For all Liberal Gun Owners

[hornadylnl]

1st marriage.
I should have took my chances and zig-zagged the hell out of there.

A woman awakes during the night, and her husband isn’t in bed with her. She goes downstairs to look for him. She finds him sitting at the kitchen table with a cup of coffee in front of him. He appears to be in deep thought, just staring at the wall. She watches as he wipes a tear from his eye and takes a sip of his coffee. "What's the matter, dear?" she asks. "Why are you down here at this time of night?"
The husband looks up from his coffee, "Do you remember 20 years ago when we were dating, and you were only 16?" he asks solemnly.

"Yes, I do," she replies.

"Do you remember when your father caught us in the back seat of my car making love?"

"Yes, I remember," says the wife, lowering herself into a chair beside him.

The husband continues, "Do you remember when he shoved the shotgun in my face and said, 'Either you marry my daughter, or I'll send you to jail for 20 years?’"

"I remember that, too," she replies softly.

He wipes another tear from his cheek and says, "I would have gotten out today."

 

[Bunnykid68]

It conflicts with the image they've created of me.

Ohhh Nooeess, a conflict

 

[Denny347]

I find there are two types of liberals, the kind that are bat **** crazy and want the government to run everything, and the kind that simply want to make sure everyone in America is taken care of if they work hard for it or not.

IMO we could use more of the second type on the side of gun owners

Same with Conservatives. They tout publicly that they are fighting for your rights at the same time voting for the Patriot Act. They say they want to eliminate welfare at the same time they 100% support farm subsidies (to the tune of $250 billion in the last 10 years). Defense spending is welfare for the defense industry. It's "make work" for huge defense contractors with lobbyists who have unlimited budgets. The United States spends more on its military than the next 14 largest military spenders combined (China, Russia, UK, France, Japan, Saudi Arabia, India, Germany, Brazil, Italy, South Korea, Australia, Canada, and Turkey). It's more than we need.

 

[churchmouse]

A woman awakes during the night, and her husband isn’t in bed with her. She goes downstairs to look for him. She finds him sitting at the kitchen table with a cup of coffee in front of him. He appears to be in deep thought, just staring at the wall. She watches as he wipes a tear from his eye and takes a sip of his coffee. "What's the matter, dear?" she asks. "Why are you down here at this time of night?"
The husband looks up from his coffee, "Do you remember 20 years ago when we were dating, and you were only 16?" he asks solemnly.

"Yes, I do," she replies.

"Do you remember when your father caught us in the back seat of my car making love?"

"Yes, I remember," says the wife, lowering herself into a chair beside him.

The husband continues, "Do you remember when he shoved the shotgun in my face and said, 'Either you marry my daughter, or I'll send you to jail for 20 years?’"

"I remember that, too," she replies softly.

He wipes another tear from his cheek and says, "I would have gotten out today."

Perfect.

 

[popsmoke]

One voice from the LGC Forum:
"Looked over the information on the gun control bill.....I guess it makes me no never mind. Sorry if that upsets some of you but as far as I'm concerned, I see no gun on that entire list (the old list from the Clinton AWB) that I would miss all that much....and as far as I'm concerned, a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, seems to just gobble up too much ammo anyway, besides, who the hell needs a bayonet, or suppressor on their hunting rifle. They say that already owned guns will be grandfathered in and grandfathered guns from the ban list will need to be registered.....OK, so be it....I've been finger printed for things ranging from my CCW permit, to the HAZMAT endorsement on my CDL and my Gov't clearance where I work sometimes....just keep your nose clean and don't worry about it. Besides, perhaps it is best to track some kinds of guns.....we track all kinds of dangerous materials....so perhaps placing the same types of restriction on certain kinds of guns, doesn't seem all that terrible to me. People are just getting worked up over nothing. I just don't see this bill as a threat the the 2A.
...
Look, it is going to pass, if not now, then later.....what is everyone's proposal? ***** and Moan? Rant and Rave? Make threats? Civil war?

Sometimes, it boils down to making some peace and not getting worked up over something you can't do anything about anyway. I personally think we can let this one go and concentrate energy on rights that that matter to more people, jobs to keep people working, clean environment, union rights, feeding the poor, social equality, fair taxation, etc. The AWB just doesn't add up to much more than a pile of horse **** in the grand picture of suffering that is going on."



But on the other hand:

Sounds like something the government would post. After seeing how they've repeatedly placed spies in "threat groups" in the past, and clearly have no problem snooping on what they view as dangers to their agenda.

I have no problem believing that they'd put their own guys into groups like this, or the NRA, and post crap like this.

 

[Concerned Citizen]

No, no I shouldn't get involved in this discussion...but I am.

I am a staunch conservative, and I am a proud, non appologetic Christian. However, I don't think this "gay marriage" issue is anybody's damn business. I have been married for over 20 years now. When I got married, I made a promise to God, to my wife, and to the people who attended that day. The license I got was only because I legally had to. It was simply a receipt stating that I had paid the tax that was required by law. That means nothing to me.

I have several friends that are homosexual. I don't judge them, because I don't have a right to judge anybody. My religion tells me as much. None of you have the right to judge them either.

I have discussed the issue of gay marriage with some of them, and they mostly just don't care. They are professionals that are living their lives and don't need the gov't to ratify their relationship any more than I do. If someone is in a committed relationship with another person, that's their own business. That is a commitment they have made to someone in the same manner I have.

The people who are pushing this legal issue are such a minority (albeit a vocal minority), but that is who the radical left media likes to make their "darlings".

It really is not much different than us who choose to carry guns. Leave me alone and let me live my life, and I will leave you alone & let you live yours.

OK, RANT OFF...

 

[danbb]

I'm sorry, but if you are pro-gun and pro-2a, voting for these liberal politicians is basically signing your own death warrant, no matter what your personal views are. Look at Illinois, California, Massachusetts, New York, and basically every other state run by liberals. Besides being fiscally irresponsible, they have the tightest restrictions on gun rights, concealed carry, and all the other things we hold dear as gun owners. Maybe you individually cannot be stereotyped, but as a collective group, they have done the most damage to our constitutional rights of any political group.

 

[thompal]

One voice from the LGC Forum:

Same old liberal BS. "Who needs blah blah blah on their hunting rifle?" "who needs more than 10 round magazines." "must register banned guns" " I've already been fingerprinted, so who cares?" "it's best to track guns."

Those attitudes make me want to regurgitate.

 

[thompal]

One voice from the LGC Forum:
Sometimes, it boils down to making some peace and not getting worked up over something you can't do anything about anyway. I personally think we can let this one go and concentrate energy on rights that that matter to more people, jobs to keep people working, clean environment, union rights, feeding the poor, social equality, fair taxation,

"CLEAN ENVIRONMENT?" "UNION RIGHTS?" "SOCIAL EQUALITY?" Oh lord - get me an air sick bag. I'm going to hurl.

 

[LPMan59]

No, no I shouldn't get involved in this discussion...but I am.

I am a staunch conservative, and I am a proud, non appologetic Christian. However, I don't think this "gay marriage" issue is anybody's damn business. I have been married for over 20 years now. When I got married, I made a promise to God, to my wife, and to the people who attended that day. The license I got was only because I legally had to. It was simply a receipt stating that I had paid the tax that was required by law. That means nothing to me.

I have several friends that are homosexual. I don't judge them, because I don't have a right to judge anybody. My religion tells me as much. None of you have the right to judge them either.

I have discussed the issue of gay marriage with some of them, and they mostly just don't care. They are professionals that are living their lives and don't need the gov't to ratify their relationship any more than I do. If someone is in a committed relationship with another person, that's their own business. That is a commitment they have made to someone in the same manner I have.

The people who are pushing this legal issue are such a minority (albeit a vocal minority), but that is who the radical left media likes to make their "darlings".

It really is not much different than us who choose to carry guns. Leave me alone and let me live my life, and I will leave you alone & let you live yours.

OK, RANT OFF...

The best government is that which governs least

The United States Magazine and Democratic Review

 

[KW730]

I love how fast thread go to **** on here.

 

[Mad Macs]

I'm sorry, but if you are pro-gun and pro-2a, voting for these liberal politicians is basically signing your own death warrant, no matter what your personal views are. Look at Illinois, California, Massachusetts, New York, and basically every other state run by liberals. Besides being fiscally irresponsible, they have the tightest restrictions on gun rights, concealed carry, and all the other things we hold dear as gun owners. Maybe you individually cannot be stereotyped, but as a collective group, they have done the most damage to our constitutional rights of any political group.

As opposed to states run by Conservatives where illiteracy and right to work rule the population?

Please spare me the garbage, both parties have their faults.

 

[thompal]

Apparently we don't need video gamers as allies either.

We need all the allies we can get.

People who support the ban because "we don't need more than 10 round magazines to hunt," or "I've been fingerprinted before, so the registration doesn't bother me" or "we need to track firearms" are NOT allies.

They are the "legitimate sporting purpose" people, who would be fairly satisfied to leave their fully registered $5000 clays shotgun in a government-approved facility until they asked permission to use it for a legitimate sporting purpose.

 

[thompal]

Maybe they'd be more receptive of issues important to us like unfettered 2a if we were more receptive of issues important to them.

Would that be the "union rights" or the "social equity" that was mentioned?

 

[danbb]

As opposed to states run by Conservatives where illiteracy and right to work rule the population?

Please spare me the garbage, both parties have their faults.

Illiteracy is not really common in any state, and it certainly is not a choice made by lawmakers and imposed upon the citizens, such as making concealed carry illegal. Also, what do you have against a RIGHT to work, a RIGHT to choose whether or not you want to join a union? Should union membership be imposed upon everyone too?

 

[thompal]

LOL. Yeah, that's it. As soon as we embrace homosexual marriage, the liberals will suddenly have an epiphany about constitutional conservatism.

This is exactly why the libertarian party is a joke. They demand freedom without responsibility.

And just HOW is believing that "the government shouldn't interfere with the ability of people to marry" demanding freedom without responsibility??

Do you believe that the government should regulate every aspect of a person's life? Tell people what they can and can't eat, drink, or smoke? Who to marry?

It sounds to me like the freedom to do something places the burden of responsibility on the citizen, rather than on the government.

 

[Liberty1911]

And just HOW is believing that "the government shouldn't interfere with the ability of people to marry" demanding freedom without responsibility??

Do you believe that the government should regulate every aspect of a person's life? Tell people what they can and can't eat, drink, or smoke? Who to marry?

It sounds to me like the freedom to do something places the burden of responsibility on the citizen, rather than on the government.

I addressed it in this thread:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...distinguishing_government_from_society-3.html

 

[thompal]

Exactly my point. Don't tell me conservatives should embrace homosexual marriage so liberals will respect 2A, which is actually in the Constitution.

Liberals need to start respecting constitutional rights before they demand others respect their personal preferences.

Your premise is absurd.

Perhaps if you studied the Constitution, you would find out that any power that is not SPECIFICALLY granted to the government remains a right of citizens.

Liberals AND conservatives need to understand the Constitution before they start advocating laws to regulate people's behavior.

 

[Liberty1911]

Marriage is a right. I could get married tomorrow and the State or the government can do nothing to stop me.

Awesome. I assume gay people will go and get married then and stop bothering the rest of us with this nonsense.

Wait, that's not happening. I wonder why?

 

[Liberty1911]

Perhaps if you studied the Constitution, you would find out that any power that is not SPECIFICALLY granted to the government remains a right of citizens.

Liberals AND conservatives need to understand the Constitution before they start advocating laws to regulate people's behavior.

Maybe you didn't read my other posts in this thread. I addressed that, and pointed out that regulation of marriage is a state issue under 10A, so no need for proponents of the homosexual agenda to force their morality on the rest of us, which is what they accuse their opponents of doing.