Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

allingeneral wrote:and by the way - I guess my post above is the exact opposite of what you're trying to accomplish...welcoming gays (as one segment of the liberal population) to take up the 2A cause...but to be quite honest with you, I would rather not have some Poof next to me at the range.

Carry on!

How would you know the sexual orientation, the political affiliation, the religious association, or anything else about the person next to you on the range.

Gat6

allingeneral wrote:

Taggure wrote:

allingeneral wrote:and by the way - I guess my post above is the exact opposite of what you're trying to accomplish...welcoming gays (as one segment of the liberal population) to take up the 2A cause...but to be quite honest with you, I would rather not have some Poof next to me at the range.

Carry on!

Ok Now how in the heck would you know if they are a "Poof" or not.

I have known several "Poofs" and they all support the 2A as well as hunt and fish and unless you are fiends with them you would never know if you met them at a range.

If I can't tell whether a person is a poof or not, then I don't care what they do behind closed doors - that's for God to judge. It's the folks who feel like they have something to prove with the whole "lisp/limp wrist/girlish giggles/etc" that really get to me. I don't want to be around it - I don't want my kids around it. I am raising my kids to understand that it's NOT OK - and I hope they do the same when they raise their kids.

What's not OK? I'm curious, how do you raise kids not to like people who, as you call them, exhibit homosexual mannerisms? Do you demonstrate the mannerisms you find offensive? Are you teaching prejudice? And what do you tell them when they ask why? What do you tell them about homosexuality if anything? Finally does it concern you at all that every study shows there is no reliable way to know with any degree of certainty who is or is not a homosexual?

Gat6

Whether someone is gay or not, I really don't give a rip. For the purposes of gaining converts to the cause of the 2A, I only care about one fundamental thing: is that person pro-2A or not at this point? If so, then that's good. If not, then that's an opportunity for ambassadorship.

Zephyp is 100% correct in that the anti-gunners will always do whatever they can to discredit us as a community. And Mindflayer is also correct when he says that some of us give the anti-gunners ammo in their efforts to discredit us. That's what we need to counter. Remember folks, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. This is one part of that.

gatlingun6 wrote: What's not OK? I'm curious, how do you raise kids not to like people who, as you call them, exhibit homosexual mannerisms? Do you demonstrate the mannerisms you find offensive? Are you teaching prejudice? And what do you tell them when they ask why? What do you tell them about homosexuality if anything? Finally does it concern you at all that every study shows there is no reliable way to know with any degree of certainty who is or is not a homosexual?

Gat6

Ya know sport, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure some things out and sometimes all a stinking study does is pump out loads of bull crap on the tax payer dime.

Take you for instance...I couldnt pick you of a crowd of one if I saw you on the street but I still have a pretty good idea you're probably a socialist commie...

Gat6, don't worry about Zephyp. When he gets cornered he starts calling names. Your only options are to agree with him, or get called a socialist commie. He is actually demonstrating the kind of attitude that CoyboyT suggests has to change.

tursiops wrote:Gat6, don't worry about Zephyp. When he gets cornered he starts calling names. Your only options are to agree with him, or get called a socialist commie. He is actually demonstrating the kind of attitude that CoyboyT suggests has to change.

Cornered?

For the most part gatlingun6 spews out flames and severely criticizes anyone that does not agree with him. Quite honestly I dont have the time nor inclination to craft an intelligent response to his posts...ergo, he merely gets a quick sentence from me and a label.

AND IMHO, there is a very big difference between the "Liberals" Cowboy is referring to and the likes of "Gat6."

zephyp wrote:

tursiops wrote:Gat6, don't worry about Zephyp. When he gets cornered he starts calling names. Your only options are to agree with him, or get called a socialist commie. He is actually demonstrating the kind of attitude that CoyboyT suggests has to change.

Cornered?

My thoughts exactly! What thread is he reading?


It appears SPECOPS has joined Gecko45 once again.

Oh man, you all have me cracking up! Hang on while I get some .

You guys have good points in this excellent discussion, but there's no need for name-calling. Come on now, kiss 'n' make up.

And having gotten to know Zephyp personally, I can say this about him. He doesn't normally do that, and he's got some very cogent and appropriate concerns about this and other issues regarding our country, as we all here do. He's right in that we are facing an uphill battle with some folks like that Lt. Col he pointed out previously, and at times it's damned frustrating. Yep, to me, too. What's so obvious to anyone who reads the Constitution in the context of its premise of liberty is not getting through to some people, even in some cases those in our military/police forces sworn to defend it!

However, always remember this: not all of these folks are like the Bradys, Clintons, Holders, and Obamas of the world, any more than all Conservatives are KKK or Aryan Nation members. A whole lot of these folks are like me. My mind about the 2A got changed ultimately by a series of cogent arguments over time. That's what we need to present--cogent, rational argument about this issue, without insults, without attacks, without judgment of the person. As I said, marketing matters, and what we're selling is the idea of Freedom.

- T

Well said Cowboy...sometimes we get to the point where enough is enough...and the past couple of weeks have put that (enough) in terms of a new light...

gatlingun6 wrote:

allingeneral wrote:and by the way - I guess my post above is the exact opposite of what you're trying to accomplish...welcoming gays (as one segment of the liberal population) to take up the 2A cause...but to be quite honest with you, I would rather not have some Poof next to me at the range.

Carry on!

How would you know the sexual orientation, the political affiliation, the religious association, or anything else about the person next to you on the range.

Gat6

When they complain about the recoil on a .22LR!

/sorry, I couldn't resist...you know, stereotypes.

Glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read that!

Here's a dude out in California, pretty close to where I used to live, who also sees the need for good ambassadorship. Raymond is a born-again Christian (yes, they do exist in the SF Bay Area) who recently did a video series on how to reload .223 on his Dillon XL650.

The pertinent part is from 5 minutes, 52 seconds (5:52) to 6 minutes, 54 seconds (6:54).

http://www.youtube.com/v/y7tFxx9W-Yk

CowboyT wrote:Here's a dude out in California, pretty close to where I used to live, who also sees the need for good ambassadorship. Raymond is a born-again Christian (yes, they do exist in the SF Bay Area) who recently did a video series on how to reload .223 on his Dillon XL650.

The pertinent part is from 5 minutes, 52 seconds (5:52) to 6 minutes, 54 seconds (6:54).

http://www.youtube.com/v/y7tFxx9W-Yk

Has anyone said we don't need to be good ambassadors? I don't think so. What some people have taken issue with is the manner in which you presented it...particularly with the racial overtones; intended or otherwise.

Actually, yes, some folks have. The form of saying it amounts to, "let them come to us, let them wake up, then we'll welcome 'em, otherwise they can go to hell." That's not going to change hearts and minds toward our cause.

We've got to face the facts, bro. That perception does need to be overcome, even if some folks don't like hearing/reading that fact. And perception is important. Obviously nobody's compelled to agree with me on that; that's fine. But that really is what we need to do to counter it.

BTW, you mentioned in a previous post that you do reach out to other folks who aren't necessarily pro-gun--taking 'em shooting and such. That's great! Keep doing it! That's the sort of thing we need.

So far, this has been a good discussion. With few exceptions, it's been pretty rational, even if we all don't agree on certain points. That's a big part of what America is all about.

gunderwood wrote:When they complain about the recoil on a .22LR!

/sorry, I couldn't resist...you know, stereotypes.

Haha, I nearly spit my drink out.

There have been some good arguments in this thread, and also some of the thinking to which Cowboy was referring in his OP.

Gun ownership is a polarizing issue, and it is truly one of the few issues that is black and white. I do not care if gays get married (I say let them suffer as much as the rest of us ), and am not sure how that became a topic in this thread. What I do care about is the powers that be stepping on my Nature-|God-given right to protect myself against tyranny of any form. Let's not pollute the water with moral questions when we have a very simple, binary ethical question at stake - should citizens retain the right to arm themselves and defend against tyranny in any form?

Mindflayer wrote:Gun ownership is a polarizing issue, and it is truly one of the few issues that is black and white.

I would also add that gun owners are an opinionated bunch. Given the type of people (self-reliant), I think it is a self-selection problem. I.e. if you are willing to own, train, and carry a firearm for your own protection you probably have pretty strong opinions about most things.

gunderwood wrote:if you are willing to own, train, and carry a firearm for your own protection you probably have pretty strong opinions about most things.

I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT!!!!!

TheGodfather wrote:

gunderwood wrote:if you are willing to own, train, and carry a firearm for your own protection you probably have pretty strong opinions about most things.

I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT!!!!!

Well played.

gunderwood wrote:

Mindflayer wrote:Gun ownership is a polarizing issue, and it is truly one of the few issues that is black and white.

I would also add that gun owners are an opinionated bunch. Given the type of people (self-reliant), I think it is a self-selection problem. I.e. if you are willing to own, train, and carry a firearm for your own protection you probably have pretty strong opinions about most things.

I think gun owners are opinionated because they've actually had to do some critical thinking.

I think people that are willing to invest time into a debate on an Internet forum are usually pretty opinionated.