For the past ten years, rural Democratic-leaning voters who own and use firearms have been telling me they wish we had a Democratic candidate who is strong on their interpretation of the Second Amendment.
For the past ten years, I’ve been reassuring these same people that the Democrat who is actually on the ticket won’t initiate restrictions on guns.
This year, in Ohio, we have an NRA-endorsed Democratic incumbent Governor who is in a tough race.
I’m happy when I see the NRA endorsement, because I’m thinking all those gun rights rural Democratic-leaners I’ve been listening to for years will come out in droves.
Finally, they have their candidate, and he needs them.
“Our members will interpret your ‘A+’ rating and endorsement as an indication that you are a pro-Second Amendment, pro-hunting candidate who supports sportsmen and gun-owners on every issue,” said Chris Cox, the chairman of the NRA’s Political Victory Fund, in a letter to Strickland.
Except, I’m not feeling it. They’ll vote for Strickland, but I was expecting enthusiastic support, on that single issue.
So, to the Second Amendment Democrats, how important is an NRA endorsement? I know you’re not single-issue, or you would be supporting very few Democrats.
Is this issue a big plus to you as an individual voter, or just one less negative?
neill
It’s one of the things Feingold has had going in Wisconsin — for a long time… but it isn’t enough this time, it seems…
Kryptik
I honestly find my hackles raised on the issue of the NRA. Mostly because they almost are singlehandedly responsible for WV going GOP in regards to Presidentials. Coal issues keep the state red, but the NRA is responsible for the state going Bush the first time, if I remember right. :/
Gus
I’m not really a second amendment Democrat, ’cause I think the NRA are a bunch of nuts, but I do own and am comfortable with guns. A candidate’s stand on guns has pretty much no bearing on my vote. Don’t expect enthusiastic support, though, because the NRA is about as neutral politically as the Chamber of Commerce. A Republican might get enthusiastic support, but it won’t happen to a Dem, regardless of his NRA rating.
kdaug
I think for gun owners, it isn’t an issue one way or the other if you’re “pro-gun” – that’s the expected default.
Being perceived as “anti-gun”, however, is a different issue entirely. That’s where the “he wants to take our guns away” meme comes from, and for gun owners it’s political poison.
Kryptik
@Gus:
Pretty much this. It’s why I cringe when Dems go out of their way to try and placate that crowd, since it almost unerringly fails to do anything except make even sensible gun control stuff (like closing the gun show loophole) feel like total fringe issues.
@kdaug:
Not to mention that it’s usually politically bullshit too. Potent political bullshit, but bullshit nonetheless.
mantis
Since virtually no Democrat these days has any interest in seriously pursuing increased gun control, and no state legislature has in years, to my knowledge, instituted any laws that would realistically restrict hunters/sportsmen’s ability to pursue their pastimes, I find it hard to believe that many Democratic voters are very motivated by second amendment stances among candidates.
Lunatics on the right believe every Democrat wants to outlaw all guns and send Fed goons to their houses to confiscate their collections, but since there is no evidence that anyone even wants to do anything remotely like that, and the only place you hear it is in the talk radio/internet swamps of the right, I doubt even paranoid, gullible second-amendment Democrats are worried about the issue.
Plus, you know, jobs. Economy. Stupid. All that.
kay
@Kryptik:
That’s my question. They’re a huge negative if they oppose the Democrat, but not a net positive, for the Democrat?
I was thinking there was this group of voters who would probably end up supporting the Democrat on other issues, but would get really excited about an affirmatively pro-gun Democrat.
We’re not finding any of them.
jrg
The GOP released the “The Personal Responsibility Act” in the ’94 “contract with America” in part to discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy.
14 years later, GOPers voted for a woman who had a child that had an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter. They cast their votes with pride.
I don’t think that gun rights are any different than teenage pregnancy to rural Republicans. It’s just an excuse – an form of authoritarian tribal identity that can change from one day to the next. Do they like guns? Yes, but they hate libruls more.
Nick
I’m reminded of Jolene Unsoeld, the former Washington State congresswoman who was basically a gun-loving Kucinich who went down in part because of the Assault Weapons Ban she didn’t even vote for.
kay
@mantis:
We actually have to address it as a negative constantly. Every year. It always comes up in the context of a talk with union members, here. Always.
Earl Butz
I don’t give a shit about the NRA; they’re a front group for the GOP and have been since at least the 1980s. Fuck them and their joke of an organization. Do some research. You’ll find that when they are not just simply filing amicus curiae briefs and then rolling over for increasingly strict gun laws, their legal staff have consistently fought for more restrictions on firearms possession, not less.
That being said, whether a politician is in favor of gun control can be a deal-breaker for me. Sadly, here in California I don’t have a choice. The Democrats here are solidly anti-gun, Arnold is anti-gun, and the Republicans are so rabidly batshit insane that to consider voting for one is literally unthinkable.
I am not surprised. The folks at the gun range cannot believe that I’m an enthusiastic Dem, and some of them would get downright nasty about it if not for my size (six-two, two-twenty). That, and well, everyone’s packing at a gun range. Bad idea to start fights – everyone is very polite at the gun range.
Kryptik
@kay:
Most of the folk who are ardently pro-gun to the point of joining and parrotting the NRA have probably bought the ‘All Dems want to take your guns away’ pablum. For those who count ‘2nd Amendment Rights’ as one of their major issues determining their vote, there just isn’t a Dem who could be pro-gun enough, since Republicans are probably even more pro-gun than that.
Snarki, child of Loki
Oh come on!
A Dem can be 100% endorsed by the NRA, be anti-abortion, be anti-deficit, vote for a health care reform plan first floated by the GOP a decade ago, pro-miltary, a highly decorated veteran, and STILL get slimed by the GOP noise machine and not get right-leaning independent votes.
It’s tribalism. Dems, even blue-dog Dems, aren’t of The Tribe. So they must be attacked by GOP tribe members, using whatever comes to hand.
It’s not about policies, it’s not about political platforms, positions, votes on bills, speeches in Congress. It’s much more primitive than that.
Cris
In Montana, Democratic candidates consistently and repeatedly trumpet their NRA credentials, and they still get accused of wanting to “take away your guns.”
Joel
@jrg: Ding ding ding ding ding!
This is the argument that needs to be shouted from the mountaintops. It’s the perfect summary of the Tea Party movement.
Tea Partiers are as concerned with personal responsibility, the Constitution and taxation as Jets fans are concerned about Ben Roethlisberger’s disregard for women’s rights. (No offense to the 0.1% of reasonable Jets fans that might frequent this board).
kay
@Kryptik:
Well, I’m a little more generous than that. I was seeing it as a short-cut. The endorsement means they don’t have to ask that question. I know “the NRA” is different than “gun owners”, but I’m pro-choice and I use a NARAL endorsement as a short-cut, although I’m not a member.
Like that.
Just Some Fuckhead
As a Democrat and gun owner, I view with suspicion anything the NRA does. They are a reliable Republican front group.
socraticsilence
I’m actually kind of suprised the NRA didn’t endorse Reid- his only questionable votes are his supreme court ones- which frankly aren’t that bad considering that with the exception of Scalia- most of the courts conservatives would probably back federal gun regs if done in the name of terrorism (Scalia- with some exceptions tends to actually try and follow his publicly stated reading of the constitution- which is wrong but at least consistent- excepting: Bush v. Gore which really the court should have ignored since all it did was split the court along partisan lines and have both sides in effect abandone their long held beliefs about states rights, equal protection, etc in order to justify a blatant political decision and an equally political dissent). I mean Reid’s a gun guy- you know the guy shoots, you know the guy probably hunts, the guy built a massive freaking gun range in Nevada- and they’d rather sit the race out (can’t endorse Angle for two reasons: one it’d be such a slight to Reid that it would basically rob the NRA of any politically based Dem support–no reason to back something if there just going to turn on you– and two she’s kind of insane and the NRA’s spent the better part of a decade trying to rehab their image from the survivalist who needs assault rifles and “cop-killer” rounds to the Surbuban Duck hunter).
kay
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Thanks, JSF, for the straight response. I feel the same way about the Chamber of Commerce, and I’m pro….commerce. Generally.
Well, more hostile. Much more.
jrg
@Snarki, child of Loki: Yep. This is what I was trying to say.
The fact that the discussion is about “gun rights” is incidental. It’s primarily about tribal identification. They’ll just find something else to b*tch about if a Dem is pro-gun.
That said, in rural states, being pro-gun is probably one less negative for moderates. It takes an issue off the table. The hardcore rednecks will always hate the Dem candidate, though – pro-gun or not.
Hawes
Ever since Democrats gave up on gun control issues in the mid-90s, I’ve been waiting for this issue to fade. And maybe it has.
But “second amendment” always seemed like a dog whistle to me. But so high pitched a dog whistle I couldn’t figure it out.
I think it must be a dod whistle for states’ rights/secessionists. If you hate the federal government doing all that soshulistic giving people health care and putting air bags in cars stuff, then you want to have an AK-47 under the floor boards of the trailer to fight off the black helicopters.
Even if you’re not batshit Timothy McVeigh crazy, you still see yourself as needing to defend yourself against black people/black helicopters/zombies. And any effort of the government to strip you of that defense would leave you feeling vulnerable. So even where the threat doesn’t even exist, you’re hypervigilant about it.
Ultimately, it’s an expression of the fear you feel from “others”. As long as you have a mini-gun in the closet, you can protect yourself from “others”. And that includes the Hispanic migrant worker across town who the “guvmint” wants to give an education at your tax paying expense.
socraticsilence
@mantis:
Urban gun regulation is literally the only thing I can think of- things like Chicago’s regulations on ownership or the DC ban that was overturned. Note that these things aren’t played up as much as they could be by the GOP because they show the clear schism between their rhetoric on local control and their actual beliefs about said control– namely that its only okay if White Christian Conservatives make the rules in question- otherwise local control is wrong — its not a constitutional thing because these yahoo’s don’t care about the constitutionality of things like the 10 commandments monuments– no, its a who makes the rules thing on virtually any other issue local governments making a rule and being slapped down by the Supreme Court would be “judicial activism” but here well here its all good.
DanF
@mantis: Yes. It is insane that this is even an issue anymore. No one talks about gun control – it’s no longer even acceptable in the context of “Maybe we shouldn’t let insane people and terrorists buy weapons. Maybe? Just putting that out there? No? OK.”
socraticsilence
@Hawes:
Naw if it was a states rights/ local government issue conservatives would have been up in arms when the Supreme Court overturned the DC gun ban and in doing so basically tossed the regulation of firearms in every major metropolitan area in the country.
kay
@Hawes:
I just read it straight, because most of them are voting for the Democrat. I’m not bothering with lunatics, generally.
I can see it as a legal issue. “Well regulated Militia” versus “shall not”. I see that argument.
Bender
@jrg:
Of course, that’s the Moronic Ball-Juicer Post Of The Day. But fine…let’s all play:
The Democratic Platform of 2008 recognizes the need to fight drug abuse through various family programs. Yet, they voted for a coke-nosed, weed-smoking candidate for president and a VP whose daughter loves her a faceful of blow. Becuzz of teh HippocrizzY!
mantis
@socraticsilence:
Urban gun regulation is literally the only thing I can think of- things like Chicago’s regulations on ownership or the DC ban that was overturned
Yeah, but those are laws passed years ago that are now kaput, and I don’t hear much talk about trying to find new ways to ban handguns (or other guns). Especially since everyone knows, at least here in Chicago, that municipal handgun bans don’t do jack shit. People get shot by handguns here all the time.
arguingwithsignposts
@Bender:
I think you’re selling yourself short, Bender. You’ve still got hours to up your game, troll.
shell13m
The incumbent Dem Gov in Iowa just got the NRA endorsement and it will have zero positive impact for him. More importantly, it was just reported that Iowa has a budget SURPLUS currently, and that’s not going to save him either. Unfortunately, the impression most people have of Culver is that he’s gained more weight and attended more Hawkeye football games than any other governor in memory. And that’s about it.
mantis
@Bender:
The Democratic Platform of 2008 recognizes the need to fight drug abuse through various family programs. Yet, they voted for a coke-nosed, weed-smoking candidate for president and a VP whose daughter loves her a faceful of blow. Becuzz of teh HippocrizzY!
Bender, we don’t think people who have tried drugs are demons, unlike Republicans (unless the drug user is a candidate, of course, then IOKIYAR). So by focusing efforts to curb drug abuse on prevention and treatment, we want to do something about the problem other than throwing a bunch of non-violent drug users in prison, like Republicans, because we don’t think they are awful people. So, umm, where’s the hypocrisy here, moron?
jrg
You win. It’s worth noting, however, that I support fight drug abuse through various family programs because it keeps the grown children of crack-addicted mothers off of internet message boards.
Greg
I have no problem with private gun ownership and would work against an anti gun candidate in primaries, but I think the NRA is a bunch of whack jobs. To be honest their active support would be a negative for me. A lot of things they oppose are reasonable and sensible.
I’d rather the candidates had meaningful things to say about civil rights, the economy, getting us out of foreign wars, etc.
Davis X. Machina
Of all nine of them, four said ‘very important’, three said ‘somewhat important”, and two said either ‘not important’, or ‘not important at all’.
That’s not of the nine polled, that’s of the nine Second Amendment Democrats, period.
There are also tens of thousands of “I say I’m a Second Amendment Democrat, but I’m actually a non-insane Republican ashamed to own the name” Second Amendment Democrats, but they weren’t represented in the polling.
Stillwater
Exactly. In some of these folks, liberal hate constitutes the entirety of their political identity.
cyntax
@Bender:
Dude, you must be hitting the pipe pretty hard if you think any of us voted for Bush.
dlw32
I have to agree with those who’ve said that the NRA endorsement is not going to help a Dem.
Frankly anyone who gets an endorsement from the NRA has a serious negative strike in my book. And it has nothing to do with the actual issues. The NRA is simply a hate-group.
Felonious Wench
Not at all…outside of the fact that if a Dem gets their endorsement here in Texas, it’s a nice bullet-point on their resume.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
shecky
The NRA is at an interesting crossroads. Some factions want to want to steer the organization away from the cozy GOP arm it’s had for a while, with this crazy notion that the NRA should concern itself about gun rights only. The relationship, however, which had been very cozy for lots of wingnuts, who are up in arms lately at such impudence, and not so candidly reminding the NRA which side of their bread is buttered.
The question is whether the NRA folds completely to save itself and it’s largely conservative funding base, or heads in a new direction without the Right’s explicit support.
debbie
Buckeyes may love their guns, but at the moment, they’d like a job even more. Don’t forget the Republican slogan of this gubernatorial campaign (coming from the RGA, by the way): “Strickland didn’t get the jobs done.”
trollhattan
@dlw32:
Yup, pretty much this. They can go f*#k themselves with an RPG (legal or not).
JenJen
When it comes to Strickland, the #1 reason I feel he deserves reelection is his tough stance as pro-Ohio-consumer, and his sharp tack against the new Bankruptcy Laws enacted by the Hastert Congress during the Dubya’s. He and Attorney General Cordray have really gone against the grain here in Ohio, raising homestead and automobile exemptions above and beyond the limits enacted by Congressional BK laws, and (Cordray) suing the living shit out of unfair creditors preying upon the working poor, essentially shutting them down.
It might just be a pet issue of mine, but the increasingly terrifying hard line creditors and bankers have taken against the working poor in Ohio is a big deal to me, and I’m scared shitless to see how Kasich or DeWine would roll back the advances Strickland and Cordray have made here in Ohio.
Disclaimer: Yes, I’m a volunteer for Legal Aid. It just breaks my heart watching the little guy go up against The Man and losing constantly. Strickland has given them hope, and tools, and I’d like to see Ohio continue in this current progressive trajectory.
ETA: Realize I’ve gone a bit off-topic here. But, to keep it on-topic, I’m a Buckeye with a gun. :-)
Stillwater
@dlw32: The NRA is simply a hate-group.
This comment lends some credence to a view I’ve held for some time now: that the term ‘gun rights’ is politically synonymous with ‘states rights’, and all that it entails. It’s not obviously synonymous, since the rhetoric around the uses differ. But there is more than a hint of (h/t Dengre) Confederate-style language and beliefs in other positions so-called ‘gun rights’ advocates hold.
Erik Vanderhoff
Personally, I think the NRA-ILA are a bunch of hacks.
SixStringFanatic
Brad Ellsworth, Democratic senatorial candidate in Indiana, has received the NRA’s endorsement in his race against Dan Coates. According to a Terre Haute radio station, Coates voted for the handgun purchase waiting period in ’93 in his previous turn in the Senate. Ellsworth is still trailing badly in the race, though, so I’m not sure how much it’ll help him.
Erik Vanderhoff
@Earl Butz:
This. Us gun-owning Democrats in California are kind of fucked. Our politicians aren’t even intelligently anti-gun. They don’t know shit about them, understand how they work, or even how their anti-gun legislation works in practice. If it sounds good (ballistic “fingerprinting,” serial numbers on ammunition, etc.) they’re for it, even if it doesn’t work (see: ballistic “fingerprinting,” serial numbers on ammunition, etc.) or makes the gun less safe (magazine disconnect).
But to vote for a Republican here is to vote to give the craziest motherfuckers west of the Rockies more power.
Paris
According to the NRA, if you’re “pro-hunting candidate who supports sportsmen and gun-owners ” you therefore support private militias’ access to automatic weapons. Anything less and you’re accused of wanting take everyone’s guns away.
I would avoid an NRA supported candidate.
celticdragonchick
I regard that as a major selling point. I will see if I can throw a few bucks his way.
celticdragonchick
@Erik Vanderhoff:
Exactly.
Paris
@Stillwater: Its not a coincidence that the NRA and the KKK appeared on the scene at about the same time.
celticdragonchick
@Stillwater:
No. The NRA has been pushing for federal legislation that upends “state rights”.
There are a number of states with very restrictive guns laws that the NRA has targeted with federal law over-rides.
mattH
The NRA is at an interesting crossroads. Some factions want to want to steer the organization away from the cozy GOP arm it’s had for a while, with this crazy notion that the NRA should concern itself about gun rights only. The relationship, however, which had been very cozy for lots of wingnuts, who are up in arms lately at such impudence, and not so candidly reminding the NRA which side of their bread is buttered.
They already went over that bridge (to mix metaphors a bit) back in the 80s, basically throwing their lot in with the Republicans. Are you saying they might be going back over again?
celticdragonchick
@Paris:
Would that be the same coincidence where a board member of CORE (yeah, the Congress of Racial Equality) also happens to be on the governing council of the NRA??
Just wondering.
celticdragonchick
@socraticsilence:
Me too. They should have.
artem1s
@JenJen:
I agree with you on Strickland. and let’s don’t forget that Kasich was instrumental in helping Taft piss away all of the state pension funds. I sure don’t want him going near the state investments again.
as to the gun thing in OH, I think the hard line, anti government wingnuts are way too prevalent here now. spend 5 minutes dialing around the talk radio stations sometime. Driving to Columbus from Cleveland used to be one NPR station hopping to another mixed with sports talk. Now its like a bad parody on crazy right conspiracy and religious hell fire and brimstone. And that’s FM. Don’t go near AM. be afraid, be very afraid.
sure they want a pro-gun candidate to back but for them its got to be on the level of Cheney-shoot-you-in-the-face to really count.
xephyr
I’ve always owned guns, believe in the 2nd amendment, and wouldn’t take kindly to attempted restrictions on my right to own hunting weapons or handguns. That said, I believe the NRA is mostly composed of paranoid fools who do more harm than good. As a rational American I am progressive in my politics and generally vote for democrats as the lesser of evils.
MrBenchley
Frankly, all the gun nut Democrats I’ve ever encountered are all gun nut and no Democrat.
They’re racist conservatives who use their crappy little hobby as a code word, and they’re only going to vote Democratic when Strom Thurmond arises from the dead and brings back the Dixiecrats.
...now I try to be amused
As best I can tell, single-issue voters are all on the Right.
@Snarki, child of Loki:
What’s more, I imagine The Tribe gets pissy when outsiders adopt their totems and rituals.
Arclite
@Earl Butz:
Cool. Folks should start bringing guns to political rallies so everyone will be polite to each other. Oh, wait…
Earl Butz
@Arclite: If everyone did, the degree of civility would probably (no guarantee) rise astonishingly.
Related: the reason that California has such drastic gun laws in the first place – especially the part about carrying loaded weapons in public openly – is a direct result of the Black Panther marches on Sacramento, where the Panthers carried loaded shotguns in full view. You never saw conservatives get religion on gun control so quick as you did then. The only thing they fear more than the government taking their guns away is that the liberals will figure it out and start arming themselves.
Riggsveda
Kay, my husband and I own guns, he hunts, and we’re both from rural areas. People in my own family also hunted when I was growing up. But what we have been yearning for are people like us who also, like us, believe in common-sense gun control and limits on gun ownership.
Maybe the difference between people like us and people like Sarah Palin lies not in simply owning guns, but in the kinds of guns one owns. We have no handguns, and know too well the poor job they do of “protecting” people. After all, if simply owning one was protection, cops and Ft. Hood soldiers would never get hurt. And contrary to the survivalist argument, packing a gun (or a whole aresenal of them) is not going to stop a government backed by the full force of the American military from doing whatever the hell it wants, as the soldiers of the Confederacy found out.
The problem is that people who believe in the sane application of the 2nd Amendment, like us, are pretty much invisible so far as the rest of the debate is concerned.
Just Some Fuckhead
@kay: Thank you, Kay (and Anne Laurie, for that matter) for your interesting front page posts that appear to be free from the usual “us vs. them” douchebaggery so prevalent here these days.
celticdragonchick
@Earl Butz:
Exactly.
I have no idea how many times I have read some wingnut comment to the effect that in the next Civil War, the “libruls” had better run because they don’t have any guns.
50 different kinds of fail in comments like that…but it is striking how often those idiots assume that “libruls” are waiting to be lined up and shot.
wengler
Remember how much the NRA supported A+ Howard Dean in the Democratic Party Presidential primary? Yeah…me neither.
My Dad finally canceled his annual membership this year after Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck showed up at the NRA’s yearly get together. Anyone who is not put off by that is just another rightwinger that sees gun ownership as a right to kill libruls and/or brown people “when the day comes”.
celticdragonchick
@wengler:
Yeah, that was pretty bad. I still have my membership, but I cannot fault your dad on that one.
Bill ORLY
@Riggsveda: Regarding handguns not protecting cops and the Ft. Hood soldiers… Sadly, most cops just can’t shoot. Budget restrictions mean if they are lucky, the average cop probably doesn’t fire more than 200 rounds/year, unless they buy their own. And, with the exception of a few guards, nobody on military bases is allowed to carry loaded firearms.
I grew up in the home of Remington Arms, and my grandfather worked there for 30 years. I’ve owned guns all my life. This includes handguns (CCW and competition pistols). I’ve refused to join the NRA my whole life because they are front for gun rights, but are purely a GOP/TeaTard lobbying organization (I’m independent, because the Dems are useless and have demonstrated that they can’t get shit done). I do have friends who fear a UN gun grab (because of course, the US military would NEVER obey such an order), but if this happens, I’ll hand mine over. Even though I’m likely a much better shot, I’m limited when it comes to air support or artillery.
JDC
My family of sportsmen cancelled their NRA memberships during the assault weapons ban “controversy”. Shotgun-toting quail hunters just don’t understand why it’s really important to carry AK-47s with underslung grenade launchers. They sure as hell don’t want to pay any money to try to make that possible.
debbie
@ JenJen:
I’m a little disenchanted with Strickland, specifically because he [email protected]@ied out with the video slots. However, he’s far, far better than Kasich, who I’ve heard interviewed a number of times during this campaign. Each time, he’s come off like a bigger cowboy than GWB ever was. The last thing we need.
Twice I’ve contacted Cordray’s office with consumer complaints. Not only did the AG’s office even respond, but my complaints were forwarded to the agencies that could see to it that the problems were resolved — both in my favor! Blackwell would have been too preoccupied with himself to even set a system like that in place.
DeWine’s campaign has seemed tepid to me — except when he accuses Cordray of filing endless job-killing lawsuits. Then I know that his mild-manneredness is just a front.
maus
Hahaahhah bullshit.
They’ll use it to immediately DISCOUNT a Dem, but they’ll never use it to support one.
There are plenty of gun-owners that vote dem, but the NRA fanatics who think Obama’s trying to take away their guns will not vote progressive, or even centrist.
JR in WV
Davis X Machina, is that you Wayne?
I just happened to visit a South Charleston gun shop today to buy a gun. The shopper beside me was a giant black dude, who bought a .45 for his girlfriend, and something for himself.
I was the grey-bearded retiree with a ponytail, a skinny one since I’m way bald, but still. I know lots of liberals who like guns and shooting.
The guy who sold me my gun was a cop who worked there part time, everyone was polite, and jovial even. There was some gentle and good-natured humor about the .45 for the big guy’s girl, since a .45 is a pretty good sized gun. He could have a really big girlfriend and she still be petite beside him, he was nfl lineman way big.
I’m pretty sure everyone but me was packing, and I wasn’t because my current/replaced today rig isn’t really very comfortable, being a revolver.
All that said, I despise the NRA almost as bad as the Dixicrat bigots, even though I’ve lived around guns my whole life. My Grandma taught me, and my wife, and my brother and my cousins all to shoot as soon as we could hold up the far end of the .22 rifle. Well, not my wife, she was grown up by the time Grandma got to her.
We’re Union members, I donate to Dem candidates, particularly in places where I think it might make a difference. I agree that the NRA managed to give WV’s 5 electorial votes to GWB, they spent a ton of money here that year. Bastids.
Some gun stores I’m not comfortable in, and I don’t spend much money there. Maybe some ammo if I don’t know where else handy to go, but never anything expensive. There are plenty of shops where they make everyone comfortable, even Dems.
I think comparing the gun nuts to states’ rights black helicopter types is probably right on. I don’t have a clue how to get away from the NRA’s lock on gun rights. I believe in all 10 amendments, unlike many 2nd amendment types, who aren’t really sure any of the other amendments are appropriate.
JR
Darth Baracus
I’ve seen posts here implying that out of the entire Bill of Rights, Republicans/conservative voters only care about the 2nd Amendment. However, I believe these people are under the impression, right or wrong, that Democratic/liberal politicians, or the Democratic party are against the entire document, and therefore vote according to their own impression of “lesser of two evils.”
Personally, I believe that there are numerous Republicans and Democrats that intend on upholding the entire BoR, R’s and D’s that think/say they are but aren’t, and a lot of them that are definitely not pro-freedom. Of course, the exact numbers of each of the categories are debatable… I’m sure there are many enthusiastic viewpoints! :-)