TexasCHLforum.com

loadedliberal wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

loadedliberal wrote:So because Im a liberal that automaticly makes me an idiot... In the words of Dick Cheney to Sen. Layhe Go... well never mind.

What makes you a "liberal?" Obviously you're not an advocate of banning guns. While there may be "conservatives" who are anti-gun, and liberals, like you, who are "pro gun," certainly they wouldn't represent the preponderance in either camp. Surely you don't consider yourself to be aligned with the gun banners and anti self-defense crowd, who are predominately "liberal," so what do you mean when you call yourself a liberal? Do you vote for gun control advocates? You've mentioned anti-Obama comments --don't you think if the political winds were favorable he'd be taking away your right to carry and eventually your guns, and eliminating the right to self-defense as the collectivists in the UK have done? I'm just not sure how "liberal" anyone with a CHL can be --when I think liberal I think Pelosi, Schumer, Rangel, Daley, Franken, and Frank --is that the crowd you consider yourself part of? I'm skeptical because I usually find gun toting "liberals" to be something closer to libertarians than the bunch that has appropriated the liberal label these days.

Im a "individual liberties" liberal. I wear that label proudly, however I can see how I would fit into the libertarian camp at times.

I think all the political labels have been co-opted and corrupted these days. Liberal, conservative, libertarian --a lot of people seeking political benefit or cover (I'm mostly talking about pundits and politicians of various kinds) have appropriated labels for political expediency and are merely opportunists, not people who hold the associated core philosophical beliefs. There are a lot of politicians calling themselves conservatives and libertarians, and liberals, who all fit under the single label "scoundrels." I tend to use the "liberal" label when it would be more accurate to say "collectivist."

VMI77 wrote: I think all the political labels have been co-opted and corrupted these days. Liberal, conservative, libertarian --a lot of people seeking political benefit or cover (I'm mostly talking about pundits and politicians of various kinds) have appropriated labels for political expediency and are merely opportunists, not people who hold the associated core philosophical beliefs. There are a lot of politicians calling themselves conservatives and libertarians, and liberals, who all fit under the single label "scoundrels." I tend to use the "liberal" label when it would be more accurate to say "collectivist."

I hate the traditional static line definition of left and right anyway. This is how I view the political spectrum:


and here's a link to an explanation of that spectrum: http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1644

There are aspects of the Republican party I agree with it. But not all of it. My view on leftists is simple. If we can get to a point where we no longer have to worry about gun bans in this country, then we can argue about other stuff. Till then, we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Frankly a lot of other issues do have areas to argue about because BOTH sides are at times based on emotion and personal feelings instead of facts. But the 2A isn't one of those. Study after study, example after example shows us that law abiding citizens don't need govt overwatch when practicing their 2A rights, and in fact when left to do so, reduce crime in their states and fail to go on mass murdering sprees we keep being told we're all one fox news broadcast away from going on. Its time for the facts to come out on this one, call it a settled argument, and let us move on to other things.