Quote of the Day
There has been a surge in the number of liberal Americans owning a firearm, according to new gun ownership data from the University of Chicago’s NORC research group cited by The Wall Street Journal.
According to WSJ, a world that has long been the domain of the white conservative male is being adopted by a growing number of Democrats who are ditching their scruples and getting themselves down to the local gun store.
Given this growing trend, it is hardly surprising that presidential candidate Kamala Harris has repeatedly drawn attention to how she and her running mate Tim Walz are both gun owners.
thedailydigest.com
October 8, 2024
Is soaring gun ownership among Democrats linked to US political polarization? (msn.com)
In general, this is good for gun owner rights issues. The more gun owners the more votes we get against restrictive gun laws. That’s fine, but the question I have is, “Why now?”
This is one of the answers given in the article:
Michael Ciemnoczolowski, a dyed in the wool Democrat from Iowa, interviewed by the news outlet, said that he was anxious about various unsettling trends that included a rise in armed right-wing extremists.
This chimes with what Professor Deana Rohlinger, a sociology professor at Florida State University, said in Newsweek – that rising gun ownership amongst Democrats could well be linked to the increasing political polarization in the US.
“For some, a gun purchase may be the result of their read on how increased political tensions and divisiveness in the US might play out,” Rohlinger told the news site.
There are other suggested reasons. But I have to express my concern that a big component is those 10% of Americans who say they believe political violence is justified to prevent Trump from becoming president again.
My underground bunker in Idaho is not going to be ready in time.
Armed Democrats will still support gun control.
Their side getting more guns just makes the future that much worse for us. They’re the ones all-in on rounding up people they don’t like into concentration camps.
My first thought exactly.
Actually, in my head it was phrased more like: “Sure, they see the value in being armed now, and that’s great. But how will they VOTE?”
And I more-that-suspect that when it comes time to vote, they’ll vote for the candidates that would take ban and confiscate that gun they just purchased.
They may be “gun owners”, but they are NOT “gun culture”.
“And I more-that-suspect that when it comes time to vote, they’ll vote for the candidates that would take ban and confiscate that gun they just purchased.”
Since most are on the government dole some form or another.
Harris/Walz won’t being lying when trying to institute a “gun buy back”?
Just think’in.
Not fake news but fake fear. Conservatives wouldn’t even do anything about a stolen election and the COVID lockdowns.
I think people were surprised, confused, and in shock the first time. They have had time to think, plan, and prepare. Now they are on watch and waiting for the “Go!” signal.
Both sides have a distorted world view. Truth is the first casualty in war…
Conservatives won’t do shit other than whine on the internet, no matter what happens. Now if Trump should win, I expect widespread rioting, at least in leftist cities.
How many of those “I’m getting prepared for political violence” types are going to realize that the media and entertainment have been lying to them consistently (at best, only for dramatic effect) about how guns work and the effectiveness of first time owners at using them?
And if that’s their true purpose, where are they getting their MOUT training? All the anticipated combat is going to happen inside city limits. Outside city limits, the Army, Marine Corps and National Guard combined are outnumbered by just the deer hunters.
Outside city limits, the Army, Marine Corps and National Guard combined are outnumbered by just the deer hunters.
And you do NOT want to mess with 30-50 million pissed off citizens with the skills and tools to drop a man-sized target with one shot at hundreds of yards. Even the vaunted “3%” of that number exceeds all active-duty and reserve armed forces, several times over. (And that doesn’t even get into that in rural areas you’re likely to find a LOT more retired military with the same — or greater — skill sets as the active-duty troops than you will find within city limits.)
The cities will be considered the “safe” duty area.
If it gets to the point we’re talking about, the cities are not going to be safe duty locations for long.
Which big US cities have their entire electricity generation capacity inside their limits? Water, sewer, firefighting capacity, even natural gas rely on electric pumps. Disrupt the supply of electricity, and they’re out of water and food within about five days.
Anyone that thinks about it for any amount of time knows that kind of conflict will make the Balkans look like a bar fight. It’ll be beyond nasty.
That every man be armed.
This is a very good trend. Armed people are polite people. When you know everyone else is armed, you tend to leave people alone and mind your own business, until you’re willing to die for a cause.
Taking responsibility for your own well being (or anything else) is a very good trend.
More of this please.
If the person in question has thought about it. Being a responsible gun owner includes attitude and approach, as well as equipment.
I would worry that many of the people who are miserable to others when out and about (I think most of us have seen them, if not been in the receiving end directly) will not immediately adjust their approach when armed.
That won’t end well for anyone.
It may not end well, but it will end quickly.
problem solved.
How many American shooters can hit a target the size of a human head at half a mile(880 yds)? Bet it numbers over a half million.
How many can hit the same at 1760 yds? Bet it numbers over 100,000.
We even have CIVILIANS who can do it at further range. For fun!
The future will be ugly. But, it will not feature people in cattle cars rolling towards Hillary’s ‘re-education camps.
I’m not sure if the numbers are that high… now.
Let Gene and Monty and Hubbard and myself work on them for a day or so.
Paraphrasing Ol Remus … Best not be in the area
Being in Idaho is a bit of a buffer to the coming “interesting times”. The big stuff will hit the D cities first and serve as a warning as the Times spread out. Living in SW Idaho (nearer OR than WA), I think of Boise city as the canary in the coal mine: when the Times hit Boise, it’s time to activate the defenses (as opposed to simply being ready). Such defenses could include blocking road cuts and passes – a bit of boom-boom will blow the passes and bridges to block the roads. Not knocking ITD, but it took them a while to clear the rockfall on Hwy55 under good conditions. How long would it take to clear a road under adverse conditions?
I have no doubt things will get ugly no matter who “wins”.
I have to consider/wonder what Little will do come the showdown. Enforce the 10th for the good of the state or support the Feds? I voted for Bundy. Not that I thought Bundy would win (fat chance) or that he was qualified (even fatter chance), but to send a message to Little that he’s not as much a shoo-in as he thought.
Buying a gun, and using a gun, are two totally separate things.
Like Bracken said; A plan to ride a tiger is completely different than actually riding one. (Go ask a real bull rider.)
Owning a gun, and actually shooting one under stress? I’m about as worried of liberals with guns as I am that professor in Kansas is going to line me up against the wall and shoot me.
And just think. Maybe you will be prying one from there “cold dead hands”.
And it’s comforting knowing there’s extra guns and ammo out there, readily available.