I believe the utter idiocy of pushing for an assault weapons ban has been demonstrated multiple times in multiple threads.
Fewer than 400 people killed by assault weapons since the AWB expired in 2004 (that accounts for less than 0.2% of all gun deaths and that is assuming that the guy who killed someone with an Assault Weapon didn’t have another gun they could have used to kill).
Assault weapon is an almost meaningless term that differentiates semi-automatic weapons by mostly cosmetic features like a pistol grip or a bayonet lug.
It is idiocy. Not only because it wold do almost NOTHING to reduce gun violence but because it makes you look like an idiot to all but the uninformed. At this point you are adopting republican political tactics and relying on the ignorance of your electorate to win on an issue. I think their idiocy has been pretty well proven.
What makes the idiocy so complete is that you have sacrificed a chance at REAL gun reform to chase this bullshit gun control.
No I leave the ad hominem arguments to Hentor, if I took that from him he would have nothing left.
Right on cue.
You don’t have anything left but calling people names, do you? Why don’t you go off to one of the threads where you can argue some other issue. You have gotten so used to having the facts on your side and all you can do when the facts aren’t on your side is hurl insults.
I hope you enjoy the new background check which might cover just gun shows.
I don’t have anything else? The facts aren’t on my side?
I just went and searched the polling on guns to get the results of 9 other polls on assault weapons - the first nine I came across on Polling Report.com.
These clearly demonstrate that your reliance on one poll, that from Gallup, is in fact the cherry-picking. You ignore many, many other polls which do not provide data in your favor. They clearly show that more people favor than oppose a ban on assault weapons.
You have the gall to clip all of that and accuse me of not having facts on my side?
You are sad and pathetic. You are almost literally blind and deaf to evidence that runs contrary to what other gun strokers have told you. Why should anyone bother to bring such evidence to you, when you do nothing but clip it out of existence.
I had actually hoped to see that you might have considered the mountain of evidence that put lie to your molehill. Your ignorance is bracing, really.
Apologies, I must have missed the part where you outline your plan for “REAL gun reform”. Would you review that for us? With special emphasis on what makes your plan more “REAL” other than it being capitalized? (Which is very impressive, by the way, except for the fact that it doesn’t appear to mean anything.)
I know its hard to keep us gun nuts straight. I’m the one that advocates universal licensing and registration.
I was watching the Rachel Maddow show yesterday and she showed a clip of LBJ arguing for exactly the same thing.
The part that I think you (and frankly most people) would object to is my view that the federal ban on machine guns is permissible only if the states agree (and I think almost every state does, I can’t think of one that doesn’t). It wouldn’t bother me terribly if that wasn’t part of the package.
I believe that between licensing and registration we get about as much bang for the political buck as you can get.
I didn’t mean to ignore your cites. I could quibble with the polls and point out where the polls seem to conflate assault rifles with machine guns but some of the polls are phrased almost exactly like the Gallup poll and yield VERY different results (I can’t explain it, is Gallup owned by the NRA or something?).
I should clarify that I think that public opinion is different than facts. There are a lot of polls that say that the public is moderately in favor of an AWB. The fact is an AWB is largely ineffective and is a huge waste of political capital.
My goal is to reduce gun murder, I think it should be your goal too but if you waste all your political capital on an AWB it shows that you either are not in command of the facts or you are not actually interested in reducing gun murders.
From my perspective, if you have everything explained to you and you still want to waste political capital on an AWB, then you have taken a partisan position (rather than a pricipled position) on gun violence.
Rand is at her best when showcasing the idiocy and inhumanity of collectivism. Not so good at writing love stories, and terrible when she gets on her soapbox about Objectivism.
Damuri Ajashi, thank you for giving consideration to the evidence.
Popular opinion is fact, in that when you ask people how they feel and they tell you, that is data. What it means beyond that is of course less clear.
In this case, when asked, more people favor an assault weapons ban than oppose it. I’m not sure I understand your assertion that pursuing a policy that has the popular support of the people is “wasting political capital.”
What, by the way, is political capital? Can you tell me how much Obama now has, and how much he would have after signing an assault weapons ban into law? To me, it has the feeling of concern trolling. It seems like some unquantifiable, murky measure, the specter of which is invoked only when some politician is doing something that you in particular do not want him or her to do.
I think you’ve convinced yourself that an AWB is unpopular and would result in a backlash of some kind. If it were indeed unpopular, that might be the case. It objectively is not.
OK, in that sense, that is fact… in much the same way that a poll of views of the afterlife is fact. I think a fully informed rational person is unlikely to reach the conclusion that an AWB will actually make a difference.
Also, I am still a bit confused by the discrepancy between gallup and the other polls that you pointed out.
I think that political capital in this case is a combination of political will and credibility. There was a lot of political will to do SOMETHING after Newton, among gun owners and non-gun owners alike. When the first reflex was the old AWB, they lost credibility with people that are familiar with guns. They could have put the NRA in a corner and hung them with that ridiculous speech after Newton by proposing things that would have been effective, but instead they decided to fight stupid with more stupid and you ended up with gun owners retreating into their corner right next to Wayne La Pierre. I think if an AWB passed, I think it would move a lot of votes away from the Democrats and would gain them almost none.
I’m not sure what concern trolling is, I don’t think any parent can see what happened at Newton and NOT think that something is horribly wrong and even if we couldn’t have prevented this particular atrocity, we can certainly do something about gun violence generally. At least thats where I ended up. I was emotionally affected by the stories coming out of Newton, I think a lot of gun owners were.
Or, do you think that I am being insincere in my support of licensing and registration or that I am being insincere in arguing that the focus on an AWB is hurting the chances of getting things like licensing and registration?
Let me ask you, what do you think are the chances of an AWB? What do you think are the political costs of pursuing an AWB?
How do you think the pursuit of an AWB has affected the likelihood of a magazine cap? (which I oppose on principle but would concede might have some sort of effect if coupled with paid confiscation).
How do you think the momentum has shifted since they started pushing the AWB? DO you think that things would be different if they dropped the AWB in early January and pushed licensing and registration like LBJ did after the MLK assassination?
I am saying that the AWB is counterproductive to our mutual goal of reducing gun murders (your goal may be broader but it at least includes reducing gun murders) because it makes it less likely that anything will happen.
Are you under the impression that any of this shit could have gotten past the Republicans in the house because of a 60/40 split in the electorate? These guys have districts that are almost mostly in the 40%. We had trouble getting them to agree to increasing taxes on the top 1% when something like 80% of the public supported that. We may not have been able to get licensing and registration but at least with licensing and registration, the juice would have been worth the squeeze. With an AWB, the political price would be so high that it would impede meaningful gun control for years to come.
This weeks Daily Kos #GunFAIL blog number IX has the usual “waistband ninja’s”, little kids hit with stray bullets, ‘forgot it was loaded accidents’, and a surprising number of gun shop and shooting range incidents, including one that happened following the 8 hour safety course.
It seems like there is a trend in renting a gun at a shooting range to off yourself these days.
I guess that makes sense- why waste money buying a gun when you can rent one? To counter this new trend, shooting ranges will now make you bring a buddy to the range. They think you will be less likely to commit suicide if your friend is present.
Some majority opinions will align with empirical evidence, some will not. The point you’ve been asserting is that the Democrats are going to face political blowback and lose political capital if they pursue an AWB. The polling figures are directly relevant and clearly undermine that assertion.
I am a fully informed and rational person, and I disagree with you.
Mitt? Mitt Romney, is that you? Do you really stand agape at Gallup coming out with polling figures that differ from essentially everyone else? Do you also acknowledge that when you proffer one selected set of polling figures that are at odds with most of the others, you are the one who is engaging in cherry-picking?
I think most people who are “familiar with guns” already have a very selective view of the world. This thread has proven to me that even the most reasonable gun person has no idea how research works, how to read and interpret research, what our basic infrastructure for evaluating health risks in this country is, what the basic facts are regarding public opinion, and so on and so forth.
In short, this is not a demographic segment that we ought to be placating. In addition, it is shrinking, and its power is illusory. The lessons from the last election was that they can win without such people.
Again, you say these things with a very skewed and selective filter on your views of the world.
I think that your sincerity is tempered by, and your overall perceptions are biased by, your investment in a particular position. As you say below, you oppose things that you might not otherwise (a cap on the size of magazines) out of “principle.” I don’t think this is principled. I think its spiteful and reactionary and driven by a somewhat Manichean view of the world. Excepting that the dichotomy is not good/bad, but manly/wimpy, strong/weak, virile/code pink, what have you.
I think the chances are poor, but I think the political benefits are positive. The chances are poor because of the entrenchment of the NRA and those politicians who are still willing to do their bidding. But pushing the issue is the only way to change the dynamic. Sitting quietly out of fear is not remotely going to effect positive change.
I think the issues are easily disentangled.
Did you look at the polling I showed you? Although the polling firms differed, the results were consistent, and they spanned the range from the beginning of the year to just a week or so ago.
And I continue to tell you that your position is based on a completely nonsensical view of the world. Just like your views on the CDC, the NIH, NEJM, research, epidemiology, health funding, public polling, and so on and so forth. All of these have been markedly impaired by whatever sources you have been turning to.
In reality, politicians have successfully started turning an F rating by the NRA into a political advantage, and conversely tarnishing opponents who have an A rating. The political landscape is changing, the popular base of gun support is shrinking, the political power of the NRA is waning and their role not as advocates for individual gun rights but as a heat shield for manufacturers is being revealed, public opinion is strongly supportive…
There is no reason whatsoever to cower in fear of the political might of the NRA.
Is there any such thing as “gun porn”? Could Google it and find out, I suppose, but I squick easy. Ewwwphobia. But I can suggest it to you bunch of deves and pervs, and somebody will check it out and tell me.
Stewardess Sluts with Sexual Assault Weapons starring Maggie Zeene and Bay Annette.
Depressingly, it’s all about the guns. Sure, there’s some stuff with women in bikini tops shooting stuff, but that’s only pornographic in Utah. Where, coincidentally, most of it is filmed.
