Do ( D )s sell more guns than ( R )s?

[Anomalocaris]

The question is:

Do irrational fear sell more effectively than rational need or availability of discretionary income?


The answer is absolutely yes, and not just for guns, but for all manners of merchandise, and much more importantly for all manners of ideas.

This is why democracy, and democrats fail, and republicans, and Christianity, succeed.

The irony is liberty will be destroyed because of the fear of loss of freedom, ignorance will be allowed to rule for the fear of not knowing, and extinction will be driven by the fear of death. This seems to be tragedy of the 21st century.

[arewethereyet]

The question is:

Do irrational fear sell more effectively than rational need or availability of discretionary income?


The answer is absolutely yes, and not just for guns, but for all manners of merchandise, and much more importantly for all manners of ideas.

This is why democracy, and democrats fail, and republicans, and Christianity, succeeds.

Christianity doesn't use fear?

Since when?  What's that hell thing all about if not fear?

And it succeeds with really wonderful stuff like...child molestation run amok.  

Details, details.

[Yonadav]

If our country could survive a made up WALL emergency, and it can...than it would probably survive a real emergency handled poorly.  We've been there before.

Yeah, you've gone full libtard Poe. You aren't dumb enough to believe what you are saying.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I' ll give you that one - voting ( R ) may not get less guns sold - but voting ( D ) almost certainly will get more...

---

And for the record - I am not the NRA....

Yep. You're just a puppet.

[Yonadav]

I' ll give you that one - voting ( R ) may not get less guns sold - but voting ( D ) almost certainly will get more...

---

And for the record - I am not the NRA....

Yep. You're just a puppet.

No idea why you would say that. Idiots keep raging against people and organizations that are fueled by their rage. Raging against them just makes them stronger, because they benefit from the publicity. You don't have to be very cynical to see the left and the right feeding each other. For a lot of Dems, gun control is an easy issue that appeals to their base. The more noise that they make about it, the less time they have to spend talking about more difficult substantial issues. It's an easy path to victory for them. And all of that noise gives publicity to the NRA and boosts gun sales.

I'm not sure what to do about gun violence in America. But I am certain that the issue is fertilizing an environment in which a couple of parasites maintaining a symbiotic relationship with each other are flourishing.

[The Grand Nudger]

If our country could survive a made up WALL emergency, and it can...than it would probably survive a real emergency handled poorly.  We've been there before.

Yeah, you've gone full libtard Poe. You aren't dumb enough to believe what you are saying.

Your intra-party struggles are your own business.  Ultimately I may be wrong, our next mistake could always be our last, but I do like to believe that the US is capable of weathering any number of mistakes - we do have a long history in that regard.  

An america where guns are banned is still america, and the michigan militia aint gonna do shit about it.  There's just no apocalypse in this apocalyptic hand wringing around the issue of gun control or even gun bans.  I'll still have my own guns.  The feds would have to bring a shovel and a metal detector, and then comb my heavily wooded property, lol.  

Aint nobody got time for that - but that's not how any future gun ban in the us would play out anyway, so it's just pretend times for the lulz.

[Rev. Rye]

LOL The Republicans would allow the already lax gun laws to lapse, making the problem worse.

AND you have the cart before the horse. The reason gun sales go up during Democrat administration is the relentless fear mongering of the NRA puppets.

I heard about this shortly after Trump was inaugurated: gun nuts were terrified that the Obama administration would be their last chance to buy guns. since they were convinced that he'd either ban gun sales or confiscate pre-existing guns (even though it took until his second term for Obama to do anything but expand gun rights and even his proposed gun control measures were toothless). Then Trump got elected, and gun manufacturers reported that gun sales went down and they cited that specific reason, that gun nuts were afraid their days were numbered under Obama, but not under Trump, creating less urgency.

[The Grand Nudger]

Then, ironically enough, the trump admin went after their bumpstocks, lol.

[Yonadav]

Yeah, you've gone full libtard Poe. You aren't dumb enough to believe what you are saying.

Your intra-party struggles are your own business.  Ultimately I may be wrong, our next mistake could always be our last, but I do like to believe that the US is capable of weathering any number of mistakes - we do have a long history in that regard.  

An america where guns are banned is still america, and the michigan militia aint gonna do shit about it.  There's just no apocalypse in this apocalyptic hand wringing around the issue of gun control or even gun bans.  I'll still have my own guns.  The feds would have to bring a shovel and a metal detector, and then comb my heavily wooded property, lol.  

Aint nobody got time for that - but that's not how any future gun ban in the us would play out anyway, so it's just pretend times for the lulz.

A gun ban and a president unilaterally disarming the population aren't really the same thing, are they? Our nation can't survive a president unilaterally disarming the people. If a president can unilaterally do that, then there is nothing that a president can't unilaterally do. Our faith in democracy would be completely destroyed. This is the primary reason that so many Republicans want Trump to back off on declaring an emergency for the wall. We can't have presidents declaring emergencies just to give themselves unilateral power.

And you can't compare a wall 'emergency' with a disarm the population 'emergency'. Everyone knows that the wall is just symbolic. But taking people's guns away is not symbolic. That's going to engender some real hostility. And like you said, people aren't going to give up their guns. You're not. I'm not. Very few people will. So it won't even work. Even if it didn't start a civil war, it would probably backfire because of racism. Gun control as a long and embarrassing history of being oriented toward a fear of black people with guns. Guess whose guns we would probably be pretty successful at taking?

[The Grand Nudger]

Your intra-party struggles are your own business.  Ultimately I may be wrong, our next mistake could always be our last, but I do like to believe that the US is capable of weathering any number of mistakes - we do have a long history in that regard.  

An america where guns are banned is still america, and the michigan militia aint gonna do shit about it.  There's just no apocalypse in this apocalyptic hand wringing around the issue of gun control or even gun bans.  I'll still have my own guns.  The feds would have to bring a shovel and a metal detector, and then comb my heavily wooded property, lol.  

Aint nobody got time for that - but that's not how any future gun ban in the us would play out anyway, so it's just pretend times for the lulz.

A gun ban and a president unilaterally disarming the population aren't really the same thing, are they?

Depends on how it's achieved, in her scenario they were one and the same.  

Our nation can't survive a president unilaterally disarming the people. If a president can unilaterally do that, then there is nothing that a president can't unilaterally do. Our faith in democracy would be completely destroyed. This is the primary reason that so many Republicans want Trump to back off on declaring an emergency for the wall. We can't have presidents declaring emergencies just to give themselves unilateral power.

I think that it could...I mean, what else is there to say about that?  We have had that, we're still here. Hell, our faith in democracy is already completely destroyed....and yet we're still here.....

And you can't compare a wall 'emergency' with a disarm the population 'emergency'. Everyone knows that the wall is just symbolic. But taking people's guns away is not symbolic. That's going to engender some real hostility. And like you said, people aren't going to give up their guns. You're not. I'm not. Very few people will. So it won't even work. Even if it didn't start a civil war, it would probably backfire because of racism. Gun control as a long and embarrassing history of being oriented toward a fear of black people with guns. Guess whose guns we would probably be pretty successful at taking?

OFC I can compare one abuse of power to another, don't be ridiculous.  Our nation has survived many abuses of power....most of them worse than somebody coming to git our guns, doubleplus ungood!  That informs my belief about the ability of the nation to withstand whatever the next abuse of power happens to be.