Red Coats

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Feud

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
453
Location
In a house.
The term "anti" gets tossed around fairly loosely among the gun community. As a result, it can mean several things, among which are:

A) Someone who doesn't like guns, but thinks the people are fine
B) Someone who only likes certain types of guns for sporting purposes
C) Someone who wants guns banned

As a result, things can be a bit confusing if the context of the situation in which the term is used isn't made clear. For that reason, I propose that a new term be adopted for those who wish to ban guns, that of "Red Coat(s)".

When the British marched on Concord it wasn't to enforce tax law, the goal was to seize the weapons and ammunition being stored there. I feel that the term "Red Coat" applies well to those who currently wish to disarm the masses, effectively carrying out the goal that the British attempted 233 years ago this April.

What do you all think?
 
Sounds too much like advocacy of shooting 'em.

Sorry to rain on the parade. I'm sure that you put thought into it, but that's my honest reaction to the term.
 
I can think of a few names I have for them, most I cant put up on the high road:) Anyone ever notice most anti gunners seem kind of neurotic and unreasonable? The ones I meet always seemed more unhinged from reality than pro gunners or even those that have little opinion.

I rarely meet one that has valid or rational arguments. usually I hear stuff like all guns do is kill people or such w/o anything or facts to back the statements they blurt out.
 
Sorry to rain on the parade. I'm sure that you put thought into it, but that's my honest reaction to the term.
Click to expand...

No need to apologize. Good ideas can withstand criticism, and bad ideas need to be rooted out by it.
 
Antis may be neurotic and unreasonable about guns, but that doesn't mean they are neurotic and unreasonable about everything. I find a lot of conservative ideas about human rights and social responsibility to be simply horrifying, but that doesn't give me the right to lump conservative people into a convenient category simply because I happen to disagree with them.
 
I like a nice neutral GCA: gun control advocate. Win hearts and minds by trying to be the voice of reason.
 
bloodesky has a good point but the anti gunners I tend to meet, unfortuanately many of them seem to be neurotic and unreasonable in other areas as well. The stereotype of a pro gunner is as disturbing sometimes especially when it is true in some cases.
 
I tend to call someone an "anti" who wants to ban guns. They are the most vocal and political.

Someone who does not like guns and someone who only likes certain guns tend to keep quite and don't lobby congress, but will certainly support the gun banner.
 
I find a lot of conservative ideas about human rights and social responsibility to be simply horrifying, but that doesn't give me the right to lump conservative people into a convenient category simply because I happen to disagree with them.
Click to expand...

What issues are those. If you are like so many folks your history sucks.

Dimocrats = Per factual history. Lincoln was the first REPUBLICAN President. The Dims were pro slavery.
Dimocrats = Against 1964 Civil rights legislation. It took Johnson and the Republicans to get it through. Once again Dims on the wrong side of history. But today it is hard to understand. That is how successful the Liberal/socialist propaganda has been.

And social responsibility? I guess when you seize other folks property to fulfill you sense of social responsibility, and the guy who's property you seized, complains, you accuse him of a poor sense of of social responsibility. Use your own property, and do not force another at gun point, now you have social responsiblity.

We can continue, but I really don't understand your point.

Go figure.

Fred
 
I was in an argument with HS kid a while back over Lincoln being a Republican.

He swore that Lincoln was a Democrat because "Republicans never did anyone any good at all" and "Republicans want everybody to be their slaves".

The funny thing is that his High School history book made no mention of Lincoln being a Republican or that the South was Democrat. Maybe it's brainwashing by ommision?
 
red coats won't work with the current red state blue state analogies since the reds are usually pro gun.

I agree that derogatory name calling doesn't help. We, the pros, have law, history, logic and rights on our side of the argument. There are antis that will never listen to reason but if you tangle with one it is relative easy to get the discussion to a point where all they can fall back on is emotion and bomblastic generalities. Doesn't do much to the anti but any fence sitter might notice the contrast in the logic and adult dignified stance of the pro position and be swayed.

I will admit I like the slur Dimm applied to Democrats :)
 
Whaddaya mean? They're the party of Hope! As in I hope I don't lose my rights. I hope we don't get attacked by the Chinese. I hope Iran doesn't develop a nuclear bomb. I hope I can still get healthcare after the government takes it over. I hope Iraq doesn't fall apart after we leave.
 
Neurotic? Definitely! Didnt Freud say that fear of weapons was a sign of "something" immaturity? They must have an outlet for that pent up stuff. Also, proven scientific, psychological fact: Most serial killers cannot, well, have relations with others? I think this is cyclical reasoning here (turn on logic units!). Not very high road, but maybe a theory (key word here, THEORY). Folks I talk to around here call them black hats or OPFOR, for what it's worth.
 
Aw, chieftain, so accommodating of you to put words in my mouth. :)

I don't really see Republicans and Democrats as being conservative or leftist, because both parties tend these days to blur the lines between the two ideologies. So I am not really talking about Republicans or Democrats; rather, the ideologies of conservatism and leftism per se.

I am horrified by conservative notions that people need "a way out, not a handout," to quote a local conservative politician (who blessedly did not win her campaign). Sometimes a job isn't enough to pay the bills. And with college costs rising so steeply, I'll venture to generalize and say that college is fast becoming a pursuit of the wealthy, thus watering down the skill level of our society.

Yes, I said it. Sometimes a job isn't enough. Ronald Reagan was wrong.

Conservative ideas about the role of religion in society; women's rights; drugs; and teenaged sex are a bit deranged. Religion is purely personal and does not belong in public institutions, women have the right to seek an abortion if they choose, the war on drugs has done absolutely zero, and teenagers will have sex whether or not you tell them not to. Teaching them abstinence does not work, as evidenced by our status as one of the industrialized world's leading purveyors of teenaged mothers.

However, affirmative action is complete offal.

I completely embrace the conservative interpretation of the Second Amendment. I also think it is wrong to disarm a nation in the hopes that the rest of the world will follow suit.

People aren't perfect. Neither side in this polarized country is completely correct in its policies.

Where did I say that people should have their property seized? (In the invisible text at the bottom?)
 
I think we should all be very careful to not label Democrats as anti-gun or republicans as pro-gun or any other type of label. I don't really see that kind of behavior as any different than racism. I have had friends that are very democratic, but enjoy guns as much as I do. I have had republican friends that hate guns. Just remember that there are only two parties in this country and just because someone picks one doesn't mean they agree with everything, it just means they didn't have a better choice.

I have to disagree with the calling of names because then we would be stooping to the same level that they are. I am not a red-neck or a hick. I am definitely not a purveyor of death and crime, but I am called that by many anti-gun people. The only thing their name calling does to me is galvanize my position against them.
 
I have no problems with people believing in what they believe in, given that they are well educated on the matter. It's the ignorant that get to me.

"It's the thing that goes up." I mean seriously...what kind of educated person says that?
 
What about the term moonbat? I like that one. Conjures up images of Edith Bunker and Reverend Lovejoy's Wife. :)
 
So, rocinante, should we call the Republicans the Republicraps? Works for me.
Click to expand...

Works for me too. I believe in more of the principles Republicans give lip service to but don't believe or act on anymore. Quaint old fashion stuff like limited government, financial responsibility, support of small business, people minding their own business and not holy roller crusaders. I refuse to support the Democrats because they more consistently prove themselves to be enemies of gun rights. Republicians are borrow and spend and Democrats are tax and spend. The only difference is what they spend it on and which voters they choose to bribe out of the public pot. Slightly cynical aren't I?


I use moonbat all the time. The hysterics and reasoning fits to a tee. [EDIT] Archie called Edith Bunker dingbat.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Husker1911
  • Locked
Celebrate April 19, Patriot's Day
Replies
18
Views
836
Nehemiah Scudder
N
G
  • Locked
The Pledge
Replies
3
Views
1K
El Tejon
E
C
  • Locked
Brady Campaign's Mission is an Insane Delusion... Legally
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
unspellable
U
Deanimator
  • Locked
Swatting as an Inevitable Byproduct of "Red Flag" Laws
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Robert
Robert
N
  • Locked
Supreme court to take on the DC gun case!
Replies
8
Views
1K
romma
R
Back
Top