Biden Stumps for More Action on Guns

[dan_bgblue]

LInkage (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/18/biden-warns-legislators-country-has-changed-on-gun-violence/?hpt=hp_bn3)

[CitizenBBN]

"The one thing that each of us have been saying to our colleagues about these votes is the country has changed," Biden said. "You will pay a price, a political price for not – for not getting engaged and dealing with gun safety."

That's why the only politicians facing recalls are those who voted with Biden, despite Bloomberg spending 10s of millions across the country to target key Senators. The only true thing in his statements is this: he and the anti-gun groups are not going to give up. Bloomberg is spending vast sums on federal, state and local elections nationwide. Some of the blue states are lost, but they were lost on so many things it's not exactly a surprise.

I watch all the polls and numbers on this very closely and if I say so myself very objectively. My views aren't objective, they're my views, but I have to know the lay of the land and the only way to do that is to pick apart all the polls and look for the truth b/c none of them will give it to you if they can help it. Biden is right in one sense, Newtown did change the views of many on guns. Many who were anti-gun became seriously anti-gun, but the part he doesn't mention his how many who were neutral have become strongly pro-gun.

What they've realized is that they cannot rely on the "government" for their safety or the safety of their families. That goes for crazed shooters but also robbers and crack heads and pretty much every other kind of security. They realized that when seconds count, help is only minutes away. A cliche, but an accurate one and one I hear from the mouths of people who are now in the gun market who have never fired one in their lives.

Bloomberg is spending the money to try to make a difference, but the truth is that these shootings showed two things, one less obvious than the other. Yes it showed the risk of a crazy person with a gun and what they can do, but it also seems to have shown people just how ineffective and unprepared government is to protect the citizens of the country. Refusal to protect schools better in the wake of Newtown has hit home just as much as fears over AR rifles and high capacity mags. It's shown a lot of people that the anti-gun movement doesn't care about their direct safety, just the gun issue, which left them feeling like no one was speaking up for their safety and that of their kids, so they realized theyd' better do something about it themselves.

The best thing the anti-gun groups could have done is embrace the NRA push to put guards in schools and enact other target hardening steps for schools and public places. As part of an overall security program a lot of those people would have seen the gun control part within the context of their safety. Just banning ARs, the big push, didn't connect with them as part of the way to insure their safety, it didn't resonate. As one part of a complete package they'd have supported the whole package, but as a narrow "assault weapons ban" it failed b/c they didn't see how that helped them that much.

But those groups are so stuck in "gun free" being good they couldn't possibly get past it to see that "armed trained LEOs in schools" is not "gun toting rednecks roaming the halls with our kids".


Like I said though, one thing is true and Biden is right about it: as long as Obama is in office, this is a LONG way from over as an issue. He'd ban them all if he could, just like in England and Australia, and this fight was a given the day he won re-election. He has nothing to lose in it now, and neither do the anti-gun groups who know no other President will support this cause like he does. They have a 3 year window to make a difference, and they know it. Even most Democrats won't support the Small Arms Treaty as President IMO, much less a Republican, much less an assault weapons ban. They won't use their chips for it even if they believed in it, and the ball is likely to shift enough that they won't believe in it.

[suncat05]

I agree with what you say. However, something that sticks in the back of my mind is how will the next shooting and its aftermath play into their hands?
And I fully agree with you about people needing to realize that they, not the police, are responsible for maintaining their own personal safety. I have said that very thing here myself on several occasions. It is the truth. So, just maybe, the truth is finally becoming evident to those who choose to rationally think about the situation.
We can only hope.

[CitizenBBN]

I agree with what you say. However, something that sticks in the back of my mind is how will the next shooting and its aftermath play into their hands?
And I fully agree with you about people needing to realize that they, not the police, are responsible for maintaining their own personal safety. I have said that very thing here myself on several occasions. It is the truth. So, just maybe, the truth is finally becoming evident to those who choose to rationally think about the situation.
We can only hope.

No doubt each shooting will only become another political football, and I didn't mean to sound optimistic b/c I think the fight will be bitter and I think the newfound funding of the anti-gun groups will let them swell their ranks. I'm just glad that the ranks of the pro-gun groups are also swelling so we can maintain the fight.

They are reporting those who got off the fence and became anti-gun, but they aren't reporting those who got off the fence and became pro-gun. The political landscape has changed, but what it has done is thin the ranks of the "undecided" as they split between the two groups. In Blue states I'm assuming most went to the Bloomberg side, in Red states people are buying up guns. Both sides are digging trenches and preparing for a protracted battle.

I'm not so much an optimist, I'm just glad we weren't overrun in the first wave and I don't feel alone in my trench. :)

[Doc]

but the part he doesn't mention his how many who were neutral have become strongly pro-gun.

What they've realized is that they cannot rely on the "government" for their safety or the safety of their families. That goes for crazed shooters but also robbers and crack heads and pretty much every other kind of security. They realized that when seconds count, help is only minutes away. A cliche, but an accurate one and one I hear from the mouths of people who are now in the gun market who have never fired one in their lives.

This is where I fall, sort of. I don't own a gun and likely never will hence I'm not in the gun market. However I'm much more "don't take away the rights of an adult" on this issue than I was.

[suncat05]

And that approach & common sense rationale is appreciated and applauded in this corner, Doc. But you are an intelligent, critical thinker, unlike many on both sides of the issue who fail to do their own research and rely on the mainstream media or whatever information sources they rely on that may or may not be correct or truthful.

[Doc]

Its interesting juxtaposition in my mind when liberals tout every shooting incident as another failure in gun control and why we need to increase restriction yet use the exact opposite approach concerning terrorism/wire taps. See wire taps are fine because there are fewer acts of terrorism as illustrated by the up to 50 reported, but as of yet unsubstanciated, cases of terrorist acts thwarted due to the nsa phone tracking practice yet gun legal gun ownership has yet to prevent a single crime and in fact is in part responsible for any and all shooting incidents. :533: