Why are liberals so opposed to firearms when they know so little about them?

Question

Really, ask an extreme leftist anything technical or statistical or anything like that about a firearm and they'll know either something false or nothing to little. For example I've asked one just out of the blue "How do you think firearms operate?" they told me batteries. Batteries... you know how many firearms operate on batteries? Not many. The ones that do are mostly stationary like GAU-17 vulcan cannons on helicopters, etc but yes there are a VERY tiny amount that are triggered by batteries in the small arms world for example the G-11 assault rifle, the P11 pistol, but I highly doubt that liberal knew that. Honestly, they oppose this stuff without knowing anything about it and people like John Kerry with higher agendas term ignorant and unfounded terms like "assault weapons" when really they are semi-automatic weapons designed for target practice not fullyautomatic or burst capable weapons with intentions of killing. Granted Class 3 owners can own those butmostliberalsdontknowthat

Answer 1

First and formost, not ALL liberals oppose firearms, just as not ALL 'Christians' are really Christians. But, to answer the question, the reasons are twofold, split into the two seperate classes of liberals:
1. The liberal politicians hate gun ownership for the same reasons some conservative politicians hate it: it threatens their power. 20% of an armed American population overthrew the most powerful standing military in the world 230 years ago, and, if pushed, 20% of an armed American population could do it again today. That scares them, and it restricts and threatens the one thing they cherish: them. Therefore, it's gotta go.
2. The grassroots liberals hate gun ownership for many diverse and assorted reasons. Fear of guns, a misguided desire to see murder lessened (I do feel you there), a basic misunderstanding of gun ownership and it purposes and its overall effects on America as a whole, a little bit of blind loyalty to whomever claims the mantle of 'liberal leadership,' a desire to see a more authoritarian style of government (over my dead body), a lack of understanding of the basic depravity of mankind, and probably a dozen other reasons too obscure to list. Add this to answer#1, and you have a very dangerous situation. Private ownership of firearms is the only guarantee of the rule of law; without it, those in power could do whatever they wanted to do, and in the rest of the world, they do. Which is why we must guard jealously and passionately this ; without this right, there are no others! For as long as we are obliged to protect it, governments are obliged to respect it!

Answer 2

Why don't you ask George Bush?? I bet he has all the answers for you.

Start with asking him whether the Constitution is just a piece of paper, then ask him to recite the second amendment!!

I am a liberal. I am PRO firearm and I believe in the second amendment

You shouldn't be running around with a GAU 8/A. It normally fires DU rounds, You know what that is right?

How do you get an M1 thumb??

One thing you should have learned by now is you can never say all of anything, because you are automatically wrong!!

All liberals are not anti- 2ND Amendment!! And some have actually fired weapons in places like Vietnam!

All you need to turn an AR-15 into full automatic is a $10.00 conversion kit

Answer 3

I think the answer to your question is right there in your question. People oppose and fear what they do not know or understand. This is not just "liberals" but all people. It is true however that most people who grow up with a more down home background which is more likely to have included some fire arms experience or military background will end up being conservative. Conversely people who tend to be more passive or liberal will tend to have stayed away from firearms or may have had a difficult or traumatic experience with one. While I may not be a big fan of his politics John Kerry is a decorated war veteran so I am willing to bet he knows his way around an assault rifle (which by the way is what a military M-16A2 and M-4 carbine the newest incarnation are referred to and they are NOT automatic weapons).

Answer 4

Well, as a liberal minded person myself, I"d have to say that I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Whether I know details on guns, like batteries (yes I know that there are very few guns that use batteries), or the maximum stopping power of a pistol (egads, I think it's the nice little Desert Eagle, with a .50 caliber ability to stop anything), the point is that guns (barring childs guns or toy guns or ref's starting guns or caulking guns and the like) are designed to kill.

Yes, you can take a killing gun to a range and shoot it, and that is fun, but the purpose behind a gun, the reason that they were invented, was to kill.

They weren't designed to build, or to create. They weren't made because they are pretty to look at, or because they are a form of art that just isn't understood.

They were designed for one purpose only, to kill.

It's true that some are designed to kill a burglar or local bad guy, some are designed to kill people protected by a large metal thickness of a tank, others are designed to kill everyone in an area, and even others are designed to kill an animal for survival (yeah, there are a lot of Americans who rely on hunting for daily survival....), but the point is that death is always going to be involved.

While it's true that any politician should be wise in the ways of things that they are affecting with their silly votes, and that if a politician (left or right, doesn't matter) doesn't know what it is that he or she is voting on, they should refrain from making any sort of judgment until they have learned about the bill in question.

First, pigeonholing all liberals or liberal minded people into a gun ignorance group is, well, to state it mildly, wrong. I don't mean wrong like an overweight person in a thong, but I mean wrong in that it's just plain incorrect and assumes a generality that has no backing.

And secondly, it takes very little for me as a liberal to understand the concept behind guns. If the argument is that there is a wild difference in the killing power, then great, I'll give you a point for that, as I'm sure that there is, but my point is that no matter what, they are designed to kill.

Love as always,

Sebastian

Answer 5

Let's see now, I'm a liberal and a gun owner. I own a Model N Smith and Wesson 357 magnum, a sporterized '03A3 Springfield 30-06, a nylon 66 22 bolt action and a M-1 carbine from World War II. I've probably owned 2 dozen guns in my life. My dad was a liberal and he owned own 50 guns. We put food on the table with them. And yes I am in support of control, but my form of gun control is hitting what you aim at. The 2nd Amendment will be debated for ever. Some say we need it to use in case the government oversteps it's boundaries. Thomas Jefferson wanted in to be for a militia instead of a standing army, but had to compromise to get what we got now. But to say all liberals oppose firearms is just plain ignorant.

Answer 6

Whoa! Back up a minute, please! There are two types of people in the US: those who simply follow a party line on everything because they agree with some or most of what the party stands for, and those who choose to look at each issue separately and make up their minds on a case by case basis. Please don't confuse the two.

I am extremely liberal in my politics, and I not only don't have problems with guns, I own my own handgun (an S&W .357 Mag with a custom grip that holds six rounds). We also have one other handgun, a deer rifle, a .22, and a shotgun. My husband and I are talking about buying me my own shotgun because the 12-gauge kicks too much for my taste, and my aim is off because I am too worried about the recoil to pay attention to what I am doing.

I agree that many of my fellow liberals are not fully informed on firearms, but I find that it is more a matter of being afraid of them and not having ever been exposed to one than anything else. I live in a very conservative state, and firearms of all kinds are quite common because of the popularity of hunting. It is always interesting to travel during hunting season, because by law here, you can wear a sidearm as long as it is out in the open and as long as certain precautions are taken to keep it from going off accidentally. (Revolvers must have two empty chambers, the one in front of the hammer, and the next one in line. Semi-automatics must be completely unloaded, including nothing in the chamber, if I am not mistaken.) However, the fact that they are very common doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of political conservatives who don't know anything about them, either. In fact, most of the people I know who are anti-gun are actually quite conservative in their politics. My personal opinion is it all has to do with who has been exposed to what, and where their interests lie. If you aren't interested in firearms, why do you need to learn about them? I know very little about fishing not because I am an idiot, but because it doesn't interest me.

One reason why I think many people, both liberal and conservative, are opposed to firearms is because they are so frequently used in the commission of crimes here in the US. They are easy to come by, so they seem to be the weapon of choice in many crimes. Unfortunately, what those people don't realize is that it isn't the guns that are causing crime. The UK has very restrictive gun laws, yet per capita, their crime and murder rates are very near those of the US. Crimes are simply committed with different weapons, such as blunt weapons and knives, because those are more readily available. What they also don't realize is that serious criminals are always going to have firearms. They don't carry legal, registered weapons now, why would that change if firearms were outlawed tomorrow in the US?

It seems to me that what you are really talking about is the anti-gun lobby, not liberals. Please don't paint us all with the same brush, because we certainly are not all the same.

Answer 7

Are you so knowledgeable or so stupid?

To stereotype so many to get your point across is immoral, to say the least.

I'm not a Liberal, I'm an Independent, but I work with Vets every day and there are a lot more Democrats than Republicans serving our country now, as has always been the case. And there are as many Democrats as Republicans who own guns. I know this from the hundreds of profiles I go through.

Of these people I have yet to meet one who is opposed to Americans having the right to keep arms in their house.

Can you try not to lie to get your point across?

Answer 8

Back up there. I'm extremely liberal and I have absolutely nothing against firearms. People kill People, not guns. I own a few and enjoy a trip to the range once in a while.

Answer 9

i'm a liberal Democrat besides as an NRA member. Being Black Republican, Muslim Catholic, on welfare makes no distinction. you won't be able to be a felon or were deemed by a courtroom of regulation to be mentally unwell. all people else can own firearms or be an NRA member.

Answer 10

2 things wrong. . .

1. I am a liberal, and I don't mind firearms in the least. If you want to own them, that is your choice. Not my choice to make.

2. You know way too much about guns. Are you going up to the bell tower next?