• 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.

Ever Heard of the Liberal Gun Club?

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,467
Location
Dallas
Saw this on Lucianne.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Liberals-find-comfort-level-in-NPR-of-gun-clubs-5107330.php

Don't see in the article where there are get-togethers in NYC or DC. They have to go someplace o/s of Nancy Pelosi's district to meet.
Their attitudes on 2A sound okay - too bad they didn't delve into how they reconciled that with the policies of the politicians in the vanguard of their liberal philosophy.

Perhaps a CA OCDO member can look into membership and attend a meet up?
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Easy. They don't believe in the RKBA. They believe in the PKBA.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
I would QFT, but, after reading the article, I don't think they are even PKBA, I think that they are just really, really stupid.

I've never seen so much contradiction in my life. "I'm an anarchist, but I support gun control law." Whaaaaaaaaat?

Edit: But on a serious note, you're probably right.
 
Last edited:

cjohnson44546

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2013
Messages
188
Location
Memphis, TN
No reason to be mean... from reading their website it looks like they are mostly people who do not agree with the normal politics of the right, but do agree with the 2A.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
No reason to be mean... from reading their website it looks like they are mostly people who do not agree with the normal politics of the right, but do agree with the 2A.

That might be what they say, but according to the article they still stood behind gun control bills being passed. They are either lying, or they don't understand the basic premise of the 2A (or other rights).
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Liberals will say that they support the 2A. However, they don't believe it protects an uninfringed RKBA! The words to listen for that are meaningful are "I respect your right to keep and bear arms," not, "I support the 2A."


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Brace

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Messages
183
Location
Colorado
Their attitudes on 2A sound okay - too bad they didn't delve into how they reconciled that with the policies of the politicians in the vanguard of their liberal philosophy.

"We make ourselves a special place where we don't have to hear about the 'Kenyan Muslim socialist' in the White House," said Hoeber, a biotech equipment mechanic who says she's politically "somewhere around Emma Goldman," the turn-of-the-20th century anarchist.

Here's your answer. Mainstream progressives don't represent her, she's closer to an IWW member in terms of philosophy. The quintessential "bomb-throwing anarchist" (only not really, because she has a very technical job working directly underneath/with petite bourgeois which is something you will find to be true about basically every white self-styled anarchist in this country. Extreme political opinions are like fashion statements.)
 
Last edited:

Brace

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Messages
183
Location
Colorado
That might be what they say, but according to the article they still stood behind gun control bills being passed. They are either lying, or they don't understand the basic premise of the 2A (or other rights).

I don't see where it says that. Quote please? This is what I read:

The club praised Gov. Jerry Brown when he vetoed seven gun-control bills in the last legislative session, including one by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, that would have required gun owners to register their low-capacity rifles as assault weapons if they had detachable magazines.

More regulations on lawful gun owners "are overprescribed political placebos that fail to cure ... the root causes of violence," the gun club said in a position statement. Instead of "window-dressing 'solutions' like so-called 'assault weapons' bans and magazine capacity restrictions," the group argued, government should back "mitigation for violence prevention: stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment."

The group also views monetary disincentives to gun ownership, such as ammunition taxes, as "class barriers" blocking the poor from exercising their constitutional rights.

"I have really strong feelings about my distaste for the state having the monopoly on force - and about my distrust of the police," she said.

Even background checks go too far for most members of the Liberal Gun Club.

Wooten says requiring lawful gun owners who have already passed background checks to go through the process again for additional purchases is burdensome and unnecessary - "kind of like having to take a driver's test every time you change cars."
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
There is a implied distinction between owning and carrying. Those liberals want to do the owning part of exercising our 2A, they want everyone to own. But they certainly do not support the carry aspect of the exercising of our 2A.

Good for them. I hope that their membership grows to meaningful and noticeable numbers. Owning may lead to a desire to carry. If liberals voice their desire to carry in CA then a change may be more forthcoming. It would be a great victory for CA citizens if "shall issue" were the law of the land. OC is nothing but a pipe dream at this point.
 

Brace

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Messages
183
Location
Colorado
There is a implied distinction between owning and carrying. Those liberals want to do the owning part of exercising our 2A, they want everyone to own. But they certainly do not support the carry aspect of the exercising of our 2A.

Where is the passage that implies it?
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Implied by omission. No efforts to exercise their right to carry. You'd think that some of those folks would have discussed shall issue, at least in the article to get their message and agenda out there. But, I could be wrong.
 

Brace

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Messages
183
Location
Colorado
http://www.theliberalgunclub.com/about-us/talking/

They appear to be in favor of CCW with minimal regulations, with support for national reciprocity. No stated position on open carry. A minority on the forum express a preference for constitutional carry, or skepticism of the utility of CCW regulation.

In my view the right to keep and bear arms, especially for personal defense, should be considered a basic civil right, every bit as dear as voting or being able to express your own cultural, ethnic, or religious distinctiveness. There are a number of reasons conceal carry is wiser than open carry, including reduction of general public angst at seeing weapons all the time, and not presenting yourself as a potential target for persons who might want to cause harm. Ironically it is open carry that is more often the default form of carry even though one has to have better discipline and situational awareness to do so safely.

Not a fan of 4 or 5, as those can easily be perverted into whatever it is that the current administration wants it to be from, completely zero requirements (not going to happen), to costly and impossible to reach requirements that will prevent most folks from the right to own and carry. (most probable.)

That's 2 out of 28 posts though. Most of the rest just say "I agree" and similar. Also:

I'm in favor of repealing the 68 GCA.

is brought up once.

On the forums they seem to range from skeptical to outright hostile towards Open Carry though:

http://www.theliberalgunclub.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15486
http://www.theliberalgunclub.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=20741

So overall, they are about average in opinion on issues of carry for a gun group, I guess. Most CCW advocacy groups rest in the same general area. No mention of may-issue vs shall-issue, but since they express worry over discriminatory licensing I think it's reasonable to assume they support the latter. I can't imagine that the woman the OP article lead with, for example, would want police to have discretion to deny her the ability to protect herself.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
No arguments from me on your observations. A advocacy group should be focused on a single achievable goal and shall issue is a more realistic goal in my view given CA politics.

I shall be following this group's efforts and if they need a few coins in pursuit of their goal I may contribute. Shall issue and reciprocity would move CA very much closer to restoring liberty for its citizens.
 

Kirbinator

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
903
Location
Middle of the map, Alabama
IMO,

Most people are anti-OC until they take a few history lessons and start researching the laws, then they realize that the first anti-carry laws were or are based in racist society.
 
Top