PDA

View Full Version : AB144 Open carry month. Starts tomorrow.


CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 7:58 PM
Hey first time poster here my friend sent me a email and I made a video in response to the AB144 bill. I will be open carrying along with him. Hope you all join in the fun of open carry month. Lets beat back a bad law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe73jv3Ab-s

dantodd
05-31-2011, 8:06 PM
MORE big open carry events on the eve of this bill becoming law will not beat the bill back but will actually increase the likelihood of it being signed into law.

Cokebottle
05-31-2011, 8:08 PM
MORE big open carry events on the eve of this bill becoming law will not beat the bill back but will actually increase the likelihood of it being signed into law.
+1

And without the proper education and warnings, can be a very dangerous thing to publicize.

I hope everyone participating has at least $20k in the bank, and is willing to potentially be a prohibited person for 10 years.

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:11 PM
MORE big open carry events on the eve of this bill becoming law will not beat the bill back but will actually increase the likelihood of it being signed into law.

I disagree I think exposing people to firearms and quelling the fear of the public will help our case. I would prefer both methods of carry to be 100% legal. We need to let people know we are not the problem and treating gun owners with such high levels of scrutiny is not right. People are holding us to a higher standard then police and it is unfair. Most of us are better trained in the use of firearms then the police ever will be. The idea that banning open carry will prevent a mass shooting or a open carry advocate will rob some one is absolutely preposterous. This bill is BS and needs to be killed and we need to do everything we can to kill it.

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:12 PM
+1

And without the proper education and warnings, can be a very dangerous thing to publicize.

I hope everyone participating has at least $20k in the bank, and is willing to potentially be a prohibited person for 10 years.

Most open carry people know the law. I will make a link to the open carry site for more info for the newbies.

Cokebottle
05-31-2011, 8:13 PM
This bill is BS and needs to be killed and we need to do everything we can to kill it.
Agreed... but posting it on Youtube and getting a hundred people arrested for carrying in a school zone that they didn't realize was there is not the way to do it.

Are you and your friend going to provide legal defense for the people who answer your call to arms?

Public opinion does not matter to DeLeon and the other people pushing this bill.

hoffmang
05-31-2011, 8:15 PM
I disagree I think exposing people to firearms and quelling the fear of the public will help our case.

In 48 states, open carry caused no legislative reaction. Here in California, unloaded open carrying is moving the legislature to ban the practice.

Extra open carrying will give supporters of AB-144 more ammunition to get the bill passed and signed.

Please don't make it harder to potentially stop the bill.

-Gene

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:20 PM
In 48 states, open carry caused no legislative reaction. Here in California, unloaded open carrying is moving the legislature to ban the practice.

Extra open carrying will give supporters of AB-144 more ammunition to get the bill passed and signed.

Please don't make it harder to potentially stop the bill.

-Gene

How are we making it harder to stop this by carrying? So basically all we can do is get mad call our reps and sit on our hands? If they ban this I am going to open carry swords. I will start a open carry sword movement.

CitaDeL
05-31-2011, 8:25 PM
Please don't make it harder to potentially stop the bill.

You mean that the passage of AB144 isnt 100% assured?

And that there are machinations behind the scenes that have designs to spoil the legislation before it bears fruit as law?

Here I go reading between the lines that are between the lines...;)

Its like interpreting for Lassie.

Arf, arf!

What is it Lassie? Timmy has fallen into the well?

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:28 PM
You mean that the passage of AB144 isnt 100% assured?

And that there are machinations behind the scenes that have designs to spoil the legislation before it bears fruit as law?

Here I go reading between the lines that are between the lines...;)

Its like interpreting for Lassie.

Arf, arf!

What is it Lassie? Timmy has fallen into the well?

You sir win a free internet you made me laugh.

Kestryll
05-31-2011, 8:30 PM
Both the video and the 'flier' shown in it are using my Copyrighted logo and Trademarked name without my permission, consent or approval.

Having verified with the others whose logos you are using, SAF and the Pink Pistols, those logos are being used also without permission or consent.

The 'flier' shown as well as the video are both examples or Copyright Infringement and Violation of Trademark. I suggest that they be removed immediately so as to avoid any necessary legal action being taken.

epilepticninja
05-31-2011, 8:34 PM
I just got back from Phoenix. I saw a couple of people open loaded carrying in public places there, and no one was tripping at all. wtf is wrong with our state when people loose their mind at the sign of an unloaded openly carried firearm?

Baconator
05-31-2011, 8:35 PM
Both the video and the 'flier' shown in it are using my Copyrighted logo and Trademarked name without my permission, consent or approval.

Having verified with the others whose logos you are using, SAF and the Pink Pistols, those logos are being used also without permission or consent.

The 'flier' shown as well as the video are both examples or Copyright Infringement and Violation of Trademark. I suggest that they be removed immediately so as to avoid any necessary legal action being taken.

Kes bout to whip somebody ***!

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:40 PM
Both the video and the 'flier' shown in it are using my Copyrighted logo and Trademarked name without my permission, consent or approval.

Having verified with the others whose logos you are using, SAF and the Pink Pistols, those logos are being used also without permission or consent.

The 'flier' shown as well as the video are both examples or Copyright Infringement and Violation of Trademark. I suggest that they be removed immediately so as to avoid any necessary legal action being taken.

I believe this falls under fair use.

Cokebottle
05-31-2011, 8:42 PM
Begs the question.... which member's sockpuppet are you?

First post tonight after posting your video, yet logos and images are used in the video that would only be sought after to be used by someone deeply involved with or at least very fond of Calguns.

Kestryll
05-31-2011, 8:43 PM
I believe this falls under fair use.

You are wrong.

The Calguns logo and name are registered Copyrights and Trademarks as I suspect are the logos for SAF and the Pink Pistols.

Not to mention I just noticed your video displays the Trademarked and Copyrighted logo of the CRPA.
As a sitting Director of the CRPA Board I think I'd have heard if we were going to support or advocate this or lend our name and logo to it.

Librarian
05-31-2011, 8:43 PM
I believe this falls under fair use.

Not when the copyright holder says "no".

Read up on "fair use" - follow the links in this thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=363956

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:45 PM
Not when the copyright holder says "no".

Read up on "fair use" - follow the links in this thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=363956

Hrmm alrighty I will re-up a version with them cut out.

Kestryll
05-31-2011, 8:45 PM
Begs the question.... which member's sockpuppet are you?

First post tonight after posting your video, yet logos and images are used in the video that would only be sought after to be used by someone deeply involved with or at least very fond of Calguns.

Well this account does share a singular and unique IP address with another account...

hoffmang
05-31-2011, 8:47 PM
You mean that the passage of AB144 isnt 100% assured?

There's a chance that it will not become law, but pushing the issue right now and until the bill either passes or fails is just unwise.

And for everyone who knee jerks that I'm anti-OC, I was LOCing a whole lot over the weekend in public but in a state where that doesn't cause this reaction..

-Gene

Kestryll
05-31-2011, 8:48 PM
Hrmm alrighty I will re-up a version with them cut out.

That would be without the logos of:
Calguns.net
The Second Amendment Foundation
The Pink Pistols
The California Rifle and Pistol Association

As I mentioned, it has been verified with the holders of these Trademarks and Copyrights that they are being used on the 'flier' and video WITHOUT permission or Consent.

In addition as one of the holders of those Copyrights and Trademarks I expect any printed material with my name and logo on it to be reclaimed if distributed and all to be destroyed.

goober
05-31-2011, 8:50 PM
Both the video and the 'flier' shown in it are using my Copyrighted logo and Trademarked name without my permission, consent or approval.

Having verified with the others whose logos you are using, SAF and the Pink Pistols, those logos are being used also without permission or consent.

The 'flier' shown as well as the video are both examples or Copyright Infringement and Violation of Trademark. I suggest that they be removed immediately so as to avoid any necessary legal action being taken.

wow.
EXTREMELY bad form to use the official logos of important, respected, well-known groups/institutions without first getting their permission and endorsement.
can't say i'm too surprised, its likely the same naivete & hubris that leads you to think organized open carry actions and events will somehow help defeat AB144 and improve 2A conditions in CA.

wash
05-31-2011, 8:52 PM
How are we making it harder to stop this by carrying? So basically all we can do is get mad call our reps and sit on our hands? If they ban this I am going to open carry swords. I will start a open carry sword movement.
Go for it, open carry of swords is perfectly legal, I don't even think you have to worry about school zones (school grounds are probably off limits).

If you need a sword to borrow, let me know.

Just don't be version 2.0 of the Black Panthers marching on the Capitol with guns (and getting LOC banned).

CitaDeL
05-31-2011, 8:52 PM
Just saw the video and flyer.

It is not 'fair use' as it implies endorsement of the message. Even if there were no message, the poster is not an agent of the groups represented and isn't authorized to throw logos out there as if they were.

I am reminded of the quote- "When you absolutely have to sue every M-F-r in the room..." When you start using their stuff without permission, prepare for litigation, because they will deliver...

blazeaglory
05-31-2011, 8:54 PM
pwned!

dantodd
05-31-2011, 8:56 PM
I just got back from Phoenix. I saw a couple of people open loaded carrying in public places there, and no one was tripping at all. wtf is wrong with our state when people loose their mind at the sign of an unloaded openly carried firearm?

There is a lot "wrong" with CA and guns when compared to AZ. Additionally, we are not dealing with all of CA. While I have zero specific knowledge it would seem that there are very targeted messages being sent out to help keep this bill from becoming law. Getting a bunch of press pictures of people open carrying in urban areas may either cost us allies that we need or put so much political pressure on allies that they are unable to act to our benefit.

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 8:57 PM
That would be without the logos of:
Calguns.net
The Second Amendment Foundation
The Pink Pistols
The California Rifle and Pistol Association

As I mentioned, it has been verified with the holders of these Trademarks and Copyrights that they are being used on the 'flier' and video WITHOUT permission or Consent.

In addition as one of the holders of those Copyrights and Trademarks I expect any printed material with my name and logo on it to be reclaimed if distributed and all to be destroyed.

We only made like 10 its just a small group of us. We know the laws about guns not about copy right. BRB Taking care of business. I just wanted to do something fun and positive. Now I have to read up on my copy right laws as well lmao.

Cokebottle
05-31-2011, 9:03 PM
We only made like 10 its just a small group of us. We know the laws about guns not about copy right. BRB Taking care of business. I just wanted to do something fun and positive. Now I have to read up on my copy right laws as well lmao.
Copyright law in a nutshell: If you don't own it, you can't use it for something intended for public distribution.

"Fair use" would be if you were to make a big blue plywood cutout of the Calguns logo and hang it in your game room (not your public bar)....

...unless Kest tells you to take it down.
Owner's desires trump fair use.

OleCuss
05-31-2011, 9:03 PM
I'm still trying to understand the logic. It was open carry events/demonstrations which fueled the move to ban UOC last year and this year. But somehow throwing more fuel on the fire is going to put it out? Not likely.

I sometimes wonder if the UOC demonstrators have Brady bunch infiltrators. I then convince myself that they don't, but it would explain behavior that the Bradys/LCAV/etc. couldn't pay enough to generate.

CGF managed to kill the UOC ban last year (not sure last year's author knows that yet), but I'm not sure they can do it this year.

I am increasingly starting to regret the fact that CGF managed to kill it last year since the UOC demonstrators seem determined to do whatever it takes to get the ban passed. At least we'd have gotten some good out of it given the beneficial provisions for CCW in last years bill. . . But still, bad law should be opposed - and it was and is bad law when it violates your 1st Amendment right to free speech.

Cokebottle
05-31-2011, 9:06 PM
I am increasingly starting to regret the fact that CGF managed to kill it last year since the UOC demonstrators seem determined to do whatever it takes to get the ban passed. At least we'd have gotten some good out of it given the beneficial provisions for CCW in last years bill. . . But still, bad law should be opposed - and it was and is bad law.
As has been mentioned before.

"How does a Californian shoot himself in the foot with an unloaded gun?


UOC."

Kestryll
05-31-2011, 9:06 PM
We only made like 10 its just a small group of us. We know the laws about guns not about copy right. BRB Taking care of business. I just wanted to do something fun and positive. Now I have to read up on my copy right laws as well lmao.

I understand very much about wanting to do something and to take positive action, unfortunately on this field there are a LOT of things that have to be researched and understood before engaging.

I'm going to be stern about this in a thread and as long as we can agree on removal that's about where it ends.

If this were involving an anti-gun group I can guarantee they'd be going for blood and money and the first notice you'd get is from their Attorneys.

For my part, I'm saying this and being as stern as I am because I LIKE to see people willing to stand up and get involved but I don't like to see them do so in a manner that gets them in trouble.
Better to to catch a sharp tone here on a gun forum and learn than to get wrapped up by someone who doesn't share the same basic belief in 2A who would want to do harm.


Get involved.
Get active.
Use that energy.

But first pay attention to those who have already trod those first few miles and learn how to be involved, active and energized the right way and the safe way.

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 9:13 PM
Copyright law in a nutshell: If you don't own it, you can't use it for something intended for public distribution.

"Fair use" would be if you were to make a big blue plywood cutout of the Calguns logo and hang it in your game room (not your public bar)....

...unless Kest tells you to take it down.
Owner's desires trump fair use.

Damn college professor. She fed us LIES she said you can use what ever you want so long as you don't profit from anything. Guess that was a half truth. Where I went wrong was guilt by association. They were not part of this event and don't want to be associated with it and I never asked if they wanted to be.

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 9:15 PM
I understand very much about wanting to do something and to take positive action, unfortunately on this field there are a LOT of things that have to be researched and understood before engaging.

I'm going to be stern about this in a thread and as long as we can agree on removal that's about where it ends.

If this were involving an anti-gun group I can guarantee they'd be going for blood and money and the first notice you'd get is from their Attorneys.

For my part, I'm saying this and being as stern as I am because I LIKE to see people willing to stand up and get involved but I don't like to see them do so in a manner that gets them in trouble.
Better to to catch a sharp tone here on a gun forum and learn than to get wrapped up by someone who doesn't share the same basic belief in 2A who would want to do harm.


Get involved.
Get active.
Use that energy.

But first pay attention to those who have already trod those first few miles and learn how to be involved, active and energized the right way and the safe way.

Thanks so much for the advice. I will take it to heart. I will dig through the old threads and see what people did before to make things more effective in the future and do things the right and safe way so I don't get canned.

Cokebottle
05-31-2011, 9:19 PM
Damn college professor. She fed us LIES she said you can use what ever you want so long as you don't profit from anything. Guess that was a half truth.
The problem is that "profit" is not always defined as "money"
"Goodwill" is a tangible asset and factors into the value of a company's net worth.
So, in terms of "support" or "goodwill", the videos and flyers were indeed attempts at "profit" as a CPA would define it.
Where I went wrong was guilt by association. They were not part of this event and don't want to be associated with it and I never asked if they wanted to be.
Bingo.

707electrician
05-31-2011, 9:25 PM
In 48 states, open carry caused no legislative reaction. Here in California, unloaded open carrying is moving the legislature to ban the practice.

Extra open carrying will give supporters of AB-144 more ammunition to get the bill passed and signed.

Please don't make it harder to potentially stop the bill.

-Gene

Why even try to stop this bill if we are going to tell people not to exercise the right anyway. We aren't going to change the "public's" opinion of UOC so its either it gets banned by way of law or effectively banned by way of nobody exercising their right for fear of it being banned by law.

Maybe I am just being too dense though.

No disrespect meant toward you Gene, or anyone else for that matter.

rackem1899
05-31-2011, 9:26 PM
Kinda new to this, is there a way to see how your representative voted?

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 9:29 PM
Why even try to stop this bill if we are going to tell people not to exercise the right anyway. We aren't going to change the "public's" opinion of UOC so its either it gets banned by way of law or effectively banned by way of nobody exercising their right for fear of it being banned by law.

Maybe I am just being too dense though.

No disrespect meant toward you Gene, or anyone else for that matter.

Fear keeps people in line. We give up liberty for security.

I would also like to know how to know what way your representative voted.

goober
05-31-2011, 9:32 PM
Kinda new to this, is there a way to see how your representative voted?

Fear keeps people in line. We give up liberty for security.

I would also like to know how to know what way your representative voted.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_144&sess=CUR&house=B&author=portantino

Its been through 2 committees in the Assembly and passed on the floor and is now in Senate Public Safety Committee (no votes in Senate yet). Scheduled to be heard on June 7th.

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 10:08 PM
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_144&sess=CUR&house=B&author=portantino

Its been through 2 committees in the Assembly and passed on the floor and is now in Senate Public Safety Committee (no votes in Senate yet). Scheduled to be heard on June 7th.

Thank you sir.

Gray Peterson
05-31-2011, 10:13 PM
Whistling Past the Graveyard, aren't you?

CaptainSlav
05-31-2011, 10:16 PM
Whistling Past the Graveyard, aren't you?

? Huh? Whats that mean.

OleCuss
06-01-2011, 4:54 AM
Why even try to stop this bill if we are going to tell people not to exercise the right anyway. We aren't going to change the "public's" opinion of UOC so its either it gets banned by way of law or effectively banned by way of nobody exercising their right for fear of it being banned by law.

Maybe I am just being too dense though.

No disrespect meant toward you Gene, or anyone else for that matter.

There is a distinction which should be made.

I do not know anyone on this forum who objects to an individual UOC'ing if they believe that will enhance their security. After all, with a short delay they can go from UOC to loaded for bear and there is a chance that they could go from exercising their 1st Amendment right to free speech to exercising their 2nd Amendment right to self defense rapidly enough to save their life.

There are plenty of us, however, who have become convinced that UOC demonstrations are horribly counterproductive in this state. The demonstrations are going to kill the 1st Amendment right and secondarily damage their potential to exercise their RKBA.

So I (as an example) have no problem with someone carefully researching the relevant law, scouting the area for things such as GFSZ's, perhaps coordinating with LEO's, and UOC'ing. I doubt it is worth the effort for most, but I can imagine circumstances where it would be.

As it is, there are limited resources for litigation and taking on a 1st Amendment case to recover the right to UOC may not be practicable. In fact, if one went to look at the purpose and goals of SAF, the NRA, CGF, etc. I'm not totally sure it would be within their mission/goal to litigate such a 1st Amendment case. Maybe SBOC has the money to litigate it successfully, but they'd have to get the right court and the right lawyer in order to have a prayer of winning in California (remember how Peruta's district judge couldn't even separate out 1A and 2A issues?). I seriously doubt they'd be able to get the ACLU to take the case. . .

Bigtime1
06-01-2011, 8:00 AM
Now Captain, don't go off half-cocked. Its easy to let vitriol get you spun up and want to do something to make a statement, but in this case those with their nose to the grindstone and ear to the ground are asking you stand down. If you really want to help - listen to them.

As it is now you and your fellow travelers in the UOC movement will simply be useful pawns to the supporters of AB144. They love to see us fight amongst ourselves, get us wrapped up engaging each other when all need to be focused on the true enemies of liberty.

The old phrase Divide And Conquer could apply here.

Keep a cool head, understand there are those that know more than you and have the satellite view of the environment. Seek their guidance and counsel. If we present a unified, dignified, organized front we will prevail.

loather
06-01-2011, 8:05 AM
This screams, "bad idea."

This is how open carry demonstrations have gone in California.

*poke the bear*
*poke the bear*
*bear turns around and growls*
*poke the bear*
*poke the bear*
*bear turns around and says, "poke me again and you'll regret it"*
*poke the bear*
*bear takes a swing, narrowly misses*

We're at this point after the assembly bill to ban UOC failed last year. Do you *really* want to poke that bear again? Let the legislature chill the **** out. Let's get some wins under our belt and cement the right before our ability to exercise it has been taken away.

Don't be stupid, selfish, stubborn, and short-sighted. You poking that bear again affects more than just your rights, it affects mine and everyone else's as well. And most importantly, you won't be the one cleaning up the mess. CGF, SAF, NRA et al. will. They have very large plates. Why give them more work? Why make them spend more money?

Use your brain. The people in power don't want you doing this. They've already shown a desire and have the ability to ban it. If you keep doing it, it will be banned. Solution: stop doing it until their ability to ban it is taken away once and for all.

Am I being clear yet? If not, how much clearer do I need to be?

Don't do it. Period.

goober
06-01-2011, 8:21 AM
Begs the question.... which member's sockpuppet are you?

First post tonight after posting your video, yet logos and images are used in the video that would only be sought after to be used by someone deeply involved with or at least very fond of Calguns.

Well this account does share a singular and unique IP address with another account...



interesting....

Wrangler John
06-01-2011, 8:47 AM
How are we making it harder to stop this by carrying? So basically all we can do is get mad call our reps and sit on our hands? If they ban this I am going to open carry swords. I will start a open carry sword movement.

Making this an online invitation is asking for trouble from agent provocateurs of the other side. They may wear guns (or fake guns) and engage in weird behavior for benefit of the media. Remember the fake Tea Party members engaging in embarrassing give and take at some town hall meetings, one of which was linked to the Democratic Congress member holding the meeting? Remember the fake signs with outrageous declarations? All your reasonable comments and appeal to your "rights" will end up edited while the "nuts" will be looped endlessly during news broadcasts.

Time to realize that open carriers have no bargaining chips to play through public demonstrations, its like fighting fire with gasoline. I was able to loaded open carry in California at one time, until the Black Panthers invaded the Capitol with their firearms. All you are doing is adding work and expense to overcoming bad legislation. Or are you working for the other side?

fleegman
06-01-2011, 9:27 AM
...I hope everyone participating has at least $20k in the bank, and is willing to potentially be a prohibited person for 10 years.

For LAWFULL conduct?

Kestryll
06-01-2011, 9:28 AM
Why even try to stop this bill if we are going to tell people not to exercise the right anyway. We aren't going to change the "public's" opinion of UOC so its either it gets banned by way of law or effectively banned by way of nobody exercising their right for fear of it being banned by law.

Maybe I am just being too dense though.

No disrespect meant toward you Gene, or anyone else for that matter.

One quick thing to remember, people aren't being told UOC is evil and never to do it, just to choose the time wisely and hold off when politically profitable.

As to why fight this bill, all laws designed to unfairly or unconstitutionally restrict or remove our rights need to be fought and removed.
It's generally better and cheaper in both money and political capital to do so before they become law rather than after.

Kestryll
06-01-2011, 9:31 AM
For LAWFULL conduct?

Yup.

You may not need it but if you get a 'true believer' DA who wants to press the issue expect to spend a fair bit of money proving your innocence.

You'll likely win and in a few years might even get your attorney's fees paid but in the mean time you'd better have the cash on hand.

SunkenShadow
06-01-2011, 9:35 AM
I think there's one point no one has made so far. Don't get me wrong, I support OC, both UOC and LOC but yeah, sure cops may treat UOC'ers with extreme prejudice and educating the police may be important, but those guys are not the lawMAKERS, they are the law ENFORCERS. I do agree, that this will cause enforcers to talk to makers and tell them to make sure that this bill does pass.

sfpcservice
06-01-2011, 9:39 AM
Just heard Paul Watson on the radio this morning talking about his strategy for defeating the wailing fleets. He doesn't have to stop all of the ships... He just has to interfere with enough of them to make the season unprofitable. It seems like the antis are doing that to us by passing laws we have to fight in court with money that could be spent elsewhere. AB144 is just one more thing we'll have to fight in court.

scarville
06-01-2011, 9:58 AM
Well this account does share a singular and unique IP address with another account...
That doesn't mean much. Both could be posting from behind the same NAT address. I was once accused of having a sockpuppet (not here) because another user was posting via the same secure tunnellng proxy I was using.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 10:02 AM
CS - I think people respect the fact that you want to "do something." But there's a whole Zen aspect of doing and not doing that you are missing.

The way things work, politically, in California is extremely complicated. It's hard enough to see how all the pieces fit - EVEN WHEN YOU KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING.

Here, you are "flying blind," much like "Donny The Jet Boy." He was a previous poster who also had an uninformed perspective on the scene here in CA. His "perspective" was that he thought his money made him an expert on these things.

Here, your enthusiasm is clouding your vision. . .

Here, you are doing something that might get a lot of press, and/or might lead to more arrests, and/or might have strange repercussions in Sacramento.

IF you *really* want to fight AB144, the way to do it is by working within the system. Start with your local NRA Members' Council and/or Calguns C3 Chapter. Talk to them and find out what is being done at a grassroots level - then HELP.

Heck, I can even put you in contact with UOC leaders so that you can get their perspective on what you are attempting.

Unfocused action actually HURTS US more than HELPS US.

All 2A direct action in California should be focused, and should be part of a larger plan. What you are doing, judging the the "logo debacle" - is kind of like playing with Tinker Toys. You are building something, but it's a machine that might break and damage other machines. The "machines" here in California are well-oiled, and effective. It's when you start trying to create your own "machine" that you run into problems.

NOW, if you are really smart, and know a lot about "machines" and their "operating environment" - you most certainly CAN build a machine. But you have not demonstrated that. Your knowledge of copyright law is apparently from a high school or college "class." That makes me think that your knowledge of politics is also book learned, or not "learned" at all. . .

Hey first time poster here my friend sent me a email and I made a video in response to the AB144 bill. I will be open carrying along with him. Hope you all join in the fun of open carry month. Lets beat back a bad law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe73jv3Ab-s

scarville
06-01-2011, 10:05 AM
? Huh? Whats that mean.
"Whistling Past the Graveyard" is an American Idiom for an attempt to stay cheerful in a dire situation. Also means to proceed with a task while ignoring an imminent hazard. It is optimism on steroids.

In California the hazard is, "Exercises an unpopular right and the Government will f**k you over."

oaklander
06-01-2011, 10:05 AM
AB144 would not have even come to the floor, if it were not for people who had more bravado than brains. And you can quote me on that!

Just heard Paul Watson on the radio this morning talking about his strategy for defeating the wailing fleets. He doesn't have to stop all of the ships... He just has to interfere with enough of them to make the season unprofitable. It seems like the antis are doing that to us by passing laws we have to fight in court with money that could be spent elsewhere. AB144 is just one more thing we'll have to fight in court.

stix213
06-01-2011, 10:27 AM
Why even try to stop this bill if we are going to tell people not to exercise the right anyway. We aren't going to change the "public's" opinion of UOC so its either it gets banned by way of law or effectively banned by way of nobody exercising their right for fear of it being banned by law.

Maybe I am just being too dense though.

No disrespect meant toward you Gene, or anyone else for that matter.

Step 1) secure 2A rights outside the home in SCOTUS
Step 2) exercise 2A rights outside the home in view of the public

Stop trying to skip step 1

Havoc70
06-01-2011, 10:33 AM
Jesus, I'm all for open carry, but for $DIETY's sake, please stop the "protests" and "demonstrations" while strapped. They are counter productive at best and down right destructive at the worst.

I'm all for open carry, used to be heavily involved with them, but the whole "poke the bear with the stick" thing got really old and didn't accomplish חרא.

bwiese
06-01-2011, 10:49 AM
MORE big open carry events on the eve of this bill becoming law will not beat the bill back but will actually increase the likelihood of it being signed into law.

Correct. The IQ Failure in this thread is amazing.

We simply do NOT need to aggravate/entice our enemies and corner our quiet friends. The state is
screwed up enough such that other things are way bigger on the radar and things can sometimes
'go away' thru alternate paths.

J.D.Allen
06-01-2011, 11:10 AM
And for everyone who knee jerks that I'm anti-OC, I was LOCing a whole lot over the weekend in public but in a state where that doesn't cause this reaction..

-Gene

:eek: you didn't get robbed for your gun, or shot first by someone committing a violent crime, and didn't scare hapless soccer moms into urinating in their peddle pushers???

Go figure :rolleyes:

bwiese
06-01-2011, 11:13 AM
:eek: you didn't get robbed for your gun, or shot first by someone committing a violent crime, and didn't scare hapless soccer moms into urinating in their peddle pushers???

Go figure :rolleyes:

1. He wasn't in CA.
2. He wasn't at Babies-R-Us or Sunday morning Starbucks with 10 others.

bwiese
06-01-2011, 11:14 AM
I've posted this on a separate thread but given the content here, this again needs to be said here:

YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO PUT A GUN ORGANIZATION'S LOGO ON YOUR FLYER/MAILER WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THAT ORGANIZATION.



I *know* this is the case with the NRA. (Those logos are well-defended.) And specific
Memebers' Councils names cannot be used either without that MC's mgmt chain approval (!!!)
.
I *know* this is the case with CRPA (I'm on its Board.)
.
I *know* this is the case with SAF (we just checked w/Alan Gottlieb).
.
I *know* this is the case with Calguns.Net (Kestryll (Paul Nordberg) owns that logo.)
.
I *know* this is the case with The Calguns Foundation (um, I helped start CGF).
.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 11:16 AM
He didn't get robbed because the BG's knew the gun was loaded. What part of "U" do "U" not understand?

He was also in a state with WAY different politics. Situational awareness is important when thinking here. And posting here.

:eek: you didn't get robbed for your gun, or shot first by someone committing a violent crime, and didn't scare hapless soccer moms into urinating in their peddle pushers???

Go figure :rolleyes:

oaklander
06-01-2011, 11:18 AM
Yes, and guess who gets to write nasty letters and file lawsuits when some dodohead starts misusing the CGF logo???

:chris:

I've posted this on a separate thread but given the content here, this again needs to be said here:

YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO PUT A GUN ORGANIZATION'S LOGO ON YOUR FLYER/MAILER WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THAT ORGANIZATION.



I *know* this is the case with the NRA. (Those logos are well-defended.) And specific
Memebers' Councils names cannot be used either without that MC's mgmt chain approval (!!!)
.
I *know* this is the case with CRPA (I'm on its Board.)
.
I *know* this is the case with SAF (we just checked w/Alan Gottlieb).
.
I *know* this is the case with Calguns.Net (Kestryll (Paul Nordberg) owns that logo.)
.
I *know* this is the case with The Calguns Foundation (um, I helped start CGF).
.

J.D.Allen
06-01-2011, 11:24 AM
1. He wasn't in CA.
2. He wasn't at Babies-R-Us or Sunday morning Starbucks with 10 others.

I know, I know, just reminding people how things work in the vast majority of this country.

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 11:32 AM
"Whistling Past the Graveyard" is an American Idiom for an attempt to stay cheerful in a dire situation. Also means to proceed with a task while ignoring an imminent hazard. It is optimism on steroids.

In California the hazard is, "Exercises an unpopular right and the Government will f**k you over."

Ahh so thats what it means thanks for the info.

J.D.Allen
06-01-2011, 11:47 AM
He didn't get robbed because the BG's knew the gun was loaded. What part of "U" do "U" not understand?

He was also in a state with WAY different politics. Situational awareness is important when thinking here. And posting here.

DUDE! Put the 6th cup of coffee down and back away from the energy drink.

I an quite aware of those facts but there are plenty of people on this board that say even Loc will get you robbed for your gun. And I am aware of the fact that he said he was in another state. I was just trying to poke fun at him while reminding some people that it is not impossible for the climate regarding OC in this state to change and become more mainstream.

Calm it down a bit bro, I am NOT advocating UOC. Especially not now.

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 11:57 AM
This screams, "bad idea."

This is how open carry demonstrations have gone in California.

*poke the bear*
*poke the bear*
*bear turns around and growls*
*poke the bear*
*poke the bear*
*bear turns around and says, "poke me again and you'll regret it"*
*poke the bear*
*bear takes a swing, narrowly misses*

We're at this point after the assembly bill to ban UOC failed last year. Do you *really* want to poke that bear again? Let the legislature chill the **** out. Let's get some wins under our belt and cement the right before our ability to exercise it has been taken away.

Don't be stupid, selfish, stubborn, and short-sighted. You poking that bear again affects more than just your rights, it affects mine and everyone else's as well. And most importantly, you won't be the one cleaning up the mess. CGF, SAF, NRA et al. will. They have very large plates. Why give them more work? Why make them spend more money?

Use your brain. The people in power don't want you doing this. They've already shown a desire and have the ability to ban it. If you keep doing it, it will be banned. Solution: stop doing it until their ability to ban it is taken away once and for all.

Am I being clear yet? If not, how much clearer do I need to be?

Don't do it. Period.

Why do we even have rights then? If we are afraid we will lose them if we use them why have them at all? They might as well be nonexistent. That open carry sword movement is sounding like a really good idea right now.

hgreen
06-01-2011, 11:57 AM
People who UOC in CA caused AB144 like people who go to the range caused AB962 and gun dealers caused SB427 and SB819.

I'm learning something everyday here, today I learned that PC12031 must also apply to the arguments used to keep people from UOCing in CA.

All the experts agree that AB144 will pass the Senate (and again Assembly if amended), its HIGHLY unlikely that any effort would cause Brown to veto it, people UOCing now will not "help" AB144, it doesn't need help.

What needs help are the already failed arguments that government must be obligated to give out permits to exercise something that the state has turned into a privileged. The thing CCW ONLY advocates fear the most is the restoration of LOC in CA because then there will be no hope of getting CCW in CA.

UOC HAS, IS, and WILL help educate people about their rights and the fact that they are being attacked when they previously had no clue. If you don't agree, I challenge you to spend 5 minutes at the SBOC booth at any of the street fairs they attend and listen to the people that come by and are told about 2nd amendment issues in CA, and promptly sign up for SBOC email lists and buy memberships and come back the next day ready to support the cause through educating people and writing their legislators.

See http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=439257

BTW, since SBOC started last year the average attendance at the local NRA members council in the South Bay has sky rocketed (most of them are OCing at the meeting too), you can ask their president yourself.

If you want to remain disarmed in public until SCOTUS makes a ruling for CA, go ahead. Hope the criminals do the same...

Glock22Fan
06-01-2011, 12:01 PM
I was in Cabela's in Reno last Friday.

I saw a checkpoint just inside the door where you were supposed to check in firearms for "safety."

I read the sign carefully and came to the conclusion that they only asked to see firearms that you were taking in there for repairs, sale or some such purpose - probably to avoid you waving around an (accidently) loaded firearm at the gun counter. Therefore I continued to carry my G22 under my coat, unseen, unchecked and without drama.

My first visit there. Heavenly.

bwiese
06-01-2011, 12:14 PM
UOC HAS, IS, and WILL help educate people about their rights and the fact that they are being attacked when they previously had no clue. If you don't agree, I challenge you to spend 5 minutes at the SBOC booth at any of the street fairs they attend and listen to the people that come by and are told about 2nd amendment issues in CA, and promptly sign up for SBOC email lists and buy memberships and come back the next day ready to support the cause through educating people and writing their legislators.

You've spent some limited time in a somewhat right-leaning area. Point instances are not the basis for valid generalizations.

(I do admit the last photos I saw did have people dressing/looking better than previous UOC outings I've observed.)

Sgt. J Beezy
06-01-2011, 12:14 PM
I believe a right not used will be a right lost.

This ban is set up to become law if there is nothing done to change it's course. I believe it is our bending over and taking it you know where that has gotten us to this point. I believe that there are not enough movements to exercise our rights and to show the public that we are not the ones to be feared rather we are to be trusted. It is not the civilian that is carrying legally they should be worried about rather the crimes that are being detoured by the UOC'ers from the criminals carrying illegally.

This same thought process would have shut down civil rights movements. Rosa Parks would have went to the back of the bus and MLK would have never marched for civil liberties because they wouldn't want to "provoke the government." I signed up to this forum because I thought it was a great forum to meet like-minded individuals that fought for our rights.

As a Marine Corps Veteran, with 2 combat tours under my belt, I understand the importance to fight for what you believe in. I proudly fought for this country because I believe in the "American Dream." The progressives in this country are taking away our God Given Liberties faster than we can comprehend. We should not have to give up the right to UOC so we may have a fight for CCW. We should be allowed to exercise both of these rights.

Instead of bashing this dude for wanting to help contribute to our collective goal of preserving our Constitution, and succumbing to our culture of "suing everyone in the room" we should be supporting and giving advice as to how to go about in doing this the right way. I am a new member to this site and although I have liked much of what I have read, I am really disappointed in this thread in particular. If many of you feel that this is the time for us to be quiet in the face of this bad is the correct way to go about things it seems as though we are conceding defeat. We must ask the question "Has what we have done thus far helped or hindered our movement?" I believe our inactivity has hindered our movement.

If there are things going on behind the curtains maybe Calguns should make it more public so that we know that our sitting on the sidelines is not in vain, otherwise, It is looking like we only have a limited time to exercise our right to UOC and now is the time to do so more than ever. It is easier to express yourself concerning an issue while it is still legal rather than when it becomes illegal. If this ban gets passed, it will forever stay passed. How often do bans like this get overturned in CA??? Not.

There is a right and wrong way to handle these issues. I believe that although it was somewhat zealous, CS intentions are honorable. With more planning I would be privileged to demonstrate UOC with you.

If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything.

bwiese
06-01-2011, 12:16 PM
If there are things going on behind the curtains maybe Calguns should make it more public so that we know that our sitting on the sidelines is not in vain, otherwise, It is looking like we only have a limited time to exercise our right to UOC and now is the time to do so more than ever. It is easier to express yourself concerning an issue while it is still legal rather than when it becomes illegal. If this ban gets passed, it will forever stay passed. How often do bans like this get overturned in CA??? Not.


There are valid reasons not to fan the flames at this time.

Any chance(s) [not the plural!] we have can get scuttled with bad PR.

Glock22Fan
06-01-2011, 12:20 PM
As a Marine Corps Veteran, with 2 combat tours under my belt, I understand the importance to fight for what you believe in. I proudly fought for this country because I believe in the "American Dream." The progressives in this country are taking away our God Given Liberties faster than we can comprehend. We should not have to give up the right to UOC so we may have a fight for CCW. We should be allowed to exercise both of these rights.


As a Marine Corps veteran (and thank you for your service) how did you feel when you commanders sent you into battle outnumbered and outgunned?

Did you feel that this is what you signed up for, to fight when you knew you were right, even though you were going to get massacred?

Or did you prefer it when your commanders said "This isn't the right time for this fight, we will regroup, get reinforcements and only go into battle when we can be assured of victory?

Who was it who said "It doesn't matter who was right, it only matters who is left?"

Sgt. J Beezy
06-01-2011, 12:29 PM
As a Marine, you never question your commander. You do what you're told or people die. In the midst of battle you don't have the luxury to question what you are told. You trust your officers and intel and let your instincts handle the rest.

You are never assured of victory.

I would rather fight for what I believe in and lose than lose what I should fight for.

When is the time to fight if not now?

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 12:30 PM
There are valid reasons not to fan the flames at this time.

Any chance(s) [not the plural!] we have can get scuttled with bad PR.

Most people in the media are idiots people value news casters and opinion reporters less and less. More and more people log online and do their own research these days then ever before. More people realize that gun owners are not the problem. Every time I see a OC, ULOC person in the news or on youtube they are always saying the right things and representing the movement positively and being great ambassadors to the public.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 12:32 PM
But you don't just wander around the battlefield with a bunch guns and no plan at all. You keep talking about commanders. Here, we have collaborators, which is the same concept.

Don't just send some kid into a "media/PR/political fight" that is going to hurt us.

You have everything mixed up in your head.

As a Marine, you never question your commander. You do what you're told or people die. In the midst of battle you don't have the luxury to question what you are told. You trust your officers and intel and let your instincts handle the rest.

You are never assured of victory.

I would rather fight for what I believe in and lose than lose what I should fight for.

When is the time to fight if not now?

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 12:34 PM
As a Marine, you never question your commander. You do what you're told or people die. In the midst of battle you don't have the luxury to question what you are told. You trust your officers and intel and let your instincts handle the rest.

You are never assured of victory.

I would rather fight for what I believe in and lose than lose what I should fight for.

When is the time to fight if not now?

Thank you for your service sir.

IrishPirate
06-01-2011, 12:36 PM
Kestryl, if someone were to come up with a good pro-gun event and wanted CGN to get behind it and use your logo/name/etc.......how would you prefer they contact you and get approval?? i'm sure you probably get more PM's than you want

oaklander
06-01-2011, 12:36 PM
Ooops! Good point!

Starbucks coffee is fairly strong. Even when brewed at home. . . And I don't need to look at fat white guys with empty guns to drink it!!!

:p

You are correct - but every thread does not need to be a discussion about whether UOC will get you "robbed for your gun." Here, some kid wants to do a PR blitz right at about exactly the wrong time (i.e., NOW). . .

Let's stay on topic, and if you do that, I agree to not drink the 6th cup of coffee. . .

:D

DUDE! Put the 6th cup of coffee down and back away from the energy drink.

I an quite aware of those facts but there are plenty of people on this board that say even Loc will get you robbed for your gun. And I am aware of the fact that he said he was in another state. I was just trying to poke fun at him while reminding some people that it is not impossible for the climate regarding OC in this state to change and become more mainstream.

Calm it down a bit bro, I am NOT advocating UOC. Especially not now.

J.D.Allen
06-01-2011, 12:41 PM
Ooops! Good point!

Starbucks coffee is fairly strong. Even when brewed at home. . . And I don't need to look at fat white guys with empty guns to drink it!!!

:p

You are correct - but every thread does not need to be a discussion about whether UOC will get you "robbed for your gun." Here, some kid wants to do a PR blitz right at about exactly the wrong time (i.e., NOW). . .

Let's stay on topic, and if you do that, I agree to not drink the 6th cup of coffee. . .

:D

Agreed :thumbsup:

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 12:42 PM
Ooops! Good point!

You are correct - but every thread does not need to be a discussion about whether UOC will get you "robbed for your gun." Here, some kid wants to do a PR blitz right at about exactly the wrong time (i.e., NOW). . .



I think its the perfect time to carry. If people get accustomed to seeing guns as a part of everyday life people will become less concerned and only the most hardcore Hoplophobs will still really care. We should also point out the absurdity that somehow unloaded guns present a danger to the public.

Sgt. J Beezy
06-01-2011, 12:48 PM
Oaklander, I distinctly remember saying:

"There is a right and wrong way to handle these issues. I believe that although it was somewhat zealous, CS intentions are honorable. With more planning I would be privileged to demonstrate UOC with you. "

Your arguement:
"But you don't just wander around the battlefield with a bunch guns and no plan at all. You keep talking about commanders. Here, we have collaborators, which is the same concept."

Please read all of my posting if you are going to comment. Planning is essential for success. When has anything got accomplished without opposition??? If we don't bring the issue to the people, we lose.

How many violent crimes have been committed while UOC'ing??? I haven't been able to find any.

bwiese
06-01-2011, 12:50 PM
How many violent crimes have been committed while UOC'ing??? I haven't been able to find any.

What in the world does this remotely have to do with feelgood laws being randomly passed in Sacto?

You're assuming rationality.

We're assuming irrationality and that some side-effects - if situation not agitated by the unknowning/naive - may help block this.

Sgt. J Beezy
06-01-2011, 12:58 PM
What is going to block this ban from happening???

Am I missing something???

Sitting on the sidelines doing nothing, that is going to block this ban???

What if the ban gets blocked? Half of us are so scared to not uproar public opinion that there is no point whether or not it gets passed or not because there will never be a time in CA that it will be socially acceptable to UOC, OC, or CCW without us taking a stand and proving that we are not the ones to be feared.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 1:04 PM
I know they don't really teach history in high school anymore, but you really *should* study up on the CA gay rights movement.

It was only AFTER the more extreme elements of the movement quit doing provocative things (like excessively waving around penises at parades), that the movement got mainstream enough to get real traction.

And now YOU want to make the EXACT same mistake that Act Up made??? Knowing nothing??? There's a reason we look down on half-baked ideas. We don't just randomly tell people that their ideas are stupid.

I edited your post slightly so you would understand what I am telling you now.

I think its the perfect time to flash. If people get accustomed to seeing penises as a part of everyday life people will become less concerned and only the most hardcore Homophobes will still really care. We should also point out the absurdity that somehow unloaded penises present a danger to the public.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 1:06 PM
You are like a dog that assumes that its owner stops existing when he leaves the room. Just because you can't SEE something does not mean that it does not EXIST.

What is going to block this ban from happening???

Am I missing something???

Sitting on the sidelines doing nothing, that is going to block this ban???

What if the ban gets blocked? Half of us are so scared to not uproar public opinion that there is no point whether or not it gets passed or not because there will never be a time in CA that it will be socially acceptable to UOC, OC, or CCW without us taking a stand and proving that we are not the ones to be feared.

Kestryll
06-01-2011, 1:06 PM
Kestryl, if someone were to come up with a good pro-gun event and wanted CGN to get behind it and use your logo/name/etc.......how would you prefer they contact you and get approval?? i'm sure you probably get more PM's than you want

The easiest way would be to send me an email (ketryll@gmail.com), nowadays between the iPhone and wireless at home I can't escape the darned stuff! ;)

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 1:10 PM
I know they don't really teach history in high school anymore, but you really *should* study up on the CA gay rights movement.

It was only AFTER the more extreme elements of the movement quit doing provocative things (like excessively waving around penises at parades), that the movement got mainstream enough to get real traction.

And now YOU want to make the EXACT same mistake that Act Up made??? Knowing nothing??? There's a reason we look down on half-baked ideas. We don't just randomly tell people that their ideas are stupid.

I edited your post slightly so you would understand what I am telling you now.

Not in HS I am over 20 in college. I will look more into it.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 1:14 PM
Cool!!!!

That is all we are asking. Your intentions are good - but everything needs to be put in current and historical perspective. You need to learn a LOT MORE about all of this before you do anything that can impact our rights in a negative fashion.

To give you perspective on how much more I know than you, when you were one day old, I was finishing my first year of law school.

Not in HS I am over 20 in college. I will look more into it.

Sgt. J Beezy
06-01-2011, 1:17 PM
As a God fearing Christian I know what it means to believe in something that I cannot see physically. There is no need to try and demean me by comparing me being "like a dog." I asked that if there were things happening that we were not known to let them be known.

Oaklander, I will refer to my previous post to you that you should reread all of what I have written before you use your progressive attacks to make me out to be something that I am not, uneducated.

Sgt. J Beezy
06-01-2011, 1:23 PM
As a lawyer and a mature adult I would expect your argument to reflect as such.

RobG
06-01-2011, 1:25 PM
Sitting on the sidelines doing nothing, that is going to block this ban???



If you believe that members on this board and the CGF are doing nothing, you are not paying attention. And if you also think a group of open carriers sitting down for coffee at a Starbucks in an affluent neighborhood will somehow get this bill blocked, you are still not paying attention. UOC has been around a long time. It is not until recently, due to the attention brought upon themselves (open carry groups), that the issue of UOC is getting the (unwanted) attention it is now recieving.

If one really feels UOC is a way to protect themselves, then please do so. But I ask; how have all those meet ups at Starbucks, malls, restaurants, etc., and then posting up the results on Youtube, worked out?

oaklander
06-01-2011, 1:27 PM
You know nothing about me, and yet you keep trying to tell me what to do. Read more, and talk less.

I thank you for your military service, but on THIS issue, you know nothing.

As a lawyer and a mature adult I would expect your argument to reflect as such.

RobG
06-01-2011, 1:27 PM
The easiest way would be to send me an email (ketryll@gmail.com), nowadays between the iPhone and wireless at home I can't escape the darned stuff! ;)

Pretty sure you missed a letter:D

fleegman
06-01-2011, 1:43 PM
Yup.

You may not need it but if you get a 'true believer' DA who wants to press the issue expect to spend a fair bit of money proving your innocence.

You'll likely win and in a few years might even get your attorney's fees paid but in the mean time you'd better have the cash on hand.

Won't cost me a G-D dime. I will not hire an attorney, I will simply state the obvious truth that I have committed no crime, and it is up to the DA to prove I did. If that "true believer DA" succeeds in getting me convicted for obviously lawfull conduct, I may or may not become a guest of the taxpayers, but I swear before all that is holy that after it is finished I will be that DA's new nightmare.

Oh, and by the way, I have never OC'd and never plan to. If I believe I am in truly imminent danger I will simply load up and carry concealed.

yelohamr
06-01-2011, 1:44 PM
CaptainSlav, I've been open carrying since 1988. I was never stopped and checked by any LEO. Until last year, after the uproar over the mass UOC gatherings. Up until then, no one noticed.

If you want to UOC, go ahead, but be prepared for the consequences.
As for being a "new poster", BS. Maybe with that name.

If you are as uninformed as you appear to be, go ahead and do what you want, while you are in jail, the rest of us won't have to read your silly a** posts.

curtisfong
06-01-2011, 1:47 PM
Won't cost me a G-D dime. I will not hire an attorney

I will be that DA's new nightmare.

Those two statements are incompatible. To win, you need real resources ($$) not tough talk.

Uriah02
06-01-2011, 1:51 PM
How are we making it harder to stop this by carrying? So basically all we can do is get mad call our reps and sit on our hands? If they ban this I am going to open carry swords. I will start a open carry sword movement.

I hope you have a lawyer on retainer...

fleegman
06-01-2011, 1:57 PM
Those two statements are incompatible. To win, you need real resources ($$) not tough talk.
Read my post again, and try some reading comprehension. I wasn't talking about "winning", I even stated I may go to jail. I was talking about what comes next.

stix213
06-01-2011, 2:02 PM
Read my post again, and try some reading comprehension. I wasn't talking about "winning", I even stated I may go to jail. I was talking about what comes next.

Yeah, your post discussed your solution to legal troubles as threatening DA's, followed by admitting to illegal concealed carry (since you don't seem like the type to go through the trouble getting a permit). Freaking genius here, why have lawyers when we could all have just been doing this the whole time? :rolleyes:

I hope your post gets deleted

Merc1138
06-01-2011, 2:04 PM
Read my post again, and try some reading comprehension. I wasn't talking about "winning", I even stated I may go to jail. I was talking about what comes next.

Uhh, you'd need to win your court case. Lawyers cost money. Court cases take up time. Time spent in jail is time not spent at your job earning money. You're asking "what comes next", apparently you didn't think far enough ahead.

m1aowner
06-01-2011, 2:09 PM
Oh jeez, another do-gooder boy scout. You been living in a cave or what? Get a clue and listen to those here.

fleegman
06-01-2011, 2:12 PM
Yeah, your post discussed your solution to legal troubles as threatening DA's, followed by admitting to illegal concealed carry. Freaking genius here, why have lawyers when we could all have just been doing this the whole time? :rolleyes:

I hope your post gets deleted

Exactly where did I "threaten" anyone?

Also, there is an exception in the concealed carry PC for "immediate grave danger".

Try again...

wash
06-01-2011, 2:15 PM
It's funny seeing everyone miss the real issues.

Open carry in California is pointless for two reasons.

#1, 1,000 foot "gun free school zones"

#2, the "U" in UOC stands for unloaded.

If you want to fight something, fight against GFSZs because they limit OC in urban areas to very tiny pockets that may be legal. It's so hard to determine if a place is a GFSZ that every time you try to open carry you may very well be breaking California law.

UOC events do nothing to fight GFSZs.

Also, as has been stated before many times, a gun that isn't loaded is only a little more useful than a rock for self defense purposes.

The issue of loaded guns will be in a court room soon.

Instead of riling up the antis and causing a UOC ban to be passed, figure out an effective way to fight the two issues I listed. When they are fixed, OC will mean something in California.

abechira
06-01-2011, 2:16 PM
Sooo, UOC in downtown L.A. tomorrow to protest this wouldn't be a good idea?:eek: Even if I take my family from South Orange County?:eek::eek:


:rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:

CaptainSlav
06-01-2011, 2:24 PM
It's funny seeing everyone miss the real issues.

Open carry in California is pointless for two reasons.

#1, 1,000 foot "gun free school zones"

#2, the "U" in UOC stands for unloaded.

If you want to fight something, fight against GFSZs because they limit OC in urban areas to very tiny pockets that may be legal. It's so hard to determine if a place is a GFSZ that every time you try to open carry you may very well be breaking California law.

UOC events do nothing to fight GFSZs.

Also, as has been stated before many times, a gun that isn't loaded is only a little more useful than a rock for self defense purposes.

The issue of loaded guns will be in a court room soon.

Instead of riling up the antis and causing a UOC ban to be passed, figure out an effective way to fight the two issues I listed. When they are fixed, OC will mean something in California.

True is the GFZ law being challenged in court right now? Its crazy to have that because it is almost impossible not to avoid a school unless you live in the sticks.

stix213
06-01-2011, 2:24 PM
Exactly where did I "threaten" anyone?

Also, there is an exception in the concealed carry PC for "immediate grave danger".

Try again...

Like you're going to be the DA's nightmare from prison any other way :rolleyes: If I'm wrong, please explain how and I will eat my words.

There is an exception to loaded carry for "immediate grave danger" not concealed carry. If you were referring to PC 12025.5, you should read the whole thing.

Try again...

MudCamper
06-01-2011, 2:33 PM
Also, there is an exception in the concealed carry PC for "immediate grave danger".

Try again...

You are incorrect. You are confusing PC 12025 (concealed) with 12031 (loaded). There is an exception in 12031, not 12025:

12031 (j) (1) Nothing in this section is intended to preclude the carrying of any loaded firearm, under circumstances where it would otherwise be lawful, by a person who reasonably believes that the person or property of himself or herself or of another is in immediate, grave danger and that the carrying of the weapon is necessary for the preservation of that person or property. As used in this subdivision, "immediate" means the brief interval before and after the local law enforcement agency, when reasonably possible, has been notified of the danger and before the arrival of its assistance.

goober
06-01-2011, 2:40 PM
True is the GFZ law being challenged in court right now? Its crazy to have that because it is almost impossible not to avoid a school unless you live in the sticks.

Grammar is important. Work on it.

Librarian
06-01-2011, 3:00 PM
True is the GFZ law being challenged in court right now? Its crazy to have that because it is almost impossible not to avoid a school unless you live in the sticks.

No.

Imagine, if you will, the opposition propaganda: " Oh, those mean gun owners, they want more guns around our chilllldrennnnn! :eek:"

Eventually they'll have to get over that, but in the current climate it's a PR disaster.

First, we need to establish legal carry, in some fashion, outside the home for self defense, as a RIGHT. We already think it is; persuading assorted elected and administrative levels of government in both CA and nationally will require a large Federal SCOTUS cluebat.

MasterYong
06-01-2011, 3:13 PM
OK I just read the first page of this thread and my first thought is:

ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR BLIMMIN' MIND?????????????????????

...and my second thought is: Edited out. Changed my mind. Goes without saying.

ETA: Watched the vid. Are Pullnshoot and friends endorsing this? Cuz he usually seems to have better strategy than that, and you used his likeness.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 3:16 PM
As a lawyer and a mature adult I would expect your argument to reflect as such.

LOL, that's the other thing you got wrong!!!

:D

http://bit.ly/lFQgd0

This isn't about being "mature." It's not "about" me at all - that's the point. There are certain ways that pro 2A stuff MUST be done in CA in order for it to work. You are shooting the messenger here, I'm just relaying the truth to you. I did not write the rules.

The "rules" on this are the battlefield. Here, you've walked onto a battlefield, not knowing the rules, the players, or the history.

That = FAIL.

Glock22Fan
06-01-2011, 3:18 PM
Won't cost me a G-D dime. I will not hire an attorney, I will simply state the obvious truth that I have committed no crime, and it is up to the DA to prove I did. If that "true believer DA" succeeds in getting me convicted for obviously lawfull conduct, I may or may not become a guest of the taxpayers, but I swear before all that is holy that after it is finished I will be that DA's new nightmare.

Oh, and by the way, I have never OC'd and never plan to. If I believe I am in truly imminent danger I will simply load up and carry concealed.


All I will say is, oh Lord, please enlighten this poster before he ruins everything for the rest of us.

It is people like this that make me sometimes wonder whether those push for "Shall issue for everyone" should not make exceptions for some people.

aklover_91
06-01-2011, 3:35 PM
For some reason these threads always remind me of conversations I had in Highschool trying to explain how things really worked to home schooled "safety bubble" friends...

eaglemike
06-01-2011, 3:36 PM
As a Marine, you never question your commander. You do what you're told or people die. In the midst of battle you don't have the luxury to question what you are told. You trust your officers and intel and let your instincts handle the rest.

You are never assured of victory.

I would rather fight for what I believe in and lose than lose what I should fight for.

When is the time to fight if not now?
Are you sure you are working with the best intel on this point?

With bad PR, there will be pressure for the bill, and the gov to sign the bill. With only the anti's jumping up and down, making non-logical statements, IMO there is a better chance to get this thing defeated in the background.

Glock22Fan
06-01-2011, 3:47 PM
As a Marine, you never question your commander. You do what you're told or people die. In the midst of battle you don't have the luxury to question what you are told. You trust your officers and intel and let your instincts handle the rest.

You are never assured of victory.

I would rather fight for what I believe in and lose than lose what I should fight for.

When is the time to fight if not now?

Of course you do what you are told and of course you are never assured of victory. However, what you are saying, and what you have said about UOC bears out why you are not a commander yourself, as you are apparently unable to see the "bigger picture." Which commander was it who said "If you find yourself in a fair fight, you haven't planned it right?"

Now is indeed the time to fight, and the fight is happening. Sadly, your idea of fighting does not seem to allow for anything except for the head on, in your face, "let's see who has the biggest cannon" mentality. Our force is outnumbered. We need to use guile and strategy to overcome that disparity. The courts are going to be our friends, once Heller properly trickles down. Public demonstrations are NOT our friend.

SanPedroShooter
06-01-2011, 3:55 PM
Here is a response to a letter I sent to Nancy Skinner (D-14) about AB 144. Is she trying to confuse me on purpose...?? Look at the section in italics and tell me what that means.

Thank you for your correspondence regarding your opposition of Assembly Bill 144. I value your opinion and appreciate you taking the time to write to me.

AB 144 would change existing law and establish an exemption to the offense for transportation of a firearm between certain areas where the firearm may be carried concealed, or loaded, or openly carried unloaded, as specified. The bill would make it a misdemeanor (with exceptions) to openly carry an unloaded handgun in certain public areas.

I supported this bill when it came before me on the floor of the Assembly and the bill is now in the Senate awaiting a vote. While I regret to see that we disagree on this measure, I would like to explain my stance regarding this vote. I supported this bill because it is my belief that AB 144 will help protect the communities in which we live without imposing unreasonable registration requirements or restrictions.

Thank you for keeping me informed of your views. It is an honor to serve you in Sacramento.


Yours etc etc...

Here's my reply

"AB 144 will help protect the communities in which we live without imposing unreasonable registration requirements or restrictions."


What does that even mean? I can not get a CCW unless I win American Idol or contribute close to six figures to the sheriff. Do you understand that? As weak as Unloaded open carry is, it is the only way for me to carry a firearm for defensive use out side of my home.


I guess we'll see this one in court...

Thanks for nothing Nancy....

hgreen
06-01-2011, 4:02 PM
You've spent some limited time in a somewhat right-leaning area. Point instances are not the basis for valid generalizations.


You obviously are not from the South Bay:
Democrats have a distinct advantage in the 36th Congressional District, with 45.3 percent of the 347,812 registered voters identifying themselves as Democrats. Republicans trail with 27.5 percent of the electorate, while 22.3 percent of voters decline to state a party, according to information from the California Secretary of State's office.



(I do admit the last photos I saw did have people dressing/looking better than previous UOC outings I've observed.)

Where have you observed "UOC outings"? These last pictures look just like a standard SBOC event.

There are valid reasons not to fan the flames at this time.

Any chance(s) [not the plural!] we have to get CCWs can get scuttled with bad PR AB144 failing and LOC being restored.

Fixed

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:10 PM
Banning UOC will only bring CGF another uphill battle. However it will rid the state and this forum of the UOC exhibitionists and their feel good campaign.

wash
06-01-2011, 4:18 PM
True is the GFZ law being challenged in court right now? Its crazy to have that because it is almost impossible not to avoid a school unless you live in the sticks.
Things are happening in the background that you probably have no idea about.

We might have a solution to gun free school zones if we don't get UOC banned before it happens.

For people who know what it is, please remain quiet, I don't think the antis know what we are doing in that area.

MudCamper
06-01-2011, 4:24 PM
Banning UOC will only bring CGF another uphill battle. However it will rid the state and this forum of the UOC exhibitionists and their feel good campaign.

Careful there. AB144 would ban UOC in the Valley and on all the BLM roads in our neck of the woods. 36 CFR 261.10 (d) bans shooting from any road. That triggers the prohibited area language in PC 12031 and will trigger the similar language in AB144, thereby banning carrying. This bill needs to be fought and defeated.

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:28 PM
Careful there. AB144 would ban UOC in the Valley and on all the BLM roads in our neck of the woods. 36 CFR 261.10 (d) bans shooting from any road. That triggers the prohibited area language in PC 12031 and will trigger the similar language in AB144, thereby banning carrying. This bill needs to be fought and defeated.

I don't think so... You can't ban a place where legal LOC exists. Our BLM roads are areas that are legal to shoot and hunt from. Besides they are not even designated roads.

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:31 PM
Mud, I know what you are getting at. For the record, the roads in our little Spring Valley?? Are considered/designated private roads maintained by the county for a special fee. Paid by the residents of Spring Valley. Thats why the residents had to post signs in the valley designating no hunting in certain areas of the valley. ;)

Librarian
06-01-2011, 4:36 PM
Sounds like a great reason to challenge 12031 in its entirety, hopefully you'll put your money where your mouth is:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/California-Right-To-Carry/115871318495700?sk=info

Some people do not have Facebook accounts - I can't read that, Facebook insists I join. No thanks.

stix213
06-01-2011, 4:37 PM
I don't think so... You can't ban a place where legal LOC exists. Our BLM roads are areas that are legal to shoot and hunt from. Besides they are not even designated roads.

It is illegal to shoot directly from the road, so it is illegal to LOC directly on the road. Many of what we would think of as just trails in NF or BLM are actually technically roads that prohibit loaded carry currently (even if rangers may look the other way when encountering you, cause you are in the middle of nowhere).

So what MudCamper is saying is all those places it will be illegal to open carry at all if this passes. You'll be able to LOC on BLM land, but when you walk to your truck parked on the side of the roadway you would have had to LUCC your firearm before you got to your vehicle. Its going to be ridiculous if this passes.

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:37 PM
Sorry hgreen, not with you guys! Your 1A exhibitions is what gave us this bill. I'm on my way to a CCW and will continue to LOC in my area. Better to have a loaded weapon than unloaded weapon. IMHO

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:42 PM
It is illegal to shoot directly from the road, so it is illegal to LOC directly on the road. Many of what we would think of as just trails in NF or BLM are actually technically roads that prohibit loaded carry currently (even if rangers may look the other way when encountering you, cause you are in the middle of nowhere).

So what MudCamper is saying is all those places it will be illegal to open carry at all if this passes. You'll be able to LOC on BLM land, but when you walk to your truck parked on the side of the roadway you would have had to LUCC your firearm before you got to your vehicle. Its going to be ridiculous if this passes.

Understood. Mud and i have dirt in the same area. Our roads are private and exclusive to our area. My property borders BLM. Again i am not for the bill passing!!!! I just have to ability to bypass this bill and its laws in my unique situation. CCW and the ability to LOC. I hope that CGF will make this happen for the rest of my Calif. neighbors.

wildhawker
06-01-2011, 4:44 PM
1. AB144 needs to be defeated now, not later. It's a horrible thing for all gun owners - period.

2. A facial challenge to 12031, especially now and without a Gura or Clement running it, is not a bad idea. It's outright dumb.

stix213
06-01-2011, 4:45 PM
Understood. Mud and i have dirt in the same area. Our roads are private and exclusive to our area. My property borders BLM. Again i am not for the bill passing!!!! I just have to ability to bypass this bill and its laws in my unique situation. CCW and the ability to LOC. I hope that CGF will make this happen for the rest of my Calif. neighbors.

I'm jealous

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:49 PM
I'm jealous

Your not that far from "the dirt" LOL

taperxz
06-01-2011, 4:52 PM
1. AB144 needs to be defeated now, not later. It's a horrible thing for all gun owners - period.

2. A facial challenge to 12031, especially now and without a Gura or Clement running it, is not a bad idea. It's outright dumb.

Sorry Brandon, I was not trying to give the impression i was OK with the bill passing! Just my opinion that those who are heavily invested in UOC exhibits are some of the folks who are responsible for the bill. Just my honest opinion.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 5:07 PM
I don't like arguing with UOC people, since some of them are my good friends. And I generally support the concept of openly carrying (loaded, of course).

BUT - what you posted on your website concerns me:

May 5th, three days after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals released its decision in the Nordyke case, a lawyer I know told me he would take on our case seeking to overturn PC 12031 for a very reasonable flat fee.

His offer is too good to pass up.

Next month it will be three years since the Heller decision and one year since the McDonald decision.

I would like to file the lawsuit on the anniversary date of one of those two landmark decisions.

But I need your help to do so.

Eeeek!!!!

You don't have "a lawyer you know" file ANYTHING that can so easily go sideways. I'm actually a pretty good lawyer myself, but even *I* won't file anything like this. It requires a "lawyer's lawyer" - not some guy you know.

I hope you understand why this is true?

But, if you still insist, I know THIS GUY works cheap:

http://bit.ly/m7F858

:D

ETA: ALSO, a case like this CAN'T be done via a "flat fee" - this is a case that could take hundreds or thousands of hours. Your lawyer friend, what type of law does he or she practice?

Cokebottle
06-01-2011, 5:20 PM
For LAWFULL conduct?
Yes, simply because not all law enforcement agencies understand that it is lawful conduct.

So what happens after an arrest?
Easiest and cheapest way out?
You front 100% of the money for bail, DA refuses to press charges, you get your money back (but you still have to HAVE it).
Next in line, you pay 10% to a bail bondsman. That money is gone forever. DA refuses to press charges, you go home.
Next in line, DA notices that you were 990 feet from a school that is a block over on a residential street and not visible from where you were. This school happens to be a private school based out of a church.
You are now in violation of 626.9, because thanks to the judge and DA in Theseus's case, we now have case law that indicates that 626.9 ACTUALLY reads as follows:
626.9
(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written permission of the school district superintendent, his or her designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as specified in subdivision (f).
(c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private property, if the place of residence, place of business, or private property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the firearm is otherwise lawful.
Theseus did not know the school was there.
Theseus was on private property.
Theseus was found guilty and is now prohibited from possessing firearms in California because the judge DENIED him from using the two defenses that I struck-through in the PC.

taperxz
06-01-2011, 5:21 PM
Oak, Just my opinion but, when you have someone asking for money, hgreen, wouldn't it be wise to at very least give the name of the lawyer? CGF as far as i can see has never held back intel to its donors that would benefit gun owners. (except info not for the ears of the general public for reasons of not letting the enemy get a heads up of course)

wash
06-01-2011, 5:23 PM
I hope it's not Gorski.

oaklander
06-01-2011, 5:24 PM
I think he's trying to do a good thing, and I am certain that the money will go towards the lawyer.

BUT - what bothers me is the concept of even doing this without it being part of a litigation strategy that includes other CA cases which would set up the groundwork.

Oak, Just my opinion but, when you have someone asking for money, hgreen, wouldn't it be wise to at very least give the name of the lawyer? CGF as far as i can see has never held back intel to its donors that would benefit gun owners. (except info not for the ears of the general public for reasons of not letting the enemy get a heads up of course)

fiddletown
06-01-2011, 5:34 PM
...If people get accustomed to seeing guns as a part of everyday life people will become less concerned ...And exactly how do you know this? What evidence do you have that this is true? In fact, recent events, including the introduction of AB144 and its predecessor bill seem to indicate that it is not true.

In the real world, when commercial enterprises want to influence public opinion, they first test possible strategies with surveys and focus groups.

The organizers of UOC demonstrations have done nothing of the sort and have absolutely no idea how to influence the public. And indeed it appears that what they've done so far has been counterproductive.

CitaDeL
06-01-2011, 5:47 PM
And exactly how do you know this? What evidence do you have that this is true? In fact, recent events, including the introduction of AB144 and its predecessor bill seem to indicate that it is not true.

In the real world, when commercial enterprises want to influence public opinion, they first test possible strategies with surveys and focus groups.

The organizers of UOC demonstrations have done nothing of the sort and have absolutely no idea how to influence the public. And indeed it appears that what they've done so far has been counterproductive.

Empirical evidence through the practice of open carry nationwide as well as other civil rights efforts. Lunch counters used to be segregated. Interacial marriage used to be taboo. Homosexuality used to be behind closed doors. Gay marriage wasnt even a considered an option. All that was challenged-- BUT these challenges came about in measured doses...

Mass open carry events do not normalize gun ownership because they make a spectacle of the practice. However, one or two advocates at a venue, slowly acclimates the bystanders often without alarming anyone.

KylaGWolf
06-01-2011, 5:59 PM
I disagree I think exposing people to firearms and quelling the fear of the public will help our case. I would prefer both methods of carry to be 100% legal. We need to let people know we are not the problem and treating gun owners with such high levels of scrutiny is not right. People are holding us to a higher standard then police and it is unfair. Most of us are better trained in the use of firearms then the police ever will be. The idea that banning open carry will prevent a mass shooting or a open carry advocate will rob some one is absolutely preposterous. This bill is BS and needs to be killed and we need to do everything we can to kill it.

Do me a favor and read my WHOLE post before you go off me.
OK as someone who opened carried for a while now I will say that open carrying at this time will NOT help them beat this law. And before you say I am anti open carry I am very pro open carry but I am all for being a responsible open carrier as well. As a matter of fact I have stood up for open carriers here on Calguns over and over again. And I will also say there are many here that will do nothing but tell you that you are stupid and crazy. And while yes most gun owners are well trained we have seen many times people that buy a gun and DON'T learn anything or even open carry and not bother to do their homework.Even though I did my homework I STILL ran into a situation with a local LEO that turned ugly and even though I was not open carrying at the time MY fourth amendment rights were violated because I with those that WERE open carrying. But if you are STILL bound and determined to open carry then you damn well better do your homework AND here are some GOOD ideas to begin with:

1) Have QUALITY digital recorder with BRAND NEW batteries.

2) Have at least one person in your group that is NOT open carrying and they have either a digital camera and or video camera on them and if it is a video camera that it runs from the moment you leave your home til you return and make sure that person has the guts to NOT turn off that recorder if you do get into an encounter with an officer because I can guarantee it WILL happen.

3) Have the number of a good guns rights attorney/criminal law attorney on your cell phone and the friends cell phone in case you are unable to make the call because you are being arrested at the moment.

4) Make sure you can afford to get yourself out of a jam IE be able to hire a lawyer if something goes wrong even if you are in the right things have happened.

5) Make sure you can quote the relevant penal codes forward, backward and sideways. And make sure you have flyers with those penal codes with you.

6) Do your homework not only google the area you are going to be in looking for ANY K-12 schools but go to the locations physically BEFORE the fact and look. BTW you do know that charter schools don't have a lot of signage and DO fall in to the category of 626.9. Know the boundaries of where those schools end. Those borders are from the edge of the property of where the school is to 1000' out in all directions. And know that Westgate Malls seem to be getting charter schools in most of their malls so that makes them off limits.

7) Do you know the policy of ALL businesses that you may be frequenting. Just because you have a right to carry they also have the right to say you do NOT have the right to do so in their business. If they don't allow it can you keep your cool with the management and leave or are you going to cause a problem that may get the LEO to come on a call.

8) If you are going to go as a group what is the demographic of your group. Do you have those that are not the normal open carriers in your group. Women, minorities and disabled people will get your group a lot further than if it is a group of all males that are wearing "kill them all" type of T-shirts.

9) Do you plan on telling people what to wear when they do this event? As with the point above first impressions will make or break your event. If you have fifty people wearing "gun" t-shirts, combat boots and baseball bats will not go over nearly as well as a group of people that may be dressed in business casual clothing.

10) And telling the general public that you may be better trained than their local LE might get you the opposite reaction than you are wanting. There are many departments that are excellent in their training of their officers. Even though we all know there are some that are not. Telling them or the general public that will not win anyone over. Not to mention there are quite a few LEO people that frequent Calguns and don't like seeing someone say they are not as "well trained" as you are.

fiddletown
06-01-2011, 5:59 PM
Empirical evidence through the practice of open carry nationwide...Like in Philadelphia? ...as well as other civil rights efforts. Lunch counters used to be segregated. Interacial marriage used to be taboo. Homosexuality used to be behind closed doors. Gay marriage wasnt even a considered an option. ....Bad analogies. These causes had wide and deep support before public demonstrations. When MLK and others were marching, their actions were being supported by editorials in major, mainstream media, on college campuses and from pulpits around the country. We have nothing like that currently going for us, nor do we have anyone carrying our banner with anything like the charisma of many of the leaders of these other movements.

KylaGWolf
06-01-2011, 6:01 PM
Empirical evidence through the practice of open carry nationwide as well as other civil rights efforts. Lunch counters used to be segregated. Interacial marriage used to be taboo. Homosexuality used to be behind closed doors. Gay marriage wasnt even a considered an option. All that was challenged-- BUT these challenges came about in measured doses...

Mass open carry events do not normalize gun ownership because they make a spectacle of the practice. However, one or two advocates at a venue, slowly acclimates the bystanders often without alarming anyone.

Because the previous bill that you mention was due to a legislator from here in San Diego getting upset that some of us had the audacity to open carry at the beach.

wash
06-01-2011, 6:17 PM
Honestly, open carry outside of California has probably hurt our situation here almost as open carry in CA.

When people saw that guy carrying an AR outside of an Obama campaign event, people freaked out. The locals didn't bat an eye but the main stream media (based in densely urban areas) treated it like the guy had a parasitic twin that wanted to sing in American Idol.

Then there are the antis and Starbucks. They got pissed off when they complained and Starbucks said "it's not against the law and they aren't causing trouble so we will not ban them from our stores". That is probably what started the soccer moms going around and ~threatening boycotts at chain restaurants if they did not ban carry. Once the issue was in the public eye, the antis had something to attack.

That is enough empirical evidence for me to know that the good done by open carry is outweighed by the bad it can cause (and by a large margin).

Once carry has been established as a right that can not be infringed (by the courts), my tune will change but now is not the time.

CitaDeL
06-01-2011, 6:22 PM
Honestly, open carry outside of California has probably hurt our situation here almost as open carry in CA.

When people saw that guy carrying an AR outside of an Obama campaign event, people freaked out. The locals didn't bat an eye but the main stream media (based in densely urban areas) treated it like the guy had a parasitic twin that wanted to sing in American Idol.

Then there are the antis and Starbucks. They got pissed off when they complained and Starbucks said "it's not against the law and they aren't causing trouble so we will not ban them from our stores". That is probably what started the soccer moms going around and ~threatening boycotts at chain restaurants if they did not ban carry. Once the issue was in the public eye, the antis had something to attack.

That is enough empirical evidence for me to know that the good done by open carry is outweighed by the bad it can cause (and by a large margin).

Once carry has been established as a right that can not be infringed (by the courts), my tune will change but now is not the time.

You make no distinction between solo open carry and open carry en masse, do you?

I think its funny you mention the boycotts- and I'm wondering just how that is working out for the folks at the Brady Campaign. They really must miss their Starbucks after they failed to coerse Starbucks from serving openly armed customers.

Audredger
06-01-2011, 6:26 PM
In County we "open carry" everywhere! Now mind you, it's no a gun in our holsters but a copy of the Constitution!

Carry a Constitution in your holster! It sends a message and, it won't get you thrown in jail! Carry a spare in your mag holder incase you need to reload!

oaklander
06-01-2011, 7:31 PM
I thought you said "In Country" - then I read the whole rest of your post thinking you were in The IRAQ!!!

ROFL:D

Then I realized that you live in a "free COUNTY" - like I do!!!

In County we "open carry" everywhere! Now mind you, it's no a gun in our holsters but a copy of the Constitution!

Carry a Constitution in your holster! It sends a message and, it won't get you thrown in jail! Carry a spare in your mag holder incase you need to reload!

oaklander
06-01-2011, 7:46 PM
LOL - I just reread the rest of the thread, and realized that I actually DID drink that 6th cup!!!

I'm sorry if any of my posts were mean. They were intended to be.

Sometimes we are our own worst enemy when we substitute random "feel good" action for cold, hard, planned legal and political strategies.

As much as I joke on these forums, I am very serious behind the scenes on this stuff - and I KNOW the people who call the shots on things (bad analogy, sorry). I'm not making things up when I say that mass UOC protests can really hurt us right now.

Good intentions that have bad effects are equally as bad as bad intentions that have bad effects. . .

Agreed :thumbsup:

mossy
06-01-2011, 8:27 PM
I believe this falls under fair use.

DO NOT anger the calguns gods. they are very powerful and vengeful and will smite those who defy them with the force of a thousand suns. repent before it is to late!!!!!

hoffmang
06-01-2011, 8:49 PM
Can any of you unloaded open carry absolutists explain to me why you carry unloaded?

The right to keep and bear arms is the right to bear functional firearms.

I know the answer to my question. Everyone is making a strategic decision but then folks get bent out of shape and try to call those of us thinking about the issue in a broader form with more understanding of the battlefield as somehow less patriotic.

AB-144 is constitutional. Sorry folks. States can choose the manner in which you carry and California has chosen concealed while unconstitutionally withholding permits at the LEA level.

You can't convince Kennedy that a state can't ban LOC while allowing shall issue concealed carry or vice-versa.

This is from someone who has documented proof of LOCing this past weekend. However, I was in TN where it causes no problems...

-Gene

Falconis
06-01-2011, 8:55 PM
In County we "open carry" everywhere! Now mind you, it's no a gun in our holsters but a copy of the Constitution!

Carry a Constitution in your holster! It sends a message and, it won't get you thrown in jail! Carry a spare in your mag holder incase you need to reload!

I actually kinda like this ..... :D

Falconis
06-01-2011, 8:57 PM
Can any of you unloaded open carry absolutists explain to me why you carry unloaded?

The right to keep and bear arms is the right to bear functional firearms.

I know the answer to my question. Everyone is making a strategic decision but then folks get bent out of shape and try to call those of us thinking about the issue in a broader form with more understanding of the battlefield as somehow less patriotic.

AB-144 is constitutional. Sorry folks. States can choose the manner in which you carry and California has chosen concealed while unconstitutionally withholding permits at the LEA level.

You can't convince Kennedy that a state can't ban LOC while allowing shall issue concealed carry or vice-versa.

This is from someone who has documented proof of LOCing this past weekend. However, I was in TN where it causes no problems...

-Gene


Yeah can you give us a recap? I just saw the "stats" :D

hgreen
06-01-2011, 9:54 PM
Oak, Just my opinion but, when you have someone asking for money, hgreen, wouldn't it be wise to at very least give the name of the lawyer? CGF as far as i can see has never held back intel to its donors that would benefit gun owners. (except info not for the ears of the general public for reasons of not letting the enemy get a heads up of course)

You are more than welcome to ask the individuals involved with the legal action yourself.

I have nothing more to do with it than posting the link to let people know what's going on and donating a few dollars.

Not sure why you think its my case, my name is not on the website.

KylaGWolf
06-01-2011, 10:05 PM
Can any of you unloaded open carry absolutists explain to me why you carry unloaded?

The right to keep and bear arms is the right to bear functional firearms.

I know the answer to my question. Everyone is making a strategic decision but then folks get bent out of shape and try to call those of us thinking about the issue in a broader form with more understanding of the battlefield as somehow less patriotic.

AB-144 is constitutional. Sorry folks. States can choose the manner in which you carry and California has chosen concealed while unconstitutionally withholding permits at the LEA level.

You can't convince Kennedy that a state can't ban LOC while allowing shall issue concealed carry or vice-versa.

This is from someone who has documented proof of LOCing this past weekend. However, I was in TN where it causes no problems...

-Gene

Gene I know why I do but then again we all know I am not your typical open carrier and even I had the smarts to stand down even before Calguns asked a while back. And in all honesty as much as I would love to open carry every chance I get I also know that right now it would not be wise for me to do so since there are at least two laws that could make it nearly impossible for me to even get my gun out of my house to go to the range.

And while I would love to be able to choose between LOC and CCW depending on which situation is right for that outing and what my physical condition is that day. I doubt we shall ever be as lucky as some in that respect. Given that I want CCW if I can't have both.

For those that want to do the so called poke the bear in the nose routine know this that bear WILL bite back and hard and that bite will affect a whole lot more than just you. And while I am all for open carry quite frankly I don't want to lose what little bit of rights I have because someone has decided to thumb their nose at those that have a good idea of what is going on.

5thgen4runner
06-01-2011, 10:23 PM
This states codes and regulations and it's military Aka leo's that enforce them is nauseating

hoffmang
06-01-2011, 10:51 PM
Yeah can you give us a recap? I just saw the "stats" :D

Proof that I LOC:

24500853

-Gene

Falconis
06-02-2011, 12:42 AM
Ever try concealing that thing? :)

wildhawker
06-02-2011, 12:59 AM
Ever try concealing that thing? :)

That's what she said.

oaklander
06-02-2011, 5:24 AM
You still have to have some room for the HUGE balls!!!

(CANNON BALLS - you perverts!)

:D

Back on topic: the GENERAL RULE IS THIS:

In the United States, it's perfectly fine to open carry in those portions of the country that have a lot of banjos. Not sure why this is - but it's true out here too. Just remember, "if there's a lot of banjos around, open carry is OK."

Just a general rule of thumb. . .

Ever try concealing that thing? :)

tenpercentfirearms
06-02-2011, 6:45 AM
CaptainSlav, I've been open carrying since 1988. I was never stopped and checked by any LEO. Until last year, after the uproar over the mass UOC gatherings. Up until then, no one noticed.

If you want to UOC, go ahead, but be prepared for the consequences.
As for being a "new poster", BS. Maybe with that name.

If you are as uninformed as you appear to be, go ahead and do what you want, while you are in jail, the rest of us won't have to read your silly a** posts.

This sums up the open carry movement for me. Responsible citizens have been open carrying as a means of protection for quite some time. It was never an issue.

Some people are open carrying in large groups for no reason other than "they can". And that is where we got AB144.

yelohamr
06-02-2011, 9:17 AM
You still have to have some room for the HUGE balls!!!

(CANNON BALLS - you perverts!)

:D

Back on topic: the GENERAL RULE IS THIS:

In the United States, it's perfectly fine to open carry in those portions of the country that have a lot of banjos. Not sure why this is - but it's true out here too. Just remember, "if there's a lot of banjos around, open carry is OK."

Just a general rule of thumb. . .

And if you hear the banjos...
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTKGf-ruyKv1pjPrIi8J0KGTQ_AH0X5cvOnn03iZB0PhP7CANPS

Maestro Pistolero
06-02-2011, 9:44 AM
If it's been said in this thread, my apologies, I confess to having skimmed the last two pages.

But if we can beat this back one more time there is a chance that LOC could be protected down the line, which, needless to say, is much more meaningful than UOC.

It is MUCH harder and expensive to strike a law after the fact than to prevent it's passing in the first place.

If there is a chance to prevent it's passing, IT WILL BE MADE MORE DIFFICULT IN AN ENVIRONMENT THAT RUFFLES FEATHERS In SACRAMENTO, i.e. with UOC demonstrations.

It would be smarter to play on their fear by pointing out that banning UOC will lead to shall-issue CCW. :eek:

When you're stalking prey, you don't start off by marching loudly into the forest. Lay low for a little while longer, I think that's all we're suggesting here.

sharpie613
06-02-2011, 10:56 AM
Old bull and the young bull.

:)

stix213
06-02-2011, 11:34 AM
It would be smarter to play on their fear by pointing out that banning UOC will lead to shall-issue CCW. :eek:


I'm considering using a bit of reverse psychology here by writing my representatives in support of AB144, and citing this very thing. Something like "Please support Concealed Weapons Permits for all, support AB144"

I'm betting that will be a more persuasive argument with Mark Leno then asking him to vote no so I can occasionally open carry.

Ctwo
06-02-2011, 11:42 AM
After reading all of the comments in this thread and carefully considering everyone's position, perspective, and point of view, all I have to say is,

Bahahaha bahahaha...

SpoonKiller
06-02-2011, 11:42 AM
The way to get people on board is not by scaring or shocking them to our point of view but by showing people on the fence that OCers are your friends and neighbors. How bout open carrying bananas in your holsters, make a mockery of the event to reflect the mockery that is taking place in the Capitol. That would get people talking and would make you more approachable and then you can get your message accross to "regular" folks. Show up with guns and all you're doing is reinforcing the crazy gun nut caricature that the antis push out.

dantodd
06-02-2011, 12:22 PM
A big part of being in the Trenches in any battle is knowing when to keep your fool head down.

BOFH
06-02-2011, 4:37 PM
Old bull and the young bull.

:)

Indeed.

Cokebottle
06-02-2011, 6:14 PM
Back on topic: the GENERAL RULE IS THIS:

In the United States, it's perfectly fine to open carry in those portions of the country that have a lot of banjos. Not sure why this is - but it's true out here too. Just remember, "if there's a lot of banjos around, open carry is OK."

Just a general rule of thumb. . .
Jeez.... that's an easy fix!

I've always wanted to make a banjo.

Maybe I should make a few hundred and sell them in LA County.

Cokebottle
06-02-2011, 6:16 PM
Old bull and the young bull.

:)
Bingo.

Or as Gene says, "Chess, not checkers"


It's not all about "King me"... and sometimes a few pieces have to be sacrificed to bring about a win.