CAguns.net website

[MrTokarev]

Earlier today I skipped over there, and read the thread regarding AB1078. Yep, they have a few real, genuine communists over there.

Yeah that thread is eye opening.

[Deelayed]

At first I participated over there because this site was totally gone, as far as I was able to get on to it. However, after watching the interactions of a few of the key participants over there (one of whom was actually describing how and why they would vote for Newsome as president), and a few warnings about my descriptions of some of our elected officials, I decieded to no longer participate. On top of that, I sense that the Raccoon is not a real 2A advocate, but basically a liberal leaning gun owner/competition sport shooter who runs the site as a marketplace of some kind. To each their own, not my interest.

YEAH THAT SITE BLOWS hard

[newshooter650]

I just checked and CAguns is in fact still working. I still prefer OG CALguns myself though!

[stormvet]

I just checked and CAguns is in fact still working. I still prefer OG CALguns myself though!

Oh it’s working alright, it’s working hard to destroy what little 2a rights are left in California. The coon is on a mission and that mission sure as hell doesn't help California 2a.

[Warbonnet]

Oh it’s working alright, it’s working hard to destroy what little 2a rights are left in California. The coon is on a mission and that mission sure as hell doesn't help California 2a.

Site owner there is very confused. He believes that one can balance their politics in a way which coexists with liberal social ideals and leaves some space for 2nd Amendment protections. We all know how wrong that is. The left has ZERO regard for our 2nd Amendment rights as the Democrat party has moved beyond any balance, and is now entirely controlled by the DEI / restorative justice, illegal immigration rights, climate hysteria coven, and the trans agenda kooks. The democrats are at war with gun rights, and have for decades now. You cannot not vote for a democrat in California who will defend gun rights.

Over at Caguns they defend members who have voted for California democrats, and called out anyone from here who has dared remind people of the dire political consequences voting left. The owner at Caguns found a niche of younger gun owners who appear to mainly be they types with recently moved from online gaming to going out and buying rifles and handguns, and are now deep into the "tacti-cool" aspects owning a firearem, and see gun rights mainly as a sport/hobby. Which it can be, but if they are only looking to protect a sport/hobby, then they FAIL to understand the 2nd Amendment's reason.

But over at Caguns if you dare to try and have a political debate; the owner will ban you, and has banned people. He banned on person who dared to say "guns don't kill, people kill". Which somehow triggered the site owner oddly enough.

[ar15robert]

Too much moderation makes it a boring site. Not much for info as the crowds are small. Even though I ain’t in ca anymore I will still come here for some info and reading.

besides been on this site from the begining.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

... Which somehow triggered the site owner oddly enough.

The 'story' was that he had a friend who was shot and killed. The problem was he still blamed the 'gun' and not the individual pulling the trigger, at least insofar as we could ascertain from his posts before he scrubbed them due to the reaction. He claimed to not want to be told how he should... ahem... 'feel' about the incident and when he was informed that it wasn't about how he 'felt' regarding the shooting, but about how he used the language of the anti-gunners, blaming the 'gun' rather than the shooter, he began scrubbing things.

The individual who was banned as part of the reaction, so far as we could tell, hadn't violated any actual rules. However, he was attempting to 'correct' the incongruous 'talking points' many, including the owner, had over there in relation to guns vs. gun rights. In one sense, I could see where he was perceived as an 'irritant.' In a more meaningful sense, however, the reaction and the ban (not to mention the scrubbing and attempted revisionism) told most what they needed to know with regard to the timbre of the site and how it would be 'orchestrated' in the future.

[Warbonnet]

The 'story' was that he had a friend who was shot and killed. The problem was he still blamed the 'gun' and not the individual pulling the trigger, at least insofar as we could ascertain from his posts before he scrubbed them due to the reaction. He claimed to not want to be told how he should... ahem... 'feel' about the incident and when he was informed that it wasn't about how he 'felt' regarding the shooting, but about how he used the language of the anti-gunners, blaming the 'gun' rather than the shooter, he began scrubbing things.

The individual who was banned as part of the reaction, so far as we could tell, hadn't violated any actual rules. However, he was attempting to 'correct' the incongruous 'talking points' many, including the owner, had over there in relation to guns vs. gun rights. In one sense, I could see where he was perceived as an 'irritant.' In a more meaningful sense, however, the reaction and the ban (not to mention the scrubbing and attempted revisionism) told most what they needed to know with regard to the timbre of the site and how it would be 'orchestrated' in the future.

Yeah, that is pretty much how I heard it too. That somebody dared to try and correct the wrong language in a constructive way, and the site owner jumped all over him; had a public tantrum, and then banned him.

I could never associate with a forum like that, especially not one where you would assume people value the 2nd amendment. Why is he afraid of political discussions? Who's feelings is he trying to protect?

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Yeah, that is pretty much how I heard it too. That somebody dared to try and correct the wrong language in a constructive way, and the site owner jumped all over him; had a public tantrum, and then banned him.

I could never associate with a forum like that, especially not one where you would assume people value the 2nd amendment. Why is he afraid of political discussions? Who's feelings is he trying to protect?

His claim is that 'political discussions' lead to chaos and acrimony. In a sense, he's not entirely wrong. From a more realistic viewpoint, he does allow 'politics' on his website; but, there is a decided and noticeable slant. As has been noted, there are a number of Left-leaning members over there and they seemed determined to set the timbre for what is and isn't allowed on the site. My sense is that they came from Reddit and there was even a thread not all that long ago indicating that someone got banned from Reddit over there due to moderators or a moderator taking umbrage to a more 'traditional' way of viewing things. (Maybe it was here. I don't remember at the moment.) If I remember correctly, it was an actual attorney who got banned from Reddit.

If you think back to the raccoon's earlier posts (most of which having been deleted), he was 'gifted' his site's name by the Reddit crew, then he accused Kestryll of 'negligence' in not acquiring it. He then, regularly, observed that the majority of his members were coming from Reddit; though he was clearly pirating membership from here so as to create a sense of 'legitimacy.' Thus, I'm suspicious that he views Reddit as not only his 'market,' but that he likely feels a 'buyer' will come via Reddit, providing him his desired ROI. That means, most likely, what he's 'protecting' isn't so much a 'who,' but a 'what' - his eventual ROI. Of course, he'll snort, deny, and otherwise attempt to reframe it; but, he dug his hole long ago and has little or no actual 'control' over what that hole has been being filled in with.

[jarhead714]

There’s a guy over there on the Koon-Azz’s site who owns the domain, “CAgunz” or something like that and the guy is hounded by the Koon to sell it.😂

The Koon just wants a liberal cuck buyer.

[Warbonnet]

His claim is that 'political discussions' lead to chaos and acrimony. In a sense, he's not entirely wrong. From a more realistic viewpoint, he does allow 'politics' on his website; but, there is a decided and noticeable slant. As has been noted, there are a number of Left-leaning members over there and they seemed determined to set the timbre for what is and isn't allowed on the site. My sense is that they came from Reddit and there was even a thread not all that long ago indicating that someone got banned from Reddit over there due to moderators or a moderator taking umbrage to a more 'traditional' way of viewing things. (Maybe it was here. I don't remember at the moment.) If I remember correctly, it was an actual attorney who got banned from Reddit.

It is just ridiculous to assume that MEN are incapable of mixing it up with political discussions which are passionate. This is supposed to be a community of men who honor civil rights; our 2nd Amendment, which we know must be defended in light of the plans to dismantle it from the left. As long as people don't make personal attacks on other members, these discussions AND DEBATES are perfectly acceptable, especially in off topic areas of a forum. And here those are somewhat filtered out from mass public view from the "upstairs" threads. A space where members may have slightly longer leashes. And here it always seems that discussions are mainly self moderated. Which is part of being MEN; learning where the line is.

Sounds to me like that other place is a space for young men, or "men" incapable of navigating the waters like men ought to be able to do. AKA: "safe spaces". A policy there to avoid people getting "triggered". Which must be the site owner's personal sensibilities.

If you think back to the raccoon's earlier posts (most of which having been deleted), he was 'gifted' his site's name by the Reddit crew, then he accused Kestryll of 'negligence' in not acquiring it. He then, regularly, observed that the majority of his members were coming from Reddit; though he was clearly pirating membership from here so as to create a sense of 'legitimacy.' Thus, I'm suspicious that he views Reddit as not only his 'market,' but that he likely feels a 'buyer' will come via Reddit, providing him his desired ROI. That means, most likely, what he's 'protecting' isn't so much a 'who,' but a 'what' - his eventual ROI. Of course, he'll snort, deny, and otherwise attempt to reframe it; but, he dug his hole long ago and has little or no actual 'control' over what that hole has been being filled in with.

Calguns' challenges aside, that guy over there holds no superiority to Kestryll and this community here. I've seen some of the quotes by caguns members slamming the community here and calling us a bunch of old grumpy boomers..... LOL!! Do they actually think that bothers us?

What is it with many young men today and their "feelings"? Has society turned them into a bunch of chicks

[stormvet]

The coons narcissism was/is off the charts, he came here thinking he was Calguns savior and everyone should view him as a white night in shinning Armor. If I owned Calguns all would be perfect and you will all bow to me, that may work over on Reddit but he was in way over his head here. His my friend was murdered with a gun, so I know what I’m talking about and everyone has to agree with me tantrums were extremely cringe worthy. Like he’s the only one in the world that has experience with that, there is far too much life experience here for that type of none sense. I’ll see his one friend and raise it to three, one a soldier I served with in Iraq KIA and two LE officer friends that were murdered in the line of duty. That was the point when I really noticed that he’s just a whiney kid, living in his Bay Area bubble.

[eaglemike]

IMO the level of actual self-awareness there just isn't very active.
I had a few discussions, and actual facts are not valued. No actual objectivity.
I don't know if I'm banned there, he made some noise about me giving him a bad time. IMHO the discussions in no way were "giving him a bad time."
In my (less than perfect) experience, when some people get a little pushback they seem to become victims.
Old guys that I worked with long ago would have been far less patient than I was.

[Warbonnet]

The coons narcissism was/is off the charts, he came here thinking he was Calguns savior and everyone should view him as a white night in shinning Armor. If I owned Calguns all would be perfect and you will all bow to me, that may work over on Reddit but he was in way over his head here. His my friend was murdered with a gun, so I know what I’m talking about and everyone has to agree with me tantrums were extremely cringe worthy. Like he’s the only one in the world that has experience with that, there is far too much life experience here for that type of none sense. I’ll see his one friend and raise it to three, one a soldier I served with in Iraq KIA and two LE officer friends that were murdered in the line of duty. That was the point when I really noticed that he’s just a whiney kid, living in his Bay Area bubble.

Typical of many today who lock onto some thing in their life which they feel allows them some type of special victim status. Yeah, in a bubble.

I wouldn't even dare to guess how many here have had people close to them murdered or victims of a bad guy using a gun. I know I have stared down the wrong end of bad guy's gun more than once myself.

[MeatyMac]

Does the raccoon still post on CGN? Saw some of his posts in a thread here on CGN maybe 5 months ago, haven’t seen any since; as I remember, he got annihilated in that thread by some of you in this thread…Strange dude, why come here and offer up excuses/defense for his site’s existence, just go do your thing over there…