Why are "Guns" a Left/Right issue?

[Empirica]

I don't think anyone will argue the accuracy of the thread's Title!

The world has long been ideo-politically divided on the right of private citizens to own guns_

Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Progressives and 20th Century Democrats all believe that citizens should be disarmed! (for the good of society they say)

Except of course for Bernie Sanders; although I highly suspect he had to tweak his ideo-politic-ology to make himself palatable to the Vermont electorate_

Which I also believe he would quickly un-tweak should he actually get himself elected POTUS or maybe even just nominated as the Democrat Party's Candidate_

Well known Utopian Revolutionaries such as Lenin, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Min and Castro, etc; all disarmed their people immediately after their respective revolutions_

And Western Nations such as Canada, Australia and the European Union have all been actively disarming their populations since they began their transformation to Socialism_

And here in our own backyard, the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution has for decades been at the top of the agenda for the far-left Progressive Democrat Party_

For some reason the Leftist Elites, Politicians and Revolutionaries appear to fear guns in the hands of the populous which is obvious by the fact they have always made a point to disarm them_

While Rightwing Politicians and Capitalists don't seem to have the least bit of fear of law-abiding citizens having the right to keep and bear arms_

Anyone have any theories as to why such a distinct ideo-political contrast has always been drawn on Gun Rights?

 

[OrphanSlug]

You answered your own question, in a manner of speaking.

If you agree that our political system is dominated by a couple of political parties heavily invested in division oriented politics, then it makes sense no matter how sad it may be that the 2nd Amendment issue, various issues involving religion, the abortion debate, gay marriage debate, "right to work" vs. union protection, taxation, minority protection issues, and so many other issues end up left vs. right issues.

It is all by design, and is the very faction oriented thinking so many of us should be concerned about but are not.

 

[akrunner88]

The vast majority of leftists, democrats, etc in this country support the 2nd amendment and believe in gun rights. "Reasonable gun control" does not equate to the disarnment of the American people.

 

[Casper]

I don't think anyone will argue the accuracy of the thread's Title!

The world has long been ideo-politically divided on the right of private citizens to own guns_

Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Progressives and 20th Century Democrats all believe that citizens should be disarmed! (for the good of society they say)

Except of course for Bernie Sanders; although I highly suspect he had to tweak his ideo-politic-ology to make himself palatable to the Vermont electorate_

Which I also believe he would quickly un-tweak should he actually get himself elected POTUS or maybe even just nominated as the Democrat Party's Candidate_

Well known Utopian Revolutionaries such as Lenin, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Min and Castro, etc; all disarmed their people immediately after their respective revolutions_

And Western Nations such as Canada, Australia and the European Union have all been actively disarming their populations since they began their transformation to Socialism_

And here in our own backyard, the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution has for decades been at the top of the agenda for the far-left Progressive Democrat Party_

For some reason the Leftist Elites, Politicians and Revolutionaries appear to fear guns in the hands of the populous which is obvious by the fact they have always made a point to disarm them_

While Rightwing Politicians and Capitalists don't seem to have the least bit of fear of law-abiding citizens having the right to keep and bear arms_

Anyone have any theories as to why such a distinct ideo-political contrast has always been drawn on Gun Rights?

Umm, good old Bernie said he would ban all guns except hunting guns, meaning in his case we would be all using muzzle loading guns from the 1700's. Does not sound like he is against gun ownership at all ..................

 

[Casper]

The vast majority of leftists, democrats, etc in this country support the 2nd amendment and believe in gun rights. "Reasonable gun control" does not equate to the disarnment of the American people.

Define "Reasonable". The Devil is Always in the Details.:shoot

 

[Port & Starboard]

More and more democrats are buying guns.

 

[MrT]

Umm, good old Bernie said he would ban all guns except hunting guns, meaning in his case we would be all using muzzle loading guns from the 1700's. Does not sound like he is against gun ownership at all ..................

This notion appears to largely be the result of a conservative blog echo chamber. The closest I found to any actual statement was a very small blurb from an interview wherein he stated that he believed there should be a ban on guns used exclusively to kill other people. All of his other actions and statements make it fairly clear that this statement is a reference to assault rifles, and not towards hand guns - although I have made the argument that hand guns really do not serve any other purpose. I just don't see any evidence to suggest that Bernie feels the same on that particular type of firearm.

 

[MrT]

I am curious why a post that is allegedly designed to understand the political divide in the topic of gun control would present a very biased and ideologically driven argument regarding the "history" of gun control.

 

[MrT]

Define "Reasonable". The Devil is Always in the Details.:shoot

A license to purchase type of system wherein you obtain a card (or something gets added to your driver's license) after you have undertaken a background check, completed a gun safety course, and paid a small fee. It makes the process of selling firearms much smoother and reduces the burden on law enforcement. It also helps to ensure that anyone able to purchase a firearm, regardless of obtaining from a firearm dealer or from a private sell, has undergone some safety training and passed a background check.

Such a system has been tied to a roughly 40% reduction in homicides in Connecticut and the repeal of which has been tied to a roughly 25% increase in homicides in Missouri.

 

[akrunner88]

This idea that leftists are against guns is absurd. While I don't deny there are definitely a few who are, the majority of my friends, and myself for that matter support and even own guns. I own a handgun and a shotgun. I support concealed carry. I even support "assault weapons" ownership.

 

[Master PO]

I don't think anyone will argue the accuracy of the thread's Title!

The world has long been ideo-politically divided on the right of private citizens to own guns_

Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Progressives and 20th Century Democrats all believe that citizens should be disarmed! (for the good of society they say)

Except of course for Bernie Sanders; although I highly suspect he had to tweak his ideo-politic-ology to make himself palatable to the Vermont electorate_

Which I also believe he would quickly un-tweak should he actually get himself elected POTUS or maybe even just nominated as the Democrat Party's Candidate_

Well known Utopian Revolutionaries such as Lenin, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Min and Castro, etc; all disarmed their people immediately after their respective revolutions_

And Western Nations such as Canada, Australia and the European Union have all been actively disarming their populations since they began their transformation to Socialism_

And here in our own backyard, the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution has for decades been at the top of the agenda for the far-left Progressive Democrat Party_

For some reason the Leftist Elites, Politicians and Revolutionaries appear to fear guns in the hands of the populous which is obvious by the fact they have always made a point to disarm them_

While Rightwing Politicians and Capitalists don't seem to have the least bit of fear of law-abiding citizens having the right to keep and bear arms_

Anyone have any theories as to why such a distinct ideo-political contrast has always been drawn on Gun Rights?

i have to disagree here to a point, they want the government to be able to have full control of who and who cant have firearms.

as we have already see legislation, in which the public cannot do something ,yet the law is written so public officials can....IE. Dianne Feinstein gun control bill.

 

[longview]

This notion appears to largely be the result of a conservative blog echo chamber. The closest I found to any actual statement was a very small blurb from an interview wherein he stated that he believed there should be a ban on guns used exclusively to kill other people. All of his other actions and statements make it fairly clear that this statement is a reference to assault rifles, and not towards hand guns - although I have made the argument that hand guns really do not serve any other purpose. I just don't see any evidence to suggest that Bernie feels the same on that particular type of firearm.

If you want to get right down to it, the right to keep and bear arms, is specifically the right to bear arms capable
of killing people, what good would they be otherwise?
From a purely technical and historical perspective, modern assault rifles are NOT designed to kill people,
but rather to wound them. Something nasty we picked up from the Japanese!
With lighter ammunition, each soldier can carry more, and each wounded enemy soldier required
significantly more of the enemies resources than a dead one.

 

[KevinKohler]

Umm, good old Bernie said he would ban all guns except hunting guns, meaning in his case we would be all using muzzle loading guns from the 1700's. Does not sound like he is against gun ownership at all ..................

I see ALL guns as hunting guns. I mean, no one specified WHAT we were hunting....



AmIright!?!?!?

 

[joG]

I don't think anyone will argue the accuracy of the thread's Title!

The world has long been ideo-politically divided on the right of private citizens to own guns_

Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Progressives and 20th Century Democrats all believe that citizens should be disarmed! (for the good of society they say)

Except of course for Bernie Sanders; although I highly suspect he had to tweak his ideo-politic-ology to make himself palatable to the Vermont electorate_

Which I also believe he would quickly un-tweak should he actually get himself elected POTUS or maybe even just nominated as the Democrat Party's Candidate_

Well known Utopian Revolutionaries such as Lenin, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Min and Castro, etc; all disarmed their people immediately after their respective revolutions_

And Western Nations such as Canada, Australia and the European Union have all been actively disarming their populations since they began their transformation to Socialism_

And here in our own backyard, the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution has for decades been at the top of the agenda for the far-left Progressive Democrat Party_

For some reason the Leftist Elites, Politicians and Revolutionaries appear to fear guns in the hands of the populous which is obvious by the fact they have always made a point to disarm them_

While Rightwing Politicians and Capitalists don't seem to have the least bit of fear of law-abiding citizens having the right to keep and bear arms_

Anyone have any theories as to why such a distinct ideo-political contrast has always been drawn on Gun Rights?

If you are a democrat and believe in individual freedom, then guns, self protection and last resort control of government with weapons in hand you worry less about citizens owning them. The new generations of Democrats and essentially increasingly since fdr are not tolerant and less and less convinced that the individuals' rights should be protected, when they stand in the way of what progressive Democrats want them to behave like. They have become statists and statists hate citizens to be able to defend themselves. Ask stalin, what he did, when they did.

 

[roughdraft274]

Define "Reasonable". The Devil is Always in the Details.:shoot

Pretty much by definition, "reasonable" is a subjective measure and will change depending on who's being asked. But it doesn't negate his entire point which I'm not sure you grasped. The original post is a lot of just blanket assertions that aren't backed up by any evidence.

 

[Empirica]

You answered your own question, in a manner of speaking.

If you agree that our political system is dominated by a couple of political parties heavily invested in division oriented politics,

I find it a little hard to believe the left's rabid hatred of gun rights is simply for the sake of political division!

then it makes sense no matter how sad it may be that the 2nd Amendment issue, various issues involving religion, the abortion debate, gay marriage debate, "right to work" vs. union protection, taxation, minority protection issues, and so many other issues end up left vs. right issues.

It is all by design, and is the very faction oriented thinking so many of us should be concerned about but are not.

You don't believe the "Left" might be a little more vehemently anti-2nd Amendment?

Keep in mind the anti-gun policies of all leftists throughout the history of the world?

The vast majority of leftists, democrats, etc in this country support the 2nd amendment and believe in gun rights.

If so; then why do all of these "supporters" follow in lock-step with the Progressive/Democrat Party politicians that are in constant conflict with the 2nd Amendment?

"Reasonable gun control" does not equate to the disarmament of the American people.

Yes it does; and if you truly believe it does not then you sir are delusional_

 

[faithful_servant]

This notion appears to largely be the result of a conservative blog echo chamber. The closest I found to any actual statement was a very small blurb from an interview wherein he stated that he believed there should be a ban on guns used exclusively to kill other people. All of his other actions and statements make it fairly clear that this statement is a reference to assault rifles, and not towards hand guns - although I have made the argument that hand guns really do not serve any other purpose. I just don't see any evidence to suggest that Bernie feels the same on that particular type of firearm.

Define "exclusively to kill other people" As has already been stated "The devil is in the details"

 

[faithful_servant]

A license to purchase type of system wherein you obtain a card (or something gets added to your driver's license) after you have undertaken a background check, completed a gun safety course, and paid a small fee. It makes the process of selling firearms much smoother and reduces the burden on law enforcement. It also helps to ensure that anyone able to purchase a firearm, regardless of obtaining from a firearm dealer or from a private sell, has undergone some safety training and passed a background check.

Such a system has been tied to a roughly 40% reduction in homicides in Connecticut and the repeal of which has been tied to a roughly 25% increase in homicides in Missouri.

Correlation does not equal causation.

 

[DA60]

I don't think anyone will argue the accuracy of the thread's Title!

The world has long been ideo-politically divided on the right of private citizens to own guns_

Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Progressives and 20th Century Democrats all believe that citizens should be disarmed! (for the good of society they say)

Except of course for Bernie Sanders; although I highly suspect he had to tweak his ideo-politic-ology to make himself palatable to the Vermont electorate_

Which I also believe he would quickly un-tweak should he actually get himself elected POTUS or maybe even just nominated as the Democrat Party's Candidate_

Well known Utopian Revolutionaries such as Lenin, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Min and Castro, etc; all disarmed their people immediately after their respective revolutions_

And Western Nations such as Canada, Australia and the European Union have all been actively disarming their populations since they began their transformation to Socialism_

And here in our own backyard, the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution has for decades been at the top of the agenda for the far-left Progressive Democrat Party_

For some reason the Leftist Elites, Politicians and Revolutionaries appear to fear guns in the hands of the populous which is obvious by the fact they have always made a point to disarm them_

While Rightwing Politicians and Capitalists don't seem to have the least bit of fear of law-abiding citizens having the right to keep and bear arms_

Anyone have any theories as to why such a distinct ideo-political contrast has always been drawn on Gun Rights?

What is No Amnesty - No Exceptions in regards to?

 

[KevinKohler]

Define "exclusively to kill other people" As has already been stated "The devil is in the details"

Doesn't even matter, IMO.


A gun purchased for the purpose of self defense had damn well BETTER be designed exclusively to kill other people.


I mean, what exactly are you trying to defend yourself from? Varments? Rabbits and deer?

I have not ever, now will I ever, I imagine, be attacked by rabbits or deer. I have been attacked by humans, and being attacked again by that particular species is FAR far more likely to happen to me than my being attacked by any other mammal, with the exception of dogs.

 

[VanceMack]

EVERYTHING is a left/right issue politically. Most people simple argue an opposition side. You are this...I must therefore be that.

 

[OrphanSlug]

I find it a little hard to believe the left's rabid hatred of gun rights is simply for the sake of political division!

You don't believe the "Left" might be a little more vehemently anti-2nd Amendment?

Keep in mind the anti-gun policies of all leftists throughout the history of the world?

You are making my point for me.

And it is not simply for the sake of political division because of boredom, it is for the sake of lining up voters on one side of the issue or the other. Agree with them or not there is an ideology of being against the 2nd Amendment.

Of course the left is more vehemently anti-2nd Amendment and this one issue illustrates with perfection my point. There is little room for middle ground between a Supreme Court backed interpretation of the 2nd Amendment as we know them, and restrictions on the 2nd Amendment as the left constantly pushes for.

Be upset with me all you would like, but the reality is we have a strong case of political parties lining up people with a checklist of things making them lean left or right. And in some cases it greatly confuses what is and is not Constitutional (on issues other than the 2nd Amendment.)

You asked why the issue of the 2nd Amendment is left and right, I answered. If you do not like than then take a stab at answering your own question in terms other than what you want your opposition to believe.

 

[Empirica]

Define "Reasonable". The Devil is Always in the Details.:shoot

Pretty much by definition, "reasonable" is a subjective measure and will change depending on who's being asked. But it doesn't negate his entire point which I'm not sure you grasped. The original post is a lot of just blanket assertions that aren't backed up by any evidence.

Gun control has long since gone far beyond "reasonable"_

It has now entered the surreal realm of utterly ridiculous_

 

[Casper]

This notion appears to largely be the result of a conservative blog echo chamber. The closest I found to any actual statement was a very small blurb from an interview wherein he stated that he believed there should be a ban on guns used exclusively to kill other people. All of his other actions and statements make it fairly clear that this statement is a reference to assault rifles, and not towards hand guns - although I have made the argument that hand guns really do not serve any other purpose. I just don't see any evidence to suggest that Bernie feels the same on that particular type of firearm.

All guns can be hunting rifles, there are no exceptions, so either Bernie does not know that fact or he has his own criteria.

 

[jaeger19]

You answered your own question, in a manner of speaking.

If you agree that our political system is dominated by a couple of political parties heavily invested in division oriented politics, then it makes sense no matter how sad it may be that the 2nd Amendment issue, various issues involving religion, the abortion debate, gay marriage debate, "right to work" vs. union protection, taxation, minority protection issues, and so many other issues end up left vs. right issues.

It is all by design, and is the very faction oriented thinking so many of us should be concerned about but are not.

I'd agree. To further that point.. these "right/left" issues are largely meant as a distraction while the powers that control both sides do what they will.

Its like a great magic trick...

"Watch the gay man.. he is getting married" while "poof" your taxes disappear.

"Its those guns".. while "poof" your taxes disappear.