Davis: For Many, Guns are Like a Religion and Should Be Respected The Same Way

gun store

(M. Spencer Green/AP)

Though he was criticized for saying it, President Barack Obama was exactly right when he compared guns to religion. Guns are—for some—what religion aspires to be: a real source of meaning in life.

Politicians should talk about guns the way they talk about religion, with appreciation for their distinctive value. Imagine a politician saying, “Look, we don’t want to ban your religion—we just want to curb its most dangerous excesses.” Maybe have a government-determined waiting period to make sure you really want to join.

Or consider a politician’s reassurance that, “Look, we don’t want to take away your right to vote—we just want to make sure all of the voters are appropriately credentialed so there won’t be voter fraud.”

People find these statements threatening, and it’s easy to see why. They take something that many hold sacred, and treat its regulation as a matter of mere policy. The offense is in what is said; not what is planned.

— Ryan W. Davis in Guns and the Rural Vote

comments

  1. avatar GunnyGene says:

    What a load of psychobabble. Weapons are tools to accomplish a task, nothing more, nothing less.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Clearly you are in a different place and don’t get the gist of the idea. Nothing wrong with that.

    2. avatar Coolbreeze says:

      Glad GunnyGene had the first comment because he nailed it clean, right out of the gate. The right to bear arms is separate from freedom of religion. Check “the document”, if you’re not sure.

    3. avatar jwtaylor says:

      You missed the point of his article, which is quite fair as it is not well represented in the pull out section posted here.

      Think of it this way. As you say, guns are a tool to accomplish a task.

      That task is important, and even more important is the willingness and ability to accomplish that task.

      In this case, that task is being a productive member of the local culture and society. It is being a responsible member of the family.

      Someone may not like guns, but they probably do like the notion of being part of the culture and the family.

      In this culture, in this family, guns are a necessary tool accomplish the task of being a full and responsible member.

      To choose to not own or carry that necessary tool means you are unwilling to be a part of that culture of family.

      It would be like me refusing to own or put on work gloves. Well, I’m signaling pretty loudly that I’m not willing to do the constant fencing my family’s farm requires. I’m not willing to contribute.

      This was the author’s way of trying to get people who don’t like guns to see why guns are so important to some cultures. They aren’t frivolities. They are, as you put it, necessary tools for an extremely important task.

      1. avatar GunnyGene says:

        I did not miss his point. I simply disagree with it. That’s still allowed is it not?

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          It is allowed. For instance, I disagree with you as I know that the author’s premise is correct.

        2. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          And now it’s 2 to 1 Gunny. Because you are wrong. In fact, historically, you’re wrong. Do you think people in Japan passed down swords as not just heirlooms but things with names, who held the spirits of their Ancestors, because they believed they were just tools? I can go on, but you see my point. Just because you don’t hold it to be true doesn’t mean it isn’t for others.

        3. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          @ChoseDeath

          But, but…according to President Biden wielding a sword (knife) does not make one an “armed” assailant….therefore, swords good…until he decides they’re not.

        4. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          @Montana, Haha! Ain’t that the unfortunate truth. The Slope seems particularly slippery lately.

        5. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          Yeppers…Tefloned owl snot with a touch of KY added kind of slippery.

        6. avatar drunkEODguy says:

          gotta agree with JWT on this one. While maybe equating it directly to religion in the sense of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc. isn’t quite right in most cases, weapons have traditionally been regarded as central pieces of something like “civic virtue” through the ages and across widely varying human cultures. With only minutes of google-fu:

          “The sabre was in widespread use in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth during the Early Modern period, especially by light cavalry during 17th century. The sabre became widespread in Europe following the Thirty Years’ War and was also adopted by infantry. In particular, it served as one of the symbols of the nobility and aristocracy (szlachta), who considered it to be one of the most important pieces of men’s traditional attire.” – Poland

          “Eligible citizens of the canton or district meet on a certain day in the open air to decide on specific issues. Voting is accomplished by those in favor of a motion raising their hands. Historically, or in Appenzell until the admission of women, the only proof of citizenship necessary for men to enter the voting area was to show their ceremonial sword or Swiss military sidearm (bayonet); this gave proof that you were a freeman allowed to bear arms and to vote.” – Switzerland

          In both ancient Greece as well as Rome, citizenship often was directly tied to military service, and arms and armor were passed down the line of male lineage. Your arms were your ticket and proof of civil rights and suffrage.

      2. avatar Coolbreeze says:

        That may have been the author’s point, but his attempt to equate firearms to religion is misguided and fails. If he thinks that the right to bear arms will be protected from leftists because it is sacred, he’s dead wrong. Leftists want to do away with all rights.

    4. avatar . says:

      Worshipping a Firearm is a bit twisted.

      1. avatar rt66paul says:

        The passing down of weapons and armor(like religious relics) happens because the items are only allowed to be owned and carried by a certain class of people(like priests that “understand” the mysteries that we have to believe in because they say so).
        These items are no more relics than an open end wrench, they are just tools that almost anyone can learn to safely use.

    5. avatar Roymond says:

      Rubbish.

      The rifle that a friend of my father took from a Japanese soldier he’d killed in the Pacific and brought back with him after the war, then passed on to me as an unofficial uncle to unofficial nephew is one heck of a lot more than a tool to accomplish a task — it’s a thing of honor, of affection, of patriotism, and not just for me; my father was honored that this unofficial uncle would pass it to me. So when I look at that rifle, I don’t see a tool, I see history, dedication, love of country, and a heritage handed to me to carry on however I might.

      One may as well say that a grave is just a tool, “nothing more and nothing less” — but if that were so, then people wouldn’t visit the graves of loved ones, or put flowers on them. Yes, a grave is a “tool”, something that gets a job done, but it is much more than a tool. And a gun is a tool, but can be much more than a tool.

      So the author is quite correct: guns can be a matter very much like religion, because of what they mean.

    6. avatar frank speak says:

      don’t think obama…and certainly the progressive left…hold religion in high regard either…

    7. avatar Hon Cho Bai says:

      No Grasshopper, they are not simply tools. Try explaining that to an owner of a work of art in blued steel and walnut by Maurice Ottmar, Al Biesen, Jerry Fisher, John Linebaugh, or one of the other Grandmaster gunsmiths.

  2. avatar GS650G says:

    You know abortion is serious business and we want to impose a 6 month waiting period on it.

    See how that would fly.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Then at the end of the waiting period, you still need permission from the government if you want to follow through with it. Oh, and your name will be added to a registry.

  3. avatar JIM ABRAHAM says:

    Nonsense.

  4. avatar seatex says:

    Well, it’s clear now our votes don’t matter, with upholding a stolen election for the highest office in the country.
    And Biden has readily confessed his desire to take our guns. Texas is already talking secession. We get what we put up with now.

    1. avatar Debbie W. says:

      You people are delusional zombies for Trump. You talk of sedition and treason. Trump lost for us plain and simple. Nothing was stolen. We picked an incompetent crazy person to lead us and our bad choices have come home to roost. Deal with it.
      Biden talks tough but he has bigger things that coming after us on his plate. If he does try it will be an uphill fight and he knows it.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        “Biden talks tough but he has bigger things that coming after us on his plate.”

        You mean like working for China?

        1. avatar Dude says:

          There’s China bragging about funding the Biden Foundation run by Hunter. And here’s more proof for the media to ignore of Joe’s knowledge and participation in it:

          “[P]lease have keys made available for new office mates,” Hunter Biden wrote in the email before listing Joe Biden, his stepmother Jill Biden, his uncle Jim Biden and Gongwen Dong, who he identified as the “emissary” for the chairman of the now-bankrupt Chinese energy conglomerate CEFC.

          Hunter Biden also requested that a sign be made for his office stating “The Biden Foundation” and “Hudson West (CEFC US).”

          https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/11/hunter-joe-biden-cefc-office-mates/

          But Trump’s compromised by Russia! (honk, honk)

      2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

        @Debbie Does not read similar to what you have written before.

        soo Sock Puppet I assume.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Definitely not the real Debbie. The real one always includes a snark against ‘enuf’ at the end of every comment, lol.

          Well, the real ‘enuf’, anyway. He has an impersonator as well.

          As did I, for a while (All Hail). That’s why I finally got a Gravatar to put an end to the nonsense.

      3. avatar Geoff "Trolls, the other white meat" PR says:

        “You people are delusional zombies for Trump.”

        Not the real Deborah.

        You’re incapable of mimicking her ‘style’, and worse, you’re obvious about it… 😉

      4. avatar Ing says:

        Looks to me like the Biden voter known as Enuf is stealing the name of Debbie W.

      5. avatar Roymond says:

        You know who lost the election for Trump? It’s easy: Mitch McConnell. I’ve read several Democrat commentators who are almost gleeful over how McConnell managed to not get another stimulus check sent out before Halloween because in their analysis that would have changed the vote enough that Trump would have won every contested state.

    2. avatar . says:

      The United States of America certainly stopped communist aggression in North Korea and Vietnam didn’t it.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        seem to recall a prosperous country named South Korea…so we’re 1 for 2 in that regard…

      2. avatar Ad Astra says:

        Because scum led by that drunkard ted kennedy and the like blocked the US from holding up its treaty obligations after NV invaded.

  5. avatar Shire-man says:

    They kind of already do look it like religion.
    All wishy-washy, half-assed, and bent to fit the narrative.
    See abortion supporting Catholics and homosexuals for Islam.

  6. avatar Din Djarin says:

    I am a Mandalorian guns are my religion.

    1. avatar William A Walker says:

      This is the way.

      1. avatar enuf says:

        He takes his helmet off for some scenes in the latest episode. He’s adapting to the sneaky shit being an undercover operative for the good guys sometimes requires.

        I always liked Gina Carano, sad to see she’s gained weight. Still a heck of a hand to hand fighter though. She was a hot babe and tough chick in her first spy movie some time back, before all the extra pounds.

        Ming Na Wen isn’t getting much to do but be a stone faced sniper. She’s a very skilled martial artist, but this role now she just stands there casually picking off storm troopers at long range.

        Rosario Dawson, looking real good as a grown up Ahsoka Tano. hoping to see a lot more of her!

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          The only sad thing is that she’s rebel scum.
          Gina gets hotter every episode.

        2. avatar Geoff "Trolls, the other white meat" PR says:

          “I always liked Gina Carano, sad to see she’s gained weight.”

          Fuck off,,,

        3. avatar Dude says:

          Longtime fan. I’ve followed Gina since the days of Strikeforce and EliteXC. She always struggled to make weight in MMA.

        4. avatar Ad Astra says:

          “Sad to see she has gained weight”
          Wow everyday you find a way new way to sound more like like a superficial douche. Besides i’d bet she could wipe the floor with you in the ring not matter what she weighed in at.

  7. avatar GS650G says:

    Nothing in the quoted article suggests guns save lives or deter violence. It’s more of a meme about outsmarting gun owners with acceptance and trying to treat guns as culture. Of course that is a part of it. A big part is self defense, made bigger this year thanks to the democrats decision to unleash the mobs. People didn’t clean out gun stores to go deer hunting after all.

    The left should accept the fact logistically de-gunning the US isn’t possible and will result in bad things happening. They won’t win that fight in the court of public opinion. Sneaking gun bans through laws and taxes will be effective and may cost them Congress.

    Eventually someone is going to have to go house to house and that’s not a job with retirement benefits. Maybe they should just focus on taking from the productive and giving to the non productive.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      You are delusional atheist. The left which is also a theistic will never give up its dream of disarming the civilian population. That is what they do, in every society they’ve ever taken over. And if you had read history you would know that.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Athiest? Hardly. Reader of history, sure. Doesn’t mean we are bound by it.

        1. avatar Victor says:

          I think “atheist” is his pet code-phrase for “people who state something I don’t like”.

    2. avatar jwtaylor says:

      You’ve got it backwards. His article is pro-gun, trying to get anti gunners to understand why guns are so important.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        He left out self defense and focused on culture. And the left doesn’t care about culture they disagree with. An armed society will keep them at bay.

      2. avatar GunnyGene says:

        As old Oog said to old Uug: “Understand this”, as he brained old Uug with a club.

        “In the dimness of the shadows
        Where we hairy heathens warred
        I can taste in thought the lifeblood
        We used teeth before the sword.” (Patton)

      3. avatar Ing says:

        If it’s pro-gun, then please explain this: “The offense is in what is said; not what is planned.”

        That can be true in many situations, and it is at the root of the liberals’ misunderstanding of what the rest of us are all about. From that perspective, fair enough.

        But the anti-gun contingent’s plans *are* offensive, and more so considering that they seem to think that the flaw is not in their plan, but only in their failure (so far) to find the right lies with which to obscure it.

        I admit that I haven’t read the full article, but as it stands here, that statement looks like a validation of the progressive belief that their lust for authority is legitimate, and that they only need to find the right honeyed words to get the rubes to quit resisting.

        1. avatar GS650G says:

          I read it and what I got from it is not really support for gun ownership rather let’s tweak the message and pretend to understand hunting.

      4. avatar frank speak says:

        comes across as another failed attempt from the left to understand something they’re clueless about….we always seem to leave them scratching their heads…..

  8. avatar Dennis Sumner says:

    Always was and always will be nothing but a smokescreen to hide the underlying reticence of lots of folk’s reluctance to prosecute and persecute the miscreants who use guns in the pursuit of their chosen violent paths!

  9. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

    If the democrat traitors (from now on I will refer to them by what they are, communists), steal Georgia it’s over. There aren’t going to be any more elections that mean anything. The communists will own the country.

    The filibuster will be done away with. The southern border wall will be abandoned and/or torn down. The Border crossings will be wide open. Puerto Rico, Guam and DC will be admitted as states which will ensure a communist traitor majority in each house. The coal and gas fracking industries will be shut down. Gasoline taxes will skyrocket with gas back above $5/gallon.

    SCOTUS will be packed with communist judges who will destroy the bill of rights by declaring that laws which infringe on them are in fact constitutional. Churches will be shut down. Babies will be murdered in greater numbers.

    Guns will be seized by the now deputized anti-fa goons, led by Beto. They already have the lists of all of us who purchased our guns legally through background checks. You really didn’t think that the laws requiring them to destroy the records was actually followed, did you?
    By 2022 we will be worse than Venezuela. Pin this to your wall. It’s going to happen.

    1. avatar Ragnar says:

      $5+ a gallon for gas? Not that big of a deal, as all vehicles will be mandated to be electric powered by 2022.

    2. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

      There was a line the old movie Mountain Men;

      “Yeah, that would be AFTER the fight.”

    3. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      You left out that the oil producing states in the south and maybe the ones in the north will secede along with most of the “red” states. The ” blue” states will be friendly to China and other communist countries and they will be invited on our continent. No longer will the commies be on the other side of the ocean.

      1. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

        We tried that once. It didn’t work then. It won’t work now. Here’s why. If the states secede then every citizen of those states who receive Social Security, Medicare, military pensions, etc will have their funds cut off. Unless there is some mechanism for ensuring continuing monetary relief the articles of secession will fail.

        1. avatar Texican says:

          States that secede won’t have Federal taxes anymore. They can use that to pay SS and other pensions. And with more freedom people will have more disposable income and goods and services will go down in price. But it does mean there will have to be a strong deterrent to Federal machinations. And, if some think they’ll lose those fedgov payouts, they are free to move to a less free state. Making that state even more free and conservative.

        2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “Unless there is some mechanism for ensuring continuing monetary relief the articles of secession will fail.”

          The mechanism is called we will cut off their electricity and food will cost them dearly.

          “That’s a nice shiny city you have there, be a shame if it goes dark and cold in winter…”

          All those fresh veggies they like and steaks, chicken, and pork. We’ll have plenty, if they want them, they will *pay*… 😉

        3. avatar jwm says:

          A very real concern and one that not many of the ‘let’s start this cw2’ advocates consider. Splitting or fragmenting a nation that is a majority of over 50 year old, like the US, is a disaster of biblical proportions in the making.

          Splitting the nation is simply not viable. Getting Trump to use the military to corral the traitors that have sold out to china and attempted to over throw the legal .gov is much more viable. A few high profile treason trials and executions from the biden crime family and their supporters will be enough to start a much needed turn around in our country.

          It’s a start.

        4. avatar frank speak says:

          think it will be more like people seceeding from one state to join another….

    4. avatar Anymouse says:

      Even is Georgia falls, there may still be hope. Joe Manchin has said he won’t vote to kill the filibuster, and Feinstein has expressed opposition in the past (which may be why there’s a push to remove her for cognitive decline). If the filibuster stands, the hopes of a permanent Dem totalitarian regime is put off for at least a couple years.

      1. avatar rt66paul says:

        It is not about a Dem totalitarian regime, it is about keeping the 2 party system going with the puppet masters running the whole show. They keep us fighting among ourselves on issues that do not matter to them. They are scared of Trump and Bernie(and any other politician that thinks for themselves or may not follow the party line). They want to know how and why they will vote on the issues they feel they paid for.
        There are many Republicans that are glad to torpedo Trump and allow the Dems power. They do not want him to upset the apple cart the way Teddy Roosevelt did.
        The parties are 2 sides of the same coin, they do not want to replace the coin or use dice instead.

        1. avatar frank speak says:

          so who’s on their hit list besides gun owners?…how about anyone religious…or anyone who disapproves of homosexuals…the anti-abortionists….the cops….capitalists…anti–immigration types….anyone who says anything bad about china… and the whole republican party…..looks like they’ve already gotten rid of Trump…at least for now….

  10. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

    “You might think, “Fine, but progressives don’t want to take away people’s guns. That’s just gun-lobby fearmongering.” But this response misunderstands the conflict. When symbolic values get involved, it’s not about policy disagreement anymore”

    It’s not symbolic. All gun control is an attempt to deprive some portion of the population of some portion of their weapons or weapon accessories in an incremental push designed to eventually and incrementally take all or most of ordinary people’s guns.

    Take universal background checks as an example. The vast majority of criminals buy guns on the black market thereby evading background checks entirely. That will not change if background checks are made universal. The vast majority of spree killers have not had their criminal convictions or mental health dispositions reported to the system by the authorities. That HAS NOT changed despite repeated highly publicized examples. They will still pass universal background checks. A small fraction of them spree killers have no criminal or mental health history to report, and thus they will also pass a universal background check.

    But we have seen in PA that background check denials sweep up a broad array of people with insignificant and ancient legal or mental health encounters that should not be prohibiting but are (mis)interpreted by the state as being prohibiting. These people are disenfranchised from their right, while those who truly present a danger to others simply ignore the system or are even enabled by the very authorities who are supposed to maintain and enforce the law.

    The linked article mentions magazine capacity. WTF does magazine capacity actually matter? If I am not going to harm another person or commit a crime then what does it matter to anyone else if I have 10, 13, 15, 17, or 30 rounds in my weapons magazine? And we see with the mob violence over the summer that you might be facing more than 10 individuals.

    Criminals, on the other hand, will simply ignore the law as they ignore all others. Cops, and military are exempt from the law. That leaves only ordinary citizens at the mercy of cops and criminals.

    We know that the goal is disarmament. We know that all lesser attempts at gun control are part of plan to implement disarmament incrementally. We will not comply.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      ok…you will not comply…but that doesn’t mean they won’t do their best to turn you into a felon or a prohibited person…they want to start…[much like they did in the 90’s] …by making it difficult if not impossible for you to acquire a firearm…then ammunition…only then will they concentrate on disarming you through things like expansive red-flag laws and getting people to rat you out….they’ve got a plan….

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      History is full of examples of compliance with laws written by people with bad intentions. Unfortunately for the left we know what the end game rally is. And they let the mask slip this year all the way.

  11. avatar Ragnar says:

    The strongest, wealthiest and most fanatical religion in the USA is the Democratic Party.

  12. avatar Ron says:

    Well, they don’t respect religion, either…

    Correction, they don’t respect Christianity. They sure love Islam.

    Correction two, they don’t “not respect” it either, they want to outright destroy it.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      The left pisses on Christianity in all forms since no violence comes as a result. Judaism is tolerated since attacking Jews will get a very public response. Islam cuts heads off critics so it’s off limits.

      If Catholics smacked the shit out of people who called their entire religion and faith nasty names they would pipe down for sure. Plenty of bad things happen in all.religious organizations but only certain faiths get dragged through the street. We allowed this to happen through silence.

  13. avatar Bigus Dickus says:

    Or consider a politician’s reassurance that, “Look, we don’t want to take away your right to vote—we just want to make sure all of the voters are appropriately credentialed so there won’t be voter fraud.”

    Just saying, I don’t find this threatening at all, this is how voter registration and validation should be applied. If it were managed this way the shit show we are seeing now would not have happened.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      I sure as hell do. History has shown us how this works, and it never works well for freedom.
      Did you attend public school that taught a national board of education sanctioned “social studies” class? Can you provide evidence of such?
      Can you prove that you understand why your benevolent leaders would place a bond measure on the ballot for your approval and benefit?
      No? Well then you clearly aren’t educated enough to vote.
      That’s how this works.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        But all we’re asking for is proof that you’re a legal citizen that lives within the jurisdiction, and you haven’t died yet. But that’s a bridge too far for the folks that encourage election fraud.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Sure, but that’s not what the article is referring to.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      you walk up…show id…sign in…and vote….what could be simpler?…..maybe using one of those mail-in ballots they tried to send to everybody…and guarantees victory for them…..

  14. avatar Mike Jones says:

    It is clear now with the Supreme Court decision that the system of honest election has completely broken down. When you are opposing a team that cheats and fouls and the referees will not call them on it, then the only solution is to cheat and foul more than them. In the future, if you have the opportunity, destroy or flip any Democrat votes you can. Dispose of and destroy any Democrat campaign materials. Pass the word. It is time now to take the gloves off if you want to keep your firearms and your liberties.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Maybe the republicans should start playing by the democrats rules from now on. Or else they will end up a forgotten party.

  15. avatar MB (the real MB) says:

    Not anything even close, guns are tools, nothing more. They are useful and essential when needed and there is no direct substitute. They can be fun, entertaining, provide food, and also protection from 2 and 4 legged predators. They are a tool, like a can opener, without a can opener, you can still open the can with brute force and using a knife, cleaver or an axe. It will most likely be messy and spill most of the contents of the can all over the floor . A gun will just produce a small hole or 2 (exit hole) with a little fluid leaking out. Guns are just tools.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Sure.
      But what if the tool is required to be a functioning member of society?
      Now it’s more than just a tool.
      That’s the author’s point.

    2. avatar Ron says:

      “A gun will just produce a small hole…”

      Says you. My go to calibers are .308, .303, 12 gauge, .44 mag, and 8mm Mauser.

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      “tools” that empower you…which is why they want them gone….

  16. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    The American atheists have never supported the First Amendment. The first amendment is antithetical to their belief system.

    Are there atheists that support the First Amendment? Very very few.

    What they have done is to pervert the First Amendment just like they perverted the second amendment. By saying that Christians only have First Amendment rights inside a church building. Just as they say the Second Amendment only applies to the National Guard. Not to an individual citizens birth right to Arms.

    Many atheists like to quote President Eisenhower’s what they call “the military industrial complex” speech. But they don’t want you to listen to the entire speech. They only pick out the two sentences that they like.

    President Eisenhower if you listen to the entire speech said that the enemy of the United States was atheistic in nature. He also said in that speech that the academy, education, was being corrupted by federal spending. And the godless Communists have thoroughly infiltrated higher education in the United States.

    They simply don’t believe in the Bill of Rights. They believe they have a right to block a military recruiting center. But they don’t believe you have the right to block an abortion Center.

    They don’t believe you have a right to March publicly carrying guns, where you want to. But they do believe the Klu Klux Klan has the right to March through black neighborhoods while carrying guns. Just as they believe the Ku Klux Klan has the right to go, onto the private property of the black person, and burn a cross on their front lawn.
    Yes I said it. Now go look up the court cases.

    The American atheist has a right to keep and bear arms. Just like everyone else. But they will not fight for the right of non atheists for the same thing.

    Former California Congressman Pete Stark was an out of the closet proud atheist. He is a perfect example. He was anti civil rights down to his core.

    1. avatar Ron says:

      Overall I agree with the sentiment. Atheists often campaign for the removal of anything even slightly religious in public. Even war memorials. They’re goal isn’t about equality, it’s about destruction.

      What’s funny is, though, atheists don’t *dare* criticize Islam. They’re too afraid apparently, either of being blown up, or of being called racist by their own lefty buds.

      If the atheists ever really get their way, they’ll learn the hard way, like Eurabia will. When they’re under the thumb of the local Wahhabi sheik, who takes their money, property, and family members at will.

      1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

        Just so you know, I’m an atheist. Probably further Right than you. Unicorns do exist, is all I’m saying.

      2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Even the honest atheists will admit that the west is Christian. American was founded on Christian principles. its founders were Christian white men. The atheists from the very beginning have been working to re write American history. And erase this fact.

        You have never had to be a member of a church to live in this country. Interesting how the atheists have made an alliance with Muslims. They both hate Christians. And they both hate the 1st amendment. Even going back to the founding of the boy scouts. They attacked them as well. And succeeded in destroying the scouts.

        1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          You really need to start saying “The Atheists” instead of “the atheists.” I didn’t do any of that shit. You sound like a fucking Leftist saying “white people.”

        2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          to ChoseDeath
          You and (a)theists like you, need to stop being cowards and confront other (A)theists. Who are making you look like sh*t. That is your responsibility. Not mine as a (C)hristian or a (c)hristian.

          But what happens is the (A) or the (a) gets the hell out of California, New York, etc, and go to what they have called, “The Bible Belt”. After they have voted for all this F*cked up crap in their Liberal “blue” state. And then they bring their progressive socialism with them.

          Or they are like the atheist Joe Rogan. Who proudly never voted in California. He didn’t care who got elected. But as a rich Libertarian atheist he could move to Texas. And he won’t vote their either. He will do nothing to keep Texas a free state. He won’t give money to people who fight for freedom.

          They have even switch colors. They were proudly “Red” in the 1960’s. They were the ones who first used colors to define states. And they choose “blue”. After the implosion of the USSR. Blue was the original color of freedom. The Left perverts everything they touch.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “And then they bring their progressive socialism with them. ”

          There should be a constitutional amendment that requires people living in blue states must live in a red state for ten years before moving there.

        4. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          You know what Chris, you make an awful lot of assumptions about someone you don’t know. You calling me a coward though?! Fuck you, you preachy piece of shit. You don’t know a goddamn thing about me or what I do. And prejudicial, preachy, holier-than-thou asshats like you are why I quit going to church in the first place. That’ll be the last time I try to talk to you you close minded fuck. 🖕

        5. avatar rt66paul says:

          Our country was founded by educated men. An education back then meant studying the Bible. That does not make them Christian, but they did understand Western, Christian values. Jefferson put together a New Testament(by copy and paste), where any miracles were explained. It was obvious that he did not rely on just faith. George Washington made a point of attending many different churches of different denominations(people had to pay lip service then – he was also a Mason).
          Our country was based on new ideas of the time, since all had a Bible based education, that came out in the vernacular of the time. The fact that they allowed freedom of religion(even non-Christian), tells us that they were not narrow minded people and did not follow (lock step) any one denomination, religion, or lack thereof.

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The fact that they allowed freedom of religion(even non-Christian), tells us that they were not narrow minded people and did not follow (lock step) any one denomination, religion, or lack thereof.”

          Spoiler alert: lengthy reply ahead.

          Because of all the mythology surrounding the second constitution of the United States, it is difficult to hold onto the realities. For instance, many people are under the impression that some provision of the second constitution required all the then existing State constitutions to be changed to conform to the federal compact. There is nothing of the such in the second constitution. To get a grip on this, one must review the history of the nation prior to 1868. In doing so, one comes up against the hard fact that the States did not subjugate themselves to the national government in all matters (there are definite reasons for Amendments 9 and 10).

          Of all the mythology is the idea that the founders intended to remove religious prejudice inside/within the several States. If one looks quite closely at the tangle of words comprising the First Amendment, one finds this statement buried at the beginning of the opening sentence of The First: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”. The term “Congress” did not mean, “The Congress of the United States, and the individual States therein….”.

          The individual and sovereign States had their own ideas about religious freedom at the moment. Recommend reading the following links (all of them, in their entirety) to get an understanding not only of “religious freedom” in the States, but to also come to grips with the nature of the US Constitution at the founding: the sovereign States were the controlling entities of the national government….including even those powers permitted to the national government.

          https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/801/established-churches-in-early-america

          https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel05.html

          https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/americas-true-history-of-religious-tolerance-61312684/

          https://freedomoutpost.com/were-the-united-states-originally-established-christian-at-the-time-they-ratified-the-us-constitution/

          https://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/1/essays/138/establishment-of-religion

        7. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          to ChoseDeath
          These atheists don’t support the bill of rights either. Just like Joe Rogan.
          Many of them moved out of high tax California. And moved to places like Colorado. And wrecked that state. They support making pot legal. But they don’t support civil rights at all.

          https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-20/meet-the-men-marijuana-made-into-millionaires-and-billionaires

          I don’t care if you don’t talk to me. That’s ok. Many folks have become very upset with the things I say. I’m not here for a conversation with them. I’m here to correct the record. and leave information. That anyone can check out for themselves. I’m always open for a conversation with anyone.

          If you go away mad, that’s ok just go away.

        8. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          to rt66paul
          I’ve read the writings of the founders. They were (C) or (c)hristian believers. How strong their faith was I don’t know. But I do know that slavery was something that disturbed them very much. And the hypocrisy of being a slave holder. I also know both Washington and Jefferson wanted to free their slaves. But the colonial laws at the time were against it.

          I don’t remember the numbers, but only one quarter of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, were slave holders. By the time of the signing, most of the northern states had ended slavery. It wasn’t atheism that ended slavery. It was Christianity. The fight for civil rights has always come out of the church. And the synagogue. It never came out of the secular education academies. The church and the synagogue were places where the ethnic people could go to find relief. Especially when they first got off the boat.

          Every religion in the USA had associated civic groups that helped new arrivals. And they built hospitals. Some of the churches even had a gun range as part of the church. But the atheist’s didn’t like a religious based health care system. So they worked to destroy it and the traditional family.

          There are plenty of “pro gun” quotes in the bible. Which is one of many reasons why the atheists don’t like the bible. It’s not about believing in god that they don’t like. They want the civilian population to worship the government.

        9. avatar GS650G says:

          Chris in KY calls anyone he thinks is wrong an atheist. I guess that sounds better than asshole or dipshit.

      3. avatar frank speak says:

        well,..bill maher did…and they jumped all over him for it…watch his movie..it’s worth your time…

    2. avatar Mark says:

      That is some of the most bizarre claptrap about a religion I’ve ever seen.
      Which part of not believing in a deity has anything to do with the National Guard?

    3. avatar Victor says:

      Chris: “Political leftist lobbying group” and “atheist” are not interchangeable.

  17. avatar Gregory Peter DuPont says:

    This Is The Way

  18. avatar enuf says:

    “For Many, Guns are Like a Religion”
    ———————————————————-

    I’ve never met a single person who prays to their guns.

    Guns are tools. They are also fascinating at times as machines, as expressions of human creativity. Sometimes even as art. I can and do say similar things about other machines that humans have created. Steam engines, mechanical clocks, rocket ships and inventions small and monumental in scope.

    The thing about firearms is they are rolled up in what is a natural right of all humans. The right of self defense and community defense. The natural right of protecting ourselves and others creates the need for the tools to do so.

    When a tool is a necessity, you develop a deeper interest in it, it’s unavoidable. Add to that a fascination with and appreciation for the inventiveness and artistic expression of the human mind, and you have several strong natural forces of the mind encouraging the ownership of guns.

    But comparing them to a religion is a step over a line beyond Reason and into the fantasies of those who fail to grasp the reality of our natural drives. Drives that are reinforced by the realities of the world we live in.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Why do you care so much what a Christian believes??? The Bill of Rights is a secular document. Not a religious one. Many christians do believe it has a religious origin. But you don’t have to believe that. You just have to support the Bill of rights. And that is a secular act. Not a religious one.

      Atheists use to say “live and let live”. But they don’t say that anymore. From my observations.

  19. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    I understand the author’s point. However, comparing firearms ownership to a religion is a bit strong. See the first and second of The Lord’s Commandments.

  20. avatar Steve Eisenberg says:

    What is sacred is our right to self-defense, not the means to that end.

    1. avatar Texican says:

      Exactly Steve. My take on his article is that the 2nd Amendment should be hallowed exactly like the 1st Amendment. And the means to enforce it with arms/guns take on more significance than a mere tool. His article is just a little wordy for me and is probably tailored to a particular audience.

  21. avatar Sam I Am says:

    Except for this: “Politicians should talk about guns the way they talk about religion, with appreciation for their distinctive value. Imagine a politician saying, “Look, we don’t want to ban your religion—we just want to curb its most dangerous excesses.” Maybe have a government-determined waiting period to make sure you really want to join. Or consider a politician’s reassurance that, “Look, we don’t want to take away your right to vote—we just want to make sure all of the voters are appropriately credentialed so there won’t be voter fraud.” ““…the article is balderdash, blithering, wandering in the wilderness.

    1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

      I’ll play Sam. What makes you say so amigo? And you can just cut to the quick, you don’t have to engage in verbosity. I’ll ask for elucidation if necessary.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “What makes you say so amigo?”

        Because.

        1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          Perhaps a bit more explanation than that, lol. Although I do applaud your brevity.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Perhaps a bit more explanation than that, lol. Although I do applaud your brevity.”

          Have to admit to being uncertain as to which part of my manuscript you wish clarified (briefly). Be happy to respond.

        3. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          Well, which part do you find to be balderdash, the position itself (Gun Culture is a sacred thing to some, like a religion, and should be treated as such) or the way the argument is presented (you disagree with the example, etc.)? Also, God I love the word “balderdash,” and so infrequently do I encounter it.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Well, which part do you find to be balderdash,…”

          Aaaahhh. Understand.

          Cannot respond in a three sentence paragraph. Do you wish to proceed?

        5. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          I’d love to Sam. At your leisure, my good sir.

  22. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

    “The offense is in what is said; not what is planned.”

    The last sentence of the quoted article says it all for me. More misdirection…like a stage magician who distracts you with his “prattle” while physically doing as he planned..ie. implementing the “trick”. The plan is the ultimate action…that action which actually hurts people…the prattle not so much.

    1. avatar Hush says:

      Seems simple enough. The author makes his points clear enough in the examples given and it is clearly implied that the statements made by the left reflect what they say but don’t reflect what they mean……..whereas POTG say what they mean and mean what they say.
      The left: lies, misleads, misdirects and misrepresents the truth in attempts to gain your approval and support.

  23. avatar Ralph says:

    Guns = Religion? Well, New York and California have banned the right to keep and bear arms, and they are well on their way to banning the free exercise of religion. So while the two are not really comparable, they seem to be equally despised by communists.

  24. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Religion and guns having always gone together. As far as the atheists are concerned. They got both banned as education subjects in the public school system decades ago.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      The atheist’s who run silicon valley don’t support civil rights, guns or the 1st amendment.

    2. avatar Dave says:

      The former never belonged there. Seizing people’s money by force under color of law and using it to fund someone else’s religious activity constitutes dhimmification.

      If you don’t support the establishment clause of 1A with the same fervor you do its free-exercise clause, you’re just as much a part of the problem as these atheists that you prattle about are.

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        There is no such thing as a “separation between church and state”. That is a violation of the Bill Of Rights, that the atheists like to cling to so much. They say government workers can’t conduct religious activities while working for the government. Wrong. The ACLU has never supported the Bill Of Rights. But they do attack it all the time.

        It’s the atheists who have a fear of being left out, or discriminated against, because they didn’t want to attend a Christmas party or a prayer session during the lunch hour. So they force everyone else to give up their 1st amendment right.

        Atheists used that argument to destroy the entire private religious based health care system we had in this country. And forced the Baptist, Lutherans, Catholics, etc to sell off their private hospitals, to the government. It was one of the first wealth transfers, from private to government. It was the atheists who have always supported expanding the power of government.

        It’s laughable to hear an atheist’s say religious displays on government property are illegal. But the KKK or nazi can put up a display. The atheist “love interest”, the ACLU, says the 2A is for government workers, Military/ police only. Not for the civilian population.
        No the atheists have never supported the 1st amendment. A religious display on government property does not establish an official religion of the United States. And its the atheists who have established an alliance with the Muslim religion.

        So no. The atheist’s aren’t neutral on this issue at all. They use to say “live and let live”. They don’t say that anymore.

  25. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    The atheist’s who run silicon valley don’t like other atheists who tell the truth about the Crusades. This video was on Freedom main Radio You Tube channel and had 1 million plus views. Until they took it down.

    My favorite atheists are Stefan Malenoux, Felix Rex and styxhexenhammer666. They are honest and have integrity. And they support the 1st amendment. But silicon valley hates them. Freedom main is what Malenoux created.

    “The Real History of The Crusades” video 1hr 12 min long. from 2015
    https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=10155548666979183

  26. avatar GunnyGene says:

    This entire thread seems to be devolving into some kind of religious argument. And for any who care to research it, religion (of any stripe) has historically, at it’s core, been the source of all human conflict. Which is why I shall bid you all good day.

    1. avatar UpInArms says:

      ” religion (of any stripe) has historically, at it’s core, been the source of all human conflict ”

      Couldn’t disagree more. Religion has often been employed as a motivating excuse, but the real source conflict has always been about controlling resources. And that’s all I’m going to say in this thread. It’s kind of silly.

    2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      You are correct. Religion has been the source of many human conflicts. And atheist war against religion has killed tens of millions in the 20th century. I don’t care if atheist believe. All that is required of them is to support the 1st Amendment and the rest of the Bill of rights. Which is a secular act.

    3. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

      @GunnyGene,

      I respectfully disagree with your assessment.

      An old college prof of mine explained tribal and national conflict very succinctly: He said that all wars are fought for the one thing that is not being made…that one thing that is in finite supply…LAND.

      The excuses people dream up to engage in stealing or forcibly seizing land from their neighbors have been many and varied…with religion being one of the foremost. Honor, politics, race, ethnicity, religion, wealth (or lack thereof), even Manifest Destiny (USA) have all been used, either singly or in combination to justify aggression towards other peoples and countries with the ultimate goal of occupying their land(s).

      War is, essentially, just a big turf battle between rival gangs…with a whole lot of collateral damage and unintended consequences.

      I’ve tried for nigh on to 50 years to prove Dr. M wrong…hasn’t happened…the old traf was right.

  27. avatar =TW= says:

    I’ll just leave this here…
    https://youtu.be/Qe01Bvvzt6U

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Good song. Thanks for the link. But I have to say that the only people who believe that god and guns don’t mix are atheists. The rev Martin Luther King believed in gun ownership. But he was turned down for a carry permit because of his skin color.

  28. avatar Krobi says:

    I see why some see guns as tools, like knives. I collect both. But I get the article’s point as I find both a pleasure and a comfort in my collections like some Catholics find in crucifixes. Each shooter and knife has the memories of what attracted me to it in the 1st place. If it was a gift, who gave it to me. How I felt when I held it the 1st time and when I sighted it in. I hate selling them, but I have. Couldn’t the carrying of it, keeping it close for years, the memories be similar to the pleasure and/or comfort, even feeling more secure be the rough equivalence of religion?

  29. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

    I believe GunnyGene nailed it in the first comment: “What a load of psychobabble.”

    Finally got around to reading Davis’s entire article. What a wishy-washy individual. He states early in the article that the Progressives are losing votes to firearm owners that they could reap if only the Progressives can obfuscate their rhetoric regarding how they portray gunz and the people who own them. In other words: if the Progressives cannot dazzle gun owners with their brilliant ideas and ideals….they should baffle them with persuasive misdirection and lies by pretending to “understand” where gun owners are coming from.

    What a shill…what an apologist…what a maroon!

    Assistant Prof at BYU…goodness, how far that school has fallen from the Conservative values it used to espouse.

  30. avatar Sk Skeeter says:

    This specific article does not argue the point well. The RIGHT to bear arms is equal to and just as important as all the other rights enumerated in the Constitutional Amendments.

    The Constitution does not give you rights, it only enumerates ( not rank ) them. These are natural rights that come from you being born. They cannot be taken away without due process.

    All these arguments about the technology used to express these rights are specious. “The press” at the time of the Constitution’s ratification was that just that, a press i.e. moveable hand carved wooden blocks in a mechanical press that required manual actuation for each copy.

    Why would a honest citizen need an unregistered full auto printer. To put it another way there was no Telegraph, Telephone, Radio, Television, Fax machine, laser printers, ink jet printers, Cellular phones, video cameras, digital cameras, satellite networks or Internet when the Constitution was written. When speech is converted to electrical impulses does it not longer become speech? Are the files on a remote server real yours? These technologies came way after and are a integral part of modern life.

    In keeping with the article, any religion which came after the 1776 is S.O.L. ?Talking to the Mennonites ( Amish ) and Mormons.

    The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is at least equal to the Freedom of Speech. A right, is a right is, a right. Any ‘reasonable’ restriction on one should be able to applied to the other. Eg. Out of staters need a permit to demonstrate or excericse the First Amendment in another state.

    If a first class stamp impedes or government ID impedes the right to vote, licensing fees, no matter how ‘reasonable’ , impede the right to keep and bear arms.

  31. avatar Robert Davis says:

    The right to own firearms, or any other modern efficient means derives from the right to self defense, which in turn derives from the right to life. The right to life is the right to determine the value of your own existence, and that value is a deeply personal matter of conscience. It is not inappropriate to draw parallels to religion.

  32. avatar Sam I Am says:

    “…Jerry Fisher’s works of art in blued steel and walnut.”

    Works of art? Fine. But guns are not religious monuments or icons.

  33. avatar RedFlaggedandBagged says:

    Yeah, Empress KAMALA and gang really respect religion. So they will definitely leave guns alone if you compare guns with religion.

    Because the same leftists who closed down churches over CONvid1984 will show the same respect for your guns.

  34. avatar Pete says:

    Does it really matter?
    We have plenty of politicians that want to ban both guns and religion.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “We have plenty of politicians that want to ban both guns and religion.”

      “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people”.
      – – K. Marx (he was the brother who didn’t speak)

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email