Helpless Venezuelans lament losing guns, right to stand up to government

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Liberal said:
Like AlexanderA says, the active gun community will pay a hefty price for supporting the Republicans recently when the Democrats come back into power. If Ds can win big on a federal and big-state level without the gun community, it’s going to be bad for the 2A.

So if gun owers supported Democrats, they'd suddenly become pro 2A? That's nonsense.

If the gun community wants actual bipartisan support and active engagement, we need to reach out to liberals and independents and stop using gun rights as our sole litmus test.

This is more nonsense. This is a gun owner's forum where we discuss gun related issues, which is why you see us discussing this one issue here. I'm not a one issue voter, nor are any gun owners I personally know. Of course where candidates stand on gun rights affects our votes, but taxes, illegal immigration, foreign policy, education and healthcare are some of the other issues we also consider, but we don't discuss them on this forum. Gun owners I know who don't vote for Democrats do so because they believe they're wrong on a number of issues. What could gun owners possibly do to change the minds of Democrats who are anti gun? When I was younger there were pro 2A Democrats. The 2A hasn't changed. The Democrats did.
Click to expand...
 
paulsj said:
Sadly vote for a Democrat is a vote against gun ownership. They get away with it because they know those supporting fair wage for working class, environmental issues, consumer rights and healthcare reform will never vote Republican.
Click to expand...
I'm going to predict that the Democrats are going to stay far away from the gun issue, nationally, in 2020. They got a wake-up call in 2016, when the "deplorables" in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin (many of whom were gun owners) voted against them. In 2020, the Democrats have two paths to victory: the first path runs through the aforementioned "upper tier" states, and the second path runs through the Sun Belt states of Florida, Texas, and Arizona. Banning guns does not play well in any of these states. Democratic activists may be against guns, but the political professionals that run campaigns know better. (For some of the same reasons, I'm going to predict something like a "centrist" Beto O'Rourke - Amy Klobuchar ticket. You heard it here first.) You see it already with the stress on health care, college tuition, and other "pocketbook" issues.
 
Last edited:
Sistema1927 said:
Do you even believe half the stuff that you are posting?
Click to expand...

Of course he does. And this goes back to the problem of extreme polarization of this country that I mentioned earlier. He isn’t going to believe anything you guys throw at him. You can place facts before him and he will argue against it, facts, not opinions. They have made up their minds. How one can deny facts is beyond me but clearly people like to run with nothing other than how they feel and what they think is true. Again, super dangerous territory and another reason I stated earlier on in this thread that the US will wind up like Venezuela. It’s just a matter of time as there is too many people that don’t understand what is going on and have accepted the lie that guns are the root of all evil.

My question is this, why is someone that seems to be on the side of the anti gunners on a gun forum? Do you even have any guns? Do you actually shoot said guns? If they are so evil then why do you have them? Do you believe the so called assault rifle is anymore deadly than any other gun? If so, please explain why and how.

Bringing us back around to Venezuela, I also have to ask if you’d like the US to be more like Venezuela? Have you ever been there? Got any idea what is happening there?
 
AlexanderA said:
I'm going to predict that the Democrats are going to stay far away from the gun issue, nationally, in 2020. They got a wake-up call in 2016, when the "deplorables" in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin (many of whom were gun owners) voted against them. In 2020, the Democrats have two paths to victory: the first path runs through the aforementioned "upper tier" states, and the second path runs through the Sun Belt states of Florida, Texas, and Arizona. Banning guns does not play well in any of these states. Democratic activists may be against guns, but the political professionals that run campaigns know better. (For some of the same reasons, I'm going to predict something like a "centrist" Beto O'Rourke - Amy Klobuchar ticket. You heard it here first.)
Click to expand...

Texas didn’t want Beto and the nation shouldn’t either. Beto will not stay away from 2A issues. He will actively push the Democrat party to work anti-2a issues. You say they’ll stay far away from it, but they won’t. They can’t help it. And if you are predicting him on the ticket (and i think you are right), then gun control will be a platform plank. You heard it here first.

https://betofortexas.com/issue/gun-safety/

A260AFAD-2EF6-4688-9380-F1304A08EF3B.png

^^From his platform/website. He’s open about that. What’s he not open about?


“This is as politically charged as it comes in Texas, and this is how I hope you know that I have the courage of my convictions because I'm willing to do this," he said. "I cosponsored the assault-weapons ban. Now, I understand there are many Texans who own these AR-15s, and some of them are very good friends of mine that I've been out shooting with. And they say, ‘Beto, why are you going to prevent me from buying a gun? I haven't hurt anybody. I haven't shot anybody. I keep this gun in a gun locker. I teach my kids gun safety. How could you do this because there's some crazy, evil person in Florida or Sutherland Springs or Las Vegas or pick the next city it's gonna to happen in?' I say, ‘You know what? You're right. We have the Second Amendment, and it's incredibly important, but the Second Amendment is not unlimited. You cannot carry a bazooka down the street. You cannot drive your tank down the street because we have a Second Amendment. There's gonna have to be some rational limit to our ability that keeps more people in our communities safe and alive.'"

https://www.google.com/amp/s/freebe...-continues-attack-nra-pushes-gun-control/amp/

My point here is you are predicting that GC won’t be an issue, and that Beto will be the nominee for the White House. Those two scenarios cannot exist in same time and space. They are incongruous and don’t fit well. But i believe you are right about beto. So we will continue to vote on 2A issues as we have.
 
entropy said:
Now you do. And I posted the reason why in post #143.
Click to expand...

I should have been a little more clear. I wasn’t implying that there were none or that doing so was wrong, only that in my circle we have a number of issues to consider. We’re in Illinois, which is a sinking ship. I wanted to make sure the poster understood there’s more than one type of voter.
 
SilentStalker said:
Again, super dangerous territory and another reason I stated earlier on in this thread that the US will wind up like Venezuela. It’s just a matter of time as there is too many brainwashed people that don’t understand what is going on and have accepted the lie that guns are the root of all evil
Click to expand...

If Beto is elected we will be one step closer to venezuela. His family is linked to cartel activity and cartel-related shady dealin’s in El Paso.

Back to Venezuela and their disarmament. Sorry for the political drift.
 
Sovblocgunfan said:
If Beto is elected we will be one step closer to venezuela. His family is linked to cartel activity and cartel-related shady dealin’s in El Paso.

Back to Venezuela and their disarmament. Sorry for the political drift.
Click to expand...

And the powers that be want him in charge. Look at how much money was spent campaigning for him in Texas. They pumped a ton of money in there and he still lost, for now. This just further proves my point that money is the root of all evil. How much political power do you think the cartel has? Also, can you prove what you stated? If so, we should be able to put down his political career before it starts.
 
The Liberal said:
Hell, we’re already seeing this in the south, where the Republicans are trying to make things like getting an ID harder in predominantly-black counties. No ID means that legally buying a gun is harder, and I reckon that not a lot of tears are shed over it.

Plus the deafening silence we hear from conservatives when an armed legally-carrying black man is shot dead by police...
Click to expand...


I can only assume you're talking about the Hoover Alabama mall shooting.
I can assure you as an Alabama resident I've heard plenty about this shooting. From BOTH sides. It seems clear that it was a wrongful shooting*, from what I've heard --- and supposed "facts" have been overturned atleast once. One central issue right now is muddy; the culpability of the officer who did the shooting. We know the victim was a army vet who was legally armed.
What I don't know, and what seems unclear to the media and public, is exactly why the officer shot the deceased. Was the deceased acting in a threatening manner .... or appearing to? He was shot in the back, so I presume the officer himself must not have felt threatened ---- or if so was wrong. But did the officer perceive a threat to others?
A truer test IMHO may come when it becomes clear what really did happen. If the results condemn the officer's actions, will both sides agree it was wrong?
Right now, it's a bit premature to criticize the republicans for silence ..... while those who are outright condemning the police may turn out to be right .... it's also conceivable they may wind up being wrong.


*edited to add: by "wrong" I mean in the existential, or objective sense of the word here, not in terms of was the police officer in the right or wrong.
 
SilentStalker said:
And the powers that be want him in charge. Look at how much money was spent campaigning for him in Texas. They pumped a ton of money in there and he still lost, for now. This just further proves my point that money is the root of all evil. How much political power do you think the cartel has? Also, can you prove what you stated? If so, we should be able to put down his political career before it starts.
Click to expand...

Shady dealins: Can start with Paso del norte group, which his family was involved in while he was on city council. It threatened eminent domain unless a property owner sold to the city for common area projects and public works.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...and-profiteers-targets-an-el-paso-barrio/amp/

Can also point to his father’s activities (he was a judge) related to the Juarez cartel.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ghost....an-cut-man-with-a-dirty-family-file-pt-1/amp/

Of course, I do not possess criminal evidence that would lead to an indictment. I’m a Joe Schmoe who isn’t a lawyer or cop.

But this is the kind of thing that people forget about or ignore when all that’s left to do is the cuttin’.
 
Sovblocgunfan said:
Texas didn’t want Beto and the nation shouldn’t either. Beto will not stay away from 2A issues. He will actively push the Democrat party to work anti-2a issues.
Click to expand...
He came within 3 percentage points of beating Cruz. That's a big deal in Texas, especially with a diminished off-year electorate. In 2020, Texas will have a larger presidential electorate, and a larger share of Latino voters. With Beto running as a native son, that clearly puts Texas' 38 electoral votes in play.

If you carefully read Beto's statement on guns, that you posted, you see that he wants to ban the commercial sale of assault weapons, not the guns themselves. This is a fairly moderate statement, by Democratic party standards. Of course he has to "check the antigun box" to be viable in Democratic primaries. In many ways, Beto is an empty canvas upon which voters can project their personal aspirations, much like Obama in 2008. I don't believe that Beto is a radical or a "socialist."

(BTW, banning the future commercial sale of assault weapons while grandfathering existing ones would work just like the Hughes Amendment did in the case of full automatics. Current owners would have a huge windfall profit. Smart guys should be stockpiling them now at low prices.)
 
Last edited:
Reality check for
Texas didn’t want Beto and the nation shouldn’t either. Beto will not stay away from 2A issues
Click to expand...

Ted Cruz* Republican 4,260,553
Beto O'Rourke Democrat 4,045,632

Population of Texas - 28.3 million

That a difference of about .75 % of the population in the count.

Also, about him called himself Beto - Cruz calls himself Ted when his first name is Rafael. So both played the ethnic race card.

Apple is bringing 10,000 new jobs to TX. If you think any state is in the bag because of ethnically limited and focused conservative base, you may be in for a surprise over time. Folks are pinning their 2nd Amend. hopes on a Maginot Line of a small constituency. The ML worked well for the French.
 
So. After all the money and visiting all the counties and getting those votes: did he win?

Believe me. There’s no maginot line here. The American experiment is just about over. I think the country’s pretty much lost, and I think my beloved texas isn’t too far behind. Only some catastrophic event could change our trajectory at this point. In the Tyler Cycle of democracy, we are moving from apathy to dependence.

It’s only a matter of how long we choose to fight it out at the ballot box.
 
So. After all the money and visiting all the counties and getting those votes: did he win?
Click to expand...

That wasn't my point. It was that saying that TX didn't want Beto from a dichotomous choice isn't really useful in the larger political game.
 
AlexanderA said:
He came within 3 percentage points of beating Cruz. That's a big deal in Texas, especially with a diminished off-year electorate. In 2020, Texas will have a larger presidential electorate, and a larger share of Latino voters. With Beto running as a native son, that clearly puts Texas' 38 electoral votes in play.

If you carefully read Beto's statement on guns, that you posted, you see that he wants to ban the commercial sale of assault weapons, not the guns themselves. This is a fairly moderate statement, by Democratic party standards. Of course he has to "check the antigun box" to be viable in Democratic primaries. In many ways, Beto is an empty canvas upon which voters can project their personal aspirations, much like Obama in 2008. I don't believe that Beto is a radical or a "socialist."

(BTW, banning the future commercial sale of assault weapons while grandfathering existing ones would work just like the Hughes Amendment did in the case of full automatics. Current owners would have a huge windfall profit. Smart guys should be stockpiling them now at low prices.)
Click to expand...

You completely baffle me with some of your statements. Are you on a pro gun forum making the argument for an anti gun politician? The way I read your post is that you are in agreement with him banning the sell of commercially available, as you say, assault weapons. Really? No, but hell no!!! What exactly is an assault weapon? Is it any more lethal than any other firearm out there? Frankly, I’m not in agreement with any of this. I don’t know how you consider yourself pro gun with making statements like this. You must be friends with The Liberal lol.
 
GEM said:
That wasn't my point. It was that saying that TX didn't want Beto from a dichotomous choice isn't really useful in the larger political game.
Click to expand...

*shrug* okay. I guess it’s not really important, in the overall scheme of things. I give texas another 6-10 years before we are mimicking california.
 
Sovblocgunfan said:
*shrug* okay. I guess it’s not really important, in the overall scheme of things. I give texas another 6-10 years before we are mimicking california.
Click to expand...

I give every state about that amount of time. Then it’s time for decisions to be made. By then tho it will be too late. Should have started fighting earlier.
 
AlexanderA said:
Half of Europe has socialist governments, and they are not "tyrants."

Socialism is an economic system, and is independent of civil liberties (or the lack thereof).

The NRA's "kick" against socialism is a distraction from its core mission, is designed to pander to the extreme political Right, and is one reason why I'm thinking of resigning my Life Membership.
Click to expand...
 
SilentStalker said:
I give every state about that amount of time. Then it’s time for decisions to be made. By then tho it will be too late. Should have started fighting earlier.
Click to expand...

Yup. No argument there. Unfortunately, the folks that will be most affected by it won’t have the sand to do any kind of fighting anymore (literal or figurative).
 
AlexanderA said:
Half of Europe has socialist governments, and they are not "tyrants."

Socialism is an economic system, and is independent of civil liberties (or the lack thereof).

The NRA's "kick" against socialism is a distraction from its core mission, is designed to pander to the extreme political Right, and is one reason why I'm thinking of resigning my Life Membership.
Click to expand...

By all means go ahead and resign if that's the way you feel! Socialism is defined as government ownership of the means of production. With that goes the abolition of almost all private property and a contraction or elimination of all civil liberties.
 
Sovblocgunfan said:
Yup. No argument there. Unfortunately, the folks that will be most affected by it won’t have the sand to do any kind of fighting anymore (literal or figurative).
Click to expand...

Yep. I’ll be approaching 50 by then myself. Sad state of affairs. Our best weapon is to convert and teach young people. I was hoping to have a boy to train and go shoot with but I got two girls instead. One is so scared of loud noises that I don’t know if she will ever care to learn to shoot. I have hopes for them both tho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top