New / better approach to "protests" or "activism"?

[MDFF2008]

I'm Jewish and a gun owner. I'm also a registered Democrat (gasp! .) Frankly as much as MDshooters/MSI tries to be a single issue site, the discussions are majorly conservative and that tends to scare away some who might join and participate as many minorities are liberal. I can't stand terms like "libretard" but I tend to overlook it because of the otherwise good commentary and discussion here. I'm liberal, I'm proud of it and I want my 2A rights. Keeping the board and discussions party neutral, and doing things like removing images of Obama as a socialist dictator from peoples signatures would probably go a long way.

To the OP:I'd stay far away from the Nazi comparisons, it's not something to be taken lightly at all. To put the emotions in perspective, prior to WWII there were about 18 million Jews in the world (we are less than .3 % of the worlds population), Hitler murdered over 6 million of us in cold blood. Understand that each and every one of us was involved or knows someone who was involved in the holocaust. Today our population hasn't even returned to pre WWII levels. Seeing our freely elected leaders compared to the mass murderer of our brothers, sisters, parents and grandparents is not something we take in jest and are going to respond to.

I'm a Democrat too, but I'm not a socialist Democrat like the ones we have now.

As for MDS/MSI, I just have to remember that MSI and MDS are two separate things, and I don't know, maybe that's an issue we need to address at some point. If I go into the water cooler, I know I'm going into a conservative area, but that's more of an off-topic area.

I too am tired of the name calling, but I see it on both sides, libtards and retardicans.

I like the OP's vigor though, I hope he will join MSI and help us fight for our rights, but within the due bounds of the organization.

 

[Southern_Boy]

Seems to me the best point of the vid I linked has been missed -- even I got drawn off on a tangent until I thought about it for a while...

They didn't call anyone names -- nor did I suggest it (OK, "unterscheissfuhrer" was a bit over the top -- mea-culpa)...

They merely made the point that the Nazis would have approved of the abuse of power being perpetrated.

And... they WOULD HAVE APPROVED!

They didn't call the politicians Nazis - and I wouldn't advocate for that either.

I see it as very similar to the vids MTV put out a few years ago....

It *CAN* happen here - in fact I believe we get closer every day...

 

[MDFF2008]

We didn't miss the point, it's just we've seen the point before and it hasn't worked. I understand your not calling him a Nazi, but it's the very comparison.

Nazi comparisons have not had much success here, and it tends to alienate a great number of people when it's done. Basically, it is a high cost in political capital, with a low return. Brian Frosh and a large portion of Maryland's Jewish population believe total gun control is absolutely in line with Jewish theology.

The people don't see the government as a bad thing.

The other problem is Maryland has a large number of Sportsman and Apathetic gun owners.

Sportsman are people who hunt and fish, and typically are extremely apathetic towards gun politics because it doesn't affect them since they don't care about CCW and don't use handguns. Since Maryland has an extreme fetish obsession with handguns, they tend to ignore the political scene.

Apathetic Gun owners are people who own a gun for self defense, don't really shoot it much, keep it in the house just for self defense if ever needed. They also tend to be very absent from gun politics since they typically don't care about CCW and they believe the government will never take their guns away. They also tend to be ok with many of the gun laws we have, or otherwise ambivalent towards them.

Cracking those two demographics has been very hard.

 

[yellowfin]

They've been hard to crack because we haven't been trying for that long. Too much of American firearms ownership history has been sportsmen oriented so our non-sportsmen efforts are still early in development in a lot of cases and many on our own side don't even know where to start.

 

[yellowfin]

Plus, like I said, Frosh is REALLY sensitive about people questioning his Jewish Gun control.

Then it's a GREAT place to attack because it's vulnerable. We just have to get good at it. That unholy alliance is absolutely in need of demolition. NY has a bad case of it too so we need it cured also.

 

[Splitter]

I'm Jewish and a gun owner. I'm also a registered Democrat (gasp! .) Frankly as much as MDshooters/MSI tries to be a single issue site, the discussions are majorly conservative and that tends to scare away some who might join and participate as many minorities are liberal. I can't stand terms like "libretard" but I tend to overlook it because of the otherwise good commentary and discussion here. I'm liberal, I'm proud of it and I want my 2A rights. Keeping the board and discussions party neutral, and doing things like removing images of Obama as a socialist dictator from peoples signatures would probably go a long way.

To the OP:I'd stay far away from the Nazi comparisons, it's not something to be taken lightly at all. To put the emotions in perspective, prior to WWII there were about 18 million Jews in the world (we are less than .3 % of the worlds population), Hitler murdered over 6 million of us in cold blood. Understand that each and every one of us was involved or knows someone who was involved in the holocaust. Today our population hasn't even returned to pre WWII levels. Seeing our freely elected leaders compared to the mass murderer of our brothers, sisters, parents and grandparents is not something we take in jest and are going to respond to.

Brings your liberal friends.

That's not a challenge, it is a hope. I agree that discussions here tend to be too one sided, but that's not the fault of the posters. It's the fault of the people who don't post or who refuse to become involved with the site.

Unfortunately, I fear you will be hard pressed to recruit other liberal Democrats to a gun forum. I am sure you realize that in your party and as a liberal, your views on the 2A are in the minority.

As for portraying Obama as a socialist and such...those things were done to Bush too. Hitler actually was a favorite depiction for Bush. I definitely don't like some of the stuff I see, but I'm not prepared to condemn one side without doing so to the other.

I really wish you would bring in more liberal friends to the pro-2A community. Not only would the numbers help but it would invigorate the discussions.

Splitter

 

[MDFF2008]

Then it's a GREAT place to attack because it's vulnerable. We just have to get good at it. That unholy alliance is absolutely in need of demolition. NY has a bad case of it too so we need it cured also.

There def is a body of work by Orthodox Rabbi's on how self-defense is a Jewish issue and gun control is NOT a Jewish issue.

The question is how to get that information out to the people.

 

[MDFF2008]

I'm Jewish and a gun owner. I'm also a registered Democrat (gasp! .) Frankly as much as MDshooters/MSI tries to be a single issue site, the discussions are majorly conservative and that tends to scare away some who might join and participate as many minorities are liberal. I can't stand terms like "libretard" but I tend to overlook it because of the otherwise good commentary and discussion here. I'm liberal, I'm proud of it and I want my 2A rights. Keeping the board and discussions party neutral, and doing things like removing images of Obama as a socialist dictator from peoples signatures would probably go a long way.

To the OP:I'd stay far away from the Nazi comparisons, it's not something to be taken lightly at all. To put the emotions in perspective, prior to WWII there were about 18 million Jews in the world (we are less than .3 % of the worlds population), Hitler murdered over 6 million of us in cold blood. Understand that each and every one of us was involved or knows someone who was involved in the holocaust. Today our population hasn't even returned to pre WWII levels. Seeing our freely elected leaders compared to the mass murderer of our brothers, sisters, parents and grandparents is not something we take in jest and are going to respond to.

MDS isn't MSI. MDS is just an online discussion board. You can be a member of MSI and never interact with MDS.

 

[yellowfin]

Start attacking the identity politics which is holding the whole thing together. There is a great deal of conformity and packaged thinking that has been exploiting religious cultural identity, so see how to chip away at it, making people question why X affiliation MUST subscribe to unrelated and ridiculous idea Z purely because of being affiliated with X. Absurd, isn't it, to say that because someone owns a bicycle they must be allergic to peanuts because some other people are and say so? Or because you were born on a Thursday you must wear orange on Fridays?

It seems a very large percentage of the anti gun garbage is accomplished by getting people to accept the same nonsense without thinking:

*I must be anti gun because I'm Jewish, because gun ownership is for non-Jewish people and I don't know any Jewish gun owners.
*I must be anti gun because I'm black, there is no non-crime associated gun ownership for people like those around me. (According to them, not me, just to clarify.)
*I must be anti gun because I'm a feminist, because gun ownership is for chauvenist men and I don't know any feminist gun owners.
*I must be anti gun because I'm a _________ resident, because gun ownership is for country people and I don't know anyone near me who is a gun owner.
*I must be anti gun because I'm a vegetarian, because gun ownership is for hunters, and I don't like cruelty to animals and I don't know anyone like me who is a gun owner.
*I must be anti gun because I'm wealthy, because gun ownership is for poor stupid people, nobody in my social circles would be a gun owner.

And so on. It's almost always a "I'm not like those people" and rejection by association. It's all about tweaking the nose of the guy they don't like, like they're picking on fans of a rival sports team. Very stupid, really, especially since these same people will scream up and down that they hate prejudice and bigotry, yet look what they're doing. So start addressing it as that rather than wasting your time giving credibility to the other side by responding as if they're talking about safety. They're not, and they're not interested in that anyway. It's displaced hate.

 

[SirMrManGuy]

There def is a body of work by Orthodox Rabbi's on how self-defense is a Jewish issue and gun control is NOT a Jewish issue.

The question is how to get that information out to the people.

It is difficult situation, religions in general tend to reject outsiders telling them what "their" book says. Its funny, I just got back from a tour of Israel, since everyone is in the military guns are just part of life. There were a few on the trip who were freaked out by having an armed guard at first but they got used to it pretty quick. They have a saying that the traditional Israeli works the land with one hand and carries his rifle in the other.

I think the right approach is to leave religion out of it and like we do in general, take an anti shooting. I find trap/skeet works well (especially with my generation who grew up with Duck Hunt .) I just got an extra 12g just for bringing friends. Shooting handguns at human silhouette targets can be a bit much the first time and there is just something classy about shooting clays.

On the liberal front, I tend to stay out of the discussions because I'm not well versed enough to discuss most topics.

 

[MDFF2008]

I tend to agree with you, that religion should be left out, but when you have a person saying that Gun Control is Jewish, I think you have to address that.

If we could develop a strong Jewish membership, we might be in a better place, but even when the Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership came in, it was bad, but there tactics I didn't agree with.

Taking an anti shooting is a great idea though

 

[yellowfin]

Maybe have a regularly scheduled Jewish range day?

 

[SirMrManGuy]

I tend to agree with you, that religion should be left out, but when you have a person saying that Gun Control is Jewish, I think you have to address that.

If we could develop a strong Jewish membership, we might be in a better place, but even when the Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership came in, it was bad, but there tactics I didn't agree with.

Taking an anti shooting is a great idea though

Maybe I'll draft a letter to Frosh discussing it. The words may seem more plausible coming from my pen then yours. I'll work on something in my (little) free time and post for comments.

The problem with gun control is that it seems logical until you scratch the surface. For those just playing identity politics/towing the party line the challenge is getting them to question the norm (why ownership/carry by law abiding citizens is a good thing and doesn't endanger the masses).

The one big issue/gap in our sides logic is that criminals DO continue to obtain guns illegally which were once manufactured and sold LEGALLY at some point in their life and we offer no solution for how to prevent that from happening. Tougher penalties works on the back end but we also need to figure out a way to prevent it on the front end in a way that works and we can accept. This is no easy task, and I don't even know how to go about doing it, but if we can figure this out and offer solutions I think we'll see many join our side.

 

[rambling_one]

Tougher penalties works on the back end...

Uh, only if they're enforced and those who are sentenced actually do serve the proscribed time.

 

[yellowfin]

Maybe I'll draft a letter to Frosh discussing it. The words may seem more plausible coming from my pen then yours. I'll work on something in my (little) free time and post for comments.

The problem with gun control is that it seems logical until you scratch the surface. For those just playing identity politics/towing the party line the challenge is getting them to question the norm (why ownership/carry by law abiding citizens is a good thing and doesn't endanger the masses).

It's not that they don't know, it's that their incentives point towards playing identity politics and towing the party line, then acting like they don't know better because by doing so they're exempt from being held to examination of results.

The one big issue/gap in our sides logic is that criminals DO continue to obtain guns illegally which were once manufactured and sold LEGALLY at some point in their life and we offer no solution for how to prevent that from happening. Tougher penalties works on the back end but we also need to figure out a way to prevent it on the front end in a way that works and we can accept. This is no easy task, and I don't even know how to go about doing it, but if we can figure this out and offer solutions I think we'll see many join our side.

Here's the problem with that too: big government politicians LOVE crime. It provides:

A. More reason to promote controlling, invasive laws. That's power.
B. Bigger police forces with more union dues paying members ($ for their reelection) and powerful police chiefs giving them endorsements on camera.
C. Bigger demand for court systems--lawyers and judges making more $$$ because of more work. Guess who they have to thank for that?
D. Scared public willing to listen to ideas they'd think were stupid otherwise = more power.
E. More stories for the media. Guess who the media then owes a favor for getting more business?

By being anti gun they can blame a source of the crime and claim to be doing something about it while keeping all the benefits that higher crime provides.

 

[shawn]

There def is a body of work by Orthodox Rabbi's on how self-defense is a Jewish issue and gun control is NOT a Jewish issue.

The question is how to get that information out to the people.

This link is a start.
There are many many more of Rabbis talking about self defense and guns in general.

http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Rabbi_0363.htm

 

[MDFF2008]

The one big issue/gap in our sides logic is that criminals DO continue to obtain guns illegally which were once manufactured and sold LEGALLY at some point in their life and we offer no solution for how to prevent that from happening. Tougher penalties works on the back end but we also need to figure out a way to prevent it on the front end in a way that works and we can accept. This is no easy task, and I don't even know how to go about doing it, but if we can figure this out and offer solutions I think we'll see many join our side.

Some people would argue the penalties are enough, I don't agree with that. I see it this way:

Criminals will get guns regardless of the law, but we don't have to roll out a red carpet for them.

One of the problems is that people try to make gun laws to address 100% of the problem. The simple truth is nothing will never prevent 100% of criminals from getting guns. I believe in the 80/20 rule. You try to prevent 80% of criminals from getting guns, and accept that the other 20% will defeat any law you throw at them and you work on other ways to address them.

Criminals are stupid. Instant background checks have caught criminals buying guns at gun stores. Adjudication of mental illness has kept guns out of the hands of dangerously sick people.

The big thing you can consider is that many gun laws proposed in Maryland lack any form of due process. They are done administratively, and there is no due process of law to contest your loss of gun rights, or attempt to get them back. It's all at the whim of the people in charge.

 

[yellowfin]

If you continue to indulge their ruse that they really care about crime and that's their real reason or even a real reason, you're still dividing by zero.

 

[JOBU]

That vid is so lame and amateurish that I did not get past minute 1:00.

Picking eye boogers out of my dog is more interesting.

 

[SirMrManGuy]

Some people would argue the penalties are enough, I don't agree with that. I see it this way:

Criminals will get guns regardless of the law, but we don't have to roll out a red carpet for them.

One of the problems is that people try to make gun laws to address 100% of the problem. The simple truth is nothing will never prevent 100% of criminals from getting guns. I believe in the 80/20 rule. You try to prevent 80% of criminals from getting guns, and accept that the other 20% will defeat any law you throw at them and you work on other ways to address them.

Criminals are stupid. Instant background checks have caught criminals buying guns at gun stores. Adjudication of mental illness has kept guns out of the hands of dangerously sick people.

The big thing you can consider is that many gun laws proposed in Maryland lack any form of due process. They are done administratively, and there is no due process of law to contest your loss of gun rights, or attempt to get them back. It's all at the whim of the people in charge.

Yup exactly, we have to work to help design intelligent laws that are enforcable and actually work to prevent crime/illegal gun ownership. Most of what MD has on the books was written by the uneducated (regulated gun ammo?! Wtf) and ends up hurting those who its designed to protect.

I work as a regulatory engineer (was nuke now fossil) and one of the approaches we take to prevent the goverment from writing "stupid" regulation is to draft and adopt industry standards to preempt them from regulating. This approach works for us, I wouldn't mind seeing what our gun experts could do.