Political/gun control posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
jeepnik

jeepnik

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
2,485
Location
SoCal
Am I the only one who thinks that all of the posts in this area belong in the political section?
 
This is straight from the rules page and probably why there is not a forum called politics.

We have learned from bitter experience that discussions of politics, abortion, religion, and sexual orientation often degenerate into less-than-polite arguments or claims that "my God is better than your God". For this reason, we do not discuss such subjects on THR, and any threads dealing primarily with these subjects will be closed or deleted immediately. Threads which deal with other subjects, but which mention abortion, religion or sexual orientation as a side issue, may be allowed to continue, but will be closely scrutinized, and closed or deleted if they "cross the line"
Click to expand...

There is a forum called Activism that people have been posting a lot in lately, but that is strictly for posting about taking action to support RKBA.
 
I get it. He probably means some if not all of the following plus others not included:


I grow weary of people saying the Founders
What do YOU think the Second Amendment means?
Defending Hi-Cap Mags
What Are Your AWB "Panic Guns?"
blow this poll up
Problems with mental health checks
Who has contacted their Reps?
Outrageous! Biden's Chief of Staff closes "NO AWB" poll
Marlin 60 and the upcoming AWB?
If Private Sales Banned- Where do dealers stand?
Mental Health is the Issue, Not Guns and Armed Guards in Schools is not the Solution
The very hypocritical Dianne Feinsten
Austrailia gun ban fail
Machine guns have been very tightly regulated since 1934...
"Compromise" from pro 2A perspective
AWB and senate control?
Dianne DeGette (D, CO) to Introduce Magazine Ban in the House

Also, I should think it's obvious that he's referring to the Legal and Activism forums.

I know it's easy to snipe the list - just sayin' as example.
 
ApacheCoTodd,

While I know what the OP is getting at and what you are explaining, I was trying to point out that the forum the OP was asking about does not exist for a reason, and those posts you listed don't fall under what the Activism forum is about. That is why they are in General Gun Discussions, and rightly so.

Don't take this the wrong way; it's nothing we should get our undies in a bundle over.
 
People here are mature enough to own weapons but are not mature enough to have a frank discussion of the political direction of our country..... :eek: You have to love the logic of that statement.:neener:
 
If it gets owners to voice themselves to their reps, they need to post everywhere. Right now we need more activity not less from gun owners.
 
I'm taking a break from all things political anyway. Besides, this forum is on the wrong side of all things political, with the exception of guns. It does no good to read posts that have been micromanaged and sanitized. Given the restrictions on discussion, it's obvious that monologue, not dialogue, is allowed.

Plus, after the castrated rupugnants caved in on the budget, I don't see much use anyhow.
 
On the wrong side of all things political except for guns?:confused:
From what I've gathered, most opinions on this forum tend to be liberty minded and strongly in favor of personal responsibility with an emphasis on individual choices and freedoms. There is nothing wrong sided about any of that...

Let's be frank; there's a reason why firearms ownership is generally connected to 1 side of the political spectrum and not as much with the other. Firearms ownership is closely tied with personal responsibility, individual choice, self-determination, and self reliance. These are concepts that are more closely associated with one general side of politics. The other side holds concepts such as collectivism, social responsibility, the deference of personal views to societies views, and mandated equality of outcome through top level control as paramount. That side of the political spectrum does not trust the individual to decide for themselves or take responsibility for their own safety. An individual with a gun is not an individual who easily falls into lockstep with whatever views and opinions the leadership tell them to have. The bottom line is one side of our American political spectrum sees the individual as an individual. The other sees the individual as part of a collective. And individuals who have the ability to use violence to protect their own individuality do not fit well in collectives.
 
Last edited:
Steel Horse Rider said:
People here are mature enough to own weapons but are not mature enough to have a frank discussion of the political direction of our country..... You have to love the logic of that statement.
Click to expand...

Political discussion does not fall within the scope of the focus of this forum. It has nothing to do with members being mature or not mature enough to talk about politics. In fact, if it is political in nature but has to do with the 2nd amendment, you'll most likely see it right here in General Gun Discussions.
 
My opinion is this... We should all be discussing this topic in a meaningful way to everyone whenever we can, wherever we can until this is resolved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top