Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

spin

(17,493 posts)
21. You make it sound so simple ....
Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:14 PM
Dec 2012

Just make AR type rifles illegal to own and then confiscate them.

Gun owners are well aware that your idea would do little to solve the problem so then you would pass a law banning and confiscating all semi-auto firearms. That is called the "slippery slope" by gun owners as they believe that the ultimate goal of the gun control movement is the total disarmament of all American citizens accomplished in small incremental steps.

The overwhelming majority of gun owners and their voting family members will oppose any effort to ban and confiscate a popular class of firearms knowing that it is merely the first step. They WILL show up at the voting booth to vote against anyone who supports such an idea.

In the recent past many good Democrats lost their seats in state governments and at the congressional level over this issue. Some experts believe that Democrats lost two Presidential elections over the gun control issue.

In the last 10 years the Democratic Party has largely ignored the gun control issue and we have been able to elect representatives to Congress and put Obama in office for two terms. Returning to supporting draconian gun laws could possibly cost us seats in the House and the Senate during the midterm election and possibly insure the election of a Republican President in four years. In fact a push for strong gun control might enable the Tea Party to regain its momentum.

Another assault weapons ban faces a difficult path in today's congress as almost all Republicans would oppose this bill ban and many Democrats from Red states would be hesitant to risk their political career over this issue. If one does pass it will probably be so watered down that it will be no more effective than the last ban.

Of course I might be wrong and I admit that gun control does enjoy strong support from the media which is happy to distort and even lie about the issue. However I fear the damage to the Democratic Party may prove irreversible and the results will put the Republican Party back in change.

I know a lot of gun owners who agree with me on most issues but absolutely refuse to vote for a Democrat because of the gun control issue. In the last ten years gun control hasn't been a serious issue and gun owners may not have been as enthusiastic about voting.

The NRA has been seen as the big bully that stops gun control but it only has 4.5 million members. Some recent news reports have stated that the NRA is gaining 8000 members a day. If you think that they are powerful today imagine how powerful the NRA would be if it doubled or tripled in size.

I'm a gun owner but I am also a Democrat. Our party is making real headway on a number of issues. For example we have a start to finally getting a good health care system for all in our nation.

I do feel we can make some progress and change existing gun laws to better insure that only honest responsible citizens can buy them. However if we overreach we may lose not only on gun control but also many other extremely important issues.

Time will tell.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

So you are not arguing against a new AWB, your arguing for one that is greatly expanded. jmg257 Dec 2012 #1
I'm not sure Recursion Dec 2012 #3
One doesn't have to try and ban all semi-automatics. Kaleva Dec 2012 #9
This would be a serious proposal. krispos42 Dec 2012 #11
I have your thread bookmarked. Kaleva Dec 2012 #18
Thanks. krispos42 Dec 2012 #25
With my budget, I'd be limited to something like this Kaleva Dec 2012 #30
I'm gonna sell when my AR's are worth 3500. ileus Dec 2012 #23
And you'd probably get that in a few years if there was a comprehensive ban on... Kaleva Dec 2012 #27
Hopefully we won't see such a broad ban. ileus Dec 2012 #33
If someone votes Republican over this issue, we don't need them MightyMopar Dec 2012 #2
We don't get to decide what's important to voters (nt) Recursion Dec 2012 #6
Many people who don't vote would come off the fence to vote against the gun culture MightyMopar Dec 2012 #28
You wouldn't mind if we try to write a better law. upaloopa Dec 2012 #4
Firing so many rounds Recursion Dec 2012 #5
You are not thinking big enough. jmg257 Dec 2012 #7
Well you just keep bringing up exceptions and I can write a law to cover them upaloopa Dec 2012 #8
No, these aren't exceptions, that's my point Recursion Dec 2012 #10
Like I said it matters what paradigm you see the world through. upaloopa Dec 2012 #13
Well I in fact do think we need gun control, so you're missing something Recursion Dec 2012 #15
You keep dodging the subject. PavePusher Dec 2012 #39
Be aware that an AR-15 runs about $1,500 a copy. krispos42 Dec 2012 #14
What do you think fair market value on all those would be if they were illegal to possess? jmg257 Dec 2012 #16
Black markets are difficult to model Recursion Dec 2012 #17
No clue krispos42 Dec 2012 #20
You make it sound so simple .... spin Dec 2012 #21
I was told expressly that technical details didn't matter. krispos42 Dec 2012 #12
About Point #2 Bonhomme Richard Dec 2012 #19
Actually I think "pretend military rifle" is a great term Recursion Dec 2012 #22
Go ahead. I am tired of people getting hung up on semantics. Bonhomme Richard Dec 2012 #26
While I dislike the rhetoric, your points hold merit enough to warrant further study. Decoy of Fenris Dec 2012 #29
How about all of the lever rifles oneshooter Dec 2012 #56
I'm now into the school of thought that says reclassify all semi-automatics to be covered under the RomneyLies Dec 2012 #24
I think I understand that gun officionado's want to get the laws "right". MichiganVote Dec 2012 #31
Well said, and I do get that Recursion Dec 2012 #32
:) If only others did too. Thing is, we need every rational mind now on this MichiganVote Dec 2012 #34
It is not now, nor has it ever been, about "safety". ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #35
To parents, to neighborhood to people-the issue is safety. MichiganVote Dec 2012 #36
Well, you have it half correct. ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #37
We can exercise control too if its important enought to us. MichiganVote Dec 2012 #46
The last time we tried to legislate social safety quickly, we got the Patriot Act. PavePusher Dec 2012 #40
And I would argue that the Patriot Act was more about repression. MichiganVote Dec 2012 #45
One man's perception of safety is another mans repression. PavePusher Dec 2012 #48
Correct. Its a conundrum. Until you remember 20 dead 1st graders and their families. MichiganVote Dec 2012 #49
...and the fact that the laws of their state required them to be essentially defenseless.... PavePusher Dec 2012 #50
Ah, I see. The answer then in your eyes is for 1st graders to be defensive. MichiganVote Dec 2012 #53
Have fun with that shark you jumped.... PavePusher Dec 2012 #54
Then let's ban semi-automatic weapons with detachable magazines, then. And handguns. nilram Dec 2012 #38
"They aren't doing anyone any good..." PavePusher Dec 2012 #41
The Australian homicide rate was going down before the ban gejohnston Dec 2012 #42
I'm glad they got busted. Good news for a change. nilram Dec 2012 #43
agreed gejohnston Dec 2012 #44
Our homicide rate has gone down slightly more than Australia's has Recursion Dec 2012 #47
This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Dec 2012 #51
I disagree Recursion Dec 2012 #52
Skinner's temporary amnesty allowing Second Amendment posts in GD brought out those who only think jody Dec 2012 #55
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»The case against an assau...»Reply #21