A House Divided

Was there a link or something you meant to include?

"Much of this retoric is detail vs details and the main picture seems to get lost in the fog of sometimes ridiculus discussion."

Details give the big picture meaning, otherwise we're just chanting cliche slogans at each other. The details are sometimes ridiculous because too often the implications of anti gun logic are ridiculous.

TCB

As one who spends a pretty fair bit of time debating forcefully with "our own" to explain and reinforce the important details which come from understanding the foundations of our beliefs, I agree with you that it is sometimes distressing how heated that gets. And I also lament that it is a rare debate that doesn't include a few comments that shouldn't be there: insult rather than insight and accusation rather than instruction.

But we're all individuals and our education on our issues is highly uneven. It isn't like most Americans finish high school or college with a deep understanding of how our government works, how to apply the proper functions of logic to overcome the weight of whatever opinion they've come up with on their own, or a deep understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of the belief in fundamental RKBA.

Rarely is taking the median opinion of a random collection of enthusiasts a good formula for waging a political and social struggle. To break down the organic, unformed, uninformed, "truthy" beliefs of "our" own side -- those basic "I like guns" feelings that brought each of us to favor the 2nd Amendment in the first place -- and educate/reform them into logically sound and internally consistent platforms of thought from which each can reason and fight our daily RKBA battle effectively is one of the basic reasons we come here and debate.

We can't all go marching off to political and social "war" on the strength of whatever "reasonable," "middle-of-the-road," flawed and gap-riddled perspective that each of us comes to out of our own limited views and experiences. That's not good enough. Got to do better, and doing better means educating and challenging each other and spreading a higher level of understanding of our issues, and of strategies for winning our battle.

Sure, there will always be a lot of "cannon fodder" among us. The common foot-soldier who doesn't really understand the big picture, or the details of the little picture, or why anyone among us might care about issues beyond his tiny sphere, but heads to the polls to pull the lever we most want him/her to pull come election time.

But when that average Joe gun owner picks himself up a little higher and shows enough interest to come here and dig into the pool of deeper understandings, we might have the chance to make an officer out of him! A leader and educator of those in his own group of friends and gun shop pals. Maybe even, someday, a General -- who gets up the gumption to visit his Senators or organize a march or rally.

So yes, we must be polite and respectful of each other as persons. But we must draw a firm line at allowing flawed ideas to propagate among us. We do something important here, in educating and forming the RKBA soldiers and leaders of today and tomorrow. Can't let that be diluted for the sake of not rocking anyone's boat.

Well said, Sam.

Sam1911

We do something important here, in educating and forming the RKBA soldiers and leaders of today and tomorrow. Can't let that be diluted for the sake of not rocking anyone's boat.

Click to expand...

I become better-informed every time I come here. Thanks THR.

Sam has it right. Those of us who have been financing and participating in making the incremental real changes in the laws regarding the RKBA over the last 20-30 years understand that the system we have is one in which small changes take place over a long period of time, and are done by careful study and attention to details. Tnose of us with 30-40 year memories know that the second amendment rights of the citizens of our republic stand as the best status since the mid 60's. CCW laws are expanding monthly, there is a real interest in NFA firearms among the "normal" people, and there's an AR-15 in every third house in suburbia.

Those who invest the many hundreds of hours of reading and study in the subject are often amused by those with less understanding, who shout out slogans and then retreat to sulk when their fantasy views aren't taken seriously. But the fact is that the litigation and constant efforts put forth by those who are actually working the issues are being done for all, and anyone who excercises their rights is part of who we work for. We don't always agree, and there are many sub-factions of the "community" that I would conciously avoid social interaction with on a personal level, but their rights are as enshrined as mine, and so they are part of the same family for which we fight. That includes even "Mall Ninja and the Neckbeards", which is both a perfect name for a rock & roll band and a descriptor of those who I don't invite to dinner, but for whom I will defend the second amendment for as long as I am able.


Willie

.

This is the biggest issue I have..

1. There are people who are in fact against guns. They don't want firearms period. Not in public, not in your own house, period.

That's clear there are true anti-gun people.

2. There are people who WANT guns, but want safety when it comes to guns.

But far too often the political right sticks group 2 in group 1.

President Obama supports the 2nd Amendment, but wants safety.

But all I ever hear from the right, EVER since he was President was:

"Obama's gonna git yer guns! Obama's gonna git yer guns!, buy moar guns cuz Obama's gonna get yer guns!


Yet in the 6 years and 5 days he's been in office, not one gun has been taken from me or anyone I know.


When the right labels "gun regulation" as "gun confiscation", that is nothing but fear born from ignorance.

President Obama supports the 2nd Amendment, but wants safety.

Click to expand...

HOLD THE PHONE!

Wait, who told you that? HIM? Good grief.

Yet in the 6 years and 5 days he's been in office, not one gun has been taken from me or anyone I know.

Click to expand...

Are you really that far out of touch? Do you have any idea how DAMNED hard we've been fighting him and his cronies to hold the line? And the places we've lost ground? Look at NY, CO, CT. Look at all the things he said after Newtown, and the stuff he's tried to push through and the Executive Orders he was finally boxed into a corner with only that left.

When the right labels "gun regulation" as "gun confiscation", that is nothing but fear born from ignorance.

Click to expand...

If you don't understand how inexorably one leads to the other, you need to do a LOT more history reading.

And if you don't understand how laws only limit the folks who FOLLOW THEM ANYWAY, you need to do a lot more THINKING.

You've made some progress this week, I've seen, but you've got a long way to go. Keep up the work.

President Obama supports the 2nd Amendment, but wants safety.

Click to expand...

Your head stay warm in that sand?

Yet in the 6 years and 5 days he's been in office, not one gun has been taken from me or anyone I know

Click to expand...

That's not for lack of effort on the part of the Obama administration and the Democrats as a whole. They just didn't have the votes in congress or the public support to pull it off.

Another member stated in another thread that THR may not be a good fit for you, and I'm inclined to agree. You are remaining willfully ignorant of the obvious truths in the struggle to preserve RKBA.

Another member stated in another thread that THR may not be a good fit for you, and I'm inclined to agree. You are remaining willfully ignorant of the obvious truths in the struggle to preserve RKBA.

Click to expand...

Hold on, friend. It might be the BEST place for him. He's young at this. Green. Give him some time. He's got a long way to go, but this place is probably about the best on earth for that kind of study.

Sam1911 said:

HOLD THE PHONE!

Wait, who told you that? HIM? Good grief.


Are you really that far out of touch? Do you have any idea how DAMNED hard we've been fighting him and his cronies to hold the line? And the places we've lost ground? Look at NY, CO, CT. Look at all the things he said after Newtown, and the stuff he's tried to push through and the Executive Orders he was finally boxed into a corner with only that left.


If you don't understand how inexorably one leads to the other, you need to do a LOT more history reading.

And if you don't understand how laws only limit the folks who FOLLOW THEM ANYWAY, you need to do a lot more THINKING.

You've made some progress this week, I've seen, but you've got a long way to go. Keep up the work.

Click to expand...

Find one instance just ONE, where President Obama wanted to ban guns entirely.

He DID, want to Reinstate the Assault Weapons ban, but NOT a total weapon ban.

Also..

Bill Clinton passed a AWB in 1994.

Even Ronald Raygun, Jimmy Carter, and Gerald Ford had this to say:

May 5th, 1994.

WASHINGTON — Three former presidents endorsed legislation Wednesday to ban the future manufacture, sale and possession of combat-style assault weapons as a closely divided House neared a showdown today on the hotly controversial issue.

Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan sent a letter to all House members expressing their support for the measure, effectively joining President Clinton in urging approval of the ban.

Click to expand...

I guess they are a bunch of Anti's too?

Funny, no guns were taken during all four presidencies, either.

Give me a break.

Wanting regulation DOES NOT MAKE SOMEONE AN ANTI.


Let's go back to '91.


March 21st, 1991.

This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them. If the passage of the Brady bill were to result in a reduction of only 10 or 15 percent of those numbers (and it could be a good deal greater), it would be well worth making it the law of the land.

Click to expand...

-President Ronald Reagan.

So Mr. Reagan, considered the "best president" by the political right is an "anti" too? SAY IT AIN'T SO!

Find one instance just ONE, where President Obama wanted to ban guns entirely.

Click to expand...

He has been quoted by John Lott, who knew him before he entered politics, as saying he didn't believe anyone should be allowed to own guns. Believe that or not, doesn't matter.

He DID, want to Reinstate the Assault Weapons ban, but NOT a total weapon ban.

Click to expand...

Ok, then he is my dedicated, to all ends, flat out, eternal enemy. Clear?

Bill Clinton passed a AWB in 1994.

Click to expand...

Ok, that would make him a prior dedicated, flat out, eternal enemy. Clear?

Even Ronald Raygun, Jimmy Carter, and Gerald Ford had this to say:

Click to expand...

Really digging for POWERHOUSES of the pro-gun movement here aren't you? Like I'd give a squeak what Jimmy Carter thought about anything. Ford...meh. Ronnie? See below.

So Mr. Reagan, considered the "best president" by the political right is an "anti" too? SAY IT AIN'T SO!

Click to expand...

Yup. He had a few other embarrassing and disgraceful misses, too. Want me to list them? (To be honest, the Hughes Amendment wasn't really his fault, but we can pin it on him if it makes you happy.)

Funny, no guns were taken during all four presidencies, either.

Click to expand...

Is actual, physical CONFISCATION the only thing you think makes someone an enemy? Brother, that just ain't so. Restrictions on types of weapon, restrictions on sales, restrictions on magazines, restrictions on carry, increased types of "prohibited person," ammo "sin" taxes, closures and economic strangulation of dealers, licensing, increasing the number of "gun free zones" ("victim disarmament zones"), shipping and transport limitations -- there are HUNDREDS of ways a politician can prove they are an enemy of the right of the citizen to Keep and Bear Arms.

Wanting regulation DOES NOT MAKE SOMEONE AN ANTI.

Click to expand...

It does to ME, if they are old enough to know better and/or in a position of power. If not, I just assume they're ignorant and if their opinion matters to me I help them see the light.

Wanting regulation DOES NOT MAKE SOMEONE AN ANTI.

Click to expand...

No, it makes them a fudd, which is basically an unwitting collaborator.

You have got to either take your blinders off or admit that you're an anti trying to infiltrate our community as a moderate. There really can be no middle ground; "compromise" as it concerns RKBA simply means our side giving up less than our opponents want. We gain nothing.

Ya Know Sam, not everyone has to agree with you.

Ya Know Sam, not everyone has to agree with you.

Click to expand...

Have I ever said they do? They don't have to be an ally. They don't even have to be right. I won't force them. It's a free country.

You have got to either take your blinders off or admit that you're an anti trying to infiltrate our community as a moderate. There really can be no middle ground; "compromise" as it concerns RKBA simply means our side giving up less than our opponents want. We gain nothing.

Click to expand...

If in fact that is how you believe, you must also be against the NRA.

If in fact that is how you believe, you are also against the NRA.

Click to expand...

Well, it isn't like the NRA's always been right about everything.

And they play deep politics. They do make certain choices for political ends which I might not. At times and on certain issues, I've opposed their plans and sometimes their people.

Generally though they are on the right side of history. And fortunately we do have a vibrant family of other pro-gun groups which work together (through agreement AND disagreement) to nudge the country in the right channel.

If in fact that is how you believe, you are also against the NRA.

Click to expand...

I certainly don't agree with the organization 100%, but as they have transitioned toward much more of a no compromise stance, I tend to find my self more aligned with the NRA than in years passed.

What you two need to remember is that the extremes define the middle. There are X million staunchly pro gun people and X million dyed-in-the-wool anti gun folks, and then there's the rest of the population; we'll simply call them the non-gunners. And while the pro gun folks outnumber the anti gunners, the antis are backed by big money from bloomberg, Soros and the like, and they also have the majority of media and academia in their pocket. So, the anti gun crowd has a disproportionately loud voice, and unless we counter them vehemently at every opportunity, the non-gunners are easily swayed by the one-sided diatribe they are fed day-in and day-out by the major media outlets. Well, the non-gunners still vote, and if they never hear both sides of the debate and are not interested enough to research the subject on their own, they are easily swayed by the sound bites, and become an enemy of RKBA without having any stake in it and, really, without even realizing.

Well... wake me up when one of our good politicians figure out how to regulate common sense and criminal behavior.

thirty-ought-six said:

President Obama supports the 2nd Amendment, but wants safety..

Click to expand...

He was saying he wanted a 500% raise in taxes on Ammo when he was running in 2008 before he even got elected , so either he is anti gun or he don't want poor folks to protect them selves, or he is anti hunting , ?? but he sure is NOT in Support of the 2nd Amendment ,

Find one instance just ONE, where President Obama wanted to ban guns entirely.

He DID, want to Reinstate the Assault Weapons ban, but NOT a total weapon ban.

Click to expand...

It is unbelievable, the 'word parsing' that people will do, in order to defend a totally misguided point. An AWB is ok because it's not a TOTAL ban? Really? You are really missing the point. The entire premise of a ban on anything (magazine limits, the way a firearm looks, etc) is misguided from the start. That kind of stupid illogical thinking reminds me of those who use to say that red cars are more dangerous.

I think what a lot of people miss on not just the gun issue is being president isn't the same as being dictator/king, Obama isn't gun friendly, but it takes congress and the president to make most substantial changes. Just because nobody took your guns does not mean nobody wanted to.