Guns and debate

[Boats]

Problem is, you used the word treason, a word with an accepted legal definition. In fact, it's defined in the Constitution itself. You may not agree with a viewpoint, you may hate it with a passion, but that doesn't make it treason.

I never used the word treason. I used the words traitor or traitorous, both of which have a time honored history of colloquial use outside of the legal system.

There's two things wrong with your charges and accusations. First off, you assume I vote liberal, and second off, is your utterly nonsensical presumption that one can't be both a 2A supporter and left of center at the same time. Wrong on both counts.

Since you are the only one even picking up the gauntlet, I am treating your position as the liberal one. Even when bearing their standard for them, whatever your motivations, you are coming up short.

But I guess, to get to core issue... your question is basically "How can someone call themselves a 2A supporter and liberal at the same time?"

Well... for starters they can vote against local and statewide gun control measures.

These concerns are not tremendously realistic in Oregon outside of Portland and Eugene.

They can contact their local leaders and representatives with their concerns. They help can educate fellow citizens of the importance of gun rights. They can be active in pro-gun organizations. They can also vote for pro-gun candidates, even if said candidates are with the Democratic party. There's far more of those than you seem to realize, like the Blue Dog folks, for example.

Aye and here's the rub. They can vote for "Blue Dogs" all they want and then those dogs go and kowtow to the most rabid antis in the land. Not on easy votes against high profile cases like in the aftermath of Columbine. Since their AWB debacle, the Dems don't twist arms on votes like that.

The erosive action is their capitulation behind the scenes. It's in the judicial appointments that go unchallenged in the Senate. It's in the restoration of funding to the CDC to treat guns a a public health problem. It's in not challenging the Obama State Department over international small arms treaty initiatives that could cut off imported ammo and dry up the C&R mil-surp firearms market. It's insidious, odious, and it goes totally unchecked by any of these so called "Blue Dogs" from within their own caucus.

As far as what I actually believe. I think partisan lines are sheer stupidity. The Founding Fathers knew it, seems like most people these days don't.

Where'd you go to school? The founders knew that human nature was to form factions. They had fractured themselves over the Articles of Confederation and formed into Federalist and Antifederalist factions. They set up the Constitution to delay and obstruct factions running amok. Arising out of that original schism was the Bill of Rights, to put certain topics out of the reach of a tyrannical majority in Congress or an overreaching executive branch.

One of these is the gun rights enshrined, not granted by, the Second Amendment. Who's done the majority of the undermining of this Amendment over the course of federal constitutional history? It ain't the conservatives.

*SNIP*

 

[ZeroRing]

Okay, this thread started out one way and then quickly descended into examples of the very reason there are RULES here "discouraging" political sniping and flaming. I had hoped that the tone would change but since it's obvious that it hasn't I'm shutting it down.