Why are liberals against the second amendment?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

ganymede

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
177
Location
Downtown SL, Ut.
I'll admit, I've always thought of myself as a liberal. But i just can't understand why so many liberals are agianst certian things. Like guns for example. To me, being liberal is more about alowing people to choose for themsleves what they should do. How they live their lives, what things they buy and do in their free time should be up to them and the government shouldn't be involved in people's personal life. Especialy when it comes to guns. Why dont some of my freinds see that?

I've always thought the founding fathers put the amendments to the constitution in order of importance. Right to protest, free speech and free religon first. Then as a close second the right to bear arms. So it doesnt make sense to me that someone could say it's unconstitutional to prohibit free speech but it is okay to impose bans on firearms. How can "the people" mean everybody in the first amendment and mean the army in another?
 
i can already hear the keys to this thread's lock... For the record I am a moderate liberal- but don't you think that conservatives have an equal number of things they're against?
 
As a U.C. Berkeley graduate, I can answer that question.

Because anti-gun is a liberal, anti-right thing to do. You have to understand that a lot of so called "liberals", including a lot of college students are too ignorant/stupid to research and to think for themselves, but rather ride the band wagon and stand up for the sake of being liberal.
 
you sound like a conservative with those 2 paragraphs. Some people don't follow the logic. they think it can't happen to them. If everyone who hated guns put those signs up that they don't have any, they would all be killed by criminals. Then the country would all be pro gun. It is a solution, although a bad humorous one.
 
to me, being liberal is more about alowing people to choose for themsleves what they should do. How they live their lives, what things they buy and do in their free time should be up to them and the government shouldn't be involved in people's personal life. Especialy when it comes to guns.
Click to expand...

+1 for me
 
to me, being liberal is more about alowing people to choose for themsleves what they should do. How they live their lives, what things they buy and do in their free time should be up to them and the government shouldn't be involved in people's personal life. Especialy when it comes to guns.
Click to expand...

smaller goverment, personal freedom, pro-gun....sounds kinda Republican :D
 
It stems from the liberal professors who are left over hippies from the 60's who preached peace and love. Turn on, tune in and drop out. That's from Timothy Leary the acid freak. People like him (died in 96') have been brainwashing our youth in the classrooms for decades. How do I know? I lived through it but managed to escape the madness. Today, those liberals are running the country. What a sad note to end on.
 
As a U.C. Berkeley graduate, I can answer that question.

Because anti-gun is a liberal, anti-right thing to do. You have to understand that a lot of so called "liberals", including a lot of college students are too ignorant/stupid to research and to think for themselves, but rather ride the band wagon and stand up for the sake of being liberal.
Click to expand...

Concur. I was in a room with a politician when her aide came in. He asked about something and she thought aloud, had to figure out what the herd would do to formulate her response.
 
For the record, I am not a moderate

Liberal at all.

Oxymoron.

Year: 1970

I was one of them "redneck hippies"

Let your freak flag fly.

I fail to understand how this

"Angels on the head of a pin" argument

Still exists.

I own and use a skilsaw.

No CCW there.

Plus a chainsaw.

Plus a shotgun.

Plus a 3/4 ton pickup.

I own and use a pistol.

Then the administrivia begins...

And, yeah,

I have a CCW for the pistols.

Just exactly when does a tool

Turn into a weapon (of potential mass destruction.)


Get a grip.

isher
 
Here's an angle you didn't expect...

What individual is most responsible for the organized anti-gun lobby in America, for the most far-reaching gun control procedures like background checks that affect you at every purchase, for proposed legislation to ban certain types of firearms arbitrarily, and whose name is synonymous with gun-grabbing in the name of ending violence and crime in America as if the gun is committing the crime and the criminal is innocent?

Is it a Liberal?

Is it a Democrat?

No, it is a lifelong committed Republican conservative: Sarah Brady.




So if you think this is a liberal problem, your sights are set at short range:
Gun grabbers are not just liberal Democrats, but include plenty of conservative Republicans.
Shooting sports enthusiasts and self-defense advocates are not just conservatives, but include plenty of liberal Democrats.

It would be wise to draw the line between gun haters and us gun lovers, not simply between those liberals and us conservatives.



A search of voting in Congress during the 1990's shows that 20% of Democrats in the House and Senate voted against gun control laws, while 33% of Republicans voted for gun control laws. The lines are not always drawn where you think they are. For voting records, go to the official Government Printing Office web site: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/ .



All this may be contrary to conventional Internet thinking, but I'm sure you are willing to keep an open mind. Just don't accuse me of being a liberal Democrat, because I'm certainly not.
I choose my friends based on the ideals they hold, not the labels we place on them. It would be wise to pick our advocates the same way.
 
While I am a conservative, I can't offer a whole lot of insight other than to say that no one (liberal or conservative) likes to have their freedoms trampled, and we all (liberal and conservative) need to be careful not to trample the rights of others for any reason.

Keep on shooting! :cool:
 
It's interesting to attempt to label a anti-gun person. We oftentimes use the down-and-dirty two label method- liberal or conservative. As one poster mentioned, Sarah Brady was a longtime Republican. She is now one of the biggest opponents of guns.

Of course, many times we say liberals are anti-gun [but it's basically a lazy way to label tthe anti-gun folks]. Then a bunch of liberals will quickly chime in and say they aren't. Political views and party affiliation aren't a true barometer of a anti- 2nd stance. Were it only that clear-cut.

One guy I shoot with is, IMO, as liberal as they get. I don't think there's an entitlement program enacted he isn't in favor of. But he's a staunch advocate of the 2nd.
 
Because guns are used to protect you from criminals and the govt.
libs want to control you thru poverty and race discrimination.
 
To me, being liberal is more about alowing people to choose for themsleves what they should do. How they live their lives, what things they buy and do in their free time should be up to them and the government shouldn't be involved in people's personal life.
Click to expand...
That's libertarian not liberal.

No, it is a lifelong committed Republican conservative: Sarah Brady.
Click to expand...

I guess that's why she supports liberal Democrats.
 
When you examine Marxist theory and strategy, the first almost perfectly Marxist move was the creation of police departments. Police departments "protect and serve." Thus you have no need to protect or serve yourself. They have the monopoly on this very basic human need, and grant it to the State.

'Course it doesn't work. But if you have the means of self defense, then the Marxist state loses ground in its all encompassing agenda.

Liberal and Marxist are not quite synonymous, but darned close. There are statists or collectivists, and, for lack of an better word, on the other end of the spectrum, individualists. Both liberal and conservative, as I see it, are statists to a certain extent. Each seeks to define the role of government in our lives, and each legitimizes it in its quest for that definition.

I guess I just don't see it as beneficial to legitimize the state, but rather seek to define my rights and discharge my responsibilities. In the end, the state is just certain individuals who seek to dominate and impose their will and power on me.

Can't dominate the cat!
 
To me, being liberal is more about alowing people to choose for themsleves what they should do.
Click to expand...


As state above, your ideals are more Libertarian than Liberal.


Give me some leeway on this for a second and pay attention to the shifting of terms...


POLITICAL liberals are NOT about freedom. If you look at those that we call "liberal" in politics, nothing about their policies have anything to do with freedom. It all has to do with the federal government having more control over you and your assets, beliefs, and ideology. It has more to do with telling a person what they can and can't do.

To me, that seems like LESS actual freedom.


Ideological liberals-- as one is often to encounter in the real world come in two forms:

1.) Those that believe that they will benefit personally from large-government policies and have -- in essence-- sold their "freedom in exchange for more government benefits. I detest this category.


2.) Freedom valuing persons that see the label "liberal" and somehow believe that they have ANYTHING in common with POLITICAL liberals. These will come to realize that in time.


In the end, the term "liberal" has been co-opted by the collective marketing department. When it comes to politics, liberalism is anything BUT freedom.


It disheartens me that many who consider themselves "liberal" get butt-hurt if anyone criticizes "liberalism." I've seen it plenty of times on THR. What these folks-- and maybe ALL of us-- don't realize is that the "liberals" that a lot of us have issues with are not the ideological liberals. It is the political liberals.

There should really be a distinction made. It would probably end a lot of the tensions that exist whenever "politics" sneeks into a discussion.


-- John
 
I love the comment about Sarah Brady...it is true.

Basically, as ideology, the 2ndA is neutral. The current Democrat party has anti-RKBA as a plank among its more liberal members and it has stuck.
 
QUOTE: lvcat2004,"As a U.C. Berkeley graduate, I can answer that question.
Because anti-gun is a liberal, anti-right thing to do. You have to understand that a lot of so called "liberals", including a lot of college students are too ignorant/stupid to research and to think for themselves, but rather ride the band wagon and stand up for the sake of being liberal."
You said a mouthful there:D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ganymede,
Get a copy of the Second Amendment Primer, by Les Adams, Palladium Press.

As to liberals and Democrats after you wade through it all you'll find
the only way to be and think is as a Republican, but not the republican party as it is today, corrupted FUBAR.:barf:

Today's phrase Liberal is a misnomer. Being a lberal has nothing to do with liberty or freedom, it's about everything in history that had to do with the failure of an otherwise successful government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
What can i say to convince my liberal friends guns are good?
2 3
Replies
72
Views
3K
Evergreen
E
G
  • Locked
I am a liberal
Replies
1
Views
898
JShirley
JShirley
A
  • Locked
Why Liberals Should Love the Second Amendment
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
5K
Aristodemus
A
LiveLife
  • Locked
Meaning of $349 complete ARs for the Second Amendment
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
4K
Robert
Robert
W
  • Locked
Guns are for liberals, too
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
ArfinGreebly
ArfinGreebly
Back
Top