imported post
nyc_paramedic wrote:
Gordie wrote:
Like it or not, many liberals are anti-gun, and most anti-gunners are liberal. It is a pretty safe bet that when someone over reacts to the presence of a gun, they are a liberal. It is also a fact that academia is dominated by liberal leaning professors.
I beg to differ. I honestly believe that many people --liberals *and* conservatives-- don't have enough information in this day and age to make an informed decision. And if someone overreacts to the presence of a gun, it's more likely because of the fact that they have not had any exposure to firearms, *not* because of their political leanings.
Please tell me where this fact concerning liberals and academia can be substantiated? Only liberals get teaching jobs? Please, please, please, tell me you're not serious.
Tell me what information is lacking in this day and age to prevent an informed decision on the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd amendment is clearly written, and any confusion about the wording can be cleared up by a simple investigation into word usage at the time of it's writing.
As for liberals in academia, you can't honestly be suggesting that the education system in our country is not left leaning.
An article by the Washington Post dated
Tuesday, March 29, 2005:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html
College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.
By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.
The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.
"What's most striking is how few conservatives there are in any field," said Robert Lichter, a professor at George Mason University and a co-author of the study. "There was no field we studied in which there were more conservatives than liberals or more Republicans than Democrats. It's a very homogeneous environment, not just in the places you'd expect to be dominated by liberals."
In an article dated Tues., Dec. 28, 2004 from MSNBC:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6739040
It says:
Professors and politicsA recent study by Santa Clara University researcher Daniel Klein estimated that among social science and humanities faculty members nationwide, Democrats outnumber Republicans by at least seven to one; in some fields it’s as high as 30 to one. And in the last election, the two employers whose workers contributed the most to Sen. John Kerry’s presidential campaign were the University of California system and Harvard University.
Another article also describes the lack of diverse views on college campuses.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/986138/posts
I never said that there were no conservatives in education, just very few by comparison, and yes, I am very serious. Can you show that there is a balance of ideas in the education system?
You point out some of the worst examples of what is said on this forum and imply that the pro gun community is out of line. In some cases you are right. What about some of the extreme examples from the anti crowd?
Rosie O'Donnell is a prime source for this.
http://www.alphadogweb.com/firearms/rosie.htm
[suB][suP]
"I think there should be a law -- and I know this is extreme -- that no one can have a gun in the U.S. If you have a gun, you go to jail."
- Rosie O'Donnell, April 21, 1999: [/suP][/suB]
[suB][suP]"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison."
- Rosie O'Donnell, 1999:[/suP][/suB]
Let's not forget Carolyn McCarthy, who had this memorable exchange:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ospNRk2uM3U
Tucker Carlson: In February you introduced the assault weapons ban and law enforcement protection act of 2007. It would regulate semi-automatic assault weapons including weapons that have pistol grips, a forward grip or something called a "barrel shroud". Weapons with a barrel shroud would be regulated. What's a barrel shroud and why should we regulate it?
Carolyn McCarthy: I think... I think the more important thing is... and it also would have had banned the large capacity clips that Colin Fergeson had used and also the killer.
TC: Right, I read the legislation and it said that it would regulate barrel shrouds. hat's a barrel shroud and why should we regulate them?
CM: The guns that were chosen back in those days were basically the guns that most gangs and criminals were using to kill our police officers. I'm not saying it was the best bill, but that was the best bill we could get out at that particular time.
TC: Do you know what a barrel shroud is?
CM: I actually don't know what a barrel shroud is.
TC: Oh, OK. Because it's in your legislation.
CM: I believe it's a shoulder thing that goes up.
TC: No. It's not.
I could find dozens more, but time and space constraints keep me from doing so at this time.
The big difference between people on this forum and the people in my examples, is access to network news media. People see these individuals and others like them on TV and think "They're on TV, they must know what they're talking about."
If people get carried away in defense of their rights, it is only because they have to defend against this kind of nonsense. The frustration can get the best of us.
