Republicans and Democrats are split far apart on abortion and gun laws in general. The funny thing is that Democrats don’t care about polls that disfavor them, but will immediately take to referring to polls that disfavor Republicans. With the 4 gun control measures blocked yesterday, USAToday says that:
“Democrats say the GOP is out of step with the American people, pointing to polls that show a majority want stricter gun laws. An NBC News/Survey Monkey online poll conducted after the Orlando massacre last week found 61% of those surveyed support stricter gun laws; 38% opposed them. The survey also found 60% support a ban on “assault weapons” and 38% oppose it.”
So just because some survey determined stricter gun laws are favorable, we should enact laws that reflect it? There is a lack of process there. Surveys can be inaccurate, but more importantly they do not have the power to destroy the second amendment. By that, I mean that some of the stricter laws suggested are moderately to extremely infringing on our right to bear arms. One such proposal was the Feinstein proposal which was blocked. I know that there are many laws that we- those of us in the firearms community- feel as if our rights are already being infringed upon. But for people to suggest that lawmakers should follow knee-jerk reactions and surveys taken on emotion, and for those people to ignore the right that they do not wish to use is not a clean way to go. Miguel pointed out that gun control people should heed the due process of our rights because they would then sound more reasonable. It would force them to carefully consider what laws they want put in place.
And what does this have to do with abortions? Well, according to CNN polling: “58 percent of Americans oppose all or virtually all abortions” and “only 40 percent of Americans generally favor legalized abortion in most instances.” The article also pulls polls from previous years were the percentage against abortions is in the 60’s. So does this mean to Democrats that anti-abortion laws need to be instantly put in place? Absolutely not. Polls are just estimates to try find out what the percentage of the population agrees or disagrees with. Those who support legal abortions, at least in most cases, point to the ninth and fourteenth amendment. Those are the two amendments that were largely used to decide Roe V. Wade. The ruling under Roe left it so that abortions are legal and laws relating to abortion should be under the standard of strict scrutiny.
So when a poll’s majority says gun laws need to be stricter, Democrats support a democracy and mob rule. However, when poll’s majority say abortions should only be done under strict circumstances, Democrats favor our Constitutional Republic.
On a side note, I absolutely hate the Republican/Democrat splitting on situations purely based on party lines. The two party system is crap, and instead of ideologies, people are choosing to align with an entire party’s ideology when voting. So, I don’t like to just say sweeping things like “Democrats do [insert bad things]”, but in this case of gun and abortion laws I did so because the situation has been a party-line split historically.
I guess I’m not the typical conservative in that I don’t have a problem with abortion in general or even large numbers of subsidized abortions.
After all, conservatives don’t get abortions.
Okay, I will go there. Everyone get ready to cringe. People will scream at me, but I am going to simply present scientific/medical truth here initially.
The moral ramifications are profound. So, I will next have to go there.
We all learned in 5th grade health class that a new HUMAN life begins at conception. It is not a unicorn, it is not a walrus. It may only be a single cell, but it is endowed with all of the components in the normal process to allow it to grow into a baby that can be delivered. That is, if it is not destroyed on purpose.
The only question that needs to be asked has been answered. It is an innocent HUMAN life and the malicious and intentional destruction of it is murder. We do not have a Constitutional right to murder. Actually, we have all sorts of laws against unjustified homicide.
We do have a Constitutional RECOGNITION of our innate right of self defense to protect our very own personal and innocent HUMAN life via the Second Amendment. So, all of the firearms control legislation and the infringing piss poor court decisions are null and void.
So, Democrats are wrong on both topics. They are the party of death and murder.
One final shot. Anyone who reads this and believes they can simultaneously be a Christian and a Democrat are deceived. It’s like being a Jewish Nazi. They are incompatible.
If democrats want to enshrine a right to abort their fetal offspring, I have to say that I really don’t have a problem with that.
Conservatives don’t get abortions.
Laredo,
I agree with you about party-line voting and even news reporting. I suspect that the majority of voters dislike at least some aspects of their preferred party’s platform. I was so frustrated by this that I decided, about 40 years ago, that I had been forced to become a single-issue voter. Since then, I only ask one question of myself: pro second amendment? That has always been the deciding factor. The result was that I always ended up voting for a republican, even though I often disagree with many of their positions.
The election issues of the NRA publications make this process even simpler.
The reason I mention this is the recent attempt by the democrats to throw the Constitution under the bus. Now every intelligent American should be able to see their true colors.
I realize that in recent years gun-owner control has been primarily a Democratic Party issue but when did it actually become so? Was it primarily following the assassinations of the Kennedy’s and MLK (since I believe JFK was an NRA Life Member)? And the Republicans have gotten in their licks in recent years as well. I know some of the earliest major gun-owner control pushes go back to the 20’s and 30’s and even before, with FDR passing the NFA and anti-union, anti-immigrants, and anti-anarchist movements driving passage of some of the earliest laws, I believe under both parties. I’m not a historian, and am too old to start, but I am interested in your take on the situation.
It was before MLK, because gun control as a concept was first initiated in the US as a way to keep guns out of the hands of blacks, and say what they like, the Democrat party have always had it in for blacks who go off the plantation.
MLK and Malcom X both had some rather choice words for blacks who voted Democrat.
It goes even further back than that. Gun control was first initiated against the Native Americans, pre-American Revolution, and continued on through and past the Civil War in that fashion. Enacting gun control against blacks is a relative newcomer to the North American stage. Gun control predates the founding of even the Democrat Party and its anti-native activist and founder, Andrew Jackson.
Knuckles,
I think I posted about this question some time ago, so I will try to re-create my thoughts.
Why would anyone be against self-defense? Why would they want a mother to be unable to save her child? Why would any woman deny a woman who wishes to be armed to be free to arm herself? Why deny any adult citizen arms and ammunition? It makes no sense…unless there is a hidden agenda. What hidden agenda could there be that requires disarming the public? …could it be, say, a desire to trash the Constitution and install a totalitarian government? Maybe there’s another reason but I’m too dumb to figure it out….
These people decry violence but don’t enforce laws on the books, such as the Chicago thug and murderer recently that had enough felony convictions to be locked away for many years, but was released anyway and killed again. Did the anti-gun people yelp about his release from jail? Nope, instead they demanded more anti- gun laws. Rinse and repeat. The architects of the anti-gun agenda love crime, and use every incident that they can to further their agenda. This blog is filled with examples. The saddest thing is that the otherwise intelligent people who are following their leaders willy-nilly to a police state are too blind or befuddled to see it for what it is. Why can’t we convince them that they are wrong? Perhaps: cognitive dissonance, motivated reasoning, or one of a dozen other ways our brain can play tricks on us. Humans have the ability to look at facts and come to opposite conclusions, depending on their current state of mind and desires.
Polls these days are not designed to reflect public opinion, they’re designed to shape it. It’s relatively easy to shape a poll question, or series of questions, to get a desired response, or to shape the respondent pool. One then publishes that poll to attempt to advance a desired policy and drive public opinion, or at least be able to hide behind the claim of following the “will of the people.”
Moreover, the Founders – and rightly so – took certain policy positions off the table 200+ years ago. The option to bar firearms ownership is one of them. And due process is another. Feinstein’s bill attacked both. It died a deserved death, though it is troubling 40+ Senators, sworn to uphold the Constitution, voted to gut it.
Remember – we are a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
Guns and abortion are wedge issues, i.e. issues which people feel very passionate about and will not compromise on, so they go with the party that reflects their views on that issue. If you are passionately pro-gun, you are likely to vote Republican, even if the other planks of the platform (pro-traditional marriage, etc…) are things you disagree with. I know plenty of people who are pro-gun & pro-choice, but they feel more passionately about guns so they vote Republican, despite the fact that the party doesn’t reflect their views on abortion.
And there’s a few people who are the opposite way. They’re pro-gun, pro-abortion, but they feel more passionately about abortion, so they lean “D”.
I feel though that with regards to the gun issue, it’s such a contentious right that we can’t afford to give ground. Compromise on healthcare or whatever, we can fight those issues later, but the gun issue is ten times more difficult to regain lost territory on…
Polls are a very poor way to get information. Who is polling who? Abotion? Murder a pregnant woman and its TWO murders…….abort a baby anytime and its a right….huh. andwe wonder why liberals cant understand our aaugmentation about guns…
GMC 70 and Curby are both correct. Polls can be ‘structured’ to get the answers those paying for the poll want. It’s called ‘push’ polling, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll#Types_of_push_polls_and_their_effects
Also, through social media postings, you can steer the results as well. For example, if you want a poll to lean towards support for gun control, you can post the link to the poll on Facebook, and use the “boost” function (paid posts for more visibility) on your business page to target sympathetic people.
So, say USA Today posts a gun control poll. “Do you support ?”
Everytown For Gun Safety gets ahold of the link.
They post the link on their fan page, and then target interests like:
Democratic Party of the United States
Liberalism
Gun Control
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders
Dianne Feinstein
…and things of that nature. Basically selecting people pre-disposed to click “Yes” on that poll.
Then they put down Mikey’s AMEX card, and pay for the post to reach millions of people who otherwise may have never knew of this poll.
It can be combatted organically, but it is tough.
Social media is pay to play, and any poll with the participants bought in via a paid social posting is automatically suspect – that post has been targeted for the results the pollsters want.
I recommend that nobody join or use any social media at all. There are a thousand reasons why it’s a bad idea, and the poll angle is a particularly egregious one.
I wish it were that simple. Unfortunately in order to get our message out, we have to go where the people are, especially the younger generation.
What do they do all day? They’re on their phones and laptops cruising Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat.
We can use “their” tools against them. If Everytown can target people to get their message out, then so can we.
If we keep the pro-2A sentiment to ourselves, it dies with us.
And our message does get out. The big gun bloggers all have huge social media followings. Colion Noir makes a post and millions of people see it, including people on the fence about the Second Amendment. They see a professional and urbane black gentleman using guns in a responsible (and fun sometimes) manner and their mind is blown. Prior to that, any time they saw a black guy with a gun in the media, it was in a hip-hop video or the news.
Pod,
You make a compelling case. I am not savvy about these things, I just don’t like the things that I hear about the billionaires that own these media being rabidly left-wing anti-gun folks. Is this true? I just don’t know. I think it was the facebook guy that I heard about. Sorry for the quick reply but I’m pressed for time right now.
It’s all good.
The social channels are run by left-wing anti-gun people, for the most part. However, they’ve largely left gun content alone. They haven’t 100 percent stopped the signal. I think their business ideals overtake their personal ideals.