Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

appal_jack

(3,813 posts)
21. Regarding the new, & the effective.
Sun Apr 28, 2013, 12:23 PM
Apr 2013

Prior to the 1930's, the Federal government did not take an active role in RKBA issues. What is even newer than the "belief that the second amendment deals with personal gun ownership outside of militia service" is the Democratic Party's embrace of gun control. Before the 1960's, gun control was pretty much the province of segregationists and racists of either party. Indeed, I contend that Reagan's CA gun control efforts were primarily racist in intent, &, obviously, Republican-led.

I think that we can agree that the tragic assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, Harvey Milk, etc. of those times (too many to name) deserved a response, as do the violent tragedies that have happened in the US since. Given that many of these early tragedies happened with bolt action rifles and revolvers, I do not feel that progress was or will be made via hardware restrictions. I believe that a re-prioritization of law enforcement efforts (away from all victimless crimes & toward stopping violence), and targeted programs to alleviate poverty and improve mental health services are the way to go.

Since the late 1960's and the Democratic Party's embrace of gun control, Democrats have almost only won the Presidency when guns were not a big part of the national conversation. Clinton's 1996 victory (post 1994 AWB) is a notable exception, but his second term was hardly inspiring or exemplary on any front. Gun control issues did play a significant role in the defeats of Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry, unfortunately. How many more elections are worth losing over this?

-app

K & R! billh58 Apr 2013 #1
And we want PEOPLE to take out liability insurance Warpy Apr 2013 #2
But that would infringe billh58 Apr 2013 #3
Alright supernaut Apr 2013 #4
You DO know where you are billh58 Apr 2013 #6
I will when I publish a newspaper, novel, or magazine. Warpy Apr 2013 #7
Uh supernaut Apr 2013 #8
Warpy isn't the one who is enlightenment Apr 2013 #26
Sometimes it's just not billh58 Apr 2013 #10
Take your NRA bullshit elsewhere. Scuba Apr 2013 #9
An Appalling Lack of Civility Here norge May 2013 #30
Civility is a language inherently alien to bullet-heads. lastlib May 2013 #31
^^^^ ellisonz Apr 2013 #17
and PPR'd now too...like so many at DU who get blocked here then PPR'd shortly after CreekDog Apr 2013 #29
But, but, what about... freshwest Apr 2013 #5
Are you renouncing future AWB's & magazine limits? appal_jack Apr 2013 #11
You're in the wrong forum.... Scuba Apr 2013 #12
So, asking questions is forbidden here? appal_jack Apr 2013 #13
Your premise was that if one is for background checks, one must not also be for magazine limits. Scuba Apr 2013 #15
Post removed Post removed Apr 2013 #16
If you think magazine capacity limits are unconstitutional, you are definitely in the wrong place. DanTex Apr 2013 #18
It's you who are confused, Dan. appal_jack Apr 2013 #19
The belief that magazine limits are unconstitutional puts you well to the right of Scalia. DanTex Apr 2013 #20
Regarding the new, & the effective. appal_jack Apr 2013 #21
Regarding liberalism, & libertarianism. appal_jack Apr 2013 #22
Post removed Post removed Apr 2013 #24
Name calling all you have? Mwc33 Apr 2013 #25
Well. aren't you the billh58 Apr 2013 #27
Hey ~ Mwc33 In_The_Wind May 2013 #32
And yet another Gungeoneer billh58 Apr 2013 #14
Well said. (nt) Paladin Apr 2013 #23
You nean bans/limits on *PEOPLE* owning those things? -eom gcomeau Apr 2013 #28
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»"Guns don't kill people. ...»Reply #21