New-ish member from Central NY

1
I've been prompted to start my own intro thread.
Honestly, I thought I'd registered before and just couldn't log in for whatever reason.
Whatever.
LEO from the Tompkins County area, for the past 27 years
22 years Army National Guard, retired. Three years mobilized, if that matters to anyone.
23 years as an FFL, still going strong in that endeavor.

Anyways, I'll be upfront and say that I am here primarily for the prep subforum although that's not to say I wont post elsewhere if a topic is of interest.
I'll also be upfront and say that I don't consider myself a liberal, although other people on other gun forums may disagree.
I'll try to be respectful in my comments, but I'll also be quite frank that living in an area that politically is dominated by liberals to an extreme, I have nothing positive to say about liberal politicians and their views and practices. Monopolized political power in the hands of either political extreme is not a good thing and an abomination of how our system of governance should work.

I understand that people are able to hold divergent views on different issues, almost to the point of being bipolar.
But I have to ask how any of you can self-identify with a political philosophy that wants to strip all of us of the very thing this and other gun forums are focused on.

carry on.

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

7
:welcome: from Oregon! Yeah, we can seem like an odd bunch. It only seems that way from the outside, though; the view from within the freakshow is that it's those who want to take our guns who have it wrong. :) Or, as this poster likes to think, 'Piss off... I like guns!'
"I am not a number, I am a free man!" - Number Six

Image

Image
Image

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

8
Welcome. You'll find a wide spectrum of philosophies on this forum from the far left to the moderate right. Relating to folks here as individuals that share common interests and struggles is a good tactic for fitting in. I'm still mastering it. I don't often identify as liberal anymore but I can't relate to the alternatives and resent popular labels and categories others try to define for me. If I started a gun club it would be called The Left-of-Center-Moderate-Sick-of-Left-and-Right-Wingnuts-and-All-Politics-Just-Looking-For-Meaning-and-Cool-Weapons-and-Pastries Gun Club.

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

9
Bacchus wrote::welcome: from Oregon! Yeah, we can seem like an odd bunch. It only seems that way from the outside, though; the view from within the freakshow is that it's those who want to take our guns who have it wrong. :) Or, as this poster likes to think, 'Piss off... I like guns!'
Right on, Mike! Shooting stuff is fun. end of argument.
Cynistoicureanism: The world view best expressed by "I can't trust 'em any farther then I can throw 'em, There's nothing I can do about it anyway, So let's have a drink".

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

10
tc556guy wrote: ...But I have to ask how any of you can self-identify with a political philosophy that wants to strip all of us of the very thing this and other gun forums are focused on...
To speak directly to your (perhaps rhetorical) question: Speaking solely for myself, the extent to which I identify with any philosophy constitutes a compromise. I have many concerns in my life, only some of which involve firearms and 2nd amendment-related issues. Will I throw my lot behind a party - or individual - that supports 2nd amendment rights at the expense of jobs, healthcare, roads and infrastructure, or any of the other amendments or elements of the Constitution I hold dear? No. I refer to Inquisitor's link upthread, as I think that it's spot-on. I believe that any politician's focus on 'gun control' is silly, short-sighted, and ultimately ineffective versus efforts that actually address issues of violence in our society.

It does get complicated for this voter, but I have yet to find anyone - anyone - who lines up identically with my own political philosophy on every issue. Generally, I think that's a good thing.
"I am not a number, I am a free man!" - Number Six

Image

Image
Image

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

13
senorgrand wrote:Welcome!

What made you come find us and whatchya shoot?
Nowadays mostly semiauto stuff
Used to be on the state pistol team when I was in the Guard, and being Infantry spent a lot of time on various full auto stuff that my liberal state considers too evil for the common man
In my early days as a LEO we still had wheelguns so unlike most of my younger coworkers I still have a few of those kicking around the collection.
I originally came to the site because your prep subforum was linked to somewhere else, can't recall where or when.
It's sat in my collection of gun/prep forums ever since

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

14
Bacchus wrote:
tc556guy wrote: ...But I have to ask how any of you can self-identify with a political philosophy that wants to strip all of us of the very thing this and other gun forums are focused on...
To speak directly to your (perhaps rhetorical) question: Speaking solely for myself, the extent to which I identify with any philosophy constitutes a compromise. I have many concerns in my life, only some of which involve firearms and 2nd amendment-related issues. Will I throw my lot behind a party - or individual - that supports 2nd amendment rights at the expense of jobs, healthcare, roads and infrastructure, or any of the other amendments or elements of the Constitution I hold dear? No. I refer to Inquisitor's link upthread, as I think that it's spot-on. I believe that any politician's focus on 'gun control' is silly, short-sighted, and ultimately ineffective versus efforts that actually address issues of violence in our society.

It does get complicated for this voter, but I have yet to find anyone - anyone - who lines up identically with my own political philosophy on every issue. Generally, I think that's a good thing.
The problem with that is if someone aligns themselves with the Democratic party in any way, they're aligning themselves with a party that is entirely anti-gun. The party as an entity wants to do away with firearms not in the possession of the government. That is their ultimate goal, and the events of this last week have caused them to drop any pretense they might show that would say otherwise.
As for the topics you list, I'll run down them
It isn't the gov'ts business to "make jobs". The gov'ts business in job creation is to make the conditions through which job creation can occur. That means a favorable tax system, primarily.
Healthcare is simply not the business of gov't outside of vets who have received injuries while in service to the nation
Roads and infrastructure are indeed the business of gov't, and I see those being maintained every summer during our limited construction season in Upstate NY. Lets face it: we have 200-plus years of roads here in the East. Century-old service infrastructure like water and sewer. There isn't enough money anywhere to be able to do it all in a short time.
I'm primarily a single issue voter: where does the candidate stand on guns. The other issues are great to weigh in on, but if they are anti-gun they are completely a non-starter for me as a candidate

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

15
tc556guy wrote:
Bacchus wrote:
tc556guy wrote: ...But I have to ask how any of you can self-identify with a political philosophy that wants to strip all of us of the very thing this and other gun forums are focused on...
To speak directly to your (perhaps rhetorical) question: Speaking solely for myself, the extent to which I identify with any philosophy constitutes a compromise. I have many concerns in my life, only some of which involve firearms and 2nd amendment-related issues. Will I throw my lot behind a party - or individual - that supports 2nd amendment rights at the expense of jobs, healthcare, roads and infrastructure, or any of the other amendments or elements of the Constitution I hold dear? No. I refer to Inquisitor's link upthread, as I think that it's spot-on. I believe that any politician's focus on 'gun control' is silly, short-sighted, and ultimately ineffective versus efforts that actually address issues of violence in our society.

It does get complicated for this voter, but I have yet to find anyone - anyone - who lines up identically with my own political philosophy on every issue. Generally, I think that's a good thing.
The problem with that is if someone aligns themselves with the Democratic party in any way, they're aligning themselves with a party that is entirely anti-gun. The party as an entity wants to do away with firearms not in the possession of the government. That is their ultimate goal, and the events of this last week have caused them to drop any pretense they might show that would say otherwise.
As for the topics you list, I'll run down them
It isn't the gov'ts business to "make jobs". The gov'ts business in job creation is to make the conditions through which job creation can occur. That means a favorable tax system, primarily.
Healthcare is simply not the business of gov't outside of vets who have received injuries while in service to the nation
Roads and infrastructure are indeed the business of gov't, and I see those being maintained every summer during our limited construction season in Upstate NY. Lets face it: we have 200-plus years of roads here in the East. Century-old service infrastructure like water and sewer. There isn't enough money anywhere to be able to do it all in a short time.
I'm primarily a single issue voter: where does the candidate stand on guns. The other issues are great to weigh in on, but if they are anti-gun they are completely a non-starter for me as a candidate
Oops! Didn't intend to start debate in the intro thread... :oops: I'm sure you'll find by browsing the threads that many here have problems with the D party. Also, liberal is not the D party, and vice-versa. You're opinions of what the gov't role is are noted. You'll find some single-issue voters here, too. Again, welcome.
"I am not a number, I am a free man!" - Number Six

Image

Image
Image

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

20
tc556guy wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:25 am
sikacz wrote:Welcome and I believe the 2nd amendment and the RKBA are the most liberal of ideas. :beer2:
Classic liberalism yes.
Modern liberalism, no
Nope, you're trying too hard. It's simple, really: The Democratic party is the only US party that has an anti-gun plank in their platform. Thing is, the Democratic party isn't liberal. They're almost as far right as the Republicans. There's a LOT happening left of center - and we like all of the Constitution over here.

Image

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

:welcome:

Re: New-ish member from Central NY

21
This is my view on the relationship towards guns by various political proclivities.

For conservatives, guns are symbols of tradition and order. Right now they oppose most gun regulations, but I think a lot of it is a reaction to what they perceive (rightly, IMO) as an opportunistic progressive push. In the long run, I would not trust their steadfast support for a truly egalitarian access to guns.

Progressives, being no fan of the status quo, tend to be against guns for the same reasons that conservatives are for them, unless they have a more aggressive/revolutionary stand (e.g., because they don't trust the political system will change on its own, or perhaps fear oppression), in which case the can be seduced by the power of guns too, at the very least to keep the state power in check.

Liberals can appreciate guns as symbols of individualism and personal responsibility. I'm in that camp. I accept that widely available guns make my daily life a little less safe, because of careless or deranged people who could misuse them and hurt me or someone I love. For me, it's more than tolerable. I am no more afraid of guns in the waistband of a stranger I encounter than I am afraid of driving at 60 miles per hour down a road with opposite traffic, which is to say a little, but not much. Am I afraid for my kids' safety at school? Honestly, somewhat yes, but I am way more scared of them driving around, now that they are novice drivers. So I keep things in perspective, and also consider the benefits that guns provide me. First and foremost, and this is not brought up enough IMO, they are FUN. I enjoy shooting tremendously, It's my only hobby. Some of the proposed gun regulations, like banning ARs, limiting mag capacity, or the worse of all to me, certified gun lists, go right against that pursuit. I also want the ability to defend myself if I am attacked in my home, or cornered somewhere in a public place. There too, I understand and accept that I could very well hurt myself (or someone else) through negligence, but that is my problem and my responsibility to deal with. If the state objects in the name of public safety, then I think it would be acceptable to establish a gun ownership license system, with reasonable proficiency requirements. More generally speaking, I think there is value for a society to learn to deal with its citizenry having access to guns or other powerful tools. It's only going to get worse as technology and knowledge disseminate more and more. The solution to public threats cannot be to clamp down or legitimate rights (like the right to have fun or defend oneself) every time technology is misuse by a very few with malicious intent.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests