User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/19/2014 11:13:54 AM EDT
[#1]
What is with this type of attitude among some gun owners? We should have supported a huge erosion of our rights (HB 1588) because something worse might be enacted? Fuck that, not another inch!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2014 12:17:49 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is with this type of attitude among some gun owners? We should have supported a huge erosion of our rights (HB 1588) because something worse might be enacted? Fuck that, not another inch! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2014 1:46:49 PM EDT
[#3]
What, you think they would have stopped at HB 1588?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2014 3:30:21 PM EDT
[#4]
incrementalism has always been the word of the day for liberals. They sure as shit weren't going to stop.
As far as how I "feel", I feel that tyranny lite is still tyranny, and it all sucks ass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 12:07:08 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is with this type of attitude among some gun owners? We should have supported a huge erosion of our rights (HB 1588) because something worse might be enacted? Fuck that, not another inch! esto
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 3:02:16 AM EDT
[#6]
the NRA encouraged members to shoot down HB1588, which we did, and then left us to hang with virtually zero support on I-594.
all the while, the NRA is spending millions trying to unseat incumbent senators. and then tell us they have "no money" to support us on opposing I-594. the NRA spent $2.3m defeating the mandatory gun locks bill in 1997. where are they now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 3:15:56 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is with this type of attitude among some gun owners? We should have supported a huge erosion of our rights (HB 1588) because something worse might be enacted? Fuck that, not another inch! gun owners are going to have to start being more strategic about this, or lose. always approaching things on black or white terms is not going to be productive. black or white thinking is why mr. rambo and hs "absolute OC rights" crashed the anti-594 rally with his slung AK and tacticool camo, for the pleasure of the pro-594 TV cameras looking for scary guys with guns to plaster all over the news. whatever goodwill was generated by the rally attendees was demolished by mr. rambo on the TV. all because showing off his OC rights was so important. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 5:24:52 AM EDT
[#8]
When, in the past, has compromise worked in our favor? When the other side makes gains they want to push farther, they are not content to stop at one win. Perfect example is the 94 AWB. Bush said he would keep the ban going as long as the Dems would not add to it. The Dems were taken aback at not gaining new ground, they told Bush they wanted to add in new stuff and he refused to renew the ban. Whether it be taxes, tolls or gun laws the Democrats ( in general, there are a few good ones) there is no amount that will satisfy them. They will always want more and think the people need more.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 11:46:46 AM EDT
[#9]
If they won that background check already this round would have been mag limits and more bold registration and something about icky assault something or another. They don't want compromise, they want our guns plain and simple. Background checks just happen to be the theme of this round, makes no difference.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:02:00 PM EDT
[#10]
Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts.
Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:36:23 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
gun owners are going to have to start being more strategic about this, or lose. always approaching things on black or white terms is not going to be productive. black or white thinking is why mr. rambo and hs "absolute OC rights" crashed the anti-594 rally with his slung AK and tacticool camo, for the pleasure of the pro-594 TV cameras looking for scary guys with guns to plaster all over the news. whatever goodwill was generated by the rally attendees was demolished by mr. rambo on the TV. all because showing off his OC rights was so important. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is with this type of attitude among some gun owners? We should have supported a huge erosion of our rights (HB 1588) because something worse might be enacted? Fuck that, not another inch! gun owners are going to have to start being more strategic about this, or lose. always approaching things on black or white terms is not going to be productive. black or white thinking is why mr. rambo and hs "absolute OC rights" crashed the anti-594 rally with his slung AK and tacticool camo, for the pleasure of the pro-594 TV cameras looking for scary guys with guns to plaster all over the news. whatever goodwill was generated by the rally attendees was demolished by mr. rambo on the TV. all because showing off his OC rights was so important. And what should we do about "Mr. Rambo", ostracize him? Abrogate his rights because it doesn't mesh with YOUR agenda, plan or strategy? I don't think it was a wise choice on his part, but it should have been fully expected. It was a rally about fighting back and asserting our willingness to fight for our rights after all. And in terms of strategy, I will not accept yours that basically calls for "measured small defeats" in the hopes of preventing a larger defeat. You are advocating an "Appeasement Doctrine" with the anti-rights crowd, thinking that somehow if we continue to compromise our rights, while they give nothing back, we'll eventually end up with an acceptable status quo? You sir, are a fool. They will continue to push their agenda until they've achieved total victory, which is the complete elimination of private ownership of ALL firearms in the USA. "Peace for our time" mean anything to you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 8:28:49 PM EDT
[#12]
yeah, the "let's pretend we're a bunch of pussies in order to win elections" sure did work great with McCain and Romney. I fail to understand why the "only way we can win" is to be as passive as possible...while the statists regularly win while being as aggressive as possible. Clearly taking a strong position / being aggressive is not the critical factor. I'm fine with OC guy. If a free person legally carrying a firearm in absolute compliance with the law is an untenable position, then whatever you are trying to "win" is basically rearranging the chairs on the titanic.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 11:03:34 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yeah, the "let's pretend we're a bunch of pussies in order to win elections" sure did work great with McCain and Romney. I fail to understand why the "only way we can win" is to be as passive as possible...while the statists regularly win while being as aggressive as possible. Clearly taking a strong position / being aggressive is not the critical factor. I'm fine with OC guy. If a free person legally carrying a firearm in absolute compliance with the law is an untenable position, then whatever you are trying to "win" is basically rearranging the chairs on the titanic. Because the avg voter who really doesn't care about guns or gun rights gets to vote, Having some Asshat OC retard crash the No 594 rally was O help for our cause. People are generally turned off by obnoxious asshatery..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 12:11:03 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because the avg voter who really doesn't care about guns or gun rights gets to vote, Having some Asshat OC retard crash the No 594 rally was O help for our cause. People are generally turned off by obnoxious asshatery..... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
yeah, the "let's pretend we're a bunch of pussies in order to win elections" sure did work great with McCain and Romney. I fail to understand why the "only way we can win" is to be as passive as possible...while the statists regularly win while being as aggressive as possible. Clearly taking a strong position / being aggressive is not the critical factor. I'm fine with OC guy. If a free person legally carrying a firearm in absolute compliance with the law is an untenable position, then whatever you are trying to "win" is basically rearranging the chairs on the titanic. Because the avg voter who really doesn't care about guns or gun rights gets to vote, Having some Asshat OC retard crash the No 594 rally was O help for our cause. People are generally turned off by obnoxious asshatery..... The average voter is a deadbrain that follows whatever the feel-good crowd tells them to. And, even if it was not enough there's the crooked way votes are "counted" here in WA. So, despite I do not OC I do not attack one who does since he/she are legally doing so. The other side cares less about even following the law. For them the ends justify the means no matter what. Do a search and you wil easily find many of them even advocating not following laws they do not consider reasonable (for them). So, keep in mind that there's no reasoning with those people. With them is their way or highway. Do not try the high ground with them because they do not know it or would follow if they did. There are no ethics or high moral grounds with them. Enough is enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 12:36:41 AM EDT
[#15]
no reason there can't be differing opinions on how to win the 2A wars. IMO, refusing to exercise a Right is not the way to maintain it, and even if it was it's fundamentally self-defeating. It'd be a little bit like fighting for religious liberty by renouncing God and refusing to adopt any religion or spirituality. Many others disagree. It's all good. We're all voting the same way on election day. On this issue anyway...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2014 2:09:34 AM EDT
[#16]
then you all better kick out ever slack jawed fetal alcohol syndrome beer gut having mush mouth in this crowd too because the media is only too happy to interview them. The game is rigged clowns, they are not going to tell our side of the story no matter what we do. The rallies are FOR US, not for them. Get your head in the game, the world's on fire and you fucks are bitching about fashion.
Secondly, if you couldn't be bothered to attend then shut your cock holster, you're a handmaiden to the undoing of this nation. Some of us have been fighting this shit since before the AWB.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2014 11:02:56 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts. Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2014 2:24:10 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the state constitution needs to be amended such that initiative only pass if they receive votes from more than 50 percent of eligible voters. Make them tougher to pass, so they cannot be used to tyrannize minority constituents. Call it "common-sense" initiative reform. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts. Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. Like Tim Eyman's successful I-960, which required a 2/3 majority in the legislature to increase taxes, the state rulers will simply conjure up a ruling to declare the initiative unconstitutional, and continue on with business as usual. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 2:06:58 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts. Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. In reality the best thing to do is what tangeant just mentioned above. Beat them at their own game. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2014 4:37:42 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In reality the best thing to do is what tangeant just mentioned above. Beat them at their own game. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts. Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. In reality the best thing to do is what tangeant just mentioned above. Beat them at their own game. The 591/594 both-passing scenario appears to confirm this...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2014 7:01:02 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In reality the best thing to do is what tangeant just mentioned above. Beat them at their own game. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts. Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. In reality the best thing to do is what tangeant just mentioned above. Beat them at their own game. this is my point. gun owners need to start thinking about this strategically rather than black/white, all or nothing. we do not have a convincing argument against background checks. not one which will resonate with voters. and especially not one which can survive an onslaught of millions of dollars. this initiative process is a new tactic, one which cannot be defeated head on, like we are fighting now. it just can't work. the only way to turn this in our favor is to get ahead of the curve, with initiatives of our own. concede background checks, but tack on a bunch of things in our favor. to oppose our bill, bloomberg would have to be arguing against background checks, which doesn't resonate with voters. then eliminate registries, which leaves Bloomberg in the unenviable position of arguing in favor of registries - something which does NOT resonate with voters at all. we constrain the bill to purely cover private sales, and get exemptions for CCW/CPL holders, etc. etc. this all or nothing approach by gun owners and the NRA is going to screw us long term. we need to start conceding the battles that cannot be won, and lose them in our favor. we can either write the legislation ourselves, or let the opposition do so. this is not appeasement. this is strategy. do you really think eliminating a gun registry is appeasement? no, for the gun grabbers it undoes their hard work, creates even more difficult barriers for them. it is probably already too late for Nevada and Arizona. How many states falling to this crap will it take before gun owners realize what's up? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2014 10:35:30 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this is my point. gun owners need to start thinking about this strategically rather than black/white, all or nothing. we do not have a convincing argument against background checks. not one which will resonate with voters. and especially not one which can survive an onslaught of millions of dollars. this initiative process is a new tactic, one which cannot be defeated head on, like we are fighting now. it just can't work. the only way to turn this in our favor is to get ahead of the curve, with initiatives of our own. concede background checks, but tack on a bunch of things in our favor. to oppose our bill, bloomberg would have to be arguing against background checks, which doesn't resonate with voters. then eliminate registries, which leaves Bloomberg in the unenviable position of arguing in favor of registries - something which does NOT resonate with voters at all. we constrain the bill to purely cover private sales, and get exemptions for CCW/CPL holders, etc. etc. this all or nothing approach by gun owners and the NRA is going to screw us long term. we need to start conceding the battles that cannot be won, and lose them in our favor. we can either write the legislation ourselves, or let the opposition do so. this is not appeasement. this is strategy. do you really think eliminating a gun registry is appeasement? no, for the gun grabbers it undoes their hard work, creates even more difficult barriers for them. it is probably already too late for Nevada and Arizona. How many states falling to this crap will it take before gun owners realize what's up? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can't really blame the NRA for not wanting to waste money on NO 594 because the odds are pretty good it will pass with just a simple majority required . The fight will be in the Courts. Expect a Assault Weapon Ban Initiative next cycle if 594 passes, that has been the Anti-gunners plans to take it to the State level with WA and CO as the litmus test with our stupid Citizen Initiatives . The best thing we can do is beat them at their own game with pro-gun initiatives better thought out than 591. Hell even an Initiative to end Initiatives would be a better cause to push back with. In reality the best thing to do is what tangeant just mentioned above. Beat them at their own game. this is my point. gun owners need to start thinking about this strategically rather than black/white, all or nothing. we do not have a convincing argument against background checks. not one which will resonate with voters. and especially not one which can survive an onslaught of millions of dollars. this initiative process is a new tactic, one which cannot be defeated head on, like we are fighting now. it just can't work. the only way to turn this in our favor is to get ahead of the curve, with initiatives of our own. concede background checks, but tack on a bunch of things in our favor. to oppose our bill, bloomberg would have to be arguing against background checks, which doesn't resonate with voters. then eliminate registries, which leaves Bloomberg in the unenviable position of arguing in favor of registries - something which does NOT resonate with voters at all. we constrain the bill to purely cover private sales, and get exemptions for CCW/CPL holders, etc. etc. this all or nothing approach by gun owners and the NRA is going to screw us long term. we need to start conceding the battles that cannot be won, and lose them in our favor. we can either write the legislation ourselves, or let the opposition do so. this is not appeasement. this is strategy. do you really think eliminating a gun registry is appeasement? no, for the gun grabbers it undoes their hard work, creates even more difficult barriers for them. it is probably already too late for Nevada and Arizona. How many states falling to this crap will it take before gun owners realize what's up? That might work. Or WA will hemorrhage gun owners to free states and y'all will be left fighting the leftists over your bolt action rifles with the fudds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 12:10:10 AM EDT
[#23]
All your "strategy" will do is cause us to lose our rights a a slower rate. Every time a new law passes we lose more of our right. There is no true compromise as we are gaining nothing. Look how much we've lost in the last hundred years. The only wins if you call them that have been to overturn a couple laws in DC and IL.
Your strategy is like letting a thief steal only couple hundred at a time from you bank account instead of all at once. What is the difference in the end? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 12:41:58 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All your "strategy" will do is cause us to lose our rights a a slower rate. Every time a new law passes we lose more of our right. There is no true compromise as we are gaining nothing. Look how much we've lost in the last hundred years. The only wins if you call them that have been to overturn a couple laws in DC and IL. Your strategy is like letting a thief steal only couple hundred at a time from you bank account instead of all at once. What is the difference in the end? and your strategy will cause us to lose them all, overnight. do you really prefer that? seriously? just so you can make a principled last stand? we have a reasonable chance to win some arguments, like registration, magazine limits, "AWB", etc. but background checks IS NOT ONE OF THEM. better to lose background check in favor of other gains, like eliminating a gun registry, gaining reciprocity, right to carry in your vehicle on private property, etc. we can set it up so we gain ground vs the gun grabbers, make it a net loss for them! or you can lose background checks AND EVERYTHING ELSE ON TOP OF THAT! you will be left with ZERO! is that really what you want? fight the battles you can win. a strategic loss is better than a complete loss. the initiative process and billionaire backing make this battle completely different. we need to co-opt the anti's message and use it against them. traditional strategies based on lobbying legislators won't work. we need to put the antis in the uncomfortable position of arguing against a background check bill. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 9:08:03 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
and your strategy will cause us to lose them all, overnight. do you really prefer that? seriously? just so you can make a principled last stand? we have a reasonable chance to win some arguments, like registration, magazine limits, "AWB", etc. but background checks IS NOT ONE OF THEM. better to lose background check in favor of other gains, like eliminating a gun registry, gaining reciprocity, right to carry in your vehicle on private property, etc. we can set it up so we gain ground vs the gun grabbers, make it a net loss for them! or you can lose background checks AND EVERYTHING ELSE ON TOP OF THAT! you will be left with ZERO! is that really what you want? fight the battles you can win. a strategic loss is better than a complete loss. the initiative process and billionaire backing make this battle completely different. we need to co-opt the anti's message and use it against them. traditional strategies based on lobbying legislators won't work. we need to put the antis in the uncomfortable position of arguing against a background check bill. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All your "strategy" will do is cause us to lose our rights a a slower rate. Every time a new law passes we lose more of our right. There is no true compromise as we are gaining nothing. Look how much we've lost in the last hundred years. The only wins if you call them that have been to overturn a couple laws in DC and IL. Your strategy is like letting a thief steal only couple hundred at a time from you bank account instead of all at once. What is the difference in the end? and your strategy will cause us to lose them all, overnight. do you really prefer that? seriously? just so you can make a principled last stand? we have a reasonable chance to win some arguments, like registration, magazine limits, "AWB", etc. but background checks IS NOT ONE OF THEM. better to lose background check in favor of other gains, like eliminating a gun registry, gaining reciprocity, right to carry in your vehicle on private property, etc. we can set it up so we gain ground vs the gun grabbers, make it a net loss for them! or you can lose background checks AND EVERYTHING ELSE ON TOP OF THAT! you will be left with ZERO! is that really what you want? fight the battles you can win. a strategic loss is better than a complete loss. the initiative process and billionaire backing make this battle completely different. we need to co-opt the anti's message and use it against them. traditional strategies based on lobbying legislators won't work. we need to put the antis in the uncomfortable position of arguing against a background check bill. Initiatives can be overturned if considered unconstitutional. I remember California overturning the anti-gay marriage referendum not long ago. So, I'm not sure whether this is a lost war. The point is we always concede. Enough is enough. If these freaks want background check we must get a lot more in return for that, mostly knowing this is a piece of garbage legislation that does absolutely nothing for what it's advertised. Just test it with the latest school shooting and that suicidal guy who killed the daughter and granddaughter in the process of killing itself. Anyone with an IQ over 40 sees that but we know the lemmings cannot. Therefore, we do not need to concede anything. We just need to craft better initiatives and use that same deceitful tactics of the bloombergs and its cronies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 12:43:23 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
and your strategy will cause us to lose them all, overnight. do you really prefer that? seriously? just so you can make a principled last stand? we have a reasonable chance to win some arguments, like registration, magazine limits, "AWB", etc. but background checks IS NOT ONE OF THEM. better to lose background check in favor of other gains, like eliminating a gun registry, gaining reciprocity, right to carry in your vehicle on private property, etc. we can set it up so we gain ground vs the gun grabbers, make it a net loss for them! or you can lose background checks AND EVERYTHING ELSE ON TOP OF THAT! you will be left with ZERO! is that really what you want? fight the battles you can win. a strategic loss is better than a complete loss. the initiative process and billionaire backing make this battle completely different. we need to co-opt the anti's message and use it against them. traditional strategies based on lobbying legislators won't work. we need to put the antis in the uncomfortable position of arguing against a background check bill. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All your "strategy" will do is cause us to lose our rights a a slower rate. Every time a new law passes we lose more of our right. There is no true compromise as we are gaining nothing. Look how much we've lost in the last hundred years. The only wins if you call them that have been to overturn a couple laws in DC and IL. Your strategy is like letting a thief steal only couple hundred at a time from you bank account instead of all at once. What is the difference in the end? and your strategy will cause us to lose them all, overnight. do you really prefer that? seriously? just so you can make a principled last stand? we have a reasonable chance to win some arguments, like registration, magazine limits, "AWB", etc. but background checks IS NOT ONE OF THEM. better to lose background check in favor of other gains, like eliminating a gun registry, gaining reciprocity, right to carry in your vehicle on private property, etc. we can set it up so we gain ground vs the gun grabbers, make it a net loss for them! or you can lose background checks AND EVERYTHING ELSE ON TOP OF THAT! you will be left with ZERO! is that really what you want? fight the battles you can win. a strategic loss is better than a complete loss. the initiative process and billionaire backing make this battle completely different. we need to co-opt the anti's message and use it against them. traditional strategies based on lobbying legislators won't work. we need to put the antis in the uncomfortable position of arguing against a background check bill. I hate to break it to you, but the same tactics being used by the antis, which you think will work if turned against the antis, will backfire. Try and run an initiative that legislates UBCs, under the condition of also loosening specific restrictions on SBS, MGs, CC licensing, etc. They would promote your UBC bill and simply fail to mention any of the "compromise" elements of it, just like they fail to mention any of the bullshit that is included in the 18 pages of hogwash that is 594. When they win, they will gleefully take the UBCs you so eagerly gave them, and will immediately challenge the rest in court (hey, how come your initiative covers multiple issues?), throwing away any gains that we have made. WA state is already so close to being a true 2A adherent state, there is virtually nothing that we can gain by playing this kind of game with the antis. We have nothing to gain and everything to lose. These people have the support of many state politicians and media corporations. It has already been made clear that we can count on the NRA for nothing. Try and play legal chess with these groups, you will lose. The best we can do on the initiative process is to beat what they put out by sheer strength of voter count. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 1:23:11 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
These people have the support of many state politicians and media corporations. It has already been made clear that we can count on the NRA for nothing. Try and play legal chess with these groups, you will lose. The best we can do on the initiative process is to beat what they put out by sheer strength of voter count. there is no way to win the initiative process head on when you're facing a biased AG, biased media, and billionare backers. you can't get the votes if the votes are not there to be had. your strategy is being tried now, in nevada and arizona. unless the NRA massively outspends bloomberg, it will LOSE. i just don't see the NRA taking this seriously at all. so you are left with grassroots. no chance. i've been following the nevada gun groups and they are pretty much just sitting on their hands doing nothing! the only other strategy would be to defeat it at the signature gathering stage, but again that would require massive funding from the NRA. not going to happen. again. we either learn to use the initiative process ourselves, or continue to have it used against us. taking initiatives head on, without massive financial backing, WILL NOT WORK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 2:42:12 PM EDT
[#28]
What you're saying is that every time the anti-2A crowd comes out with a new attack, we have to give up something, and hope that they let us get something else in return - which they have been proven to avoid at all costs. Never works, never has. Otherwise, you would have a long list of compromise bills to present to us. You don't, and you never will.
Either we fight them "all or nothing," or nothing is what we will get, regardless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 3:45:49 PM EDT
[#29]
no, we need to take the moral high ground on the argument. that's the only way we are going to de-fang Bloomberg.
we need to co-opt the message and present ourselves as the good guys. being confrontational, absolutist with "come and take them" and "from my cold dead fingers" is not the good guys. you are not going to get voters on your side that way. Quoted:
Either we fight them "all or nothing," or nothing is what we will get, regardless. again: fighting "all or nothing" on a battle you CANNOT WIN is completely irrational. you are fighting not only the gun grabbers, but a good number of gun owners who favor background checks. better to take a strategic loss on an unwinnable battle, and conserve your resources for battles you have a reasonable chance of winning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 4:44:56 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:being confrontational, absolutist with "come and take them" and "from my cold dead fingers" is not the good guys. you are not going to get voters on your side that way. Worked for the Founders, but I guess they aren't the 'good guys' anymore...didn't compromise with the King enough... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 4:47:12 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Worked for the Founders, but I guess they aren't the 'good guys' anymore...didn't compromise with the King enough... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:being confrontational, absolutist with "come and take them" and "from my cold dead fingers" is not the good guys. you are not going to get voters on your side that way. Worked for the Founders, but I guess they aren't the 'good guys' anymore...didn't compromise with the King enough... the founders already had wide support. we don't. also, it wasn't an argument about guns. read the declaration of independence for the list of grievances. the initiative process is the new game. gun owners must adapt, or lose. how many states must completely fall to draconian bills before gun owners wake up and realize all-or-nothing won't work? that we must take the offensive with our own initiatives or else? are you willing to sacrifice Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, Minnesota, Texas, the rest of the US on pure principle? there are only two realistic ways to fight the initiatives: 1) massively outspend them. ain't gonna happen with bloomy backing them. 2) outmaneuver them with our own initiatives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:16:02 PM EDT
[#32]
Not that I supported HB1588 or anything but...
What makes any of you think that the gun grabbers will stop at I-495? It's going to pass, there are too many dummycunts in "Seattle" for it not to pass. There will be the day when gun owners will wish that I-491 had been a 100% background initiative only and not the ball of crap that I-495 is. I predict that I-495 will be held up in the court system until it's unfucked, but in the end it will pass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2014 1:17:45 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that I supported HB1588 or anything but... What makes any of you think that the gun grabbers will stop at I-495? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that I supported HB1588 or anything but... What makes any of you think that the gun grabbers will stop at I-495? nothing. they won't. the question is, what do we do for the next round. continue with the same strategy, take the next initiative head on? against biased press, biased attorney general, biased public, and deep pockets? Quoted:
It's going to pass, there are too many dummycunts in "Seattle" for it not to pass. There will be the day when gun owners will wish that I-491 had been a 100% background initiative only and not the ball of crap that I-495 is. EXACTLY!!!! losing the background check argument while gaining a bunch of others is NOT a "compromise", if the alternative is to lose the background check argument AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND GET NOT ONE SINGLE THING IN RETURN! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2014 8:40:11 PM EDT
[#34]
If we use your strategy we're going to lose our rights anyway, we'll just give them up a little more slowly. What's the point? Might as well just get the raping over with instead.
You keep giving up something, and eventually you'll have nothing left to give. It won't seem as bad because it will have been taken in small chunks that made it more palatable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 1:56:07 AM EDT
[#35]
Indeed. We've been giving up critical aspects of or gun rights for the last 80 years. Another 80 of this compromising and we won't be allowed to own anything but a single shot 22lr...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 2:55:21 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Indeed. We've been giving up critical aspects of or gun rights for the last 80 years. Another 80 of this compromising and we won't be allowed to own anything but a single shot 22lr... The end game for them is NO private ownership. Bani thinks we can negotiate with them, and is willing to concede big chunks in an attempt to regain small pieces, that they'll eventually renege on those "concessions" with the usual "common sense" mantra. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 9:19:34 AM EDT
[#37]
Best analogy for these critters are cockroaches and other pests. Do they ever give-up invading our clean homes? No, they could live outside and we would let them be if they stayed there. However, like any parasite, they have to keep trying to invade, disturb and infect.
It's the same with those progressive-liberals. Those critters will not stop and, therefore we will have to always fight to keep them outside. There's no negotiation as we also cannot negotiate with the critters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 2:33:04 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The end game for them is NO private ownership. Bani thinks we can negotiate with them, and is willing to concede big chunks in an attempt to regain small pieces, that they'll eventually renege on those "concessions" with the usual "common sense" mantra. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Indeed. We've been giving up critical aspects of or gun rights for the last 80 years. Another 80 of this compromising and we won't be allowed to own anything but a single shot 22lr... The end game for them is NO private ownership. Bani thinks we can negotiate with them, and is willing to concede big chunks in an attempt to regain small pieces, that they'll eventually renege on those "concessions" with the usual "common sense" mantra. this is not negotiating. we aren't "negotiating" anything. you don't seem to understand what a grave threat this initiative process is. you think we can just continue business as usual, expect the NRA to lobby in congress and state legislatures, influence representtives, and block unfavorable bills. it won't work anymore. we must change our tactics, change our strategy, or LOSE ALL OUR RIGHTS AT ONCE! this same thing is happening RIGHT NOW in arizona. the local gun rights groups and the NRA are thinking exactly like you, just oppose the initiative head on and it will get defeated. they aren't doing jack squat right now. arizona, nevada, then idaho, montana and texas are gonna get raped. how many states will we have to lose before you realize what's up? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 7:37:47 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this is not negotiating. we aren't "negotiating" anything. Quote HistoryQuoted:
this is not negotiating. we aren't "negotiating" anything. This is not negotiating? originally posted by bani
the only way to turn this in our favor is to get ahead of the curve, with initiatives of our own. concede background checks, but tack on a bunch of things in our favor. That is ABSOLUTELY negotiating! I don't think you understand what the word means, probably just like the guy who comes to my door trying to sell me something and doesn't think he is "Soliciting" when I point out my "No Soliciting" sign. 
We have a position (Go Fuck Yourself and your I-594 initiative) and they have a position (Ramrod through I-594.) We are at odds in our two positions. Any concession gun rights supporters come up with, like the one you posted above on Page 1, is NEGOTIATING! Quoted:
how many states will we have to lose before you realize what's up? What is your solution to that? It appears to be give ground constantly and hope that we gain it back somewhere else. "Give them UBC, but try to get MGs back". That is a very small-minded strategy frankly. You are already conceding DEFEAT, and just hoping to salvage a small, meaningless victory. Fuck that. The only way we are going to win is to have a winning attitude, it sure as shit doesn't start with "let's concede......" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 10:46:16 PM EDT
[#40]
so when round 2 comes up next election cycle, another draconian initiative. you just say take it head on again? against the bloomy infinitely deep pockets juggernaut?
just watch, arizona is gonna get completely raped too. because of everyone with your 1-dimensional thinking. this isn't the old legislative game. the NRA can't save your ass by lobbying representatives. keep playing that way and you will LOSE EVERYTHING. initiatives are gonna kick our ass, repeatedly. unless we take the offensive. we have to use initiatives as a weapon also. being on the receiving end of these initiatives is bringing a knife to a gunfight. again: you can write the initiative, or you can have a draconian one rammed down your throat. you choose draconian. i don't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 11:30:13 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so when round 2 comes up next election cycle, another draconian initiative. you just say take it head on again? against the bloomy infinitely deep pockets juggernaut? just watch, arizona is gonna get completely raped too. because of everyone with your 1-dimensional thinking. this isn't the old legislative game. the NRA can't save your ass by lobbying representatives. keep playing that way and you will LOSE EVERYTHING. initiatives are gonna kick our ass, repeatedly. unless we take the offensive. we have to use initiatives as a weapon also. being on the receiving end of these initiatives is bringing a knife to a gunfight. again: you can write the initiative, or you can have a draconian one rammed down your throat. you choose draconian. i don't. How about lying through the teeth like the progressive-liberals do but making it "feel good" to the sheeple? Instead of saying that it's to protect gun-rights, which the sheeple fears and "feel" as evil, just say it's "common sense", "save lives", "for the children". Use the same buzzwords and make-up some even more "full of feelings". Make-up numbers and facts also, the sheeple does not care and the other side cannot process it anyway. There are no moral grounds with those people. It's past beyond guns now. Those hypocritical parasites and all their bullshit such as political correctness, affirmative acts, mediocrities, promiscuities and corruption will keep pushing around everywhere. There are no more concessions. Give one inch they want 100 miles. Enough is enough. 
http://youtu.be/1aJCrMDl-H4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 12:17:51 AM EDT
[#42]
Bani, since you are convinced that electoral victories are impossible, and that a state level AWB is next, I would LOVE to hear what your "get out in front of the issue with our own initiative!" Plan is. Just which of our "assault weapons" are you looking to ban before the antis do?! And what do you plan on "getting back in return"?
The problem with your political theory is that you believe " we have no chance of winning " AND 'we can come to a negotiated settlement'. My dad has a saying, "negotiations are for losers!" If the other side can't lose, why should they conceed jack shit? Their final objective is a total ban on everything. If they "can't lose", what we do... Either your strategy or any other, is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 1:42:24 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bani, since you are convinced that electoral victories are impossible, and that a state level AWB is next, I would LOVE to hear what your "get out in front of the issue with our own initiative!" Plan is. Just which of our "assault weapons" are you looking to ban before the antis do?! And what do you plan on "getting back in return"?
The problem with your political theory is that you believe " we have no chance of winning " AND 'we can come to a negotiated settlement'. My dad has a saying, "negotiations are for losers!" If the other side can't lose, why should they conceed jack shit? Their final objective is a total ban on everything. If they "can't lose", what we do... Either your strategy or any other, is irrelevant. background checks cannot be fought, the support just isn't there. this isn't just WA state. arizona is next, as is every other state with a voter initiative process. e.g. about half the US. AWB, magazine limits can probably be fought, as can mandatory storage / regstration / licensing. those don't have nearly the same wide support as background checks. fight the battles you can win. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 1:46:53 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If we use your strategy we're going to lose our rights anyway, we'll just give them up a little more slowly. What's the point? Might as well just get the raping over with instead. You keep giving up something, and eventually you'll have nothing left to give. It won't seem as bad because it will have been taken in small chunks that made it more palatable. No dude, not at all. You're a smart guy, you know that most laws passed by the legislature or by initiative are flawed. I would have rather had neither initiative show up on the ballot. If I had to choose I would rather have an initiative that was one page that said "All gun buyers must have a background check done anytime a gun is bought in the state of Washington" and not the pile of shit that I-594 is. The state compromised on the original "Assault Weapons Ban", only withing that past few years did "we" get around to fixing the Silencer and SBS parts of the law. I do think that once Aunt Mary is arrested and hauled off to jail for not registering her late husbands firearms or when Timmy and Billy are out hunting deer and they are stopped by the game police to check tags and the game police find that Billy is using cousin Jimmy's 30-06 and is arrested some aspects of I-594 might come under scrutiny. If you think that I-591 is going to pass.... We are our worst enemies. Everyone of us should be a life member of the NRA, every one of us should be a member of the WAC and the SAF. Instead we bitch about the WAC and about the SAF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 1:49:43 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about lying through the teeth like the progressive-liberals do but making it "feel good" to the sheeple? Instead of saying that it's to protect gun-rights, which the sheeple fears and "feel" as evil, just say it's "common sense", "save lives", "for the children". Use the same buzzwords and make-up some even more "full of feelings". Make-up numbers and facts also, the sheeple does not care and the other side cannot process it anyway. There are no moral grounds with those people. Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about lying through the teeth like the progressive-liberals do but making it "feel good" to the sheeple? Instead of saying that it's to protect gun-rights, which the sheeple fears and "feel" as evil, just say it's "common sense", "save lives", "for the children". Use the same buzzwords and make-up some even more "full of feelings". Make-up numbers and facts also, the sheeple does not care and the other side cannot process it anyway. There are no moral grounds with those people. welcome to politics. take the moral high ground, continue to get carpet bombed into the ground by the dirty tricks. or you can hijack their tactics and survive. Quoted:
It's past beyond guns now. Those hypocritical parasites and all their bullshit such as political correctness, affirmative acts, mediocrities, promiscuities and corruption will keep pushing around everywhere. There are no more concessions. Give one inch they want 100 miles. Enough is enough.  http://youtu.be/1aJCrMDl-H4
http://youtu.be/1aJCrMDl-H4 the real world isn't star trek. this is political warfare. your idealism is going to get you destroyed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 1:10:22 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
welcome to politics. take the moral high ground, continue to get carpet bombed into the ground by the dirty tricks. or you can hijack their tactics and survive. the real world isn't star trek. this is political warfare. your idealism is going to get you destroyed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How about lying through the teeth like the progressive-liberals do but making it "feel good" to the sheeple? Instead of saying that it's to protect gun-rights, which the sheeple fears and "feel" as evil, just say it's "common sense", "save lives", "for the children". Use the same buzzwords and make-up some even more "full of feelings". Make-up numbers and facts also, the sheeple does not care and the other side cannot process it anyway. There are no moral grounds with those people. welcome to politics. take the moral high ground, continue to get carpet bombed into the ground by the dirty tricks. or you can hijack their tactics and survive. Quoted:
It's past beyond guns now. Those hypocritical parasites and all their bullshit such as political correctness, affirmative acts, mediocrities, promiscuities and corruption will keep pushing around everywhere. There are no more concessions. Give one inch they want 100 miles. Enough is enough. http://youtu.be/1aJCrMDl-H4
http://youtu.be/1aJCrMDl-H4 the real world isn't star trek. this is political warfare. your idealism is going to get you destroyed. One does not have to wonder much why honest and high-moral people seldom go to politics, which attracts mostly scum, isn't it?
Yes, the world is not Star Trek. However, that scene describes this situation quite well, doesn't it? The Borg (which describe the progressive-liberals quite well - almost perfectly) keep advancing on all fronts. Normal people with good moral values left keep receding and the two characters are having a discussion where one keeps trying to convince the other, who had enough, to give-up "just a little bit more and fight somewhere else". Nothing is lost while not really lost. How many battles, considered lost before even started, were won because some did not give up? And how many times the tides were turned? It's the same here. We did not lose anything. If it's lies, deceit and corruption those scum want give it to them. Many times more. Make them wish they never started it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 1:43:06 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: this is political warfare. your idealism is going to get you destroyed. Logical fallacy. The antis are rabidly ideological, and they can't lose. Some pro 2A people are ideological, and some are bed wetters, and we can't win? That makes zero sense. Being ideological clearly isn't a factor. Just because you're ideological doesn't mean you can't leverage incrementalism. That's what they left does. They want a total ban. So, one year you ban assault weapons. Next year you ban Saturday night specials, next year you can HP bullets, and on and on. It's entirely ideological, and us checking off THEIR boxes actually hastens or demise. All they will do in response is speed up their timeline. If you really think the antis will be sitting in their war rooms crying out, "OH NO! The pro gun people got to background checks before we did! That's it, we're toast! The gig is up!" You clearly don't understand them. Whatever little pro-gun elements you think you carved out they will quickly eliminate, meanwhile their agenda will march on. Giving the left "some" background checks would be less effective than giving Hitler some of Czechoslovakia. More to the point, you still haven't answered the fundamental question. You want to give away gun transfer rights. OK, that will sate the left for about 5 minutes. What are you going to give away next? You said we have to stay ahead of the antis, so I want to know, with specificity, what you plan to "get ahead" with next? You said if 594 passes, awb will be next. OK. We've got 2 years until the awb initiative is on the ballot. GO. Give us your grand plan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 10:19:15 PM EDT
[#48]
We need to start an initiative that makes it illegal for signature gatherers for initiatives to be paid. It must be 100% voluntary with 0 compensation.
The days of having signature gatherers at every store would disappear.... along with the passage of all these shitty initiatives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:19:46 AM EDT
[#49]
I think what they fail to realize in the end is when you make people outlaws by fiat, some will embrace that and truly be outlaws when they had no plans or intentions to be previously. I recall stories from Canadians I know about how the penalty for unregistered semi autos was the same as unregistered machine guns, hence when the semi auto bans and registration schemes came into being in Canada, everyone with unpapered semis just made them into MGs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2014 1:12:36 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:More to the point, you still haven't answered the fundamental question. You want to give away gun transfer rights. Quote HistoryQuoted:More to the point, you still haven't answered the fundamental question. You want to give away gun transfer rights. you STILL don't get it. you're going to lose your transfer rights anyway. period. there is NOTHING you can do about it. the only difference is how draconian the law is that does it. NV is next, and their bill is EVEN WORSE! write the bill yourself, or get bullshit rammed down your throat. you chose bullshit for NV, that's what they are going to get too. as well as every other state with an initiative process. just watch. Quoted:OK, that will sate the left for about 5 minutes. What are you going to give away next? You said we have to stay ahead of the antis, so I want to know, with specificity, what you plan to "get ahead" with next?
You said if 594 passes, awb will be next. OK. We've got 2 years until the awb initiative is on the ballot. GO. Give us your grand plan. you STILL don't get it. it isn't about "sate the left". it is about selling feelgood bills to the public that "solve" a perceived "problem". the majority of voters just look at the title of the bill and vote based on that. shut off the left's sales pitch by getting there first with a competing product. this is marketing, pure and simple. awb doesn't have the broad support that background checks do. there's a reasonable chance to fight it head on but it will require the NRA to get involved. mandatory storage, that is the one we will have to get ahead of. or get saddled with another draconian law. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
