Guns and debate

[Boats]

What a load of crap, which is EXACTLY why political discussions don't belong on these boards...

Feel free to PM me if you can't explain in public how you DON'T enable gun grabbers, or get their judicial appointments on the federal benches to undermine gun rights, or bureaucratic appointees into office to run the BATFE, and other insults to gun rights large and small. I'm very patient and willing to hear you out. I'll even publicly apologize if you convince me I am wrong.

 

[capdek]

Well-said Boats!

 

[raftman]

Feel free to PM me if you can't explain in public how you DON'T enable gun grabbers, or get their judicial appointments on the federal benches to undermine gun rights, or bureaucratic appointees into office to run the BATFE, and other insults to gun rights large and small. I'm very patient and willing to hear you out. I'll even publicly apologize if you convince me I am wrong.

Sounds like black and white thinking, in that it suggests those left-of-center are invariably bad for gun rights, and are un-American, and those right-of-center are the opposite. It's kind of like saying, "You are free to believe as you wish, as long as you believe what I want you to."

FWIW, there's plenty of egregious examples of conservatives that have been very un-American and doing great harm to gun rights. There's an article the details some examples.

Here's some key quotes:

In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. "Guns are an abomination," Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."

It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."

It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street."

One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.

Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation's strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.

Full article:

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/issue11/dont_blame_liberals.htm

The article is a bit dated, so I suppose one could add that the New Orleans confiscation occurred on Bush Jr's watch.

You don't have to look that hard to find other examples.

What's my point? Being a conservative doesn't guarantee one is somehow a truer American, or someone that knows and loves the Constitution, and a liberal isn't always someone who doesn't. Not even when it comes to the issue of gun rights,

 

[ZeroRing]

This is a forum about firearms, not politics (unless they relate to firearms). I can only imagine how many more flame wars there would be here if we discussed general politics.

There are other political fourms out there...

^^^
This is why


Many of us come from differing religious or political backgrounds, and such issues usually just always cause "flaming" between users. (I have yet to see a political or religious debate on a forum remain civilized and without flaming)

These arguments eventually drive us apart, when we should be united for one cause, firearms and the 2nd amendment.

Post fixed!

And as the thread continues to stray it thus provides the very evidence that supports the reason for the rule in the first place!!

 

[ZachS]

And as the thread continues to stray it thus provides the very evidence that supports the reason for the rule in the first place!!

Perhaps at an appropriate time, it should be locked, made into a sticky, and the title changed to "Why we only allow firearm-related political discussion".

 

[Cougfan2]

Perhaps at an appropriate time, it should be locked, made into a sticky, and the title changed to "Why we only allow firearm-related political discussion".

And the winner is........

 

[Boats]

I have done alot of reading and I got to say that is a perfect descrition of the situation. Best I have read in years. Mind if I borrow your words and post them elsewhere??

Thanks

jj

Feel free to use them with attribution.

 

[bugeye]

Here we go, another inspirational message from the uber moon-bat side .......

Yeap, more proof! And this is totally reprsentative of the quality of the debate too. The old moon-bat argument.

 

[Boats]

Sounds like black and white thinking, in that it suggests those left-of-center are invariably bad for gun rights, and are un-American, and those right-of-center are the opposite. It's kind of like saying, "You are free to believe as you wish, as long as you believe what I want you to."

FWIW, there's plenty of egregious examples of conservatives that have been very un-American and doing great harm to gun rights. There's an article the details some examples.

Here's some key quotes:











Full article:

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/issue11/dont_blame_liberals.htm

The article is a bit dated, so I suppose one could add that the New Orleans confiscation occurred on Bush Jr's watch.

You don't have to look that hard to find other examples.

What's my point? Being a conservative doesn't guarantee one is somehow a truer American, or someone that knows and loves the Constitution, and a liberal isn't always someone who doesn't. Not even when it comes to the issue of gun rights,

You are really going to set these milquetoast notions, proposals, and scattered instances of minor gun control stupidity against the NFA, the GCA, the AWB, DC's handgun ban, Chicago's handgun ban, Illinois FOID card, California's "Safe Handgun Act" a raft of liberal jurists, four of whom consistently vote against gun rights on the Supreme Court of the United States, and the continual reelection of people like Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Dick Durbin, and even our own anti-gun clown Ginny Burdick?

Really? You need to rethink how comparatives are done. It is not "black and white" thinking to suggest that your vote is not, and perhaps has never been, where your mouth is.

 

[bugeye]

Feel free to PM me if you can't explain in public how you DON'T enable gun grabbers, or get their judicial appointments on the federal benches to undermine gun rights, or bureaucratic appointees into office to run the BATFE, and other insults to gun rights large and small. I'm very patient and willing to hear you out. I'll even publicly apologize if you convince me I am wrong.

Your crazy belief that one party won't come for your guns is just plain nuts. You folks are like the low lying fruit, easy to pick up with a few key words. If you don't get that betrayal is basic to all politics you really don't get politics at all.

 

[Boats]

Your crazy belief that one party won't come for your guns is just plain nuts. You folks are like the low lying fruit, easy to pick up with a few key words. If you don't get that betrayal is basic to all politics you really don't get politics at all.

If that makes you feel better about your traitorous voting proclivities so be it. Conservatives vote out their own gun controllers like Bush I when they show themselves.

You guys give yours lifelong careers in politics no matter how egregious the assault on your gun rights is.

The communists called that type of "player" a "useful idiot." You sympathize with the forces of evil and expect some sort of respect for it from the gun grabbers? Or kid gloved understanding from far more unstinting defenders of gun rights than yourselves? Go figure.

 

[Chee-to]

Yeap, more proof! And this is totally reprsentative of the quality of the debate too. The old moon-bat argument.

Absolute proof, moon-bat is what moon-bat does

 

[Gunner3456]

I don't discriminate. I hate everyone.

 

[bugeye]

If that makes you feel better about your traitorous voting proclivities so be it. Conservatives vote out their own gun controllers like Bush I when they show themselves.

You guys give yours lifelong careers in politics no matter how egregious the assault on your gun rights is.

The communists called that type of "player" a "useful idiot." You sympathize with the forces of evil and expect some sort of respect for it from the gun grabbers? Or kid gloved understanding from far more unstinting defenders of gun rights than yourselves? Go figure.

Any jerk can say he loves Jesus and Guns and gets about 25% of the vote, that is picking up the low lying fruit. You are people of one issue, like that is the only thing on the table. We have more amendments than the 2nd, and we have a hundred major real problems not related to guns, sheesh. I'm willing to back someone who is soft (not anti) on the 2nd if they support the others and have reasonable plans for fixing our problems, because it's easier to work on someone over the 2nd then it is to work on them over nearly everything else.

Why don't you transcend your single bit binary universe and come and join the sane people in the real world.

 

[Boats]

Any jerk can say he loves Jesus and Guns and gets about 25% of the vote, that is picking up the low lying fruit. You are people of one issue, like that is the only thing on the table.

There isn't a Democrat alive whom I would vote for. I am not a single issue voter, I am a voter who doesn't appreciate being lied to on an issue of major importance to me. Democrats lie about supporting gun rights continuously. Even the so-called "firm" ones are there backing antis in leadership positions and confirming political appointees without complaint, so they are liars.

We have more amendments than the 2nd, and we have a hundred major real problems not related to guns, sheesh.

Name one other "amendment" as you put it, where there's a dime's worth of difference in the approaches of the parties. The "Patriot Act" was bipartisan and just renewed by the Chicago gangster and his congressional rubber stampers. As to the "hundred major real problems" you'll have to detail which one of those is so important as to continually betray gun rights over.

I'm willing to back someone who is soft (not anti) on the 2nd if they support the others and have reasonable plans for fixing our problems, because it's easier to work on someone over the 2nd then it is to work on them over nearly everything else.

Well could you have been any more mealy mouthed than that? By working with those who are "soft" on gun rights, you are empowering antis. It should be as plain as the nose on your face, but you choose to be blind about it.

Do you ever think Wyden, or the union puppet Merkley, or the twin Senate bimbos up in Washington State would ever put a "hold" on one of the One's judicial appointments for having a clear anti-gun track record? I don't. You aren't "working with" any of these jackasses who pay lip service to you, rather you are simply shrugging off being ignored on the gun rights topic.

If I am "low hanging fruit" to use your fruity metaphor, you aren't even really on the tree, being a gun rights vegetable and all.

Why don't you transcend your single bit binary universe and come and join the sane people in the real world.

Why would I join sell-outs, because you found it so easy?

 

[goneshooting]

 

[PhysicsGuy]

This entire thread is proof as to why that rule is there

 

[goneshooting]

you can quote me


Internet was created so we can rant, rave and stand on our soap boxes and never actually get anything accomplished.

 

[SSG]

Raftman has it right..

If everyone can, for five minutes just look at the facts, in a calm, logical fashion...and stop 'talking sides' because it feels good to be a conservative, or your just being a sheep dog follower that needs buddies...you might see what's really going on..

Regan abolished concealed carrying CA
Bush Sr did the assault weapons ban
Arnold has put in laws, you just won't believe....
Where is the NRA, asleep?

Conservatives for less taxes and smaller govt? What's 'small' about Regan's Trillion $ runnup for 'star wars', or Bush's biggest military buildup...ever...massive debt, that put us in this mess...

Now...what has Obama done? Nothing so far, but maybe he's messing with the ammo supply, not sure, and can't be proved...I do know that under his watch, the supreme court, actualy made a decision that the 2nd ammendment means individual gun rights, not the militia crap...

Clinton?...ten round magazine requirement. that's..that's his claim to fame...and the economy was going pretty good..

So if your whinning about he economy?...blame the Republicans, that allowed for a bank/stock market free for all, with no one watching......bubbleguming because you can't get that Streetsweeper, AK, ect...blame Bush....

The reason I don't vote is because you average voter, is...well...stupid, uninformed and just wants to get along with others...and he will think what they think so that he feels accepted....why bother...

 

[goneshooting]

"They got to keep US separated"


Lets all drop the politics and talk about guns

Whats better a Glock or 1911