Guns still in political cross hairs

Sunday, May 12, 2002 - Six years ago, the Colorado Democratic Party put guns in its political cross hairs. Trying to help U.S. Senate candidate Tom Strickland, the party mailed thousands of brochures with dramatic photos of a cemetery burial service and a blunt headline: "How many more will die before Wayne Allard votes to ban assault weapons?"

Today, Strickland is trying again to win a Senate seat from Allard, but he's campaigning with a different message.

The former U.S. attorney is one of a growing number of Democrats across America trying to distance themselves from the party's anti-gun image. In the 2000 presidential election, many leading party members, including President Clinton, concluded that Al Gore lost the key swing states of Arkansas, Tennessee and West Virginia because of a backlash from gun owners.

In that national election, guns became a political fault line: People who owned firearms voted overwhelmingly for George W. Bush, and people who didn't voted largely for Gore, exit polls showed. Guns were a leading reason why the Democratic candidate fared poorly among rural residents and white men over age 30 in blue-collar or middle-class households, polls showed.

"Guns are for Republicans what abortion is for Democrats - a political weapon to use against the other side," said Jay Marlin, a Democratic consultant with Squier Media in Washington, D.C., who worked for former Colorado Sen. Tim Wirth. "For a lot of people, the gun issue is a test of values."

About half of all Colorado households have a gun; that's slightly higher than the national figure of 45 percent, polls show. The United States today is home to 280 million people and at least 200 million guns, including 70 million handguns.

National pro- and anti-gun activists are watching this year's U.S. Senate race in Colorado closely. It's the first major statewide candidate election since the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, which polls show eroded public support for guns in a traditionally firearms-friendly state. The Senate election also comes after voters' overwhelming approval in 2000 of Amendment 22, which closed the so-called "gun-show loophole" by requiring criminal background checks of buyers at gun shows.

Strickland says his own opinions about guns haven't changed since 1996. He describes himself as a sportsman who first hunted deer with his father at age 12 and shot pheasants with his 20-gauge at a game ranch just last month.

In his last race against Allard, Strickland did criticize the Republican for voting to repeal a national ban on assault weapons and for his opposition to the Brady Bill, which gave law enforcement five days to check criminal records of handgun buyers. Strickland also attacked Allard's "100 percent voting record" from the National Rifle Association.

This year, however, Strickland has backed off criticisms of the NRA, saying the group has "some good ideas and some bad ideas." The old fights over gun legislation are over, Strickland said.

The only new gun legislation needed, Strickland said, is nationalization of the Colorado-approved Amendment 22 ballot initiative that closed the gun-show loophole. Arizona Sen. John McCain and Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman are co-sponsoring a bill that Strickland says could accomplish that goal.

The proposed McCain-Lieberman bill, Allard said, "goes far beyond what we have in the state of Colorado as far as the paperwork and intensive bureaucratic structure."

Both Colorado's Amendment 22 and the McCain-Lieberman bill have been denounced by the NRA. Allard was endorsed by the NRA in 1996 and has received $7,950 from the group for his re-election campaign.

"My position all along has been that I don't support any federal mandates," said Allard, a Loveland Republican, who cast his own ballot in favor of Amendment 22. "Basically, it's a state issue. But I would support those that the majority of Colorado support. For example, I would support legislation at the federal level that is identical to the state ballot initiative."

Polling done by the pro-Amendment 22 forces in 2000 found that urban voters, especially in Denver, hold a more restrictive view of gun ownership, an attitude shared by New Englanders. Colorado's rural voters, like Southerners, voice the most support for the NRA's pro-gun positions. And suburban voters generally take a centrist position - strong support for guns for hunting, but squeamishness over laws allowing the concealed carry of handguns.

"The words in the debate are so important," said Rick Ridder, the Denver pollster who helped lead the Amendment 22 campaign. "Voters here are very supportive of things called "gun safety' - child safety locks on triggers, lock boxes to prevent children from getting their parents' guns. But anything called "gun control' is a whole other issue. "Gun control' gets into the question of access, and government control, and that's a tougher sell."

In 1996, Allard defeated Strickland by a staggering 2-to-1 ratio in 13 counties, all rural. The vast edge in those counties, combined with strong advantages in other Eastern Plains and Western Slope communities, gave Allard an electoral edge that overwhelmed Strickland's support from cities.

If Strickland can't whittle away Allard's strong rural advantage, he'll have an extremely tough time winning in 2002, political consultants say. Rural residents agree.

"If I knew there was a pro-gun Democrat, I could vote for him. But the Democrats always seem to be trying to grab our guns," said Mark Turner, 45, a self-described independent voter in Julesburg who voted for Bush in 2000 and Allard in 1996. He owns 25 guns. "I hope the Democrats do change."

Guns also appeal to a key Colorado constituency - white men with moderate incomes.

Though blue-collar voters long have been wary of GOP ties with big business, they increasingly have turned away from Democrats because of worries about gun control, political analysts say.

Many of these men live in the populous, and crucial, suburban counties of Adams, a former Democratic stronghold that has turned more Republican, and Jefferson, a one-time GOP bastion that now is up for grabs in elections.

Both Allard and Strickland campaign managers say they're focusing intensely on winning support in Adams and Jefferson counties.

Meanwhile, Strickland has shifted his rhetoric. He touts his accomplishments as U.S. attorney in Project Exile, a tough-on-violence program that, he says, nearly tripled the number of defendants charged with gun crimes in two years. Strickland personally prosecuted one case, which sent a gun-toting crack dealer to prison for 13 years.

As part of Project Exile, Strickland helped put two archenemies - NRA vice president Wayne LaPierre and Handgun Control trustee James Brady - together on the same stage for the first time to endorse a crackdown on gun violence.

"The issue here is leadership," Strickland said. "I was sworn in as U.S. attorney on the day after Columbine, and I had a responsibility to show leadership. I don't recall any leadership from Sen. Allard on the issues of gun violence. He wasn't there to lead on Project Exile, even though his Republican colleagues, Sen. (Ben) Campbell and Congressman (Tom) Tancredo were. I don't recall him being out in front on closing the gun-show loophole in Colorado, or the Brady Bill and the assault-weapons ban in Congress. This isn't an area where Sen. Allard has shown any leadership."

"Does he have a position on guns? I'm trying to figure out what his position is, because he's changing it on us," Allard said. "He said he was opposed to any gun control laws. But he put out a real negative piece on me in the last election. Now he's taking my position when he's out in Lamar. Then he's taking a new position by saying he supports McCain-Lieberman. I mean, what is it? What is his position? He has really moved around a lot on that issue."

It's clear that the DemocRATs are realizing that their support for gun control cost them the presidency. While it's flattering to watch them try to trim their sails to the wind, I don't believe them for an instant. And even if Strickland had truly undergone a change of heart, he would be elected as a DemocRAT and caucus with the DemocRATs, so that we'd still have Leahy as chairman of the judiciary committee, blocking consideration of pro-RKBA judges. Sure, he'd couch his opposition in more neutral terms - "lacks judicial temperament, yadda, yadda, yadda" - but he's still oppose them.

You can't change the leopard's spots - while the GOP may not be perfect on 2A rights, if the DemocRATs had the power, they'd take our guns right now.

"You can't change the leopard's spots - while the GOP may not be perfect on 2A rights, if the DemocRATs had the power, they'd take our guns right now."

Ya got that right!

Picture of Texas Rep. Susan Gratia Hupp at her father's graveside after his murder in Luby's Cafeteria, with the "blunt" caption: "How many more deaths will it take before liberals recognize that guns save lives?" [subhead] "He'd still be here if she'd been allowed to bring her pistol into the restaurant. But the law said 'No.' It promised to protect her. And him. It failed. And he paid the price. So did she."[graf]

"We all do."

I just don't understand how these jerks can say the First amendment is an individual right but the Second isn't. Was the Bill Of Rights written for the individual or not? That's the question we can use to hang these gun grabbing #@%$!@# on.

I'm sure you do understand: the extreme leftists are attempting to revoke the Second Amendment. Since they know they can't get away with repealing it, they're chipping away at it on the installment plan. After the Second Amendment is declared null and void--whether it's repealed outright or not--they'll do likewise with the First.

"We don't need any more gun control," Strickland said in Lamar.

"You just need to enforce the laws you already have," Strickland said in Yuma.

"Elect me as a moderate so I can screw you for 6 years as a liberal gun grabber."

Hey, it works for Daschle in South Dakota every election cycle.

The thing is, they never once envision themselves at the recieving end of the limitation of their liberties. The visualize a utopia of their own englightened construction, where the lemmings follow their wisdom to the letter so that they can remain happy at the small cost of their freedom. Little do they know that once they've picked away at all of our personal freedom for the sake of their peace of mind once their king of their world (wouldn't want their reign to be cut short by revolution), then comes the big guy with the only gun left to put everyone under his jackboot. Including these liberal punks.

Brian

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.