• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds............

Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Unlikely. Not in todays current public climate. The court will be hard pressed to overturn Heller. And the NRA won't be challenging any gun restrictions with a liberal court to put Heller in jeopardy. Its not like we haven't had to deal with a liberal court.

And frankly its the democrats third rail. Go after firearms and it will cost the democrats election after election.

Face it haymarket.. people don't accept your definition of "reasonable" when told exactly what your regulations would entail.

What verifiable evidence do you have for these claims?
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

What verifiable evidence do you have for these claims?

the last 50 years of political history.

What verifiable evidence do you have that I am wrong.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

the last 50 years of political history.

What verifiable evidence do you have that I am wrong.

What specific events in that very large span of fifty years are you referring to?

Public opinion polls demonstrated that between 80 and 90% of Americans - including NRA members - would support reasonable measures like universal background checks on ALL firearms purchases.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

What specific events in that very large span of fifty years are you referring to?

Public opinion polls demonstrated that between 80 and 90% of Americans - including NRA members - would support reasonable measures like universal background checks on ALL firearms purchases.

The fact that universal background checks have not been accepted by the general public in the last 50 years.
the fact that gun ownership has increased in this country
the fact that a major contributor to Gore's loss to Bush was because of his gun control stance
The fact that in the last 15 years there has been more acceptance of firearms in the media. Whole shows like redjacket, Pawn stars, American guns, Top shot.. that portray gun owners in a good light.

The public opinion poll that you say 80-90% of americans, including NRA members support universal background checks was seriously flawed. For one.. it had no way of determining if someone was an NRA member. It had no way of determining if the person speaking was even an actual gun member. The questions appear to have been very misleading.

Fact.. if 80-90% of NRA members REALLY supported universal background checks.. we would have universal background checks. But they don't.. and that's why we don;t have them. They simply aren't supported by the public when you get right down to it.

ask a person.. "if your father wants to hand down the family .22 to you, do you think you should have to have a background check?".. and you will get a VERY different picture of "universal" background checks.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

The fact that universal background checks have not been accepted by the general public in the last 50 years.
the fact that gun ownership has increased in this country
the fact that a major contributor to Gore's loss to Bush was because of his gun control stance
The fact that in the last 15 years there has been more acceptance of firearms in the media. Whole shows like redjacket, Pawn stars, American guns, Top shot.. that portray gun owners in a good light.

The public opinion poll that you say 80-90% of americans, including NRA members support universal background checks was seriously flawed. For one.. it had no way of determining if someone was an NRA member. It had no way of determining if the person speaking was even an actual gun member. The questions appear to have been very misleading.

Fact.. if 80-90% of NRA members REALLY supported universal background checks.. we would have universal background checks. But they don't.. and that's why we don;t have them. They simply aren't supported by the public when you get right down to it.

ask a person.. "if your father wants to hand down the family .22 to you, do you think you should have to have a background check?".. and you will get a VERY different picture of "universal" background checks.

There are two reasons why politicians push for UBGC

the first is pandering. Lots of slow witted or low wattage voters scream for answers every time some nut or racist kills a few people in a gun free zone. none of those massacres could or would have been stopped by a UBGC but its something politicians throw out to placate the howling mobs.

the second reason is far more sinister and machiavellian. Anyone who understands how guns are bought and sold knows that the UBGC cannot be enforced on private citizens unless there is complete and total registration of all currently owned private firearms or at least most of those that are legally owned. That is the real goal of so many of the Banners

a side note to that is the hope that it will create criminals out of people who have never misused firearms. We know that in many states or cities, registration requirements imposed on people who already owned firearms when the law was passed, refused or ignored registration requirements this of course has the possibility of making them "criminals". Banners hope to do that to people who aren't going to bother with the stupidity of a UBGC when they sell to a neighbor, or a coworker
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

There are two reasons why politicians push for UBGC

the first is pandering. Lots of slow witted or low wattage voters scream for answers every time some nut or racist kills a few people in a gun free zone. none of those massacres could or would have been stopped by a UBGC but its something politicians throw out to placate the howling mobs.

the second reason is far more sinister and machiavellian. Anyone who understands how guns are bought and sold knows that the UBGC cannot be enforced on private citizens unless there is complete and total registration of all currently owned private firearms or at least most of those that are legally owned. That is the real goal of so many of the Banners

a side note to that is the hope that it will create criminals out of people who have never misused firearms. We know that in many states or cities, registration requirements imposed on people who already owned firearms when the law was passed, refused or ignored registration requirements this of course has the possibility of making them "criminals". Banners hope to do that to people who aren't going to bother with the stupidity of a UBGC when they sell to a neighbor, or a coworker

Agree.

for most gun ban politicians its a distraction to pander to folks irrational fears.

Much like the right's irrational fear of homosexuals...

I think some though.. like Pelosi, and Hillary are true believers. I think they honestly don't think that the average American is responsible enough to own a firearm or pretty much do anything without government guidance...i.e. their guidance.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

The fact that universal background checks have not been accepted by the general public in the last 50 years.

What evidence do you have of this claim?

the fact that gun ownership has increased in this country

How does that fact provide evidence that people will not accept reasonable laws regarding guns?


the fact that a major contributor to Gore's loss to Bush was because of his gun control stance

What verifiable evidence do you have of this claim?


The fact that in the last 15 years there has been more acceptance of firearms in the media. Whole shows like redjacket, Pawn stars, American guns, Top shot.. that portray gun owners in a good light.

What evidence do you have that this claim shows the American people would not also support reasonable gun laws and policies?



The public opinion poll that you say 80-90% of americans, including NRA members support universal background checks was seriously flawed. For one.. it had no way of determining if someone was an NRA member. It had no way of determining if the person speaking was even an actual gun member. The questions appear to have been very misleading.

So you claim. Where is your evidence?


Fact.. if 80-90% of NRA members REALLY supported universal background checks.. we would have universal background checks. But they don't.. and that's why we don;t have them. They simply aren't supported by the public when you get right down to it.

That is a dog chasing its tail and makes no sense since it did happen and we don't.

ask a person.. "if your father wants to hand down the family .22 to you, do you think you should have to have a background check?".. and you will get a VERY different picture of "universal" background checks.

What evidence do you have for this statement?
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

What evidence do you have of this claim?

the fact that for years, gun control advocates have pushes universal background checks and we don't have them.

How does that fact provide evidence that people will not accept reasonable laws regarding guns?

Actually it proves that people will accept reasonable laws regarding guns. The problem is that what you support are not reasonable laws. And people realize this.

Its one reason that has prompted more people to purchase guns.. because they fear that they will not be able to in the future if your so called "reasonable" laws.. do manage to get passed.

What verifiable evidence do you have of this claim?

Gore had put his finger in the political winds and decided America was turning against gun rights. Gore talked about gun registration and more bans (the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was then in effect). He loudly participated in a march against gun rights under the banners of Handgun Control, Inc. in Washington, D.C.

During this time the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) membership spiked. Darren LaSorte, a former NRA lobbyist who in 2000 was the NRA’s state liaison in Gore’s home state of Tennessee, told me: “I saw a shift happen firsthand in Tennessee. The voters there turned against him largely because of the gun issue.” That November Gore lost his home state. If he’d carried Tennessee there wouldn’t have been a “hanging chad” controversy in Florida because Gore would have won the presidency.
LaSorte said, “After Gore lost the election and with it Tennessee, even former President Bill Clinton said Gore lost his home state and likely the election because guns were the issue in Tennessee and were made a major issue by Gore across the nation.
After Gore’s loss, even politicians who wanted more gun control toned down their anti-gun rhetoric—this includes Barack Obama

What evidence do you have that this claim shows the American people would not also support reasonable gun laws and policies?

Oh they do support reasonable gun laws and policies. The NRA is a strong supporter of reasonable gun laws and policies. Its just that people understand that the laws you are pushing are not reasonable.

The popularity of such shows is indicative that the general public is not as unreasonable as you are.

What evidence do you have for this statement?

both NRA and GOA did polls of their own members.

* NRA did a scientific survey of about 1,000 members and found that 5% of its members support the universal registry legislation.

* And GOA did a non-scientific poll of its members. After nearly 25,000 gun owners responded, GOA’s survey found that only 4% of its members supported “universal background checks.”

These poll results are significant as they show that the “mainstream” polls are about 70-80 percentage points off when they survey members of gun organizations.[1]

Additionally, a recent Quinnipiac poll found that, by a margin of 48-38%, Americans think background checks will lead to confiscation. And a CBS News poll found that only 47 percent of Americans want stricter gun control. So if that’s true, how is it that twice that number supposedly want background checks expanded? The numbers just don’t add up.

A January 14 Gallup poll shows that only 4% of Americans thought gun control was a major priority.

Likewise, an earlier Quinnipiac poll showed that Governor Andrew Cuomo’s support had fallen 15 points after signing the gun ban in New York. (Jan. 30, 2013)

Finally, a Zogby/O'Leary poll indicated that by a 2-1 margin (52%-26%) voters would be more likely to oppose Senators who were not supportive of issues that are important to gun owners. (July, 2009)
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Agree.

for most gun ban politicians its a distraction to pander to folks irrational fears.

Much like the right's irrational fear of homosexuals...

I think some though.. like Pelosi, and Hillary are true believers. I think they honestly don't think that the average American is responsible enough to own a firearm or pretty much do anything without government guidance...i.e. their guidance.

Yes control freaks. people who demonstrate why the citizenry has to be well armed. its the liberal mantra-we are smarter than you and thus we need to run your lives. The corollary on the right are the social fascists-we love God more than you do so we will tell you when you are a sinner.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

the fact that for years, gun control advocates have pushes universal background checks and we don't have them.

While that may speak to the effectiveness and power of the NRA lobby in Congress - it says nothing about public support for the same measures. So you are just plain wrong in taking lack of action from Congress as any measure of public support those same measures.

Actually it proves that people will accept reasonable laws regarding guns. The problem is that what you support are not reasonable laws. And people realize this.

80 to 90 % of the American public when surveyed declare that they can support universal background checks and obviously do consider them as reasonable.

Your thinking is completely backward on this and you are making conclusions based on the NRA lobby's power in Washington and NOT the American people.

You presented no verifiable data that Gore lost the presidency because of his stand on guns. One folksy observation by somebody who was a NRA lobbyist and whose opinion is obviously skewed in the first place on guns is not verifiable data of the reason for a national election loss.

I have little doubt that the NRA can and did conduct their own survey and asked the questions so they got the results they campaigned for and coached for.

A January 14 Gallup poll shows that only 4% of Americans thought gun control was a major priority.

Compared to the economy - it is down the list and I too would have said that.


Likewise, an earlier Quinnipiac poll showed that Governor Andrew Cuomo’s support had fallen 15 points after signing the gun ban in New York. (Jan. 30, 2013)

Now all you have to do is link the two with proof that one caused the other.

Finally, a Zogby/O'Leary poll indicated that by a 2-1 margin (52%-26%) voters would be more likely to oppose Senators who were not supportive of issues that are important to gun owners. (July, 2009)

And what issues would those be? Without knowing that - the poll is of debatable value.
 
Last edited:
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Yes control freaks. people who demonstrate why the citizenry has to be well armed. its the liberal mantra-we are smarter than you and thus we need to run your lives. The corollary on the right are the social fascists-we love God more than you do so we will tell you when you are a sinner.

Bingo..

Turtledude for president....

Of course both the right and left would probably tar and feather you.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

the fact that for years, gun control advocates have pushes universal background checks and we don't have them.



Actually it proves that people will accept reasonable laws regarding guns. The problem is that what you support are not reasonable laws. And people realize this.

Its one reason that has prompted more people to purchase guns.. because they fear that they will not be able to in the future if your so called "reasonable" laws.. do manage to get passed.







Oh they do support reasonable gun laws and policies. The NRA is a strong supporter of reasonable gun laws and policies. Its just that people understand that the laws you are pushing are not reasonable.

The popularity of such shows is indicative that the general public is not as unreasonable as you are.

in 1994, the Democrat party, along with some "moderate" republicans like Danforth of Mo, thought that supporting the Clinton gun ban would make them popular with the suburban soccer moms who seemed to be the major constituency group screaming for gun bans. People claimed that most of america opposed honest Americans owning "these weapons of war" especially after marxist agitator Josh Sugarmann of the extreme left/extreme anti rights group the Violence Policy Center-told the MSM to intermix the term "assault weapons" with machine guns (after the Sugarmann propaganda paper was sent out to the press, the term "semi automatic" was used by the press many thousands of times more than they had used the term prior to that.

So many Democrats and more than a few republicans voted for the hysterical side of the issue and the Clinton Gun ban was passed. and I heard lots and lots of soccer moms, yuppies and others say that this was a good thing. and in a way it was because the 40 year lock the Democrats had on the House was blown up by that idiocy when voters retaliated against this blatant rape of the second amendment. The dems took a beating that had not been seen in decades.

and why? because the suzy soccer moms who reflexively support gun control, aren't exactly hard core voters on that issue. its a placebo to pander to their emotions. But for those of us who actually really care about the issue, we vote and we vote against the dishonest scum bags who pretend banning our firearms and limiting our rights is a valid tool of crime control
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Bingo..

Turtledude for president....

Of course both the right and left would probably tar and feather you.

well the gun banning, tax hiking, haters of American greatness would despise me. So would the "God tells us we are right" moral control freaks who think that if you don't persecute gays and make sodomy a capital offense, you will burn in hell.

But the good news is-the best armed people in the country would be watching my six.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

While that may speak to the effectiveness and power of the NRA lobby in Congress - it says nothing about public support for the same measures. So you are just plain wrong in taking lack of action from Congress as any measure of public support those same measures.

Sure it does. Because the NRA gets its power from the 5 million members or so it has. While gun control lobby has to rely on a few extremely wealthy people like Bloomberg and Soros to push their agenda.

80 to 90 % of the American public when surveyed declare that they can support universal background checks and obviously do consider them as reasonable

As already pointed out.. that does not add up with the polls regarding whether americans support greater gun control etc. and it does not add up to the claims about the NRA members. As already pointed out.

You presented no verifiable data that Gore lost the presidency because of his stand on guns. One folksy observation by somebody who was a NRA lobbyist and whose opinion is obviously skewed in the first place on guns is not verifiable data of the reason for a national election loss.

Former President Bill Clinton warned a group of top Democratic donors at a private Saturday meeting not to underestimate the passions that gun control stirs among many Americans.

“Do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them,” Clinton said.

“Alot of these people live in a world very different from the world lived in by the people proposing these things,” Clinton said. “I know because I come from this world.”

Clinton recalled Al Gore’s 2000 campaign against George W. Bush in Colorado, where a referendum designed to close the so-called gun show loophole shared the ballot with the presidential ticket. Gore publicly backed the proposal, while Bush opposed it.

Though the referendum passed with 70 percent of the vote, Gore lost the state. Clinton said that the reason was because a good chunk of the referendum’s opponents were single-issue voters who automatically rejected Gore as anti-gun.

And Clinton said that passing the 1994 federal assault weapons ban “devastated” more than a dozen Democratic lawmakers in the 1994 midterms — and cost then-Speaker of the House Tom Foley (D-Wash.) his job and his seat in Congress.

“I’ve had many sleepless nights in the many years since,” Clinton said. One reason? “I never had any sessions with the House members who were vulnerable,” he explained — saying that he had assumed they already knew how to explain their vote for the ban to their constituents.

That's president Clinton speaking. I guess you don't think he knows anything about politics.

And what issues would those be? Without knowing that - the poll is of debatable value.
'
Please.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

in 1994, the Democrat party, along with some "moderate" republicans like Danforth of Mo, thought that supporting the Clinton gun ban would make them popular with the suburban soccer moms who seemed to be the major constituency group screaming for gun bans. People claimed that most of america opposed honest Americans owning "these weapons of war" especially after marxist agitator Josh Sugarmann of the extreme left/extreme anti rights group the Violence Policy Center-told the MSM to intermix the term "assault weapons" with machine guns (after the Sugarmann propaganda paper was sent out to the press, the term "semi automatic" was used by the press many thousands of times more than they had used the term prior to that.

So many Democrats and more than a few republicans voted for the hysterical side of the issue and the Clinton Gun ban was passed. and I heard lots and lots of soccer moms, yuppies and others say that this was a good thing. and in a way it was because the 40 year lock the Democrats had on the House was blown up by that idiocy when voters retaliated against this blatant rape of the second amendment. The dems took a beating that had not been seen in decades.

and why? because the suzy soccer moms who reflexively support gun control, aren't exactly hard core voters on that issue. its a placebo to pander to their emotions. But for those of us who actually really care about the issue, we vote and we vote against the dishonest scum bags who pretend banning our firearms and limiting our rights is a valid tool of crime control

Very true.. and here is the other side of that issue;. A lot of those soccer moms.. that in a poll,, or when questioned on the street.. would say.. "I agree with that". UNTIL they found out what it really entailed. Heck, MY MOM was once polled about that very issue and she seemed to go along with the pollster. I was next to her (I was 12), and I said.. "mom you know they are talking about not letting Dad purchase or have a firearm". and my mom turned to the pollster and said.. "now wait.. what are you actually talking about? You aren;t talking about keeping guns from felons? And the lady told her "well no.. guns should not be in the hands of anyone that has children".
My mom told her to push off (well much nicer than that).. but she did demand that her response be changed to indicate no support for what the woman was suggesting.

You have it right when these anti gunners pushing these laws lie and obfuscate. They make it seem that they are trying to keep "guns out of the hands of criminals" or " keep machine guns off the streets"... not telling them that the law includes my dad's turkey hunting gun. Or that it would bar me from shooting competition until I was 21.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Very true.. and here is the other side of that issue;. A lot of those soccer moms.. that in a poll,, or when questioned on the street.. would say.. "I agree with that". UNTIL they found out what it really entailed. Heck, MY MOM was once polled about that very issue and she seemed to go along with the pollster. I was next to her (I was 12), and I said.. "mom you know they are talking about not letting Dad purchase or have a firearm". and my mom turned to the pollster and said.. "now wait.. what are you actually talking about? You aren;t talking about keeping guns from felons? And the lady told her "well no.. guns should not be in the hands of anyone that has children".
My mom told her to push off (well much nicer than that).. but she did demand that her response be changed to indicate no support for what the woman was suggesting.

You have it right when these anti gunners pushing these laws lie and obfuscate. They make it seem that they are trying to keep "guns out of the hands of criminals" or " keep machine guns off the streets"... not telling them that the law includes my dad's turkey hunting gun. Or that it would bar me from shooting competition until I was 21.

Here is an example of a poll question I saw

Should people be able to own weapons of war designed only to kill large numbers of people as fast as possible? (when i hear that I think of militarized anthrax or 500 pound bombs etc). This poll that meant semi auto rifles
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Here is an example of a poll question I saw

Should people be able to own weapons of war designed only to kill large numbers of people as fast as possible? (when i hear that I think of militarized anthrax or 500 pound bombs etc). This poll that meant semi auto rifles

Exactly.

And I think the non gun owning public is catching on a bit to the lies of the gun banners.

I do think the NRA has to be a little careful I think in the next election to not get caught up in the three ringed circus that's about to unfold.
 
Re: Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds...........

Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds Government Right to Regulate Guns
Despite NRA Victory Claims, Latest Heller Decision Importantly Upholds Government Right to Regulate Guns



Now haven’t I been telling yall that is the case……….

Frankly, I'm not going to bother reading a blog. However I will state that yes, the federal government can still regulate guns. But now it can't simply outright ban guns as DC essentially tried to do by banning all handguns that weren't owned prior to 1975. It also can no longer make guns useless by requiring that they be disassembled and unloaded or have a trigger lock on them. Those were the laws that were overturned as being unconstitutional. Heller did not address, as it states, the federal governments ability to regulate in certain ways such as requiring a background check for interstate sales or preventing felons from owning guns. Although I do believe that last part needs to be revisited as not all felons are violent or even slightly violent and as such should not have their 2nd Amendment permanently revoked after they have served their time in prison/jail and probation.
 
Back
Top Bottom