "red" than Oregon, like Texas (where I'm from) and Georgia (where I am now). Even in Tx and Ga, the inner city urban areas are deep blue anti-gun hellholes (Rodney Ellis, discussed in another thread, is from inner city Houston). I do think that in Tx and Ga, once you get out of the inner city and out to the suburbs, and then out to the rural areas, things get deep red and very pro gun quickly. This part of the suburban Atlanta metro area, for instance, is very pro-gun, and the next town out (Kennesaw) is noted for having an ordinance requiring all households to have a gun (sufficient loopholes for those who shouldn't or who object, though). It is the case study that pro-gun thinktanks point to when they need to show the correct corelation between gun ownership and crime rates, as Kennesaw's is very low. Anyway, the big difference I see is the relative red vs blue populations, and what sort of Gerrymandering has been done to load the dice towards (or against) the reds or the blues.
 
yorec, I agree 100% my family was once Democrat but this isnt the democratic party of 40 years ago or more, I feel it has been hijacked by extremist just as the Islamic religion has been. Unfortunately its seems way too many of the left are willing to fall on thier own sword to defend thier political views and others dont seem to have a clue, the good democrats that are left are becoming dinosauers and will soon be driven out if things keep going the way they are. I have seen alot of people leave the party since the Clinton takeover, now that Howard Dean is running the DNC this tells me just how extreme they have gotten, I live in N.H. and having Vermont next door is really effecting us. I have heard some really stupid reasons for people voting Dem., one of the best is when I was a Vehicle Operations Officer in the Air Force ( now Ret.) and I had a civilian one day reading the paper bitching about Clinton and the election was near, so I said I guess youll be voting for Dole. The reply I got was not what I expected, he said hell no I,m voting for Clinton, I said WHAT!!! He said I'm an Irish catholic and because of that I have to vote democrat. ( the kennedy thing) My response was no, this is America and you vote for who you want. The irony of it is the guys name was Charlie McCarthy, people used to call him the wooden dummy and I felt bad for him up until that day. I asked this question because I know some hardcore Liberals that own guns that believe all the trash from Moveon.org, the free republic etc and support gun control issues such as ammo bans, ammo registration, filling out paperwork everytime you buy ammo, banning gun shows and to boot and still claim they support gunowner rights and the NRA I do not call that support and these are the people that I do not feel have the right to say they support gunowners or what the NRA stands for, I feel it is hypocracy. I do agree there are some ( very few) democrats that support gun ownership the former Dem Zell Miller was one but he too had enough of the left and quit. We had a couple Dems get elected here that supported gun owners until they got elected then stuck it right up our posterior. If a dem. is supporting a true blue blood gun supporting Dem. thats not a problem, but it seems that the Dems. get more extreme year after year on gun issues until this past election and I feel the only reason some are laying low is due to negative reprocussions and thier true agenda has not changed. Do not forget the Kerry hunting license/trip fiasco and then about the only time he made it back to DC to vote while campaigning was to vote against gun owners. He too supported gunowners right up to the antigun vote. I also remeber Bill Clintons duck hunting trip yup another friend of the hunter and gun owner, you just cant trust the left when it comes to some issues regardless of what comes out of thier mouth. What has me fired up is the words of Robert Byrd that Republicans are Nazis, kind of ironic coming out of the mouth of a former KLU KLUX KLAN recruiter.
 
Yes, Democrats can support gun rights. And anyway, at the national level, the Democrats are more likely to attack gun rights directly. It's obviously a
easy target for them. Local level much less so.
And anyway, the GOP might be more overtly 2nd amendment, but they're quite happily dismantling the associative rights, upon which the 2nd is supported.
So after the 4th, 5th, 1st and 6th are gutted, the 2nd is a moot issue.
That's one of the reasons that, at times, have been ambivalent about the NRA. Too often, they've let themselves be a pet of the GOP. And looked the
other way when such rights so closely related to the 2nd, as the 4th A, have been compromised.
 
hell yes

And I am one. See its like this..gun control is only one issue in the thousands of important issues of life. I think those of you who say "hey republicans, do whatever you want with the environment, take my social security and bet it on the stock market, start as many wars as you want, lie to me in the media and take away freedom of speech......as long as you dont take my guns away...you are a FOOL.

Just like anything, you have to educate people about issues. People are too fricking lazy to research things for themselves. The news runs stories of people being killed with guns, and people automatically think.."guns are bad, ban them." Its much more complex than that. I try to educate people that banning legally owned guns doesnt do ANYTHING to stem the flow of ILLEGAL guns, which is what is used in alot of violent crimes.

I vote democrat because its the people's party...not the rich people's party. I dont understand why anyone who wasnt rich would vote republican. The wool this republican administration is pulling over the eyes of the American public is so incredibly thick that people are letting their own liberties be stripped away from them. When the President cancels an important meeting in Germany because the Germans refused to sign an agreement not to ask any questions that would cast the president in any other light except a ray of sunshine, that is scary.
 
I voted Republican last year. Flame away Libretarians, but voting for someone who has no chance to win (no chance to finish 2nd, probably even no real chance to finish 3rd) just doesn't appeal.

Does that mean I support immigration laxing? How about faith-based initiatives?
 
Does a person who votes democrat have the right to say they support gun ownership
Click to expand...

Does a person who votes Republican have the right to be against religious symbols, ritual, and general involvement in government? Is a pro-choice Republican a bad Republican?

I think the number of pro-gun Democrats in the House is 13, and they should get some credit. Sadly, it is zero in the Senate.
 
People like the billionaire "Hanoi" John Kerry for instance. LMMFAO
Click to expand...

Well, unfortunately, it takes millions and millions of dollars to even be a contender for President. Even though I knew he couldnt win, I voted for Ralph Nader for President because I think he would do what is best for the country, and democrat on everthing else.Ralph Nader is about the closest to the working man that would protect our interests that there is.

When you have a president like we do now that REFUSES to raise minimum wage and let people who work their asses off barely survive while giving millions of dollars in tax breaks to coporate buddies, thats not someone who cares about the " American people"

At least Kerry sees that the minimum wage needs to be raised which would include many mothers raising children while Bush could care less.
 
When you have a president like we do now that REFUSES to raise minimum wage and let people who work their asses off barely survive while giving millions of dollars in tax breaks to coporate buddies, thats not someone who cares about the " American people"
Click to expand...
Of course President Bush refuses to deal with the minimum wage issue. The issue is a load of crap. Minimum wage is for people with entry-level skill sets. People who wish to make something more than minimum wage need to obtain something other than entry-level skill sets. In other words it is incumbent upon the person in question to do whatever is necessary for them to become a worker that businesses find desirable. Then said worker can find a job that pays good money, and (depending on the skill sets acheived) may even find him/herself being lured away from his/her present job by another company willing to pay even more.

I know that liberals think that businesses should be forced by the gubmint to pay microcephalic crack whores 10 bucks an hour to mop floors, but that just isn't going to happen. It especially isn't going to happen if the gubmint lets said business owners keep their guns. That is in essence the entire point of this thread. Will people who wish to steal from others to feather their own nests, or to feather the nests of the so-called downtrodden ultimately choose the continued private ownership of guns over their personal need to empower goverment to steal the property of others. I know where you stand on the issue, but what others need to ask themselves is where do they stand?

What's it going to be? Government enforced theft/entitlement, or people being responsible for their own problems?
 
No!

You may personally support private gun ownership, but you support a party that has worked harder at destroying the RKBA than any organization in American history.

Could you support the right to life and support the Nazis at the same time? There's your answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top