TexasCHLforum.com

To my former countrymen,
Paul Waldman in "The Week" recently wrote an article titled "America's made-up culture of guns." http://theweek.com/articles/763866/a...p-culture-guns. He uses many words attempting to explain how we must better understand your positions and make concessions to you. He talks about these things to make himself and you feel better about your positions, and ends up denigrating us deplorable people anyway, because that is the default position of progressive socialists. He wants us to be more "accepting" of your culture and understand how you don't want guns in your society.
Mr. Waldman asserts household gun ownership has fallen from 50% to 32%, mostly due to more people living in big cities and not rural areas. Yet, he fails to note than millions of citizens living in those big cities are unable to own firearms due to the anti-2A policies of the left, while armed criminals terrorize and kill unarmed law abiding citizens without fear of encountering an armed victim.

It’s not just your anti-gun culture that is in opposition to the culture of those of us who exercise our 2nd amendment rights. Your culture of depravity in media, lifestyles choices, pseudo science, nanny state, killing unborn children, open borders with unchecked illegal immigrants, forced acceptance of behaviors that not too long ago were considered mental illnesses, assault upon our freedom of religion and speech and general willingness to demonstrate that you despise us for being unlike you that is in opposition to values we hold.
Every inch we’ve ever yielded to you in the culture war has only emboldened you to push for a mile.
Well, we’re just not going to take it much more. Your side has pushed and derided and declared war upon us. Now that you can see there may be unintended consequences to your actions you want to extend an olive branch?
Sorry, experience shows us that you don’t mean it and next week you’ll be slapping us with your gloves in challenge to something else about us you don’t agree with.
We have shown a willingness to allow you your depravity in some states while desperately trying to keep some states for ourselves. Yet, you are unwilling to let us be as we have been to allow you to live as you see fit. We see that you will never be satisfied until you have crushed those who think and act and live their lives differently than you.
There exists no longer a “united” states of America, you progressive socialists have destroyed it. So, I leave you with this,
“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Never heard of Paul Waldman in "The Week" - Neither he or the magazine.

Probably because it's a leftist skewed rag I wouldn't read were it given to me.

Abraham wrote:Never heard of Paul Waldman in "The Week" - Neither he or the magazine.

Probably because it's a leftist skewed rag I wouldn't read were it given to me.

I'd never heard of "The Week" or the author before today either. The article was linked at a blog I read. I don't go to leftist sites, but I do read stuff like this because it's good to keep up with the thoughts of the opposition.

bblhd672 wrote:

Abraham wrote:Never heard of Paul Waldman in "The Week" - Neither he or the magazine.

Probably because it's a leftist skewed rag I wouldn't read were it given to me.

I'd never heard of "The Week" or the author before today either. The article was linked at a blog I read. I don't go to leftist sites, but I do read stuff like this because it's good to keep up with the thoughts of the opposition.

I think he is a “bully”.

Mr. Waldman asserts household gun ownership has fallen from 50% to 32%

Mr. Waldman is making a common bogus claim.

The truth is that the number of firearms in the US has never been higher:

According to the Congressional Research Service, there are roughly twice as many guns per capita in the United States as there were in 1968: more than 300 million guns in all...."There's a gun for every man, woman, and child, more or less," says Deborah Azrael of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center.

NPR

Hardly anyone would want to admit that their household has a gun, because of issues with criminal's targeting them, illegal confiscation, or privacy. Those household gun ownership numbers are bogus. I would imagine the true percentage is WAY over 50%.

When someone like retired Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens writes an op-ed in The New York Times calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment, it only convinces people that you're a bunch of gun-grabbers.

LOL, we already knew "you're a bunch of gun-grabbers" but I do appreciate John Paul Stevens letting the ENTIRE WORLD know that we are ENTIRELY CORRECT. Radical elitists are attempting to #1. dismantle the Constitution, #2. negate our god-given rights, #3. end the free state that the 2nd Amendment specifically protects. Thank you John Paul Stevens! Message received.

Paul Waldman says:

So let's ask a different question: What kind of a society do we want to create?

Liberalism is correlated with high openness and low conscientiousness

- Christopher Wylie

Conscientiousness... is a fundamental personality trait that influences whether people set and keep long-range goals, deliberate over choices or behave impulsively, and take seriously obligations to others. Conscientiousness is a key ingredient for success

Psychology Today

Low conscientiousness people therefore are unable to set and keep long-range goals, they behave impulsively, and do not uphold obligations to others. This is a key ingredient for failure.

Christopher Wylie has shown liberals are typically people of low character with tendencies toward criminal behavior.

Their predisposition towards low character and criminal behavior was also demonstrated in a study that showed 7 in 10 felons register as democrats

What kind of society would I like to create? A society with HIGH levels of conscientiousness. A society where people set and keep long-range goals, behave logically, and take seriously obligations to others. I would like a successful society without Convicted Felons getting an equal vote to honest, hardworking law abiding citizens. A nation where felons are not allowed to vote from prison. A nation where convicted felon's can NOT hold state or federal office. A nation where low-conscientious citizens and illegal aliens are not stealing the property of citizens who worked hard to earn/create that property. A nation where individual rights such as the right to keep and bear arms is respected.

Is that so much to ask????

Excellent response, OP. I forced myself to read the linked article because like others, I've always thought it helpful to keep up with what the other side is thinking. I now find myself less and less inclined to do so for reasons you alluded to in your open letter (condescension, arrogance, blatantly false arguments presented as fact, etc.). This article was no exception and if I have time later I might respond specifically to a couple of things that got my blood pressure up. Like you, I am becoming fed up with this stuff. Fed. Up.

My wife's family is from the northeast and are predominantly left-wing radical liberals. I'm on Facebook with most of them and vowed long ago to keep my mouth shut when I see their idiotic postings. I finally cracked last week after one of them attended that anti-gun march and posted a nonsense slogan about "School clothing is more regulated than guns". I tried to point out to this person that there were literally thousands of federal, state and local laws and regulations dealing with firearms - how can you possibly compare that to a simple dress code? The comeback was essentially that AR's were weapons of mass destruction and the laws didn't stop people from committing mass murder with them while clothes never killed anyone. I tried to explain that an AR was simply a semi-automatic rifle and essentially no different than any other semi-automatic weapon - did she want all of them banned and if not, what exactly did she want to see happen? She refused to answer and "defriended" me.

I don't know where this ends but unless the courts quit giving these people everything they want, something is going to give.

For instance, the idea that anyone should be able to own military-style rifles designed to kill as many human beings in as short a period as possible, for no real reason other than the fact that some people think they're cool, is supposed to be a part of people's culture, no matter how ludicrous it would have seemed to your grandparents.

He thinks that people who hunted with military surplus rifles would be horrified by people owning military style rifles. The Enfield has always had a detachable box magazine. Using one, a normal infantryman could put 10 or 15 shots on a 12" plate at 300 yards in a minute. A good one could do 30.

Thanks for keeping us updated on what the enemy is doing, and yes, I mean enemy. I believe that most democrats/marxists have good intentions, but their naivete and lack of understanding of human nature leads them to push American society in a direction that would be favored by the Communist party, for several reasons.

If things don't change, I predict there will be an armed revolution within 50 years. I would help, but I'll be gone. For the rest of you, start stocking up now.

MaduroBU wrote:

For instance, the idea that anyone should be able to own military-style rifles designed to kill as many human beings in as short a period as possible, for no real reason other than the fact that some people think they're cool, is supposed to be a part of people's culture, no matter how ludicrous it would have seemed to your grandparents.

He thinks that people who hunted with military surplus rifles would be horrified by people owning military style rifles. The Enfield has always had a detachable box magazine. Using one, a normal infantryman could put 10 or 15 shots on a 12" plate at 300 yards in a minute. A good one could do 30.

The Founding Fathers, wanted exactly, the same type of weapons, any military, may have,to be available to the "people" so that they could successfully, repel, and/or replace a tyrannical government.
We have already conceded, that fundamental right, and are left with the under powered, non-satellite guided weapons at our government's disposal. Our ability to actually defend ourselves against the government, is laughable at best.
If this yahoo, wants to sit in his echo chamber, and whine about the minuscule effort,we would actually, be able to put forth, let him be. While I know that a full scale battle against, (my) government, would be an excercise in futility, at least I will be able to face my maker, with the knowledge that I did everything I could. When they come for his keyboard, and put him in a train car, can he say the same?

We all know that Paul actually writes for "The Weak", they just can't spell it correctly.

There is a lot to say about that whole article, but I found this paragraph in particular to be troubling.

And when you say something is part of your culture, you're placing it beyond reasoned judgment. Its status as a component of culture infuses it with value that can't be argued against. I don't tell you that your religious rituals are silly, because they have deep meaning for those within that culture. Your ethnic group's traditional music may not be pleasing to my ears, but I'm not going to argue that it sucks and you ought to start listening to real music, defined as whatever I happen to like. The food your parents taught you to make from the old country might not be to my taste, but I'll appreciate it (at least once or twice) as a window into another aspect of our rich human tapestry.

First of all, nobody is arguing that we have a right to keep firearms as part of a "culture". We're arguing that we have a right to keep firearms because the 2nd Amendment says we do. And if you want to scratch even deeper, the 2nd Amendment is there to codify/clarify a natural right that the founders considered self-evident. It has nothing to do with a "culture"; if anything, that's a card HIS side plays with regularity.

Second, people like this author most certainly do tell people that their religious rituals are silly. Not only that, they have increasingly pushed laws and social conventions that force religious people to choose between their beliefs and their ability to make a living or even participate in the public arena. He's just flat out lying when he claims otherwise.

I have utterly no clue what his point is about ethnic music or food from "the old country". Am I missing something?

Scott Farkus wrote:There is a lot to say about that whole article, but I found this paragraph in particular to be troubling.

And when you say something is part of your culture, you're placing it beyond reasoned judgment. Its status as a component of culture infuses it with value that can't be argued against. I don't tell you that your religious rituals are silly, because they have deep meaning for those within that culture. Your ethnic group's traditional music may not be pleasing to my ears, but I'm not going to argue that it sucks and you ought to start listening to real music, defined as whatever I happen to like. The food your parents taught you to make from the old country might not be to my taste, but I'll appreciate it (at least once or twice) as a window into another aspect of our rich human tapestry.

First of all, nobody is arguing that we have a right to keep firearms as part of a "culture". We're arguing that we have a right to keep firearms because the 2nd Amendment says we do. And if you want to scratch even deeper, the 2nd Amendment is there to codify/clarify a natural right that the founders considered self-evident. It has nothing to do with a "culture"; if anything, that's a card HIS side plays with regularity.

Second, people like this author most certainly do tell people that their religious rituals are silly. Not only that, they have increasingly pushed laws and social conventions that force religious people to choose between their beliefs and their ability to make a living or even participate in the public arena. He's just flat out lying when he claims otherwise.

I have utterly no clue what his point is about ethnic music or food from "the old country". Am I missing something?

Like the term "assault rifle" the left is using "gun culture" as a baseball bat to beat everyone within reach of their words. Their culture is so hopelessly corrupt and evil, all they can do is point out the perceived faults of everyone who disagrees with them in the least amount. Often they will demonize their own if one of them happens to point out hypocrisy in their position or actually embraces a fact or two.
Like their beloved cultural leader BHO, who still desires to fundamentally change America, they are evil.