We pride ourselves on gun ownership as a defense of freedom. What happens if that is not enough? Just owning guns does not make you a warrior. And a gun will not help you if you are outnumbered.
Too many gun owners take the libertarian position. Themselves against the world. They know how to shoot. Have a strong independent streak. But they lack the training of a warrior. Nor do they know how to work as a team. And they have no one they trust to cover their back.
If you listen to the fear that many express, it is that the government will come for them. They feel alone. Isolated. This is typical of many libertarians. They have little contact with family, few friends. No organizations that they belong to. Just themselves.
The left learned this lesson well back in the '60s. In the '70s there were a number of books on how to organize. The left preached this. Now the left is able to keep their ranks organized and not fighting each other (look at how libertarians and conservatives go at each other rather than being focused on defeating the left). And Islam has organization via the Mosque. Thus strength.
We need to organize. We need to network. It would not hurt to have strong families. Or to have church ties. People that can stand with you.
Otherwise you are divided and easily conquered.
There is one other situation where owning a gun is not enough. It is when firearms become obsolete by new technology. We are dealing with 500 year old technology. Kinetic energy weapons, which includes explosives, have only been perfected. We are pushing a mass (ie as slug) down a barrel using chemical propulsion. At some point we will develop weapons that use energy or such. At such a point, firearms become ineffective.
Posts: 3,340
Threads: 46
Joined: Mar 2011
Trooper Wrote:We pride ourselves on gun ownership as a defense of freedom. What happens if that is not enough? Just owning guns does not make you a warrior. And a gun will not help you if you are outnumbered.
Too many gun owners take the libertarian position. Themselves against the world. They know how to shoot. Have a strong independent streak. But they lack the training of a warrior. Nor do they know how to work as a team. And they have no one they trust to cover their back.
If you listen to the fear that many express, it is that the government will come for them. They feel alone. Isolated. This is typical of many libertarians. They have little contact with family, few friends. No organizations that they belong to. Just themselves.
The left learned this lesson well back in the '60s. In the '70s there were a number of books on how to organize. The left preached this. Now the left is able to keep their ranks organized and not fighting each other (look at how libertarians and conservatives go at each other rather than being focused on defeating the left). And Islam has organization via the Mosque. Thus strength.
We need to organize. We need to network. It would not hurt to have strong families. Or to have church ties. People that can stand with you.
Otherwise you are divided and easily conquered.
Trooper:
What is wrong with the NRA and the numerous pro-gun organizations? They offer a unified front against those who want to deprive us of our Second Amendment right.
LR1955
LR1955 Wrote:Trooper:
What is wrong with the NRA and the numerous pro-gun organizations? They offer a unified front against those who want to deprive us of our Second Amendment right.
LR1955
The problem is that many gun owners dislike even joining the NRA. They dislike all organization, nothing is good enough. They only trust themselves and their weapons. Thus the constant fear of government due to extreme isolation from society. These "extreme individualists" do not want family, government, church telling them anything. They are close to being anarchists.
Plus I am more referring to the the fear that a single man would be facing down 50 armed police officers or military. If you are a loner then you have no backup. Your weapons are next to useless. It is the ability to organize, to work in teams, to network that give power. Not weapons.
Well, FWIW, the Taliban kicked the Russians in the arse... In that day it seemed like Cavemen vs. Aliens.
Posts: 3,340
Threads: 46
Joined: Mar 2011
Trooper Wrote:The problem is that many gun owners dislike even joining the NRA. They dislike all organization, nothing is good enough. They only trust themselves and their weapons. Thus the constant fear of government due to extreme isolation from society. These "extreme individualists" do not want family, government, church telling them anything. They are close to being anarchists.
Plus I am more referring to the the fear that a single man would be facing down 50 armed police officers or military. If you are a loner then you have no backup. Your weapons are next to useless. It is the ability to organize, to work in teams, to network that give power. Not weapons.
Trooper:
Your statements seem to be avoiding something.
What is the problem and what are your recommendations?
LR1955
LR1955 Wrote:Trooper:
Your statements seem to be avoiding something.
What is the problem and what are your recommendations?
LR1955
The problem is that I am running into a lot of libertarian types are full of fear. Much of their fear is due to being loners. Their isolation from others (no networking, church membership, political organizations) feeds their fears that they could be taken out.
Compare that to a drug gang. People are organized, someone has your back. If the police take you, often the community comes to your defense. Al Sharpton will stage rallies.
Similarly in Islam there is the concept that if you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims.
Gun ownership is not enough. the 2nd amendment deals with two aspects of defense. One is that the people should be armed. the other is that the people should be organized and trained (militia). America was not to be a nation of loners but of warriors.
Posts: 3,340
Threads: 46
Joined: Mar 2011
Trooper Wrote:The problem is that I am running into a lot of libertarian types are full of fear. Much of their fear is due to being loners. Their isolation from others (no networking, church membership, political organizations) feeds their fears that they could be taken out.
Compare that to a drug gang. People are organized, someone has your back. If the police take you, often the community comes to your defense. Al Sharpton will stage rallies.
Similarly in Islam there is the concept that if you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims.
Gun ownership is not enough. the 2nd amendment deals with two aspects of defense. One is that the people should be armed. the other is that the people should be organized and trained (militia). America was not to be a nation of loners but of warriors.
Trooper:
Are you directing this at Libertarians? If so, why? Self described Libertarians who actually vote Libertarian are so few in numbers and so convoluted in thought that they represent a very small minority of the people you have to convince.
Since you offer that there should be more Militias, why haven't you started your own Militia?
LR1955
Posts: 2,982
Threads: 194
Joined: Jun 2012
LR1955 Wrote:Libertarian are so few in numbers and so convoluted in thought...LR1955
Hold on one second. Why are we attacking our own? Because they don't fit your definition of conservative?
This is exactly how these threads get off topics and is what bwaites warned us against.
Whatever brand of conservative you identify yourself with rather it be Libertarian, Tea Party, etc we have far more common values than values we disagree upon. Let's not turn on our own, but find a way to stand united.
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither." Benjamin Franklin
cory Wrote:Hold on one second. Why are we attacking our own? Because they don't fit your definition of conservative?
This is exactly how these threads get off topics and is what bwaites warned us against.
Whatever brand of conservative you identify yourself with rather it be Libertarian, Tea Party, etc we have far more common values than values we disagree upon. Let's not turn on our own, but find a way to stand united.
+1
Here is the problem that I see with this. In the case of using gangs and Muslims vs. the average American Joe that lives in the burbs. With gangs, in most cases you have groups of people that share the same house hold in numbers or several house holds on a particular street. In the Muslim aspect, you will generally run across entire neighborhoods or communities that are solely populated by Muslims. In both examples, you have strength in numbers
Now lets get over here to American Joe. Like most of us, he lives in a neighborhood. Family members most likely live in a separate neighborhood several to many miles away. American Joe may be a member of NRA or any other organization but when it comes down to it, those members/supporters or those whom would have his back are no where near a location to give him the much needed support.
In the event that say 50 tyrannical police officers are coming to my house to disarm me, I can't rely on a neighbor to stand up and get my back. You are still fighting against the odds. Until Libertarians and conservatives that have the same mind set start to build and populate entire neighborhoods where they all have the same common goal, the task at hand would be a difficult one to achieve.
Posts: 4,444
Threads: 97
Joined: Mar 2011
There are multiple good points here:
1) We all see the problem with fractionated conservative values. There are significant differences between what SOME libertarians propound and what I believe. Staying just with 2nd Amendment issues, there is a wide variety of beliefs among conservatives. For instance, some conservatives see no issue with universal background checks, while I have major issues with it, others are ambivalent.
2) What LR1955 is trying to get at is that we know those problems exist, what are we going to do about it? Without proposing a solution to the problem, pointing it out is useless.
I agree that pointing fingers at the various different "conservative" groups is also useless, but we really need those groups to step up and develop a coherent policy, and I think LR1955 is pointing out that the libertarians have done a terrible job of that.
For instance, what is the actual libertarian viewpoint on the 2nd Amendment? Can you find a single, nationwide agreed upon stance? I can't. Some say we need more background checks, others say we shouldn't have ANY checks, etc.
Conservatives need to come together and develop a coherent policy plan, but I'm not sure that conservatives and libertarians can actually co-exist to do that.
You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live. - John Galt
Posts: 4,444
Threads: 97
Joined: Mar 2011
07-02-2013, 05:24 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-02-2013, 05:28 PM by bwaites.)
In the meantime, this is a guy I could support 100% on his views of the Second Amendment:
For the IOS impaired, here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44zW84FKd50
For some reason I could not get the video to embed.
You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live. - John Galt
Posts: 353
Threads: 25
Joined: Jan 2012
bwaites Wrote:In the meantime, this is a guy I could support 100% on his views of the Second Amendment:
For the IOS impaired, here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44zW84FKd50
For some reason I could not get the video to embed.
Hell yeah!!! Great video and opinions bwaites. Thanks for posting!!!
Politics and religion.
Recalling that many Muslims are semites, it appears the rule has been suspended and that antisemitism is indeed tolerated here.
Nukes Wrote:Politics and religion.
Recalling that many Muslims are semites, it appears the rule has been suspended and that antisemitism is indeed tolerated here.
It is a common belief among Muslims that there is no relationship between them and Jews. They see Jews as being European.
But that is not the discussion. Rather the point was that Muslims do unify in ways that most gun owners do not. It is our divisiveness that will be our destruction.
mwilkins Wrote:Here is the problem that I see with this. In the case of using gangs and Muslims vs. the average American Joe that lives in the burbs. With gangs, in most cases you have groups of people that share the same house hold in numbers or several house holds on a particular street. In the Muslim aspect, you will generally run across entire neighborhoods or communities that are solely populated by Muslims. In both examples, you have strength in numbers
Now lets get over here to American Joe. Like most of us, he lives in a neighborhood. Family members most likely live in a separate neighborhood several to many miles away. American Joe may be a member of NRA or any other organization but when it comes down to it, those members/supporters or those whom would have his back are no where near a location to give him the much needed support.
In the event that say 50 tyrannical police officers are coming to my house to disarm me, I can't rely on a neighbor to stand up and get my back. You are still fighting against the odds. Until Libertarians and conservatives that have the same mind set start to build and populate entire neighborhoods where they all have the same common goal, the task at hand would be a difficult one to achieve.
Under the law, we are not allowed to have neighborhoods that have any form of ethic unity. If a church, as an example, would try to purchase the properties around them so that they could sell only to their members, they would be sued by the local EEOC. Yet there are Muslim only neighborhoods.
So the question is how to get around the laws so that we could have like minded neighborhoods.
LR1955 Wrote:Trooper:
Are you directing this at Libertarians? If so, why? Self described Libertarians who actually vote Libertarian are so few in numbers and so convoluted in thought that they represent a very small minority of the people you have to convince.
Since you offer that there should be more Militias, why haven't you started your own Militia?
LR1955
I disagree with the libertarians, many who are not big L types, as they are divisive and tend to attack republicans and conservatives. That is all we need. Think of what happens next year if the republicans lose the Congress. It would mean the end of gun ownership as we now know it.
As for militia, I believe more in mandatory military service. Eight years in the National Guard for all males who can meet standards.
cory Wrote:Hold on one second. Why are we attacking our own? Because they don't fit your definition of conservative?
This is exactly how these threads get off topics and is what bwaites warned us against.
Whatever brand of conservative you identify yourself with rather it be Libertarian, Tea Party, etc we have far more common values than values we disagree upon. Let's not turn on our own, but find a way to stand united.
We have a lot of libertarians in the Indiana Gun Owners forum ( http://www.ingunowners.com) who do nothing but attack conservatives. They hate all conservatives unless you totally agree with them.
Trooper Wrote:It is a common belief among Muslims that there is no relationship between them and Jews. They see Jews as being European.
But that is not the discussion. Rather the point was that Muslims do unify in ways that most gun owners do not. It is our divisiveness that will be our destruction.
You miss the point. That stated rule is "no politics, no religion." In stereotyping Muslims, you transgressed that.
If the rule is suspended, I will be most happy to discuss the genetics, biblical exegesis, and stereotypes.
|
