THR and "feed[ing] the hogs"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zundfolge

Zundfolge

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
10,757
Location
Wichita, KS
Lately there have been a few threads here bringing up the subject of invocation of the 2nd amendment in the way Jefferson intended (y'all know what I mean).

These threads tend to get locked or disappear all together.

I'm not going to debate the merits of either the pro or con position on use of violence to force political change in the USA because thats not what this thread is about.

I just wanted to call out those who want to discuss this here and kindly slap their little hands a bit.


I am not a moderator here, nor am I a member of the administrative staff. I'm nothing more than a charter member here who's been a part of this community (both here and TFL) for many years so I think I can speak with a little authority here (although that determination will ultimately come down to the mods).



It seems to me that even though many of us "regulars" here believe the Second Amendment is indeed the "doomsday clause" of the Constitution, it is still inappropriate discussion for these forums.

The purpose of The High Road is primarialy to support the cause of RKBA ... to be an outreach and resource to the fence sitters out there and help guide them to our side of the fence.

Refusal to discuss which politicians we'd off first when the S hits the F and the shooting starts is NOT a sign of weekness or lack of resolve, but is instead an acknoledgement that such discussion goes against the primary mission of this site.


Maybe it would help if Oleg or one of the moderators could pen a "Mission Statement" and put it in the FAQ just so there's no missunderstanding.
 
Well, I haven't been here as long as you have, but I beg to differ. This is a valuable resource for discussing every political aspect of firearms, including the original intent of the Second Amendment. You cannot read the Federalist Papers without becoming very clear on its intent, so why should we be ashamed to talk openly about something the Founders discussed openly in the popular publications of the day?
 
I don't have a problem with people here discussing the original intent of the founding fathers, the problem is there are too many "Okay boys, when do we start shooting and who do we shoot?" type of threads lately that get locked down and then some neophyte comes along complaining about how weak kneed THR is when it comes to the "true meaning" of the Second Amendment.

Battle plans and "hit lists" are not the purpose of THR. Thats all I'm saying.
 
I just wanted to call out those who want to discuss this here and kindly slap their little hands a bit.
Click to expand...
Carefull there, I bite and I've not had my shots this year.:neener:
It seems to me that even though many of us "regulars" here believe the Second Amendment is indeed the "doomsday clause" of the Constitution, it is still inappropriate discussion for these forums.
Click to expand...
Well, that is really the Moderators call ( and I think we've can all asses what THEIR view is ) and finally Oleg's decision. Personally I don't think its inappropriate at all. Imprudent in a public venue, yes.
 
i was a poster on the thread you are referring to.
And I also disagree with shutting these types of threads down.

The people who feel this way are part of our community, Shutting them down does not make us look better or HighRoady in the eyes of the antis and lurkers, which I believe is the intent of the censorship, it merely gives them proof that there are gun owners so crazy that we try to hide them out of shame.

These threads invariably attract well thought out, reasoned responses from members that counter the "vote from the roof tops crowd" ,if given time.

Countering people with ideas distasteful to you is much more productive than telling them to shut up
 
Last edited:
Not to hijack or change the subject of this thread, I find an unsettling similarity between the "feed-the-hogs" threads and the many cop-bashing threads I have seen on this forum. I understand the problem. Many of the folks here are as dissatisfied with the form our government seems to be morphing into as I am. As the most direct and tangible representatives of that government, its authority, and its ability to apply force, law enforcement officers and politicians make easy targets.

The problem that immediately rears its ugly head is how to decide who the bad guys are. For many here, the list would include Feinstein, Schumer, Kerry, Clinton, etc. For an equal number, the list would include Cheney, Bush, Rove, etc. See what I mean? Can we lump all politicians and cops together and call them bad guys and discuss how to "put them out of our misery", or should we support the ones who are performing as we believe they ought? After all, who is ultimately responsible for the people who get elected and the laws that get passed? Folks, in the immortal words of Pogo "We have met the enemy and he is us."

It may be that our government has gotten too big to find "individual rights" as anything more than an impediment to efficient administration. I fear that this may be true, but I continue to believe that standing up for those individual rights is worthwhile. If you don't vote, have never contributed to a candidate, walked the street for one, I for one will take your complaints about our form of government with a huge grain of salt.

As far as voting is concerned, I am a one-issue voter, and that issue is RKBA. As much as I hate the many things that have been done by the current administration, I see it as the lesser of two evils. When it comes time to discuss rejecting both, I pray it's done with the ballot box. Any option beyond that is subject matter for another forum than THR. Moderators are free to chastise me for the temerity of my comments.
 
My favorite "feedthehogs" style posts are the ones posted from a .gov IP address. Just a note to THRs self-styled revolutionaries - you are hitching your wagon to people who are either not particularly bright or looking for advancement at the DoJ.

But then again, not particularly bright describes pretty much anyone who would advocate illegal activities on a public forum where every message has a unique traceable identifier attached to it and is stored for an indefinite amount of time. Contrary to what some of you think, you aren't anonymous on the Internet.
 
Basically, the purpose of this forum is defined in two places: overall in the Forum Rules, and for each sub-forum in the description of that forum on THR's home page. Any post not fitting into those categories is technically OT.

We try to be reasonably flexible about "borderline" posts. For example, there have been a number of threads on the illegal immigration issue in L&P lately. Technically, these don't deal with civil rights (illegal immigrants, by definition, don't have any), and are not linked to the RKBA in any obvious way. However, since they do address an area of pressing political and legal interest, we've let them stand (merging them into combined threads when necessary, so as to avoid thread proliferation for no good reason).

In other areas, we try to remain on the High Road of discussion. For example, when discussing law enforcement issues, there are known problems in some areas. If a specific case is discussed in reasonable terms, or a given incident is analysed for legality, etc., we're fine with this. However, when some members exhibit a knee-jerk reaction to bash all cops, or condemn law enforcement overall, because of the actions of a few, we stop that sort of nonsense as soon as we see it. In the same way, there are those who are absolutists in their interpretation of the Constitution. They ignore the fact that the very same Constitution allocates roles and functions to the legislative, executive and judiciary branches of government, and that as long as the SCOTUS rules that laws, regulations, etc. are Constitutional, those laws and regulations are as binding as the Constitution itself on our behavior. When a moderator sees some idiot pontificating about how he's going to obey the Second Amendment only, and doesn't need anyone to give him permission to carry concealed, we sigh deeply and ponder the depths of Constitutional and legal ignorance which are thus displayed . . . :rolleyes:

On some subjects, we're rapidly losing patience, because some people just won't listen. If a moderator asks folks to cool it in a particular discussion, that should be taken as a directive. If idiots persist in getting all hot-headed in that thread, it's going to be closed and/or deleted - and that's final. If they don't like it, they do not have the right to post threads complaining about it. THR is a private forum, and the rules and moderators will govern what is said and done here. If that's not to a member's taste, he/she is free to leave us and find another forum on the Internet to call his/her home. We are not going to change THR for their benefit.

We moderators have discussed the problems caused by THR's rapid growth. We now have something over 8,000 active members, which makes us one of the largest 2A/RKBA boards on the Internet. (Don't pay any attention to the "Total Members" number - that can include people who registered years ago, posted once, and have never been back. Active membership is the key statistic.) Given that we now have a lot of relatively new members who are still "getting the feel" of the place, we try to be relatively low-key in leading them into our way of discussion. Some won't listen - and they go. It's more aggravating when those who've been here for some time, and should know better, persist in being bull-headed, obstinate and un-co-operative. We tend to deal with them somewhat more firmly, as they should know better.

BTW, you might spare a thought for the moderators. One of the things that makes THR a very high-class forum (not in our opinion, I hasten to add, but in the judgement of thousands of users!) is the hard work that moderators and administrators put in. There isn't a day when I'm on the board that I'm not moving threads to more appropriate forums, closing OT and disintegrating threads, discussing issues with other moderators, and - if I have time - trying to learn from new threads and contribute something myself. I know most of the other mods are the same. It would be nice, sometimes, to have a little recognition of this effort from our members. Now and again, someone will say something nice - and it's much appreciated when you do.
 
This problem is the same as with militias. You are comingling anarchists with mature, real patriots.
 
It would be nice, sometimes, to have a little recognition of this effort from our members. Now and again, someone will say something nice - and it's much appreciated when you do. -Preacherman
Click to expand...

Well hey, if it weren't for that fine effort, I wouldn't be here or recommend THR to others. I would actually support a heavier hand and a tighter interpretation and enforcement of what is appropriate. Too many threads are just hate-of-the-week with little objectivity and the barest if any connection to gun ownership. I wouldn't support being obsessive about it and upsetting good people. Just state a charter and stick to it. It is disturbing when you don't, appearing arbitrary. As a subscriber, I expect you to mean what you say. Thanks.
 
merits of either the pro or con position on use of violence to force political change in the USA
Click to expand...

You mean like the time a bunch of fellows in white wigs and funny hats did that about two and a half centuries ago?

For example, there have been a number of threads on the illegal immigration issue in L&P lately. Technically, these don't deal with civil rights (illegal immigrants, by definition, don't have any)
Click to expand...

Time for the THR chorus with a rousing rendition of, "Rights aren't granted by the state...."
 
We try to be reasonably flexible about "borderline" posts. For example, there have been a number of threads on the illegal immigration issue in L&P lately. Technically, these don't deal with civil rights (illegal immigrants, by definition, don't have any), and are not linked to the RKBA in any obvious way.
Click to expand...

Well, I wonder what a million people in Los Angeles will be marching for tomorrow then? They seem to believe otherwise. And I wonder whether those of us who aren't illegal aliens don't have our civil rights affected mightily by the presence of mass numbers of illegal aliens? Creating a socialist nation--which is going to be the inevitable result down the road of any kind of mass amnesty--is not an RKBA issue?

That said... As for talk of violent overthrow, etc., obviously that has no place on this or any other responsible forum.
 
Even if I harbored those thoughts, and I don't, I wouldn't verbalise them on a telephone, much less express them on a public forum.
As Bob Dylan said, "The times, they are a changin'..."
Biker
 
I have reflected upon the subject and agree that discussions about violent insurrection are probably best avoided, even as theoretical subjects like "when is it ok to assasinate people?".

Because it will scare off the newbs and fence sitters. Politics is easier to stomach than war, and we dont want to frighen people away from politics with warlike talk.

I suspect that the mods would lock down anything that approached a smith act violation. No need to promote the careers of the .gov henchmen.
 
2A

Moderator hat off...Speaking as a member and avid supporter of 2A:

We all know why 2A/RKBA was put in place by the founding fathers. They were too aware of how dangerous a governing body can be if not held in check by the very people whom they seek to govern. 2A ain't about duck huntin', and we know it...The antis in power also know that. They can talk about "Sporting Purpose" 'til they turn blue...but they know that's not what it was put there for. Simply owning, keeping, using...and carrying your arms
is invoking 2A. Message sent. Nothing else need be said or done.

Moderator hat on...Speaking as a moderator and a lawful, sensible, and responsible gun owner:

The right to free speech doesn't mean that we can yell "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater...unless there is, in fact, a fire.

There is a vast difference between exercising your right to keep and bear arms, and calling for war, assassination...or outright revolution...as some of these threads and posts seem to drift whenever the politics of Pro vs Anti is the topic. As noted, the act of keeping and bearing arms is a silent notification that...although we want to live in peace under US Constitutional law...we stand ready to resist, with the means to resist should anyone attempt to usurp that constitution and our Bill of Rights. The message is this: "We want very much for you to leave us in peace with our Constitutional rights in full force...but we will fight if you will have it no other way. Your call." This is what 2A is all about. Talk of murdering duly elected officials and a Coup de T'at is treason.

If you want'em out of office, throw'em out. Vote! Many of the antis in Washington and individual state capitols have backed off much of their vehement rhetoric because the voters sent them an unmistakeable message. "Our right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed! Your job is to serve US...NOT the other way around! Get a grip on that!" Vote to keep your guns so that your children's vote and your grandchildren's vote will carry the same weight as yours does now. And educate at every opportunity.
 
As will the fact that we have a right to defend ourselves from violent criminals or despotic regimes. Your point?
Click to expand...

My point is that, de facto, illegal aliens do have rights, though we may insist they don't and should not. They are proving that every day by working illegally, collecting social welfare benefits illegally, getting free educations, getting free medical care, all with the complicity of courts, law enforcement, the media, and a goodly chunk of the business community. Saying they have no rights is tantamount to saying they're not here and are stigmatized, and, to the point, that we don't have to concern ourselves about this as problem.

We do, and we'd better. Does it affect RKBA? RKBA springs from a certain political and culture environment, an attitude about personal liberty in relation to government. When that environment disappears--and it's certainly under attack from many directions--RKBA will vanish.
 
They are proving that every day by working illegally, collecting social welfare benefits illegally, getting free educations, getting free medical care,
Click to expand...
If I walk up to you and slap you in the face, does that mean I had a right to do it? If I walk up to you every morning and slap you in the face, does that mean I have a right to keep doing it? If you tell the police that every morning I slap you in the face, and they do nothing about it, does that mean I have a right to do it?

Illegal aliens have the same inalienable, god-given, human (whatever other moniker you wish to add) rights that you or I do. They do not, however, have any civil rights at all. The fact that they act as if they do, and no-one stops them, does not change that fact.
 
As a moderator, I try to ignore a point of view. My deal is polite discourse. Act like grownups.

I tend to close threads which contain a bunch of sarcasm and name-calling and general rude phrasings. Arguments generated from errors of fact don't help matters.

We all have strong opinions. Fine. It would be nice, once in a while, to read, "My opinion about XXX is..." instead of some categorical statement presented as one of the Eleven General Orders with which one must agree or turn purple all over.

Art
 
There's theory and there's reality. Reality is that as many as 20 million people are in this country illegally and reaping the full benefits, in many cases--and that includes suffrage--of legal immigrants and citizens. They are able to do that because their "rights" have been re-defined by the courts and re-interpreted by the bureaucracies. The media, including those that allegedly tilt "rightward," have all but extinguished the difference between illegal aliens and "immigrants."

Your rights are what you are able to exert, no more, no less. Talking about God-given rights obscures the real issue, which is the actual shape of our society and what is actually going on today. From what I can see our rights as Americans have become a matter of how many bodies you can put in the street and how inconvenient enforcing our laws happens to be. That isn't a very good basis for a good and honest society of free men.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Forum Rules
Replies
0
Views
554
Matt King
M
R
  • Locked
THR vs TFL
2 3
Replies
72
Views
4K
FPrice
F
S
  • Locked
Keeping The Bar Raised.
2 3
Replies
60
Views
4K
Justin
Justin
D
  • Locked
For your consideration
2 3 4 5
Replies
108
Views
6K
Tcruse
T
Staff
  • Sticky
A THR Primer on Courtesy and Basic Abbreviations, Acronyms and Terminology
Replies
11
Views
94K
jim in Anchorage
J
Back
Top