Posted by
Takeadair on Saturday, December 09, 2006 9:57:32 PM
Calling politicians out on their suport or non-support of the Second Amendment is useful but doesn't really put them on the spot. This fundamentally isn't a question of pro-gun versus anti-gun.
It is about whether the politician is:
"pro-self defense"
or
"pro-police state".
If they are pro-self defense, then that means individuals have to have weapons to defend themselves.
If they are pro-police state, that means that only the state has weapons.
When you frame it this way it is clearer to non-gun people what the real debate is. Non-gun people don't feel the need to own guns, but they sure believe they have the right to defend themselves. The honest ones know that the state isn't going to be there to defend them when needed, only there to respond after the fact and investigate the results.
Labelling a politician Pro-gun or Anti-gun doesn't do much for me (see McCain), labeling them Pro-self defense or Pro-police state tells me everything I need to know.