Remember when...

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by modernpaladin, Sep 13, 2020.

  1. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,701
    Likes Received:
    21,100
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    there were communists that supported gun rights with the understanding that the proletariat would need a means to defend itself from the bourgeoisie's enforcers?

    ...those were the days.

    Where did they go?
     
    joesnagg likes this.
  2. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Though my post doesn't directly apply to gun rights, that's because I am pointing out that, strictly speaking, neither does yours. What your mental image of, "Communists," should tell you is that it is erroneous to apply this term generally to the left, to liberals, or even to Socialists. Your conception of Communists as revolutionaries, in favor of a total overthrow of their system and status quo, is more applicable to today's militias and more extremist gun-rights advocacy groups, which are acknowledged to be hard-right. Further, it's interesting to note that a good number in the gun rights community, in recent years, have developed warmer feelings toward Russia: ties with a supposed fledgling Russian NRA, a sense of comradeship with the Russian people, & adoption of a more friendly, trusting posture toward the Russian government (which, it should be remembered, is controlled by former KGB agent, & Communist, Vladimir Putin).


     
    Cosmo and Imnotreallyhere like this.
  3. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Or was it your intention to suggest that forceful toppling of our current government IS a worthwhile (& practical) goal? In which case you would've been advocating, to your compatriots on the left, their also embracing the Communist attitude on guns from, "the good ol' days?"
     
  4. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What a crock of BS.
     
  5. roorooroo

    roorooroo Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    2,814
    Likes Received:
    3,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The gun grabbers have a quandary on their hands: Which is the greater cause... taking away everyone's guns, or worshiping their favorite -victim- group? Tough call.
    [​IMG]
     
  6. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I assure you, I don't PURPOSEFULLY try to bullshit anybody. If I am mistaken in my understanding of something, by all means, help show me the truth; I welcome it. However, I will need something more substantial than your, "BS"-rating (the, no doubt, high regard in which that is held in some circles notwithstanding) to change my mind; I am not THAT easily swayed. In fact, my requiring reputably-sourced information, or a logical argument using verifiable facts, to accept something as true is behind my stating the words about the connections between, & sympathies of, "a good number," of members of the NRA/gun-rights enthusiasts & Russians (I'll assume, from your economical use of words in your reply, you'll forgive my generalizing in re-stating what I'd posted, for brevity's sake).

    I got my information from a 60 MINUTES story. They're not infallible (nor is any source) but I take their reporting to be generally reliable, & I believe the general public would concur w/ that assessment of this long- running news program. I'm sure, if you didn't see the broadcast, it would be a simple matter to access it from CBS News's archives. And how worth the effort it would be if you are able to discredit this report which, w/ its significant popularity, has doubtless influenced so many others to believe this falsehood! My ears are open; convince me.
     
    Grau and Cosmo like this.
  7. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A totally fake news source and you fell for it.
     
  8. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And the evidence to support your contention (i.e., the reason I should believe you over this well-vetted, professional, public news source)?
     
    Cosmo and Imnotreallyhere like this.
  9. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You made the claim, it's incumbent upon you to prove it to be true, not the other way around.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2020
  10. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,701
    Likes Received:
    21,100
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You presume (too) much.

    I just want to know why it used to be common to have at least a couple self proclaimed communists pipe in on gun control discussions in opposition to such an obvious ploy to dominate the working class, but nowadays there arent.

    Did they change their mind?

    Were they abducted by the govt?

    Are they too busy burning down Portland?

    I do like to poke fun at commies sometimes... but at the end of the day, anyone who would take up arms against tyranny is an ally. Now (it seems) they all just want to take away arms for tyranny.
     
    roorooroo likes this.
  11. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are, or at least were, far more attuned to Communist-Americans' opinions on gun regulation than I, who cannot recall ever hearing someone I knew to be a Communist speak about the subject, & who, truth be told, could not name a single American Communist, though I imagine there must be some famous people of the past among their rolls-- is it possible the reason that you no longer commonly hear their advocacy for lax (or non-existent) gun laws be that you've drifted out of the Communists' direct grapevine?


    Admittedly, I did feel your post was meant to suggest something more than merely a curiosity over the cause for Communists' supposed switch to silence (I can only take your word about the good old days). I do try not to make assumptions; actually, I immediately followed my 1st reply w/ another, on the possibility that you were suggesting something very different than I originally thought. However, if that was honestly the topic-focus you were expecting to be the basis for this thread, it still seems a VERY odd choice. In fact, has anyone else, to this point in the thread, opined on the reasons for American Communists' absence in the gun debate, or even specifically ON that silence, at all; if not, I guess I'm not the only one who was misled by your post.
     
  12. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,701
    Likes Received:
    21,100
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope, not yet. I hope that just means no one else knows either, as opposed to everyone trying to read things between the lines that arent there...
     
    DEFinning likes this.
  13. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Either way, I think the answer to your question about what happened is that the U.S.A.'s Communists have mostly vanished.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2020
  14. Richard The Last

    Richard The Last Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2017
    Messages:
    3,980
    Likes Received:
    1,376
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So, as it is your source, can you provide a link to the 60 Minutes episode?
    "...a good number..."? Just wondering how many that would be? Both Pew and Gallup give 30% as the number of Americans who own guns. If my math is correct that is somewhere around 100 million. So I'm thinking that "good" number being part of that 100 million would be something like 30, 40, 50 million Americans. Would you agree that would be a good number of "members of the NRA/gun-rights enthusiasts"? So what do you think 60 Minutes is trying to say about those millions of Americans? I wonder if the folks at CBS are suggesting that American gun owners are Communists. Maybe on the part of the American gun owners it is just benevolence. You know, kind of like the Olympics. Maybe just looking to help our fellow gun owners in Russia to get organization up and running so we can compete in shooting competitions. Maybe some of the American gun owners who hunt are hoping to get invited to Russia to hunt moose or bear. There is some great hunting in eastern Russia. I wouldn't mind going on one of those hunts myself.

    My sources for number of Americans owning firearms:
    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/22/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/
    https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx
     
  15. Richard The Last

    Richard The Last Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2017
    Messages:
    3,980
    Likes Received:
    1,376
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, I think Joe McCarthy took care of them.
     
  16. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A) If all you are trying to ascertain is that the info isn't coming from a suspect source, no one, of course,
    needs a link to find, "60 Minutes."
    B) In case you doubted that 60 Minutes did such a story, or that I'm mischaracterizing it, I have been scrolling through the archives of their many episodes for, honestly, more time than I feel it's worth unless you tell me that being able to watch that has any real chance of being sufficient evidence to change your preconceptions on the gun issue.


    You are confusing, "a good number," with, "a high percentage," which is not what I said or meant to imply (sorry if you got that impression). The story showed people representing various local gun groups, e.g., supporting the idea that Russia was a friend. There was (I believe) also poll data, from a gun-owning sample population, that supported that position that their opinion of Russia had shifted from being negative to more positive recently, but I never said anything remotely like the majority of gun-owners are now fans of Russia.

    Before this devolves into a battle over semantics, and over gun rights in general, I want to state clearly, in case you didn't read this thread from the top, that the reason I posted at all was that I read, "modernpaladin," to be associating revolutionary Communists w/ Democrats and anyone on the left, generally; something he then said was not what he'd meant to imply, & so which I have accepted as, "my bad." Here is the original quote in which I mention your (quoted) point with which you would take issue:
    2 things-- First, my supplementary point ("Further, it is interesting to note...") is not even vital to my argument that revolutionary Communists bear a closer resemblance to extremist, ultra-right wing militias than to the modern left at large. Perhaps a less controversial (?) way of saying this is that the preponderance of armed American militias are not associated or aligned w/ the political left.
    And second, unless you are saying you wish to make the argument which I'd mistakenly believed modernpaladin to be implying, it's all a moot point, anyway. I was not making an argument about gun rights-- even if I do not personally view the concept of regulation, itself, as an automatic violation of the 2nd Amendment-- and neither was the person who BEGAN THIS THREAD!

    If you (& others who would like to go after me, here) want to have a gun-rights debate, I suggest you start a thread on that topic. Depending in what I read in it, I may even choose to join in there.
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2020
    Richard The Last likes this.
  17. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm really not sure what your meaning or reason for posting that is; I'm certainly not going to assume it's an expression of support for Senator McCarthy's tactics, but nor does it seem, to me, anything to be made light of (unless your avocation is political comedy, in which case I'll just say, "needs work").
     
  18. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As I suggested in a previous reply to you, seeing as this is-- or was till now-- such a short thread, it might be worthwhile to get the context of the posts you comment on.

    modernpaladin initiated the thread. After my response, he stated more specifically what he had intended, which I thought hadn't come across clearly (surely not to me).
    So the time-frame we are talking about (if I dare hazard another guess about m.p.'s posts) is much more recent than McCarthy's era. Also, McCarthy was NOT successful in diminishing Communism, only in punishing disclosed Communists to take away their livelihoods, making them poor or destitute (which is the substrate, ironically enough, upon which Communism most greatly thrives), & driving others underground. It must be noted that, at the time, homosexuals were seen as, at the very least, the tools of the Communists, and were just as ferociously under attack by McCarthy. Is that why there are so few homosexuals today?
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2020
  19. Richard The Last

    Richard The Last Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2017
    Messages:
    3,980
    Likes Received:
    1,376
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, first off the McCarthy thing was just meant to be tongue in cheek. As far as I'm concerned McCarthy was a witch hunter.

    As for 60 Minutes and linking to your source; sure I can find it. My point was, if you are going to reference information it would be nice to have a link. A link, to the information you are using to make your point, helps keep things moving along. Also a good way to quickly back up your statements.

    I don't believe I am confusing "a good number" with "a high percentage". I was actually trying to establish what "a good number" would be ("2" is a good number but so is "3"). I believe you did the same thing as 60 Minutes. When you say "a high percentage" what does that mean? I guess many would say 90% is a high percentage and that may be, but if you are talking interest rate on a 30 year mortgage 8% would be a high percentage. When I suggested 30-50 million that would be roughly 30-50% of American gun owners. Who decides if that is a good number or high percentage? I am sure you see my point. When 60 Minutes refers to a "good number" it seems rather arbitrary. I just wonder what that number is out of something like 100 million gun owners. I would expect, a supposedly reputable, news program to offer something better. My guess is that it is just the liberal media putting their usual slant on all things Second Amendment. If they have proof that a hundred or a thousand or a hundred thousand gun owners are snuggling up with the commies then say it, otherwise I'm going to have to go with @Well Bonded and call BS on 60 Minutes.
     
  20. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Point taken. I was only stating a general impression I'd received from a news report which I couldn't specifically cite (that I hadn't even named, when I first made the comment). I suppose I could only plead the, "When in Rome," defense: coming across posts in which every assertion, unless it's clearly caveated as, "this is only my impression but..." is specified & linked to a reliable source, is not the norm, here-- at least that has been my impression-- but it's no excuse.

    For the record, though, "a good number," is my terminology, not 60 Minutes'. I hadn't just seen the episode, so I couldn't quote more specifically and, as I explained in an earlier response to you, didn't find it to be vital to the overall argument I was making at that time, so let it slide w/o thoroughly researching it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2020
  21. Resistance101

    Resistance101 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2020
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    If you do not consider gun regulation to be a violation of the Second Amendment, then by all means you are not for gun Rights. The Second Amendment provides:

    A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    There is NOTHING in the Second Amendment that allows for the regulation of guns. The militia is what is to be regulated, not the firearms. And what was meant by regulating the militia?

    "The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry

    "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms". Richard Henry Lee

    "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed". Alexander Hamilton

    Maybe that misunderstanding on your part leads you to accept the view of other countries in the interpretation of a Right to keep and bear Arms.

    "Communist China, which currently has millions of people locked away in concentration camps, said in state-controlled media this week that the Second Amendment is a “serious problem” and that there needs to be “change” in how the American public views “private ownership of guns.” (that is Communist China's position in 2019)

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/comm...ip-of-guns-in-u-s-serious-problem-must-change

    What you and those who think like you are advocating is Soviet style communism:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control_in_the_Soviet_Union

    Your view of gun Rights fails on the American's Right to keep and bear Arms:

    1) Under the Constitution, the government has NO jurisdiction when it comes to regulating firearms and deciding what kinds and types of firearms are appropriate for the citizenry to own

    2) United States Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story (nominated by the primary author of the Second Amendment so sit on the bench) stated:

    "The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally ... enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

    The irony of what you're trying to sell by "regulating guns" is that the ones you want to regulate are the most protected under our Constitution.
     
  22. Resistance101

    Resistance101 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2020
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I can't change the facts to make you feel good. Know this: Had I referred to you as a zealot, my post would have been deleted and I'd be arguing with a moderator if not banned outright. But, then again, the first one to call someone names loses any "debate." So, now we don't have to worry about this being a debate, but rather an adversarial exchange, when you articulate a position, the onus is on you to defend it. YOU described Soviet communism as an ideology you support. Pick another name for it. It still is what it is.
     
  23. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    15,971
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When you define, "not assuming any gun regulation is automatically a violation of the 2nd Amendment," as , "supporting Soviet Communism," you are making up facts, Resistance 101, & not only will any credible legal expert tell you that, but even most non-lawyers will tell you that restricting assault rifles, for example, is NOT tantamount to supporting Soviet Communism. In fact, as I'm sure you know, an American leader who played a crucial role in defeating Communism in Eastern Europe & aiding the transition of those nations to Western-style Democracy, is the same President who signed an assault weapon BAN, George H. W. Bush. And you can call him a pinko Communist all you want but, in your own words, it is what it is.

    And what it is, is a pointless waste of time to, "debate," someone who thinks the word zealot is offensive language when-- check a dictionary-- your words already have shown you to be as clear an example as one is ever likely to meet. Oh, I get your game: you slander my character while charging that I'm the one hurling the blackballs, making ever more outlandish claims in an effort just to get me to answer you back. And you think you've succeeded. But if you stick to that playbook, you're going to be arguing with yourself. I'm inclined to give a person a generous benefit of the doubt. This is as far as that doubt extends.There are other threads on this forum to discuss gun rights. This thread-- go back & read to confirm this-- was started because the poster wanted to know if anyone knew what happened to the American Communists of the good old days, who used to be in favor of citizen gun-ownership, to be used in fighting government tyranny. I only brought my voice here because of suggestions I thought the poster was making, which he assures me he was not. So my part in this thread is done.

    Maybe, if you show that you have at least a modicum (not a foul word) of control over your aggressive impulses & you unlock the radar you've, for some reason, set specifically on me, when I see you making the ludicrous argument in an appropriate thread that, properly-armed, you & your bros could fight off the U.S. military, I will join in & see how much scrap you really have in you. But, if you continue this tact of trying to annoy or harass me into a private argument w/ you here, I will merely put you on, "ignore;" your choice.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2020
  24. Resistance101

    Resistance101 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2020
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Why do you follow me from thread to thread hoping to pick a fight with off topic subject matter that is only peripherally related to the topic? Why do you start threads asking one question just to draw people in so you can attempt (unsuccessfully) to try and humiliate them with some other issue you think you have a majority of people on your side with?
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2020
  25. Resistance101

    Resistance101 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2020
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not posting just so the moderators can delete the post. Tell them to put my posts back up and I can answer your question. Otherwise, they won't allow me to post a response. But, now you get to make that back handed accusation that I'm "anti-semitic?" That's after you called me a subhuman?
     

Share This Page