Shotgun News Followup about recent Pink Pistols column

[Shoobee]

Can we stick to the 2A issues? How quickly this thread moved to off-topic is the best indication of dangers associated with crossing over to unrelated civil rights.

It is not whether anyone is right or wrong on the non-2A issues raised here, it is that we shouldn't even be discussing them in the first place, except to the extent they can help with the advancement of 2A.

Definitely agree.

[Shoobee]

Wow, it now looks like two completely different persons have taken the place of the first two of us who got off track in the first place. Ergo this thread is probably doomed, too, agreed.

I only wish one thing. That I could pack my .45 ACP with me to work and back again, since I often work really late and am the last person to leave the office at night, by which time the riffraff and x-cons are out on the streets of San Jose. But Sheriff Laurie Smith disagrees. And former Chief Rbt McNamara also disagreed. So I have to wonder whether this is just a San Jose thing?

If the Rainbow Community can use their enormously strong political power as a minority to implement the full Second Amendment all over California, including BEARING as well as KEEPING arms, then I will gladly kiss them until the cows come home.

[sharxbyte]

excellent article.

[Gray Peterson]

If the Rainbow Community can use their enormously strong political power as a minority to implement the full Second Amendment all over California, including BEARING as well as KEEPING arms, then I will gladly kiss them until the cows come home.

Up until the late 1960's, the black communities were pro-self defense and somewhat pro-gun. Then the white pacificist liberal demanded their pound of flesh: Support gun control, or your community will be cut off from any further "progress" in terms of it's interests. They complied mostly. CORE was the only ones who didn't comply with this, and they became nearly all African American instead of a mix of black and white that occurred before.

Read Chapter 8 of A different day: African American struggles for justice in rural Louisiana ...
By Greta De Jong

If Equality California and other statewide gay equality groups started demanding pro-2A legislation, Half of the Democrats in the Legislature would turn on them immediately and kill any legislation designed to deal with their issues in revenge. They are true believers in gun control and will punish any group who supports gun rights, period.

Also, the Republican legislators, generally hating gay people, would not lift a finger for them, won't suddenly support gay equality because the organizations which represent them likes guns. They'll say "that's nice" and still vote against bills they feel that they need.

Also, Equality California is a single issue organization. Delving into guns would be against their best interests.

[QQQ]

Some people still believe that a black dude shouldn't be able to use the same drinking fountain as I use?

If a person OWNS the drinking fountain, you think the government should force him to share it with whoever?

Some people believe not everyone should have the right to own a gun.
Some people think women shouldn't vote....or drive.

If you're on private property, the property owner should have the right to prohibit you from carrying guns or driving on his property for whatever reason he wants. Wouldn't you agree?

Some people still think that my brother in law's gay marriage is an affront to my hetero marriage.

It's not. But I'll be damned if the government forces me, or anyone else, to call it a marriage.

Gun rights are civil rights are gun rights because you can't defend any of them w/o the 2nd of them.

What about private property rights?

[Shoobee]

Up until the late 1960's, the black communities were pro-self defense and somewhat pro-gun. Then the white pacificist liberal demanded their pound of flesh: Support gun control, or your community will be cut off from any further "progress" in terms of it's interests. They complied mostly. CORE was the only ones who didn't comply with this, and they became nearly all African American instead of a mix of black and white that occurred before.

Read Chapter 8 of A different day: African American struggles for justice in rural Louisiana ...
By Greta De Jong

If Equality California and other statewide gay equality groups started demanding pro-2A legislation, Half of the Democrats in the Legislature would turn on them immediately and kill any legislation designed to deal with their issues in revenge. They are true believers in gun control and will punish any group who supports gun rights, period.

Also, the Republican legislators, generally hating gay people, would not lift a finger for them, won't suddenly support gay equality because the organizations which represent them likes guns. They'll say "that's nice" and still vote against bills they feel that they need.

Gray, you are such an optimist.

So my hopes that the Rainbow community might be able to use their power to remove the infringement on bearing arms are ill fated?

Guess I just need to go back to trying to understand why Laurie Smith and Robt McNamara think citizens carrying guns is a bad idea. How lucky the people of Arizona, Texas, and Florida are! They don't have to worry as much about crime. They can pack their own heat. And they are not plagued by Laurie Smith nor Rbt McNamara.

[Shoobee]

If a person OWNS the drinking fountain, you think the government should force him to share it with whoever?If you're on private property, the property owner should have the right to prohibit you from carrying guns or driving on his property for whatever reason he wants. Wouldn't you agree?It's not. But I'll be damned if the government forces me, or anyone else, to call it a marriage.What about private property rights?

Anyone who drinks from a drinking fountain is taking a huge disease risk.

And the M word is going to get this thread locked again. But at least this time it won't be my fault. Not gonna go there, at all.

[Gray Peterson]

Gray, you are such an optimist.

So my hopes that the Rainbow community might be able to use their power to remove the infringement on bearing arms are ill fated?

Unfortunately, as I explained, if the gay rights groups were to step outside of their single issue and start going for other things against the party in charge, they will be punished brutally and none of the legislation it would be pushing would be passed.

Guess I just need to go back to trying to understand why Laurie Smith and Robt McNamara think citizens carrying guns is a bad idea. How lucky the people of Arizona, Texas, and Florida are! They don't have to worry as much about crime. They can pack their own heat. And they are not plagued by Laurie Smith nor Rbt McNamara.

And in 20-30 years, unless we get carry as a fundamental civil right declared protected under 2A by the Supreme Court, these three states will start reversing it's pro-gun trends there and backslide....

Btw, Laurie Smith is a law and order Republican conservative.....

[Mesa Tactical]

I thought we were approaching this issue through the courts rather than the ballot box. Is this a misunderstanding on my part?

If you think we can rely on the courts to preserve our gun rights you may as well sell all your guns right now.

We live in a democracy. If your pet issue does not have the support of the broader population, you will certainly lose, sooner or later.

Gay rights were not won in the courts, they were won in the hearts and minds of ordinary Americans, which translated into gay-friendly legislation and social acceptance. This effort took decades.

California gun rights activists (especially California gun rights activists) absolutely must reach out to those segments of the population that traditionally don't care about guns or are explicitly opposed to gun rights. This includes urban blacks, Hispanics, members of the LGBT community, "liberals," "progressives," Democrats and women of all races and economic strata.

One way to do this is to meet and mingle with such people and take them to the range. You can't do this if you insist on going through life associating only with your own narrow circle of middle class white male companions who parrot your own comfortable worldview back at you.

Another is to make common cause with the civil rights struggles of other segments of the population. You can't do this by dumping on gays and Hispanics, as the (apparently suicidal) California Republican Party insists on doing at every juncture.

[YubaRiver]

http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/

IBTL/D

One scholarly interpretation of "unclean" is that it is a broad term that
means being "set apart". Things are unclean for many reasons, including
health, and tribal cohesiveness. Things were sometimes set apart because
they are vulnerable.

From an Enviro/Christian outlook, it is an abomination to to kill the
vulnerable things.

In that train of thought, it would be an abomination to single out and discriminate against people who are vulnerable (aliens, gays, minority races,
the elderly, females etc.).

[goldrush]

Round two



http://www.shotgunnews.com/2012/01/2...pride-round-2/

Well said.

Unfortunately, many gun forums are overrun with unabashed anti-homosexual insults.

[QQQ]

Gay rights were not won in the courts, they were won in the hearts and minds of ordinary Americans, which translated into gay-friendly legislation and social acceptance. This effort took decades.

Wrong. Gay rights have progressed only because they have formed an effective, cohesive litigation and lobbying bloc which has worked to counter the "anti-gay" laws put in place by the legislature and by popular referendum. And this is exactly the strategy that is going to work for gun rights- we will not win this battle by trying to put things like shall-issue LTC and repeal of the NFA on the ballot- at least here in California.

You can't do this if you insist on going through life associating only with your own narrow circle of middle class white male companions who parrot your own comfortable worldview back at you.

When you assume things, you make an "*** out of youand merself".

[Mesa Tactical]

Wrong. Gay rights have progressed only because they have formed an effective, cohesive litigation and lobbying bloc

Your understanding of history is woefully inaccurate.

Gay rights advanced in the US as more and more writers and other celebrities came out of the closet, as did increasing numbers of ordinary Americans (your neighbors, your coworkers, your family members). I tend to think Gore Vidal as pivotal in this evolution, though he would be the last person in the world to call himself a gay rights activist. As for a "cohesive litigation and lobbying bloc," the gay rights movement is in fact hopelessly splintered. I can't think of a single big, effective national gay rights lobbying group on the order of the NRA. I don't recognize any of the organizations on this list

[QQQ]

Your understanding of history is woefully inaccurate.

Then how do you explain the recent passage of popular referenda which restrict the definition of marriage?

And why should someone who votes one way on this issue be excluded from supporting the cause of gun rights?

[bwiese]

Then how do you explain the recent passage of popular referenda which restrict the definition of marriage?

CA Prop 8 passed as a unique event at one point in time - the concurrent election was for the first Black president in a transitional and polarizing time and brought out a bunch of black voters who didn't like it on top of Obama bringing out the religious Right as well as the "freedom Right" people like myself.

Sentiments/polling show that Prop 8 wouldn't pass today in CA.

Furthermore, the LGBT/liberty crowd was a little self-over-confident that CA wasn't backwards enough to pass this, and didn't ramp up their fundraising til late - and they weren't aware til late of the illegal conduct of the Mormon Church dumping money in either.

If Prop 8 were to come up again now, I'd expect major funding by large tech companies (with educated employee base) who don't want their employees demonized (Google, Cisco, Apple, Genentech, you-name-it) - as opposed to Fred's Tire & Brake or Cathy's Christian Cake shop or whatever.

[Why the Mormons and other religious groups pitching directly into the Prop 8 fight get to keep their tax exempt religious status I simply do not know.]

And why should someone who votes one way on this issue be excluded from supporting the cause of gun rights?

He shouldn't be excluded but he should be brought around to recognize that the politics surrounding his other beliefs have been harmful to gunrights. He should also examine how this ties into why Republicans are no longer electable in CA to legislature except outside a few fading districts and why there are no Reeps in any statewide office (and they'd even lose the race for state dogcatcher).

In general, Californians are more fiscally conservative than socially conservative. But that means they'll vote for harm to their pocket before they vote for a party with Neanderthal social baggage.