the end of 2A?

[Mark75H]

The existence of the 2A makes socialism impossible because only an unarmed populace can be subjugated. Put a different way, at some point the socialists will spend enough of other people's money to make further redistribution an impractical proposition without first removing the citizen's ability to say "enough is enough".

That would be repudiation of their core democratic position and put truth to subjugation of the populace

I guess the real answer to my question would be it was when they thought they held the majority or could persuade the majority. Seems we have passed that point in their opinion. I pray it is not the case.

 

[dragonfire1911]

Sorry, those people identified as liberals, not conservative. The answers were given, and clearly met the bar.

Now I know that a lot of people are just going to carry on with "all liberals hate the 2A". I get that--which is why I almost never bother to participate in these threads. But it just doesn't hold water. Truman, with overwhelming majority in Congress, popular opinion, and at the high water mark of the liberal movement, never even considered limiting the 2A the way that current politico's are trying to do. A bit of a lesson there, imo.

Oh and here is another supportive link to my assertion--
http://www.ammoland.com/2013/06/nation-invokes-truman-for-gun-control-but-he-loved-guns-the-nra/

Now if you really believe that it is necessary to purge the state from non-believers, err, I mean Democrats, err I mean Liberals, then I am saying that you just aren't going to get anywhere this decade or the next, culture war wise.

I'd much rather see pro-2A people not to keep sticking the issue in a "Republican when we feel like it" box, but make it an every candidate issue, on both and all sides of everything.


Gundahar

I grew up in the south and there are many elected Democrats that are in no way Liberals. As they say, all politics are local. They get elected because of their family affiliations and name more than political party affiliations. Some remnants of the Dixiecrats. They connect with the locals, that's how they get elected. In the South, it's about God, family, friends, and guns. In South Carolina there was a Dem governor Dick Riley. He was SC governor for 2 terms and his politics are pretty much a conservative democrat. The Riley name has been know in SC for generations and all are Democrats. But in no way they resemble the Liberals of today. The list of Dems you put out there are mostly in Southern states and some from the Midwest and I wouldn't consider them Liberals (look up their voting records). But frankly, I'm not worry about these Dems. It's the Liberals that I worry about. The Liberals in states like MD, NY, NJ, Mass, ect. 2A is an afterthought for them. They are elected not for their 2A stand but for their other Liberal stand. They will sacrifice your 2A rights to cater to the uneducated masses and their political agenda.

 

[BigToe]

Liberals want to destroy the economy through government overspending, break the system and recreate it as a socialist model. Just look up "Cloward-Piven Strategy".

Problem is, as long as there are US citizens who are armed and willing to fight for their liberty, the libs will not be able to recreate the system that they want. So first step is to disarm the American People. Once that is done, they will allow the dollar to collapse, impose Martial Law and start spreading that wealth.

 

[casualmadness]

Name me a "liberal" state that has friendly gun laws.

Washington state. I moved here from WA last year. WA politicians are silly as hell and they're wildly liberal but 2A is untouched there. Private transactions are legal-hell I never heard of a "regulated" firearm until I moved to MD. I still remember when I bought my first pistol in WA-bought it from a friend. I called the WA state patrol (WASP) and asked what I needed to do legally to buy the gun. The woman I spoke with said "legally...just give him the cash and take the gun."
I asked if we needed to do some paperwork or have it transferred. She said there was an optional form that could be completed and mailed to the WASP but it wasn't mandatory and no one ever bothered with it. Also, WA is a shall issue state. I paid my $50 and four days later had my CCP. I bitch about libs as much as the next guy but not all lib states are as shitty as MD.
WA politicians are wildly liberal but they tend not to tread on the constitution.

 

[Mr H]

Liberals Progressives want to destroy the economy through government overspending, break the system and recreate it as a socialist model. Just look up "Cloward-Piven Strategy".

Problem is, as long as there are US citizens who are armed and willing to fight for their liberty, the libs progs will not be able to recreate the system that they want. So first step is to disarm the American People. Once that is done, they will allow the dollar to collapse, impose Martial Law and start spreading that wealth.

Minor--but significant--correction.

"Liberals", in many cases, don't understand the bigger strategy, and many of those are simply in love with the ideals of the left.

The same sort of gradation can apply to the right as well, but in terms of your post, we definitely need to replace Liberal with Progressive (as defined over the past 110 or so years)

 

[BigToe]

Minor--but significant--correction.

"Liberals", in many cases, don't understand the bigger strategy, and many of those are simply in love with the ideals of the left.

The same sort of gradation can apply to the right as well, but in terms of your post, we definitely need to replace Liberal with Progressive (as defined over the past 110 or so years)

You are correct, "progressive" is more accurate a description, but the "liberals" I was referring to are those in the white house and congress, not the lemmings who blindly follow their agenda.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

Washington state. I moved here from WA last year...

NOPE... every unfriendly for NFA. http://www.submachinegun.net/sbsconr.htm

 

[SoMd Ed]

Wow, I wonder if it is possible to cause more division amongst a group of people with the same goal in mind.

How about we stop grilling people over what their politics are. So they identify as liberal? Big freaking deal, they also support 2A. This is more than a liberal conservative thing, and to be honest the D's and R's are what is running this country into the ground. I know many people who identify as both. You can be socially liberal and fiscally conservative or vice versa. Neither side has everything right, but expecting someone to explain why they identify as either just causes division. I generally only lurk on these forums, but the more of this trash I see the harder it is to read.

Step back, take a deep breath and realize that people with differing viewpoints can agree on a single cause like an adult. Damn. 2A is not the only cause out there and people will not identify with one line of thought just for that cause, at least not the clear thinking people.

 

[Bagpiperer]

Neither side has everything right, but expecting someone to explain why they identify as either just causes division. I generally only lurk on these forums, but the more of this trash I see the harder it is to read.

I wholly disagree. Consensus has its place, but not for its own sake.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, should be willing (and able!) to logically defend his politics. Taking your ball and going home when your sacred cows get skull-stomped is childish and unproductive. The intellectual reciprocation of reasoned debate is a good thing for society, and the idea that discussing politics should be taboo is not.

Now, I will say this. There are entirely too many Democrats in D.C. willing to piss on the Constitution. There are entirely too many Republicans who will do the same. Anybody remember how many Congresscritters voted against the NDAA, or the Patriot Act?

The purpose of government is to ensure that you and your descendants are able to live free. That's it. Any official, law, or policy working against that goal needs to be removed at the ballot box or through the courts. And a healthy debate over which policies, laws, and officials are dangerous to liberty can only be a beneficial thing.

That said, when in doubt, vote them out.

 

[psucobra96]

My father used to have no interest in guns, lately he decided with all the loons he wants protection. My wife has never had any interest in guns, now she asks how much ammo we have and thinks we need more and gave me an approval on a AK. Peoples minds change when they see the real threats out there that (1) the media hides or (2) the police cannot protect you from.

Only person who I can't seem to convince is my mother who holds the "you'll shoot your eye out mantra." When ever I ask her what she would do if someone breaks into her house, she responds with call the police. I tell her someone is already in your house, what do you do then? She then has no answer.

Edit: Both parents are Dems and complain about their elective officials daily, so I am very confused when they complain. I keep asking how does it get worse voting for a Rep. and their only response is big business or something to that effect. Yet they complain about handouts to the non-working class and their increase in taxes thanks to M'OM.

 

[SoMd Ed]

I wholly disagree. Consensus has its place, but not for its own sake.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, should be willing (and able!) to logically defend his politics. Taking your ball and going home when your sacred cows get skull-stomped is childish and unproductive. The intellectual reciprocation of reasoned debate is a good thing for society, and the idea that discussing politics should be taboo is not.

While I agree people should be able to logically defend their politics, having to explain to someone who basically responds with no your wrong explain it again is pointless.

I personally love political debates, but when there are so many close minded people either berating your views or flat out ignoring what you say because they don't agree it becomes divisive. The simple fact is, if you vote for a D or R you are sacrificing your liberty, albeit different liberties depending on party. Neither party cares what the voting base believes as they are the only teams playing right now. What we really need is a strong 3rd party come into play. I am just hoping that it happens soon, because we are sunk without some new ideas.

 

[Smitch521]

Wow, I wonder if it is possible to cause more division amongst a group of people with the same goal in mind.

How about we stop grilling people over what their politics are. So they identify as liberal? Big freaking deal, they also support 2A. This is more than a liberal conservative thing, and to be honest the D's and R's are what is running this country into the ground. I know many people who identify as both. You can be socially liberal and fiscally conservative or vice versa. Neither side has everything right, but expecting someone to explain why they identify as either just causes division. I generally only lurk on these forums, but the more of this trash I see the harder it is to read.

Step back, take a deep breath and realize that people with differing viewpoints can agree on a single cause like an adult. Damn. 2A is not the only cause out there and people will not identify with one line of thought just for that cause, at least not the clear thinking people.

Unfortunately there are many who seem to prefer berating those who they disagree with on certain social/economic issues rather than embracing and encouraging pro 2A supporters who, if welcomed, may be able to start to reverse the party platform.

 

[Brooklyn]

Unfortunately there are many who seem to prefer berating those who they disagree with on certain social/economic issues rather than embracing and encouraging pro 2A supporters who, if welcomed, may be able to start to reverse the party platform.

I agree. How can we get past this?

 

[Bagpiperer]

What we really need is a strong 3rd party come into play. I am just hoping that it happens soon, because we are sunk without some new ideas.

Honestly, it's even money as to whether the Dems or the Republicans go the way of the Whigs first. Both are big-tent parties full of statists, and both are already showing fracture lines.

The true conservatives in the Republican party, as well as the libertarians, are increasingly marginalized by the power-brokers, c.f. Karl Rove's reaction to the Tea Party. The failed attempt to take over the party in 2010 seems likely to lead to a party split.

Meanwhile, the Democrats' voting base care less and less for many of the issues that white middle-class liberals do. Abortion rights, gay marriage, and the environment aren't on the high on the priority list of the diverse voters living on Uncle Sam's dime. There's a big potential for desertion, there.

A third party is probably coming, but I'd bet we'll be back to a two-party system again shortly thereafter.

 

[SS396]

This is bull and you know it. If you were fiercely pro 2A you wouldn't be a liberal. Period. You can't say you support gun rights when you vote for a party that directly opposes them. It's in the party platform. And you support it.

I think you need to need to take a long hard look at what the people you support are doing to gun rights before you can claim that you support gun rights. You can protest all you want as the people you voted for pass a bill further restricting gun rights. That protesting doesn't make you pro-2A. The people you put in office makes you an enemy and you wonder why you feel unwelcome in the gun community.

Well said. For the liberals that can't understand why you're seeing "sweeping generalizations", take a look at what the current administration has done to this country. In the last five years we've been completely divided by race, class, gender, and religion. Each one of these cards is played regularly to demonize whatever is to be attacked next. Is it a shame that we can't see some common ground between a liberal and a conservative with common hobbies? You're damn right it is, but the blame goes to leadership that's carving the country up rather than bringing us all together as Americans.

When you can turn a man like me, someone who has been a law abiding, patriotic, constitution loving, family man his entire life and make him feel like he's a racist, subversive, enemy to the country, then you've failed as a leader....and I know I'm not alone. It's a sad day when we start looking at what should be fellow Americans as the "enemy". Why can't more people see where this is originating from? I say this as a new guy on this site and with all due respect to all.

 

[Minuteman]

We need to continue to get liberal gun owners involved in politics, especially in PRIMARIES where they can make their voice heard.

A democrat will probably vote for a Democrat over a Republican, but in the primary they have a chance to select the kind of democrat they want, a liberal gun owner or a gun grabber.

This!

We must vote in the democrat primaries.

 

[SS396]

Well IMBLITZVT, here's my answer; There are some things I'm liberal on, and others I tend to lean right. Example, I don't believe in big government. I'm a strong believer that govt should fear its ppl, and not the other way around. I also believe our rights are our rights, and are not subject to interpretation by some jackass with an agenda. However, and this may be a stereotype, but I don't lean fully right because I do understand that life is rough, and everyone can't be strong all the time. Basically people sometimes need help, I do not believe in the whole "if you can't help yourself, then starve" mantra. Don't get me wrong, I know some people don't want to work I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about people who can't work, or don't make enough money. Also the republicans I seen on tv seem to have a visceral hatred for anything, or anyone who don't look like, and believe as they do. I respect anyone who respects me. So that's why I'm liberal, and pro 2A

The "If you can't help yourself, then starve" comment, and the hint at racism, reveals that you've bought in to left leaning media propaganda, probably MSNBC. I am quite conservative as are most of my associates and not one of them thinks this way. This is what many on the left (many of the people that you support whether you know it or not) want you to believe. Again, demonize what stands in your way and eventually you'll get your way. Talk about "sweeping generalizations" that someone else mentioned above. Do you hear yourself? Not all conservatives are good people, nor are all liberals. From some of the things that you've written, I think you may be more conservative than you think. I've seen this before; would be conservative thinkers being afraid to take on that label for fear of what will be said of them. Your quote above drips this. It isn't easy being conservative today. You CAN be a compassionate conservative who looks out for his fellow man. I challenge you to listen to some conservative programs. You won't like everyone that you hear; I don't either. If some of what you say above is true, I think you'll be surprised.

Conservatives want everyone to be prosperous and have incentive to work harder and achieve more; not reduce incentive by providing handouts to everyone with their hand out. If you are voting along liberal, left leaning lines, you are voting for candidates who are wishy washy on Second Amendment rights at best. They'll cave as soon as it becomes self serving and you know this. No disrespect intended. I don't agree with your line of thinking, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

 

[larr]

The "If you can't help yourself, then starve" comment, and the hint at racism, reveals that you've bought in to left leaning media propaganda, probably MSNBC. I am quite conservative as are most of my associates and not one of them thinks this way. This is what many on the left (many of the people that you support whether you know it or not) want you to believe. Again, demonize what stands in your way and eventually you'll get your way. Talk about "sweeping generalizations" that someone else mentioned above. Do you hear yourself? Not all conservatives are good people, nor are all liberals. From some of the things that you've written, I think you may be more conservative than you think. I've seen this before; would be conservative thinkers being afraid to take on that label for fear of what will be said of them. Your quote above drips this. It isn't easy being conservative today. You CAN be a compassionate conservative who looks out for his fellow man. I challenge you to listen to some conservative programs. You won't like everyone that you hear; I don't either. If some of what you say above is true, I think you'll be surprised.

Conservatives want everyone to be prosperous and have incentive to work harder and achieve more; not reduce incentive by providing handouts to everyone with their hand out. If you are voting along liberal, left leaning lines, you are voting for candidates who are wishy washy on Second Amendment rights at best. They'll cave as soon as it becomes self serving and you know this. No disrespect intended. I don't agree with your line of thinking, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

^^^^THIS^^^^