Why do liberals/progressives hate/fear guns?

[occupied]

Supporting a woman's right to manage her own body and fertility is a libertarian argument with the exact same basis as firearm ownership. They are individual rights and the government should mind it's own business.

Nonsense. Murder is not a natural right.

The right to protect yourself from anything dangerous, costly or detrimental is a natural right.

 

[badbob85037]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Anyone with half a brain knows this . There are more importane things than free speech, the right to possess firearms, to be safe in your papers and effects and basic freedom. It's a food stamp and a check in the mail the first of each month. Once Joe gives 5 million illegal democrats citizenship we won't have to worry about any of our freedom again. Weather it's telling the truth about biden and his agenda or taking the kids out on the weekend to learn the safety and enjoyment of putting a small piece of lead in the center of a target. No matter how many people save their self from injury and death it matters nothing to tyrants, stupid or not. This can be seen in every democrat ran state and city in the country with their sky high murder rate and their answer of more gun laws. Disarming the innocent setting up crime zones for the criminals. When ever a criminal is caught and convicted they are given a slap on the wrest then turned loose to do it again. If we want to do anything abut crime, which has nothing to do with crime we should ban democrats.

 

[bodecea]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Don't fear guns...own a few. Not afraid of going out in the world without guns too....and surely not infatuated with guns in order to replace personal inadequacies either.

 

[JGalt]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Hey!
70% of Republicans favor gun legislation
more than 70% of Independents favor gun legislation.

Guns make guys with tiny little guns feel like big men.
The size of the penis is inversely proportional to the size and number of guns.

Your diatribe is full of lies. Ipso Facto...You call yourself a "conservative."

I was hoping one of the non-gun people would weigh in. It's pretty obvious that you have a distaste for firearms, so please explain why.

Are you a felon, a drug user, or some other ineligible person?

Do you feel intimidated by people who own firearms?

And why do you associate some sexual symbolism with firearms? Granted, some firearms are downright sexy-looking, but that's the last reason I own any of the ones I do.

 

[JGalt]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Don't fear guns...own a few. Not afraid of going out in the world without guns too....and surely not infatuated with guns in order to replace personal inadequacies either.

There's the sexual innuendo again. That generally seems to be the end-all strategy you non-gun culture types use to shame gun people. I suppose you think that insulting one's manhood will cause a twinge of insecurity and make me want to sell off the firearms, right?

How does that work with women, though? You know there are many women who collect firearms and are avid shooters, too. So would you say to a woman the only reason she likes her guns is because it makes her titties look bigger, or her ass smaller?

Between you and me, I have no sexual or personal inadequacies, other than not being able to to take down a 250-pound man armed with a knife, and intent on doing me harm. Nor is my dick long enough to reach out 100 yards and turn some mortal threat's head into mush.

Would you deny a woman the same luxury, or is it that you view men as "threatening"?

 

[K9Buck]

Leftists don't have a problem with guns, walls, or security; leftists have a problem with YOUR guns, walls, and security.

 

[Orangecat]

Like a Jesus freak but with guns.

What the fuck is a "Jesus freak"?

 

[whitehall]

Liberal progressives don't hate guns, they often have the assets to employ entire little armies of armed guards. Notorious anti-gun politician Edward (Teddy) Kennedy had a bodyguard who was arrested trying to enter the Senate Office Building with an unregistered fully automatic weapon. Teddy quietly had the case dismissed. Liberal progressives like power and the only way they can preserve their power is to restrict the 2nd Amendment to the elite and prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves with firearms.

 

[Vrenn]

Liberal progressives don't hate guns, they have the assets to employ entire little armies of bodyguards. Notorious anti-gun politician Edward (Teddy) Kennedy had a bodyguard who was arrested trying to enter the Senate Office Building with an unregistered fully automatic weapon. Teddy quietly had the case dismissed. Liberal progressives like power and the only way they can preserve their power is to restrict the 2nd Amendment to the elite and prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves with firearms.

We are coming for your guns. We are your worst nightmare. We just got our Stealth Blackhawks out of Depot Mantainance, out Wheel Pigs (painted black, naturally) have just been serviced and we are armed with every know light and medium weapon we can find. And we have all your addresses. Don't look for us because we will come like thieves in the night when you are sleeping. We are going to crash through your windows, kick in your doors and shoot your dog. And we bring plenty of zip ties. Sleep well, oh schizoid one, it won't do you any good.

 

[Dadoalex]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Hey!
70% of Republicans favor gun legislation
more than 70% of Independents favor gun legislation.

Guns make guys with tiny little guns feel like big men.
The size of the penis is inversely proportional to the size and number of guns.

Your diatribe is full of lies. Ipso Facto...You call yourself a "conservative."

I was hoping one of the non-gun people would weigh in. It's pretty obvious that you have a distaste for firearms, so please explain why.

Are you a felon, a drug user, or some other ineligible person?

Do you feel intimidated by people who own firearms?

And why do you associate some sexual symbolism with firearms? Granted, some firearms are downright sexy-looking, but that's the last reason I own any of the ones I do.

Not me with an itchy trigger finger and a gun that might go off if you touch it.

You see little one, it is not I who lives in fear.
Black people don't scare me. Asians don't scare me. Muslims don't scare me.
And some coward who needs a gun to check the mail certainly doesn't scare me.
You know who should be scared?
Your family, neighbors, and friends because when your guns finally kill someone the overwhelming probability is that like the Wolfman
You're only going to kill those you love.

As for me, don't you worry your empty little head!
I've a weapon more powerful than any gun, my ginourmous brain.
I don't do stupid stuff like going someplace where I think I might need a gun.

 

[Concerned American]

It's the old Mafia trope from Al Capone's heyday that guns are for "police and active duty military" only, and to this day the FBI and ATF enforce the Mob Rule of the Chicago Outfit, AVLN, Crips, Bloods, New York's gangsters and Five Families mobsters who prohibit guns for law-abiding citizens, except for licensed professional contract killers in the employ of the top bosses.

I'm confused. During the time of Capone, anyone could legally purchase a Thompson sub-machine gun without a background check.

It was during the 70's that all these cockamamie laws started to come into effect. I can remember, during the 60's taking a shotgun to high school in the truck's gun rack in order to go hunting after school in NM. No registration, no questions asked. Responible gun owners and not a bunch of self-loathing liberal democrats.

 

[whitehall]

Members of a quirky little religious sect in Waco Texas came under the scrutiny of the ATF during Clinton's first term when they sent away for (legal) brochures about refurbishing WW2 junk British Sten guns. The ATF was fresh off their victory in Ruby Ridge where an FBI sniper shot Randy Weaver's wife in the face while she was holding an 18 month baby in her arms and they needed a big bust during budget time. David Koresch could have been arrested while shopping at the 7-11 but the cowboy agents needed a more dramatic entrance. After the aborted raid and the subsequent siege and the eventual incineration of over 80 men, women and children there was no trace of the alleged British WW2 junk that was the basis for the initial federal search warrant and nobody cared. The lesson is not to fuck with the feds especially during a democrat administration. They will kill you and the media will call it justified every time.

 

[JGalt]

Members of a quirky little religious sect in Waco Texas came under the scrutiny of the ATF during Clinton's first term when they sent away for (legal) brochures about refurbishing WW2 junk British Sten guns. The ATF was fresh off their victory in Ruby Ridge where an FBI sniper shot Randy Weaver's wife in the face while she was holding an 18 month baby in her arms and they needed a big bust during budget time. David Koresch could have been arrested while shopping at the 7-11 but the cowboy agents needed a more dramatic entrance. After the aborted raid and the subsequent siege and the eventual incineration of over 80 men, women and children there was no trace of the alleged British WW2 junk that was the basis for the initial federal search warrant and nobody cared. The lesson is not to fuck with the feds especially during a democrat administration. They will kill you and the media will call it justified every time.

Wasn't that under the same administration that kidnapped that little child at gunpoint, and sent him to Cuba?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/hist...gonzlez-gunpoint-custody-battle-raged-months/

 

[themirrorthief]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Hey!
70% of Republicans favor gun legislation
more than 70% of Independents favor gun legislation.

Guns make guys with tiny little guns feel like big men.
The size of the penis is inversely proportional to the size and number of guns.

Your diatribe is full of lies. Ipso Facto...You call yourself a "conservative."

I was hoping one of the non-gun people would weigh in. It's pretty obvious that you have a distaste for firearms, so please explain why.

Are you a felon, a drug user, or some other ineligible person?

Do you feel intimidated by people who own firearms?

And why do you associate some sexual symbolism with firearms? Granted, some firearms are downright sexy-looking, but that's the last reason I own any of the ones I do.

Not me with an itchy trigger finger and a gun that might go off if you touch it.

You see little one, it is not I who lives in fear.
Black people don't scare me. Asians don't scare me. Muslims don't scare me.
And some coward who needs a gun to check the mail certainly doesn't scare me.
You know who should be scared?
Your family, neighbors, and friends because when your guns finally kill someone the overwhelming probability is that like the Wolfman
You're only going to kill those you love.

As for me, don't you worry your empty little head!
I've a weapon more powerful than any gun, my ginourmous brain.
I don't do stupid stuff like going someplace where I think I might need a gun.

if you are a democrat...its highly debatable that your brain is all that.

 

[Ben Thomson]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

So owning common firearms like shotguns, hunting rifles and pistols but see no need for military configured assault type rifles with extended magazines, favorite among mass shooters by the way, makes you a 'Fudd'??

 

[JGalt]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

So owning common firearms like shotguns, hunting rifles and pistols but see no need for military configured assault type rifles with extended magazines, favorite among mass shooters by the way, makes you a 'Fudd'??

That's right, Mr. Fudd.

BTW, not all mass shooters use those tools you mentioned, and statistically, very few of those tools are ever used in mass shootings.

Do a little research and find out just how many of those are in the hands of law-abiding American gun-owners.

You will be amazed.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

It's actually pretty simple.
They hate guns and want them banned or ridiculously regulated, because they know it's the last thing to overcome in order to create their feminized utopia. The left hates individualism, and the 2nd Amendment helps guarantee individualism.
Another way to look at it is, as long as the American white male remains armed, it will be much harder for them to completely destroy their (white males) power.

 

[Muhammed]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

 

[JGalt]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

 

[Mac-7]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

Liberal is the label that most people understand and associate with the left

but other labels do fit