Will I Be Welcomed Here?
Just want to ask before I do much posting here. I have been a member of GunBroker for many years and I have bought several rifles and shotguns from this site. However, I doubt if even 1% of the people on this forum will agree with me on politics. I am a liberal and vote for Democrats, am a union member and I have never seen a problem concerning my political beliefs and my gun owning and shooting hobby. I am a former gold medalist in the 55 and over age group Florida State Games skeet shooting division and I currently shoot center fire rifles every Friday morning at the local range. I have a couple of liberal friends at the range also and I get along fine with the conservatives there. So, can I take part in political discussions here and offer my liberal slant on things, or will I be crucified?
xvigauge
xvigauge
0
-
Why is it that, every time we have a mass shooting, the first thing out of the progressives' pie hole is "we-need-common-sense-laws-to-keep-guns-out-of-the-hands-of-criminals."
Fortunately there are a large majority of the 535 clowns in the Capitol Building zoo that want to be re-elected, and who know that more emotional knee-jerk reactions to a tragedy are not the way to make that happen.0 -
What honest liberals do not understand is the government is lying to them to get them and everyone else to go along with what the Government wants but the government is lying. It only wants power and when it gets enough it will crack down on liberals and conservatives. NO ONE will escape the coming totalitarianism. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by varsity07840
Come on people, let's get past all the rhetoric and get down to reality. Since 2008 the gun lobby has preached the gospel that
Obama is going to take your guns. Well, it's 2015 and I still have mine and unless you're a bad guy, which you all say that you're not, then you all have yours. Why is it that every time we have a mass shooting , the gun lobby goes on the defensive and says that
The incident is another opportunity for gun rights people to take guns away? History tells us that after decades of gun violence that it's never happened. In fact, in a number of states, gun rights, relative to carry have been enhanced.
So far, I haven't seen a fact, argument, or even the hint of a rational thought from either you, Oh Two Post Wonder, or the other new arrival.
What you have done is summarily dismiss the comments and discussion points made by others, and both have posted a circumstance, i.e. we still have our guns, as some sort of existential proof that no effort has been, or is being, made to change that circumstance. That a circumstance exists, in no way in and if itself, proves that no one is trying to change it. Which means that you are no better at debate that the 16 Shades of English visitor.
Frankly, what I see so far is a better than even chance that the 'two' of you are in fact one unit, and even better odds that 'both' of you are nothing more than the latest version of the leftist trolls who play hit & run on websites all over the InterWeb.0 -
I didnt read all the post but when I sawr this I quit and am posting.
" Can't have too many liberals."
we have to many in politics0 -
Given his in-depth and numerous posts supporting his liberal position, I see no choice but to give up and join the cause. After all it's all about feelings, isn't it? Or perhaps not! Or better said... Hell no!!!
When will we finally come together and agree that the hardware of violence is not the cause? A kitchen drawer full of knives is about as deadly an arsenal as a cabinet full of guns. And it's unlocked and pretty much available to any hand that reaches in. Failing the kitchen knife there's always a hammer or screwdriver.
Only when we as a civilized nation begin to understand that criminals commit crimes and must be dealt with irregardless of race or religion will we have any chance of getting back on track. Only when our educational system begins to educate and demand accountability from students can we reasonably hope for a change.
Then parenting. Before either of the above have any chance we need to begin to teach and demand good parenting from our population. This may even include the word "God" which I know is abhorrent to many of our liberal friends. After all, invoking His word and teaching His laws runs counter to the freedoms guaranteed to us by our Constitution at least in their minds. Heaven forbid we enforce His laws.
Which, if true, raises another issue. If our Constitution guarantees a right to live any way one pleases with no consequences (It doesn't), then why would a liberal possibly care if we on the other side armed up with machine guns?
Or is it that there isn't room for two sides in the liberal mindset? I find this very strange considering the definition of "liberal" seems to be quite different from the reality. But what do I know? I'm just a simple country boy with little education. How could I possibly hold even a semi intelligent conversation with an educated liberal? How could my values be worth consideration?0 -
quote:Originally posted by xvigauge
quote:Originally posted by Rocklobster
IMO, the idea that one can truthfully claim to be a firearms enthusiast and supporter of the Second Amendment while being comfortable with supporting those who openly call for civilian disarmament reinforces the theory that liberalism is a mental disorder.
It is a treatable condition, however.
I may have a mental disorder, but liberalism is not it. I believe that those in power do NOT call for "openly civilian disarmament." They may want to invoke certain gun laws that may make it safer for all Americans and I see nothing wrong with that. I have been following the gun law evolution since I was 12 years old. I even wrote a research paper on it when I was in the 7th grade. I am now 64 and have a Master's Degree in English, and I have still been able to buy, sell, own , shoot, and reload with no problems. But, there are other issues and being a gun owner and shooter does not mean that I have to automatically take a conservative stance on those issues and support a party that constantly works against the American working man.
xvigauge
I am curious as to which gun laws that 'make it safer for all Americans' you support.
Also, the statement that you can buy sell, etc. with no problem is fairly meaningless.
Does being forced to petition government for permission to purchase a firearm comport with a Constitutional right to own and carry firearms?
Does a governmental assumption of the power to select which people can own and carry firearms comport with that Constitutional right?
Does a governmental assumption of the power to select which types of weapons its citizens can own and carry comport with that right?
Does a governmental assumption of the power to license people and register weapons comport with that right?
While it may be true that government is operating with the agreement of a majority of the citizens in the above power grabs, can we allow that government these powers absent a proper change to the 2nd Amendment?
In my opinion, this is the dividing line between the two major philosophies of government we face. One philosophy will seek to promote their ideas of how to protect the majority from the minority, regardless of whether or not it is Constitutionally supported. The other will seek to protect the rights of a minority from the mob mentality that is the democratically based actions of that majority.
In short, we do not need a Constitution to protect the majority. We need it today more than ever to protect us from that majority.0 -
I have a feeling these two guys may be done. Or if not, perhaps they will become like two others that swing through occasionally, throw out the Democratic Underground Talking Points of the Day, take their spanking, then go crawl back under the baseboards. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by xvigauge
Just want to ask before I do much posting here. I have been a member of GunBroker for many years and I have bought several rifles and shotguns from this site. However, I doubt if even 1% of the people on this forum will agree with me on politics. I am a liberal and vote for Democrats, am a union member and I have never seen a problem concerning my political beliefs and my gun owning and shooting hobby. I am a former gold medalist in the 55 and over age group Florida State Games skeet shooting division and I currently shoot center fire rifles every Friday morning at the local range. I have a couple of liberal friends at the range also and I get along fine with the conservatives there. So, can I take part in political discussions here and offer my liberal slant on things, or will I be crucified?
xvigauge
Well the short answer is NO.
But you brought up guns and liberalism on GunBroker.com/forums.
But if we just stick to politics and leave the gun rights issue for another forum:
"I am a liberal and vote for Democrats"
Why?
What would your positions on these issues be?
Pro choice?
favor public funding of abortions?
For or against voter ID?
Is the National Debt equal to GDP a problem?
Is declining/stagnate GDP a problem?
Open borders?
I am just interested in perspective.
I consider myself an originalist.0 -
Very difficult to have a debate where one side has nothing but personal feelings to bring to the table. Debates don't work that way.
I noted that 16 Gauge was welcomed and never condemned by an obviously conservative majority here. Not one of us was impolite. The fact is that we as a group seemed to wish to learn. Sadly, we got feelings rather than solid facts to back his position.
Is it reasonable to wonder if the gap between liberal and conservative is now so great that it cannot be bridged? What is so obvious to us seems incomprehensible to the liberal camp and the same in reverse for them.
The fact that we can't bring our differences to each other and reach common ground is worrisome. Wars have started for less cause and it's not a portent of good things to come if we can't talk to each other.0 -
It is much deeper than a liberal vs conservative point of view Nord. It is a fundamental mindset difference. For some reason liberal/Progressives can't see that granting more power to government has never ended well in the 5,000 year history of human governments.
Only almost unlimited individual freedoms, coupled with individual responsibility to society assures humans avoid bondage. By giving government more power it creates a monster. Strangely, we see that now right before our very eyes, almost unlimited power, zero accountability and ever growing rules and regulations to control it all.
Progressives can not argue points, they lose every time because they FEEL rather than think logically. Couple that with expecting governments to actually do something good except feed its own power and you have what you see here posted by avowed liberals; smarmy comments lacking any substance and void of facts.0 -
Bpost,
I'm well aware. I'm also deeply concerned about the depth of our differences. My hope is that there is still some common ground but I doubt it more ever passing day.0 -
Bpost and Nord,
You are both on the correct path. You and I are willing to allow the progressives to live their lives as they choose. Conversely, they want to allow us to live our lives as they choose. And they seem blind to the difference.
I think they are simply wrong on many points, politically, socially, culturally, intellectually.
They think I am simply evil.
I am at a loss to see how the disconnect between those two attitudes ends well. But end it will, and I like my odds.0 -
Liberals can only hope that granting of power to a central government will not result in total government and a police state. And they are stupid enough to leave it up to hope. 0 -
....it comes down to states rights....What Mass. wants,does not mean what 'Bama wants...its called traditional values...Having an English Degree doesn't mean your right..My son has one, but has a "Tavor"...which if the degree has any bareing, he would turn it into a plow shear...16 Gauge, welcome to absurdity...long live your pointless reason for posting... a change in scenery is always welcome....I have some reservations about the validity of all are nothing firarm regs, but its like anything else,we are all human.and the agreed to disagree rule is invoked...[:o)] There is no way you can espouse Liberal Values , and promote yourself to act in favor of firearm freedoms...Welcome to the "grinder".... 0 -
quote:Originally posted by varsity07840
Come on people, let's get past all the rhetoric and get down to reality. Since 2008 the gun lobby has preached the gospel that
Obama is going to take your guns. Well, it's 2015 and I still have mine and unless you're a bad guy, which you all say that you're not, then you all have yours. Why is it that every time we have a mass shooting , the gun lobby goes on the defensive and says that
The incident is another opportunity for gun rights people to take guns away? History tells us that after decades of gun violence that it's never happened. In fact, in a number of states, gun rights, relative to carry have been enhanced.
New York SAFE Act ring any bells?
A direct result of Sandy Hook.
My state has instituted universal background checks, eliminated FTF sales as a result of Sandy Hook and other incidents.
Other states have put in place additional restrictive laws because of these incidents, so yes, there is concrete evidence that the left will use these incidents to restrict ownership rights. Interestingly, all of the weapons purchased for these shootings have been done using the NICS system. The recent shooting in Charleston is unique, of course in that the 3 day delay acceptance portion of the NICS system was implemented.
Obama has recently stated that one of his main regrets is that he was unable implement common sense gun control laws at the national level.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by varsity07840
Come on people, let's get past all the rhetoric and get down to reality. Since 2008 the gun lobby has preached the gospel that
Obama is going to take your guns. Well, it's 2015 and I still have mine and unless you're a bad guy, which you all say that you're not, then you all have yours. Why is it that every time we have a mass shooting , the gun lobby goes on the defensive and says that
The incident is another opportunity for gun rights people to take guns away? History tells us that after decades of gun violence that it's never happened. In fact, in a number of states, gun rights, relative to carry have been enhanced.
New York SAFE Act ring any bells?
A direct result of Sandy Hook.
My state has instituted universal backggun rights, relative to carry have been enhancedround checks, eliminated FTF sales as a result of Sandy Hook and other incidents.
Other states have put in place additional restrictive laws because of these incidents, so yes, there is concrete evidence that the left will use these incidents to restrict ownership rights. Interestingly, all of the weapons purchased for these shootings have been done using the NICS system. The recent shooting in Charleston is unique, of course in that the 3 day delay acceptance portion of the NICS system was implemented.
Obama has recently stated that one of his main regrets is that he was unable implement common sense gun control laws at the national level.
+100
And I will take the easy one!
"gun rights, relative to carry have been enhanced"
And this is over the vocal objection of the Liberal/Democrats.
Mainly in RED States.
(ref. Texas open carry)0 -
Maybe when up is down and down is up. Until then, pretty sure the answer is no. The country is too divided, people are too stubborn, white folks are terrified, both parties are bought and paid for. It's much easier on the blood pressure to just lurk and read. Good luck. 0 -
I simply do not get it. You quote Feinstein word for word, lamenting that she could not get enough votes to confiscate all firearms, quote the President saying outright that he doesn't believe anyone should be allowed to have a gun, and its "out of context?"
Anyone with a seventh-grade education can read the particulars of the UN "Small Arms Treaty" recently signed by John Kerry "on the behalf of the American people" (feh) and heartily endorsed by the President and most of the other Democrats.
I realize that it has no teeth unless ratified by the Senate, but the principle of the idea that our so-called leaders would support such a thing, and the progressives say "no one is calling for civilian disarmament," and slide right up to a ballot box and vote for these traitors?
No. I just don;t get it. [V]0 -
See... Your problem is that you don't have feelings![;)] 0 -
i would wager 99.9% of those in favor of banning firearms have never been the victim of any sort of crime or personal assault...and truly believe that law enforcement will immediately answer a 911 call for help and save the day.....to many tv shows 0 -
quote:Originally posted by nord
See... Your problem is that you don't have feelings![;)]
Feelings. Nothing more than Feelings. Wo Wo Wo Feelings....
[;)][:D]0 -
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/07/29/california-lawmakers-send-defiant-message-to-nra-after-taking-major-action-on-gun-control/
Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously on Tuesday to make it illegal to be in possession of high-capacity ammo magazines, likely setting up a new Second Amendment battle in the Golden State.
After passing the measure with a 12-0 vote, Councilman Paul Krekorian reportedly challenged the National Rifle Association.
"If the NRA wants to sue us over this, bring it on." he said.
Even though California law already prohibits the manufacturing of high-capacity magazines, lawmakers argued the so-called "loophole" that allowed people to own them has become a public safety issue amid recent shootings.
People who own magazines that hold more than 10 rounds will have 60 days from the time the law goes into effect to destroy, legally sell or surrender them. Violators will face a misdemeanor charge, The Los Angeles Times reported.
In a statement released on Tuesday, the NRA urged Los Angeles officials to start enforcing federal gun laws before passing new gun control measures.
"Instead of passing new bans that criminals ignore and prosecutors neglect-while leaving good, law-abiding citizens disarmed-maybe Los Angeles should improve its shameful record as one of the worst cities in the U.S.when it comes to enforcing existing federal gun laws against criminals," the gun rights group said.
It wasn't immediately clear if the NRA planned to fight the magazine ban via the legal system.0 -
LA is a Sanctuary City.
It will impose laws upon its citizens but will not enforce them upon its illegal residents.
Is there any way we can trigger the 'Big One'?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
LA is a Sanctuary City.
It will impose laws upon its citizens but will not enforce them upon its illegal residents.
Is there any way we can trigger the 'Big One'?
We could only hope. OOPS is that hateful or mean spirited?
Wait, we could ask Bush. If he could steer a hurricane perhaps he has the code.0 -
Has anyone noticed the original self declared liberal poster is long gone from this thread? 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
55 comments