National Anarchists and Guns

[Ownerus]

Thanks for the memories
Semper Fi!

 

[bbbass]

I don't think it's possible to have a gun site without some political discussions - that's what impact our rights, so it's unavoidable. That said, it's entirely possible to have political discussions that don't have to devolve into simple name calling. That's not a discussion - that's how you avoid a discussion. Some folks just can't handle doing these things without constant name calling. It will always be that way, unfortunately.

Okay, but is applying labels name calling? I mean, we ALL know that there are insulting words and references to people/groups as well as the usual cusswords. Is saying somebody, one outside our membership, is a lefty, name calling? Now, it's different if you and I are having a discussion and I say something like "well, you're just a leftist hack"... that's an obvious ad hominem attack. But saying that Pelosi is pushing a leftist agenda, or that AOC is a fool... could be somebody's feelings might get hurt by identification/association, eh?

 

[CamoDeafie]

Both majority parties seem to wish to use State and Federal government agents/agencies to control, restrict, or eliminate rights that are not in line with their respective platforms.

What option is there for gun owners, and for individual liberty to remind the Fed Govt that they are in power only by the People's consent?

What is it going to take to wake up, and realize that right, left, of the Statist System is not for individual liberty?

Does it really matter, if both sides wish to use Federal and State agencies/agents/powers to control the free exercise of the enumerated, recognized rights of the people?

I say yes. When it is framed as either being for State/Fed ruling over the People, or being against that and being called an anarchist...

How does one balance absolute freedom and liberty of gun ownership, with the desire to use absolute governmental controls to punish and restrict opposing views/beliefs?

 

[DuneHopper]

Okay, but is applying labels name calling? I mean, we ALL know that there are insulting words and references to people/groups as well as the usual cusswords. Is saying somebody, one outside our membership, is a lefty, name calling? Now, it's different if you and I are having a discussion and I say something like "well, you're just a leftist hack"... that's an obvious ad hominem attack. But saying that Pelosi is pushing a leftist agenda, or that AOC is a fool... could be somebody's feelings might get hurt by identification/association, eh?

We must understand the opposition plays by no moral induced rules, just us. Obvious when you look at the peaceful Rally in Salem, and the Riots in Portland. Rabbit hole we are all going down. No idea why the thread got a warning, I saw no one arguing or insults. Just posting the cause and effects is all I saw. I could be wrong Anifta could have been some Christian Choir boys beating the crap outta a reporter and a senior. LOL. I'll go with that so no one gets offended. Damn choir boys always bashing windows and burning cars.

Happy 4th All.

 

[DuneHopper]

Both majority parties seem to wish to use State and Federal government agents/agencies to control, restrict, or eliminate rights that are not in line with their respective platforms.

What option is there for gun owners, and for individual liberty to remind the Fed Govt that they are in power only by the People's consent?

What is it going to take to wake up, and realize that right, left, of the Statist System is not for individual liberty?

Does it really matter, if both sides wish to use Federal and State agencies/agents/powers to control the free exercise of the enumerated, recognized rights of the people?

I say yes. When it is framed as either being for State/Fed ruling over the People, or being against that and being called an anarchist...

How does one balance absolute freedom and liberty of gun ownership, with the desire to use absolute governmental controls to punish and restrict opposing views/beliefs?

This is so true.

 

[billdeserthills]

Okay, but is applying labels name calling? I mean, we ALL know that there are insulting words and references to people/groups as well as the usual cusswords. Is saying somebody, one outside our membership, is a lefty, name calling? Now, it's different if you and I are having a discussion and I say something like "well, you're just a leftist hack"... that's an obvious ad hominem attack. But saying that Pelosi is pushing a leftist agenda, or that AOC is a fool... could be somebody's feelings might get hurt by identification/association, eh?

Perhaps but since Pelosi is pushing a leftist agenda & AOC is obviously a fool, so saying those things is just speaking the truth

 

[etrain16]

Okay, but is applying labels name calling? I mean, we ALL know that there are insulting words and references to people/groups as well as the usual cusswords. Is saying somebody, one outside our membership, is a lefty, name calling? Now, it's different if you and I are having a discussion and I say something like "well, you're just a leftist hack"... that's an obvious ad hominem attack. But saying that Pelosi is pushing a leftist agenda, or that AOC is a fool... could be somebody's feelings might get hurt by identification/association, eh?

Depends on who you're talking to. Some folks get really worked up over the labels. I have no problem using left and right. Where it really gets to be a problem is when "liberal" turns into "libtards" and conservatives become "nazi's" People can't seem to separate their hatred for one view and their desire to insult them ever chance they get - again, that's not discussion, it's the low road and accomplishes nothing.

Policies can be liberal or conservative, left or right. But a lot of folks aren't talking about policies, they're attacking individuals and groups with insults - that accomplishes exactly nothing. We can talk about why certain policies on the left are harmful to gun rights without insults. That type of discussion can be really valuable as we try to protect our rights. The minute insults creep in, both sides stop listening, and any hope of trying to find solutions to our issues, are gone.

 

[billdeserthills]

Thread Closure Imminent,

because speaking the truth isn't PC, even on a private forum

 

[bbbass]

Perhaps but since Pelosi is pushing a leftist agenda & AOC is obviously a fool, so saying those things is just speaking the truth

I quite agree, but one man's truth is another man's insult.

 

[billdeserthills]

I quite agree, but one man's truth is another man's insult.

Might be true but neither of them are men

 

[bbbass]

Might be true but neither of them are men

There ya go... bunch of whoosies!!! LOL

 

[bbbass]

Back to the general discussion, time to weigh in:

Are we talking anarchists in general or AntiFa (didn't click)?

I don't care if anarchists arm, as long as they are not fomenting revolution. I'm not an anti-government type overall, even tho I oppose some things govt. What I'm against is big gov, and gov run amuck. I'm libertarian, so I want to be let be.

AntiFa... go ahead and arm up... bring it on!!!

 

[DB is Here]

No idea why the thread got a warning, I saw no one arguing or insults.

They were cleaned earlier.

 

[BillyJean]

Back to the general discussion, time to weigh in:

Are we talking anarchists in general or AntiFa (didn't click)?

I don't care if anarchists arm, as long as they are not fomenting revolution. I'm not an anti-government type overall, even tho I oppose some things govt. What I'm against is big gov, and gov run amuck. I'm libertarian, so I want to be let be.

AntiFa... go ahead and arm up... bring it on!!!

The bottom line is folks don't get to call themselves Pro 2A if they're not supporting those rights for everyone.

If it's a natural right, a constitutional right, then you should have no problem with folks who are wildly different from you (or maybe not so different from you) exercising the same rights you enjoy.

It's not that complicated.

 

[DB is Here]

The bottom line is folks don't get to call themselves Pro 2A if they're not supporting those rights for everyone.

If it's a natural right, a constitutional right, then you should have no problem with folks who are wildly different from you (or maybe not so different from you) exercising the same rights you enjoy.

It's not that complicated.

 

[CLT65]

I didn't read through the whole thread, as this kind of thread just isn't really my thing anymore, but thought I'd share something I saw, as it relates to the whole right/left thing:



Yes, I know it's a bit simplistic and general, but it illustrates that there's so much more to the story than just the old right/left linear graph. I remember my dad telling me decades ago that traditional European conservatism was quite different from traditional American conservatism, because the European view nearly always tended towards statism, whereas traditionally the American view is rooted in more libertarian ideals.

I don't want to wade into any political threads, but I just thought I'd post that graph. I know it's simplistic, but it made sense to me the first time I saw it, helped me understand things I didn't really get before.

 

[Member 52301]

They were cleaned earlier.

I missed what was there - what was cleaned up.

Cate

 

[Member 52301]

My problem is these folks are being allowed to do whatever they want. Each "event" escalates and gets more violent. They need to realize they aren't the only ones around here that have an opinion. If they can't let others do as they have the right to, they shouldn't be surprised when there are consequences. These antifas want to hurt others and get this huge look if shock when someone fights back. Love that look.

^^^

This and thank you!

Cate

 

[Member 52301]

The bottom line is folks don't get to call themselves Pro 2A if they're not supporting those rights for everyone.

If it's a natural right, a constitutional right, then you should have no problem with folks who are wildly different from you (or maybe not so different from you) exercising the same rights you enjoy.

It's not that complicated.

^^^

This is true! Thank you.

Cate

 

[bbbass]

The bottom line is folks don't get to call themselves Pro 2A if they're not supporting those rights for everyone.

If it's a natural right, a constitutional right, then you should have no problem with folks who are wildly different from you (or maybe not so different from you) exercising the same rights you enjoy.

It's not that complicated.

Preaching to the choir? Enjoy...

I didn't read through the whole thread, as this kind of thread just isn't really my thing anymore, but thought I'd share something I saw, as it relates to the whole right/left thing:

View attachment 597126

Yes, I know it's a bit simplistic and general, but it illustrates that there's so much more to the story than just the old right/left linear graph. I remember my dad telling me decades ago that traditional European conservatism was quite different from traditional American conservatism, because the European view nearly always tended towards statism, whereas traditionally the American view is rooted in more libertarian ideals.

I don't want to wade into any political threads, but I just thought I'd post that graph. I know it's simplistic, but it made sense to me the first time I saw it, helped me understand things I didn't really get before.

I like it! Tho I'm a bit uncomfortable seeing fascism on the conservative side. Historically maybe, but now I'm seeing a lot of fascism coming from the other side. The high handed push of this year's OR supermajority immediately comes to mind.