Hello everyone. Over the past few days/weeks, I've been mulling over what the purpose of this site is. This led to me spending some time at the FAQ page where I found this great question "What is the purpose of this site?"
This is a Democratic blog, a partisan blog. One that recognizes that Democrats run from left to right on the ideological spectrum, and yet we're all still in this fight together. We happily embrace centrists like NDN's Simon Rosenberg and Howard Dean, conservatives like Martin Frost and Brad Carson, and liberals like John Kerry and Barack Obama. Liberal? Yeah, we're around here and we're proud. But it's not a liberal blog. It's a Democratic blog with one goal in mind: electoral victory. And since we haven't gotten any of that from the current crew, we're one more thing: a reform blog. The battle for the party is not an ideological battle. It's one between establishment and anti-establishment factions. And as I've said a million times, the status quo is untenable.
I find it interesting how Markos recognizes something that I feel many RKBA detractors don't get,
...that Democrats run from left to right on the ideological spectrum, and yet we're all still in this fight together.
The RKBA group here is formed of Democrats, we are on the side of the Democratic Party, we support Democratic causes and hold the position that Republican rule is hardly in the best interest of our nation. Oh, and we voted for President Obama. So Democrats owning guns, like us in the RKBA group, should not be viewed as a negative, a problem or a hindrance to the Democratic cause; rather gun owning Democrats, which by the way represent a significant portion of our voting block, should be viewed as an important asset to the Democratic cause.
Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a DKos group of second amendment supporters who also have progressive and liberal values. We don't think that being a liberal means one has to be anti-gun. Some of us are extreme in our second amendment views (no licensing, no restrictions on small arms) and some of us are more moderate (licensing, restrictions on small arms.) Moderate or extreme, we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections. We don't want a repeat of 1994. We are an inclusive group: if you see the Second Amendment as safeguarding our right to keep and bear arms individually, then come join us in our conversation. If you are against the right to keep and bear arms, come join our conversation. We look forward to seeing you, as long as you engage in a civil discussion.
So how does the purpose of this blog fit with RKBA or how does RKBA fit with the purpose of this blog? Well, the right to keep and bear arms does hold a valued position with a significant portion of the Democratic Party. Maybe not so much in large urban areas but there is a good chunk of suburban Democrats and virtually all rural Democrats that are pro-RKBA. Elections are close these days and it didn't take much time to go from having a majority to being in the minority. The time has come for everyone to recognize that the 2nd Amendment is here to stay, it is not going away, nor will it be watered down or modified to suit those who dislike personal ownership of firearms. To advocate for such a change would be political suicide. Everyone is aware of that, right? Even efforts seen as significantly restricting the 2nd Amendment do nothing more than play into the hands of the Republicans and cost us votes. What was that bit in the FAQ?
But it's not a liberal blog. It's a Democratic blog with one goal in mind: electoral victory
With this in mind it is time for the Democratic Party, on a national level, to embrace the 2nd Amendment, make it a visible part of our platform and reject calls for legislation that will do nothing to reduce violent gun crime. I am of the opinion that it has gotten to the point where we must over-communicate this message in order to remove the label of "gun grabbers", which we have allowed the Republican Party to hang around our necks. So what should we do to help us in our journey to electoral victory? In order to know what to do, it is sometimes good to look at what not to do. So let's take a look at what will not help us attain victory.
Enacting legislation that requires:
• people to register their guns
• people to obtain a license to own and operate a firearm
• people to purchase gun insurance
• people to be held liable for having their gun stolen
• waiting periods for firearm purchases
• the banning of large capacity magazines
• the banning of certain firearms based on cosmetic features
All of the above mentioned restrictions have been offered up as "reasonable" or "common sense" recommendations for gun control. Hell, I've even had someone suggest that if a criminal breaks into your house, it's only common sense to let them do/take what they want, that you don't want to escalate the situation by protecting yourself with a gun (Jeez, and because I own guns I'm a loon? Go figure). Nevertheless, the problem with such "reasonable" and "common sense" solutions is that they are anything but. I mean just how much reason and common sense is there in focusing legislation on people who haven't committed a crime but are exercising a right? None whatsoever, and why suggest legislation which focuses on the potential acts of people who are unlikely to commit violent crime? Seems silly to me. How about we focus any necessary new legislation on those that do commit violence and on the environmental factors that contribute to and reinforce violent behavior? Now there's something that is reasonable.
From European Economic Review – What causes violent crime?
The results from cross-country analysis provide strong evidence in favor of a model of criminal behavior that emphasizes the role of economic variables and accounts for inertial effects. Both economic growth and income inequality are robust determinants of violent crime rates. Furthermore, even after controlling for country-specific effects (including systematic measurement error), there is clear evidence that violent crime is self-perpetuating. These variables – economic growth, inequality, and past crime rates - worked well for homicides and remarkably well for robbery rates. Their sign and statistical significance survived the addition of other explanatory variables, including measures of crime deterrence, illicit drug activities, demographic characteristics, and cultural traits.
This is my favorite bit:
...there is clear evidence that violent crime is self-perpetuating.
Which sounds like this:
Handgun purchasers with prior misdemeanor convictions are at increased risk for future criminal activity, including violent and firearm-related crimes.
And this:
People with previous firearm offenses were more likely to be charged
with a subsequent firearm offense than were those charged only with other types of offenses.
The bottom line is that if you aren't in the habit of committing violent acts it isn't likely you are going to start, which describes 99% of all legal gun owners. It is not common sense or reasonable to focus our attention on restricting the actions millions of people who vote Democrat instead of the root causes of violence. Unless of course you are anti-2nd Amendment and think gun owners:
• have a mental disorder
• are compensating for having small Dicks
• fondle themselves while thinking about firearms
Or if you:
• want to punish people before they commit a crime
• view the 2nd Amendment as being anachronistic
• want to ban handgun ownership
• want a constitutional amendment to eliminate/re-define the 2nd Amendment
With thoughts and opinions like these, what is reasonable and common sense doesn't come into play much.
In closing I would like everyone one to keep in mind that, like it or not, gun laws are being reformed. 38 states are considered "shall issue" when it comes to concealed carry permits but there hasn't been the much prophesied corresponding increase in violent crime. All but two states in the US allow for some form of civilian concealed carry and those two states are looking to pass some form of carry law within the next two years. Face it folks, gun rights are a fait accompli, gun owning Democrats are an integral part of the foundation of the Democratic Party and the sooner we get around to embracing all of our rights, the greater the likelihood of achieving electoral victory.