PDA

View Full Version : Something Troubling in a Post McDonald World


The Shadow
11-01-2010, 1:30 PM
Tomorrow is election day, and for the most part we will be voting for a Republican, Democrat, or some third party candidate.

In light of all of this, I decided to look at how candidates, specifically Republicans, view the second amendment. Republicans are viewed as pro-gun but the NRA's website would suggest otherwise.

State Senate

Dist 6 - Marcel Weiland - ?

8 - Doo Sup Park - ?

12 - Anthony Canella - ?

20 - Kathleen Evans - B

26 - Nachum Shifren - B

30 - Warren Willis - B

34 - Lucille Kring - B

40 - Brian Hendry - B

State Assembly

1 - Karen Brooks - ?

6 - Robert Stephens - ?

7 - Doris Gentry - ?

8 - Michelle Connor - ?

9 - Rick Redding - B

11 - Julie Craven - ?

12 - Alfonso Faustino - F

13 - Laura Peter - C

14 - Ryan Hatcher - ?

15 - Abram Wilson - C

16 - James Faison - B

18 - Michael Havig - D

19 - Alberto Waisman - B

21 - Greg Conlon - ?

22 - Eric Hickok - ?

23 - Atul Saini - ?

24 - Robert Chandler - C+

28 - Robert Bernosky - B

30 - David Valadao - C-

31 - Brandon Shoemaker - B

35 - Mike Stoker - D

37 - Jeff Gorrell - C

38 - Cameron Smyth - B+

40 - Dennis De Young - B

41 - Terry Rathbun - ?

42 - Mary Toman-Miller - ?

43 - Sunder Ramani - ?

44 - Alvaro Day - C

45 - Suzanne Olivos - ?

47 - Lady Cage - C

49 - Brad Taylor - ?

52 - Gwen Patrick - ?

54 - Martha Flores-Gibson - ?

55 - Christopher Salabaj - ?

56 - Henry Bestwick - ?

57 - Brian Gutierrez - ?

61 - Ray Moors - ?

62 - Jean Ensley - ?

63 - Mike Morrell - B

64 - Brian Nestande - B

76 - Tony Atkins - ?

78 - Rick Powell - C

79 - Derrick Roach - ?

80 - Steve Sanchez - B

No surprise, in the state assembly, two democrats, scored a B by the NRA. Most scored an F rating. In the state senate, only one democrat, scored a B rating. The points I'm making are, first, being a member of the Republican party does not guarantee that a candidate is going to be pro-gun, and second, we have to change the hearts and minds of both parties before we can get meaningful pro-gun legislation through. As it stands, neither party seems to consider the second amendment a serious constitutional right. Maybe it's because it's a newly reacquired right, but those listed seem to have little regard for the second amendment. A "B" rating is unacceptable because it suggests that the the candidate believes that some infringement is okay.

Window_Seat
11-01-2010, 1:38 PM
The Legislature is always helpful in working on pro-2A stuff, but the Courts will be the main venue for current & future RKBA reform.

Erik.

Librarian
11-01-2010, 1:54 PM
Tomorrow is election day, and for the most part we will be voting for a Republican, Democrat, or some third party candidate.

In light of all of this, I decided to look at how candidates, specifically Republicans, view the second amendment. Republicans are viewed as pro-gun but the NRA's website would suggest otherwise.

...

No surprise, in the state assembly, two democrats, scored a B by the NRA. Most scored an F rating. In the state senate, only one democrat, scored a B rating. The points I'm making are, first, being a member of the Republican party does not guarantee that a candidate is going to be pro-gun, and second, we have to change the hearts and minds of both parties before we can get meaningful pro-gun legislation through. As it stands, neither party seems to consider the second amendment a serious constitutional right. Maybe it's because it's a newly reacquired right, but those listed seem to have little regard for the second amendment. A "B" rating is unacceptable because it suggests that the the candidate believes that some infringement is okay.

You see the symptoms clearly, but I think you miss the significance.

For good or ill (I go with "ill") gun rights are not perceived as important to most Californians, and they vote to elect legislators who reflect that view. I think most legislators take their anti-gun stands because they get money from anti-gun organizations to help them reach every legislator's highest goal: re-election.

Cynical, of course, but explains the behaviors very well.

robcoe
11-01-2010, 1:56 PM
The points I'm making are, first, being a member of the Republican party does not guarantee that a candidate is going to be pro-gun, and second, we have to change the hearts and minds of both parties before we can get meaningful pro-gun legislation through. As it stands, neither party seems to consider the second amendment a serious constitutional right.

I agree completely with this, hell the most hardcore anti-gun people I know are also the most rightwing people I know, while all the liberals I know own guns.

RRangel
11-01-2010, 2:42 PM
Republicans are considered more pro gun in this nation for a reason. Though being part of the Republican party does not mean that's a given. Likewise the Democrats are considered more anti-gun for a reason. Though being part of the Democrat party does not mean that's a given. The right to bear arms should be treated as a respected civil right across the board but to those who espouse nanny state views it's certainly not.

I don't see where there's any revelation. The state of California is also a different animal being the blue state that it is. As a whole the nation will benefit where gun rights are concerned after mid-term elections. It's very hard to argue that it will not.

Ford8N
11-01-2010, 3:02 PM
We had a Republican President and both houses of Congress and no significant ending of Federal Gun law happened. Actions speak louder than words with me.

M1A Rifleman
11-01-2010, 3:34 PM
Nothing new. Like you said, its really not the party you need to look at, its the person and their view on the 2nd and guns. In this state, most of the republicans are liberal and anit-gun. The other thing to consider is the whole elitism thing where gun owners are viewed as knuckle dragging rednecks that need to be controlled and kept in the corner.

The Shadow
11-01-2010, 3:49 PM
What I'm inclined to do is vote Libertarian across the board and tell the Republicans why.

To paraphrase an old quote, I would rather deal with the problems of too much liberty, than deal with the problems of too little liberty.

Crom
11-01-2010, 3:54 PM
It very well may take a generation to normalize the 2nd amendment right with the majority of people in our state. The key is to make it non-controversial right; they don't have to like it, but it should be respected by both the left and the right.

The Shadow
11-01-2010, 4:03 PM
You see the symptoms clearly, but I think you miss the significance.

For good or ill (I go with "ill") gun rights are not perceived as important to most Californians, and they vote to elect legislators who reflect that view. I think most legislators take their anti-gun stands because they get money from anti-gun organizations to help them reach every legislator's highest goal: re-election.

Cynical, of course, but explains the behaviors very well.

Does anyone know what percentage of the California population legally owns firearms? And what percentage of that considers the second amendment issue important?

RomanDad
11-01-2010, 5:07 PM
There is another issue... Especially when it comes to CCW....

CCW has always been a privilege for the political elite.... Republican or Democrat. You get elected City Council (let alone to the state or federal legislature) and want a CCW (which many Republican politicians do) and suddenly, YOU'RE TAKEN CARE OF....

And then, it becomes a case of "Screw the unwashed masses"... You've got yours. And then it becomes one of those trappings of power that separates you from the little people. In fact, as there become fewer and fewer such trappings available for the ruling class (you cant even get a decent bribe any more without somebody blowing the whistle) the political and social power of the CCW and the sense of aggrandizement that goes along with being the select few, becomes more important.

Librarian
11-01-2010, 5:31 PM
Does anyone know what percentage of the California population legally owns firearms? And what percentage of that considers the second amendment issue important?

Cans of worms, those.

Really no good way to judge either one, because data collection is subject to such problems.

The most often used data is from General Social Survey. (http://www.norc.org/GSS+Website/) Latest data available is 2008. In 2004, the data suggested (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2610545/) 38% of households and 26% of individuals reported owning at least one firearm. This corresponds to 42 million US households with firearms, and 57 million adult gun owners. 64% of gun owners or 16% of American adults reported owning at least one handgun. Long guns represent 60% of the privately held gun stock. Almost half (48%) of all individual gun owners reported owning [gt-or-equal, slanted]4 firearms. Men more often reported firearm ownership, with 45% stating that they personally owned at least one firearm, compared with 11% for women.So if CA were to closely match the 26%, about 9 and a quarter million Californians would own at least 1 gun in 2004.

The Shadow
11-01-2010, 7:33 PM
There is another issue... Especially when it comes to CCW....

CCW has always been a privilege for the political elite.... Republican or Democrat. You get elected City Council (let alone to the state or federal legislature) and want a CCW (which many Republican politicians do) and suddenly, YOU'RE TAKEN CARE OF....

And then, it becomes a case of "Screw the unwashed masses"... You've got yours. And then it becomes one of those trappings of power that separates you from the little people. In fact, as there become fewer and fewer such trappings available for the ruling class (you cant even get a decent bribe any more without somebody blowing the whistle) the political and social power of the CCW and the sense of aggrandizement that goes along with being the select few, becomes more important.

So, no matter how much things change, ultimately they stay the same. In other words, the "lords" in America have attempted to limit the ownership and carrying of arms by the perceived "serfs."

Cans of worms, those.

Really no good way to judge either one, because data collection is subject to such problems.

The most often used data is from General Social Survey. (http://www.norc.org/GSS+Website/) Latest data available is 2008. In 2004, the data suggested (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2610545/) So if CA were to closely match the 26%, about 9 and a quarter million Californians would own at least 1 gun in 2004.

Interesting stats I found. In 2009, the population of California was 36,961,664. This last April, the population was reported as 33,871,648. That's a drop of 9.1%. (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html)

Considering that gun owners are about a third of the population in California, that could account for the lack of concern for second amendment freedoms. However, having 9 million gun owners and only a fraction of us are involved is still a troubling statistic that's hard to ignore.

Apocalypsenerd
11-01-2010, 7:50 PM
Your list is only partial. Both my state rep. and state sen. are strong 2A supporters. Neither is on the list you have up there.

The Shadow
11-01-2010, 8:12 PM
Your list is only partial. Both my state rep. and state sen. are strong 2A supporters. Neither is on the list you have up there.

That was intentional. You'll also notice that I mentioned only three Democrats. The point was to illustrate that just because a politician claims to be a Republican, or for that matter, a conservative, it doesn't mean that they are pro second amendment. There are a lot of luke warm or flat out anti second amendment politicians that are part of the Republican party, which proves that you can't judge their second amendment stance based on the letter next to their name. What I would say is that if your representative is a Republican and not on the list, they have an "A" rating by the NRA. If they are a Democrat and one of the three I listed, they have a "B" rating. No politician in the Democrat Party had an "A" rating from the NRA.

Apocalypsenerd
11-01-2010, 10:24 PM
Ahh, well I find myself voting single issue for some of the races. That issue is 2A rights. It is slow, but I think things are changing. I'd like to thanks CGF, SAF, NRA and the various other 2A organizations for that. We'll know things have affected our culture, not just our laws, when the folks in Sacramento stop their anti-2A shenanigans.

chuckdc
11-01-2010, 11:06 PM
We had a Republican President and both houses of Congress and no significant ending of Federal Gun law happened. Actions speak louder than words with me.

Guess I must have missed the part where they renewed the Federal AW ban after it sunset. ... wait, they didn't.

nick
11-01-2010, 11:19 PM
It's much easier for me, my US Rep. is Henry Waxman. So voting is a no-brainer.

Dreaded Claymore
11-02-2010, 3:17 AM
I agree completely with this, hell the most hardcore anti-gun people I know are also the most rightwing people I know, while all the liberals I know own guns.

I wish I could hang out with you. I'm kinda liberal, and all the other liberal college students here at HSU think I'm strange. Except for the anarchist college students. They want guns so they can overthrow every government on Earth, starting with LA and Oakland.

Ford8N
11-02-2010, 5:00 AM
Guess I must have missed the part where they renewed the Federal AW ban after it sunset. ... wait, they didn't.

I don't mean to get in a pissing contest but really I meant repealing the big guys.:

1934 National Firearms Act
1938 Federal Firearms Act
1968 Gun Control Act
1986 Firearm Owners' Protection Act
hell, just throw us a bone and dump 922r!

The Republicans had the majority of the government and they didn't spend any political capital to help get rid of those now unconstitutional laws. Actions speak louder than words with me. Gun owners are used and very easily played, Republicans know this. If the just as stupid Democrats would embrace the Second Amendment, not with just platitudes and lip service but with actions. They would kick a**.

GM4spd
11-02-2010, 5:49 AM
We had a Republican President and both houses of Congress and no significant ending of Federal Gun law happened. Actions speak louder than words with me.


That is correct and if it happens again you will NOT see any repeal of
existing Federal gun laws despite what you read on this board. Pete

VegasND
11-02-2010, 6:38 AM
The Republican apologists need to remember that not only did Republicans NOT repeal intrusive laws and decrease government intrusion into our lives when they owned Congress and the White House -- Bush43 specifically promised to sign a renewed AWB if it made it to his desk.

A friend and supporter of our rights would have praised its expiration and promised to support the diminishing of remaining infringements.

cmichini
11-02-2010, 8:16 AM
Remember to vote NO on YES.

Barabas
11-02-2010, 8:25 AM
Party politics are poison. Vote on issues not what club they're a member of. I love being DTS, particularly during this last primary when both parties let me vote for their shill and this general when there were six balloted candidates and several "authorized" write-ins to choose from. I cast my own vote, no party can vote my conscience.