Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 01-06-2010, 5:10 PM
GrizzlyGuy's Avatar
GrizzlyGuy GrizzlyGuy is offline
Gun Runner to The Stars
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern Sierras
Posts: 5,469
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6172crew View Post
Why would you take what he said and not take what CGF says? CGF says it is going to cost more and be alot harder to fight bad laws without a 2nd ammendment.

All the UOC carry guys have to do is wait, its the rest of us who will have to pay up later if they are wrong.

If CGF is wrong you had only to wait 5 months.

Who here think that is too uch to ask?
MANY, apparently. See the various UOC threads or visit this forum. People can wish that not to be true, but it is nevertheless true. The world has changed, the genie is out of the bottle, and the genie isn't going back in. A new reality now exists.

My assessment of why that happened is here, and my suggestion for how to respond to this new reality is here. Wildhawker hints that a similar idea may already be on the CGF shelf here. Could it be time to grab it off the shelf and deploy it earlier than originally desired?

Analogy: a parade has suddenly appeared in front of CGF's window. They didn't plan for the parade to happen until much later, and wish that parade wasn't there right now, but it is real and not an illusion. More and more enthusiastic people are joining the parade every day. CGF's options:

1) Jump in front of (or at least walk along side of) the parade and help mentor/guide/lead it to maximize benefits and minimize risk.

2) Follow the parade.

3) Do nothing, adhere to the original strategy with no tactical changes, keep fingers crossed, and hope no harm comes from the parade's enthusiastic activities in the next five months.

OFF THE TABLE OPTION: Yell "Stop!" at the parade goers, or plead with them to stop, and expect them all to actually stop parading and go home.

Not to go Godwin, but there was once a guy who had (in conjunction with his generals) developed a pretty darned good strategy and plan for conquering the guys to his east. Everything went well, but then the reality on the ground changed. Rather than adapt, he refused to budge from his original plan, denied his generals the ability to make even a tactical retreat, and... ended up pushing non-existent armies around on his grand-plan board right up to the time he died.

He was obviously a bad guy, but nobody wants to see history repeat with the good guys losing instead. Reality IS, it must be dealt with, no matter how uncomfortable, surprising or disconcerting it may be.
__________________
Gun law complexity got you down? Get the FAQs, Jack!

Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 01-06-2010, 6:36 PM
MudCamper's Avatar
MudCamper MudCamper is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sebastopol
Posts: 4,264
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyGuy View Post
MANY, apparently. See the various UOC threads or visit this forum. People can wish that not to be true, but it is nevertheless true. The world has changed, the genie is out of the bottle, and the genie isn't going back in. A new reality now exists.
Every time a new newspaper article comes out about UOC or another TV news spot runs, we see a whole bunch of new members join up on OCDO. On COCDO the site traffic increased by 10 fold for several days after each TV news story ran. The anti-2A press is actually creating more open carriers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulgron View Post
If the UOCers push this thing hard enough that the legislature passes a bill banning unloaded open carry
My question at this point is, if the CA legislature passed such a law in record time (before June), would it not take effect until 2011? And if we win 2A incorporation in June of 2010, would it be possible to block the new law on constitutional grounds before it goes into effect?
__________________
FPC, CGF, SAF, Madison, NRA, CRPA - CCW DENIED by SCSO
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 01-06-2010, 6:43 PM
RP1911's Avatar
RP1911 RP1911 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Minden, NV.
Posts: 4,799
iTrader: 165 / 100%
Default

They can do an urgency bill which becomes law upon passage if not vetoed by the Governor. However, it requires aye votes by 2/3 of both Senate and Assembly.
__________________
RP1911
-----------
NRA Life
CGN and NVS
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 01-06-2010, 7:16 PM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chainsaw View Post
I concede that point, but ask to consider the following. "Rights" are never absolute (in spite of everything a whole bunch of absolutists on all sides claim), but are a social convention, and as such a function of the values of the society. And since societies contain a multitude of individuals and viewpoints, the rule of law is distilled from the view of the overwhelming majority of the member. As an example: In some societies, eating humans (for nutrition, or for religious ceremonies) was considered acceptable, and humans were even bred and kept for this purpose. Today in a western society, it is so inacceptable and taboo that is has given rise to humor/horror of the "soylent green" variety. The overwhelming majority of us does not want to be eaten (other than as an exclamation in pornographic movies), and this causes cannibalism to be outlawed. This extreme example shows that what some societies consider to be their right, others consider abhorrent. There might still be a very small antropophagous minority in our society, but the strong conviction and large number of the opposing side makes that irrelevant.

Now what happens is that certain applications of rights are very much in the center of societal consensus. For example, speaking one's mind on issues of legislation in a forum such as this is a core application of the first amendment, and as such exercising that right is unlikely to harm that right, rather on the contrary. On the other hand, other free speech (such as discussing detailed plans for the assassination of the president, or advocating for erotic acts of the NAMBLA variety) is on the fringe of free speech rights, so much so that the free speech right has had exceptions carved out so this form of speech is no longer legal. Sometimes, rights are so unpopular with the majority that insisting on exercising them, in particular if done with no purpose other than to advocate for those unpopular rights, is likely to cause society to redefine the scope, and remove those rights.

So, I have to (grudgingly?) agree with the following modified version of your statement:

Unpopular exercise of a fringe case of a Constitutional right, in particular if done for no useful purpose, is indeed likely to cause its revocation. This sentence probably summarizes the CGF's position on OC.
Thanks for your thoughtful response. Please note that discussing detailed plans for the assassination of the president is a crime only in the context of making or plotting an actual threat or attempting or conspiring to execute it, as distinct from, say, plotting a movie about a fictional assassination. On the other hand, advocating homosexual paedophilia short of engaging therein is perfectly legal. This last case makes my point, inasmuch as the rights most worth defending are those that are so unpopular with the majority that insisting on exercising them is likely to cause their removal. Protecting the right to the most appalling expression makes for the difference between freedom for all and selfish regard for the like-minded.
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 01-06-2010, 9:25 PM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyGuy View Post
Analogy: a parade has suddenly appeared in front of CGF's window.
One UOC'er has lost his gun rights and been convicted. Another will also. A third probably will not be convicted, but he's going to be out real money, a bunch of grief, and a lot of his time.

UOC activities can not be leveraged while there is no incorporation since there is no right to enforce. Further, causing mass hysteria will only succeed in getting laws detrimental to the carry outcomes passed. What is most likely to happen is that open carry will be fully and completely banned by UOC activity and we'll only be able to CCW.

If that's what you want, carry on UOCing at this time.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 01-06-2010, 9:52 PM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
If [you believe the Party line and] that's what you want, carry on UOCing at this time.
Fixed that for you.
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 01-06-2010, 10:00 PM
Vinz's Avatar
Vinz Vinz is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Daly City
Posts: 2,898
iTrader: 78 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Booshanky View Post
I haven't had a chance to read through this whole thread so this may be beating a dead horse, but I thought what that officer was saying was fairly reasonable. If you're going to be OC'ing in a place that's going to be sending out 20 cops and a helicopter, it's probably not a bad idea to call them up beforehand and say "hey, just FYI we're going to be doing this". And make sure to do it often, once a week or so. Eventually it'll be no big deal.

Unfortunately some areas tend to be more freaked out by firearms than others. The only way around that is time and exposure
.
I was talking with a few outsiders and it seems one fear amonst law enforcment and the public is the fear of a crrime being commited by a person OC and no call was made because firearms becoming the a common place in public.


vinz
__________________
Armis Exposcere Pacem
VM-1 AMBI SLING PLATES stamped US made
VM-1S Strap version ambi sling plate

In Memory Of Babe....I also remember the Eggs and Country fried potatoes that went with that Bacon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fot View Post
In before the penis measurements
ROFL
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 01-06-2010, 10:22 PM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Fixed that for you.
Content free contradiction remains your specialty.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon

Last edited by hoffmang; 01-06-2010 at 10:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 01-06-2010, 11:04 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Fixed that for you.
So, do you have a solution to the conundrum?
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 01-06-2010, 11:55 PM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
So, do you have a solution to the conundrum?
Think for yourself regardless of the Party line.
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:02 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Think for yourself regardless of the Party line.
And what is the "Party line"?
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:25 AM
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,275
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
And what is the "Party line"?
It's whatever he perceives to be in conflict with his own worldview that is expressed by more than one person.
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:25 AM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
And what is the "Party line"?
See above.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:29 AM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
It's whatever he perceives to be in conflict with his own worldview that is expressed by more than one person.
Cute but dumb. A Party line is an opinion held in concert by a mutual admiration society sworn to deprecate all non-joiners.
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:42 AM
IrishPirate's Avatar
IrishPirate IrishPirate is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fairest of the Oaks
Posts: 6,417
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lowracer View Post
Right about now someone will post the photo of the black panthers in the statehouse circa 1967...
who would do that?.....



seriously....i can see why the next-day protesters would get upset, and how they would want to make a point....but it's the hot headedness, not the message, that ended up getting accross to the cops, anti's, and store owners. That was a serious step backwards for us. I'll be the first to admit that when i first heard about UOC I wanted to run outside and walk around the block with my unloaded gun on my hip, just because I could. I didn't do it because i'm in a school zone, but just feeling that i had the power to shove that in the faces of the anti's really made me feel good. Now that i've done a little more research and had the good talk with many calgunners, i'm glad i never did. I think it will be much more beneficial to the gun owning community as a whole to wait until we get incorporation. that way when someone gets arrested for it, we can have the media on our side that their rights were violated. it's a shame that those guys haven't found Calguns yet.....otherwise i doubt they would have been there.
__________________

Most civilization is based on cowardice. It's so easy to civilize by teaching cowardice. You water down the standards which would lead to bravery. You restrain the will. You regulate the appetites. You fence in the horizons. You make a law for every movement. You deny the existence of chaos. You teach even the children to breathe slowly. You tame.
People Should Not Be Afraid Of Their Governments, Governments Should Be Afraid Of Their People

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:45 AM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Cute but dumb. A Party line is an opinion held in concert by a mutual admiration society sworn to deprecate all non-joiners.
Still more content free disagreement.

I sometimes think you're simply annoyed that you can get no one to join you on your not firearms related windmill tilt.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:56 AM
Sinixstar Sinixstar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,520
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinz View Post
I was talking with a few outsiders and it seems one fear amonst law enforcment and the public is the fear of a crrime being commited by a person OC and no call was made because firearms becoming the a common place in public.


vinz
That's a pretty big leap of logic there. I would think there's a huge difference between being accustomed to seeing someone with a gun on their hip, and seeing someone with a gun on in their hand pointed at somebody's head.

I OC'd all the time when I lived in NV, and saw many other people who did as well. It was no big deal to see someone carrying there. Yet somehow I think I would still be able to distinguish somebody OC'ing from someone robbing a liquor store. I dunno - maybe that's just me. I R T3h Sm4rtiez.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 01-07-2010, 1:00 AM
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,275
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Cute but dumb. A Party line is an opinion held in concert by a mutual admiration society sworn to deprecate all non-joiners.
Now that we have that cleared up... are we discussing something or is this the "I Disagree With the CGF Conspiracy" party line section?
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 01-07-2010, 1:11 AM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Still more content free disagreement.

I sometimes think you're simply annoyed that you can get no one to join you on your not firearms related windmill tilt.
Thank you for thinking sometimes. It's a fine habit. Consider doing it more often.
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 01-07-2010, 1:15 AM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Thank you for thinking sometimes. It's a fine habit. Consider doing it more often.
Posting content instead of vapid troll like responses would be a better habit for you. You are now at three content free posts in response to me.

Please explain, using facts, why UOC is a good idea at this time.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 01-07-2010, 1:23 AM
Vinz's Avatar
Vinz Vinz is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Daly City
Posts: 2,898
iTrader: 78 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinixstar View Post
That's a pretty big leap of logic there. I would think there's a huge difference between being accustomed to seeing someone with a gun on their hip, and seeing someone with a gun on in their hand pointed at somebody's head.

I OC'd all the time when I lived in NV, and saw many other people who did as well. It was no big deal to see someone carrying there. Yet somehow I think I would still be able to distinguish somebody OC'ing from someone robbing a liquor store. I dunno - maybe that's just me. I R T3h Sm4rtiez.
though it might seem like a big leap but it is surprisingly a common thought, these are the concerns that I have heard.

At what point does the act turn into action? Do we wait for the seemingly friendly UOC to draw his weapon to create harm? Lets remember it only takes 2 seconds to load and charge a handgun and even less than that to pull a loaded gun and engage in a crime. Criminals don't care about laws.

Do we think only law abiding citizens are going to use OC?
How would one know? Can't investigate if its a stolen gun. Can't find out if the carrier is a felon. I am only asking questions cause everyone else seems to ignore the other concerns.

Remember its the what if's that will nail us everytime.

I am still waiting to see what happens when we do have an Oakland UOC meet up. 98th and Edes is my old stomping ground and it would be an interesting meet site.



vinz
__________________
Armis Exposcere Pacem
VM-1 AMBI SLING PLATES stamped US made
VM-1S Strap version ambi sling plate

In Memory Of Babe....I also remember the Eggs and Country fried potatoes that went with that Bacon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fot View Post
In before the penis measurements
ROFL
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 01-07-2010, 4:56 AM
zeleny zeleny is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Posts: 329
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Please explain, using facts, why UOC is a good idea at this time.
Human responses aren't, and can't be, ruled by facts. Faced with peaceful exercise of a Constitutional right, reasonable people are more likely to acknowledge it than attempt to infringe it in response to an imaginary threat. Whereas it behooves anyone self-identified as a proponent of rights to abstain from curtailing their exercise through promotion of herd behavior.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 01-07-2010, 7:05 AM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,633
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishPirate View Post
I think it will be much more beneficial to the gun owning community as a whole to wait until we get incorporation. that way when someone gets arrested for it, we can have the media on our side that their rights were violated.
What in the world makes you think the media will suddenly be on our side post-incorporation??? That seems to me an incredibly naive position to take.

Understand this: post-incorporation, nobody is going to immediately change their beliefs or position. Their actions will not change, either. The only thing that will change is our ability to challenge 2A-violating laws in court, and that's all.

But for some things, that will be sufficient.


Don't confuse legal victory with social victory. They're not the same thing at all.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 01-07-2010, 8:04 AM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 20,905
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Cute but dumb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Thank you for thinking sometimes. It's a fine habit. Consider doing it more often.
Well, I see we've moved from real discussion to childish insults and derogatory comments.

Congratulations, now you're REALLY a 'non-joiner'.

Maybe when you grow up and learn how to discuss and debate above the Jr. High Schoolyard level you can try again.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CRPA.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 01-07-2010, 8:19 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Wasn't this guy banned once before for doing the same thing, Kes?
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 01-07-2010, 8:34 AM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 20,905
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
Wasn't this guy banned once before for doing the same thing, Kes?
I try to give second chances but sometimes it just doesn't work.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CRPA.
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 01-07-2010, 8:44 AM
GrizzlyGuy's Avatar
GrizzlyGuy GrizzlyGuy is offline
Gun Runner to The Stars
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern Sierras
Posts: 5,469
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
One UOC'er has lost his gun rights and been convicted. Another will also. A third probably will not be convicted, but he's going to be out real money, a bunch of grief, and a lot of his time.

UOC activities can not be leveraged while there is no incorporation since there is no right to enforce. Further, causing mass hysteria will only succeed in getting laws detrimental to the carry outcomes passed. What is most likely to happen is that open carry will be fully and completely banned by UOC activity and we'll only be able to CCW.

If that's what you want, carry on UOCing at this time.
I understand your position and strategy Gene, and I'm not challenging it. I am simply observing that there is a small and growing group of activists pursuing UOC now, and they aren't going to stop. Those activities pose a risk to your strategy.

Wouldn't it be better if they (the ones not willing to stop) could somehow be persuaded to conduct their activities in ways that are less provocative to LE, and project a more positive public image (e.g. a walk-a-thon benefiting a popular charity held outside the urban areas)? That would lower the probability of "mass hysteria" occurring. Even if we stipulate that 'no good can come from UOC at this time' for the sake of argument, wouldn't that at least make it less bad?

I'm not suggesting changing your strategy. I'm only suggesting a minor tactical adjustment so as to minimize the risks to your strategy.
__________________
Gun law complexity got you down? Get the FAQs, Jack!

Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 01-07-2010, 9:46 AM
ipser's Avatar
ipser ipser is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 499
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyGuy View Post
I understand your position and strategy Gene, and I'm not challenging it. I am simply observing that there is a small and growing group of activists pursuing UOC now, and they aren't going to stop. Those activities pose a risk to your strategy.

Wouldn't it be better if they (the ones not willing to stop) could somehow be persuaded to conduct their activities in ways that are less provocative to LE, and project a more positive public image (e.g. a walk-a-thon benefiting a popular charity held outside the urban areas)? That would lower the probability of "mass hysteria" occurring. Even if we stipulate that 'no good can come from UOC at this time' for the sake of argument, wouldn't that at least make it less bad?

I'm not suggesting changing your strategy. I'm only suggesting a minor tactical adjustment so as to minimize the risks to your strategy.
GrizzlyGuy, you're making a key, but subtle point that bears closer examination.

While it's all well and good to demand proof or evidence of others before we are persuaded, it's naive to forget that they are quite capable of acting on their own beliefs without anyone's permission here. Any strategy that fails to take that into account is not a good strategy and anyone who pursues such a strategy won't engender much confidence.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 01-07-2010, 10:46 AM
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,275
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Ipser, I'll repost 2 comments from another thread due to their relevance here.

A number of people have suggested that, if UOC activism is to continue pending 2A incorporation, it be performed in a manner more conducive to mitigating exposure and fostering some goodwill in the communities. Note that we've not seen this sort of strategic operation by the currently-active UOC group because they are either a) incapable or b) uninterested.

For all the talk of "don't tell me 'no', give me options" there is no evidence to suggest that the active UOC camp has any intention of doing anything other than what they wish to do. You're absolutely correct, people can act free of permission and a basis in logic and reason; I must ask, however, if "irrational and arrogant" is how we should wish our cause to be viewed. Further, this sort of activity flies in the face of the UOC camps proferred justification for maintaining their participation: outreach to the common citizen and modification of the currently-negative perception of gun owners. Do you at your core feel that we're witnessing such as the result of planned militant actions designed not to bridge the chasm but highlight its presence?

LEAs, citizens and policymakers do not distinguish between the various subsects of "gun people"- we either are "one of them [gun nuts]" or not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyGuy View Post
Those are all great questions, Wildhawker. Let me rephrase them slightly so as to hopefully take into account the reality on the ground (as you alluded to in your comment):

1. Given that these activities will continue, how can they be conducted so as to get the best possible publicity? (or least harmful depending on a person's perspective)

2. Given that these activities will continue, how can they be structured to maximize and leverage gains in political capital while minimizing the chances of legal violations occurring?

3. Hold that thought...



Most of the UOC activities have been in urban areas with population, LEAs and media that are not predisposed to enthusiastically accept the message being conveyed by the activists, or for LEAs to respect their 4A rights. In the San Pedro instance, that particular urban area is even more challenging. Through no fault of Army and the other activists there, LAPD overreacted, caused understandable anxiety for the nearby non-participating citizens (helicopter hovering, streets blocked, many LEOs = understandable anxiety), and setup the conditions that could have led to a negative outcome in terms of publicity.

So... given that UOC activities will continue, can they continue in a way that answers the above questions? I think so. One possibility:

Organize a UOC walk-a-thon that benefits a noncontroversial charity that is supported by the majority of Californians: veterans assistance, cancer research, SPCA, etc.

Conduct the walk-a-thon on a well-traveled and pedestrian-safe highway outside the "hostile" urban areas. We obviously want it to be a safe location, and well-traveled means greater exposure to more average people whizzing by. Those people would see a peaceful walk for a good cause, by people who are only incidentally carrying firearms.

Choose media that are most likely to do fair and balanced reporting, and alert them in advance.

Choose one or two activists to be public ambassadors and spokesmen to both the media and law enforcement (should LE show up). Prior to the event, develop talking points and hold a conference call where these spokesmen are challenged with difficult questions and practice their responses. This is much like how politicians prepare for debates.

Consider doing the walk-a-thon with rifles (not black ones, just the tame looking ones) instead of handguns, since people walking down highways with rifles is not uncommon in some areas. Thanks to propaganda from the Brady Bunch and other antis, I also think people are more likely to associate "handgun" with "bad guy".

Designate a walk-a-thon safety officer (like a RSO) who inspects and assures that all firearms are being lawfully carried, traffic laws and other laws are respected, etc.

OPTIONAL: Inform LE in advance that the walk-a-thon will occur, so that they will have an opportunity to plan their response (if any) accordingly. I say "optional" because I'm not sure if the activists would accept this idea, and there may be regions outside of urban areas where it may not be necessary (not all LE agencies dispatch a helicopter, dozens of officers, and block streets).

I could go on, but see Oak's graph.

You may not believe that an event like this would produce positive results or that it is desirable at this time. But given that OC events will continue regardless, wouldn't you agree that conducting them in this way would at least minimize risk to CGF's strategy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
You've offered some reasonable suggestions not unlike what Gene has in the past. If UOC is going to continue, it should predominantly include non-skinhead non-white males.

I completely agree with this strategy and feel that, if UOC activists are going to maintain participation while we wait for McDonald/Palmer/Sykes, they should be wise enough to consider such.

That said, I've witnessed no movement to such a position which tells me that they either refuse to acknowledge the realities of their own movement or they cannot organize such a diverse event in a context less likely to cause damage and more likely to foster some goodwill. Further, I expect that we'll not see it as the primary form of UOC expression until after incorporation and through Calguns events. It's fair to say that my skepticism of UOCs practical value is based more on the historically-consistent approach by the UOC movement than UOC itself.
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.

Last edited by wildhawker; 01-07-2010 at 10:52 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 01-07-2010, 11:13 AM
ipser's Avatar
ipser ipser is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 499
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Ipser, I'll repost 2 comments from another thread due to their relevance here.
Thanks for the repost, it is relevant and I hadn't seen that particular discussion, though I'd seen some less complete versions of the same.

Quote:
A number of people have suggested that, if UOC activism is to continue pending 2A incorporation, it be performed in a manner more conducive to mitigating exposure and fostering some goodwill in the communities. Note that we've not seen this sort of strategic operation by the currently-active UOC group because they are either a) incapable or b) uninterested.

For all the talk of "don't tell me 'no', give me options" there is no evidence to suggest that the active UOC camp has any intention of doing anything other than what they wish to do.
Frankly, I am skeptical of this claim.

Quote:
You're absolutely correct, people can act free of permission and a basis in logic and reason; I must ask, however, if "irrational and arrogant" is how we should wish our cause to be viewed.
But I can appreciate why the UOC movement doesn't pay attention to the Calguns complaints and demands given this.

You think they are arrogant idiots who won't listen to reason and you are surprised that they won't listen to you?

Quote:
Further, this sort of activity flies in the face of the UOC camps proferred justification for maintaining their participation: outreach to the common citizen and modification of the currently-negative perception of gun owners. Do you at your core feel that we're witnessing such as the result of planned militant actions designed not to bridge the chasm but highlight its presence?

LEAs, citizens and policymakers do not distinguish between the various subsects of "gun people"- we either are "one of them [gun nuts]" or not.
From what I've seen described and on video, I see some events that appear positive and others that make me cringe (e.g. the original event of this thread).

If the question you are asking is "isn't the UOC movement hoplessly detrimential ot the RKBA cause" I don't see that. I remain comfortably seated on the fence for reasons that we have discussed here and in the past.

If the question is what can Calguns do the mitigate the downside risk and consequences of the UOC movement it's not at all clear that the current approach is best. And that's the issue that GrizzlyGuy raised (and which I have raised in the past).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 01-07-2010, 12:39 PM
Asmodai's Avatar
Asmodai Asmodai is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes
Posts: 322
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyGuy View Post
Wouldn't it be better if they (the ones not willing to stop) could somehow be persuaded to conduct their activities in ways that are less provocative to LE, and project a more positive public image (e.g. a walk-a-thon benefiting a popular charity held outside the urban areas)? That would lower the probability of "mass hysteria" occurring. Even if we stipulate that 'no good can come from UOC at this time' for the sake of argument, wouldn't that at least make it less bad?

I'm not suggesting changing your strategy. I'm only suggesting a minor tactical adjustment so as to minimize the risks to your strategy.
Well said sir.

My problem is while I recognize the right to UOC, the intellectual dishonesty of some individuals performing UOC "stunts" bothers me. Some do it to exercise their right and educate people which is laudable and not what I would label a stunt, others perform it purely for spectacle and to antagonize law enforcement under the guise of exercising their "right" and "educating the public" and that only harms multiple pro gun-related causes. EDITED [Both displays are touching tender spots right now, which is why the "cease and desist" plea was voiced]

Then to drape some of these activities with a "civil rights movement" cloak, while video taglines or forum posts mock "look at stupid sergeant so-and-so putting my 1911 magazine in backwards" or "see officer X display his total lack of knowledge of UOC laws while he illegally detains me - ha ha" is the height of absurdity. If they think that is persecution, they have another thing coming...

I agree with the principle, not with some of the activity related to it.

People really have far too much time on their hands these days. We need a really big meteor strike or a good old fashioned plague to keep everyone occupied...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony270 View Post
Yeah but it is best when you can walk up to the hog and not be afraid to put the barrel on its forehead at the correct angle and then pull the trigger, or if you let the hog charge you with the pistol holstered then draw down when the hog is 6 feet away and let him have it, thatís the exciting way to take a hog.



Last edited by Asmodai; 01-07-2010 at 12:54 PM.. Reason: Clarification
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 01-07-2010, 1:49 PM
Merle Merle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: East Lake Tahoe
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I read this and get a nagging thought of the UOC methods being used are similar to the ones used by black people. In many of the replies, the acronym UOC is interchangeable with black.

One is a fundamental right and the other is a civil right. I don't think the marches held off, nor were blacks less activist as they waited for the cases to wind through the court system. I would hazard to guess that the activism and growing non-black support helped swayed the courts and their judgements.

When you see the picture of armed men on the capital steps, do people see the guns, or black men first? There are armed officers present but the black man stands out and appears more menacing, especially armed.

Asking people to stand down, as they recognize their rights being violated daily, in hopes an appropriate outcome from the courts is coming goes against human nature and history.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 01-07-2010, 2:18 PM
Asmodai's Avatar
Asmodai Asmodai is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes
Posts: 322
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merle View Post
Asking people to stand down, as they recognize their rights being violated daily, in hopes an appropriate outcome from the courts is coming goes against human nature and history.
And there's the heart of the matter. No ones rights are being violated. Everyone gets sent along their merry way after the fact. No lynchings, no water cannons, no dogs - maybe a police helicopter at $700 per hour in San Pedro...

Exercising an existing right of which no one is familiar with and causes alarm to many who are not in the know will result in detainment and assessment. It is obvious that many UOCers expect this and hope to be on the receiving end of it. They get a kick from it. This is not the way to reaquaint the general public with this seldom used right.

Again, comparing something that ALREADY is a Right (but little known or understood) that a few people have decided to rally around recently - to the Black Civil Rights Movement is ridiculous and insulting. It shows a typical 21st century lack of understanding of the real suffering and toil behind many REAL causes in recent history. And please don't lecture me on how Blacks had the 14th Amendment at the time blah blah blah. It is not the same no matter how important people want to make this particular 2nd Amendment spin off cause.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony270 View Post
Yeah but it is best when you can walk up to the hog and not be afraid to put the barrel on its forehead at the correct angle and then pull the trigger, or if you let the hog charge you with the pistol holstered then draw down when the hog is 6 feet away and let him have it, thatís the exciting way to take a hog.



Last edited by Asmodai; 01-07-2010 at 2:24 PM.. Reason: clarification
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 01-07-2010, 5:26 PM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyGuy View Post
I understand your position and strategy Gene, and I'm not challenging it. I am simply observing that there is a small and growing group of activists pursuing UOC now, and they aren't going to stop. Those activities pose a risk to your strategy.
It's not a risk to "my strategy." It is a risk to your gun rights.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 01-07-2010, 6:51 PM
lavgrunt's Avatar
lavgrunt lavgrunt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 803
iTrader: 62 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
And there's the heart of the matter. No ones rights are being violated. Everyone gets sent along their merry way after the fact. No lynchings, no water cannons, no dogs - maybe a police helicopter at $700 per hour in San Pedro...

Exercising an existing right of which no one is familiar with and causes alarm to many who are not in the know will result in detainment and assessment. It is obvious that many UOCers expect this and hope to be on the receiving end of it. They get a kick from it. This is not the way to reaquaint the general public with this seldom used right.

Again, comparing something that ALREADY is a Right (but little known or understood) that a few people have decided to rally around recently - to the Black Civil Rights Movement is ridiculous and insulting. It shows a typical 21st century lack of understanding of the real suffering and toil behind many REAL causes in recent history. And please don't lecture me on how Blacks had the 14th Amendment at the time blah blah blah. It is not the same no matter how important people want to make this particular 2nd Amendment spin off cause.
Very, very well said......++++1,000,000 !!!!
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 01-07-2010, 7:03 PM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,872
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeleny View Post
Thank you for thinking sometimes. It's a fine habit. Consider doing it more often.
Who is this guy?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 01-07-2010, 7:24 PM
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,275
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardW56 View Post
Who is this guy?
I like to refer to him as "the artist formerly known as Zeleny".

http://www.subrah.com/subrah-iyar/
http://larvatus.livejournal.com/
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 01-07-2010, 7:30 PM
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,275
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
And there's the heart of the matter. No ones rights are being violated.
While I may disagree with the strategy of UOC activists, their rights are most certainly being violated in some documented circumstances (and, I expect, many that have not been).

It's quite appalling to me that we'd attempt to make excuses for what have been in some cases egregious behavior on the part of the law enforcement officers and their respective agencies.
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 01-07-2010, 7:35 PM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,872
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
I like to refer to him as "the artist formerly known as Zeleny".

http://www.subrah.com/subrah-iyar/
http://larvatus.livejournal.com/
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 01-07-2010, 11:16 PM
Theseus's Avatar
Theseus Theseus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,681
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodai View Post
And there's the heart of the matter. No ones rights are being violated. Everyone gets sent along their merry way after the fact. No lynchings, no water cannons, no dogs - maybe a police helicopter at $700 per hour in San Pedro...

Exercising an existing right of which no one is familiar with and causes alarm to many who are not in the know will result in detainment and assessment. It is obvious that many UOCers expect this and hope to be on the receiving end of it. They get a kick from it. This is not the way to reaquaint the general public with this seldom used right.

Again, comparing something that ALREADY is a Right (but little known or understood) that a few people have decided to rally around recently - to the Black Civil Rights Movement is ridiculous and insulting. It shows a typical 21st century lack of understanding of the real suffering and toil behind many REAL causes in recent history. And please don't lecture me on how Blacks had the 14th Amendment at the time blah blah blah. It is not the same no matter how important people want to make this particular 2nd Amendment spin off cause.
I can tell you now that I neither desired or got a kick from police interaction. I agree they could have better things to do with their time and efforts and would rather they spend their time doing that. If I could open carry with no issues criminal or government I would be happier than a turd in a punch bowl.

Is OC exactly like the civil rights movement, not quite. We are not lynched and hung from trees from consorting with white women or sitting at a whites only establishment. To believe they are completely the same is ridiculous I agree. But to say that our fight for rights is not the same in the fact that it is just that, a fight for recognition of our right, then I agree.

But I ask you one question. . . How many gun laws that we have now were not originally designed as a means to prevent blacks and/or other minorities from owning, possessing, and using firearms? And the answer is few.
__________________
Nothing to see here. . . Move along.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:50 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.