Good read. Thanks for posting.
I like to think that those who describe themselves as liberal gun owners, but who currently vote for anti-2A politicians, are in a period of transition and will eventually align their voting habits with their 2A beliefs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's worth it to note in here that leftists are extremely pro gun... but not for good reasons. There is a great chasm between leftists that are marching towards communism and liberals. The 2a community needs to be a little careful about how excited we get at the premise of those "on the left" supporting guns. There's leftists that specifically want the guns for violent bloody revolution against us.
Bret is more of the classical liberal type, which is why his support of the 2a is somewhat novel.
Jus wanted to point out that he is incorrect in asserting that the U.S. Revolution was "won by men with muskets." While it is true that the flintlock rifle was the predominate small arm of the war, the war was not won exclusively by men with these arms. Rather, the war was also won by the Continental Navy at sea with commissioned and privately owned and ships, ships that disrupted commerce and even took the fight to the British mainland a la John Paul Jones.
The reason I make this distinction is because for many years before/during/after the founding of our Nation, private individuals could own war ships ("privateers"). This would be the equivalent of a modern American owning a strategic-level weapon (a guided missile cruiser, a strike fighter, etc). So it really bothers me when liberals claim that the founders could not have seen a world in which private citizens are able to own "weapons of war."
He’s really more of a libertarian than a liberal.
The Weinstein brothers are both very intelligent and rational. I always enjoy hearing what either has to say on a particular topic.
I do think Brett has hit upon something that the entire political spectrum in America can view as common ground. This is anecdotal, but I hope it serves as an interesting datapoint:
The vast majority of my family is very liberal. I think that is because the majority of us grew up in hyper conservative areas of Kentucky. Like less than 5 miles to multiple churches that still practice snake handling (not a criticism, just trying to paint a picture). It is natural for kids to rebel against the mainstream, and in our case it was against conservatives. Since most everyone was conservative, it follows that the majority of ignorant blather was from conservatives. Then we all went off to college, having been told we were going to hell for not being southern Baptist or whatever, and we discover the party of peace and love. I ended up enlisting and was quickly exposed to people from all over the world, and traveled the world a fair bit. My world travels led me back to a classical liberal perspective, and the realization that good intentions are useless when 99% of the actions taken by a certain party end up causing more harm than good.
As my relatives have matured in life, some have started to wake up to the fact that their tax dollars are being used to cause more harm than good, and others have not. Or they know it and don’t care, because regardless they can’t fight off the ghosts of our past that they use to define what they are not.
Trump was incredibly unpopular in my family, but at a base level it was not because of what he did. It is how he behaves. I know many on this forum feel differently, and I’m not debating the topic. Just reporting what my large extended family thinks.
As one might guess, a common holiday tradition at our family get togethers is to play stump the conservative chump, so I get a lot of opportunities to defend my viewpoints. The second amendment is historically a topic of interest. As I’ve matured, I’ve simplified my argument on the topic to: Guns (and the intent of the second amendment) need to be easily accessible and widespread among civilians to allow for violent overthrow of the government if necessary. The threat of violence is one of a very few things that will make a bureaucracy stop and think, and that is a good thing. I settled upon this argument because it really doesn’t have a logical counterpoint, and the very indoctrinated tended to see it as crazy. No point in trying to argue with a crazy person. Either they agree or will agree to change the subject.
For good or ill, Trump and the civil unrest of the past two years has severely undermined my liberal relatives’ dreams of utopian socialist America, and now they are increasingly apt to view the government as untrustworthy and unwilling or unable to protect them from the dregs of society. Suddenly the stump the chump sessions have altered to questions about the best firearms to protect the home. In 2021 my liberal relatives have started to find common ground with me on firearms, which is mutual distrust of the government. Yes they will still largely probably vote for the same shitty politicians as always, but they have started to wake up. They are starting to realize that we live on the same planet as the war torn third world, and there is less separation between us and them than they thought.
Make it a sample size of Two: my mom is the queen of circular and disjointed logic. Voted for Obama because "healthcare", and now hates the healthcare world even more. Is Pro mask mandates, and wears her mask around her neck everywhere yet never puts it on unless going in to a retail store. I can debate a topic with her and lead her through the logic, letting her answer in her own way (usually correctly), and when it gets to the conclusion she slips back in to her preconceived notion of what is "right" rather than the logical conclusion.I hosted my parents for Thanksgiving. My father claims to be a blue dog Democrat. His politics are nonsensical and contradictory.
He's a Democrat voting gun owner. He truly believes that Democrats will never tamper with the Second Amendment. He's outraged by the rioting, homelessness and crime but votes for Social Democrats.
He went on a rant about anti-vaxxers being "Trumptards" and clearly blames them for the US not reaching "herd immunity." When I stopped him and pointed out that people across genders, age groups, races and political boundaries have resisted vaccination, he switched tracks and claimed that it's "not political" but in the very next breath blamed Trump for politicizing the virus. His train of thought was so disconnected, contradictory and bewildering that I put the brakes on it and told him that there would be no further discussion of politics during the holiday weekend. After my parents left, even my wife expressed incredulity at his beliefs and train of thought.
My dad is a college educated engineer. He doesn't get his news from social media. How he arrives at his conclusions is simply beyond my comprehension. He seems to be trying to straddle a line of moderation but is failing miserably. I realize that a sample size of "one" does not make a good study but this is the kind of crap we're up against in the American electorate.
At least one Liberal at the Washington Post is starting to get it...just starting to. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...t-guns-its-about-why-people-are-willing-kill/
We rail on about guns.
The rifle, pistol, machete are not mind-controlling devices that make people do what they ought not to do. Guns, knives, tire irons are means. The urge, the willingness to use them to kill or hurt another person stems from elsewhere.
What does create that urge?
Think rage. Think greed, revenge, jealousy, fright, being looked down upon, mental brokenness — pick one, add others.
Our crisis — the urge to kill — is the curve that needs flattening. Otherwise, the annual homicide threshold will keep rising even as mothers, grandmas and other loved ones weep, and bodies continue to fall.
If only we didn't have the guns......
Like with most liberals, I see this theme resonate throughout the dissertation here as well.
I personally see this article as again being about diversion. Skillful diversion perhaps. Perhaps not purposeful diversion. But diversion none the less.