NorthDecoder.com -- North Dakota's Most Influential Political Blog

Yesterday I posted something about how North Dakota's GOP Chairman is upset that the Republican party's elected officials aren't giving proper respect to the GOP platform. Keeping that in mind, I thought I'd run a one-question quiz by you folks to see what you know about the GOP's platform on one issue: Guns.

[I'll post the correct answer later today for those of you who aren't familiar.]

I have issues said:

	OK, I'll bite D. None of them. (Gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens. Gun control laws are ineffective at reducing crime.)
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 30, 2008, 10:34 AM
Votes: +0

nimrod said:

	Me, too. I choose D. I'm pretty sure that it is right in line with the "no government bailouts" section of the platform.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 30, 2008, 10:53 AM
Votes: +0

WayneS said:

	I'll Guess It is D, Since the NRA is such a supporter of the Repugs
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 30, 2008, 11:06 AM
Votes: +0

doug d.riley said:

	I choose D I choose D because outlaws an terrorist don't need gun control,with the right amount of money you can buy anything you want on the street.....
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 30, 2008, 11:29 AM
Votes: +0

Truth said:

	... Under Republicans its probably D, but under Democrats they would like us to think its A, but then they would allow them to have a hearing to show that they only did one terrorist act and then the Dems would say, OH that is OK, we can't discriminate against you because you are a terrorist, so go ahead and have a gun and we can give you a ride to where you want to go and start shooting.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 30, 2008, 11:37 AM
Votes: +0

Adam said:

	/eyeroll D For once Truth, I'm not biting.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 30, 2008, 02:51 PM | url
Votes: +0

LJ said:

Trick question.
It would not make any difference what Gary Emineth wanted. No one can walk into any gun store anywhere in the USA and legally purchase a fully automatic firearm. There are federal laws preventing this. It is a very expensive drawn out process to get the federal permit that is needed to purchase a fully automatic firearm. I think Chet is just testing the intelligence of his readers. I noticed that at least 6 of them missed the obvious.

December 30, 2008, 03:21 PM
Votes: -1

Adam said:

And terrorists are never well-financed...
If Osama is still alive, and it appears that he is...he has been able to pay to keep himself on dialysis for 7 years.

The people who flew the planes were all able to take flight instruction courses...with long expensive drawn out processes...

They wouldn't mind waiting for permits.

But a quick background check that might turn up a criminal history? God forbid we do that...

December 30, 2008, 04:45 PM | url
Votes: +0

Chet said:

Yeah, but...
Here's a spoiler alert. This is the answer to the Tuesday Drop Quiz question. If you haven't answered yet, don't read this comment.

The answer is the letter D. Here's some text taken from the RNC's platform, online:

We recognize that gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens, and that such proposals are ineffective at reducing violent crime.

Click here to view the "values" section of the RNC platform.

LJ suggests this is a trick question, but it really isn't. The question doesn't ask what the law currently says; it asks what would be the case if the RNC's platform were the law of the land. The RNC has taken a very clear-cut, black-and-white position against all regulations relating to the manufacture, purchase, sale and possession of all firearms, including fully-automatic assault weapons. If the RNC's position were the law of the land, everybody COULD purchase fully-automatic firearms. You'd just pop into the local assault weapon store and buy one. No questions asked.

This isn't a trick question at all. You just have to read and understand it. Nothing tricky about that.

The Mr. Emineth and RNC are apparently fine with making people provide a photo ID and have their name checked against a database in order to vote. The RNC is fine with making people provide a photo ID and have their name checked against a database in order to travel on a commercial airline. But Gary Emineth thinks the RNC needs to crack down on elected officials who think a terrorist should have to go through the inconvenience of having his government-issued photo ID cross-checked against a database before he buys the fully-automatic assault rifle he wants to use to kill your family.

No wonder people are leaving the Republican Party in waves.

December 30, 2008, 05:01 PM
Votes: -1

LJ said:

Trick question reply
I do not see anything in the GOP platform that says anything about removing background checks. I do however see “We oppose federal licensing of law-abiding gun owners and national gun registration as violations of the Second Amendment.” I read the platform several times and am unable to find where it says that they want to remove any restrictions or laws already in place with the exception of automatic denial of returning veterans. I am not sure how Chet got fully automatic-assault rifle from automatic denial. Statements like “fully automatic-assault rifle” are intended to scare poorly informed readers. Sadly Chet, I must inform you that the statement “We recognize that gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens, and that such proposals are ineffective at reducing violent crime” is very true. Every unbiased study ever done confirms that statement. The only studies that do not support that statement were done by biased groups such as the last audits that our own WSI bought and paid for. I think Chet and I agree that those audits were biased and not credible. When did you last read a news story that said armed crime victim was killed defending himself? It is very rare that an armed person becomes a victim. The US Supreme Court tells us the police have no obligation to protect us. The control freaks, usually Democrats, but not always Democrats want to take away my ability to protect myself, family, and belongings. The country’s that have banned or severely restricted firearm ownership have seen skyrocketing violent crime and are now going after knives. The gun control zealots and the religious zealots are ripping this country apart.

December 30, 2008, 06:18 PM
Votes: +1

Bruce said:

Learn About Firearms
As LJ has indicated your terminology is deaply flawed.The “fully automatic-assault rifle” is a class III firearm that is both highly restricted and limited in quantity (no new weapons can be registered after May 1986). You cannot walk into a gun shop and buy one, you have to go through extensive paperwork, and wait a minimum of six months, and then you get to pay a transfer tax on top of the inflated price for the weapon. If you plan on reporting on firearms, you need to educate yourself. I realize that the mainstream media isn't any better, but I hope you don't want to use them as your example. The weapons that individuals can go into a gun store and buy are semi-auto (single shot per trigger pull) weapons, and they are not a weapon of choice for criminals (all rifles combined constitute less than 3% of all homocides nationally). They are also the most popular weapon among recreational shooters, and a growing number of hunters.

January 05, 2009, 01:21 AM
Votes: +0

Bruce said:

Additionally...
the terrorism watch list has already proven to be severely flawed. I do not want law abiding citizens that have been erroneously placed on the list (a list that there is no way to get your name off from), and be denied their constitutional rights. If the watch list could be repaired, I would consider the verification as part of the NICS check on firearms purchases, but not before that.

January 05, 2009, 01:40 AM
Votes: +0

Chet said:

Educate Me, Bruce (or anyone)
The Republican Party platform says this:

gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens, and that such proposals are ineffective at reducing violent crime

When the GOP adopts this as its platform, isn't it fair to understand that the GOP is against "gun control"?!?

See... when YOU write that "“fully automatic-assault rifle” is a class III firearm that is both highly restricted and limited in quantity (no new weapons can be registered after May 1986). You cannot walk into a gun shop and buy one, you have to go through extensive paperwork, and wait a minimum of six months, and then you get to pay a transfer tax on top of the inflated price for the weapon" aren't you really saying "there is a gun control law that makes fully automatic assault rifles class III firearms that are both highly restricted and limited in quantity [etc.]"?!? Aren't you saying "some gun control laws affect criminals and ARE EFFECTIVE at reducing violent crime"?!?

If that's not what you're saying, then there are obviously some laws regulating firearms [like the one making full-automatic assault rifles class III firearms that are both highly restricted and limited in quantity...] that you and/or the GOP do not consider to be "gun control laws." That might be what YOU think, but it's obviously not what the GOP SAYS. Or... if it is what you think the GOP says, can you please give me a comprehensive list of all of the laws that regulate the ownership of firearms that are not "gun control laws" and that are supported by the GOP? Include in your list any laws that have not yet been enacted.

Thanks.

[cricket, cricket, cricket.]

January 05, 2009, 06:24 AM
Votes: +0

nimrod said:

	Republicans The Republicans have not been able to sleep at night since the Brady Bill was passed.
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 05, 2009, 09:35 AM
Votes: +0

Bruce said:

I am not a Republican,
So I am not here to support their platform. But I am also not going to stand by as misinformation is disseminated either. The 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA), which regulated (not banned) full-auto weapons and short barrel rifles/shotguns, did have some effect on crime. Those weapons had become the weapon of choice for the high profile criminals of the time. On the other hand, the 1986 ban of these weapons had zero effect on crime, since the weapons banned had already been strictly regulated since 1934.

I also pointed out that I am not opposed to the background check on firearms purchases (NICS, National Instant Check System = FBI background check), as long as it is a legitimate check. The terrorism watch list is not, in its present form, legitimate. It has been perverted by the Bush administration, and without a house cleaning and strict rules on who can be added to the list (actual terrorist), it is not something I will trust.

January 05, 2009, 11:53 AM
Votes: +1

Chet said:

Speaking of misinformation...
If I recall correctly, I wrote a blog post about the GOP's platform as it related to "gun control." I didn't write about Bruce's platform. I appreciate that you are not trying to speak for or in favor of the GOP platform on this, but the fact that you aren't kind of makes your criticism of the comments here as being "deeply flawed" kind of... well... deeply flawed, no?

If there were information online about what Bruce's platform is, I probably wouldn't disagree with Bruce's position on gun control, but -- like most Americans -- I disagree with the GOP's blanket platform claim that all "gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens, and that such proposals are ineffective at reducing violent crime."

Again, the GOP's platform -- and I'm not talking about Bruces' or Chet's or anybody else's platform here -- proclaims that all "gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens." You and I seem to disagree with the GOP on this, as we both seem to agree that some forms of "gun control" -- namely, for example, the regulation of fully-automatic assault rifles -- are reasonable and acceptable. We seem to agree (don't we?) that the 1934 NFA -- a "gun control" law -- has an affect upon and penalizes law-breaking citizens.

Where the GOP runs into trouble is, of course, where it adopts a platform that insists that ALL gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens. That is -- of course (and I suspect you agree) -- an absurd claim. I suspect you and I would also agree that not all "gun control" is good. But that's not what this blog post is about. This blog post isn't about things that Chet and or Bruce think; it's about what the GOP has proclaimed in its platform. Things like a blanket assertion that all "gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens."

Keep in mind -- too -- the context in which we're talking about this. We're talking about this in the context of a North Dakota Republican Party state chairman who wants to hold GOP elected officials accountable when their votes do not strictly conform to the GOP's official platform. It's my understanding Gary Emineth would want elected Republicans held accountable unless they push for elimination of ALL gun control laws, including those that restrict the purchase, manufacture, sale and/or possession of fully-automatic assault rifles.

Where the discussion gets interesting is where someone comes in here and claims that I've added the word "ALL" at the beginning of the sentence that reads "...gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens." I'll admit that I've added the word, but I would insist that adding the word does not change the meaning of the sentence in the GOP's platform. The GOP's platform doesn't say "some gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens." If they'd meant that, they'd have written that. But they didn't. They write "gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens..." The "all" is implied. If the "all" weren't there, it would render the sentence virtually meaningless.

I've already asked, but I'll ask again: If the GOP hasn't taken the position in its platform that the GOP is against ALL gun control, then what specific gun control laws does the GOP support? Though you don't speak for the GOP, I'd like to know what your best educated guess is. Does the GOP support the law that makes fully-automatic assault rifles class III weapons? If you think that's the GOP's position, what part of the GOP's platform makes you think that to be true(?), because I'm not seeing it.

Maybe a better way to ask the question is this way: Don't give me an example of a specific "gun control" law that the GOP supports; explain to me what the difference is between gun control laws that the GOP's platform supports (e.g. bans on some assault weapons? -- if you really believe the GOP's platform is supportive of some gun control) and the gun control laws that the GOP's platform does not support (e.g. bans on other assault weapons?). And, again, point me to something in their platform that would cause me to believe that the GOP platform supports ANY gun control law, automatic assault weapon bans or otherwise.

I'm not seeing it.

January 06, 2009, 08:42 AM
Votes: -1

Bruce said:

	No, you wrote that ... you can go into a gun store and buy a “fully automatic-assault rifle”, and that is a flat out False. It is fraudulent anti-gun propoganda at it's highest. If you want to argue gun control, you need to start by being truthful. I didn't post here in anyway to support Republicans, but to keep Democrats honest. We are suppose to be better than Republicans aren't we?
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 06, 2009, 01:05 PM
Votes: +1

Nodakrider said:

Not Again
None of the above If the GOP chairman had his way, because he is a true conservative, the terrorists would not be in the country to begin with. Its the Democrat Liberals that let them in so it a loaded question. HA HA . Lets blame American gun owners and conservatives for the terrorists walking around America typical Democrats. Your so clueless. You believe that you can't keep terrorist or illegal aliens out of the USA but you believe you can change the climate of the world, your almost to stupid to talk with.. Hint, Hint terrorist are smart enough to steal or buy their guns from a liberal drug dealer or illegal alien off the street. Only a liberal, terrorist or illegal alien would walk into a gun store and ask to buy a fully automatic rifle its a dead give away, everybody else knows you can't buy one. You can fill out a form but don't hold your breath. Unbelievable I waisted time on a liberal again.

January 09, 2009, 04:03 PM
Votes: +0