And, yes, I will say unequivocally that the Democratic Party punted on guns. No question about it. I was and am disappointed by that fact. The pertinent question, though, is why?
And, yes, I will say unequivocally that the Democratic Party punted on guns. No question about it. I was and am disappointed by that fact. The pertinent question, though, is why?
Jaw (02-22-2018)
I think to a large political reasons in terms of wanting to win voters. I still remember seeing John Edwards make a campaign appearance in semi-rural Georgia and a third of the speech was about how integral guns had been in his life. It was one of the most disingenuous things I've ever witnessed and led to me the conclusion that he was a fake sack of **** before he was outed as such.
I don't think the organization's influence stops at the Republican Party at all.
It's practically a political slur to have anything less than an "A" from the NRA.
Go get him!
Founding member of the Whiny Little Bitches and Pricks Club
I am personally in favor of reforms to gun laws and measures that effect the power of industry lobbies to affect the political process, yet I am unwilling to countenance criticism of the people who advocate and vote for the exact opposite of what I believe.
Nice place to hang your hat.
But I like how we've couched accusations of murder as "criticism".
I think the Heller decision threw the Democrats' messaging into flux. Until then, it was relatively easier for a D politician to take a federalist position. And, honestly, there's some logic to that. I don't really care that much about what people are packing in sparsely populated areas of the Great Plains and the west. There are valid reasons for those folks to be carrying, just as (IMO) there are valid reasons to restrict what people are carrying in more densely populated areas.
Now, the Heller decision was essentially based on Scalia having a seance with the founding fathers, but that's a discussion for another day.
Moral culpability and legal culpability? Not my province, exactly, though I have my opinions. But, again, if you think that, for example, the type of weapon used in the most recent massacre shouldn't have been legally in the hands of the shooter, it would seem to follow that you could be arsed to apportion a measure of blame for the folks who've actively and successfully campaigned for its availability.