BREAKING! SAF lawsuit challenges I-594

[GunRightsCoalition]

This is reality. Reality is that as long as we allow each state to screw with our constitution as they wish we slowly are losing this fight. That is reality and we need to wake up to it.

 

[RB87]

Yay, another debate over realpolitik (political pragmatism) and clear moral beliefs (the right to self defense). You can be so pragmatic that you compromise your beliefs away.

We've had the gun grabbers on the run now for twenty years supposedly, after decades of compromises. If we give in here, they'll be happy and leave us alone! Then 1968, 1986, 1994 etc.. How long as the Sullivan act been law in New York state/city? But you know, lets march back through the institutions at a snails pace after decades of losing.

I question people who wish to solely play by the legal/court and voting route. Standing up for your beliefs, voicing them vociferously and not backing down does work. That means yes, you may be deemed scary racist white guys (among other things) for showing up at a rally armed. Given modern cultural attitudes, you will lose like 591 did playing solely by their rules and their games. The gun grabbers, now calling themselves gun safety experts instead of gun control proponents, don't play by their own rules. Their science is feelings, nothing more than feelings. Provide them with hard facts and the response is you're a racist, bigot, nut job etc..

Look at the reactions (and counter reactions) to shirtgate or gamergate. That is how you win against the prevailing orthodoxy. Not by offering up a competing bill that supposedly will sound better to all yet just confuses people and divides support. You call your opponents on their idiocy. You reject their ideas. Fight against their propaganda. Kids are suspended from school for little plastic guns held in gi joe's kung fu grip. Oppose government healthcare? You're a racist and heartless for the uninsured. Logic? Logic doesn't matter to these people. Feelings do. Rhetoric does. Mix in logic with your rhetoric and you will likely win the moderates among others. Standing up for your beliefs solely in the courtroom does not win hearts and minds. The courts generally serve those in power, not the people. If you'll compromise on this fundamental belief, what else will you compromise on? Do you really believe in what you say? The gun grabbers do or at least act in public like they do and they sell it well.

That Maine Prepper video linked earlier amused me. He talked about people who say fight when the gov is knocking on the door as being hard headed or wooden. Sure, but what do you think the gun grabbers are? Look at the abortion protesters. They yell, scream and get in people's faces. "If we let this law pass in Texas, ten years from now they'll ban abortion!" The national media promotes their cause. Self defense advocates march with open carry? They're only a few gun nuts, threatening harmless mothers against drunk drivers er sensible gun laws.

Fools may rush in, but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. Two steps forward, one step back. Yeah, you won some court cases. Yet the government still has plenty of wiggle room to ruin people's lives over some petty arbitrary rule breaking. You've now woken up the gun grabbers from their slumber, who've counter attacked. Playing solely by their rules will at least drum up lawyers fees, membership dues and controversy for the news people to sell.

Call me in a 100 years if you've marched back through the institutions and won the war.

 

[U201491]

OK, You really are a nut.

SAF is challenging this law in court, and you are all up in arms that they want to do away with Constitutional Carry altogether.....ooookaaaaayyyy

I have no clue where you got that idea. You are the nutcase. I never said anything of the kind.
I am all for SAF going ahead with their lawsuit. I just wish they would have got more orgs on board before they did. You really have to stop taking strange drugs when you read these posts It messes with ya big time.

I am 100% for "Constitutional carry" true constitutional carry. IE; no permit required !!!!!!!
YEAH I have a CHL, but don't like the fact I have to have it ! We under the 2nd should not have to have anything "permitting us" to carry any way we want !

Again stop with the LSD already.

On one hand you back up Obumf___ and on the other you are for constitutional carry. WHAT THE HELL SIDE ARE YOU ON?????????? You sure confused the hell out of me ???????

My stand, is Pry it from my cold dead fingers if you can, and Don't screw with My 2nd Amendment ! That is it in a nutshell. I support every no compromising protection of that 100% and always have.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Now if you can find fault or some twisted definition of that, you really are on some very very bad drugs.
OoooohhhhhWeeeeeOOOOOO Twilight zone theme........

 

[Dave Workman]

Very true, but remember that can also be a danger. Amy messing with the Constitution can be a serious danger.
That is why I always advocate leaving it solidly alone and as is. It is a pretty damned clear document and unique in the world as is.

I also advise against "messing with the Constitution." It's worked pretty good over the years, even when we may not like the outcome. It's better than anything else that's come along over the past 230 years or so, and once anybody opens it up, the whole thing is in trouble.

I am all for SAF going ahead with their lawsuit. I just wish they would have got more orgs on board before they did.

SAF got on board good plaintiffs. If others want to file lawsuits, that is up to them. Besides, more than one lawsuit against the same law is maybe not such a bad thing.

 

[Brigadier]

Very true, but remember that can also be a danger. Amy messing with the Constitution can be a serious danger.
That is why I always advocate leaving it solidly alone and as is. It is a pretty damned clear document and unique in the world as is.

Well, if you study the Article V process, everyone crying about a runaway convention are full of it. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing.

 

[Brigadier]

I have no clue where you got that idea. You are the nutcase. I never said anything of the kind.

Well, you jumped in on a conversation you weren't part of, so I wasn't replying to your narcissistic self originally. My original post was aimed at chariot13, not you. So move on. This was an A and B conversation. Please C your way out of it.

 

[U201491]

Well, you jumped in on a conversation you weren't part of, so I wasn't replying to your narcissistic self originally. My original post was aimed at chariot13, not you. So move on. This was an A and B conversation. Please C your way out of it.

.
Sure there general run with your arrogance. Tired of your bs anyway ROFLMAO.
Dig your hole.

 

[Gunguy45]

Take it to PMs already.

 

[U201491]

Love that Ignore switch

 

[Monica Cowles]

*Sigh* Guys...can't we all just get along? Sheesh.....

 

[freestoneangler]

Reading some of these posts with thoughts about how best to fight the fight is interesting and there are merits to all of them. While the discussion continues, keep in mind we're all on the same team (pretty sure the vast majority are anyway) and it will take everyone of us and then some to change the current trajectory. Besides, nothing more the pro I-594 crowd likes than seeing they've got us beating the hell out of one another .

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

I don't care if they see us beating each other up as long as we are together when we line up to fight. They might be surprised if they think we are not united because we disagree here and there on exactly how we proceed and then have a united front in spite of it.

 

[RW-Ore]

*Sigh* Guys...can't we all just get along? Sheesh..... [/QUOTE


Agree for sure

 

[tommy98466]

Very true, but remember that can also be a danger. Amy messing with the Constitution can be a serious danger.
That is why I always advocate leaving it solidly alone and as is. It is a pretty damned clear document and unique in the world as is.

I haven't been following your thread for very long but do you know the difference between a Constitutional Convention, to amend the Constitution, and a Convention of States?

 

[pdrake]

I haven't been following your thread for very long but do you know the difference between a Constitutional Convention and a States Convention?

Do tell.

 

[tommy98466]

Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures the power to act as a final check on the abuse of power in Washington, D.C. Under Article V, state legislatures have authority to hold a limited convention that can propose much-needed amendments to our Constitution. Once 34 states pass a resolution applying for such a convention, Congress must call one.

 

[BoonDocks36]

I haven't been following your thread for very long but do you know the difference between a Constitutional Convention and a States Convention?

Uhhh, one starts with an S, for States...

IOW, DAQ.

philip..... Monica, I enjoy the snarkey conversation, to a certain degree!

 

[Stomper]

philip..... Monica, I enjoy the snarkey conversation, to a certain degree!

Aw shucks, this ain't nothin' more than two siblings wrastlin' on the front room carpet, getttin' the occasional rug burn... and maybe knockin' over the leg-lamp that was dad's "major award".


It also reminds me of the time in the makeshift EM club on Palmerola AB in Honduras back in '86 when I watched two (drunk) Army Rangers punching each other in the face to see who could take it the longest... and they were battle buddies, too! LOL!

 

[Brigadier]

Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures the power to act as a final check on the abuse of power in Washington, D.C. Under Article V, state legislatures have authority to hold a limited convention that can propose much-needed amendments to our Constitution. Once 34 states pass a resolution applying for such a convention, Congress must call one.

Listen to Mark Levin's radio program and you will learn all about it. He also has an excellent book about entitled "The Liberty Amendments".

 

[Stomper]

Love me some Levin on the drive home! I also like Michael Berry! He's highlarious!