Great blog post "Dear Gun Control Dems" written by a D

[Bailey Guns]

Damnit, that man just made sense out of all of this nonsense. Why cant anybody else?

He said the same things those on the right have been saying since this debate began. As a matter of fact, he used a lot of talking points and facts brought out by the right and the NRA. It made sense to me a long time ago, long before a democrat said it. While it was a good read, there's nothing new in it other than it's coming from a self-described leftist.

In other words, it's coming from someone who's part of the problem, not part of the solution. The writer posts wonderful points about why gun control is a loser with the American people. He points out how Obama, Holder, Feinstein, Degette, et al, are lying to the American people on guns. He points out that the NRA isn't the boogeyman those same people on the left make it out to be.

Yet he continues to support democrats at the ballot box. Democrats who, by and large, will support party over personal ideology when push comes to shove on the gun debate. He supports a party that has made gun control, an "assault weapons" ban, universal background checks and other 2A infringements a cornerstone of their national party's beliefs and goals.

I will concede there are democrats and liberals that like guns. But there is no such thing as a "pro-gun" democrat.

[nynco]

Bailey, I am not going to disagree with you about these things being restated. Facts are restated all the time. I think what is important here is the delivery of the message. If people don't find a way to deliver the message in a way that gets to the person you want to talk to, then...well whats the point? There are pro-gun Dems, and we need to help them change the party so regardless of which side wins, guns are safe.

This same guy has another great blog about the stupidity of the AWB. http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/...-ill-tell-you/

[Ronin13]

He said the same things those on the right have been saying since this debate began. As a matter of fact, he used a lot of talking points and facts brought out by the right and the NRA. It made sense to me a long time ago, long before a democrat said it. While it was a good read, there's nothing new in it other than it's coming from a self-described leftist.

In other words, it's coming from someone who's part of the problem, not part of the solution. The writer posts wonderful points about why gun control is a loser with the American people. He points out how Obama, Holder, Feinstein, Degette, et al, are lying to the American people on guns. He points out that the NRA isn't the boogeyman those same people on the left make it out to be.

Yet he continues to support democrats at the ballot box. Democrats who, by and large, will support party over personal ideology when push comes to shove on the gun debate. He supports a party that has made gun control, an "assault weapons" ban, universal background checks and other 2A infringements a cornerstone of their national party's beliefs and goals.

I will concede there are democrats and liberals that like guns. But there is no such thing as a "pro-gun" democrat.

Pardon my French, but A FUCKING MEN! I couldn't get that little thought out of my head while reading that: "This is a democrat, okay, so he likes guns, but he still votes for the party that wants to be rid of the 2nd Amendment."

Bailey, I am not going to disagree with you about these things being restated. Facts are restated all the time. I think what is important here is the delivery of the message. If people don't find a way to deliver the message in a way that gets to the person you want to talk to, then...well whats the point? There are pro-gun Dems, and we need to help them change the party so regardless of which side wins, guns are safe.

This same guy has another great blog about the stupidity of the AWB. http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/...-ill-tell-you/

Hate to break it to you, but I'm going to put this as bluntly as possible... Here's a simple analogy- a big part of football is rushing, we can all agree on that... football is not football without a running game somewhere in the mix, so even if you don't like it, you still have to respect the fact that it exists, it's legal, and it's part of the game. Same thing with the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It's not going anywhere, it's a vital part to the Constitution, and you can't have the US Constitution without it. Don't like it? GTFO. And what is America without the Constitution (to include the BOR)? It isn't. So using that logic, I surmise that the Democratic party is against one of the most vital aspects of the Constitution, and therefor are technically against the Constitution in it's original and current form, thus I can therefore determine that if you boil it down to just the bones of the subject- here comes the kicker- the Democratic party is, for lack of a better word: UNAMERICAN. There, I said it. Don't like it? Well tough, ya know, 1st Amendment and all that. You either respect all of the rights enumerated in the Constitution or none of them, there is no half assing.

[cstone]

It was a well written article. The article made no new points except that it was written by someone from the left. The other issue the author expressed support for was the right to have an abortion. If I were inclined to comment on that blog, I would ask the author this question:

Two candidates are running for public office. One candidate supports abortion clinics and assault weapon bans. The other candidate would like to severely restrict abortion clinics and does not support any new gun laws. Which candidate do you vote for?

There are very few "one issue" candidates on tickets. As voters, we prioritize the issues and make compromises on issues based on those priorities. When looked at from a larger perspective, the simplest thing to do in many elections is to look a the overall platform of the party supporting the candidates and choose the party which better reflects your priorities.

Until we have direct government, we are forced to make this compromise every time we vote.

Be safe.

[Bailey Guns]

Bailey, I am not going to disagree with you about these things being restated. Facts are restated all the time. I think what is important here is the delivery of the message. If people don't find a way to deliver the message in a way that gets to the person you want to talk to, then...well whats the point? There are pro-gun Dems, and we need to help them change the party so regardless of which side wins, guns are safe.

This same guy has another great blog about the stupidity of the AWB. http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/...-ill-tell-you/

Well, that's all fine and dandy. What evidence do we have that the message is being received by those on the left who CONTINUE to support a party that states in their party platform they are for various types of gun control? I'll tell you...NONE. We still have the current crop of rabidly anti-gun democrats in Colorado and national office and the anti-gun onslaught by those people continues, as do their made-up numbers and statistics.

There is no such thing as a pro-gun democrat. There just isn't and I've already articulated why that's true. Not you nor anyone else has been able to articulate why it isn't true except to say that, "I like guns" or "I own guns" or "Sen So-n-So voted against that gun bill".

Until the democrat party platform changes and until democrats help to vote people like Feinstein, McCarthy, Morse, Hudak and others out of office it will be true.

[nynco]

Ronin correct me if I am wrong (which I know you would in a heartbeat)... but didn't you say you wanted to be a cop someday? How are you going to be a cop and carry out your duty if you consider 50% of America to be traitors? The world is not black and white.

Cstone... I think one of problems you are alluding to can be summed up with this statement... "we don't live in a free country, we live in a two party dictatorship that hides under the illusion of freedom". These two parties have abused the constitution for far too long. I think if any of us really care about protecting it, then we need to find a way to reform our elections so that we are not a two party system. One solution I see for that is Instant Run Off voting. We can not do that at the presidential level but we can for all other elections. We have been divided and conquered by politicians that are just plain evil.

[Bailey Guns]

Two candidates are running for public office. One candidate supports abortion clinics and assault weapon bans. The other candidate would like to severely restrict abortion clinics and does not support any new gun laws. Which candidate do you vote for?

A pro-gun person wouldn't even have to think in order to answer that question.

[nynco]

Well, that's all fine and dandy. What evidence do we have that the message is being received by those on the left who CONTINUE to support a party that states in their party platform they are for various types of gun control? I'll tell you...NONE. We still have the current crop of rabidly anti-gun democrats in Colorado and national office and the anti-gun onslaught by those people continues, as do their made-up numbers and statistics.

There is no such thing as a pro-gun democrat. There just isn't and I've already articulated why that's true. Not you nor anyone else has been able to articulate why it isn't true except to say that, "I like guns" or "I own guns" or "Sen So-n-So voted against that gun bill".

Until the democrat party platform changes and until democrats help to vote people like Feinstein, McCarthy, Morse, Hudak and others out of office it will be true.

I am currently using that page as a means of talking to the other side. I get shit from the right here and get pilled on by the left in other places. I am doing my best to bring what I perceive as the truth to the other side. Sometimes the only way to do that is to have a message tailored for the other side. Some have described it as "dog whistle" talk.

Yes there are pro gun democrats and we need to help them rather than make it worse.

[Bailey Guns]

Cstone... I think one of problems you are alluding to can be summed up with this statement... "we don't live in a free country, we live in a two party dictatorship that hides under the illusion of freedom". These two parties have abused the constitution for far too long. I think if any of us really care about protect it, then we need to find a way to reform our elections so that we are not a two party system. One solution I see for that is Instant Run Off voting. We can not do that at the presidential level but we can for all other elections. We have been divided and conquered by politicians that just plain evil.

That is simply a transparent attempt to deflect from the issue of gun control. It has nothing to do with an imagined "two party dictatorship". It has everything to do with one party being historically vehemently anti-gun and one party historically against further gun control.

It has nothing to do with our electoral system that works just fine. It has everything to do with ideology.

[Bailey Guns]

I am currently using that page as a means of talking to the other side. I get shit from the right here and get pilled on by the left in other places. I am doing my best to bring what I perceive as the truth to the other side. Sometimes the only way to do that is to have a message tailored for the other side. Some have described it as "dog whistle" talk.

Yes there are pro gun democrats and we need to help them rather than make it worse.

If you truly are, I commend you in those efforts and wish you good luck. If you continue to vote for democrats you're simply pissin' into the wind.