Just how much have the 'libs' done to encourage gun ownership in this country?


PDA






anymanusa
November 8, 2008, 09:01 PM
What I mean is, how many people have guns, or more guns than they would have if it weren't for the libs and their gun bans and gun laws.

I for one, have many more guns than I would if it weren't for the Clinton AWB. I actually 'gunned' up just prior to the election (the current one), because I saw the writing on the wall.

Now if we were a calm, collected, rational society that actually addressed real problems, rather than promoting liberal agendas, I'd probably not have any guns at all, or maybe just a pistol or rifle. But as soon as Clinton made it illegal for 10 years, when that ban expired, I went "all in".

I plan on staying "all in" until rational thought once again prevails, if that ever happens again.

What do you think?

If you enjoyed reading about "Just how much have the 'libs' done to encourage gun ownership in this country?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Lookn4Brass
November 8, 2008, 09:10 PM
AMEN, and pass the bang bang sticks!:)

Sepia
November 8, 2008, 10:18 PM
I know that I jumped in to get my concealed permit once it was all over but they crying for B.O. So I'm sure that many guns were purchased in his honor as well as other communist liberals.

jakemccoy
November 9, 2008, 04:52 AM
These "conservative" and "liberal" labels really don't mean much in real life, do they? Eight years ago, GWB was pegged to be one of the most conservative Presidents ever - small government, fiscally conservative, etc. On GWB's watch, the federal government has grown to gargantuan proportions, and the bailouts have brought us epic socialism that will be entrenched in our system for a long while. Yet, folks still toss around the "conservative" and "liberal" terms as if these terms are supposed to mean something to me. Well, they don't.

Sinixstar
November 9, 2008, 06:44 AM
Yea, let's not turn this into a liberal/conservative debate.

I learned how to shoot at age 6, was carrying my dad's old model 37 in the field by 12, and shot my first .44mag at 14.

I'm also a member of the Douglas County Democratic Central Committee. Here in Nevada. I'm on this site to get some advice about a rifle for girlfriend.

As I mentioned in the other thread, 2nd rights are extraordinarily low on the list of priorities right now. In case you haven't noticed - there's just a few slightly bigger issues in the world today...

vanguard
November 9, 2008, 08:59 AM
It doesn't take a lot of research to figure out that spending under "conservative" presidents has been a lot higher than it's been under the only democratic president in the last 28 years. The term doesn't mean much to me.

As for liberals driving gun buying, I hope so. I took two new shooters from work to the range last week and now another is asking to go. To me, that's the way to drive a gun ownership culture. Once people take an interest and learn more they'll feel better about guns. I read this on the daily kos today.

I'm nervous around guns because they kill in an instant. I don't even feel safe when the gun is openly worn by a police officer. There has been more than a couple of times when I have been in line somewhere behind an old fat cop, with my hand inches from his pistol. I could have had it out and fired before he could react if I had been in a suicidal mood - not that I would ever do such a thing, but a crazy person could. Did I mention, I don't like be around guns, period?

A guy like that is uncomfortable around what he perceives to be a death ray. If we can get him to the range and show him how to use the tool he'll feel better. If we can help him understand their utility in terms of home defense (or farm defense from predators) he'll think differently. Libs are mad a Bush and generally think of him as "shredding the constitution" for the way he denies prisoners a right to a speedy trial. When I point out that they are shredding the constitution by not supporting gun rights it makes them think. In my experience, liberals aren't bad people, they just think the world would be better off without guns and don't see their appeal.

Rxxdoc
November 9, 2008, 09:31 AM
I agree the Liberal vs Conservative labels need to go. I am considered very liberal in reguards to the environment, but I also believe in a smaller federal goverment control and fiscal responsibility. I own a Ford hybrid because I believe oil is a national security issue.

Our issue is about protecting the second ammendment. Not our stance on the environmet or the goverment spending. Stay focused and stay friendly.

Telling somebody their ideas are stupid is just asking for a fight. Try to win people over with reason.

I am not going to fight this statment, but many of our founding fathers would have been considered progressive and liberal for their time.

JWarren
November 9, 2008, 09:42 AM
No, the Liberal and Conservative labels need to stay.

But it is an error to automatically assume that Democrats or Republicans ARE synonymous with those labels respectively.

I'd much prefer that those that use the terms for themselves actually demonstrate those characteristics.

In addition, there are different THINGS to be liberal or conservative about. I know plenty of people who describe themselves as Fiscal Conservatives and Social Liberals.



-- John

Good Shot Group
November 9, 2008, 09:46 AM
My hippy brother is going to purchase an AK and at least a 1,000 rounds of ammunition. He hasn't owned a firearm in his life. But he told me that he better, "get one while he can". It was very suprising to say the least.

Sinixstar
November 9, 2008, 09:48 AM
Our issue is about protecting the second ammendment. Not our stance on the environmet or the goverment spending. Stay focused and stay friendly.

I couldn't agree more.
The 2nd issue does not break down party lines. There are democrats that support gun rights, and republicans that oppose them.

We shouldn't let this turn into a left vs right issue - because that's not what it is.

anymanusa
November 9, 2008, 11:52 AM
GWB was pegged to be one of the most conservative Presidents ever - small government, fiscally conservative, etc. On GWB's watch

We are talking in a context of gun rights... let's keep it to that, and yes, in that context, the 'lib' and 'conservative' labels do apply.


I'm also a member of the Douglas County Democratic Central Committee

I didn't say 'democrat', did I? I realize many democrats are the staunch advocates that I depend on to keep my 2nd amendment rights.

Once again, the 'lib' label does apply to the subject at hand.

It doesn't take a lot of research to figure out that spending under "conservative" presidents has been a lot higher than it's been under the only democratic president in the last 28 years

How can so many of these posts be off topic?? I clearly stated, or I thought I clearly stated that 'liberals' have driven a culture of gun ownership by focusing on them. I'm not interested in talking about president Bush or Obama in this thread.

No, the Liberal and Conservative labels need to stay.

But it is an error to automatically assume that Democrats or Republicans ARE synonymous with those labels respectively.

Finally, a voice of reason.

My hippy brother is going to purchase an AK and at least a 1,000 rounds of ammunition. He hasn't owned a firearm in his life

My point exactly. I have 3 friends, 2 of which are hippies, that are all new gun owners as of the past month. Two have never owned a gun before, and the other one just happened to have been given 2 guns from his grandfather recently, but they all want to 'gun up' before what they perceive to be a very gun-unfriendly time hits us.

The liberal focus on gun rights and ownership have contributed greatly to the 'gunning up' of america, imo.

Just Jim
November 9, 2008, 12:00 PM
If the socialist have promoted gun ownership it wasn't on purpose, it was out of fear.

jj

Just Jim
November 9, 2008, 12:10 PM
This board is afraid to talk politics and will lock any thread with the mear mention of it but to understand WHY a party turns into gun grabbers is pure politics.

Socialism goes for gun control because they fear people. Socialism controls peoples lives and to have people armed means less control.

It's that simple.

jj

hso
November 9, 2008, 12:19 PM
We are talking in a context of gun rights... let's keep it to that, and yes, in that context, the 'lib' and 'conservative' labels do apply.

While we've not had this particular conversation before about Panic/Preparation buying, we've had this tired old topic about "liberals" and "conservatives" before. It goes nowhere and does little except divide people in the firearms community. Let's keep the simple minded labeling above the name-calling level and remember that your prejudices may not be accurate (regardless of how blindly you cling to them). They just don't foster sound discussions.

Right now we have a very clear example of how concern over the potential political action to limit RKBA has motivated a large group of Americans to purchase firearms. These folks would identify themselves as "conservative", "liberal", Democrat or Republican. They're now gunowners. There are more of us today than yesterday. There will be more of us tomorrow than yesterday. Folks some of you want to call "libs", as if it means the same to everyone as it does you, are amongst them and may even be the majority.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to welcome them instead of trying to keep coming up with ways to divide the community with pejorative labels?

Just Jim
November 9, 2008, 12:30 PM
Fear has a way of removing societies labels. It is a good motivator too, but when the fear goes away people revert back to their old selves unless they have taken on an understanding of guns and the freedoms they give people.

People need to be taught why the course of gun grabbing and who does it shouldn't be followed. However political conversation is stiffled and this will be the end of the gun owner.

I suggest a pure political about guns and ownership place of disscussion here at THR. A place where people can use civility to discuss guns and their party. How about it???

jj

anymanusa
November 9, 2008, 12:33 PM
HSO, and how would you have had me title my thread so as not to offend peoples' sensibilties? Remember this is a thread title to sum up an idea, and draw people into a specific conversation, and I thought the word 'lib' or 'liberal' worked better than any other.

Maybe you have a more pc suggestion?

hso
November 9, 2008, 12:34 PM
A place where people can use civility to discuss guns and their party. How about it???

Tried it. It didn't work. See all the discussions about it in Technical. Years and years of discussion and yet people who were otherwise good rational helpful members became ranting flaming trolls for "their side". Tragic. Disgusting.

hso
November 9, 2008, 12:41 PM
The first sentence of your post was perfect. It sets up the discussion accurately. The post is fine.

The label Anti is the one we should be concerned about. We know what that means. We know what an anti wants and wants for us. The other labels are pretty difficult for folks to agree upon since they mean different things to the wide membership of THR and to people in the wider gun community.

subierex
November 9, 2008, 12:42 PM
When it comes to politics and the 2A, I think you need to look more at each individual's record. There certainly are plenty of them out there today that are no friend of the 2A. You know who they are without even knowing what their party affiliation is.

Just Jim
November 9, 2008, 12:46 PM
Years and years of discussion and yet people who were otherwise good rational helpful members became ranting flaming trolls for "their side". Tragic. Disgusting.

I can understand how free speech can be disgusting when you don't agree with what is being said. I do give the board an A+ for effort if you tried it.

Civility is a lost art and has been repalced by the lock because people on the net hide. But because of this the PC (pre-conditioning for socialist takeover)crowd will use the advantage to take our guns away.

Freedom isn't free, sometimes you have to hear disgusting words to keep freedom alive. I am going to drop the subject here and never bring it up again.

jj

Joe Demko
November 9, 2008, 12:51 PM
If folks could get past the idea that people who disagree with them are evil, such discussion might be possible.
In the meantime, you can go to APS if you want to participate in rants about the "libs" and all that is wrong with them.

goon
November 9, 2008, 01:06 PM
I agree that the far left had kind of stuck it to themselves on this one.
The mere thought that you may not be able to obtain an AK or AR has been enough to pretty much drain all the distributors of everthing they have.
The word I'm getting from the local store is that all their distributors are completely sold out of AK's/AR's/etc. and that 5.56, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51 are also getting hard to find. My local stores still have some HDR's around because they were already well stocked and because my area is kind of saturated, but I suspect that they'll also be sold totally out before too long.

And you know what?
I'm freaking loving it. Anything that gets the American people to arm themselves is enough to make me crack a crooked little smile. This time, it's not just the "gun nuts" - The gun nuts have been preaching firepower and stacking ammo for their AK's in their closets for years. This is the "normal" people buying the best firepower they can afford. Did I mention that it kind of gives me the giggles? :D

The next question I'd ask, were I one of TPTB, is "What, exactly, are all these people planning to do with all this hardware?"
It has to make you wonder...
What kind of a "just in case" scenario are these people envisioning that makes them take a "drastic" step like buying an AR-15?

A-190
November 9, 2008, 01:09 PM
Well don't know about the "gunning up" thing.

I have been around guns all my life. I don't consider them intrinsically evil............just the users of them.

I have carried a gun for the government now over forty years, first with the army and until recently as a main street cop. Im retired now and glad I don't HAVE to carry them if I so choose.

That being said. No I didn't go out and buy any because of the election................all ready have what I want and will get what I want in the future if something pleases me.

For example I just recently purchased a S&W model 32 terrier, produced in 61 and NIB never shot.............Antique pistol, antique cartridge (38 s&w) but will make an excellent ccw pocket pistol................and I will put up that old new model top break I carried ................ok ok, I know, neither one are particularly suitable for personal protection like my police weapons were, but............................

hso
November 9, 2008, 01:11 PM
To get back on topic -

anymanusa, I was pretty much like you. Until the AWB I was just a milsurp collector. I wanted one example of each rifle used from 1900 until, then, 1994. I had an SP1 for my "M16" example and a P17 Enfield and was looking for a deal on the 03 and Garand and M1 carbine. I had a "doh" moment when I was told I needed to add a 45-70 to the list. But I otherwise didn't really think much about the question of carry or capacity or ...

Then the discussions of the AWB came along and they didn't make any sense to me. I hung out at the local police supply and other gun shops looking for a deal on my milsurps and never heard about problems. I saw the guns that came into the police supply when the local counties sold off evidence firearms and was usually impressed by how much was just junk used by criminals. It just didn't make sense that anyone would propose banning any firearm. I'm a safety "engineer" so I started researching the statistics on crimes and weapons like anyone else could and there just didn't seem to be any basis for the hoopla. The only way I could reconcile the disconnect between the crime stats and what I saw was that there were people fear mongering for political gain or that they had some other agenda. They certainly couldn't be interested in reducing crime by banning certain types of guns because the guns they wanted to ban just weren't used in enough crimes to matter.

That's when I became active in the RKBA community. Thanks to the AWB I've dedicated hours each day to opposing restrictions on our right to keep and bear arms.

I hope that the threat of such restrictions cause many more to join our ranks, even if it's just purchasing a gun and learning to shoot so they can explain to their non-shooting friends that a gun is just a thing that doesn't act without the intent of a person. Perhaps there will even be a few who will actually work to preserve our rights who never thought about it before.

goon
November 9, 2008, 01:25 PM
Well don't know about the "gunning up" thing.

...

That being said. No I didn't go out and buy any because of the election................all ready have what I want and will get what I want in the future if something pleases me.

For example I just recently purchased a S&W model 32 terrier, produced in 61 and NIB never shot.............Antique pistol, antique cartridge (38 s&w) but will make an excellent ccw pocket pistol................and I will put up that old new model top break I carried ................ok ok, I know, neither one are particularly suitable for personal protection like my police weapons were, but............................


Same story with many others.
Many of the more "hard-core" gunowners already have a couple semi-auto rifles or a hi-cap 9mm handguns. Either that or we've already owned them and decided we're happier with something else.
But what seems to be going on here is that people who've never owned guns before or who've only owned "fudd guns" are seeing a need for HDR's. The implied threat of losing that right is enough to make them act in a big way - buying a rifle that will turn a car into swiss cheese in a few seconds and that will cost the better part of $1,000 or more.
It's a huge step, especially when you consider that many people don't really have the financial security to make a purchase like that right now but they're still doing it.

Nothing that you, I, the NRA, or the GOA said could have convinced all these people to make that decision last week at this time.
Tomorrow even more of them will be buying AK's.

Sinixstar
November 9, 2008, 01:28 PM
The next question I'd ask, were I one of TPTB, is "What, exactly, are all these people planning to do with all this hardware?"
It has to make you wonder...

This may prove to be a case of "careful what you wish for"...
I don't know about you - but the thought of thousands of new novice gun owners with AR's in their hands, is not exactly the most settling feeling.
It's great more people are getting interested, and taking a stand with their wallets - but we do have to consider some of the implications down the road. Educated shooters with a respect for what they're doing are not the problem, and pose very little ammo for the "anti" crowd. Uneducated shooters who lack that respect could create a firestorm.
We need to do everything we can to make sure the newly initiated act responsibly - or this surge in ownership could easily backfire.

Just Jim
November 9, 2008, 01:59 PM
There is alot of fear out there right now and it is right that there should be with the econmy tanking and a new government taking over. The direction this all goes is speculation now and I don't believe the public has alot of confidence. Guess we will see what happens.:scrutiny: :what: :banghead:

jj

fastattack
November 9, 2008, 02:30 PM
The liberal agenda has influenced me to be way more active in my gun buying than I ever would have. This is directly related to the concept that my freedom is not theirs to take away. You should have seen the run on 20 and 30 round mags here in California before the stupid 10 round limit went into affect in 2000. I even sent my "representatives" a thank-you note saying in effect that, if not for their anti-gun policies, I would have never needed to buy them.

I have friends that have firearms I can't buy, simply because they bought them back in the day and I wasn't forward thinking enough to realize someday I wouldn't be able to (not to mention lack of money). If that doesn't frost your a$$ I don't know what will.

-v-
November 9, 2008, 08:22 PM
If anything, its good that people are buying more guns. As always, people in the USA vote as much with their dollars as they do with their votes, and vote more actively with their Franklins, Washingtons, and Grants then they do with the ballot. Hopefully, this will make the politicians take note that "the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed" and that the American people have spoken.

goon
November 9, 2008, 11:47 PM
This may prove to be a case of "careful what you wish for"...
I don't know about you - but the thought of thousands of new novice gun owners with AR's in their hands, is not exactly the most settling feeling.
It's great more people are getting interested, and taking a stand with their wallets - but we do have to consider some of the implications down the road. Educated shooters with a respect for what they're doing are not the problem, and pose very little ammo for the "anti" crowd. Uneducated shooters who lack that respect could create a firestorm.
We need to do everything we can to make sure the newly initiated act responsibly - or this surge in ownership could easily backfire.

I'm not that worried.
There are some stupid people running around but they'd be just as stupid with Ruger Blackhawks or Marlins.
Or with lawnmowers for that matter...

If you enjoyed reading about "Just how much have the 'libs' done to encourage gun ownership in this country?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!