Regarding the VA rally from somebody with experience with VA "protest control"

[Steve_Zissou]

Your entire premise is flawed. Think of it this way. The pro-gun faction has the super-majority. The Democratic minority proposes gun control measures. Do we give in? Hell no! We laugh and squash them like cockroaches. We don’t give a sh!t what they do. Screw them. They are the minority.

Got it yet?

Isn't that sort of an argument FOR making them legitimately fear us? If they hate us, and outnumber us, and respond to our polite attempts to advocate for the 2nd with laughter and derision, isn't doubling down on the same sort of tactics that have only gotten us increasingly infringed and neutered gun rights a textbook case of the insanity of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results? I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

And it really IS no different from the gay rights movement or the civil rights movement, gays and American blacks had no special protections in the Constitution any more so than anyone else, whereas gun rights have an amendment explicitly protecting them.

In the 1940s, a 2/3rds supermajority of the American people were still in favor of continuing segregation, and as recently as the 2000's a majority of Americans were against gay marriage, and yet somehow those minority groups were able to get their rights claims rammed through congress and held up in the courts while relying, constitutionally, only on some legally shaky post-WWII political philosophy-tinged reinterpretation of the framers' intent. Meanwhile, we've got an entire ****ing amendment ensconcing our rights to keep and bear arms, uninfringed, and yet here we still are.
What did they do, or what did they have going for them (or who did they have backing them?) that we don't have?

 

[Occam]

I like that, that's damn good. I really think they'll be receptive to that and completely change their vote. Especially Beidle. She seems really on the fence about gun laws.

TO THE FUTURE!

No, it won't change their votes. But it reminds them where the fight really is and will be. It won't inspire them to double down. Though the strategy you're proposing, if you actually have the no-filters, no-impulse-control urge to act on it, will - every time you're waking someone up at home in the middle of the night, or re-enacting a lefty restaurant rant in someone's face - definitely give those politicians you hate exactly the moral support they crave to go after us even harder. That's Maryland. I know it, and you know it. It's frustrating, but don't take out your anger about reality on the people here. We put our time and money where our mouths are.

If your tactics wouldn't change your mind, spare us the bad press of acting as if they'll change someone else's.

 

[AACO_Salami]

No, it won't change their votes. But it reminds them where the fight really is and will be. It won't inspire them to double down. Though the strategy you're proposing, if you actually have the no-filters, no-impulse-control urge to act on it, will - every time you're waking someone up at home in the middle of the night, or re-enacting a lefty restaurant rant in someone's face - definitely give those politicians you hate exactly the moral support they crave to go after us even harder. That's Maryland. I know it, and you know it. It's frustrating, but don't take out your anger about reality on the people here. We put our time and money where our mouths are.

If your tactics wouldn't change your mind, spare us the bad press of acting as if they'll change someone else's.

I agree man, you've changed my mind. I mean, yeah your tactics haven't worked yet, but dammit, maybe they'll work this time.

Kill em with kindness!!!!

 

[teratos]

Isn't that sort of an argument FOR making them legitimately fear us? If they hate us, and outnumber us, and respond to our polite attempts to advocate for the 2nd with laughter and derision, isn't doubling down on the same sort of tactics that have only gotten us increasingly infringed and neutered gun rights a textbook case of the insanity of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results? I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

And it really IS no different from the gay rights movement or the civil rights movement, gays and American blacks had no special protections in the Constitution any more so than anyone else, whereas gun rights have an amendment explicitly protecting them.

In the 1940s, a 2/3rds supermajority of the American people were still in favor of continuing segregation, and as recently as the 2000's a majority of Americans were against gay marriage, and yet somehow those minority groups were able to get their rights claims rammed through congress and held up in the courts while relying, constitutionally, only on some legally shaky post-WWII political philosophy-tinged reinterpretation of the framers' intent. Meanwhile, we've got an entire ****ing amendment ensconcing our rights to keep and bear arms, uninfringed, and yet here we still are.
What did they do, or what did they have going for them (or who did they have backing them?) that we don't have?

You bring up excellent points. We do, in fact, have an amendment regarding arms. The States are not keen on supporting that right. Most eyes are on the courts. The Constitution is all about protecting rights the majority may not like. In the case of segregation, the Congress actually addressed that. At this point, we are seeing anti-2A movements in States. I’m sure, given time, we will see it on a National level. Libs are spreading like a cancer. It will be interesting to see what the courts do. I pray we never have to reach for the ammo box.

 

[bibitor]

Kill em with kindness!!!!

It's working for Spacey.

 

[IDFInfantry]

Hey Governor Northam!

 

[Occam]

I agree man, you've changed my mind. I mean, yeah your tactics haven't worked yet

The people who live five miles from me in DC can now own guns and are in a Shall Issue jurisdiction. The DC government gave up fighting these matters because they knew it was a done deal, in court. Not because somebody decided to harass them in front of their children or keep them awake at night with childish phone calls. Ask the people in Illinois if they'd prefer having gained nothing (except juvenile satisfaction) by screaming and having fits, or prefer the actual victories - in court - that have re-acquainted them with gun ownership and self defense.

I don't think you want success, you just want a bar fight because that's what you're in the mood for.

 

[DCSCO]

Have you read the Constitution? This is how a republic works. Also, most citizens were on the side of the civil rights movement. Do you contend that “colored” people should still be 3/5 of a person, or do you (like most people even in the 60’s) believe in the civil rights movement?

The constitution was invoked when the issue was presented, in a confrontational and take no prisoners manner.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jed195]

I believe Maryland has a law that says you can't have a firearm at a demonstration...what's the deal with VA? I mean technically we can open carry long guns here but you'll get a visit from a police officer when someone makes a call about an armed man/women in the area. I'm just asking as someone who is kicking around the idea of joining the Marylanders going down with an AR. Is this an act of mass civil disobedience or more like a they can't arrest us all thing?

 

[BeoBill]

Very naive. Lol. I'll ask you the same s I asked before. Who's tactics have been more successful? Your polite, higher road tactics, or the lefts total war tactics?

I daresay, if the pro-2A side had the Sun; the WaPo, the Crab Wrapper and their local ilk, EVERY ONE of the major radio and TV outlets, and Bloomberg's millions and near infinite resources behind us, I don't think the VA rally/protest would be necessary for success.

Given that, I think faced with the obstacles above and the vast majority of state citizens who do not actually give a damn about the 2A either way (if they EVER thought about it), we've done pretty well. Sadly, not as well as we'd like, but pretty well.

Don't get me wrong, the VA protest is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY IMO. Northam is acting and REACTING like a spoiled, petty tyrant. He and the Dem majority care nothing about anyone's civil rights but their own. And that cannot be allowed to continue.

And if you can't or won't participate. just bear in mind that the Revolution's hostilities began with no more that 100 people total, and saw only THREE PERCENT of the population participating during the height of action.

Flame away.

 

[swamplynx]

No, it got recognized because the constitution requires equal protection under the law. And since the government is still in the marriage business, denying people equal treatment under the law is facially unconstitutional. That one wasn't the least bit complicated, any more than was saying that skin color has no bearing on your civil rights.

Exactly THIS. I have no problem with gay marriage because government “marriage,” long before gay marriage has become nothing more than two parties entering into a partnership agreement defined by nothing more than the common law and statutes of the jurisdiction they reside in (in absence of a prenup, which is really just Ts&Cs to a marriage contract). It is akin to creating a business with someone with no more than a handshake. Absurd on all grounds.

The government shouldn’t be in the marriage business, but if they want to offer contractual partnerships to parties (or multiple parties for all I care) to enter into foolhardy agreements, it should be open to everyone.

Argument can be made of course that government marriage exists for the societal benefits of procreation and nuclear man-woman-child families, but beyond a meager child tax credit, there is hardly any reason to get government married to rear a family.

All that being said, the government should get out of marriage all together. If churches want to marry me to my dog, that is their business. If the government wants to give you a tax credit for raising a kid, so be it. But they should not be conflated or commingled.

...and of course this whole argument ignore how the left has weaponized gay marriage. But I digress.

 

[rbird7282]

I agree man, you've changed my mind. I mean, yeah your tactics haven't worked yet, but dammit, maybe they'll work this time.



Kill em with kindness!!!!

Are you just here to piss in everyone’s Wheaties or are you going to add something constructive without being a Richard?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AACO_Salami]

Are you just here to piss in everyone’s Wheaties or are you going to add something constructive without being a Richard?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing to add, I am changed. As mentioned before your unwarranted personal attack. I will be holstering my extreme ideas for change and instead will use the old tried and true methods.

 

[knovotny]

Aaand now he has access.

 

[Occam]

Aaand now he has access.

I’ve been wondering if it wouldn’t be wise to have a system that - instead of automatically doing that at that threshold - auto-creates a poll thread so the existing membership past that threshold has to have, say, 25 people bless the ascension.

 

[Norton]

A[Maryland]Farmer was a three-time previously banned user.

Again, predictable as humidity in the summer in Maryland are those that emerge anytime that there is serious legislative stuff going on.

 

[Doctor_M]

Thanks for your efforts, Norton.

 

[Adolph Oliver Bush]

VA state police bringing their protest control toys. Seen near Richmond:

Reminds of a movie I once saw: https://vimeo.com/86165866?ref=em-share

 

[welder516]

I would love to know the players that keep coming back taking a swing at the ball here at MDS . Really weird

 

[Norton]

I would love to know the players that keep coming back taking a swing at the ball here at MDS . Really weird

All are low post count agitators in this case.