Who wants Politics on Kahrtalk?

[OldLincoln]

I don't watch TV because it is all politics all the time with everybody yelling at each other. I avoid political posts here but there are too any blasting opinions now and we still have a ways to go before the Nov elections.

I just want to know if I'm the only ole codger out here.

[tilefish]

I voted yes because it would create an area to discuss topics which may be too controversial for a general discussion area.

[wyntrout]

I think that we should be talking about whatever we want. There are areas for SOME topics, but as I pointed out several years ago... we shouldn't have to stop conversations and adjourn to another sub-forum for every change of topic within a conversation... as normal conversations go.

Political discussions are normal "free speech" and usually a thread is started for a topic like that, but sometimes the topic comes up in discussion about other things. If a thread "drifts" and becomes political, you don't have to stay and participate.

Wynn:)

[CJB]

Yes as closely relates to firearms rights, and firearms topics.

[muggsy]

Political free speech is constitutionally protected. It's one of our God given rights. If you don't cast an informed vote then don't vote at all. I participate in politics to protect my rights. Not everything in life is enjoyable, but some things are necessary. I'm sure that when the time comes Linc, that you'll step up to the plate. You're not the type to forfeit the game.

[mr surveyor]

having been a moderator and administrator (still) on several forums, I can say that the "First Amendment" right to "free speach" begins and ends with the opinions of the forum management. They own the bandwidth on the www, and can control whatever they want. In the purest sense of the "!A", and "private property rights", there's a bit of a conundrum concerning what you can, and cannot discuss.

[jaggedx]

Topics that relate to gun ownership and our politicians views and voting record are important to me. If our current president gets re-elected we are in real trouble.

[Bawanna]

I voted no. Someone like Jocko with his mob back ground and being in organized crime for so many years might understand it but it's all a bunch of jumbo to me. I study, try to learn and make an informed vote. I must be doing ok none of the guys I vote for hardly ever win.

I can see an occasional post where gun rights are involved but we have to remember we only hear what the media tells us and you know who they work for.

I prefer to talk things that don't aggravate me. Guns, cars, how damn good looking I am, that sort of thing.

[kramm]

I have mixed thoughts on this. On some of the other forums I go to that have political or 2a sections, I've seen some pretty ugly stuff between members. I'd hate to see that kind of thing happening here. Seems for the most part we get along pretty well here. I think I'm going to agree with WynTrout on his post.

[mr surveyor]

I remember when a guy named " Jesse James" was running for state treasurer in Texas (just a few years ago) ..... he danged near won just on name recognition alone:rolleyes:

politics and ignorance/apathy tend to go hand in hand

[TheTman]

Considering some of the things I have posted, I be a hyprocrite to vote no. I have a bad habit of running across things that outrage me and tend to post about it. I guess I'm so frustrated with the way the country is going, that I tend to get outraged pretty easy and post about things I see the get my goat, or things I think are good news for gun owners.

[mr surveyor]

Considering some of the things I have posted, I be a hyprocrite to vote no. I have a bad habit of running across things that outrage me and tend to post about it. I guess I'm so frustrated with the way the country is going, that I tend to get outraged pretty easy and post about things I see the get my goat, or things I think are good news for gun owners.


for what it's worth, I appreciate your posts

edit to add: now we'll both be kicked off the island

[JimBianchi]

I voted yes, just because I love to give the BHO lapdogs an internet wedgie with my wit and wisdom.

[Chief Joseph]

You can't avoid politics when it applies to guns. It has been a pet project to ban them on the left for decades. Gun rights are under constant attack here in oregon by the democrats, ginny burdick the biggest one. Were it not for Lars Larson, most would not even be aware of her antics. If we can't discuss it, say goodbye to our rights some day. Even heated arguments will bring a lot of information that many may not be aware of. Hate to see the 2nd Amendment community stick their heads in the sand on the other extremely important issues of our time. Back door unconstitutional antics of the left can only be fought by finding out what they're doing, it won't come from the main stream media. That leaves us forums like this. I used to go to lunch with my Grandpa when I was a kid, we'd sit up at the counter and he'd argue for the entire hour with the 15 other regulars over politics and other subjects. I asked him why he goes their to argue all the time. He said "we weren't arguin, we were discussin".

[yqtszhj]

Sure why not. Just be nice as we discuss it. I will say that most folks on here have more sense than the average person even if we disagree.

[yqtszhj]

I remember when a guy named " Jesse James" was running for state treasurer in Texas (just a few years ago) ..... he danged near won just on name recognition alone:rolleyes:


Do you think he'd be interested in running for commander in chief? Jesse sounds a whole lot tougher than Mitt or Rick. Way better than Barak.

[QuercusMax]

I don't watch TV because it is all politics all the time with everybody yelling at each other. I avoid political posts here but there are too any blasting opinions now and we still have a ways to go before the Nov elections.


I voted "No" because I totally agree.

In general, the only postings of any kind that I find useful are ones that either inform or entertain. Political postings do neither. Take any given political post: You will either agree with it (in which case you have learned nothing), or it will upset you (again, not useful, and it often leads to ill-tempered responses and bad feelings). I don't need either of those.

[Popeye]

Don't we already have a discussion area for that in the RKBA (right to keep and bare arms) section?

I fear that another section just for overall politics will surely divide us more than help us. I used to be a monitor on another site and it caused way more harm then good. It had to be closely monitored because it got into some serious name calling and caused hard feelings that bleed over into to other areas of the site, ended up to be more of a problem than it was worth. RKBA section is IMO all we need for discussing our rights and the 2nd ammendment. JMO.....Popeye.

[Wayne Nelson]

IF YOU WANT ME TO REMOVE THIS JUST LET ME KNOW!

This may not belong here but it should be read by all Americans. This has nothing to do with GUNS but seeing that the subject of Politics is brought up here, you might want to read and watch this. INTERESTING!!!!

SHOCKING ABC News on Obama/USA Infrastructure

Diane Sawyer reporting on U.S. bridge projects going to the Chinese... NOT Americans.

The bridges are right here in the U.S. and yet Obama has approved for Chinese contractors to come
in and do the work. What about jobs for Americans???

Watch this video. It doesn't take long to view.

This one should be tough for the supporters of the current regime to swallow....AND it comes from ABC NEWS...no Snopes or Wikileaks on this one!!

U.S.A. Bridges and Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms
Shocking to say the least! This video is a jaw-dropper that will make you sick. (It was also shocking that ABC was actually reporting this story.)

The lead-in with Obama promising jobs in the U.S. by improving our infrastructure is so typical of all his promises!

Our tax dollars are at work - for CHINA !!!

I pray all the unemployed see this and cast their votes accordingly in 2012!

Click here: U.S. Bridges, Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms | Video - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/us-bridges-roads-built-chinese-firms-14594513?tab=9482930?ion=1206853&playlist=14594944)

[DKD]

OK Guys, lets not get our BVD's in a wad........say OMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!
Now lets all hug a tree and sing *** Ba Ya....:rolleyes:

[Thunder71]

No thanks, nothing turns friends into enemies more than politics and religion.

[Tinman507]

OK Guys, lets not get our BVD's in a wad........say OMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!
Now lets all hug a tree and sing *** Ba Ya....:rolleyes:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/__-XseFV7BzI/R4iZdLFOhQI/AAAAAAAAAIs/TQhX-mecfPg/s400/sumo-wrestling-crack.jpg

[Hognutz]

I agree with Thunder..The best way to end a friendship is to discuss politics and/or religion. It starts out nice, but never ends well. Whatever the platform or plate that it is served on.

[Bawanna]

I voted "No" because I totally agree.

In general, the only postings of any kind that I find useful are ones that either inform or entertain. Political postings do neither. Take any given political post: You will either agree with it (in which case you have learned nothing), or it will upset you (again, not useful, and it often leads to ill-tempered responses and bad feelings). I don't need either of those.

We have a bingo here. I can almost guarantee there will not be a dedicated politics area here. It's been talked about and they just never seem to be anything but ugly.
Most of us here are pretty informed, so as Quercusmax said we learn nothing or we just get upset. If upset causes us to find a solution that's a good thing but not likely.

Long as it stays civil and nice we'll roll with it.

[Thunder71]

Politics, civil, nice = Illinois, guns, friendly

[kenk]

No thanks, nothing turns friends into enemies more than politics and religion.

I voted No. I totally agree with Thunder and Quercus. In our extended family, we have deep political differences BUT we have decided to NOT bring them up....we value each other too much to interject such known divisive subjects.

Ken

[BEARDOG]

i voted "no" because i totally agree.

In general, the only postings of any kind that i find useful are ones that either inform or entertain. Political postings do neither. Take any given political post: You will either agree with it (in which case you have learned nothing), or it will upset you (again, not useful, and it often leads to ill-tempered responses and bad feelings). I don't need either of those.

agree 100%!!!

[Tinman507]

I voted yes because the First Amendment is sacred to me. I can choose to participate or not. I think there are issues in this country that need some discussion.

I would rather there not be any artificially imposed restrictions (aside from vulgarity or personal attacks). Once we begin to censor things deemed off limits or inappropriate we begin to slide down a slippery slope.

I'm ok with mods closing threads that get ugly, but not everyone is going to agree with the trigger point for closure.

I think Bawanna has been beyond fair with his restraint in closing threads. His threshold is a lot higher than mine.

[jlottmc]

for what it's worth, I appreciate your posts

edit to add: now we'll both be kicked off the island


Well when we're all kicked off, then maybe we should just form our own island and do it right the first time.

[hpg]

NO.....

[muggsy]

If you don't like discussing politics then don't. In spite of what Obama is trying to do this is still a free country. :)

[Thunder71]

Come on, whether you 'want to' or not, having the topics display on 'Active Topics' is about as tempting as a fat kid walking by a candy store. There are plenty of other places to discuss politics if you choose to, and 'freedom of speech' isn't just your right, it's also the right of the forum owners to determine what they want allowed on their board, so it is being supported.

I like the site how it is, if something political is brought up it's generally tolerated to an extent so long as it's a valid discussion, although the magnifying lens burns hot from watchful eyes in case it goes too far.

[skiflydive]

I voted no because I'm actively seeking sanctuary from all their bovine scatology

[BEARDOG]

If I joined a political talk forum and started posting about guns, gunsmithing, reloading, and holsters would that be appropriate ??? I don't think so.

KahrTalk = Talk about GUNS.

[Scoundrel]

I voted "No", but...

I don't know if I would agree with any rules against it for "free speech" reasons. That being said, I came here to learn and talk about guns. Technical stuff, style stuff, popular opinions, real-world scenarios as opposed to what the media propagates, and help understanding and finding gun-related laws.

When I see political discussions that are far beyond the scope of guns, I stop reading and unsubscribe the thread. I almost got sucked into one a few days ago but exercised self-restraint and bowed out.

Posts involving politics as they are directly related to guns are inevitable and I consider those to be relevant, even if I don't enjoy reading them. But posts about the validity of someone's birth certificate, while they could be remotely, through an extended chain of reasoning, be relevant to guns, are not DIRECTLY relevant to guns, and I don't care to read about anyone's opinions regarding that subject here.

When I see extreme posts that are bashing our "leaders", and those posts go beyond reason, proof, or civility and turn into hate posts, that really turns me off. When I see that kind of post from users whose opinions about other subjects I have respected in the past, and who have input that I consider valuable on other subjects, it saddens me and my respect for those people goes down a notch with every foaming-at-the-mouth political post.

My computer gaming friends have wildly different political and religious backgrounds and opinions. When we get together to play games, we talk about game-related stuff, and we don't talk about politics and religion. Why not? It's not because we've made any rules restricting freedom of speech in our gaming sessions, it's because everyone understands without having any formal rules that we'll all get along better and have positive interactions if we choose to avoid those subjects.

If we were getting together for the purpose of discussing politics, well, then it would be a different story. There are plenty of forums online where you can go and discuss politics until you're just as full of **** as the politicians are. But that's not the purpose of this forum.

[O'Dell]

I have no problems with it especially in this most important election year. I would prefer that it remain civil, but I also realize that with the high emotions running today, some will occasionally go over the line. Gun rights are currently so entwined with politics that the whole issue is hard to avoid.

[MW surveyor]

I voted NO but I do peek from time to time.

[getsome]

I'm ok with it so long as it doesn't get nasty...It's perfectly normal to have a difference of opinion so long as we act like ladies and gentlemen...Sometimes it's healthy to look at any subject from another persons perspective so thats a good thing....

As long as it doesn't turn into a big p!ssin match b!tch slap session making Bawanna go cut a switch to seperate some folks I say lets continue on...

[TriggerMan]

I voted "No", but...

I don't know if I would agree with any rules against it for "free speech" reasons. That being said, I came here to learn and talk about guns. Technical stuff, style stuff, popular opinions, real-world scenarios as opposed to what the media propagates, and help understanding and finding gun-related laws.

When I see political discussions that are far beyond the scope of guns, I stop reading and unsubscribe the thread. I almost got sucked into one a few days ago but exercised self-restraint and bowed out.

Posts involving politics as they are directly related to guns are inevitable and I consider those to be relevant, even if I don't enjoy reading them. But posts about the validity of someone's birth certificate, while they could be remotely, through an extended chain of reasoning, be relevant to guns, are not DIRECTLY relevant to guns, and I don't care to read about anyone's opinions regarding that subject here.

When I see extreme posts that are bashing our "leaders", and those posts go beyond reason, proof, or civility and turn into hate posts, that really turns me off. When I see that kind of post from users whose opinions about other subjects I have respected in the past, and who have input that I consider valuable on other subjects, it saddens me and my respect for those people goes down a notch with every foaming-at-the-mouth political post.

My computer gaming friends have wildly different political and religious backgrounds and opinions. When we get together to play games, we talk about game-related stuff, and we don't talk about politics and religion. Why not? It's not because we've made any rules restricting freedom of speech in our gaming sessions, it's because everyone understands without having any formal rules that we'll all get along better and have positive interactions if we choose to avoid those subjects.

If we were getting together for the purpose of discussing politics, well, then it would be a different story. There are plenty of forums online where you can go and discuss politics until you're just as full of **** as the politicians are. But that's not the purpose of this forum.Great post. Sums up my feelings exactly.

[1radman]

Lets have it all! politics, guns, humor, even the occasional purddy lady!
Gotta live a little!
We're all adults....self-edit before you get ugly...unless it's too late fur ya.

[ltxi]

nope....not really

[jocko]

I voted no but u all have my permission to hammer the great one any time. I think our freedom of speech still allows that. I must say I have more respect for my dog that I do the great one. I wish I did not feel that way...Just sayin.

[jocko]

having been a moderator and administrator (still) on several forums, I can say that the "First Amendment" right to "free speach" begins and ends with the opinions of the forum management. They own the bandwidth on the www, and can control whatever they want. In the purest sense of the "!A", and "private property rights", there's a bit of a conundrum concerning what you can, and cannot discuss.

in layman terms WTF did u say:behindsofa:

Just askin

[jocko]

I don't watch TV because it is all politics all the time with everybody yelling at each other. I avoid political posts here but there are too any blasting opinions now and we still have a ways to go before the Nov elections.

I just want to know if I'm the only ole codger out here.

for urself "codger". :behindsofa: I can remember when 40 was old and then I hit 40 and then 50 was old and then I it 50 and then 60 was old and I hit 60 and 70 was old, and I ai't there yet so I am a younster by those standards:behindsofa:

[mr surveyor]

in layman terms WTF did u say:behindsofa:

Just askin

well... I was trying to point out that there is a bit of a difference in Constitutionaly guaranteed "free speach", and what you can and cannot do in or on someone else's property. All the forums I participate on make their own "house rules". If the rules state you can't use the work "pink", then them's the house rules. These are private forums that just happen to have a public audience.

That's my take on it anyway.


surv

[Jeremiah/Az]

I really study politics a lot, not the popular media, but I dig deep into it. I voted no, because no one is going to change another's mind on this subject. It just causes hard feelings, but I don't think it should be outright banned. I just skip those threads. Religion & politics are subjects that I will not discuss on an open forum.

[popgoestheweasel]

I voted "No", but...

I don't know if I would agree with any rules against it for "free speech" reasons. That being said, I came here to learn and talk about guns. Technical stuff, style stuff, popular opinions, real-world scenarios as opposed to what the media propagates, and help understanding and finding gun-related laws.

When I see political discussions that are far beyond the scope of guns, I stop reading and unsubscribe the thread. I almost got sucked into one a few days ago but exercised self-restraint and bowed out.

Posts involving politics as they are directly related to guns are inevitable and I consider those to be relevant, even if I don't enjoy reading them. But posts about the validity of someone's birth certificate, while they could be remotely, through an extended chain of reasoning, be relevant to guns, are not DIRECTLY relevant to guns, and I don't care to read about anyone's opinions regarding that subject here.

When I see extreme posts that are bashing our "leaders", and those posts go beyond reason, proof, or civility and turn into hate posts, that really turns me off. When I see that kind of post from users whose opinions about other subjects I have respected in the past, and who have input that I consider valuable on other subjects, it saddens me and my respect for those people goes down a notch with every foaming-at-the-mouth political post.

My computer gaming friends have wildly different political and religious backgrounds and opinions. When we get together to play games, we talk about game-related stuff, and we don't talk about politics and religion. Why not? It's not because we've made any rules restricting freedom of speech in our gaming sessions, it's because everyone understands without having any formal rules that we'll all get along better and have positive interactions if we choose to avoid those subjects.

If we were getting together for the purpose of discussing politics, well, then it would be a different story. There are plenty of forums online where you can go and discuss politics until you're just as full of **** as the politicians are. But that's not the purpose of this forum.

Like another member already said, I could not agree more...particularly with the following:

" When I see extreme posts that are bashing our "leaders", and those posts go beyond reason, proof, or civility and turn into hate posts, that really turns me off. When I see that kind of post from users whose opinions about other subjects I have respected in the past, and who have input that I consider valuable on other subjects, it saddens me and my respect for those people goes down a notch with every foaming-at-the-mouth political post. "

i might add, when the name calling (particularly about Obama) reaches a point that is clearly RACIST, it makes me want to puke.

[Bawanna]

Sadly in my own mind I think the only reason Obummer hasn't been tarred and feathered and deported is the race card.

Any one who complains about him must be a racist.

[popgoestheweasel]

in my opinion, mr. moderator, complaining about obama certainly doesn't make one a racist. what reasonable person believes THAT? it's the racist words and names (WE ALL KNOW WHAT THEY ARE), used all too often on kt (typically by the same people) that scream of racism. let's keep it real...stop pretending it doesn't exist.

[Scoundrel]

While I don't think we should have a ban on discussing politics, I DO believe that we should have a flagging system, like on CraigsList. Sure, we can click the little exclamation mark thingy at the upper right and "report" a post, but that's not the same thing.

A flagging system lets every user flag a post as inappropriate - and if enough users flag it, then it gets ixnayed - or in the case of some media sites, "collapsed by the community" and you can click the + sign if you really want to read it anyway.

I wonder if vBulletin has a flagging module that our fearless forum admins could install.

[Scoundrel]

This post, [censored]:eek:, illustrates very well why it would be better if we did not discuss politics. It can/will sidetrack ANY and ALL threads. This thread is about the merits of discussing politics in the KahrTalk forum - but people are using it to push their political agendas, dig at each other, etc. instead of discussing the topic at hand, which is "should we discuss politics".

People with opposing views all feel insulted for their beliefs. It is likely that neither party will be able to refrain from a hot-tempered reply, other people will probably jump in, and NOTHING will be accomplished except to get some people hot under the collar and irritate others who'd rather not watch it happen.

I'll probably get jumped on next. It will probably be something like "if you don't want to watch it then unsubscribe the thread" or something even less civil/polite. The irony is that I am still on topic - discussing whether or not we should discuss politics - and I will probably get told to butt out by someone who is off-topic, flaming, attacking, and discussing politics.

[Bawanna]

My apologies Old Lincoln but I've had a belly full of this one too. Maybe I'll see about getting a speed thread closer to save time.

[Bawanna]

OK boys and girls, at the suggestion of another member I deleted a few personal post involved in a little Hatfield and McCoy feud and reopened this thread. Since it was Mr. Old Lincolns thread to start, no reason he should be shut down for others actions. I don't want to be a referee here, it's no fun and with a tiny bit of effort on everyone's part there is no need for one.

Lets try to be nice, lets keep personal conflicts off the forum. Life hands us enough enemies and hurdles to jump over, we don't need to seek any out here in our little oasis.

OK?

[TheTman]

I see it's 2-1 against, I'll try to refrain from posting some of the political stuff unless it involves the RKBA.

[JFootin]

Thanks, Bawanna! :) Sorry, OldLincoln and everyone. :o

[knkali]

OK boys and girls, at the suggestion of another member I deleted a few personal post involved in a little Hatfield and McCoy feud and reopened this thread. Since it was Mr. Old Lincolns thread to start, no reason he should be shut down for others actions. I don't want to be a referee here, it's no fun and with a tiny bit of effort on everyone's part there is no need for one.

Lets try to be nice, lets keep personal conflicts off the forum. Life hands us enough enemies and hurdles to jump over, we don't need to seek any out here in our little oasis.

OK?

I like when people calmly explain their political views and why they have them. I really listen and have tempered some of my past beliefs and adopted new views on things from some members here. I call it growth. Yelling and chest pounding has the oposite effect with me and probably most people too. I hope that we continue the political type threads here with minimal hate. After all, most people want the same thing in the end. A great country where we can live in peace and prosper.

[OldLincoln]

I must have been elsewhere in my head when I posted the poll. thinking folks would just vote without much comment. However, now I believe my point has been made.

Politics today seem to divide families and best friends but the damage doesn't always repair itself after the heat is gone. I consider you all like family and it's painful to read things said to defend a position.

It became obvious in several posts promoting one candidate or another and was worse than most caliber wars I've read over the years. The sad thing is I believe most have decided on their candidate of choice so no minds change position, so I consider it pointless but destructive. America has a secret ballot for reasons, and this is possible one of them.

I hope all who feel it necessary to discuss politics can do so taking into consideration that those who don't share their views are not their enemy, and appreciate the freedom to make a personal decision. If nothing else, think about those who gave their lives and won't be voting any more. Don't disappoint them, vote for sure, but don't fight over it.

Okay I'm done.

[Ubaldo99]

I voted "no". Remember, folks, we're trying to have a civilization here. Arent we? :D

[Scoundrel]

"Now was that civilized? No, clearly not. Fun, but in no sense civilized."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysdX3e22WLQ

[Bawanna]

Seems your right by an even 2 to 1 margin.

Sorry folks, 4 more years of bawanna unless my contract expires. Do I have a contract? Think I need one?

[mr surveyor]

Bawanna

By the authority vested in me by the State of Insanity, and the fact that I saw my shadow under the almost full moon last night, I hereby appoint you to serve another 4 year term as Hall Monitor. Amen, Play Ball.

surv

[Bawanna]

Bawanna

By the authority vested in me by the State of Insanity, and the fact that I saw my shadow under the almost full moon last night, I hereby appoint you to serve another 4 year term as Hall Monitor. Amen, Play Ball.

surv

So do I gotta make a speech or anything, swear on the bible, maybe I could get one of those white sash belt dealy hymers like we wore when we was crosswalk patrol boys.
Guess a swagger stick might be pushing it on the request level.

[Scoundrel]

I think we should pitch in and buy Bawanna a swagger stick!

[Ubaldo99]

Good one, Scoundrel. Bawanna: 4 more years! 4 more years! :D

[ltxi]

I think we should pitch in and buy Bawanna a swagger stick!

Nope...a vintage Safety Patrol badge, an eye patch, and an ASP.

[Tinman507]

A Special CCW Sash?
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSXFk0jX8qCvUnH7JDt8u9y6Ch9ZKfep 1XO44I-ZHCP3mAdZA-2sdnDEuft

[mr surveyor]

he needs a secret decoder ring to make sense out of some threads

[Frankhenrylee]

a special ccw sash?
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:and9gcsxfk0jx8qcvunh7jdt8u9y6ch9zkfep 1xo44i-zhcp3madza-2sdndeuft
what the f!*k is that?

[MW surveyor]

what the f!*k is that?

Man, you mean you don't have one? If you CC, you gotta have one. All of the mall ninjas wear them and it helps to identify you as one of the "good guys" to other CCers and the cops. Plus it gives you a place to clip your CCW badge.

[Bawanna]

I use mine to cover my private parts when I sumo wrestle. Doesn't say much for my private parts does it.

[Tinman507]

I just threw up a little in my mouth

[Tinman507]

Of course with a CCW Badge you need the special holder to go with it.

http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o542/tinman507/CCW-Badge.jpg

[Bawanna]

Now I just threw up a little in my mouth.

[WMD]

I voted "yes". I, like many others get enraged at the stupidity currently going on in the Whitehouse. I also understand how easily it is to offend folks on both sides who have passion for their beliefs.

That being said, education is everything! I think discussions both pro and con help educate folks to make informed decisions. I think way too many important decisions (like who to vote for, or even should I vote?) are made by folks who do not understand the big picture.

[popgoestheweasel]

provide factual information + listen to opposing views + open discussion + allow the individual to arrive at his/her OWN conclusions = best chance of influencing others of YOUR political views.

having said this, i voted NO because I do not see enough factual information (absent of 'spin') being offered HERE which usually leads to an ugly ending.

[wyntrout]

Maybe we could have a Political sub-forum like XDTalk has and require a certain number of post to participate... they use 250 posts. We could use 1,000. :D

Of course, participation is OPTIONAL!

Wynn:)

[Scoundrel]

Is it still a freedom of speech issue if we say "If you want to talk politics, do it HERE and not in other threads"?

Yeah, like anyone would pay attention to that.

[QuercusMax]

On the assumption that the name "KahrTalk" was an indication of the purpose of this board, I came here to learn about and talk about guns, primarily my Kahr.

While it is inevitable and often useful for some non-Kahr topics to come up in related discussions among people who have become acquainted here, I would like to suggest that talking about Kahrs is still the best thing for us to do here.

Compared to a few other boards that I visit from time to time, KahrTalk has a "small town" feel that seems more civil and more friendly than the others. It would be a shame to let politically-induced tempers disrupt that, especially among a group who otherwise seem to get along very nicely.

There are plenty of other places where people can go to discuss and yell about politics. Let's not let politics disturb the peace of our nice little town.

[Bawanna]

I'm putting you in for Sainthood QuercusMax. Bully of a grand idea.

Guns in general, kahrs a lot, with a little life goes on mixed in is a great recipe.

Hard to say gun without politics rearing it's ugly head and in some cases that's not a bad thing to discuss but politics in general, not so much.

[Steve-$]

I agree 100% with QuercusMax.

If we really need to bring politics into this forum, it should be with the intent of protecting our second amendment rights.

[Scoundrel]

I agree 100% with QuercusMax.

If we really need to bring politics into this forum, it should be with the intent of protecting our second amendment rights.

Those who would push their agendas will say that it's all inter-related and that we can't JUST protect those rights without also saying all of the other things they want to say about politics.

[WMD]

Thinking about it, asking the question (political discusions, yea or nay?) is kind of after the fact.


Haven't there already been a number of political discussions held on this forum? Has this hurt the forum in any way? Unfortunately (or fortunately for some ;)), I am not able to get on the forum as frequently as I would like so am not aware of any previous issues as a result of a political discussion. From what I have seen, most of the discussion has been OK. Then again, I may have missed some big blowout.

Have we previously suffered from political discussion?

[Bawanna]

Short answer to that is oh yeah!