Russ Jackson
member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 564
I cannot think of anything I could disagree with more.
I am a Democrat for RKBA
- Thread starter hm
- Start date
- Status
Fastcast
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 874
For crying out loud, this post is one of the best reads here in a long time! Can we quit threatening (members & mods) to have it locked down? 
We all may learn a little something, if the politically correct crowd puts their big boy pants on for a change!
We all may learn a little something, if the politically correct crowd puts their big boy pants on for a change!
vito
Member
In this country you have a choice of voting for a Republican, a Democrat or not voting. A vote for a third party candidate will ALWAYS be, in effect, a vote for the Republican or Democrat. Third parties do not and have not, in modern times, achieved any national significance. Sometimes their positions are incorporated into the platform of one of the major parties. So you folks who considered Romney not conservative enough, not pure enough for your liking, who then voted for some third party or just didn't vote, you actually were aiding Obama to get re-elected. Reagan said that a person who agreed with him 80% of the time is not his enemy. So if you didn't vote for Romney, you are part of the reason we have Obama for another four years. The company is slipping backwards, our foreign policy is in total disarray, government continues to grow and become more intrusive (just wait until the rest of you see the real implications of Obamacare!) and our 2nd Amendment rights are under attack. Those who claim to support the 2nd Amendment who do not vote Republican are what are called "the useful idiots of the Democrat party".
herkyguy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 1,409
I am against those who wish to disregard the Constitution in any way shape or form, especially RKBA. I am not so much against Democrats, but more against the progressive wing of that side that sees fit to change the very structure of our nation to fit their worldview. This falls squarely in the liberal lap, hence i often agree with the liberal bashing when they cry out that government will take care of us and we don't need guns anymore.
It comes down to whether or not one assumes responsibility for their own well being or would rather give up their rights to sleep under false pretenses of big government taking care of your problems.
In my humble opinion, those who choose the latter category are sorely misguided and un-American.
Firearms are a physical manifestation of the principles on which this nation was founded. When I talk with folks from other countries, I usually end up laughing a bit, shaking my head, and end the conversation by telling them that America is unique, we have freedoms they can't fathom, and our forefathers paid a heavy toll to give us American Exceptionalism.....a concept I strongly believe in and make no apologies for.
It comes down to whether or not one assumes responsibility for their own well being or would rather give up their rights to sleep under false pretenses of big government taking care of your problems.
In my humble opinion, those who choose the latter category are sorely misguided and un-American.
Firearms are a physical manifestation of the principles on which this nation was founded. When I talk with folks from other countries, I usually end up laughing a bit, shaking my head, and end the conversation by telling them that America is unique, we have freedoms they can't fathom, and our forefathers paid a heavy toll to give us American Exceptionalism.....a concept I strongly believe in and make no apologies for.
JustinJ
Member
If its really about liberty why isn't there a massive organization like the NRA to restore the fourth amendment? And for those who only subscribe to media that validates their world views it was trashed by Bush with the Patriotic act and then trashed further by Obama. Unfortunately, the reality is the vast majority apparently don't care about the actual principle of liberty, in spite of how often they wrap themselves in that cloak, but only the specific liberties they value. If they did there would be a National Fourth Amendment Association but i guess since there are no massive corporations to fund it or political parties to use it for advantage we will never see one.
GiorgioG
Member
If you happen to be gay, or a woman who wants the right to choose, or someone who believes that paying taxes means having a right to be represented...these are constitutional/bill of rights issues.
herky,
Your 2nd sentence contradicts your 1st. Pretty sure it's not the Dems who try to fuse church back into state schools, and wanted to modify the Constitution to ensure gays were incapable of receiving certain rights.
An attack on one right is an attack on all. The red and blue just tend to attack different rights.
John
Your 2nd sentence contradicts your 1st. Pretty sure it's not the Dems who try to fuse church back into state schools, and wanted to modify the Constitution to ensure gays were incapable of receiving certain rights.
An attack on one right is an attack on all. The red and blue just tend to attack different rights.
John
Godsgunman
Member
I see what the OP is trying to say and do. I have a coworker and shooting buddy who would probably fall along the same lines. He actually has more firearms than I do and owns a couple dreaded "assault rifles". He is as pro gun as I am but thats one of the few things we see eye to eye on. But here's the problem especially this election, there was NO true 2A candidate. We had Romney who had already passed strict gun laws and we had Obama who everyone knew was waiting for a 2nd term to push his anti-2A agenda. No win situation. So we had to truly vote for the lesser of 2 evils. I personally feel it was all a setup to begin with when Romney got the nod, a lukewarm, wish-washy candidate. It came down to the other issues which anyone with only one eye open could see that Obama is bad for this country on all levels. Unfortunately though I believe the high ups in the Republican party stabbed us all in the back and no matter who would have been voted in we would still be dealing with this 2A attack. However you can't vote for a candidate of a party that has always been for gun control and against certain Constitutional rights and then cry foul when that person does exactly what the party stands for. Especially when that candidate has ALWAYS spoken out against it and its taken no one with a rational brain by surprise.
BHP FAN
Member
''I voted for President Obama, as did a majority of Americans (thus, he's prez). I would eagerly vote for him again today...''
the definition of insanity, is to repeat the same action, expecting different results.
the definition of insanity, is to repeat the same action, expecting different results.
bainter1212
Member
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2012
- Messages
- 1,175
No, repeating the same action and expecting different results is called PRACTICE. You know, like throwing a baseball 1000 times makes you a better thrower or playing your sax for hours makes you a better musician.
Stupidest quote ever.
Stupidest quote ever.
If the Democrat party were the party it used to be back in Harry Trumans time and Liberals were still liberal in the classic sense of supporting MORE freedom than I might well be able to vote in D column sometime. Neither is the case anymore though. The Dem party OF TODAY is hard left, politically correct, gun banning/gun confiscating run by the most radically left elements we have ever seen in our nations history.
I ask all here to think about if this had happened at the beginning of Obama's FIRST term when he had super-majoritys in both the house and the senate. The Finestein bill wouldn't be a subject of debate, it would have already been passed. THATS why I can't support Dems as much as the R's often tee me off.
I truely believe that the communistic and fascist elements we as a nation battled against in WWII and since have insidiously taken over at least intellectually the press, unions, academia and the current day Democrat party and are now pursuing their agenda from inside those institutions.
I am NOT saying that any individual member of the above groups would recognize or claim allegience to the communist or fascistic partys. Most undoubtedly believe themselves to patriotic americans, who support organizations and/or professions, the leadership of which are systematically undermining the concept of individual freedom and liberty this nation was founded on and our Constitution was written to protect.
I am also not exempting the R's from culpability in our march to destruction, lots of bad there too, but there are more supporters by far of our tradtional values than the D's.
I ask all here to think about if this had happened at the beginning of Obama's FIRST term when he had super-majoritys in both the house and the senate. The Finestein bill wouldn't be a subject of debate, it would have already been passed. THATS why I can't support Dems as much as the R's often tee me off.
I truely believe that the communistic and fascist elements we as a nation battled against in WWII and since have insidiously taken over at least intellectually the press, unions, academia and the current day Democrat party and are now pursuing their agenda from inside those institutions.
I am NOT saying that any individual member of the above groups would recognize or claim allegience to the communist or fascistic partys. Most undoubtedly believe themselves to patriotic americans, who support organizations and/or professions, the leadership of which are systematically undermining the concept of individual freedom and liberty this nation was founded on and our Constitution was written to protect.
I am also not exempting the R's from culpability in our march to destruction, lots of bad there too, but there are more supporters by far of our tradtional values than the D's.
Taking away our rights and sending us to financial ruin is something we just need to keep on "practicing"...Wow, just wow.
hm
Member
OP Reply
Wow...just wow. What a great discussion!
I don't think there's much more I can add that hasn't already been said, but I will address some of the sentiments y'all wrote about.
First and foremost, huge Thank You's to the Mods for trusting us to stay on-track and allowing this great discussion!
To "jmorris" I'll say that, to me, "unduly" means preventing law-abiding citizens from owning handguns, rifles and shotguns. I do not, however, believe that criminal and mental health background checks upon purchasing a firearm are an infringement of my rights, just as long as the government that is performing the background check is an elected one accountable to We The People via legitimate elections. In short, don't limit my mag cap, but do make sure I'm not cuckoo before letting me have an AR-15.
Just so you all know, I do contact my gov't reps, in writing, identifying myself as a Dem and fervently pro-2A. Especially when the rep I'm writing to is a Dem, I urge them to support 2A as well. And, by the way, I have long been a member of an organization called Democrats for Gun Ownership. They are a national organization that has a presence in DC and supports pro-2A Dems. In other words, I agree with those of you who assert that I need to be talking up Pro-2A to my fellow Dems more than dueling with Republicans. Especially in the wake of recent shootings that received a lot of media attention, I have increased my pro-2A letter-writing (politicians & newspaper editor).
My overall thoughts on all the replies is this: Some people still seem to see the world in black and white...all or nothing. But most of the posts (whether or not you happen to agree with my rationale) show that the majority of members on THR see the real shades of gray in the world. I love this board even more now.
Wow...just wow. What a great discussion!
I don't think there's much more I can add that hasn't already been said, but I will address some of the sentiments y'all wrote about.
First and foremost, huge Thank You's to the Mods for trusting us to stay on-track and allowing this great discussion!
To "jmorris" I'll say that, to me, "unduly" means preventing law-abiding citizens from owning handguns, rifles and shotguns. I do not, however, believe that criminal and mental health background checks upon purchasing a firearm are an infringement of my rights, just as long as the government that is performing the background check is an elected one accountable to We The People via legitimate elections. In short, don't limit my mag cap, but do make sure I'm not cuckoo before letting me have an AR-15.
Just so you all know, I do contact my gov't reps, in writing, identifying myself as a Dem and fervently pro-2A. Especially when the rep I'm writing to is a Dem, I urge them to support 2A as well. And, by the way, I have long been a member of an organization called Democrats for Gun Ownership. They are a national organization that has a presence in DC and supports pro-2A Dems. In other words, I agree with those of you who assert that I need to be talking up Pro-2A to my fellow Dems more than dueling with Republicans. Especially in the wake of recent shootings that received a lot of media attention, I have increased my pro-2A letter-writing (politicians & newspaper editor).
My overall thoughts on all the replies is this: Some people still seem to see the world in black and white...all or nothing. But most of the posts (whether or not you happen to agree with my rationale) show that the majority of members on THR see the real shades of gray in the world. I love this board even more now.
OP just little confused, not to say confused big time.
He knew that BHO was anti-gun from begging and Democratic party is anti-gun too.
But he is devoted Democrat and it is his way of life. Can we blame his for that. No because it is still "free" country yet and he entailed to have his own opinion and believes.
That's huge dilemma...Problem not to what party you belong, this day not GOP or Dem's are absolute right. They both have unacceptable problems. Problem is ideology used by liberals and that never worked in good way. I mentioned already that I'm from former Russia, and I know that hard way. Liberal ideology that a problem and that makes people believe in "ideal society" witch is never an option in reality .
He knew that BHO was anti-gun from begging and Democratic party is anti-gun too.
But he is devoted Democrat and it is his way of life. Can we blame his for that. No because it is still "free" country yet and he entailed to have his own opinion and believes.
That's huge dilemma...Problem not to what party you belong, this day not GOP or Dem's are absolute right. They both have unacceptable problems. Problem is ideology used by liberals and that never worked in good way. I mentioned already that I'm from former Russia, and I know that hard way. Liberal ideology that a problem and that makes people believe in "ideal society" witch is never an option in reality .
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
"Letting me...?" Oh, isn't it just peachy-keen when the government LETS ME have something I'm Constitutionally assured is my right to be able to own?
I understand that we do have background checks and such, for now ... but the underlying philosophy of asking the government "Mommy may I?" is nauseating and despicable. Screening my fellow citizens who are free and walking the streets is not something I ask, nor trust, my government to do.
I have doubt about anyone, gun owner or not, who would vote for Obama, the most radical President in the history of the USA. And, I have contempt for gun owners who refuse to support the NRA. The NRA is the only reason we still have a viable Second Amendment today.
hm
Member
Sam1911,
You know, I actually thought about my wording before writing that, but didn't think anyone would truly read some sinister looney left conspiracy into it. I'm disappointed to see that I was wrong.
You know, I actually thought about my wording before writing that, but didn't think anyone would truly read some sinister looney left conspiracy into it. I'm disappointed to see that I was wrong.
Correct, why wouldn't you support the NRA? If not the NRA some other pro gun organization. Especially for your ability to support an anti gun president over and over again.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
While it's all well and good that you're a pro-gun Democrat, it doesn't change the fact that the party leadership are virulently anti-gun.
There's plenty of pro-gun Dems, it's a pity that none of them (with the single exception being Harry Reid) actually wield any influence within the party.
Cesiumsponge
Member
Somewhere on the DU, there is an thread with a gun-hating member who voted for Romney and Obama supporters screaming, "a vote for a third party is a vote for Romney".
Try again.
Try again.
Fishslayer
Member
A person's opinion of the 2A is usually a good barometer of where that persons stands on the rest of our rights and the citizen/.gov relationship in general. Our leftists in Sacramento didn't get elected for their 2A views.
That's OK. A lot of people actually voted for our Gov. Moonbeam believing he was PRO 2A.:banghead:
I can see where you went wrong though. BHO was such a rabid supporter of gun rights in the Senate for the brief time he was there...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
