Taking WWNC to White House!

trickg · Mar 22, 2019

Here's a thought, and I know it's not going to be well received, but here it is anyway:

We have always championed the idea that the vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens, and that we are not the problem when it comes to firearms related crime and violence in this country. With that in mind, if we take WWNC to the White House and make a news-worthy spectacle with that message, in effect, we'll be stating that we are NOT law-abiding gun owners, because by openly stating, "we will not comply," it means that we are no longer going to be law-abiding, and we're going to openly break the law.

That makes anyone who doesn't comply a criminal. The fact that the laws are unconstitutional - something that has to be rectified by following a process through the courts - is immaterial. It's not a good image of gun owners to be pumping into the homes of people across the nation, many of whom are anti-gun to begin with. It gives them MORE ammunition when it comes to further working to infringe upon our rights because they don't know and understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means.

clandestine · Mar 22, 2019

trickg said:
Here's a thought, and I know it's not going to be well received, but here it is anyway:

We have always championed the idea that the vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens, and that we are not the problem when it comes to firearms related crime and violence in this country. With that in mind, if we take WWNC to the White House and make a news-worthy spectacle with that message, in effect, we'll be stating that we are NOT law-abiding gun owners, because by openly stating, "we will not comply," it means that we are no longer going to be law-abiding, and we're going to openly break the law.

That makes anyone who doesn't comply a criminal. The fact that the laws are unconstitutional - something that has to be rectified by following a process through the courts - is immaterial. It's not a good image of gun owners to be pumping into the homes of people across the nation, many of whom are anti-gun to begin with. It gives them MORE ammunition when it comes to further working to infringe upon our rights because they don't know and understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means.

The Crown had problems with is Colonists having Arms.

We didn't comply.

trickg · Mar 22, 2019

clandestine said:
The Crown had problems with is Colonists having Arms.

We didn't comply.

No we didn't, and in that time and place, it worked out - England didn't have the means to wage a war from across the Atlantic ocean, and so we created a new country from that. If the colonists fighting British rule had lost, anyone who was a part of that would have been jailed at the least, or executed at the worst.

This is not that fight, and this is not the 1760s-1780s. It's a whole different situation, 250 years later, and as a result, that argument doesn't really work. What are we going to do - have a Maryland Civil War? How well do you think that would work out?

Bob A · Mar 22, 2019

There's already enough laws to ensure that everyone is a criminal.

Being nice has brought us to this pass; being more nice will continue down the same path to total disarmament. It's time the lawmakers are given a message.

Those who don't care for confrontation are welcome to move to the UK, where everyone has to be nice, except those who we may not mention.

trickg · Mar 22, 2019

Bob A said:
It's time the lawmakers are given a message.

I ask again, how well do you really think that's going to work out? Do honestly think that those lawmakers are going to see this and think, "Golly gee! They might be on to something there! We can't possibly pass this current batch of anti-gun bills! I sure am glad those good folks decided to protest!" Be real - this stuff is going to get slammed through regardless, and openly saying that we won't comply is going to strengthen their resolve to do so.

Keep in mind, I don't disagree - something has to be done, but to openly show your face with the declaration that you are going to break new firearms laws as they are enacted....

The best course of action might be to simply quietly go about your business, and not comply that way rather than to draw that kind of attention to ourselves.

Again, we have always prided ourselves that we comply with the gun laws, no matter how bad they get, because gun owners are a law-abiding people. There once was a time on this board where it was frowned upon if anyone talked about ways to get past laws or to not comply with them. How is it that this reversal in attitude is actually being condoned now?

Ammo Jon · Mar 22, 2019

trickg said:
I ask again, how well do you really think that's going to work out? Do honestly think that those lawmakers are going to see this and think, "Golly gee! They might be on to something there! We can't possibly pass this current batch of anti-gun bills! I sure am glad those good folks decided to protest!" Be real - this stuff is going to get slammed through regardless, and openly saying that we won't comply is going to strengthen their resolve to do so.

Keep in mind, I don't disagree - something has to be done, but to openly show your face with the declaration that you are going to break new firearms laws as they are enacted....

The best course of action might be to simply quietly go about your business, and not comply that way rather than to draw that kind of attention to ourselves.

Again, we have always prided ourselves that we comply with the gun laws, no matter how bad they get, because gun owners are a law-abiding people. There once was a time on this board where it was frowned upon if anyone talked about ways to get past laws or to not comply with them. How is it that this reversal in attitude is actually being condoned now?

At this time We Will Not Comply is a statement and no laws have been broken. If someone chooses to or not it is their business but not speaking up is exactly what they want us to do. Once they're done with the 2nd, you might not have a choice about speaking up. It's a slippery slope.

trickg · Mar 22, 2019

Ammo Jon said:
At this time We Will Not Comply is a statement and no laws have been broken. If someone chooses to or not it is their business but not speaking up is exactly what they want us to do. Once they're done with the 2nd, you might not have a choice about speaking up. It's a slippery slope.

I understand that at present, no laws have been broken, but with that statement, it clearly shows intent - "intent is a subjective state of mind that must accompany the acts of certain crimes to constitute a violation."

We're between a rock and a hard place, but I still contend that this statement doesn't help us - it hurts us. A better statement would be a declaration that we will tirelessly fight any laws that are passed that don't meet constitutional muster. That would show that we are continuing to be law-abiding people with a deep respect for the law and the system in place that will help to overturn anything that is unconstitutional.

smokey · Mar 22, 2019

trickg said:
That makes anyone who doesn't comply a criminal. The fact that the laws are unconstitutional - something that has to be rectified by following a process through the courts - is immaterial. It's not a good image of gun owners to be pumping into the homes of people across the nation, many of whom are anti-gun to begin with. It gives them MORE ammunition when it comes to further working to infringe upon our rights because they don't know and understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means.

This bolded part is THE point. You don't really have a case to bring to the court if everyone complies. I'd like to point you in the direction of the work the PAFOA folks up in Pa did in order to get carry laws fixed in philly. Basically, one or more people would go to philly and get themselves arrested while exercising their rights. They would then sue the city and the forum would donate cash towards the effort. Each time they won, 2a rights got advanced and the police would have to add new training.

So, while the message of "we will not comply with unconstitutional laws" is the duty of every american in my mind, it is also necessary for the legal process you are describing to take place. The people promoting the WWNC message have stated numerous times that if police show up to arrest them, they will follow commands of law enforcement and then challenge their arrest(and the law) in court. They have not publicly advocated that people violently resist enforcement efforts.

MigraineMan · Mar 22, 2019

smokey0118 said:
So, while the message of "we will not comply with unconstitutional laws" is the duty of every american in my mind, it is also necessary for the legal process you are describing to take place. The people promoting the WWNC message have stated numerous times that if police show up to arrest them, they will follow commands of law enforcement and then challenge their arrest(and the law) in court. They have not publicly advocated that people violently resist enforcement efforts.

In order to challenge the laws in court, one must have legal standing to do so. Unfortunately, there's only one way to obtain standing regarding an unconstitutional law ...

fabsroman · Mar 22, 2019

Adolph Oliver Bush said:
Seems to me that Fabsroman gets an extra helping of tolerance.

Is there any truth to the rumor that he does Norton's taxes?

The answer is no. I do not do Norton's taxes. Norton has banned me on occasion too. If you read what Norton wrote, Rack was given three, count them, THREE, warnings and he chose to ignore them. Seems as though somebody just did not care. I have never been given a warning, EVER. Seems like Rack got special treatment with THREE warnings and he chose not to comply. Granted, I have seen public warnings like the post that Norton made yesterday, and I pay attention to them and comply because I like being able to come to the board.

Some people just think that everybody and their mother is always out to get them and that there is a conspiracy behind everything that happens to them. Rack just kept on going and going and going, buy that is just how Rack is. Then, when he has to pay for his actions, he has you here questioning what happened, when you have only a scintilla of the facts and/or choose to ignore the facts.

Sadly, life isn'r fair, it isn't unfair, it just is. If life was fair, I would get three warnings before getting hit with the ban hammer. If life was fair, the scales of justice would actually work and attorneys would not be needed. Alas, life goes on.

danb · Mar 22, 2019

Bertfish said:
Name calling in another thread.

People around here need to calm the hell down and remember who the enemy is.

This, times a million. We cannot grow as a community or influence legislation if all we do is alienate people - most importantly alienate the people who agree with us 80% of the time.

trickg · Mar 22, 2019

MigraineMan said:
In order to challenge the laws in court, one must have legal standing to do so. Unfortunately, there's only one way to obtain standing regarding an unconstitutional law ...

I, for one, cannot afford to get arrested, and especially not for a firearms violation - the idea of having my guns confiscated (which they would be) is not something I would ever voluntarily subject myself to. But if you want to do it, by all means, go ahead.

fabsroman said:
Sadly, life isn'r fair, it isn't unfair, it just is. If life was fair, I would get three warnings before getting hit with the ban hammer. If life was fair, the scales of justice would actually work and attorneys would not be needed. Alas, life goes on.

I've always seen getting banned on an internet forum as being akin to getting arrested - it's pretty easy to not do.

fabsroman · Mar 22, 2019

smokey0118 said:
This bolded part is THE point. You don't really have a case to bring to the court if everyone complies. I'd like to point you in the direction of the work the PAFOA folks up in Pa did in order to get carry laws fixed in philly. Basically, one or more people would go to philly and get themselves arrested while exercising their rights. They would then sue the city and the forum would donate cash towards the effort. Each time they won, 2a rights got advanced and the police would have to add new training.

So, while the message of "we will not comply with unconstitutional laws" is the duty of every american in my mind, it is also necessary for the legal process you are describing to take place. The people promoting the WWNC message have stated numerous times that if police show up to arrest them, they will follow commands of law enforcement and then challenge their arrest(and the law) in court. They have not publicly advocated that people violently resist enforcement efforts.

I agree completely with the "We Will Not Comply" message out of one side of the mouth and then the "law abiding gun owner" message out of the other side of the mouth. Hard to have it both ways. Great, if you don't want to comply, that is fine and that is up to you. None of us comply with all the laws out there. However, to send a message of "We Will Not Comply" and think that represents the stance of most gun owners in Maryland is a little presumptuous.

Did Heller get arrested for that case? I don't think so. Don't think Kolbe or Brockman got arrested either for them to have standing.

Regarding litigation, people need to stop chomping at the bit for it and filing lawsuits right after a law passes. Heller was not brought until what, 30+ years of the DC law being in place. 30 years and a well thought out lawsuit got us Heller. The Court had a decent makeup and it was a decent thing to sue over. If they pass the HBAR lawsuit, I think that is a good one to challenge and it gives us another bite at the apple for one of the most popular rifles in the nation. That is looking at it from the public policy side of things. An attorney that is only interested in making money will try any case for an hourly fee. An honest attorney will tell a client whether or not he/she/it stands a chance of actually winning and whether the money is going to be well spent.

End of the day, these are all keyboard strokes that are wasted because PP WWNC will do its thing tomorrow regardless. Even if a poll on here showed that 80% of people are opposed to it, the show would go on.

fabsroman · Mar 22, 2019

trickg said:
I, for one, cannot afford to get arrested, and especially not for a firearms violation - the idea of having my guns confiscated (which they would be) is not something I would ever voluntarily subject myself to. But if you want to do it, by all means, go ahead.

I've always seen getting banned on an internet forum as being akin to getting arrested - it's pretty easy to not do.

Correct. The cost paid though is worse for getting arrested and convicted in court versus receiving a ban on the board. I like my freedom and firearms more than I like being on this board, but I like being on this board.

PowPow · Mar 22, 2019

Can we use this thread to for its purpose, which is to coordinate with folks who are going to come down to DC tomorrow?

Please?

If you are coming tomorrow at 10AM, let us know.

Mr. Ed · Mar 22, 2019

trickg said:
Here's a thought, and I know it's not going to be well received, but here it is anyway:

We have always championed the idea that the vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens, and that we are not the problem when it comes to firearms related crime and violence in this country. With that in mind, if we take WWNC to the White House and make a news-worthy spectacle with that message, in effect, we'll be stating that we are NOT law-abiding gun owners, because by openly stating, "we will not comply," it means that we are no longer going to be law-abiding, and we're going to openly break the law.

That makes anyone who doesn't comply a criminal. The fact that the laws are unconstitutional - something that has to be rectified by following a process through the courts - is immaterial. It's not a good image of gun owners to be pumping into the homes of people across the nation, many of whom are anti-gun to begin with. It gives them MORE ammunition when it comes to further working to infringe upon our rights because they don't know and understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means.

Would it help to have a text line in small print under the bold letters that said," With Unconstitutional Laws'?

PowPow · Mar 22, 2019

Bump. Can we use this thread to for its purpose, which is to coordinate with folks who are going to come down to DC tomorrow?

Please?

If you are coming tomorrow at 10AM, let us know.

danb · Mar 22, 2019

Mr. Ed said:
Would it help to have a text line in small print under the bold letters that said," With Unconstitutional Laws'?

A law is "unconstitutional" if and only if 5 Supreme Court Justices say it is. Nobodys opinion here counts for dick.

DivingDriver · Mar 22, 2019

And little Johnnie stole my captain Crunch. Just when you think it can't get anymore crazier there we go again.. If we would put as much effort into writing our representatives and calling them and,if it's your choice instead,to stand outside with signs protesting it's your choice . Maybe we could get an upper hand on some of these infringing laws they are trying to pass. EVERY BIT HELPS. So you don't think caring signs does anything, great don't carry signs but don't bash the man that feels it's his best way of getting the message across. You have great skills putting your thoughts on paper and sending them to your delegates, that's your method of fighting the fight and you may very well be making more of an impact doing it your way but remember either way the message gets across. The media would rather put video out of people out in the streets with signs proclaiming that they will NOT comply than interviewing some Joe blow on the street saying that they wrote a letter to there senator. The fight is on many fronts and it's up to us to make sure that all bases are covered.

PowPow · Mar 22, 2019

Let's use this thread for its purpose, which is to coordinate with folks who are going to come down to DC tomorrow?

Please?

If you are coming tomorrow at 10AM, let us know.

Taking WWNC to White House!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Guns 'n Drums

AR-15 Savant

Guns 'n Drums

όυ φροντισ

Guns 'n Drums

Ultimate Member

Guns 'n Drums

2A TEACHER

Defenestration Specialist

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

Guns 'n Drums

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Where's the beef?

This IS my Happy Face

Where's the beef?

dont be a dumbass

Ultimate Member

Where's the beef?

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics