testtest

WHY

Status
Not open for further replies.
The open and honest dialogue on this site and getting the chance to learn is why the forum is the BEST I’ve ever been on. You guys and I hope gals are awesome.
Here’s a question not asked. Is there any woman on this forum????
 
I was merely using the Democrats own views to show how it is plausible democrats are anti gun.

i am not saying I believe 100% democrats dont like/use guns.

i was answering your question Of “ why the administration is pro gun’
 
Grifter said:
I have some opinions about this and I am interested to see what you guys think. When I say democrat I mean the party and not individuals. I truly believe an individual democrat can and will support the 2nd amendment.

@benstt, please correct me if I make false statements or assumptions. The democrat talking points seem to promote that it is someone else's fault for the majority of the "wrongs" in the world. If you are poor, someone is holding you down. If you are a woman, the men want you in the kitchen. If you are a minority, the white man caused all your problems. All of these things and ideas minimize the idea that you are responsible for your actions and place in life and place the fault on someone else.

This is where one aspect of gun control comes in. If the person is at fault when they use a gun to commit a crime, then it undermines the other ideas. So we blame the gun manufacturers or the type of gun. Hence the idea that if we ban "assault weapons" mass shootings will stop. If makes zero sense statistically or logically. It appeals to the people that believe that it is also someone else's fault, not the person who committed the crime. The funny thing about this idea is that they pick and choose it. Has anyone ever seen any of the mainstream news sources report about what prescription drugs these active shooters are on? If we are serious about stopping them we should explore every avenue. So why isn't it reported? Well turn on a news station and tell me how many pharmaceutical ads you see in an hour. I digress, back to the original point.

So if we aren't personally responsible it has to be the tool's fault. Just like a person who drinks and drives and kills someone, the news screams that we should ban alcohol. Wait, what do you mean they don't blame the alcohol? Oh, that is right, how many beer ads do you see on television. So now the 2nd point, money money money. We cannot alienate the companies that are paying the liberal owned television stations billions of dollars a year.

Lastly is the people the democrats are pandering to. Minorities will make up the majority of the voting block in 10 to 20 years. Most of these will be immigrants that come from countries that are violent and have strict gun control, yes I see the irony. These immigrants have always depended upon their governments to keep them safe, they don't understand the idea that they have the right to protect themselves and their loved ones like we do. Not bashing them, just explaining the facts. So they come here, are told that they were being held down by the man, that nothing is their fault, and that we have to ban guns so you are all safe. This idea also applies to the African American communities in this country.

The interesting thing about all of this is that I am sure there are many immigrants that have been here for years that are introduced to firearms and the right to protect your own life that become ardent 2A supporters, we just won't ever see their stories.

TLDR: The democrat party wants to appeal to the half of the population that doesn't want to own their actions, acts on feelings more than logic, while not alienating the companies that pay them billions. Yes, individual democrats can support the 2A, but they will never be heard from outside of small settings. The party won't allow it.
Click to expand...
I think that's an over generalization. I'd say MOST democrats work their tails off and expect everyone to do the same. Most of us just want a level playing field. There are those who want everything handed to them but not most. I think democrats do recognize that the country has changed a lot economically, with the costs of living going up way faster than income, putting a lot of people in a bad spot; we want to do something about that but dont see trickle down economics as a viable option. I've seen Amy Klobuchar talk about deer hunters in my state and how she wont hurt them, which isn't as far as I'd go but it does recognize the right to keep and bear arms. Uncle Joe attacks Bernie now about his vote to shield gun manufacturers from law suits. I dont see anti-2A as a party position, but a personal one for some, but by no means most, of the people in the party.

I see the characterization of all democrats as wanting to have the world given to them as the Fox News equivalent of MSNBC saying the RNC wants to screw the poors and give all the money to the rich, while letting the people who can't pick themselves up by their bootstraps die in the gutter. It's entirely disingenuous on both sides, but no one has ever accused either MSNBC or Fox News of being constrained by things like "facts" or "intellectual honesty". Both Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow are partisan hatchetmen. If it plays to the base, they get paid, so the nonsense goes on and we all get the worst view of each other. My two cents.

Let me know if that doesn't answer your question fully. Its early in the morning and I'm typing on a cellphone :)
 
Great comments. I have found it interesting in the last 10-20 years we use a blanket to categorize an individual. I agree that this is a great forum with diverse individuals. IMO it is people with different backgrounds/beliefs working together for a common cause that creates change, and today people spend their time talking to one side of the room.
 
benstt said:
I think that's an over generalization. I'd say MOST democrats work their tails off and expect everyone to do the same. Most of us just want a level playing field. There are those who want everything handed to them but not most. I think democrats do recognize that the country has changed a lot economically, with the costs of living going up way faster than income, putting a lot of people in a bad spot; we want to do something about that but dont see trickle down economics as a viable option. I've seen Amy Klobuchar talk about deer hunters in my state and how she wont hurt them, which isn't as far as I'd go but it does recognize the right to keep and bear arms. Uncle Joe attacks Bernie now about his vote to shield gun manufacturers from law suits. I dont see anti-2A as a party position, but a personal one for some, but by no means most, of the people in the party.

I see the characterization of all democrats as wanting to have the world given to them as the Fox News equivalent of MSNBC saying the RNC wants to screw the poors and give all the money to the rich, while letting the people who can't pick themselves up by their bootstraps die in the gutter. It's entirely disingenuous on both sides, but no one has ever accused either MSNBC or Fox News of being constrained by things like "facts" or "intellectual honesty". Both Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow are partisan hatchetmen. If it plays to the base, they get paid, so the nonsense goes on and we all get the worst view of each other. My two cents.

Let me know if that doesn't answer your question fully. Its early in the morning and I'm typing on a cellphone :)
Click to expand...
Great points sir.

I gave up watching any mainstream news years ago. Both sides spew the propaganda too much for me.

Maybe we just need to recognize that there isn't a one size fits all solution for any problem. That the best we could hope for is something the benefits the majority. I hate the fact that it appears that both sides have become more polarized and that compromise is considered a bad thing.

Though I won't compromise on the 2A, I feel like there are many places I would.
 
Grifter said:
Great points sir.

I gave up watching any mainstream news years ago. Both sides spew the propaganda too much for me.

Maybe we just need to recognize that there isn't a one size fits all solution for any problem. That the best we could hope for is something the benefits the majority. I hate the fact that it appears that both sides have become more polarized and that compromise is considered a bad thing.

Though I won't compromise on the 2A, I feel like there are many places I would.
Click to expand...
We agree on that, no doubt. It's bad when we just get these propaganda type views of each other. I doesn't help anything.
 
I don't know how many times in the past I split my ticket. Been a lot. But that was the past.
We are not dealing with the same Dem party any more.
Green New Deal.... no planes, trains or cars.., Nuke Americans that don't turn in guns.
Put a seed in a hole, food for all. Turn a crank, make all the parts we need.
Let anyone in to the country..... No Vetting!
Which now makes it us vs them.
Why? Because even those Dems that disagree still fall in the party line when it comes vote time
in Congress or at the Polls.
They really scare me for the generations to follow.
 
The Democrat party line - the stated mission of the party - is anti-gun. It is also anti-individual; anti-responsibility; pro-diversity; pro-abortion; and these days, pro-illegal-immigration, pro-crime (see NYC bail laws), pro-communism, and anti-American.

People vote based on party. While some Democrat voters may have views that differ from the party line, when they vote for the party, they support the party line whether they believe in all of the party views or not.

People don't understand that.

Voters don't understand that if you vote for a candidate who supports one or two of your ideas...when they go to work, you're going to get ALL of the "features" of the party they are affiliated with.

If someone is a TRUE, full-on, wholehearted Democrat...they believe completely in the party line. That includes anti-gun.

If you don't believe in every single aspect of the party line...you need to re-evaluate who you vote for. Because if you vote Dem, you're getting the whole ball of socialist wax - and that includes a goal of total gun confiscation, removal of individual rights and liberties, and the destruction of our Nation and our Constitution as we know it. Look at how that party is trending and the direction it's heading, objectively look at it...and you can see it plain as day.

Speak with your ballot.

Tell that party that radical socialist crap isn't going to fly in the United States of America.

Vote them out of office, and keep them from getting back in.
 
Peglegjoe said:
The Democrat party line - the stated mission of the party - is anti-gun. It is also anti-individual; anti-responsibility; pro-diversity; pro-abortion; and these days, pro-illegal-immigration, pro-crime (see NYC bail laws), pro-communism, and anti-American.

People vote based on party. While some Democrat voters may have views that differ from the party line, when they vote for the party, they support the party line whether they believe in all of the party views or not.

People don't understand that.

Voters don't understand that if you vote for a candidate who supports one or two of your ideas...when they go to work, you're going to get ALL of the "features" of the party they are affiliated with.

If someone is a TRUE, full-on, wholehearted Democrat...they believe completely in the party line. That includes anti-gun.

If you don't believe in every single aspect of the party line...you need to re-evaluate who you vote for. Because if you vote Dem, you're getting the whole ball of socialist wax - and that includes a goal of total gun confiscation, removal of individual rights and liberties, and the destruction of our Nation and our Constitution as we know it. Look at how that party is trending and the direction it's heading, objectively look at it...and you can see it plain as day.

Speak with your ballot.

Tell that party that radical socialist crap isn't going to fly in the United States of America.

Vote them out of office, and keep them from getting back in.
Click to expand...
Amen.....
 
Peglegjoe said:
The Democrat party line - the stated mission of the party - is anti-gun. It is also anti-individual; anti-responsibility; pro-diversity; pro-abortion; and these days, pro-illegal-immigration, pro-crime (see NYC bail laws), pro-communism, and anti-American.

People vote based on party. While some Democrat voters may have views that differ from the party line, when they vote for the party, they support the party line whether they believe in all of the party views or not.

People don't understand that.

Voters don't understand that if you vote for a candidate who supports one or two of your ideas...when they go to work, you're going to get ALL of the "features" of the party they are affiliated with.

If someone is a TRUE, full-on, wholehearted Democrat...they believe completely in the party line. That includes anti-gun.

If you don't believe in every single aspect of the party line...you need to re-evaluate who you vote for. Because if you vote Dem, you're getting the whole ball of socialist wax - and that includes a goal of total gun confiscation, removal of individual rights and liberties, and the destruction of our Nation and our Constitution as we know it. Look at how that party is trending and the direction it's heading, objectively look at it...and you can see it plain as day.

Speak with your ballot.

Tell that party that radical socialist crap isn't going to fly in the United States of America.

Vote them out of office, and keep them from getting back in.
Click to expand...
There's not a single thing I agree with in what you wrote aside from getting everything a candidate stands for if you elect them. You're entitled to your opinion but I think you grossly mischaracterize the democratic position, just as I would be mischaracterizing the republican position if I were to say that the entire republican party wants to destroy our national parks and dump coal waste into fresh water upstream from cities just because some members do.
 
Anytime I see a crazy headline or quote from a candidate, I try to remember we live in the day and age of social media where any attention is better than no attention.

Do I think they want the guns? Yes. Will they nuke us to get them? No.
They want the spotlight and attention that comes from the outlandish quote.

Will they send a goon squad door to door? Probably and that is what worries me.
 
40 years ago my two elderly aunts were murdered by a building contractor that owed them money. He used a claw hammer to kill them. We'll use the same logic: hammers kill people so they must be banned!! and of course, it wasn't his fault, the hammer made him do it!!
Guns don't kill people, people kill people: the gun is just the tool.
BTW the contractor is serving two 99 year sentences with no parole.
 
Richtex said:
40 years ago my two elderly aunts were murdered by a building contractor that owed them money. He used a claw hammer to kill them. We'll use the same logic: hammers kill people so they must be banned!! and of course, it wasn't his fault, the hammer made him do it!!
Guns don't kill people, people kill people: the gun is just the tool.
BTW the contractor is serving two 99 year sentences with no parole.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the family tragedy and sorry the contractor is able to still be serving time.
 
I didn't mis-characterize a single thing about the Democrats - I watch news clips, and listen to the words coming out of their mouths, on camera, in public. For example, quid-pro-quo-Joe "fire that guy, or you don't get a billion dollars. I leave in 20 minutes. And damned if he didn't get fired!". ON CAMERA. No translation, no hearsay, no interpretation. Or Mayor "hell yes, I'm coming for your guns" Pete. ON CAMERA.

As I said - that is the main party line. The people in charge of that party DO feel that way. It's on tape, and they're proud of it. The MSM avoids those clips...but watch some other sources and you'll see their true colors, right from the horse's mouth.

"Trust, but verify". Don't listen to opinion pieces, seek out the video clips yourself, from multiple sources, and make your own decisions.
 
benstt said:
There's not a single thing I agree with in what you wrote aside from getting everything a candidate stands for if you elect them. You're entitled to your opinion but I think you grossly mischaracterize the democratic position, just as I would be mischaracterizing the republican position if I were to say that the entire republican party wants to destroy our national parks and dump coal waste into fresh water upstream from cities just because some members do.
Click to expand...

If the problem were parks and coal waste we wouldn't have an issue.
Democratic party has lost all sight in the American Values that have made this country the greatest on the planet for the last 250 years.
Now the Democrats are h++l bent on it's destruction. I really feel sorry for those constituents that are still being
led down the path to failure.
Thankfully there are millions of us that will not allow that to happen. We intend to Keep America Great inspite of
the bile the Democrat party is spewing.
 
A democrat that owns guns and likes to shoot. That tells me the person is willing to give up the 2A for the sake of the party.
A Democrat that owns guns and likes to shoot and wants to keep the Constitution is called a..... you know!! ;)

I spent most of my military career opposing the Commie doctrine. We won the Cold War. As the oath demands we defended the Constitution from a foreign enemy. Now unfortunately, we must protect the Constitution from a domestic enemy. We'll do our best to do it by means of the polls.

So can I be buddy buddy with a full blown Democrat that likes guns and shoots?
Nope, and Warren in the last debate explains very well why.
After pointing out all the flaws of the candidates on the stage with her, she went on to say.
If she's not nominated she'll fully support whomever is. o_O Good Democrat Ms. Warren.
 
benstt said:
We agree on that, no doubt. It's bad when we just get these propaganda type views of each other. I doesn't help anything.
Click to expand...
Worst part is when some are not capable of seeing through the propaganda flood being sent to them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top