Why Obama lost the gun debate

[candycorn]

Obama didn't lose the debate. He lost a vote in the US Senate where the votes no longer bear any resemblance to actual public opinion.

The politics of it are such though that this won't be a factor in 2014 or 2016 unless there is another catastrophe involving guns around election time.

 

[boedicca]

Obama didn't lose the debate. He lost a vote in the US Senate where the votes no longer bear any resemblance to actual public opinion.

I think you are confusing the resemblance to actual public opinion aspect with how ObamaCare was jammed through.

 

[eflatminor]

Why do libs use emotion and exploitation instead of facts and common sense?

It's all they have.

 

[mudwhistle]

Why do libs use emotion and exploitation instead of facts and common sense?

The fact is that felons cannot legally own guns.

The common sense is that given that fact, you would want the most effective laws possible to enforce the fact that felons cannot legally own guns.


The Senate Republicans stood in the way of implementing one more common sense measure to that end.

Common-sense meaning going after legal gun owners instead?

That makes sense.


If Obama was as concerned that we had a fair election as he is for gun-control he wouldn't be POTUS.

If he cared as much about aborted babies as he did for those kids at Sandyhook we would have fewer abortions.


Obama lost because he was trying to force yet another bad bill through congress.

 

[Immanuel]

The fact that 99.9% of the conservatives on this site and that make up the uninformed rabid base of the party were manipulated to think "they're coming for our guns" is a major driving force behind why this legislation was DOA.

The legislation was DOA because it did not do jack shit to stop the crimes its proponents said they wanted to stop. Only an idiot beleives a criminal hell bent on killing people would be stopped by background checks. This law would not have prevented one of the tragic killings this nation has suffered recently; neither Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine, VA Tech, etc would have been prevented by this legislation. Someone set out with plans to kill will get the guns either legally or not.

I have nothing against licensing or even registration of guns, but the paper used to print this legislation on would have served us better as bath tissue.

Immie

 

[legaleagle_45]

The politics of it are such though that this won't be a factor in 2014 or 2016 unless there is another catastrophe involving guns around election time.

Incorrect. The politics of it are such that this will only be a factor for pro gun rights voters who will turn out in mass to vote against persons seeking to restrict gun rights in 2014 or 2016 unless there is another catastrophe involving guns around election time in which case public sentiment will favor those who would restrict gun rights. For most people gun rights is a minor issue which will be overwhelmed by more "important" issues, such as the economy or jobs or health care. For those who view the gun issue as very important, most of them are pro gun advocates... outnumbering the anti gun advocates by about 100 to one. I reach that figure rather loosely and it is subject to criticism, but it in not totally a random number. Membership in the largest gun control group, The Brady Campaign, is estimated at 50,000 nationwide. Membership in the nations largest gun rights group, the NRA, is estimated at 5,000,000. Thus the 100 to one estimate.

 

[Politico]

Because Boston exploded.

 

[Antares]

Moron, 4 Dem Senators prevented the Law from passing.

God you people are stupid.

Why do libs use emotion and exploitation instead of facts and common sense?

The fact is that felons cannot legally own guns.

The common sense is that given that fact, you would want the most effective laws possible to enforce the fact that felons cannot legally own guns.


The Senate Republicans stood in the way of implementing one more common sense measure to that end.

 

[tjvh]

Obama lost the gun debate because people who go against the Freedoms of Law abiding citizens to own guns always lose the debate.

 

[emilynghiem]

The fact that 99.9% of the conservatives on this site and that make up the uninformed rabid base of the party were manipulated to think "they're coming for our guns" is a major driving force behind why this legislation was DOA.

Dear RDD: It did not help where the law was too open in the risk of federal govt getting into private mental health records, where things like treatment for depression, or if a rape victim has post trauma and is on medication, made people wary of the risk of losing rights.

If you don't listen to when people protest the violation of state rights by federal intrusion
the FIRST time, with health care bill crossing that line,
what makes you think they are going to see this any different, but as a continuation of
that same agenda?

If the Supreme Court failed to check the federal govt for legislation that went outside the lines, this was the protestors' way of saying no to bigger federal govt intrusions.

Had Obama and Congress not rushed to push this through using emotional inertia and media hype from Newtown, maybe they could sit down and work out these issues properly.

Many people were supporting properly enforced background checks.
If States can do this better locally than federally, maybe that should be the focus.
Same with why the health bill is so divisive because both parties approach it differently, one focuses on going through states and private business; the other through federal govt.
So why not let each party set up their own system and fund it themselves their way?

If you don't agree, maybe that policy SHOULD be set up locally by people who agree to it, and not push it nationally if it does not represent all people and parties. why not?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Was there a debate? I must have missed it.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The fact that 99.9% of the conservatives on this site and that make up the uninformed rabid base of the party were manipulated to think "they're coming for our guns" is a major driving force behind why this legislation was DOA.

Damn I didnt know we had so much power...so explain democrats voting against it?

And uniformed, uh it's people like you that want to pass knee jerk reaction bills and ban stuff...so you want to ban pressure cookers or just require a background check to buy em? Talk about stupidity, focusing on the means or how rather than the who and why is why we laugh at liberals. We're more intested in finding these people and then "torturing" them as you would call jailtime or even better the death penalty.

It's amazing that you guys get more pissed off at gun laws failing than you do at the people who kill others.....

 

[candycorn]

The politics of it are such though that this won't be a factor in 2014 or 2016 unless there is another catastrophe involving guns around election time.

Incorrect. The politics of it are such that this will only be a factor for pro gun rights voters who will turn out in mass to vote against persons seeking to restrict gun rights in 2014 or 2016 unless there is another catastrophe involving guns around election time in which case public sentiment will favor those who would restrict gun rights. For most people gun rights is a minor issue which will be overwhelmed by more "important" issues, such as the economy or jobs or health care. For those who view the gun issue as very important, most of them are pro gun advocates... outnumbering the anti gun advocates by about 100 to one. I reach that figure rather loosely and it is subject to criticism, but it in not totally a random number. Membership in the largest gun control group, The Brady Campaign, is estimated at 50,000 nationwide. Membership in the nations largest gun rights group, the NRA, is estimated at 5,000,000. Thus the 100 to one estimate.

I was speaking from the democratic side of the coin. There won't be any "primarying" going on during the democratic primaries over gun control votes in April of 2013.

As for your math, you're making the assumption that these people vote on the whole which is not the case. Obama won nearly every battle ground state...where were they?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Moron, 4 Dem Senators prevented the Law from passing.

God you people are stupid.

Why do libs use emotion and exploitation instead of facts and common sense?

The fact is that felons cannot legally own guns.

The common sense is that given that fact, you would want the most effective laws possible to enforce the fact that felons cannot legally own guns.


The Senate Republicans stood in the way of implementing one more common sense measure to that end.

Actually wasn't the vote 54 to 46? So those 4 dems could have voted yes and it still would not have passed. An Amendment requires 60 votes to pass.

 

[legaleagle_45]

I was speaking from the democratic side of the coin. There won't be any "primarying" going on during the democratic primaries over gun control votes in April of 2013.

I was speaking generally and suggesting a possible reason for the power of the NRA. They have a lot of single issue voters who do vote and can make a difference in a close election.

As for your math, you're making the assumption that these people vote on the whole which is not the case. Obama won nearly every battle ground state...where were they?

That does not disprove my assertion. Instead it may merely indicate that sufficient voters favored Obama to overcome the slight advantage afforded to pro gun politicians. At best, that advantage may account fore 1% or 2% depending upon the state. Thus, Obama may have won those battleground states by 1% or 2% more than he actually did but for the gun issue. The truth is, most Americans do not feel the gun control issue is that important. A recent Gallup Poll found that only 4% of Americans feel that it is an important issue:

Gallup: Only 4% of Americans Think Gun Control is an Important Problem | CNS News

That is in the midst of Sandy Hook and proposed gun legislation all over the news channels. As we move further away from a crisis, that number will decline further. Of those die hards remaining, I believe that the fanatic pro gun rights people will outnumber the fanatic anti gun rights people about 100 to one... and that is the reason for the power the NRA weilds. It makes little difference for a clear favorite, but where everything else is equal, it may in fact be a difference.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Also worth noting was the level of anger he displayed at his speech after loosing. All the name calling pretty much sealed the fate for any future legislation on this subject. The idiot still thinks you can insult your opposition and somehow expect them to work with you in the future.

Is there any civil way to describe such folks, besides calling them what they are:

....COWARDS??!!!

 

[Crackerjaxon]

The fact that 99.9% of the conservatives on this site and that make up the uninformed rabid base of the party were manipulated to think "they're coming for our guns" is a major driving force behind why this legislation was DOA.

We're not as dumb as you. I know that is a revelatory concept, but it's true.

Every time a liberal assumes intellectual high ground, he reveals imself as a moron.

Sometimes, it's amusing. Most often it's both annoying and pitiful.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Why do libs use emotion and exploitation instead of facts and common sense?

The fact is that felons cannot legally own guns.

The common sense is that given that fact, you would want the most effective laws possible to enforce the fact that felons cannot legally own guns.


The Senate Republicans stood in the way of implementing one more common sense measure to that end.

Why shouldn't felons own guns?

If you know they're felons, you know they've done their time, right?

So why shouldn't they own guns?

 

[Ernie S.]

He lost it because he wanted to try out a new facial expression.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

He promoted bills that would have 0 impact on the murders they wrapped this legislation around. His bills did NOTHING to prevent school shootings.

Those were the parameters that he set shortly after the shooting and he failed to meet them with his bills. He campaigned to protect children and offered a completely disconnected solution.


Also worth noting was the level of anger he displayed at his speech after loosing. All the name calling pretty much sealed the fate for any future legislation on this subject. The idiot still thinks you can insult your opposition and somehow expect them to work with you in the future.

Obama acts like an amateur and we're witnessing the results

Disagree.

There never was a ‘debate.’ One can’t ‘lose’ something he never had a chance to ‘win’ in the first place.

I and several others at the outset of the ammo hoarding and gun buying frenzy stated as much, and noted the idiocy of the extreme right with regard warnings of a ‘new AWB’ and ‘gun confiscation.’

If you want to be critical of the president at least make your criticism accurate, and blame Obama for being so naïve as to believe any gun control measures could be passed in the first place – it was foolish for him to even try.

Of course, if Obama had refused to pursue new gun measures, he would have been criticized for that as well. The whole ‘gun thing’ was a lose/lose for Obama and democrats from the get-go.