|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 10, 2019, 01:25 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,289
|
Is it worth it to call out all candidates lies?
Beto O'Rourke was on NPR and I am wondering if we should just ignore him or call him out on his lies? It's a genuine question. O'Rourke isn't seen as any kind of a front runner these days so maybe we should just ignore him.
On NPR he was talking about "assault weapons", AK-47's and AR-15's and about the UNIMAGINABLE wounds these weapons cause. He did not mentioning there are a variety of bullets these rifles can fire and that many other rifles fire the SAME bullets and that many, many rifles fire bullets MUCH MORE destructive and powerful. He also went on about how the framers of the constitution didn't have these weapons in mind when they wrote the second amendment etc. etc. So, ignore him or call him out? And by call him out I mean writing letters to the editor, posting comments to news stories about him and posting these lies right here on this forum. The interview is about 6 and a half minutes long and can be found here: https://jwp.io/s/BVum84Pq or here: https://www.npr.org/2019/10/09/76784...s-want-details |
October 10, 2019, 01:43 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 8,783
|
More "Push-Back" is coming !!!
Quote:
Be Happy and; Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing. |
|
October 10, 2019, 02:05 PM | #3 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 20, 2014
Posts: 2,083
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Targa; October 10, 2019 at 02:16 PM. |
||
October 10, 2019, 02:47 PM | #4 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
That said, I think some measure of "pick your battles" applies. First, most newspaper editors are dyed-in-the-wool liberals, so letters calling out the liberals' favorite lies probably won't ever be printed. Second, I think we need to be careful not to delve too deeply into the minutiae of technical "gun" stuff that will leave most fence sitters shaking their heads in total confusion. An example of that might be trying (once again) to explain the difference between a military full-auto rifle and a similar-looking commercial semi-auto rifle. Is it worth pointing out that the AR-15s we can buy are NOT the same as the M16s the Army buys? Of course. Just don't get bogged down in details. Remember that the average attention span of readers today in measured in nanoseconds. Of most important to me is calling out the lies about the Constitution. Quote:
"The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."You could then point out that the Founders didn't foresee typewriters and personal computers, but the Supreme Court seems to think that using modern computers and printers to express one's thoughts is a valid activity worthwhile of First Amendment protection. It's obviously unfair and illogical to claim that one amendment protects the use of the most modern technology while another amendment protects only the technology that existing as of 1776.
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
||
October 10, 2019, 03:13 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,235
|
All politicians tell lies, commit fraud and so forth. They can even get away with petty crimes. I don’t think calling them out these days will help. Constituents know that their chosen candidate or politician lies, cheats and say whatever they want... most are generally ok with it as long as they follow the agenda.
I grew up, been many years since I was young. None of us believed in propaganda, because we were taught about political rhetoric, yellow journalism and similar concepts and we were taught how to recognize them. It’s pretty amazing and also mind blowing that so many people actually believe rhetoric, political propaganda and partisan journalism... accepting as fact. We’ve got much larger problems in addition to proposed gun control, our country is changing, it was designed to change. Who is going to enjoy the new USA and who isn’t remains to be seen. |
October 10, 2019, 03:36 PM | #6 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
Quote:
We've all seen the video of Carolyn McCarthy telling Tucker Carlson that a barrel shroud is the "shoulder thing that goes up". That was false, but probably not a lie. I genuinely doubt that she knew perfectly well what a barrel shroud is, but decided she would deceive. My guess is that she spoke with certainty on a matter about which she was ignorant. I find minor factual lies (conscious deception) in public life fairly rare. When Camila Harris held a piece paper and asked Brett Kavanaugh if he'd ever had a conversation with someone and warned him to be careful because he is under oath, the implication that she had evidence of such a conversation was a deceit. Let's assume that Robert Francis O'Rourke believed the falsehood he spoke with conviction. That doesn't get him off the hook. What does this tell us about his other convictions?
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
||
October 10, 2019, 05:55 PM | #7 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
It's possible that he's that ignorant ... but I don't believe it.
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
|
October 10, 2019, 06:21 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
RFO spent several sessions as a member of the house, as did Carolyn McCarthy. Remember when a member of the upper house, the Senator from Hawaii, condemned a reference of Jeff Session to Anglo-Saxon legal tradition as racist? That was so achingly ignorant that it was difficult to believe his ignorance was feigned. There may be quite a bit someone in that position doesn't know, or may know that isn't true.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
October 10, 2019, 07:11 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 10,792
|
Let him keep talking. He won't be the nominee, but his rhetoric will make it harder for anyone to win that isn't pro-gun.
__________________
"If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong" Winston Churchill |
October 10, 2019, 08:07 PM | #10 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,675
|
I'd say the point of calling him out on his untruths, whether due to ignorance or deliberate lying, is not to convince or educate HIM, but to make others who hear him aware that what they are hearing is bull ..dung...
If you can open the eyes of even one voter, tis a worthwhile thing.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
October 10, 2019, 08:41 PM | #11 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
|
October 10, 2019, 10:26 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 4,322
|
If it’s a misdemeanor to lie to the cops,
and a felony to lie to the FBI, then why isn’t it a capital offense for the elected or appointed to lie to the American people?
__________________
Cave illos in guns et backhoes |
October 11, 2019, 07:24 AM | #13 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Media these days is all about talking heads, ratings..on EITHER side of the political spectrum. Again, not about ideology or 'courage of their convictions'... So, hear something, get all sweated up and indignant and yell, 'gotta do something'..or ignore the circus, and vote on November 3, 2020. Quote:
Fits here Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” Last edited by USNRet93; October 11, 2019 at 09:26 AM. |
|||
October 11, 2019, 08:02 AM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
The 2d Am. isn't the only part of the COTUS that RFO seems determined to mangle. He also wants to apply federal income tax differently according to whether he agrees with an organization's stated positions. Whether or not you conclude that he believes what he says, a would be officeholder who rests his appeal on blowing right past legal limits on government power is a problem. Casual observers won't know about that problem unless you identify it.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
October 11, 2019, 09:53 AM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 182
|
Lies and misinformation should ALWAYS be called out. Otherwise the uninformed can take it as gospel, and then the result is people actually believing this junk.
|
October 12, 2019, 10:31 AM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 8,783
|
Push back in your way and ..... VOTE
Quote:
"Never try to teach a pig, how to sing; It's a waste of your time and annoys the pig" My push-back is to influence the folks, in my circle and vote on all levels of governments. …… The first time I was able to vote, I had to get some input from friends as it was somewhat confusing as to how to I should vote.???? I am no longer confused !! Vote and; Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing. |
|
October 13, 2019, 07:46 AM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
So post right below..and NO, not making ANY statement of political loyalty but I rankle at absolutes of partisan 'decisions' or observations. Really BAD on both sides at all levels these days..in terms of 'truth telling'...
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” Last edited by USNRet93; October 14, 2019 at 07:06 AM. |
|
October 13, 2019, 09:11 AM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,714
|
If you are going to call out O'Rourke on the statements you consider to be lies, will you also call out Trump on the incorrect things he says? I am just curious to know if your goal is to ensure truth in politics (a truly noble cause) or if your goals are more politically motivated simply for your preferred party to win, signing off on its lies while calling foul on the lies of the opposition?
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
October 13, 2019, 12:07 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 1,868
|
Waste of time. People that vote for liberals have already made up their mind. Poor people like those getting government benefits have also. They may be good people but are ignorant! They think the way to survive is the guy wanting to give them more. Seem's there's been less talk about that this time and I see where lot of those people are walking away from the Democraps. Hope that's true! But you calling them out simply bring's their name up front and that is what I think they really want! Ignore them.
|
October 13, 2019, 02:46 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 1,117
|
If you told the truth about the future of entitlement programs and the implications of the national debt you'd never get elected.
|
October 14, 2019, 06:03 AM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2014
Posts: 577
|
Focus: One recent anti gun personal locally made an interesting comment The comment went all guns should go. Only police should have guns. You gonna reason with that?
This thinking is shared widely by many anti-gun people. Looks like the main force of the anti-gun drive ends up being aimed at visible firearms owners. You may come to the conclusion that anti-gun rhetoric has more with making war on the Base. Much of the anti-gun is a smoke screen for something else-call it what you may.
__________________
Intentionally Antagonizing Another MemberInsults and Ad Hominems |
October 14, 2019, 07:16 AM | #22 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Lots of rhetoric out there by LOTS of people who populate the airwaves but their actual power to do the above is limited or non existent. Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
||
October 14, 2019, 09:43 AM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2014
Posts: 577
|
Back in the day...
Back in the day...: The was an article in slick paper magazine. The article went on to make two points. Point number one is that very large majority firearm owners are law abiding citizens with a hunting or shooting interest.
The second point confirms what has just been shared in the previous post. That to confiscate all firearms would cost as much as enforcing all the other laws in this country combined. There was also those who have a real interest in firearms but did not hunt or shoot. This last point is my addition. I personally handload and participate in shooting matches. I do not remember being involved in a mass shooting of any sort. From one individual anti-gunner was that neighbors would turn gun owner in. One of the other was to listen for shooting and call the authorities. Yet another wanted to go after cartridges. This is individual stuff but may reflect more widely held beliefs. My question is what would happen after all this confiscation was over with this huge police force? Addendum: What would happen as these firearms were being confiscated?
__________________
Intentionally Antagonizing Another MemberInsults and Ad Hominems Last edited by J.G. Terry; October 14, 2019 at 09:53 AM. |
October 14, 2019, 10:11 AM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 19, 2005
Location: southwestern va
Posts: 830
|
the state of the media has now sunk to the point that you have the liberal news and facts and the concervative news and facts and the truth is somewhere in between.
The "do whats right" part of me whispers that lies should be called out, but whos going to listen lol.
__________________
"i got the most powerful gun in the world........an .88 magnum. It shoots thru schools......" |
October 14, 2019, 10:29 AM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 405
|
The difficulty in finding and confiscating firearms does not in any way preclude the government from making them illegal. Anyone who was caught in possession of a banned firearm would be prosecuted. Not any different than the ban on bump stocks or illegal drugs, where there is no large scale search and confiscation process.
__________________
Support the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|