Obama's gun problem

what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne

That really tickles me. What exactly works in Chicago? Judging by how many people get shot in a city where guns are effectively banned it seems to my admittedly novice eyes that whatever they're doing there ... isn't really working, is it?

And here I thought the 14th Amendment preventing the Democrats from denying blacks guns. Silly me.

What I thought was interesting was the the wording was

we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne

Rather then the reverse. That kind of implies that a total ban is the default position, but gets loosened up where it won't fly politically.

What works in Chicago is that the liberals have been successful in making sheep out of free people, what doesn't work in Cheyenne (the town in which I grew up and got my values) is that they won't stand for elitist liberals treating them like children.

That kind of implies that a total ban is the default position, but gets loosened up where it won't fly politically.

You've got that right! The Democrats never learn.

They're floundering around hoping to come up with something that will resonate. Something that will pass the BS test. Something, hell anything, that will allow those trying to organize and persuade blue collar Dems to vote for Obama to say, quickly, that the Democratic platform is supportive of Second Amendment rights. Then, they are supposed to immediately change the subject back to $4.00 gasoline (which is decreasing), Iraq (which ain't working as well as it once did), the so-called housing crisis.

And here I thought the 14th Amendment preventing the Democrats from denying blacks guns. Silly me.

When we're all slaves, we'll all be equal.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

In the 1860s, the 14th amendment was drafted and ratified with the aim of preventing Democrats from taking guns away from black people. 150 years later, what do you see in DC, Chicago, Detroit and NYC? Democrats taking guns away from black people, still pretending the 14th amendment doesn't exist.

Speaking if I may for Cheyenne, we don't want it whether or not "works" for Chicago.

And Flash Gordon, sadly enough Boulderites moved here that Cheyenne is suffering such Dem fads as "smart growth" and a smoking ban. It isn't the town you grew up in, sadly.

"reinstating the assault weapons ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals"

Just once I would like one of these people to show me exactly how the so-called "assault weapons ban" prevented ANY gun from falling into the hands of the wrong person. I can't tell you how many times I have had to explain the AWB to some mouth-breather who has bought the propaganda about how it "banned" those "military-style machine guns." It's like the infamous five stages of dying - they don't want to believe it at first. They have become so mentally invested in believing that the AWB actually forbid the sale of machine guns and prevented drug dealers and terrorists from using them to spray hot lead into schoolyards.

When you explain what the so-called AWB actually did, they start out with denial, then anger, etc. And that's only if they are intellectually honest enough to actually consider the facts and acknowledge that they never actually did the research themselves. The scales fall away from their eyes... but then they decide they need a stronger law that actually DOES ban those nasty, scary, black rifles with pistol grips and folding stocks, because, y'know, nobody really "needs" those and they're only used for killing people anyway.

I read the whole thing. Disregarding the subject of Arms for the nonce, there are a few (very few) positions I agree with in it, but over all it's an over blovated and blatant call for s o c i a l i s m (sorry, spam filter) or nationalism of industries.

Based on what actually happens in the Dem Party trenches, I find this platform dishonest to a very high degree.
It represents perhaps a third of the actual intentions of the authors.

Ok this whole thing is a doozy!

"We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition,
and we will preserve Americans’ continued Second Amendment right to own and use
firearms."

Since your party has endorsed the "collective" right and not the individual right now for well over twenty years why should anybody believe you have changed your mind because of Supreme Court ruling?

"We know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne."

What we have seen from gun control is that it doesn't work in Chicago, but it doesn't work any place else. Also with the Deomcratic Party's history of subverting the 9th and 10th amendments, why should anybody trust you in any of the other 8?

"to enact and enforce common-sense laws and improvements, like closing the gun show
loophole, improving our background check system and reinstating the assault weapons
ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals."

Didn't we try this stuff already? Wasn't this horse-crap overturned by Congress? These people never learn. This last passage will be a wonderful addition to any NRA mailers. Keep it up Democrats!

So ... they admit that Chicago Democrats are mentally and socially retarded, and cannot be trusted with the right to keep and bear arms?

So, exactly why should they be trusted with something far more dangerous, like voting?

The only thing that "works" in Chicago is corruption and Machine Politics.

What works in Chicago may not work in Alabama.