Political correctness

M

MrGunaholic

Inactive
Does anyone think political correctness is holding law abiding citizens back from expressing their 1st and 2nd amendment rights? What I mean is; it seems like in the past couple years, political correctness has really become a big thing. We are lead by a man who has giving harsh criticism to the people who are questioning him and his party calls those debaters racists for even bringing up those arguments. Gun-owners, it seems like to me, have all been grouped together in a "blood thirsty" clan of sorts. Can we ever get past the political correctness and be more of what our founding fathers invisioned the country to be, rather then the dream our current president has?

Just wondering what the opinion of the forum is.
 
Welcome to The Firing Line, MrGunaholic!

The "Language War," as I've come to think of it, is a useful topic in today's political climate. In response to your post:
MrGunaholic said:
Gun-owners, it seems like to me, have all been grouped together in a "blood thirsty" clan of sorts.
Click to expand...
I would both agree and disagree. On the one hand, we have all sort of been "grouped together," but there's more than one categorization out there. We may be, collectively, portrayed as:
1) bloodthirsty;
2) paranoid (not mutually exclusive as to #1);
3) old-fashioned and recalcitrant (sort of a "this is the modern age, we don't need the 2A any more" slant on things); or
4) as generally supporting X, Y or Z ("universal background checks" come to mind.

Interestingly, not all of those things make sense together. If we were really a paranoid, bloodthirsty group, why would the anti-gunners care if they had our support in given measures?
 
Ok im sorry!


The only example of potitical Corectness that wasnt an issue, that i can think of, was the fillibuster by Sen. Rand Paul. are there any other examples?
 
It would seem to me that the principles underlying the First Amendment to the United States Constitution run contrary to Political Correctness. Accordingly, I have asked for some years whether Political Correctness has any place in our society.
 
I think political correctness keeps at least some gun owners and advocates from expressing their pro gun views. The anti gun folks are anything but politically correct in their fierce condemnation of gun ownership. Gun owners less so, either because of political correctness or fear of being known gun advocates.
 
What is "political correctness" in this context.

Yes, we need to argue our case vigorously. But how we do it has social and political consequences of which we need to be mindful.

The key to winning our case politically will be our neighbors, the people in our communities, the people in our towns, the people we work with, the people we see at the mall, etc. If enough of our neighbors, enough of the people in our communities, enough of the people in our towns, enough of the people we work with, enough of the people we see at the mall, etc., don't like guns, and don't trust the rest of us with guns, are afraid of guns and people with guns, politicians who take anti-gun stands can get elected and re-elected (and bureaucrats who take anti-gun stands can keep their jobs).

So we need to win support to the extent possible of our neighbors, the people in our communities, the people in our towns, the people we work with, the people we see at the mall, etc. Part of doing that involves being good ambassadors for shooting and gun ownership -- dispelling the negative stereotypes many members of the public have of gun owners.

Is that political correctness or is it effective public relations?
 
" An armed society is a polite society", a quote from one of my favorite authors. I think it explains a lot of the low key gun owners.

Anyone wish to add the attribution?
 
I think most people here know the attribution. While many love to quote that line, it's worth remembering that it comes from a work of science fiction, which was set in an invented society.
 
Political correctness is when people who can lawfully carry a sidearm exposed choose not to do so because it might upset other people. And police officers in lawful open carry jurisdictions who try to arrest (or at least harass) open carriers for upsetting other people.

Political correctness is us pretending that guns aren't, first and foremost, weapons intended to kill. If we are honest, we admit that gunpowder and firearms were first invented for the purpose of waging war against other human beings, not for the purpose of making holes in pieces of paper with circles on them. But the same can be said of many other weapons. Swords were invented and developed as weapons of war. Fencing was originally nothing but practice for combat with swords. Today, however, fencing is an effete gentlemen's sport, while guns are reviled in the mainstream press.

All because of political correctness, and our losing the war of words.
 
Then there is what has become "legal" political correctness.

In many of the court cases, the courts are agreeing with the defendants (States and Cities) that keeping law-abiding citizens from carrying (openly or concealed) in public, is a public safety issue. The implied threat is that those law-abiding citizens who carry guns will indiscriminately shoot other citizens: i.e. we are common criminals if we are allowed to carry in public.
 
It seems to me initially the idea of political correctness was sort of a good thing basically an effort to protect the members of society that fell into some minority category based on demographics or ideas. However, as of late political correctness seems to have evolved into just what it initial was intended to protect us from. Now, it has become like a religion of sorts and if you don’t follow it’s accepted tenets you are considered a threat to the majority.

Now, as those of us that own firearms inch closer and closer to being a minority we are seen more and more as a threat. The frustrating thing is that the politically correct orthodoxy is that firearms owners who have never committed a crime are seen as a threat. However at the same time criminals who have actually committed a violent act with a firearm are often somehow seen as victims and their acts minimized.
 
California Vs. Idaho

Having been a Police Officer for 7 years in California I know all to well the damage political correctness can do. The politically correct values often are contrary to true Godly values. That is who we really should worry about offending! Now I live in Idaho, what a difference. California is more politically correct vet tons of Californians flee to Idaho and more "Conservative Valued States" to escape the crazy.
This is a great forum. If you're from Idaho please support our local forums on Zidaho Zidaho.com
 
I think we need to start from the source of origin. As I recall the term "political correctness" was coined by a couple of college students as a lark and a joke a couple decades back. And for what ever reasons, it became popular and well accepted and the use of it became wide spread.
So here is where I see the problem in it,s use. What perameters define the use of "political correctness". I don't think there is any valid definitions or situations in the English vocabulary that warrants the use of it to describe a condition, action, or form of expression.
If anything it is a declaration of politeness, consideration and it strongly trends towards a expression of cowardice more than anything.
Frankly I despise the use of it. I adds so dam much negativity to an expression of an opinion or thought that it just plain ticks me off to no end.

I now give up my soapbox
 
Political correctness is a contrary term. You will be correct with the side that agrees with you only.

Oh and let us not forget how many people were willing to throw the 1st amendment under the bus saying video games are too violent. They start spouting numbers of how those who play such games are more prone to violent behavior.

Many pro 2nd amendment supporters were quick to jump on the band waggon for that.

I am pro consitution period. I do not care how politicaly uncorrect that may be. When one amendment is infrenged upon they will not stop there.
 
Political correctness is a contrary term. You will be correct with the side that agrees with you only.

Oh and let us not forget how many people were willing to throw the 1st amendment under the bus saying video games are too violent. They start spouting numbers of how those who play such games are more prone to violent behavior.

Many pro 2nd amendment supporters were quick to jump on the band waggon for that.

I am pro consitution period. I do not care how politicaly uncorrect that may be. When one amendment is infrenged upon they will not stop there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, attacking the 1st to protect the second makes very little sense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Depends on what you mean by "attacking the 1st."

Pointing out the possibility of desensitization through repeated exposure to violence in the media is not attacking the 1st.

On the other hand, criminalizing speech is (in all but the most extreme cases, such as yelling "Fire!" in a theater) most definitely attacking the 1st.

Suggesting that intelligent people can't back gun rights isn't exactly an attack on the 1st, in the legal sense, but the social pressure being brought to bear by the media on this issue is an attack on the 1st, in the spirit.
 
There's tactfulness and there's political correctness. Politicians often use political correctness two mask the effects of their forked tongues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top