Liberals find comfort level in 'NPR of gun clubs'

[jcbvh]

I really dont understand how any man who hasnt been castrated or doesnt have vagina envy could be of a liberal mind set.

Politics aside, I simply dont get it.

 

[Brooklyn]

There is a laundry list, but most notably they have been against reasonable background checks and any thing that would make those background checks effective.

You can dismiss liberal gun owners at your (our) own peril. Here in MD gun owners would be extinct if the politicians didn't have to worry about pissing off the liberal gun owners and shifting the balance. But please, dismiss away.

Well then don't join the NRA. I appose background checks because they fail to pass IS. And they were never intended to do so.. They were intended to intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2a. Period.


I am done compromising. And no one is going extinct... until the $$ collapse of course. Make you a deal ---as soon as you succeed in outlawing poverty, eliminating drug use via prohibition, and solving social problems by fiat-- then we can discuss the inane presumption of making it unlawful for career criminals to break the law by getting guns on the same back market where they buy their drugs.


Feel free to vote any way you want. I am proud to stand in opposition.

42 states are going to decline to drink the liberal cyanide-- soon enough we will now how the others fair after the fall.

Best of luck with that.

 

[clandestine]

Well then don't join the NRA. I appose background checks because they fail to pass IS. And they were never intended to do so.. They were intended to intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2a. Period.


I am done compromising. And no one is going extinct... until the $$ collapse of course. Make you a deal ---as soon as you succeed in outlawing poverty, eliminating drug use via prohibition, and solving social problems by fiat-- then we can discuss the inane presumption of making it unlawful for career criminals to break the law by getting guns on the same back market where they buy their drugs.


Feel free to vote any way you want. I am proud to stand in opposition.

42 states are going to decline to drink the liberal cyanide-- soon enough we will now how the others fair after the fall.

Best of luck with that.

I agree completely.

 

[Blake_7.62]

What it boils down to is a bunch of people who are basically butt-hurt because others don't find them as awesome and enlightened as they find themselves. Not being able to accept such a blow to the ego, they blame their feelings on everybody else and decide to create their own "Super Special Club" because after all - that will show those mean, bully, conservative, gun nuts. To make it even more serious, we'll start a thread about our special group as if anyone really cares.

 

[Biggfoot44]

The Bill of Rights ( and 2A in particular ) is non-partisan. I tell the uninformed/ potential converts/ opponents/ whoever that supporting the Bill of Rights ( and 2A in particular ) does not prevent them from holding their views on other issues.

If you want to start a club for left handed people with curly hair who are between 5'7" and 5'9" , and enjoy gourmet cooking , AND like to shoot , go for it. If these San Francisco people want their own Gun Club , it's no skin off any other Gun Club.

We all know that shooters and gun owners are way more diverse ( in literal usage ) than we are portrayed. If this group getting coverage helps to loosen the sterotype , that's a positive thing.

 

[iggy]

Well then don't join the NRA. I appose background checks because they fail to pass IS. And they were never intended to do so.. They were intended to intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2a. Period.


I am done compromising. And no one is going extinct... until the $$ collapse of course. Make you a deal ---as soon as you succeed in outlawing poverty, eliminating drug use via prohibition, and solving social problems by fiat-- then we can discuss the inane presumption of making it unlawful for career criminals to break the law by getting guns on the same back market where they buy their drugs.


Feel free to vote any way you want. I am proud to stand in opposition.

42 states are going to decline to drink the liberal cyanide-- soon enough we will now how the others fair after the fall.

Best of luck with that.

You have obviously had more than a couple of sips of the NRAs koolaid.

1st, background check aren't intended to "intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2ndA". I have bought numerous guns under NICS and wasn't intimidated away from exercising my rights, I am guessing you have done similarly. Background checks are intended to prevent people who are already prohibited from owning firearms from purchasing them, period.
2nd, Conservatives are outnumbered in Maryland. Since not all conservatives are gun owners, and believe it or not some support gun control, conservative gun owners are even more outnumbered. We need all gun owners in the fight, not just the ones that agree with your vision.


the bottom line is that not all of us, even us conservative gun owners, are in lockstep with the NRA, and some of us can see that the NRAs national platform doesn't always jive with what is best for 'us' as individuals.

 

[Blackstar65]

You have obviously had more than a couple of sips of the NRAs koolaid.

1st, background check aren't intended to "intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2ndA". I have bought numerous guns under NICS and wasn't intimidated away from exercising my rights, I am guessing you have done similarly. Background checks are intended to prevent people who are already prohibited from owning firearms from purchasing them, period.
2nd, Conservatives are outnumbered in Maryland. Since not all conservatives are gun owners, and believe it or not some support gun control, conservative gun owners are even more outnumbered. We need all gun owners in the fight, not just the ones that agree with your vision.


the bottom line is that not all of us, even us conservative gun owners, are in lockstep with the NRA, and some of us can see that the NRAs national platform doesn't always jive with what is best for 'us' as individuals.

I completely agree

 

[DavidMS]

This is an intresting devide

There are two groups here, one that places gun rights as a property of being a real conservative. The other that sees gun ownership rights as being non partisan (like voting) and something any reasonable person should support (Frosh is not a reasonable person). I'm in the later group.

I plan to be in Annapolis on FEB4 and look forward to seeing everyone who believes the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own firearms, even scary looking ones.

 

[RightNYer]

You have obviously had more than a couple of sips of the NRAs koolaid.

1st, background check aren't intended to "intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2ndA". I have bought numerous guns under NICS and wasn't intimidated away from exercising my rights, I am guessing you have done similarly. Background checks are intended to prevent people who are already prohibited from owning firearms from purchasing them, period.
2nd, Conservatives are outnumbered in Maryland. Since not all conservatives are gun owners, and believe it or not some support gun control, conservative gun owners are even more outnumbered. We need all gun owners in the fight, not just the ones that agree with your vision.


the bottom line is that not all of us, even us conservative gun owners, are in lockstep with the NRA, and some of us can see that the NRAs national platform doesn't always jive with what is best for 'us' as individuals.

If that was truly the case, the DOJ would prosecute those millions of people who have lied on their 4473 form. Why? Because there's no reason to think that a career criminal who fails NICS at the store is not going to then turn to another source (the black market or straw purchaser).

 

[RightNYer]

There are two groups here, one that places gun rights as a property of being a real conservative. The other that sees gun ownership rights as being non partisan (like voting) and something any reasonable person should support (Frosh is not a reasonable person). I'm in the later group.

I plan to be in Annapolis on FEB4 and look forward to seeing everyone who believes the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own firearms, even scary looking ones.

Well, I think all reasonable people are conservatives, and that only children and unreasonable people can believe in the disease that is liberalism. What camp does that put me in?

 

[clandestine]

If that was truly the case, the DOJ would prosecute those millions of people who have lied on their 4473 form. Why? Because there's no reason to think that a career criminal who fails NICS at the store is not going to then turn to another source (the black market or straw purchaser).

You are going to ruin his Liberal Koolaide.

 

[RightNYer]

You are going to ruin his Liberal Koolaide.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Gun laws are never proposed in good faith. Their intent is ALWAYS to harass law abiding gun owners and discourage civilian gun ownership.

 

[Brooklyn]

You have obviously had more than a couple of sips of the NRAs koolaid.

1st, background check aren't intended to "intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2ndA". I have bought numerous guns under NICS and wasn't intimidated away from exercising my rights, I am guessing you have done similarly. Background checks are intended to prevent people who are already prohibited from owning firearms from purchasing them, period.
2nd, Conservatives are outnumbered in Maryland. Since not all conservatives are gun owners, and believe it or not some support gun control, conservative gun owners are even more outnumbered. We need all gun owners in the fight, not just the ones that agree with your vision.


the bottom line is that not all of us, even us conservative gun owners, are in lockstep with the NRA, and some of us can see that the NRAs national platform doesn't always jive with what is best for 'us' as individuals.

Go look up IS. And no we do not need gun owners at all. We need constitutionalists.

And I am libertarian not conservative.

There is no level of gun control that will satisfy the end state condition. Therefore there is no amount of gun control that will satisfy the left. Furthermore I prefer enemies I can trust over allies I can not. If the left held to even one compromise over the last 30 years I might look the other way ( again) .

I don't trust them. I don't trust their motives. And will not compromise.

Good luck .

 

[Benanov]

What it boils down to is a bunch of people who are basically butt-hurt because others don't find them as awesome and enlightened as they find themselves. Not being able to accept such a blow to the ego, they blame their feelings on everybody else and decide to create their own "Super Special Club" because after all - that will show those mean, bully, conservative, gun nuts. To make it even more serious, we'll start a thread about our special group as if anyone really cares.

Pretty much.

Avatar aside, I'm Libertarian, not a Liberal, and their little gun club strikes me as hopelessly silly. These people will probably figure out they're actually Libertarian or something reasonably close to it - once they get over the mental block they have.

I stay here because I find it much easier to move the 2A movement out of its stereotype than make yet another hopelessly useless splinter group where I can be "special"

Also, this cracked me up:

Hoeber's childhood love of such guns has morphed into collecting, tinkering and even making her own bullets.

Yet another journalist that doesn't know about the shoulder thing that goes up. *sigh*

 

[beretta_maven]

QFT…

This needs to be beaten into the heads of some people…

From what I've been reading on this and other threads over the past few months, I think that this is a lost cause...and that is unfortunate.

 

[kcbrown]

There is a laundry list, but most notably they have been against reasonable background checks and any thing that would make those background checks effective.

That's because background checks do not, and cannot, achieve the goal you cite below:

You have obviously had more than a couple of sips of the NRAs koolaid.

1st, background check aren't intended to "intimidate and prevent the exercise of the 2ndA". I have bought numerous guns under NICS and wasn't intimidated away from exercising my rights, I am guessing you have done similarly. Background checks are intended to prevent people who are already prohibited from owning firearms from purchasing them, period.

If they're already prohibited, then they are breaking the law by attempting to acquire a firearm. And if they intend to do harm with the firearm, then they are most certainly in violation of the law regardless. So you're dealing with someone who is intent on breaking the law.

How, exactly, are you going to prevent that person from further breaking the law in order to obtain a firearm, by (for example) going on the black market for it, or by stealing it? Said person already has the intent to break the law.

The answer, of course, is that you can't. Therefore, the only real effects background checks can possibly have are to prevent inadvertent violation of the law -- which is actually a case that is invalid here because someone who inadvertently violates the law intends no harm from it -- and to improperly prevent someone from obtaining a firearm. And the statistics back this up.

Thus, to support background checks in the face of the above is to ignore logic (which is controlling in the real world) and evidence, and to substitute for them your own provably incorrect biases.


There is but one group of people who background checks can be effective against, and it is a very narrow group: those who are unpredictably and dangerously insane, enough that they would have insufficient forethought of malice to go beyond an attempt to purchase a firearm through legal channels but who have sufficient forethought to purchase a firearm and use it afterwards. And because it is a fundamental Constitutional right we're talking about here, the only proper way to forbid such a person from acquiring a firearm in a legal manner would be through due process of law, i.e. through court adjudication where the person can challenge said prohibition.

At that point, given the false positive rate of the NICS system, it would be unconscionable to insist on imposing such a system on the entire population. Doing so would be the equivalent of imposing a background check on all who wish to buy a computer "just in case" they might be a crazed sex offender or something.


Rights are an all or nothing proposition. You either support all of them equally, or you support none of them. That's because the very same "reasoning" that can be used to nullify one of them can be used to nullify all of the others. The recent examples of NSA spying and search and seizure of your computer data at the border, both of which have thus far been upheld by the judiciary on the very same grounds that 2A claims have been denied ("public safety") should make that crystal clear to you.

 

[jpk1md]

Making potential gun owners, or even current gun owners, Fudds, etc. feel at odds with the shooting community in this state probably is not a good thing for our 2nd Amendment cause.

QFT…

This needs to be beaten into the heads of some people…

Maybe you two would care to explain how embracing people who perpetually vote for pro tyranny/anti 2a politicians actually is a good thing for 2A?

Social pressure on the other hand has a proven track record over the course of several thousands of years of human history of convincing individuals to act/behave in certain ways.......

 

[MadCat0911]

Pretty much.

Avatar aside, I'm Libertarian, not a Liberal, and their little gun club strikes me as hopelessly silly. These people will probably figure out they're actually Libertarian or something reasonably close to it - once they get over the mental block they have.

I stay here because I find it much easier to move the 2A movement out of its stereotype than make yet another hopelessly useless splinter group where I can be "special"

Also, this cracked me up:



Yet another journalist that doesn't know about the shoulder thing that goes up. *sigh*

Excuse us for wanting to have a forum where we don't see such enlightening threads such as:
"Ok I'm Gonna Pick On Liberals Now" (as if this forum ever stopped)
"Liberal Mindset Does Not Work"
"Help with my Libtard brother"

Or users with names bashing liberals, or gunsmiths being proud of their "no liberal" policies, or the like.

Yet, I'm sure if my username said something about hating "teabaggers" or if I started a posting threads about horrible "repugnicans" or the like, I'd be banned in a heartbeat.

Yeah, we got our own club. It's nice. There's no hostility there against me just for being liberal. It's not being about being butthurt, it's about not feeling like arguing with people all day long or sifting through threads debating which ones I could answer without being banned or considered trolling or the like.

 

[JosephIV]

It's not a bad thing IMO. The more responsible gun owners that we have the better. Don't let the politics and lifestyles divide us. The rules at the range don't change. If hippies in Che Gueverra shirts or same sex spouses show up I don't care. As long as they show tact, firearms safety, respect of fellow shooters, and range etiquette I'm fine and happy to have them involved in shooting sports. I'm past the point of Xenophobia, I can't afford it in this day and age where we need all of the support that we can get. Sharing this sport with others who aren't like me is not a compromise of my principles.

I don't espouse my ideals at the range and I expect the same courtesy. Nobody likes having their rights taken away. If you see a tattooed, transgendered, communist, atheist, paraplegic, albino or whatever at the range don't be afraid to talk to them. They may be "different" from your norm but you have something in common. You may end up bringing them into discussion of 2A issues that they may not otherwise get involved in. This is a chance to get more Americans on our side. I don't believe that these people would be unwilling to fight to keep their guns which is part of their "lifestyle" as much as it is a part of ours.

 

[rh92]

What is IS?