Gun owners contributing to loss of Second Amendment?

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Gun owners showing up in tactical gear and "armed to the teeth" and we hear of no arrests, no shots fired, no violence. And if we showed up in suits and ties or evening wear we would still get a bad press.
What "they" object to is that we exist, we will not roll over and play dead and grovel before them, confess our "sins", beg forgiveness.

 

[Onomea]

I agree that far right ostentatiously armed protesters at state capitals are a lot more harmful to the cause than those who are not absolutest about the 2A. (By absolutest, I mean advocates of no background checks, any adult non-felon citizen who wants any type of firearm should be able to have one, no questions asked, and carry it openly with them wherever they want to in the US at any time.)

I think it is important to be inclusive. Don't turn people away from engagement in support of the 2A just because they are not absolutists, not "pure enough" for you in their views.

I also agree that garnering support across the political spectrum, including the left if we can get it, is a good idea. More allies is better than less allies.

Almost any political issue has absolutist supporters, e.g., some topics that are banned here, that are political litmus tests for absolutist adherents. Most people, most voters, however — I don't think, anyway — are not issue absolutists/litmus test voters.

I like a big tent as a better approach for our future.

 

[rockquarry]

"Gun owners contributing to loss of Second Amendment?"

Yup, they protest at state capital's in tactical gear carrying AR's. Some gather in front of a Governors residence armed to the teeth carrying protest signs.

These folks were certainly an embarrassment to sensible Second Amendment Right advocates/ gun owners everywhere. Such protests really had little to do with rights and much to do with intimidation. Their poor judgement only hurt the image of responsible gun owners, something the protestors weren't bright enough as a group to recognize.

 

[dockmurgw]

These folks were certainly an embarrassment to sensible Second Amendment Right advocates/ gun owners everywhere. Such protests really had little to do with rights and much to do with intimidation. Their poor judgement only hurt the image of responsible gun owners, something the protestors weren't bright enough as a group to recognize.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Finally, someone who gets it. I spend a considerable amount of time every year making phone calls, sending emails, and talking to people to generate opposition to the same old restrictions proposed every year in our legislature. Chances are pretty good that I spend more time fighting these laws than some of the most vocal here that think I'm the bad guy. All the chest beating, preaching to the choir, and silly meme's here wont change this simple and undeniable fact: these protest's are fuel for the fire, they are used by the gun control crowd, and I'm getting tired and worn out trying to overcome the damage they do.

 

[ladder13]

....
What "they" object to is that we exist, we will not roll over and play dead and grovel before them, confess our "sins", beg forgiveness.

True.
And all the emails and letter writing means squat.

 

[CScott]

We've now probably got about the lowest Fudd/2A supporter ratio we've ever had with gun owners.

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "Fudd:?

 

[dockmurgw]

Gun owners showing up in tactical gear and "armed to the teeth" and we hear of no arrests, no shots fired, no violence. And if we showed up in suits and ties or evening wear we would still get a bad press.

Wrong. If we show up in suits and ties we get no press, there's nothing to sensationalize. Unlike showing up carrying an AR dressed like a ninja. I'll take no press over the sensationalized press any day, its less harmful. And that's my point. But go ahead, ridicule and discount the MAJORITY of gun owners that feel as I do, embrace the MINORITY view prevalent in this forum, and every state in the country will have gun laws like yours. Just ask Virginia.

 

[dockmurgw]

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "Fudd:?

Around here it would be me. Read my post's.

 

[quikdraw67]

A Fudd is a term applied to hunters and others who think that an "assault rifle " (and yes, I know the difference between a M16 and an AR15) ban would be okay since they are not hunting/sporting rifles, supports magazine capacity limits, universal background checks, etc.

2A supporters oppose all of those and consider the Fudds to be useful idiots to the anti-gun groups.

That's my interpretation.

 

[smithra_66]

To get a third post in, I'll go ahead and say fudds are barely a blip on the radar for our 2A issues. I've spend years doing outreach and women, people of color, people of different sexual orientations, people on different sides politically, and whoever else into shooting. I saw a lot of interest during the obama years from all types of people, and that sharply dropped during and after the 2016 election. I believe our biggest **** up was tying gun ownership to any side of our divisive politics, and that the association of guns with the far right (and make no mistake, this has increased, I do remember the days democrats at least paid lipservice to gun ownership as a right) is what has given antigunners the most ammo.

But how do you fight for gun rights by staying neutral in politics?

There is one CLEAR side fighting for our rights and one that is CLEARLY against those rights.

What's the NRA going to, NOT endorse Trump over Hillary or Trump over Biden?

 

[double-dipper]

usmc 1978. I'm not sure who you're talking to or what you're reading but, in my little world the "fellow gun owners" I know are not willing to bend, give up or surrender their rights. I do know gun owners are some of the most studied groups of people. Interesting fact that 20% of gun owners are liberals. Go figure right?
source
Survey reveals diverse motives behind American gun ownership

 

[smithra_66]

A Fudd is a term applied to hunters and others who think that an "assault rifle " (and yes, I know the difference between a M16 and an AR15) ban would be okay since they are not hunting/sporting rifles, supports magazine capacity limits, universal background checks, etc.

2A supporters oppose all of those and consider the Fudds to be useful idiots to the anti-gun groups.

That's my interpretation.

ehhh that's a loose definition. You may be correct in some of it, but the "Fudd" moniker that I always see is usually applied by younger people to what they perceive as older guys that like blued/walnut guns and would appreciate a classic S&W revolver over a tacticool plastic gun or rifle.

There are a lot of people who would be called "Fudds" that "get it" regarding all aspects of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[usmc 1978]

An AR is not an assault weapon

Of course, you're correct. Interesting that when DHS put out for bid a select fire rifle, the name of the item was "Personal Defense Weapon." How is it that my semi-auto is an assault weapon, but a select fire in the hands of the gov is a "personal defense weapon"?

As an anti that question and watch their head spin off. Although that assumes they understand the difference.

 

[usmc 1978]

True.
And all the emails and letter writing means squat.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that. In some cases (sent to the hard-core libs) they don't mean squat. In other cases I believe they do. In any case, if you don't ask the question then you know what the answer is. You gotta try.

 

[usmc 1978]

A Fudd is a term applied to hunters and others who think that an "assault rifle " (and yes, I know the difference between a M16 and an AR15) ban would be okay since they are not hunting/sporting rifles, supports magazine capacity limits, universal background checks, etc.

To put it simply, a Fudd is a dummy who thinks the 2A truly is about deer hunting.

 

[usmc 1978]

usmc 1978. I'm not sure who you're talking to or what you're reading but, in my little world the "fellow gun owners" I know are not willing to bend, give up or surrender their rights.

Most of my gun-owning friends are true 'gun guys.' Looking beyond my circle (and yours), there are a lot of gun owners who don't get it. I know trap shooters who don't give a whit about anything but their O/U. Ban everything else, why do they care? Some people who carry ... that's their only gun and they don't think we should have what we want. They're out there, trust me.

 

[outta_ammo]

I suspect this will be ridiculed around here, but some of us on the left ARE engaged. Maybe not to the satisfaction of all here, but it's one more oar in the water.
The Liberal Gun Club | A gun owners organization whose main goal is to provide relevant information to firearms owners

 

[dockmurgw]

"To put it simply, a Fudd is a dummy who thinks the 2A truly is about deer hunting."

To put it simply, a Fudd is a guy that defends the 2A, wants everyone to own what they want, fights restrictions at every turn (even with emails and phone calls that don't mean squat), takes a no compromise view on gun control, opposes magazine restrictions, opposes restrictions based on what a gun looks like, supports constitutional carry ...but yet, foolishly believes that a knucklehead standing at the capital steps with an AR dressed as a ninja aint doing us any favors. Thats a Fudd.

 

[MRB1]

I'll continue to be the silent majority - the less the commies know, the better.

 

[smithra_66]

I suspect this will be ridiculed around here, but some of us on the left ARE engaged. Maybe not to the satisfaction of all here, but it's one more oar in the water.
The Liberal Gun Club | A gun owners organization whose main goal is to provide relevant information to firearms owners

That's good that there's a group called "the liberal gun club," but I really don't understand its purpose.

If guns are an important issue to you, you guys vote against your own interests.