[Leaky Waders]

Many organizations and people make a living by whittling away the second amendment. They are agressive and submit legislation that affects all of America...yet there is no consequence if they fail...they simply pack congress again at a later date and reintroduce another form of legislation.

If an organization was around that made its living on attempting to bring back slavery, or curtail some newspapers rights, then there'd be hell to pay. Yet, the democract party to name one of the top of my head can repeatedly and conspiringly alienate gunowners amongst ourselves and fellow law abiding Americans w/o any consequence....they can infringe upon our rights w/ magazine capacity, high taxes and weird laws that curtail sales, and make certain weapons legal only in certain places. Why?

Why dont they say a newsman can only report one paragraph per day, and be taxed 10 cents per every 'e' used in the report, and only allow pulp-paper to be used in california and rice paper to be used in maryland that must be blessed by a hindu-priest after import fees of 20 dollars per sheet. This is not infringing upon a reporters right to free speach any more than it infringes upon my right to own arms.

Why doesn't S&W, Sturm Ruger, the NRA, the Federalists, Colt Bushmaster and others get together and sue the hell out of the democratic party and finally break their backs? Then use the proceeds to press more suits against individuals (congressman and senators among others) and governments California and Maryland who try to defy basic constitutional rights?

Has or is this being done?

It seems to me that the KKK was very strong until some of their members were convicted of hanging a young fellow in Alabama (?). Up to then many persons had been convicted of kkk related activity but...this lawyer then followed up w/ a suit that financially broke the clan and made it lose a lot of land to boot. Yes the klan still exists in its mean spirit...but it is not as solvent nor as powerful as before.

Just and idea....I'm not a lawyer nor very lawyer inclined...but it seems like it would force a supreme court ruling eventually or stop people from trying to tamper w/ the constitution w/o state sanctioned amendments.

Just an idea...maybe it's been done,

v/r,
LW

[Standing Wolf]

I think you're on the right path.

The firearms manufacturers who've been under great financial stress as a result of the frivolous law suits should turn the tables on those states and counties and cities, and take them to court.

It's my understanding Jim March is taking the People's Republic of California to court over the issue of C.C.W. permits.

I see no reason Second Amendment supports couldn't make the same use of the courts as the anti-Second Amendment bigots. Maybe we're just too polite for our own good.

[Waitone]

Pro-second amendment types are happy to live and let live. They are happy to accept just a thin strip of skin being pulled off.

So far we've been happy to stop the anti-2's pushing at us. We've not gotten to the point of pushing back.

In other words we have not adopted the predatory practices of the anti-2 movement.

Things may well be changing as we speak. I suspect the days of not pushing back are over.

[D.W. Drang]

A few points*:
1) You can send out all the statements and press releases and the like you want, "they"do't have to even read them.
2) To be pro-active is not necessarily a good thing.
3) To sue the heck out of everybody you need lawyers and either deep pockets OR a reasonable expectation of winning. Sue the NY Slimes for being biased? You have to PROVE bias. In court. To a jury that has been propagandized by the guys you're tryin to sue.
4) Ever hear of Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership? http://jpfo.org/ The Second Amendment Fondation? http://www.saf.org/ The Second Amendment Sisters? http://www.sas-aim.org/ Not all organizations are as passive as you seem to think the NRA is... and I don't think being the first to march into federal court to file suit against the Campaign Finance "Deform" Law was exactly being passive!

*Started out as "two ponts", but I'm NOT the Spanish Inquisition!:evil:

[Thumper]

We didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition...

[Monkeyleg]

In order to be proactive you need to first imagine what your opponent might do, or at least recognize some early signs.

Unlike many states, Wisconsin has been moving forward on gun issues largely because a few people in the capitol recognized early signs and moved to thwart them. In just a very few years we got: a) pre-emption legislation that prevents municipalities from enacting gun laws more stringent than those at the state level; b) a right to keep and bear arms amendment that's pretty clear in its language; c) a range protection act, which keeps the buyers of new homes from shutting down ranges because of the noise; d) a right to hunt, fish and trap amendment, which keeps the PETA folks from closing off land to hunting; and e) legislation to prevent gun makers, distributers and dealers from being sued for the criminal use of their products.

These same people have created a political climate in which almost no politician can utter a word about gun control without suffering serious consequences at the polls.

It's my opinion that these folks have a long-term plan in place. For example: our state supreme court will soon rule on the constitutionality of the current ban on concealed carry. Considering the language of the RKBA amendment, it's hard to imagine that they'll let current legislation stand as is.

Following the court ruling, we'll be seeing another introduction of the concealed carry bill. If it passes--and it should--the mayors of some of the big cities will want exemptions made. But, no dice. The pre-emption legislation, you see.

Following passage of CCW legislation, I foresee other forward progress. Perhaps eliminating waiting periods for handguns.

The anti's have succeeded in many areas because they work incrementally. We can, too, if the committment is there.

[Bainx]

Ask the relocated Cherokee indians about being reactive rather than proactive. That is THE reason they are living out west on a reservation.
It is much easier, cheaper, less stressfull to be reactive.
However, it will cost you in the long-run.