Special Interest Groups

[tongodeon]

crisper asked how conservatives would react if Barack Obama started pushing an anti-abortion legislation package or a radical roll-back of gun control. He thinks they might turn it into a right-wing scare about arming minorities and encouraging them to breed. I've got an even more cynical theory. I don't think it would change anything at all

Comments

[mister_borogove]

...for having personal preferences which allegedly "endorse" or "favor" gun restriction...

I think you misspelled "being black and a Democrat."

[ikkyu2]

Actually, there are a lot of stereotypes about black American people, but their not being in favor of gun ownership isn't exactly one of them. If anything, there is a stereotype about young black men owning a lot of guns and using them too freely.

[tongodeon]

I was once talking to someone who was citing a study about young black men who do, per capita, own a lot of guns and use them too freely. He was saying that if they're going to confiscate anyone's guns, they should confiscate the guns of young black men.

I pointed out that the same study showed that this trend decreased rapidly by age. Young black men used their guns more freely than young white men, but by the time you get to late middle age it's old white men who use their guns more freely than old black men. I suggested that we could perhaps improve the plan by confiscating young black men's guns, give them to young white men, and then when they get to middle age confiscate the guns and give them back to the now-middle-aged black people. As a middle aged white man he didn't seem to think this sounded like a good idea.

[tensegritydan]

Why isn't this a scene in a sitcom?!

I am thinking Archie Bunker vs. Meathead.

[ikkyu2]

How do you feel about the supposedly non-partisan "Gun Owners of America?"

[hwrnmnbsol]

Same story, second verse.

[substitute]

I feel about the NRA the way I feel about the ACLU. Both of them are chartered to preserve a constitutional right. Both of them end up as right- or left-wing pressure groups. It's a shame but inevitable, and it's a result of class and cultural differences that so often trump idealism.

[tensegritydan]

I disagree with your characterization of the ACLU. Of course, as a member I am biased. It is true that the ACLU more often than not supports positions shared by the left wing. But it can be argued this is simply because the left places a relatively higher value on civil liberties than the right.

Infrequently, conservatives are concerned with civil liberties. In those cases, the ACLU sides with conservatives.

As tongodeon states, the NRA *never* supports liberal positions or liberal politicians (aside from coincidental dovetailing of interests, e.g., protecting wetlands for hunters).

Likewise, the ACLU's positions are supported by a consistently high standard of legal analysis and argument. Many may not agree with their conclusions, but it is harder to challenge the level of seriousness of their efforts. The consitutional scholarship of the NRA is, of course, quite high, but when it gives arbitrary 'F' grade with no defensible justification, the seriousness and professionalism of its advocacy is open to question.

[substitute]

Points well made.

The NRA does a much worse job than the ACLU in this area. In the ACLU's case I was thinking about their extension into social justice issues which don't seem very close to constitutional civil liberties, but on reexamination most of the things that have bugged me have been initiatives by local chapters rather than the national organization.

[headlouse]

This problem occurs with any organization whose goal is an ideal, especially organizations who have antagonistic goals. Because their funding is tied to this goal their PR will always have two mouths: one side proudly stating how effective they are; and the other using fear to explain how they are now needed more than ever

[tongodeon]

This maxim applies not just to special interest groups like the NRA but also to government organizations: like the DEA, whose goal it is to get rid of drugs;

Counterexample: agencies like the Department of Energy have managed to retask themselves from power generation to weapons to developing weird antiterrorist/antiproliferation technology. Government agencies don't necessarily have to keep going back to Congress to fund the same stuff, but I agree that it happens a lot.

[headlouse]

Well yes but the Dept of Energy's goal isn't a single overarching ideal nor is it in any way antagonistic. Note the contrasting mission statements:

DOE
"The Department of Energy's overarching mission is to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States; to promote scientific and technological innovation in support of that mission; and to ensure the environmental cleanup of the national nuclear weapons complex."

DEA
"The mission of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is to enforce the controlled substances laws and regulations of the United States and bring to the criminal and civil justice system of the United States, or any other competent jurisdiction, those organizations and principal members of organizations, involved in the growing, manufacture, or distribution of controlled substances appearing in or destined for illicit traffic in the United States; and to recommend and support non-enforcement programs aimed at reducing the availability of illicit controlled substances on the domestic and

[jakeinhartsel]

When I became a life member in the NRA in 1957 there was none of this political crap. I would no join today.

As for the Right Wing Propaganda, Perception Is Everything.