Liberal gun owners need to educate your fellow libs!

[usagi]

this thread seems to be mostly mental masturbation, lacking any real content.

alienating category of gun owners by constructing a strawman representation of it and gleefully attacking isn't productive, though it may be emotionally satisfying. it does not help the cause.

i've found the best way to "educate" anti gunners - conservative and liberal alike - is to take them shooting. a lot of it comes from fear of the unknown. most of them just need first hand experience to get over it and understand a firearm as a tool, an inanimate object like any other tool. and not a fearsome monster that might jump out from the shadows at any moment and start eating children.

some of them will never be convinced, but in my experience most just need a little nudge to get over the intimidation factor. i've brought lots of people over. you just have to stop painting people with a prejudiced opinion of what they "must" be and treat them as a student to be taught -- not a caricature to be made fun of or demeaned. a great way to get someone to ignore you is to sneer at them.

a lot of them don't understand that law enforcement is under no legal obligation to protect you. a lot of them believe law enforcement is required by law to come to your aid when requested. that alone can be an eye opener for some.

 

[AMProducts]

Hey guys, I think it's fairly important to remember that "liberal" is exactly what these people are not.

The fathers (yes, fathers, I know paternalistic) were John Locke, David Hume, Rousseau and all those who believed that the freedom of the individual was best protected by a minimalist state.

All of these "liberals" are actually something else, unfortunately they don't realize it's just re-branded trotskyist communism. I suppose "liberalism" has a better ring to it.

It's rather funny... in mixed company, I like to introduce myself as a liberal when politics start coming up, and then make people cry when I tell them they're not liberal enough because they've never read the anti-federalist papers, the road to serfdom, or anything by von misses.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

I think your miss-identifying these PPL. Conservatives support the BOR. It is possible to be fiscally conservative, even socially consertivive and still be a Progressive Commi/fascist

Even people who ID themselves as Conservatives can be swayed by the barrage of anti-gun sentiment after Sandy Hook. Especially if they are not "gun people" in the first place. Also peer pressure is fierce in parts of Oregon. Some might just agree to get along.

 

[Koda]

my anecdotal experience with liberal gun owners is they are just blind to the fact that there is a huge movement to take away their guns. Most of them are not assault gun owners so they don't see that as an issue, maybe they hunt, maybe they own 1 pistol for home defense.... but they are not gun enthusiasts so they don't think about it day to day. What they don't see is that is just the beginning.
They 'claim' to support our constitutional rights, so my tactic lately has been to highlight the issues of violations to the law abiding citizens... like the many gun owners in Connecticut that now have to either give up their rights, or become a felon... they have never committed a crime. That should be an eye opener to anyone on any side of the fence.

 

[U201491]

If those statement help you justify the progressive 2A onslaught glad if works for you. Their are some republican progressives also you named 2 and there are many more. At this point in time you can't name one Repbulican state that is implementing gun control like the onslaught of progressive states currently taking there states gun rights away. So go ahead and get your sleep while the rest of us deal with the 90% of the threat while you dream of the 10% problem.

The ones taking freedom may call themselves republicans but there is no way that is what they are except for the label. They are Rinos. Demos in drag. Turncoat traitors committing fraud on the people when they run under the republican banner. It should be called what it is. Fraud, a felony, nothing less.
They essentially steal the vote from the people that thought they were electing a real republican.

 

[Jim Colvill]

. Most of them are not assault gun owners so they don't see that as an issue, maybe they hunt, maybe they own 1 pistol for home defense.... but they are not gun enthusiasts so they don't think about it day to day. What they don't see is that is just the beginning.

How many assault guns do any of us own?

These generalizations, erroneous assumptions and vehement name-calling is why you will never get "libtard gun owners" on board with you even though they support the Second Amendment.

Just my $.02

 

[Bacchus]

before anyone forgets. james brady is a republican. arnold is a republican.

if you really believe republican representatives won't sell out gun owners in a millisecond if they think they could profit from it, you are only fooling yourself.

keep whining about liberals though. ignoring the real threat -- gun grabbers are in all political parties.

I copied this from another gun web site:


Assault Weapons Ban
U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote
H.R. 3355. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. August 25, 1994

Passed by a vote of 61-38

Republicans vote for/against: 7/36; 16% FOR
Democrats vote for/against: 54/2; 96% FOR

89% of the FOR votes were cast by the Democrats.


Brady Bill
U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote
H.R. 1025. Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act Federal Firearms License Reform Act of 1993. November 20, 1993

Passed by a vote of 63-36

Republicans vote for/against: 16/28; 36% FOR
Democrats vote for/against: 47/8; 85% FOR

75% of the FOR votes were cast by the Democrats.


Commerce in Arms
U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote
S.397. Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. July 26, 2005

Passed by a vote of 66-32

Republicans vote for/against: 53/1; 98% FOR
Democrats vote for/against: 13/30; 30% FOR

97% of the AGAINST votes were cast by the Democrats.

This last vote data and calculations do not include the one senator who voted as Independent.

Some of the Democrats voting No on this issue are the headlining members of the Gun Control Hall of Shame: Joe Biden, Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer.

Don't even try and tell me the two parties are the same.

 

[Asp]

So being their portland selves, they went on the inform me that any real lib was anti-gun. So, for those libs in here, please make your voice heard louder and louder to convince your fellow libs that it's not the tool, it's the operator that causes harm, and most of all, your views of the 2A, and how you support it.
Thanks

A real liberal would tell you or your wife to get a divorce, so you can live in a gun-free home. If they were real liberals they would tell you to your face that you are stupid for having guns and that you have a small pee pee.

BUT that's what "real (post-cold war) liberals" would say.

I'm neither.
But I think you and your wife need to divorce yourselves from having friends who are going to judge you (two as a team) for being you.

Find new friends or divorce your wife.

 

[BAMCIS]

You're right DMax. I think it's hard to convince a Union guy or a low/no wager to vote against their wallet vs. gun rights. Short term Santa delivers all right but sooner or later his bag is going to get empty! I gave up talking to anyone who I.Ds themselves as progressive or Dem or lib for the most part. If I do happen to find myself in a conversation with one who will listen (hah!) then I try to get the point across about one lost election won't put a dent in the goodies they're getting under current management.
If they bring up Rino Republican gun grabber exceptions or think it's healthy to keep voting one party in year after year I tell them to look how that worked out for Ca.! and I ain't just talking guns.

Add Detroit to that too........

 

[Koda]

How many assault guns do any of us own?

These generalizations, erroneous assumptions and vehement name-calling is why you will never get "libtard gun owners" on board with you even though they support the Second Amendment.

Just my $.02

I didnt call anyone names and everyone knows what an assault rifle is now regardless if its an incorrect name.

 

[Mikej]

this thread seems to be mostly mental masturbation, lacking any real content.

alienating category of gun owners by constructing a strawman representation of it and gleefully attacking isn't productive, though it may be emotionally satisfying. it does not help the cause.

i've found the best way to "educate" anti gunners - conservative and liberal alike - is to take them shooting. a lot of it comes from fear of the unknown. most of them just need first hand experience to get over it and understand a firearm as a tool, an inanimate object like any other tool. and not a fearsome monster that might jump out from the shadows at any moment and start eating children.

some of them will never be convinced, but in my experience most just need a little nudge to get over the intimidation factor. i've brought lots of people over. you just have to stop painting people with a prejudiced opinion of what they "must" be and treat them as a student to be taught -- not a caricature to be made fun of or demeaned. a great way to get someone to ignore you is to sneer at them.

a lot of them don't understand that law enforcement is under no legal obligation to protect you. a lot of them believe law enforcement is required by law to come to your aid when requested. that alone can be an eye opener for some.

I appreciate your effort. I would also expect you too to learn to leave these threads alone, as many others have done.

Thanks for trying though!

"Mental Masturbation" Har Har.....

Mike

 

[BAMCIS]

Its like trying to call a 2012 Honda Accord a muscle car cause it can go 100mph.

But it is a muscle car if it has fart pipes!

 

[Koda]

Salted Weapon, I agree with everything you said about using the term "assault weapon"..... I should have put the quotes around the word in my post back there.

 

[2506]

Except when you go to actual senate voting record and you see HR 3355 passed 95 to 4 with 1 abstention. No votes were split evenly between the two parties, the abstention was a Democrat.
U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote .

 

[Bacchus]

HR 3355 is not a gun bill, judging by the "Measure" description.

 

[2506]

HR 3355 is not a gun bill, judging by the "Measure" description.

It was officially an amendment to The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968--not a gun bill prima facie, but look at the portion of the bill listed as TITLE XI--FIREARMS

 

[fd15k]

It was officially an amendment to The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968--not a gun bill prima facie, but look at the portion of the bill listed as TITLE XI--FIREARMS

Also there is this :

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, H.R. 3355, Pub.L. 103–322 (commonly referred to as the Assault Weapons Ban even though only parts of it technically qualified), is an act of Congress dealing with crime and law enforcement that became law in 1994.

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bacchus]

It was officially an amendment to The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968--not a gun bill prima facie, but look at the portion of the bill listed as TITLE XI--FIREARMS

Oh, you're right; I even referenced 3355 in thread post 51.

Your link shows a Senate vote that took place Nov 19, 1993, and passed 95 to 4. My link is the same bill voted on again on Aug 25, 1994, which passed 61 to 38, with most of the Republicans voting against. I don't know why it was voted on twice; did something get added ?

 

[2506]

Oh, you're right; I even referenced 3355 in thread post 51.

Your link shows a Senate vote that took place Nov 19, 1993, and passed 95 to 4. My link is the same bill voted on again on Aug 25, 1994, which passed 61 to 38, with most of the Republicans voting against. I don't know why it was voted on twice; did something get added ?

I think my link showed the original bill passing 94 to 4; your link showed the following year's amendment passing 61-38. Recall, that in 93 when the original gun control bill passed nobody was up for reelection--1994, however, was a different story as seen in your link. What this shows you, I think, is that they're more worried about re-election than anything else. Nobody will remember they were for the bill before they were against it, right?

 

[2506]

O.K. So, what is the point your are trying to make?
I'm a little slow on the uptake, and do not understand

My point was that it looks like a bill about safe streets and crime control, when in fact it was the assault weapons ban. The section I listed outlines everything e-vil that the bill made illegal, if you want to read the actual text it's maddening.