How to convert your liberal friends (to win next election)

[marksiwel]

What I've done is take some friends who are "On the Fence" about guns to the range, go over the Hows and Whys of gun handling blah blah blah, but everyone smiles on the way home.
Then you take some of the converted and you get some of the antis and you mix em together and take them to the range together.
It seems to work

As for getting them to Change their political views on the other stuff? Impossible.

Heck I love guns, support the 2nd, but if they Run a Cheney/Palin or Palin/Romney or a Palin/Anything I'm voting for a 3rd party president.

I cant convert support the 2nd in my friends over Health Care, Social Security problems, Pollution, the Economy, Gay Marriage put together. One or two of those options? Yes. All of them, no.

I think its time for organizations like the NRA to branch out and support personal freedoms, like gay marriage, smaller government, less taxes, freedom of speach, freedom of privacy ect to get more people on "The gun side" so that way liberals know that they cant touch gun issues with a 10 foot pole, and Republicans know they cant Wiretap people without warrants without losing the gun vote.

[Zee]

My "delete" key isn't working. Can I get some tech-help, here?

Same problem here. I was hoping this was getting fixed.

[mr.72]

I think its time for organizations like the NRA to branch out and support personal freedoms, like gay marriage, smaller government, less taxes, freedom of speach, freedom of privacy ect to get more people on "The gun side" so that way liberals know that they cant touch gun issues with a 10 foot pole, and Republicans know they cant Wiretap people without warrants without losing the gun vote.

What do those issues have to do with the NRA? I am not the biggest fan of the NRA but certainly diluting their purpose and blurring issues together is not going to help any.

And by the way, what does "gay marriage" have to do with freedom? This is another law someone wants passed to give something to somebody. Gay people have the same right to a state-sanctioned marriage as straight people do. When you go get a marriage license they don't ask if you are gay. There are probably many thousands of gay people in TX who are legally married. Now IMHO, if the state did not sanction ANY marriage and then this becomes a complete non-issue. What the gays want is not to be able to get married. They want to force society to validate their lifestyle choice. This is about as anti-freedom as you can get.

IMHO.

[Zee]

And by the way, what does "gay marriage" have to do with freedom? This is another law someone wants passed to give something to somebody. Gay people have the same right to a state-sanctioned marriage as straight people do. When you go get a marriage license they don't ask if you are gay. There are probably many thousands of gay people in TX who are legally married. Now IMHO, if the state did not sanction ANY marriage and then this becomes a complete non-issue. What the gays want is not to be able to get married. They want to force society to validate their lifestyle choice. This is about as anti-freedom as you can get.

IMHO.

I've never heard this position stated this way before.

[Keith B]

OK folks, this is going WAY off topic. Keep it on how to convert anti-gun people or those that are misguided on guns and nothing else or it will be locked.

[03Lightningrocks]

There seems to be a bit of confusion over understanding how to recognize a liberal. The following behavioral indicators may help:

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn`t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a black man or Hispanic are conservative, they see themselves as
independently successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government
protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he's in labor and then sues.

If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended".

...at the very least I am going to quote it and post . Yes....copies are made.

[03Lightningrocks]

OK folks, this is going WAY off topic. Keep it on how to convert anti-gun people or those that are misguided on guns and nothing else or it will be locked.

Keith...the topic is actually how to convert your "liberal" friends. So far we are all right on topic. OOPS!!! Correction time...I didn't see the post about gay marriage and what not. Yep...that would be going astray a bit. It was bound to happen though. It is hard to discuss liberals without eventually getting to the rest of the stuff too.

[Purplehood]

And some of us really need to be converted.

[drjoker]

marksiwel,

I agree with your point, but I disagree with the specific off-topic issues you propose we support. However, I do see the relevance of 2nd amendment rights, 1st amendment rights, and other constitutional rights. You might be surprised to find that the whole liberal vs conservative or dem vs rep thing is simply a ruse to divide honest, hard working Americans. Divided we fall, united we stand. It is just a divide and conquer ruse created by the power elite to control this country. After all, how many purely 100% liberals or conservatives do you know? For example, as much as a conservative I am, I have let my liberal friends persuade me that the death penalty is wrong, not in principle, but in practice. This is because they gave me convincing evidence that up to 1 in 7 of those convicted on death row were innocent (1). That's the percentage that was found innocent when they first discovered DNA testing. There are undoubtedly more innocents on death row right now, but they just cannot be exonerated by DNA evidence. Besides, didn't the constitution, which protect our right to bear arms also state that we should be free from cruel and unusual punishment? (8th amendment right) So, I'm not 100% conservative. My liberal friends are not 100% liberal because I've persuaded them to support 2nd Amendment rights. marksiwel also pointed out that he is unhappy about the unpatriotic Patriot Act that allows unconstitutional searches, seizures, and wiretaps without a warrant. (4th amendment right)

I don't think the NRA necessarily needs to go out and march in a gay rights parade, however I get his point. The NRA should target recruitment of minorities, whether they be racial minorities or sexual preference minorities. After all, in case you haven't noticed, the president is a minority. Ignoring minorities will cause us to lose the next election. Broadening the scope of the NRA to protect the bill of rights and not just be about gun owners' rights would broaden its appeal to all honest, hard working Americans. The reason that I support the NRA is not because I'm a "gun nut". I own ZERO guns (my wife forbids it). I support the NRA because like Wayne LaPierre says, "This is the right that protects all your other rights." Your 2nd amendment right is the weakest right on the bill of rights. If they were to blatantly take away all our rights and establish tyranny, rest assured that the right to bear arms would be the first right that the power elite will take away. The last time I went to a Friends of the NRA meeting, I observed zero blacks and zero hispanics. I know that none of us at the meeting are racist, so what's the problem? The Patriot Act would've generated a sea of protesters camped out in University campuses and in D.C. if this were the 60's. Where are the protesters now? Where are they? The reason that so few are protesting is because we Americans are DIVIDED. NOBODY CARES ABOUT GUN OWNERS' rights but gun nuts. Nobody cares about wrongfully convicted people on death row but convicts. Nobody cares about the government using illegal wiretapping except for those being wiretapped. However, everyone cares about CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, which includes right to bear arms (2nd A), freedom from cruel and unusual punishment (8th A), and protection from illegal searches and seizure (4th A). If the NRA were to assemble a crack legal team to question the Patriot Act in the court system, if the NRA were to organize a protest for a high profile innocent man on death row, and other activities to defend not just 2nd A rights but CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, then you might be surprised to find that its membership would double overnight. After all, we Americans live in America because we enjoy these constitutional rights. To divide ourselves to support only one constitutional right or the other is equivalent to dividing ourselves to be easily conquered and subjugated by the power elite.

I mean, if there is no power elite suppressing our 2nd A rights, amongst other rights, then why are there only 2 parties? As varied a melting pot of a country we are, shouldn't there be more major parties? Why was the Libertarian candidate ASSAULTED when he tried to join the presidential debates on T.V.? Even though I am a conservative Rep, as a constitution supporting American, I think this is WRONG. We are only truly democratic if the voters heard EVERYTHING before deciding, whether the views are Libertarian, Democrat, or Republican. I invite all HARD WORKING, PATRIOTIC AMERICANS UNITE together, liberal, conservative, and everything in-between to take back our constitutional rights through united peaceful protests.

1. American Civil Liberties Union article:
http://www.speakout.com/activism/issue_ ... 31b-1.html
Please note that this article has some mistakes. For example, it is not 8 percent of 100,000 people will be murdered, but 8 out of 100,000. Here is the real and correct statistic: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html . Even though some of their statistics are sloppy, I do get their point. Their point is that some of those on death row are innocent. This was proved by the invention of DNA testing. The justice system is made of people. People make mistakes. Even if only one innocent person on death row is innocent, we should not have the death penalty because death is irreversible. More conservative statistics found 2% to be innocent, but sorry I forgot where I saw this statistic. The point is, there are innocent people on death row.

P.S. You might be surprised to find that this is NOT off-topic. Finding ways to broaden support for our 2nd A rights and winning the next election is definitely NOT off-topic.

P.P.S. Why should a conservative Rep like me support the freedom for gays to be gay? Why should a gay man in San Francisco who's never touched a gun support my freedom to bear arms? You might be surprised to find that taking away a fellow American's freedom only makes ALL of us that much less free.

[Zee]

Drjoker: I've altered my signature to more accurately decribe myself. You are correct about wondering just how many are really hard left or hard right.

[mr.72]

So you are suggesting the NRA should morph into "the ACLU for hunters", and that is what is going to help those who support the 2A win elections?

I don't agree with this premise one little bit. In fact, I think the NRA is too broad to do a very good job as it is, so making it more diffuse is not going to help. What's wrong with the ACLU carrying the flag for the 1A? Let some other organizations handle your 8th Amendment and 4th Amendment arguments (with which I fully agree, we need to confront these things, but it's just not the role of the NRA).

The problem, if there is such a thing, is that the two big political parties have inconsistent platforms. In some ways, each one supports some kind of liberty or limitation of government, and in other ways each party supports some kind of restriction of liberty or abridgment of rights. It just so happens that the left wing Democrats support restriction or abridgment of the 2A rights, and at least pretends to support the 1A instead (well, as long as your 1A rights don't include free exercise of the Christian religion...). The Libertarian party may be close to supporting liberty and the least abridgment of rights, but we should recognize that most people do not support this philosophy. Simply put, today's Americans, by and large, don't support the freedoms outlined in the Constitution. They may support part of it, as it benefits them specifically, but otherwise they seem to desire abridgment of rights and handing over more and more powers to the government. We are already halfway down the slippery slope either way. Too many people with their hands out are having something put in it to gain support of taking away the handouts and returning freedom to people to their own right to their property. Too many people have special status according to the law to support equality and liberty, since it will result in taking away their "special" status and allowing others to be just as "equal" as they are.

Sounds like the suggestion is to turn Conservatives into Liberals, only with support for the 2A. That's a fool's errand and will not result in what we need.

Frankly, the reason we are going to need the 2A eventually is because of the abridgment of the rest of our freedoms and conversion of our government to veiled socialism, ignoring of the Constitution besides the 2A, which are all part and parcel of the Democrat party platform. The 2A can be used to defend our freedom from a tyrannical government. Allowing a tyrannical government in order to preserve the 2A is not exactly going to work.

[Purplehood]

So you are suggesting the NRA should morph into "the ACLU for hunters", and that is what is going to help those who support the 2A win elections?

I don't agree with this premise one little bit. In fact, I think the NRA is too broad to do a very good job as it is, so making it more diffuse is not going to help. What's wrong with the ACLU carrying the flag for the 1A? Let some other organizations handle your 8th Amendment and 4th Amendment arguments (with which I fully agree, we need to confront these things, but it's just not the role of the NRA).

The problem, if there is such a thing, is that the two big political parties have inconsistent platforms. In some ways, each one supports some kind of liberty or limitation of government, and in other ways each party supports some kind of restriction of liberty or abridgment of rights. It just so happens that the left wing Democrats support restriction or abridgment of the 2A rights, and at least pretends to support the 1A instead (well, as long as your 1A rights don't include free exercise of the Christian religion...). The Libertarian party may be close to supporting liberty and the least abridgment of rights, but we should recognize that most people do not support this philosophy. Simply put, today's Americans, by and large, don't support the freedoms outlined in the Constitution. They may support part of it, as it benefits them specifically, but otherwise they seem to desire abridgment of rights and handing over more and more powers to the government. We are already halfway down the slippery slope either way. Too many people with their hands out are having something put in it to gain support of taking away the handouts and returning freedom to people to their own right to their property. Too many people have special status according to the law to support equality and liberty, since it will result in taking away their "special" status and allowing others to be just as "equal" as they are.

Sounds like the suggestion is to turn Conservatives into Liberals, only with support for the 2A. That's a fool's errand and will not result in what we need.

Frankly, the reason we are going to need the 2A eventually is because of the abridgment of the rest of our freedoms and conversion of our government to veiled socialism, ignoring of the Constitution besides the 2A, which are all part and parcel of the Democrat party platform. The 2A can be used to defend our freedom from a tyrannical government. Allowing a tyrannical government in order to preserve the 2A is not exactly going to work.

I dunno about the statements regarding the left-wing Democrats... it seems to me that alot of right-wing Democrats (imagine that?) have been standing up for 2A rights and even making it difficult to get the Healthcare nonsense passed.
It is almost like the lines between the parties are blurred or irrelevant.

[karder]

I think anytime we set out to "convert" someone, we are likely in a losing battle. The feeling that creates is "your wrong, and I am right" and that tends to harden the listener regardless of political affiliation. While I am personally very conservative, I am not sure that I have more conservative friends than liberal. I think that most of my friends are moderate. I have a young lady I work with who is very sweet, smart and talented, but an extreme liberal. I just scratch my head sometimes at the comments that she makes. Still, I respect her right as an American to have those opinions, regardless of how off base I think they are. I won't try to change her mind, and while I consider myself open-minded, she would have her work cut out for her if she were going to sway me in the Democrat direction.

Fear of guns is almost universally linked to a lack of experience and knowledge of guns. I would suggest inviting your liberal friends to the range. Let them shoot and handle the guns and see how fun the sport actually is. I would bet they will finish the day with less of a fear of weapons than they started it with, and that is the first step. Ultimately, we have to respect each others views, Republican or Democrat. Honestly, Washington is so corrupt, at the end of the day, I am not sure it even matters. Ok, it matters a little, but I digress. Now if I figure out how to make my liberal friends as afraid of taxes as they are of guns, I will get back with you guys and let you know the secret!

[mr.72]

Fear of guns is almost universally linked to a lack of experience and knowledge of guns.

Really? I don't notice that anyone who knows or cares about politicians' positions on guns, gun control, or government actions towards gun rights have any fear of guns or lack of experience. Those fearful of guns, who lack the experience, as you correctly suggest, probably do not pay attention to gun rights at all.

I think those who actively want to restrict your ownership and rights with respect to guns, and who desire to ensure that only the government has access to guns, absolutely and definitely know what guns are useful for and are quite comfortable with them being used to create a disparity of force. You know that no liberal politician who intends to restrict your gun rights is afraid of guns, certainly not afraid of the guns being carried by their own protective detail and most of them have guns of their own. They just don't want you to have guns. Or money. Or anything else that will give you power that cumulatively may add up to enforce accountability from government.

[Purplehood]

Fear of guns is almost universally linked to a lack of experience and knowledge of guns.

Really? I don't notice that anyone who knows or cares about politicians' positions on guns, gun control, or government actions towards gun rights have any fear of guns or lack of experience. Those fearful of guns, who lack the experience, as you correctly suggest, probably do not pay attention to gun rights at all.

I think those who actively want to restrict your ownership and rights with respect to guns, and who desire to ensure that only the government has access to guns, absolutely and definitely know what guns are useful for and are quite comfortable with them being used to create a disparity of force. You know that no liberal politician who intends to restrict your gun rights is afraid of guns, certainly not afraid of the guns being carried by their own protective detail and most of them have guns of their own. They just don't want you to have guns. Or money. Or anything else that will give you power that cumulatively may add up to enforce accountability from government.

I tend to agree. I think it is all about power.