In article <JN6dnT6qOogIYh_anZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@comcast.com>, DanielSan
<petersonj07@comcast.net> wrote:

I have never suggested that being a "Republican", "Libertarian" or
whatever you may call yourself means that you must tow the party line.
...I

FYI: it is /toe/ the party line.

In my sentence, I mean to literally "tow" it. Grab the party line, wrap
it around your waist, and pull it like a ball and chain. ;-)

I understand "typogyphical" errors. I also understand homonym errors,
where the "mined" is thinking one thing "butt" another word comes out.

But those who claim their typographical errors or homonymic errors were
actually what they'd intended, well, they go in my kill file.

DanielSan wrote:

Still no evidence to show that the majority of the Democratic party
are "gun grabbers" or "anti-gun".

Barak Obama: "I believe we need to renew--not roll back--this common
sense gun law," Obama said. - In reference to the 1994 Assault Weapons
Ban.

Hillary Clinton: "I stand in support of this common sense legislation
to license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun," Clinton said. "I
also believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be
registered in a national registry, such as Chuck [Schumer] is
proposing."

John Edwards: "Mr. Edwards voted during his single Senate term for a
measure to impose background checks at gun shows, for a ban on
so-called assault weapons, and against a bill to protect gun makers
from lawsuits."

Bill Richardson on instant background checks: "That [background
checks] includes gun sales at gun shows."

I suggest that the majority of people who identify with the Democratic
Party are going to support at least one of the above four people.

Presumably if a member of the Democratic Party votes for one of the
four that person is in communion with the beliefs of the candidate, no
matter how irrational that belief may be.

DanielSan wrote:

Still no evidence to show that the majority of the Democratic party
are "gun grabbers" or "anti-gun".

Barak Obama: "I believe we need to renew--not roll back--this common sense
gun law," Obama said. - In reference to the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

Hillary Clinton: "I stand in support of this common sense legislation to
license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun," Clinton said. "I also
believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a
national registry, such as Chuck [Schumer] is proposing."

John Edwards: "Mr. Edwards voted during his single Senate term for a measure
to impose background checks at gun shows, for a ban on so-called assault
weapons, and against a bill to protect gun makers from lawsuits."

Bill Richardson on instant background checks: "That [background checks]
includes gun sales at gun shows."

I suggest that the majority of people who identify with the Democratic Party
are going to support at least one of the above four people. Presumably if a
member of the Democratic Party votes for one of the four that person is in
communion with the beliefs of the candidate, no matter how irrational that
belief may be.

DanielSan wrote:

HeyBub wrote:

DanielSan wrote:

I am a Democrat. I am a liberal. I am a "tree-hugging
environmentalist". I have no problem with gun ownership.

You are the exception to the norm then.

Sorry, but I don't believe that. Can you provide some evidence to
back up that assertion?

Eric Hoffer settled this hash back in the 1940's with his book "The
True Believer." In that book he offered the observation that
membership in mass movements was largely interchangeable - that those
who belong to one mass movement easily, often, and with vigor join
another.

The anti-gun parade is, by all objective standards, a "mass movement"
(admittedly the mass has shrunk). "Tree hugging" is a mass movement.
The memberships overlap to an anstonishing degree.

People join mass movements to escape individual responsibility; mass
movements give their life meaning. By joining such groups,
individuals can take their minds off their own meaningless affairs by
minding other people's business.

Still no evidence to show that the majority of the Democratic party
are "gun grabbers" or "anti-gun".

Historically, the Democratic Party had gun control as one of their
official platform planks.

a majority of Democrats favor gun control.

DanielSan wrote:

Still no evidence to show that the majority of the Democratic party
are "gun grabbers" or "anti-gun".

First, I will have to say that I believe that the Democratic National
Committee would not, possibly could not, put a plank into their national
platform that is not supported by the majority of the membership of the
party. If this is not true, then it the party is no longer
representative of anything and there is no such thing as a party. People
would leave it as soon as they disagreed with party on enough planks,
and would force them to change planks they disagreed with.

If the above is correct and the majority of the party members support
each plank in the platform (and it is not necessarily the same majority
for each plank), then all I need to do is show a plank in the party
platform that supports gun control. This I can do. I refer you to page
18 of the 2004 Democratic Party Platform, under the heading of crime
control, where it says the following:

"We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms, and
we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by
fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing
the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do."

http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

And this is the current party platform, since the 2008 platform has not
yet been written.

Is the above a gun control statement? Yes, because it proposes to ban
guns from citizens hands, even if it is a limited type of firearms. It
also proposes to interfere in private party sales of personal property,
using the misnomer "gun show loophole" to say this. Despite the phrase
claiming to protect the 2nd Amendment rights of the citizenry, the
Democratic Party is the party of gun control.

Q.E.D. a majority of Democrats favor gun control.

Note, i do not know how large a majority it is. It could be as little as
one person over 50% to as much as 1 person less than 100%. I believe it
is probably at least 80% but I will freely admit that I have no proof of
that at all, just a belief on the possibility of the plank existing with
a much smaller majority.

Steve Rothstein