The pinko liberal, the fudd, the joo, etc.
- Thread starter Oleg Volk
- Start date
- Status
haven't a clue here.
I just didn't realize that it was really another division. Seems like divisions amongst gun-owners really just comes down to intended uses and willingness to defend the 2A in its purest form.
purest probably should be "purest" if you know what I mean. I don't think we'll ever have any SC decision say the 2A means we can store nuclear weapons in our basement.
I just didn't realize that it was really another division. Seems like divisions amongst gun-owners really just comes down to intended uses and willingness to defend the 2A in its purest form.
purest probably should be "purest" if you know what I mean. I don't think we'll ever have any SC decision say the 2A means we can store nuclear weapons in our basement.
Why the extreme sensitivity? Oleg, I'm sure, was caricaturizing popular bigotries as they apply to modern culture.
Get some thicker skin, folks, and put things into context instead of actively seeking out and embracing every opportunity to be insulted.
Biker
Get some thicker skin, folks, and put things into context instead of actively seeking out and embracing every opportunity to be insulted.
Biker
I think we also need to be less sweeping in hatreds and more focused in uniting. I think there are plenty of places where uniting works. People like Rep. McCarthy give an aweful lot of rural Democrats a taint when they do what they do, but just calling them all dimocrats drives them further from the issue. I live in Oregon where there a lot of prog-gun Dems. The Democratic Party of Oregon even passed a resolution to support the Second Amendment aggressively, and we now have an official Gun Owners Caucus in the party. One of our leading Democrats (Burdick) apparently hasn't gotten the memo, but the rest have. I personally have converted a number of Dems here in Oregon.
So the low hanging fruit is in swing states or states where you typical Democrat doesn't believe all the same things as a Massachusetts Democrat. I know it well because I grew up and spend most of my life in Mass, and now live in Oregon. Work hard to bring into the fold Democrats from states like Oregon, Indiana, Colorado, West Virginia and the andti-gun people start getting awefully marginalized (certainly true on both sides with people like bloomberg and guiliani as well).
N
Mannlicher
Member
redneck2
and it would help, when a constituent writes an inquiry, that the congress kritter would actually write back. I hardly bother communicationg anymore with those guys. If you write, you get back a form letter, rubber stamped by some functionary. I doubt that elected officials ever see the mail that is sent to them.
Most of the elected folks up in DC, and in the State legislatures, are very far removed from their constituents.
and it would help, when a constituent writes an inquiry, that the congress kritter would actually write back. I hardly bother communicationg anymore with those guys. If you write, you get back a form letter, rubber stamped by some functionary. I doubt that elected officials ever see the mail that is sent to them.
Most of the elected folks up in DC, and in the State legislatures, are very far removed from their constituents.
Brian Dale
Member
TheEconomist,
As I read it, it's an example. Oleg's Jewish. His original post included the sentence,
Make sense?
Happy Bob - yeah I suppose.
I just didn't realize religion had anything to do with guns.
I guess what he must have been saying was to end whatever differences we have at all, whether they be gun related or not, and focus on the issue at hand - such as making sure there is no new AWB, etc.
If so, I'm a little surprised. I've been coming to the conclusion lately that anti-semitism is declining rapidly.
I didn't realize it was still considered a major hurdle.
I grew up being told that gun-owners were largely anti-semitic, but as long as I've been a gun-owner, I've found no more of it than I would find otherwise. Either things have changed, or the anti-semitic-gun-owner stereotype is overblown.
Which it is, I haven't a clue.
Sure, I see plenty of Nazi relics/flags/etc. at gun-shows, but I attribute it to more of an interest with history than with people actually relating to Nazi ideals.
I just didn't realize religion had anything to do with guns.
I guess what he must have been saying was to end whatever differences we have at all, whether they be gun related or not, and focus on the issue at hand - such as making sure there is no new AWB, etc.
If so, I'm a little surprised. I've been coming to the conclusion lately that anti-semitism is declining rapidly.
I didn't realize it was still considered a major hurdle.
I grew up being told that gun-owners were largely anti-semitic, but as long as I've been a gun-owner, I've found no more of it than I would find otherwise. Either things have changed, or the anti-semitic-gun-owner stereotype is overblown.
Which it is, I haven't a clue.
Sure, I see plenty of Nazi relics/flags/etc. at gun-shows, but I attribute it to more of an interest with history than with people actually relating to Nazi ideals.
SoCalShooter
Member
I try to be nice and have pleasent and informative discussions but the other side just wants to play on emotions nd not rationaly think. I agree however that the community is hurting itself.
Brian Dale
Member
TheEconomist, part of the frame of reference for this thread is the cat-fight over the recent Zumbo affair. One response by THR members is this thread. Please see especially Fly320s at Post #46, with Sage of Seattle's example photos at Post #105.
Religion, ethnicity, national origin, wealth, occupation, sex, sexual orientation, height and weight: all irrelevant.
The issue is fundamental human rights, and RKBA in particular.
And anti-semitism is somebody's own personal screwed-upness.
Religion, ethnicity, national origin, wealth, occupation, sex, sexual orientation, height and weight: all irrelevant.
The issue is fundamental human rights, and RKBA in particular.
And anti-semitism is somebody's own personal screwed-upness.
I'll be the first...
...to concur that there is a large segment of the Democratic leadership and even the urban rank & file who are antis. Given the massive battles I have with some of these folks on Daily Kos (yup - I'm one of them) trying to talk some sense into them, I'd be a fool to deny it. Just this week we had one thread over there which generated 1500+ comments - in 24 hours. And the majority were pro-RKBA, or accepting that the sensible thing is to recognize the 2nd A along with all the others as a *personal* right.
I'm not saying 'trust' the Dems. Heck, I don't trust any pol. There are those idiots like McCarthy who are catering to her urban constituents (and who is acting out of grief over her husband and son being shot - an understandable, if misguided reaction. I say that because my own dad was a cop killed on the job, yet I went the other direction and blame the man who did it, not the gun he used.) HR 1022 will probably not even make it out of committee, and is the same legislation she has sought to introduce for the last 12 years. It doesn't have a single sponsor. Yeah, I'd be happier of the Dem leadership would quash such nonsense, because it hurts Dem chances.
Anyway, my point is that demonizing all those with a liberal inclination is foolish in this forum, yet I see it constantly. It almost drove me away - and I'm strongly on your side. Save it for talk radio. I'll be happy to fight those fights elsewhere. But let's join together on this issue, and take the RKBA off the table as a partisan issue.
7
...to concur that there is a large segment of the Democratic leadership and even the urban rank & file who are antis. Given the massive battles I have with some of these folks on Daily Kos (yup - I'm one of them) trying to talk some sense into them, I'd be a fool to deny it. Just this week we had one thread over there which generated 1500+ comments - in 24 hours. And the majority were pro-RKBA, or accepting that the sensible thing is to recognize the 2nd A along with all the others as a *personal* right.
I'm not saying 'trust' the Dems. Heck, I don't trust any pol. There are those idiots like McCarthy who are catering to her urban constituents (and who is acting out of grief over her husband and son being shot - an understandable, if misguided reaction. I say that because my own dad was a cop killed on the job, yet I went the other direction and blame the man who did it, not the gun he used.) HR 1022 will probably not even make it out of committee, and is the same legislation she has sought to introduce for the last 12 years. It doesn't have a single sponsor. Yeah, I'd be happier of the Dem leadership would quash such nonsense, because it hurts Dem chances.
Anyway, my point is that demonizing all those with a liberal inclination is foolish in this forum, yet I see it constantly. It almost drove me away - and I'm strongly on your side. Save it for talk radio. I'll be happy to fight those fights elsewhere. But let's join together on this issue, and take the RKBA off the table as a partisan issue.
7
Post Closed
I was in the midst of writing this, when the original post was closed.
I think this applies for general gun discussions.
We better unite or we are doomed. I really don't care, why any one of you reading this, wants a gun. I used to hunt. I no longer do. I don't care why you want to hunt, or choose not to. Go hunt. Good luck to you. I have friends that hunt and share in the spoils of their efforts. Yummy! You should be able to own the guns you want to own, for whatever reason you choose to own them.
My guns, are for one thing only, self defense and SHTF situations, should one ever arise. Will i ever hunt again? Maybe. But i would have to buy more guns, than i have now.
Hunter? Self defense? Sport shooter? Competition shooter? Who cares?
We all own guns, and want to continue to own guns. Everyone should get off the "i'm better than you, because "this is what i do with my gun, and i am right and you are wrong" thing, before we all lose what we all cherish.
If we keep this up, only the "elite" will have guns.
Done with my rant
I was in the midst of writing this, when the original post was closed.
I think this applies for general gun discussions.
We better unite or we are doomed. I really don't care, why any one of you reading this, wants a gun. I used to hunt. I no longer do. I don't care why you want to hunt, or choose not to. Go hunt. Good luck to you. I have friends that hunt and share in the spoils of their efforts. Yummy! You should be able to own the guns you want to own, for whatever reason you choose to own them.
My guns, are for one thing only, self defense and SHTF situations, should one ever arise. Will i ever hunt again? Maybe. But i would have to buy more guns, than i have now.
Hunter? Self defense? Sport shooter? Competition shooter? Who cares?
We all own guns, and want to continue to own guns. Everyone should get off the "i'm better than you, because "this is what i do with my gun, and i am right and you are wrong" thing, before we all lose what we all cherish.
If we keep this up, only the "elite" will have guns.
Done with my rant
Last edited:
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Off topic and I'm not Jewish but I don't see that it's in any decline in the places I work and travel.
Anti-semitism is rising strongly in Europe. It could happen here in a flash.
I note that on the cover of this month's American Rifleman is a nice Jewish girl - the Prez - as pointed out clearly in the article.
Also, I despair when liberal is used as insult or a necessary predictor of being antigun. It is as useful as saying gun owners are fascists. There may be some correlation that folks with social liberal beliefs are more likely to be anti and social conservatives are more likely to be pro but the correlation isn't perfect. The gun list ranting use of liberal is very counterproductive.
On a gun mailing list of quality, I expressed an opinion negative to GWB's support of the AWB and was called a political provocateur by a ranter. Me - so RKBA - it hurts. A picture of me shooting a Desert Eagle in my office in a college, an Oleg poster (about Jews and guns) and a slogan from John Lott - More Guns, Less Crime. But I'm quite socially liberal.
I note that on the cover of this month's American Rifleman is a nice Jewish girl - the Prez - as pointed out clearly in the article.
Also, I despair when liberal is used as insult or a necessary predictor of being antigun. It is as useful as saying gun owners are fascists. There may be some correlation that folks with social liberal beliefs are more likely to be anti and social conservatives are more likely to be pro but the correlation isn't perfect. The gun list ranting use of liberal is very counterproductive.
On a gun mailing list of quality, I expressed an opinion negative to GWB's support of the AWB and was called a political provocateur by a ranter. Me - so RKBA - it hurts. A picture of me shooting a Desert Eagle in my office in a college, an Oleg poster (about Jews and guns) and a slogan from John Lott - More Guns, Less Crime. But I'm quite socially liberal.
Really? Maybe I'm just not noticing it then.
Whatever.
The original point though that Oleg made is valid.
We need to unite regardless of what we do with guns (well, so long as it's not unethical and blatantly illegal of course) - and defend the 2A as best we can. Skin color, religion, ethnicity, native language, whatever, I don't care - if we want to protect our collective right, we need to make the best of our population and put aside petty differences, or we WILL lose our right to bear arms.
Hunters, casual plinkers, enthusiasts/collectors, CCW'ers, survivalists, etc. - we all need to unite.
Yes - I'm talking to you guy who owns one gun in his home to protect his family, as much as I'm talking to you, lady with a pistol in her purse, and even you - person with no interest in guns personally, but who has an WWII relic passed down by their father or grandfather.
Everybody - you want to keep them - work together to ensure that.
good post Oleg - even though you had me confused for a minute there.
QuestionEverything
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 178
Gun ownership has some high barriers to entry, and this is something gun owners need to work on. There are the technical barriers, which are being overcome through Appleseed shoots and other outreach efforts, and then there are the cultural barriers.
When a liberal who's thinking about buying a gun walks into the shop and sees a "Liberal Hunting Permit" and other insulting bumper stickers, how do you think they will feel? How about a Muslim who wants to start shooting, looks for gun discussions online, and sees the THR posters with "kaffir" labels in their signatures? The gun shows in my area have banned racist literature, but there are still some where you can find tables with copies of the Turner Diaries proudly displayed.
Remember that Digg thread on gun control the other day? There were tons of great pro-gun arguments, and one guy who said "I'm a law-abiding gun owner, we have to go after the criminals, and you have to admit that blacks are more likely than whites to commit crimes." That one guy probably did more damage to the RKBA cause than the dozens of other people in that thread helped.
The Democratic "package deal" has only included gun control for about a decade and a half, so it's a lot less entrenched than Democratic segregationism. But whenever you attack liberals and Democrats, you will harden their hearts toward the RKBA. Remember, only half of gun owners are Republican. Hang together or hang separately.
When a liberal who's thinking about buying a gun walks into the shop and sees a "Liberal Hunting Permit" and other insulting bumper stickers, how do you think they will feel? How about a Muslim who wants to start shooting, looks for gun discussions online, and sees the THR posters with "kaffir" labels in their signatures? The gun shows in my area have banned racist literature, but there are still some where you can find tables with copies of the Turner Diaries proudly displayed.
Remember that Digg thread on gun control the other day? There were tons of great pro-gun arguments, and one guy who said "I'm a law-abiding gun owner, we have to go after the criminals, and you have to admit that blacks are more likely than whites to commit crimes." That one guy probably did more damage to the RKBA cause than the dozens of other people in that thread helped.
The Democratic "package deal" has only included gun control for about a decade and a half, so it's a lot less entrenched than Democratic segregationism. But whenever you attack liberals and Democrats, you will harden their hearts toward the RKBA. Remember, only half of gun owners are Republican. Hang together or hang separately.
Wesson Smith
Member
Well, good for you. I'm assuming that was tongue-in-cheek. At least I hope so...
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Joo = Jew as written by some people. I used all of those labels in jest, just to emphasize how poorly they work for actual communication.
QuestionEverything - absolutely right.
The "Liberal Hunting Season", and all related anti-liberal stickers, signs, t-shirts, etc. at gun shows really do need to go.
I will admit that I have made anti-liberal comments, but the reality is that THEY are not our enemy, it is the IDEA itself that "guns are bad" that is our enemy.
Imagine it this way, your friend Joe is roomates with a guy named John, who is a friend of his, but you've never gotten along with John. In fact, John one day punched you to show how "tough" he was to a lady-friend. Joe is still your friend, and just doesn't have a personal problem with John, so he sees no reason to kick John out of the flat.
That's what's going on with liberals. They're not the enemy, instead they're simply housing an enemy because to date the enemy has not burned them personally and they have no personal problems with the enemy. It doesn't make them the enemy though. We just need to show them why the IDEA is wrong, so they'll kick that IDEA out of their house.
Whatever. It's a stupid analogy I know, but at least it gets the point across.
We need to nix the anti-liberal comments, mentality, etc. and just take issue with their ideas - not them. Calling them names, or mocking them is no better than them calling republicans rednecks.
The best things we can do is to just reform their mentality on the issue. Many of them are under the mistaken impression that your average CCW'er is a guy named Jim-Bob who drives a pickup and has a pitbull in the passenger seat (no offense meant to anybody on this forum who fits that description). The fact simply is that you can't characterize your average CCW'er. If I told the folks at temple that I carry - they'd be surprised beyond belief. Unfortunately, I can't do that for obvious reasons. You get the point though. We need to show them that law-abiding gun-owners are just average people like them.... people who may happen to own some Glocks with hi-cap mags and an AR-15 or two, three, or fifteen. We are not their enemy, and they are not ours.
What we own doesn't define us. Whether or not we stand up for what we believe in - does. Don't be a Republican, just be a gun-owner.
The "Liberal Hunting Season", and all related anti-liberal stickers, signs, t-shirts, etc. at gun shows really do need to go.
I will admit that I have made anti-liberal comments, but the reality is that THEY are not our enemy, it is the IDEA itself that "guns are bad" that is our enemy.
Imagine it this way, your friend Joe is roomates with a guy named John, who is a friend of his, but you've never gotten along with John. In fact, John one day punched you to show how "tough" he was to a lady-friend. Joe is still your friend, and just doesn't have a personal problem with John, so he sees no reason to kick John out of the flat.
That's what's going on with liberals. They're not the enemy, instead they're simply housing an enemy because to date the enemy has not burned them personally and they have no personal problems with the enemy. It doesn't make them the enemy though. We just need to show them why the IDEA is wrong, so they'll kick that IDEA out of their house.
Whatever. It's a stupid analogy I know, but at least it gets the point across.
We need to nix the anti-liberal comments, mentality, etc. and just take issue with their ideas - not them. Calling them names, or mocking them is no better than them calling republicans rednecks.
The best things we can do is to just reform their mentality on the issue. Many of them are under the mistaken impression that your average CCW'er is a guy named Jim-Bob who drives a pickup and has a pitbull in the passenger seat (no offense meant to anybody on this forum who fits that description). The fact simply is that you can't characterize your average CCW'er. If I told the folks at temple that I carry - they'd be surprised beyond belief. Unfortunately, I can't do that for obvious reasons. You get the point though. We need to show them that law-abiding gun-owners are just average people like them.... people who may happen to own some Glocks with hi-cap mags and an AR-15 or two, three, or fifteen. We are not their enemy, and they are not ours.
What we own doesn't define us. Whether or not we stand up for what we believe in - does. Don't be a Republican, just be a gun-owner.
thirty-thirty
Member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Messages
- 178
When nearly all the major anti-gun politicians, Schumer, Feinstein, Waxman, Cellar, Lautenberg, Boxer and Metzenbaum are "joos", you can't really expect people not to draw distinctions or go along with pretending the issue has been addressed when it has only been discussed under the suppressive influence of taboos and rules that prevent discussion of such matters. If THR is not the place to discuss these matters, then THR is also not the place where conclusions about these matters can be arrived at.
Those pretending to address these issues when counter arguments are disallowed are being intellectually dishonest, IMO.
That is the dillemma for public forums. The more rules they have concerning which viewpoints are disallowed, the less "public" that forum becomes. That decision is up to the forum's owner.
Those pretending to address these issues when counter arguments are disallowed are being intellectually dishonest, IMO.
That is the dillemma for public forums. The more rules they have concerning which viewpoints are disallowed, the less "public" that forum becomes. That decision is up to the forum's owner.
- Status
