|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On December 28 2018 01:12 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2018 18:19 Falling wrote:
Yeah, lots and lots of hunters in my community. I don't know of any Rambos. They're just your average mechanics, contractors, teachers, and doctors. They're concerned about conservation and personal gun safety because they're in it for the long haul. They're annoyed with long gun registries and bans on hunting grizzly bears, but they aren't a bunch of shoot 'em up yahoos. I'd expect the culture to be somewhat the same amongst hunters down south, by and large. I wouldn't if I was you. Canada has a very different gun and hunting culture compared to the US. I'm not saying all hunters in the US are bad, however their lax rules lends themselves to let bad people with lacking knowledge go hunt as well (who apparently think it's fine to mow down groups of deer, if certain posters here are to be believed). The vast majority of hunters, just like the vast majority of gun owners in general, are probably fine, but like with anything, rules are put in place to weed out those who aren't. Someone did mention above that it would be wise to work with the hunters, and I couldn't agree more. That would indeed be the best course of action, if possible.
All I could think about after reading that was Dick Cheney and how that problem extends far beyond hunting. A lot of gun owners stretch the meaning of "hunter" though thinking that picking off coyotes with their AR from their back porch with a 0.15+ BAC qualifies.
|
They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at."
Washington Free Beacon
It’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means.
|
On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means.
lol
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly
I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl.
That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though?
We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool
|
|
|
I know so many gun owning democrats and none of them have the mythical “fear vilification” over owning a gun. They are not made of candy glass.
|
On December 28 2018 04:15 Plansix wrote:
I know so many gun owning democrats and none of them have the mythical “fear vilification” over owning a gun. They are not made of candy glass.
I mean this cuts a lot of ways. I'll personally just draw attention to how there is a legitimate concern among Black gun owners about Democrats finding bipartisan consensus for locking us up as a consequence of feel good legislation.
|
On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Show nested quote +Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? Show nested quote +We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool
Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent.
|
On December 28 2018 04:15 Plansix wrote:
I know so many gun owning democrats and none of them have the mythical “fear vilification” over owning a gun. They are not made of candy glass.
Yes anecdotes vary.
|
On December 28 2018 04:44 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 04:15 Plansix wrote:
I know so many gun owning democrats and none of them have the mythical “fear vilification” over owning a gun. They are not made of candy glass. Yes anecdotes vary.
Oh I have no doubt that there are some gun owners that have convinced themselves they will be personally attacked for their beliefs. I’ve just never met any or heard of any gun control zealots bragging about telling gun owners they are the devil.
|
On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent.
I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny.
|
On December 28 2018 04:58 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent. I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny.
It’s easy as a focus. If you don’t like something, ban it (or excise tax it). If you like something, subsidize it.
Now actually changing legislation, that’s a whole other ballgame.
|
On December 28 2018 05:25 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 04:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent. I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny. It’s easy as a focus. If you don’t like something, ban it (or excise tax it). If you like something, subsidize it. Now actually changing legislation, that’s a whole other ballgame.
So yeah... you can't really be upset if they focus on the guns if when presented with the opportunity to make your case for your vision of alternative solutions you present nothing.
It's then fair to conclude you're opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional rather than rooted in a reason-based desire to improve the situation.
|
On December 28 2018 05:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 05:25 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 04:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent. I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny. It’s easy as a focus. If you don’t like something, ban it (or excise tax it). If you like something, subsidize it. Now actually changing legislation, that’s a whole other ballgame. So yeah... you can't really be upset if they focus on the guns if when presented with the opportunity to make your case for your vision of alternative solutions you present nothing. It's then fair to conclude you're opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional rather than rooted in a reason-based desire to improve the situation.
Haha conclude whatever you like, it’s your right. I think it’s fair to state truthfully my preference in a gun thread without turning the conversation to health care, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. Yes, they’re related and you express your desire to hear more, but you’ve never accepted my policy ideas as being rooted in good faith, and allege the stupidest bad faith insinuations imaginable (like my views on gun control shifting if blacks showed up armed with AR-15s everywhere).
|
|
|
On December 28 2018 06:21 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 05:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 05:25 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 04:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent. I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny. It’s easy as a focus. If you don’t like something, ban it (or excise tax it). If you like something, subsidize it. Now actually changing legislation, that’s a whole other ballgame. So yeah... you can't really be upset if they focus on the guns if when presented with the opportunity to make your case for your vision of alternative solutions you present nothing. It's then fair to conclude you're opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional rather than rooted in a reason-based desire to improve the situation. Haha conclude whatever you like, it’s your right. I think it’s fair to state truthfully my preference in a gun thread without turning the conversation to health care, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. Yes, they’re related and you express your desire to hear more, but you’ve never accepted my policy ideas as being rooted in good faith, and allege the stupidest bad faith insinuations imaginable (like my views on gun control shifting if blacks showed up armed with AR-15s everywhere).
Here's the thing. I (and just about everyone here) agree with you and the group that you presented that if we want to reduce gun deaths we have to discuss solutions rooted in improvements to healthcare, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment.
So sure, you could express your preference for turning the discussion away from guns specifically and to the underlying social, systemic, and structural issues leading to the preponderance of gun deaths and that's perfectly fair.
But if when asked to present your preferred alternatives you act indignant you not only embarrass yourself, you undermine the credibility of people that are making the argument sincerely. Moreover it endangers the rights of responsible gun owners by using their sincerely held positions in order to advance a vacuously ideological line of argument. One made, whether you realize it or not, in the interests of the industry not the 2nd amendment.
EDIT: Before you start feeling persecuted, keep in mind that most of my participation in this thread is trying to disabuse liberals from their version of this.
|
On December 28 2018 06:43 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 06:21 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 05:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 05:25 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 04:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent. I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny. It’s easy as a focus. If you don’t like something, ban it (or excise tax it). If you like something, subsidize it. Now actually changing legislation, that’s a whole other ballgame. So yeah... you can't really be upset if they focus on the guns if when presented with the opportunity to make your case for your vision of alternative solutions you present nothing. It's then fair to conclude you're opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional rather than rooted in a reason-based desire to improve the situation. Haha conclude whatever you like, it’s your right. I think it’s fair to state truthfully my preference in a gun thread without turning the conversation to health care, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. Yes, they’re related and you express your desire to hear more, but you’ve never accepted my policy ideas as being rooted in good faith, and allege the stupidest bad faith insinuations imaginable (like my views on gun control shifting if blacks showed up armed with AR-15s everywhere). Here's the thing. I (and just about everyone here) agree with you and the group that you presented that if we want to reduce gun deaths we have to discuss solutions rooted in improvements to healthcare, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. So sure, you could express your preference for turning the discussion away from guns specifically and to the underlying social, systemic, and structural issues leading to the preponderance of gun deaths and that's perfectly fair. But if when asked to present your preferred alternatives you act indignant you not only embarrass yourself, you undermine the credibility of people that are making the argument sincerely. Moreover it endangers the rights of responsible gun owners by using their sincerely held positions in order to advance a vacuously ideological line of argument. One made, whether you realize it or not, in the interests of the industry not the 2nd amendment. EDIT: Before you start feeling persecuted, keep in mind that most of my participation in this thread is trying to disabuse liberals from their version of this.
No persecution needed or implied. I just don’t think a tangle with you will be fruitful on means to the goals on the issues, and the best thing is to agree in part or full that the focus ought to be on those topics. It is an article on liberal gun groups numbering in the thousands, and one of the divides with conservatives are the very basics of the ways to achieve them.
But sure, keep what you think is fair to conclude from this reticence. I don’t do the “if you’re sincere” games as much as you like them.
On December 29 2018 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't have the time at the moment to explain why I think pretty much everything you said was wrong but I'll preface a more in depth answer with capitalism isn't the best at any of those things.
In the hopes of being a little more diplomatic with you, let me clarify that I mean much a related sentiment you express in this quote. It takes time and energy to coalesce all my thoughts on those varied subjects into a forum post. Your previous comments on how much depends on your acceptance of the argument to prove I actually mean what I say (presumed bad faith unless you choose to accept my argument otherwise:
That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? ... ...
If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny. ... ...
you can't really be upset if they focus on the guns if when presented with the opportunity to make your case for your vision of alternative solutions you present nothing.
It's then fair to conclude you're opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional rather than rooted in a reason-based desire to improve the situation.
I flat-out reject the your presumption that unwillingness to argue with you on the specifics means I must confess no desire to improve the situation. You're a known person when it comes to your thoughts on my thoughts. I quite simply consider it a waste of time telling you my policy ideas on the aforementioned social policy given how little consideration you tend to exert. I could be very wrong in this.
Your responses thus far have rather confirmed my presumptions. I don't express my current thoughts on solutions under pain of "scrutiny" and someone who is willing to "conclude you're [sic] opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional." If in the future your comportment is more free and open to discussion, rather than presumption of bad intent unless proven otherwise through scrutiny, then I might revise my position on spending effort outlining my thinking on specifics.
|
On December 28 2018 08:19 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2018 06:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 06:21 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 05:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 05:25 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 04:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 04:43 Danglars wrote:On December 28 2018 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 28 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:They may not like Trump & McConnell but they love Smith & Wesson.
That's what I took away from the time I spent in the sweltering fall heat of Orlando, Fla., shooting guns and discussing politics with members of the Liberal Gun Club. Over the course of three days the group of 25 or so dues-paying members (of the more than 3,000 spread around the country not to mention the 5,000 registered forum members) traveled around central Florida shooting sporting clays, steel challenge matches, and even a few machineguns while planning how they'll expand the club and use it to lobby against new gun bans and for what they view as more effective means of addressing gun violence.
Between driving around the sporting clays course, trying to figure out the best way to approach some truly fascinating USPCA-style shooting courses, and trying to choke down the pain that comes when you're shooting a fully-automatic M14 when your shoulder is bruised from 8 hours with a 12-gauge the day before, I was able to chat with a number of members and try to get a glimpse into what motivates somebody to join a club many people on both sides of the aisle might think sounds like an oxymoron. What I found was a group of people who enjoy and value their gun rights as much as any other gun owners I've ever met. They were welcoming and friendly. They're definitely liberals and they're definitely gun lovers. [...]
The club also serves as an escape from some less-than-tolerant anti-gun left-wingers. Pattie, Sean, and Keith all said they'd faced more backlash from the average liberal who found out they owned guns than from gun owners who found out they were liberals. In Pattie's case, she said gun owners tended to be far more tolerant of her being gay than liberals are of her being a gun owner.
Being around the group for three days was an interesting experience. The shooting community is one of the most diverse groups I'm a part of on a regular basis, but it's fairly common to show up to a shooting event where most of the people are white conservative men like me. So, it's noticeable when I'm the only white conservative man at one of these gatherings.
Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly—it simply helps to get a different perspective on things. [...]
"Root-cause mitigation is the idea that it's not a gun violence problem, it's a violence problem," she said. "If we're going to solve the problem we need to look at what's causing the violence overall. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. What's causing that?"
The club believes figuring out what drives people to shoot themselves or others and then trying to address that problem through government programs designed specifically to fix them is more effective than the traditional liberal solution of banning guns or magazines.
"If we want to solve the problems, a gun ban is not going to do anything," she said. "Magazine capacity restrictions are particularly ineffective—there are studies on it. Getting to the root of why people are depressed, why we are having these issues, what causes violence—those are the solutions we should look at." Washington Free BeaconIt’s good to see an article on the possibility of bipartisan reform. It really makes me more optimistic to see more liberal people than me come together to shoot and share. It’s not really as much of a left-right issue as you might ascertain from reporting. Gun owners who vote Democrat also fear vilification and argue against gun and magazine bans and for addressing violent crime/suicide from other means. lol Being around the Liberal Gun Club was a lot like being around the all-female DC Project or being one of only two white people at a Black Guns Matter event in Philly I can see how hanging around 25 bourgeoisie white liberals is very similar to a Black Guns Matter event in Philly rofl. That aside I actually agree with their main message, not sure you do though? We favor root cause mitigation for violence prevention, stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment rather than focusing on prohibiting or restricting one tool Those are good goals, though I’m sure the means will differ to some extent. I suspect the differing methods are why it's easier to focus on the tool designed to kill. If you're sincere in your desire to protect gun owners and reduce gun related deaths it requires that you present the solutions to those problems as you envision them, for scrutiny. It’s easy as a focus. If you don’t like something, ban it (or excise tax it). If you like something, subsidize it. Now actually changing legislation, that’s a whole other ballgame. So yeah... you can't really be upset if they focus on the guns if when presented with the opportunity to make your case for your vision of alternative solutions you present nothing. It's then fair to conclude you're opposition is disingenuous and/or emotional rather than rooted in a reason-based desire to improve the situation. Haha conclude whatever you like, it’s your right. I think it’s fair to state truthfully my preference in a gun thread without turning the conversation to health care, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. Yes, they’re related and you express your desire to hear more, but you’ve never accepted my policy ideas as being rooted in good faith, and allege the stupidest bad faith insinuations imaginable (like my views on gun control shifting if blacks showed up armed with AR-15s everywhere). Here's the thing. I (and just about everyone here) agree with you and the group that you presented that if we want to reduce gun deaths we have to discuss solutions rooted in improvements to healthcare, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment. So sure, you could express your preference for turning the discussion away from guns specifically and to the underlying social, systemic, and structural issues leading to the preponderance of gun deaths and that's perfectly fair. But if when asked to present your preferred alternatives you act indignant you not only embarrass yourself, you undermine the credibility of people that are making the argument sincerely. Moreover it endangers the rights of responsible gun owners by using their sincerely held positions in order to advance a vacuously ideological line of argument. One made, whether you realize it or not, in the interests of the industry not the 2nd amendment. EDIT: Before you start feeling persecuted, keep in mind that most of my participation in this thread is trying to disabuse liberals from their version of this. No persecution needed or implied. I just don’t think a tangle with you will be fruitful on means to the goals on the issues, and the best thing is to agree in part or full that the focus ought to be on those topics. It is an article on liberal gun groups numbering in the thousands, and one of the divides with conservatives are the very basics of the ways to achieve them. But sure, keep what you think is fair to conclude from this reticence. I don’t do the “if you’re sincere” games as much as you like them.
No game, just saying it like it is. You're just trying to stifle discussion on potential reforms around guns by exploiting an argument about how healthcare and poverty should be the focus.
|
|
|
|
|
More states need mutual combat laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
