Are we de facto in more danger from Republicans than Democrats in regard to 2nd Amendment?

[Doug.38PR]

When Democrats are in charge, the NRA is: “From my cold dead hands!” and “any gun any time anywhere” and “good guy with a gun” and other Republicans generally follow these battlecries and refuse to give in.

When Republicans are in charge, Republicans gradually push for “universal background checks”, “Red Flag laws” and “Common sense gun reform” and the NRA is: “please don’t do that” and “bump stocks are not arms”

I mean if limp wristed Lindsey Graham is pushing for it, that’s one thing and nobody cares, but we have Greg Abbott, Mitch McConnell and even Ted Cruz and John Cornyn flirting with the ideas as well as President Trump. It’s building support among Republicans in the House and Senate and White House.

Even in the, so-called Red State of Texas. (Texas WILL go blue soon if demographic and immigration changes aren’t radically made)

[KLB]

Depends on what you mean by "de facto danger." Democrats will always take any anti-gun step they can, up to and including legislating confiscation (let's not get into the difficulties of effecting confiscation). Republicans are the only bulwark, and when they decide to relent on some point, that point is gone.

[Tex1961]

I like to think of it more in in the terms of "Lesser of two evils"

[Doug.38PR]

I like to think of it more in in the terms of "Lesser of two evils"

I get that. But that argument, over the years, has really shown to be a non-solution.
Lesser of two evils is still an evil. With the Democrats our guard is always up and they get nowhere, with Republicans we trust them to a fault and let our guard down and even let them spit on our back and tell us “it’s raining” with barely a “please don’t do that, we are your supporters” from the NRA (or any other group supporting conservative American beliefs)

[Doug.38PR]

Depends on what you mean by "de facto danger." Democrats will always take any anti-gun step they can, up to and including legislating confiscation (let's not get into the difficulties of effecting confiscation). Republicans are the only bulwark, and when they decide to relent on some point, that point is gone.

You mean the point when Reagan, in effect, banned Machine Guns in 1986?
Looks like we are in for worse now with the way the party is going...including the President...and now Texas. (If we lose Texas via demographic change...we lose all of the states. America will be gone forever)

[chasfm11]

You mean the point when Reagan, in effect, banned Machine Guns in 1986?
Looks like we are in for worse now with the way the party is going...including the President...and now Texas. (If we lose Texas via demographic change...we lose all of the states. America will be gone forever)

So I'll put my devil's advocate hat on and say that we are better than we have been for the Second Amendment. There are challenges and there will always be challenges but other than the bump stock mess, we haven't "officially" lost ground because no new restrictive laws have been passed at the Federal level.

Regarding the restrictive laws at the State level, there have been a few high profile cases where "they" tried to make an example of an individual for breaking one of those laws. Most of those have not gone the way that the gun grabbers wanted. There have been pardons and charges dropped. There were threats in Connecticut when the bans were passed there that the police would be kicking in doors at 6am. It hasn't happened. It is a standoff between the politicians and the gun owners. There has been a lot of fallout and the loss of jobs and firearm companies moved out. Places like Illinois and D.C. have had to capitulate on carry laws. Clearly there are hold-outs - NJ, NY, CA, HI but in all of those places, the Second Amendment is only part of the problem.

We need to look in a mirror. We have not grown the NRA and other gun support groups to the extent that we should have. We have not made the phones of those representing us at the State and Federal levels ring off the hook when they do and say stupid things. They will try to get away with all that they can, if we let them. I'm a citizen advocate (part of a group) who has called entire committees in the Texas House and Senate over specific pieces of legislation. We have gotten changes made. If half of the members of this forum had make similar phone calls about specific pieces of firearm related legislation, those bills would almost have certainly gone differently. I'm not here to defend any of our reps at the Federal or State levels. I've been furious without most of them more times than I can count. But this is a representative government and we get the representation that we allow.

[der Teufel]

I like to think of it more in in the terms of "Lesser of two evils"

I get that. But that argument, over the years, has really shown to be a non-solution.
Lesser of two evils is still an evil. <SNIP>

I understand your thought process, but when you're faced with a choice of two evils, it's still a good idea to go with the lesser evil.
If I have to choose between Republicans who are giving away some of my freedom, or Democrats who will take it all, the choice, while it sticks in my throat, is obvious.

This week I'm sending a contribution to the NRA. I don't like all the internal politics that's going on, but again — in the lesser of two evils camp — I still think they're the best line of 2A defense around.

[C-dub]

When it comes to politics or politicians it almost always comes down to the lesser evil.

[K.Mooneyham]

I like to think of it more in in the terms of "Lesser of two evils"

I get that. But that argument, over the years, has really shown to be a non-solution.
Lesser of two evils is still an evil. With the Democrats our guard is always up and they get nowhere, with Republicans we trust them to a fault and let our guard down and even let them spit on our back and tell us “it’s raining” with barely a “please don’t do that, we are your supporters” from the NRA (or any other group supporting conservative American beliefs)

Then please, by all means, tell us all EXACTLY what to do. Do not speak in boilerplate phrases, or offer traditional platitudes. Tell us EXACTLY what specific items we as individuals can do to fix the problem. I've asked this of others before. Some made efforts, but I have yet to get a completely satisfactory response. IMHO, there is a limit to what the individual, or even a small group of individuals, can actually accomplish under the conditions we find ourselves in these days. No one likes that, but there it is. Prove me wrong, I beg of you. Until such time as someone comes along with a fool-proof, or even reasonable likely method to fix this mess, I will continue to vote Republican, including voting for the most conservative person during the primaries, for want of anything better to do.

[srothstein]

Then please, by all means, tell us all EXACTLY what to do. Do not speak in boilerplate phrases, or offer traditional platitudes. Tell us EXACTLY what specific items we as individuals can do to fix the problem.

You can do any of several things. The two biggest steps that you, as an individual, can take to end the problem of voting for the lesser of two evils are:

1. Make sure one of the options is a good person and not just a lesser evil. That can be running for office yourself or convincing someone you know to run. It can be working with the party you support to make sure they know not to support lesser evils and that we will not support them (as in donate money to the candidate or to the party) if they do. In other words, you can devote some of your time and effort to this.

2. You can realize and help spread the word that we are not a two party system. The US is a multi-party system and we have parties that are not the lesser of two evils. OK, some of the smaller parties are even more evil than the two big ones, but some are also not evil. As a general rule, for one example, the Libertarian party is going to support more freedom on the gun rights issue than any other party. I think they tend to be more internally consistent on issues than most parties, but that is my opinion and you may not want that consistency. But it is important to get the word out that Libertarians and other parties really can win IF people vote that way. We are generally a two party system because most of the population has bought into the lie that we are a two party system and only the two major parties can actually win an election. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy in that people vote for the lesser of two evils instead of the good because they think the good cannot win anyway. Just picture how a four way race could go if a socialist, a democrat, a republican, and a libertarian were all running and the people in that district did not feel constrained to just vote for one of the two parties.

In the interest of full disclosure, about 25 years ago I ran for congress as a Libertarian. Obviously, I did not win. I am no longer a member of any political party. I did learn quite a bit about our political system and found that the biggest two problems in our system are listed above. The media bias is another large problem, but it is a distant third, IMO, compared to these two.

[apostate]

When Democrats are in charge, the NRA is: “From my cold dead hands!” and “any gun any time anywhere” and “good guy with a gun” and other Republicans generally follow these battlecries and refuse to give in.

When Republicans are in charge, Republicans gradually push for “universal background checks”, “Red Flag laws” and “Common sense gun reform” and the NRA is: “please don’t do that” and “bump stocks are not arms”

I mean if limp wristed Lindsey Graham is pushing for it, that’s one thing and nobody cares, but we have Greg Abbott, Mitch McConnell and even Ted Cruz and John Cornyn flirting with the ideas as well as President Trump. It’s building support among Republicans in the House and Senate and White House.

We got National Park carry under Obama.

We got gun parts classified as machineguns under Trump.

Draw your own conclusions. And vote accordingly.

[KLB]

We got National Park carry under Obama.

We got a gun accessory classified as a machine gun under Trump.

Draw your own conclusions.

True as far as it goes, but I doubt you would prefer Obama to Trump or Democrats to Republicans, generally. Abjuring the lesser evil gets you the greater evil.

[apostate]

Most of the Republicans who will appear on my ballot next year have gone out of their way to attack my constitutional rights. That makes them ineligible for my vote.

Their choice. Their consequences.

[rtschl]

I'm becoming cynical as I get older, but I think both parties are using voting blocks (gun rights vs gun ban in this case) for fund raising and election purposes and could care less about really supporting the issue. It's about the campaign money and the votes. If the GOP actually voted like they campaign we would see a myriad of changes that are in conservative/libertarian favor regardless of the issue.

But what does that benefit the person running for office, especially on hot button issues where you have reliable blocks of voters turning out election after election if they actually solved something? How could they reliably count on the large block of issue voters still voting for them?

I seriously think we're being used and that we the people are more committed to principles than many of those representing us.

[Oldgringo]

Some are friends of the NRA and the 2nd Amendment.ALL are concerned with getting re-elected. TERM LIMITS for congress and federal courts!