WSJ article on growing group purchasing guns

[MEHavey]

The gentle reader should remember four critical things.

One Definition:
Politics: the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area,
especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping
to achieve power.

Three memes:
- Rules for thee, not for me.
- Leopards don't change their spots.
- Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

The Founders were supremely aware of all four.

 

[Basura Blanca]

Should we welcome them into the fold with open arms? I don't know...do what you feel comfortable with, but I sure as hell don't trust them.

The big mistake in your reasoning is your belief that anyone cares about being "welcomed into the fold", as if we have a monopoly on the 2A.

 

[Basura Blanca]

The "with us or agin' us" view throws away the opportunity to pull people away from the extremists you characterize everyone else to be. That's a loosing strategy.

The "with us or against us" position *is* the extremist view. It's not a strategy at all.

 

[LocoGringo]

The big mistake in your reasoning is your belief that anyone cares about being "welcomed into the fold", as if we have a monopoly on the 2A.

Let me clarify. I don't believe "we" (conservatives) have a monopoly on anything...especially the Second Amendment. I was speaking from the perspective of trusting them as allies simply because they bought their first firearm which seems to go against their ideology.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the OP seemed to be suggesting that maybe the liberals are changing their mind on things because they bought their first gun even though it seems to go against their beliefs. By them buying their first gun, maybe they can be allies to be taught more about the second amendment and eventually, possibly, turned into conservatives. I don't necessarily agree with that premise. I believe liberals view things through many different lenses than conservatives and a fundamental change has to take place in their minds to even consider the possibility that they may change their beliefs.

Generally (very generally), I believe conservatives are fact based in their thoughts and VERY concerned about consequences as a result of actions and ideas put into action. On the flip side, I believe liberals are more emotion based and reactive to things and want to see their form of "justice" so that all people live together in harmony. They strive for emotional utopia. If I'm correct (which I allow I could be WAY off), then the two views are so far apart, they can't be reconciled. I also understand that there is a HUGE spectrum between the extremes. Put extremely simply, conservatives follow their heads while liberals follow their hearts. Can those two extremely different views be allies?

 

[Howland937]

Put extremely simply, conservatives follow their heads while liberals follow their hearts. Can those two extremely different views be allies

The side that wants to claim the moral high ground wishes to legislate their morality, which is more rooted in emotion than sound thinking. (Not to mention largely hypocritical)

If you're discussing the fringe elements, then no. They'll never work together. The ones who haven't strayed too far from moderate have a decent chance, but the difference of opinion on gun ownership isn't exactly consistent amongst those of us already here. I'm a pretty conservative individual overall, but I have a better chance of having civil dialogue with a left leaning moderate than a far right winger.

So to your point, I'm not shutting the door on the idea of working with someone pretty far left. However, if firearms ownership is all we have in common and I otherwise can't stand to be around the person, all bets are off.

 

[ilbob]

The side that wants to claim the moral high ground wishes to legislate their morality, which is more rooted in emotion than sound thinking. (Not to mention largely hypocritical)

If you're discussing the fringe elements, then no. They'll never work together. The ones who haven't strayed too far from moderate have a decent chance, but the difference of opinion on gun ownership isn't exactly consistent amongst those of us already here. I'm a pretty conservative individual overall, but I have a better chance of having civil dialogue with a left leaning moderate than a far right winger.

So to your point, I'm not shutting the door on the idea of working with someone pretty far left. However, if firearms ownership is all we have in common and I otherwise can't stand to be around the person, all bets are off.

I am curious what political positions you consider "far right" and what positions you consider "left leaning moderate".

 

[Howland937]

I am curious what political positions you consider "far right" and what positions you consider "left leaning moderate".

As this topic has already turned more political than is generally allowed on THR, it's probably best not to answer here. You're welcome to send a private message and I'll gladly explain myself as best I can...if that's acceptable.

 

[LiveLife]

I am curious what political positions you consider "far right" and what positions you consider "left leaning moderate".

As this topic has already turned more political than is generally allowed on THR, it's probably best not to answer here.

Or you could freely discuss the topic under "General Forum" of NTT, sister forum of THR where all topics of discussions are allowed - https://notechtyranny.com/index.php?forums/general-forum.2/

As to the OP of minority group of "Liberal" Democrats becoming gun owners, they represent subset of "We the People" just as another minority group like us gun owners also represent subset of "We the People".

And the Founders intended Second Amendment protection to cover ALL minority subsets of "We the People" (ahem, after slavery was banned ) so in the end, it doesn't matter what the majority mob rule bi-coastal states want, it will ultimately come down to how the Supreme Court will rule on various gun cases.

And in 2016, "We the People" already elected representatives using Founder framed Electoral College and appointed "Originalist" justices to the Supreme Court. We will see who "We the People" elect in 2024 to further the work of "We the People" regarding gun rights.

Long live the Republic.

 

[Hunter 08]

Or you could freely discuss the topic under "General Forum" of NTT, sister forum of THR where all topics of discussions are allowed - https://notechtyranny.com/index.php?forums/general-forum.2/

As to the OP of minority group of "Liberal" Democrats becoming gun owners, they represent subset of "We the People" just as another minority group like us gun owners also represent subset of "We the People".

And the Founders intended Second Amendment protection to cover ALL minority subsets of "We the People" (ahem, after slavery was banned ) so in the end, it doesn't matter what the majority mob rule bi-coastal states want, it will ultimately come down to how the Supreme Court will rule on various gun cases.

And in 2016, "We the People" already elected representatives using Founder framed Electoral College and appointed "Originalist" justices to the Supreme Court. We will see who "We the People" elect in 2024 to further the work of "We the People" regarding gun rights.

Long live the Republic.

But that's only IF SCOTUS takes up those cases and those cases have to come forward. However fortunately they have been kind to us lately, hopefully the court will continue to rule in favor of the Constitution.

 

[wayneinFL]

I've never understood how firearms ownership or self defense ever became a right wing topic. Right wing, left wing, and center should all be embracing firearm rights. If you don't have firearms, you can be forced to the will of whoever is in power.

I could see firearms rights in question as more of a libertarian vs. authoritarian issue. If you trust the government with authority to save citizens from themselves, then you want the government to be armed and citizens disarmed and easily subjugated.

Very few people I've met on the left or right are in that authoritarian camp. I'm relieved to see that more liberals are starting to see it that way. My millenial and gen z kids have been telling for the last 5-10 years that liberals, especially their peers, are coming around on that issue.

 

[Hunter 08]

I've never understood how firearms ownership or self defense ever became a right wing topic. Right wing, left wing, and center should all be embracing firearm rights. If you don't have firearms, you can be forced to the will of whoever is in power.

I could see firearms rights in question as more of a libertarian vs. authoritarian issue. If you trust the government with authority to save citizens from themselves, then you want the government to be armed and citizens disarmed and easily subjugated.

Very few people I've met on the left or right are in that authoritarian camp. I'm relieved to see that more liberals are starting to see it that way. My millenial and gen z kids have been telling for the last 5-10 years that liberals, especially their peers, are coming around on that issue.

I have no idea why it became such a partisan problem. And why is it that certain people do not want people to be able to defend themselves? Topic for another day I guess.

 

[LiveLife]

But that's only IF SCOTUS takes up those cases and those cases have to come forward. However fortunately they have been kind to us lately, hopefully the court will continue to rule in favor of the Constitution.

Majority "Originalist" justices have already stated in majority opinions/concurring opinions that such clarifications is needed and expansion of Second Amendment protection to "modern" arms like magazine fed semi-auto rifles.

Reason why the Supreme Court has denied review of various gun rights cases is because they were "interlocutory" in nature meaning cases have not been ruled on by District and Circuit courts. But they have clearly stated once gun rights cases receive final merits decisions, they would review the cases and we already have several cases at the Supreme Court level for the next term.

Their quotes from various rulings/opinions have been fully documented in these threads going back several years - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-22#post-12956944

I can provide direct quotes if you want to read them.

 

[Bill_in_TR]

One potential problem I see with these new liberal gun owners is exactly how/if they truly fit into the RKBA side of things. If several hundred thousand or more of these people go out and by self defense handguns because of a perceived need just how far have they really come? Suppose they take the position that even though they bought a self defense handgun they still don't see why anyone needs one of those "assault rifles". And then the die hard antis promote the propaganda that a huge number of gun owners support an AWB. Could this so called liberal shift to gun ownership actually be a disadvantage? I am waiting to see more than just a switch to ownership of one particular type of gun and maybe only one of them.

 

[wayneinFL]

One potential problem I see with these new liberal gun owners is exactly how/if they truly fit into the RKBA side of things. If several hundred thousand or more of these people go out and by self defense handguns because of a perceived need just how far have they really come? Suppose they take the position that even though they bought a self defense handgun they still don't see why anyone needs one of those "assault rifles". And then the die hard antis promote the propaganda that a huge number of gun owners support an AWB. Could this so called liberal shift to gun ownership actually be a disadvantage? I am waiting to see more than just a switch to ownership of one particular type of gun and maybe only one of them.

Even if they don't come all the way at least they came this far. We don't even have 100% support for semi-auto rifles from conservatives.

After Parkland, my right wing war hero NRA A+ rated US House representative wrote an op ed for the New York Times advocating an assault weapons ban.

Opinion | I’m Republican. I Appreciate Assault Weapons. And I Support a Ban. (Published 2018)

I’m a congressman who was in the Army. I know how lethal these weapons are because I used them in combat.

www.nytimes.com

He lost his A+, and quit showing up at gun shows and Friends of the NRA banquets.

 

[Insignificant bill]

I sure hope so too, but in the past we've seen a bunch of "do as I say, not as I do" from that segment.

We have a current presidential candidate who has claimed to be a gun owner. This person also stated (while in a prior role in state level government) after a safe storage law was passed, that LEO's would have authority to enter the home of any registered gun owner to verify compliance.

I suppose that's not full on anti-gun, but definitely not pro gun. Enemy of my enemy I guess.

It's called violating the Constitution.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

As a long time resident of a liberal town in a liberal state I am well aware of the dichotomy-the hypocrisy if you will-of people supporting an anti-gun party and politicians but still exercising their RKBA.

 

[Basura Blanca]

By them buying their first gun, maybe they can be allies to be taught more about the second amendment and eventually, possibly, turned into conservatives. I don't necessarily agree with that premise.

There's a lot of wiggle room between sharing a common interest, or even degrees of that interest and upending an entire belief system. Also, there's a lot of assumptions being entered into the equation and the terms themselves are vague (i.e. your definition of "conservative" vs. someone else, etc.).

If you look at actual data about gun ownership, the picture is a bit clearer than what a superficial article in the WSJ can muster. The relevant data point is 52% of non-gun owners indicating they'd own one in the future. That's not an insignificant number of people, especially when spread across various demographics. Knowing that, coupled with current ownership data, it's not that statistically surprising that people who don't fit a certain stereotype are interested in owning guns. But there's also a difference between owning a gun, and being a gun owner. It seems to me you're suggesting there's a trust issue at play because gun owners who fall outside the majority demographics, aren't ideologically equivalent because they're not allied in the greater cause, and you believe that based on voting habits or presumed voting habits.

I don't see it that way though. I'm not one to demand ideological purity/conformity to see the positive benefit of gun ownership existing under a bigger, more diverse umbrella. In other words, I'm not really concerned how new gun owners are voting, even if their support is going towards those who aren't typically friendly to the 2A. What matters to me is the sheer numbers and it's because no major social movement has ever succeeded without broad public support. We desperately need a bigger base, and that base needs to represent a better cross section of Americans than it currently does. It's a lot harder for politicians to ignore us when we no longer fit a certain picture of the typical gun owner. That's the starting point of the conversation.

 

[The Night Rider]

Here is your growing group

How America's left is preparing for escalating violence | DW News

There are fears that a polarizing election will further inflame the culture war in the US. This week the Department of Homeland Security warned of a rise in ...

youtu.be

These people are not buying guns because they're "our" allies. They're buying guns because they're afraid of us.

I suspect that this is not going to end well for either side

 

[Jim Watson]

I think a lot of those "progressives" are going to get to thinking of preemptive strikes against We Reactionaries instead of defense from unassimilated minority infiltrators.

 

[wayneinFL]

Here is your growing group

How America's left is preparing for escalating violence | DW News

There are fears that a polarizing election will further inflame the culture war in the US. This week the Department of Homeland Security warned of a rise in ...

youtu.be

These people are not buying guns because they're "our" allies. They're buying guns because they're afraid of us.

I suspect that this is not going to end well for either side

Why would it not end well? They're going to start carrying. So what? There are lone wolf mass murderers targeting Christians, gays, Jews, Asians, Muslims, blacks. Every group that someone could think of has been attacked at some point.They should all be armed.

A little weird that they think right wingers are going to form militias and hunt them all down. It's not going to happen. But it's not any more paranoid that what I've heard from anybody else. Ever since the 70s, I've heard an invasion was supposed to come from Cuba and that hasn't happened, either.

 

[Necessary_Nutrient]

One potential problem I see with these new liberal gun owners is exactly how/if they truly fit into the RKBA side of things. If several hundred thousand or more of these people go out and by self defense handguns because of a perceived need just how far have they really come? Suppose they take the position that even though they bought a self defense handgun they still don't see why anyone needs one of those "assault rifles". And then the die hard antis promote the propaganda that a huge number of gun owners support an AWB. Could this so called liberal shift to gun ownership actually be a disadvantage? I am waiting to see more than just a switch to ownership of one particular type of gun and maybe only one of them.

There is no one size fits all. It's not required to spend hours a day mainlining propaganda crack from OAN and believing the UN blue-hats are under your porch. It's not required to think that machine guns and hellfire missiles or suitcase nukes should be legal nor is it mandatory to yearn for planes full of armed, free passengers.

 

[Hunter 08]

Well this is really devolving down the tinfoil hat rabbit hole.

What's the old saying, An armed society is a polite one?

 

[GEM]

I agree. Too much ideological purity demanded. Many folks can see the need and utility of a handgun for SD but NOT an EBR. That's a common attitude. So they are evil? They see a bizarre family give a disturbed kid an AR, who then goes nuts (probably given his parents) and you wonder why some have doubts?

That saying is from Robert Heinlein and its provenance and meaning is more complex.

 

[Walkalong]

Here is your growing group

How America's left is preparing for escalating violence | DW News

There are fears that a polarizing election will further inflame the culture war in the US. This week the Department of Homeland Security warned of a rise in ...

youtu.be

These people are not buying guns because they're "our" allies. They're buying guns because they're afraid of us.

I suspect that this is not going to end well for either side

They are buying guns because of all the hate rhetoric painting right leaning individuals as terrorists who want to kill folks on the left.

Stupid, and false.

It's only a handful waaaaaaaay left and waaaaaaay right who really want to. Unfortunately, there are many on
both sides that are scared they may have to.

 

[Basura Blanca]

Well this is really devolving down the tinfoil hat rabbit hole.

You mean youtube videos meant to gaslight rubes into believing a revolution is on the horizon are a detriment to rational thinking?