Can Not We All Just Get Along,,,, I Guess Not? #DeletedByAProgressive

By John J. Petrolino III

NRA Coexist T-Shirt
Can not we all just get along,,,, I guess not? #DeletedByAProgressive
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

New Jersey –-(Ammoland.com)- It would not be fair to start pointing fingers or saying things like “those dam liberals“….So I will not.

This is such an interesting dynamic I personally ask myself how is this all possible?  Let me set the stage so I can be afforded a little latitude, though I do not believe I need to be given any such privilege.

Beyond having a day job that entails its own amount of aptitude and challenges, I am also a writer.  I have written for small newspapers, I have written a lot of poetry, two books actually, several articles, reviews, essays, and now Second Amendment related articles.  Look at what I just did there…I used an Oxford comma!  I hate Oxford commas and my brother-in-law Larry and I have discussed at length the misuse of such punctuation with his girlfriend.  I know a little about writing.  Not a ton.  I have lectured and done poetry readings at all kinds of schools, colleges and Universities too.  I have and do walk what I call the line of freedoms.

What would you say the “line of freedoms” is?

It’s fairly simple.  I am a Constitutionalist.  I believe in freedom.  Period.  So the line, for me gets drawn between the First Amendment, the one about talking, writing and religion….and the Second Amendment, the one about guns.  You know, the Second protects the First and is so important its number two on the list.

Actually, it was not initially number Two, there were other Amendments that were not adopted but when The Bill of Rights actually got ratified, the important gun information ended up in the Second Amendment and the important speaking information ended up in the First Amendment.

What have I noticed?  A great many of the people that exercise the First Amendment until their little heart's content, in some cases ad nauseam, have zero respect, what-so-ever for the Second Amendment.  What am I speaking about specifically?  This is where we get to the finger pointing, “Those damned liberals” (should be a musical)!  News flash America, it is not the “liberals” or even the explicit “liberal agenda”, but the progressive one.  Sigh of relief, there are progressives on BOTH sides of the street, however, sorry gang, I have seen more progressive close mindedness in the artistic/writing community than anywhere else I have traveled through or in, in my life.  The people who act like they are the most enlightened and educated seem to only have nine amendments to the Bill of Rights.  Yes, I know, not all – but a great many.

I was listening to a Second Amendment podcast sometime over the last year or so.  The moderator made a very interesting point, or really comment, that I took in and stowed for future reference.  The co-host was talking about social media. You know #MyBoringLife'sEveryDetail – #BitchAndComplainAboutEverything – #BragThroughPicturesAboutVacation – #WoeIsMe.…you get it.  Did I even use those potato labels properly?  I digress, social media.

Like the “Facts of Life”, You take the good, you take the bad, you take em' both and there you have….”  Social media is what can create complete revolutions and can possibly create the destruction of society as a whole.  Information that is not communicated on main stream media has this awesome potential to go viral.  No, that is or can be a good thing…its a computer term, just bear with me!  What the co-host mentioned was a derivation of this idea – so I (the co-host, we'll call him Anthony for argument's sake) – so, Anthony was talking about putting posts on social media that are about the Gun Amendment and he talked about how certain people, we'll call them progressives, would fire back about the evils of guns and fight until the end about their point that all guns are evil, especially the big black ones…the big black ones scare the hell outta people that don't understand them…if that is not bigotry, I do not know what is.  Anthony would give the person the liberty to express themselves on what I would consider “his space” – that is a social media post on his wall, floor, tweeter board, ceiling or whatever the moniker is for “his space.”  Anthony would then respectfully respond – and in my opinion, I am not sure that respectfully has to be applied here, it is “his space”, but none the less, respectfully reply.  There may or may not be a game of preverbal ping pong and then, in the end, the progressive deletes Antony from his or her friend list as a final eff ewe.  Time and time again, Anthony creates a post, makes a point and then gets deleted.  Not the other way around.  To this I said “hm” and digested.

I have since experienced this several times and was SHOCKED.  Okay, I do not agree with you.  You do not agree with me.  Maybe we think that the other is stupid.  Maybe all kinds of things.  Here is the thing…psst, I did not delete you.  That’s right, maybe I'm so idealistic to think that even though we don't agree about everything, we can still #CoExist in this hyper-reality of cyberspace.  I was clearly mistaken, time and time again, as I continue/d to suffer the same fate as Anthony – #DeletedByAProgressive!  Another friend lost!  Yes this continues to happen – I make a post, I get a comment (obnoxious or not), I reply, we dance, and I get deleted by a progressive, usually a writer (sorry Larry, Oxford comma, I know).  What I noticed is that there is an incredible amount of progressives complaining and campaigning left and right about a thing called freedom…always talking about the infringements of one person's or a group of person's individual freedoms.  The minute I talk about my own freedoms or exercising of said freedoms, or someone else doing so, it turns into a mother may I, oh no you can't, you are wrong and some progressive freedom fighter that does not give a hoot about my personal freedoms, tells me or states how wrong the other person(s) is/are at great length.

Now let’s throw every other right out the window, and go toe to toe, single issue voter, I am talking about guns.

Two recent cases come to mind.

Join the NRA
Join the NRA

The first, an April's fools mock up post from the NRA about a membership drive.  I posted about discounted NRA memberships.  Not a bad thing?  I mean, I think I maybe doing several services here 1) Possibly trumping up NRA membership 2) Saving potential members a little money, maybe the right amount to get someone onboard.

Two solid benefits from my sharing of this event.  I got several thumbs ups (okay two lol), and pokes, and peeks, and likes, and whatevers that happen in cyberspace.

And then I get one glaringly negative comment from a writer out of Long Island, NY “Fat chance!”  I simply turned the conversation politely to the Amendment about words and worship and whatnot and how that it may – I'm saying MAY – may be a little hypocritical to kick and scream and exercise the Amendment about praying and talking and things but not appreciate my own personal affinity to the one about big black scary things.

We did not go back and forth, she just deleted me immediately….and it was only after that, that I expressed myself privately to her directly in a manner which would not be gentlemanly.  #DeletedByAProgressive.

The next instance I am going to cite, that is there are others, but not as jarring as these two.  For that matter, there were other situations where full out arguments developed with straight up liberals – not progressive liberals – that did not result in my deletion, just a deletion of our conversation.  We're still friends, Hallelujah!  #CoExistance.  Anyhow, I recently posted a link about an article talking about cars and guns.  That would be the Amendment about the guns and the Amendment – wait a second, there is no right concerning cars – okay so maybe a bad example, but none-the-less, the amendment about guns and the privilege about driving.  The article spun a nice picture about how a progressive liberal, in this case they happen to be presumed liberal, had a picture go viral – in that computer way – about how gun owners constantly draw the parallel that overall cars are generally more dangerous than guns….and the “point” of the picture talked about the regulation of guns in a similar manner to cars.  In many instances of the point, there are already laws on the books that do what is proposed.

In other instances, what is proposed would give “us” (the big black scary gun people) more freedoms.

Hence, my comment on my ‘ceiling’ was:

Treat Guns Like Cars
Treat Guns Like Cars

Then came the comment from the progressive.  Now this fellla was just complaining on his own platform about a woman using religious freedom as her springboard to not issue any marriage licenses to people, particularly because of the resent SCOTUS ruling on gay marriage.

Let the record show the following, before I go forward….I am personally happy for all the people in the homosexual community that can now be legally recognized in all 50 states of the Union.  A great many of people I know personally now are having their rights recognized.  This, IMHO, is a ‘good' thing.

Now, there is a woman, good – bad – or – indifferent that feels she is being put in a situation that violates her rights, right or wrong.  And guess what America, since it is her feeling on her own personal rights, no one can say a damned thing.  She may be right.  She may be wrong.  I think she was recently released from jail, right now (at the time of this event she certainly was in jail).  It does not matter because she expressed something that is actually within her actual rights – the one about writing and praying – and I want to know this, how can the preverbal “you” lash out against anyone that is screaming for justice for their own rights, when “you“, yourself, are a so called freedom fighter, protester of rights, arm chair activist about everything under the sun right up until it disagrees with your own ideology.

Holy shit!  So not everyone's rights actually matter?

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”  Call me a romantic but I kinda feel that we need to take into consideration everyone's rights and how one affects another.  Something I can say for certain about something I learned from the world of literature is best summed up by a quote from Blake, from The Marriage of Heaven and Hell ~ “One law for the lion and ox is oppression.”  Take from that what you will – I can just undeniably state I am appalled by the gross number of academics and intellectuals that may teach or come across this precept and not actually execute it in actuality.  The self realization that no matter how hard we try and no matter how important every single one of our individual liberties are, there will undoubtedly be someone walking away trampled and or defeated – violated.  In the microcosm of social media I do not know who the actual victor is, however I can say what happens #DeletedByAProgressive

So what was his response?  He being a retired teacher, writer and a person who went back to school for his Masters in Creative Writing….his comment to my post and what I consider a dignified (maybe a bit tongue in cheek) response from me is as follows:

2 People Like This
2 People Like This

And then it ended.  He ended all that was us.  He did not think that we could, I dare say #CoExisit.  And in a final utterance, he said:

Right Wing Shit
Right Wing Shit

And then I found myself subject to a progressive hate beyond disagreement.  An ignorance beyond not seeing eye to eye.  A statement that, no, we cannot #CoExisit.  I found myself brutally #DeletedByAProgressive….

Arguments and rhetoric being what they are, what is the message that we should all take away from this situation?  Am I so base to think the statement is that there is nothing for either party to learn from another?  Are the arguments too strong or perhaps too weak?  Why would “these people” feel so compelled to just end it, like that?  Sand undoubtedly gets tossed about the sand box, but why the complete exile from said grounds?  All I can say is that I, personally, am willing to #Coexist.


John Petrolino is a US Merchant Marine Officer, writer, author of Decoding Firearms: An Easy to Read Guide on General Gun Safety & Use and NRA certified pistol, rifle and shotgun instructor living under and working to change New Jersey’s draconian and unconstitutional gun laws. You can find him on the web at www.johnpetrolino.com on twitter at @johnpetrolino and on instagram @jpetrolinoiii

Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jack K Keates
Jack K Keates
4 years ago

Progressives have one thing going for them that conservatism and Christianity do not. Alluded to in several previous e-mails is the ability of progressives to knowingly lie to make and support a position. A simple example would be the president and Hillary Dillary Dock. Our leadership and presumptive leadership are trying to deceive us which is why when a video of their speaking to their real constituents surfaces, they ignore or belittle the reaction. The idea that stands behind the progressive mind is that we are too stupid to govern ourselves. Add the idea that truth changes, because the bible… Read more »

diamondearthday57
diamondearthday57
5 years ago

The one REAL problem I have with communist, socialist, fascist and progressives is this one little fact. And the fact is they will LIE knowingly. They will lie to all that listen and if you call them on the lie they shrug and continue with the lie as soon as the occasion presents itself. The thing that hurts the worst is the protectors of the 1st amendment (the press) will and do pass the lie along as truth, if it suits their agenda and if it does not they simply fail to pass the information along to people that may… Read more »

Eric Weder
Eric Weder
5 years ago

Get this book. You will appreciate the insights and the methods given to deal with these people.

http://www.amazon.com/SJWs-Always-Lie-Taking-Thought-ebook/dp/B014GMBUR4

It’s an e-book now but will be out in paper form soon.

JohnC
JohnC
5 years ago

It seems to me that both sides of the arms issue are closed minded and inflexible. While an important part of our national makeup, guns are not the only issue. It seems that most 2nd amendment defenders care about little else as far as rights. As the article implies many Progressives are against gun ownership. The side of the debate that you are on makes you neither right or wrong. I believe in the right to won guns and I strongly support free speech. But there are and should be limitations to both freedoms. There are certain things that cannot… Read more »

oldshooter
oldshooter
5 years ago
Reply to  JohnC

There are close minded folks on both (all?) sides of every debate. However, while everyone is entitled to hold his own opinion, not all opinions are equally valid; some are simply wrong (for example, those who still believe the world is flat certainly have a right to hold their opinions, but they are objectively wrong). The problem that occurs in arguing with progressives, in my own experience, lies in the fact that they hold many opinions that are incorrect, and can be shown to be so with logical arguments. When this occurs, most of the progressives I have argued with,… Read more »

John Gregory
John Gregory
5 years ago
Reply to  JohnC

(Ahem) “Shall Not Be Infringed” is inflexible. The definition of the Militia is inflexible: It’s found in Federalist Paper #29. The definition of ALL who stand against the Constitutional RKBA BEFORE the Bill of Rights was even written is found in Federalist Paper #46. And for those who say that the Fed Papers have no legal standing, I have only to look at the cover of the original binding of the 89 individual essays into one volume. (Ahem) “The Federalist Papers: A Collection of Essays that Explain the Meaning of the New Constitution.” As the Founders called these essays their… Read more »

MarkPA
MarkPA
5 years ago

As soon as you realize you are communicating with a Progressive, abandon all hope. It’s a total waste of energy. Our forum is with those who are willing to listen. We must learn our lesson from the Progressives. We need to connect on a level of fundamental emotions. The stories of: Carol Bowne, Shaneen Allen; Steffon Josey-Davis should be used to prompt an open-minded audience to begin questioning gun-control laws. Explain the empirical data. Large numbers of home-defense. Notable numbers of street-self-defense. Negligible cases of a permit-holder being convicted of homicide. No social institution is perfect; but the 2A has… Read more »

Gary
Gary
5 years ago

I don’t often reply to these articles, but couldn’t help notice how childish Progressives really are. When they get whipped in debate, they cut and run like a child who don’t get their way. I have engaged Progressive’s many times, resulting in the same actions/response, reality isn’t on their side, they start to lose the debate, resort to childish name calling, then cut and run. I personally think that Progressivism (the new name for Communism, Socialism and Fascism combined in one neat package) is a mental illness, and a serious one that does lead to violence. I usually deal with… Read more »

Janek
Janek
5 years ago

There is nothing as constant as change, but Liberals never change. Not in my lifetime!

JW
JW
5 years ago

If you have an opinion you can change that opinion when you receive additional information that causes you to reevaluate your position But that requires an open mind and a willingness to learn. I am amazed at the number of people who refuse to be willing to learn and grow. But you nor I can make a person unwilling to change become a person willing to consider other options. That is what I think and do not try to change my mind with facts. Remaining in communication with someone like that is a waste of time so having that communication… Read more »

hippybiker
hippybiker
5 years ago

The old adage is…”It just depends on who’s Ox is getting gored.”

E. A. (Al) Schmidt
E. A. (Al) Schmidt
5 years ago
Reply to  hippybiker

Liberals are brain dead, they have been brainwashed to believe that they have no brains & that the Government has all the brains. They have been programed to say what the Government wants them to say. Government needs to remove all weapons from law abiding citizens in order to create a tyrannical Government. Our founding Fathers wear geniuses & knew that if law abiding citizen were to lose there firearms, we would be a tyranny.