Liberals With Guns ???

[Zappa]

http://liberalswithguns.com/_wsn/page3.html

==

A recently converted lib sent me this link.

Unfortunately, we Leftists need to admit that we have been wrong about guns. The Second Amendment provides an important defense against tyranny--particularly the right-wing variety.

What a concept!
Who woulda' thunk ?
Maybe there is hope for some of them.

 

[goofycj7]

It was interesting reading about the Ludlow massacre. How money bought off the national guard and the police with a liberal President aware of the situation.
Only when armed miners fought back did anything get done about the killing of the miners and their families.


http://www.rebelgraphics.org/ludlow.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre

 

[theGringo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre

plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
http://www.serendipity.li/waco.html

In a similar vein, I recall when NRA caught hell for putting out an ad that showed a picture of battered Tianenmen Square protesters over the title, "Today's Headlines Remind Us Why". What? Use guns against your own government? Unspeakable!

From 1989:

The NRA is also involved in a fascinating controversy involving the First Amendment. After the massacre of Chinese students in Beijing, the advertising agency representing the NRA produced an ad showing a demonstrator who was staggering away from some of the soldiers who had beaten him.

At the top of the ad were the words: "...The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms... - Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution.

"The headline below the picture declared, "Today's headlines remind us why."

The ad went on to point out that tyranny - such as that in China - cannot tolerate armed citizens. The ad concluded, "The National Rifle Association's defense of firearms isn't just about hunting, or competitive shooting, or even personal protection. The right to own a firearm is a statement about freedom...."

U.S. News & World Report, The Washington Post, The Washington Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, National Journal, Denver Post, Phoenix Republic and Manchester (NH) Union Leader carried the ad.

However, Time and Newsweek flatly refused to print the ad.

A spokesperson for Ackerman, Hood & McQueen, Inc., the NRA's ad agency, spoke with Newsweek publisher, Howard Smith, regarding that magazine's rejection of the China ad. I obtained a copy of an internal Ackerman memo written following that conversation, and I think you'll find it as interesting as I did.

The memo indicated that Smith said he rejected the ad because "the whole Beijing thing is so sensitive," because the ad implied that if you didn't like the way things are going, to get your gun and because it "appeared to condone inciting riots against the government."

So, I guess we all have our reasons. In my case, I pulled out that ad and framed it.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Can you imagine the NRA having the balls to make advertising like that nowadays?

Didn't think so.

Sure wish they would

It sure would go a long way towards making me feel better about the annual check to Fairfax, VA.

 

[mikem317]

Reminds me of that 30 Days episode that somebody posted recently.

 

[terraformer]

This unfortunately should not be an isolated event nor a novelty. Pro 2A supporters need more women, more libs and more minorities.

 

[caillean]

This unfortunately should not be an isolated event nor a novelty. Pro 2A supporters need more women, more libs and more minorities.

I'm a woman and I'm a liberal. I also love our guns and our 2A rights. BUT... when I come to these forums and read the consistent 'liberal' bashing and some of the hyperbole I feel distinctly unwelcome here. I've met lots of people on this forum, who are the sweetest, nicest people I could wish to meet. The people at my gun club are with very rare exceptions also the nicest, sweetest people you could meet.

What we all share is our commitment to 2A and our love of guns. But sometimes I wonder if being pro-2A isn't "good enough" for some folks here.

 

[theGringo]

I'm a woman and I'm a liberal. I also love our guns and our 2A rights. BUT... when I come to these forums and read the consistent 'liberal' bashing and some of the hyperbole I feel distinctly unwelcome here. I've met lots of people on this forum, who are the sweetest, nicest people I could wish to meet. The people at my gun club are with very rare exceptions also the nicest, sweetest people you could meet.

What we all share is our commitment to 2A and our love of guns. But sometimes I wonder if being pro-2A isn't "good enough" for some folks here.

I'm very sympathetic to your plight. I tried challenging some ... orthodoxy over at at Democratic Underground once. It was worse than just ... having my feelings hurt. They just flat out delete any post that doesn't toe the liberal line. It's stated right there in the rules that you can't be ... impolitic at DU. Support the Party catechism, or get out. They use very bad language there too. Kinda like ... hate speech. It offended my tender sensibilities.

Now having read your blog from time to time, and Bill's (how nice that you're cross linked) I can see that you are both truly sincere in your liberal political positions. That's very sweet.

Now, I'm sure that you and Bill are just looking to share and enjoy the shooting sports with like minded shooters, and chew the fat on the great issues of the day. I would never for a moment suggest that you are trolling or pulling the "divide and conquer" thing because I've seen pictures of your actual guns. There's no way you would be engaged in a two-pronged attack on this board or it's members in an attempt to stifle right wing views. I'd never suggest that. Never.

I'm sure you really are passionate about RKBA and I suppose that through some freak dislocation of the mind you might find no inconsistency between RKBA and Obama's socialist master plan, and gosh, that's just wonderful.

But if you want sweetness and light and happy banter all the time, and if you, or Bill, expect to post your views on politics, rant a bit about Bush, and Palin, and Steele and conservatism generally, and if from time to time you want to poke a finger in someone's eye (We all do it. I just did it, and I'm ready to do it again) then expect to hear back and to get some static once in a while. And if you're just here for the fellowship and good feelings, just skip the political stuff. It get's a little ... passionate at times. And if you're feelings are hurt by reading strong views, expressed strongly, then maybe this just isn't the place for you. You might try to seek affirmation here.

So quit crybabying. Bill, at least, has the nads to throw it back.

Other contributers here will disagree with me, I'm sure, but I have my BS detector set on HIGH all the time and I just ain't buyin' what you're sellin'. I'll err on the side of caution and I certainly won't moderate my political expression here or elsewhere in hopes of making a friend of a gun-owning moonbat. I know one of them personally. She is a threat to my liberty, and there's just no meeting half-way with such people. I have to walk about fifty feet to the left to find their hand, outstretched slightly to the right.

Screw it.

Ayn Rand said this:

In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.

That's from Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Capitalism. Huh. Does that make me bad?

 

[joehaus]

What we all share is our commitment to 2A and our love of guns. But sometimes I wonder if being pro-2A isn't "good enough" for some folks here.

No. It's not good enough here. We might not all be republicans but most of us are conservatives. Sorry, but don't look for sympathy here.

 

[terraformer]

This is North East Shooters, not North East Conservatives. As a life long Independent, I use my brain to analyze and assess the situation in front of me. DU may be a cesspool of ideologues, but their behavior doesn't justify bashing on people who come here looking to bond with other shooters, regardless of their political pursasion. Nor does that mean either of you should stop being conservative. Argue your point based on the facts at hand and you will find that the label one ascribes to their beliefs becomes irrelevant.

 

[goofycj7]

I'm a woman and I'm a liberal. I also love our guns and our 2A rights. BUT... when I come to these forums and read the consistent 'liberal' bashing and some of the hyperbole I feel distinctly unwelcome here. I've met lots of people on this forum, who are the sweetest, nicest people I could wish to meet. The people at my gun club are with very rare exceptions also the nicest, sweetest people you could meet.

What we all share is our commitment to 2A and our love of guns. But sometimes I wonder if being pro-2A isn't "good enough" for some folks here.

Personally I would say that being pro 2A IS enough.

THat being said this forum can be rough, but just raise up to the challenge!

The "liberal" bashing seems more against the gun banning crowd, Plenty of posters have problems with the "conservatives" who ban guns as well.

Neither side agrees with my philosophies 100%, I am registered Democrat but vote for either side depending on THEIR votes and views. Plenty of local Democrats are NRA supported such as Ann Gobi.
Appearently neither party agrees with your views 100% either so why get bothered because you consider yourself "liberal" on maybe everything but 2A?
Better to argue about it then just give up. Plenty of people on this forum agree with certain liberal ideals, just not how they actually carry them out.

 

[caillean]

No. It's not good enough here. We might not all be republicans but most of us are conservatives. Sorry, but don't look for sympathy here.

I don't want sympathy, but civility would be nice.

 

[theGringo]

This is North East Shooters, not North East Conservatives. As a life long Independent, I use my brain to analyze and assess the situation in front of me. DU may be a cesspool of ideologues, but their behavior doesn't justify bashing on people who come here looking to bond with other shooters, regardless of their political pursasion. Nor does that mean either of you should stop being conservative. Argue your point based on the facts at hand and you will find that the label one ascribes to their beliefs becomes irrelevant.

Bashing is a two way street. I've been watching this "dynamic duo" from day one and, frankly, I smell a rat. Expressing a strongly liberal POV while simultaneously expressing offense at a strong conservative POV is a liberal strategy for limiting speech. Doing it as a thread-posting pair may obscure the intent (think good-cop, bad-cop) but only makes it all the more insidious. This strategy has been very successful on college campuses, as well as in the press. It may be a calculated ploy to "split" posters here, or just a reflexive aspect of the liberal mindset. In either case it's a threat, and should be exposed.

 

[theGringo]

I don't want sympathy, but civility would be nice.

Let me know what words and expressions you find ... offensive. Maybe we can develop some sort of speech code, or something.

 

[terraformer]

Bashing is a two way street. I've been watching this "dynamic duo" from day one and, frankly, I smell a rat. Expressing a strongly liberal POV while simultaneously expressing offense at a strong conservative POV is a liberal strategy for limiting speech. Doing it as a thread-posting pair may obscure the intent (think good-cop, bad-cop) but only makes it all the more insidious. This strategy has been very successful on college campuses, as well as in the press. It may be a calculated ploy to "split" posters here, or just a reflexive aspect of the liberal mindset. In either case it's a threat, and should be exposed.

Having never seen either persons posts, I can't say one way or the other. But my statement is more generic than this one or two people. BTW: the speech code line is funny but if one is arguing based on the facts, there should be little need for a speech code.

 

[goofycj7]

Bashing is a two way street. I've been watching this "dynamic duo" from day one and, frankly, I smell a rat. Expressing a strongly liberal POV while simultaneously expressing offense at a strong conservative POV is a liberal strategy for limiting speech. Doing it as a thread-posting pair may obscure the intent (think good-cop, bad-cop) but only makes it all the more insidious. This strategy has been very successful on college campuses, as well as in the press. It may be a calculated ploy to "split" posters here, or just a reflexive aspect of the liberal mindset. In either case it's a threat, and should be exposed.

As far as "split" posters I don't think we need any help!


Besides, What husband and wife team do see eye to eye on everything? Definately not my wife and myself!
Just wait til she starts posting, Oh boy...

How about you and the Mrs?

 

[theGringo]

As far as "split" posters I don't think we need any help!

So true. And dammit, we like it that way!

Besides, What husband and wife team do see eye to eye on everything? Definately not my wife and myself!
Just wait til she starts posting, Oh boy...

How about you and the Mrs?

One recent conversation went like this:

ME: WooHoo! The Tec-9 just sold for $575!

MRS: Great! We really need that money!

ME: It's already spent on AR parts.

MRS: Why do you need another gun?

ME: That was the deal. I sell one out of inventory, I replace one in inventory.

MRS: Oh. [sad2]

 

[Erebus]

I don't want sympathy, but civility would be nice.

If being civil means you don't want people challenging your views or stated values then you won't get any here. We discuss and sometimes down right argue about all kinds of issues.

 

[FalArAk]

I'm a woman and I'm a liberal. I also love our guns and our 2A rights. BUT... when I come to these forums and read the consistent 'liberal' bashing and some of the hyperbole I feel distinctly unwelcome here. I've met lots of people on this forum, who are the sweetest, nicest people I could wish to meet. The people at my gun club are with very rare exceptions also the nicest, sweetest people you could meet.

What we all share is our commitment to 2A and our love of guns. But sometimes I wonder if being pro-2A isn't "good enough" for some folks here.

If it was up to me,I would ban every self admitted Liberal on this site.I could care less whether or not you own a gun,because Liberals are anti-America and if there is one thing I can't stand,is a group of people that will spit on the flag that so many people have shed blood for....liberals are the domestic enemy in my opinion,more so than terrorists since Liberals are hell bent on destroying America from the inside...But, since I'm not in charge,you are safe.

You do not share my love of guns for the same reason I do.Guns are part of the 2nd to protect this great country from the tyrannical government people you and your like are voting into office.

If Liberals would quit wanting fund the sewer of diversity with my hard earned money,I wouldn't despise them so much.

 

[Admin]

I don't want sympathy, but civility would be nice.

It's honestly hard to be civil when Liberals are the ones who are constantly trying to take our guns, constantly increasing taxes, constantly passing more freedom taking laws, and constantly being soft on criminals.

Yeah it's difficult when most liberals do the above.

 

[PaulD]

No. It's not good enough here. We might not all be republicans but most of us are conservatives. Sorry, but don't look for sympathy here.

Speak for yourself. I don't consider myself liberal or conservative, at least not by the current definitions.

 

[Blitz1]

Bashing is a two way street. I've been watching this "dynamic duo" from day one and, frankly, I smell a rat. Expressing a strongly liberal POV while simultaneously expressing offense at a strong conservative POV is a liberal strategy for limiting speech. Doing it as a thread-posting pair may obscure the intent (think good-cop, bad-cop) but only makes it all the more insidious. This strategy has been very successful on college campuses, as well as in the press. It may be a calculated ploy to "split" posters here, or just a reflexive aspect of the liberal mindset. In either case it's a threat, and should be exposed.

+1

 

[Blitz1]

It's honestly hard to be civil when Liberals are the ones who are constantly trying to take our guns, constantly increasing taxes, constantly passing more freedom taking laws, and constantly being soft on criminals.

Yeah it's difficult when most liberals do the above.

Yup.

 

[Bill Nance]

If it was up to me,I would ban every self admitted Liberal on this site.I could care less whether or not you own a gun,because Liberals are anti-America and if there is one thing I can't stand,is a group of people that will spit on the flag that so many people have shed blood for....liberals are the domestic enemy in my opinion,more so than terrorists since Liberals are hell bent on destroying America from the inside.

Even though my wife has been whining about this thread I wasn't going to respond. -Until this little bit of foolishness. Tell ya what tough guy, I served this country proudly (USAF 1981-1985) -Not that that should make any difference, as last time I checked, serving in the military was a voluntary thing and not required to be a citizen (though it's too bad, Heinlein had it right).

You have a caricature of people based on God only knows what (Limbaugh et al I presume) that bears no relation to reality. I have a commitment to the constitution. which mean no federal interference in states rights, which includes btw, Roe vs, Wade, which while I agree with the sentiment, has no basis in constitutional principles. Nor do I support federal curriculum standards, gun control, or many other kinds of federal intrusions that don't have constitutional mandates.

YOU, on the other hand, don't appear to support constitutional principles at all.

You do not share my love of guns for the same reason I do.Guns are part of the 2nd to protect this great country from the tyrannical government people you and your like are voting into office.

Therefore people who disagree with you should be silenced? To me, Bush and Co. along with all the Dems who supported nastiness like the Patriot Act are the real villains. Where were you when such totalitarian measures were put in place? Oh, that's right, you were SILENT. Wake up. Authoritarian measures can come from ANY side of the political spectrum. A "liberal" at least in my thinking, should be against ALL such measures, irregardless of the political party proposing them. Dildo bans? WTF? AWBs? WTF? Library records accessed by the FBI WTF? Warrantless phone tapping? WTF?

If those are "liberal" positions I'll proudly wear the label. To me, the policies above represent totalitarian measures which drastically increase government authority without constitutional authority.

Obama? Yep, I voted for the guy. I campaigned for the guy and make no apologies for it. We can disagree all we want on whether the policies he will propose re best for the country. God knows I'll oppose him on many issues, which I knew before I voted.

On the other hand, Mccain represented other positions, equally as odious, equally as repressive, without a shadow of the credibility or intelligence represented by the Obama campaign.

Maybe you're right, maybe I'm wrong. But to accuse me and people like me of trying to undermine the country or being against America is not conservative. It's fascistic and authoritarian.

 

[theGringo]

Therefore people who disagree with you should be silenced?

No. This is not Democratic Underground. They should be confronted. They should be challenged. They should be opposed.

The rest of your post is typical liberal claptrap. It gets tedious after a while.

 

[joehaus]

Speak for yourself. I don't consider myself liberal or conservative, at least not by the current definitions.

That is why I said most and not all. I'm sure there is a minority here that aren't conservative but I rarely ever read anyone's posts to the contrary of general conservative thinking.

 

[FalArAk]

Tough guy ?

Yes,you and your self described whining wife should be silenced on this board.

 

[caillean]

It's honestly hard to be civil when Liberals are the ones who are constantly trying to take our guns, constantly increasing taxes, constantly passing more freedom taking laws, and constantly being soft on criminals.

Yeah it's difficult when most liberals do the above.

Thank you for a civil response, you didn't jump in with name calling and Ad Hominem attacks. Now, let me address your points:

• I'm a strident supporter of the 2nd amendment. The only restrictions I am at all ok with on 2A rights are 1. restricting violent felons and those who've been adjudicated mentally ill from owning firearms. And 2. I draw the line for what's ok to possess as a civilian at things that can blow up your neighborhood by you being an idiot. aka explosives, grenades, and the like. That's it.
  
• I'm not in favor of tax increases. In fact, I'd like to see taxes decrease for the middle class, working class, and the poor. As it stands I think they bear a disproportionate amount of the tax burden in this country.
  
• I'd like to see the government stop disregarding the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and especially the 10th amendment!
  
• Who said anything about being soft on criminals? Violent criminals? Lock them up and throw away the key.

 

[Bill Nance]

Tough guy ?

Yes,you and your self described whining wife should be silenced on this board.

Roe vs. Wade is unconstitutional intrusion of federal authority, Dildo bans? WTF? AWBs? WTF? Library records accessed by the FBI WTF? Warrantless phone tapping? WTF?

To me, the policies above represent totalitarian measures which drastically increase government authority without constitutional authority.


What part of that do you disagree with?

 

[Bill Nance]

No. This is not Democratic Underground. They should be confronted. They should be challenged. They should be opposed.

The rest of your post is typical liberal claptrap. It gets tedious after a while.

+1 to you for admitting that things you disagree with should be argued, not silenced.(It's disgusting when the far left does this crap and I've said so publicly) And for the record, no, this is not some "liberal conspiracy" to destroy NES. I believe what I believe, and believe it or not, am willing to listen to views with which I disagree. Convince me that "liberal claptrap" which I described is incorrect. I'll listen.