What are we doing wrong

J

jim8115

New member
How is it thousands upon thousands of people can be organized to go to Washington to protest a pipeline? Yet, even though their are way more of us that that group, it appears we do nothing. We talk amongst ourselves, we post on forums, but we don't really do anything. If we don't figure a way to get some attention, we are in serious times my friends. What can we do? How? We need to be thinking about it. United we can make a stand, if not, they will feel free to pick us off, one at a time, and they will win.

JIM
 
Glad your in the right Forum now Jim.
I'm with you and if you can get it together I will see you in Washington. If there is anything I can do to help you organize it PM me.
 
Everyone loves to talk, but they want someone ELSE to do the dirty work and commit..........it is going to take a serious second Lexington or Concord to wake these folks up
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand, most of us work, so I would not expect us all to be able to go to wahington. But what about at a local level? Imagigne the press if gun rights groups showed up at the capitol of every state one day for a rally, or even local courthouses? Im just saying we need to get together. I hear people saying " let them try and take mine". While noble, how long do you think an individual can hold off the Govt, but united , we stand a chance

JIM
 
I wish I could say this without being crass... but...

Protest marches are most effective when they appeal to the unemployed (who have the time to participate) and are targeted towards politicians who cater to the unemployed.

Think "Occupy Wallstreet"... The accountants, bankers, and lawyers in Manhattan did not organize their own "occupy" movement in response. The used the power of their wallet. In the end, the only thing the "occupy" movement succeeded in doing was putting a few unlucky restaurants out of business, spreading a lot of STDs, and smoking a lot of weed.

We, the gun-owners, tend to have full time jobs and disposable income. Well-written letters and campaign donations are our best weapon.
 
It might even be counterproductive.
Imagine the media coverage. Pick the scariest looking person, bait them, and get something damaging on film.
The purpose of a march is to get positive press that changes minds or scare politicians with numbers. With the way that the news is run by people who hate guns our numbers would be ignored or under reported. Then the type of people involved would be twisted or outright lied about.
I really wish that a march would work, I think we could get the support.
 
What we are doing wrong.

We have no attention span. We mobilize when we perceive an IMMEDIATE threat, but after a couple of weeks, we lose interest and assume that the threat is gone. The threat is never gone. It will never be gone. We will be fighting this battle forever--or until we lose.

We are up against opposition who is fine with pursuing a course of action that may take decades to attain. Our opponents held on through the CCW movement, they didn't give up after Heller, they didn't fold after McDonald. They will never give up. We make a gain or two and assume we've won and relax. We must understand that we will never win this battle. There are only two options--fight continuously or lose.

We are willing to sacrifice our allies and some of our rights if we perceive any benefit in such sacrifice; even if that benefit is clearly only temporary. Rather than fortifying our position behind the bulwark of unity, we fight amongst ourselves and cooperate with our opponents to aid them in dividing and defeating us.

We expend tremendous effort and money in non-productive avenues instead of putting it to use where it will do the most good. Scrambling around trying to find guns that can be banned with the stroke of the pen and then buying them for 2X what they're worth is a waste of time and money. It would be better to spend that effort mobilizing support for gun rights. It would be better to spend that money and time campaigning for pro-gun politicians and against anti-gunners. If everyone who panic-bought ammo or guns had spent that money (or even a tenth of it) on gun-rights advocacy instead, and had spent the time signing up members to gun-rights groups, and on recruiting and educating new shooters, the results would have been spectacular.

We don't act when we have the chance and then, when the inevitable result of that inaction comes to pass, we ask ourselves what we are doing wrong.
 
I attended a rally in Buffalo NY, Clarence Center, NY and will be at one in Lockport, NY this afternoon. I hope and pray it helps, but if it doesn't at least I can say I did what I could. I have written letters, sent emails, made phone calls and will continue to do so. I have given contributions to GOA, NRA, 2nd Amendment Foundation and others.
I am a Viet Nam veteran and I will do whatever I feel will help to ensure that all my fellow veterans did not die in vain. If we loose our constitutional rights then the lives of all who fought and died for our freedoms was in vain. This is not acceptable. Our freedoms were fought for and it is our responsibility to preserve them.
 
Right now the legislature in MN is in session and they are of course considering some new gun laws.

LOTS more pro-gun than anti-gun folk showed up for a panel of legislators considering some laws and I am sure it heartens the pro-gun legislators to know they have some support. I know it cheers me up to see 'our' side to visibly have more support than the anti-gun side.

They talked about jobs in the firearms industry in Minnesota:
http://dpmsinc.com/

They demonstrated how a wood stock Ruger 10/22 could become an evil black rifle and was same rifle whether it had a wooden stock or pistol grip stock.

And there was a particularly heart wrenching story from a man whose son had been shot by a drunken neighbor but said none of the laws being proposed would have prevented what happened.
 
Is this with respect to the possibility of anti-gun legislation being passed, or was this in response to the nth rerun of the email claiming that the U.N. was going to take our guns via treaty? There's a huge difference...
Click to expand...

JohnKSa,

With respect, please explain the huge differences. Especially when dealing with our current administration that is infested with anti-gun politico's that will stop at nothing to shred our 2nd Amendment.

Yes, we've had anti-gun legislation in the past with other administrations. So it's ok to discuss that topic. But it's taboo to discuss the real possibility of the U.N. requesting stricter gun control for the US and the 'powers to be' listening. Which this administration would love anyway.

And why is it out of the question to even consider having a discussion here of the possibility of UN troops helping to enforce these laws in the US ?

If this could NEVER happen here in the US... or it could... the reasons why it couldn't or how it could, would be a worthy discussion.
 
Last edited:
Yet, even though their are way more of us that that group, it appears we do nothing. We talk amongst ourselves, we post on forums, but we don't really do anything. If we don't figure a way to get some attention, we are in serious times my friends.
Click to expand...

Bingo!!!

The gunowning public is fractured. You can't expect much from gunowners who are willing to compromise our Second Amendment rights away. We have gunowners who are willing to jump through federal hoops to sell their guns, folks who favor a ban on "high capacity magazines" and even folks who favor an AWB.
 
As a newer member here, and a younger one aswell, I don't particularly think several people would take my 2 cents for what they are but i'll voice them anyway.

You are posting on TFL forums, they have rules, clearly the staff set those rules in place for a reason so the place they created is a certain way.(They are the site's Founding Fathers)

That being said, whining about threads you couldn't start here is pointless and irrelevant. There are probably hundreds of other places you can talk about those specific things. Taking from another site I know, if you join a site, and then complain about how it's run is just downright dumb, learn2internet.

Finally, since the topic of protesting hasn't been shut down yet obviously it's ok to talk about. I once talked to my representative back in CA and they said other than the sometimes "crazy" ones they get, letters written to their offices are usually about only the 1 in 50+ that feel that way, and that letter represents a larger group of people. So as long as your representative isn't corrupt then your letter IS important, also be encouraged to stand up and peaceably protest any matter you can at any level you can.
 
MLeake,

Agree with your post. Especially this...

I, for one, fully understand that the Constitution forbids ratification or enforcement of any treaty that violates the Constitution, so I am not one of the guys who fears the Blue Helmet takeover. OTOH, I also recognize that the MO of many of our political opponents is to pass laws of extremely questionable Constitutionality, in the expectation that the court process will take a long, long time, and require time and treasure from our side.
Click to expand...

The lack of respect for our Constitution this administration has, is now, and seems to be gearing up to show is simply astounding.

Far as an out-n-out 'Blue Helmet' takeover , I don't fear that either. At least not in my lifetime. But instead of fearing an outright murder of our 2nd amendment rights, I do fear a slow, painful cancer of them spearheaded by the anti's that show no boundaries in which this administration is deeply embedded.

Obama said "he would do anything in his power" to accomplish stricter gun control. He didn't beat around the bush, he didn't disguise it, he didn't imply he would be willing to do this with a vote of the people on the issue...he said he would use every power his office has to get the job done. That would seem to leave the door fairly wide open as to what he and this administration is willing to do to achieve their anti-constitutional ways. In short, this administration has shown to have the least regards for the Constitution of any prior administration in my lifetime and would not care to re-write the whole thing to adhere to their own appeasement.

Remembering what Obama said about using every power his office is capable of, why then are discussions about these issues and the way this administration may attempt to implement/enforce their new policies deemed as political or conspiracy theories and closed without discussion?
 
Last edited:
Some good points made here,
but sadly ( Here in Connecticut between the locals and Washington crowd)
the deals are already done.. just waiting for the announcements of the new roll outs ....
None of our local or Washington reps have ever publicly
stated their support for 2A. lots of wishy washy statements a few lame emails
but nothing solid. the anti's have the high ground.
 
wouldn't a "Million Gun Owner" march
from the viewpoint of the Oman & Biden crowd, DF et. al.
consider this an "uprising" ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What are we doing wrong

Is it possible that, as gun owners, we are not standing up for all our gun rights and instead are just willing to stand up for the ones that individually, directly affect each one of us.

Example: I don't even own an AR style rifle. You know, the 'demonic' black rifles labeled by the anti's as 'assault' rifles. Yea, the ones made for killing only. :rolleyes:

But just because I don't own one and banning them would not directly affect me in any way, do I still speak up and wright/call my Rep. about the proposed ban on these rifles? Yep!

I was standing at the counter at a local LGS about three weeks ago and there was a discussion going on between a customer and a salesperson. The customer was in the market for a new varmint/predator rifle. He was checking out a bolt action rifle when I walked up.

The salesperson pulled an AR off the rack(that was marked up at a humorous price) and says to the customer, " a lot of guys are using AR's for varmints these days, shoulder this one and see what you think. If you don't have one you ought to buy one before the ban".
The customer replied, "I don't like those kind of guns and could care less if they ban them".

Some may only own one or two handguns. Those pistols may only hold a capacity of under ten rounds. So a magazine ban wouldn't directly affect them. Are they opposed to a higher count magazine ban or could they care less since it doesn't directly affect them?

When it comes to our rights as gun owners, we need to get out of our own little world and realize that just cause I don't own an AR, there are those that do, should have the right to do so and we should ban together to insure the AR owners their rights. Same with other proposed bans that may not directly affect us as an individuals.
 
+1 to shortwave

it's a short jump from "Military style Assault Weapons" to any item that is specifically designed to cause the death of anyone by projectile, or however they would word it.

SHALL NOT be infringed is pretty succinct
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top