A friendly reminder in dark times....


PDA






CoyoteSix
January 31, 2013, 06:36 AM
Remember during these crazy times in the post Sandy Hook gun culture, the Anti-gunners are still our fellow Americans.

I don't mean Obama, Feinstein, Bloomberg, Morgan or any other Political talking head. etc. I mean the co-worker you've got that you debate with every night on swing shift, the nosy neighbor that always calls Law Enforcement to your home any time he even catches a glimpse of a gun at your place, the relative that you dread seeing at Thanksgiving because you know He/She is gonna call you an irresponsible parent for keeping guns in the house with your kids, Heck, even the stuck up girl in one of my classes that claims "Gun's raise testosterone levels" is my fellow American.

These people, for whatever reason, have Anti-gun beliefs because they truly feel that Anti-gun Legislation will make everyone safe. We can't think of them as the enemy for doing what they truly feel is good for the country. We'd just become hypocrites for doing that.

And I'm sure there are special cases where someone is Anti-Gun for very malicious reasons. Heck, just look at some Politicians we've got.

I'm not advocating Anti-Gun theory in anyway possible. I'm just saying remember:

They're not the enemy, they're our fellow countrymen.

They're not evil, they just believe what they do is truly "The Best" course of action is.

It's not "Us" and "Them", It's just Us. We're all in this together.

No matter what they believe in, Anti-Gun or not, I'd still use my gun(s) to help them if the time ever came. Hell, call me soft but I'm not sure I could stop my self from intervening if Bloomberg or Feinstein were truly in danger. I'm not a judge, I don't get to decide who deserves what. I've got a duty as a human being to not look the other way when others are in danger though.

Have patience with those who've got a different opinion on on the current gun issues is all I'm trying to say.


We fight clean, we fight for what's right, we keep on fighting even when the there's nothing left to fight for, and most importantly, we don't hurt anybody. Than nobody can say we didn't try.


Thank's for your time THR.

Regards, Kicker.

If you enjoyed reading about "A friendly reminder in dark times...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Micha2u
January 31, 2013, 06:49 AM
I read what you said but I believe that Paul Markel's view on this is more appropriate. His blog on this is at the link below.

http://studentofthegun.com/blog/69-setting-the-record-straight-the-enemy-is-the-enemy.html

CoyoteSix
January 31, 2013, 07:02 AM
A good article indeed Mic. What I took from that article was that the Author considers anyone that restricts anyone from defending himself or his family an enemy.

I'm just trying to address it at the civilian, non-gov't, level.

I agree that Gov't officials of any level are bad for the U.S. when they go anti-gun.

I just want to remind everyone that all us non-legislative Americans are on the same side.

When we go to political war against Gun Grabbers, we're not going to war against our neighbors, but against our law makers who entertain these ideas.

Holding resentment that leads to a "Us V.S. Them" mentality doesn't help anyone.

Roadkill
January 31, 2013, 07:11 AM
the Anti-gunners are still our fellow Americans.

No, they are not. They are destroying the Constitution. Without it America can not exist.

We can't think of them as the enemy for doing what they truly feel is good for the country.

Yes, I can. And do. They are the enemy. And what about what I "feel" ?

They're not the enemy, they're our fellow countrymen.

Yes, they are. They will make me a felon. And no, they're not. Not any longer.

They're not evil, they just believe what they do is truly "The Best" course of action is.

Yes they are, and I don't give a damn what they think. Why should I? They don't care what I think?

It's not "Us" and "Them", It's just Us. We're all in this together.

Ask the folks in NY how they feel about that.


We fight clean, we fight for what's right,

And a lot of damn good that's done.

RiverPerson
January 31, 2013, 07:25 AM
I could have a little more respect for anti gunners if they actually took the time to learn about the the things they are trying to take away.

People don't think. This is prevalent on both sides of the political spectrum and all economic classes. Instead, people just react and support whatever sounds good at the time, without doing any kind of research.

itchy1
January 31, 2013, 07:36 AM
While I agree with the basic spirit of what you are saying, I feel that each situation is unique and should be dealt with accordingly. Some people can be reasoned with and even "converted" to our side with some basic education. Others are so deeply brainwashed that there is little to no hope of ever reaching them with facts and examples. These types should be dealt with boldly. They are a big part of the problem in the sense that they vote for the Feinsteins and Shumers as well as spew their hatred of guns to all who will listen. They may also financially support rabid anti gun groups. They are on the opposite side and therefore an adversary to be reckoned with in a swift, firm manner. No holds barred.

mcdonl
January 31, 2013, 08:00 AM
If a group of Americans were saying you could no longer be a Catholic, or writer editorial articles in the paper that are negative towards elected officials would you consider them an enemy?

Anyone who wants to infringe upon ANY of our constitutional rights is an enemy.

REPOMAN
January 31, 2013, 08:39 AM
Great read Micha2.... Thouroughly enjoyed it..... Thanks for the link

radiotom
January 31, 2013, 08:40 AM
I wonder how many people believe us yet, that the secular communists have taken over? Seriously...how much more do you have to see?

jamesbeat
January 31, 2013, 09:05 AM
In a way, I agree with you. Nobody wants another Sandy Hook, and a lot of people blindly believe the politicians and have got it into their heads that restricting our 2A rights would somehow stop another massacre.

If good people believe that premise, then of course they would want a ban.

The crime that they are commiting is one of stupidity.
Banning guns won't stop another massacre, and they are willing to take away our rights simply because they have either chosen not to think for themselves or are incapable of doing so.

Either way they are the enemy, good intentions nonwithstanding.

geekWithA.45
January 31, 2013, 09:41 AM
A lot of evil is sanctioned by people with good intentions.

SoCalNoMore
January 31, 2013, 10:26 AM
If a group of Americans were saying you could no longer be a Catholic, or writer editorial articles in the paper that are negative towards elected officials would you consider them an enemy?

Anyone who wants to infringe upon ANY of our constitutional rights is an enemy.
Like how BHO banned protests anywhere the SS is near? It starts small, chip away, chip away. Its starts with this;

"San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne said we can “it may take a generation but guns will eventually be taken off the streets through new laws like Senator Dianne Feinstein’s proposed assault weapons ban legislation.”

ThorinNNY
January 31, 2013, 10:27 AM
Well.......a self described "bleeding heart liberal" wrote in a letter to a newspaper"...that despite being gun owners ....husband & wife never discussed defending themselves against home invasion...or BATF agents coming for their guns.....the race war you were expecting......down in the man cave polishing your guns,counting your bullets.....most Americans were evolving........you rant against the man most of us elected...you can do that because of the First Amendment ....I object to you referring to yourselves as patriots ...Websters dictionary defines a patriot....that`s not you......call yourselves dinosaurs.!" signed name,address.

This particular dinosaur would rather do something MORE enjoyable and exciting -like escaping from a a ticked off Tyranosaurus Rex - rather than listen to her ranting!

tnelson31
January 31, 2013, 10:35 AM
the secular communists have taken over
agreed, and at what price 'glory?'

the collateral damage to individual freedom is huge...but that is the point

JonnyGringo
January 31, 2013, 10:40 AM
I appreciate the sentiment of the OP; just keep in mind that tolerance does not mean acceptance and appeasement will only keep the wolves at bay until the next round of "common sense solutions".

Krogen
January 31, 2013, 10:44 AM
Be wary of letting your guard down. The anti-gun "fellow Americans" will exploit that opening. I hardly think they consider us their fellow Americans as the OP suggests we consider them. Yes, it's us vs. them. No way around it. Any time a person or a group takes the stand "We know what's right for YOU and the heck with your rights" I consider them on the the other side; the enemy.

JRH6856
January 31, 2013, 10:54 AM
As for fellow countrymen who are only doing what they truly feel is good for the country, I recommend you read They Thought They Were Free, The Germans 1933-1945, by Milton Mayer, University of Chicago Press, 1955 (Library of Congress Catalog # 55-5137, ISBN: 0-226-51190-1 / 0-226-51192-8)

A look at creeping tyranny masquerading as benevolence in the lives of ordinary people.

wingman
January 31, 2013, 10:55 AM
IMO liberalism is a mental illness or the the ability to reason in a common sense manner sadly it is being taught in our public schools and our colleges with great effect all we need to do is watch mainstream media to view the damage did by a journalism degree.

I believe those on the left in power know exactly what they are doing and why they do it certainly not out of kindness but the desire to have overwhelming power over the people. I just don't see how one can comprise with people like this and sadly to some degree it's in both parties.

Shinbone
January 31, 2013, 11:14 AM
We'll see how many are Americans when BHO tries for a third term.

JRH6856
January 31, 2013, 11:14 AM
The American Progressive movement defined itself in the last half of the 19th century. It's goal was and as to remake American society to serve the greater good. It's tool of choice: the Federal government. The primary barrier to the Progressive's use of that tool of choice is the United States Constitution as it places unacceptable limits upon government power and authority. For the past 100+ years, Progressives have used, reinterpreted, reimagined, or ignored the Constitution as it suited their need.Where authority existed, they used it. Where it did not, they imagined it. When they could, they just ignored it. And when none of that worked, they forced it.

A primary strategy in this has been Progressive control of the education system, especially institutions of higher learning. That is where the policy decisions that affect our daily lives and future are born. Lawyers, economists, political scientists, journalists, and teachers—especially teachers, that is where they are taught what to think (though not always how to think, at least not originally) They seek to mold minds to their way of thinking. It is necessarily a slow process, but it has worked well.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 11:18 AM
IMO liberalism is a mental illness or the the ability to reason in a common sense manner sadly it is being taught in our public schools and our colleges with great effect all we need to do is watch mainstream media to view the damage did by a journalism degree.

I believe those on the left in power know exactly what they are doing and why they do it certainly not out of kindness but the desire to have overwhelming power over the people. I just don't see how one can comprise with people like this and sadly to some degree it's in both parties.

As a non liberal, I take offense at that statement. While you may believe that, The truth is you are in the small minority with that extreme and dismissive opinion, any valid points you might have gets lost in the noise of your paranoia and anger. You readily demonize one party while admitting both parties are making the same mistakes, which makes you look incredibly biased, and is sadly, a common theme among the hard right. It makes me and many others look bad by association, destroys any credibility your post might have had, and serves to foster an "us vs them" mentality, create division and animosity rather than to educate.

By the way, did you forget the Patriot Act, that gem of freedom foisted on the people by CONSERVATIVES? The extreme corruption and cronyism's of that great F'up, the Iraq war?
There is rot throughout.

P.S.
I know a liberal or two. So far I have not overheard their personal plans to have overwhelming power over me, but I'll let you know if I do....maybe they just haven't gotten their marching orders from Fearless Leader yet...

taliv
January 31, 2013, 11:29 AM
A good article indeed Mic. What I took from that article was that the Author considers anyone that restricts anyone from defending himself or his family an enemy.

I'm just trying to address it at the civilian, non-gov't, level.

I agree that Gov't officials of any level are bad for the U.S. when they go anti-gun.

I just want to remind everyone that all us non-legislative Americans are on the same side.

When we go to political war against Gun Grabbers, we're not going to war against our neighbors, but against our law makers who entertain these ideas.

Holding resentment that leads to a "Us V.S. Them" mentality doesn't help anyone.

you couldn't be more wrong. those gov officials are there because they REPRESENT people who hold the same beliefs. those people are the source of the elected representatives' power.

those people are trying to take away your rights. if you went to war, it would be against your neighbors, the ones who put those politicians in power. they are they enemy, and until they are defeated, politicians would only be replaced with new faces that reflect the same beliefs of our enemy.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 11:35 AM
you couldn't be more wrong. those gov officials are there because they REPRESENT people who hold the same beliefs. those people are the source of the elected representatives' power.

those people are trying to take away your rights. if you went to war, it would be against your neighbors, the ones who put those politicians in power. they are they enemy, and until they are defeated, politicians would only be replaced with new faces that reflect the same beliefs of our enemy.

Wait...so the conservatives gave us the Patriot Act,....The liberals are marching us towards socialism....Can you define who the "enemy" is again, please, Taliv?
Yup, we'd just better pick up our guns and just start shooting each other, since we are all each others enemy.
I'd expect more from a High Road mod.

"They" are voted in by the people riding a carpet of support for issues that they know are "important"...then go about voting for their own agenda, on the basis that their opinion "represents" that of the majority of their constituents....and are many times voted out by that same group of people who voted them in, for that reason. You forget in 1994 they voted too blatently on their personal opinion, instead of their constituents, and were ousted. Don't paint the entirety of the people who voted in a particular official as entirely agreeing with that official and supporting their agendas throughout their political career.
Voting for someone based on their record and what they say they represent, then finding out they don't represent what they portrayed, is hardly an indictment in this day and age. Its the norm.
I was as surprised to see Obama go for guns at the first opportunity, as I was to see hard-line governor Christie give him a wet sloppy one when he wanted more funding from him.

Gaffer
January 31, 2013, 11:36 AM
The antis are simply wrong! End of discussion!

Capybara
January 31, 2013, 11:41 AM
All of the antis I know are sheeple, the swallow the current administration's lies and propaganda hook, line and sinker. The sheeple are the ones that re-relected Dear Leader, if you get right down to it, the sheeple are the problem, not the leaders. The leaders are like wind up toys, the electorate wind them up and they totter along, spewing their rhetoric, as one would expect. But it's the sheeple that had the choice, it is the sheeple that elected them. The sheeple are the problem, not the leaders.

readyeddy
January 31, 2013, 11:51 AM
It's not black and white. There are sheeple and then there are herders. Politicians tell lies when campaigning for a reason... they need to trick people into voting for them. Nothing is ever simple. Our enemies are at every level, just like our friends.

RaceM
January 31, 2013, 11:54 AM
Cain't fix stupid.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 11:56 AM
All of the antis I know are sheeple, the swallow the current administration's lies and propaganda hook, line and sinker. The sheeple are the ones that re-relected Dear Leader, if you get right down to it, the sheeple are the problem, not the leaders. The leaders are like wind up toys, the electorate wind them up and they totter along, spewing their rhetoric, as one would expect. But it's the sheeple that had the choice, it is the sheeple that elected them. The sheeple are the problem, not the leaders.

After seeing Romney true behavior post election, and how he imploded into a petulant child immediately after being defeated, while also knowing how he had voted previously considering new firearm legislation, I would guess we wouldn't be in much of a different spot at this point in time if he had been elected. Leaders, or lack of leadership, is very much a problem for both sides, and you are one of the "sheeple".
You are looking at a crystal ball through rose colored glasses.

Ever hear the phrase "between a ******bag, and a turd sandwich"?....When you have the current style of elections, people don't vote based on what they truly believe, many people vote for the least repugnant choice. Some people can more easily stand the ******bag, some can better tolerate the sandwich.
Until the Republican party starts putting up electable candidates, your statements don't fly.

Manco
January 31, 2013, 12:40 PM
Most people are simply ignorant about the subject of firearms, and that is totally understandable because it is complex, they have been indoctrinated in falsehoods by the media over their entire lives (and public education), and they have no particular interest in firearms and shooting to motivate them to overcome these handicaps (yes, they are handicapped as citizens of a free country). The vast majority of antis and on-the-fencers are NOT our enemies (this includes a number of lawmakers), and it is up to us to engage and educate them respectfully.

taliv
January 31, 2013, 01:19 PM
Wait...so the conservatives gave us the Patriot Act,....The liberals are marching us towards socialism....Can you define who the "enemy" is again, please, Taliv?
Yup, we'd just better pick up our guns and just start shooting each other, since we are all each others enemy.
I'd expect more from a High Road mod.

"They" are voted in by the people riding a carpet of support for issues that they know are "important"...then go about voting for their own agenda, on the basis that their opinion "represents" that of the majority of their constituents....and are many times voted out by that same group of people who voted them in, for that reason. You forget in 1994 they voted too blatently on their personal opinion, instead of their constituents, and were ousted. Don't paint the entirety of the people who voted in a particular official as entirely agreeing with that official and supporting their agendas throughout their political career.
Voting for someone based on their record and what they say they represent, then finding out they don't represent what they portrayed, is hardly an indictment in this day and age. Its the norm.
I was as surprised to see Obama go for guns at the first opportunity, as I was to see hard-line governor Christie give him a wet sloppy one when he wanted more funding from him.

i'm afraid you have completely missed the point of this conversation. the OP stated that our enemy was the politicians, and that your neighbors and coworkers, whom he stated were actively trying to strip you of your rights, were in fact, not the enemy.

simply put, that line of thinking is treating the symptom, not the disease.

the "enemy" are the individuals who are trying to take your rights. when a restaurant manager tries to strip your rights by posting a no-ccw sign on the door, they become your enemy and your response should be commensurate. talk to them, but stop patronizing them until they stop acting against you. when an actor publicly supports banning guns and gives their money to anti-gun politicians, stop putting money in their pocket. stop supporting them. stop enabling them.

nobody said anything about shooting them.

the point is the mindset of how you treat people who are working against you. are you going to ignore it? that will only ensure their success. or are you going to fight it?

don't make the mistake of mixing up issues. bringing the patriot act in only confuses the conversation. but it does show the advantage of my position over that of the OP's: a stereotype such as you suggest ("conservatives" and "liberals") is so broad as to be useless as you point out. it is impractical because it prevents action, as you implied. the fact is it is only at precisely the individual level that any reasonable action can be taken.

mcdonl
January 31, 2013, 01:32 PM
silicosys4 - If the war is defined as maintaining (regaining) our second amendment rights as written the enemy are those who are trying to strip them.

The politicians are just the implements that our enemy are using.

Ryanxia
January 31, 2013, 01:35 PM
As a non liberal, I take offense at that statement. While you may believe that, The truth is you are in the small minority with that extreme and dismissive opinion, any valid points you might have gets lost in the noise of your paranoia and anger. You readily demonize one party while admitting both parties are making the same mistakes, which makes you look incredibly biased, and is sadly, a common theme among the hard right. It makes me and many others look bad by association, destroys any credibility your post might have had, and serves to foster an "us vs them" mentality, create division and animosity rather than to educate.

By the way, did you forget the Patriot Act, that gem of freedom foisted on the people by CONSERVATIVES? The extreme corruption and cronyism's of that great F'up, the Iraq war?
There is rot throughout.

P.S.
I know a liberal or two. So far I have not overheard their personal plans to have overwhelming power over me, but I'll let you know if I do....maybe they just haven't gotten their marching orders from Fearless Leader yet...
While I respect your opinion some of us do not wish to educate those that are taking away our freedoms, we chose to resist in other ways and speak out for ourselves when we see others attempting to circumvent the Constitution.

dogrunner
January 31, 2013, 01:51 PM
Any whichaway you look at it, the friend of your enemy IS your enemy..........now, it's true he may not bear you the rabid malice that a Feinstein or a Schumer exudes..........BUT. he/she supports their philosophy and therefore is directly aligned against you!

Remember, those Torys during the period of our revolution were 'fellow' Americans too..........they quickly became Canadians............much to our benefit!


Just remember, there is no such thing as a 'second place' winner............Bill Jordan said it better than I can. Compromise: We lose..........'Second place': We lose...............I would rather lose it all than give one damned inch, THEN and only THEN do I truly know I gave it my all!

mgmorden
January 31, 2013, 01:57 PM
I think part of the problem here is a definition of anti-gun.

Once upon a time if someone was "anti-gun" it meant that they didn't agree with them. They wouldn't carry one, and didn't want to have one in their home.

I think those people are erroneous in their ways, but I respect their decision. I can live with THAT type of "anti-gun" person.

The problem is that the modern "anti-gun" person doesn't typically behave that way. Rather than simply agreeing to disagree, they're attempting to pass legislation to FORCE their viewpoint onto the people that DO believe that firearms serve a useful (necessary even) purpose in the lives of everyday citizens.

Disagreeing with me I can tolerate. Trying to legally force me to conform to your viewpoints I cannot.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 02:02 PM
i'm afraid you have completely missed the point of this conversation. the OP stated that our enemy was the politicians, and that your neighbors and coworkers, whom he stated were actively trying to strip you of your rights, were in fact, not the enemy.

simply put, that line of thinking is treating the symptom, not the disease.

the "enemy" are the individuals who are trying to take your rights. when a restaurant manager tries to strip your rights by posting a no-ccw sign on the door, they become your enemy and your response should be commensurate. talk to them, but stop patronizing them until they stop acting against you. when an actor publicly supports banning guns and gives their money to anti-gun politicians, stop putting money in their pocket. stop supporting them. stop enabling them.

nobody said anything about shooting them.

the point is the mindset of how you treat people who are working against you. are you going to ignore it? that will only ensure their success. or are you going to fight it?

don't make the mistake of mixing up issues. bringing the patriot act in only confuses the conversation. but it does show the advantage of my position over that of the OP's: a stereotype such as you suggest ("conservatives" and "liberals") is so broad as to be useless as you point out. it is impractical because it prevents action, as you implied. the fact is it is only at precisely the individual level that any reasonable action can be taken.

Except the restaraunt owner is not "stripping you of your rights". You have the right to not give him patronage. You have the right not to enter his store. You have the right to tell him his actions are costing him your business. It is the same situation as someone who hates guns, being at a gunshow. You don't like it, don't go in, don't give them your money, but don't try and take away their right to conduct themselves legally under the laws of this country. Every citizen of this country has a legal right not to like your guns, you, or your carrying them, and they have the right to request you not carry one on their property....just as you have the right to object, and the no legal obligation to comply in most situations.

I object heartily to your labeling of people who share opposing opinions and exercise their rights in accordance with the law as the "enemy".
An "enemy" is someone who is trying to do you or your family harm directly. Not someone who is well intentioned but misguided. (unless you are one of those whacko "all libs are evil nazi's!!" idiots... In that case, there is indeed no cure for stupid").
Label them ignorant and an opposition to what you stand for, but until one of them takes direct action to harm you or yours, leave the "line in the sand" "black and white" "anyone not for us is against us" rhetoric at home where it won't harm our cause and make it difficult for us to come to the table with our neighbors who share different viewpoints and opinions.

I know you would never listen to anything the enemy would say, and would certainly never consider doing things their way....why would the "enemy" do the same for you?
Having enemies where you could have disagreements and conversation that leads to agreements instead... is stupid.
You'll fend them off for a while, but not forever....especially in this day and age of changing demographics

"don't bring up the patriot act...it confuses the issue".....
If you are going to demonize people who vote for a specific person as being your enemy because of issues supported by the person they voted for, and your perception of how they endanger your freedom, it goes both ways.

"If you voted for Obama, you voted against RKBA"

If you voted for Bush and the party that supports him, and I know many of you did, you endangered more than that.

Ryanxia
January 31, 2013, 02:29 PM
Except the restaraunt owner is not "stripping you of your rights". You have the right to not give him patronage. You have the right not to enter his store. You have the right to tell him his actions are costing him your business. It is the same situation as someone who hates guns, being at a gunshow. You don't like it, don't go in, don't give them your money, but don't try and take away their right to conduct themselves legally under the laws of this country. Every citizen of this country has a legal right not to like your guns, you, or your carrying them, and they have the right to request you not carry one on their property....just as you have the right to object, and the no legal obligation to comply in most situations.

I object heartily to your labeling of people who share opposing opinions and exercise their rights in accordance with the law as the "enemy".
An "enemy" is someone who is trying to do you or your family harm directly. Not someone who is well intentioned but misguided. (unless you are one of those whacko "all libs are evil nazi's!!" idiots... In that case, there is indeed no cure for stupid").
Label them ignorant and an opposition to what you stand for, but until one of them takes direct action to harm you or yours, leave the "line in the sand" "black and white" "anyone not for us is against us" rhetoric at home where it won't harm our cause and make it difficult for us to come to the table with our neighbors who share different viewpoints and opinions.

I know you would never listen to anything the enemy would say, and would certainly never consider doing things their way....why would the "enemy" do the same for you?
Having enemies where you could have disagreements and conversation that leads to agreements instead... is stupid.
You'll fend them off for a while, but not forever....especially in this day and age of changing demographics

"don't bring up the patriot act...it confuses the issue".....
If you are going to demonize people who vote for a specific person as being your enemy because of issues supported by the person they voted for, and your perception of how they endanger your freedom, it goes both ways.

"If you voted for Obama, you voted against RKBA"

If you voted for Bush and the party that supports him, and I know many of you did, you endangered more than that.
If every private land said no guns then where could you actually go in life and hold on to your Constitutional Right? That's why I say it should be a law that at least for stores/retailers/etc. no guns policies should be illegal.

CoyoteSix
January 31, 2013, 02:32 PM
Some very good points brought up in the replies, I enjoy seeing such a passionate thread.

To clarify, I would never appease Gun Grabbers. Nigh would I let my guard down. That's not the message of of my original post.


The message is that we don't demonize our fellow Americans for exercising their beliefs.

Think of the civil right's movement. Who was the more successful of the two big civil rights activists? Malcom X? Or Dr. Martin Luther King?

Malcom X and his militant ways didn't get a damned thing done. He started up the Black Panthers and pushed us closer to a race war. He viewed that the only way to fix things was through arms. Through armed conflict.

Of course it was Dr. King who was able to rally the people and push equality.

Guess what? Dr.King did it without harming any "White Man". Having read some of his work, most notably his "Letter from Birmingham Jail" one can see that he didn't address white's as the enemy.

See what I'm getting at here? If we take the Malcom X route, vilifying our fellow countrymen who disagree and preparing for a second civil war of sorts we're gonna get nowhere. Lives may be lost, and we'll be worse off than we started.

Now if we go the Dr. MLK route we may actually get something done. The Rallies at the state capitals were a great start. We gotta keep our heads down and our hopes high and do this without hurting anybody.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 02:36 PM
If every private land said no guns then where could you actually go in life and hold on to your Constitutional Right? That's why I say it should be a law that at least for stores/retailers/etc. no guns policies should be illegal.

Your own land.
I was raised to believe that a mans land is his own. If I don't like what a landowner wants me to do or not do on his land, its his land...and I don't want to be there.That is why people work hard to buy property, so they can do what they want on it.
The importance of your right to shoot whatever guns you want on your own land,
is just as important to me as your neighbors right to not have guns on his own land, and to not allow them there. His land. Don't go there if you don't like it.
That said, most people don't have a problem with your guns, because most people aren't your "enemy" regardless of who they vote or don't vote for.
A select minority has big problems with guns and has a big voice in the media, just like Sandy Hook had a big voice in the media for just one incident.
How do I know its the minority? We still have our guns. As soon as WE are the minority, we will lose them. Unfortunately, our constitution does not offer the same inarguable protections it once did.
How do we become the minority? by labeling people who are on the fence or not as sensitive to the importance of gun ownership as the "enemy".
What will bring them over the fence onto our side? Reasonable discussion, and repetition of facts.

As for signs disallowing firearms in businesses on private property...Do your research. For the most part, most of them are not binding by law. They are simply an expression of opinion and desire, and you are just as free to ignore them in most states in most cases, as you are to not patronize or trespass on private property.
Check your state and area for legality though.

Ryanxia
January 31, 2013, 02:39 PM
Your own land.
I was raised to believe that a mans land is his own. If I don't like what a landowner wants me to do or not do on his land, its his land...and I don't want to be there.That is why people work hard to buy property, so they can do what they want on it.
The importance of your right to shoot whatever guns you want on your own land,
is just as important to me as your neighbors right to not have guns on his own land, and to not allow them there. His land. Don't go there if you don't like it.
That said, most people don't have a problem with your guns, because most people aren't your "enemy" regardless of who they vote or don't vote for.
A select minority has big problems with guns and has a big voice in the media, just like Sandy Hook had a big voice in the media for just one incident.
How do I know its the minority? We still have our guns. As soon as WE are the minority, we will lose them. Unfortunately, our constitution does not offer the same inarguable protections it once did.
How do we become the minority? by labeling people who are on the fence or not as sensitive to the importance of gun ownership as the "enemy".
What will bring them over the fence onto our side? Reasonable discussion, and repetition of facts.

As for signs disallowing firearms on private property...Do your research. For the most part, most of them are not binding by law. They are simply an expression of opinion and desire, and you are just as free to ignore them in most states in most cases, as you are to not patronize or trespass on private property.
Check your state and area for legality though.
I should have clarified that I'm focusing on commercial property. A man's land is one thing but when every place you go to purchase goods tramples on your Constitutional Rights that's wrong.

And in my state a no guns sign does carry the weight of law.

LNK
January 31, 2013, 02:41 PM
After seeing Romney true behavior post election, and how he imploded into a petulant child immediately after being defeated, while also knowing how he had voted previously considering new firearm legislation, I would guess we wouldn't be in much of a different spot at this point in time if he had been elected. Leaders, or lack of leadership, is very much a problem for both sides, and you are one of the "sheeple".





"don't bring up the patriot act...it confuses the issue".....
If you are going to demonize people who vote for a specific person as being your enemy because of issues supported by the person they voted for, and your perception of how they endanger your freedom, it goes both ways.

"If you voted for Obama, you voted against RKBA"

If you voted for Bush and the party that supports him, and I know many of you did, you endangered more than that.


The fact is you are trying to make it seem as though a vote for GWB is the same as a vote for BHO. I am sure you remember the "petulant child", Al Gore, after his first election?

You are right about the Patriot Act, that was a non starter for me. But not much different from the NDAA is it? Perhaps Mr. Kerry would have been a better choice? Not. Turned against his own U.S. soldiers for political gain.

The difference Between the "R's" and the "D's", has more to do with the trying to change the United States into something else. Bush may have had the Patriot Act, but I believe he really Loves this country. Can you say the same for BHO? Honestly?

Stop trying to justify your vote. Romney wasn't my first choice either, nor was McCain. But you can bet that I will not vote for anyone that goes against the Constitution before I vote for them. Nor will I ever vote for them again if they do. Can you say the same?

LNK

ljnowell
January 31, 2013, 02:48 PM
Except the restaraunt owner is not "stripping you of your rights". You have the right to not give him patronage. You have the right not to enter his store. You have the right to tell him his actions are costing him your business. It is the same situation as someone who hates guns, being at a gunshow. You don't like it, don't go in, don't give them your money, but don't try and take away their right to conduct themselves legally under the laws of this country. Every citizen of this country has a legal right not to like your guns, you, or your carrying them, and they have the right to request you not carry one on their property....just as you have the right to object, and the no legal obligation to comply in most situations.

I object heartily to your labeling of people who share opposing opinions and exercise their rights in accordance with the law as the "enemy".
An "enemy" is someone who is trying to do you or your family harm directly. Not someone who is well intentioned but misguided. (unless you are one of those whacko "all libs are evil nazi's!!" idiots... In that case, there is indeed no cure for stupid").
Label them ignorant and an opposition to what you stand for, but until one of them takes direct action to harm you or yours, leave the "line in the sand" "black and white" "anyone not for us is against us" rhetoric at home where it won't harm our cause and make it difficult for us to come to the table with our neighbors who share different viewpoints and opinions.

I know you would never listen to anything the enemy would say, and would certainly never consider doing things their way....why would the "enemy" do the same for you?
Having enemies where you could have disagreements and conversation that leads to agreements instead... is stupid.
You'll fend them off for a while, but not forever....especially in this day and age of changing demographics

"don't bring up the patriot act...it confuses the issue".....
If you are going to demonize people who vote for a specific person as being your enemy because of issues supported by the person they voted for, and your perception of how they endanger your freedom, it goes both ways.

"If you voted for Obama, you voted against RKBA"

If you voted for Bush and the party that supports him, and I know many of you did, you endangered more than that.


You really are acting like a child. If you are upset that you voted for a gun grabbing turd, then don't do it again. No matter how you slice it though, if they are trying to take away our gun rights they are the enemy. This is THR.org, we only do guns. Not any other policy. Not the patriot act, roe vs wade, nothing else. Anyone that opposes our freedom is the enemy. Its not that hard to figure out.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 02:49 PM
The fact is you are trying to make it seem as though a vote for GWB is the same as a vote for BHO. I am sure you remember the "petulant child", Al Gore, after his first election?

You are right about the Patriot Act, that was a non starter for me. But not much different from the NDAA is it? Perhaps Mr. Kerry would have been a better choice? Not. Turned against his own U.S. soldiers for political gain.

The difference Between the "R's" and the "D's", has more to do with the trying to change the United States into something else. Bush may have had the Patriot Act, but I believe he really Loves this country. Can you say the same for BHO? Honestly?

Stop trying to justify your vote. Romney wasn't my first choice either, nor was McCain. But you can bet that I will not vote for anyone that goes against the Constitution before I vote for them. Nor will I ever vote for them again if they do. Can you say the same?

LNK

1. you have no idea who I voted for, but I can tell you think you do.
I'll give you a hint. It starts with "lib" but doesn't end in "eral".
This is why political discussions have no place in The High Road.

I'm not interested in a discussion of which potus "loves" this country more. Both have screwed us over royally.
Bush sure did love awarding his friends big juicy contracts, after starting a B.S. war that the public DIDN'T want, that cost a lot of money, over lies peddled to the public.
B.O....well, I hardly need to explain what he's done, in here.

And yes, I do believe a vote for one is pretty much just as harmful at this point, as a vote for the other.
Neither D's nor R's are good for this country any more.

Texan Scott
January 31, 2013, 02:49 PM
JonnyGringo: tolerance does not mean acceptance

This precisely. If I may comment on the fancy "coexist" bumper stickers, we do not peacefully coexist because we agree, but only to the extent we agree to DISAGREE. We tolerate the differences of those whose differences do us no harm because, being harmless, we've no valid cause to complain of them.
Read more of Thomas Jefferson on this point:
But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

The problem is that we cannot coexist peacefully with those who REFUSE to leave us in peace. We may mean them no harm, but if they mean us harm, we cannot tolerate them either, and I refuse to feel that this is my fault when they're the ones pushing an agenda.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 02:52 PM
This precisely. If I may comment on the fancy "coexist" bumper stickers, we do not peacefully coexist because we agree, but only to the extent we agree to DISAGREE. We tolerate the differences of those whose differences do us no harm because, being harmless, we've no valid cause to complain of them.
Read more of Thomas Jefferson on this point:


The problem is that we cannot coexist peacefully with those who REFUSE to leave us in peace. We may mean them no harm, but if they mean us harm, we cannot tolerate them either, and I refuse to feel that this is my fault when they're the ones pushing an agenda.

The ones pushing an agenda aren't the people, regardless of who they vote for. Either way, the people just want to be safe, eat well, and live comfortably. They are the politicians and the media, and judging by this thread, they are very successfully turning us against each other.

mbt2001
January 31, 2013, 02:57 PM
I hear people that say that things are so partisan now... that people are divided...

America HAS ALWAYS been a war of ideas. Born in literal blood, and drawing metaphoric blood daily. Jefferson called his victor in 1800 the bloodless revolution! Why? Because for the first time, a ruling party handed over power to a party that had a different IDEA / BELIEF / DIRECTION for the country. It was in fact monumental in it's compass.

So... here we are. Fighting it out. Day in and day out, we are fighting, arguing, and trying to create a better country, preserve the best of what we have had, and so on. I do not want a "civil" political process. Obama is trying to take over and that is how I feel. He wants our guns and I do not want to give them up. We continue to engage in the world of ideas and we argue and protest and deluge our reps with our letters and feelings OR WE LOSE THE WAR.

Welcome to the United States... Check your self control at the door or you will end up as someone else's monkey.

LNK
January 31, 2013, 02:59 PM
You are correct, I don't know who you voted for, nor do you know who I voted for. But you do seem to want to defend on side more than the other. I also believe Ron Paul was the only candidate that deserved my vote, alas, he was not on the ballot. Sometimes it comes down to the lesser of two evils. Unless you have a better idea, if you do I would love to hear it.

We are now way off topic.

LNK

xXxplosive
January 31, 2013, 03:02 PM
Hmmmm...........and the Tories all boarded ships and sailed back to England after their cause was lost.

Constrictor
January 31, 2013, 03:06 PM
The OP is wrong. As a matter of fact id be very surprised if he/she even owned any firearms. There are a lot of frauds around, not saying the Op is one but...............

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 03:12 PM
The OP is wrong. As a matter of fact id be very surprised if he/she even owned any firearms. There are a lot of frauds around, not saying the Op is one but...............

Allright, so then your neighbor is your enemy...
What are you going to do about it? Enemies must be eliminated.
If I had an enemy, I'd eliminate them. Enemies want to hurt me, my family, and cause misery.
Gonna kill your neighbor? Shoot them with your gun if he doesn't own one and doesn't personally agree that you should own yours, so that you are safe from harm? Do you see the irony? Do you realize how stupid that sounds, and how labeling your neighbor as the enemy over his opinion pretty much justifies and concretes his idea that you shouldn't have one, and smacks of fascism to boot?

Or are you just waxing drama?
Death to America! or at least that 52% that didn't vote like me

mcdonl
January 31, 2013, 03:17 PM
Allright, so then your neighbor is your enemy...
What are you going to do about it? Enemies must be eliminated.
If I had an enemy, I'd eliminate them. Enemies want to hurt me, my family, and cause misery.
Gonna kill your neighbor? Shoot them with your gun if he doesn't own one and doesn't personally agree that you should own yours, so that you are safe from harm? Do you realize how stupid that sounds, and how it plays right into their camp?

Or are you just waxing drama?
Death to America! or at least that 52% that didn't vote like me

silicosys... read my post a few up... once you define the battle the tools to fight it are not all the same. Heart Disease is my enemy, I do not "kill" my heart, I fight the enemy using diet and exercise.

When the battle is one of politics, you fight the enemy with political actions.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 03:20 PM
silicosys... read my post a few up... once you define the battle the tools to fight it are not all the same. Heart Disease is my enemy, I do not "kill" my heart, I fight the enemy using diet and exercise.

When the battle is one of politics, you fight the enemy with political actions.
First off, I would agree that you don't want to "kill" your heart....if heart disease is your issue. You want to "kill" the heart disease....as in make it a non entity, no longer in existence.

I am sorry to hear about your heart problem. I have to disagree though. Heart disease is not your enemy, it is simply a consequence of actions and behaviors which determine your health, or lack thereof. Bacon...Coffee...Cigarettes...Genetics...Your poor health practices that led to your heart disease is your enemy....and hence you are your own enemy. If you want to shine the sharp light on others, first shine it on yourself.

"You fight the enemy with political actions". If you are referring to people based on if they vote for one person or another, you'll lose that fight. You don't "fight" the "enemy"...especially if you have to live with them afterwards. You inform your uninformed neighbor, and change his mind. then you both call your politicians and tell them you will vote against them unless...
90% of your "enemy" could be your ally, with the right words and facts and approach. Call them the "enemy" once, though, and they will become your heated opposition that must protect themselves from you and your guns.

Kosta88
January 31, 2013, 03:32 PM
what you just wrote is the key item that Obumer and the others do NOT remember their oath to the constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

taliv
January 31, 2013, 03:39 PM
The ones pushing an agenda aren't the people, regardless of who they vote for. Either way, the people just want to be safe, eat well, and live comfortably. They are the politicians and the media, and judging by this thread, they are very successfully turning us against each other.

and this is where you are wrong. this country is chock full of people who want to use the government to inflict their personal desires on their fellow countrymen. It is exactly the people who are pushing gun control.

look at it the other way. The "NRA" isn't a couple of rich guys pushing all of us to like guns. The "NRA" is four million gun owners pushing a couple rich guys to lobby for us.

As for signs disallowing firearms in businesses on private property...Do your research. For the most part, most of them are not binding by law.

YOU do YOUR research.

Allright, so then your neighbor is your enemy...
What are you going to do about it? Enemies must be eliminated.
If I had an enemy, I'd eliminate them. Enemies want to hurt me, my family, and cause misery.

this has already been addressed. you need to read more and post less, or stop trolling if that's your intent. your silly preoccupation with semantics is an impediment to your ability to reason. the fact is we live in a world where relationships are complex both personally and corporate and between states. the company i work for (500k employees) has many partners and competitors. often, we compete with a company in one area and partner with them in another. the US has a love hate relationship with China and many other countries. We are enemies in some ways and partners in others.

like i said, relationships are complex, and most adults do not have difficulty understanding this. nobody is proposing eliminating your neighbor if they vote for obama. so stop with the strawmans and red herrings.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 04:05 PM
"chock full of people who want to use the government to enflict their own personal desires on their fellow countrymen"
people like you who will point the finger while doing the same thing....you are just as willing to force someone else to accommodate your lifestyle as they are you. Lucky for you and me, our constitution was written to protect the correct opinion, or rather, right... But don't play white sheep there.

The NRA is a lobby group. They are supposed to represent their members. They charge membership dues, and are obliged to represent their members' interests.

Elected officials are free from public opinion until their next election. B.O. is free from public opinion for the duration of his next term. They very much ignore the majority of their constituents to pursue their own agendas, as B.O. is ignoring the majority of his constituents when he states that the majority are in favor of an AWB, so he can pursue a ban...which has been on his agenda.

Nice backpedaling to say that your enemies can also be your neighbors. "relationships are complex" but you are willing to declare enemy over ONE issue, and over an opinion at that, your "enemy" doesn't even have to take action, they just have to have an opinion and vote contrary to yours...what a crime. You seem to also think that the average anti-2a is voting specifically on gun issues. Statistically, anti-2a people don't think specifically about guns when they vote, and they don't vote based on their candidates gun views..its secondary to the issues they are actually concerned about.
The one issue voting thing is pretty much a pro2a phenomenon...try and keep that in mind.

enemy
/ˈenəmē/
Noun
A person who is actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.
A hostile nation or its armed forces or citizens, esp. in time of war.

Straw men and red herrings...pardon me if I address the flaws and laziness in your arguments, and offer counterpoints.

Shadow 7D
January 31, 2013, 04:08 PM
Allright, so then your neighbor is your enemy...
What are you going to do about it? Enemies must be eliminated.
If I had an enemy, I'd eliminate them. Enemies want to hurt me, my family, and cause misery.
Gonna kill your neighbor? Shoot them with your gun if he doesn't own one and doesn't personally agree that you should own yours, so that you are safe from harm? Do you see the irony? Do you realize how stupid that sounds, and how labeling your neighbor as the enemy over his opinion pretty much justifies and concretes his idea that you shouldn't have one, and smacks of fascism to boot?

Or are you just waxing drama?
Death to America! or at least that 52% that didn't vote like me
Nice strawman and slippery slope...
got anything to add?

BHP FAN
January 31, 2013, 04:17 PM
self deleted

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 04:20 PM
^^Yea, Obama sucks, I won't argue....but

"BUSH: I did think we ought to extend the assault weapons ban"

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/george_w__bush_gun_control.htm

You done?
Politics....sheesh.

taliv
January 31, 2013, 04:42 PM
people like you who will point the finger while doing the same thing....you are just as willing to force someone else to accommodate your lifestyle as they are you.

in what way have i tried to force someone to accommodate my lifestyle? I'm about as libertarian as you can be.

Nice backpedaling to say that your enemies can also be your neighbors.

not backpedaling. it's the first thing i said in this thread. the individuals, your neighbors are the enemy, and the politicians only represent them.

read your own definition. "a person actively opposed to something". that sounds dang near identical to my description of the enemy over this whole thread. while your working definition of "enemy" seems to be someone you shoot at.

The one issue voting thing is pretty much a pro2a phenomenon...try and keep that in mind.


good grief man, i take it you've never been around environmental activists, or aids/GLBT activists, or abortion activists, or anti-war activists, or ...well... dang near anyone. it's as if this is your first political discussion.

ljnowell
January 31, 2013, 04:56 PM
Allright, so then your neighbor is your enemy...
What are you going to do about it? Enemies must be eliminated.
If I had an enemy, I'd eliminate them. Enemies want to hurt me, my family, and cause misery.
Gonna kill your neighbor? Shoot them with your gun if he doesn't own one and doesn't personally agree that you should own yours, so that you are safe from harm? Do you see the irony? Do you realize how stupid that sounds, and how labeling your neighbor as the enemy over his opinion pretty much justifies and concretes his idea that you shouldn't have one, and smacks of fascism to boot?

Or are you just waxing drama?
Death to America! or at least that 52% that didn't vote like me

You are the only person here advocating violence. Are you incapable of having an enemy with expressing yourself violently? Again, quit acting like a child.

ljnowell
January 31, 2013, 04:59 PM
this has already been addressed. you need to read more and post less, or stop trolling if that's your intent. your silly preoccupation with semantics is an impediment to your ability to reason. the fact is we live in a world where relationships are complex both personally and corporate and between states. the company i work for (500k employees) has many partners and competitors. often, we compete with a company in one area and partner with them in another. the US has a love hate relationship with China and many other countries. We are enemies in some ways and partners in others.

Isn't it obvious thats what he is doing? How long till the ban hammer comes down? lol.

soonerfan85
January 31, 2013, 05:02 PM
no message

xXxplosive
January 31, 2013, 05:07 PM
.....and the $42,000.00 question is.........Can't an eleted official be brought charges against for violating his sworn Oath of Office.....seem that would make someone a "T".......IMO.

JustinJ
January 31, 2013, 05:13 PM
this has already been addressed. you need to read more and post less, or stop trolling if that's your intent. your silly preoccupation with semantics is an impediment to your ability to reason. the fact is we live in a world where relationships are complex both personally and corporate and between states. the company i work for (500k employees) has many partners and competitors. often, we compete with a company in one area and partner with them in another. the US has a love hate relationship with China and many other countries. We are enemies in some ways and partners in others.

I'm certainly not one for arguing semantics but i do find the use of the term "enemy" highly objectionable in this context. In no way am i going to accept the term "enemy" to reference loved ones just because they have different opinion than i on what regulations should be in place regarding firearms.

look at it the other way. The "NRA" isn't a couple of rich guys pushing all of us to like guns. The "NRA" is four million gun owners pushing a couple rich guys to lobby for us.

The NRA does have a pretty bad habit of using extremely divisive and polarizing rhetoric to fund raise. The NRA is also largely funded by gun manufacturers who profit from the lobbying efforts of the NRA so i think it is inaccurate to portray the NRA as "grass roots". While i don't care for the level of government influence that corporations can buy in general i don't fault the NRA or gun manufacturers for this specifically as that is unfortunately our political system.

goon
January 31, 2013, 05:47 PM
I watched the testimony of one of the parents of the children killed at Sandy Hook, I believe his name was Heslin, yesterday.
It reminded me of this. I really do feel terrible for the guy and wish there was something that could be done to ease his pain, or to give him back his son. Really, I wish someone had been in place to prevent this in the first place.
I wish that Nancy Lanza had had an easier time getting someone in mental health to pay attention to her kid (which I have read she was desperately trying to do).
I wish Nancy Lanza had never taught that kid to shoot. I wish she had pulled the bolt and slides from her guns and locked them in a pistol safe. I wish Adam Lanza had been pulled over for a broken tail light before he got to the school.

I wish his heart and mind just hadn't been so twisted so he never would have thought to do this in the first place.

But this will happen again. There will be another attack. The next shooter may have a semi-auto weapon, or he may have a shotgun, or he may have several DA .38 revolvers, or he may have ten gallons of gasoline and a bunch of flares.
But there will be another attack. I truly believe that. No amount of abstract legislation on paper is going to make insane people or evil people turn away from their crimes.
And our nation had better get ready to face those attackers and stop them.

Shadow 7D
January 31, 2013, 06:05 PM
Keep it clean and on issue
look at the PM, there's a Triangle with an exclaimation mark
USE IT

personal attacks ARE NOT high road

EDIT:
BTW, there are few things that are PM'd that will get you banned,
stuff like mod warnings and infractions, will yeah get attention
airing an insult or argument related to a thread.....

Shadow 7D
January 31, 2013, 06:49 PM
there is a middle way
attacking one side or the other, does little to sway the middle
I will not debate a rabid anti
to discuss something, one MUST admit or allow for one to be wrong, and be WILLING to shift, open to new ideas etc.

To many anti/pro comes down to: No, you are wrong...
yelling at eachother does little, but I will NOT give an inch (see, I'm right) and I'll back it up. So, for me it's 3 categories

Anti - pointless to argue, too stupid or too set to change (like my Democratic underground troll of a brother)

Undecided - I try to educate and present the other side they miss by being spoon fed by the media

Pro - who I look to for information and facts to back my argument.

Time is best spent on the undecided, once you find that one is an anti and is just as 'right' in their mind as you, it's just a merry go round of one upping and counters. In the mean time, lets not give the gun grabber ammo, rather we really ought to work to present a unified front, see, that's the anti/media trick, they make it seem like .01% is really 51% by presenting their opinion as fact.

silicosys4
January 31, 2013, 07:05 PM
there is a middle way
attacking one side or the other, does little to sway the middle
I will not debate a rabid anti
to discuss something, one MUST admit or allow for one to be wrong, and be WILLING to shift, open to new ideas etc.

To many anti/pro comes down to: No, you are wrong...
yelling at eachother does little, but I will NOT give an inch (see, I'm right) and I'll back it up. So, for me it's 3 categories

Anti - pointless to argue, too stupid or too set to change (like my Democratic underground troll of a brother)

Undecided - I try to educate and present the other side they miss by being spoon fed by the media

Pro - who I look to for information and facts to back my argument.

Time is best spent on the undecided, once you find that one is an anti and is just as 'right' in their mind as you, it's just a merry go round of one upping and counters. In the mean time, lets not give the gun grabber ammo, rather we really ought to work to present a unified front, see, that's the anti/media trick, they make it seem like .01% is really 51% by presenting their opinion as fact.

I would add another one to the list

Ignorant but opinionated - the ones who think they know the truth, but only because they have heard biased or incomplete data. These ones are harder to educate, but I have managed to turn a few of my friends from this side, to full blown pro-2a "not a single more law, repeal old ones" firearm fans.

I believe this is the biggest group out there, and its mostly younger people who have absorbed enough "knowledge" to form an opinion, but not enough real knowledge or facts to have conviction of their opinion.

Xfire68
January 31, 2013, 07:07 PM
you couldn't be more wrong. those gov officials are there because they REPRESENT people who hold the same beliefs. those people are the source of the elected representatives' power.

those people are trying to take away your rights. if you went to war, it would be against your neighbors, the ones who put those politicians in power. they are they enemy, and until they are defeated, politicians would only be replaced with new faces that reflect the same beliefs of our enemy.
__________________

I was scanning the posts til I found someone that said what I was going to say. It did not take to long.

Our enemies are any person or group that wants to reduce, restrict or remove any of our rights.

If you enjoyed reading about "A friendly reminder in dark times...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!