doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Canadian & UK Gun Laws

Keith- by and large we're on the same page but it isn't necessary to ascribe to me such things as:
But he chooses to excuse the behavior of the extreme left wing liberals who have co-opted the heart and soul of the Democrat Party.
It wasn't part of the dialogue and although I'm sure your perceptions of the liberals devolve from your observations I believe them to be flawed. Your discussion degenerated into the common right-wing "welfare theme" even tho we are talking about social drivers of gun control and gun culture.

Note that the recent school shooting hasn't brought out the (yet) the flood of anti-gun rhetoric. I personally think that a lot of public thinking has changed and this is indeed reflected in the liberalization of many gun laws. No Democratic administration is going to take on this issue now. If not check-mated, they are checked.

There have been huge cultural changes in the past 30 years and our world will never return to that golden age (that never was). And a lot of polarization comes from the fact that poor working people have been severely flukced and their way of life is disappearing.

Whenever there are great cosmic cultural changes (Think industrial revolution) some groups make it and others don't. Culture is supposed to protect people and if the culture is inadequate then the group collapses.

We see that right now when our nation is being pulled to war with Iran by foreign powers who have bought congress and yet we have sexual deviants in the Republican party trying to legislate vaginal probes and others are fixated on "man-on-dog" under the guise of "family values" rather than deal with substantive issues that threaten our security and national sovereignty.

This is a harbinger of collapse. And I will defend 2A rights but in ways other than voting for the American version of misogynistic perverted Mullahs.

Sorry for my rant. One outcome of the cultural shift is that we'll never see re-runs of "Gunsmoke"

Dianne Feinstein was a junior senator with a big mouth and no clue, like that nut case Pelosi as Speaker of the House. I love these politicians shooting their mouths off when they first get elected but, in a few years, they learn to keep it shut.
Old Ed Rendell, our past Governor, when he was Chair of the Democratic National Committee, ranted and raved that he doesn't want gun control he wants gun confiscation. While Governor he learned the hard way to keep his big mouth shut about guns. He learned and he was a dummy. They all learn here in this country, one way or another, they all learn.

"You cannot claim to be pro-gun and support gun rights and then go into a voting booth and pull the lever for a man with a 100% anti-gun voting record."

True. Only it's not that simple. Many vote on single issues but most don't. Countries change governments when electorates are simply fed up, none more surprising to the world than the US.

Canada's majority conservative government is killing the gun registry but is opposed strongly by its own members on bills involving internet surveillance and to lesser degree tougher-on-crime.

My guess is that US currently in comparatively good shape on gun liberties will vote for the party its favours to get the country on its feet. Otherwise, to use your example, it's voting to make a point, not win.

Gnomon, I ascribe nothing to you. I base my statement on what you have told us repeatedly here in dozens of threads. Whenever you see any criticism of the liberal left, you are among the first to defend the liberal left. And the recent liberalizing of many gun laws is hardly a product of liberal left politicians having a change of heart. Furthermore, you criticize the right at least as vehemently as I do the left. My so called "degeneration" of the discussion, by bringing up the "common right wing welfare theme", was a continuation of my contention that the left is using our tax dollars in order to buy the vote of masses who have become hooked on entitlements. They need to do this in order to win elected office and advance their agenda. Part of that agenda is attempting to dismantle the Second Amendment. And speaking of "degeneration of the discussion" away from the social drivers of gun control, wasn't it you who has twice brought up intravaginal ultrasound probes? Why yes, it was indeed. Can you spell hypocrite?

Your statement... "No Democratic administration is going to take on this issue now. If not check mated, they are checked."... is absurd in the extreme. Your boy in the White House has already done tremendous damage that will haunt gun-owners long after his term is done. He has managed to seat two extreme anti-gunners on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Sonia Sotomayer lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee during her confirmation by stating, "I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller." She termed it "settled law". Yet only months later during the McDonald case to strike down the Chicago gun ban she sided with Justice Stephen Breyer who wrote, "I can find nothing in the Second Amendment's text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as 'fundamental' insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes." In the same case, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in his dissent, "The Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of self defense. By its' terms the Second Amendment does not apply to the States: read properly, it does not even apply to individuals outside the militia context"

Obama appointee Elena Kagan is just as vehemently anti-Second Amendment, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently told the Harvard Club that the Supreme Court in Heller and McDonald was "grieviously mistaken", and that the minority opinions would ultimately be used to rewrite history making the Second Amendment a "collective right connected to the militia."

So this is how you support the Second Amendment... by promoting and voting for politicians who either overtly or covertly try to gut it? One more anti-gun Supreme Court justice will give the antis a majority. Do you want that? I really think you do. Otherwise you would not be expending so much time and energy trying to convince people that Obama is no threat to gun ownership when it is abundantly clear that he is.

OK, Keith. We'll never agree on this.

But I do wish to gently point out that the President of the United States is not my "'boy' in the White House"

If Obama were to get a 2nd illegal term he would have no reason to operate "under the radar" inre. to gun control. This guy has shown his disdain for Congress and due process of the law and believes that governing by fiat is proper since he is the only one that knows what's right for this Country.
However he has demonstrated the extent of his arrogance by spitting in the eye of Catholics who were among his supporters in 2008. This arrogance could well be his undoing.
I agree with Keith that the real long term damage he has wrought to this point is his two socialist Supreme Court appointments along with Ginsberg,who IMO should be impeached, as a result of her recent remarks.
One more socialist appointment could change hisory and our concept of freedom in this Country forever.
As an aside Keith: I put Gnomon and a few others of his ilk onto my ignore list as I believe they have NOTHING positive to contribute here so I have no idea what he or the others are currently babbling about.
Jim