Are there no liberal gun-rights supporters?

[mountaindrew]

I have a suggestion. Rather than describe yourself ans a "liberal" with all the implications and predjudice that go along with that term,(or "conservative" for that matter) simply decribe yourself thusly:

"I am a conscientious free thinker who doesn't subscribe to either parties veiws line-for-line, but makes up my own mind on individual issues based on thier merrits, not based on what some demigogue tells me to believe."

If only all american practiced this.
Unfortunately most americans are Lazy, and of course its easier to let someone else do the thinking for you, so most americans simply sign up for a party, and let the party leader tell them what to think, even when it is glaringly inconsistant.

 

[Henry Bowman]

Mysteriously, I wonder why the US vs. Miller supreme court decision didn't call the constitutionality of the 1934 NFA into question regarding automatic submachine guns...

No mystery. Constitutionality of the NFA was called into question on that basis (and found unConstitutional) in the lower courts. At the Sup. Ct., Miller was unrepresented and not present. No briefs were filed. No argument made.

Do more research.

In theory, you can be liberal (spend lots of other peoples' money for social "welfare" programs) and be pro-gun. In practice, in order to keep the masses dependant, you will find it necessary to disarm them.

 

[BenW]

"If the heartland feels so alienated from us, then it behooves us to wrap our arms around the heartland," she said. "We need to bring our way of life, which is honoring diversity and having compassion for people with different lifestyles, on a trip around the country."

And herein lies the problem. I think in general, gun owners are the kind of people who believe in "live and let live." The most vocal of "liberals" seem to subscribe to the philosphy stated by this woman in the above quote. I don't need someone "wrapping their arms around me" and telling me how to think.

 

[nualle]

bbaerst: we're here. But the tenor on THR is so consistently (and often stridently) right-wing that many of us post seldom.

The great thing about THR is that the mods maintain an atmosphere in which it's possible to have meaningful discussions between people who disagree. This puts this forum above any other I've found (right- or left-interest) that focuses on politically charged topics.

 

[longrifleman]

So, in essence, I wonder there seems to be no support of anything democratic or liberal on these boards--support of gun ownership should not preclude any liberal views whatsoever.

In theory. The problem is that the modern versions of liberalism are opposed to most forms of individual liberty that don't involve sex.

The open hostiliy to private property rights is an aspect that offends me as much as most anything. The live and let live lifestyle is hard to follow if everything you thought you owned is subject to confiscation at the whim of someone who thinks you have too much stuff you don't really deserve, no matter how hard you worked for it.

"I'm saddened by what I feel is the obtuseness and shortsightedness of a good part of the country - the heartland," Dr. Joseph said. "This kind of redneck, shoot-from-the-hip mentality and a very concrete interpretation of religion is prevalent in Bush country - in the heartland."

Yeah, when I hear folks talking about me like this I just wonder what I've been doing wrong and want to ask them what I should be thinking, since I'm obviously an idiot.

One aspect of modern liberalism that causes a great deal of disagreement is the almost pathological insistence that noone is responsible for their actions and everything is society's fault, or their parent's fault or the moon was in the wrong house or whatever. Until that changes it will be very difficult to agree on many solutions to the common problems we all deal with.

 

[MP5]

One aspect of modern liberalism that causes a great deal of disagreement is the almost pathological insistence that noone is responsible for their actions and everything is society's fault, or their parent's fault or the moon was in the wrong house or whatever. Until that changes it will be very difficult to agree on many solutions to the common problems we all deal with.

Until people widely adopt and espouse personal responsibility (and civic duty), liberty is as much of a threat as a benefit, to self and others. People know that many of their neighbors aren't responsible and indeed can't be trusted, so they sacrifice some of their own liberties to (supposedly) keep the other guy in check. It's a vicious cycle, and the people who preach that "It's not your fault" are exacerbating it instead of ameliorating it. Instead, they need to instill self-discipline, self-respect, and good old-fashioned guilt and shame to get society to where those neighbors really can be trusted on their own and we can all enjoy more freedom.

Some people are stupid, indolent, greedy, or violent. Society or genetics may have played a role, but what you do with your own mind and actions is ultimately up to you. Only a coward would claim otherwise. A lot of people need to be smacked, not coddled.

 

[longrifleman]

and good old-fashioned guilt and shame to get society to where those neighbors really can be trusted on their own and we can all enjoy more freedom.

How do you do this with moral relativism being the guiding philosophy of modern liberalism?

 

[Scottmkiv]

I'm a classic liberal gun owner. That means I'm a libertarian in today's political world.

 

[hso]

The extremists at DU give Liberals as bad a name as the KKK give Conservatives, i.e. they ain't Liberals only radical haters posing as Liberals.

I've referred to myself as an "armed Liberal" for years in the southern intellectual tradition. Check with Oleg, John Shirley, Preacher, and others I've guested at my home if you don't accept it fitting.

Attempts to co-opt the term to move it far left and up the facist scale are used by extremists on both sides to rob the legitimacy from the concept.

 

[Cosmoline]

There are more liberal gun rights supporters than you may think. One reason I like Alaska so much is that the RKBA is a given. So you have both liberal dems and conservative Reps working for gun rights.

 

[Gordon Fink]

Congratulations, bbaerst, you are almost a libertarian!

That said, most folks here on the High Road are Republicans. They like their guns, Christianity, and police. They dislike taxes, homosexuals, and drugs. They support wars started by Republican presidents and disdain wars started by Democratic presidents.

Nevertheless, we are all united here by our support for the right to keep and bear arms.

~G. Fink

 

[ducktapehero]

"I'm saddened by what I feel is the obtuseness and shortsightedness of a good part of the country - the heartland," Dr. Joseph said. "This kind of redneck, shoot-from-the-hip mentality and a very concrete interpretation of religion is prevalent in Bush country - in the heartland."-----------"New Yorkers are more sophisticated and at a level of consciousness where we realize we have to think of globalization, of one mankind, that what's going to injure masses of people is not good for us," he said.

That's funny, us "rednecks" are saddened that some Americans have become so cowardly that they would exchange their freedom for security. And liberals think that we(conservatives) are the only reason we're a divided people. Their arrogance is becoming old.

That said, I consider myself more of a libertarian than a republican.

 

[BigG]

Oh we just need common sense gun laws, hmmm? Nevertheless, welcome aboard. Hillbilly, RileyMc, etc. said everything I would have said already.

 

[BigG]

The extremists at DU give Liberals as bad a name as the KKK give Conservatives

Hello. Please get a clue. The KKK were/are without exception Democrats. Hardly a conservative.

 

[Igloodude]

So, in essence, I wonder there seems to be no support of anything democratic or liberal on these boards--support of gun ownership should not preclude any liberal views whatsoever. What makes gun owners, especially the ones on these boards, so conservative? Why do I not see any liberal 2nd Amendment supporters like myself? Does anyone share my position?

As you're seeing, a lot of people do (including me). In general, social liberal + pro-RKBA = libertarian.

I've noticed the same thing, though - at the range and on many shooting-related web forums the prevailing attitude is what I'd call hardcore conservative rather than libertarian, despite both being roughly equally pro-gun.

 

[JesusCow]

In another pro-gun forum I was called a hippie-liberal because I am pro-abortion, as well as pro-gay "rights."

 

[richyoung]

The notion of a "liberal (in the modern sense) gun rights activist" is an illogical non-sequiter because of the intellectual dishonesty, or, alternately, outright hypocrisy, required to hold such incompatible views. The "right to keep and bear arms" was NOT "granted" to the people by the Second Ammendment. As the preamble reads, ...we hold these truths to be self-evident, That All men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." The WHOLE PREMISE of our system of government rides on the obvious ("self-evident") truth that God ("Creator") embued each and every one of us with ALL of our rights at the time of our creation, and that for convenience and prosperity, we collectively agree to contract a temporary grant, (or "lease", (if you will), of a portion of these rights ( they cannot be irrevocably granted, as they are "unalienable" - they are intrinsic to the person and cannot be removed) to be exercisedfor the collective good, on the provision that said government not overstep it's bounds, such bounds being the contract (Constitution) between governed and government. Rather than "granting" the right to keep arms, the 2nd Am. is a restrictive clause prohibiting the Federal government, (and since the 13th & 14th Ams., subordinate governments by incorporation...) from infringing an ALREADY EXISTING right. To (correctly, in my opinion) insist that this clause of the Constitutional contract be interpreted literally would also require that the 10th ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. ") also be so regarded. This Am. alone, even WITHOUT the 2nd, would prohibit ANY gun control, as such power is not specifically delegated to the federal government. (Not to mention prohibiting almost everything the government has done since the Civil War...). Social Security, the Endowment for the Arts, PBS, the cabinet level departments of HEW, Energy, Selective Service, U.N. membership, Medicare/Medicaid, welfare - all in violation of the 10th. You can't have the "nanny state" big government without taking the same "liberal" interpretation of much of the Constitution that gun-grabbers take of the 2nd.

 

[F4GIB]

Someone posted earlier: "The liberal perspective is not some left-wing conspiracy to overthrow individual rights and freedoms in the name of socialism; nor is it that America is a despicable entity with no hope. After all, if "the liberals" hated America so much, why do they work to change it,"

Actually, it is. They work so hard to change the nation precisely BECAUSE they don't like the America the rest of us love. They are stuck with living here (because they enjoy a higher standard of living in the USA than in France) but they'd prefer an European "social Democrat" lifestyle. So they work very hard to change America into a mirror of Europe. That benefits two groups - those who have so much that no taxing scheme will impact their life of pleasure (e.g., movie and rock stars, trial lawyers, George Soros, ...) and those who will benefit as wealth is transferred from those who studied and skimped and worked hard to those who did not (shop workers who envy the auto body shop owners their "wealth"). Liberals don't want America, they want something else altogether. Every time they allow that to become clear, hugh majorities of real Americans reject their vision.

That's why I don't live in New York or California. I've voted with my feet but, of course, that offends the liberals. I'm free of their "good" ideas. I don't need some liberal "elite" to direct my life (my IQ is quite high enough to do that on my own). So they must use government to force me (wherever I run) into their "great society. It's about power over my life and (to the extent they can) power over my thoughts, attitudes, and entire lifestyle. They want me to live in their utopian "1984" under their benevolent control and I refuse to go there - it's my individual right. They'll have to tear freedom from my cold, dead hands.

Like dealing with radical Islam, there is no more room for compromise.

P. S. I lived in Europe for 4 years. What passes for "freedom" there would be unacceptable, even to liberals, if they had actually tried it.

 

[CentralTexas]

What THR needs

is a Libertarian forum!
CT

 

[roscoe]

The KKK were/are without exception Democrats. Hardly a conservative.

They WERE, about 50 years ago and before. Nowadays, you would be hard pressed to find a KKK member who admits to being a Democrat. Are you suggesting the KKK is a LIBERAL organization?

You are talking about the days of the Dixicrats, before Strom Thurmond became a Republican. That was a long time ago. Remember - the Republicans under Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln were the liberals of their day.

 

[BigG]

Are you suggesting the KKK is a LIBERAL organization?

Yo, Roscoe. In today's terms, that's exactly what I'm saying. The classic liberal exists no more than Santa Claus.

 

[roscoe]

You mean the KKK wants big government, gun control, a secular welfare state, affirmative action, abortion rights, redistributive taxation, socialized medicine, and membership in the UN? Last time I checked, that was not what they stood for.

from their (damn near unreadable) website:

thanks to the foresight of our founding fathers America has held out the longest against the global, race mixing, homosexual, anti-Christ forces working to wipe out White Christianity the way we have always known it.

they oppose:

the ideas of race mixing, globalism, homosexuality, abortion, and dozens of Marxist based, liberal schemes meant to artificially lift non-whites to a higher level of civilization

Yeah, they are pretty liberal, alright!

I mean, you can demonize modern liberalism (and I might agree with some of it), but let's get a grip. These guys are RIGHT-wing nuts, not LEFT-wing nuts.

 

[ClonaKilty]

In my bleeding-heart liberal community, I actually bring up gun control and debate quite a bit, and I am always recieved with an open-mind and thoughtful debate--I in no way feel shunned due to my stance on one issue. I spend a lot of time discussing gun control with my liberal friends, and I really can't say I agree with you at all that people will be "treated like lepers" if they mention guns.

I respect your experience, but I have to say that here in the San Fran Bay Area, the many "liberals" (= leftists) I speak to are uniformly rabid on this issue. I have lost several friends because of political discussions; in each case, THEY were the ones who broke off our friendship and refused to ever speak to me again. I can honestly say that I have almost never had an "open minded, thoughtful" discussion of guns with a leftist

I have learned to keep my mouth shut unless I know the person I'm speaking to is conservative, libertarian or (even more rare) is truly open-minded and willing to discuss the issues civilly.

YMMV.

 

[Firethorn]

True, the KKK are reactionary nuts. On the other hand, you have the shining examples of the Soviet party, with people like Stalin, the National Socialist Worker's Party in Germany.

The enviromental nuts on the left vs the abortion nuts on the right.
The atheists on the left who oppose people seeing the word god vs
The religious types who oppose the teaching of the theory of evolution.

I could go on and on...

Extremes are bad, dontcha know?

 

[only1asterisk]

bbaerst,

What makes gun owners, especially the ones on these boards, so conservative? You do! It's a matter of perspective.

David Harris