ASHINGTON, Sept. 9 — Senator Jean Carnahan, the Missouri Democrat, pulled out her 20-gauge Browning Citori shotgun the other day and fired off a few rounds as part of a skeet-shoot benefit for a home state research center.
In Alaska, Lt. Gov. Fran Ulmer, the Democratic candidate for governor and owner of a permit to carry a concealed weapon, went gun shopping in July with reporters in tow. Ms. Ulmer, who owns eight firearms, mostly rifles, told The Anchorage Daily News that she needed something to make her feel safe on the campaign trail — and that she did not own anything small enough to fit in her purse.
In New Mexico, Bill Richardson, the Democratic candidate for governor, was a member of the Clinton cabinet and former ambassador to the United Nations. Although his voting record in Congress was generally pro-gun, his association with the antigun Clinton administration is enough to worry the gun lobby. Anticipating such concern, Mr. Richardson is marketing himself as "the choice for New Mexico gun owners and sportsmen."
These Democrats and others nationwide are well aware that gun owners cost Al Gore crucial votes in a handful of states in the 2000 presidential election, including Tennessee, his home state. They are also aware that Mark Warner, a Democrat who was elected governor of Virginia in 2001, neutralized the gun issue in his campaign by reassuring white male voters in rural areas that he did not want to take their guns.
As a result, many candidates this year are eagerly emulating the Warner model. Across the country and across party lines, candidates — many of whom are running on a big day of primaries on Tuesday — are supplicants to their pro-gun-rights constituents. They may not be advancing the agenda of the National Rifle Association, but they do not want to alienate the powerful gun lobby. Rather, they are trying to inoculate themselves against the N.R.A.'s Election Day forces.
The association endured organizational problems in the 1990's but has since rebuilt its fund-raising and remains an important force in the Republican Party.
Now, Democrats are so eager for the gun lobby's endorsement that the rifle association is involved in three times as many Democratic primaries this year as it was during the 2000 elections, said Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the association.
Gun control advocates concede that some candidates need to assuage their constituents who own guns. But, they argue, that does not reflect the sentiment in most of the country.
"There is no question that candidates running in rural areas — Democrats and Republicans — find themselves forced to cater to the gun lobby," said Michael Barnes, a former Democratic representative from Maryland and now president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, formerly Handgun Control. "And you've got such a pro-gun administration — Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft are all so extreme on the issue — that there's more focus on it."
But, Mr. Barnes cautioned, "the N.R.A. is running against the tide of demography in the United States."
Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, countered: "There's been a sea change on this issue since the 2000 election. Democrats are running away from gun control like the plague, and we are just not being attacked. If they're not agreeing with us, they're silent. They're either looking for the N.R.A. endorsement or they're making sure the N.R.A. doesn't do anything against them."
The rifle association will not endorse candidates until late October. But it is leaning toward giving its blessing to more Democrats than ever before.
"Because more Democrats are restructuring their position, that may happen," Mr. Arulanandam said. "But our endorsement process is fairly rigid. We're concerned that we might have a lot of fair-weather friends. These people are obviously paying attention to the changing political winds and right now everyone is currying favor with the N.R.A., but will they be there when something bad happens and we need their vote?"
Mr. Barnes said Democrats for gun control needed to hold their ground.
"Democratic members of Congress might be saying the party has to focus on rural white males, but my response to that is, if you believe the future of American politics is winning the votes of rural white males, you're crazy," he said. "The future is the suburbs, especially women."
The affluent suburbs of big cities are still among the most reliably antigun strongholds in the country. In suburban Maryland, all five candidates — four Democrats and the Republican incumbent — for the House support gun control. Mark K. Shriver and Christopher Van Hollen Jr., both Democrats, are each running television commercials declaiming their antigun credentials; the winner of their Sept. 10 primary will face Representative Constance A. Morella, a Republican who is already advertising the fact that she has been endorsed by the Brady Campaign.
Such jousting in the suburbs, however, seems to be the exception.
Not far from Ms. Morella's suburban Maryland district is a rural House district where Representative Wayne T. Gilchrest, a six-term moderate Republican, is being challenged by a conservative Republican in the Sept. 10 primary. Mr. Gilchrest is running commercials calling himself a "Marine hero, longtime N.R.A. member who understands the need to protect our Second Amendment rights." (Officials from the gun lobby say Mr. Gilchrest joined their organization only in June.)
In Tennessee, where Mr. Gore lost in 2000 to George W. Bush by 47 percent to 51 percent, several Democratic candidates are similarly casting themselves as the sportsman's friend. These include Lincoln Davis, running for the House seat where Mr. Gore began his political career. He has the backing of the former vice president and the gun lobby.
Steve Rosenthal, political director of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., said that in 2000 the labor movement was "extremely antsy" about the gun issue because the gun lobby was making inroads with union members based on their cultural affiliation with guns.
"We had to say, `It's not about guns; it's about your family's economic security,' " Mr. Rosenthal said. "And we'd say, `Gore doesn't want to take away your gun, but Bush wants to take away your union.'
"In places where we took them head-on, we won," he said, adding that 58 percent of union members who own guns voted for Mr. Gore, while 37 percent voted for Mr. Bush.
This year, Mr. Rosenthal said, "our folks are encouraging candidates to keep the spotlight off the gun issue."
This season, gun control has vanished from the Democrats' agenda on Capitol Hill. The Senate and the House have bills that would give gun makers federal immunity against civil lawsuits, but analysts predict there will not be any votes on major gun legislation before the election.
