Gabby and Da Spaceman Toxic?

[erudne]

As gun control proponent Gabby Giffords gets more "aggressive" in her push for gun control candidates, at least one of those candidates is distancing herself from the ads Giffords is running.
New Hampshire's WMUR 9 ABC reports that though incumbent Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH 1st District) is thoroughly in favor of gun control, the tone of attack in Giffords' new ad is simply too much for her. The video on the outlet's website clearly demonstrates Shea-Porter's desire to move away from being associated with the former representative's ad.
<broken link removed> , Carol Shea-Porter has "flatly denied any association" with the ads against Republican challenger Frank Guinta (R). Giffords' group--Americans for Responsible Solutions (ARS)--is running the ad.
The ad attacks Guinta for his pro-Second Amendment stand in much the same way Giffords' group has been attacking the pro-Second Amendment stand of Martha McSally (R) in Arizona's District 2.
Guinta continues to embrace the Second Amendment and says Congress should be finding ways to defend it, rather than taking it apart after the fashion of Giffords and Shea-Porter.
Said Guinta, "I think we've got to find ways to respect the Second Amendment, those 27 words in the Constitution," according to WMUR.
Real Clear Politics has NHD1 listed as a "toss up" in which Guinta currently leads.

Read More

 

[tiggers97]

Mrs. Gifford was here in Portland last night pushing the new marketing screed of gun-control because domestic violence. Oregonian didn't report much, but at least one online blogger got some video of it:

Ad to that this article and you can clearly see what their strategy will be this year. "Fact" sheet for Oregon. Typical propaganda stuff like conflating suicides (Oregon is about 80-83% each year) with other gun deaths.

I'm all for reducing domestic violence. But I'm not for allowing a special interest group, like gun-control, to use it as a vehicle to advance their cause. Especially when it doesn't reduce domestic violence.

I'm thinking that "return on investment" might be a good way to present an argument next year. When Oregon did their background check analysis a few months ago, only 8 arrests out of ~37,500 checks were made. That's a "return on on investment" of 0.02%. Or 2.4% out of the total of 331 denied for various reasons. Does that sound like a good use of time, money, energy and political capital (Last one is for the legislators)? Do we want "more please", or will more lives be saved if we invest in other areas? Would helping local shelters, public awareness, increasing penalties for domestic violence, etc be a better return on investment?

 

[erudne]

Suicide is legal in OR so how did it end up on a crime sheet?

 

[PiratePast40]

http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/29/gabby-giffords-struggles-to-make-guns-a-midterm-issue/

Even the libs are starting to see through the smokescreen. The gun issue isn't about crime at all, just control. Looks like the other issue of her being used as a puppet are also becoming more obvious.

 

[etrain16]

I think the problem for them is they keep claiming that these proposed new laws would keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, yet each time a shooting comes up, it's someone who either obtained it through legal channels or stole it. Even the latest shooting in Seattle could not and would not have been prevented by more restrictive laws. Even those of the liberal mindset are capable of seeing the logic in that - though I know many will disagree with that last statement

 

[Navman]

The irony is that Gifford's agenda would only affect those of us that would be the most likely to come to her aid or anyone else for that matter.

 

[U201491]

http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/29/gabby-giffords-struggles-to-make-guns-a-midterm-issue/

Even the libs are starting to see through the smokescreen. The gun issue isn't about crime at all, just control. Looks like the other issue of her being used as a puppet are also becoming more obvious.

The problem that creates the headaches for all of us is they are just too damn dumb to know when to quit and just go away. What they do wastes everyone's time. Anything that goes against the constitution is also treasonous in my eyes. We have the best and most unique freedom document holding this country together in the entire world.
STOP SCREWING WITH IT !

 

[coyote223]

Only toxic until the election cycle is over,,,

 

[Grunwald]

The woman has brain damage, thus she is the perfect representative for the statists.

 

[Norm0931]

The irony is that Gifford's agenda would only affect those of us that would be the most likely to come to her aid or anyone else for that matter.

Which is why liberals and anti-gunners support it. They are so pacifist when it comes to guns they are blinded to reality and think everyone sees things like they do.

 

[Norm0931]

The problem that creates the headaches for all of us is they are just too damn dumb to know when to quit and just go away. What they do wastes everyone's time. Anything that goes against the constitution is also treasonous in my eyes. We have the best and most unique freedom document holding this country together in the entire world.
STOP SCREWING WITH IT !

The thing is we have a way of modifying the Constitution. If as many people as they claim supported them actually did, they could get an amendment passed. We all know they don't have the numbers though because the majority of Americans don't want more gun control.