even if I don't necessarily agree with them. DU is a private forum, I'm a guest, and I intend to act respectfully, particularly since even with the occasional argument concerning guns or otherwise, most everyone here agrees with the totality of my liberal views far more often than not.
The forum you host is an echo chamber, although it has so little activity that it's virtually silent. I certainly have no objection to a forum dedicated to "gun control reform activism," but I've seen precious few posts explaining how to realistically actually enact gun control, reform gun laws or culture, or really much organization to achieve such goals. The "activism" usually consists of posting old cartoons and cross-posts with threads here and GD, largely complaining about us "ammosexuals" and "gun humpers" (although since I've never owned any firearms, nor have a desire to do so, I'm not quite sure how I'm defined; maybe I'm a "closet ammosexual" or just "ammo-curious?"
.
My point has always been the importance of relatively civil discourse. You are certainly free to have any positions about guns, self-defense, crime, or anything else. Whether I agree is irrelevant. If you believe strongly in gun control and related matters, or the stories, editorials and cartoons you routinely post here, often multiple times per day, I believe it's hardly unreasonable to expect you to have the courtesy, confidence, and conviction to engage in debate with your Democratic Party peers. If you can't have a discussion with us, how do you expect to ever convince anyone else? If you are comfortable with your positions, and have the evidence to back them up, I don't see why you would hesitate for the briefest moment to truly and fully join the discussion. The water's warm, come on in...
I additionally find it interesting that you claim to know the positions concerning firearms and similar topics among all here on DU, and imply the views expressed here are outside the mainstream of our party. Let's look at the most recent Democratic Party Platform concerning firearms,
Right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation
We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.
We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious.
We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms.
We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements--like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole--so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking
Respectfully, as I read the Platform, neither you nor many gun rights proponents who regularly post here fully embrace all the Democratic Party positions, although there's a great deal of common ground for those who aren't ideologues and are willing to compromise. However, unlike you, both gun rights advocates and opponents who substantively share their views at least implicitly acknowledge that the only way any consensus can reached or systemic improvements be made is with "an honest, open national conversation about firearms."
Edit history
= new reply since forum marked as read
