NRA Democrats

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes Armed Bear, I understand that explanation. Makes sense from what I've seen over the years.:)


I see TT, makes more sense now. Thanks for the explanation.:)

They "believe individuals are incompetent". Man, that makes my blood boil!!
 
We've survived Rep and Dem administrations senates and houses in the past but don't think we have ever had such wacky people as Pelosi, Reid and possibly Obama in the drivers seat at one time. Esp with 2 or 3 Supreme Court seats comming up in the next few years.
 
The more we take our love of guns public, the better chance we'll have in disassociating guns with the far right.

A couple thoughts...

Stop worrying about where gun rights are ALREADY associated and START incorporating them into non-traditional areas.

While I understand your sentiment, I think your message could be better phrased that you would like 2A support not to be solely a "far-right" notion. However, quit worrying about disassociating things. Worry about associating things. The far-right will likely ALWAYS be pro-2A-- as we have always been. That will not change.

As a conservative, right-wing person, I agree with you. I would much rather RKBA issues NOT to be solely associated with one ideology or the other. There's plenty of room for everyone in supporting the 2A.

If this is no longer a polarized issue, I suspect that position becomes dramatically more secure.
 
Although the 94 ban was a Clinton piece, Republicans had the power to filibuster,why didnt they, did they not consider it that important?

Personally if i have a full size 9mm and limited to 10,i feel like i am gettin messed over
 
i no longer enjoy visiting this site.i'm tired of all the insults when all i wanna do is talk guns.this site is republican 1st and a gun site 2nd.i don't feel welcome here.you guys make me wanna give up the hobby.i said i was dem,i did'nt say i was voting obama.unlike you guys,i'm not even telling anyone else who they should vote for.a true firearms advocate would try to get along with both parties,not cut them off.my other hobby is reef keeping.the people in those forums have twice the intelect and 3 times the money.they are true republicans,very very rich,and non of them would bully people over politics.
 
Nobody is bullying anyone, ziggy, by expressing opinions and backing them up with examples.

Is that what Democrats really think? If I don't agree with you, and I can cite reasons, I'm a bully?

Give me a break.

(And your use of periods instead of spaces makes it hard to read your posts, BTW. That will be true anywhere.)
 
Ziggy, honestly most of these ppl have been very helpful but you are right, TONS of ppl on here have ANTI Democratic propaganda in their taglines

If ppl wanna vote McCain that is fine,just glad they vote,but to be insulted for being pro gun and Democratic is absurd and yes i think guns rights are better protected by the GOP,but i am certainly not going to be a Republican for ONE SINGLE issue and ditch the other MILLION issues i agree with my own party on

MILLIONS OF ACTIVE Democrats ARE gun owners and to inssult and try to intimidate is awful,there are many Democrats on here and noone bashes McCain....we all have the same hobby and interests,why try to offend others?

And i greatly appreciate the mod HSO stating please stay on topic tht was class,Thanks
 
For the sake of fairness, please note that my explanation of communitarianism is as seen by a libertarian. No communitarian will agree with my definition- you can easily search online to get another point of view. But regardless of the claimed motivation, the Democratic agenda syncs very closely to communitarian philosophy.
 
I've been buying guns for 47 years. during that time there have been Dem and Rep presidents. I have never been denied the purchase of a gun and noone has come to my door demanding that I surrender one. When Obama takes office in January I don't expect anything will be different.
Now tell me again how I can LAWFULLY move to Chicago with my handguns?

I mean, if nobody's going to take my guns, that should be pretty easy, RIGHT?

Signed - Liberal EX-Democrat
 
Pro gun politics

Gentlemen, I am a registered repubilican. I vote for individuals not parties. Currently, the NRA is endorsing a Democratic state representative in my district not the republican. I voted for the Democrat last term & I'll vote for him again this term. I also will be voting for repubicans, libertarians, independents, and maybe even a write in or two. I consider myself pro gun, pro God, pro life, and enjoy my pursuit of life and liberty here in this wonderful land of opportunity. It seems to me that the Democrats generally lean too far toward unbridled socialism and tend to punish the rich business owners (who provide us jobs and a lucrative tax base) and lean heavily on unwarranted, poorly supervised, and poorly administrated social welfare (read that hand outs without hand ups) programs. The republicans on the other hand seems to lean heavily on wanting to make big government work for just the elite heirarchy. Our founding Fathers and our Supreme Father above would not be pleased to vote for most who aspire or serve to political office today.

Our politicians enjoy good wages, excellent health care benefits, great retirement plans (vested and evergreen), great security personnel, and it seems job security due to an uninformed and misinformed people who care more about Sundays sporting event scores than the welfare of this nation.
I remember the words of Thomas Jefferson who warned with almost prophetic urgency that every democratic republic would become sufficiently corrupt every 200 years or so to warrant purging. Earlier patriots also said that the tree of Liberty should be refreshed with the blood of patriots from time to time.
Let us be informed citizens unitedly and rebuke media lies, half truths, self serving and self perpetuating innuendos. May we be informed by self education, supported by hard work, and rewarded with honest, public serving
public servants who love the liberty they enjoy here in the good old USA.

Republicans ,Democrats, libertarians, and independents are and have been welcomed to my shooting range. We are all equals on the range but all enemies on the fields of battle. Good Shooting
 
You are either Pro gun Rights or a liberal. Can't be both. It don't work that way.
Strange, it works that way for me.

I don't care if you want to marry another guy.

I don't care if women have abortions.

I won't vote for fanatical anti-gunners like Obama.

I'm a liberal independent.
 
Let's get back onto the OP question and quit picking at whether Dems is devils or not. This isn't a philosophy discussion group.:rolleyes:
 
Although the 94 ban was a Clinton piece, Republicans had the power to filibuster,why didnt they, did they not consider it that important?

Was it the AWB or the Brady Bill where the Dems called a vote and then blocked the doors so some absent Republicans couldn't vote? It was one or the other.

You are either Pro gun Rights or a liberal. Can't be both. It don't work that way.

A true liberal should be pro gun, as the term involves allowing people to do as they want within some basic boundaries (i.e. do not harm another through the excercise of your rights). Most who claim to be liberal aren't, but are only interested in seeing their interests and beliefs advanced at the expense of others.
 
I think communists might restrict guns because they can, just like they restrict religion, free speech, etc.


This is an overly simplistic.. and in my opinion.. incorrect viewpoint.


The communists had very good reasons to restrict religion, free speech, and firearms.

Religion: Can't have the populace worshiping God. That interferes with the 'cult of the personality' that Stalin cultivated. He was revered to the point of a deity. For a modern day example, look at Kim Jong-Il "Dear Leader" in North Korea, or perhaps the 'rock star' status of Obama amongst some groups.


Free speech: Cultivation of dissent and revolution begins with people discussing and advertising that they are unhappy with the current situation. Make it a crime to discuss dissent, and that helps to stifle dissent. People were killed in Soviet Russia for speaking out against communism.

Firearms: Without guns, how can peasants overthrow a government backed by an armed military?


As for ziggy's comments about leaving:
Discussion about firearms themselves never or rarely delves into politics. Go the the rifles forum... lots of people talking about long arms.... Same with the pistols and competitive shooting forums... et al. You brought up politics. It should not surprise you that on a firearms forums you are finding an opposing view to your own. Democrats have tied the rest of their liberal policies to gun control in most of their candidates. I am not here to debate the merits of conservative vs. liberal policies. I can tell you it is a pure fact that the Democrats namely: Schumer, Feinstein, Pelosi and Obama favor intolerable restrictions on our rights.

If you don't want dissent... don't start a thread announcing: "Hey I like guns just like the rest of you! But I plan to vote for people who want to take them away." You are going to stir up some irritated people.

Regards,

Indy
 
We've survived Rep and Dem administrations senates and houses in the past but don't think we have ever had such wacky people as Pelosi, Reid and possibly Obama in the drivers seat at one time.

Regardless of party affiliation, I don't think anyone can realistically or credibly argue that this predicted administration and Congress will not represent the most anti-RKBA in history. Never before have so many with a virulent and confessed hatred of the RKBA been in positions of leadership. They might have felt that way, but they didn't publicly wallow in it.
 
Last edited:
A true liberal should be pro gun, as the term involves allowing people to do as they want within some basic boundaries (i.e. do not harm another through the excercise of your rights).

True.

However, "liberal" in 2008 America doesn't mean that. Hence the need to coin the term "libertarian."

"Liberal" in 2008 is essentially equivalent to "statist" or "nanny statist."

Abortion is sort of an outlier; both sides have arguments based on individual rights. Carl Sagan, for one, proposed limiting abortion to the first trimester as a compromise. Neither side wants a compromise.

Gay marriage is another interesting case. Someone who is really libertarian might ask why the government has ANYTHING to do with marriage. This is a whole different approach from the "conservative" support for traditional marriage, and the "liberal" support for simply adding another protected class to those who can have government-controlled marriages.

By coincidence, many American traditions are libertarian, so they often mesh with "conservative" tenets -- but not always. And "liberals" tend to support the "nontraditional", which sometimes meshed with libertarianism. However, neither "conservatives" nor "liberals" are libertarians -- as support for the "War on Drugs" from both sides of the aisle illustrates.
 
Ok, once again we tried to have a discussion about how self described Pro-Gun Democrats might band together to support RKBA and some folks insist on sniping at them instead of trying to help come up with ideas that might make just a little difference in helping them help the overall community.

So, once again, again, CLOSED.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top