CALGUNS FOUNDATION SUES LOS ANGELES COUNTY, SHERIFF LEE BACA (3/9/12)

[CEDaytonaRydr]

This is a discussion forum, anyone is free to share their opinions, concerns and views.

We're getting conflicting guidance here, Kest. You're saying "have at it", and Librarian is trying to rein us in... (see my previous post above, with his reply quoted)

I respect you, and this forum, so I've been trying to stick to the rules as much as possible, one of which is: "a)Please stay on topic in all forums"

So, how much "wiggle room" do we have on this topic? Can I respond to the previous personally directed posted without fear of getting banned?

[taperxz]

How come you don't talk about how CGF abandoned this forum and its Sunshine Initiative after taking in thousands of dollars? Go into that part of the forum and see how thousands of posts are there asking questions and no one from CGF is responding to those questions. Again, are you blind?

Do you not realize that they have abandoned that entire endeavor? This forum is how they got started on donations solicited here and they disappeared without a trace of information.

Click on a link for any county and you will see those links lead to no where!

Open your eyes my friend.

Gettin real tired of the personal attacks...

Per the mods:



Your location is listed as Lake County! This topic doesn't apply to you.

Please show me the personal attack.

[CEDaytonaRydr]

Please show me the personal attack.

Spoken like a person who has no knowledge of the situation what so ever.

There's one...

I'll find others, and post em up. I've already tried to block you (like I did with FGG and other people who have basically called me an idiot for simply disagreeing with them) but you're a webmaster, or something, so I can't.

[IVC]

So, how much "wiggle room" do we have on this topic? Can I respond to the previous personally directed posted without fear of getting banned?

If it's respectful but off topic, the mods will delete a sub-thread, not ban you. Ban is typically for insults and lack of civility.

[smogcity]

Even the Hatfields and the McCoys buried the hatchet as some point.

The creepy part of this thread is the venom, snark, "lol"s, and laser focused hate. Obviously there is some back story that I'm not privy to as to why we can't conduct a legal round table that works in a civilized manner towards a consensus.

[kcbrown]

Make no mistake, I wish them both success but all of this bad-mouthing of the CGF, and praise of the NRA is one-sided. The NRA, as I have already pointed out, has not been without their faults.

Yep, exactly.

No organization is perfect, and on balance, it looks to me like it's too early to even say which one is "better", if that even has any meaning (there are things that CGF does that, as far as I know, NRA/CRPA do not, and there are probably things that NRA/CRPA do that CGF does not).

What I don't like is that the community has chosen this topic to be the "pissing contest" between the NRA and the CGF,

Well, to be fair, I have seen this repeated in essentially every thread involving CGF litigation, so this isn't exactly something new or anything.

and as a LA County resident, I would like to know what the current status is, and if we need to organize in support of this. For 24 pages now, this thread has degenerated into a back-and-forth between a few people who think they know more than they actually do. The mods are aware of it but seem to be letting us "blow off steam", or whatever.

Some may think they know more than they actually do. Almost certainly, some come in with preconceived notions. But how can those misconceptions be resolved except through debate?

I find these discussions, heated as they may be, to be quite informative. I almost always learn something new from them. I can't say whether the positions of the others change in light of what is learned (probably not). I try to ensure that mine do when the arguments and evidence demand it. That's all I can really do, however.

I guess I'll just have to rely on e-mails from the CGF for info about this case, because this topic is useless for LA County residents, at this point.

Well, I wouldn't rely solely on any one source for information about anything, frankly, and I think, if you're willing to skip over the vitriol, you can find useful information even in threads such as this one. No, it's not necessarily as easy as it might otherwise be, but is anything that's worthwhile, really?

[kcbrown]

Tincon's claim that this litigation produced "nothing of value" is, however, unwarranted, and shows that he is a biased actor.

A caveat to the above. Bias does not automatically make one incorrect. It does increase the chance of it. Whether someone is biased or not, their arguments must be evaluated individually, independently of any bias the person may hold.

Which is to say, the above is a statement about a person, not of their arguments. It's something I try to avoid making, and I slipped up a bit in the above, so I have to apologize to the forums and to Tincon for it.

The same goes for my similar statement about FGG.


And no, I'm not doing this in response to something anyone else said. This is just me reevaluating my own words and my mindset at the time, and determining that it was a bit out of character. I try to be rigorous in my approach to things, but that rigor went missing a bit in the above. Sorry about that, guys.

[kcbrown]

Sufficiently smart people compel other smart people to do things they don't want to do all the time. There is an entire field devoted to his idea, called marketing.

Um, no.

Compelling someone means putting them in a position where they really have no other choice but to do what you wish them to, else the consequences for them will be so dire that it would be unthinkable to do other than what is asked unless the person being compelled is crazy, a fanatic, or something. That is the type of influence curtisfong refers to.

Nobody compels a judge to issue a given decision. There are no real consequences to a judge for him to issue a decision that differs from that which he wishes to issue. One can attempt to persuade, plead, beg, etc., but in the end, it is the judge's decision and his alone.

"Marketing" is a much better term for it, because it attempts to persuade. But in the end, the decision is still that of the buyer, and they can decide to do differently. And often do, for that matter. Marketing is not, after all, 100% successful. Not even close.


So: influence? Yes. Persuade? Perhaps. But compel? No.

[Tincon]

You are confusing compel with coerce.

[kcbrown]

You are confusing compel with coerce.

Doesn't look that way to me...

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

transitive verb \kəm-ˈpel\ : to force (someone) to do something
: to make (something) happen : to force (something)





Full Definition of COMPEL

1
: to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly <hunger compelled him to eat>

2
: to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure <public opinion compelled her to sign the bill>

3
archaic : to drive together


...

Synonyms
blackjack, coerce, force, constrain, dragoon, drive, impel, impress, make, muscle, obligate, oblige, press, pressure, sandbag

"Coerce" is listed as a synonym.

[Tincon]

"To drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly" pretty much sounds like marketing to me, good marketing anyway. But this really is a tangent don't you think?

[smogcity]

"To drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly" pretty much sounds like marketing to me, good marketing anyway. But this really is a tangent don't you think?

Yeah, we do..

[kcbrown]

"To drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly" pretty much sounds like marketing to me, good marketing anyway. But this really is a tangent don't you think?

Perhaps, but regardless, that is not the kind of influence that is available to those who petition the courts, because there exists no argument that one can put in front of the judge that he would find irresistible and contrary to his preferences and contrary to his metapreferences (by that I mean the preferences the judge would use to evaluate arguments).

Which is to say, none of the above contradicts curtisfong's original statement. The bottom line is that if the judge doesn't like your argument, no matter how valid your argument is, he's going to rule against you, and that's pretty much that. You aren't going to be able to do anything to coerce his decision to be in your favor.

[H Paul Payne]

Oh OK, thats what i thought and 610 was simply to reiterate the law. gotcha.

Can you tell me where the law before SB 610:

1) Definitively required issuing authorities to publish their specific policyat the outsetstatutory basisin writing how specifically

[Uxi]

Unfortunately LA county is still unlikely to recognize any right to bear arms in California. If this gets us closer to THAT lawsuit, that's good. Doesn't seem. Our proverbial runner can at least get up to bat now.