Just ran across this pre 9/11 article and it rang true...

Why Liberals Hate Guns Neal Boortz Tuesday, July 24, 2001 This column originally ran June 15, 2000. When you hear screams for gun control you can almost bet the farm that the screams are coming from a big-government liberal. Why is this? Don’t liberals want to protect themselves from crime too? If a liberal wakes up in the middle of the night to hear someone coming through the bedroom door, wouldn’t they like to reach for a gun for some protection? Finally, I think I have it. There’s a movie set for release this weekend called "The Patriot." It stars Mel Gibson. I like Gibson. He’s stayed married to the same woman for a lengthy period of time. That’s nice to see. He also once told a reporter that he would give up smoking when Clinton gave up lying. That’s nice to hear. There’s a historically accurate scene in "The Patriot," which is about the American Revolutionary War, that is causing liberals great anguish. In this politically incorrect scene Gibson’s cinema character actually hands rifles to his two sons, one 10, the other 13, and off they go to protect their farm and their freedom from the Redcoat onslaught. Then, the unthinkable happens. These two "children" actually fire those guns at British soldiers and KILL them – just to defend themselves and their property – oh, and to fight for freedom! Then it hit me. Just like a mathematical equation. American patriots would not have been able to fight for their freedom without guns. Therefore, guns equal freedom. No guns, no freedom. Liberals made that association long ago. They, too, know that people cannot fight for or preserve freedom unless they have the means to do so – and that means guns. Liberals are not lovers of freedom. Liberals believe that the average person is simply too ignorant to be free. They believe that the average person can only live a fulfilling life with the help and guidance of those who are more qualified, capable and intelligent – and that, of course, would be the leftist intelligentsia. Liberals love government. They love coercive government. If there were a revolutionary war today, it would not be the liberals waiting to see the whites of their eyes. Liberals are well aware of the interconnect between guns and freedom. So, now you know why liberals hate guns.

Very insightful.  A lot of truth to it.  Probably why very few liberals live in my neighborhood...too many people own guns.

I'll wait for the Cliff Notes on that article, or the movie.
However, Liberals, and this is a common misconception, do not hate guns [i]per se[/i]. They just hate [i]you[/i] to have guns.

truth hurts, the libs that is

Good read, basically said what I've known for the last 42yrs. I loved the movie "The Patriot", it shows why we must NEVER give up our guns. It also shows people willing to fight/die for what they believe in, if we had more of that today we'd not be in the spot that we're in now.

Here's the catch though,WE aren't AVERAGE citizens.We are OUTSTANDING(which draws unwanted attention to ourselves)citizens.

"Average" citizens ARE dumb as a sack of rocks
who depend on the system for everything and believe everything that they are told by the syetem.

We think for ourselves.THAT's why they HATE us.

Good read.  I listen to Neal's talk show daily.  He's one of the best on the radio...


-HS

Exactly. There is no room for individualism in a collectivist utopia, and guns equip the individual with the ability to dominate his immediate environment with no permission or assistance from the Politburo.

We can't have that now, can we?

Liberals hate guns for the same reasons many people in the center hate guns and some conservatives hate guns - GUNS KILL AND MAIM PEOPLE. Do you really think Geo. Bush, junior and senior, Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, etc. really are favor of looser gun laws? Not in their neighborhoods, anyway.

These people are afraid that violent people will carelessly use a gun and an innocent bystander will be killed or maimed.

These people believe there should be more training and closer background checks to make sure people who have deadly weapons are qualified.

We tend to forget that when the framers drafted the 2nd amendment they lived in a society where gun training was universal from birth. Hunting happened every week for many people and military service in a milita was the norm for everyone with a gun. We were a nation of riflemen.

With no draft in America today, we have people who have none or minimal gun experience able to walk into a gun store or even answer an internet ad and almost instantly possess a deadly weapon capable of killing at random and at long range.

When I was in the army I asked one of our company NCO's, a lifer, why he stayed in. His answer was that he would be uncomfortable on the outside with all those people with guns and no one watching and training them. He wasn't all wrong as reading this board sometimes shows.

No, that's the message that George Soros is spending millions of dollars to spread, but it's just not the truth. Tobacco, alcohol and cholesterol kill many times as many people every year than firearms do. Millions are killed in motor vehicle accidents, in boating accidents, in accidents involving pools and bicycles and five gallon buckets, but no one is trying to outlaw any of those. Where is the "Americans for Backyard Pool Safety" foundation?

If they are only concerned about innocents dying, why aren't the same people as militant about cars, drugs, alcohol, bacon and skateboards?

Than why are you here??? I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing you are perfect, right? Tell you what, why don't you have an informal training session to teach all of us dumbasses how to handle our guns that "maim and kill people"?

I've been handling firearms for almost 30 years and I think I do just fine. While I feel I know very little about guns, I am happy to pass my knowledge on to anyone who asked.

So if you don't like guns or the way they are handled don't post on this board Mr Perfect.

They'll like you over at the DU.[:K]

And it'll be this NCO and his "only following orders" friends who knock on your  door  in the future demanding your guns.

I'm  only a recreational shooter, like alot of guys here, but I GUARANTEE that I'm  safer with my guns than most cops  or weekend warriors, and at least as good a  shot as your average copper.

I've got enough "training" for my FLA nonn-resident CCW. Good enough for  you ?
If I can shoot a minimium  US Army  qual. score with my AR, can I carry that too, Mr. Army Man ????

CKMorley

You should get facts from both sides and a neutral source before stating your position.  You have obviously retained biased opinions and held them as truth.  First of all, you should research this claim:
[b] These people are afraid that violent people will carelessly use a gun and an innocent bystander will be killed or maimed.[/b]
Try to find the statistics of the number of "innocent bystanders" who are killed or injured by individuals who use a legally owned firearm to defend themselves.  If you were referring to the occurances of "negligent discharge" by which an individual pulls the trigger of their weapon unintentionally and injures themself or others, you may find that the majority of these cases involve police officers who are "trained" to handle their sidearms.  Even more so, if you were referring to negligent discharge of the firearm, you will find through research of unbiased sources, that occurances are extremely rare when compared to injuries resulting from negligence (I refuse to use the word "accident") in the use of power tools, sharpened instruments, agricultural equipment, watercraft, and automobiles.

[b]GUNS KILL AND MAIM PEOPLE.[/b]
If this is true, then the extensive collections of several people I know and the many firearms I have owned in the past are all defective.  My current firearms, all of the firearms I have owned, and the firearms of every gun-owner I know have never killed or maimed anyone.  Do you know what is a much more effecient tool for killing and maiming people?  How about cigarettes, alcohol, and above all automobiles.  When was the last time you heard a politician screaming for the outright ban of a certain type of car just because it has features which appeal to a certain crowd?  When was the last time you heard a politician screaming for the ban of a certain vehicle just because one like it is/was used by the military?  You won't hear such things because vehicles don't give the citizens of this country power, neither do alcohol, cigarettes, power tools, watercraft, baseball bats, or even knives.  Our right to own firearms guarantees us our freedoms.  Our Second Amendmend rights were granted us so that if an oppresive government tried to take them away, the citizens had power over them.  This doesn't fit into the government's scheme of things so in 1934 they began placing restrictions on the one right that guarantees the rest.  They put more and more restrictions on firearms and now talk blatantly about confiscating all of them.  
For what reason?  They like to claim that it is for the good of the people.  What good can come from disarming law-abiding citizens?  Do you honestly believe that if a sweeping ban was passed tomorrow which made every gun in the United States illegal and called for confiscation of firearms that criminals would walk up to the drop-off point and hand in their guns?  Do you honestly believe that criminals will be effected by the passing of more laws?  Criminals, by definition, break the law.  No matter how illegal you make guns, criminals will still obtain them.  One can easily look at the failures of Prohibition to see this.  

Laws are already in place to prevent criminals from purchasing and owning firearms.  Law-abiding gun owners are very much in support of harsher punishment for criminals.  Criminals are able to obtain firearms now with little problem, do you honestly believe taking millions of firearms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens will change that?  Laws against guns are simply insurance for criminals that they will face an unarmed victim, making their job much easier.

[b]With no draft in America today, we have people who have none or minimal gun experience able to walk into a gun store or even answer an internet ad and almost instantly possess a deadly weapon capable of killing at random and at long range.[/b]
Have you ever purchased a firearm before?  I would guess not, and say that you are getting your information from what some anti-gun website or CNN tells you.  Every gun dealer in this country is required by law to perform a  quick background check, which requires a simple 5 minute phone call, for each individual who wishes to purchase a firearm.  If a dealer is abiding by federal law, no one can "just walk in and buy a deadly weapon..." without being checked to ascertain whether or not they have a criminal background.  I have no idea what kind of lie you have been told about answering an internet ad to obtain a firearm.  All guns purchased via internet ads must be transferred to a federally licensed dealer, then the individual may pick up the gun from that dealer only after he has been given his background check just like everyone else.

You seem to think that individuals with lack of experience or training should not be allowed to obtain firearms.  How do you expect someone to learn how to shoot without owning a gun?  Our police officers, who are supposedly "well trained" in the use of their weapons are more often than not the most likely candidate for a negligent discharge.  They also usually prove to be horrible marksmen when actually forced to fire their weapons.  Police involved shootings rarely involve accurate shot placement.  The term most would put to it is "spray and pray".  Police officers have been known on many occasions to emtpy the magazine of their sidearm and hit nothing but air, whatever happens to be behind the target, the ground, other officers, innocent bystanders, and buildings housing more innocent bystanders.

Research the facts from unbiased sources before pretending to know what you're talking about on a gun-related forum.  You have made yourself look like a complete fool.  By the way, your company NCO was a complete pussy.

Cy.
 

But also the founding fathers of the USA also didn't think very highly of the general populace either. The electorial college was formed, ONE of the reasons was that they feared people would not vote intelligently.

Excerpted from : A NATION OF COWARDS
by Jeffrey R. Snyder

"Conservatives must understand that the antipathy many liberals have for gun owners arises in good measure from their statist utopianism. This habit of mind has nowhere been better explored than in The Republic. There, Plato argues that the perfectly just society is one in which an unarmed people exhibit virtue by minding their own business in the performance of their assigned functions, while the government of philosopher-kings, above the law and protected by armed guardians unquestioning in their loyalty to the state, engineers, implements, and fine-tunes the creation of that society, aided and abetted by myths that both hide and justify their totalitarian manipulation."


Liberal elititst see themselves as the modern day version of the philosopher-kings.

CKMorley

This is true to some extent. They referred to them as screaming hordes or some-such, but I do believe they intended to allow a measure of freedom to all citizens and truly thought the 2nd would be a tool agianst invasion and tyranny (which it is).

I like the article I posted, but personally I've always thought libs hated guns because to understand the purpose of a gun is to admit that the world is a scary place and other people may harm you. That's an admission they just can't make or live with. Utopians...

Oh yea and jimb100 is a [:K] (or an idiot... or both)

[img]http://www.aquaticisf.org/FAIP-BannerNew.jpg[/img]

Next question. I'll take "Safety Nuts" for 200, Alex.

I had to ask... [:D]

But do they have a billionaire in their pocket financing their collectivist schemes?

Why is it that anyone who even remotely challenges your viewpoint or tries to explain the other sides view is a troll or an idiot?

You are the poster boy for gun laws. You will cause more gun laws to be passed than any liberal.

Your inability to give a fair hearing to the concerns of the other side do much more harm than anything I could ever say.

I did my bit for America, I've had more training with firearms than you ever will. I've seen more people killed and maimed with guns that you ever will.

You are a true internet commando and about the only thing that allows us to keep our guns is that no one pays much attention to you. You are the lunatic fringe we must endure so everyone else can have a measure of freedom.

Grow up.

Maybe we should cut Jim  some slack..... he's just  talking about reasonable gun-safety laws,  right ? ?

Gag!

CKMorley

Wtf?? Are you referring to the article posted above?  It takes all of like 60 seconds to read.  Would you like it condensed down to three words, or what...

Edited to add:

Just for kicks I reread the article and timed it, a whole 45 seconds.

It's an entertaining read but credits libersl with far too much organization and forethought.

What it really comes down to is how liberals cope with fear and violent emotion. They don't.  

Liberals don't cope with their fear, they force others to prevent them from feeling it, and when they cannot, they sue them for their failure.  

They also recognize (in a blinding, but limited flash of self-awareness)  that they have poor impulse control and if they had the ready means to do violence on another person during a fit of anger, they probably would before their brain kicked in and told them NO.   The problem with this insight is that in it's limitation, they cannot see that it is only liberals like them with poor emotional impulse control who have this problem.  Other people actually have a deeply ingrained moral system, understand the concept of self-discipline and value other people's lives.  But assuming everyone is like them, liberals choose to protect themselves from the fear of other people like them popping off and killing them over a spilled latte by hiring other people to make laws against people owning guns.  All this despite the objective fact that most people are not a danger to others, whether armed with a single shot .410 gauge shotgun or a 5,000 pound, deep-penetrating, bunker-busting smart bomb.

Conservatives don't have any less fear, to say so is ridiculous.  We just think about it differently.  And deal with it differently.  Rather than running away from it, ignoring it or pawning off responsibility for dealing with the causes of those fears on others, conservatives choose to deal with their fears themselves, taking responsibility for their own defense and well-being in so much as it is practically possible. They tend to take care of themselves financially, medically (though not necessarily fitness wise), and security wise and expect others to do the same.  Conservatives do not depend upon government to provide charity to the unfortunate, they handle it themselves, directly, by writing a check or donating goods or time to charities they choose in their communities.

When a conservative loses a job, they go out looking for a new one.  And while they may collect unemployment (after all, their employer paid into the fund against this possibility) they are reluctant to do so and try to get off it ASAP. If their unemployment benefits run out before they can find another job, they take part-time work doing whatever is necessary to meet their obligations until they can get a job in their chosen career field or start their own company to make a better job for themselves and get back on their feet.

Responsibility is the difference between liberals and conservatives.

No maybe we should all tell jim exactly what we think of him and his elitist view.......

And just what makes you think that, cowboy?  Always amazes me these people who assume things about people they have no idea about on the internet.  Keyboard Commando Jim, why don't you enlighten us on a little bit of your training and experience with death and maiming...?  Or is it classified?[rofl]


Oh and your company NCO, no matter what amount of training he had, was/is still a pussy.

Cy.

"Operation Flashpoint"! Oooo-rah!

Sorry, Jimbo, but GUNS don't kill people.  As the rest of the old saying goes "People kill people."  Guns are inanimate objects and have no ability to do anything.

Your line of reasoning would never let you eat a steak due to fear that the steak knife would kill you.  Haven't people been killed by knives?  What about baseball bats?  Cars?

The supporting part of your argument regarding training likewise doesn’t hold water.  Training is available from many places, & had the liberals not vilified guns over the last 30 - 40 years, it would be available in many more places.  The army is not the only place to receive firearms training.

Evidently Jim thinks he is the only ex-soldier on this board who has seen war, and that the rest of us who haven't been to war have never had an ounce of formal training. So he beats his chest and proclaims his superiority in terms of both.

All that said, he is generally RIGHT in what he said in his first post.  The liberals and other gun grabbers hate guns because they are afraid of them.  That's as far as it goes though, because that fear is unsupported by facts and realities. It's just fear, gut-wrenching, unreasoning fear.

I've met darned few soldiers who know more than jack about guns in general.  They may know their personal weapon reasonably well, and they may know about employing it in warfare, but they generally do not know much about guns in the civilian world.  Lifers are in some ways worse, because they, like academics, live in a cloistered world with rules that are quite different from those the rest of us live by.

As far as the draft is concerned, the US has been well served by the draft in very few cases.  WWII for certain and maybe Korea, but the draft was not all that successful during Vietnam, instead it created great hostility toward government and the military.  The military force produced by conscription was poorly trained and poorly motivated by today's standards.  Our current all volunteer force is FAAAR superior to the conscript army of Vietnam in terms of individual skill levels and soldier dedication and motivation.  The soldiers who come out of our current force make better citizens than those that left the conscript force.  Why?  Because they CHOSE to serve.  That is a huge difference.

Weapons handling in the military generally sucks.  By civilian standards it is incredibly unsafe.  Soldiers constantly violate the basic rules of firearms safety, constantly sweep one another both in drill and in combat, they aren't terribly good at keeping fingers off triggers, and while there are marksmanship standards, they aren't all that high.  Most shooters who engage in regular competitive activity are better marksmen than your average soldier (including infantrymen.)   It's just not that great a standard of comparison.

Trolls are common here and usually those with anti-gun feelings are just that. If you are truly frequenting a firearms related site and posting anti-gun points of view and are not a troll then what exactly would that make you?



I have no reason to give anyone in favor of removing a constitutional right a hearing.



Nice rant kiddo. You have no idea who you're hurling your insults at. Or what my proficiency is. Or what I do for my country every day for that matter.

Wanted to say that but was afraid of hurting his "liberal" feelings.

Some people hate guns, because to them weapons represent violence.And they live under the thought that if you remove the tool that the violence will go away.Example lets take my Pastor's wife Ann she hates anything that is "made" to be a weapon guns,knives etc if it's made to hurt people she's against it. She doesn't think guns just jump up and kill people.But she believes that people who want to own weapons are basically evil people that want to kill other people. [yes me too]She lets cops and soldiers off the hook because it's their job to fight and that they really don't want to hurt anybody it's just their job. But old SS is just a scared little fag that needs guns and knives to feel safe.

PS....she still hasn't forgiven me for teaching her son to love AR15......hehehe