Could there be a backlash?


PDA






monotonous_iterancy
June 12, 2014, 07:20 PM
There seems to have been a lot of high-profile shootings in the news lately. I know that there's another thread in this vein, but I'm not saying we should "do" anything.

As I'm seeing another incident in the news, followed by another, and then another, I'm steadily growing concerned about what the "average person" is thinking.

We at THR are a minority. We tend to be much more firm on our 2nd Amendment than most. We're more informed, and we tend to have a better perspective. Most people don't. Perhaps gun owners in general are a minority. I know that we easily avoided a major defeat recently, we've been steadily gaining ground overall. But we need to make sure we don't develop an echo chamber.

I'd like to start a discussion on the following things. I think it's important, even if just for our future reference.

1. What is the chance that a backlash could develop beneath our feet? That a "silent majority" could give us a setback when we least expect it?

If it's possible, I'm not thinking that it would be led by anti-gun activists, it could be simply from most people tiring of hearing about (seemingly) regular tragedies.

2. How do we recognize this when it starts? How do we counter it in it's early stages?

If you enjoyed reading about "Could there be a backlash?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
wally
June 12, 2014, 07:26 PM
If it's possible, I'm not thinking that it would be led by anti-gun activists, it could be simply from most people tiring of hearing about (seemingly) regular tragedies.

I think if people are actually paying attention to anything in the news beyond celebrity gossip, any backlash will be against all the lies being told by the current administration and their willfully blind media lapdogs -- "gun violence" statistics included.

monotonous_iterancy
June 12, 2014, 07:33 PM
I think if people are actually paying attention to anything in the news beyond celebrity gossip, any backlash will be against all the lies being told by the current administration and their willfully blind media lapdogs -- "gun violence" statistics included.

That illustrates part of what I'm saying. You and I are part of a minority. You know those statistics are false because you're passionate about gun rights and you care enough to spend your free time delving into the details of these things.

Most people don't. They don't take time to learn the intricacies, to research the false methodologies used. They see CNN say "74 school shootings" and they take it at face value.

george burns
June 12, 2014, 07:33 PM
I started typing a similar thought before, and decided to stop. But you may be right, I more than anything else can see the President, "being a lame duck", putting some kind of mandate in place just to say he did something.
Even if it is illegal and unconstitutional, he is the type of person who doesn't forget that we stopped him on the gun laws he tried to push through with the Assault rifle ban, so it wouldn't be far fetched IMO, to see him push through some kind of moratorium on certain types of weapons.
Let's hope that doesn't happen, but nothing surprises me any more.:neener:
He might try some kind of marshal law or emergency law that he pulled out of his rear end just because he is able to, "if he's able to". I am sure he is or has looked into it.

readyeddy
June 12, 2014, 07:39 PM
No backlash, don't worry about it. Most Americans don't even watch the evening news or read the newspaper anymore. I mean, most Americans don't even realize that the $400 billion natural gas deal between Russia and China is without the petrodollar and even less know what the petrodollar is all about.

hso
June 12, 2014, 07:40 PM
We have opportunists actively working against us and we need to accept and look for it. Every incident has important background information that we need to understand and to be prepared to counter the dumbed down "the gun is responsible" media rant.

Shotgun used in Washington? Didn't Joe Biden say that's all you need?

Kid off his meds wants to die having taken others with him? Where's the therapists, doctors, psychiatrists that should have reported he was a threat? Where were the parents that should have intervened?

When do we start pointing out that the news media aggrandizing these people provide goals for notoriety and infamy?

herkyguy
June 12, 2014, 07:45 PM
There will eventually be another panic. It's like anything else these days. What will set it off, I don't know, but since about 2008 or so, my buying practices have changed. I'm a much more savvy shopper nowadays. I don't buy at inflated prices, I know where to find good deals, and I try to speak honestly and frankly about responsible gun ownership with others who may or may not share my views.....

HorseSoldier
June 12, 2014, 07:47 PM
There is potential blow back against the 2A from any high profile crime involving a firearm. On the national level we dodged a bullet (;)) after some of the more lurid incidents in the last few years, but that only does so much to help people in Colorado or the New England states that jerked their knees after Sandy Hook. But if you're not always keeping an eye out for local/state/national repercussions from sensationalized crimes, you're likely to be caught by surprise at some point.

bmnloader
June 12, 2014, 07:50 PM
It's definitely a possibility and I too think obummer will try if he can, to do something. How to stop it? All I think we can do is to keep pushing our thoughts EASILY on the anti's. I also believe that the media plays the biggest role in all of it. I know I tend to watch or read the things that a person like us(pro gun) people would and the anti's watch and read what they are used to so it's tough to change the mind of someone that is continually brainwashed(not the correct term I know) by the media. We just have to keep gently pushing our agenda. Not the way the OC people are doing it. That's not helping anything on our end. We need to take kids with us to the range, regardless of who's kids they are and get them acquainted with guns. There, I'm done with my rant.

monotonous_iterancy
June 12, 2014, 07:58 PM
Even if it is illegal and unconstitutional, he is the type of person who doesn't forget that we stopped him on the gun laws he tried to push through with the Assault rifle ban, so it wouldn't be far fetched IMO, to see him push through some kind of moratorium on certain types of weapons.
Let's hope that doesn't happen, but nothing surprises me any more.
He might try some kind of marshal law or emergency law that he pulled out of his rear end just because he is able to, "if he's able to". I am sure he is or has looked into it.

Actually, President H.W Bush (republican), banned the importation (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/08/us/import-ban-on-assault-rifles-becomes-permanent.html) by executive order of certain firearms after a shooting in the late 80s. It's happened before.

In the 90s, President Clinton banned (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2209&dat=19940528&id=SJpKAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hJQMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4275,6666358) (by executive order) all importation of Chinese firearms.

The president can't ban weapons outright, but he can stop the import of foreign made guns.

As for martial law, that is not going to happen. I don't know all the details, but there are cultural and structural problems to implementing that, not the least of which is the clear triviality of declaring a "state of emergency" over gun violence.

Obama is left-of-center, certainly, and he is no friend of freedom. However, he is not an evil Marxist wannabe dictator.

Schwing
June 12, 2014, 08:12 PM
The majority of those who support the anti-gun agenda typically do so for what they feel are valid reasons. My experience has been that they are the very young, the educated elite (College professors and those who live off of government grants) and the ultra liberal. What I mean by ultra liberal are those who truly envision a utopian society of equality, safety and literal hugging and singing in the streets. Another group, the group that is the most tragic, are the victims and families of victims of gun violence who truly want the deaths and injuries of their loved ones to mean something. Of course, there are those I hesitate to mention... Those who basically don't have the intelligence to tie their own shoes.

At the forefront, you have a very small group of very wealthy and powerful individuals who are guiding the aforementioned groups and manipulating them to their will. The very young are easily swayed. The educated elite make their fortunes studying and proclaiming the nonsense, and the ultra liberals honestly believe that a 100% peaceful and utopian society are possible and that guns are the only thing in their way. Those who grieve are exploited the most in my opinion. They are trotted out on stage in their mourning to, essentially, play on the emotions of the crowd. If you will notice, they are quickly discarded when their grief plays its course or, heaven forbid, have a change of heart.

Unfortunately, those who lead this movement are extremely intelligent and calculating. They have done a magnificent job of casting us "Gun Nuts", as a bunch of toothless white supremacist hicks who hate the government. They have trained their followers that we all fit in the same mold and they have a list of talking points that are drilled into them so intensely that even proving to them on paper that they are wrong just doesn't cut it.

The solution, in my opinion, is extremely difficult because it requires us to force them to see us OUTSIDE of that mold. This means always taking the high road (no pun intended). It means being willing to have discourse and never lose our cool regardless of the insults or blatant misinformation. It requires taking our time to help educate those who may be on the fence and stand up for the right without being confrontational or stooping to the level of stating false facts or misinformation like the opposition.

The most difficult thing it requires is the willingness and ability to actually SEE the other side of the argument and understand WHY they feel the way that they do. Please don't mistake this with agreeing with them! People arrive at their beliefs through many ways and, without truly trying to understand why they believe the way that they do, they will see our side as simply argumentative etc.

Agsalaska
June 12, 2014, 08:24 PM
As long as we speak and believe in absolutes and make decisions based on that there will always be the risks you speak of.

monotonous_iterancy
June 12, 2014, 08:29 PM
As long as we speak and believe in absolutes and make decisions based on that there will always be the risks you speak of.

Actually, I think that Wally's post under my OP illustrates the "echo chamber" I'm talking about.

We can easily fall into a logic that goes like this,

"Well, if people paid any attention at all, they'd know that the statistics on gun fatalities involving children involve those up to age 25 and include gang-fights."

Things that are common knowledge to us, aren't to most people. We spend our free time reading about this stuff, getting into wonky detail.

Joe Demko
June 12, 2014, 08:35 PM
The price of personal and political freedoms is frequently paid in lives. The lives are not infrequently those of people who weren't offered a choice. Doesn't matter whether we're talking about guns or cars or alcohol or many other things. That's the price. The average member of this board would, if pressed hard enough, probably finally admit the price for guns is worth it.
Now all you have to do is convince those who don't to agree with you.

AlexanderA
June 12, 2014, 08:39 PM
I worry that gun owners may become victims of our own success, particularly because of the wave of "shall issue" carry legislation. The pendulum swings one way, and then the other. The fact that more people are carrying guns, raises the profile of guns. If you couple this with the seemingly daily reports of shooting incidents, the result could be a growing revulsion against all guns by the general population. We can't afford to lose the battle for their "hearts and minds."

ohbythebay
June 12, 2014, 08:50 PM
For some time now..

what do we have to counter of equal weight ?

ANTI
Look at these poor innocent children killed
Look at these poor slain law enforcement officers
Hype
Hype
Add more hype

Gun supporters
We haven't shot anyone today
We fought for gun rights

Which one do you think is going to sway opinion ?

This is why in the activist thread (I wont cross post the link) I wrote a letter to our elected officials that people can copy, paste and send to their own representative. I even posted links that tell you who they are and how to contact them. I have even received some non-canned responses.

But if you don't do it, email those people today, en masse, then don't wring your hands and post about it because if we do not push hard, public opinion will sway them. It is absolute truth that the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Be the squeaky wheel.

AlexanderA
June 12, 2014, 09:00 PM
The price of personal and political freedoms is frequently paid in lives. .... That's the price. The average member of this board would, if pressed hard enough, probably finally admit the price for guns is worth it.

Those of us who study political theory (and who perhaps have not been personally touched by gun tragedy) would agree with you. However, the members of this board are not representative of the people we need to convince. The people we need to convince are the thousands who pack stadiums after shooting incidents, shouting cries of "Not one more!"

If we couch the choice in terms of safety versus freedom, most people in this country today would choose safety over freedom. Perhaps that's a shame, but that's the way it is. This is not the revolutionary 18th century.

And the argument that guns in civilian hands are a bulwark against tyranny doesn't resonate at all with the vast majority of voters. They figure that as long as they have the right to vote, nobody can tyrannize them. Who can blame them? They haven't lived through a Holocaust or a Nazi occupation the way my parents did.

vamo
June 12, 2014, 09:02 PM
No not with this senate or house. Be sure to vote in November to see that it is true with our next senate and house.

Joe Demko
June 12, 2014, 09:21 PM
As long as the populace has guns, there will inevitably be some amount of misuse of guns with people injured or killed as a result. Now, how do we sell this fact as something with which everybody should be okay?

barnbwt
June 12, 2014, 09:42 PM
All changes cause a backlash, and we've been winning a lot lately. It's the nature of the beast, history, because change never occurs gradually, but in fits and starts. Our system is specifically designed to damp this effect, which is why it's hard for us to win, or overreach.

We're still operating between constitutional guardrails, so don't sweat the progress we might make.

TCB

ohbythebay
June 12, 2014, 09:54 PM
But the constitutional guiderails will pale in comparison to public outcry. We know our politico's are easily swayed...Just look at Obamacare...

If you don't apply pressure and depend on what was written, then new things will be written and THAT will be the law.

I keep saying Heller opened the door because of the caveat SCOTUS added. yes, you have the right to keep and bear arms...and they have the right to impose reasonable restrictions and guidelines. Define reasonable?

What good is the right if its almost impossible to exercise ? Look to Jersey and NY.

barnbwt
June 12, 2014, 11:25 PM
My point is that we don't need to fear what we might accomplish 'for fear of a backlash' since the recoil will happen no matter how slow we go, and our system is specifically designed for this back and forth dynamic. What we need to do is fortify our gains while we have the initiative, instead of focusing solely on transitory gains like simple-majority passages of laws. I personally think that we should be lobbying congress to pass renewals of our favorite gun-friendly laws, if we aren't yet ready to test the waters on actually trying for new policy, since the renewal votes can be constructed to require larger majorities than they do currently (and et cetera) so they are better protected by all but court rulings. Assorted non-binding resolutions about the extent of congressional and executive powers on the issue would also be crowd pleasers if constructed properly.

FWIW, the "reasonable restrictions" aspect of Heller was already unspoken law for generations, so them acknowledging this isn't that big a 'defeat,' or whatever, it was more that the existence of restrictions wasn't the issue before the court so much as the DC-specific prohibition laws (which were ruled unconstitutional).

NY/NJ are the spawning ground of American gun laws going back over 100 years. No one expects that to change, and no one expects that kind of entrenchment to be dismantled quickly or without monumental effort (see again "fortifying your gains while having the initiative to tide you over for the times when the battle is going poorly"). Just as it will take a good part of 100 years to undo that damage, it will also take a good portion of that time to spread their garbage across the whole of the US (even when everyone was completely complacent about anti's back in '94, something as meager/pointless as an AWB was an monumentally foolish overreach; and we won't be fooled again). No danger of that happening any time soon, at least, not unaccompanied by more pressing existential threats to our system.

TCB

ohbythebay
June 12, 2014, 11:35 PM
FWIW, the "reasonable restrictions" aspect of Heller was already unspoken law for generations, so them acknowledging this isn't that big a 'defeat,' or whatever, it was more that the existence of restrictions wasn't the issue before the court so much as the DC-specific prohibition laws (which were ruled unconstitutional).

And can be imposed at any time at the Federal level. It is called for almost every day.

NY/NJ are the spawning ground of American gun laws going back over 100 years. No one expects that to change, and no one expects that kind of entrenchment to be dismantled quickly or without monumental effort

And could become the norm across the nation in a heartbeat.

I feel like too many are living here in a plastic bubble. Recently, almost on a daily basis, the media and even the President are stirring up the pot.

As was pointed out in someone else's post..The BIG majority of American's are non-gun owners. There is no loss of vested interest for them if they side with the anti's, throw up their hands and say "Yeah..makes sense".

No fight is ever won being purely reactive; wars and battles are won being proactive.

BSA1
June 13, 2014, 12:01 AM
For starters quit acting like losers and more like the winners we are.

Gun owners are the majority.

Gun rights are being expanded regularly.

More & more people are buying guns.

More & more people are losing confidence in the Government and taking responsibility for their own safety.

Realize we will never change the anti's.

Quit being scare of the anti's.

Have confidence that the majority of Americans can see through the medias and politicians lies.

Have courage.

We are winning.

ohbythebay
June 13, 2014, 12:03 AM
Are false statements.

John Q. Pirate
June 13, 2014, 01:42 AM
Are false statements.

Says who?

Your previous posts suggest NY/NJ-style gun control could be "imposed" unilaterally and at any moment nationwide. If that's the case, why hasn't it happened yet?

We have a president who just a day ago was publicly lamenting the failure of his signature gun law as the biggest "frustration" of his tenure. Why the all the theatrics if new restrictions were just a pen stroke away?

Look, I get it. Our derelict media is doing our side no favors by sensationalizing mass shootings and giving the banners free air time for their cause. But that's just one aspect to this whole "debate."

Not long ago a study was done and a statistic surfaced that fully 4% of the entire voting population of the US considered gun control as an important issue. I have no reason to doubt this figure - the overwhelming majority of folks I encounter (and I happen to live in a very restrictive state) are simply ambivalent about the 2A.

We're not fighting the whole US population. For all practical purposes, we're surrounded by fence-sitters, and believe it or not, it would be wrong to assume it is a foregone conclusion that they're so easily lost to MAIG, Everytown, or whatever Bloomberg is calling his group these days.

Don't get me wrong. We shouldn't rest on our laurels, and could use more with your uncompromising zeal. But we also have earned the right to be optimistic.

castile
June 13, 2014, 09:01 AM
Canter and Iraq have the latest gun bashing to page 18. Only the very focused anti gun nut is still trying to push gun control. Canter's loss will also be a shot in the arm of the GOP to stay the course and not waver to the dark side of gun control or immigration or amnesty what it really is. Canter was an opportunist who did his own thing instead of working for the people he represented.

BSA1
June 13, 2014, 10:42 AM
ohbythebay,


For starters quit acting like losers and more like the winners we are.

Gun owners are the majority.

the first two

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are false statements.


For some reason you continue to have negative attitudes about being a gun owner and gun ownership in general.

Gun owners are the majority. Consider these facts;

The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US. (This estimate is old data. I could not find any newer stats from the FBI. Other sources state there are 310 million guns are privately owned in the United States).

If you add those owned by the military, law enforcement agencies and museums, there is probably about 1 gun per person in the country. If you want to get a rough idea of how many guns there are out there just look at how many people you see out there then multiply by a factor of estimated ownership. The last best guess was about 350,000,000 Total. That would be 1 weapon for every man woman and child. The average gun enthusiast owns several firearms which includes pistols, shotguns, and rifles of all makes and models. It is often estimated that about 1 in 4 people own any firearms and on average firearms owners own 4 guns each. When you factor in the households that have spouses, significant others, adult children and relatives living in a single household this number becomes even more important when all the family members have access to the firearms in the home.

Bear in mind when determining who actually “owns” the guns in the household. For many years my wife has had no interest in owning a gun strictly for herself. However she often shoots the firearms I own. So depending on how the question is asked are there 1 or 2 gun owners living in our home (at one point my two adult children were also living at home and they are both shooters). Just for the record she is now the proud owner of a Colt Police Positive Special.

Don't overlook the fastest growing part of the handgun market is women buying guns.

Another important factor is how many people will admit to owning firearms in anti-gun places like Washington D.C., NYC, Chicago and States like New Jersey where mere possession will result in prison time? With the level of distrust of Government in America today how many people anywhere in America are going to answer yes on a survey that asks if they own guns?

So...I still stand by my statement that gun owners are the majority but for your benefit I will amend my statement to;

GUN OWNERS AND PEOPLE WITH PRO-GUN ATTITUDES ARE THE MAJORITY.





http://www.gunsandcrime.org/numbers.html

http://www.gunsandcrime.org/suter-fa.html

ohbythebay
June 13, 2014, 11:28 AM
Lets just talk and keep it civil as it has been so we understand one another.

You are incorrect on your assumption (about me) and the numbers.

I do not have a negative attitude about gun ownership. Quite positive in fact, own 6 guns, go to the range several times per week, love to talk about them, write my politicians almost weekly to make sure they get the message. If I am negative on anything is people thinking "negative things could not happen". Being complacent rather than proactive. Did you use my letter in activism and write your political representatives? If we don't, the only voice they hear is from anti's.

It is estimated that there are approx. 57 million gun owners in the US, regardless of the number of guns. That leaves about 280 million NON gun owners and potential votes against us. The NRA itself has only approx. 5 million members.

We are not in the majority. That's all. I respect and support the things you have to say but I want proactive work.

John Q. Pirate
June 13, 2014, 12:05 PM
It is estimated that there are approx. 57 million gun owners in the US, regardless of the number of guns. That leaves about 280 million NON gun owners and potential votes against us. The NRA itself has only approx. 5 million members.

You can't count the entire US population as a potential voting pool.

According to the Census Bureau, as of 2012, 23.5% of the entire population is under 18, and thus ineligible to vote (and own guns).

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

Also, voter turnout in recent elections hovers between 50-60%; less so for congressional midterms.

http://www.abc15.com/news/national/election-results-2012-voter-turnout-lower-than-2008-and-2004-report-says

I've said it before and I'll say it again - we absolutely must not become complacent - however, you're overstating the potential opposition.

Billy Shears
June 13, 2014, 12:17 PM
I think if people are actually paying attention to anything in the news beyond celebrity gossip, any backlash will be against all the lies being told by the current administration and their willfully blind media lapdogs -- "gun violence" statistics included.
Don't hold your breath. Just look at all the scandals that have emerged in the last few years -- "Fast and Furious" gunwalking scandal, NSA monitoring reporters, hacking Sheryl Atkisson's computer, IRS targeting conservative groups, Benghazi, VA scandal, et al. -- how this administration has dealt with them, and what the aftermath has been. It invariably follows this procedure:

1. I am outraged that this has happened.
2. We will get to the bottom of this and hold those responsible accountable.
3. I will appoint _____ to investigate this issue and get to the bottom of what went wrong.
4. Nothing happens
5. Move on.
6. It's a phony scandal
7. What difference does it make?
8. Dude, that was two years ago.
9. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Any time any sort of backlash or groundswell of outrage even begins to emerge, this president and his administration start spinning, slick talking, and making all kinds of promises, and people are mollified, the media conspicuously loses interest in covering things any further, and people lose interest in doing anything. This president and his cronies stall for time, and bank on people getting bored and moving on, and so far it has worked like a dream. We are six years into what is easily the most mendacious and untrustworthy administration in my life time, possibly excepting the Nixon administration, and this president and his appointees are no closer to being held accountable than they were when these scandals started coming to light. Look at Eric Holder: the man is clearly stonewalling congressional investigations, lying to the American public, and almost certainly perjuring himself in his sworn testimony. Don't hold your breath waiting for him to be tried and convicted as he should be for this.

george burns
June 13, 2014, 12:27 PM
Most people who don't own guns, are ignorant as to their function and use. They don't know the difference between a rim fire and a center fire or a revolver vs a semi auto, nor what constitutes an "assault rife vs a standard hunting or target rifle".
There is a lot of leeway for politicians to lump them all together. They can easily bamboozle people into thinking that banning certain types of "scary" guns, is the right thing to do, based on their appearance.
This is what we most be careful of more than anything else. I can see Obama or his lackeys trying an end run near the end of his term. I too write letters and send emails all of the time, and most people who are on gun forums don't, either because they can't find the information, or aren't familiar with the process, or are just lazy and like to complain.
but telling one another isn't going to help much, you need to tell those in a position to help or hurt the cause.
Don't think for a minute that the anti gun people just gave up and went home. They are organized and continue to call out their representatives on these issues, so get busy by going to the NRA-ILA and send out the appropriate emails to the appropriate legislators, they will give you their names and emails, and even write the letters for you if you choose not to do it yourself. There are per written letters on every point of contention.

ohbythebay
June 13, 2014, 01:12 PM
You can't count the entire US population as a potential voting pool.

According to the Census Bureau, as of 2012, 23.5% of the entire population is under 18, and thus ineligible to vote (and own guns).
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html


Granted - that takes us to 252,450,000

Also, voter turnout in recent elections hovers between 50-60%; less so for congressional midterms.

http://www.abc15.com/news/national/e...04-report-says

That takes us to approx. 126,000,000

But that also has to be applied to gun voters so 57,000,00 becomes 28,500,000 pro - 97,500,000 potential against

As I said, we are outnumbered better than 3 to 1

mgmorden
June 13, 2014, 01:21 PM
Gun violence is hot in the news right now.

Think about it - when is the last time a multi-car accident that killed 4 to 8 people made national headline news? It doesn't, because the public knows that things like that while a tragedy, does indeed happen and there's not a lot to do about it.

Similarly, I think the public is becoming less interested in the issue lately. The mainstream media seems to be beating a dead horse but on social media and the like? People just don't seem that riled up anymore.

The simple reality is that even if we improve mental health (or banned all the guns), these types of tragedies would STILL happen. Its a simple consequence of having billions of people on this planet. Every so often one of them decides to do something evil and crazy and there's really very little we can do to prevent them from acting out their plans. All that we can do is stay vigilant, and stop them as quickly as possible once they act. I think the public is coming around to that realization.

ohbythebay
June 13, 2014, 01:36 PM
I guess if I sound negative or pick, may be related to my occupation. I do risk mitigation, security, disaster planning and tactical remediation for the "what if's". I have been doing this for the past 14 years so I guess it spills across when I look around every corner, look at every event as a risk scenario. Not always what is happening now but what could happen if A and B occur.

Trust me when I say I am shoulder to shoulder with you fighting the garbage. I get so ticked when I see someone write in the news, on facebook,etc. about needing more gun control after an event. I say "Really? This happened in a state where there were many controls..this happened outside any possible control. What more do you want ?

it is sort of like what I do for a living. We can mitigate so many risks in so many categories, but there are some (identified) that are just above and beyond any control you can put in place. You can mitigate against any safety item in life (and have no life) but if you ever go outside, you can still be struck by lightning. Sigh

John Q. Pirate
June 13, 2014, 01:46 PM
But that also has to be applied to gun voters so 57,000,00 becomes 28,500,000 pro - 97,500,000 potential against

As I said, we are outnumbered better than 3 to 1

You would be right, if you could somehow convince ALL 97,500,000 to vote for gun control AND reliably get them out to the polls on Election Day - an impossible feat. When have that many voters ever agreed on a single issue and voted for it in such an overwhelming percentage?

I think you're assuming that just because someone isn't an NRA member or a gun owner that the odds favor that they'll vote anti. I disagree - there are plenty of progun people who nevertheless don't own any. But more to the point, the vast majority of the population simply don't care either way. Refer to my earlier post - 4% of the voting population doesn't consider gun rights/gun control to be an important issue. They are essentially blank slates - precisely the group of people we in the pro-2A community need to reach out to and to introduce the positive aspects of gun ownership.

BSA1
June 13, 2014, 04:58 PM
ohbythebay,

It may help give you a more positive outlook if you ignore the media and get your news from conservative websites such as Matt Drudge and raw media websites.

A while back a Israeli women armed with a handgun shot and killed a terrorist before he could carry out his attack. The national media here in the U.S. changed her identity to a Israeli security officer. A armed female citizen didn't fit in their liberal agenda so they just changed her description.

Distrust everything you hear from the media and read on the Internet until you fact check it yourself.

barnbwt
June 13, 2014, 09:35 PM
"It may help give you a more positive outlook if you ignore the media and get your news from conservative websites such as Matt Drudge and raw media websites."
I wouldn't ever advocate ignoring anything with legitimate value, but drawing from other than poisoned wells can only be beneficial for a person's outlook.

As it stands, we're in the best position we've had in at least 100 years, as far as peoples' appreciation for civil bearing of arms, longer than that as far as our organization, and yet the world did not collapse on us when we did not hold such an advantage. 1968 was the low point; a decade of high-profile assassinations and popular unrest had people weary of the risks of too much freedom, so they burned it on the alter of the common good.

The media's gleeful fixation on gruesome murders to prop up their dying industry doesn't hold a candle to real social problems like Vietnam/et al., Cold War nuclear annihilation, Civil Rights, or organized domestic terrorism, like were truly present in the 60's.

No need for undue concern (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-concern-trolling.htm) ;)

TCB

ohbythebay
June 13, 2014, 10:17 PM
DOES NOT apply to me.

I thought I made it pretty clear that my comments are based on my preemptive risk adverse nature. if you saw my faceook page or read my letter in Activism forum you would see I am quite sincere. The link was offensive.

barnbwt
June 14, 2014, 12:03 AM
Note the ;), please. If you read the first paragraph or so of the link, you will see that concern trolling is nearly indiscernible from 'nervous-nellyism' or whatever stupider-sounding term accurately describes genuine supporters with illogical or unsupported doubts about the cause. I made the comment, similar in vein to numerous others here, as a (perhaps too) subtle suggestion to all doubters to allay your fears, and stop (unintentionally or no) sowing needless division and distraction in the ranks. See how many people are tied up here soothing each other's anxieties?

It isn't directed to you, singular, since there is a lot of doubt permeating the forums of late. Since precisely the last "Mass Media Shooting Event" to be exact, and the subsequent "Mass Media Home Grown Terrorist Event" has really brought out the quivering in our ranks. We've got guys afraid to advocate for open carry for fear of being associated with the OCT/C jerks, afraid to be seen with black rifles, guys afraid to stand up to calls for unconstitutional restrictions on people under the most flimsy and broad of medical justifications, people afraid of taking the fight to the opponent's turf by pushing legal victories, and people afraid of cementing our own historic gains thus far. None of this fear is productive, and none of it is justified (just 'felt')

The other side thrives on fear; not us. We're poisoned and divided by it.

The link was offensive.
We're offensive for owning firearms. No one has a right to not be offended. Move past it.

I thought I made it pretty clear that my comments are based on my preemptive risk adverse nature
It's really easy to be afraid; that's why it is so easy for our opposition to exploit that tendency in undecided/ambivalent Americans. Fear is a useful default mindset to take the most conservative path and avoid all foreseeable risk. But it is not very useful for getting things done; only for not getting things done. What I have done for myself is try to determine why I feel uneasy; if I worry about NJ/East Coast laws spreading, what about them am I specifically worried about taking hold (AWB, CCW, registry, etc.). Then, I seek out information to find whether those fronts are actually moving against us. Practically every time I've looked into it, we've been gaining territory outside the most fortified lands of the banners. We are on offensive, so our gains are 'delicate,' and the anti's on defensive, so their holdings are being strengthened against further losses. If you look at it from a skewed perspective, not seeing the forest for the trees, it might look like they are in a stronger position than they were. The Brady campaign had like 5000$ in donations to the DNC in 2012; now what does that tell you about the pool of support they are actually sitting on?

TCB

Joe Demko
June 14, 2014, 07:29 AM
"No one has a right not to be offended."
Perfectly true. However, offended people are not obligated to passively accept being offended. They are quite able to attempt societal and legal changes to remove that which offends them. Not infrequently, they succeed.
Sometimes offending others may be unavoidable. Only a fool, though, careens through life gratuitously offending others while braying it's "because he can."
My other major interest is motorcycling. We have fools in that community who seem to think it is their life's mission to alienate non-motorcyclists into passing restrictive laws, too. Their preferred tool is the straight pipe.

BSA1
June 14, 2014, 11:20 AM
barnbwt makes excellent points.

It is important to remember that the media in America has always had a political slant. First in the print, then radio and now TV. Conservatives now dominate AM Radio and are successful with getting their message out via the Internet.

I believe that the TV and Newspaper media flat out lie on political issues 60%, misstate facts 30% and report the news accurately only 10% of the time. The only reason they report the news accurately 10% of the time is so they can claim they are fair and balanced.

For example; Consider the CNN News reported after Tuesday's shooting at an Oregon high school, and many media outlets, reported that there have been 74 school shootings in the past 18 months that are similar to the violence in Newtown or Oregon -- a minor or adult actively shooting inside or near a school.

That's the time period since the December 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 children and six adults were shot to death.

The statistic came from a group called Everytown for Gun Safety, an umbrella group started by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a passionate and public advocate of gun control.

On Wednesday CNN reexamined the incidents on Everytowns list and determined that only 15 of the shootings were similar to Newtown. The rest of the other incidents on Everytown's list included personal arguments, accidents and alleged gang activities and drug deals.

CNN corrected itself only after first reporting the false information, Which one of the reports do you think the rest of media picked up on and the public paid the most attention too?

http://us.cnn.com/2014/06/11/us/school-shootings-cnn-number/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

I am not saying to blindly accept everything you hear Conservatives say either. We have tremendous resource at our fingertips in the Internet to fact check facts and figures reported by the media. Sadly all too often folks repeat misinformation they read on the Internet because they are too lazy to fact check it themselves, because it sounds catchy or it fits their personal beliefs.

MagnumDweeb
June 14, 2014, 01:04 PM
So you're worried. That's great. What are you doing to organize gun owners?

There's always a chance for a backlash. It's why I now refuse to vote Democrat ever again (I voted for Dem in the Senate in the last election and I voted for Kerry, never again). I stock up when the getting is good. I learned to make my own ammo. I learned to do some gun building.

I figured out 50lbs of prilled ammonium nitrate is way cheaper than 50lbs of Power Pistol (for my own rendition of Ammon Pulver).

So now I'm slowly working towards a series of Trusts that won't violate Anti-Trust laws, that will allow serious activists to organize for the creation and investment in gun and ammo manufacturing, RKBA based litigation and politicking, and quality job creation.

At the same time I also buy guns cheap and I teach people to shoot (NRA Certified Pistol Instructor) and after I run a background check on them (using Lexis Nexis products), and having known them for a few months I offer to sell them one of the moth balled guns that's been sitting in the back of my safe for the last few years (9mm Tokarevs, 85% Model 10s and 15s, etc.).

We have some wins, and we have some losses. We've still lost more than we have gained when you look at what's happened in Colorado.

Get organized, get active. That's all we can do.

ohbythebay
June 14, 2014, 03:10 PM
Well, besides joining and supporting the NRA ?


How about writing my politicians from bottom to top every week?

Providing that letter in the activism forum for others to use along with handy links that will tell them who their reps are.

Posting on facebook

Supporting my local range...

Supporting any local rallys


No I have not started an ammo company ...but if your post meant Ensign Pulver and not Ammon Pulver...you may soon see a visit from DHS..

Posts that even allude to such things can and WILL be used against you if need be...

I am not worried, I am proactive.

monotonous_iterancy
June 14, 2014, 04:00 PM
So, what does the average (non-gun involved) person think when they see these stories on the news?

Ky Larry
June 14, 2014, 04:07 PM
If there is a backlash against gun owners,what do you expect to do about it? If it happens, all we can do is keep on keeping on. I can't live my life worrying about what might happen. Do the right thing and let the chips fall where they may.

RustyShackelford
June 14, 2014, 04:17 PM
I did not read all the reply messages but it seems with the most recent events; WA, southern CA(Santa Barbara) it seems many media sources/public just don't care anymore.
I've seen more news items & articles/remarks saying how no one really has any outrage or problem with these tragic incidents. :rolleyes:
Even President Obama sulks away from gun law issues & blames the NRA/2A groups rather than the US medical & mental health community(which has far more support in the DNC/democrats).

The smart move for 2A groups & gun clubs/gun owners is to push proper training, safety/security(safe storage), new laws or statues to take guns away from felons/mental health cases, and better logistics/records by US gun makers/FFL holders.

Spree killers & looney tunes who prance around casual dining restaurants with rifles or shotguns(because they can :rolleyes: ) are going to turn more people against guns/2A issues.

BSA1
June 14, 2014, 04:19 PM
There is nothing wrong with being worried (or concerned) about things that are taking place in our country and in our State Houses and in Washington, D.C. However I believe it is equally important not to be shrill.

I consider myself fortunate that I love in a State that has passed pro-gun laws and my Senator and Represenative in D.C. are pro-gun so I don't need to send them emails every day about gun issues. In a State or District with anti-gun Congressmen I can see the need for more frequent contacts although my efforts might be better put to use by supporting pro-gun groups like the NRA and pro-gun candidates.

ohbythebay
June 14, 2014, 04:43 PM
I wish it was that easy...I live in WA where the gun laws are just fine...with two liberal democrats for senators - one of which says she voted for restrictions...which is why she gets hammered. My congresswoman on the other hand doesn't go for that crap..so...we will see...

Later..Back to the range :D

Onward Allusion
June 14, 2014, 06:31 PM
BSA1 -

You are wrong that gun-owners are the majority. About 45% of households own guns. About 1/3 or adults own guns. As for grown gun ownership, I really would like to know if it is more gun owners or the same or less gun owners buy more guns. The stats from NICS only shows the number of checks and not the number of distinct purchasers.

Onward Allusion
June 14, 2014, 06:48 PM
So, what does the average (non-gun involved) person think when they see these stories on the news?

Not sure if this is representative, but the people I work with (white collar professionals) are all sick and tired of hearing about one shooting after another. EVERY ONE OF THEM, even the gun owners, want some type of change. They just don't have a real solid idea on what it should be. Some say mandatory background checks, others say mental health records should be available to the States.

Let me tell you, I really like my guns, the ability to carry, the target sports...etc...etc. BUT, I think something needs to be done. Be it throw violent criminals into a burning pit, re-institute public executions, send mental health data to the guberment, make it a felony for healthcare professionals to not report violent threats by patients, toss parents of these killer teens in prison, ban the sensationalizing of shootings...etc...etc... Something needs to be done, and it has to be drastic. Because what we have been doing ain't freaking working. In fact it is getting worst. Every other week there's some nutjob going around shooting people and places up...

larryh1108
June 14, 2014, 07:30 PM
All I can say is in the last few years, I'd guess more than a million women have entered the gun owning world. They are our new face in the gun community. These women have purchased and then went out and practiced (hopefully) with their new guns and many now feel more secure knowing they can now protect themselves when no one else is around.

These woman now see the tragic deaths happening in our country and realize that their gun and their ownership did not contribute to the senseless deaths. They now realize that it isn't the gun but the person who is evil. When they try to legislate their gun away they will say "no, my gun didn't hurt anybody. It protects me and my family" which is the same thing we've been saying for over 200 years. They now get it where a few years ago they could have been swayed to ban the evil guns that kill people.

Don't sell the new, female, gun owners short. They have a huge voice in what goes on in every corner of our country. We are getting the best voices there are, mothers and daughters, into the world of taking care of yourself because no one else can or will. They are our best weapon against those who want to take them away. They are the new "front line" of our rights and I don't see them giving up their own, personal protection.

BSA1
June 15, 2014, 09:45 AM
You are wrong that gun-owners are the majority. About 45% of households own guns. About 1/3 or adults own guns. As for grown gun ownership, I really would like to know if it is more gun owners or the same or less gun owners buy more guns. The stats from NICS only shows the number of checks and not the number of distinct purchasers.

Actually you are proofing my point when you state about 45% of households own guns and about 1/3 or adults own guns. If you will carefully reread my post #28 I addressed the points you are raising. Since I already posted my rebuttal prior to your post I will not take the time to repost it.

However I will mention one counterpoint;

The population of NYC is 8,405,837, CHICAGO is 2,714,856 and WASHINGTON, D.C. is646,449 for a total of 11,767,142. Just how many of those 11,767,142 people are going to admit owning a gun when it is mandatory jail time for mere possession of a gun? And this is just the surface. How many millions of people in States like N.J., CT., MA., etc. have not registered their guns?

In fact in todays political environment and the massive abuse of power by the Federal Government why would anyone admit to owning guns?

Don't believe the liberal lies and the massive propaganda campaign by the media and Government. We are the majority. The reason the Government wants us to believe we are a minority is because they fear an armed, informed population.

If you enjoyed reading about "Could there be a backlash?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!