Why Gun Rights Kill Democrats

[JMHX]

When Al Gore took a leftward swing towards the end of the 2000 campaign, the chilling effect in his home state of Tennessee was clearly evident. Tennessee, like moderate West Virginia, Arkansas, Missouri and Ohio, has a delicate balance of just how much liberalism they are willing to stomach. When the topic of liberal discussion falls on what is perceived as limiting the rights of gun owners, many swing voters quickly shy away from the Democratic Party.

It may be that places like West Virginia, a state that has gone Democrat in three of the past five elections, is forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. When faced with John Kerry, who provided a confusing policy on guns to begin with and capped everything off with a staged duck hunting photo opportunity, West Virginians bolted to the man who they disapproved of economically but knew would protect their right to bear arms.

The extent of the worries over John Kerry seems more to blame for losing West Virginia than a sudden surge in popularity by George W. Bush, as West Virginia was one of the few states that went Dukakis in 1988.

Losing places like West Virginia must be looked at as a mistake, an error on the behalf of the Democratic Party. That mistake is a direct result of four years of anti-gun rights policy from the very liberal left wing of our party, those who are obsessed with assault weapons bans and long waiting periods. President Clinton’s Assault Weapons Ban most likely did far more to hurt the Democrats going into 2000, and continuing into 2004, than anything that has been done recently.

To begin repairing this image of Democrats as untrusting elitists who seek to take away the guns of law abiding hunters, we must acknowledge what is true for many moderates – the Second Amendment is an important part of our Constitution.

In some state Constitutions, Indiana’s for example, the right to bear arms is given to any able-bodied citizen over seventeen years of age, with proper age restrictions for purchasing a firearm and ammunition. This brief position is truly all the Democrats need, as evidenced by the fact that crime rates during the Assault Weapons Ban were no different than the crime rates before the ban was put in place.

The Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) did more to hurt the Democratic Party than to help it. Crime rates resulting from the use of firearms went virtually unchanged during the time of the ban, and many moderate Democrats and swing Republicans abandoned the Democratic Party over what they saw as a completely unjust intrusion on their Constitutional rights.

The vast majority of gun owners in the United States are law abiding citizens who either own the firearm for personal and family protection or to hunt. These are valid reasons for owning a firearm, and owners should not have come under fire for owning them as they did when the AWB was passed and signed.

It is true that owning an assault weapon may worry some Democrats, but the fact that the same weapon with minor modifications could still be sold during the time of the AWB is a fact often overlooked by those seeking to argue blindly for it.

Criminals will be able to obtain guns whether or not there are bans in place. That does not make it wrong to attempt to curb some of the weapons being sold, but when the AWB proved to be ineffective, the Democrats should have led the effort to admit their mistake and take the ban down. Instead, several liberal Democrats led the charge to enhance and extend the ban while John Kerry spoke a much different view to voters, who were rightfully confused over the entire issue.

The disunity of message in the Democratic Party during 2004 on the issue of the AWB was astounding. Had the ban simply been left to expire without comment, or perhaps touched upon in the past tense by Kerry, West Virginia and Ohio may have swung further his direction.

It is understandable to want to protect our children and loved ones, but the AWB attempted to solve these problems in a way that was determined to be not only ineffective, but lethal to moderate and swing voters in their support of the Democratic Party.

In order to regain these voters, as well as the South and West, Democrats must be willing to admit that the AWB was a failure from the beginning, as it stressed only cosmetic changes banning a gun from sale.

We must be willing to admit that our position in 2000 and 2004 to restrict the ownership and sale of guns was, however noble, on the wrong moral side of the issue. In 2000 and 2004, gun rights was an issue that Democrats, sadly, were simply on the wrong side of.

[BAWLS]

I agree 100%.

Democrats would win more elections if the majority of them weren't anti-gun. This is why Feigngold is so fucking awesome.

[Draconias]

It is worthwhile to note that over 80% of firearms used in crime are obtained illegally. It's extremely obvious that attacking legal gun owners will achieve almost nothing.

I hope the Democratic party does improve some of their foolish policies recently, this being one of them. I am, personally, a conservative, and I absolutely don't support the Democratic party at this point. However, that doesn't mean that it wouldn't be better for all politicians to stop making these aggravating infringements on our Rights.

Put simply, if you try to attack our Rights, you're going to get a severe backlash. I don't support the Democrats because, far too often, they are supporting attacking our Rights, or ignoring those attacks because they are "justified." Politicians should realize this and stop damaging our country.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Democratic Politicians!

[stafffighter]

Guns kill democrats because gun nut republicans shoot them to shut them up

[LazyDrunk]

At 1/17/06 10:23 PM, stafffighter wrote: Guns kill democrats because gun nut republicans shoot them to shut them up

Democrats simply put the barrel to their temple and pulled the trigger.

[FightingForFreedom]

Guns kill democrats because gun nut republicans shoot them to shut them up

Democrats simply put the barrel to their temple and pulled the trigger.

Wow, thats a subtle fucking metaphor... If you want to get down to it both parties infring on our civil liberties. The Repulicans do it in the interest of NATIONAL security such as the recent NSA wire taps and the Patriot Act, while the Democrats do it in the interest of DOMESTIC security like gun control and media censorship.