I think the gun community's response to politicians is flawed

I see video after video or post after post of people within the 2A poking fun or making comments on politicians lack of knowledge with guns or other things they try to regulate.

Now let me be clear. My issue is not whit us having an opinion and thinking a lack of knowledge should be something that should hold someone back from making moves that effect our abilities to own/use guns. My issue is that this is the default answer on false claims these politicians make.

Take for example that our VP saying she would crack down on AR-15 imports and inferring that this is how they are getting into our communities. Now we all know this is not the case. We know AR-15s are made here. We also can agree that a lack of knowledge on this should hold the VP back from making such a claim. However my point is that she has a lot of advisors and a lot of resources at her disposal as the VP of the USA. There is no way that she cant get the information needed to know this.

Knowing this I think we should stop defaulting to the argument that politicians are morons on the subject of guns. They know these thing. What I’m saying is politicians are not uneducated on this subject, they are simply liars.

I’ll give you another example. Remember a few years back when CNN had that left leaning former military general on for a segment where he was shooting an AR-15 and he called the rifle a “Full Semi-Automatic”? We all clowned him for being a dumbass. I have a hard time believing a former military general would not know the basics of fire arms to such a degree they thought Full Semi-Autonomic is a thing.

What I’m saying is that these people are liar and that they know what they are doing and that is far far worse.

Look at it this way. It’s a 2 pronged attack on the subject that is 2A/Guns. Is it better to fear monger or is it better to fear monger AND spread misinformation about guns and all things 2A is you are a leftist politician? I think the answer is clear.

We need to combat this and the first step is to recognize our 2A rights are not being attacked by ignorant people but cold calculater liars.

Also I know…I’m pointing out that politicians are liars gasp! Revolutionary stuff I know! Lol. This is more me commenting on us not recognizing when we criticize them for making such ridiculous that they do.

Yes it’s common sense for you and I but your giving too much credit towards a public that is basically made up of retards.


Good point.

The entire non 2a community in the US gets all their gun knowledge from tv and movies. When my wife found out I had an Uzi and recently sold it she couldn’t believe it. When I told her it was completely legal (We live in CA) and not some amazing killing machine she still couldn’t believe it.

The left usually doesn’t know fuck all about anything they push these days…


You have a valid point. I see people make the same false claims over and over despite being corrected. They dont do that from ignorance but are following an agenda.

She knows exactly where they’re made, but her supporters don’t. So she’ll fight to get it pushed through, and can claim it as a victory to her ignorant supporters

While I’d like to agree with you, because I used to have a hard time accepting that people are truly that stupid, I’ve spent enough time in the public sector to know better.

Too many people, from the basic Starbucks barista to top company board members, rely on talking points instead of having an understanding of the topic at hand. They hear a tidbit that provides confirmation bias for their views, and take it as Gospel without ever verifying the information.

I’m not talking about your average day coffee drinkers. I’m talking the policy makers in this nation and left leaning military personnel.

I honestly don’t understand what you are suggesting the “gun communities” change in their approach. Personally, I don’t care if a politician is lying or if they are stupid, in either case I want those claims challenged and corrected, which is probably what the “gun community” videos are doing.

Can you clarify what should change in the approach?

Instead of poking fun at them for their lack of knowledge, point out that they are lying and trying to spread misinformation.

Like pointing out that someone lied due to their own ignorance vs point out that someone lied in an attempt to mislead and misinform. Both are lies but are very difference in terms of displaying the character of the person lying.

I confess I still don’t understand.

For example, I politician says “50 round clip magazines should be banned”. A “gun community” youtuber makes a video that where they play the clip of the politician saying “50 round clip magazines should be banned” and says, something along the lines of “this politician is too stupid to know what they are talking about, please do not let them pass this bill”.

Is that a fair example of what you are talking about? If so, what would you like done differently?

The answer is for every gun owner to simply say “fuck you, no” to the government. That’s the whole point of the 2nd amendment anyways.


No. A better example is one of the 2 in my OP. A military general who knows an AR-15 is semi-auto makes up a term and calls it Full Semi-Auto and preaches how dangerous these guns are takes part in a news piece to lean people on a more gun control path.

Then some gun You-Tuber(or anyone pro-2A) who is pro-2A makes a video laughing at this former generals lack of knowledge.

We know this general is not a moron. We know hes used these guns before. We know hes well educated on this matter. He then goes on TV and lies, yet we laugh and call him an idiot instead of calling it what it is. A man lying to spread both fear and misinformation.

How do we know? Seriously. I’ve seen figures that less than 10% of the US Military sees combat. The vast majority of the US Military does not. My understanding is outside of boot camp, it depends on your role as to if you will be regularly training with firearms.

My point is just because someone is in the military or former military doesn’t necessarily mean they are knowledgeable about firearms. I wouldn’t expect a pilot to know much about firearms. I would expect them to know about the aircraft they fly. So, isn’t the answer “it depends”, because the General might not know what they are talking about.

(As an aside, I don’t believe an active General would be allowed to comment on political matters.)

Brute, you’re giving these people too much benefit of the doubt.

As much as we like to pretend we are a merit-based society, the number of idiots vastly outweighs the number of competent people. I’m sure every OGer has at least 1 story about working for/serving under a blithering idiot.

Let them continue to sound like fools. You won’t change their minds, anyway. The only thing that will do that is a harsh dose of reality coming to their doorstep.

1 Like

An AR-15 isn’t even a military weapon, at least in name. The AR nomenclature, at least in my experience, was reserved for civilian and law enforcement hardware, while select-fire military models carry the M designation.
So, right off the bat, a “general” talking about this stuff is failing right out of the gate.

1 Like

Ok what about my other example of our VP. You think politicians are not briefed on the subjects they are talking about? They just go off the cuff and say what they assumed to be correct all the time? They dont use the wide network of experts at their disposal?

I don’t think our VP is intelligent enough to rub two sticks together without help. For evidence I would submit pretty much every interview she’s been in where she starts cackling before attempting to respond to the question she was asked.

So, if she’s briefed, I doubt she remembers what she’s been told. It honestly wouldn’t surprise me at all if politicians are briefed on what to say by “media handlers”, and not the facts of the issue by experts in the field.

Now, you may disagree, and that’s fine. I still don’t understand why you feel it’s “flawed” to point out someone saying very stupid nonsensical things is likely to be, well, stupid and what you would rather have as a response.

You really think someone can become a lawyer/DA and eventual VP is not smart enough to retain basic information given to them like where something is manufactured? Most of all when it’s a major subject being talked about like guns?

If that’s the case what does it say about us allowing such retards to gain major political power within out nation?

As Plato said “One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.”. If our VP is currently such an inferior to where she cant rub two sticks together without help, what does that say about you and me as voters for allowing such a thing to happen?

I’m getting off track here. I simply do not believe our politicians are retards. Not because I place them on some pedestal but because I recognize what they have achieved in terms of political power they have gained and the successes in life they have achieved outside of it. I can disagree with someone and recognize they have solid intellect.

What is more likely? Someone being smart enough to achieve what the VP has achieved and just being of low enough character to spread misinformation or is some retard who lucked their way into a position she currently holds and has no idea what she is talking about?

Given her history of with holding evidence in the past I think it’s clear which one is more likely.