Author Topic: A Short History of Gun Control (Read 1381 times)

lazs2 · « **Reply #45 on:** June 14, 2007, 08:53:51 AM »

68.. call it what you will.. give the absolute defenitions... the truth is that the people who call themselves liberals and the ones who call themselves socialists all believe in gun control.. that may not have been true 200 years ago but that is how the terms have developed.

Look at the sites that silat links for instance... very far left. very "liberal"... very much into socialism (big government and restrictions) and of course... gun control.

Perhaps the term "progressive" is more palatable and has less historical baggage but a "progressive" is todays liberal.

liberal today does not mean what it started out to mean... that is too bad but it is a fact.. it really doesn't even matter that much since almost everyone associates the new "liberal" with "progressive" and socialist today anyway.

It may not be the historical correct way to put it but it is a very understandable one.. one that gets the point across and that everyone is on the same page with (in the US at least).

I see no problem with using it.

The proof is that the right people get offended when I say womanly liberal socialists.. the lefties all get offended.. right wingers or individualists do not.

The terms have simply changed in America... I didn't do it.. it wasn't my fault.. I am just being pragmatic about the whole thing.

lazs

68Hawk · « **Reply #46 on:** June 14, 2007, 01:07:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
liberal today does not mean what it started out to mean... that is too bad but it is a fact.. it really doesn't even matter that much since almost everyone associates the new "liberal" with "progressive" and socialist today anyway.

It may not be the historical correct way to put it but it is a very understandable one.. one that gets the point across and that everyone is on the same page with (in the US at least).

Not every liberal believes in Gun control, and conservatives can also be progressive in their own way.

Does everyone in California believe in gun control? You live there so you must right?

You're feeding the misconceptions. Application of the terms has changed in America, and I'm saying that's a bad thing. Not like ideas haven't changed since the French revolution, but now right takes things from left, left takes things from right and the center doesn't even know where it is anymore.

New term: conservo-socialist. Oh wait they've already got one for that: Neo-conservative!

bsdaddict · « **Reply #47 on:** June 14, 2007, 01:23:16 PM »

If anyone's seen Aaron Russo's America: Freedom to Fascism you might remember towards the end we're admonished to:

Stop being Good Democrats...

Stop being Good Republicans...

Start being Good Americans.

I wish more people would be able to see past the party politics, but alas, most of the sheeple are too conditioned to do so...

AKIron · « **Reply #48 on:** June 14, 2007, 01:33:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bsdaddict
If anyone's seen Aaron Russo's America: Freedom to Fascism you might remember towards the end we're admonished to:

Stop being Good Democrats...

Stop being Good Republicans...

Start being Good Americans.

I wish more people would be able to see past the party politics, but alas, most of the sheeple are too conditioned to do so...

Many think that most of those who don't agree with them politically are sheep. Thinking it doesn't make it so or you any less of one. There's often a good reason why a lot of people agree on something and it usually isn't a sheep mentality.

BTW, sheep don't carry guns, they rely on someone else to defend them.

68Hawk · « **Reply #49 on:** June 14, 2007, 02:18:06 PM »

That's almost contradicting yourself Iron.

You're right that its thrown around, but designed structure has more to do with group dynamics than most people think.

I'll refer you to this book from the '20s:

Bernays, Edward. Propaganda. (Ig Publishing: Brooklyn, NY), 1928.

He's a cheerleader, but he demonstrates the value and subtlety of propaganda, even in the commercial and media world of 80 years ago.

lazs2 · « **Reply #50 on:** June 14, 2007, 02:36:40 PM »

68.. now you are just being dishonest... you know as well as I do that liberals/progressives/socialists are very much for gun control... with maybe only a tiny fraction that might not want total gun control.

And that is the problem.. the liberals are ashamed of themselves.. they get all defensive and evasive.. why do you do that? Why pretend?

Neo con? who cares.. the term does not offend me in the least even tho it does not describe me.

Bottom line... I would 100 times rather take my chances with my freedom by voting for republicans than for democrats who foster all the liberal socialist ideas today and ....99.9999% of the gun control.

BSD.... Tell you what... get the a huge percent of the blacks and gays and lawyers and teachers and unions to "vote their conscience" first and then I will talk to you.

Turn democrats into libertarians and we have won the battle... get republicans to vote libertarian and the womanly liberal socialist democrats have won.

lazs

68Hawk · « **Reply #51 on:** June 14, 2007, 02:47:46 PM »

Would it not better server you to encourage those on the left that do not espouse gun control and some of the wild ideas that you hate? There's more than you think. Not saying vote for the left, but you don't have to chock them all up in the same group.

And I'm not calling you a neo-con, just saying there are conflagrations on both sides and just calling a neo-con a conservative is missing a lot.

lazs2 · « **Reply #52 on:** June 14, 2007, 02:56:36 PM »

I hold no hope for telling the left anything... I do know that when I take them out shooting or when they simply grow up a lot of the mush that was crammed into their heads goes bye bye.

I enjoy debate tho obviously and... I like to get those on the left so mad that they quit pretending and say what they do believe in. sometimes they have to change handles 3 or 4 times before they do but..

I also have no problem with generalizations... They work. If you say "those on the left favor big government and gun control" you will be right 95+% of the time... good enough to live by.

If you say "every single person on the left believes in gun control" that is a different thing.

How it shakes out for me is... if a person is a lefty and says he does not favor gun control... I pretty much ignore him anyway since he will be voting for the people who are for gun control.. his lip service to freedom is worthless to me.

lazs

68Hawk · « **Reply #53 on:** June 14, 2007, 03:09:50 PM »

See, isn't taking them out shooting engaging in a dialog? Let the gun speak! You can tell them things in more ways than one. They might not always vote left, especially with your encouragement.

I try to vote by policies and not affiliation, and as such I have voted for democrats recently. I'll tell you this, I won't vote Hillary. I don't know who I'm going to vote for yet because the candidates aren't decided. There ARE candidates in the democratic party who believe gun control is bad for our country. It might behoove you to encourage them, even if you never want to see them in office.

See when you say "favor" you're generalizing in a good way. When you say all democrats are liberal/socialists it muddles everything.

bustr · « **Reply #54 on:** June 14, 2007, 09:01:37 PM »

Laz,

I have borrowed this but it gets to the origion of Democratic Gun Control as a party platform line.

Until Lyndon Johnson came to the White House in 1963 following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, gun control was simply not a national issue. There were no significant federal gun control laws on the books, and the NRA was a shooter's organization that intentionally shied away from any political involvement.

All of that changed with the 1968 assassinations of Sen. Robert Kennedy and civil rights leader Martin Luther King. In the civil unrest that followed, the media found a new whipping boy – America's gun owners. The media blitz against gun rights was unprecedented and became the driving force behind Democrat leaders proposing national gun control.

Although JFK and his brother, Sen. Robert Kennedy, had been NRA Life Members, America's new president, Lyndon Johnson, was a committed gun control advocate. No president ever matched his power and his will when it came to controlling the legislative process. His attorney general and much of his senior staff searched for new ways to restrict gun ownership among the American people. This was part of Johnson's Great Society vision of an all-powerful federal government controlling the lives of ordinary Americans.

lazs2 · « **Reply #55 on:** June 15, 2007, 08:32:33 AM »

Thank you but... I lived in that era. I brought my rifle to school and the NRA taught us gun safety in class and we had a school shooting team and got marksmanship merit badges and such.

No one shot anyone in school. the democrats were a different party. sure.. they supported the corrupt unions and they raised taxes but not that bad.. you could vote your concience.

LBJ got in and the world got turned on its side for democrats... the party became the nanny party.. the party of guilt and socialism and class warfare.. they were reaching.. they wanted to get rid of the stigma of years of fighting republican led civil rights...

They wanted the womans vote. they courted it and they helped the worst of the women in the US get power... women like finestein and boxer and some of the colored ones.

They latched on to guns as something to call their own.. some evil to fight that was not a republican idea.

They let the women lead the parade... women are socialists. they fit right into the democratic party leadership.

It is run by women and womenly ideas. in effect.. the entire government (when controlled by democrats) is worried about us running with scissors.....

couple that with the normal democrat penchant for class warfare and the karl marx playbook that they use and their idea that we can tax our way into equality and/or prosperity... and...

you have a match made in hell. In a nutshell...a party of socialists and nannies.

libertarians and individualists are endangered by democrats far more than by republicans... libertarians should be courting the democratic vote and fighting democrat leaders.

LBJ, FDR and lincoln were all the worst presidents free men have ever had to bear. the enemies of freedom.

If you vote for democrats.. no matter what their personal thoughts or claims... you are voting for gun control.

I write em... I give money to the NRA and other groups.. I write here... I do not do nothing. Probly close to 100 people who had never shot a gun (let alone a handgun) have shot them now because I took em out and let em shoot mine.

Even gun owners are not always the friends they could be... some of them have odd ideas about semi autos or handguns.. I have changed a few of their minds too.. shown them how fun and uselful handguns really are.

The one common thing is... those who oppose gun ownership... never know a thing about guns. at best.. they may have shot a few in the service.

lazs

john9001 · « **Reply #56 on:** June 15, 2007, 09:53:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
The one common thing is... those who oppose gun ownership... never know a thing about guns.

i remember finestein trying to stick the magazine into the "assault rifle" backwards at a press conference. And then she said "with this gun you don't have to aim, you just spray and shoot".

lazs2 · « **Reply #57 on:** June 15, 2007, 02:41:28 PM »

finestein is protected by government guns that are with her every moment.

She is saying... "I know my laws will ruin your hobbies and make you easy prey for any tyranny that comes down the pike... make you unable to defend against it but..... that is a chance I am willing to take."

lazs

bustr · « **Reply #58 on:** June 15, 2007, 05:16:42 PM »

Feinstien became an amature totalitarian because of her personal experiances in the San Francisco City government. During her time in SF she had a bomb left on her front porch and she was in her office a door down the hall during the twinky killing. After that she got a CCW and began her career of separating the unwashed masses from the 2nd amendmant. When SF had a gun turn in drive she was seen turning in an old unfireable .38 that she had picked up for the event. A reporter who had researched her CCW info confronted her on the issue because her CCW showed a nickle plated .38 Police Special as her registerd side arm. Her response was a "%uck 0ff" to the reporter.

I have noticed in California Dem politicians work overtime to disarm the populance and have CCW registrations at the same time.

bsdaddict · « **Reply #59 on:** June 15, 2007, 05:47:34 PM »

like I said in the other thread, show me a determined criminal who has been successfully thwarted from arming himself with a firearm and I'll show you a constitutional federal gun law. (yes, background checks and waiting periods included, they all need to go...)