By Travis Pike
The gun culture is a snake eating it’s own tail. Not every member of the gun culture mind you, but a loud minority that makes us all look bad. The fact of the matter is the millennial generation is the future of gun ownership, and gun culture 2.0 is leading the way. Unfortunately, the loud minority of gun culture is representing us all . . .
My First Sergeant used to say if you mess up off base in town, the first thing the local newspaper will say is Marine [insert rank here] [insert last name here] was arrested in bar fight Or arrested for DUI. Or arrested for any other stupid thing 19-year-olds get into.
The same goes for gun owners and gun culture. A loud minority of gun owners happen to be homophobic, Islamophobic, and some can be quite racist. This is from a right-leaning Libertarian, who has been blown up twice in Afghanistan and shot at by Muslims countless times in a short period. Someone who thinks a bakery should be able to serve whoever they like. And someone who thinks race hustlers should have rotten vegetables thrown at them (not really, but stocks in the public square aren’t a terrible idea).
The main problem with this, as we will see in the comments section, is that this minority of gun owners will blame an entire race, religion, or sexual preference for acts of a couple tool bags. The reason that sounds familiar is because it’s the same brush that anti-gunners use to paint us all with after one tool bag does something terrible.
I know some gay assholes sued a bakery. Some Muslim asshole killed four Marines and a Sailor. A gun-owning asshole shot up a movie theater. You know what they all have in common? They’re assholes.
We have Ted Nugent appearing at NRA rallies, serving in some position or another, spouting off comments like, “big, uneducated, greasy, black mongrels,” when referring to rappers on MTV. We should probably disassociate from someone like that.
When Brian Klawiter, owner of DieselTec in Michigan refuses to serves gays, but embraces gun owners, we should distance ourselves. We should let the world know we think he’s a d-bag. I don’t advocate the state taking action, but as gun owners, we should push back and let people know we don’t respect or appreciate being associated with close-minded bigots.
When some loudmouth YouTubevangelist scam artist (raises thousands of dollars through crowdfunding to ‘buy a camera,’ still films on his cell phone and buys a 7,000 dollar watch) starts spouting off at the mouth about protecting his first amendment rights against the imaginary gay conspiracy trying to take his free speech rights with an AR pistol, we should let it be known as the gun community we think this guy is a loud mouth d-bag.
When two gun stores brand themselves a Muslim free zones, as gun owners, we should respond with public scorn and let them know Muslim gun owners are still gun owners, and can still vote pro gun. A minority of Muslims are terrorists and a minority of gun owners commit crimes. Again, I don’t want the state taking action, I want gun owners taking action with their wallets.
The media will always run the anti-gun piece first, and use idiots, d-bags, and assholes as examples of why the gun culture is so terrible. People who may not be sold on the gun-violence-is-everywhere line could easily be sold on the gun owners are racist/homophobic/Islamophobic shallow end of the gene pool. We need to face the facts that this is a PR game, and the loudest minority will always make the front page, or lead story when it comes to gun rights.
That loud minority of jerks is the snake that’s eating its own tail when it comes to gun rights.
There are always going to be assh0les, and I’m not going to spend my life trying to correct or denounce them. Because even if there’s only one, the leftist media will play him up as if he speaks for all of us. That’s the way it is. Get over it. And that snake is eating its own tail, not tale.
https://youtu.be/2cV_q-mVAAA
I’m with Ralph all the way on this one. Geez, we have enough to do just trying to keep stupid, card-carrying gun owners from doing stupid things with guns that make headlines. And you can’t fix stupid.
The bakers, mechanics and range owners who try to restrict their clientele based on some prejudice will have to sink or swim on their own.
Ralph said it all. No need for me to even subscribe for comment replies.
I’m beyond fed up with people trying to push the author’s line of reasoning. It’s an impossible goal that progressives hope that POTG will obsess over so that they won’t have enough energy for the real fight. It’s a diversion. Don’t take the b8 m8!
Yup. These goobers will inevitably be highly profiled as to support the media’s stereotypes and antigun agenda. Also, excessive use of profanity detracts from otherwise persuasive writing and is a sure sign of a weak vocabulary. Just a thought.
I ignore the “azzholes” on both sides of this (or any other argument) focusing instead on those I perceive to be willing to listen and entertain my (pro gun rights) point of view. However, let us never doubt the resolve of those alligned against our rights. They will use anything, anytime, anywhere to subvert those rights. It is right to engage them on every front, ceding nothing but taking everything we can. One cannot bargain or negotiate for our rights; they should be fought for.
In before the racist/homophobic/Islamophobic comments. Agree with the author.
Yep
“If we police our own to appease the enemy, they’ll totally admire us and surrender.” – a cuckservative writer
Personally, I think the anti-gunners are just too Gung-Ho trying to step on gun owner’s rights. On the other hand, I get so tired of hearing about “stupid liberals” from people who seem to be the type this article is written about. Just lump everyone into one group, make it an us against them. In actuality there are quite a few Democrats that are liberal on many issues, may have even voted for Obama, and have owned guns for decades, just as there are Republicans who hate everything Obama stands for, and think anyone that owns a gun is just plain ignorant and stupid. It would be nice if everyone could tone the rhetoric down. The anti-gunners should realize that there are way too many guns in America to even think about getting rid of them. The pro-gunners should realize that America will do what the majority of Americans want. If they live in a liberal state, they probably don’t see the need for guns, and they will enact laws to show that. The older generations that live in more rural states want things to always stay the same, anybody should be able to own any gun, and they will vote for politicians that reflect that. Bottom line- guns will always be a part of America, but there will be some areas where you won’t have as many rights as some other areas of the country. There is nothing either side can do to change that.
This is your winner right here.
Big FAIL on this article. Pull your head out of the sand…some assholes are assholes because of their “religion”, because they want to ram their gay bullshit down your throat (pun not intended) and some assholes are racist bastards because they hate white people.
Don’t ask me to kowtow to those assholes just because I happen to believe in the Constitution an like my guns, thank you very much. You want to bend a knee, have at it. Don’t ask me to bend mine.
I agree. The lady that banned all Muslims at her gun range was extremely embarrassing to me. And what was more embarrassing was the large amount of support she got from gun owners with various biggotted anti-muslim phrases.
Its crap like that that also got me to start identifying as libertarian than conservative, even though I’m a mix of both.
Same, especially when I started realizing that “small government” Republicans were about as small government as Democrats. All of them wanted to control me one way or another.
Republican =/= conservative.
For that matter, Russ, Republican =/= republican.
Yeah, y get a lot of that liberal evil blue house of (D) bs like that around every election.
NO ‘guns’ won’t be the way we can all “get along” so you can sell more liberal bull_shit.
Tired if libs sh_tting on America and blaming conservatives.
When they say “get rid of guns” “guns are bad” from the stupid-crazy liberal evil blue house of (D) you should hear “we’re out to get you” “you are bad”
@Roy H, like me. I’m glad she banned those assholes.
This guy explains why I don’t read this website on a regular basis (this is, basically, the end of the Internet for me), and why I have to quietly say, “I like to shoot” when people ask about hobbies.
Gun owners are losing the PR battle to the controllers, which is why even as controllers become more shrill and desperate they continue to have a presence. It’s far too easy to let a few loudmouthed idiots ruin everyone else’s fun, and the sooner the loudmouths figure it out the better off we’ll all be.
There is an element of disarmament types that feign belonging to the people of the gun community solely to bring discredit on us.
If they own guns, then they are gun owners. Or do you mean that they just act like they own guns and then do stupid stuff?
No, their liberalism is why we’re having to fight for our guns.
Actually it isn’t. I go shooting with a good number of liberals, some who love Bernie Sanders, except they also love guns. Indeed, actual liberalism should love guns, since it is supposed to be about individual freedom.
Then there are the Blue Steel Democrats, liberal right down the line, who support the Second Amendment (though they weirded out and opposed national reciprocity because of — hard to believe! — states’ rights).
The infection of liberalism with anti-gun fervor is actually recent — until the last generation or so, being opposed to guns would have astonished liberals.
No, this blog is about ‘guns’ and only tangentially about ‘gun rights’. If we didn’t have Liberals, we wouldn’t need to argue over ‘gun rights’.
If you think you can separate out the issue from the rest of the trash that is liberals and liberalism, you might not be alone, but that wouldn’t make you any less wrong. It has all been tried before, and it settles out with ruin and violence.
When it comes down to-it, even if I stand alone, this sh_t will never be included on “my side”.
It’s rather telling about people when they post only to pick on is a spelling error.
If only we had people of the gun that were able to post well thought out replies we might be in a better long run position.
In other words, act like the same apology-seeking outrage-culture denigrators infesting traditional media so as to combat the same.
@Yes, let’s be the kinder gentler gay loving, leftist longing, cross our borders for free shit types….let’s be just like the d-bags that want to take our freedoms away…and maybe they will leave us alone?
Riiiiiiiiiight……..yeah, that’ll work.
So, if the next Islamic nutjob to shoot something up for Allah’s Snackbars is found to have vetted/trained exclusively or even partially at an NRA certified range, the screeching rhetoric won’t instantly go to ‘Mean NRA conservatives use freedoms to train baby/soldier killing terrorists?’ Not that the rhetoric from the left isn’t to that point already.
Somehow I don’t think there’s a winning option when it comes to the Muslim free ranges. If they think can turn Islamophobia on gun owners they’ll try it.
See the post about the 16 year old kid on guns save life for example
To be fair, we also like to eat our own, like when those people (who had to ask the state for permission to carry a pistol concealed) publicly ridicule and denounce the open and constitutional carriers…. Which is just like when “fudd” hunters were/are all too happy to throw evil black rifle owners under a bus full of demanding moms, in hopes of preserving their preferred tool.
:-/
Just like assholes, everyone has an opinion; some just are louder & stinkier than others. Ignoring them is a lot easier than trying to douse them with febreeze whenever they get too offensive.
Uhhhh…. yeah… you don’t know how the three sea shells work…
A peaceful Muslim today, a crazed gunman tomorrow.
A peaceful gun owner today, a crazed spree killer tomorrow.
Right?
Wrong. Most people wouldn’t go on a killing spree in the name of their religion.
Neither would most Muslims.
You do realize how many Muslims DON’T kill in the name of their religion, correct?
Well a pox on both houses.
Most of the mass killers that used firearms (or other means) to kill had a long history of disturbing behavior or had voiced their intentions in some manner (social media, friends, family). So technically it’s not peaceful Muslims, nor peaceful Gun owners that everyone needs to be concerned about.
Serial killers are, however, another matter altogether. They are a little more successful in masking their intentions.
In before “but muh rights to be an asshole”
“The main problem with this, as we will see in the comments section, is that this minority of gun owners will blame an entire race, religion, or sexual preference for acts of a couple tool bags. The reason that sounds familiar is because it’s the same brush that anti-gunners use to paint us all with after one tool bag does something terrible.
I know some gay assholes sued a bakery. Some Muslim asshole killed four Marines and a Sailor. A gun-owning asshole shot up a movie theater. You know what they all have in common? They’re assholes.”
Spoken like a (“don’t call me a liberal”) true lib.
You know what they (REALLY) all have in common. People are willing to equate them with mouthy pro-gun types who are so F-ing flabbergasted with the abandonment of the pillars of society by the freekin’ morons on the left [as though they haven’t been attempted an failed too many times throughout history to even bother trying to recite – BUT NEWS-FLASH – giving those types any slack is part of the reason they even make mention today, and anyone’s ‘horror’/’disbelief’/ or unconscionability over the actions of such people are only because you are too stupid and lazy to mildly examine history – you don’t get to play the stupid game again because you were to stoned to see or remember how the last one turned out] .
“Eat our own” or don’t when it’s Bullsh_t hash that were slinging, IT DOESN’T FU<KING MATTER.
We all get to the same place anyway, except in a more littered eventuality. If we're going to get there eventually, I say we all go there today. Who the f wants to wait around til I'm 90 for you f-ers to try to pull something.
I haven't seen too many (true) 'homophobic' comments here. There's just been a whole lot of 'push-back' on the notion of "Equality" with it. Again, equality is a meaningful and important thing in the relationship between people, and between things. I see a whole lot of people here that are not homosexual, and THEY DON'T WANT TO BE EQUATED WITH IT. Not (necessarily wholly) because it is repulsive, but because it doesn't serve any purpose to be equated with, and tends to counteract/countermand their heterosexual agenda if they are even remotely confused with being 'equal to it'. [i.e., the needs of the one (side) contradict the goals of the other]. AGAIN AND STILL, homosexuality is not a "new" thing, it is bullsh_t to attempt to trot it out there like human history hasn't already blessed it with whatever value it might collectively attain, and the predominance of that is as explained above. IN ANY CASE it is also incredibly stupid BULLSH_T to say that homosexual unions (as blessed by society and called "marriage" where it applies [still obviously not those not fully taking part in a "permanent union"]) are a threat/hinderence/ or drain on society. They are ALSO NOT WHY HOMOSEXUALITY IS UN-EQUAL. This is know to be true because "inequality" is not a "projected state" [TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012].
P.S. – I've been close enough to being 'blown-up' several times in Iraq, so much so that, if I were any much closer to it, I could no longer use the word 'close'. And I have to say, none of those incidents are why I hate muslims and their kind (again, I am a student of history) and there are too many other reasons.
On the notion of 'guns', we keep and bear them because we are all just individuals stuck here on a planet (and which will continue we're stuck on another, or even many other planets). Weapons are our way of maintaining our individuality and individual sovereignty. We all got to get our own needs taken care of each day, and if you happen to f-with me during my daily routine (that I owe you prudence and planning enough to not similarly interfere with yours) then I need the means to 'end' you, because history has also shown us what flaccidity in each demanding personal sovereignty buys us. [TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012]
There you go quoting your own manifesto again. Can you for once tell us where we can read this “TERMS” thing you wrote, Joe M. Thomas R.?
I’m with you Michelle, I’ve been awaiting the day Joe R publishes his manifesto. I think it will be ‘good’ reading.
So, I am a bit confused here.. you state you have studied history, and allude to being justified in your hatred/disdain/bigotry of Muslims, but you seem to gloss over a couple sections in history where Christians were perpetrators of heinous actions (Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, etc..)… by your own logic (history = Muslims bad), Christians must also = bad. Your arguments against homosexulaity seem to enure feelings that you, yourself are Christian, thus making your argument hypocritical… Both for the history = Muslims bad but not Christians, and for ignoring the Bible which blatantly states “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” (Matthew 7:1-3King James Version (KJV) 7). So.. I am wondering at the hypocrisy here? For me closed minded and judgemental, lazy, non-accountable and ignorant = bad, not someone’s race, religion, sexuality, etc…
To the author of the contest entry: Be consistent in your words/actions, be accountable for yourself, and leave others to their own devices. We may be ‘victimized’ by the media but, just like every family, there are those in our group that make us look bad. Get over it, and stop trying to control others.
Interesting. I guess you didn’t realize the crusades were a response to muslim aggression? Or that the primary reason behind the Spanish Inquisition was rooting out muslims pretending to be Christian after the reconquest of Spain?
Right, that’s why the European Christian armies invaded Muslim lands in the Middle East?
[Citation Needed]
Actually the prelate of the orthodox church petitioned for help against the Muslim aggression.
As to the citation needed, Google is your friend. Such trivial knowledge is too easy for you too find on your own.
History is easy to research.Sadly, too many don’t, and buy into all the revisionist cap being put out today.
As a response to Muslim aggression, the Crusades were a very late and clumsy response.
As for the Inquisition, it was begun in order to root out Jews pretending to be Christians; Muslims became of interest only later.
You might want to actually crack a few history books. You are wrong on both counts. Jews did get swept up in the inquisition, many were aligned with the muslims during the the islamic rule there, go figure. Spain expelled all non-Catholics, and the was seeking out those who pretended to be in order to stay.
The crusades began while Islamic expansionist was ongoing.
Well, the The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Britannica, the New World Encyclopedia, and a lot more agree with me: Ferdinand and Isabella were convinced by a Dominican friar that crypto-Jews were a danger to their new kingdom’s unity, so they asked Pope Sixtus for the authority to establish their own Inquisition.
And given that Jerusalem fell to the Muslims in 637, the Crusades were a very belated reaction.
Where did I say anything about Jerusalem? Oh, I didn’t! Like I said, crack open a few history books. Islamic aggression has been ongoing for 14 centuries. It is interesting that so many sources neglect to mention muslims and the Spanish Inquisition, especially seeing how Spain had just been retaken from the moriscos, excepting Grenada, and the very real threat they posed was obvious. Even wikipedia gives them a mention. I guess antisemitism is still extant. Muslisms are even sanctioned to hide their identity if it may further Islam. Jews aren’t.
The point is that Muslim aggression against Christian lands began long before the Crusades, and it took that long to decide to do something about it? Didn’t European Christians care about the Holy Land for six centuries? Why the sudden interest?
And as a response to the appeal from the eastern Patriarch it was pitiful: they refused to coordinate or even cooperate with Byzantine forces, and ended up hastening the fall of eastern Christendom instead of helping. The noble Crusaders for the most part had no real interest in defending eastern Christians; they just wanted lands and/or prestige.
As for the Inquisition, yes, it later got used against crypto-Muslims, but that was not one of the reasons it was begun.
Your allegation that the response was late is laughable, Jerusalem was a lot further away back then, figuratively. The response, regardless of its quality, was a response, not self-initiated. They were asked to come help.
I will grant that anti-Semitism was rampant in Europe at the time of the Spanish inquisition, and as such the crypto -jews received the brunt of the attention. That still ignores the events in Spain immediately prior, the reestablishment of Catholic rulers. Islamic remnants and presence absolutely had bearing on the initiation of that inquisition. Jews never wrested control of the land from the native Spaniards. They were a convenient scapegoat, with material wealth ripe for the taking.
The request to the pope for having an Inquisition under the authority of the Crown rather than the Church was made because the “Catholic Monarchs” were worried about Jews pretending to be Christians. The decree by Ferdinand and Isabella establishing the Spanish Inquisition, issued after receipt of the papal bull Exigit Sincerae Devotionis Affectus, mentions only the Jews as a reason for starting the institution*, and for the first forty years the targets of inquisitions were almost entirely Jews.+ They were thus not scapegoats, but the focus.
Documents do show that in some cases lesser official identified “moros” as to be examined (see Homza), which may be where the erroneous representation of the reason for the Inquisition arises. But there is no doubt that in purpose and early practice the reason for the Spanish Inquisition was the conversos, converted Jews.
*The Spanish Inquisition, 1478–1614; 2006, ed. tran. Homza
+Religion and Society in Latin America; 2015, ed. Lee M Penyak , Walter J. Petry
If you want to look at “recent events” in the Iberian peninsula, you’ll find that the precipitating cause of the request fr the Spanish Inquisition was a set of riots against and involving both Jews and relapsed conversos (converted Jews). The two monarchs trying to unite their realms saw this as a threat, and moved to respond to it — and this was while the fight against the Moors was still ongoing. Muslims — who were regarded more as foreign intruders than religious foes — were viewed as an external matter, and the Inquisition was intended to deal with an internal matter. Only later, once the political power of the foreigners had been ended, did they become an internal matter.
Further, the Jews were a worry because they shared the Old Testament with Christians, and so had an easy time (it was said) masquerading as Christians when they weren’t. Even more, they blended in with the population, whereas the Moors did not. The Moors/Muslims, OTOH, didn’t have that shared background of scriptures, so there was little need for any inquiring/inquisition to reveal them.
Islam claims both testaments, but that they were corrupted and theirs was the correct version of affairs.
The fact that there were a number of morisco converts goes contrary to your assertion.
Well, let’s see:
according to all sources, the Spanish Inquisition was begun to target Jews — Catholic sources, Jewish sources, everyone. According to recent research, those original sources are correct.
All you have is . . . nothing.
There are many reasons to hate muslims. I didn’t invent any of them.
If you’d like to avoid some of those reasons, you need to not have any commercial shipping pass near the northwestern shores of Africa. You need to keep your daughters away from the slave traders. You need to keep your kids away from the “men are for sexual pleasure and women are for procreation, and you need to do a 1.5 day ritualistic cleansing after the latter before you can again partake of the former” a-hole muslims who start in on the kids at an early age. You need to avoid being any other religion around them because they like to sacrifice you to their god. You need to not be literate or an intellectual there because they like to weed you out in order to keep you under control. You need to not be a woman or small child, because you will suffer as a 3rd class citizen (below the family pet or livestock). You need to not make any more excuses for them because they are coming for all of you (it’s part of their 5 year (slow to complete 1.5 millennial) plan) worse than the evil blue house of (D) liberal cr_p.
Take a close look, Paul, at Roymond’s post. He cites sources. Something you could take a real lesson from.
No citations? No links? Peanut Grinder, your consistency is awful. More like generic peanut butter. And of course, no relevant additions to the discussion, just trollish distraction. Go watch cartoons.
I’ll cite E762, below:
“If you have to resort to derogatory slurs and visceral rants, you’ve already lost any debate you hoped to have.”
So then, when I was called “Skippy”………
Nothing wrong with carrying forward the theme.
I’ve been preaching this to our choir for years – because I’ve been accused of being a “LibTard” [only] once here for my progressive/diplomatic aspirations for a negotiated truce, or failing that just tell ’em to FU & FO. But since you mentioned Muslim terrorists, I think it is disturbing that when Muslim-majority country’s citizens were surveyed that a whopping 80% of them preferred Sharia law, the death of anyone leaving their “peaceful” religion and “honor killings” of defenseless women for violating the slightest of super-strict rules. For that commitment, I think it is safe to say that a MAJORITY of Muslims can be classified as “extremist” by anyone else’s standards.
This is exactly what is wrong with people in this country. Everybody is outraged at something.
Instead of decrying the shallow thinking process that leads to outrage we try to pander to those people even more. Yeah, that will show them what fine people we are.
There is no winning with perpetual outraged. They will move the goal posts all the time.
Thank you. This is what I was going to say. There is no appeasing the outraged. They aren’t trying to correct us; they want to get rid of us. If they had the ability (though they generally don’t), some of them would even like to see us dead. If you cannot understand that, you aren’t thinking and reading. Yes, there are azzholes on “our side”, but even if we stifled them, the antis would just make stuff up.
“And that snake is eating its own tail, not tale.”
“This is from a right-leaning Libertarian, who has been blown up twice in Afghanistan and shot at by Muslims countless times in a short period.”
Possible TBI, cut him some slack…
Granted. He’s waving a bloody shirt of a different sort. For some, waving one with a ACU/DCU/BDU print makes their’s less noisome.
There are many things I disagree with in this article, but I’m not going to throw out the “I was in combat, so I’m wiser than you” card to float an argument.
I didn’t read that as a “so im smarter than you” card or anything of the sort. I read it as an example of why he would have ample reason, in many people’s eyes, to be bigoted against all Muslims. I read it as “Even I don’t hate all muslims, and look at how many reason I have to do so”
This is what I was aiming for Rocket Scientist.
I tend to agree with your premise, but I don’t think it matters much if we distance ourselves from the racists and homophobes, because most of the media is biased against us and will still portray their stupidity as representative. Even if there was only one asshole gun owner, he’d still be the go-to quote guy for most of the mainstream media. And if there wasn’t one, they’d invent him.
P.S. I don’t think you’re using the “snake eating its own tail” metaphor correctly. The snake eating its own tail is a symbol of cyclical renewal (much like the phoenix) or infinity, not of self-destructiveness. Then again, it might be an appropriate usage: assholes and idiots have always been with us, and will always be…
Fighting against the morons is just as never-ending as the fight to preserve our right to be armed. But it is still a necessary fight. Hears and minds are a real thing and there are real potential supporters who are turned away in disgust at the moronic assholes who all-too-often become representatives of gun owners, whether we like it or not.
Um, no. I’m not going to continually scan the news just so that I can speak out against every nutjob with whom I disagree.
Instead, I’ll continue to send my hard-earned money to the organizations I think are doing right. And I’ll continue to vote for the politicians I think are doing the least harm. And I’ll continue to teach new shooters all about the importance of marksmanship, training, and civic duty.
But I’m not going to be a BookFace social justice warrior just because there are some assholes out there.
+1
I’m with you Joe R.-and if we depend on “millennials” for truth and justice we are doomed. I’m also tired of being lectured to by veterans(who volunteered) to be in war.Hell-my own 40 year old son was in war and I DON’T like his opinions on 2A…or a whole lot of what he believes…but he’s my kid and the father of my grandkids.
Your opinion is just that-an opinion. AS far as being homophobic or islamophobic-that implies fear. I’m not afraid of either one-or confederate battle flags. I AM afraid for my countries future. Whatever-OFWG’s rule-millennials drool…and we still pay most of the bills,support pro-gun politicians and give $ to the NRA,SAF.goa,Illinois RA and other groups…I’m not a big fan of the Nuge but I bet HE’S done more for my rights than anyone writing on this blog…
Right on!!!
“I’m with you Joe R.-and if we depend on “millennials” for truth and justice we are doomed.”
Exactly. The issue millennials are going to have to face is essentially the same one I had to face, one upon a time, when I was a pretty committed Person Of The Left. It took awhile, but I finally understood enough about the world to realize that Marxism, collectivism, liberal politics, and just about anything that promoted government intervention was a direct threat to my personal liberty and freedom. Millennials are just going to have to figure that out and then understand that guns, and owning and carrying guns is just part of the deal. Perhaps the most important part of the deal. Fortunately, in the here and now, public opinion is running strongly against statist attempt to control guns. Maybe there’s still time . . .
You know, when people like you always mention that young veterans volunteered to be in a war, you miss the point. A lot of us needed money for college or to be able to afford healthcare to support a family, or whatever the DoD was promising. College isn’t cheap anymore, and it’s also a bit of a requirement these days if you want to make a respectable about of money.
The fact that Harvard advertises that 90% of students qualify for financial aid, despite the school getting a $30+ billion dollar grant a year, should be a clue.
I joined because the job market sucked, my college fund died with the stock market, and the Army was right there. Not everyone joins to be a flag-waving ultra-patriot that uses the flag pole to kung-fu terrorists while never letting the colors touch the ground. The U.S. has enormous, stupid military obligations. We also have an “all-volunteer” force. Hold higher education consistently out of reach by the lower-income end of the spectrum, offer to pay for enough college to get a decent (but not good) job, and boom, a constant supply of volunteers.
Don’t go taking a dump on me or any other troops because of when we graduated high school and what our options were. Turned out working what jobs I could get didn’t pay for jack as far as college goes.
In exchange for service to the country (but mostly its interests), I can get the financial support I need to get to medical school. I didn’t join so I could patriotically help guide $14,000 missiles on to poor, uneducated, self-destructive fundamentalists just so three more could pop up in his place. I’d really rather the whole world get along so my son can have a good place to live instead of a world full of people so scared of moving forward that they villainize anything they don’t understand.
That’s all of ISIL and good chunk of the developed world, really. We should all be prancing around in space like a bunch of Trekkies, but instead we’re all standing around waving our militaries (full of children) at each other while a bunch of extra-special losers are slaughtering people wholesale and decrying education (of all things) in the name of their twisted interpretation of developing-nation-faith-of-the-week.
So, yes, the term “millennial” is annoying and it makes you and everyone with any sense want to punch faces, but it’s not like your generation was actually all that helpful. The world sucked beforehand and it still sucks, so you contributed, in the grand scheme of things, nothing with your decades of existence.
Thanks.
@An honest man or Reed
I like the honesty even though it is not flattering.
“In exchange for service to the country (but mostly its interests), I can get the financial support I need to get to medical school.”
You should have just went as a security contractor, but then you wouldn’t be able to milk the system.
It is hard for some to grasp that individuals join the military as a capitalistic financial opportunity, and not out of patriotic duty or love of country. The generals that promote gun control are of this breed. The people that join for purely selfish reasons are the ones that will choose to continue making money by killing their own countrymen, if that time comes.
Thanks for the reply-I didn’t join because Vietnam. But I know plenty of guys whose lives were F’up forever as draftees. My kid joined for benefits-little did he know he’d get shot at. It worked out for him-but I’ll be damned if people object to me pointing out that you need to know what you’re getting into. And I respect your service-but it was your choice. Iraq and Afghanistan had nothing to do with America’s security.
So many simple minded folks who can’t find a medium between being a race baiting prog and an out and out racist. Yes liberals who make everything about race and obsess over being PC are idiots, no that doesn’t mean its ok to be racist.
“Islamophobic” – The liberal term for those who choose to be intolerant of an actual religion of intolerance. The religion that promotes misogyny and the mutilation of women, or violence against homosexuals, not to mention the violence against non believers. “Phobia” also insinuates one would be afraid of the religion, though it is not the religion that scares me, nor the minority who actually commit the terrorist acts, rather it is the silent majority who chose to neither say or do anything against it…
This is from an atheist libertarian.
The point is everyone has a right to be armed, even the ass holes. The left leaning media doesn’t care about the majority or new wave of firearms enthusiasts. They care about promoting an agenda, they will always use the worst examples of the firearms community and if they can’t find something to make them look bad, they will fabricate it. They use specific vocabulary to insight fear in the less informed, it doesn’t matter how well we behave, because to them the simple ownership of guns is amoral and we are misbehaving.
Well said Chris-I am evil just for existing(I don’t even get points for having a black wifeLOL)…
Going by what is really the only relevant metric, “us”-vs-“them” fertility rates, they’re not particularly successful in their so called “mutilation of women,” are they. But hey, at least you got a chance to flaunt your level of progressive indoctrination.
Female genital mutilation has nothing to do with making a woman infertile. Extra points to you for your willingness to speak out despite your ignorance.
But whatever it has to do with, it still doesn’t seem to have nearly the negative effect on women’s ability to be women, that whatever it is that we do with ours does…..
That is an interesting, unsupported, inane, conclusion.
Apparently you have never spoken to a victim of FGM.
Freedom and liberty are messy things at times, sometimes gloriously so. I told Lunchmeat the other day that the occasional shooting/massacre, everyday crime, and unfairness of life in general was the price of our freedom, and a bargain at that. This is just part of that bargain, no more, no less. Naturally we’re going to eat a few of our young, and naturally there will be some jerks and agent provocateurs making us look bad, but as long as we have faith that we’re on the good Lord’s right side (mind you, just my personal, Catholic opinion, so don’t hate 😉 ), then I think the truth shall set us free, even though the good fight is and will likely always be eternal.
People like Lunchmeat and that ‘god’ troll just about bleed from their eyeballs and THAT other place when it dawns on them that they can’t really win, and never will unless we let them.
Tom
Travis Pike implores you to behave like good little deracinated libertarians and cuckservatives.
He instructs the POTG to publically devour their own when the sacrosanct boundaries of political correctness are crossed.
Because guns.
There is no overwhelming support from gun owners supporting the Muslim-excluding range owners.
In contrast….
There is near universal support from the gay community in support of gays suing bakers, photographers, and caterers into bankruptcy. So much support in fact that city governments pile on to the lawsuits.
Big difference. Hope your next post has some merit.
That’s not true at all. Plenty of gay ppl not only supported but gave money to the bakery that sued gays
Travis Pike implores you to behave like good little deracinated libertarians and cuckservatives.
He instructs the POTG to publically devour their own when the sacrosanct boundaries of political correctness are crossed.
Because guns.
Travis Pike implores you to behave like good little deracinated libertarians and cuckservatives.
He instructs the POTG to publicly devour their own when the sacrosanct boundaries of political correctness are crossed.
Because guns.
I wonder if Travis is one of those who believe it is bad public relations to open carry. After all, some people are freaked out by it and many stare. Yet, it is the only way the 19-year-old Marine Travis describes can invoke his constitutional right to bear arms. Younger millennials can open carry but cannot legally carry concealed until 21.
Nope carry however you choose. Please keep making unfounded assumptions though
I for one believe we should denounce our radicals unlike that other side that won the culture war by embracing theirs.
Yep, we’re supposed to be pro-gay and pro-women but also be pro-Islam. Yet Islam is extremely homophobic and treats women like second class citizens. Or worse.
I don’t have any issue with tolerance as long as it isn’t masquerading as PC naïveté. Embracing Islam and Sharia law just isn’t any good for our nation. Much of Europe – like France – has paid the price for welcoming Islam.
I’m just not going to bend over backwards to be tolerant of intolerance. Even a cursory understanding of Islam or the life of Muhammad reveals an incredibly violent and intolerant history.
Please, take a moment to research Muhammad’s life if you don’t understand the points. Don’t insult me or yourselves by regurgitating Obama’s idiotic “religion of peace” litany. The “peace” in Islam is merely on the secular side. If you follow a violent prophet who lived the life of a warlord, it’s entirely feasible that violence will ensue. If you deny that Muhammad was a warlord, than your essentially to ignorant to have such a discussion.
I agree with the gist of the article. However, I must always caution against being trapped by the idiocy of political correctness. Nothing in that movement is worth dying for, and most of it favors bare emotion and baseless accusations. It’s like Governor Brown removing the term “alien” from CA law. That’s not going to do a whole lot of good for legitimate taxpayers.
At the end of the day, I punish someone for the crimes they commit. There’s no racism here – all races of criminal are equally worthless. I judge based upon the evidence and the totality of the circumstances. I award zero extra points or consideration for being black, gay, Muslim, female, etc. Yet our mainstream media is incredibly racist and unapologetically pro-female. Look at all the hype for Obama being black or Hrod being female. Neither are competent leaders, yet the PC movement helped jettison them into fame and fortune.
Yet I’d happily vote for Condi Rice for CA senate because I believe she’d be a much better leader than our current female senators.
Life’s too short to be PC. If I’m going to fight, it’s going to be for the truth.
^ Agree 100%.
You can support gay rights and women’s rights, or you can be silently tolerant of Islam.
But you can’t do both, or you’re just a hypocrite.
“Islamophobia” involves a tacit expectation that we extend a moral equivalency to Muslim culture and Islam’s doctrines. My litmus test for Muslims is simple. Just ask them what they think about Jews. The answer you get will be a pretty good indication of whether or not they belong in civil society. Not many Muslims will step outside Islam’s institutionalized hatred of Jews. The one’s that can are OK. The one’s that can’t . . .
Great point Garrison. Will have to try that if I ever run into a Muslim that will talk to me. The only one I have known owned a Koran but admitted he did not really read it that often. That was after I brought up some points about women’s rights and other issues, in the Koran, that appear to conflict with our values. He argued for a while and then admitted his ignorance of the Koran. Did not really want to discuss anything after that.
Another key question to ask a Muslim is “Would you support Sharia Law?” If they do, then they are not someone that supports our Constitution and The Bill of Rights. The Muslim religion is more than a religion. With Sharia Law it is also a political system. One that does not agree with ours.
That’s an interesting test for sensible Muslims — I’ll have to remember it.
The only Muslims I’ve known were engineering and physics students who thought Islam should triumph by doing better engineering and physics than anyone else. Only one had anything supportive to say about the use of violence, and she considered it tragic that they were “driven to it”, seeing it all as the underprivileged against the oppressor with little to do with religion. Obviously not a truly representative sample there, though.
FWIW, one became a Christian when he compared the lives of Jesus and Mohammed, noting that both claimed to have a religion of peace but only one acted like it.
Yep. How many have read the Koran? The Hadith? Even a basic history of Muhammad ‘s life in the spreading of Islam? It is a story straight out of the Old Testament.
How many people are there that are so PC about Islam and yet have no problem looking at the actions of Moses and the early Israelites with horror and disgust?
You are trying to compare apples and oranges, ignore context, and a couple millenia of supposed human progress as well. Yep, I have done the reading. Sounds like you haven’t
Sorry, read your comment wrong and my edit didn’t take. You are quite correct. The OT events were singular as well, as opposed to Islamic commands still in effect today.
Too many do as I mistakenly assumed you were doing.
Accur81, I am not advocating being Pro anything, I am simply trying to say there is no reason to be disrespectful and rude towards somewhat different than you for no reason. When a business bans gays or Muslims, I don’t want the state to take action, I think they should be allowed to ban whoever they want, however. The problem is that it’s going to turn away people from guns when they see a gun store banning on specfic race/gender/creed.
I am decently versed in the history of Islam, and I don’t think it’s a good relgiion, but I feel that way about most religions. However, I would never want to see Christians banned from a place of business, even if I disagree with their beliefs.
Fair point, sir.
Racists, Sexists, Deists, Atheists, Homophobes and even people who are so wrong headed they have opinions that differ from mine are all covered by the RTKBA and the right to freedom of speech.
Here is a little secret about the anti gun media. Are you ready? If they could not find an objectionable proponenent of gun rights they would just make something up. I have been listening to their lying propaganda for over 50 years, fabrication and distortion are what they do best. That is why they are losing the PR war. Gun ownership is up, firearms manufacturing has skyrocketed, people across this land are becoming aware of the truth about guns. A current MSN poll on concealed carry in retail stores and restaurants shows 90% support for pistol packing citizens.
If you support the RKBA, you will have to stand shoulder to shoulder with people who do not bathe as often as you think they should. Try to remember, personal hygiene and personal beliefs are a separate issue.
This right here. Well-worded and I agree.
Thank you for a well-reasoned response that didn’t involve calling me a Muslim. Anyway I understand the media hates us, but should we make it easy for them to target us?
However, when a gun store bans Muslims that crosses the line between my beliefs in gun ownership and personal feelings. It makes us look exceptionally horrible, to not just the PC ninnies but most of middle America.
“Anyway I understand the media hates us, but should we make it easy for them to target us?”
You are kind of an emotional little snowflake aren’t you Travis. Behavior modification to conform to the statist belief is not very liberty minded.
How hard is it to understand that some people want us dead, for just believing in the Second Amendment.
Indifferent people that choose to remain in the middle of conflicting Ideologies are not a new social phenomenon like same sex marriage. The people in the middle are usually known as cowardly refugees seeking asylum.
Asking people to respect others is being an emotional snowflake? If it take behavior modification to respect people then I don’t know what to tell you bub.
I think it’s fairly obvious that Uhhmerica doesn’t play well with others.
Regardless of what anyone thinks, PR is a big problem in the firearms community. Too often, we’re painted as screaming lunatics like Ted, because Ted has the loudest voice in the room. In the left’s eyes, if you own a gun, you are Ted Nugent. There’s no middle ground.
I try my damnedest to be polite when I talk about guns in mixed company. Most of the time, it works. Sometimes I get thrown in the lunatic bin. The people who label me a screaming lunatic, I’ll label them right back. An acquaintance of mine suggested that the mere act of carrying a loaded firearm in public was akin to punching him in the nose, and that I was a raging bully. I tossed him in the proverbial bin after that one. His opinions on guns hold no water with me.
But I always try to keep in mind the PR angle of things. If I were to OC, if it were legal in Florida, I’d act the part and dress nice. I don’t think people would care as much if I were in a tailored suit while OCing.
It sucks, but with this issue, we gotta play the PR angle. Winning the hearts and minds of the younger generation is critical. Millennials are already predisposed to statist tendencies, having grown up through the biggest expansion of government in history. We gotta counter that, and if it means having to hire spin doctors and do a little old-school ad man schtick along with social media engineering, then so be it. It’s too important to just grumble about on the couch.
Thank you for the post.
The *only* reason I chose the GGO tag was to tweak the nose of a homophobic commentator – and perhaps a little ‘consciousness raising’ for those that assume LGBTs fit a stereotype. This is the only forum where I so label. My sexual orientation is about as relevant as eye color in terms of how I live life and my values.
A few bigoted comments here, but less so here than on other web sites. Much more troubling is antipathy and apathy toward law enforcement and government. If we don’t work for our interests, then roadkill may become our fate.
There’s the internet and then there’s reality.
I shoot at a club that’s mostly white men over 50. I expected to find some prejudice when I began there. Just the opposite – some of the nicest, friendliest, most considerate people I’ve met. Sometimes I see surprise – like the 3 twenty-something first-time latin guys last Friday night during public hours. They seemed startled that an anglo volunteer would give some pointers, set a target for them, and sweep brass away from their lane. They had a great time and couldn’t thank me enough.
Or the young woman I helped on Sat . First-timer, she outshot her dad and boyfriend. She was ecstatic and had asked for guidance; they didn’t.
Yes, PR is vital. So is person-to-person outreach; hope to see these 6 take up our sport. I think there’s a good chance we can increase our ranks. Pontificating nannies v. friendship and fun? Fun usually prevails.
So, Travis, do you plan to convert, or pay the jizya tax?
This blows my mind. Because I disagree with blaming an entire race for the actions of some I am going to join them?
Do you not get angry when a white idiot does something and the black lives matter brigade blames all white people?
Don’t you just love getting hit with the binary fallacy, reducing everything to just two sides?
Good old false dichotomies — where would we be without them?
We need as many smart, sane and legal allies we can get to keep our rights. The people who are trying to take them away have deep pockets and a disgustingly powerful media machine at their disposal. As said before they tend to have little conscious about doing things like using the blood of victims as a rallying cry and setting up a soap box on their graves before grass has even grown in order to whip up an irrational, emotional mob they can sic on their intended victim no matter who it may be.
Character assassination is a very common ploy we need to be aware of as we are more susceptible to it than our protectionist counter parts. They can go “oh, he is X Y or Z *AND* he has a gun” which is a great scare tactic on the sheeple and/or the mob they are targeting.
There are plenty of ways to promote firearm realities and educate people. As a previous TTAG article pointed out, when was the last time you took someone to the range? Explained the importance of voting, making good decisions and ensuring that our country stays free?
“The same goes for gun owners and gun culture. A loud minority of gun owners happen to be homophobic, Islamophobic, and some can be quite racist.”
GFY you PC Liberal a$$hole!
Whaaaa. Your “millennial generation” as a group can’t find their 4th point of contact. As clueless as the libtard potheads of the “babyboomer generation”.
When you/they grow up then give a lecture.
Just like Donald Trump you just insulted 50% of gun owners in America. Millennials and women make up the fastest growing segment of the gun culture in America. The old, rural white guy is dying off the fastest of any segment of the gun culture.
Off topic, I wouldn’t trust Trump with the military or the nuclear arsenal. And if he keeps insulting everyone that doesn’t look and behave like him he’s going to get Hillary elected… but that may his goal to begin with.
I agree with most of the points in the article. I was well written IMO. Not sure how gun owners and 2A supporters would actually be able to do what the author says, as a group, though ? But it would be great if we could figure that out. I think that coming out against anyone that is a gun owner but acts in a way that is not rational, prejudiced or just plain hateful makes the sane gun owners look much better to John Q. Public as well as to other sane gun owners.
I want to address a few points. First off sorry for the grammar error. Secondly I was not using my time in the Marines to history anything or make my point more valid, I assumed it was common knowledge that many soldiers and Marines are seen as racist due to the casual racist slang used for the people we are fighting. My only point was to say I dont hate Muslims, and I feel I have more experience than many. Good experiences and of course bad.
Next I am not saying you have to like anyone but everyone deserves a base level of respect before they are personally known. This piece was inspired by one of the many anti gun groups that screenshot gun owners comments and use then against us. One of these rants use comments to disparage an entire race and sexuality. No need to use racial/homophobic/sexist slurs just because you dont like a type of people.
Finally to those making Millennial comments. First off I didn’t choose to name my generation but pretending I’m not a millenial is foolish. I was born in that thyme period(thyme is a joke BTW) However, before millenials how many gun battles did your generation win? You lost on the Brady Bills, you lost on the AWB previous generations lost the GCA and of course let the Hughes Amendment slide. I can continue if you’d like?
However, when gun control came to my generation we seemed to beat it back with a stick every chance we had. Where’s the new federal gun legislation? No federal UBCs, all 50 states can conceal carry in some form or another, and No federal AWB. So maybe my generation does dumb things but so did the yuppies the hippies and every other generation.
As nice a sentiment as it is and as much as I may agree with the message it is realistically impractical and potentially damaging to the cause to focus on the riff-raff.
A prime strategy of debate with these people, if you can call it debate, is to trap you in a closed loop of apology. You spend so much air time apologizing, ensuring no hurt feelings, that before you know it the segment is over and all you’ll be known for is wallowing in the actions of others.
Piers Morgan uses this tactic almost exclusively. Take a cue from politicians and ignore the trap of the closed loop otherwise the message will never get out.
A good majority of the media and pundits out there rely on two tactics: closed-loop trap and walking you toward a pre-determined conclusion. Middle-school debate stuff that works with an audience of morons. There are a lot of good laughs to be had at the exchange between Alex Jones and Piers Morgan but at least he didn’t let Piers trap him in either tactic. Develop a gameplan somewhere between being trapped and sounding like a raving lunatic and you’ll have your winning approach.
All that’s needed is to concede that every group has its assholes.
An Islamic radical jihadist kills a bunch of innocent people. The left says not to blame all Muslims.
A mentally ill white kid kills a bunch of innocent people. The left blames all guns, gun owners, gun sellers, gun rights groups, and flag owners. Isn’t there a message in there someplace?
We should be better and more objective than the left.
“That loud minority of jerks is the snake that’s eating its own tail when it comes to gun rights”
Thank God for that small minority of Assholes, who 200 hundred years ago rejected being forced to their knees out of political expediency.
What a bunch of a fragile little girls on here. The only optics that have ever mattered when dealing with statist are optics that are mounted, not the optics of sticks and stones. This ideology that the author would like to appease is responsible for 66,000,000 deaths.
Some of you appeasers on here are what have allowed an American’s rights to become a state privilege. Not all millennials are liberal gun owners and social justice warriors like the the original poster. Not all residents in America are capable of being citizens, because citizenship requires responsibility to more than just themselves.
Some of yall need to just embrace the fact that you believe in this:
“Freedom spoils, and lack of freedom teaches.” is what some of you believe in, when you willingly you degrade yourself by accepting the statist ideology of forced association.
I don’t associate with non-whites, and I don’t accept the homosexual lifestyle, and amazingly my guns are still my right to fight for, and I don’t even have to drop to my knees.
See this is our problem. I’m not a SJW and I’m not advocating for acceptance I am advocating for respect.
Its amazing your so thick. You dont associate with non whites? Really? All non whites are criminals right? You dont associate with gays why? Is it because there is a closet you are trying to come out of
@Travis
“See this is our problem. I’m not a SJW and I’m not advocating for acceptance I am advocating for respect.”
My problem is people like you who think you represent me and mine or our individual Liberty, not the other way around.
“Its amazing your so thick.”
Thanks for the the tolerance and respect in not labeling me for having a different opinion than you.
“You dont associate with non whites? Really?”
I associate with Asians and Indians but no others. I will be around blacks if they were raised around whites and are not in a group. I don’t enjoy being around another human that I have to view as a pound dog waiting to snap at me out of some past grievance.
“All non whites are criminals right?”
Of course not, but statistically that is another story. I know who I will be attempted to be robbed by if out with my wife, and it is not a white guy. Nobody every says damn the white people moved in next door.
“You dont associate with gays why?
I don’t associate with homosexuals, because it is my free choice to not to be around individuals, who have morals, that are not moral to me as a Christian.
“Is it because there is a closet you are trying to come out of”
Perfect example of the SJW that you claim not to be. Your emotional thinking is clearly taking over by labeling me a closet homosexual, just because I love women.
You clearly don’t know what an SJW is. If you simply not being a racist homophobe is being an SJW. A SJW appeals to the state for aid, and to make laws, I do not. I appeal to gun owners to help preserve the 2A by distancing themselves from racist homophobes.
Gun owners are a small minority or people, fervent anti gunner are a small minority. Neither of us really decide the laws in place, the people in the middle do. I know this won’t make it through to you, because by your own admission your prejudice and homophobic, but I doubt the majority of gun owners follow your life philosophy. I’m appealing to those people to try and distance ourselves as a community from irrational hate and fear towards those who are different.
The reason for a republic instead of a democracy is to prevent the tyranny of the majority. The Bill of Rights was penned to enumerate some, and protect all of our natural rights.
The devolution into democracy is our undoing as a nation.
@Travis: “A SJW appeals to the state for aid, and to make laws, I do not.”
Actually, a Social Justice Warrior will use any levers of influence to change social mores and individual behavior they believe is specifically egregious to those “vulnerable” in society. Often times it does involve government, but not necessarily so. Another avenue is to try and force individual companies and corporations to adhere to their principles, and use social and news media to further their activism. Government may or may not play a role in that, it just depends on the specific cause and the audience. So for example, activists for the so-called blacklivesmatter movement, want more government involvement in law enforcement, disregarding the argument that it may or may not lead to more problems down the line or hide the real problems at hand. In contrasts, feminists in the gamergate scandal did not look to governments to force their agenda on the gaming industry, because they knew it was antithesis to the notion of freedom of speech, so they tried to use backdoor deals and social media shaming.
Says somebody who never associates with non-whites. Funny thing is, many non-whites DO say this. Fail on your part.
Further, every crime I have experienced, from theft to assault, have been committed by WHITES. This includes when I lived in a primarily non-white “ghetto” area.
You’re just a racist asshole. And that’s all you’ll ever be. Your grandchildren will joke about “racist, angry old grandpa” and that will be your legacy.
@Uhhmerica
You are one of the assholes we have to admit to having.
“Don’t associate with non-whites”? I pity you. God made us all, and all are in His image, yet you despise the image of God for cosmetics.
Ugh. So much crybaby in this article. Should have just posted a picture of a pacifier to take advantage of the double meaning.
huh
To paraphrase one of Jesus’ teachings, “The assholes will always be with you.” In the latter quarter of the last Century we Americans embarked on an “embrace of diversity” and the Internet came along and gave everyone a World Wide voice. Now any asshole can say any stupid-ass thing that crosses their mind and “post” it to the World Stage. We are in flux as the Greatest Generation, which was very homogenous, dies out and its children deal with the World we have created, which is more diversity accepting, more ego-centric and much more connected across the Globe than any previous generation ever dared imagine. Trying to “fix” this is like playing a never-ending game of “Whack-A-Mole”. Everyone has a voice and thinks their point of view. is superior to that of anyone else. The only way to control it is by ruthless suppression, which is why things like ISL are spawning, and what the far left in the U.S. would do, if given the unfettered opportunity. Look at what has happened in the past seven years under Obama’s reign. It may be several decades before it all plays out, and I think we have as yet no glimpse of the final outcome.
There sure seem to be a lot of “Libertarians” here at TTAG who want to tell all of us how to act, think and speak.
Yep – its called Freedom. Live and let live. When any group decides they want to tread on another group, Libertarians are going to take issue with it.
I can not agree more. I am forever havibg to remove discriminatory remarks from my facebook page. We are law abiding gun owners, we are the good guys, we should act like it.
So youre saying that people cannot disagree with sodomite marriage or call out Jihad for what it is?
If thats the case – you are the problem!!
I’m not saying you can’t disagree with anything. However, every person deserves basic human respect, up until hey do something wrong. You don’t have to agree with gay marriage, but when you ban a particular type of person from an establishment based on their sexual orientation, religion or skin color, and that establishment has something to do with guns, you are hurting the work done to improve the 2nd Amendment.
You can do whatever you want, but at least realize when you do, that your actions have consequences.
This article is spot on. Thanks for writing it. I am tired of watching our own supporters screw us eternally with their words and actions. If we all endeavored to remain professional and polite in this fight, it would go a hell of a long way to swaying undecideds in our favor.
We are never going to change the minds of the anti-gun people. They are not who we are competing for. We are competing for the people who are on the fence, and by acting like Mom’s Demand Attention caricatures of ourselves, we are scaring these people away.
And I know people will respond saying a bunch of hostile derogatory things about undecideds and this comment, and that we don’t need them anyway… then when we lose our rights and are sitting there with sling shots, they will say “Wha’ Happen?”
It’s called playing smart.
Why is the ouroboros twisted into a mobius strip? It’s redundant and just looks dumb.
There are a number of different versions, including a figure eight, and one with two snakes swallowing each other (also done as a figure 8).
The sideways 8, which is the infinity symbol, is apparently newer, and I suspect is meant to get across the idea of infinity more strongly. It’s sometimes done a s a Moebius; why, I have no idea.
But since the article merely refers to the snake eating its own tail, a circular or oval version would seem more appropriate.
I’ve been saying that this is more of a PR battle then a Constitutional fight.
There are 3 main groups.
Gun owners
Anti Gunners
The middle who don’t have an opinion
The moment we lose the people in the middle and they start calling their lawmakers demanding bans or worse a repeal of the 2nd Amendment is when we’re screwed.
The MSM isn’t on the side of gun rights and would be complicit in any gun control attempts.
I’ll add one more to that list:
Gun owners who have a visceral hatred of Police, and express that through degrading slurs, calls for violence, and ranting self-promotion.
Its one thing to not trust the Police – many share that skepticism to some degree. Its another thing entirely to talk like a puffed-up 13 year old whenever the topic comes up: “F**k those coward pigs, F***ing baby-killers jack-booted thugs, I’d shoot all of them if they did that to me..” etc, etc etc…
This is not behavior fit for adults – EVER. If you have an issue or a belief to express, do it in a mature, constructive manner.
If you have to resort to derogatory slurs and visceral rants, you’ve already lost any debate you hoped to have.
Comments are closed.