How will the Democrats gun control agenda play out in rural America?

Question

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) are among those who have said that the Virginia Tech shootings underscore the need for tougher regulation.

"Everyone's afraid of the NRA," said McCarthy's spokesman, George Burke. "It's a pro-gun House and a pro-gun Senate. That's just the reality of it."

Answer 1

It won't play out well if they insist on targeting law abiding gun owners.
People are only afraid of what they don't know and I would assume they are ignorant about the NRA.
Democrats can't pick and choose which amendments they want to stand by. The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting either!
As long as there is mental illness there will be people like Cho. How about addressing our non existant mental healthcare in america?
Without the second amendment all other amendments mean nothing.

Answer 2

I Certainly hope the Democrats bring it back up, just so the American people can once again smack them down (through votes), fire them, and return the Republicans to Congress.

The 2nd Amendment is the Right to Bear Arms, NOT the right to hunt, right to own toy weapons, or the right to allow other agencies to bear arms (such as the military or police forces).

The Second Amendment states the following:

" A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. "

The right of the People to keep and bear Arms... this is pretty self-explanatory. In other words, the People have the Right to KEEP and BEAR ARMS, not "hunting weapons", not "knives" or "swords" or "muskets". Clearly it says Arms, meaning weaponry.

Our forefathers may not have been able to envision a machine gun or an assault rifle, but they weren't morons. They understood that technology would continue to advance to a place beyond their imaginations and beyond even that!

So, I say to the Democrats "bring it on" because they will once again learn a Constitutional lesson from the American People.

Answer 3

And in 1934 the national Firearms Act grew to become into handed and signed by potential of FDR, a Dem. Then in 1994 the AWB grew to become into signed into regulation by potential of William Jefferson Clinton, yet another Dem. Our Prez has not had assorted time to dedicate to gun subjects (that pesky melancholy ingredient) yet in Illinois as a Senator, he by no potential met a gun administration regulation that he did not like. Mitt is likely certainly one of the international's poorest excuse for a Republican.

Answer 4

Rural America - which tends to have a lot of guns, and not a lot of violence - will, of course, ignore the issue unless whipped up by demagauges. It's very much a (sub)urban issue - that's where peole are packed closely enough for the threat of violence to feel palpable, and where libs are packed close enough together to have a shot at abridging the rights of a gun-owning minority.


As to the 'pro gun congress' quote, it's standard political practice in the US to paint yourself as the oppressed minority or underdog when trying to garner support.
(See? I did it, above. I didn't even think about it, it's like a reflex action.)

Answer 5

Haven't you learned anything yet? Are you that naive about politics? You read one statement in one news rag and assume that everyone is labeled the same way. There are just as many republican gun control agenda people as there are democrats. Most, if not all politicans are swayed by the PAC's or political action committees. Each politican wants to get re-elected and usually vote by who funds the most money. And, if you have not noticed, a bunch of politicans vote or make a speech or bring up a bill that makes them look good, even though they know that there isn't a snowballs chance in hell of it ever passing. But, then they can turn around and say that they tried, so "we" sheep keep voting them in office.

Answer 6

How about it's pro-intelligence in the House and Senate, except for the idiot libs who think that they can stop things like this with more gun control. Are they so stupid that they can't see that the shooter was breaking a law by bringing those guns on campus? If he's going to do what he did, do they really think he's going to care about breaking gun laws. I don't want to hear any of that crap about limiting availability either. Name me one place where you can legitimately buy marijuana and then compare that with the amount of marijuana for sale on the streets of any given city. There are places where you can legitimately purchase firearms so what makes them think that a ban wouldn't boost the black market in guns? Their logic is stupid beyond belief.

Answer 7

It's amazing how when something like this happens they always want to come up with a new law so that way they look like they are really doing something, when in fact they always come up with a quick solution that ends up only hurting the already law abiding citizen. The NRA is not the problem, most NRA members support gun control, we are the ones who go out and buy the safes to keep our guns in, and have trigger locks on our guns to boot, and give real information when buying our guns and ammo, so really the laws they come up with will only be lip service and infringe on more civil rights, the bottom line is we all know who the criminals are, who the gang members are the real problem is no one wants to be the bad guy that points out this fact, and the one who is going to get sued by them because we have become so politically correct that now the criminals have more rites than victims!!

Answer 8

regulation works great- but only if you actually do something. enforce the current laws and the need for more regulation is irrelevant.
for example- use a gun to comit a crime go straight to prison for ten years, no parole, no deals, no pleaing to a lesser offence. take the ability of prosecutors to lessen the puinishment for crimes committed away from them. then, if a crime is committed, the one who commits the crime STAYS in prison for the required number of years. NO PAROLE, NO PLEA BARGAINS, NO FEDS LETTING PEOPLE OFF TO GET AT SOMEONE ELSE. commit a crime, go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect two hundred dollars!
if you can'tafford the time, don't do the crime.

Answer 9

I could care less. The last ban on guns was a farce. I bought several guns two of which were assault rifles and one was a fully automatic rifle and they couldn't do anything about it. The dems think they can curb gun sales with restrictions but there are no restrictions on the streets.

Answer 10

The reality is they have 21,000 + regulations on the books. Cho and other criminals pay them no attention. They can't offer solutions just rhetoric.

Here is a good question; why is the democratic leadership opposed to an instant back ground check against criminal history and mental health records for potential gun owners? The NRA supports it? Why not the liberals?

Answer = easier access for honest law abiding people to have weapons.