Bush/Cheney bumper sticker sent man into road rage

" You don't have to compromise with the most ridiculous people, like Feinstein. But you do need to find middle ground.

You're still unclear on the concept, Handy. There *is* no middle ground with people like Feinstein. She has said, in plain language, that she wants to ban all privately owned firearms. "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in." She is a United States Senator. She will continue to get elected until the cows come home, and she will never stop introducing gun control legislation.

"CWL are a big compromise, but one we gun owners have embraced. I assume, Tim, that you would not "appease" anyone by getting one."

I have no idea what you're talking about here, but for your information California is a "may issue" state. That means that most people cannot get concealed carry permits under any circumstances. But that's a perfect example of my point. If the gun-grabbers made a deal like "OK, we'll ban 50BMG rifles, but we'll give you 'must-issue'", then that would be a compromise. But the gun-grabbers never compromise; they only take.

Tim
 
Tim, you don't seem to be following. As I already specifically noted with her, Feinstein is an example of the kind of person that you don't bother with. But many of the people she "represents" don't take things to her extreme - those are the people to talk to.


The CWL example was not intended for CA, if that is where you are. It was intended to give an example of the US wide compromise that many gun owners have either made, or would like to. It sounds like you would like to make this compromise as well, if only CA would license YOU to practice your "rights". ;)
 
"As I already specifically noted with her, Feinstein is an example of the kind of person that you don't bother with. "

You *have to* bother with her. She's a US Senator.

Tim
 
Why would you even consider compromising with a person or group of people who, on a daily basis, willfully and knowingly violate their oath to uphold the Constitution. To say that you don't have to deal with them is akin to the story about denying that there is a elephant in the room. Feinstien, Shumer, Clinton, Boxer, Kennedy, Byrd, Kerry, McCain, Lautenberg, Warner and many, many others do need to be dealt with because they won't be satisfied until there is no more private, legal firearm ownership in the US.

Snack...
The allegation in your post regarding alleged reponsibility for the 9/11 attacks is, at best, ignorant of the facts.
 
No, you don't have to deal with her. She didn't get the Assault Weapon ban renewed, she doesn't control anything more than her vote. The Harry Reids of the world can easily ignore her ilk, and will if there is reason to. Offer support for other issues and they will.


The BEST way of winning support for the 2A is to deemphasize it as a Democrat/Republican issue. When it is no longer platform issue the Feinsteins and Schumers lose even more power.

Treating any liberal as a monster acheives the opposite, strengthening the opposition.
 
snacktrack,

If I may, we need to put this to bed:

especially ironically since they are the ones who allowed the 9/11 attack on us in the first place.
Click to expand...

This happened 9 months into GWB's first term. It has been documented that the terrorist don't do things without alot of planning. If one MUST put blame on someone, then put blame on the first attack of the World Trade Center, in 1993, and under Who's watch?.

Under who's watch was the attack on the USS Cole?

Before they were fired, who appointed those in our intelligence agencies that FAILED to either brief or do anything against the plans of the terrorist? I say that the blame is of both parties, moreso on the democrat party then the republican. You can't appease these people and that is what most liberals wish to do, they have already said so.

I am not a republican, I am an independent. I have vast disagreements with both sides of the isle. I consider myself as more tolerate then "liberals" say of themselves, and less patient with those who wish to impose their "rights" over others.

Personally, I fear the "liberal" side more then I do the "conservative" side. Since I don't fall into either catagory, I guess that I could be harmed by either side, but I find myself more aware in the presence of "liberals" then the other, just experiences.

To let pure emotion run your thinking is what makes our fight, for gun ownership and Rights, so hard. This emotion and pure hatered is being shown here so therefore everyone is getting an insight of what the anti's use to devoid or take our Rights. And I'm speaking of both "sides", not just one or the other. Hate is not a good thing, nothing but bad will come from it.

This is what we need to overcome. Hey, I can honestly say that I didn't vote for Clinton, I didn't like most of his policies. But I can say that I didn't hate the man. I didn't have such a burning hatered that it consumed my soul to blame him for any harm that the world suffered. Heck, I'd gotten more hand signed (not pre signed or stamped) letters back from him when I had issues with the policies that he enacted. I will give him that, he did personally respond to the people then GB Sr. and GB Jr. ever had. We both came to the conclusion that we would agree, to disagree.

My main point of this post is this, I highly doubt that the terrorist that pulled off the WTC decided overnight what their plan would be. That this plan was in the process for years, not 9 months, not one day, not one week. If you ever go to flight training school, it takes over a year to train and get your creditials to fly an aircraft, not 9 months. And, we knew that the WTC was a target as far back as 1993, so please, don't lay this blame at Bush's feet because it wasn't started or done only on his watch...

Wayne
 
The same irrationally violent mindset that causes some misguided folks on the left to damage or destroy the property of conservatives, threaten them and disrupt or deny civil discourse with or among them is present in those senators and representatives that strive to forbid legal firearm ownership in this country.

They failed to pass an AWB extension because they WERE dealt with and effectively repudiated. No one compromised. No one kowtowed, yet they remain undeterred.

Demonstrating to the world the depth of their desire to strip our Constitutional rights from us is PARAMOUNT in fighting these folks. They are, in fact, the enemy and any quibbling about the danger that they pose and the lengths that they will go to to achieve their ends IS tantamount to appeasement.
 
You don't have to compromise with the most ridiculous people, like Feinstein. But you do need to find middle ground.
Click to expand...
I'll leave the middle ground to those who are without conviction. I refuse to appease those who want to compromise my rights... even if they only want to compromise them a little bit.
As I already specifically noted with her, Feinstein is an example of the kind of person that you don't bother with.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of people that don't need to be "bothered" with or who can safely be ignored (they often occupy middle ground BTW) but U.S. Senators aren't among them. :rolleyes:
 
Unfortunately, with issues as polarized as they have become, the power is in the 'middle ground'. For good or ill these folks NEED to be courted and brought into the fold. In a 45 - 45 split, it's the 10% in the middle that hold all the trumps. They can't be ignored.
 
G,

That's exactly what I'm talking about. If someone is mildly anti-gun, and our rhetoric labels them as "filthy traitors", they have NO reason to shift.
 
I'm sorry, Handy. Mildly anti - gun just doesn't compute. It's like being mildly anti free speech, mildly anti freedom of assembly, mildly anti secure in our personal belongings, etc. It's simply a non starter for me. Half measures will not convince folks that we are in earnest about maintaining and defending our rights. No one ever learned a thing from touching a luke warm burner, but touch one that's red hot; that's another story. We may run off as many as we get to join. That's ok, its still a relatively free country. The middle must be prostheletized, not in an irrational, crazed or wild eyed sense...but with a passion that helps convince them that ours is the true path.
Anyone whittling away 2A rights is the enemy and does not deserve anyones support.
 
G, you voted for an administration that is rather "mild" on several rights issues, including being mildly anti-speedy trial. This is the pot calling the kettle black. Gun rights are not the only ones getting stomped on, and not one party is doing it.
 
Both the Republicans and the Democrats wipe their asses with the Bill of Rights; they just use different amendments for toilet paper. Trouble is, between the people on both sides of the aisle, there's not too much left of the BoR that hasn't been mangled and defiled.
 
Parties

Conservative and liberal are very much misused.
A conservative wishes to conserve, that is to save and protect, a liberal wishes to be liberal[ free of major restraints].
The current regime is fascist, before you get upset, read the definition of "Fascist", the opposition is socio- communist , again read the definitions.
The ideal is a republicanist, some one who supports the constitution and the constitutional laws, not a democrat, some one who supports majority, that is , mob rule.
I do not support either party, both have recently sent me a letter that was a pack of bald faced lies, both thanked me for my past financial support, I have never given 1c to either party, both thanked me for voting for their candidate, I voted Libertarian, and both thanked me for my active and continuing support, another lie, as I do not support either party now or in any foreseeable future.
Pols who put out such stupid letters should have keepers, preferably in white coats.
Don :rolleyes:
 
Handy makes the most sense here to me. Wholesale bad mouthing of ~1/3 of the population turns off a lot of the people in the middle third, too. Plus, you are attacking fellow gun owners who are liberals and may agree with you on the issue, why insult them? I "sell" gun rights to anybody I feel can be influenced. Those of you who indulge yourselves in name calling are one of the major impediments to influencing others to support our cause.
No thanks to you for doing so.
Marko, crudely put, but dead on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top