What Have We Become?

[Machodoc]

We gun owners do a lot of chest thumping and have more than a little bit of tough talk when it comes to claiming our rights to have firearms, but what happens when there's a petition to make our feelings known about an "Executive Action" to prohibit the re-importation of U.S. military weapons?

ALMOST NOTHING!

Two weeks into a White House petition to retract that Executive Action we have just over 11,000 signatures. Worse yet, in most of the places where people have posted information about the petition, many of the same people who talk a big talk about not giving up their firearms have actually posted against signing the petition, claiming such ridiculous things as it will be ignored by Obama (of course it will ... that's not the point), or even that doing so will put you on a watch list (we're probably already on one, just for being members of this group).

Sorry, but what a bunch of cowardly PUSSIES we've turned into in this country. All hot air and no steam! Granted, 11,000 votes are more than nearly any other petition in the same time period has gotten, but it's still 89,000 short of being enough to require a response.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/retract-executive-order-against-re-importation-us-military-firearms/Gw1Pc64d

P.S. ... in case someone thinks this should be moved elsewhere, the Executive Action in question is specifically about collectible C&R firearms.

 

[StantonCree]

I actually signed up to whitehouse.gov to sign this one when it was last posted but ill agree with your sentiment

 

[Alphabrew]

11,000 sigs seems like a lot? Or at least a respectable number?

 

[Machodoc]

11,000 sigs seems like a lot? Or at least a respectable number?

100,000 signatures are required for the White House to respond. As it is, we are looking like we are all ready to just roll over on this and take our whipping like good dogs.

 

[KSFrostie]

I agree, I signed it as soon as I saw the petition. And I am super new to the milsurp game lol

 

[Robert1955]

Since the CMP does not import M1's and the S. Korea weapons this was mostly targeted at were judged to be junk I never gave this one much thought but reading your post made me change my mind.

 

[Silverlode]

We gun owners do a lot of chest thumping and have more than a little bit of tough talk when it comes to claiming our rights to have firearms, but what happens when there's a petition to make our feelings known about an "Executive Action" to prohibit the re-importation of U.S. military weapons?

ALMOST NOTHING!

Two weeks into a White House petition to retract that Executive Action we have just over 11,000 signatures. Worse yet, in most of the places where people have posted information about the petition, many of the same people who talk a big talk about not giving up their firearms have actually posted against signing the petition, claiming such ridiculous things as it will be ignored by Obama (of course it will ... that's not the point), or even that doing so will put you on a watch list (we're probably already on one, just for being members of this group).

Sorry, but what a bunch of cowardly PUSSIES we've turned into in this country. All hot air and no steam! Granted, 11,000 votes are more than nearly any other petition in the same time period has gotten, but it's still 89,000 short of being enough to require a response.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/retract-executive-order-against-re-importation-us-military-firearms/Gw1Pc64d

P.S. ... in case someone thinks this should be moved elsewhere, the Executive Action in question is specifically about collectible C&R firearms.

Don't I recall you volunteering to help negotiate the surrender of more of our gun rights sometime last winter when all of the Sandy Hook BS and MD gun ban threats were occuring?

 

[Machodoc]

Don't I recall you volunteering to help negotiate the surrender of more of our gun rights sometime last winter when all of the Sandy Hook BS and MD gun ban threats were occuring?

Can you be more specific about what you are saying? I'm not at all certain what you are talking about. I'm not in a position to volunteer to negotiate the surrender of anything ... whether I wanted to, or not.

I am all in favor of keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, and I don't think that submitting to reasonable background checks is too high a price for us to pay to accomplish that (it takes about 5 minutes where I live). I'm a very staunch believer in the U.S. Constitution as being THE BASIS OF LAW in our country.

I recall saying something about a group (including you?) of guys thumping their chests about what they would do if certain of their rights were taken away (laws enforced), including hiding out in their bunkers and fighting to the finish. I pointed out that, realistically, none of those people were going to do that, and that it wouldn't accomplish a thing if they did. At the same time, I made at least one proposal about how the issue could be played, using the current rules of the game instead of chest-thumping claims that would never be carried out. Just because I look for legal (and constitutional) solutions, rather than making hollow threats about what I'm going to do if the rules don't suit me, doesn't mean that I agree with those rules. Some people have to frame the world so that anyone who doesn't agree with them 100% is their enemy. I'm not one of those people.

We are a country of laws, for better or for worse, and just because I might suggest a legal remedy, or even a compromise, to a political situation instead of blowing hot air about how I'd be ready to shoot it out, doesn't mean that I am not in favor of preserving our gun rights. I think that MD citizens are getting screwed. No doubt about that. But it's the voters and politicians of that state who are doing that, and any talk about armed defiance of the law is absurd. You aren't going to do it, nor are the 3-4 others who were making loud boasts about how they would do that.

I don't live in MD, even though my family was among the founders of the Calvert colony. I am about 1/4 mile from the state line, but I'm under a far more reasonable set of laws than MD has.

Are you making an effort to launch a slate of pro-2A candidates to take back the rights of MD citizens?

 

[peckman28]

I am all in favor of keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, and I don't think that submitting to reasonable background checks is too high a price for us to pay to accomplish that (it takes about 5 minutes where I live). I'm a very staunch believer in the U.S. Constitution as being THE BASIS OF LAW in our country.

Where does the Constitution authorize the federal government to force me to prove I'm not a criminal before I get to exercise my rights? You want to bitch about people not signing a petition (for the record....one I signed) to an executive branch that has ZERO authority to do what it's doing in the first place on this issue, and make a statement like that, and you expect sympathy? Get a clue, and drop this "well this is reasonable but THIS isn't...so I'm ALL FOR THE CONSTITUTION!!!!" nonsense now. Inconsistent arguments accomplish nothing.

 

[teratos]

Keep in mind that no form of gun control has ever been proven to work. Institute some form of check, and criminals will go another route. It accomplishes nothing. There should be no government restraints placed on the purchase or ownership of firearms. The only thing that has ever proven effective on keeping criminals in check is arming everyone. Let everyone buy/own/carry and you will reduce crime to the lowest levels possible.

 

[Silverlode]

Can you be more specific about what you are saying? I'm not at all certain what you are talking about. I'm not in a position to volunteer to negotiate the surrender of anything ... whether I wanted to, or not.

I am all in favor of keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, and I don't think that submitting to reasonable background checks is too high a price for us to pay to accomplish that (it takes about 5 minutes where I live). I'm a very staunch believer in the U.S. Constitution as being THE BASIS OF LAW in our country.

I recall saying something about a group (including you?) of guys thumping their chests about what they would do if certain of their rights were taken away (laws enforced), including hiding out in their bunkers and fighting to the finish. I pointed out that, realistically, none of those people were going to do that, and that it wouldn't accomplish a thing if they did. At the same time, I made at least one proposal about how the issue could be played, using the current rules of the game instead of chest-thumping claims that would never be carried out. Just because I look for legal (and constitutional) solutions, rather than making hollow threats about what I'm going to do if the rules don't suit me, doesn't mean that I agree with those rules. Some people have to frame the world so that anyone who doesn't agree with them 100% is their enemy. I'm not one of those people.

We are a country of laws, for better or for worse, and just because I might suggest a legal remedy, or even a compromise, to a political situation instead of blowing hot air about how I'd be ready to shoot it out, doesn't mean that I am not in favor of preserving our gun rights. I think that MD citizens are getting screwed. No doubt about that. But it's the voters and politicians of that state who are doing that, and any talk about armed defiance of the law is absurd. You aren't going to do it, nor are the 3-4 others who were making loud boasts about how they would do that.

I don't live in MD, even though my family was among the founders of the Calvert colony. I am about 1/4 mile from the state line, but I'm under a far more reasonable set of laws than MD has.

Are you making an effort to launch a slate of pro-2A candidates to take back the rights of MD citizens?

Accusing others of chest thumping is usually nothing more than an admission by the accuser that he doesn't have the back bone to do what the "chest thumpers" might. You have no idea what I or anyone else will do, but it's clear to all of us what you will do. Fold.

And here are some of your previous quotes, for any of those interested.

To be honest--and some will dislike this--we're at a point where we need to make some small concessions. Let the government license someone to buy, starting now, 20+ round magazines and drums. Go ahead and require fingerprints, etc.,

I'm not confused, and I already said that we all know it won't make a difference. Don't have the same automatic knee-jerk response as the antis. Read what's written.

Sorry, but I know the government and policy game as well as probably anyone on this board, and I know that you can be right, or you can be smart. It's time to be smart.

In full context, time to be smart meaning to surrender more rights.

Here is another good one.

Here's what's going to happen in the short term. A ban on high-capacity magazines is going to sail through congress...I work as a policy development professional. Is that clear enough? I have years of experience in that field, as well as additional years of higher-education training. That doesn't make me a player on the field, or even a referee. I'm more like the guy who determines the betting line on a game. I do that in a neutral and impartial way. That's my training.

Really? I Guess that didn't happen did it? And here you were ready to concede that from the get go. Looks like you need a bit more training on determining that betting line.

There is plenty more if anyone cares to read the thread and enjoy the hypocrisy of this guy calling the rest of us cowardly pussies.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=98461

 

[Long1MD]

Signed it. I was # 11,059.

 

[Machodoc]

Silverlode - I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you about this. I wouldn't convince you of a thing, no matter what I said. Go ahead and say what you want. I'm not playing your games.

For others who might be interested, those statements were not about what I preferred, but about what was, at the time, my opinion of how to best play the political chess game. We narrowly missed (and still may not have missed) a knee-jerk avalanche of anti-gun legislation that had huge support under the circumstances at that time. In a case like that, you can either try to do damage control, stay afloat, and re-arm to fight again, or you can let the ship sink and go down with it. What I expressed was my opinion of the best way to deal with a near-catastrophic situation ... not what I wanted to do ... but some people don't seem to understand that.

 

[Machodoc]

Where does the Constitution authorize the federal government to force me to prove I'm not a criminal before I get to exercise my rights? You want to bitch about people not signing a petition (for the record....one I signed) to an executive branch that has ZERO authority to do what it's doing in the first place on this issue, and make a statement like that, and you expect sympathy? Get a clue, and drop this "well this is reasonable but THIS isn't...so I'm ALL FOR THE CONSTITUTION!!!!" nonsense now. Inconsistent arguments accomplish nothing.

Keep in mind that no form of gun control has ever been proven to work. Institute some form of check, and criminals will go another route. It accomplishes nothing. There should be no government restraints placed on the purchase or ownership of firearms. The only thing that has ever proven effective on keeping criminals in check is arming everyone. Let everyone buy/own/carry and you will reduce crime to the lowest levels possible.

I don't disagree with either of you. I'm only giving my opinion of how the game needs to be played, even though I find it distasteful. It's sort of like the guy who is in court for a crime that he didn't commit, but whose lawyer knows is going to be convicted on circumstantial evidence. If he's convicted, and he almost certainly will be, he'll serve a long stretch in prison ... but if he pleads guilty to a lesser charge, he might not have to serve any time at all.

That's the dilemma. Do you go to jail for what may be the rest of your life, knowing that you are innocent, or do you take a plea to avoid jail punishment?

Gun owners are in sort of that same position. Do we make no concessions at all, and risk losing big time, or do we make a small concession that really doesn't hurt us, then work to get a new administration in office that will reverse that concession?

 

[Mark75H]

11,402

 

[Sirex]

I signed it as well as spreading the word elsewhere. Don't know what else I can do..........

 

[peckman28]

Gun owners are in sort of that same position. Do we make no concessions at all, and risk losing big time, or do we make a small concession that really doesn't hurt us, then work to get a new administration in office that will reverse that concession?

This mentality is what has gotten us to where we are today. I'm sure this is what people thought in the 1930s when the unconstitutional NFA was passed. In the 1960s most of the GCA of 1968 was supported by even the NRA....it would stop there. In 1986 the Hughes Amendment was reasonable too. In 1994 the liberals openly said the AWB was "only the beginning". This doesn't even cover the disasters that have happened in states like CA or NY, bit by bit. It's long past time for EVERY American to pull his/her head right back out their ass and stop putting up with this nonsense. You don't go looking to compromise with communist heathens who hate your freedoms and want them gone, you remove them from power, utterly discredit them, and don't give them a chance to ever go on the offensive against you in the first place. No other strategy is acceptable.

As far as 2A goes, we aren't going to be where the Constitution says we're supposed to be until I am allowed to walk into the local Wal-Mart and walk back out 5 mins later with an Uzi (complete with happy switch) and a 40-rd stick mag along with 1,000 rds of 9mm for my amusement whenever I please. ALL forms of gun control enacted by the state and federal governments need to be GONE. My use of weapons is not the government's business until I harm someone with them.

 

[necrodude]

I signed it right when I saw it #32.

 

[Silverlode]

This mentality is what has gotten us to where we are today. I'm sure this is what people thought in the 1930s when the unconstitutional NFA was passed. In the 1960s most of the GCA of 1968 was supported by even the NRA....it would stop there. In 1986 the Hughes Amendment was reasonable too. In 1994 the liberals openly said the AWB was "only the beginning". This doesn't even cover the disasters that have happened in states like CA or NY, bit by bit. It's long past time for EVERY American to pull his/her head right back out their ass and stop putting up with this nonsense. You don't go looking to compromise with communist heathens who hate your freedoms and want them gone, you remove them from power, utterly discredit them, and don't give them a chance to ever go on the offensive against you in the first place. No other strategy is acceptable.

As far as 2A goes, we aren't going to be where the Constitution says we're supposed to be until I am allowed to walk into the local Wal-Mart and walk back out 5 mins later with an Uzi (complete with happy switch) and a 40-rd stick mag along with 1,000 rds of 9mm for my amusement whenever I please. ALL forms of gun control enacted by the state and federal governments need to be GONE. My use of weapons is not the government's business until I harm someone with them.

The gospel truth brother. This clown is the Neville Chamberlain of 2A supporters. I'm glad there are some that get it.

 

[reverendbeer]

The gospel truth brother. This clown is the Neville Chamberlain of 2A supporters. I'm glad there are some that get it.

"Arrogance is no substitute for leadership"

No s**t.

Jesus, dude. Get with the f***ing program. No unity, no win.

Period. No. F**king. Win.