Why are liberals against the second amendment?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Statist does't always mean anti-gun. For instance, there are probably some people who want the state to intervene to protect guns.
Click to expand...

A state that acts in such a manner is most assuredly NOT statist. Quite the opposite, in fact. Statism implies a pretty much continaul attempt at centralization of power. Any state that acts to protect guns (by which, I'm assuming you mean a traditionally pro-liberty position on private firearms ownership) is not centralizing power.

For your statement to be true, it would involve highly unorthodox interpretations of both gun rights and the term "statism."
 
smaller goverment, personal freedom, pro-gun....sounds kinda Republican
Click to expand...

Maybe back during the Eisenhower administration, but since then not so much. We had just as many antigun legislation passed by the Republicans as the Democrats in the name of fighting crime. They increased government size, increased spending, and decreased personal freedom as much as the Democrats, if not more so (especially Government size, thinking of the Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr and Bush Jr administrations).

Now if they can remove the 91 ban on imported non sporting arms and lift some of the 86 restrictions, not to mention the 2001 ban on imports of barrels for certain guns. Then there the likes of the Hatch-Craig gun control amendment and so on. I really don't see why anyone thinks either party does anything but whatever will get them the most votes in the elections.

Now back to the questions. Some liberals want to ban firearms as they see them as a way to control the country and force power over others. Some liberals see them as a defensive method to protect the people against the status quo. Some conservatives want to ban firearms as a way to maintain society as they see it. Some see it as a way to protect the status quo from laws forced upon them.

Then there are the other millions of views. At times I think the majority of people accusing the evil liberals of wanting to take away the people guns are those up for election and want to make sure they get the votes.
 
A state that acts in such a manner is most assuredly NOT statist. Quite the opposite, in fact. Statism implies a pretty much continaul attempt at centralization of power. Any state that acts to protect guns (by which, I'm assuming you mean a traditionally pro-liberty position on private firearms ownership) is not centralizing power.

For your statement to be true, it would involve highly unorthodox interpretations of both gun rights and the term "statism."
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Wabbit season - Duck season - wabbit season - duck season...

I claim to be a Libertarian. That's what comes closest to the way I feel. A lot like Reagan about the Democrat party "the party left me" I feel that way about Republicans for the most part.

Statist my arse. What Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Reed want to do to us is communist!
 
(chuckling)
You know what? All the confusion, obfuscation, pandering, misinformation,
straw arguments, and hypotheticals just shows me that people just CAN NOT THINK OBJECTIVELY AND LOGICALLY.
It is all what you want, and what you think you want and what you actually get.
"I want a safer society. I think I can get it by banning or restricting firearms. But there are always going to be bad people. But I want a safer society. And on and on and on and on..."
 
Quote:
Why are liberals against the second amendment?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen this link posted in this thread, but if it's a dupe, my apologies.

Would you think you'd find support for the 2nd Amendment at the ultra-liberal Daily Kos web site? It's an interesting article... followed by a bunch of inane comments from Brady Bunchers... but it shows a different liberal perspective on gun ownership.

Worth a read, whether you like it or not.

Why Liberals Should Love The Second Amendment
 
Liberals & the 2nd Ammendment...

I consider myself to be rather liberal but then again not. I guess it depends upon the issue. On some issues I lean in a conservative direction while on others I lean liberal. So again it depends on the issue.
Now with regards to firearms, well we have a right to bear arms. Plain and simple guns don't commit crimes, criminals do. The other day in my town a man & wife came home to find a burglar in their home. A struggle began and the burglar stabbed the man. Let's ban all knives! That will stop stabbings. In fact let's make it illegal to live in a house! That way if there are no houses there won't be any home break-ins.
CNN did a survey and today better than 77% of Americans polled said that we have a 2nd amendment right to own firearms. President Obama knows and agrees with this so I wish folks would stop beating up on our President for the gun control thing. Prices are through the roof thanks to Capitalism plain & simple. And nobody is going to take your treasured guns away so please stop worrying about that.
GOD bless, go out to the range and shoot up a storm and please stop worrying. Maybe if the hysteria stops, prices and availability will come back down to earth.
 
Code: 
Why are liberals against the second amendment?
Their "argument" goes something like this...

  • Guns are bad
  • Guns kill people
  • Guns are the cause of society's ills
  • Gun owners are virtual criminals
  • Citizens who cling to guns are not mentally healthy
  • Average citizens should not have the freedom to defend himself/herself with lethal force
  • Violent criminals willingly abide by gun control laws
  • Gun manufacturers are to blame for all violent crime
  • Violent crime wouldn't exist if guns were banned
  • The higher violent crime rates in other countries has nothing to do with an unarmed populace
  • Gun manufacturers conspire to organize gang activity amongst ethnic groups
  • Gun manufactures invented Gangsta Rap
  • One million children are killed by guns everyday
  • Ten million children are killed by guns everyday
  • Twenty million children are killed by guns everyday
  • Our utopia awaits on the other side of complete gun control enforcement
  • Only government personnel are capable of handling firearms safely
  • All government personnel are a different, flawless, perfected, race of human kind
  • All gun owners suffer from a number of mental illnesses
  • All gun owners are slack-jawed, red necked, racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobes
  • Concealed carry permits are issued at random to inner city gang members
  • Only federally qualified individuals are competent enough to carry guns
  • Guns are readily available at Wal Mart to children and felons
  • Gun shows hand out free handguns without checking ID
  • Mountain militias manufacture and distribute black market machine guns
  • Assault weapons tend to fire without operator control
  • Manufacturers often label full-auto guns as semi-auto to slip them through
  • All semi-automatic guns eventually become full automatic machine guns
  • Any child can convert a semi-automatic gun to full automatic with an emery board
  • Children order all types of guns over the internet everyday
  • Society is more peaceful when the populace is dominated over by the government
  • All governments are under the obligation to completely control its citizenry by force
  • The proper place for the citizenry is underneath the thumb of government
  • Totalitarianism is a wonderful path to nirvana
  • Communism is coming and we'll need your guns in order to get there
  • The government can't effectively oppress you if you keep and bear arms, so hand them over
  • Guns are responsible for 100% of the deaths in America
  • Gun violence is the #1, #2, and the #3 causes of death in the USA, Canada, and Switzerland
  • There is no reason that a person should ever own, possess, use, keep or bear arms
  • The Second Amendment was meant for the 1800s and the old west
  • The Second Amendment (and the rest of the Constitution) is outdated and needs revision
  • The Second Amendment applies to organized militias (which are obsolete), but not individuals
  • The Bill of Rights and the Constitution were written by slave owning Nazis
  • We won the past two elections, you now have no rights, get used to it
  • You'll be happier without your guns, trust us
  • You don't need guns now that BHO has descended from the Heavens
  • Hope & Change = Change the 2nd Amendment, & Hope for the best
  • If you take the guns of law abiding citizens, violent criminals will surrender their guns too
  • Owning a gun makes you impotent
  • Charlton Heston's hands are now cold & dead, so... hand over the guns
 
I haven't seen this link posted in this thread, but if it's a dupe, my apologies.

Would you think you'd find support for the 2nd Amendment at the ultra-liberal Daily Kos web site? It's an interesting article... followed by a bunch of inane comments from Brady Bunchers... but it shows a different liberal perspective on gun ownership.

Worth a read, whether you like it or not.

Why Liberals Should Love The Second Amendment
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that link. Very interesting, well reasoned article. I was also encouraged to see how much support he received from people on that site.
 
It's hard to tell a man with a gun, to give up 60% of his income to the government, stop smoking his cigarettes/cigars, stop driving his SUV, stop keeping his house 72 degrees and don't eat fast food.

I find it interesting that the people who were dancing naked at Woodstock, smoking pot, taking LSD, having sit-ins and love-ins (that's still a good idea, I think they call it swinging now), protesting the government that they were free under the constitution. That no one could tell them what to do with their bodies, that money was bad, that you shouldn't trust anyone over 35 are now the ones telling us how we must handle every second of our lives.
 
I just bought a house and I have been searching Ebay for art I like for the house and I came across something interesting today when I used the word search "peace".

I came across this painting,as I looked at it ,it made me think.The first half depicts death and misery,the middle represents weapons and the world,the latter part depicts peace and happiness.I want to live in peace and happiness,it hurts me to think of all the killing and sadness created by war and violence.

However as I looked at that M16 I thought "most of us want peace,but in the real world there are bad people and sometimes you got to use a weapon to protect yourself and make that peace".The difference with alot of anti's is their intention for peace is good but they naively believe ridding the world of guns will make peace.The artists name of the art is "no more guns".

p88659_2a.jpg

The second painting I bought for the kitchen ,it represents what I want and believe humanity needs to strive for,I want peace and love in my life and for everybody,I don't want to hurt or kill anybody.However I own guns and understand that there might be a need to use them in self defense hopefully not,hopefully my guns only ever blow up clay targets and paper targets.

love.jpg


Latter on in the day I started looking at WW2 photos.I came across this one and it mad me feel terrible.1942 Ukraine,German soldiers murdering a woman with her child.What anti's don't understand is while they want to disarm civilians governments through history are responsible for more murder using a gun than any common criminal could ever do.We all want peace,unfortunately there are those who sometimes gain power who don't.

battle_holocaust23.jpg
 
Latter on in the day I started looking at WW2 photos.I came across this one and it mad me feel terrible.1942 Ukraine,German soldiers murdering a woman with her child.What anti's don't understand is while they want to disarm civilians governments through history are responsible for more murder using a gun than any common criminal could ever do.We all want peace,unfortunately there are those who sometimes gain power who don't.
Click to expand...
1. I once talked to an ex-Canadian cop in a long range rifle mailing list who said that you have a DUTY to go into a racial concentration camp, if the government tells you to. As I recall, he said the place to fight that sort of thing was "in court". Somehow he wasn't able to explain how Anne Frank wasn't able to get a writ of habeus corpus out of the German government.

2. Years ago in usenet talk.politics.guns, there was a guy claiming to be Jewish who asserted that the ONLY appropriate response to the Holocaust was to flee. I asked him where a friend's father was supposed to flee from Romania TO at the height of WWII. He didn't really have an answer other than to excoriate the Jews of Europe for not having the "f*****g sense" (an exact quote) to get out while they had the chance. Again, he had no explanation as to WHERE they were supposed to go, given that nobody wanted them, particularly the United States which only wanted Jews who might be able to build an atomic bomb. Roofers and cobblers need not apply.

There's a certain type of anti-gunner who has FAR more hatred and contempt for Mordechai Aniliewicz and the Bielsky brothers than for Hans Frank and Juergen Stroop. But then there's a certain class of person who doesn't mind Jews... so long as they're helpless victims. The Jews who killed their guards and broke out of Sobibor are more evil to them than a thousand Rheinhardt Hydrichs.
 
Four universals come to mind after reading this thread.

1. It is impossible to be completely rational in all areas of your life.

2. It is possible, and common, to be entirely objective with the data at hand and still end up with an incorrect conclusion.

3. Do not conflate disagreement with anger.

4. People tend to overestimate their own intelligence and underestimate the intelligence of others.

None of these universals come with party affiliation.
 
Getting back to the original question from 10 pages ago, why not ask an articulate anti-gunner what he thinks. I read a simple quote from Bill Clinton which I think is as clear a summary as you could want. As best I recall he said,

"We don't want to take away anyone's hunting rifle, but I think a mother should be able to walk her child to school without being afraid of running into some criminal with an AK-47."

OK, relax a minute, and think.

Yes, crimes with AK-47's (or variants) are rare, but instances of children being hit by accident are not unknown, and incidents of children and teens being mugged at gunpoint are not unknown, and incidents of older teens getting robbed or worse while clerking in convenience stores are positively common. Clinton may not have been precise in what he said, but he does have a point, and it's not at all stupid, controlling, or mean-spirited. It's a sincere interest in making certain dangerous places into better places to live.

As a general rule in political analysis, large voting blocs are rarely entirely wrong, and if you don't seen the good in their point of view (as well as the bad), you need to look again. Of course, you may never agree; that's the way of the world.

Just one more thing. Politicians are rarely imaginative, rarely analytical, and they trust their intuitions too much when crafting legislation. One result is they often resort to banning things. They miss a lot of opportunities to craft better, more effective solutions. This is true on the right as well as the left. Bush did his best to ban pre-marital sex and certainly wasted a lot of money on "abstinence education". Not surprisingly, he didn't get far.
 
Because they are for big govt.

Big govt is the idea that the govt knows better than you do. They show you how to spend your money, they tell you what you can do and cannot do, and it is all to make us "safe". :rolleyes:

The end result with big govt is socialism and ultimately communism.

True conservatives (kind of a buzz word nowadays) want smaller govt, less control over every aspect of our lives. Less tax, less govt control, etc...

Most anti gunners are idealistic and think in their small minds that less guns will mean less crime. The problem is, they dont realize that only the law abiding will comply, therefore leaving guns in the hands of the ciminals only. Few anti-gunners know much if anything about guns.
 
Liberals are not, by definition, for "big government." They believe there are certain things that the government can handle better than individual citizens. Conservatives also believe government can handle some things better than individual citizens. They just don't agree on what things.
Citing "true conservatives" is our old friend the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

One thing I've noted in this thread is that people on our side are every bit as likely as any anti or politician to launch into "sound byte mode." You are dealing here with an audience who is already essentially on your side WRT to the gun issue. We aren't even discussing that! Yet go back and read how many posts are the same stuff that gets trotted out for arguments with antis.
I'm really tempted to think that a lot of people on our side have put no thought into this matter at all. You don't know why you believe what you believe, so you can't explain it, let alone make it attractive to the uncommitted. You don't understand yourselves, much less the antis.
Is it only on the gun issue, or is it everything in your life where anybody who disagrees with you is automatically stupid or evil?
 
One thing I've noted in this thread is that people on our side are every bit as likely as any anti or politician to launch into "sound byte mode." You are dealing here with an audience who is already essentially on your side WRT to the gun issue. We aren't even discussing that! Yet go back and read how many posts are the same stuff that gets trotted out for arguments with antis.
I'm really tempted to think that a lot of people on our side have put no thought into this matter at all. You don't know why you believe what you believe, so you can't explain it, let alone make it attractive to the uncommitted. You don't understand yourselves, much less the antis.
Is it only on the gun issue, or is it everything in your life where anybody who disagrees with you is automatically stupid or evil?
Click to expand...

Anti gunners are stupid/ignorant or evil. They could be both, but they are always at least one or the other.

The idealists are stupid (although they mean well, they fail to see the reality of the world we live in which is why they are stupid), the ones who want power are evil. Seems pretty simple to me.

What planet are you from?
 
"We don't want to take away anyone's hunting rifle, but I think a mother should be able to walk her child to school without being afraid of running into some criminal with an AK-47."
Click to expand...
I don't own a "hunting rifle". I'm not a hunter.

He DOES want to take away my AR15, and in all likelihood my handguns.

The answer is "No, I refuse."
 
"We don't want to take away anyone's hunting rifle, but I think a mother should be able to walk her child to school without being afraid of running into some criminal with an AK-47."
Click to expand...

I support the right of all law abiding mothers to own AK's. That is something a criminal should fear.
 
I'm from the planet where thought, introspection, and effective communication of one's ideas are more valuable than just being a doubleplusgood duckspeaker for your side.
Click to expand...

Yet you have said nothing except tried to belittle other gun owners for believing the way they do.

You have not communicated well and you have shown a lack of introspection and thought.
 
He DOES want to take away my AR15, and in all likelihood my handguns.

The answer is "No, I refuse."
Click to expand...

Yeah, but this thread isn't about you. It's about understanding other people.
 
Their "argument" goes something like this...

Guns are bad
Guns kill people
Guns are the cause of society's ills
Gun owners are virtual criminals
Citizens who cling to guns are not mentally healthy
Average citizens should not have the freedom to defend himself/herself with lethal force
Violent criminals willingly abide by gun control laws
Gun manufacturers are to blame for all violent crime
Violent crime wouldn't exist if guns were banned
The higher violent crime rates in other countries has nothing to do with an unarmed populace
Gun manufacturers conspire to organize gang activity amongst ethnic groups
Gun manufactures invented Gangsta Rap
One million children are killed by guns everyday
Ten million children are killed by guns everyday
Twenty million children are killed by guns everyday
Our utopia awaits on the other side of complete gun control enforcement
Only government personnel are capable of handling firearms safely
All government personnel are a different, flawless, perfected, race of human kind
All gun owners suffer from a number of mental illnesses
All gun owners are slack-jawed, red necked, racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobes
Concealed carry permits are issued at random to inner city gang members
Only federally qualified individuals are competent enough to carry guns
Guns are readily available at Wal Mart to children and felons
Gun shows hand out free handguns without checking ID
Mountain militias manufacture and distribute black market machine guns
Assault weapons tend to fire without operator control
Manufacturers often label full-auto guns as semi-auto to slip them through
All semi-automatic guns eventually become full automatic machine guns
Any child can convert a semi-automatic gun to full automatic with an emery board
Children order all types of guns over the internet everyday
Society is more peaceful when the populace is dominated over by the government
All governments are under the obligation to completely control its citizenry by force
The proper place for the citizenry is underneath the thumb of government
Totalitarianism is a wonderful path to nirvana
Communism is coming and we'll need your guns in order to get there
The government can't effectively oppress you if you keep and bear arms, so hand them over
Guns are responsible for 100% of the deaths in America
Gun violence is the #1, #2, and the #3 causes of death in the USA, Canada, and Switzerland
There is no reason that a person should ever own, possess, use, keep or bear arms
The Second Amendment was meant for the 1800s and the old west
The Second Amendment (and the rest of the Constitution) is outdated and needs revision
The Second Amendment applies to organized militias (which are obsolete), but not individuals
The Bill of Rights and the Constitution were written by slave owning Nazis
We won the past two elections, you now have no rights, get used to it
You'll be happier without your guns, trust us
You don't need guns now that BHO has descended from the Heavens
Hope & Change = Change the 2nd Amendment, & Hope for the best
If you take the guns of law abiding citizens, violent criminals will surrender their guns too
Owning a gun makes you impotent
Charlton Heston's hands are now cold & dead, so... hand over the guns



thats funny :p thx OP
 
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
900
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