invention_45
New member
Actually, if they did this each person would write himself in at the voting booth.
Pro-RKBA liberals?
- Thread starter Nightflurry
- Start date
Actually, if they did this each person would write himself in at the voting booth.
Cowled_Wolfe
New member
Edison... I understand and agree that the left, the media, and many politicians are beyond the point of reasonable, factual conversation when it comes to firearms... However, still I believe those who are sitting on the fence or blissfully unaware are alot more likely to be persuaded by a rational discussion than by anything else.
If you thought I meant we need to win over the talking heads and "think of the children" crowd with rational discussion, then I'm sorry for not having made myself clearer.
Wolfe.
If you thought I meant we need to win over the talking heads and "think of the children" crowd with rational discussion, then I'm sorry for not having made myself clearer.
Wolfe.
Silver Bullet
New member
I see no conflict with Liberals being pro-RKBA; that is, real liberals.
Many of the folks calling themselves Liberals are actually anything but: Leftists, Socialists, Communists. They certainly are not pro-RKBA: it's the antithesis of their totalitarian objectives.
But the real Liberals (sometimes referred here as Classic Liberals) are probably more pro-RKBA than many (if not most) conservatives.
Many of the folks calling themselves Liberals are actually anything but: Leftists, Socialists, Communists. They certainly are not pro-RKBA: it's the antithesis of their totalitarian objectives.
But the real Liberals (sometimes referred here as Classic Liberals) are probably more pro-RKBA than many (if not most) conservatives.
Edison Carter
New member
Wolfe, I don't think that non-neurotic, non-gun people are going to be brought over to our point of view with discussion . Even people who "don't have a dog in the fight" get unreasonably resistant when you try to evangelize.
We need to dedicate ourselves to picking an educable person, drag him, or her to a range, and put a .22 in their hands, and then let them start playing with the bigger toys.
Two hours at the range should almost eliminate 2 decades of misinformation....
Don't anybody get me started on neo-cons.....
at least not til I take my drugs.
EC
We need to dedicate ourselves to picking an educable person, drag him, or her to a range, and put a .22 in their hands, and then let them start playing with the bigger toys.
Two hours at the range should almost eliminate 2 decades of misinformation....
Don't anybody get me started on neo-cons.....
at least not til I take my drugs.
EC
Welcome Nightflurry, I love libs. They keep me on my toes
Just saturday I found out a fellow Harley rider is waaaaaay out left. We yelled and argued and drank beer. Then we decided that if folks would send us to DC we could probably hammer out agreements on most issues. He's a good dude, just wrong headed
That being said, I don't understand your "tone down your rhetoric" Line. Most law abiding gun owners were just minding their own buisness when the left declared war on us. As has been stated before, they continue to lob shells at us, all the while doing thier best to convince the uninformed that we are nuts or vicious. I am made to feel like a criminal simply for carrying a gun. Buying a gun has become almost to embarassing to attempt. These are not things that gun owners brought on themselves. Tone down my rhetoric? Cease fire? NO SIR! Or as a favorite character in a classic John Wayne movie said, "I aint comin out till you say I can shoot back" ERIC
Just saturday I found out a fellow Harley rider is waaaaaay out left. We yelled and argued and drank beer. Then we decided that if folks would send us to DC we could probably hammer out agreements on most issues. He's a good dude, just wrong headed That being said, I don't understand your "tone down your rhetoric" Line. Most law abiding gun owners were just minding their own buisness when the left declared war on us. As has been stated before, they continue to lob shells at us, all the while doing thier best to convince the uninformed that we are nuts or vicious. I am made to feel like a criminal simply for carrying a gun. Buying a gun has become almost to embarassing to attempt. These are not things that gun owners brought on themselves. Tone down my rhetoric? Cease fire? NO SIR! Or as a favorite character in a classic John Wayne movie said, "I aint comin out till you say I can shoot back" ERICsteelheart
Moderator
LOL!!!
Cowled_Wolfe
New member
Edison, can you clarify on how you've evangelized in the past? I'm just curious because in the times I've tried persuading folks, things went one of three ways:
A: I went full-on into how the gun grabbers are trampling all over our rights. This got the same response as ranting about any other topic which, to the uninformed, seemingly has no impact on their lives. End result? They get annoyed that you're ranting at them, and you represent gun owners as whiners.
B: A few times, I've tried being rational -- but at the same time, I made it readily obvious that I was a gun nut. Guns = good, rights = good... You should try it sometime too! Etc... Well unfourtunately, it's just like an infomercial -- lots of great info, viewpoints that make sence, and no decent interaction... Therefore, lack of interest and failure. (This, by the way, is what I'd consider evangelizing... Hence why I'd like a little clarification on how you've tried.)
C: The way that's worked for me is to get a good conversation going. Ask what their views are, find out why they hold those views... Make them think, but not too hard -- afterall, it's probably something they've never really considered before... Eventually, being friendly and respectful will get you milage... Before ya know it, you can ask them about going to the range without them wondering what you're up to (
)...
It's friendly, rational discussion with an upbeat tone vs. options A and B that's worked for me...
Of course, despite our differences in opinion on how to persuade folks, it's nice to see we can agree on one thing: A range trip is a great way to get a fence-sitter in on the action and over to our side.
Cheers,
Wolfe.
(EDIT: I forgot option D... It's sort of like A, but worse... Taking the approach that probably seems most scarey to someone on the fence: Spewing rhetoric and such. Nugent's "Kill 'em all!" (in reference to criminals) is definately inspiring to those of us who're on the gun side of the fence, but it's not the best way to convey yourself as a reasonable person. The two times I tried persuading with concepts like that, it didn't just get things nowhere -- it actually sent things backward.
)
A: I went full-on into how the gun grabbers are trampling all over our rights. This got the same response as ranting about any other topic which, to the uninformed, seemingly has no impact on their lives. End result? They get annoyed that you're ranting at them, and you represent gun owners as whiners.
B: A few times, I've tried being rational -- but at the same time, I made it readily obvious that I was a gun nut. Guns = good, rights = good... You should try it sometime too! Etc... Well unfourtunately, it's just like an infomercial -- lots of great info, viewpoints that make sence, and no decent interaction... Therefore, lack of interest and failure. (This, by the way, is what I'd consider evangelizing... Hence why I'd like a little clarification on how you've tried.)
C: The way that's worked for me is to get a good conversation going. Ask what their views are, find out why they hold those views... Make them think, but not too hard -- afterall, it's probably something they've never really considered before... Eventually, being friendly and respectful will get you milage... Before ya know it, you can ask them about going to the range without them wondering what you're up to (
)...It's friendly, rational discussion with an upbeat tone vs. options A and B that's worked for me...
Of course, despite our differences in opinion on how to persuade folks, it's nice to see we can agree on one thing: A range trip is a great way to get a fence-sitter in on the action and over to our side.
Cheers,
Wolfe.
(EDIT: I forgot option D... It's sort of like A, but worse... Taking the approach that probably seems most scarey to someone on the fence: Spewing rhetoric and such. Nugent's "Kill 'em all!" (in reference to criminals) is definately inspiring to those of us who're on the gun side of the fence, but it's not the best way to convey yourself as a reasonable person. The two times I tried persuading with concepts like that, it didn't just get things nowhere -- it actually sent things backward.
)Nightflurry
Inactive
Yes, I agree Wolfe. I've been around some people who were very uncomfortable with guns and uneasy about me owning them. After a little work and a trip to the range they usually end up buying them.
Also, I've noticed something just in the last few weeks; a lot of closet cases with gun people. I've mentioned my interest to a few friends of friends these last few weeks and their eyes light up. Right now I've got 2 gun virgins and 1 guy who hasn't touched one in a long time with a raincheck on a rangetrip with me.
Hell, one of my best friends was a total gun-o-phobe. He also has about 30 acres of woods. I persuaded him to let me bring up a few rifles, assuring him that if he didn't like shooting that I'd pack them up and never bring them again. Now..admittatly an 8mm Mauser was probably a bad choice to give someone who's never shot before, but he won't LET me come up now if I don't bring at least one gun.
So definatly, getting someone to a range will almost always alter their perceptions once they realize that they won't turn into a serial killer when they pull the trigger.
Also, I've noticed something just in the last few weeks; a lot of closet cases with gun people. I've mentioned my interest to a few friends of friends these last few weeks and their eyes light up. Right now I've got 2 gun virgins and 1 guy who hasn't touched one in a long time with a raincheck on a rangetrip with me.
Hell, one of my best friends was a total gun-o-phobe. He also has about 30 acres of woods. I persuaded him to let me bring up a few rifles, assuring him that if he didn't like shooting that I'd pack them up and never bring them again. Now..admittatly an 8mm Mauser was probably a bad choice to give someone who's never shot before, but he won't LET me come up now if I don't bring at least one gun.
So definatly, getting someone to a range will almost always alter their perceptions once they realize that they won't turn into a serial killer when they pull the trigger.
Edison Carter
New member
Yea Wolfe, I did A, I did B....
No Joy.
I took my ex wife shooting with my first pistol which was a 1911.....
ONCE..... ( can't start somebody with a .45 and expect em to dig it )
I got a .22 and took a couple friends and that worked much better.
I haven't even tried to make conversation with people since I purged myself of my Milwaukee East sider commie-lib friends.
I moved to America and if people get wise to the fact that I carry... well, they are generally pretty cool. It's no big deal here in America.
EC
No Joy.
I took my ex wife shooting with my first pistol which was a 1911.....
ONCE..... ( can't start somebody with a .45 and expect em to dig it )
I got a .22 and took a couple friends and that worked much better.
I haven't even tried to make conversation with people since I purged myself of my Milwaukee East sider commie-lib friends.
I moved to America and if people get wise to the fact that I carry... well, they are generally pretty cool. It's no big deal here in America.
EC
Cowled_Wolfe
New member
Lol, did she manage to hit her forehead?
Mmk back to seriousness... Yeah, A and B and D (especially D) are bad ideas... I can definately see how they might turn ya away from further attempts, but sometime when you're really bored, try C if ya can. It might work, it might not... Who knows?
Cheers,
Wolfe... (Btw, was that Milwaukee, Russia?
)These three direct quotes illustrate to the 'enth degree that "liberals" just don't get it.
I'm sorry to have to be so blunt.
You believe in your right to enjoy your *hobby*, not the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms".
To liberals it's all about -need - hobby - sporting purposes, etc.
Shooting can be and is all of that.
The RKBA isn't about any of that.
The RKBA is a serious gut check.
To really believe in the RKBA means you believe even the most despicable person you know has exactly the same right to be armed as you do yourself.
To show that this is more than lip service on my part, I believe it's a travesty of the Bill of Rights that my ex wife,,,who's due to be paroled in July after serving 12 years in prison for attempted murder,, will be denied a basic human right.
So there's no misunderstanding about my feelings - I despise this woman more than I can convey in the context of good taste/forum rules.
There is no such thing as a RKBA Liberal or a Pro-Personal Freedoms Conservative. By definition, you are no longer a "Liberal" in the current political sense when you are in favor of RKBA and vice versa.
I have to heartily agree with Steelheart in post 32, neither side is capable of offering the whole package - one only protects some freedoms, the other another set.
That is partisan politics for you. If it is an issue, it must be claimed by one of the parties and the other party MUST oppose it.
That polar state of affairs is what we, the voting public, has demanded. It seems to be all we can possibly process: Every issue has only two viewpoints, and each party has to be in charge of one of them.
The gun control issue will never be "won" by either group. The pendulumn will just keep swinging as the popularity of either party waxes and wanes. The only way for gun rights (or any of the others) to get anywhere is for the politicians to ignore them. Only then can the issue work itself out in a manner that has anything to do with reality. But the harder either side pushes, the more resistance is created by their opposite.
Unfortunately, the only practical way of breaking this chain is by ignoring it in candidate platforms and voting without reference to it. The obvious risk in doing this is more than most ardent proponents can stand, but breaking the Mexican stand off and remaining in a two party system can't really happen any other way.
The result would be a message that Americans, liberal and conservative, are tired of hearing about guns, and discourage ANY bills related to them. But, like any truce, there is a period of vulnerability that would be deemed unacceptable, so I'm not holding my breath.
I have to heartily agree with Steelheart in post 32, neither side is capable of offering the whole package - one only protects some freedoms, the other another set.
That is partisan politics for you. If it is an issue, it must be claimed by one of the parties and the other party MUST oppose it.
That polar state of affairs is what we, the voting public, has demanded. It seems to be all we can possibly process: Every issue has only two viewpoints, and each party has to be in charge of one of them.
The gun control issue will never be "won" by either group. The pendulumn will just keep swinging as the popularity of either party waxes and wanes. The only way for gun rights (or any of the others) to get anywhere is for the politicians to ignore them. Only then can the issue work itself out in a manner that has anything to do with reality. But the harder either side pushes, the more resistance is created by their opposite.
Unfortunately, the only practical way of breaking this chain is by ignoring it in candidate platforms and voting without reference to it. The obvious risk in doing this is more than most ardent proponents can stand, but breaking the Mexican stand off and remaining in a two party system can't really happen any other way.
The result would be a message that Americans, liberal and conservative, are tired of hearing about guns, and discourage ANY bills related to them. But, like any truce, there is a period of vulnerability that would be deemed unacceptable, so I'm not holding my breath.
Nightflurry
Inactive
That's a pretty cheap shot Hal. Of course I used the word "I" in my post because I was talking about me. I'm very pro RKBA. I don't get restrictrions on types of guns, or restrictions of where you can carry them (except maybe the capitol or white house.. obvious things like that). I don't recall the 2nd ammendment saying I can bear arms as long as they don't fire automatically, hold a lot of bullets, or look scary.
People convicted of a violent felony? That I do have somewhat of an issue with. You forfeit a lot of rights when you try to or successfully murder someone. I've always felt that paroled felons should be given a chance for review to be able to purchase guns again. The circumstances of the crime, the degree of violence and how out of control (or in control) they were, and if they're rehabilitated should all be looked at. If the person is reformed and changed and isn't deranged then sure, allow them their guns again. I don't think it makes me bad to not want certain psychotic murderers to be able to buy weapons. Any good citizen? You bet.
I'd really be happy if some high schools began offering shooting classes or teams. That would help a lot I think with the image of guns and also teach the upcoming teens some basic respect for weapons.
Not sure why you're saying I only want me to be able to carry a gun, that'd be pretty lonely I think.
People convicted of a violent felony? That I do have somewhat of an issue with. You forfeit a lot of rights when you try to or successfully murder someone. I've always felt that paroled felons should be given a chance for review to be able to purchase guns again. The circumstances of the crime, the degree of violence and how out of control (or in control) they were, and if they're rehabilitated should all be looked at. If the person is reformed and changed and isn't deranged then sure, allow them their guns again. I don't think it makes me bad to not want certain psychotic murderers to be able to buy weapons. Any good citizen? You bet.
I'd really be happy if some high schools began offering shooting classes or teams. That would help a lot I think with the image of guns and also teach the upcoming teens some basic respect for weapons.
Not sure why you're saying I only want me to be able to carry a gun, that'd be pretty lonely I think.
Liberal, Conservative are just BS labels.
A lot of people like to use the term "politically correct" as an insult, whenever someone disagrees with their view. Political correctness goes both ways, it just depends on what side of the fence you're on. It's just another label, to lump you into one group or the other.
I think it's sad how everyone has been lumped into one group or the other like this, an unfortunate by-product of our political system, combined with our current "condense every ideology into a 10 second sound bite" that the news media has perpetuated, and politicians have taken advantage of. It allows people to take a stand on issues without forcing them to put any thought into what they're "believing" in.
We've been BS'd from both the right and the left for years, and the only defense is to think for yourself, and not accept any of these labels.
I have a lot of views that are considered to be "Liberal", but don't call myself a liberal, because I refuse to be given some label that makes people believe that I've accepted some polital party's "package deal".
.
I support human rights, the ability of any individual to be his/herself, to be free from discrimination for things that are not harming others.
I also believe everyone should be able to stand up on their own two feet and support themselves. It would be nice if everyone could do that, but some people need help with it, and for them, some compassion is in order. If that makes me liberal in some peoples eyes, than so be it.
Does that mean I'm a liberal?
But wait, I also believe that every citizen has the right to arm themselves
in defense of tyranny. So much so that in the end, I view all gun laws as irrelevant. Turn them in because some politician got a law passed? Sure!
Does that make me a conservative?
One of my best friends is a Marxist, not a "liberal" but a full fledged
Marxist. I love talking with him. I don't agree with a lot of what he says,
but he's such a good debater, that I'm forced to listen to what he says, and think about what he says.
To close this rant, I just urge everyone to think about what you believe in, don't let anyone else do it for you.
A lot of people like to use the term "politically correct" as an insult, whenever someone disagrees with their view. Political correctness goes both ways, it just depends on what side of the fence you're on. It's just another label, to lump you into one group or the other.
I think it's sad how everyone has been lumped into one group or the other like this, an unfortunate by-product of our political system, combined with our current "condense every ideology into a 10 second sound bite" that the news media has perpetuated, and politicians have taken advantage of. It allows people to take a stand on issues without forcing them to put any thought into what they're "believing" in.
We've been BS'd from both the right and the left for years, and the only defense is to think for yourself, and not accept any of these labels.
I have a lot of views that are considered to be "Liberal", but don't call myself a liberal, because I refuse to be given some label that makes people believe that I've accepted some polital party's "package deal".
.
I support human rights, the ability of any individual to be his/herself, to be free from discrimination for things that are not harming others.
I also believe everyone should be able to stand up on their own two feet and support themselves. It would be nice if everyone could do that, but some people need help with it, and for them, some compassion is in order. If that makes me liberal in some peoples eyes, than so be it.
Does that mean I'm a liberal?
But wait, I also believe that every citizen has the right to arm themselves
in defense of tyranny. So much so that in the end, I view all gun laws as irrelevant. Turn them in because some politician got a law passed? Sure!
Does that make me a conservative?
One of my best friends is a Marxist, not a "liberal" but a full fledged
Marxist. I love talking with him. I don't agree with a lot of what he says,
but he's such a good debater, that I'm forced to listen to what he says, and think about what he says.
To close this rant, I just urge everyone to think about what you believe in, don't let anyone else do it for you.
Labels
Labels are for canned goods, packaged products, and the ENEMY!!!
Both political parties are what I call Elitist. Their way or the highway, and some of them don't even want to let you take the road!
They are about people control. I am about individual control. I decide. Not them. The parties have each staked out positions on issues, and if you don't toe the party line, you won't get anywhere in the party. This is a bad thing for individualists. Unless you have enough money to thumb your nose at the party, you don't have much of a choice.
We could spend a lot of time discussing how we got here, but the only really productive discussions would be where do we go from here. Most of us would like to go back to where we were. So do I in a lot of things. Not everything about our past was bad.
Sadly, that is one thing the self labeled "Liberals" can't or won't learn. Some things in our past were bad, but not all things. Because some things were bad, they think they all were. Some of the things they want for our future are good, but not all things. But all they offer us is a take it or leave it package deal.
There may be 80 million gunowners in this country, but there aren't 80 million people committed to RKBA. Not enough to vote RKBA as their primary concern. Not until something clearly threatens them, their hobby, their sport, personally and directly. When something does, THEN they come out of the woodwork (like in 94). Until then, they are more concerned with their bank accounts, or their kids college, or what's on TV, or whatever. The people who are concerned, well, you find people like them on this website, among other places.
Labels are for canned goods, packaged products, and the ENEMY!!!
Both political parties are what I call Elitist. Their way or the highway, and some of them don't even want to let you take the road!
They are about people control. I am about individual control. I decide. Not them. The parties have each staked out positions on issues, and if you don't toe the party line, you won't get anywhere in the party. This is a bad thing for individualists. Unless you have enough money to thumb your nose at the party, you don't have much of a choice.
We could spend a lot of time discussing how we got here, but the only really productive discussions would be where do we go from here. Most of us would like to go back to where we were. So do I in a lot of things. Not everything about our past was bad.
Sadly, that is one thing the self labeled "Liberals" can't or won't learn. Some things in our past were bad, but not all things. Because some things were bad, they think they all were. Some of the things they want for our future are good, but not all things. But all they offer us is a take it or leave it package deal.
There may be 80 million gunowners in this country, but there aren't 80 million people committed to RKBA. Not enough to vote RKBA as their primary concern. Not until something clearly threatens them, their hobby, their sport, personally and directly. When something does, THEN they come out of the woodwork (like in 94). Until then, they are more concerned with their bank accounts, or their kids college, or what's on TV, or whatever. The people who are concerned, well, you find people like them on this website, among other places.
I'm a little too tired and it's a little too late for me to go off on a four-screen rant, but I did want to point out that in my experience, even if a person who is mostly liberal is pro-gun, he is still going to be voting for those liberal politicians who DO WORK FOR GUN-RIGHTS RESTRICTIONS, and that means that the person's "pro-gun-ness" doesn't count for a tinker's dam in the real world.
On the flip-side, those who truly are pro-gun will vote for pro-gun candidates even if they are on the opposite side of the fence about a good number of other issues. I, for example, don't necessarily agree with Republicans about religious issues, but I'll be damned if I'll vote for a liberal just because he's against religion in government, when I know that at the same time he'll be looking to demonize my AR-15, call my GLOCK a "semi-automatic assault pistol," and tell me I can't carry a gun legally for my own protection.
-azurefly
On the flip-side, those who truly are pro-gun will vote for pro-gun candidates even if they are on the opposite side of the fence about a good number of other issues. I, for example, don't necessarily agree with Republicans about religious issues, but I'll be damned if I'll vote for a liberal just because he's against religion in government, when I know that at the same time he'll be looking to demonize my AR-15, call my GLOCK a "semi-automatic assault pistol," and tell me I can't carry a gun legally for my own protection.
-azurefly
Nightflurry,
Cheap shot in what way?
You yourself described your interest in firearms as a "hobby" - twice.
I merely pointed out the incongruity.
As far as a middle of the road attitude some others have mentioned,,,,
my favorite story of where that gets you is the story of Isaiah Dorman......
Cheap shot in what way?
You yourself described your interest in firearms as a "hobby" - twice.
I merely pointed out the incongruity.
As far as a middle of the road attitude some others have mentioned,,,,
my favorite story of where that gets you is the story of Isaiah Dorman......
Last edited: