NRA Push Poll

The funny thing (4.00 / 1)

. . . is that neither President Obama and Speaker Pelosi have not done a damn thing to restrict access to assault weapons, handguns, or other guns during this Congress.  They realize (wisely) that it's a polical loser, and can undermine our ability to pass health care and other more significant reforms.

That said, reading your diary gave me the 1994 heebie-jeebies.  Like the time when my then-boss had to wear a bulletproof vest at his re-election announcement after the nutcases threatened his life.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sat Apr 24, 2010 at 17:06:22 PM CDT

I remember (0.00 / 0)

reports in the Concord area of of folks trying to drive other folks off I-93 because of the bumper sticker they were sportin' after the gun vote

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Sun Apr 25, 2010 at 01:35:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

And thank the blue gods (0.00 / 0)

neither President Obama and Speaker Pelosi have not done a damn thing to restrict access to assault weapons, handguns, or other guns during this Congress.

for small favors. Asking for laws about "assault weapons" has about as much merit as asking for laws about "defense of marriage".
These are political terms with no real meaning except to those who promote a political agenda.
Kinda like "gun show loophole." A private sale is a private sale, whether at a gun show or a dog show.
The biggest liability the GOP faces going into the midterms is the Scozzofava effect: the rift between mainstream Republicans and the teabagheads. Who comes to their rescue with the solution to heal that division?
Democrats, unfortunately.
Don't think there's no gun control crap on the spike, there is, and Karl Rove and Frank Luntz smoking crack together in a bondage club couldn't have come up with a better plan to fuck us  going into the midterms.
OPPOSE HR2324 and S843.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Sun Apr 25, 2010 at 11:10:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry (4.00 / 2)

. . . but, personally, I can't stomach opposing legislation to close the gun show loophole.  Call my silly, but I don't think felons and mentally unbalanced people should be able to buy any weapon they want without a background check.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sun Apr 25, 2010 at 16:44:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There is no gun show loophole. (0.00 / 0)

A private sale is a private sale regardless of where it occurs. Dealers at gun shows do the NICS check just as if they were at a shop.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 04:13:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That is a lie (0.00 / 0)

Gun shows feature large numbers of unlicensed dealers, who do not do background checks.  

But I suspect you probably already know that. . . .  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 06:49:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

People get killed by assault weapons. (4.00 / 2)

Marriages don't suffer because other people can marry.

Just in case you're too far gone into Rovian political calculation to remember the actual world we live in.

---

by: elwood @ Sun Apr 25, 2010 at 18:25:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The more I read your reply (0.00 / 0)

the more convinced I become that you didn't really READ what I wrote.

"Assault weapon"
"Gun show loophole"
"Defense of marriage"
"Partial Birth Abortion"
These are not terms of art.
These are political buzzwords, made up pithy miniphrases intended to drive an agenda.
None of them have any real meaning.
There's that "Rovian" you were looking for.
Or maybe more like Frank Luntz.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 04:30:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

"assault weapon" is a redundant phrase since weapons are (0.00 / 0)

specifically fabricated for an assault, even if one might use a hand grenade for a paper-weight.

It would not surprise me if the effort to regulate gun shows more closely weren't a round-about way to bring all kinds of ad-hoc trade and exchange venues into the tax-collection fold.  There is a strongly held belief among some groups that the underground/shadow/black economy has gotten too large and that significant revenues from undocumented sales are being lost.  It's very easy to move from recognizing an opportunity to collect revenue (from sales) to arguing that all sales should be regulated to insure that revenues are produced.
While some people (me, for one) might be relieved and even pleased that a large number of people are able to survive a major economic collapse without actually starving to death, others are prepared to argue that the economy collapsed BECAUSE of underground activity.  I am, btw, somewhat suspicious of the sudden enthusiasm for categorizing the financial shenanigans has having been perpetrated by participants in the shadow economy.  I don't happen to think that every transaction of goods and services needs to be taxed and would much prefer to have a FAT--i.e. tax financial transactions.

http://hannah.smith-family.com...

---

by: hannah @ Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 12:09:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry to walk in (0.00 / 0)

on a food fight in progress (please hold your assault vegetables for a moment), but the NRA's specific agenda was not my main reason for posting the diary.

I was more interested in calling attention to the fact that the organization was push polling. However, since they (a.) identified the sponsoring organization, and even though my number is on the Federal do-not-call list, (b.) the prerecorded message was introduced by a live operator, it looks as if it manages to skirt the state's definitions for illegal push polling under RSA 664:2,XVII, 664:14-a, and 664:16-a.

Just 'cause it's legal don't make it ethical, tho'.

Anyone care to comment on that?

Republicans believe government is bad - then they get into office and prove it.

---

by: GreyMike @ Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 09:11:00 AM CDT

Lots of malfeasance is perpetrated under cover of law. n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: hannah @ Mon Apr 26, 2010 at 11:54:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]