What's the PRIMARY REASON why the Anti-2A Camp so often seems to be more successful at its mission t

[Old Dog]

"the White supremacism of the anti-gun left."

Did I miss something in this thread? How did we get here from there?

Anyway, a previous poster opined that voting was a/the major factor.

What I know in my state is that, given the numbers of gun-owners and CPL-holders, few of these folks went to the polls. Abysmal voting rates in the traditionally "conservative" and rural counties. As a consequence, we've recently elected numerous anti-gun, liberal legislators, governors and even our attorney general, as well as seeing the passage of UBCs and other anti-gun legislation and ballot initiatives.

 

[RX-79G]

There's ALWAYS somebody who will put his own short term, selfish interests above those of the community, be they Jews who kicked other Jews onto box cars, Blacks who supported the Daley machine and Blacks and Jews who support invidiously racist gun controls.

It's hilarious watching you frantically try to backpedal from your WILDLY anti-Semitic Freudian slip...

Well, is it "some", or the vast majority?

 

[ATN082268]

What are the THREE PRIMARY REASONS why the Anti-2A Camp so often seems to be more successful at its mission than the Pro-2A Camp?

The anti-gun types are successful because they get more gun restrictions to stick than are repealed.

 

[Deanimator]

Well, is it "some", or the vast majority?

According to YOU, it's ALL... at least when it comes to Jews.

I suspect that most people here would disagree.

 

[RX-79G]

According to YOU, it's ALL... at least when it comes to Jews.

I suspect that most people here would disagree.

If you think you are going to "win" this debate because of your ability to keep changing the subject, you aren't. You have repeatedly stated that racism is a primary factor in today's gun control push, and no amount of word play is going to change that is what you said.

I started the other thread to find out if anyone on THR will support your viewpoint, and so far it is zero. I'm pretty sure all I have to do in the future when you show up to destroy a thread with your conspiracies is to link to that thread and ignore you otherwise.

 

[Deanimator]

If you think you are going to "win" this debate because of your ability to keep changing the subject, you aren't.

If you think you're going to "win" this debate because of your ability to accuse others of doing that which you yourself do, you aren't.

 

[barnbwt]

"Gays didn't get marriage because of pride parades, they got it because they presented themselves as perfectly normal people"
Well, and ganged up on & humiliated/shamed those who opposed their goals as homophobic pariahs through an incredibly powerful network of political & media leaders. A major tactic which included --especially early on-- outrageous and embarassing pride parades in public.

 

[RX-79G]

If you think you're going to "win" this debate because of your ability to accuse others of doing that which you yourself do, you aren't.

I don't have to win anything. There isn't a debate, just you disrupting threads with wild and false conspiracies. All I need is sufficient reason to find that no one actually agrees with you, and then we can all safely ignore you as irrelevant.

 

[RX-79G]

"Gays didn't get marriage because of pride parades, they got it because they presented themselves as perfectly normal people"
Well, and ganged up on & humiliated/shamed those who opposed their goals as homophobic pariahs through an incredibly powerful network of political & media leaders. A major tactic which included --especially early on-- outrageous and embarassing pride parades in public.

This does make it sound, just a little bit, like gays didn't face massive homophobia, arrests, prison, electroshock therapy and other rather extreme prejudice long before the first gay pride parade.

 

[Deanimator]

I don't have to win anything.

And a good thing too... despite your very obvious attempts to control the terms of debate, change the subject, shut people down with ad hominems, etc.

It's good you don't think you have to win anything. In a similar vein, I don't have to be King of Andorra either. One's as likely as the other.

 

[barnbwt]

This does make it sound, just a little bit, like gays didn't face massive homophobia, arrests, prison, electroshock therapy and other rather extreme prejudice long before the first gay pride parade.

What's that got to do with the tactics they used to fight against that reality? Oh, are you saying we ought not protest as hard because we aren't subject to rather extreme prejudice (except in all those many enclaves across the nation where this actually is the reality, not to mention strict laws with terrible consequences everywhere else)? I will most certainly note that they didn't start getting steady gains in public acceptance until tactics like this became infamous (if not common)

What do you think would happen if an NRA supporter scattered a bulk-pack of 22LR or spent brass or gun powder onto Hillary Clinton like thus;

(This was Mitt Romney being 'glitter bombed' by a gay rights supporter, one of many which were widely reported media sensations for several days after each incident, and a mere couple of years before the coup de grace of Obergefell to the marriage defense movement)

Guess what? Even though these tactics are crude and offensive, their benefit of publicity and 'demonstrated bravery*' still carries over to the polite spokesmen lobbying lawmakers --and they look even more polite by comparison! Especially with the implied threat that should you rebuff the polite envoy, the outrageous one is soon to follow & ruin your day.

TCB

*I'm sure there's a Greek word for this, but the fact is, a highly motivated group or individual willing to humiliate themselves for a cause or others naturally appears more charismatic to onlookers. Not to the extent of Jesus in that there is no martyr or sacrifice, but the principle is the same.

 

[RX-79G]

No, that wasn't my point at all. You just made it sound like gay pride parades generated homophobia. If anything, the parades brought homophobia into public discussion.

There is a lesson for us in that, but I doubt it involves parades or glitter. It does involve staying in the news.

 

[barnbwt]

You just made it sound like gay pride parades generated homophobia. If anything, the parades brought homophobia into public discussion.

There is a lesson for us in that, but I doubt it involves parades or glitter. It does involve staying in the news.

No, my point was the demonstrations were used as a highly energetic response tactic to any opposition (often to the point of being downright threatening/intimidating to any reasonable person; a family member has a story of getting stuck in one in the 80s by accident, which featured pornographic acts atop the parade floats while the onlookers cheered or [presumably] recoiled). It's a Good Cop/Bad Cop tactic; you have your pinstripe suits shaking hands & making deals, and your burly Teamster enforcers keeping the opposition away. Staying in the news is literally all that matters when arguing from the perspective of an aggrieved super-minority that would otherwise be forgotten or even denied (official gay population of Saudi Arabia: 0)

TCB

 

[RX-79G]

No, my point was the demonstrations were used as a highly energetic response tactic to any opposition (often to the point of being downright threatening/intimidating to any reasonable person; a family member has a story of getting stuck in one in the 80s by accident, which featured pornographic acts atop the parade floats while the onlookers cheered or [presumably] recoiled). It's a Good Cop/Bad Cop tactic; you have your pinstripe suits shaking hands & making deals, and your burly Teamster enforcers keeping the opposition away. Staying in the news is literally all that matters when arguing from the perspective of an aggrieved super-minority that would otherwise be forgotten or even denied (official gay population of Saudi Arabia: 0)

TCB

You feel threatened by gay pride parades?

Have you ever seen one?

 

[FROGO207]

I got through the first two pages and quit! I did not vote in the poll either. The mass media coupled with teaching from an early age that "gunz are baaaad" and using emotion to appeal to low info types get their job done. How many of those that vote for HRC will actually go on to an impartial website and search for facts. I will wager not many are going to waste their time even thinking about doing it. If they see it on the local/national news or on cable then it must be the truth ----yeah right.One of the major reasons I do not use Facebook or other social media sites is the backstabbing and misinformation that abounds there, especially in regards to the 2A as of late as I watch my girlfriend try to correct the idiots with truth.

Rant over

 

[HetchHetchy]

Dear Deanimator and RX-79G:

Please dial it back a bit. Both of you.

Your collective actions lead to threads being locked.

 

[HetchHetchy]

I got through the first two pages and quit! I did not vote in the poll either. The mass media coupled with teaching from an early age that "gunz are baaaad" and using emotion to appeal to low info types get their job done. How many of those that vote for HRC will actually go on to an impartial website and search for facts. I will wager not many are going to waste their time even thinking about doing it. If they see it on the local/national news or on cable then it must be the truth ----yeah right. One of the major reasons I do not use Facebook or other social media sites is the backstabbing and misinformation that abounds there, especially in regards to the 2A as of late as I watch my girlfriend try to correct the idiots with truth.

Rant over

Why didn't you vote on the poll?

 

[steveracer]

None of the answers are correct. (No offense)
The correct answer is that the Anti-2A crowd wants to control others through their fear of themselves and their lack of control in other things.
The Pro-2A crowd wants to be left alone, and stays out of other people's business.

 

[phil dirt]

I'd say it's because too many gun owners don't vote, nor support the gun organizations that do the heavy lifting for us. I know many gunnies who buy lots of guns, but refuse to join the NRA or Gun Owners of America, and of course, they won't give them a dime. Lots of gun owners got on their high horse and refused to vote for the lessor of two evils, Mitt Romney, so we wind up with the worst President in the history of the USA. A one time shooting partner told me, " I've got my principles." He didn't vote! Try as hard as I can, I can't understand that kind of stupidity.

 

[fpgt72]

None of the answers are correct. (No offense)
The correct answer is that the Anti-2A crowd wants to control others through their fear of themselves and their lack of control in other things.
The Pro-2A crowd wants to be left alone, and stays out of other people's business.

I would like to put my two bits in on this......and I think that you are wrong here just a bit.

The anti group (and we are painting with a real wide brush here) really think that the laws will end the issues in places like Detroit, Chicago......bla bla bla.
They are using fear to forward that goal.....they see this as a long term battle, that they must chip away a little here and a little there. Real anti people that have
a brain in their head know the chances of a repeal of the 2A, where everything goes through the process is slim....now. However with each event they lay more seed
in the hope that some day they will actually repeal the 2nd.

The process would begin by the amendment being proposed by either 2/3 of both Houses of Congress or by a constitutional convention called by 2/3 of the State legislatures. It would then need to be ratified by 3/4 of the states.

Right now do you actually think there is any chance of that happening.....however supreme court judges do have massive power.....they can make it very difficult to own a gun.....this is why the next two justices and I think this next pres is going to appoint them.

 

[phil dirt]

No, I don't. There are plenty of people that are like me, or maybe like you. But the majority of the pro-gunners see 2A protection as a Conservative tradition and vote against Liberals by voting for GOP Conservatives, with everything else that goes along with the GOP plank.

All you're doing is playing games with labels. While your personal views might be "liberal" in many senses, you don't vote for "Liberals".

There are certainly plenty of pro-gun people that have little interest in Conservatism and the GOP, but since various versions of libertarianism are powerless in the US, the Conservative ticket is the default for single issue pro-gun voters.

When it comes time to vote, we have our choice between two candidates. Often it is the choice between the bad and the ugly. I absolutely will not vote for any ant-gun candidate unless one is worse than the other, like Romney and Obama. While I did not care for Romney, I held my nose and voted for him, if for no other reason than because I knew Obama's stance on gun ownership. " I don't think anybody should be allowed to own a gun." Said Obama, as a member of the Illinois State Senate.

 

[Deanimator]

When it comes time to vote, we have our choice between two candidates. Often it is the choice between the bad and the ugly. I absolutely will not vote for any ant-gun candidate unless one is worse than the other, like Romney and Obama. While I did not care for Romney, I held my nose and voted for him, if for no other reason than because I knew Obama's stance on gun ownership. " I don't think anybody should be allowed to own a gun." Said Obama, as a member of the Illinois State Senate.

When it comes to 2nd Amendment (and a host of other) rights, it's a choice between a pitbull and a Komodo dragon.

You don't know what the pitbull is going to do. He might lick your hand. He might tear it off.

There's NO doubt what the Komodo dragon is going to do. It's going to do what it's ALWAYS done. It's going to bite you, wait for you to sicken and die, then consume you.

A Komodo dragon in a pantsuit is still a Komodo dragon.

 

[HetchHetchy]

I'd say it's because too many gun owners don't vote, nor support the gun organizations that do the heavy lifting for us. I know many gunnies who buy lots of guns, but refuse to join the NRA or Gun Owners of America, and of course, they won't give them a dime. Lots of gun owners got on their high horse and refused to vote for the lessor of two evils, Mitt Romney, so we wind up with the worst President in the history of the USA. A one time shooting partner told me, " I've got my principles." He didn't vote! Try as hard as I can, I can't understand that kind of stupidity.

Yup! Good point!

 

[HetchHetchy]

None of the answers are correct. (No offense)
The correct answer is that the Anti-2A crowd wants to control others through their fear of themselves and their lack of control in other things.
The Pro-2A crowd wants to be left alone, and stays out of other people's business.

I think you're quite incorrect, but you bring up a very important point. Those who deem themselves to be "conservative" often for some reason are unwilling to take part in the political process -- any political process.

In my church for example, while it has gotten better over the years, "progressives" seem to dominate things. If not in number, definitely in influence. They are willing to engage, to persevere, to spend time, pushing whatever it is they push.

"Conservatives" on the other hand to tend to be terribly apathetic. They whine a great deal amongst themselves and they fantasize a lot about a parish church with no "progressives" but they're often just unwilling to make the effort to engage, to make things "better."

I think that's a problem in the Pro-2A Camp too. The absolute worst are those that don't vote, don't support the NRA, etc. Their schema boils down to "if the stuff really hits the fan, I'll be there vigilant with my rifle." In the mean time they do nothing. Lotta malarkey.

 

[old lady new shooter]

What are the THREE PRIMARY REASONS why the Anti-2A Camp so often seems to be more successful at its mission than the Pro-2A Camp?

Disclosure: I have been away for several days and have NOT read the whole thread, only the first couple of responses.

Someone in the first few responses mentioned the anti's being a lot better funded, I agree with this. Bloomberg by himself probably spends way more per year than the whole NRA.

What may have been mentioned (which isn't stopping me from posting this) is that the anti's are very good at manipulating language. They don't say exactly what they really mean, they say what they think will sell well. So for example they almost never say they want to ban all guns, rather they say they want "common-sense" reforms. This totally fits the leftist perspective that everything is "optics" and/or a "narrative", never mind actual facts, facts don't even exist for them. Unsurprisingly, they also fund "research" that totally misrepresents the data presented.