Time to reconsider our approach?

Aren't enlisted men overwhelmingly Trump supporters while officers are not? Isn't trust between those two at an all time low?

Methinks the tank and copter pilots would "come home to the farm..."

Also it is a dumb argument because you have to assume the government is willing to pay that price regarding workers / infrastructure. It's inconceivable they would seek such self-destruction (blowing up whole neighborhoods full of teachers, doctors, farmers, insurance adjusters, etc).
 
The "need" argument is always extremely loaded. It is asked from a perspective that the need is non-existent and must be defended by the respondent. The stock answer, is "Why do you get to ask me to qualify what I need?"

I "need" them so I can continue to make the decision of what I "Need" for myself as opposed to letting the collective make those choices for me. I get to decide how to protect myself. I get to decide what tools I use to do so. The moment you make the choice to rely on someone else and their ability and good will to protect your life, liberty, or property then you have effectively become subservient to the state. You have traded your freedoms for a false sense of security.

My firearms have many uses aside from self defense. But them being dangerous and effective is exactly the reason I own them.
 
Oh...and chocolate poptarts rock. You are entitled to be wrong if you wish.
 
Don't set me on fire for this question, because I'm just wondering... What do we need AR's and AK's for?

I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but this is how I (patiently) explain it to my friends who are ignorant about guns but legitimately want to learn. It is like owning a crossover SUV. For the daily trip where I take the kids to school, an electric car would be the best choice of vehicle to use. For driving just myself to my account in Zebulon once a month, a great mileage compact would be the best choice. For that trip to the home improvement store, a long bed pickup would be. For taking the scouts on a field trip, a van...etc. etc.

I can't swing a stable of 4 or 5 vehicles. I own a crossover SUV because it does most of those things fairly well. I might have to fold down the seats, or only get 25 mpg instead of 35 but if I can only afford one thing the crossover is the best overall fit. This is also why I bought an AR-15. It puts holes in things from far away pretty cheaply (rifle price and ammo price). If I had varmints that needed hunting, it would serve that purpose too. It also serves duty as a personal defense option. It has low recoil and an adjustable stock so that all of the different sized bodies in my household can use it effectively.

I currently own one rifle that is not a .22LR. Maybe I will own others someday. Today the AR serves as my catch-all that fills every want that I have. Just like my crossover SUV does (most of the time anyway).

Now, there is a completely separate conversation that follows about needs vs. wants and rights vs. wants. This is simply how I broach the subject in a way that makes the AR sound like it is something other than a scary baby killer.

I am in the bottom 1/10th of people on this site who know about firearms, but people who are not on this site can be ignorant in ways you can barely imagine. They only know what they are told, and they don't really want to be told about rights and freedoms until later in their education. They want to know what purpose these guns serve first, and you have to spoon feed them gently.

I know that many will say this approach is silly, but I have been trying to find ways to educate that do not fall under the normal talking points.

YMMV.
 
Plus the tank and drone drivers have homes and families. And have to come out to pee at some point. :eek:
Exactly. If conflict breaks out in this nation, I think we will see a few different factions. In the cities, I think the urban hordes which are barely kept in check as it is will riot and quickly overwhelm much of their area. I think this in turn is where we will see the bulk of government resources being spent. Things will get worse as the supplies dwindle. Another faction will be middle America, predominantly the red regions. This faction will mostly try to stay out of it, but those that engage will likely use guerrilla and sniper tactics targeting both government agents as well as the city support transports. They will also be effective against the tank driver or their family and as I said previously, if the military does turn on the people they're going to have some real logistics problems fast.

This shows a critical failing in the leftist thinking. Just as with gun restriction laws, they think that people will magically obey. The problem is that they're counting on other people to obey, people who will have different priorities. They think people will obey their onerous gun laws, they think the police will enact and enforce their onerous laws, and that the military will fight on their behalf.
 
Some of you guys really are a bit dense. He asked a question to get folks thinking. Sorry to tell you, but if you can't think through an answer that is beyond "shall not be infringed" or "come and take them" you are loosing out on the ability to move people to our side. Some folks just flow along with the current, but when given something more to think about you can start to sway them. But that requires thought and actually answering their questions. Not just spouting off canned responses or even worse, name calling. Yeah, we may be our own worst enemy here. A lot of this stuff plays well here. But if you think it plays well with some of your neighbors you are fooling yourselves.

I deal with a guy I used to go to Church with on FB. I've actually brought him along the path a little ways. His daughter is now on her schools shooting team. I didn't do it with Molon Labe and shall not be infringed. Non gun folks will just write you off at that point as an extremist. While those ideas permeate what I say, I say them without sounding like a fool.

And if you guys think you are going to move gun folks over by calling them FUDD"s you are a special kind of stupid. Along the lines of Hillary and her deplorable statement. Leave the name calling to the left and fools, or you just sound like both.

And to answer the AR/AK question. They are fun, have a lot of defensive uses, I hunt with an AR occasionally, and if things ever go sideways I want something more than my Model 94. And I should get to choose what I own, not the Gov.
 
It brings us back to the age-old question of what liberals actually want... they want nice little categories like "weird" and "not weird."

They don't want to put people in these categories (oh no hurt feelings not allowed - not at any cost or body count)... they want to put objects in them (like ARs for now).

Then 1000 rounds of ammo becomes "weird."

Bumpstocks ARE "weird."

Eventually all guns become weird... thru societal change... or become a shadow of their former selves (look at the tobacco industry to see this strategy in action). It always begins with "knowing better" than all the poor ignorant peons.

"Well maybe you want to smoke, or drink, or shoot guns, or whatever.... but I know better."

There are plenty of things that lefties enjoy that are self-destructive. Some of them are non-partisan (alcohol) others are (marijuana)... guns just happen to be the current boogeyman and in the age of Trump its something they can latch onto because most of us vote "a certain way."

Long story short:

You don't let them classify sh*t.
They don't know sh*t.
They don't actually care [about sh*t].
You don't have to explain sh*t.
There is no explanation for the AR / AK question that "they" will accept. The hypothetical person asking it doesn't exist or is a fudd (who is a gun control activist)... see above for "don't know sh*t."

Now is not the time for giving ground... we have every branch of the government and will continue to do so if we don't puss out.
The supreme court will be stacked as soon as this summer... give money to the NRA and others so they can attack the ATF after that happens.
Those new ATF rules have no teeth anyway, as its been pointed out, congress would have to redefine "machinegun" (see above: branches of government we control).

The only thing to worry about are what the lefties do then. Right now they are trying to usurp the government via unelected federal judges. They also don't recognize the transfer of power from our previous administration (these two things are the definition of a cold civil war).
When they lose their last bastion (the supremes) for good - its gonna get ugly.

IMO I wish everyone would "retreat" to a much simpler and logical stance. Quit caring so much about what CNN or Huffpo or Facebook as to say about the topic. They aren't changing anyone's minds (they were made up years ago) they are just deepening the trenches.

Parkland students aren't making a difference either (if anything they are simply selling guns). Most people (except CNN / Huffpo / etc) see their little walking stunt as what it is... a day off from school.

Don't interpret this post as "be lazy" or "get lazy" (lots of gun owners already are)... but simplify, de-stress, and keep your eye on the prize.
 
Some of you guys really are a bit dense. He asked a question to get folks thinking. Sorry to tell you, but if you can't think through an answer that is beyond "shall not be infringed" or "come and take them" you are loosing out on the ability to move people to our side. .

and that is key - moving people to our side. most data shows more guns but decreasing number of owners - that doesnt bode well for us. neither does the constant barrage of talking points people are subjected to on the news/social media daily.

while planting your feet firmly in the ground and refusing to budge is great, it will not help in a nation of laws where the population is being taught that the ak15 is a weapon of war capable of leashing untold carnage ,weve averaged one mass shooting every day this year, children are dying etc.

exposure and education is our only hope. know the data and be able to quote it, expose them to shooting and educate them on the intricacies of current laws, what the drawbacks are etc. your always going to have some that accuse you of being being a right wing nut job, but the use of reason is the only chance we have at swaying public opinion. show them what an assault weapon ban actually looks like, compare a mini14 to an AR to a souped up 10/22. quote the govt data on violent crime before and after the awb.
 
To respond to the post above my last... we will see how Independents are swayed this summer if house democrats push something more extreme than the already silly proposed AWB (likely the point of Trump's recent meeting that made Feinstein giddy).

If they are unmoved I doubt "molon labe" has anything to do with it.

Also please explain how quoting the Constitution is extremist? Maybe some uninformed people don't know what it says? Or maybe more explanation is simply unnecessary at this point (see above: who has the majority of power at both federal and state levels)?

We are the ones with the ability to actually move the needle right now (regardless what the media says). Same media had Hillary at 95% until 8pm on election night.
 
Last edited:
and that is key - moving people to our side. most data shows more guns but decreasing number of owners - that doesnt bode well for us. neither does the constant barrage of talking points people are subjected to on the news/social media daily.

while planting your feet firmly in the ground and refusing to budge is great, it will not help in a nation of laws where the population is being taught that the ak15 is a weapon of war capable of leashing untold carnage ,weve averaged one mass shooting every day this year, children are dying etc.

exposure and education is our only hope. know the data and be able to quote it, expose them to shooting and educate them on the intricacies of current laws, what the drawbacks are etc. your always going to have some that accuse you of being being a right wing nut job, but the use of reason is the only chance we have at swaying public opinion. show them what an assault weapon ban actually looks like, compare a mini14 to an AR to a souped up 10/22. quote the govt data on violent crime before and after the awb.

I like you buddy... but calling it an ak15 while trying to support Scott Free's original point doesn't bode well for him (since the premise is seeking knowledge).
 
We frankly need to win our own to unity and commitment as our first priority. As was said earlier, it really is time to start looking at the first part of the 2nd Amendment rather than just the last.

If the gun-owning demographic at large remains so polarized, we'll be relatively easy to divide and conquer, so we have to get our act together quite literally.

That said, I'm not as concerned with who is capable of defending their viewpoints, I'm looking to fight beside the man capable of defending his God-given rights.
 
I like you buddy... but calling it an ak15 while trying to support Scott Free's original point doesn't bode well for him (since the premise is seeking knowledge).

It was sarcasm since the media cant seem to get the term right.... Ak15 ar47 etc....
 
I don't think fudds are winnable or moving. Real patriots don't virtue-signal.

(there is another extremist word)

...but who knows how they actually vote. Doubtful they are single-issue voters since they are obviously so wishy-washy.

^my apologies wesley
 
Last edited:
I don't think fudds are winnable or moving. Real patriots don't virtue-signal.

(there is another extremist word)

...but who knows how they actually vote. Doubtful they are single-issue voters since they are obviously so wishy-washy.

^my apologies wesley

Most liberals ive encountered arent either. Until ive taken them to the range been broken into or mugged etc.... But it can be done. Ive had a few converts but admittedly it can be exhausting
 
You are a better man than me; I've given up on most of my acquaintances. I hope nothing bad happens to them-

I don't beat them over the head with revolutionary language either (I just keep my mouth shut / they are unreachable).

Not surprisingly I mostly reside in academia these days.
 
Ah...I see.

We need to "give". We need to compromise. We need to cede Y to get X.

No.

What we need are folks who take a firm, unwavering stance on the RTKBA....not in part, but the whole. "I support the Second Amendment, but...." ain't gonna cut it. You either support it, or you don't; really no gray areas. It's akin to saying a gal is a little bit pregnant. No; she is or she ain't...same goes for support of the RTKBA.

The reason we can't get on the same page is due to folks wanting to carve out their own little exceptions into the right instead of taking it at face value.

We don't need to compromise when we are fighting to retain rights but we do need to compromise when we are trying to REGAIN the rights we have lost. We needed to unite to get back our rights the same way we lost them one step at a time. we have had bills here in NC that got us back rights but because it did not do away with the PPP people would not support it. the all or nothing mentality kept us from gaining back more rights over the last 10 years. I will fight tooth and nail to prevent loosing any more rights but I will also take any gain of right I can get. I don't own a Bump stock and think they are silly but You do have the right to own one if you want and I will support that right. With reciprocity I kept hearing " I don't want it because I don't go to those states" and other things
 
We don't need to compromise when we are fighting to retain rights but we do need to compromise when we are trying to REGAIN the rights we have lost. We needed to unite to get back our rights the same way we lost them one step at a time. we have had bills here in NC that got us back rights but because it did not do away with the PPP people would not support it. the all or nothing mentality kept us from gaining back more rights over the last 10 years. I will fight tooth and nail to prevent loosing any more rights but I will also take any gain of right I can get. I don't own a Bump stock and think they are silly but You do have the right to own one if you want and I will support that right. With reciprocity I kept hearing " I don't want it because I don't go to those states" and other things

Part of this is because of a "Me" mentality.

"I don't care if they take his bumpstock/SBR/etc, as long as they leave me alone."
 
Thanks for that wonderful insight. I'll rephrase my question for anyone else who seems to have trouble rubbing brain cells together...

"What is it about the AR and AK platform that makes everyone want one?"
Coming from an individual that seems to have neither brain cells or eloquence.
What is your problem? In just a few short posts you have proven you can’t convince anyone to follow you with just your words.
 
Well, at least I got a few straight answers, granted, that's what I get for playing devil's advocate for a minute. Personally, I don't shoot in any competitions, I don't hunt, but I do dump quite a bit of lead in the back yard. I'm a bit of a tannerite whore, and would like to setup some decent steel targets, instead of using old computer parts.

With that said, it shows that while some of you are capable of thought-provoking discussion, some of you need your guns since you couldn't defend your stance with words if your lives depended on it.

So it’s a Bill of Explain Yourself or you Can’t Have the Right?
 
The tanks and drones comment, interestingly another canned statement that seems to be spreading amongst the leftist/librul populace, is meant to be a conversation stopper and attempt to win at the same time.

The truth of the matter is that those tanks and drones won't be as effective as they might think. It takes a lot of logistics and manpower to operate them and that assumes the crews are willing to. Ok, they can undoubtedly take out a population center, but doing so will only deepen the revolt against them. The fact that these leftist types predominantly occupy mass population centers is a real weakness on there part.

Bust one tread and it’s a sitting duck. Gotta fix it with sniper-prone dismounts to get it moving or abandon it; temporarily or permanently. In which case you’re either leaving it guarded or you’re denying enemy use by destroying it. All of which takes resources away from the objective.

Drones and aircraft can be avoided with the right field craft
 
Some of you guys really are a bit dense. He asked a question to get folks thinking. Sorry to tell you, but if you can't think through an answer that is beyond "shall not be infringed" or "come and take them" you are loosing out on the ability to move people to our side. Some folks just flow along with the current, but when given something more to think about you can start to sway them. But that requires thought and actually answering their questions. Not just spouting off canned responses or even worse, name calling. Yeah, we may be our own worst enemy here. A lot of this stuff plays well here. But if you think it plays well with some of your neighbors you are fooling yourselves.

I deal with a guy I used to go to Church with on FB. I've actually brought him along the path a little ways. His daughter is now on her schools shooting team. I didn't do it with Molon Labe and shall not be infringed. Non gun folks will just write you off at that point as an extremist. While those ideas permeate what I say, I say them without sounding like a fool.

And if you guys think you are going to move gun folks over by calling them FUDD"s you are a special kind of stupid. Along the lines of Hillary and her deplorable statement. Leave the name calling to the left and fools, or you just sound like both.

And to answer the AR/AK question. They are fun, have a lot of defensive uses, I hunt with an AR occasionally, and if things ever go sideways I want something more than my Model 94. And I should get to choose what I own, not the Gov.
Oh thanks. Thats my favorite response.

Shall not be infringed.

Its all I need. :p
 
Don't set me on fire for this question, because I'm just wondering... What do we need AR's and AK's for?
Wrong question.
Why should we give up our God given rights?
A Mini14 or 30 fires the same ammo, same sized magazines, the main difference is the "scary looking" part.
The libs are comfortable with the Mini14/30, WHY?
 
Part of this is because of a "Me" mentality.

"I don't care if they take his bumpstock/SBR/etc, as long as they leave me alone."

Got that right...

"Nobody needs an AR, so if it means they'll leave my bolt rifles and shotguns alone, ban em...ban em now."

"I don't see what the big deal is; 10 round magazines are plenty enough...nobody needs more than 10 rounds. If folks'd just concede on +10 magazines...."

Folks willing to sacrifice what others have in an attempt to protect their own stash. Selfishness.

"Semper I; f*ck the other guy."

It goes back to what I mentioned earlier in the thread. You wholeheartedly support the RTKBA, or you do not...there's really no "in between" nor room for fence sitters.

It may be ARs and 30 round magazines today, but I guarantee that eventually, they'll come for the single-shots, scatterguns and perhaps even the smoke poles.

"But...but...yall said if you could get a ban on semi-autos, you'd "let us keep" (cringe :mad:) this other stuff?!!!!"

And you believed it when they fed you that line-o-sh*t?
 
Last edited:
I'm hoping to keep mine so I don't have to resort to suicide bombs at the beginning of this fight. Those will come later most likely though.
 
I'm a firm believer in "shall not be infringed", but we don't win people to our side by shouting that in their faces. I'm not saying that you have to compromise. You do not have to give up one inch of your convictions. But you need a more persuasive argument than "shall not be infringed" when you're trying to bring someone over to the 2A side.

Don't use fear tactics. Leftists react differently to fear than conservatives do, and it only works against you. Your best tool against left leaning folks is to educate them. As you educate, also make appeals to their emotions, since they resonate strongly with them. Eventually you can pull them over to our side.

I've successfully done it with two folks. In both cases, It started out with letting them handle an unloaded gun in safe environment. Helps to get rid of some of the taboos they associate with firearms. Next take them to a range where they can shoot a 22 at paper or metal targets. At this point, we're turning guns from something "scary" into something "fun". That's progress. With time, let them try larger, more powerful firearms. Let them try an AR, AK, or a shotgun. A self defense pistol. As they become more enlightened, bring up self defense, responsibility, and protecting ones loved ones. Also talk about the current measures in place to keep criminals from legally buying guns, so that they understand the reality gun purchases, and just not what they heard on CNN.

Eventually one of my converts did decided to get their CCW permit. Turns out a small misdemeanor they'd got at 18 was about to stop them from getting the permit, 10 years after the fact. They ended up having to get an official letter from a judge before the permit could proceed. I think that, more than anything, showed them that our current system works just fine.

In the end, you can't use laws to force bad people to be good.
 
Free men are not restricted to possssing property based on what they or any .gov or fudd thinks they need.

There is no valid argument to be had here. The numbers do not lie, gun violence is trivial compared to about anything else. The mass media however does lie. Every word they speak or print has a spin at best, outright lie at worst. And the sheeple can't get enough. You want to fight on their terms, you have lost already.

I do follow our current laws as they have not quite crossed my threshold of tolerance. When they do I will still live free... or die.
 
Free men don’t beg, they don’t have to say please for something they already own. They don’t have to kiss feet and beg people to live in their free country.
And they will leak blood if necessary to keep it FREE.

How’s that for eloquent?
 
Last edited:
Free men are not restricted to possssing property based on what they or any .gov or fudd thinks they need.

There is no valid argument to be had here. The numbers do not lie, gun violence is trivial compared to about anything else. The mass media however does lie. Every word they speak or print has a spin at best, outright lie at worst. And the sheeple can't get enough. You want to fight on their terms, you have lost already.

I do follow our current laws as they have not quite crossed my threshold of tolerance. When they do I will still live free... or die.

I wasn't seeking argument, but attempting to provoke conversation about how canned responses are useless, kinda like calling people a Fudd, Democrap, Libtard, etc.
 
Free men don’t beg, they don’t have to say please for something they already own. They don’t have to kiss feet and beg people to live in their free country.
And they will leak blood if necessary to keep it FREE.

How’s that for eloquent?

Almost Shakespearean in eloquence as well as fiction. If these men existed, the NFA and BATFE wouldn't exist in any way. Technically, every single person who hasn't shed blood to remove firearm restrictions is a FUDD.
 
I seriously doubt there is some liberal board somewhere, I don't know, "CarolinaHackySack" ... where one of them has made a thread called "Time to reconsider our approach."
 
Almost Shakespearean in eloquence as well as fiction. If these men existed, the NFA and BATFE wouldn't exist in any way. Technically, every single person who hasn't shed blood to remove firearm restrictions is a FUDD.
The only thing fictional in my statement is that we live in a free country but as far as free men, there are still a few.
 
Last edited:
The only thing fictional in my statement is that we live in a free country but as far as free men, there are still a few.

I haven't met anyone who actively fights for our freedom.
I've met people who fought for vengeance, for oil, and for freedom in other countries... but who actually fights for our freedom?

***edited for clarification of context.
 
Last edited:
With that said, it shows that while some of you are capable of thought-provoking discussion, some of you need your guns since you couldn't defend your stance with words if your lives depended on it.

Thank you for the complement...you are absolutely correct in that if I am defending my "stance" and my life depended on it, I will do so with firearms and not words...if you are defending your life, you are way past words.

To read your statement any other way would be insulting, and I am sure you had no intention of insulting anyone on this forum.
 
I haven't met anyone who has actually fought for our freedom.
I've met people who fought for vengeance, for oil, and for freedom in other countries... but who actually fights for our freedom?

Tread lightly...are you absolutely certain you are not confusing Liberty with Freedom?
 
Thank you for the complement...you are absolutely correct in that if I am defending my "stance" and my life depended on it, I will do so with firearms and not words...if you are defending your life, you are way past words.

To read your statement any other way would be insulting, and I am sure you had no intention of insulting anyone on this forum.
There was no offense intended. My point was the current state of affairs, responding to people with statements like "Shall not be infringed" do nothing. Miscommunication is one of the biggest fire-starters in conflict, and a lackluster "'Murica" response doesn't educate anyone, and educating the "others" is the ONLY way progress can be made.
 
Back
Top Bottom