Gun Club For Liberals

[SmokinSigs357]

Interesting to say the least:

Gun Club for Liberals: The Un-NRA - Yahoo

 

[rob63]

More power to them.

 

[rhino]

Sounds like at least some of them want to keep their label of "liberal" to remain in their group of friends and associates, but aren't so liberal. If they actually want to adhere to the entire Bill of Rights, they're pretty much excluded from the progressive/socialist-statist/liberal club whether they like it or not.

 

[MDave]

I read polyamorous with great interest. I wonder if that refers to folks who like Glock and S&Ws? I think it is great that people with different political views feel like they can own firearms. Not sure I could be a member of the club though...

 

[Expat]

So they want to support politicians that would strip them of their gun rights in a heart beat given the chance? My gun rights rank higher on the list of considerations that I use in looking at candidates.

 

[Snapdragon]

Oh God, if I post in this thread, it will most likely solidify my reputation as a "known liberal", as I have been accused of being by a member here. I actually detest labels and don't really fit into a political pigeonhole.

I'm glad that a group like this exists, but I also think it just adds to the political polarization of gun ownership. It gives the other "side" a voice, but the fact that there are sides at all is unfortunate. Owning a gun should be like owning a car... something everyone feels they can do regardless of political affiliation.

 

[Denny347]

I rather enjoy the "Liberal Gun Club" forum.

 

[OWGEM]

It would be nice and even productive, if many of the members of this board would realize there is a spectrum of thinking, not just liberals and conservatives.

 

[cobber]

I joined their cabal a while back, to see what they're up to. Their forum is quite schizophrenic, as people simultaneously castigate the NRA, but also b*tch and moan about stupid gun laws.

With membership numbers like that, I don't think Diane Feinstein should pat herself on the back just yet.

 

[Birds Away]

Just carry.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I rather enjoy the "Liberal Gun Club" forum.

I like it here too.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Nationwide they're only 1200 strong - that's news I suppose. At 1200 that puts them in the neighborhood of the flat earth society...don't see those guys getting much press these days. That to the side, Constitutional Rights are not Republican/Democrat platform items, or shouldn't be. I have friends all over the political spectrum and there are gun owners in all of them. It's difficult for me to link Socialist (as it did in the article) and gun owner. It makes you wonder how they vote. Is gun ownership the most important issue when you walk behind the curtain? Can you vote for a conservative, still self-proclaim to be liberal, on the basis that your liberal candidate is anti-gun? If the answers to these questions is "no", then you are a self-defeating cancer. The thing you say you love, you help destroy. But then these would be the questions of true journalism and so there's none of that in the article. Haven't seen true journalism in decades.

 

[Mark 1911]

The thing you say you love, you help destroy.

Exactly this! This concept is so confused on so many levels. You can paint it up however you like, but burying one's head in the sand is still burying one's head in the sand. Whatever her other interests in life may be, whatever she may call herself, there are so many who would like to delete guns from her list of hobbies, particularly in her State (California). She seems to be happy to ignore that. When "her" guns are taken away, "she" will have nothing to complain about to those who defend "her" gun rights.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Note: I'm a liberal.

Classically speaking, so to speak.

So there.

 

[1775usmarine]

I read polyamorous with great interest. I wonder if that refers to folks who like Glock and S&Ws? I think it is great that people with different political views feel like they can own firearms. Not sure I could be a member of the club though...

I thought they like the song[video=youtube;72nb9zoYyME]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72nb9zoYyME[/video]

 

[shibumiseeker]

I don't have a political affiliation, I vote for the person who best represents my interests and 2A rights are very high on that list, but so are some other things.

Lots of people around here throw "liberal" around as a pejorative and don't seem to realize or care that a significant portion of those who are affiliated with liberal political parties ARE gun owners and 2A supporters. It's REALLY stupid to alienate those people because those are the people that the liberal politicians listen to and if you can get that group of people to pressure the liberal politicians to be less interested in being anti-gun then you make far more progress than simply voting for yet another conservative politician who will sell out the 2A whenever (s)he feels it will gain a few points.

Way too many people in the gun community take the stand of "if you don't agree with every political view I have then you are anti-2A scum" and that is, quite figuratively, shooting our gun rights in the foot. I don't want to elect a conservative politician, I want to elect a pro-gun politician, and if the person I vote for doesn't get elected, I want the other person to also be pro-gun, even if it isn't quite as much. The best way to do that is to be welcoming to ALL gun owners. Turning them away just because they are "liberal" works against this.

 

[Bogan]

I don't have a political affiliation, I vote for the person who best represents my interests and 2A rights are very high on that list, but so are some other things.

Lots of people around here throw "liberal" around as a pejorative and don't seem to realize or care that a significant portion of those who are affiliated with liberal political parties ARE gun owners and 2A supporters. It's REALLY stupid to alienate those people because those are the people that the liberal politicians listen to and if you can get that group of people to pressure the liberal politicians to be less interested in being anti-gun then you make far more progress than simply voting for yet another conservative politician who will sell out the 2A whenever (s)he feels it will gain a few points.

Way too many people in the gun community take the stand of "if you don't agree with every political view I have then you are anti-2A scum" and that is, quite figuratively, shooting our gun rights in the foot. I don't want to elect a conservative politician, I want to elect a pro-gun politician, and if the person I vote for doesn't get elected, I want the other person to also be pro-gun, even if it isn't quite as much. The best way to do that is to be welcoming to ALL gun owners. Turning them away just because they are "liberal" works against this.

Post of the month. Sadly this will go over the heads of too many people on this forum.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

I don't have a political affiliation, I vote for the person who best represents my interests and 2A rights are very high on that list, but so are some other things.

Lots of people around here throw "liberal" around as a pejorative and don't seem to realize or care that a significant portion of those who are affiliated with liberal political parties ARE gun owners and 2A supporters. It's REALLY stupid to alienate those people because those are the people that the liberal politicians listen to and if you can get that group of people to pressure the liberal politicians to be less interested in being anti-gun then you make far more progress than simply voting for yet another conservative politician who will sell out the 2A whenever (s)he feels it will gain a few points.

Way too many people in the gun community take the stand of "if you don't agree with every political view I have then you are anti-2A scum" and that is, quite figuratively, shooting our gun rights in the foot. I don't want to elect a conservative politician, I want to elect a pro-gun politician, and if the person I vote for doesn't get elected, I want the other person to also be pro-gun, even if it isn't quite as much. The best way to do that is to be welcoming to ALL gun owners. Turning them away just because they are "liberal" works against this.

I agree the term "liberal" has some confusion attached because fiscal responsibility and issues of social involvement are thrown together. Personally I don't care what people do in their personal life (i.e. abortion, homosexuality, drug use/alcohol use, etc.) - there's no reason to assume social liberals are anti-gun. On the other side, fiscal responsibility gets fuzzy but generally those who prefer government intervention in certain areas of life do not necessarily indicate whether a person is anti-gun or not. However, when it comes to a world view that's toward socialism and the ilk, it's difficult to see that person as pro-gun or pro-2A because that mind set seems to be more toward government control of safety, further from personal responsibility including responsibility to one's own safety regarding personal threats.

Modern "liberals" - at least in the media - appear to be all on the same side of the fence with regard to all three and therefore the confusion. I'm sure there are a lot of old-school "liberals" out there that are pro-2A, but you never hear from them.

 

[Redtbird]

I think I am having a deja vu 'flashback'.

This sound VERY familiar.

But then, I could be wrong.

 

[rhino]

Note: I'm a liberal.

Classically speaking, so to speak.

So there.

How so very Jeffersonian of you!