Good read on liberal gun owners

Jmoser

Jmoser

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Messages
1,630
Location
Greater Charlotte Area
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Said “legal protests” too many times. No reference at all to the damage and destruction in all those unanswered protests that turned into riots, looting, burning, and pillage.

She said “17 year old kid” one too many times. We’ve armed 17 year olds with their parent’s consent and sent them to war.

She did not speak AT ALL to the vicious slant of the American media, and how those on the right are demonized.

My take away is that her primary concern is that the American right seems to be armed to a much greater extent than the left.
 
Last edited:
OMG that was the most insane, panty waste, liberal clap trap drivel I have ever read.

There was literally nothing of value in that entire editorial. Her main point was that Democrats are going to die since republicans own more guns so they can defend themselves.

I am dumber for having read that. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.
 
Hmm.

This thread just boarded the south bound train, it seems.
 
Chdamn said:
Her main point was that Democrats are going to die since republicans own more guns so they can defend themselves.
Click to expand...
Same takeaway from me too. Which brings up a question to her:

Why do Republicans (actually should be conservatives) feel like they need to defend themselves?
 
clay_fv said:
Nope, as soon as she said "legal protestors" she lost me. Her points, no matter what they be, are null and void.
Click to expand...
First, be aware that there are two authors speaking. The reporter or "journalist" and Lara Smith who is being interviewed. My take on the "legal protests" is her distinguishing between protest, which she even points out is protected under the 1st-A and the so called "mostly peaceful protest" which is code word for loot and pillage.

Most of what she says is spot on, especially the parts about self defense being an inherent right that everyone has and that it is not a function of politics, ideology, or whether or not you like someone.

Where I disagree with her is when she says KR was "morally wrong" and calls the dead his "victims". They were NOT victims, they were violent aggressors.

In response to the final sentence of the piece: "That kid should never have been there, and I think that’s the society’s failure. He just shouldn’t have been there at all."
I would retort that he, and all the others like him should NOT HAVE HAD TO be there and that is a societal failure. Then again, I don't agree with the idea that you should be required to stand by and do nothing while violent criminals attack and destroy your stuff, your neighbor's stuff, or your community and limit your actions to calling the govt. squad which admits it has no duty to protect you or your stuff, but only the public at large. The Kenosha riots were yet another example of relying on govt for protection is useless and stupid.
 
Last edited:
“Liberals Really Need to Look at the Fact that They’re Going to Need to Defend Themselves”


No. Liberal commie maggots need to realize that they need to stop trying to harm people because those people can legally defend themselves.

Why did the maggots bring weapons to their riot? A skateboard is a weapon. A wooden club is a weapon. A pistol is a weapon. A brick is a weapon. A bottle containing gasoline is a weapon. A rifle in the hands of a boy is just another weapon that the boy used to defend himself against maggots who want to kill him and who tried several times to kill him. They do not get upset when their scum uses weapons to harm people but get furious when someone uses a weapon to keep them from killing. Liberal commie maggots have no shame when they perpetuate lies and misinformation. They do not have much shame about anything. What horrible frustrated lives they must live.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, she's off base. As pointed out, defining "legal protest" is a key point. When does protest cross the line to "illegal"? Is pushing a literal flaming dumpster at a gas station still legal? Another point is the defending property issue. Kyle was mobile and perhaps he shouldn't have been if he was there protect property. Think roof top Koreans. I think it exposed him to unnecessary risk. But, at the same time, none of the shots he fired were in defense of property. All of them were in defense of self.
 
The main issue I have with crap like what that stupid woman wrote is that she makes the 2A a political ideology and draws lines that shouldn’t be drawn.


She further goes on to place her own moral limits on who should and shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun. Age is just one of those limits you can bet money on that.

Look, I don’t care what your politics are, what color your skin is, who you're sleeping with, what pronouns you want to go by or how old you are.

The only limitation on who can own a gun should only be imposed by the parents or guardians of those who either aren’t mature enough or are mentally deficient.

The government was limited by the 2A so that it should have never been allowed to put any limitations on who can own or carry one. Why? Because it was put in place specifically to allow a reset button against the government.

That article was just one more “I believe in the second……but…”.
 
Last edited:
Missing the point about opinions on KR and protests etc etc - takeaway is a broader push for gun rights from both political sides. Which is a good thing.
 
Jmoser said:
Missing the point about opinions on KR and protests etc etc - takeaway is a broader push for gun rights from both political sides. Which is a good thing.
Click to expand...
No points missed at all here. Crystal clear. The only reason they want gun rights is to protect themselves from the right.

What they didn’t say, is as, or more important than what they did say.
 
Last edited:
Stogies said:
Legal protests are indeed still protected, problem is what happened that night was not a legal protest.
Click to expand...

Most people misinterpret what protected means. People gathering to demand redress is protected just like free speech is. However, it is protected from the government, not from other citizens.

Regardless, it doesn’t matter. Even if you are peacefully protesting that doesn’t trump another citizens right to go armed for his own defense and then use that weapon in defense of his own life.
 
Last edited:
Chdamn said:
Most people misinterpret what protected means. People gathering to demand redress is protected just like free speech is. However, it is protected from the government, not from other citizens.

Regardless, it doesn’t matter. Even if you are peacefully protesting that doesn’t trump another citizens right to go armed for his own defense and then use that weapon in defense of his own life.
Click to expand...
It does in north carolina

Best fix the law
 
Last edited:
Liberal gun owners can be divided into two groups:

1. Docile castrati that were raised or married into liberal hives of scum but developed an interest in firearms. Often found clicking tongues and clutching pearls on forums like this one.

2. Militant communists.

Neither deserve any attention
 
Last edited:
Chdamn said:
Even if you are peacefully protesting that doesn’t trump another citizens right to go armed for his own defense and then use that weapon in defense of his own life.
Click to expand...

^^^^^^^^^^^

This. Defense of one's life by any means necessary will find favor with me each and every time.

Firearms simply are more practical for that purpose in most situations.
 
Brangus said:
^^^^^^^^^^^

This. Defense of one's life by any means necessary will find favor with me each and every time.

Firearms simply are more practical for that purpose in most situations.
Click to expand...

I didn't think I'd be quoting myself in this thread but I need to make a point.

This is one reason that Carolina Firearms Forum is online today. We continue to stand for the right to defend one's life.
 
Brangus said:
I didn't think I'd be quoting myself
Click to expand...
I walked down to the other end of the house where my wife was yesterday morning. No one else there. She asked who I had been talking to so early in the morning.

“Me, I guess."
 
Last edited:
Don't ally yourself with communists (I refuse to engage in the Orwellian practice of referring to leftist authoritarians as "liberals", as liberty is precisely the opposite of what they promote). These people do not recognize the rights of the individual, whether it be the right to keep and bear arms or anything else. They will stab you in the back, steal everything they haven't already managed to take, and herd you into the killing fields as soon as you are no longer useful to them.

This article is a perfect example of how these people are willing to tell bald-faced lies in order to seek their desired ends.
 
fieldgrade said:
The only reason they want gun rights is to protect themselves from the right.
Click to expand...
They wouldn't have to if they stopped initiating violent conflict. They blow the dog whistle and then become mortified when the dogs show up and kick their ass.

It goes back to the Kyle thing. As was correctly pointed out, it's not about some white kid. That's the front. It's about depriving anyone that they attack from protecting themselves.
They want political control, social control, and physical control.
If there were only some word that described this mental depravity and blind lust for total power...:rolleyes:
 
DuncanLempRIP said:
Don't ally yourself with communists (I refuse to engage in the Orwellian practice of referring to leftist authoritarians as "liberals", as liberty is precisely the opposite of what they promote). These people do not recognize the rights of the individual, whether it be the right to keep and bear arms or anything else. They will stab you in the back, steal everything they haven't already managed to take, and herd you into the killing fields as soon as you are no longer useful to them.

This article is a perfect example of how these people are willing to tell bald-faced lies in order to seek their desired ends.
Click to expand...

FNG of The Year award material right here.

Glad to have you aboard.
 
Last edited:
DuncanLempRIP said:
(I refuse to engage in the Orwellian practice of referring to leftist authoritarians as "liberals", as liberty is precisely the opposite of what they promote
Click to expand...
THANK YOU! This bothers me no end. Totalitarians are not liberal in any way.
Friday said:
They wouldn't have to if they stopped initiating violent conflict.
Click to expand...
Yep.
 
Glad I didn't bother to read it.

The reviews here pretty much confirm what I expected. The word 'Dweeb' comes to mind.

Thanks for saving me the time.
 
Jmoser said:
Folks if we really want robust nationwide 2A rights this is a good trend. Otherwise deep blue states will always infringe.
Agree to disagree but band together for RKBA. Armed society is a polite society.

slate.com

A Liberal Gun Rights Advocate Explains What Both Sides Got Wrong About Kyle Rittenhouse

“It doesn’t complicate my ideas about it. It’s always been complicated. Who’s the good guy with the gun?”
slate.com slate.com
Click to expand...

There is no way I would ever "band together" with the woman interviewed in that article. Nearly everything she said was either spurious or a lie. Her only apparent interest in the Second Amendment is to persuade leftists to arm themselves in an arms race with conservatives.
 
I am dumber for having read that. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

^^Random quote from earlier post^^^ THIS RIGHT HERE!
 
DuncanLempRIP said:
Don't ally yourself with communists (I refuse to engage in the Orwellian practice of referring to leftist authoritarians as "liberals", as liberty is precisely the opposite of what they promote). These people do not recognize the rights of the individual, whether it be the right to keep and bear arms or anything else. They will stab you in the back, steal everything they haven't already managed to take, and herd you into the killing fields as soon as you are no longer useful to them.

This article is a perfect example of how these people are willing to tell bald-faced lies in order to seek their desired ends.
Click to expand...

CBKP..................(Communist Baby Killer Party) I've been saying it for years.
 
gc70 said:
There is no way I would ever "band together" with the woman interviewed in that article. Nearly everything she said was either spurious or a lie. Her only apparent interest in the Second Amendment is to persuade leftists to arm themselves in an arms race with conservatives.
Click to expand...

And this it's the very reason I've changed how I go about daily life these days.
.
People I know who are or reveal themselves to be liberal will never get any closer to me than "acquaintance" meaning I'll be polite but won't hang around them any more than necessary. People who I considered "friends" who have exposed themselves as liberals have been moved to the acquaintance column. Real friends are few and far between. Many think they have lots of friends and crave acceptance but let things go pear shaped and see who is there for you. That list of "friends" will get pretty d@mn short in a New York nanosecond.

A liberal will throw you under the bus the second it will benefit them in their world. That's hardly the action of a friend. It's the thing a self serving sociopath would do. I don't need that type for a "friend" and anything coming from them is suspect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom