It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Liberals and gun control, the fatal attraction that puts Republicans in office

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier


My point is maybe if we treat people as individuals and shuck off the narratives rather than reinforce them we can have discussions that are more real.


Okay... gotcha.... I think... But it seems to me that's exactly what I was doing. I was responding to the comment of one poster who was unaware of anyone on the left calling for a complete gun ban. I gave examples of individuals on the left who had done exactly that. Whereas the comment I responded to addressed the group, I addressed individuals within that group.

In this case, these individuals have "shucked off" the party narrative. It's just as silly to ignore the "ban all guns" folks as it is to ignore the "allow all guns" folks. We cannot treat people as individuals and then ignore individuals when they express themselves.




posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 08:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: luthier


My point is maybe if we treat people as individuals and shuck off the narratives rather than reinforce them we can have discussions that are more real.


Okay... gotcha.... I think... But it seems to me that's exactly what I was doing. I was responding to the comment of one poster who was unaware of anyone on the left calling for a complete gun ban. I gave examples of individuals on the left who had done exactly that. Whereas the comment I responded to addressed the group, I addressed individuals within that group.

In this case, these individuals have "shucked off" the party narrative. It's just as silly to ignore the "ban all guns" folks as it is to ignore the "allow all guns" folks. We cannot treat people as individuals and then ignore individuals when they express themselves.


You are giving a voice to a crazy radical viewpoint which is how these things perpetuate.

Let me ask do you think all republicans think arming teachers makes sense?

It's pretty easy to discredit these two points of view. Banning all guns and arming teachers.

If you create a war of ideology however people are far more inclined to jump on the band wagon.

Oh liberals think banning guns will work I side with these guys. Or arming teachers is rediculous I side with these guys.

Also I wasn't really argueing with you but rather just engaging you in a discussion. You seem to be rational so thought I would take it as an opportunity to expand the conversation.
edit on 3-6-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier


You are giving a voice to a crazy radical viewpoint which is how these things perpetuate.


Oh dear... now it's my fault??? Not the Los Angeles Times or The New Republic who actually gave these individuals a media platform to post their views? It's about me providing the example?

Now I'm just confused again. Or maybe not.

Again, my comment responded to one specific comment by another poster. I did not and never intended to speak for liberals/progressive as a whole, and I made that very clear in my original comment.

It's neither necessary nor appropriate to read anything more or less into my comment.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

It's not your fault but presenting this as an argument is the same as me pulling up crazy gun policy. Like arming teachers.

I don't for a second think most 2nd amendment supporters think arming teachers makes any sense.

There are fringe believers on both sides that have entered the mainstream. I shouldn't have said you in particular are perpetuating the arguement. I apologize.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView




i've heard the argument that Liberals [now calling themselves Progressives] are against the public's ownership of guns for the sake of public safety - and the Second Ammendment's use of the words 'well armed militia' meant the mitlitary and police - Which unfortuanlely sounds to many like the call for a 'police state' - Is this what these so called progressives want?



That's just more right wing BS propaganda...

I consider myself a progressive and own a nice collection of long guns and pistols. Most of my liberal friends own firearms for home protection if not sporting arms and antiques.

Do you think that repeating this BS will help the GOP?

btw, I am for sensible background checks for firearms.
edit on 3-6-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier


...presenting this as an argument...


Fair enough, and I agree. But let me reiterate: that's not what I was doing, and my apologies if I was not clear. I did not and never intended to address the entire gun-control debate/discussion. I was responding to a very specific comment by one poster who was not aware of anyone expressing that extreme position. I totally agree -- and stated -- that they do not speak for most, much less all. Only that there are such individuals expressing the extreme opinion.

And I alluded to those who shared the opinion, but would not publicly admit they share the opinion. I have no idea who or how many, but we know there are some.

So I agree that there are extremes on both sides of the aisle, with most of us falling in between somewhere. And our solutions will be found in the middle, not either extreme.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

I am sorry to present my replies the way I did. I guess I just want the country to heal and people to stop just trying to win at any cost. It probably made me seem hostile.

I also have children and the gun debate bothers me very deeply as it wages war on the public more people die. The false narratives are the biggest dog wagging in American history. We don't talk about gang violence, we don't talk about mental health, we don't talk about security in any depth or discussion. It just comes down to guns.

Well it doesn't and a party winning or losing doesn't ever seem to change the discussion.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Boadicea

I am sorry to present my replies the way I did. I guess I just want the country to heal and people to stop just trying to win at any cost. It probably made me seem hostile.


No worries! I understand. And you didn't seem hostile to me. I just felt like we were both in our disconnect. But we powered through so yay us!!!


I also have children and the gun debate bothers me very deeply as it wages war on the public more people die. The false narratives are the biggest dog wagging in American history. We don't talk about gang violence, we don't talk about mental health, we don't talk about security in any depth or discussion. It just comes down to guns.

Well it doesn't and a party winning or losing doesn't ever seem to change the discussion.


I'm right there with you. On 9/11, the first thing I did after the second plane hit was to raise my flag. The second thing I did was to tell my kids they weren't going to school because "the world has gone crazy." (My kids still remember that!) If my kids were still in school, I have no doubt I would have pulled them out long ago and started home-schooling. I can't imagine how parents today are dealing with this.

More and more I'm convinced it's all about the narrative... just keeping us divided... and that neither side really wants a solution. It's all about the show (and the fear). And the outliers keep the fear alive and the narrative lively. Ugh.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

There's a simple reason there's little support for a Centerest party. And its the reason the Red states are Red.......those who today might be called Centerists are in fact more closely aligned with the Libertarian view point.

What does that really mean? It means they dont want to be ruled over or regulated by ANYONE OR ANY POLITICAL PARTY!



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

Amen.

edit on 3-6-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 09:42 AM
link   


Which unfortuanlely sounds to many like the call for a 'police state' - Is this what these so called progressives want?


Yes that's what those fascists want.

They want a country where only the state and the police are the ones that get to shoot you.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 11:24 AM
link   

edit on 6/3/18 by NthOther because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: AlienView

There's a simple reason there's little support for a Centerest party. And its the reason the Red states are Red.......those who today might be called Centerists are in fact more closely aligned with the Libertarian view point.

What does that really mean? It means they dont want to be ruled over or regulated by ANYONE OR ANY POLITICAL PARTY!


And you are correct.

Thus, I usually support Republicans since they are not trying to take (as much) of my money, property, livelihood, speech, my cola, means of protection, or trying to pass laws that will make me a criminal for owning a piece of plastic or aluminum.


If the R's start to do this kind of crap even close to the level of the dems, we will need a 3rd party.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

we already need a third party, the problem is getting people to see you can win without "winning" with the 5% rule in a presidential election.

Simply eclipsing that mark would scare the pants off of both parties, but getting people to see that is difficult at best.

ETA: perot when he pulled like 19% of the populat vote, Congress was actually useful and productive for a few years after that.

edit on 3-6-2018 by Irishhaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Irishhaf

I don't see this as a major, needle moving issue. Yes, ppl have strong feelings about it, but I'm not sure it would be the over riding consideration for most. The leaders of the Democratic party are increasingly radical, to the point of socialism, that centrists/inds won't touch them.


I am certainly not ‘normal’, but I vote pro-gun as my number one issue. No wars and no socialism come a close second and third. I think the Progressive stance on guns will cause them more problems than they think. I don’t know one person that supports gun control and that includes my more liberal leaning friends.

No logical person sees guns as the issue. It is a society issue.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 12:16 PM
link   
There is nutters on both sides of the argument.

Take Oliver North blaming shootings on computer games, like no one was shot pre atari... from a guy who's entire career is connected to guns and the sales of them. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Doing nothing isn't going help, blaming GTA will only get GTA censored, more censorship... Shootings will continue.

I have no answers, just trying to add balance.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: AlienView

I am going to honest here. I stopped watching news on the tube a few months back but I still make my rounds on the internet. I go to all news sites you can think of. I believe that reading all news sources is helpful to fully understand what is actually going on in the world.
With that being said I have never seen a article from a “left” leaning site that says we should take away guns. I personally believe that is a fabrication made to help further the divide between people. The only organizations that I have seen say that are those that believe that the left is evil.
I have seen articles from left leaning sites that say the AR-15 should be illegal. I think that is bull crap though. Now I may have missed some articles that say we should outlaw guns but if I did see that I just keep scrolling cause that is complete crap.



You're not looking very hard. For example , H.R.5087 Assault Weapons Ban of 2018......76 pages of BAN....all Ak-47's, all AR type weapons, etc. , etc. Honestly , I think the left wants to ban the 2nd Amendment entirely.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: conspiracytheoristIAM

Many of them do. Not all, not by a long stretch...but the voice heard all too often is the more strident "common sense" or idiocy of that sort. The more moderate voices are drowned out all too often, or are ignored by both sides as they don't support the agenda of whichever side.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

And YOU are correct. I usually vote Republican at the State level. However, I dont much vote in the Federal races; we have a Republican House Rep, but he mostly votes with the Dems; he's former CIA so he's got his Deep State Creds, (endless wars for CIA profiteering).

He's being challenged in November by a Fillipina Lesbian who's former Army Inteligence, i.e. Deep State Creds, (endless wars for CIA profiteering) and of course she's pro-abortion, Open Borders, anti-2nd Amendment so we can have equal access victimization by MS-13, etc. I mean, well, yea.....why not if you've embraced the culture of Death, el Dia de Morte.

Final analysis it doesnt matter who wins because our District is too poor to elicit any meaningful support from Congress anyway.

I wont be voting for either of them. Frankly the establishment Republicans I find pretty useless.
edit on 3-6-2018 by TonyS because: SP



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: soundguy

No what you mean is you want to DE normalize the people on the right.

The Right's views on keeping and beating arms has been normal for as long as this country has existed.

Jaden



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join