Every liberal on my college campus seems to be pro-gun.

[GEM]

The RKBA must be presented as a basic right in a manner to convince all of the spectrum of political opinion.

As soon as I see a person start to say - Well, liberals are socialists and most of them are against guns - I see a person who has NO strategy for expanding the RKBA base of support.

Decide what you want to do - rant about socialism or support the RKBA. Convincing a person who likes universal health care that the RKBA is worth supporting is more useful than ranting to the conservative choir about socialism.

As far as the threats to liberty from some of the social conservatives - that would start a flame war - and if you don't know what they are, you are wearing tribal blinders to recent events.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Let's try and get this back on topic. For instance, socialist governments are usually antigun. (Germany, England, is China socialist?)

 

[JImbothefiveth]

As far as the threats to liberty from some of the social conservatives

The only one I've seen is the wiretapping thing, which the liberals also currently seem to be O.K. with.

 

[Art Eatman]

Okay. I did a bunch of cleanup, and the thread's open.

Before posting further, go back and read or re-read the posts on the first page. Stay on topic.

 

[rbernie]

It has been my experience that statists are statists, regardless of party affiliation. Many liberals are statists, as are many neo-cons. I know as many red statists as I know blue ones.

Those who believe that the state has the right and obligation to dictate our health, economic, domestic security, and wealth management systems are not likely to stay focused on the notion of the RKBA as an individual right. Sooner or later, they NEED to have the State 'take control', and that control only increases as time passes.

Believing in the absolute authority of the state is antithetical to the RKBA.

I try to present the RKBA to all that I contact (and I think that this is vitally important for all of us to do), but I am not hopeful that it will 'stick' as a notion to those who believe in statist views.

In my humble opinion, we will increase support for the RKBA by making people less dependant upon the State in any way possible. Move them to an individual-centric viewpoint and their support of the RKBA will follow.

 

[hso]

Has anyone else seen a sort of weird pro-gun slant from the hippies around your area?

That's the OP central question. Want to address something else, start your own thread.

 

[TT]

The core of Democratic political philosophy is communitarianism and self-defense is anathema to communitarians.

Dwight45: I'm a liberal Democrat.

Dwight45: Now you may ask, why do I vote for anti-gun politicians? Because their are so many other issues more important to me.

‘Pro-gun’ Democrats are useless to the RKBA movement. We need to work on getting those people who are philosophically libertarians to go to the polls and vote on election day- that’s where our focus should be.

 

[muddywatters]

Nice discussion here. Just about all of the folks I've been shooting with would be considered politically liberal -- though not necessarily Democrats. I've busted up cantaloupes with a 12 gauge toting, deadlocked Rasta and admired a wicked home/self defense collection from a gay (respectfully flaming) coworker. None of them would be considered conservative. Each was an American lawfully exercising his right to keep and bear arms.

 

[againstthagrane]

pro-gun liberals are the best of both worlds if you ask me.

 

[notorious]

Forget pro-gun or liberal or whatever. How about just simply PRO AMERICAN?

I'll take that over any single issue. If you are a real AMERICAN, you cannot be for gun control, big government, social welfare programs, universal health care of any other intrusion into our lives.

What's with the liberal agenda of regulating everything in our lives and making us pay for their programs for those who don't want to pay for their own? That is not a generalization, that is their platform.

 

[JWarren]

pro-gun liberals are the best of both worlds if you ask me.

Well, I prefer them to the run-of-the-mill liberals.

Now if they'd just get their hand out of my wallet....


-- John

 

[average_shooter]

Back to the original topic;

I have noticed recently that the whole "gun issue" is less of an "issue" than I previously thought.

This fall I took a friend of mine who is libertarian/liberal and his wife, also self-identified liberal, to the range. I offered, they took me up on my offer, and we all had a great time.

My friend had a great time with the blue steel and wood lever action and 1911 and his wife (remember, a "liberal") absolutely loved the Glock and AR-15 with the "evil" collapsible stock, pistol grip, muzzle brake and 20-30 round magazines.

I had previously not gotten to witness for myself the "big grin" many talk about when taking new shooters to the range, however my friend's wife had a great big grin after touching off her first round from the AR. And she asked to run another mag through it, which I granted her.

Realizing things aren't that great socio-economically right now my friend wanted to make sure his wife handled some firearms and learned safe handling should they decide in the future to get their own. He had previously had at least a little experience in the scouts.

Also, this Saturday I'm supposed to be going to a family friends' house to teach a family of three basic firearms safety and handling. This family, and the mother in particular (who is the one really interested), has historically been pretty anti-gun. Actually, very anti-gun. And now they've essentially asked me to help them understand what it's all about. Saturday will be a sort of "classroom" training session, I hope to schedule a range session soon.

I have also talked to "Conservatives" who were more concerned about job security and health care and were willing to throw gun rights under the bus to ensure they kept getting a paycheck from somewhere.

So in the end I must conclude that the "gun issue" is at the least becoming less a polarizing issue. Perhaps someday it will be a neutral issue.

 

[Joe Demko]

There are even fewer single-issue anti voters than there are single-issue pro's, I suspect. A very astute politician I know personally claims that the overwhelming mass of voters choose based on protecting their jobs. This applies to conservatives and liberals equally. I believe he is correct. When he is facing lay-offs or the loss of his small business, the average guy isn't going to have guns as the first thing on his mind. The gun isn't going to pay his mortgage or put gas in his car or shoes on his kids' feet. The very wealthy can afford to vote their liberal or conservative princples. They also have money to use to convince or scare everybody else that their way will protect jobs the best.
If you care about RKBA, join hands with those who also care about it. If what you want is to advance your gun rights, you have no other choice. Tying gun rights to social conservatism is a guaranteed losing strategy.

 

[RPCVYemen]

I think that I may me one of those pro-gun liberals, as least by a lot of folks' standard.

When I took a "political beliefs" test on the internet last year, I was almost exactly in the middle on the liberal/conservative scale, and towards the libertarian end of the statist/libertarian scale. That sort of surprised me.

On the hot button social issues that seem to be the heart of what it means to be a conservative in America (today), I am pretty liberal. I don't think the state should be deciding which adults can marry each other, and which cannot. I don't believe that the state should intervene between a woman and her minister when she's considering whether or not she terminate an unwanted pregnancy. I am not bringing up these topics for debate - just giving examples of why many people on THR would consider me a "liberal".

Does all of that make me a liberal?

I would gladly pay higher taxes for better schools and libraries - but not for "incentives" to bring corporations to town, or for sports arenas.

Does all of that make me a liberal?

I wish we'd get honest about universal health care. We more or less have it right now - since people cannot be turned away away from (public) hospital emergency rooms. We've just chosen the most expensive way to provide health care (not a penny for preventive care, millions for acute care), with a truly wacky way of paying for it - people with insurance who get sick pay for people without insurance. What kinds of sense does that make?

Does all of that make me a liberal?

I would describe myself as fiscally responsible, which used to be a conservative value, but that morphed into "Screw the deficit, cut taxes!"

I am a strong supporter of the Bill of Rights - all of them. I am a member of the NRA, ACLU, and the HRC. I do wonder at times how many folks are members of the HRC and the NRA.

I am not surprised that the OP found many liberals on his campus a pro-gun. The portrait of liberals drawn by Rush and O'Reilly is a caricature - a product of entertainers, not thinkers.

Mike

 

[Shadan7]

I'm glad to see the discussion here - I must admit, there are times when I take a long break from this and other forums because the amount of "Democrats and LIEbrals are evil" rhetoric.

Why?

Well, I'm as happy to rumble politically as anyone, but as a 40+ year gun owner, I see it as damaging to the RKBA cause and it just depresses me. When you intentionally exclude a large number of people who would otherwise be your natural allies on a given cause, you're not helping yourself.

Yeah, I'm liberal-left. In fact, I am a long-time and well-respected resident over on the Great Orange Satan. And I do work to elect pols who best represent the *mix* of issues on which I am concerned. There are actually a lot of us on the left who think that the RKBA is just as important as any of the rest of the Bill of Rights.

Now, you can say that electing Democrats means that we are undercutting the RKBA. But that's the wrong way to look at it. Pols, evil as they may be, respond to the overall demands of their supporters. If you remove being pro-gun control as one of the issues that they see as important for their constituents, you win - they will stop supporting gun control. In fact, this is clearly seen in the election of Dems in the Western states who are pro-RKBA.

Guys, regardless of how much you want to fight about this or that political stance, if we can get everyone to agree that the RKBA is a non-issue, it will be removed from the table. Having one side of the current political two-party system being the only one to support our 2A rights is a loser - it is much smarter to get *both* sides to do so. And that is what I have been working to do on the left for years.

I'm perfectly happy to rumble about politics, as I said above. But I would rather do it in other forums, and have THR for talking about guns.

Cheers.

7

 

[DRZinn]

almost exactly in the middle on the liberal/conservative scale, and towards the libertarian end of the statist/libertarian scale

Congratulations, you're a classical liberal. The modern meaning of the word liberal, though, tends to be more like what Limbaugh and O'Reilly skewer than what you describe.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Congratulations, you're a classical liberal.

I have a good friend who describes me exactly that way. I suspect that most classic liberals would be pro-gun, as would most classic conservatives. Both of those words have been morphed into something that neither JFK or Goldwater would understand.

Mike

 

[DRZinn]

I suspect that most classic liberals would be pro-gun control

Are you serious?

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Has anyone else seen a sort of weird pro-gun slant from the hippies around your area?

The one "hippie" I've talked to about this issue is anti-gun, and believes that handguns should be banned because of suicides, but somehow doesn't carry that argument over to rifles or shotguns.

Fortunantly, my congressman is pro-gun. (He's not a liberal, however.)

I don't believe that the state should intervene between a woman and her minister when she's considering whether or not she terminate an unwanted pregnancy

I don't believe the state should interfere on a man's right to enslave.

If you are voting for someone anti-gun because they support abortion, you may wish to reconsider. If women can carry guns, they can avoid getting raped in the first place. (As well as getting murdered, seriously injured, etc.)

I suspect that most classic liberals would be pro-gun control

I remember just the other day reading about George Washington trying to ban concealed carry.
I believe that "classic liberals" are closest to modern conservatives and liberatarians. (Small government, pro-gun, and the founding fathers, at least some of them, seemed to care about values/morality)

So tell us, which of these classic liberals,(different from liberals in the modern sense of the word, really conservative/liberatarian) supported gun control?

 

[rainbowbob]

Having one side of the current political two-party system being the only one to support our 2A rights is a loser - it is much smarter to get *both* sides to do so. And that is what I have been working to do on the left for years.

Bingo! Supporting the Bill of Rights in its entirety should never have become - and need not remain - a polarizing position. As Shaden7 pointed out, politicians of any stripe just want to get elected. Period. When they realize that supporting gun control looses more votes than it gains - they drop it like a hot rock.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

When they realize that supporting gun control looses more votes than it gains - they drop it like a hot rock.

No, they don't. They go on long rants about "supporting hunters", while they push legislation to ban 30-30.

it is much smarter to get *both* sides to do so.

The only way to do so is to cost them votes. When they lost control of the senate and house, they started to run pro-gun candidates.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Are you serious?

Sorry - that was a typo. I started to type "pro gun" and got distracted. I will if I can edit it.

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

I believe that "classic liberals" are closest to modern conservatives and libertarians.

I think that you are correct.

Mike

 

[benEzra]

No, they don't. They go on long rants about "supporting hunters", while they push legislation to ban 30-30.

...which then costs them votes, which leads the smart ones to reconsider. The DLC pushed the "talk up hunting, demonize nonhunting guns" strategy from 1994 to 2004, and it got them nothing but losses. Which is one reason why a significant portion of the Dem Senate leadership opposes a new AWB.

The following letter from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was posted by a fellow Democratic Underground member last year:

March 12, 2007



Mr. xxxx xxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me about the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act (H.R. 1022). I appreciate hearing from you.

Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) re-introduced the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act on February 13, 2007. This legislation would ban the transfer, possession, or manufacture of semiautomatic assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devices for a ten year period. It has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee for review.

I do not support the reauthorization of the assault weapons ban because studies have not demonstrated that it has any effect on reducing crime. I voted against the original assault weapons ban when it came before the Senate in 1993. I also voted against an effort to reauthorize the ban in 2004. Please be assured that I will keep your concerns in mind should I have the opportunity to review H.R. 1022 or related legislation in the Senate.

As a gun owner, I believe that law abiding citizens have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We must work to protect this right by enforcing gun safety laws that keep guns away from terrorists and criminals. The rights of responsible gun owners should not be compromised by individuals who use firearms to commit crimes. The overwhelming majority of Nevadan gun owners use their guns safely, and you may be certain that I will use my leadership position to work in a bipartisan fashion to preserve their rights.



Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at http://reid.senate.gov . I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

My best wishes to you.

Sincerely,
A
HARRY REID
United States Senator

I have been doing my best to educate fellow non-conservatives that most gun owners are NOT hunters, and that hunting guns are NOT the focus of gun owner concerns. Some are listening, some aren't, but IMO we have made a great deal of progress since 1994.

I would not be complacent, but I would not be defeatist, either. Yes, there are still some anti-RKBA zealots in leadership positions in the Democratic party (and alas, one of them is Vice-President-Elect of the United States). BUT, on the other side of the coin, there are a lot more pro-RKBA Dems in Congress and the Senate now than there were in 1994, the party leadership is at least slightly less clueless now than they were then, and the communitarian influence seems to be on the wane. I and many others are working to try to continue that progress.

 

[RPCVYemen]

The following letter from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was posted by a fellow Democratic Underground member last year:

That letter looks to be a candidate for a sticky to me. My calm a lot of people down.

Mike