It needs to stop

[billh58]

Friends,

There are good headlines and there are bad headlines… and there are the headlines we hope to never see.

Over the past few years, there have been far too many headlines about gun violence ripping this country apart. Whether it’s the nightmare of Sandy Hook Elementary, the terror in San Bernardino, or the daily shootings in Chicago (where there have been over 200 homicides this year alone) gun violence is ravaging our nation.

That’s why I’m fighting in Congress for stronger gun laws that crack down on illegal arms dealing, close the gun show loophole, and enforce tougher background checks.

If we’re going to make a difference in preventing gun violence, and successfully challenge a well-organized gun lobby, we need to make our voices heard loud and clear.

Ted Deutch
Democrat For Congress

http://tedforcongress.ngpvanhost.com/form/1345714940356397056

Another Democrat in the fight for sanity and reclaiming our neighborhoods and streets from ammosexual gun humpers who are a large part the chain of the illegal guns in circulation. Ted Deutch is the type of Democrat that we need to elect at all levels of government in order to win the fight against ALEC-funded Second Amendment absolutists and NRA shills.

[flamin lib]

1. Contrary to the gun humper chant, being on the side of gun control is NOT

a losing proposition. The NRA strangle hold does not apply to Democrats who never get support from the GOP sub set of the NRA no matter the NRA grade they earn.

[EdwardBernays]

2. I'm not falling for this again

Unless a politician tell me how many deaths they're trying to stop (not just "make things better" etc.) I won't believe they are actually serious.

How much gun violence will his suggestions stop? 10%?

And then what? Is that ok?

[billh58]

3. The correct answer to your question

is that even one prevented death is worth the effort. For someone whose transparency page is showing, it appears that you are only here to provoke and not to become a part of the solution.

The fact that this country is experiencing a gun violence epidemic requires a concentrated effort on the part of all responsible citizens to address the overabundance of guns on our streets, and to vote for those politicians who have the guts to fight the right-wing gun lobby.

[EdwardBernays]

4. No and here's why

When pols claim to be an advocate for stopping gun violence - and raise money on the back of it - and then only talk about plans that would leave thousands of kids dead every year, you're not a gun safety or control advocate; you're politicizing the deaths of civilians. And when you raise money on the back of dead kids without even vaguely trying to lower numbers meaningfully it's gross and crass and people that actually care about gun victims should be offended.

Imagine if Obama's anti-Iraq War platform had been "I'll bring 10 troops home". Would you have said - well hey that's 10 troops at least"? Or would you have said he was simply playing politics with soldiers lives?

When politicians don't provide metrics to judge the success of their plans they're being unserious.

If he said "my plan will lower gun violence by at least 10% in 12 months or I'll resign" then I'd take him seriously... But this "I'll make some tepid suggestions - donate to my campaign" is just gross.

[billh58]

5. You, of course, are entitled to your opinion

but I totally disagree with your reasoning. I would rather have a politician at least talk about gun violence, than one who just ignores the epidemic or agrees with the ALEC/NRA right-wing gun lobby and claims that there is no gun problem whatsoever.

For a politician to even include the gun violence problem in their campaign material takes a tremendous amount of courage in today's ALEC/NRA dominated landscape. I will always support a politician who has courage and is willing to take on the gun lobby.

And, for what it's worth, Ted Deutch is only asking for people to sign his petition in his stand against gun violence in this promotion -- not money. Like all politicians, however, he does ask for political donations on his web site.

You sound like a hard line "my way or the highway" voter who will refuse to vote for any candidate who doesn't meet your purity standards. You are a part of the problem, and not a part of the solution. The ALEC/NRA right-wing gun lobby has had decades to "politicize" the deaths of thousands of Americans every year, and has paid for influence all the way to the SCOTUS. It will take many more politicians like Ted Deutch a few more years to begin to reverse the gun violence epidemic the gun lobby has unleashed.

[EdwardBernays]

6. I understand

But you must realize that politicians have been talking about it for decades now and things in many ways are worse than when the Brady Bill was passed.

To me the time for talking about gun violence while doing nothing is over. These sorts of incremental steps - or vague promises around them - are just posturing. And posturing on the back of 3000 dead Americans a month isn't better than nothing. Not to me.

And I'm not a purity voter... But when the something you're promising to try and accomplish is close to nothing - and has no method of measuring success - then it's basically nothing.

And when you raise money - or make dire warnings about your opponents - when all you're gonna do is nothing - then I'm wildly Unimpressed.

I'd support any politician that offers a plan with real numbers and will hold themselves responsible if it doesn't achieve those goals. Those conditions are even close to "purity" but are instead a sort of bare minimum any system needs to succeed.

[billh58]

7. And I understand what you are advocating, but

your statement: "I'd support any politician that offers a plan with real numbers and will hold themselves responsible if it doesn't achieve those goals." presupposes that ANY Democratic plan to reduce gun violence would stand a chance in Hell of making it through a Republican-controlled Congressional Committee.

I believe that the best that we can hope for is to take back the House and the Senate, and in doing so elect Democrats who are willing to take on the ALEC/NRA gun lobby. Too many Democrats are lackeys of the gun lobby, which leads to the "false promises" that you point out.

In the mean time, grass roots efforts to spread the word about the gun violence epidemic which is plaguing this country, and to support Democrats who are willing to take a stand against the gun lobby seem to be our best course of action.

[EdwardBernays]

8. Here's the thing though

Unless Dems have control of the House and Senate and Presidency all gun control is probably DOA. So yes without a real change on government it's all academic.

But - and this is also a big reality - the Dems DID control all three and still did nothing. And a lot of the people in power at the time made the same sort of vague promises of progress that we hear Dems making now - including Hilary Clinton.

So I just can't have any faith in anyone being vague and exploiting gun violence.