I am a Democrat for RKBA

Status
Not open for further replies.
I tend to vote mostly on RKBA. I would vote Democrat more often if the RKBA were not at risk, but when has that ever happened? It's always at risk. Even when it's not a campaign issue with a mass theater shooting just before the election, it becomes an issue before the inauguration even takes place.

Without RKBA, all other rights become privileges. I am pretty liberal anymore, but I still trust you conservative gents with AK's in your safes, you recently discharged veterans with M-4 clones in your closets, and you good ol' boys with scoped .270's and old 30-30's to help protect the bill of rights more than I trust any politician. You, and I, and everyone else - we are the People. The Founders trusted you, so do I.

But we have to stop this bickering. We have to shut up and put our efforts into securing our rights together. We can argue amongst ourselves later - today we must stop the giant.
 
Denial is not just a river in Africa.

The people who you support hate you for owning a gun. They do not want you to have any power. You have to understand that. They wont say it to your face but they think you are a criminal for just wanting to own a gun. You are being used. The Democrats are not Democrats anymore. They are radical leftists. Look through their lies. Anyone who wants to takes your guns does not have your best interests at heart.

What you really need to do is convince your side to leave the Second alone. The other stuff can be worked on but I will not change my mind on that. If we lose the Second, we are done.
 
Last edited:
You're right - Democrats need to convince the left to leave the Second Amendment alone. And only Democrats can do that - no amount of conservative bellowing will have any impact. Democrats can influence this in primary elections. Alienating people who can wield this power in support of the RKBA is a poor decision.

And yet, by the time I check this thread again, I expect that is exactly what will have happened.
 
thx for the post.

I´m always scared when i read that people thing it`s okay to vote a complete nutjob into office on a single issue like RKBA.


And the first 10 comments i read here don't make happy.
 
Well...

Your support to Obama, knowing he would support such an out right ban because he called for it on the campaign, means, well, you gave them the power they need to accomplish a ban. You helped him attack us. Do I think you support the ban itself? Evidently not, your words establish that, though not perhaps as much indignation as the rest of us. But you did seek his reelection and lended him your support. You do not have to now walk in lock-step, but you also must accept that party that most closely espouses your political beliefs has stridently supported a ban on many firearms, and includes that in its general plank. The baby and the bath water cannot be separated in your vote. He is doing only what he said he would do. You cannot divide your vote and say your vote counts only for the things you like. The whole package got your vote.

You decided that social issues for you trump your interest in RKBA, so you're not 100%, indeed, RBKA is completely subservient to the other issues (by the way, everybody, right left and center, thinks women deserve equal pay for equal work and equal experience, so that is a non-starter, and Social Security reform didn't pan out BECAUSE of the left, and Obamacare will probably be an even greater boon-doggle than welfare or SS, but and understanding of economics is not at issue here).

I suppose my point is, for a time, you need to accept that there will be outrage towards the left because it seeks to silence us, label us Nazis, and then deny us our rights. The words "crush, obliterate, destroy" are used by those who count themselves in your camp. If firearms are indeed banned, it will not be the result of my vote. The left throws terrible words at us, which is Nazi behavior in that it dehumanizes US and OUR positions, promises to protect our rights while tearing them from us.

However, we may stand together and fight the common enemy. You and I might disagree on the rights of killing 3rd trimester babies, on my right to keep my own money rather than support a legion of those who refuse to work, on socialized medicine, on private property rights, or other liberal vs. conservative topics. Yet we might agree now and work towards the common protection of our rights. Accept that your vote will not be popular at the moment. Don't waste time defending it. I'm more than willing to stand with you about guns.

You see, I understand the importance of making a stand. My family homesteaded near DeFuniak Springs following Sherman's march to the sea. We lost most everything to hm and his army, yet never owned slaves. I have my great great grandfather's Colt 1849 Pocket Pistol he carried, at the age of 14 in the Battle of Atlanta. He got shot but survived the war. His father, also at the battle, fought to prevent their property from being taken but in the end it was. So, with what they had left they went south and started over. They lived free and responsible lives, and the homestead remains. It is but a small plot of land with a small farm house - they never had much but they had enough. Free, independent, responsible but armed. That is my philosophy today - and for me it more closely aligns with the right, not the left. A citizen should be taught to stand on his or her own two feet, to not accept the scraps from the government, and to be free - free from government's encroaching hand. Had we but taught that, instead of welfare, entire segments of society would now be far better, and the violent gun crimes in government housing projects - crimes committed largely by illegal weapons already - would not be happening.

Three times my family has used firearms to protect ourselves from looters or worse: the first was my grandfather with a Hopkins & Allen revolver in the 1950's against a home invasion - nobody shot but two baddies held until the deputy arrived, the second following Hurricane Camille where my mom, as looters began to break into the house, donned my dad's handgun and sat at the kitchen table with it leveled at the door (she drew a line that the looters, seeing her through the window, refused to cross), the last, when my grand parents were elderly in the 1980's when Florida had the rash of rest stop assaults, a man tried to carjack the car with my little sister in the back seat, my grandfather drew his Smith and Wesson he kept under a cloth between the car seat cushions - my grandmother could not walk or escape.

That is why I stridently oppose the government at this time and will grimly stand with you against what it seeks to do. That knife I feel in my back from your vote - as harsh as it might sound - remains but I stand with you all the same. Perhaps we can save ALL our rights and not be reduced to subjugation to a capricious police force.

This video sums up my stance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGtkYC0RjHY
 
Last edited:
THR tries very hard to prohibit broad-spectrum "liberal bashing."

That's a very big part of why we do not allow discussions of topics outside the strictest focus on guns, shooting, and RKBA.

To a Democrat-voting gun owner, I really don't know what to say. Try, try, PLEASE try, to change your representatives' positions from within the ranks -- I guess -- but continuing to vote for them regardless of their appalling transgressions makes your appeals ring mighty hollow to those representatives, and to your fellow gun owners as well.

If other issues are important enough to you to keep voting anti-gunners into office, then you're simply not fighting for gun rights. It just isn't important enough to you to motivate you to do anything productive for the cause. You may be a gun-rights wisher, but wishing one way and voting the other ... well, you might as well quit your wishin'.
 
I´m always scared when i read that people thing it`s okay to vote a complete nutjob into office on a single issue like RKBA.

i don't think so. Twice in my lifetime i've been involved in shootouts with gun armed home invaders. i'm still here and i vote for pro-gunners: Nothing else matters.
 
My view (and I'm absolutely right about this) is that being pro-2A has become synonymous with being a Conservative Republican in ALL regards for ALL issues. Well, I've got news for you. If you're pro-2A and you and I disagree about the need for government-provided safety nets like Medicaid and Social Security, then you and I have differences of opinion on completely different issues. You and I believe in 2A, but we disagree on Welfare. That's fine, but leave your wholesale Liberal-bashing on another forum dedicated to Welfare reform.

I'm sick and *censored* tired of the *censored* damned Liberal bashing based on a single issue when you really have a problem with ALL Liberal issues. Leave that crap elsewhere, I urge you. While we're here on this forum, let's talk about how to convince ALL our politicians, Left and Right, how to keep their hands off the guns of us law-abiding red-blooded Americans. If you have a problem with my pro-welfare stance, meet me on another website about THAT issue.

We're in agreement there.

Most people are not single issue voters.

THR is a single issue site and the members should set aside all else and focus on that issue, RKBA. It isn't easy for many and it isn't possible for some and that comes through, but the majority of our members don't muddy the water with their other politics. There are those that loudly do at times though and they hurt our cause and the cause of all RKBA advocates.

We need every voter in this country of every persuasion that supports reason and RKBA to stop the irrational, illogical, lying Antis in government who with their outdated ideas and legislation continue to try to take away our right to keep and bear arms using us as scapegoats for the acts of criminals and madmen. Bashing any segment of the 2A community over their other beliefs is tantamount to betraying RKBA at this time when we need every person in the struggle.
 
Last edited:
mh said:
I voted for President Obama believing that he would not unduly curtail my 2nd Amendment rights.

There's the tell, my friend. You say you support 2A, but you said you didn't think Obama would "unduly" curtail RKBA (you underscored it). That means you think you some curtailment, aka infringement, is due.

No. Sorry, no.
 
If other issues are important enough to you to keep voting anti-gunners into office, then you're simply not fighting for gun rights. It just isn't important enough to you to motivate you to do anything productive for the cause. You may be a gun-rights wisher, but wishing one way and voting the other ... well, you might as well quit your wishin'.

Sam-

I don't view the 2nd Amendment as being superior to or more threatened than the 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th and 14th Amendments. And while the Republicans are inarguably better on the 2A than the Democrats, the Democrats are inarguably better on the other parts of the Bill of Rights noted above. As such, I think there is a very reasonable case for voting for Democrats and pushing them to improve on their 2A stance from within.

That said, lately the Democrats have lost their way on the rest of the Bill of Rights, as well, and I've voted third party in the last several national elections.
 
Most people are not single issue voters.

Very true. Republican/Democrat is an outdated model, if it was ever accurate at all. All issues essentially fall on a statist/libertarian (small L. The ideas, not the party) scale. Those who favor more government involvement in an issue are statist. Those who favor issues being handled on the smallest, preferably individual, level are libertarian. This is because liberty itself is a directly individual-oriented concept. Liberty oriented = libertarian. State oriented = statist.

The fact remains. If you find yourself favoring more government involvement and control on a wide variety of issues, you are a statist. Whether you call yourself that or not is irrelevant. You favor state involvement. The Second Amendment exists primarily to fight statism. It is an individual liberty to protect oneself from the state.

So while things like medicare, taxes, welfare, etc all have nothing to do with gun rights per se, they all still fall on the libertarian/statist scale. If you find yourself having statist views on those issues, you are a statist. That places you firmly in the enemy camp. I'm sorry, but we're getting too close to the brink of total destruction of gun rights (and many other rights) in the country to mince words and tip-toe around it. Statism is wrong, and if you support politicians through voting or even vocally who are statists, you are wrong as well. Gun control is simply one aspect of the overall mindset that the state can and should do a better job managing things than an individual. Ash made some very accurate points. Your vote is the bed you made. It's time to sleep in it. I'm sorry if you're angry and ashamed at being called out for what you are. But when you pulled the lever for a statist candidate, you allied yourself with the enemies of individual liberty and gun ownership in particular. You are to blame. Don't cry about it. Sit down, take a good hard look at your own views and ask yourself why you think you support the individual right to gun ownership but also seek to undercut individual liberties in other areas. You can't have both. Support the individual or support the state. Choose. And then be man or woman enough to stand by your choice. You pulled the lever in November. You have a hand in our current gun control plight. If that distresses you, perhaps it's time you rethink your allegiances.
 
Let's cut to the chase. Members of both parties generally downplay the Constitution, 2A included, and will try to circumvent it, whenever it interferes with their agenda (which is, above all else, to maintain and increase their power by getting into and remaining in office).

Just about any Elephant or Donkey will argue against the Constitution when he or she has a goal that it blocks.
 
Just so the OP of this thread knows that before Barack Obama became President of this nation he is on record of stating he did not think anyone should have firearms with the exception of the police and military.
I am not so confident he has our rights in our best interest.
 
In some ways Obama is more dangerous to the 2nd Amendment than other liberal, control-your-life and build-bigger-government Democrats because he is a extreme left wing ideologue who seems unable to grasp the concept of compromise (to him it seems to mean capitulating to his position with nothing in return from him) and elitist (who sees no problem with having one set of rules for the ruling elite and another set for the rest of us peasants, like the jet-owning environmentalists telling us to reduce OUR carbon footprint). While he served in IL he voted "present" on many issues, not willing to risk offending voters by showing his true beliefs, but voted "yes" on every gun control measure ever proposed during his years as a State Senator. He even seems to believe that breaking the law is OK if it helps achieve a "higher good" in his opinion, evidenced by his approval of Fast and Furious which clearly was a ploy to encourage if not force licensed gun dealers to sell illegally, so that later he could claim U.S. sold guns were fueling the Mexican cartels. There is no doubt in my mind that had Fast and Furious not been blown open and become public knowledge it would have been the basis for seeking even more draconian gun control laws than Sandy Hook has seemed to spawn.
 
Call me a single-issue voter. I tend to use RKBA as a litmus on other rights. I despise the Patriot Act but so long long as the Second is in place, we have a means to resist.

I do seem to remember a motra that was passed here many years ago. "Loathe the Republican who passed the Patriot Act, fear the Democrat who would use it."

I am registered Constitutionalist, I believe in a strict interpretation. I have to hold my nose to vote for anyone in the current pool. Sadly, my votes in recent elections are more against someone than for someone.
 
I'm Libertarian, which means some Rs think I'm nuts and some think I'm the devil; some Ds are surprised that I side with them on certain issues, and then horrified to find out WHY.

I am NOT a single issue voter; it's just that the RKBA is such a polarized issue that it can easily be used as one of my litmus tests. Anti-2A tendencies generally betray an underlying antipathy to liberty and a tendency toward the statist mentality in general.

I also recognize that a great many Texas Ds are more in agreement with me than a lot of Yankee Rs; it's not that they're more "conservative" but precisely because they still view "liberal" in the classic sense of respecting liberty. Labling and the making of broad assumptions on the basis of R or D is, particularly in the current climate, misleading and unhelpful.

Of course, here on THR, I am a "one issue" man... because THR IS A ONE ISSUE FORUM.
Last thing anyone here needs is another bilious rant against 'Communists, pagans, and lesbians' LOL. Honestly, that sort of thing really helps none of us.
 
I don't think a vote for Obama was at all unreasonable in November, 2012. He didn't put forth any anti-RKBA bills, and actually signed legislation allowing carry in national parks. Plus, gun sales grew solidly in his first term, while the number of FFLs increased.

Today after Newtown, I am sure ANY president would have to appear to be doing "something."
 
Last edited:
I think there are a lot of things we would like to say to OP but they aren't THR.

Also, I don't really understand the point of this thread? The OP's post isn't very THR either...
 
This is not an effort to get this overly political, but I would bet many of those with critical responses voted for GWB. He openly said he would sign an AWB should it make it to his desk. He said this with a Democratic Congress that could have passed it. Thank goodness they didn't.

Our previous Republican Presidents weren't much better. GHWB greatly curtailed the import of "non-sporting" guns. Reagan signed the '86 act.

Partisans have selective memories. The Republican party had done little at the national level to promote the RKBA, other than to obstruct further restrictions for what I expect are purely political reasons.
 
One of the things that I appreciate about THR (and yes, I appreciated it for a year before actually signing up...), is the general attempt to make room for people from a wide range of the population that all have interest in firearms. I have very similar feelings as the OP, 2A issues are important but there are alot of other issues that are also important.

I'm a lonely Georgia Democrat these days but I grew up in a Michigan in a solid left wing, New Deal union family that had more than its share of gun nuts as well. There's still a good number of us around.

You might be able to recognize us sometimes because we're the ones rolling our eyes when someone says:

He even seems to believe that breaking the law is OK if it helps achieve a "higher good" in his opinion, evidenced by his approval of Fast and Furious which clearly was a ploy to encourage if not force licensed gun dealers to sell illegally, so that later he could claim U.S. sold guns were fueling the Mexican cartels.
 
I'm a fairly moderate voter. While my vote was +1 on the Obama side, it was less a vote for Obama as much as a vote against Romney. For the first time ever, my ballot was identical - votes for (I), then (D) if there was no (I), and no vote at all if there was only (R).

And yet, I used to vote (R). I didn't leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me.

Yes, I knew that Obama could potentially make attempts to restrict RKBA, but I knew of Heller and more importantly, I knew that the House belongs to the Republicans. I can honestly say that for me, the ideal would be a split Congress, always - just for cases like this.

If those of you on the Right want me to vote with your side, put up better candidates. I'm sorry, but once you step out of the feedback loop of the Primaries, you'll see how shockingly bad all of the Republican candidates for President were this cycle.

I live in Missouri and we had Todd Akins. Todd was on the House Committee for Science. Todd demonstrated a hideously terrible grasp of Science. That's the best you can do?

Put up better candidates or stop insulting those of us who believe in RKBA but refuse to vote for your terrible candidates (because it may not be 2A they want to infringe but invariably they want to infringe on other sections of the Constitution).

Either one, please.

One more thing. Equating Liberal with Godless or Godless with Liberal is just as bad. It turns out that if you step outside the feedback loop, you can be an atheist conservative who believes in RKBA because they believe in personal freedom.

Like me.

Here's the thing, it's what I understand to be the point of the THR - I may have differing views with you about most things, but not about the RKBA. I don't view you as a lesser person for disagreeing - I welcome it because it gives me another opportunity to re-evaluate my own beliefs, but more importantly, it gives me a chance to meet someone else who has a common interest.

This shouldn't be the time for Democrat/Liberal this and Republican/Conservative that, it should be a time for inclusion, not exclusion.

Inclusion strikes me as THR.
 
Last edited:
I am NOT a single issue voter; it's just that the RKBA is such a polarized issue that it can easily be used as one of my litmus tests. Anti-2A tendencies generally betray an underlying antipathy to liberty and a tendency toward the statist mentality in general.
Amen.

It may not be your only issue. It is, however, the starting point. Step one, check stance on RKBA. If good to go there, we maybe have a chance to agree on other issues. If not good to go on RKBA, we have nothing for you but (in the immortal words of Long John Silver), "...a cutlass and musket balls!" :)
 
2A is there to ensure the rest remain.

To vote in anyone who is openly willing to jeopardize that is beyond me.

I don't get into Rep vs. Dem, so don't take this as Dem-bashing or anything.
 
Pretty much 'preaching to the Choir' here.....friend.

How much time have you spent on Liberal Forums making the same spill? :confused:

That is where your efforts are needed. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top