Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Can a true progressive big government liberal be FOR the 2nd Amendment?

Can a true progressive big government liberal be FOR the 2nd Amendment?  Short answer: No.

What’s that?  You know plenty of liberals who are gun owners?  While that very well may be the case there are 2 things to keep in mind.  There is a difference between being a gun owner and being FOR the 2nd Amendment.  One need look no further than the US Senator from California Dianne Feinstein to see what a elitist liberal big governemnt gun owner thinks of the 2nd Amendment.  Basically, so long as SHE has a gun it doesn’t matter how much she infringes on the rights of others.

Also, I am talking about true, kool aid drinking, Marx quoting, dyed in the wool big government progressive liberals.  I know plenty of people who claim to be liberal and say they are for gay marriage and pro choice and ending the war on drugs.  Yet they also say they are for the 2nd Amendment, against the ATF’s harrassment of gun owners and gun control in gerneral.  Are these examples of liberals who are for the 2nd Amendment?  No.  They are just misdiagnosed Libertarians.

What brought this up was an article from ABC News that was forwarded my way about: Gun Clubs for Liberals – The Un-NRA

Basically the article centers around people who shun the perception that only conservatives own firearms.

One woman, a member of the GCFL named Marlene Hoeber, tosses in the whole kit and kaboodle with the kitchen sink when describing herself as “a feisty, liberal, transgender, tattooed, queer, activist feminist.”

I have no idea what the hell that means.  Don’t really care.  But when she talks about her club with members ranging “from socialists, to anarchists who can quote Marx, to Reagan Democrats”, I can decipher that a bit.

Can progressive socialist big government types live as 2nd Amendment loving gun owners?  I am reminded of an old maxim from the bible that goes, “You cannot serve two masters.”  In that, one cannot both put their full faith and trust in the government’s machine while also maintaining the right to keep and bear arms against that very same government.

Socialism DEMANDS that those who believe in it MUST actively believe in it.  If you cede power from the individual to the government you cannot still maintain the ability to fight against the very tyranny you support to begin with.  It is the classic, “You can’t have your cake and eat it too” scenario.

Ed Gardner, head of the Liberal Gun Club, says that 40% of Democrats are gun owners.  I don’t find that hard to believe at all.  But if you try and extrapolate from that the correlation that 40% of Democrats are FOR the 2nd Amendment that rings hollow.  People like Barack Obama, with his history of pushing for gun control and gun bans, end arounds to infringe upon the 2nd Amendment via Executive Orders and so on do not get elected to office when nearly half their own voting block is fundamentally against them.

Furthermore, to strengthen the argument that many of the 1,200 members of the Liberal Gun Club are misdiagnosed Libertarians, the Northern California Chapter of the Liberal Gun Club released the following statement advocating their point:

Additional regulations on lawful gun owners are over-prescribed political placebos that fail to cure the underlying systemic societal problems that are the root causes of violence. Instead of window-dressing ‘solutions’ like so-called ‘assault weapons’ bans and magazine capacity restrictions, we support root cause mitigation for violence prevention: stronger mental health care, addressing poverty, homelessness and unemployment.”

I have heard the NRA, GOA, and Libertarian pundits say the same only to be utterly ignored (or bashed) by the liberal political elite such as Obama, Reid, Feinstein et al as well as the liberal media complex.

I mean Hoeber herself, now a resident of San Francisco, said:

“Our position is that scary black guns are very much okay… I personally don’t believe that that kind of restriction [magazine capacity limits] makes the world a safer place.”

Yeah…go have brunch with your sitting California Senators and see how well that viewpoint is received.

So, while I don’t believe that “true” liberals can be FOR the 2nd Amendment, I don’t discount that their are liberal gun owners.  But if they are for the 2nd Amendment that just means they are Libertarians who have yet to face the truth.

My take on it, they call themselves liberals because it’s trendy, Marxist socialists because it was hip to be so in college and are against the NRA types because they wouldn’t be invited to the swank parties of the intelligentsia if they said otherwise.

So no, you can’t be a big government progressive socialist and be FOR the 2nd Amendment.  But being part of the growing libertarian wing of the Democratic party…well that’s a different tale entirely.

Maybe the Liberal Gun Club should drop the pretension and just accept that they are not as liberal as they like to believe.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Pingback: Can a true progressive big government liberal b...()

  • This article gives me a headache.

    The disingenuous crap that pours forth from their mouths changes on a daily basis, and is based on the emotional time of month they’re in or the pharmaceuticals they recently ingested/injected/inhaled.

    They are like puppies that chase after the ball thrown for them, only to be distracted by a really neat piece of paper caught in a breeze.

    • carlcasino

      Since they are having little success, except for the Iron belt and the Marxist Left coast now they are using the Federal Communication Commission to thwart the 1st Amendment. Ole Thomas Jefferson knew what he was talking about. The 2nd was put in place to protect he 1st.

  • pysco

    Feinstein’s Husband made hundreds of thousands of dollars, leasing building in Long Beach Harbor to Chinese arms dealers bringing in SKS’s, and AK-47’s, the *B*itch ins a total hypocrite.

Send this to friend