# The Democratic Party should drop the gun control issue
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [November 7, 2004, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495 "2004-11-07T14:28:29Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 4
### Author:  [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/61 "2004-11-08T15:14:24Z")
Sure, the country has been drifting rightward for a time.
But what you don’t understand is the fact that this has been a reaction to liberal excesses. Liberalism came to fruition in America in the mid-1970’s, and voters sure didn’t like what they saw.
What they saw was a combination of libertine drug use and family breakdown that made the crime rate explode and many of our cities virtually uninhabitable. Overregulation, high taxes, and follies like price controls created a nightmare economy with sky high inflation, interest rates, and unemployment.
Our military was demobilized, and our foreign policy became mere wishful thinking. This emboldened our enemies in places like the Soviet Union and Iran.
They also saw many personal freedoms curtailed. Many of our current gun control laws were passed in this period.
Now, I’ll be the first to admit that many liberals learned lessons from this period, and won’t repeat some of these mistakes. It’s still something that needs to be sold to some voters, however.
Dropping gun control as a major issue would be a step in that direction.
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/62 "2004-11-08T15:19:21Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#):
>
> You’re looking at it the wrong way.
>
> The gun-control issue, even if it is not a sole issue for very many voters, is a factor in the voting of very many people.
>
> Many of them live in states Democrats should be competitive in. Ohio is a big hunting state. Pennsylvania has more NRA members, per capita than any other state in the union. Indeed, only California has more members, and it’s a much bigger state.
>
> Hunting is similarly popular in states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee…
>
> I could go on, but I think you get my drift.
Yes- BUT
Kerry hunts. Nobody advocates taking guns away from hunters. Unless the deer in your area are particularly well armed, you don’t need an AK-47 to go hunting. If it’s a given that nobody is after disarming the hunter, then why are hunters worried about it?
---
### Author:  [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/63 "2004-11-08T15:25:35Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#):
>
> Yes- BUT
> Kerry hunts. Nobody advocates taking guns away from hunters. Unless the deer in your area are particularly well armed, you don’t need an AK-47 to go hunting. If it’s a given that nobody is after disarming the hunter, then why are hunters worried about it?
Kerry has a richly deserved “F” rating from the NRA. He is anti-gun. He has voted to ban semi-automatic shotguns, which are the weapon of choice for many deer hunters including me.
Buying a camo jacket and spending an afternoon hunting is not enough to fool the voting sportsmen.
It’s a good sign that Kerry tried to run as a pro-gun candidate. This means that the democrat political thinkers have finally realized that this is a losing issue for them. However, now they need to actually start backing this up with some action. Stop Feinstein, Kennedy and Schumer from passing laws against gun rights. Make sure that the next Democratic candidate for president really is pro-gun, not just in word but in deed. Even if they do stop being the anti-gun party it will still be quite some time before the gun owners start to trust them.
---
### Author:  [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/64 "2004-11-08T15:32:11Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#):
>
> Yes- BUT
> Kerry hunts. Nobody advocates taking guns away from hunters. Unless the deer in your area are particularly well armed, you don’t need an AK-47 to go hunting. If it’s a given that nobody is after disarming the hunter, then why are hunters worried about it?
Because the NRA whips them into a frenzy by creating the Dems as bogeymen who want to take everybody’s guns away – everything more powerful than a BB gun, and maybe those too. The NRA does this for their own institutional reasons, not out of any real fears that hunters will be disarmed.
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/65 "2004-11-08T15:36:47Z")
EvilCaptor’s reply made more sense. Follow the money. The NRA makes millions exploiting the paranoia and gullibility of its members.
---
### Author:  [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/66 "2004-11-08T15:40:03Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#):
>
> No. The organization that is the NRA, as opposed to its members, would absolutely HaTE it if the Dems put a plank in their platform supporting the right to bear arms and officially giving up on gun control because that would render the NRA useless, and eventually lose it most if not all of its political clout. They will fight desperately behind the scenes to keep the Dems interested in gun control, and will probably try to persuade their members that the Dems are not sincere so they’ll still have the bogeyman that has made them so successful.
You’ve read the NRA magazine? No, I take it. They praise Dem. lawmakers (relatively few though they are) who support the causes they care about (concealed carry, immunity from “faulty product” lawsuits against gunmakers, etc.).
By your rationale, AIPAC would be the weakest, most irrelevant PAC around, because both parties strongly support Israel. Instead, it’s one of the strongest.
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/67 "2004-11-08T15:40:53Z")
I’m an NRA member, and I’m neither paraniod nor gullible.
If anybody was exploiting the gullibility of the voters on this issue, it was Kerry. He believed that an afternoon in borrowed camo would make up for a career’s worth of anti-gun votes.
Sorry, but there are pro-gun Democrats out there, and I’m not afraid to praise them for their stance. Kerry was not, and is not, one of those Democrats.
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/68 "2004-11-08T15:42:24Z")
Can you point to specific votes that Kerry made? Did any of these votes try to ban hunting weaponry?
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/69 "2004-11-08T15:48:31Z")
I suspect this would be a winning move for Democrats, but a risky one.
One problem that could arise is the one **BobLibDem** mentioned - losing the votes of one of your core constituencies (single-issue anti-gun proponents) without gaining votes from your target audience - the moderate middle. Certainly a real risk.
The other is that abandoning the general rhetoric of anti-guns could lead to conflicts elsewhere in the Democratic platform writers - if you take the Second Amendment literally, what about the rest of the Constitution? Aren’t you then logically compelled to start thinking in strict constructionist terms about Amendments One, and Three thru Ten as well?
Dangerous stuff, when one of your other core issues is based on a penumbra that emanates from the Constitution.
I would love to see it, and the whole approach would increase the appeal of the Democratic party to people like me. If you could convince me to believe you, by not caving in the first time Sarah Brady or Diane Feinstein talks about it’s all worth it if it saves even one child from a drive-by shooting.
I think you need to declare victory on gun control, and go home. Define what is currently in place as “reasonable gun control”, focus on enforcing existing gun laws, and don’t try to implement more.
Of course, you have then basically aligned yourself with the NRA, and if you can’t stomach that, you don’t have to. Was it Adlai Stevenson who would “rather be right than President”? Don’t know about the first half of his wish, but he certainly was granted the second half.
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/70 "2004-11-08T15:54:16Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> The other is that abandoning the general rhetoric of anti-guns could lead to conflicts elsewhere in the Democratic platform writers - if you take the Second Amendment literally, what about the rest of the Constitution? Aren’t you then logically compelled to start thinking in strict constructionist terms about Amendments One, and Three thru Ten as well?
Actually, we do take the first Ten Amendments literally. Consistent court rulings have held:
1- That the Second Amendment prohibits the
_federal government_ from restricting the arming of well-regulated militias.
2- _All_ of the first Ten Amendments are restrictions on the power of _federal_ government only.
If a state wants to restrict guns, the Second Amendment does not prevent this.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/71 "2004-11-08T15:56:33Z")
What difference would a change in position make? Who even notices truth?
Does anyone here seriously believe that the Dems are pro-atheist? Did that stop the rabid right from claiming so? Just look at the looney-tunes nutbar OK just elected for Senator, worried about girls in high school going to be bathroom in pairs, rampant lesbianism, etc.
If the other side won’t engage in fact-oriented debate, the Dems real position doesn’t matter, the Pubs will just make up a position, assign it to the Dems and run against that!
(Well, except for that part about forcing Eagle Scouts into gay marriages…yeah, we really mean that. Didn’t go over too good, might want to drop it…)
---
### Author:  [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/72 "2004-11-08T16:00:53Z")
> [@mks57](#):
>
> I used to live in an area like that, they also wanted to ban nuclear weapons by local law.
Naivete such as this makes me giggle.
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/73 "2004-11-08T16:16:56Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#):
>
> Actually, we do take the first Ten Amendments literally. Consistent court rulings have held:
> 1- That the Second Amendment prohibits the
> _federal government_ from restricting the arming of well-regulated militias.
>
> 2- _All_ of the first Ten Amendments are restrictions on the power of _federal_ government only.
>
> If a state wants to restrict guns, the Second Amendment does not prevent this.
Thanks for the explanation.
I assume you have no objection, therefore, if a state wished to limit the freedom of the press, impose a state church, or outlaw abortion.
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/74 "2004-11-08T16:19:34Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#):
>
> Can you point to specific votes that Kerry made? Did any of these votes try to ban hunting weaponry?
Kerry was a co-sponsor of S. 1431 on Nov. 21, 2003. This bill would have banned all semi-automatic shotguns and detachable magazine semi-automatic rifles. This is basically “hunting weaponry”. These are some of the most common firearms used for hunting.
Kerry has voted nine other times to ban semi-automatic firearms:
Vote No. 24, March 2, 2004; Vote No. 295, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 294, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 293, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 375, Nov. 17, 1993; Vote No. 365, Nov. 9, 1993; Vote No. 133, June 28, 1990; Vote No. 103, May 23, 1990; Vote No. 102, May 23, 1990.
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/75 "2004-11-08T16:26:41Z")
> [@Debaser](#):
>
> Kerry was a co-sponsor of S. 1431 on Nov. 21, 2003. This bill would have banned all semi-automatic shotguns and detachable magazine semi-automatic rifles. This is basically “hunting weaponry”. These are some of the most common firearms used for hunting.
>
> Kerry has voted nine other times to ban semi-automatic firearms:
>
> Vote No. 24, March 2, 2004; Vote No. 295, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 294, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 293, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 375, Nov. 17, 1993; Vote No. 365, Nov. 9, 1993; Vote No. 133, June 28, 1990; Vote No. 103, May 23, 1990; Vote No. 102, May 23, 1990.
Thank you for the cites, I really appreciate the opportunity to dig into the nuts and bolts of this. I shall do some homework.
Now Shodan, a few things to keep in mind:
1- Most states have a second amendment clone in their state constitution
2- Most states also have a first amendment clone in their state constitution.
3- The first ten amendments were not cited in Roe v. Wade.
---
### Author:  [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/76 "2004-11-08T16:37:26Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#):
>
> Wrong move for the Democrats- begin pandering to the right wing. The right move is to continue to present the voice of reason and social justice.
As someone who generally supports Republicans, I would like to encourage this as well.
---
### Author:  [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/77 "2004-11-08T16:57:04Z")
> [@elucidator](#):
>
> Does anyone here seriously believe that the Dems are pro-atheist?
Well, I believe they aren’t anti-atheist. I’d like to believe they are pro-atheist in the same way I’d like to believe they are pro-gay—supportive and welcoming without assuming everyone can and will be that one. (Republicans seem to like to claim that if you are, for example, pro-gay, it means you’re pushing being gay, as if that were possible. I imagine their idea of pro-atheism would take the same form.)
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/78 "2004-11-08T16:59:03Z")
OK what do the gun enthusiasts make of this from [fact check.org?](http://www.factcheck.org/article296.html)
> [@](#):
>
> What the Bill Really Says: The Lautenberg bill that Kerry co-sponsored actually stopped well short of any blanket ban on semiautomatic shotguns or pump-action shotguns, two types of weapons commonly used for hunting.
>
> ```
> Pump-action shotguns: These guns can fire more than one round without reloading. After firing one shot, the shooter ejects the spent cartridge and chambers a new round by pulling back on a slide or pump located under the barrel. Far from banning all such weapons, the bill Kerry co-sponsored specifically exempted them. It said the ban "shall not apply to any firearm that--
> (A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, level, or slide action ;
> (B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
> (C) is an antique firearm."(We have underlined the word "or" to show that the exemption for pump or slide-action weapons applies independently of the other two exemptions for antique or inoperable weapons.)
>
> Semiautomatic shotguns: These weapons can also fire more than one round without reloading, but the spent cartridge is ejected and a fresh round chambered automatically. The recoil action from the first round powers the mechanism that loads the next one. Kerry's bill would have banned any semi-automatic shotgun that had any one of the following features: "a folding or telescoping stock . . . a pistol grip . . . the ability to accept a detachable magazine, or . . . a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds." But semiautomatic shotguns sold for hunting or target shooting typically don't have detachable clips, and hold no more than five rounds, so few if any sporting weapons would have been affected.
>
> ```
I would be interested to hear the take on the [factcheck.org](http://factcheck.org) analysis. Looks to me like the NRA exaggerated things a bit.
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/79 "2004-11-08T17:03:32Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#):
>
> Now Shodan, a few things to keep in mind:
> 1- Most states have a second amendment clone in their state constitution
> 2- Most states also have a first amendment clone in their state constitution.
> 3- The first ten amendments were not cited in Roe v. Wade.
And therefore, if the states decide to outlaw abortion, the feds (and Dems) would have no objections, as I mentioned.
Same if they decided to amend their state Constitutions and outlaw gay marriage, or impose the One True Church on their citizens, or require newspapers to pass their editorials thru the Correct Thought Approval Board.
Right?
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2004, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495/80 "2004-11-08T17:11:30Z")
Most rifles and shotguns sold today have pistol grips. These are far more comfortable for most people than a straight grip stock.
I’m looking at the Remington page, and they only sell one model of autoloading shotgun with this kind of grip. They have more than twenty other models, all having pistol grips.
A ban on pistol grips would ban legitimate hunting and sporting shotguns owned by millions of people.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495.md?page=3)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-democratic-party-should-drop-the-gun-control-issue/273495.md?page=5)