the end of 2A?

[patriot001]

I'm writing a long letter to my state senator about the legality of this; "feel good" legislation. In said letter I will point out the numerous ways this Sb 281 violates the constitution, as well as several Md laws. I will ask him how he can as a self respecting govt official allow this behavior? I will reiterate how he is in officeto protect our rights, not strip them away. Probably won't make much of a difference though. It seems as if the ones responsible for protecting our rights are the same ones stepping all over them. So my plan B is to move to America where my rights are protected, politicians respect the rule of law, and don't see the constitution as a suggestion. Oh, and all this Tom foolery has made me very anti liberal if this is how they behave I will never vote left again!

 

[Brooklyn]

I'm writing a long letter to my state senator about the legality of this; "feel good" legislation. In said letter I will point out the numerous ways this Sb 281 violates the constitution, as well as several Md laws. I will ask him how he can as a self respecting govt official allow this behavior? I will reiterate how he is in officeto protect our rights, not strip them away. Probably won't make much of a difference though. It seems as if the ones responsible for protecting our rights are the same ones stepping all over them. So my plan B is to move to America where my rights are protected, politicians respect the rule of law, and don't see the constitution as a suggestion. Oh, and all this Tom foolery has made me very anti liberal if this is how they behave I will never vote left again!

Good. Make sure they know you are a liberal or however you want to describe you views.. they need to hear from more than the normal. Pro 2a voices..

 

[MDFF2008]

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.

 

[downforthecause]

did a Maryland Democrat just convert from the dark side?

 

[Mr H]

shhh... Then EVERYONE will want to!!

Oh wait... that's a GOOD thing...

 

[Gundahar]

I probably shouldn't even get into this but.....

The current use of the term "liberal" that is being thrown around was strongly defined by the Republican party starting around the 80's---a bit earlier actually. I used to remember which Republican politico came up with the idea of hammering that in as a dirty word, but no more. You can google it.

Its pejorative, and it also means that you have, at some level, bought into the hype. I would say "Conservative" hype, but I mean Republican. You may recall that some of those supposedly conservative politicians voted strongly against gun rights--like Regan, Bush, Christie, and even McCain. By the logic I read on this forum daily, obviously a true blue red blooded American like Reagan, widely lauded as the ideal modern Conservative, obviously would never directly support and be credited with personally pushing the 1994 Assault Weapons ban over the edge. Or wait--DOH!
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Rights-Ronald-Reagan.htm

Nice.

Meanwhile, what do Libertarians think about "liberals"?
http://www.libertarianism.org/blog/liberal-is-not-dirty-word

Hayek self-identified as a "classic liberal", and can be quoted as

Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism

. From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek#Social_and_political_philosophy
Or you can just read the Road to Serfdom, as I was told to not all that long ago. Guess what--I did.

So when it comes back to it, this post was about the fact that the 2A movement is losing the culture wars despite clearly being legally in the right. Since we live in a state that is chock full of Democrat voting "liberals" (whatever that may mean to each person) you get two choices:
1) Convince them that their entire world view is wrong, convert them to conservatism (whatever that mean to you), and somehow wind up with Republican candidates who also happen to be pro-2A. (Newsflash--many are not).
Or
2) Work the angle that 2A rights are a civil right, and belong in the liberal candidate's lexicon of useful buzzwords and stump speeches as something that he is for, much like gay right to marriage.

Seems to me that if you are truly into 2A issues, then you will be willing to accept support from any side of the aisle, no matter where that person may stand on other issues.

2A actually has a strong case to be made on the liberal side of the fence. Most democrat politicians don't see it in their own best interest--but some do. They are our allies. That is, assuming that you want 2A rights to be more than a legal fiction like we have now. Me, I'd rather have more than a lip service right, and the reality is that most voters and successful politicians in this state lean left.

Your mileage may vary, but this issue is NOT owned by the right. And if it is, they have surely abused it.


Gundahar

 

[Mark75H]

I have no idea how or why the socialists in america decided that 2A was bad; to me it seems like it just arbitrarily appeared in their platform ... and now they repeat it without thinking, just "because"

Does anyone know the history? As Gundahar says, it makes no sense.

 

[Mr H]

I would go with Mao on that...

To [loosely?] quote...

The gun cannot control the Party. The Party must control the gun.

 

[patriot001]

Yes, I know about the permanent ban imposed by Bush in '89 the reasons why there are no more Famas rifle, and why Norincos are so sought after, and that ties into my original post as well:Is my tinfoil hat on too tight, or does it seem like that 2A is slowly, but surely being eroded away until one day were like hey what was in that empty space in our bill of rights? Shall not be infringed means exactly that to me.

 

[boatbod]

I have no idea how or why the socialists in america decided that 2A was bad; to me it seems like it just arbitrarily appeared in their platform ... and now they repeat it without thinking, just "because"

Does anyone know the history? As Gundahar says, it makes no sense.

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".

 

[dragonfire1911]

I probably shouldn't even get into this but.....

The current use of the term "liberal" that is being thrown around was strongly defined by the Republican party starting around the 80's---a bit earlier actually. I used to remember which Republican politico came up with the idea of hammering that in as a dirty word, but no more. You can google it.

Its pejorative, and it also means that you have, at some level, bought into the hype. I would say "Conservative" hype, but I mean Republican. You may recall that some of those supposedly conservative politicians voted strongly against gun rights--like Regan, Bush, Christie, and even McCain. By the logic I read on this forum daily, obviously a true blue red blooded American like Reagan, widely lauded as the ideal modern Conservative, obviously would never directly support and be credited with personally pushing the 1994 Assault Weapons ban over the edge. Or wait--DOH!
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Rights-Ronald-Reagan.htm

Nice.

Meanwhile, what do Libertarians think about "liberals"?
http://www.libertarianism.org/blog/liberal-is-not-dirty-word

Hayek self-identified as a "classic liberal", and can be quoted as . From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek#Social_and_political_philosophy
Or you can just read the Road to Serfdom, as I was told to not all that long ago. Guess what--I did.

So when it comes back to it, this post was about the fact that the 2A movement is losing the culture wars despite clearly being legally in the right. Since we live in a state that is chock full of Democrat voting "liberals" (whatever that may mean to each person) you get two choices:
1) Convince them that their entire world view is wrong, convert them to conservatism (whatever that mean to you), and somehow wind up with Republican candidates who also happen to be pro-2A. (Newsflash--many are not).
Or
2) Work the angle that 2A rights are a civil right, and belong in the liberal candidate's lexicon of useful buzzwords and stump speeches as something that he is for, much like gay right to marriage.

Seems to me that if you are truly into 2A issues, then you will be willing to accept support from any side of the aisle, no matter where that person may stand on other issues.

2A actually has a strong case to be made on the liberal side of the fence. Most democrat politicians don't see it in their own best interest--but some do. They are our allies. That is, assuming that you want 2A rights to be more than a legal fiction like we have now. Me, I'd rather have more than a lip service right, and the reality is that most voters and successful politicians in this state lean left.

Your mileage may vary, but this issue is NOT owned by the right. And if it is, they have surely abused it.


Gundahar

Name me a prominent liberal politician that made a pro 2A stand. Name me a "liberal" state that has friendly gun laws.

 

[Smitch521]

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

Vermont

 

[Cyclone]

Actually what you are hearing, seeing and reading about more and more are getting against it are totally wrong. It's the opposite believe me...

 

[Gundahar]

Originally Posted by dragonfire1911 View Post
Name me a "liberal" state that has friendly gun laws.
Vermont

My case in point--you actually thought that none existed, and that somehow "conservative" candidates had the issue wrapped up in a bow. You didn't even bother to google it. :-(

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/18/the-pro-gun-campaign-ad-youll-probably-like-by-a-democrat/

http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/09/12/8-surprisingly-pro-gun-democrats/

Next argument is typically that they are only pro-2A to get votes, and won't make a hard stand when it really matters--well DUH! They are politicians. They take whatever stance that they think will get them elected, or else they aren't in power too terribly long. Clearly the point that the Republicans regularly roll over on this issue was not emphasized enough.

Bottom line is--you want to win the culture wars to cement the legal victories that have been going on. Otherwise you wind up with this sort of "rights obstructionism" that we have now, plus it becomes a regular whipping boy for the politico's on "both" sides.

Now the real question (assuming that you can get beyond the notion that conservative = good and liberal = evil with no possible common ground)--is how to win the culture wars. I'm here to say that you can't with that mindset, especially in states like Maryland. The 2A movement ultimately has to cross the aisle, and the sooner the better.

Gundahar

 

[dragonfire1911]

My case in point--you actually thought that none existed, and that somehow "conservative" candidates had the issue wrapped up in a bow. You didn't even bother to google it. :-(

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/18/the-pro-gun-campaign-ad-youll-probably-like-by-a-democrat/

http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/09/12/8-surprisingly-pro-gun-democrats/

Next argument is typically that they are only pro-2A to get votes, and won't make a hard stand when it really matters--well DUH! They are politicians. They take whatever stance that they think will get them elected, or else they aren't in power too terribly long. Clearly the point that the Republicans regularly roll over on this issue was not emphasized enough.

Bottom line is--you want to win the culture wars to cement the legal victories that have been going on. Otherwise you wind up with this sort of "rights obstructionism" that we have now, plus it becomes a regular whipping boy for the politico's on "both" sides.

Now the real question (assuming that you can get beyond the notion that conservative = good and liberal = evil with no possible common ground)--is how to win the culture wars. I'm here to say that you can't with that mindset, especially in states like Maryland. The 2A movement ultimately has to cross the aisle, and the sooner the better.

Gundahar

I said "liberal" not democrats. There is a distinction.

 

[dragonfire1911]

Vermont

Actually Vermont historically has been a Republican stronghold in New England. They are pretty similar to NH as far as politics and demographics. It has become more liberal in recent years as they have experienced the influx of people from NY, Con, and Mass. We are seeing this kind of movement in states like Colorado, where traditionally it was red, but now is purple.

 

[Gundahar]

I said "liberal" not democrats. There is a distinction.

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

 

[downforthecause]

Sorry for not being more clear....1.) Anyone who supports my constitutional rights is fine by me, glad to have 'em here. 2.) if there is a difference between a Dem and a Lib, I apologize, but my angry, ignorant, redneck eyes see everything as one and the same, so making distinctions is relatively hard for me. 3.) Again, I am also sorry for using a Star Wars comparison of evil, and Democrats as synonyms. I am just bitter, as I view these voters as the guys standing by the wild fire with gasoline cans, looking like this: .


In all seriousness, if it even needs to be said, it's truly a manipulation of standpoint, conscience and stigma that situates political beliefs in this country. I think generally we all agree on what we want in life... the labels of it, the parties are what really screw things up. I consider my values to be ultra conservative by others' criteria, but in reality I just want what I want... what I morally justify, as a common, non wealthy guy. Freedom, and freedom from government with their hands in my wallet, or in my affairs. I don't at all believe in not helping those in need, I give to charity, in addition to what the government steals and distributes as it sees fit. But common stigma would say that myself, as a conservative, want kids to be dumb without enough school teachers (which my wife is), starve with no free lunch, to shoot guns by playgrounds, and women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen...No. Fact is, any woman in the kitchen is a plus, it's science and nature's love child. I guess it all boils down to my point is that women are much more attractive NOT pregnant, do you see?

really though, we need to start acknowledging some stereotypes, because face it, a majority of events shaped them into common perceptions. I am an angry white man, and a gun owner, guilty. Now guess which political party is represented by governors and senators in the states enacting laws to further limit our 2A rights!

 

[Jimbob2.0]

It will shift if te antis dig deep and far enough. Per the CDC study new gun laws are not doing much, given the states with the toughest laws have the most offenses. Everyone I knw in the liberal zone hates Aks but still cling to grandpas revolver or shotgun. No awareness of laws on ownership and legal transfer and probably a lot of technical violations. When it hits that level you will see more popular dissent. For a large portion of the pop the see Aks and ars as unnecessary and their revolvers as non evil well eventually they will be getting fingerprints for those.

 

[Smitch521]

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 couldn't agree more with you