PDA

View Full Version : Healing the Orgs. that fight


taperxz
12-10-2012, 6:18 PM
What can the users of this site do to promote healing and some sort of unity between the fighters of our 2A rights?

Do we stop donating until we see change? Take sides and keep up the bickering until someone loses financially and dies off?

What can we do in regards to CRPA, CGF, local NRA and the lawyers that i have seen personally make snide remarks to each other even when fighting for a common goal.

What should we do to persuade them to remember that their bottom line of making money in court is NOT what our mission is about let alone fame and notoriety? Flame on! Its still about our rights FWIW.;):)

JTecalo
12-10-2012, 6:22 PM
respect

taperxz
12-10-2012, 6:27 PM
respect

Respect is cool! I want winners though.

taperxz
12-10-2012, 6:28 PM
Just a question. Is it time for CRPA, SAF, CGF to start to look for a little new blood in some of the representatives??? Of course im talking locally.

bwiese
12-10-2012, 6:35 PM
I will just say web forums blow things way outta proportion sometimes.

Things move on and get done, or they don't.

elSquid
12-10-2012, 6:38 PM
Take sides and keep up the bickering until someone loses financially and dies off?


No need to take sides. Donate to the organizations that you feel are effective; nothing says that you have to pick and support just one, and nothing says that you must support all pro-gun orgs with equal amounts.

If a group accomplishes something noteworthy, toss 'em a few extra bucks.

If a group is spinning its wheels or is behaving in a manner that is counter-productive, hold off until they get their act together.

: shrug :

-- Michael

Kestryll
12-10-2012, 6:57 PM
I suspect my answers will be ill-received by some and might piss other off but hey, when you're on a roll why stop! ;)

As far as healing goes the hardest thing to get past is that the parties involved have to WANT to heal relationships first.
This is where we have a major stumbling block.

Each group/person/'side' thinks they are doing what is best in their opinion.
The problem comes when that grows from introspection, 'How/what am I doing and what is my plan' to accusation, 'You're not doing what I am or the way I think you should so you're wrong and evil'.
Essentially it's the 'One True Path' concept, 'My way is the only way, any others are wrong and should be eliminated'.

So how do you get people to talk when their starting point is that everyone else is the enemy and detrimental to their One True Path?

The other problem to overcome is the 'I don't need to deal with anyone else, I know the truth and the True path so I don't need anyone else' mindset.
As long as people/groups are convinced that everyone else needs to stop, go away and just let them fix everything there is nothing much to discuss.

Before this can be healed there has to be a desire to heal.
Before there can be any form of 'unity' or even just the basic admission of a common goal there has to be a desire for it to exist.
Before you can even discuss healing the idea that anyone who differs in opinion or does not march in lockstep is the enemy has to be set aside.

So I guess my question to you, and the forum at large, is do you think these three necessities can ever be met?

If so, then there is hope that we can stop fighting each other and all fight the same enemy.

If not then the bickering, fighting and animosity we see today is going to be the norm from now on.

taperxz
12-10-2012, 7:01 PM
SURE this can all be accomplished IF some are willing to check their egos at the door. (all groups)

Thats really all i gotta say bout that.

taperxz
12-10-2012, 7:02 PM
I will just say web forums blow things way outta proportion sometimes.

Things move on and get done, or they don't.

AND i certainly agree with this too;)

JTecalo
12-10-2012, 7:12 PM
SURE this can all be accomplished IF some are willing to check their egos at the door. (all groups)

Thats really all i gotta say bout that.

this is what I meant by respect. divide and conquer has worked for a long time.

I will now check my ego if I can find the door..;)

choprzrul
12-10-2012, 7:37 PM
Humility precludes all of these types of behavior.

Am I wrong?

.

choprzrul
12-10-2012, 7:37 PM
Humility precludes all of these types of behavior.

Am I wrong?

.

Meplat
12-10-2012, 7:41 PM
Just a question. Is it time for CRPA, SAF, CGF to start to look for a little new blood in some of the representatives??? Of course im talking locally.

I think not. With entrenchment and some success come infighting, it seems to be human nature. I think as few as one; maybe two deletions from the cast of characters would probably clear things up a lot.

Drivedabizness
12-10-2012, 8:10 PM
A lot of it is basic leadership / professionalism.

Put a bunch of passionate, alpha personalities in a room and you will soon see who wants the cause to win and who just wants to win. But when smart, people of principle (whether or not you think they have contributed as much as you have to the cause) start to recoil from your behavior a true leader checks him/her self so as not to do damage.

I'm still hoping cooler, non a-holish heads can prevail.

Meplat
12-10-2012, 8:40 PM
I remember in the past seeing certain snide sniping on the board, with the target well veiled, and thinking; ‘if you are going to bring it up in a public forum, why not let everyone in on it’?

Be careful what you wish for!:eek:

DRH
12-10-2012, 9:45 PM
I remember in the past seeing certain snide sniping on the board, with the target well veiled, and thinking; ‘if you are going to bring it up in a public forum, why not let everyone in on it’?

Be careful what you wish for!:eek:

You know I was thinking that exact same thing in the other thread when Bill make the thinly veiled attack on the other board members moral character. Even though I may not want to know the answer, I think it would be better if he explained his accusations.

OP, I believe the egos may have grown too big for these organizations to ever come back together. Maybe they should just work apart, like in divide and conquer.

Moonshine
12-10-2012, 9:53 PM
I wanted to put this out there that I think Calguns has been a real game changer in terms of grass roots organizing and has really made a lot of progress in California at a time when traditional organizations hadn't been making a lot of changes. Hence I wanted to give two thumbs up to the hard working folks here.

GettoPhilosopher
12-10-2012, 11:58 PM
I will just say web forums blow things way outta proportion sometimes.

Things move on and get done, or they don't.

This x100. There was a thread a while back where someone thought I may have gipped them ~$2 or so on the check at an event. By the time I found the thread, it was something like 3 pages of people calling for my head as the penultimate example of everything wrong with the world today. I explained that I had done the math and was fairly confident I had left enough $$$ to cover my tab, but offered to paypal some $$$ to the guy who was left holding the bag on the group check if he felt I'd gipped him (or hell, if he just wanted help covering it).

The guy said hey, no problem, I'll take your word on it and no need to send me the $$$ but thanks for offering.

....the thread then went on for a couple MORE pages of people who weren't there and had no dog in the fight calling for my head as the penultimate example of everything wrong with the world/CGN/the internet/etc.

:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Humility precludes all of these types of behavior.

Am I wrong?


You're right. However, I'd add that false humility is just another form of hubris, and is just as destructive. Passive aggression is still aggression.

In the interest of 2A rights, would it maybe be a better thing if they fight? Would it maybe be an even better thing of some of the parties win the fight (meaning they get to live to fight another day), while others lose the fight (meaning they die)?

That's kind of my personal take on it. I'm working with/supporting the group(s) and people I feel are effective. Time will tell if A or B or C was right, or A&B, or all of the above, or none of the above, whatever.


Can one organization (even if it were perfect) really further all these contradictory goals? It seems particularly difficult, given that in reality, the organization are far from perfect...

Nope. Personally, I feel that's part of the problem; groups that excelled at a specific "Thing" trying to replace or take credit for the work of Group B and Group B's "Thing". But that's just my opinion.

My suggestion is the following. Trying to force a false unity on these organization, and preventing some of them from becoming the natural victims of evolution is not productive. Let's take the current example of the recent carry court cases, with NRA/Michel on one side, CGF/SAF/Gura on another, CGN management somewhere else, and Mr. Gorski in hyperspace. Maybe it's better if competing approaches are tried out, and if they can openly critique each other, and some of these groups or people exit stage left, into well-deserved obscurity.

I agree mostly. Generally that's my POV; let's all do our "Thing", and if Group A really is King of Fort Kick@$$, it'll show, and if Group B really is incompetent, it'll show, etc, etc. The hard part is one group's screwups can cost every gun owner their rights. So while I wish we could all just STFU and do our own thing, there has to remain at least *some* dialogue, however caustic, lest the Gorskis of the world screw all of us over.

bwiese
12-11-2012, 1:18 AM
Fight?

A chain of posts on a website?

Web forums have the rough equivalent "AGC" -- 'automatic gain control", which raises weak signals to an average level (and dilutes spikes).

Work continues.

GettoPhilosopher
12-11-2012, 1:23 AM
Work continues.

QFT.

stingray4540
12-11-2012, 1:24 AM
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Why they don't consult with each other and try to work together is beyond me. So you have your differences, get together and discuss them like adults, and come to an agreement, even if its an agreement to disagree.
Even if one makes a move you don't agree with, isn't it your responsibility to support them for the sake that they are on our side?

The fight for 2A seems to be degrading into another pile of political excrement. Even if I do support them, they seem to be going the way of any other political/legal organization.

CDFingers
12-11-2012, 8:28 AM
The right could try accepting that gun owners on the left exist and vote.

CDFingers

CavTrooper
12-11-2012, 8:38 AM
The right could try accepting that gun owners on the left exist and vote.

CDFingers

Oh hey.. partisan sniping! Never thought Id see the day!

Oh wait... nevermind... its you.

tcrpe
12-11-2012, 8:42 AM
What's wrong, Cav? Don't trust the left with your 2nd Amendment rights?

Can't imagine why not.

stix213
12-11-2012, 8:49 AM
At least one thread everyone seems to be getting along in ;)

wildhawker
12-11-2012, 9:02 AM
Fight?

A chain of posts on a website?

Web forums have the rough equivalent "AGC" -- 'automatic gain control", which raises weak signals to an average level (and dilutes spikes).

Work continues.

This.

-Brandon

zhyla
12-11-2012, 9:41 AM
Group hug?

tankarian
12-11-2012, 9:41 AM
The right could try accepting that gun owners on the left exist and vote.

CDFingers
Vote for who?
Dianne Feinstein and DeLeon?
Thanks but no thanks. :rolleyes:

berto
12-11-2012, 11:09 AM
The rancor between people and orgs isn't pretty but we're in a fight. Most of the folks involved want to win but differ in the path towards victory. Yeah, I'd love a big group hug and a drum circle but I'd rather win. Sometimes winning is ugly. A lot of our drama is pointless and gets amplified because of the online nature of our discussions. Don't let the disagreements turn you away from the fight. Figure out which people/orgs are worthy of your support and help them. Let's win this.

Meplat
12-11-2012, 2:20 PM
The right could try accepting that gun owners on the left exist and vote.

CDFingers

Yet another dimension for contention is introduced! :facepalm:

Meplat
12-11-2012, 2:35 PM
The right could try accepting that gun owners on the left exist and vote.

CDFingers

Of course there are gun owners on the left! Let’s see, there’s Mao, and Stalin, and Putin, and that Ill guy in Korea……………………………………..:rolleyes:

GettoPhilosopher
12-11-2012, 5:57 PM
The right could try accepting that gun owners on the left exist and vote.

CDFingers

Calgunners: Geez, can't we get along? Stop with the infighting!
CDFingers: well, you could stop bashing liberal gunnies and calgunners.
Calgunners: SCREW YOU!

Yup, gotta love it.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2