Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Reason #1
  • Reason #2
  • Reason #3

Site Description

Blog entry that pretty much sums it up

Discussion in 'General Firearms Forum' started by outd00rs, Feb 15, 2013.

  1. outd00rs


    May 21, 2010
  2. unit1069


    Oct 10, 2007
    So. Central US
    Nice article. Thanks for posting it.

  3. janice6

    janice6 Silver Member

    Apr 4, 2006
    I have to admit, this is the way I feel too.
  4. Tiro Fijo

    Tiro Fijo

    May 31, 2011

    And it took him how long to figure out what the Leftist loons really are? :upeyes:
  5. Baba Louie

    Baba Louie

    Sep 6, 2001
    I enjoy reading his books. This blog essay is also a good read.
  6. Pier23

    Pier23 Silver Member

    Feb 26, 2012

    I thought his reasoning tangled. And I would dispute the broad-brush "liberals are banning guns"..

    By most measures, I am a liberal. Voted for Obama twice, and have fought, off and on with no measuable success, to have a Christmas creche removed from the county courthouse lawn.

    I also think that people do have an individual right to carry ...the ACT needs to be controlled -what one DOES with a weapon, or any other activity should be restricted. Speed limits are a reasonable control on the unrestricted ability to own a car, for example.

    Back to the point of the blog...I don't think that you can blast liberals as the bad guys in the debate. But this is the issue with labels. If we considered labels, then I would be a rock-ribbed conservative BECAUSE I support gay marriage, right to abortion and church/state separation BECAUSE all of these are matters of individual choice, over which the goverment should have no say.

    One may oppose positions, but saying that all liberals or all conservatives are good or bad, is just the lazy man's way of digesting issues.
  7. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    Jan 16, 2005
    Liberals are banning guns. In fact YOU are banning guns. The rest of my response is not allowed here.
  8. Really? You might want to do a fact check on who is writing the bills.

    OMao? twice?? Nevermind.
  9. Pier23

    Pier23 Silver Member

    Feb 26, 2012
    Oh? I was unaware of my exhaulted powers.
  10. Pier23

    Pier23 Silver Member

    Feb 26, 2012
    Right now, there is too much political horse trading and posturing going on...this is too good of an issue for neither side to exploit. All passions need to cool for a while. And if the current political situation has proven it CAN do, it is it has the ability to delay and ignore difficult decisions.
  11. Boats

    Boats Not Assimilated

    Dec 22, 2002
    Somewhere in Oregon
    Rationalize it all you want, but you are enabler of gun control efforts based upon who you vote for.
  12. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Oct 16, 2007
    I almost shed a tear.
  13. janice6

    janice6 Silver Member

    Apr 4, 2006
    There is no comparison between driving and guns.

    Driving is a State privilege granted by State Governments and regulated by laws. You Drive because the State says you can. You need a license granted by the State to permit you to do so. Driving is not a Constitutional right. It is a State privilege.

    The right to bear arms is a Constitutional right. This right existed prior to the Constitution and is stated so therein. The right to bear arms existed before the government.

    The right to bear arms is NOT controlled by the Government and any restrictions placed on this right are not constitutionally legal. The existing restriction on this right exist because we let them exist, not because they are legal.
  14. Pier23

    Pier23 Silver Member

    Feb 26, 2012
    Oh, I suspect the issue is a bit more complex than that....
  15. Pier23

    Pier23 Silver Member

    Feb 26, 2012
    DRIVING is a state priviledge, OWNING a car is not regulated. Anyone can own a car.

    And let's not forget that there are no rights in the Constitution that cannot be amended or revoked: note - Prohibition.

    While I am reasonably confident that amending the second amendment would probably not succeed, no one thought Prohibition would pass either, since alcohol is as firmly embedded in the culture as weapon ownership.

    A concerted enough effort to ban or severely restrict ownership could succeed...which is why I have been trying to point out that some moderation in tone for gun advocates might be wiser than strident voices prophesizing the End of Days.
  16. RonS

    RonS Millennium Member

    May 27, 1999
    Oh, USA
  17. suburbanhillbilly


    Dec 8, 2012

    I love when a liberal tells me I need "some moderation".
    Moderation usually being defined as agreeing with me, or doing what I tell you to do.

    " I don't think that you can blast liberals as the bad guys in the debate'
    Tell us more about this wait. Look up every single proposed gun control bill that has polluted both federal and state legislatures. They ALL are being pushed by liberal Democrats. So yes, I can and will blast liberals as the bad guys in this debate. Not one tiny bit of doubt in my mind who is desperately trying to run my life.

    You use your professed liberatarianism to justify your liberal activism, yet you see no contradiction in your support for BHO and your resigned ambivalence toward the apparent inevitability of gun control.:upeyes:
  18. No, no compromise anymore.

    Gun owners and freedom lovers need to put their feet down and fight this war.

    We gun owners compromised (or were sold out) in 1994. In NYS in 2013, the anti-gunners have shown us they want more from us. 10 rounds down to 7, and a ban on pistol grip semi-auto rifles. And we are criminals if we keep our legally owned 11 round magazines.

    Time to stop being a liberal or a conservative. Time to start being a gun owner and fight this war. Our freedom is at stake.

    I joined the NRA, have you yet?
  19. Pier23

    Pier23 Silver Member

    Feb 26, 2012
    Guns have always been controlled. Time was the private user could get a mail order Thompson. Time was we could have full auto weapons.

    Now, we can debate the relative wisdom of all those restrictions, but bottom line is those restrictions are in place. LEOs can get ammo civilians cannot, and the list goes on.

    The point here is that the 2nd amendment, like all rights, is not absolute. The 1st amendment, arguably the strongest we have restricts the nature of public speech.

    Will further restrictions solve anything? Of course not. But don't rely on the 2nd amendment for protection...there is too much wiggle room.