It’s not a Red vs. Blue thing

In the latest US Elections, the Republican party made some sweeping gains in terms of seats held, from the Federal level down to local levels. Naturally, in the days after there’s much posing and posturing about winning and losing, but before the election and after the election – and something that seems to exist regardless of election season – is how “gun rights” are positioned.

It seems people want to cut “gun rights” as a “red vs. blue” thing. That if you’re a Republican/conservative you are “pro-gun” and if you are a Democrat/liberal you are “anti-gun” (let’s leave us 3rd party folks out of this discussion for now). Granted, you do tend to find that the “reds” are pro and the “blues” are anti, but we really need to get away from such division and classification because “gun rights” are not directly correlated to “political party affiliation”.

Dr. Ben Carson, labeled a “Conservative Hero” seems to want to put restrictions on gun ownership. GOP candidate Mark Greenberg got an F-rating from the NRA-PVF.

Congressman Nick Rahall (disclosure: I’ve been friends with one of his daughters since high school), is a Democrat, but is a Life Member of the NRA and A-Rated by the NRA-PVF.

I’ve seen it in classes over the years. Many, if not most, of the KR Training study body, comes out of Austin – you know, that little “dot of blue in the sea of Texas red”. While you certainly get students of the “right-leaning” persuasion, we certainly see more than enough people who aren’t.

And let’s not forget the stereotype-busting I saw at one of the local indoor ranges back in 2010.

I know it’s cliché, but there’s truth in “united we stand, divided we fall”. If you care about “gun rights” then care about that and don’t let other labels that claim affiliation cloud the issue and your judgment, or divide you along colored lines. If anything, see it as a way to bridge the gap, to help us find something in common, to bring us together with a little better understanding.

4 thoughts on “It’s not a Red vs. Blue thing

    • Good catch on the apostrophe. Fixed.

      I’m not dismissing third parties in general (since I tend to affiliate with one of them). I just wanted to simplify the discussion because this discussion so much these days (esp. in the past week) has been a very Rep vs. Dem, Con vs. Lib, Red vs. Blue sort of issue; plus adding in third parties would make the article longer and I’m TRYING to write shorter, more concise articles these days.

      When you add third parties into the mix tho, it really starts to show that this isn’t a “us vs. them” thing… it’s not a “agree with me, disagree with me” so cut and dry, black and white, type of thing. And then, on more issues than just gun rights.

  1. Except that the urban liberal elites who work the levers of power in the Democratic Party have made it their mission to drive the supporters of gun rights (and any remnant of the old conservative “blue dog” Democrats) out of the party.

    20 years ago there were numerous pro-gun Democrats, but now there are only a handful. (And as for Ben Carson, he was a Democrat until fairly recently.)

    Indeed, the Democratic Party seems perfectly willing to jettison both the first and second amendments where it interferes with their agenda.

    And remember, when push comes to shove, party loyalty wins out of individual stands and the wishes of their constituents. Do you think there’s a single Democrats who’s more “pro-gun” than Bart Stupak was “pro-life”?

Join the discussion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s