• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Liberals that OC

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
Haha. It is the liberals in congress that try so hard to remove or restrict our second amendment rights. It is the liberals in the supreme court that say the second amendment does not apply to private ownership. It is the liberals, who if they still had control of the house, would have placed severe restrictions on our 2A rights, remember, just like they did in '94! It is the liberals who are always shouting for more gun control, and less punishment for violent offenders "mannn!" It is the liberals who love the 1st amendment, cause it is soooo awesome, but hate the 2nd because it is old and outdated! When they stop trying to remove and restrict my 2A rights, I will stop blaming them!
There is an awful lot of KY in this thread. *cough*

Anyway, liberals tend to be at the forefront of the anti gun crusade, but there is enough blame to go around.


Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Obama is quite used to 'administratively' abrogating liberties via 'executive order' or directing a executive branch department head to behave contrary to current law or the constitution. To my knowledge Obama has not passed the 'word' to ignore, or signed a executive order 'skirting' the law, that carry on federal land be prevented or those citizens who do carry are prosecuted for such anti-social conduct.

For those folks who like to call others stupid....what the above means is that Obama is complying with, or not ignoring, this particular teeny tiny provision of a unrelated to firearms law.

....oops....not I've done it.

Obama is knowingly and intentionally working to 'remake' America into what he thinks America should be. He and the millions of his loony-lib-sock-puppet drones look to the day where they will achieve their one and only goal, a socialist utopia. Never mind that all previous attempts to achieve the socialist utopia have yielded exactly zero successes.

Even the loony-lib-sock-puppets that OC, or CC for that matter, strive for this. They will, obviously, and when 'requested' by the all powerful and benevolent "Great Leader", happily return their ill-gotten 'guns' to the state for proper disposition. There by ensuring the safety and security of all people around the globe.

So, continue to focus on the irrelevant and enjoy the accidental opportunity to once again exercise your self-defense right on federal lands.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
Of course, of course, that's why he signed a Law that included individuals being permitted to carry in Parks.

Because someone was able to attach it to some legislation he had been pushing for, he even made a derisive comment about that rider being in the bill.
 

Gun Totin' Liberal

Regular Member
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
33
Location
Downingtown, Pennsylvania
Do you really think Obama would like people to carry in parks? Really? I will tell you, Obozo would love nothing more than to disarm us peasants.

The last time "us peasants" were disarmed was during Hurricane Katrina, by the Army National Guard. Now, remind me, was there a Democrat or Republican in the White House at that time? I know, I know, Bush probably had nothing to do with it, right? In any event, as I think someone already mentioned, there are people on both sides who would like to take them from us.
 

nobama

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
756
Location
, ,
I think the Governor had more to do with that than Bush. Who was the Gov. at that time? Who is always in bed with the united nations? Hillary?
 

Xulld

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
159
Location
Florida
I am not what most would call a modern liberal, even tho I espouse many socially liberal attitudes. I am a Libertarian, I have voted on both sides in the past 12 years, and will continue to vote on my principles even when they take me across party lines.

I think its a GREAT thing to be a "Gun toting Liberal" and be loud and up front about it. It is far to easy for most people to stereo type any given position, forget that shades of grey exist, and discount opinions because they exist on the other side of the isle from you.

It is much harder to discount the opinion of someone who share a vote with. I think it behooves us 2A supporters to help break the spell of political party stereotypes.

I am really pretty moderate, but often playing devils advocate has earned me many a pejorative aimed at the side they think I am on.

Personally I wish we could get away from the two party system, if we could get even local government appointments to be won or lost via a system such as Range Voting we could slowly erode away this black and white, pull you away from center, us vs them mentality which pollutes our political process.
 
Last edited:

Ballistic Otters

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
23
!

I never quite understood the Liberal vs. Conservative paradigm for gun control. I'm opposed to gun control in most any capacity, and I'm about as far to the left socially as you can get. We also don't all dislike police, we just have a tendency to treat them like normal people doing a job, and are a little quicker to anger when they step over their boundaries and start to infringe on our rights, which does occasionally happen. Liberals should love guns, they help maintain liberty. That thing my compatriots supposedly like. X_X
 

Animus

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Cookeville, TN
First post, yay >:3

I'm in a similar boat to the otter. I don't understand why my friends only support 90% of the Bill of Rights especially considering that the 2A was specifically included to ensure the protection of the other 9. Quite a few of them even enjoy target shooting or hunting (le gasp), but for some reason they can't come to terms with the possibility of using firearms against another human being if necessary. They'd rather leave that to the police (the same ones we usually criticize for one reason or another). Oh well, I guess until they come around I'll just have to protect them as much as myself. Once I get my permit, that is >.>...
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Oh well, I guess until they come around...

I wouldn't hold your breath. At least not until there's another Luby's and they find themselves in the middle of it but only one survives.

I'll just have to protect them as much as myself.

Why? When it comes to the 2A, you have your head screwed on straight. They don't. Protect yourself, first. Once that's accomplished and you're still feeling generous, protect them, too.

Hint: In a firefight, no one is thinking about protecting their friends. They're thinking about stopping the bad guy. When you focus on that, you're much more likely to succeed, which is the best way to protect your friends. So, ironic as it sounds, if you're in a firefight, forgot about your friends and stop the bad guy. You'll be doing your friends a favor.
 

Animus

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Cookeville, TN
I wouldn't hold your breath. At least not until there's another Luby's and they find themselves in the middle of it but only one survives.



Why? When it comes to the 2A, you have your head screwed on straight. They don't. Protect yourself, first. Once that's accomplished and you're still feeling generous, protect them, too.

Hint: In a firefight, no one is thinking about protecting their friends. They're thinking about stopping the bad guy. When you focus on that, you're much more likely to succeed, which is the best way to protect your friends. So, ironic as it sounds, if you're in a firefight, forgot about your friends and stop the bad guy. You'll be doing your friends a favor.

I just meant that if the situation ever arose, I'd be the only one able to do anything about it, and since they know this, if I failed to stop said bad guy before one of them got hurt, they would blame me.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Supporting the 2A does not absolve anyone of the vote they cast that firmly ensconce tax and spend democrats/republicans into elected office. It is their vote for these schlubs that has perpetuated the redistribution of my money to those whose only profession in this life is to excel at suckling from the public trough. Being a 'gun toting liberal' does not absolve them of their sin of taking from thy neighbor.
 

NoTolerance

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
292
Location
Milwaukee, WI
if I failed to stop said bad guy before one of them got hurt, they would blame me.

Great example of the Liberal mindset there. Refusal to take personal responsibility for themselves while condemning others for doing so, and then looking for someone to blame when things don't go their way.

Put another way, you're an evil person for carrying a gun, but if you don't use it to protect me, it's your fault I got attacked. :rolleyes:

With friends like that, chances are if you DID manage to protect them, you'd still be condemned in their eyes for attacking that poor, misunderstood criminal who probably had more need than you could ever understand.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
I never quite understood the Liberal vs. Conservative paradigm for gun control. I'm opposed to gun control in most any capacity, and I'm about as far to the left socially as you can get. We also don't all dislike police, we just have a tendency to treat them like normal people doing a job, and are a little quicker to anger when they step over their boundaries and start to infringe on our rights, which does occasionally happen. Liberals should love guns, they help maintain liberty. That thing my compatriots supposedly like. X_X
Liberals, the loony-sock-puppet type love liberty, and the exercise thereof, only as long as it is liberty (2A excluded) that is approved, by them, before it is exercised.
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
Classic liberals are fine by me. The modern variants, however, who are so self-righteous they believe they should have the right to confiscate others' property to pay for their social engineering schemes, should be able to restrict free speech to keep their feelings from being hurt ("hate speech" laws), and in general, that they should be able to use the government to accomplish whatever harebrained idea pops into their small heads, regardless of its constitutionality, are the true domestic terrorists. They have proven that they do not believe in the concept of inalienable rights*, and are, therefore, enemies to the Constitution. I will never consider that type of "liberal" to be an ally in the fight to preserve the 2A, or anything else worthwhile.


*Unless, of course, it is their "inalienable right" to force you to recognize Johnny's perpetual sodomizing of Billy as a marriage, their "inalienable right" to parade naked in residential areas, their "inalienable right" to a free education (which pushes their social agenda), their "inalienable right" to make you pay for their healthcare, etc., etc., etc.
 
Last edited:
Top