Number of anti's on THR?

[Optical Serenity]

Heh wonder how many threads like this get started over on their boards? "How many gun lovers lurk amongst us??" haha

 

[evan price]

Beatnik said:

One of the core issues with the pro 2nd crowd (which I hope you'll join someday, but it doesn't look likely) is that we have a law on the books which says that we have a right to own guns.

Well, Beatnik, not to quibble, but we don't have a law that says we have a right to own guns; we have an enumeration of our God-given right to keep and bear arms, and these rights transcend earthly authority (including laws). It all goes back to our Natural Rights (Life, Liberty, Property/Pursuit of Happiness) as the founders stated.

 

[gunsmith]

csbyte is kind of an anti

I guess it depends on how one defines an anti. I know some posters including myself have been called Antis/DUites because we don't happen to march lock step with the right wing ideology or purist views of some other posters on this board.

not being in lock step is cool, not being willing to debate stinks.

 

[Titan6]

I hope if there any other pro gun control people out there and they have something new to bring to the table they bring it. Emotional appeals are pointless however as they simply devolve into who can scream the loudest ''for the children''.

 

[71Commander]

I think we've got a lot of bleep disturbers from outfits like Democratic Underground, etc.

Usually their terminology gives them away.
__________________

They're some here that are trying to split the Republican vote so as Osama or the Hildabeast gets in. Some, not all of the Ron Paul supporters are pretty obvious in their little plan. Some of them are right from the DUmp. One of them is from Illinois and I haven't figured out his DU name yet. They get a high post count in a short time frame. Post mostly in L&P. No mention of owning any guns.

I'm a member of Conservative Underground as Tucker13 and the DU'ers know about that site. I'm also a member of DU , but can't tell my name there. I do to them what they're trying to do here.

 

[benEzra]

Seriously though. Do you really think that the citizens of this country are going to enact a nationwide ban on firearms?

Plenty of people trying to enact a nationwide ban on these:

And these:

Do you deny that?

I think we've got a lot of bleep disturbers from outfits like Democratic Underground, etc.

Usually their terminology gives them away.

I have way more posts on Democratic Underground than I do on THR. I'm not a repub, and I wouldn't be considered a conservative. Does that make me a troll?

There are a LOT of pro-gun DU'ers. The idea that rank-and-file Dems are uniformly anti-gun is Bradyite BS. The gun-control lobby wants people to think that gun rights are only a narrow "right wing" issue; they're not.

 

[anygunanywhere]

For the Children

I own my firearms for the children.

I am certain most THR devotees (pro2A anyway) have seen this. Being new to THR, please forgive me if this is unnecessary, but since the term "the Children" came up I couldn't resist since one of the reasons I do what I do is for Little Eli:

“Why do you carry a gun?”

If I had a nickel for every time I’ve been asked that question, I’d have, uh … as many guns as his firearm-festooned Editorial Immenseness, Roy-Boy. It’s been asked of me by all flavors of folks in all slices of society, with attitudes and expressions ranging from angry-arrogant to curtly-contemptuous, to brainless an’ befuddled. My answers to it have sorta formed three phases in my professional gun-carrying life. During that first and longest phase, I answered all of ’em sincerely and articulately, often following up with stacks of historic and legal documents. After many years, I concluded only a semi-significant sliver of people even heard what I was sayin’. The rest had already made up their muddled minds.

Finally, I just got sick of it, and moved on to Phase 2. If those asking seemed to have teensy open spaces in their minds, I gave ’em S & A: “Sincere & Articulate.” The more harshly-bleating sheep, however, often got exchanges like this:

“So,” queried Snidely Snotworth III, lookin’ down his un-busted but needed-bustin’ nose, “Why do you think you have to carry a gun?”

“Well,” bellowed the Brutish Neanderthal (that would be me): “Because you’re not QUALIFIED to carry one. You haven’t got the skills, the judgment, the sense of responsibility, or the courage for it.”

This answer often popped out after I’d just returned from some Heart-Of-Darkness where every living soul knew that the difference between slaves and free people is having the means and determination to defend their lives, property and liberties. That meant having guns and guts and God-given rights. Most of those people would quite literally die fighting for the freedoms so many Americans casually give away, and proudly bear social responsibilities those sheeple* won’t even recognize.

*Sheeple: Sheep-like people, many of whom deny the existence of wolves, and vote to pull the teeth of the sheepdogs who protect the flock.


The Voices

Then I matriculated to Phase 3, where I started having some fun with the Snidely Snotworth types. When they asked the Big Question, I’d go all hunchy-shouldered an’ secretive, then lean in close and mutter, “Because of the voices, ya know?” “The VOICES?” sniveled the Snidelies, suddenly scaredy-cattish. “Oh, yeah, the voices … They told me to be, you know, prepared for when the killer clowns come … ” I’d furtively goggle around. “The voices say the killer clowns are comin’ … They’re cannibals, some of ’em, and … ”

About that time the Snidelies would be skitterin’ away like mice on polished marble.

Yeah, I know, the “killer clowns” answer might not have been “helpful,” but it did just as much good as giving S&A answers to the sheeple, and it was a lot more fun for me. I know you already know why we carry these cannons. But sometimes, just sometimes, we all need a little reminder. That includes me, and I’ve got one to share with you. One that got me where I live.


The Connor Clan has been nomadic, and we’ve lived in a number of places. In one of ’em, we shared a side yard and friendship with a young woman we’ll call Miss Maine, and her knee-high daughter, Little Lizzie. Miss Maine quickly bonded with the Memsaab Helena. Clearly, Helena’s Amazon-warrior spirit and skill with arms impressed Miss Maine mightily, and much of their time and talk revolved around that fierce self-confidence — and guns.

As for Little Lizzie, the munchkin almost duct-taped herself to the Mem’s leg. She followed Helena everywhere, but always, always, kept glancing back to check on her momma, as though she were the worried parent.

There was something guarded, something hurt and defensive about both of them, and that fearfulness extended to me for a while. They got over it, thank God. Then I sorta became a moving bunker for ’em, representing cover and protection. Finally, we learned the story.

Miss Maine had been attacked — brutally and viciously. You don’t wanta know the details. As with so many such crimes, it wasn’t really about sex. It was about hate and domination, cowardice and cruelty. And an even younger Little Lizzie had witnessed it. I like to think the Memsaab and I helped them to recover emotionally.

Then one day Lizzie came and snuggled into my shadow, visibly disturbed. That morning her kindergarten had put on “Frighten The Munchkins Day.” Some schools do a pretty good job of alerting children to predators — don’t go with strangers and that kinda thing — but others do more harm than good. All they do is terrify the tots and give ’em no operating options. Lizzie already had twin tears glistening, ready to fall when she grabbed a tiny fistful of my trouser-leg and asked, “Connor-Sir, will you a’ways be here? Wouldja be here … When the bad mens come?”

My knees cracked on the sidewalk as she slammed into my shoulder, shaking with sobs as the hot tears came, splashing my neck and searing into my soul. “ ’Cause I’m a-scared!” she choked, and clutched me tighter.

Oh, GOD! Who would not — who could not — fight without fear, suffer without sense of sacrifice, and kill or die deliberately, using the most effective means available — to protect life, liberty and a Little Lizzie? For God’s sake, who?

Those who would not are no better than the predators.

Maybe in Phase 4, when somebody pops The Big Question I’ll just smile and say, “For life, liberty and Little Lizzie.” You guys can fill in the details.


John Connor
American Handgunner July/August 2005

The 2nd amendment was included to ensure we the people could respond to a tyrannical government. The broad application of the benefits of the 2nd amendment are obvious. I can not see why antis constantly dwell on their limited scope of the clause. Their very existence is supported by the document.

I will never understand.

Anygun

 

[anygunanywhere]

There are a LOT of pro-gun DU'ers. The idea that rank-and-file Dems are uniformly anti-gun is Bradyite BS. The gun-control lobby wants people to think that gun rights are only a narrow "right wing" issue; they're not.

I continually see this claim from folks like you. Yes there are GOP antis, and I do what I can to ensure they know my concerns. If what you claim is true, why are not more of you pro2A dems in office? The dems you have leading your cause most certainly do not share your pro2A point of view.

Maybe instead of hammering on the pro2A GOP or other pro2A types you ought to straighten out your own. Some of that "common ground" I keep hearing about but never see.

I am happy you pro2A dems do exist. Life certainly would get boring. It would be nice to focus on something else that we disagree on besides our civil rights.

Anygun

 

[22-rimfire]

Omahanew mentioned that you should just move if you disagree with the gun laws locally or in your state. That is easier said than done. Our system of government allows for open disagreement with our laws or policies. Few governments allow such things. I bet the folks in Iran that rioted when the gas rationing plan went into effect yesterday are just a bit nervous about now. We live in a wonderful country. Travel around the world and you will see just how wonderful this country really is. Problems, sure. I don't think you should have to move. But, many of our legal immigrants who came to the USA came here to gain the freedoms that many take for granted.

Titan6, I enjoyed your post #84. The only problem I have with this post (and your initial one in this thread) is accusing someone of being a Troll immediately if they post something that runs against the grain of the forum. I actually like to hear many people's ideas and the reasons for them. It shouldn't be any different if you talk to someone on the street. You label them Trolls or worse if they say something you disagree with in person? Probably not.....

You labeled me a Troll once. It was probably when the Zumbo discussion was popular. I am certainly not a Troll or Fudd. But everyone has their opinion. These terms really bother me.

Jwarren: Excellent post #91. The framers of our Constitution were really amazing people. To think most of them were in the 30's and to be so well educated and literate. George Washington was an old guy, something like 40 when the revolution began.

Art: As usual, you phrased it well in #92. New readers to this thread should read page one and then skip to page 4.

I know it is so often said on this forum, but I'm sure the Jews and other persecuted people in Germany during the 1930's and early 1940's never thought that gun registration would lead to confiscation and then eventually to the gas chambers. Yes, this is an extreme case, but it is true and we need to maintain our rights and freedoms from being significantly watered down by new legislation. If the government evolves into something that it was not intended to, the framers of our Constitution wanted people to be able to rebel and firearm ownership is central to that right. I would hope that armed rebellion is not the first choice and that most people would try to affect change legislatively. The USA is really a wonderful country to be organized in a way that protects people from government. The Second Amendment is part of the protection and our right. We the People...


Titan6 said:

I hope if there any other pro gun control people out there and they have something new to bring to the table they bring it. Emotional appeals are pointless however as they simply devolve into who can scream the loudest ''for the children''.

I don't mind emotional arguments. Some people just believe that guns should be illegal. They need to be educated to become better informed. There have always been people who prefer socialism or facism to the capitalistic form of government we have. It is part of what makes the USA great; the diverse ideas voiced.

 

[taliv]

in the end its about crime....

eh, not so much. it's about personal choice, freedom, and the lack of a tyrannical government

 

[Titan6]

There are progun dems but they are viewed as the DINOs of their party just as RG and Romney are the RINOs over here. Just that on the other side of the fence the true dems are the party leadership while over here the RINOs are.

''If this election is about a single issue it is about the war on terror'' - Rudy

 

[RPCVYemen]

eh, not so much. it's about personal choice, freedom, and the lack of a tyrannical government

If you start ranting about "tyrannical government" to antis, you have lost not only the battle, but the war. This may be a shocker but I would guess that less than .5% of Americans would list "fear of tyranny by our government as a concern."

Mike

 

[Beatnik]

Hey omahanew, watch me now....

Well, Beatnik, not to quibble, but we don't have a law that says we have a right to own guns; we have an enumeration of our God-given right to keep and bear arms, and these rights transcend earthly authority (including laws). It all goes back to our Natural Rights (Life, Liberty, Property/Pursuit of Happiness) as the founders stated.

You're right, I stand corrected. Indeed, the important part is that we are naturally endowed with this right, not that the law grants it to us.

I think it's important to point out that it is law, though, and that law is being broken. One can deny the existence of the creator, and one can deny the notion of natural rights. But the one thing I really hope we'd agree on with antis is that we need a functioning system of laws in order for society to work.

What I'm coming to realize is that antis - and this guy is a perfect example - actually don't much care for law. It's usually possible to paint them into a corner where they don't recognize the 2nd Amendment as law - and as stated, if you ignore one law, the others don't mean much either.

 

[Titan6]

Yemen- Fully agree. Antis are so terrified of the terrorists and criminals they will let their government do just about anything to keep their defenseless body safe.

 

[RPCVYemen]

we have an enumeration of our God-given right to keep and bear arms, and these rights transcend earthly authority (including laws).

You do understand the the appeal to divine authority is fundamentally not rational, right?

Mike

 

[22-rimfire]

Rpcvyeman: That is what I like about the forums. Everyone tends of agree fundamentally and then you mention "divine authority" not being rational. Well, maybe so, but the framers of our Constitution didn't see it that way. A little emotion is a good thing.

 

[Titan6]

Rights of a divine origin are of course not logical to an atheist. However to a believer they are. In order not to cloud the issue as many on the left are not believers I say ''Born with''. Lefties understand being born with rights quite well. In fact many feel people are born with all kinds of ''rights'' that exist only between their ears.

 

[omahanew]

"I notice that you didn't go read them, instead you want to pretend that the meaning is mysterious and ill defined and would prefer to speculate."

But I have read them. One question you may want to consider is why do people who are in favor of a strict, literal interpretation of the Constitution when it comes to some things (Freedom of Speech) get a dose of the "Let's consider other sources" when it comes to other things (the Second Amendment)?

 

[omahanew]

"Go back and read the Declaration of Independence, which states"

The Declaration of Independence is a glorious statement of principle, not the law of the land. It contains discrepancies, one of which is the statement "that all men are created equal." Someone of the time could have talked to any one of those "3/5ths" of a person for an alternative point of view.

"there are people like you that don't know the difference between a God-given right"

You're confusing religion with the rule of law and governments instituted by men.

"Rights are something that we are entitled to simply by drawing breath"

Rights are nothing more than things agreed upon by a group of people. In some countries free health care is considered a Right. In this country that isn't the case.

"confiscation has always led to tyranny or genocide or both"

The last time I checked Great Britain wasn't a hot bed of either.

"Who is the militia? YOU ARE."

What about the "well regulated" part? Often, as now, the ignored part of the amendment. Unless you're a member of the National Guard your regulation might consist of laws to restrict what firearms you may possess.

"Game, set, and match."

Hardly.

 

[hso]

Having antis on THR is an opportunity.

It provides us the opportunity to demonstrate to undecided folks that pro-2A citizen like us are just like them and the people they know and trust. In spite of being demonized by gun-prohibitionists as somehow different and evil (or at least foolish or selfish) in our thinking we're actually responsible and rational people. We understand that projecting fears onto an inanimate object, or projecting them onto those who don't fear the inanimate object, is not reasonable, rational or responsible. We're just like the vast majority of folks every day that don't wake up and ram our cars into school buses, or crash into businesses or drive off of bridges or any number of other aberrant behaviors. Reasonable people don't think any other object somehow magically takes control of the people near it, but gun-prohibitionists act like a firearm can for some reason. Just by being here and carrying out reasonable civil debates on firearms we put the lie to such foolishness.

 

[omahanew]

"Bans are not enacted by "citizens" but rather by a stratum of self-appointed nannies masquerading as legislators, arrogantly overriding both the spirit and the letter of the Bill of Rights."

It's quite sad how much you distrust your fellow citizens because they are, after all, the people that elect legislators at all levels of government.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Rights of a divine origin are of course not logical to an atheist. However to a believer they are.

What's this appeal to belief? Something is either logical, or it is not. You may be right about the existence of G-d (and I might share your belief), but that doesn't have anything to do with logic.

Mike

 

[budney]

The Declaration of Independence... contains discrepancies, one of which is the statement "that all men are created equal." Someone of the time could have talked to any one of those "3/5ths" of a person for an alternative point of view.

That's not a defect in the Declaration; it's simply an example of people stating a correct principle and then failing to uphold it.

Rights are nothing more than things agreed upon by a group of people.

Not true: the right to self and property are absolute. If everyone on earth, with the exception of only one person, say different, they're all wrong.

What about the "well regulated" part? Often, as now, the ignored part of the amendment.

You do know that "well regulated" means "well trained," and has nothing to do with legislative restrictions, right? The word "regulation" has come to mean something different today than it meant when the Declaration was written.

--Len.

 

[budney]

What's this appeal to belief? Something is either logical, or it is not. You may be right about the existence of G-d (and I might share your belief), but that doesn't have anything to do with logic.

"God-given right" is a meaningful concept even if one disputes the existence of God. It simply means: a right which transcends human authority, and therefore cannot be taken away by any human agency. It's basically a synonym for "inalienable."

--Len.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Reasonable people don't think any other object somehow magically takes control of the people near it, but gun-prohibitionists act like a firearm can for some reason.

It is interesting to me that people who purport to be rational strive so hard to project irrationality onto their opponents. And then pat themselves on the back for the possession of such a mighty intellect that they can defeat a silly argument they generated!

Have you actually listened to any antis, or do you just listen to what pro-gun folks say that antis say?