[Democrats] Why Why Why Are Libs pushing the gun control agenda again? Again?
https://redlib.catsarch.com/r/stupidpol/comments/1t6iuc0/why_why_why_are_libs_pushing_the_gun_control/
> Anybody have any thoughts or related literature as to why libs are going full-to the wall on the gun control schtick? It seems counterintuitive based on the lack of support by the base, and could harm their chances of winning majorities in certain states next time.
>
> \----------------------
>
> First Virginia, Washington, and now even Minnesota, where there seems to be quite a bit of pushback from a lot folks. Even on the local subreddit the first news story that came out had mostly negative comments, well that was deleted with a "poll" the next day that was obviously rigged. (highlighting how these state subs work now, no don't waste your time going there it's been a DFL circlejerk since covid)
>
> (yes, dfl circlejerk is a "bad" thing when they are more exercised to preventing any left politics than the tucker carlsons are btw)
>
> (background)
>
> In Minnesota the senate just passed a bill that not only would ban almost every semi auto rifle in existence, but require everyone who owned one to get a 3-year BCS "license" to keep possessing it, along with any magazine over 17 rounds.
>
> They also redefined assault weapons to be anything that can accept a detachable magazine AND has a barrel shroud, and not even one that covers the full barrel, meaning basically any stock that keeps the heat off the non-shooting hand. Basically they redefined the terms such that most semiautorifles would be included as "assault" weapons.
>
> And there are press conferences galore (one is going on on KSTP right now) that if anything make these reps look ridiculous in their constant emotionalizing.
>
> \---------------
>
> The general question is - why are they still pushing this? What's the psychology here?
>
> I even listened to some hearings and it was painfully just...bad. "assault weapons ban of 94 stopped 70% of mass shoootings" and whatnot. (lies if you read the literature of course, but they don't just lie to you, they reference a study which are basically lies by academics long discredited in anything but the public health journals, which have a history of massaging narratives / facts)
>
> Listening to these reps, it's pretty clear they are bought and paid for, or at least are so delusional that they actually believe the lies they say.
>
> I fear that any "left" wing direction really isn't going to happen once they get in power post-trump, and/or that they will go the virginia route of authoritarianism which will piss everyone off.
>
> (btw: how the hell did a former cia case agent get in power again? her job was to lie and manipulate, her being a governor is just an insult to every virginian, right or left)
>
> \---------------
>
> Anyways, just curious since i'm assuming some have a forest rather than trees approach to understanding this.
>
> I can see a libidinal argument being made against the folks the dems now hate - rural hicks. The 2nd is basically the equivalent to abortion rights for the dems, so perhaps they want to destroy their family jewels or something.
> The internal contradictions of western capitalism continue to sharpen and an armed working class is a latent threat to that order.
>
> Mike Bloomberg, one of the richest of all the bourgeoisie, bragged about owning the DNC on live television.
>
> "Democracy" is when Mike personally dumps 100 mil into a state election so he can strip the workers of arms.
>
> Liberal democracy is a polite way to say dictatorship of the rich. Burn it down
> Anybody have any thoughts or related literature as to why libs are going full-to the wall on the gun control schtick? It seems counterintuitive based on the lack of support by the base, and could harm their chances of winning majorities in certain states next time.
>
> \----------------------
>
> First Virginia, Washington, and now even Minnesota, where there seems to be quite a bit of pushback from a lot folks. Even on the local subreddit the first news story that came out had mostly negative comments, well that was deleted with a "poll" the next day that was obviously rigged. (highlighting how these state subs work now, no don't waste your time going there it's been a DFL circlejerk since covid)
>
> (yes, dfl circlejerk is a "bad" thing when they are more exercised to preventing any left politics than the tucker carlsons are btw)
>
> (background)
>
> In Minnesota the senate just passed a bill that not only would ban almost every semi auto rifle in existence, but require everyone who owned one to get a 3-year BCS "license" to keep possessing it, along with any magazine over 17 rounds.
>
> They also redefined assault weapons to be anything that can accept a detachable magazine AND has a barrel shroud, and not even one that covers the full barrel, meaning basically any stock that keeps the heat off the non-shooting hand. Basically they redefined the terms such that most semiautorifles would be included as "assault" weapons.
>
> And there are press conferences galore (one is going on on KSTP right now) that if anything make these reps look ridiculous in their constant emotionalizing.
>
> \---------------
>
> The general question is - why are they still pushing this? What's the psychology here?
>
> I even listened to some hearings and it was painfully just...bad. "assault weapons ban of 94 stopped 70% of mass shoootings" and whatnot. (lies if you read the literature of course, but they don't just lie to you, they reference a study which are basically lies by academics long discredited in anything but the public health journals, which have a history of massaging narratives / facts)
>
> Listening to these reps, it's pretty clear they are bought and paid for, or at least are so delusional that they actually believe the lies they say.
>
> I fear that any "left" wing direction really isn't going to happen once they get in power post-trump, and/or that they will go the virginia route of authoritarianism which will piss everyone off.
>
> (btw: how the hell did a former cia case agent get in power again? her job was to lie and manipulate, her being a governor is just an insult to every virginian, right or left)
>
> \---------------
>
> Anyways, just curious since i'm assuming some have a forest rather than trees approach to understanding this.
>
> I can see a libidinal argument being made against the folks the dems now hate - rural hicks. The 2nd is basically the equivalent to abortion rights for the dems, so perhaps they want to destroy their family jewels or something.
> The internal contradictions of western capitalism continue to sharpen and an armed working class is a latent threat to that order.
>
> Mike Bloomberg, one of the richest of all the bourgeoisie, bragged about owning the DNC on live television.
>
> "Democracy" is when Mike personally dumps 100 mil into a state election so he can strip the workers of arms.
>
> Liberal democracy is a polite way to say dictatorship of the rich. Burn it down