Inappropriate propagandizing during CHL class

[matrix]

...that you consider him "unaware" just tells us that you disagreed with him...

Nope. There are unaware people with whom I agree. And also aware people with whom I disagree. What really tells you that I disagree with him is... Me.

1. Whether I agreed with him or not is irrelevant (BTW, I don't).

See, it's right there.

Teamless, thanks for explaining the troll dynamic. See, the thing is I already went through the class, have my plastic, have a gun, etc etc, so I just kinda skipped those posts. But I will be making some posts about those other things as well. For example, can you recommend a good OWB holster for a Sig P238? Need one bad.

one question of our OP: did you copy your instructor this post, so that he might consider whether or not he wanted to change his style???

Not a chance. You have to understand, this guy seemed set in his ways, and REALLY REALLY disliked the president. I have a strong hunch that attempting to get him to change would cause a reflexive COMMIE LIBERAL label plastered on me and going to shoot at that range in the future would be highly...uncomfortable.

[speedsix]

...yeah, a lot of us old guys are set in our ways...AND really, really (even REALLY) dislike the president...but I'd prefer two skunks or a Commie to him anyday...at least we know where they stand...

[VMI77]

Well, I'm definitely glad to hear that not everyone has to sit through things like that for the sin of wanting to obtain a CHL. Popular opinion in this forum notwithstanding, not everybody who voted for Obama is a gun-grabbing, "guns-are-evil" person. I, for example, am very much in favor of the 2nd amendment and reserve my right to protect myself and my family from would-be assailants.

Welcome.

Strange first post but to each his own. I agree that the political statements were uncalled for in your class but I'm sure as you already know most people actively involved in the gun community are not supportive of the current president because of his stance on guns, his attorney generals stance on guns etc..

Gizzmo, I'm glad you agree with me about the inappropriate context to be making those statements, and yes, I am totally aware of how people in the "gun community" perceive the president. I just happen to disagree with most of the "gun community." (BTW, am I in the gun community? I have a CHL, own a gun, carry as often circumstances permit, etc etc.) And why you find my 1st post "strange" is a mystery to me. It's more than tangentially gun-related (right out of forum rules), and I believe posted in the appropriate folder (political issues). What's strange about that?

While I agree that such political comments are inappropriate in a CHL class I also realize that people are apt to make such comments when they believe they are addressing a friendly audience --and I suspect there aren't too many gun toting Obama supporters: that's sort of like being an anti-abortion feminist. If you voted for Obama, and are an Obama supporter, you voted for, and support and administration that wants to take away your right to own guns and your right to defend yourself, as well as other Constitutional rights. The Gun Walker program was INTENDED to covertly undermine 2nd Amendment rights and he nominated an anti-gun zealot to head the BATF --no doubt to implement policies via the BATF that he cannot pass through Congress.

Fortunately we haven't yet reached the point where a president can simply do whatever he wants --because if Obama could do whatever he wanted your guns would already be gone and you'd be subject to prosecution for self-defense --like people in the UK. If that's what you want vote for Obama again and help the gun grabbers seat more anti-gun judges on the Federal bench, perhaps get another anti-gun judge on the SC to reverse the recent 2nd Amendment victory, and enable more covert anti-gun policies. But if you're that anxious to get rid of your guns, why wait? I'm sure some of us here on this board will be willing to take them off yours hands.

[G26ster]

[
1. Whether I agreed with him or not is irrelevant (BTW, I don't). If he was sitting there praising Obama and the Democrats, I would have felt the same way. Not appropriate for the context/setting.

4. I'm not touchy enough to walk out of a class over something like this. It wasn't an earth-shattering disaster, just an unaware old guy making inappropriate statements every now and then.

Based on your comments above, I'm going out on a limb. I do not believe you would have felt the same way if he was praising the President or the Democrats. If it was not "an earth-shattering disaster," why was it so important to you? You said it didn't take up class time. What if he was commenting on the weather, or on some other topic unrelated to CHL training? I think you reacted because of HIS bias. Based on your "unaware old guy" comment, I believe you are a "young guy" who is currently attending, or who has attended an institution of higher education, and likely completely agree with the comments and biases of professors who share/shared your political views, and see no problem with it. This is just MHO. I do agree, however, that political views or other topics unrelated to CHL training should not be part of the class.

[Jumping Frog]

I don't sweat the small stuff. I've heard a lot of people over the years expound on the evils of liberalism or complain about all these right wingers with their tinfoil hats. Never saw much need to get upset about it, much less decide to go someplace and whine about it.

[matrix]

While I agree that such political comments are inappropriate in a CHL class I also realize that people are apt to make such comments when they believe they are addressing a friendly audience --and I suspect there aren't too many gun toting Obama supporters: that's sort of like being an anti-abortion feminist. If you voted for Obama, and are an Obama supporter, you voted for, and support and administration that wants to take away your right to own guns and your right to defend yourself, as well as other Constitutional rights. The Gun Walker program was INTENDED to covertly undermine 2nd Amendment rights and he nominated an anti-gun zealot to head the BATF --no doubt to implement policies via the BATF that he cannot pass through Congress.

Fortunately we haven't yet reached the point where a president can simply do whatever he wants --because if Obama could do whatever he wanted your guns would already be gone and you'd be subject to prosecution for self-defense --like people in the UK. If that's what you want vote for Obama again and help the gun grabbers seat more anti-gun judges on the Federal bench, perhaps get another anti-gun judge on the SC to reverse the recent 2nd Amendment victory, and enable more covert anti-gun policies. But if you're that anxious to get rid of your guns, why wait? I'm sure some of us here on this board will be willing to take them off yours hands.

VM, let's get out of our preconceived notions about what people are supposed to be like based on one or two of their characteristics. Labels are simple and easy, I understand the allure, but they're also simplistic and the assumptions that go with them are often wrong. Even many of the people who you would consider gun-grabbing liberals own guns and aren't anti-gun at all, just simply favor some common sense gun regulations (such as closing the gun show loophole), and oppose some of the totalitarian craziness coming out of the NRA (like their opposition to closing the gun show loophole). And let's not forget that the current system does not protect against mentally ill people legally purchasing firearms. You can be mad as a hatter (Jared Loughner, anyone?), and still walk into any gunstore and purchase a firearm. Some common sense reforms are not EVIL LIBERALS STEALING MY GUNS!!! Calm down. All this talk about the president wanting your guns has no basis in reality. It's all based on what you think he may do, not anything he's done in his first 3 years as president. Tell you what, instead of reflexively going on about how the president wants my guns, why don't you tell me a specific action he has taken as president to take my guns... Patiently waiting.

[matrix]

I don't sweat the small stuff. I've heard a lot of people over the years expound on the evils of liberalism or complain about all these right wingers with their tinfoil hats. Never saw much need to get upset about it, much less decide to go someplace and whine about it.

Well this is a gun/CHL forum right? And people do post their politically related posts here all the time, right? Almost each and every single one of them would qualify as one form of "whining" or another, under your apparent definition... Drive-by comment.

[matrix]

Based on your comments above, I'm going out on a limb.

That you did. And it broke. Be careful on your way down.

[G26ster]

You can be mad as a hatter (Jared Loughner, anyone?), and still walk into any gunstore and purchase a firearm.

What does walking in to a gun store and purchasing a gun with an NICS check have to do with the so-called "gun show loophole?" How do you propose preventing someone as mad as a hatter from purchasing a gun in a gun store? (or a knife, a baseball bat, tire iron, matches, lighter, gasoline, rat poison, etc., etc., etc.) A psychiatric exam?

[G26ster]

Based on your comments above, I'm going out on a limb.

That you did. And it broke. Be careful on your way down.

I'd be interested in where I was wrong.

[matrix]

What does walking in to a gun store and purchasing a gun with an NICS check have to do with the so-called "gun show loophole?"

Nothing. Hence the gun show loophole, and not the gunstore loophole.

How do you propose preventing someone as mad as a hatter from purchasing a gun in a gun store? (or a knife, a baseball bat, tire iron, matches, lighter, gasoline, rat poison, etc., etc., etc.) A psychiatric exam?

First, let's not go reductio ad absurdum (fancy, huh? ) with the tossing of guns into the same category with knives, poison, etc. We're talking about guns, OK? Otherwise we might as well be talking about heavy watermelons (tossing one of those from a 2nd story window and nailing somebody on the head sure seems like it would do some damage).

Second, I don't know. I'm not an expert nor am I a policymaker, but it sure seems wrong to me that a certifiable nut like Loughner can legally purchase a firearm. Don't you think we should take steps to prevent that? I'm sure a really smart person could devise a reasonable mechanism for this purpose.

[matrix]

Based on your comments above, I'm going out on a limb.

That you did. And it broke. Be careful on your way down.

I'd be interested in where I was wrong.

G26, you're on a fishing expedition, and I don't bite.

[Thomas]

First, let's not go reductio ad absurdum (fancy, huh? ) with the tossing of guns into the same category with knives, poison, etc.

Why? All have been used to kill people as well as help people. Each item you listed is a tool. Depending on how a person uses it makes it a weapon. Heck, one evil person with a bunch of poison can kill more people than one evil person with a bunch of guns.

[G26ster]

First, let's not go reductio ad absurdum (fancy, huh? ) with the tossing of guns into the same category with knives, poison, etc. We're talking about guns, OK? Otherwise we might as well be talking about heavy watermelons (tossing one of those from a 2nd story window and nailing somebody on the head sure seems like it would do some damage).

I'll make my last comment here. The issue is that we see guns differently. You place them in category of their own, as a unique device to kill, or maim. I don't. A "mad hatter" can do severe damage with a knife in a crowd, or with gasoline and matches in a building full of people. Many can die or be injured. A criminal doesn't need to go to a gun show to get a gun. I'm pretty sure they're cheaper on the street. My issue is with the gradual erosion of Constitutional rights.

[Thomas]