Don’t Blame Liberals for Gun Control

[rambone]

Sadly, I can't really disagree with this assessment anymore. Too many on both sides of the phoney "Left/Right" paradigm do not support liberty.


Don’t Blame Liberals for Gun Control

It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.

Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay."​

​

 

[jbombelli]

I'll blame Democrats. Here's what the Democratic Party has brought us over the years:

1. The National Firearms Act of 1934
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

2. Gun Control Act of 1968
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

3. The Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act.
Despite being defeated soundly in a recorded vote, Charlie Rangel declared that it passed and added it to the FOPA. Reagan signed it to get us the rest of the FOPA. However, it wouldn’t have been there to be signed at all if not for the Democrats trying to defeat the FOPA.

4. The Brady Handgun Law
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

5. The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

6. The Lautenberg Amendment
a. Made the 2nd Amendment a revocable privilege, instead of a fundamental right. Thanks, Charles Lautenberg

7. Defeated the Thune Amendment, denying us the right to carry
a. The amendment would have allowed those of us with licenses or permits to carry, to carry in all states that issue licenses or permits to carry.

8. The term “gun show loophole” and a never-ending quest to “close it” essentially outlawing sales between private individuals

9. A never-ending supply of registration schemes

10. The idea that the 2nd Amendment is some sort of “collective” right, while others that mention the “people” are individual

11. Constant lawsuits against gun companies in a shameless effort to drive them out of business

12. Magazine capacity limits in some states
a. in Ohio, for example, a 30 round magazine is classified as a machine gun.

13. Unapproved firearms lists in some states
a. like California

14. Unapproved ammunition lists
a. in New Jersey it is a crime to carry hollow-points.

15. Various assault weapon bans around the country
a. try taking an AK-47 with a detachable 75-rd. drum to Chicago, or California.

16. Many places with rampant crime where we can’t carry at all, but are instead required to be easy prey
a. Chicago, Detroit, Washington DC…




Just for starters.

 

[Jack Burton]

If 80 percent of the liberals believe in gun control and 20 percent of the conservatives do it is rather disingenuous to put forth that they are equally to blame for the problems we have with the gun control activity.

 

[bingley]

Mas Ayoob, citing Kenneth Blanchard's book Black Man with a Gun, says the following in Combat Handgunnery:

• The Dred Scott decision, which ruled that people of African ancestry were not and could not be US citizens, was partially motivated by the fear of black man with a gun. If a black man is a citizen, then he can bear arms.
• Gun control originated from the fear of freed slaves during the Reconstruction after the Civil War. The white southerners passed a law to require a license to bear arms in public. "The plan was to make the sheriffs the issuing authority, and then be sure to elect only white males who would be sure to issue the permits only to other white males." Ayoob goes on to say this is the origin of "shall issue." He doesn't explain in which state(s) this law was passed.

I am not sure of the historical veracity of either of these claims, since I haven't seen them anywhere else. Please note that this is not an invitation to get into the race-based flame wars that are forbidden on this forum. Share historical knowledge if you have it. Thanks, and I sign off respectfully,


Da Bing

 

[NYFelon]

I'll blame Democrats. Here's what the Democratic Party has brought us over the years:

1. The National Firearms Act of 1934
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

2. Gun Control Act of 1968
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

3. The Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act.
Despite being defeated soundly in a recorded vote, Charlie Rangel declared that it passed and added it to the FOPA. Reagan signed it to get us the rest of the FOPA. However, it wouldn’t have been there to be signed at all if not for the Democrats trying to defeat the FOPA.

4. The Brady Handgun Law
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

5. The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994
a. Congress had a Democratic majority.

6. The Lautenberg Amendment
a. Made the 2nd Amendment a revocable privilege, instead of a fundamental right. Thanks, Charles Lautenberg

7. Defeated the Thune Amendment, denying us the right to carry
a. The amendment would have allowed those of us with licenses or permits to carry, to carry in all states that issue licenses or permits to carry.

8. The term “gun show loophole” and a never-ending quest to “close it” essentially outlawing sales between private individuals

9. A never-ending supply of registration schemes

10. The idea that the 2nd Amendment is some sort of “collective” right, while others that mention the “people” are individual

11. Constant lawsuits against gun companies in a shameless effort to drive them out of business

12. Magazine capacity limits in some states
a. in Ohio, for example, a 30 round magazine is classified as a machine gun.

13. Unapproved firearms lists in some states
a. like California

14. Unapproved ammunition lists
a. in New Jersey it is a crime to carry hollow-points.

15. Various assault weapon bans around the country
a. try taking an AK-47 with a detachable 75-rd. drum to Chicago, or California.

16. Many places with rampant crime where we can’t carry at all, but are instead required to be easy prey
a. Chicago, New York City, Washington DC…




Just for starters.

Despite how much I hate this state, I don't like to see it characterized as the crime ridden place it was in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s. For several years in a row, NYC was the safest city of over 1,000,000 citizens in the US, I think it still is in fact, though I can't verify it. Sure, if you're above 176th on the west side after dark in Manhattan you may run afoul of some degenerates. But that can be said for anyplace else too.

edit: Just found this. Snipped it out of an article which purports to have pulled the info from 2009 FBI Info. It's just a list, and I will look to find a more trustworthy source.

The 10 Safest Cities in America, according to the FBI:
#1 New York

#2 San Jose

#3 Los Angeles

#4 San Diego

#5 El Paso

#6 Honolulu

#7 Denver

#8 Boston

#9 Las Vegas

#10 Louisville

On all the rest, I can find no fault.

 

[Bummer]

If 80 percent of the liberals believe in gun control and 20 percent of the conservatives do it is rather disingenuous to put forth that they are equally to blame for the problems we have with the gun control activity.

I don't see the Congress repealing these unconstitutional laws when there's a Republican majority.

 

[bingley]

Despite how much I hate this state, I don't like to see it characterized as the crime ridden place it was in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s. For several years in a row, NYC was the safest city of over 1,000,000 citizens in the US, I think it still is in fact, though I can't verify it.

This is true. New York City is quite safe -- certainly safer than Indy.

A previous poster said that we'd be easy prey in such large cities. This is not true. Just because the law does not allow you to have a gun, it doesn't mean you are not armed in some way, as many New Yorkers, Chicagoans, etc. can tell you from their personal experience.


Da Bing

 

[jbombelli]

Despite how much I hate this state, I don't like to see it characterized as the crime ridden place it was in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s. For several years in a row, NYC was the safest city of over 1,000,000 citizens in the US, I think it still is in fact, though I can't verify it. Sure, if you're above 176th on the west side after dark in Manhattan you may run afoul of some degenerates. But that can be said for anyplace else too.

edit: Just found this. Snipped it out of an article which purports to have pulled the info from 2009 FBI Info. It's just a list, and I will look to find a more trustworthy source.




On all the rest, I can find no fault.

Fine fine fine. I swapped out NYC for Detroit. To be fair the last time I was in NYC was 1982.

 

[jbombelli]

I don't see the Congress repealing these unconstitutional laws when there's a Republican majority.

I don't see either party repealing anything. How loudly did all the Democrats scream about the Patriot Act, only to continue it when it was their turn?

Congress almost never repeals bad law.

The only reason we lost the AWB is the sunset provision. If that wasn't there we would have the AWB forever.

 

[NYFelon]

It's not that I disagree with the characterization of NYS as a firearms hostile area, because it certainly is. NYC is downright European in their firearms policy, requiring a license for even rifles and shotguns. They also recognize NO ONE ELSE'S license. No one's, even if issued from another jurisdiction within the State of New York. The city is a giant victim disarmament zone, to be sure. I just get a little irked when people think that the South Bronx from the movie Fort Apache even still exists, or that 42nd street looks like it did in a hundred movie depictions of pimps, prostitutes and junkies. That place doesn't exist anymore.

@jbombelli

lol. Thanks for that.

This place sucks, make no mistake, but it's not really crime that does it.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think I recall some source reporting that the so-called safety in NYC is a result of police-state tactics, including cracking down on such folks as the sidewalk hotdog vendor who had no business license (since he had no set location) and on the guys who would "wash" your windows at a stop light for cash. By rousting these people and removing either the elements that hung around with them or the people listed themselves, Giuliani "made it safe" at the expense of liberty, and we all know what Franklin said about that.

Come to think of it, we know what Patrick Henry said, too, about his liberty.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[gunowner930]

Most of the gun control measures in the 20th and now 21st century were pushed by Democrats, that's not to say that there aren't good pro-2a Democrats or anti-gun Republicans (Helmke). It's also important to note that many "liberals" aint exactly liberal anymore.

 

[sbcman]

Republicans? Democrats? I guess its just in my nature to look at myself first, but when I think about over-reaching gun laws I see politicians as only the catalyst and people like me, gun owners, 2a supporters, as the ones ultimately at fault for letting such legislation take hold.

I could be wrong and I do know that certain groups like the NRA and GOA, etc have done much to curb and stop legislation.

Ultimately though, it's the section of our government called "we the people" that seems most at fault. I fear that history will look back upon us and say "they did nothing to stop it."

 

[teddy12b]

Ultimately though, it's the section of our government called "we the people" that seems most at fault. I fear that history will look back upon us and say "they did nothing to stop it."

I agree with this. While I enjoy poking fun at demacrats, everyone is at fault on this. If you've voted for a republican or a demacrat in your lifetime then you've helped support gun control.

"We" are all at fault in this.

 

[NYFelon]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think I recall some source reporting that the so-called safety in NYC is a result of police-state tactics, including cracking down on such folks as the sidewalk hotdog vendor who had no business license (since he had no set location) and on the guys who would "wash" your windows at a stop light for cash. By rousting these people and removing either the elements that hung around with them or the people listed themselves, Giuliani "made it safe" at the expense of liberty, and we all know what Franklin said about that.

Come to think of it, we know what Patrick Henry said, too, about his liberty.

Blessings,
Bill

I don't know that I'd qualify NYC as a police state prior to 9/11/01. I think you may be speaking of his "Quality of life" initiative circa 1994 or '95. The man came to office and inherited a police force which essentially had become lazy due to social acceptance of public deviance. I don't know that I'd call issuing summonses to persons urinating in a public alleyway in broad daylight heavy handed police tactics. The NYPD doesn't police food carts, the NYC Dep't of Health does. If anything Giuliani revitalized a city which had become complacent and happy to accept a lackadaisical attitude towards its duty to its citizens so long as the paychecks kept coming. He reprioritized areas of patrol via where the crime was happening, rather than to make sure the yups in MidTown felt safe and the NYPD didn't have to worry about being police. He also undersaw a large campaign to remove the graffiti which had built up under the lax supervision of previous administrations, and as a result made the city a more attractive place to visitors.

As for the windshield guys, they came in two varieties. There was the guy with the bucket of soapy water, a squeegee, and who would ask you if you wanted your windshield washed, and would do so for a couple of bucks, usually whatever you felt the service was worth. Consensual contract that one, and no issue to be found. I also never saw NYPD cite one of these folks. I'm sure it happened, but I never witnessed it. Then there was the guy that had rotted teeth, a filthy squeegee, no bucket, and would wait at traffic bottlenecks where he could rub his filthy rag on your windshield and demand payment from drivers who had never asked for their windshields to be cleaned, and who had probably left it dirtier than it had been originally. These were the people targeted by the QoL initiative.

Were there parts of the QoL I didn't care for? You betcha. The stop and frisk policy for one, which was overwhelmingly employed in uptown areas. Regardless of whether or not a crime had occurred patterns of abuse formed early on in the implementation of this policy. Did it lead to more arrests? Probably, I would think it did. Were they substantial, or even warranted, I wasn't there but I would hazard to say the majority of them were BS possession arrests that were either thrown out or adjudicated as fines. There are other attributes I found distasteful as well, that one is just a glaring example of police abuse of a power issued. On the whole however I would say Giuliani's tenure as executive officer left the city better off than when he came in, and the QoL initiative did more good than harm. It wasn't as if they drafted new laws by the boatload, they simply made the police work, and enforce laws for the public safety they had long since grown into the habit of ignoring.

Currently, there can be no, and I mean absolutely no doubt as to whether or not NYC is a police state. When roving bands of MP5 toting paramilitary are everywhere, and you can't be sure if you're in NY or Northern Ireland at the height of the war, it's safe to say the police state has arrived.

 

[Jack Burton]

I don't see the Congress repealing these unconstitutional laws when there's a Republican majority.

Federal congress is a creature of habit... look around at all the states that have liberalized their gun laws in the past 30 years and tell us if they were mostly done with a Republican or Demo majority.

Wisconsin just got CCW after years of it not passing with a Dem majority and a Dem governor. They now have a pubbie majority and pubbie governor. Do you think this is coincidence?

 

[CarmelHP]

Sadly, I can't really disagree with this assessment anymore. Too many on both sides of the phoney "Left/Right" paradigm do not support liberty.


Don’t Blame Liberals for Gun Control

How often are you going to recycle your same ol' crap? We get it. You hate Republicans. You hate Reagan. Wonderful. Who cares?

 

[rugertoter]

No matter who is right and who is wrong, my opinion is this. Anyone who is afraid of guns and lawful gun ownership is not only a fool, but a coward as well. A gun is just a tool to be used the proper way. The gun represents a freedom, just as going to the polls to vote or being able to shop at whatever store you want to. That is why the freedom of firearm ownership is so damned important. To me, its the freedom of choice more than it is the gun.

 

[bingley]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think I recall some source reporting that the so-called safety in NYC is a result of police-state tactics, including cracking down on such folks as the sidewalk hotdog vendor who had no business license (since he had no set location) and on the guys who would "wash" your windows at a stop light for cash. By rousting these people and removing either the elements that hung around with them or the people listed themselves, Giuliani "made it safe" at the expense of liberty, and we all know what Franklin said about that.

This is not correct. Giuliani FIRST made New York City safe, and as he ran out of things to do, began to pick on the minnows: unlicensed street vendors, beggars, thinly disguised beggars (car window washers), and so forth. He enforced the law rigidly. No, I wasn't a fan of his, but his administration was a far cry from a "police state." In a police state, the military and the police had arbitrary authority and acted as though they were above the law. The Franklin allusion was inapplicable. No one gave up liberty for security.

What you are thinking of is his quality of life campaign. If you tolerate a broken window in an abandoned house, soon the walls will have graffiti on them, and listless kids will start hanging out around the corner, and before you know it, gangs will move in and start dealing drugs under that innocuous broken window. I don't know whether this really worked as Giuliani advertised, or whether it was all the policemen he put on street corners, but he succeeded in increasing public safety where the previous mayors failed. That's why the New Yorkers put him in for a second term.

It seems that some posters on this forum have a bizarre image of New York City (and possibly of other cities) as a lawless and oppressive place. Fortunately, that's does not reflect reality.


Da Bing

 

[jbombelli]

You mean Escape From New York isn't real?

Damn. I was so looking forward to meeting the Duke Of New York. A Number One!