Aren't gun owners people too?

[Akita1]

Great OP Kick-down; our champion may well be a youtube star named Colion Noir. The NRA finally figured out that their old-school strategies are no longer effective and is teaming with Mr. Noir (as already noted/discussed on other threads).

 

[CoyoteSix]

@Akita: I've been subscribed to Mr. Noir for a while now, He's a good guy. I also like NutnFancy, but Noir get's the ideas across the board much quicker.

 

[JustinJ]

Seems to me that most of the crazy people who go off their rocker and kill randomly are in fact registered LIBERAL Democrats!!! What a surprise right?

And that would be because you filter out information that doesn't support your world view. The vast majority of shootings are rooted in mental illness and have nothing to do with political views. However, one very recent mass killer who killed purely out of a right wing ideology and was ruled mentally competent was Anders Breivik so do i get to run around saying "its the right wingers who do all the killing"?

No, they actually think that would make it worse. Watch the interview Piers Morgan did with Jesse Ventura. There's a point where Ventura says that had he been in the theater in Aurora Colorado, with his concealed handgun, he might have taken the guy out before he could kill so many people. And Morgan leans back, actually looks down his nose at Ventura, and says "or it would have made things even worse, with bullets flying back and forth." Ventura replies, rather effectively I thought, "Well which role of the dice would you prefer?" I do understand the anti-gunners' concern, but I think their logic stinks. Even if the armed good guy missed the bad guy with his first couple of shots and hit a bystander or two behind the suspect, and then stopped him, how would that be worse than a madman walking around unopposed for the next several minutes shooting another dozen or more helpless people like fish in a barrel?

A argument i've heard instead is that we can't rely on the off chance that somebody with a concealed gun will be there to take out the bad guy. Realistacally, even if we remove all gun free zones, the chances of there being a person with a concealed weapon who is competent enough to use it is probably not great. My reply has always been "that does not mean i should not be able to make the choice to carry the means to defend myself".

So, in summary, ardent gun control advocates are much more inclined to regard you as a bad person, a moral defective, when you disagree with them about an issue like this, on which they feel very strongly, because they simply cannot conceive how an intelligent, educated, honest, moral person could possibly disagree with them. So, you're not a human being, or a minority, or someone they can or will feel sympathy for; you're a moral defective trying to pollute society with your immoral behavior and attitudes, and they will hate you for it.

Seriously? The vitriol on this board against differences of opinion on the issue is quite extreme. I don't spend much time on boards advocating gun control (are there any?) but i rarely hear these kinds of attacks from people i know who believe in gun control. Sure, there are bloggers out there who make offensive statements but that is certainly common on both sides. To be honest there are quite a few in the gun community who seem to make every effort to feed into the negative stereotypes against us. I thought about making a thread the other day condeming Larry Pratt for going on the Solomon Show and the discussion about Obama raising a black army to attack whites but i was too worried about how many people would probably support his actions.


I think Sowell's analysis is pretty nonsensical but if progressive thought is locked in opposition to gun rights we're pretty much screwed given progressive thought eventually always wins out in the long run to some degree. Progressive is really a relative term as the founding fathers were about as progressive as one could be for their time. Their belief in an ideal solution to their problem of the times, in spite of collateral damage, is the only reason we exist today. Really though both views have proven to be more than willing to accept collateral damage to either resist or cause change. No side is also any more willing to compromise than the other. Seeking a better solution or way of being does not equate to believing in a perfect solution. Rather many simply believe that one should not let perfect be the enemy of good.

If we really want to preserve gun rights we must start appealing to a broader base and quite with the insults and alienation of anybody who doesn't fit a certain right wing mold.

 

[Mike OTDP]

There's an Ugly Truth about American society. We have always had a Designated Scapegoat Group. Or two. Groups that could be treated like dirt, without consequence.

Prior to the Civil War, the scapegoats were Catholics in the North, Blacks in the South. After it, immigrants in general (particularly Catholics) and Blacks were scapegoats nationwide.

In the 1930s, we saw a shift. Firearm owners became the new scapegoat. Along with conservatives in general.

Today? We're still the national whipping boy, along with Christians of all denominations, and conservatives.

 

[Akita1]

@Akita: I've been subscribed to Mr. Noir for a while now, He's a good guy. I also like NutnFancy, but Noir get's the ideas across the board much quicker.

Echo that Kick-Down; love their gear reviews.

 

[r1derbike]

We're pariahs, in the minds of the antis.

We own something that gives us the power to live. We will not be victims. We will not let our families (or others, if possible) be raped, murdered, tortured, robbed, carjacked, or home invaded, at gunpoint.

We are not blind to violent society, like the myopic antis seem to be. We take our lives into our own hands, because it is our right.

Political affiliation aside, all of us vote not to be victims. Unfortunately, we must fight to keep that right. I cannot accept that more metropolitan areas will turn into war zones, if we lose our 2nd amendment. I cannot accept that antis dictate how I live my life, or how it is taken away, if they have their way.

If we want to preserve our rights, skeeters, paper punchers, hunters, home defenders and more need to be unified. We have divisive behavior in our own ranks. It's embarrassing, really. The arrogant, apathetic, and the, "it will never happen to us" crowd will never even see it coming.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Let's get our own house in order.

 

[Avenger29]

i rarely hear these kinds of attacks from people i know who believe in gun contro

So you've missed all the gun control supporters calling for us gunowners to be killed or imprisoned, have you?

THOSE kind of people are the reason I own guns, and lots of them.

 

[JustinJ]

Today? We're still the national whipping boy, along with Christians of all denominations, and conservatives.

Give me a break. The right blames the left for all of our ills just as the left blames the right. One side crying foul when the other returns fire is lame.

Christians make up an over whelming majority of of this country. Pretending to be a poor little oppressed minority group is ridiculous.

So you've missed all the gun control supporters calling for us gunowners to be killed or imprisoned, have you?

Of course there are extremists out there making inflamatory statements. That is hardly a representation of the norm.

 

[sleepyone]

Christians make up an over whelming majority of of this country. Pretending to be a poor little oppressed minority group is ridiculous.

People who CALL themselves Christians certainly make up the majority of the people in this country. Polls vary from between 85-95 percent of Americans view themselves as Christians. However, people who are actually Bible-believing followers of Jesus Christ is far below that number, so we are indeed the minority in this country. Many people believe they are Christian simply because they were born in a "Christian" nation of which the U.S. is certainly not anymore. Or they believe they are Christian because their parents called themselves Christians even though they could not really tell you what that meant.

There is a saying "Going to the garage does not make you a car anymore than going to church makes you a Christian." I've met many people who when asked will say they are Christians yet their lifestyle and worldview contradicts that.

I've travelled to several countries overseas and foreigners automatically assume every American is a Christian. The terms are interchangable. Identifying yourself as a "Follower of Jesus Christ" is how you must distinguish yourself from the generic term Christian when explaining your faith in countries such as Africa, China and the Middle East. That term is needed over here as well.

 

[Billy Shears]

A argument i've heard instead is that we can't rely on the off chance that somebody with a concealed gun will be there to take out the bad guy. Realistacally, even if we remove all gun free zones, the chances of there being a person with a concealed weapon who is competent enough to use it is probably not great. My reply has always been "that does not mean i should not be able to make the choice to carry the means to defend myself".

Yet there have been a couple of incidents where an armed civilian was on the scene and potentially stopped a massacre. The "problem" from the standpoint of this argument is that because there is no massacre, the antis can deny it's a valid example.

Seriously? The vitriol on this board against differences of opinion on the issue is quite extreme. I don't spend much time on boards advocating gun control (are there any?) but i rarely hear these kinds of attacks from people i know who believe in gun control. Sure, there are bloggers out there who make offensive statements but that is certainly common on both sides. To be honest there are quite a few in the gun community who seem to make every effort to feed into the negative stereotypes against us. I thought about making a thread the other day condeming Larry Pratt for going on the Solomon Show and the discussion about Obama raising a black army to attack whites but i was too worried about how many people would probably support his actions.

You think I'm spreading vitriol? If you care to, take a gander at this thread from a board I used to post on: http://www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/13068/ (I don't jump into the argument until page 9.) You'll see what I'm talking about in action. Not just disagreement with my argument, but ridicule, derision, and contempt from a couple of the liberal posters on the board. They're not representative of all liberals, by any means, but they absolutely are representative of the more dogmatic and extreme left sort of liberal. And the more ardently liberal one tends to be, the more one tends to have the unconstrained vision.

I think Sowell's analysis is pretty nonsensical but if progressive thought is locked in opposition to gun rights we're pretty much screwed given progressive thought eventually always wins out in the long run to some degree.

I don't think it's nonsensical at all. If you read the book of his I referenced, he illustrates his points with an enormous weight of evidence and specific examples. It's an observable trend he's pointing out.

Progressive is really a relative term as the founding fathers were about as progressive as one could be for their time. Their belief in an ideal solution to their problem of the times, in spite of collateral damage, is the only reason we exist today. Really though both views have proven to be more than willing to accept collateral damage to either resist or cause change. No side is also any more willing to compromise than the other. Seeking a better solution or way of being does not equate to believing in a perfect solution. Rather many simply believe that one should not let perfect be the enemy of good.

If we really want to preserve gun rights we must start appealing to a broader base and quite with the insults and alienation of anybody who doesn't fit a certain right wing mold.

Who says one has to be right wing? It's not like there is a precise correlation between the unconstrained vision and the left, and the constrained vision and the right. In fact, the unconstrained vision falls more in the political center, because the further to the far left and the far right you go, the more authoritarian one tends to be.

 

[Sam1911]

People who CALL themselves Christians certainly make up the majority of the people in this country. ...Many people believe they are Christian simply because they were born in a "Christian" nation of which the U.S. is certainly not anymore. Or they believe they are Christian because their parents called themselves Christians even though they could not really tell you what that meant.

OMG! That sounds like my grandmother! "Oh, they THINK they're Christians! But they'll find out differently someday!"

As much fun as that tangent might be, we don't do religious discussion here for reasons that aught to be quite obvious by now. So, let's end that side trip.

Thanks.

 

[JustinJ]

You think I'm spreading vitriol? If you care to, take a gander at this thread from a board I used to post on: http://www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/13068/ (I don't jump into the argument until page 9.) You'll see what I'm talking about in action. Not just disagreement with my argument, but ridicule, derision, and contempt from a couple of the liberal posters on the board. They're not representative of all liberals, by any means, but they absolutely are representative of the more dogmatic and extreme left sort of liberal. And the more ardently liberal one tends to be, the more one tends to have the unconstrained vision.

No, I'm not accusing you of spreading vitriol. However, i think it unjustified to claim that liberals are more apt to demonize their opponents than conservatives. What i am saying is that based on this board there is tons of it coming from our side. That's not to say there is none from the other side but the collective "we" have no place playing victim in the war of words.

Who says one has to be right wing? It's not like there is a precise correlation between the unconstrained vision and the left, and the constrained vision and the right. In fact, the unconstrained vision falls more in the political center, because the further to the far left and the far right you go, the more authoritarian one tends to be.

It may not be that one side has to be right wing but come on, let's not kid about which side is supposed to be which. Yes, extremes on either side of the political spectrum do tend to be more authoritarian but that doesn't counter my point.

 

[Billy Shears]

No, I'm not accusing you of spreading vitriol. However, i think it unjustified to claim that liberals are more apt to demonize their opponents than conservatives. What i am saying is that based on this board there is tons of it coming from our side. That's not to say there is none from the other side but the collective "we" have no place playing victim in the war of words.

I'm not interested in playing victim; I am interested in knowing my enemy. Certainly people other than leftists and liberals are quite capable of demonizing or dehumanizing their enemies. I never claimed otherwise. But I think Sowell is correct, it tends to be somewhat more common among doctrinaire liberals -- not only has he supported his case well with abundant examples, it's something that jibes with my own personal experience. And I think he has put his finger on the reason why: it's a tendency that arises out of their fundamental view of the world and human nature.

It may not be that one side has to be right wing but come on, let's not kid about which side is supposed to be which. Yes, extremes on either side of the political spectrum do tend to be more authoritarian but that doesn't counter my point.

Why are you surprised at which side is supposed to be which? Look at the gun control bills being laid out on the table now in states across the country and at the federal level. You can't deny, the great majority of them are coming at us from liberal politicians.

 

[JustinJ]

I'm not interested in playing victim; I am interested in knowing my enemy. Certainly people other than leftists and liberals are quite capable of demonizing or dehumanizing their enemies. I never claimed otherwise. But I think Sowell is correct, it tends to be somewhat more common among doctrinaire liberals -- not only has he supported his case well with abundant examples, it's something that jibes with my own personal experience. And I think he has put his finger on the reason why: it's a tendency that arises out of their fundamental view of the world and human nature.

My experience tells me something different. I certaily believe right wing pundits tend to be far more nasty than left wing; Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.

While it is important to know one's enemy it's just as important to know one's "friends" and it seems most are too busy attacking to look at their own side objectively. But we can agree to disagree. I'm sure we can agree though that both do it excessively to the detriment of us all. The problem is most only complain when the other side does it and seem to love it from their one side.

Why are you surprised at which side is supposed to be which? Look at the gun control bills being laid out on the table now in states across the country and at the federal level. You can't deny, the great majority of them are coming at us from liberal politicians.

I'm not surprised by it, i just reject Sowell's premise. Yes, there are some grains of truth in it but i do disagree with many of his conclusions. There are by the way quite a few studies out concering the pyschology and brain structures of liberals and conservatives.

 

[Ehtereon11B]

I tried starting a firearms safety course on campus during my undergrad years (around when Virginia tech shooting) and was told "We don't want to promote violence." Which made me laugh because this was at a military school. So I got some alumni together and a few police officers to form the club off campus. Same year the school spent $3 Million setting up a campus wide emergency notification system to send warnings of active shooters, gas leaks etc. Huge waste of money compared to allowing campus carry.

 

[Billy Shears]

My experience tells me something different. I certaily believe right wing pundits tend to be far more nasty than left wing; Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.

Really? I don't think they can hold a candle to Amanda Marcotte, Randi Rhodes, Touré, Eric Alterman, Keith Olberman, et al. Maybe Savage can be as nasty as they are, but I've always dismissed him as a fringe wacko anyway.

While it is important to know one's enemy it's just as important to know one's "friends" and it seems most are too busy attacking to look at their own side objectively. But we can agree to disagree. I'm sure we can agree though that both do it excessively to the detriment of us all. The problem is most only complain when the other side does it and seem to love it from their one side.

Oh I complain when both sides do it. That's why I've always actively avoided listening to Savage most of the time, and it's why I don't think much of Ann Coulter, for example. Their extremism and invective tends to drown out whatever good arguments they may make, and they bring conservatives into disrepute more than they help it.

I'm not surprised by it, i just reject Sowell's premise. Yes, there are some grains of truth in it but i do disagree with many of his conclusions. There are by the way quite a few studies out concering the pyschology and brain structures of liberals and conservatives.

You might look up the recent ones by Jonathan Haidt. His research converted him from a self-described liberal to a centrist. Also interesting, he found that conservatives could imitate liberals pretty well, but not the other way around. In other words, when asked to answer a series of survey questions as they felt their political opponents would answer them, conservatives could accurately answer the questions the way a liberal would, but the reverse was not true at all. It suggests at least the possibility that conservatives may understand liberals better than liberals understand conservatives.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

There's an Ugly Truth about ****** society. We have always had a Designated Scapegoat Group. Or two. Groups that could be treated like dirt, without consequence.
Today? We're still the national whipping boy, along with Christians of all denominations, and conservatives.

Well... Don't beat up on us - and yourself - too much, it of course is not just America but most any society. It's only an issue of open awareness of the sentiments and actions.

 

[SSN Vet]

Welcome to the new apartheid!

it could get ugly really fast...

things will accelerate if the Dimwhits take the house and 60 seats in the senate in '14

Then you'll see the 'real' agenda

 

[JustinJ]

Really? I don't think they can hold a candle to Amanda Marcotte, Randi Rhodes, Touré, Eric Alterman, Keith Olberman, et al. Maybe Savage can be as nasty as they are, but I've always dismissed him as a fringe wacko anyway.

We can disagree on which is nastier but as i understand those i listed have much larger followings which seems to say more about what appeals to more of their base.

Regardless, we have no right to judge or complain about insults given how we so frequently sling them.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Regardless, we have no right to judge or complain about insults given how we so frequently sling them.

Justin, Insults really, disagreement, means I'm a racist terrorist, yet calling a leftist an idiot, or anti or dimocat is...
PLEASE
PLEASE
PLEASE
where is a conservative pundit who has called for HALF the crap that hose people have?
where is the condemnation of Marh for calling for a woman to be raped, where is the RABID (remember the guy who lost cause CONSERVATIVES were condemning him on 'real rape' comments) condemnation of liberal pundits????

Crickets, crickets crickets
and yet I should be killed in the town square? cause I own guns and don't groupthink like them, now tell me?

 

[JustinJ]

where is a conservative pundit who has called for HALF the crap that hose people have?
where is the condemnation of Marh for calling for a woman to be raped, where is the RABID (remember the guy who lost cause CONSERVATIVES were condemning him on 'real rape' comments) condemnation of liberal pundits????

No, no crickets. So because a conservative pundit has not directed insults at you specifically it's okay for him or her to say whatever about people of a different political persuasion?

So you pretty much just proved my point though. You are full of anger over something somebody you disagre with said(which i'm pretty sure is a lie) and just go on with no problem about your side's vitriol. Why aren't you complaining about Limbaugh's slut comment? A litte hypocritical, no?

 

[Shadow 7D]

No justin, I'm not full of anger (thanks for projecting< It's an effective way to minimize what I say, by claiming I'm not rational, rather I'm partisan for emotional reasons)
I'm pissed at the LACK of civil discourse
you express a mindset, there is no speaking of conflicting views
If you disagree with many liberals, in MY experience, you are attacked, not discussed, just instantly put into insults and accusations.

And of course the conservative is the 'bad guy' no matter what a liberal does, it's someone else's fault....
Disagree with them, there is something wrong with YOU that you don't agree...
and you are always at fault, they are the victim

So, in "civil" discourse, it's all right for 'Liberal' leaders to call for the rape of people, speak of the need to execute 'racist NRA terrorist'
But, disagree with them, and you are insulting them... and need to shut up

what you have here are methods to SHUT DOWN the conversation (rules for radicals is about NOT talking)
Instead you minimize (technical term) the opposition scream you are right at the top you your lungs

 

[JustinJ]

No justin, I'm not full of anger (thanks for projecting)
I'm pissed at the LACK of civil discourse
you express a mindset, there is no speaking of conflicting views
If you disagree with many liberals, in MY experience, you are attacked, not discussed, just instantly put into insults and accusations.

I wasn't projecting, just reading a tone. You have 6.7K posts on this board so I have to assume your experience matches mine that conservatives do the exact same thing.

When i hear people on the left make broad insults against conservatives or complain about right wing vitriol i call them on it just the same. But i seem to be the only one who objects to it evenly.

Regardless, unless we accept that a love of guns must expand to a wider demographic and start trying to appeal to a greater diversity gun rights have no hope. White republican males is a shrining demographic and can't continue holding onto gun rights by itself. If any left leaning or middle of the road person stumbles onto this board we'll be lucky if they last beyond a few threads.

 

[Shadow 7D]

No, no crickets. So because a conservative pundit has not directed insults at you specifically it's okay for him or her to say whatever about people of a different political persuasion?

So you pretty much just proved my point though. You are full of anger over something somebody you disagre with said(which i'm pretty sure is a lie) and just go on with no problem about your side's vitriol. Why aren't you complaining about Limbaugh's slut comment? A litte hypocritical, no?

No, what's resounding in silence is the LACK of comment/condemnation of people like Mahr
The right, says, 'these people go too far'
Where are these people in the left, the leaders are silent (and Obama NEVER gave back the money he took from Mahr....)

 

[Shadow 7D]

Centrist are radicalized by polarization, cooperation....
there was an analyses I read a few years ago on 'center issues'
The gist was that there was extensive polarization, the current politics don't help
and this administration is running 'divide and conquer'

Don't like it one bit at all
I'm a fiscal conservative, and mostly socially liberal (in the original meaning, which puts me to a rather libertarian view, (not capital L))

and sadly there doesn't seem to be a place for me in current politics.

I have to assume your experience matches mine that conservatives do the exact same thing.

as for this, no, not YET, go check out the Democratic Underground, you would think you were at a clan meeting if you switched pejoratives.