Survey: Over 1/3 of Democrats support Second Amendment repeal

[Ray From Cleveland]

Some Democrats are pro-2nd amendment, I'm sure.


I wouldn't classify the poster above me as a Democrat, that's a leftist shill. Probably doesn't even vote.

Democrats are not against guns, they are against us being able to defend ourselves without their help. That's what they really hate.

If most people in this country learned to do for themselves and became more self-reliant, then who needs Democrats around? Democrats stay in power by creating victims and government dependents. The more they create, the more power they have.

 

[Reasonable]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

You’d have to want to continue the massacres to not want a repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
It’s as simple as that.

No. It's not.

Most people don't want massacres and don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

They realize there are rational alternatives to consider inbetween "no guns" and "more guns". Unfortunately NRA doesn't seem to be rational.

By a wide majority ... the people want an assault weapon ban but the spineless GOP congress and Doofus/ prez will never listen to the people.

 

[Reasonable]

Some Democrats are pro-2nd amendment, I'm sure.


I wouldn't classify the poster above me as a Democrat, that's a leftist shill. Probably doesn't even vote.

Democrats are not against guns, they are against us being able to defend ourselves without their help. That's what they really hate.

If most people in this country learned to do for themselves and became more self-reliant, then who needs Democrats around? Democrats stay in power by creating victims and government dependents. The more they create, the more power they have.

Dumbest and most delusional post of the day.
You need a psychiatrist.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Once again, what will they accomplish in their shitty "gun-free" inner cities? They already made it mostly illegal. Are they going to ban it again?

Doesn't matter. The 2nd Amendment will never be repealed. It's incredibly hard to amend the constitution and very few amendments have passed out of hundreds of attempted ones. Repealing is the same process. It won't happen.

What needs to happen is to inject a little sanity in the process and have something BESIDES "more guns" as a solution.

There really are no better solutions. One of the reasons I posted this is because it's frightening how a large percentage of our population would like to repeal the one thing that sets us apart from every other country in the world. And what happens if that group grows to half, or sixty percent of the public? What choice would politicians have but to attempt to amend it?

There is a difference between what people say in a poll and what they'll do. This is just fear mongering. And "more guns" is not a better solution. There ought to be solutions in between "no guns" and "more guns" don't you think?

I thought a 3 day waiting period was reasonable. Oops. Guess not.

Wonderful, so riddle me this: how many mass shootings will a three day waiting period stop? That's what I thought!

Democrats often stick their finger in the wind to see which way it's blowing. It's how they make or introduce policy. So again, what happens when surveys or polls show that a majority want to repeal the Second? Given the fact that Democrats do want to disarm us, do you think they would hesitate at such an opportunity?

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Some Democrats are pro-2nd amendment, I'm sure.


I wouldn't classify the poster above me as a Democrat, that's a leftist shill. Probably doesn't even vote.

Democrats are not against guns, they are against us being able to defend ourselves without their help. That's what they really hate.

If most people in this country learned to do for themselves and became more self-reliant, then who needs Democrats around? Democrats stay in power by creating victims and government dependents. The more they create, the more power they have.

Dumbest and most delusional post of the day.
You need a psychiatrist.

Why is that? Do you think shrinks don't like the truth or something?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

You’d have to want to continue the massacres to not want a repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
It’s as simple as that.

No. It's not.

Most people don't want massacres and don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

They realize there are rational alternatives to consider inbetween "no guns" and "more guns". Unfortunately NRA doesn't seem to be rational.

By a wide majority ... the people want an assault weapon ban but the spineless GOP congress and Doofus/ prez will never listen to the people.

Did you read the OP? The article also states that over 80% of Democrats want all semi-automatics to be illegal. That includes hand guns which semi-automatics are most of.

 

[Coyote]

Doesn't matter. The 2nd Amendment will never be repealed. It's incredibly hard to amend the constitution and very few amendments have passed out of hundreds of attempted ones. Repealing is the same process. It won't happen.

What needs to happen is to inject a little sanity in the process and have something BESIDES "more guns" as a solution.

There really are no better solutions. One of the reasons I posted this is because it's frightening how a large percentage of our population would like to repeal the one thing that sets us apart from every other country in the world. And what happens if that group grows to half, or sixty percent of the public? What choice would politicians have but to attempt to amend it?

There is a difference between what people say in a poll and what they'll do. This is just fear mongering. And "more guns" is not a better solution. There ought to be solutions in between "no guns" and "more guns" don't you think?

I thought a 3 day waiting period was reasonable. Oops. Guess not.

Wonderful, so riddle me this: how many mass shootings will a three day waiting period stop? That's what I thought!

Democrats often stick their finger in the wind to see which way it's blowing. It's how they make or introduce policy. So again, what happens when surveys or polls show that a majority want to repeal the Second? Given the fact that Democrats do want to disarm us, do you think they would hesitate at such an opportunity?

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

 

[Marion Morrison]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

You’d have to want to continue the massacres to not want a repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
It’s as simple as that.

No. It's not.

Most people don't want massacres and don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

They realize there are rational alternatives to consider inbetween "no guns" and "more guns". Unfortunately NRA doesn't seem to be rational.

By a wide majority ... the people want an assault weapon ban but the spineless GOP congress and Doofus/ prez will never listen to the people.

Did you read the OP? The article also states that over 80% of Democrats want all semi-automatics to be illegal. That includes hand guns which semi-automatics are most of.

That sounds quite far-fetched.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

I'm surprised it's that low among Democrats.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

You’d have to want to continue the massacres to not want a repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
It’s as simple as that.

No. It's not.

Most people don't want massacres and don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

They realize there are rational alternatives to consider inbetween "no guns" and "more guns". Unfortunately NRA doesn't seem to be rational.

By a wide majority ... the people want an assault weapon ban but the spineless GOP congress and Doofus/ prez will never listen to the people.

Did you read the OP? The article also states that over 80% of Democrats want all semi-automatics to be illegal. That includes hand guns which semi-automatics are most of.

That sounds quite far-fetched.

Not at all. The left HATES the 2nd.

 

[Coyote]

You’d have to want to continue the massacres to not want a repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
It’s as simple as that.

No. It's not.

Most people don't want massacres and don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

They realize there are rational alternatives to consider inbetween "no guns" and "more guns". Unfortunately NRA doesn't seem to be rational.

By a wide majority ... the people want an assault weapon ban but the spineless GOP congress and Doofus/ prez will never listen to the people.

Did you read the OP? The article also states that over 80% of Democrats want all semi-automatics to be illegal. That includes hand guns which semi-automatics are most of.

That sounds quite far-fetched.

Not at all. The left HATESthe 2nd.

I'm left and I don't hate it. Maybe you shouldn't rely on labels.

 

[AZGAL]

1. 
   
   Rubio bemoans lack of civility amid gun control debate - CNNPoliticsFlorida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio is bemoaning the lack of civility in American politics amid a polarizing debate on gun control in his state following this month's school shooting. "The debate after #Parkland reminds us We The People don't really like each other ...
3. 
   
   @marceelias
   Marc E. Elias‏Verified account @marceelias Feb 21
   
   If the Senator was Marco Rubio, I would smile with pride.
   
   Marc E. Elias added,
   Marc E. Elias Retweeted toddstarnes
   toddstarnesVerified account @toddstarnes
   
   Parents, what would you do if your child lectured and ridiculed a U.S. Senator on national television?
   
   
   
   Rubio wants gun violence restraining orders | Reuters.com | USA ...
   today.news.rcompanion.org/.../rubio-wants-gun-violence-restraining-orders-reutersco...
   
   58 mins ago - Senator Marco Rubio of Florida said on Thursday that he backed restraining orders for gun-owners deemed to be dangerous, as well as funding for measures to train schools to identify warning signs for violence. H/T: Read more from Reuters.Read more on NewsOK.com ...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There really are no better solutions. One of the reasons I posted this is because it's frightening how a large percentage of our population would like to repeal the one thing that sets us apart from every other country in the world. And what happens if that group grows to half, or sixty percent of the public? What choice would politicians have but to attempt to amend it?

There is a difference between what people say in a poll and what they'll do. This is just fear mongering. And "more guns" is not a better solution. There ought to be solutions in between "no guns" and "more guns" don't you think?

I thought a 3 day waiting period was reasonable. Oops. Guess not.

Wonderful, so riddle me this: how many mass shootings will a three day waiting period stop? That's what I thought!

Democrats often stick their finger in the wind to see which way it's blowing. It's how they make or introduce policy. So again, what happens when surveys or polls show that a majority want to repeal the Second? Given the fact that Democrats do want to disarm us, do you think they would hesitate at such an opportunity?

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

 

[whitehall]

Or you can put it this way, "only 1/3 of democrats polled want repeal the 2nd Amendment even after the gigantic media blitz". When you factor in the recent news that long time liberal democrat Dianne Feinstein received about the same number in a primary it seems that democrats just might be getting smarter.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

According to National Review online, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed that over a third democrats polled favored getting rid if the second amendment. It concludes that most Democrats also favor getting rid of all semi-automatic weapons including handguns.

Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

You’d have to want to continue the massacres to not want a repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
It’s as simple as that.

No. It's not.

Most people don't want massacres and don't want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

They realize there are rational alternatives to consider inbetween "no guns" and "more guns". Unfortunately NRA doesn't seem to be rational.

By a wide majority ... the people want an assault weapon ban but the spineless GOP congress and Doofus/ prez will never listen to the people.

Did you read the OP? The article also states that over 80% of Democrats want all semi-automatics to be illegal. That includes hand guns which semi-automatics are most of.

That sounds quite far-fetched.

Not when you figure that most of the left has no knowledge of guns and probably doesn't know what semi-automatic even means. How many leftists on USMB were crying about getting rid of fully automatic rifles after the school shooting? So no, I'm not surprised at the survey at all.

 

[Coyote]

There is a difference between what people say in a poll and what they'll do. This is just fear mongering. And "more guns" is not a better solution. There ought to be solutions in between "no guns" and "more guns" don't you think?

I thought a 3 day waiting period was reasonable. Oops. Guess not.

Wonderful, so riddle me this: how many mass shootings will a three day waiting period stop? That's what I thought!

Democrats often stick their finger in the wind to see which way it's blowing. It's how they make or introduce policy. So again, what happens when surveys or polls show that a majority want to repeal the Second? Given the fact that Democrats do want to disarm us, do you think they would hesitate at such an opportunity?

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

 

[Marion Morrison]

Wonderful, so riddle me this: how many mass shootings will a three day waiting period stop? That's what I thought!

Democrats often stick their finger in the wind to see which way it's blowing. It's how they make or introduce policy. So again, what happens when surveys or polls show that a majority want to repeal the Second? Given the fact that Democrats do want to disarm us, do you think they would hesitate at such an opportunity?

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

I think it's a common sense solution. Not only will some teachers be armed, not knowing who's armed and who'
s not will be a deterrent in and of itself.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wonderful, so riddle me this: how many mass shootings will a three day waiting period stop? That's what I thought!

Democrats often stick their finger in the wind to see which way it's blowing. It's how they make or introduce policy. So again, what happens when surveys or polls show that a majority want to repeal the Second? Given the fact that Democrats do want to disarm us, do you think they would hesitate at such an opportunity?

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

No I don't. Once you make a law, it's almost impossible to get reversed. So if a law doesn't do any good, we have to wait for an all Republican federal government to get rid of it. The Democrats never would.

We had an assault weapons ban in this country, and it proved to be a complete failure. We didn't get rid of it until it met the expiration date ten years later.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Some Democrats are pro-2nd amendment, I'm sure.


I wouldn't classify the poster above me as a Democrat, that's a leftist shill. Probably doesn't even vote.

Democrats are not against guns, they are against us being able to defend ourselves without their help. That's what they really hate.

If most people in this country learned to do for themselves and became more self-reliant, then who needs Democrats around? Democrats stay in power by creating victims and government dependents. The more they create, the more power they have.

Dumbest and most delusional post of the day.
You need a psychiatrist.

Says he who has been howling in maniacal butthurt agony every single day since 11/2016

 

[Coyote]

See that is exactly what I mean. A solution that is relatively benign, not even targeting specific guns - and you can't even consider that. Just 3 days.

You are no more rational then those who want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

All I'm saying is I'm sick of Democrats making policy that doesn't produce any results. Look........ if they can guarantee me that a three day waiting period will decrease mass shootings by (I'm being generous here) 50%, then I'm all for it. But I want that guarantee first before they inconvenience me.

There is no guarantee and there are no magical panaceas - but things a 3 day waiting period - might chip away at it and does help with suicides and gun violence brought on by rage.

There is no guarantee that allowing teachers to be armed will make any difference either.

There isn't? So which school shootings had armed teachers?

If you read the stories behind the mass shooters, most of them plan their carnage weeks and even months ahead of time. A three day waiting period won't help. Some say that getting rid of high capacity magazines would help. But the Fla school shooter never used any high cap magazines.

Everybody has a different opinion of what "might" help, but none of them makes any sense. Even if you could repeal the 2nd and ban all guns, the criminals will just get illegal guns.

Again, like I said - there is NO GUARANTEE that having armed teachers will make any difference.

Most do. But not all. So you won't get a solution that will take care of "most" but if it takes care of some - with little real inconvenience to law abiding gun owners - isn't that a good thing?

I think it's a common sense solution. Not only will some teachers be armed, not knowing who's armed and who'
s not will be a deterrent in and of itself.

I am on the fence, and think it's best to leave it up to the individual communities who's children will be affected.

I think waiting periods are reasonable solutions as well.