Divided we fall

S

Sport

New member
I've just returned from the leadership
conference of the nations' largest
conservation organization. I won't
name it, but it is over sixty years old,
was created by avid hunters, and is
dedicated to the preservation of specific
wildlife populations.

While there, I conducted an informal survey
about gun control.

The impression I came away with is that
many of these sportsmens' views reflect
those of the general population: i.e.
handguns should be registered, waiting
peiods are fine, "real sportsmen" don't
need "assault rifles".

Friends, I can deal with the overt antis.
My concern is the splintering within our
ranks.
 
Sport, This is a situation where we must preach to the members of the choir who only come to practice when it suits them. When you start explaining how the M-12 Winchesters etc. fall into the evil gun category due to technical definition you start to get some attention. When you put them on to what has gone down in England and Australia you really raise a few eyebrows. It will take the members of your organization to get the ball rolling from within. Keep at it.
HankL
 
This reminds me of something Malcolm X said once. Forgive me if I don't have the quote exactly right, and I mean no offense to anyone.

"I'd much rather sit down across the table from a KKKer. At least I know what his views are and where he's coming from, and he's quite open about them. It's those people that pay us lip service that will do us the most damage."

I think the old saying, "Better the devil you know," applies here.

------------------
"...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
Luke 22:36
"An armed society is a polite society."
Robert Heinlein
 
I believe that it may have been Ben Franklin who observed: We must all hang together, or we will most assuredly hang seperately. He was right, and I note that re the subject of the original post, and comments, nothing much has changed since Franklin's day and time.

Unfortunately, any number of people seem to have forgotten his dictum, and or the following: Not an attempt to criticize dogs, but these creatures tend to have fleas, and if one insists in lying down with dogs, then one will also have fleas.

Seems an obvious, rather than an arcane principle, leaving me wondering as to why anyone would have difficulty grapsing it. Possibly the almost 40 yeares I spent in engineering and construction have left me somewhat "handicapped", in some respects.
 
I have an interesting but subversive idea for the uninvolved hunters.

How about a demonstration in front of such organizations claiming that their guns are
SNIPER Rifles and must be banned or that all of them have to be licensed to own them?

We wouldn't do that to "gunowners" would we?

I swear, and I've said this before, if they
ban guns for personal defense, etc. - I will
lobby for a total ban on all guns, esp.
rich boy skeet guns! Rant Rant!

No hunting for you, old geezer.
 
Glenn,

Your comment, posted several days ago
in another thread, was going through
my mind as I was surveying members of
the conservation organization. The
majority of them are avid hunters.
Clearly though, many of them would
jealously guard only their right to keep
and bear shotguns.
One day their self-centered, elitist
attitude is going to backlash on them.

In short, I totally agree with you!

Sport
 
Sport,

Forget the shotguns for the moment, I wonder how much longer before the Antis try to ban the .22 caliber rifle by labeling it an 'assault weapon'?

Frightening and unbelievable at the same time... :eek:

------------------
...defend the 2nd., it protects us all.
No fate but what we make...
 
I don't think it'll be long. The way I see it happening is, a couple incidents with .22s that get publicity, and they can sneak amendments to the current stupid assault weapons bills in. All it has to say is:
"Strike the word 'centerfire' from Section 4, Paragraph 3, Line 21"
or something similar. Then BOOM a large number of .22s are illegal overnight.
Can this be done or am I just paranoid? (Or both?)
 
Okay,

There have been a half dozen comments
on this subject. Each was reasoned and
articulate.
Why, then, is it a constant struggle to
get others in the family-hunters,
shooters, and gun owners- to understand
the danger to all of not presenting a
united front?






[This message has been edited by Sport (edited January 30, 2000).]
 
Sport...

It is really hard to say... I would assume this 'conservative' group contains many veterans, who either bought and paid for these liberties personally, or had friends and family give the ultimate sacrifice to ensure their liberties remained intact, and our freedoms assured.

As a very proud Veteran of this great country, it SICKENS me to see & hear these attitudes. It makes the sacrifices of my brothers & sisters, and more importantly, of ME, seem very cheapened.

These people don't deserve to call themselves Americans, and I would not hesistate to tell them personally!

Anyone, who, in good conscience, can not uphold the Constitution of the United States, one that they have sworn to PROTECT & DEFEND, should just depart the shores of MY country, for they neither desire, nor deserve the freedoms too many have died for to guarantee!

usflag.gif


------------------
Restrictive Gun Laws are ineffective... The day the criminals start obeying the law is the day we no longer have criminals.

It's Not about Guns... It's All about Rights!!!

[This message has been edited by jaydee (edited January 29, 2000).]
 
Sport:

Re the question you asked in a later post, you may have seen/heard the following before. Unfortunately, I believe it is all to true. I do not know why it is, but it does seem to be that way: Hunters, shooters. sportsmen, and in general "gun owners" tend to be their very own, worst enemies".

This is evidenced time and time again, by comment to the effect that, fill in the blank "nobody needs ...", "true hunters would never use ...", "... is unsporting", it could go on at some length, but why bother, for you may well have heard it before.

The really problematic thing about this is that this line of crap comes not only from practioners of the "slice at a time" theory of "gun control" spelled PROSCRIPTION, but we hear it from GUN OWNERS too.

If, in the end, we do loose the battle, it might well be due to the fact that our brethern THREW THE THING AWAY. Not a pretty picture, but that is, unhappily, the way it looks to me.

As some might have noticed, Iam not one of those "reasonable" or "gentlemenly" types, who blanch at the thought of even possibly offending the anti gunners. If they can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. The above however is, as noted, the way it looks to me.
 
At our local VFW, we have veterans who loudly state "... only the police and the army need guns!"

Obviously they have forgotten what their war (WWII) really was about....
-----

I went to lunch with two former business associates - both are former military. When I mentioned my CHL they both visibly paled and voiced opinions that guns are bad. (sigh)

------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
 
Sport,

We (the RKBAites) are fragmented, and seem to have been that way for a very long time. Some groups have limited objectives, while others are divided amongst themselves, and still others have lost sight of their goal(s) along the way.

We lack the unity, the one purpose of mind, that the Antis seem to have found under Brady and HCI. Grudgingly, I have to give them credit for that, as much as I hate to admit it.
They know what they want and are more than willing to 'chip away' a little at a time.
They are obviously in no hurry.

What can we do?
We can hope for a national event to come along to swing the pendulum, and public opinion, back to our side. Or,since there is little national leadership to speak of, we can continue to build on a 'grass-roots' campaign that gradually educates the great unwashed masses out there.
Or we can do nothing.

At least we still have a choice...
For now....




------------------
...defend the 2nd., it protects us all.
No fate but what we make...
 
Guess I never realized how lucky I am. At my range, if you even *mention* "sporting use" in a discussion of gun rights, Howard-the-Owner will rip you a new one.

Same with Pike's Peak Firearms Coalition. If you venture an opinion that "no one needs that," Paul Paradis will, again, rip you a new one.

I find myself surrounded by 100% pro-gun people on a daily basis, and that suits me fine.

------------------
"If your determination is fixed, I do not counsel you to despair. Few things are impossible to diligence and skill. Great works are performed not by strength, but perseverance."
-- Samuel Johnson
 
.22 rimfires are quite vulnerable to attack:

1. They are a 'gateway' gun, attracting new shooters with their deceptively low recoil and relatively quiet report. 'Studies' show that many gunowners were introduced to guns via the seemingly innocuous .22, and went on to using more deadly assault weapons.
2. The .22 rimfire is available in subsonic rounds, which are too cheap and available, like junk guns. And, they provide a deadly 'silencing' effect for criminals and gang members.
3. All .22 ammunition is too cheap and too available. Too many adults think these deadly instruments of war are somehow less damaging than larger calibers - the 'truth' is that the deadly .22 rimfire ammunition kills more people in the U.S. than any other bullet.
4. Deadly sniper rifles, equipped with high power rifle scopes often fire .22 bullets. No one needs these deadly, quiet, long-range killing machines.

And on, and on with similar BS. I don't work on Madison Avenue, but give this little project to a motivated HCI staffer, or Levi Strauss marketing department, and they'll have a field day with it. Just wait a few more years. They don't want to boil the frog quite this quickly ... but, they'll boil this one too, eventually.

Gun bigots have no shame. And, to be frank, I no longer have any respect left for hunters that have so little intelligence that they accept the logic that 'they' are not yet after 'their' gun. They truly are more dangerous than the anti's - they dilute the truth.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited January 30, 2000).]
 
This is why I have been a member of DU for the past 10 yrs or so even though I don't hunt ducks. We have quite a few duck hunters at work who were once oblivious to what was happening to their rights. I got them interested and they begain joining pro gun groups. Some would bitch about all of the fund raising and I could mention getting a letter from DU asking for money as well. I even send DU money, I've been a Bronze Sponsor for the past five years or so.
I used to be the company "gun nut" now I'm the company gunsmith/person to ask etc.
Now we have duck hunters hunting deer and belonging to the NRA and SAF. It took some doing but I know that I have gotten 20 or so people to come around and I know that they are going out and doing the same thing.
Take those guys at the VFW to the range and put a Springfield or a Garand back in their hands! Don't bitch, do something!
Off My Box
Hank
 
I would have thought that one of you would have taken me to task about saying the words "duck hunter" here!
Hank
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top