PDA

View Full Version : At what point?


glockman19
04-20-2010, 1:59 PM
with AB 962, AB 1810, AB 1934, safe handgun list, Assult weapon definitions, hi-cap magazines, along with all the other draconian unconstitutional laws governing our right to keep and bear arms...

At what point do we say:

I no longer acknowledge your authority?

ripcurlksm
04-20-2010, 2:12 PM
In either order, I do whatever Bweise and Hoffmang say

bwiese
04-20-2010, 2:22 PM
with AB 962, AB 1810, AB 1934, safe handgun list, Assult weapon definitions, hi-cap magazines, along with all the other draconian unconstitutional laws governing our right to keep and bear arms...

At what point do we say:

I no longer acknowledge your authority?

Bold step.

I think it's best to stay out of jail and retain gunrights.

MLK & civil rights leaders did not burn down Bull Connors home. They stayed in their bus seats and walked down the sidewalk and ordered Cokes at diners.

Sinixstar
04-20-2010, 2:25 PM
Clearly this is a liberal plant to make us look bad..

we all know gun owners would absolutely never consider an uprising against the government. We all love love love us some government. mmmmhmmm.

berto
04-20-2010, 2:27 PM
with AB 962, AB 1810, AB 1934, safe handgun list, Assult weapon definitions, hi-cap magazines, along with all the other draconian unconstitutional laws governing our right to keep and bear arms...

At what point do we say:

I no longer acknowledge your authority?

We're winning in court though it will take longer than we wish. No reason to go to prison when patience will be rewarded.

glockman19
04-20-2010, 2:38 PM
Bold step.

I think it's best to stay out of jail and retain gunrights.

MLK & civil rights leaders did not burn down Bull Connors home. They stayed in their bus seats and walked down the sidewalk and ordered Cokes at diners.

no one wants to go to jail or lose their gun rights but...what can we do to preserve our "Inalieable Rights"?

Is there No line we will allow then to cross before we say enough is enough?

As an example... The medicinal marijuana movement was born out of apathy for existing laws. There were many who have and still do not acknowledge the law and I think it will become legal and taxed come Nov.

glockman19
04-20-2010, 2:50 PM
Clearly this is a liberal plant to make us look bad..

we all know gun owners would absolutely never consider an uprising against the government. We all love love love us some government. mmmmhmmm.

Socially liberal, fiscally conservative.

I never said anything about an uprising or any violence. I'm advocating non-compliance of laws like AB 1934, 962, and 1810. I will not buy ammo that is "registered" to me and if a friend or relative wants 100 rounds I'll give it to them (AB962). I will not register my long guns or shotguns (AB1810). I will carry when I feel the need (1934).

No violence...no uprising. Just no acknowledement of laws that violate my "inalieable Rights" as upheld by the SCOTUS.

BluNorthern
04-20-2010, 2:54 PM
We're winning in court though it will take longer than we wish. No reason to go to prison when patience will be rewarded.
Winning what?! Our legislators and the vast majority of gun owners across the country are laughing at us when they aren't too disgusted to even take us seriously. Glockman is right, non-compliance is definitely an option, and an expression of our individual rights.

glockman19
04-20-2010, 2:59 PM
Bold step.

I think it's best to stay out of jail and retain gunrights.

MLK & civil rights leaders did not burn down Bull Connors home. They stayed in their bus seats and walked down the sidewalk and ordered Cokes at diners.

I never said to burn down anyting. I also didn't and did not advocate violence.

"MLK & civil rights leaders did not burn down Bull Connors home. They stayed in their bus seats and walked down the sidewalk and ordered Cokes at diners."

ok how do we do this with the 2A and other issues of overlegislation?

Robidouxs
04-20-2010, 3:08 PM
Winning what?! Our legislators and the vast majority of gun owners across the country are laughing at us when they aren't too disgusted to even take us seriously. Glockman is right, non-compliance is definitely an option, and an expression of our individual rights.

For my undergraduate degree I was in Illinois for four years, I was born and raised in the Bay Area. I wanted to get out of the state and see a different part of the US, not the East Coast. It was during that time period that I learned to what extent it meant to be from California (the cultural and political background). I gathered from many individuals over the years that I met in Illinois that they wanted to move to California, but none had ever been to the state. I was met always met with questions as to why I would leave California to be out in the Midwest. The few that I had met that actually been to the state, meaning they had been there longer than 1 week for vacation, found the state to be fraught with numerous issues. I can agree with you that everyone else laughs about CA, at least those who are not under the trance of this inflated image of the state, about issues which extend far beyond the 2nd Amendment.

BluNorthern
04-20-2010, 3:13 PM
Bold step.

I think it's best to stay out of jail and retain gunrights.

MLK & civil rights leaders did not burn down Bull Connors home. They stayed in their bus seats and walked down the sidewalk and ordered Cokes at diners.
They chose to break the laws as they stood at that time in our history to attempt and eventually gain their rights as citizens. In the same vein, do we dismantle our little AR buttons and slap in a 30 rd mag at the shooting range, tuck our pistols into our belts and go shopping with the wife and kids at Walmart? Do we stand up and risk it, like MLK and his followers did?

BluNorthern
04-20-2010, 3:19 PM
Robidouxs, just moved back here after 24 years in Idaho, I also wanted to experience something different. I know exactly what you mean, though I never met anyone up there that expressed a desire to move to California.

berto
04-20-2010, 3:45 PM
Winning what?! Our legislators and the vast majority of gun owners across the country are laughing at us when they aren't too disgusted to even take us seriously. Glockman is right, non-compliance is definitely an option, and an expression of our individual rights.

Heller, McDonald soon, and then the fruit that follows. Look at where we were even 5 years ago and compare to today.

When are you going to refuse compliance and risk arrest and to what end? Getting tossed in jail for the sake of getting tossed in jail is folly. Getting tossed in jail as part of a broader strategy to take down bad law is something else but now isn't the time.

Or flex by obeying the law and expressing your individual rights and have it blow back a la UOC.

unusedusername
04-20-2010, 3:46 PM
They chose to break the laws as they stood at that time in our history to attempt and eventually gain their rights as citizens. In the same vein, do we dismantle our little AR buttons and slap in a 30 rd mag at the shooting range, tuck our pistols into our belts and go shopping with the wife and kids at Walmart? Do we stand up and risk it, like MLK and his followers did?

Even the good Dr. King did not run out and ignore laws willy nilly, he also used the court system carefully, waiting for the "right" case.

From wikipedia (because I'm too lazy to find the real source)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.

In March 1955, a fifteen-year-old school girl, Claudette Colvin, refused to give up her bus seat to a white man in compliance with the Jim Crow laws. King was on the committee from the Birmingham African-American community that looked into the case; Edgar Nixon and Clifford Durr decided to wait for a better case to pursue.[32] On December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat.[33] The Montgomery Bus Boycott, urged and planned by Nixon and led by King, soon followed.[34] The boycott lasted for 385 days,[35] and the situation became so tense that King's house was bombed.[36] King was arrested during this campaign, which ended with a United States District Court ruling in Browder v. Gayle that ended racial segregation on all Montgomery public buses.[37]

M. D. Van Norman
04-20-2010, 4:27 PM
I strongly suspect that non-compliance is already rampant, but most people wont brag about it in public forums.

nobody_special
04-20-2010, 4:28 PM
Bold step.

I think it's best to stay out of jail and retain gunrights.

MLK & civil rights leaders did not burn down Bull Connors home. They stayed in their bus seats and walked down the sidewalk and ordered Cokes at diners.

True, however the Black Panthers took a different approach. One could regard it as a "carrot and stick" arrangement.

I'm not sure that this would be a good idea for firearms rights, but I do think you're ignoring some history with your response.

BluNorthern
04-20-2010, 4:35 PM
Heller, McDonald soon, and then the fruit that follows. Look at where we were even 5 years ago and compare to today.

When are you going to refuse compliance and risk arrest and to what end? Getting tossed in jail for the sake of getting tossed in jail is folly. Getting tossed in jail as part of a broader strategy to take down bad law is something else but now isn't the time.

Or flex by obeying the law and expressing your individual rights and have it blow back a la UOC.
I was attempting to draw some kind of parallel between MLK and his 'civil disobedience' to what extent (by hypothetical example) gun owners here might also try a similar method as brought up by an earlier poster. Guess I didn't get it across very well. I'm not advocating breaking a law for the sake of breaking a law, but I will not put myself or my loved ones at risk to comply with a law that limits my ability to protect us because of a bunch of legislators forcing their private agendas on me. I live in a fairly scary part of the state, and the low lifes that would do us harm have no regard for mine or even their own lives. I wish I could share your optimism, but regardless of what happens in the rest of the country regarding gun rights, California continues to get left farther behind, in my opinion.

twotap
04-20-2010, 4:48 PM
It has worked for the pot smokers and the gay rights people. I do not see why it would not work for the gun movment.Besides the state is broke, they are letting prisoners out due to budget and over crowding. It only makes a very few wet their pants to see someone carry(or not). Non compliance does make some sense. At this point in time it couldn't hurt.To keep on fighting in court seems to give only a crumb back and then more restrictions or just the same old rewriten one appears again and again and again.And they laugh at us and really do not take us serious at all .So why should we comply ?

berto
04-20-2010, 5:03 PM
I was attempting to draw some kind of parallel between MLK and his 'civil disobedience' to what extent (by hypothetical example) gun owners here might also try a similar method as brought up by an earlier poster. Guess I didn't get it across very well. I'm not advocating breaking a law for the sake of breaking a law, but I will not put myself or my loved ones at risk to comply with a law that limits my ability to protect us because of a bunch of legislators forcing their private agendas on me. I live in a fairly scary part of the state, and the low lifes that would do us harm have no regard for mine or even their own lives. I wish I could share your optimism, but regardless of what happens in the rest of the country regarding gun rights, California continues to get left farther behind, in my opinion.

We all do what we feel we need to do.

Civil disobedience in the south was organized and part of a bigger strategy that included the courts. Running an AR with a 30 round mag and no bullet button isn't civil disobedience, it's felony stupid and risks far more than a few nights in jail.

UOC is in your face activism and has so far not turned out well vis a vis legislation or public opinion.

Outreach efforts are being worked on here by knowledgable and dedicated people. They need our help. Showing up is a big part of our fight.

I understand your pessimism anout CA but McDonald will bear fruit here and it will be sooner rather than later. We're starting from the last row but we're catching up. Waiting for news, court victories, etc. is dull but our patience will be rewarded.

vantec08
04-20-2010, 5:07 PM
Dang right they want you to violate the nonsense laws - - -- - they want REVENUE.

MP301
04-20-2010, 5:55 PM
I vote stay out of jail. Step away from the testosterone!