Ammo For Sale

« « In WV | Home | Miscount » »

Democrats, guns and caution

Bitter takes to task folks from red states who urged caution in supporting pro-gun democrats. Facts are that some democrats are pro-gun. My general caution is that they tend to support judges or party bosses who are not necessarily pro-gun. That is to say, I may like Phil Bredesen on guns, generally, but if he was a rep, he’d be a vote for a Pelosi. Sorry, that’s just a generic example I made up.

I don’t really place a lot of weight in statements like the crushing debt being laid upon the heads of our children in this inter-generational theft defines this Democrat regime. After all, the crushing debt didn’t just get here. It’s been building in the last eight years too, no matter the party.

She wonders what we red state sorts think about certain races in her blue state. In those cases, going with the pro-gun guy is the thing to do if you value your gun rights. After all, their governor is anti-gun. And a big anti-gun swing would be damaging for years.

ETA: Should point out that the judge thing in PA is not an issue since they’re elected. But that does, usually, play into my thinking on the issue.

12 Responses to “Democrats, guns and caution”

  1. Bitter Says:

    Except the facts are again wrong for Pennsylvania. As I already mentioned to you privately, and in the update, all of our judges are elected by voters here. The makeup of the Senate doesn’t change that fact.

    I also pointed out that the Senate Democratic leader is A+ rated, so it doesn’t exactly look like anti’s will take over. Of course, the math for how they would take over doesn’t add up anyway – the GOP controls the Senate 3-2 right now and is expected to make gains in the fall. Supporting 2 Democrats to replace outgoing Democrats doesn’t change any of the status quo.

    So, sorry, but it still doesn’t work.

  2. SayUncle Says:

    I was talking in the general sense regarding judges etc. (i.e., explaining my general caution). And I’m not sure what ‘doesn’t work’ here exactly since I agree with you that pro-gun candidates should be supported.

  3. Bitter Says:

    It doesn’t work that we should exercise caution on those issues when they simply are not issues. How can pro-gun voters be more cautious in who they support over judicial appointments if we don’t have judicial appointments. Though I outlined a theory in which Democrats could obtain a majority to put anti-gun leaders up in the Senate, it’s pretty much politically impossible. So I would still ask why we need to factor that in as a concern. I’m trying to keep gun owners focused on the political reality around them. In both of these objections, it’s not a matter of reality for Pennsylvania gun owners – the target of the original post.

  4. SayUncle Says:

    I would still ask why we need to factor that in as a concern.

    I don’t think you do, which I thought I pretty much said here.

  5. chris Says:

    Uncle –

    Last year Bredesen vetoed legislation authorizing the carrying of a handgun by a HCP holder in restaurants.

    How do you like him generally on gun issues?

    What 2A issues does he support?

    I know that he is an avid skeet and trap shooter, but when push came to shove last year, he completely deserted us.

    I have a lot of respect for Bredesen, but he lost me when he vetoed the legislation last year which was so important to all of us.

    It’s good to hear that the voters in Pa get to vote on their judges.

    We can only vote (in true contested elections) on trial court judges.

    The appellate court judges and Tn Supreme Court justices are first vetted by a Judicial Selection Panel (which was previously so lopsided in favor of Democrats that it was a bad joke) and only then can we vote “yes or no” on them in retention elections.

    I trust the voters of Tn far more than I trust the Tn Judicial Selection Panel.

    Actually, Bredesen successfully sued the Judicial Selection Panel a couple of years ago.

  6. bill-tb Says:

    There are no pro gun Democrats. Didn’t you learn from health care? They draw straws to see who is pushed over the cliff.

    How quickly we forget what happened during the AW vote of 1994.

  7. SayUncle Says:


    He’s signed every pro gun bill but one.

  8. JD Says:

    I agree with what bill-tb said 100%.

  9. Countertop Says:

    There are plenty of pro gun dems.

    John Dingell is a pro gun dem. He also Is a union guy and has fought for passing a health car bill for 60 years. One doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the other.

  10. Countertop Says:

    What’s more, not every Dem is a vote for Pelosi. Take John Dingell as a prime example. Or Colin Peterson. Or Ike Skeleton.

    And, if you don’t elect pro gun dems, then you never have a chance to eliminate the issue and get enough voices in the Democratic party to ensure it becomes a pro gun party.

  11. Terry Says:

    Point: Senator Harry Reid gets extremely high ratings from the NRA. Does that mean I will vote for the A**hole. No. They’d (dems) better be a lot more pro other issues that we . . . Patriots believe in before my vote is added to their tally.

  12. Bruce Says:

    There are plenty of pro-gun Dems here in NH, but in the legislature, the majority party controls the agenda and calendar, and chairs the committees.

    One of our themes for this year’s state elections is “You might be a great guy, but putting or keeping a D in your seat isn’t what we need right now.”