And this is the reason, despite the fact that some members of the party are pretty wishy-washy, that I will continue to vote Republican. Its still easier to corral members of YOUR party than to rely on the good graces of someone from the other party. (And yes, I know what anygunanywhere will say). When there is no perfect solution, you go with the best one you have on hand.Jumping Frog wrote:The only true means of preserving, safeguarding, and defending the 2nd Amendment is to ensure we maintain a firm majority of the electorate on our side. If we do not maintain a firm electoral majority, then we are vulnerable to shenanigans. The Senators didn't back off because they were scared of the NRA. They backed off because they knew the NRA represented the opinion of a majority of voters (and had demonstrated the ability to mobilize those voters).
With that in mind, I encourage all of us to remember that that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture as we encounter fellow voters in our daily lives.
There is an example state where we have not been able to maintain a firm majority of the electorate, and look at the results.JALLEN wrote:When the voters of California approved . . .
Search found 1 match
Return to “A new front for gun background checks: the ballot”
- Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:28 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: A new front for gun background checks: the ballot
- Replies: 8
- Views: 811