2nd Amendment lost in CT today

[Queen_of_Thunder]

It is more than a little silly to boycott a business because they happen to be in the same state where certain laws are passed.

Then come up with an alternative.

 

[danez71]

I'm going to ask this question for about the 10th time on THR. As of yet, NO ONE has been able to provide an answer.


When has it ever been a successful strategy in this country to gain or regain a Right by people moving?


When only a few states allowed women to vote, they didn't all move to those states. What they did was fight for it in their own states and the result was positive on a national scale.

When only a few states were giving rights to African Americans, they didn't all move to those states. What they did was fight for it in their own states and the result was positive on a national scale.




This vote with your wallet idea is a joke. It didn't even work for CTD.

It didn't work for CO. Staying and fighting back is what worked in CO.


Retreating to the middle of the country is exactly what the anti 2A politician want.

This map is shows a 100 mile zone all around the USA. In that 100 mile zone lives 2/3 of the U.S. population.

Roughly 1/2 of the East and West coast is run by anti 2A politicians. Austin TX is just out side the 100 zone is has been anti for a long time now

If people keep running away from the problem and retreating to the middle of the country, they will be literally surrounded by the anti's.

Those in DC and Chicago didn't run and hide.... they fought back in the courts and got the entire country favorable 2A SCOTUS decisions.

That's a plan that has been proven to work.

Running and trying to hurt a states economy is a plan that has proven to fail.

 

[ilbob]

No district court judge in the NE US is going to rule against this kind of law. There is no case law that tells him he has to.

It needs to be appealed anyway and this makes sure we get our chance to appeal.

Probably the worst thing that could have happened was for the judge to go along with us and the state not appeal it so there is no precedential value to the case. the judge did us a favor.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

This case was a challenge to legislation after Sandy Hook. The law was signed less than a year ago and the folks in CT have already started the process. They lost, but are planning an appeal. As a "self funded government watchdog", you should be aware that these are merely the first steps in the process. Rather than supporting the people who are fighting, your suggestion is to punish them for not being successful early the process.

I would consider that to be defeatist.

These companies have been located in these states for decades, some of over a century. Do you think they supported they laws and are merely sitting out of the fight? There hasn't even been a state election since these laws were passed to see if the people responsible are voted out.

It seems unnecessarily punitive to boycott those who haven't even had a chance to express themselves at the ballot box, let alone file an appeal on a law that is less than 10 months old.

How is it a winning strategy to take money out of the war coffers of those fighting this law just as things are ramping up?

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

When doing battle you do not leave your flanks open to attack. You use everything at hand especially force multipliers like what a boycott provides. With jobs at a premium especially good paying ones the specter of major employers leaving the state due to misguided laws passed by politicians will cause those who care less about the issue to come to our side as they realize that their politicians are driving business and jobs away. You do not leave one of your most effective weapons in the armory. You use them.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Enough with the ill-fitting military analogies.

I don't follow your logic in trying to force companies to undertake the incredibly expensive process of moving by reducing their revenue so they won't be able to afford to move, but whatever... boycotts are rarely effective in forcing this kind of change.

You mention the difference 10 people can have. CCDL had over 600 at their meeting two weeks ago and has over 11,000 members. They are fighting this and have filed a notice of appeal already. But they could probably use some help. Why don't we throw a little money their way.

You (Queen of Thunder) make a $100 donation to CCDL to fund their appeal and I'll match it. No posturing, no lip service, just direct support for the cause. I'm not in CT, so I won't derive any more benefit than you will.

There's your force multiplier.


Just to be clear, I'm matching Queen of Thunder's $100 donation, not every donation!

 

[Trent]

Jorg;

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9328826#post9328826

Let's get the party started, man.

 

[Trent]

And no, I'm not saying to match it, Jorg. I just wanted to start a thread to encourage people to donate. If that case goes before the supreme court, it could affect ALL gun owners in the nation, so it's truly the forefront of all of our battle grounds right now.

This truly isn't "their battle" anymore, folks.

So stand up or shut up.

 

[RussB]

Enough with the ill-fitting military analogies.

I don't follow your logic in trying to force companies to undertake the incredibly expensive process of moving by reducing their revenue so they won't be able to afford to move, but whatever... boycotts are rarely effective in forcing this kind of change.

You mention the difference 10 people can have. CCDL had over 600 at their meeting two weeks ago and has over 11,000 members. They are fighting this and have filed a notice of appeal already. But they could probably use some help. Why don't we throw a little money their way.

You (Queen of Thunder) make a $100 donation to CCDL to fund their appeal and I'll match it. No posturing, no lip service, just direct support for the cause. I'm not in CT, so I won't derive any more benefit than you will.

There's your force multiplier.


Just to be clear, I'm matching Queen of Thunder's $100 donation, not every donation!

Thank you


I've been donating $20-$25 every couple weeks for a few months now.

 

[denton]

This decision was not quite what is being represented. The judge merely refused to issue a temporary injunction.

He also beclowned himself by using reasoning that the Supreme Court specifically rejected. He says that the law represents a permissible balance between gun owner's rights and the state's interest in safety. That is not allowed under Heller and McDonald. The reasoning that this ban is allowed because other firearms are available is also absurd and is not allowed.

Heller and McDonald specifically disallowed bans on firearms that are commonly owned for lawful purposes. The legislature, and that judge, are being willfully obstinate. It's political theater.

 

[danez71]

When doing battle you do not leave your flanks open to attack. You use everything at hand especially force multipliers like what a boycott provides. With jobs at a premium especially good paying ones the specter of major employers leaving the state due to misguided laws passed by politicians will cause those who care less about the issue to come to our side as they realize that their politicians are driving business and jobs away. You do not leave one of your most effective weapons in the armory. You use them.

Nor do you retreat to the middle to be surrounded.

And once again.... please cite an example of success using that strategy per my request above.

It seems unnecessarily punitive to boycott those who haven't even had a chance to express themselves at the ballot box, let alone file an appeal on a law that is less than 10 months old.

How is it a winning strategy to take money out of the war coffers of those fighting this law just as things are ramping up?

Its not a winning strategy as evidence that NONE..ZERO of the people that promote it has EVER been able to cite an example of it working despite my repeated requests to them.

Enough with the ill-fitting military analogies.

Agreed. Its all talk with nothing that substantiates the claim.

What do they say in Texas.....? All hat and no cattle. Something like that ....

 

[danez71]

Trent...... Bravo my friend, Bravo.

I'll peel off some CA donation money and toss some $$ that way too as soon as my next paycheck come in. (Daughter just got married and I literally just spent around $3500 extra to ship her and all of her belonging across the country to be with her new Army husband.)

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Then come up with an alternative.

Actually supporting the gun/ammo/accessories companies in the state will likely do some good in the fight for our rights. I'm sure they donate and fight for the 2A in the state and donate to pro gun political campaigns.
Boycotting a business who is not responsible at all for the actions of the legislators in the state is misguided and does more harm than good.

The fact of the matter is, businesses have enough to worry about anyway these days just to keep the doors open. Most aren't capable of pulling up stakes and going to a different state when they lose business. Most just lay off all their employees and shut the doors. Causing that isn't something I want to be a part of.

 

[RussB]

Let's start a list of all the firearms and accessory manufacturers in the tri-state area of New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts...3 states that must be on your "Ban" list...


New York,

Kimber
Rorhbaugh
Remington
Dan Wesson (subsidiary of CZ)
Checkmate (magazines)

Mass,

S&W (owns Thompson Center)
Savage Arms
Kahr Arms, which own Auto Ordnance/Thompson and Magnum Research

CT,

Colt
Marlin
Winchester
Seecamp
Stag Arms (moving)
Mossberg
Ruger (still have offices here)
C-products (magazines, New Britain CT)
Mec-Gar (magazines)
Charter Arms


Please add to the list that if you can

 

[danez71]

^^^^^ LOL


Lets see how that applies.

Presently own:

Glock 20

Rock Island

S&W model 610

On the purchase list.

Kimber
Colt
Remington
Conversion of the Glock 20 to a long slide.

I think there needs to be some radical changes in his plans.

 

[SilentStalker]

And no, I'm not saying to match it, Jorg. I just wanted to start a thread to encourage people to donate. If that case goes before the supreme court, it could affect ALL gun owners in the nation, so it's truly the forefront of all of our battle grounds right now.

This truly isn't "their battle" anymore, folks.

So stand up or shut up.

Originally posted by: Trent

Well said my friend, well said. This is so true and judging by the response/discussion to this thread, I would say we have a lot of people that do not understand what is at stake here. Folks, if you don't act on this then you don't really value your rights. As Trent stated, this has definite potential to effect each and every one of us. So, if you care you better get busy. I will be donating to the cause as well as soon as I am able. I have a lot going on right now as I have two cars to replace, some of my wife's debt to pay off, a kid on the way, etc. you get the idea but I will help where I can. If we cannot rally more troops than we have here then we have already lost.

 

[GlowinPontiac]

CT,

Colt
Marlin
Winchester
Seecamp
Stag Arms (moving)
Mossberg
Ruger (still have offices here)
C-products (magazines, New Britain CT)
Mec-Gar (magazines)
Charter Arms


Please add to the list that if you can

PTR Industries is in CT but due to these laws they are moving to SC.

I'm pretty sure every single firearm they make is now Banned in CT as an assault weapon.

 

[Island Beretta]

Hmmh. Sneaky law..it doesn't affect our ability to own guns it just narrows our choices..markets deal with choices, the laws deal with the framework within which markets operates..this is overreaching..."so yes u can eat food just don't eat any burgers"

 

[goon]

I'm going to ask this question for about the 10th time on THR. As of yet, NO ONE has been able to provide an answer.


When has it ever been a successful strategy in this country to gain or regain a Right by people moving?

If you are correct in your assertion that no one has ever won rights back by running away (which admittedly does make sense), wouldn't it also follow that if you could move more people in to fight to win that right back, your chances of success would increase with each pro-gun voter's arrival?

So if you don't live in CT already, will you be on the next bus there?

 

[KimberUltra]

The thing you guys are overlooking is that these laws passed with overwhelming support. And the laws are designed to make it even harder to get rid of. So do we need to move in a couple hundred thousand gun nuts to sway the outcome of the voting? CT can't be voted back without a MASSIVE change in demographic. Massachuesettes is next more than likely. People are moving out of CT in waves because CT just blows in general. The yuppies from NY are taking their places lookin for a cheaper place to live. It would be almost impossible to overturn the AWB.

 

[RussB]

The thing you guys are overlooking is that these laws passed with overwhelming support. And the laws are designed to make it even harder to get rid of. So do we need to move in a couple hundred thousand gun nuts to sway the outcome of the voting? CT can't be voted back without a MASSIVE change in demographic. Massachuesettes is next more than likely. People are moving out of CT in waves because CT just blows in general. The yuppies from NY are taking their places lookin for a cheaper place to live. It would be almost impossible to overturn the AWB.

Actually the law was pushed through the state legislature without the typical process' that happen with all other laws. It was an "emergency" situation, or so they told us!

 

[larryh1108]

Exactly. There was no overwhelming support. There were no public forums or discussions. The sleazy politicians pushed it thru at midnight and made it effective immediately so we couldn't go out and buy what was banned. The only way to make them pay is to make sure they lose their cushy jobs. It starts with Malloy in November. He has to go. he is the King Slimeball. A NY wannabe.

 

[KimberUltra]

Well what I meant by overwhelming support is that it was asked for and wanted by the majority. Sorry. Either way. If you guys think you can convince every stay at home soccer mom in the state that guns are great then go for it. You are barking up the wrong tree.

I swear I get pulled over on a regular basis cuz everytime a cop runs my plate they say "oo a young guy with a pistol permit and a crappy POS car. Let's see if I can ticket him for something.

 

[larryh1108]

...it was asked for and wanted by the majority.

Although the people ignorantly elected the officials I don't think that this agenda was on their minds when they cast their votes. Newtown didn't happen yet. I don't know how many people would want this type of government (sneaky and running any bill without the proper due process) if they knew up front that this is how they would operate. Hey, maybe I can accept that the majority approved this specific bill if the bill was introducted properly and it went thru all the proper motions. I would not be happy but at least the process was used properly. However, pushing it thru during the middle of the night under some made up emergency bill was done because the government wasn't sure the people would approve it. It was done before the Newtown tragedy had started to fade the extreme passions.

Any bill pushed thru this way is only done because they doubted the outcome otherwise. Why else would they do it in such a sneaky manner? If they felt the overwhelming majority wanted it then they would have done it the proper way. They didn't. That is the part where the anger and hostility comes in. I can accept the status quo, I cannot accept sneaky and undermining politics.

Coming from IL, I've seen corrupt government at work. This is corrupt, not due process. Mallory deserves a cell next to Blagojevich. Malloy needs to pay the price for his actions. He needs to be sent packing to private practice. Maybe he can defend the Constitution instead of bastardizing it in private practice.

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

Nor do you retreat to the middle to be surrounded.

And once again.... please cite an example of success using that strategy per my request above.





Its not a winning strategy as evidence that NONE..ZERO of the people that promote it has EVER been able to cite an example of it working despite my repeated requests to them.




Agreed. Its all talk with nothing that substantiates the claim.

What do they say in Texas.....? All hat and no cattle. Something like that ....

They also say "DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS".

As to my use of military terms well what do you expect from someone who has spent a large portion of their life in the United States Army. So if you don't like it it's your problem, not mine.

Now danez71 wants an example. So I'll give you a couple.
Lets start with Beretta.
They just announced that they will be opening a new manufacturing facility in Tennessee. Why? the recent gun laws passed in Maryland. This is a natural first step to moving everything out of the state of Maryland.

""The firearm companies owned by Beretta Holding in Maryland—Beretta U.S.A. Corp., Benelli U.S.A. Corporation and Stoeger Industries, Inc.—have all been deeply concerned about Governor Martin O’Malley’s effort this year to impose broad new restrictions on the rights of Maryland citizens to buy firearms, as well as on the types of firearms and firearm magazines they can acquire. The Companies have submitted comments before the Maryland legislature and to the press condemning these efforts and stating that the Governor's anti-gun activity is causing them to evaluate whether they want to remain in this State.

Notwithstanding some media reports to the contrary, those efforts have had some beneficial effects.

Through the Companies’ legislative efforts and with assistance led by Delegate Joe Vallario and others provisions were stripped out of the final Bill that would have required an immediate move of certain operations out of Maryland. The parts of the legislation that remained, though - and that were not deleted notwithstanding the Beretta Holding companies efforts to do so -remain offensive not only to our companies as firearm manufacturers, importers and distributors and as investors in jobs, taxes and income within the State of Maryland, but also to those of us who, as Maryland citizens, will now be encumbered with obstacles to our exercise of our Constitutional rights, such as a requirement we now be fingerprinted like a criminal before we can buy a handgun, without providing a commensurate benefit in reducing crime"

Magpul. They moved their corporate HQ to North Texas and production moves to Wyoming. See the press release here: http://www.magpul.com/move


Boeing while not a gun company used the prospect of job loss to force the Unions to capitulate on their demands to keep production of the 737 MAX in WA. instead of moving production to SC.

In the 1980's there was a boycott on investment in South Africa was a successful tool in ending "apartheid" in that Country.

You can also look at the boycott of British made goods in India and its success.

I've personally seen what happens to a business when its been placed off limits by the Military. They either change or they go out of business.



Job loss as a tool works. Not using it is foolish.



Now someone crossed linked a post of mine from the formation of the 10mm club. Have to say I own a S&W model 610 but it was purchased used years ago. Yes there are 10mm's on my to buy list that operate in non free states but I won't be buying any new guns from them until they move.

As to Jorg's offer to match a donation you get to keep your cash for a bit as its not in my budget for the month.