Operation Clean Sweep

[Blacksmith101]

I like the name OPERATION CLEAN SWEEP and the symbol of a broom to remind people we need to sweep out of Annapolis anyone who did not vote against the gun bills in the legislature.

We need to start now to get every gun owner registered to vote.

We need to promote and support the DINO movement.

We need to add to the Project ALAMO database and keep it up to date.

We need to produce a clear list of pro 2nd people to vote for and support with money and volunteers.

We need to keep this issue in front of every voter from now until the election.

Operation Clean Sweep will sweep the antis out of office and change the politics of the whole State.

 

[Multifaceted]

This reads like a manifesto

Edit: Ninja Photoshop

 

[Bobby Mercer]

You have to go after their constituents by turning their battle cry against the politicians they love. Why did ( your legislator here ) let so many children die before acting? Waiting this long to act on gun violence means they were willing to accept kids being executed.

 

[Bobby Mercer]

Dino will fall short. Alamo will fall short. Clean sweep won't even be a dusting unless you play by their rules. Turn their rules against them. Show the constituents a politicians job is to create laws that save lives. Sitting in office playing chess while kids are being murdered is what they were doing instead of saving lives. They've done too little too late.

 

[tomgreco]

DINO only takes 1000 or more people- VERY doable.

 

[DCSCO]

If someone is not registered to vote now, is there any hope for them in the future? You would have to be cognitively dead to be a non-voting gun owner in Maryland today.

I will register DINO, though skeptical, it could help.

I will not support people and companies that seek to undermine the constitution.

Good work keeping these important goals in front of us.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

In thinking about this phenomenon, imagine if the state demographics tilted just enough to encourage the folks to quit this gerrymandering BS.

The DINO movement should strike fear into the hearts of the politicians. In fact, it did. How do I know? They started talking about it.

 

[Bobby Mercer]

In thinking about this phenomenon, imagine if the state demographics tilted just enough to encourage the folks to quit this gerrymandering BS.

The DINO movement should strike fear into the hearts of the politicians. In fact, it did. How do I know? They started talking about it.

The politicians don't care about DINO. The threat of DINO was visible at the State House and was ignored. How do I know? They passed an AWB and 2A rights infringing laws. The guidance we've received has not worked. And like our enemies did it is time to change strategies. The politicians are only touchable by majority vote and DINO is a very small effort which is outnumbered by low information voters. We smear the politicians by labeling them kid killers and fence sitters. We say they vote with the wind which changes directions as much as they do. We label them as being derilict in office and duties.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

DINO only takes 1000 or more people- VERY doable.

That's right.

DINO is very doable and I am a member.

We have a full year to covert people.

AND

I don't want to mention any names, but this whole linking of scarey guns to the death of children is just CRAZY talk. Talking about the death of children is a STUPID idea. I don't care if the death was before, now, or in the future.

We need to address gun RIGHTS. Not dead kids. Kids should not be used as pawns in this game of chess.

YES, I'm talking to you.

 

[Bobby Mercer]

That's right.

DINO is very doable and I am a member.

We have a full year to covert people.

AND

I don't want to mention any names, but this whole linking of scarey guns to the death of children is just CRAZY talk. Talking about the death of children is a STUPID idea. I don't care if the death was before, now, or in the future.

We need to address gun RIGHTS. Not dead kids. Kids should not be used as pawns in this game of chess.

YES, I'm talking to you.

Because talking about GUN RIGHTS has been so effective thus far. The infringement of 2A rights is in full swing. The GUN RIGHTS talks have left the building. Thousands of gun rights supporters, myself included, showed up in Annapolis. We cried out dont infringe on my rights because some lunitics committed awfull crimes. Yet our voices were ignored. Crazy is defined by doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results. It's time to change tactics just as the Anti's have changed tactics. Use those tragedies as pawns just as our enemies have done. The problem with taking the high road is its lonely way up there and the oxygen levels are decreased.

We were told to be nice and respectful as not to look like a nut. Well the opposition doesn't care what you look like, you are already a nut to them.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

This reads like a manifesto

Edit: Ninja Photoshop

You, SIR are a photo shop Ninja.

Can this be done in color with red blood dripping off the tips of broom's straws?

That would be cool.

 

[aireyc]

Operation Clean Sweep? That's too nice. More like Operation Toilet Flush.

 

[K31]

The politicians don't care about DINO. The threat of DINO was visible at the State House and was ignored. How do I know? They passed an AWB and 2A rights infringing laws. The guidance we've received has not worked. And like our enemies did it is time to change strategies. The politicians are only touchable by majority vote and DINO is a very small effort which is outnumbered by low information voters. We smear the politicians by labeling them kid killers and fence sitters. We say they vote with the wind which changes directions as much as they do. We label them as being derilict in office and duties.

The politicians don't care about DINO? Good.

Why did they vote the way they did? Their own party threatened them, some like Frosh and MOM are angling for new jobs and don't care, some I'm sure swallowed the 85% approval BS.

DINO is helped by their own efforts to disenfranchise voters through gerrymandering.

 

[juan_galto]

Dino will fall short. Alamo will fall short. Clean sweep won't even be a dusting unless you play by their rules. Turn their rules against them. Show the constituents a politicians job is to create laws that save lives. Sitting in office playing chess while kids are being murdered is what they were doing instead of saving lives. They've done too little too late.

This is wrong. Essentially, you're asking the liberal argument to become "you've done too little too late," which will mean "why didn't you pass the firearms 'safety' laws faster" to many liberals.

We have a long, uphill slog because the media and self-serving politicians are willing to manufacture anger against our freedoms to generate votes. Because ignorant voters do not understand the vital role that firearms play in our everyday freedoms. Because firearms enthusiasts--including hunters--have not organized efficiently enough to educate the broader public and hold elected officials accountable.

Talking about dead children and chess matches may win a battle or two in the short run, but alone it forfeits the war.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

This is wrong. Essentially, you're asking the liberal argument to become "you've done too little too late," which will mean "why didn't you pass the firearms 'safety' laws faster" to many liberals.

We have a long, uphill slog because the media and self-serving politicians are willing to manufacture anger against our freedoms to generate votes. Because ignorant voters do not understand the vital role that firearms play in our everyday freedoms. Because firearms enthusiasts--including hunters--have not organized efficiently enough to educate the broader public and hold elected officials accountable.

Talking about dead children and chess matches may win a battle or two in the short run, but alone it forfeits the war.

YUP!!!

 

[Bobby Mercer]

Here's the deal. The Supreme Court has said inalienable rights can be restricted if the states can show public safety is more important then our individual rights. We say that SB281 is unconstitutional because you can't ban common firearms in use today. The state says oh yes we can because these assault weapons inflict mass death and destruction and public safety demands they be banned. State wins in eyes of Scotus.
We say you can't limit the capacity of magazines. The state says oh yes we can because high capacity magazines cause mass death and destruction and public safety demands a limit. The state wins in the eyes of Scotus.
We say you can't license a right. The state says oh yes we can because the license shows that you are not prohibited from owning a firearm and public safety demands we keep firearms out of criminals hands. The state wins in the eyes of Scotus.

Now please tell me how we are going to defeat this by standing up and saying you can't infringe on our right? Do you think DINO and Alamo are going to defeat the States use of public safety exemptions? Our arguments have fallen short and won't survive any Circuit Court challenges. We may win at the lower levels but the state will appeal and Circuit Court will overturn and Scotus will not hear the case.

 

[Desert84eagle]

I switched to the Democrat party just to vote against the MFrs in the primary. Proud to be a DINO.

 

[dblas]

Here's the deal. The Supreme Court has said inalienable rights can be restricted if the states can show public safety is more important then our individual rights. We say that SB281 is unconstitutional because you can't ban common firearms in use today. The state says oh yes we can because these assault weapons inflict mass death and destruction and public safety demands they be banned. State wins in eyes of Scotus.
We say you can't limit the capacity of magazines. The state says oh yes we can because high capacity magazines cause mass death and destruction and public safety demands a limit. The state wins in the eyes of Scotus.
We say you can't license a right. The state says oh yes we can because the license shows that you are not prohibited from owning a firearm and public safety demands we keep firearms out of criminals hands. The state wins in the eyes of Scotus.

Now please tell me how we are going to defeat this by standing up and saying you can't infringe on our right? Do you think DINO and Alamo are going to defeat the States use of public safety exemptions? Our arguments have fallen short and won't survive any Circuit Court challenges. We may win at the lower levels but the state will appeal and Circuit Court will overturn and Scotus will not hear the case.

So then what do you suggest? Are you willing to take charge or just talk a good game?

 

[Bobby Mercer]

So then what do you suggest? Are you willing to take charge or just talk a good game?

The first thing we have to do is agree that although the language of bill of rights and in particular the 2A says it can't be infringed, we have to accept the reality that Scotus will restrict our rights. We have to embrace the restrictions and understand that background checks are necessary to ensure a person is not prohibited. We should tell them that a non prohibited person should be able to purchase firearms in common use and that penalties should apply if you chose to own that firearm and it gets into the hands of a prohibited person.

Right now there are two sides to this fight in Maryland. Those who say shall not infringe and those who say public safety demands we infringe. Guess which side is winning. I'm not happy with this at all, but I can clearly see who is winning and although this makes me sick to my stomach to say..we have to join them since we can't beat them.

 

[aireyc]

Here's the deal. The Supreme Court has said inalienable rights can be restricted if the states can show public safety is more important then our individual rights. We say that SB281 is unconstitutional because you can't ban common firearms in use today. The state says oh yes we can because these assault weapons inflict mass death and destruction and public safety demands they be banned. State wins in eyes of Scotus.
We say you can't limit the capacity of magazines. The state says oh yes we can because high capacity magazines cause mass death and destruction and public safety demands a limit. The state wins in the eyes of Scotus.
We say you can't license a right. The state says oh yes we can because the license shows that you are not prohibited from owning a firearm and public safety demands we keep firearms out of criminals hands. The state wins in the eyes of Scotus.

Now please tell me how we are going to defeat this by standing up and saying you can't infringe on our right? Do you think DINO and Alamo are going to defeat the States use of public safety exemptions? Our arguments have fallen short and won't survive any Circuit Court challenges. We may win at the lower levels but the state will appeal and Circuit Court will overturn and Scotus will not hear the case.

So then whatever the state says is true? Doesn't the state make all laws "for the good of the people"?

Why would SCOTUS agree that these weapons inflict mass death when the statistics say otherwise? In the case of Maryland, how many murders have been committed with these scary rifles vs handguns? Last I checked, we're looking at 2-3 murders a year from rifles of any kind vs the 250ish from handguns. Or are you just saying SCOTUS is in bed with politicians and none of that matters? Please answer the same question re: mag limits.

And for the license, how does training fit into that? If you are not a prohibited person, why do you have to go through hours of training? Why do you have to pay these fees? How does a background check not accomplish the same goal without the hassle of fingerprinting?

This has nothing to do with safety.