Senator Bernie Sanders and Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley got into it in the Democratic debate, battling it out on the gun control front. Senator Sanders clung to his guns and religion contention that gun laws should depend on geography, while O’Malley assured the audience that it’s OK to disarm Americans as long as you respect their hunting traditions (until you don’t have to). Sanders sang kumbaya (we’ve got to bring people together on the issue), an idea that led O’Malley to accuse the self-awoved Socialist of pandering to the NRA. Lots of heat, no light. Not even at the end of their tunnel vision.

53 Responses to Bernie Sanders vs. Martin O’Malley on Gun Control

  1. Even if I wasn’t a gun nut, if we throw out everything about gun control gun safety, there’s nobody I like running as a Democrat. I think they are going to lose.

  2. These debates are just a competition to see who can promise to erode Constitutional protections the quickest while the audience proves that liberty dies to thunderous applause.

      • I propose, proposing a system, in which the people can enact a no confidence vote in their representative that had tell force of law, that ejects still serving representative from office and prevents now former representative from obtaining benefits, payment, and bars them from any other office for life

        • I also propose changing congress into a more parliamentary style system, where, brawls, duels and fist fights between reps, senators, and even presidents are not only allowed, but c span must cover it in great detail.

  3. What the hell is “military grade” ammunition? I know for a fact he was not talking about AP (Armor Piercing) ammo.

    • I had the same reaction, knowing that for many years the most popular rifle caliber in the US for hunting was (for all I know still is) the .30-06, a “military” round. So it must be that “high powered” ammo sold for use in “assault weapons”, specifically .223, as it was designed “for the sole purpose of killing people,” and does “catastrophic damage” to a body. Of course, O’Malley fails to note that there is no law that requires an ammunition seller to do background checks on ammo buyers, and I really doubt that Holmes was the one and only high volume purchaser in the country (separate and apart from the fact that he didn’t order it at one time, and that most of it was left in his apartment where is did no harm to anyone.) Nor did he explain why a law protecting manufacturers from liability for the independent criminal acts of third persons (that the Phillips directly challenged) should be changed. (Actually, Hillarity wants that changed also.) But from a lawyer’s perspective, a law permitting such actions would be contrary to the last seventy years of products liability law that holds manufacturers (and sellers) strictly liable only for manufacturing or design defects in the product sold–and where misuse is an affirmative defense.

  4. Love their gun control rhetoric because it screams out “Don’t vote for me I’m a socialist!” The democrat party is so out of touch with what Americans want. We want our gun rights respected and expanded, we want smaller government, lower taxes, dismantlement of government beauracracies that stifle job growth. Basically all the things that the democrat party opposes! The democrats are finshed!

    • While share your views and frustration, the Democratic Party isn’t the problem: those people that support them are the problem. The democrats are smart and understand just who they’re wooing. This country has a significant percentage of bed-wetters, free-loaders, racial-dividers, union goons and outright socialists/communists. This is their core, but it still isn’t 50%, so they try to demonize and demoralize the conservative viewpoint. But I think that and the race card are just about played out. Now they’ve introduced the gun control and LGBT-cards. Know the enemy and never assume they’re out of touch.

  5. Sanders doesn’t understand that people need guns to defend against predators. In the country, the predators have four legs. It the city, they only have two.

    It must be frustrating for O’Malley to go through this tiresome election process. I’m sure he would prefer to be appointed dictator for life.

    • O’ Malley is used to getting his way in Maryland with it being essentially a one-party state.

      Well, the rest of the country is not Maryland and this time he will actually face stiff competition from the opposing party unlike the cake-walk of gerrymandered Maryland.

  6. I’m wondering if Bernie sanders isnt entertaining the idea of a Consolidation of states. Why else would he suggest gun control geographically. It’s not like consolidation hasn’t been floated before, seems like what was fringe thinking 20 yrs ago, has gone mainstream.

    • Recent trends are in the opposite direction. California is a large state with regions that are geographically and culturally diverse. Its liberal politics are due to the large coastal cities. The inland regions are quite conservative. It has been suggested to break California into five separate states. One sees the same split in Colorado, which is dominated by Denver, and Illinois, which is dominated by Chicago.

      • I’m all for dumping Chicago…never happen. Just like upstate NY can’t rid itself of the southern juggernaut. So how is an actual communist the only “democrat” I can sorta’ tolerate? Interesting times is an understatement…

      • Sadly, Florida is turning blue as well. Miami, Orlando, and Tampa/St. Pete are all blue, and the rest of the state is red. Orlando has the 2nd highest concentration of Puerto Ricans after New York City.

      • There is also a movement that pops up once in a while (currently active) to separate rural northern California (north of Sacramento) into a separate state called the State of Jefferson, and maybe include southern Oregon into the newly constituted state. There are several problems: 1) it would require the assent of the California Legislature, which is controlled by the population centers to the south, who will never let go of their source of water; 2) it would require the consent of the federal government, which is not likely to act as long as both state senators have a D after their names–which is likely to stay that way forever; 3) the created State of Jefferson, having little industry and no viable natural resources other than water, cattle, and nuts (and lumber that is nearly impossible to harvest) would not economically viable due to a lack of tax revenues to support basic public services.

        • I think the only “fed” approval would be Congress granting statehood to the newly created state. If it were to happen right now, with the Republicans controlling both houses, that part would be a slam dunk. The problem is CA and OR are both blue/dem, and the new State of Jefferson would be red/rep. That means 2 new Republican Senators, and CA & OR would lose members of the House of Representatives.As long as each state has 2 Senators, you can have as many as you want (states & senators), but the 435 Members of Congress is set in stone. When I was young, Delaware was the only state that I could recall that had just one Congressperson, and now there’s 6 or 7 states.

    • I think from a constitutional aspect, you COULD consolidate states, but why would they? The newly consolidated state would lose their Senate representation, or rather, have it reduced to only 2 senators. You’d have to amend the Constitution to change that, and the less populated states would never agree to allowing the larger states to have more senators than the smaller ones. Increasing the # of Senators per state is the only part of the Constitution that cannot be amended. That’s the last line of Article V. (5)

      It only takes 13 states to prevent a Constitutional Amendment from being ratified, which is why the Second Amendment will never be repealed. They’ll just continue to nibble away at it through Supreme Court cases until it’s as dead and irrelevant as the Tenth Amendment is now. That’s why we can’t let Hillary into the Oval Office, nor let the democrats retake the senate if she does. Four of the SCOTUS Justice’s are over 75 years old, they could go anytime.. Ginsberg and Scalia are the 2 oldest of the bunch

  7. I believe there is a moment to merge Eastern Oregon, Eastern Wa to join Idaho… something totally plausible. But i;m afraid the left coast wouldnt allow it.

    • I think you could draw a circle around Seattle and another around Olympia, cut those out and make those areas a liberal state. The rest of WA would gladly go with the Conservatives for the most part. Problem is the other state would lose the revenue from Microsoft and some of the other software companies in Seattle and Bellevue. As well as the employment from Amazon, Boeing and some other large companies.

    • Yeah, it’s been talked about for a long time. May as well continue down California and lop off the coast from the Eastern ~2/3 of the state. Basically the same as how it breaks down in OR and WA, where the population centers are on the left (and the Left) and basically everything East of there is heavy into farming/agriculture, less populated, and to the Right.

  8. What surprises me most is the fact that Sanders is running for the democrat nomination, yet he’s still (nominally) an independent, and no democrat is raising a stink about it. One would think party rules would dictate that if you’re seeking a party’s nomination, you have to be a member of said party.

    • Well, the DNC originally thought that Bernie was a harmless, lovable old man, that he’d just go out on the campaign trail and yell at the clouds. He’d be a nice counterpoint to Hillary, and make her look a little less lefty than she is. IOW, Bernie would serve a useful purpose without really hurting anything.

      Now that he’s getting serious money, they have a problem. But even worse than that for the DNC, Bernie is attracting the True Believers (the students, the activists, the small donor class) in the Democratic Party, whilst the broom pilot in a pantsuit has negatives that just keep going up, up and up.

      Sooner or later, the issue of party non-affiliation will have to come up.

  9. I doubt it matter much what either one of these guys think because it seems that Hillary is the chosen candidate of The Dems. I pray that none of the ends up being President. I think Donald Trump, with all his flaws, is a much better choice than any of these clowns.

  10. Where, do you suppose, little Marty’s money is coming from? His campaign for the demonrat presidential nomination is a joke. Yet he is still included in the demonrat debates/love fests where he uses the national coverage to advocate for and lie about extreme gun control. I wonder who is funding this clown.

    • He’s ready if something happens to one of the front runners, and to build his credibility for another job, say, running next time. Personally, having a character in The Wire based on you is an automatic disqualification in my book (Tommy Carcetti, the politician).

  11. ………………_„-,-~”~”’:::”:::’:::::”::::”~
    …………._,-”:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::”-„
    ………..,-‘::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
    ………,-‘::::::::::::„:„„-~-~–‘~-‘~–~-~–~-
    ……..,’::::::::::,~”: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ‘-|
    ……..|::::::::,-‘: : : : : : : : – -~””¯¯”-„: : : : :\
    ……..|::::::::|: : : : : : : : : _„„–~””’~-„: : : : ‘|
    ……..’|:::::::,’: : : : : : :_„„-: : : : : : : : ~–„_: |’
    ………|::::::|: : : „–~~”’~~””””-„…_..„~””””””¯|
    ………|:::::,’:_„„-|: : :_„—~: : :|”¯¯””|: ~—„_: ||
    ……..,~-,_/”: : : |: :(_ o__): : |: : : :|:(_o__): \..|
    ……../,’-,: : : : : ”-,_______,-”: : : : ”-„_____|
    ……..\: :|: : : : : : : : : : : : : :„: : : : :-,: : : : : : : :\
    ………’,:’: : : : : : : : : : : : :,-‘__: : : :_’,: : : : ;: ,’
    ……….’-,-‘: : : : : :___„-: : :”: : ¯”~~”: ‘: : ~–|’
    ………….|: ,: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : 😐
    ………….’|: \: : : : : : : : -,„_„„-~~–~–„_: :: |
    …………..|: \: : : : : : : : : : : :——-~: : : : : |These guys SUCK I tell you what!
    …………..|: :”-,: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 😐
    …………..’,: : :”-, : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: ,’
    ……………| : : : : : : : : :_ : : : : : : : : : : ,-‘
    ……………|: : : : : : : : : : ”’~———-~”
    …………._|: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 😐
    ……….„-”. ‘-,_: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ,’
    ……,-”. . . . . ”’~-„_: : : : : : : : : : : : :,-”’-„

  12. A few thoughts. Presidential elections are mostly about the economy, unless it really drops in the toilet, the incumbent party will keep it (Democratic). Also, demographic changes are working against the Republicans. For example, in 2006, it was predicted that a Democrat would win in 2008 by 2%, and guess what happened.

    Sanders is farther along than Obama was at the same time in 2007, I expect he will get the nomination.

    To me, this strongly implied that Sanders will be the next president.

    Sander is first of all, a pragmatist. I think that there is a chance that gun owners can work to change his stance on guns, and at least keep the status quo. I don’t think it will be a major issue for him, all we need to do is make it a bit less of one than it is now.

    So, how can we do that? Donate, with a note about gun rights? Volunteer, and push from inside? Lets get going on this, he’s a lot better than most Democrats on this issue.

    At least he his willing to tell you when he disagrees with you , check out some of his speeches on youtube, perhaps the one at Liberty University (they’ve invited all declared candidates for quite some time, he’s the first Democrat to take them up on it).

    And tell my why I’m wrong, with some facts and citations please.

    • If you put any person with a Democrat party membership in any executive office, they get to choose all cabinet officers and initiate most foreign policy.

      Think about that. Another Dem controlling the DOJ and therefore the ATF. No Garands from South Korea because that’s international trade, or lifting the trade restrictions for guns with Russia.

      You’re seeing one empty seat – there’s tens if not hundreds more we have to think about.

      • Sure, but are we talking Republican politics, or guns? I’m only talking about the Presidency and guns. If it’s a Democrat, and it probably will be, Sanders is far and away the best choice. Otherwise, push for Clinton to get the nomination, and they pray that the Republican beats her (I think she’s the weaker candidate in the general election). But, I would expect the Republican to loose.

        Remember, gun people cover a spectrum of opinions on everything else, so I am trying to avoid any other policy aspects.

        A Trump presidency would be interesting, but I’m not sure I want to find out exactly how.

    • OK, here’s two reasons why Sanders won’t be the next POTUS, barring a complete implosion on the GOP side (like a convention that produces Jeb as the nominee):

      1. Sanders’ spending plan is absolutely unrealistic, and in order to fund it, or even just a part of it, he would need to raise taxes substantially. Where has Sanders been talking about raising taxes? Oh, that’s right, on the richest DNC constituency there is, Wall Street:

      https://berniesanders.com/issues/reforming-wall-street/

      The transaction tax would effectively end HFT. That’s a big profit center for several investment banks. The attack on bonuses will drive Wall Streeters insane, and his ideas of about reforming the Fed would pull the bailout rug from beneath their feet. Oh, and as of this past weekend’s debate, Sanders is saying that he would lock Goldman Sachs out of his cabinet. That was a huge applause line in the debate.

      Result? Wall Street is going to work very hard to see Sanders fail.

      Now, the irony is that I agree with many of Sanders’ perspectives about Wall Street and the Fed. I might differ in a few solutions, but I wholly and completely agree with him that they’re a group of frauds and thieves.

      2. Sanders’ posture and motions aren’t those of a leader. People take a lot of cues from body language, and for observations about this, I defer to my wife, who has proven herself highly astute in this regard.

      Her observation about Sanders in this past debate was that “the way he stands, the way he moves, the way he speaks … none of it says ‘presidential material.’ ” O’Malley looked/moved more like a POTUS, she said, but what comes out of his mouth is USDA Grade-A nonsense. She also noticed that Hillary is now wall-eyed – her right eye looks to her right of where her left eye is looking. We stopped the DVR a dozen times to look at this, and my wife has it nailed. Hillary does have a problem with her eyes.

      Talking to a couple of women who also saw the DNC debate, they had issues with Sanders too. Sanders just didn’t give them confidence. They agree with him (these were Democratic women), but they said “he is just missing something.”

      • >> Result? Wall Street is going to work very hard to see Sanders fail.

        Ironically, that might be exactly the thing that will make him succeed.

        >> Sanders’ posture and motions aren’t those of a leader.

        I would suggest looking past the debates, and seeing videos of some of the gatherings of pro-Sanders crowd where he gives his speeches. Plenty of fire there. I think keeping it out from the debate is intentional, because what you see as “posture of a leader” from a right-wing perspective may well be perceived negatively on the left.

    • One thing that Bernie has demonstrated is that he’s willing to talk seriously just about anything and to anyone, no matter how distant they might be politically. I mean, what other liberal candidate has given a talk at the Liberty University, specifically prefacing it with: “I believe from the bottom of my heart that it is vitally important for those us who hold different views to be able to engage in a civil discourse .. It is easy to go out and talk to people who agree with you … It is is harder, but not less important, to try to communicate with those who do not agree with us on every issue.”

      With that in mind, gun rights org should call Bernie out for a debate on the subject. But I do hope they’ll have some smart, educated people for that, and not just Wayne LaPierre.

  13. Everyone needs to realize this: No matter what party you are, there will be a democratic nomination no matter what. I’d rather see the republican nominee go against Bernie Sanders than chance it with Hillary. I think the election will be close, and i do not want to chance it going to Hillary. So I suggest republicans show some support to Bernie to ensure he gets the dem nom.

  14. Lets see here. Martin O’Malley is the Mayor of a city that has the highest murder count since 1990 in a country that has the lowest homicide rate in 30 years. Bernie Sanders is a politician at the core and has shown he will say whatever it takes to get elected, including put his values on the bench to keep his seat. Both are participating in simple pandering through sound bites.

    http://www.inquisitr.com/2568965/baltimore-homicides-top-300-riot-riddled-citys-death-count-surges-to-cross-a-sad-milestone/

    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-talks-gun-control-calls-assault-weapon-ban-n442351

  15. O’Malley stumbles on the messaging switch, almost saying “Gun Control” but catches himself and says “Gun Safety”

    Real gun safety legislation would have a Drivers Ed like course in schools that teach safe gun handling, marksmanship, and uses like self defense, hunting and sport.

  16. Take a step back, and look at the panel of un-electable dolts in that debate that the Democrats have surrounded Hillary with. The exception is Webb, who should be a Republican and is by far the most qualified of all the candidates to be President. It was, and always was in the bag for Hillary 2008. That election spun out of control with a legitimate, albeit tragic groundswell for Obama. I can remember Jay Severin, a conservative radio host in the Boston area talking about her pathway to the Presidency in the late 90s /early 2000s and how it was inevitable. I thought he was nuts.

    The only hope is that Hillary gets indicted. There is no doubt the FBI has a hard on for the Clinton’s after “file gate”. Will Obama’s DOJ indict Clinton over email National security violations? If not, then she will be the President. BTW, if any regular person did what Hillary did they would already be in Leavenworth serving 10 years.

  17. O’Malley is a turd of epic proportions. His policies were so popular that Maryland, hardly a bastion of conservative politics, elected a Republican governor instead of his hand-picked successor. His ‘gun control’ legislation is among the worst garbage ever dumped on US citizens, surpassed only by NY, CT, CA, and MA. He manages to make an avowed Socialist look like a viable alternative, which is pretty sad.

  18. Sanders is a weird case: A Jewish guy from NYC who moves to Vermont and swindles the people with his progressive policies, but doesn’t have an iota to take them. I’d expect a NY Jew to want to ban and confiscate everything down to slingshot.

    Maybe it’s the maple syrup that sweetens even the most sour of NYC minds.

  19. Bernie sanders has never supported the 2nd amendment. If anyone has video of sanders saying he Does post it. Sanders has said he voted they way he did because ” the old rural people of Vermont like guns”. That is not a support statement for liberty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *