Quantcast

AHSA - Change 50 BMG Policy?

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by RPCVYemen, Jan 14, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JImbothefiveth

    JImbothefiveth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,710
    Location:
    Oklahio
    If they are pro-gun, why would the NRA attack them, but not attack GOA? I'd like for you to answer this question, but I assume you can't. You have not been able to so far. That's because the answer involves AHSA being anti-gun.

    I don't think you will be able to change their mind. That would be like convincing their predecessor(spelling?), handgun control incorporated, that handguns shouldn't be banned. If you convince them of this, that means they have to drop part of their anti-gun agenda, so they won't be convinced.
     
  2. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    And again, over and over, if you want to change a groups mind on something you need to understand THEIR MOTIVES for having an opinion in the first place. That is extremely relevant to this topic.

    I will not PM you on anything. There is nothing I have to say that I am not willing to post publicly.

    So again, your argument is to somehow change AHSA's position on the .50BMG and I am asking you WHY that position exists in the first place if they are a pro gun group.

    I also asked you what you thought AHSA would think of the .50 DTC and other alternatives. The argument that the .50BMG has been used in crimes can't apply at all to the .50DTC since it is brand new.

    It does however have the exact same ballistics characteristics of the .50BMG which is why approaching the issue from NFA, Heller, or Crime statistics is pointless; there will just be another caliber tomorrow and then you are into the Creeping Incrementalism of gun banning.

    What then?

    The fundamental argument to AHSA should be that "If you are a pro gun group you have to be a pro gun group all the way"

    Having to argue specifically around the .50 BMG will not work for that reason. Today the .50BMG, tomorrow the .50DTC, then the .600 Nitro, then the 7mm Mag, then the .30-06, then the .308... 308? That's a military calber! Can't have that. .223? Military also. Rifle ammo? Some of that rifle ammp can pierce kevlar so it's "cop killer".

    This isn't fantasty, this is how the creeping incrementalism has worked in other countries, and with many other organizations.

    The AHSA must be completely pro gun or completely anti gun. There is no middle ground on this. If AHSA wants to focus on hunting, as their name implies, then do that, stay completely out of the .50 stuff to begin with.

    If you cannot successfully make that simple argument to AHSA then they will remain, as they are now, an anti gun group.

    It's VERY relevant to your thread, you just don't want to discuss it.

    Here is an example of how this works. This is taken from the AHSA position statement on .50BMG:

    The 9mm handgun round has also been possessed or used by all of these groups. Should it be banned? Shockingly enough there are laws also against hijacking airplanes and flying them into buildings. I wonder how many of these same groups have possessed or used televisions, cell phones, and cars? This kind of data doesn't really mean anything at all and is only included to ramp up the irrational fear factor. A sign that your argument is very weak.

    So can .50 DTC, and it's never been used in a single crime. It's California legal and more makers are coming to market with it. Since 50BMG is not the only round capable of this, why is only the 50BMG being called out for banning? Again, the fear mongering, irrational panic inducing stuff that these kinds of descriptions of weapons brings to mind.

    The .50BMG arrmor piercing that is legal to buy is 1930's and 1940's vintage. Modern AP round, incendiary rounds, and combo rounds are ILLEGAL ALREADY. Why is this in the AHSA position statement at all? This stuff is already illegal. Tracer rounds are NOT incendiary.

    The .50 BMG is proliferating at a miniscule level compared to all other rifle calibers. This doesn't even make any sense here.

    Neither does the .22 Colibri. Why does this matter? And who is going to define "reasonable", AHSA?

    So does every other firearm. Most firearms used by these groups are handguns. AHSA want to ban those next? And of course the crime statistics show that, while these groups might think the 50BMG "popular" they don't see it as "practical" since they don't use them in crimes.

    Same with every other Title 1 firearm, which gets to the AHSA's position on gun shows, another anti gun position. Where does AHSA stand on this so called "gun show loophole"?

    Of course they are. All firearms are regulated at the Federal level by Title 1. This is just flat dishonesty here. Again, it's this kind of language that is used to create fear of the unknown in uninformed and uneducated gun owners and the general public. It's dishonest.

    2 weeks later Serbu announced the .50DTC would be available in their product line. It is now shipping and legal to own in California. It has identical ballistics characteristics to the .50 BMG. This shows that banning specific types of firearms is wasteful of taxpayers money and only serves to allow politicians to say they are "doing something". It's the same reason groups like AHSA call for these bans, to show they "care". It's not really meaningful legislation since it "cured" a problem that didn't really exist. Note the part I put in bold about registration, we'll come back to that later.

    And here we are, at the crux of the issue. So far the arguments AHSA makes against the .50 BMG could apply to hundreds of other firearm types.
    POTENTIAL for use in crimes. Thought crimes next? So the closing argument is that since the 50BMG MIGHT be used someday for bad things, we better get it banned now. Even though many other guns can do the same thing.

    So, why is just .50 BMG being singled out here? The motivation for that would answer the question: How, if at all, do you change the AHSA position on .50 BMG.

    And of course the AHSA and other groups will counter and say "It's not a ban, we just want them put under NFA rules". Knowing full well that since many states don't allow NFA weapons, and that LE officials can at their leisure approve or deny signing the forms, you have a defacto ban. You also have defacto gun registration.

    Which by the way the AHSA appears to be in favor of since they also want all NICS searches open for access. We'll save that argument for another time, wouldn't want to go off topic here :)

    http://www.huntersandshooters.org/issues/gunrights/fbi
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  3. Hawk

    Hawk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,512
    Location:
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Still going, enh?

    I like speculating on wildly improbable stuff as much as the next guy. A couple of tangential notes:

    The folks behind AHSA reads like a who’s who of grabbers. Ray Schoenke is a spokesman. As unlikely as it would appear, wouldn’t it be great fun if the spokesman could be "turned"?

    Picture the OP as Emperor Palpatine and Schoenke as Luke Skywalker – except it works. What a hoot. It'd be like Wayne LaPierre being turned by Rebecca Peters. Chaos and confusion would ensue. Congress would pass an AWB and the spokesman for AHSA would call for Obama to veto the misguided legislation in the strongest possible terms – Schoenke's righteously indignant face plastered across Daily Kos, HuffPo and Facebook declaring he'd been betrayed, BETRAYED I say, by those he helped into office.

    About as likely as my 58 year old white male paunchy wrinkled self getting hired by the Bolshoi as a prima ballerina but it doesn't cost us anything to take a stab – the OP is doing all the work.

    If that means the OP's continued efforts to get the anti-AWB stuff posted on AHSA's site and casting the .50 BMG in terms of sporting, what the hey? I’d prefer the .50 not have to dangle on a sporting use defense but we can hardly be any worse off by assisting the OP to put that aspect front and center.

    It's not like old Ray hasn't found himself on diametrically opposing sides before – after all, he played for both the Cowboys and the Redskins. Bob Ricker seems to have a talent for switching sides as well.

    But, first things first. FCSA can provide plenty on sporting use info but we should probably start with AHSA posting, for all the world to see, their staunch opposition to an AWB. If they wish to cast the issue in a hunting context they need go no further than this:
    http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/Model_R-25.asp
    or this
    http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/Model_R-15_VTR.asp
    Put a pic of the R-25 up with a happy face and a big old "Yummy" from the spokesman and I'll immediately acknowledge that further effort is justified.

    I'll personally pledge time to the .50BMG issue in precisely the context the OP feels comfortable working with if we could get some reading on when we may expect an anti-AWB (or pro-R25) blurb to be added to the AHSA site. It'd be a demonstration of good faith.

    An unfortunate (or fortunate depending on one's outlook) aspect of the information age is that a lot of stuff is suddenly "forever". This specifically includes the Wayback Machine's cached versions of AHSA's site showing no appreciable difference between them and the VPC. Surely, adding opposition to an AWB to the current site is as trivial as removing the support for one was - and that little thing would mean a great deal to some few of us skeptics.
     
  4. JImbothefiveth

    JImbothefiveth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,710
    Location:
    Oklahio
    Why not have them show us how opposed to another '94 ban they really are. Tell them to post it on their website.

    After that, get them to remove the
    .50 from their agenda, maybe by finding someone who hunts with it.

    Of course, they won't care, because they are not a hunter's group, they are the brady campaign dressed up as fudds.
     
  5. JImbothefiveth

    JImbothefiveth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,710
    Location:
    Oklahio
    The R-25 and R-15 would still be legal if AR-15s were "regulated no different than other semi-auto rifles" and another AWB was passed. They don't have too many non-Hillary-approved features, and they use low-capacity magazines. No, we need to show someone hunting with an AR-15 that falls under the ban, maybe an R-25 with a flash suppressor.(Not to be confused with a regular suppressor.) Also, where it's legal to hunt with,(Not in a lot of states) a hi-capacity magazine.
     
  6. Hawk

    Hawk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,512
    Location:
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Actually, it wouldn't have passed muster under HR1022. Pistol grip plus removable magazine kills it (it didn't need to be a >10 mag). It would have been hunky dorey under the '94 version but likely not under what's next up to bat.

    I'm generally as absolutist as any but, in this case, I'd be pleased to see the R25 endorsed on AHSA's site. I shant be holding my breath anyway.
     
  7. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,404
    Location:
    Michiana
    Bottom Line

    There are plenty of proven pro-gun organizations that I can support before I will take a chance of supporting a suspect organization such as the AHSA. Sorry RPCVYemen. You only have to look at the site gunguys.com to realize the tactic of deceit or presenting a wolf in sheep's clothing isn't beneath the anti's.

    Now, if you would be so kind to tell me where else you are posing this information about AHSA I would very appreciate it so I can go set the record straight there. The first is just as important as the second.
     
  8. BullpupBen

    BullpupBen Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    228
    Location:
    Harrisonburg, VA
    I think that if the AHSA would change their position on these two important topics I could actually throw my support behind them. The lack of environmental conservation in politicians backed by the NRA really disturbs me and caused me to join the AHSA for about a week. I quit when I saw their rediculous policy on the AWB and .50 calibers and their support for Obama. They need to understand that while hunting is an awesome tradition, saying the 2nd amendment is about hunting is like saying the 1st amendment is about the sports page in the newspaper. I, like most other gun owners, intend to own all sorts of liberal-scaring black rifles, but I will probably never shoot a deer with anything other than a bolt action rifle with a nice wooden stock.

    EDIT: Besides, Obama is going to be president whether we like it or not and I think we're gonna need all the help we can get.. these guys probably have some influence within the administration.
     
  9. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    I am not sure that I understand the question being asked. If you are asking for my previous posts on AHSA related issues, the 1st post on this thread has URLs for the threads.

    Mike
     
  10. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    My support for the AHSA in addition to the NRA has nothing to do with the NRA's gun policies. I agreed hso not to discuss those issues on the previous THR thread and will honor that agreement on this thread.

    If you want to understand my unhappiness with the NRA, PM me. You should be able to tell from this thread that I am not bashful about expressing my opinion.

    Mike
     
  11. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    I've never shot a deer with a bolt action rifle with a wooden stock. I don't even OWN a bolt action rifle with a wooden stock.

    Yet I hunt deer every season and have since I was very young.

    The thing is, that does not make me less of a hunter. I still buy a license, contribute to conservation efforts, obey all the hunting laws in my state etc.

    Why does a "pro hunting" group care HOW I hunt. Either they really don't understand hunters, or they are an anti gun group in disguise.

    I am having a hard time believing it's the former based on their arbitrarily picking some guns to lobby for banning, and some not.

    Until that policy changes there is no question AHSA is an anti gun organization. I hope Yemen gets them to change their minds, but I'm not betting on it.
     
  12. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    If the two topics you refer to are their historical support for the AWB, and their position on 50 BMG weapons, we are in complete agreement.

    They dropped their support for the AWB long before I joined the organization, or I would not have joined. The phone conversation I had with Mr. Schoenke confirmed that view of the matter - as far as I am concerned, that's a done deal.

    That leaves one position I'd like them to change. If I can persuade them to change their position with regard to 50 BMG weapons, I would be much happier with them.

    Mike
     
  13. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    I think we are in agreement that singling out the 50 BMG is an incorrect policy position. That's precisely why I am arguing - or trying out to figure out a winning argument - to change the AHSA position on this topic.

    I accept the AHSA takes the position it does for the reasons it says it does - the GAO report, but I also believe that the AHSA would be ready to drop the position if it could be shown that 50 BMG was used widely for hunting/sporting purposes.

    While I do believe that the AHSA supports the 2nd Amendment as they say the do, and understand that you do not believe that, I also believe that the core of AHSA support is in the hunter/conservationist realm.

    All of that leads me to believe that a two prong attack might be most successful:

    1. Lobby my congressman for a new GAO study - hopefully it will demonstrate that as in 1999, 50 BMGs are used in a negligible number of criminal contexts.
    2. Find hard data on 50 BMG usage in hunting/sporting arena.

    #2 will win their hearts, #1 will win their minds ...

    Mike
     
  14. Megistopoda

    Megistopoda Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Yemen:

    What is AHSA's membership, and what kind of influence will they have in congress? They seem to have arisen about the time that Barack Obama did, so I wonder whether they have much of a membership ... in other words, are they even worth engaging on these issues?

    At any rate, I'd love for them to retract their support for restrictions on .50s.

    In fact, I've love for them to acknowledge (intellectually and then in deed) that the 2A has little to do with hunting, and FAR more to do with protecting the ownership of firearms like .50s, "assault weapons", and the like. That the 2A helps protect hunting is nice, but scarcely mentioned relative to the fulfillment of the militia clauses ("defense" in it's broadest sense). Without this understanding and acknowledgement, the AHSA approaches this issue from a fundamentally flawed context ... building 2A protections around "sporting purposes" is simply flawed fundamentally. It's like trying to build a brick house on the sand ... it will fall eventually.
     
  15. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,342
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Yemen will not address or concede this point no matter how many times you repeat it. His inputs always go back to "We must convince them that they are wrong on the 50BMG", and completely sidesteps addressing why they might have their worldview that the 50BMG is bad or how the approach itself that he's taking to convince them is bad.

    This whole thread is EPIC FAIL insofar as Activism Planning is concerned.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  16. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,288
    So essentialy "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", just what the machine he is controlling has to say?


    The AHSA was founded by Brady Campaign members who were unsatisfied with the speed of anti gun progress!
    Nothing except the name was even subtle, you could look up most of the founders and find thousands of dollars in donations to the Brady Campaign, prior membership as a board member in the Brady campaign. They recieve finances from many of the same sources...

    It is a very dangerous game you are so eager to play.
    If the AHSA becomes a "credible" voice for gun owners the antis who made it to begin with have one of the most powerful tools.
    They can file briefs in court on behalf of gun owners, intentionaly giving up rights and losing important cases.
    In fact thier position on Heller was essentialy to accomplish that. They tried to steer the result in a way that would enable DC to enact any regulations afterwards, so it would set as few pro-gun precedents as possible.


    How can you not discuss the background of an organization designed to remove rights, yet discuss why trying to work with them to reach "reasonable compromises" is a good idea?

    It is like wolves and lambs voting whether lamb should continue to be eaten.
    A few of the smart wolves even create a pro lamb protection group to speak on behalf of the lambs. They will do everything to convince the lambs to join and vote with them, let them be thier voice of reason.
    "No lamb really needs 4 legs, surely they can spare a few in a reasonable common sense compromise". Some lambs may counter "But over the last century we have already agreed to give up our first born, our second born, let the wolves oversee the licensing of the slaughter houses..."
    But you see those lambs are just being unreasonable. They should "compromise" (give up more freedoms) at least a few major times every 10 years, the wolves are hungry after all.

    ahsawolfx200.jpg
     
  17. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    What approach do you think would be most likely to persuade them that their policy is incorrect?

    Most folks seem to want to tell me how to convince who people already think the AHSA is wrong that the AHSA is wrong. That strikes me as not very much of a challenge, and not very helpful.

    So I will put an two honest question to you:

    1. How would you try to persuade the AHSA that they are wrong in their stated policy about 50 BMG weapons?
    2. Why do you expect the approach outlined in #1 to persuade the AHSA that their stated policy is wrong?

    Mike
     
  18. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,342
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    As stated innumerous time above - I would ask AHSA to state the nature of the social ills/problem(s) with the 50BMG, and then rebutt each of those objections with data.

    You have yet to obtain from them a clear understanding of WHY they feel the 50BMG must be restricted. How can you address their concerns if they can't articulate them?



    ETA - saying that something has no 'sporting legitimacy' is not identifying a PROBLEM - it's a value statement. In order to restrict something, I should have some greater burden than just to say, "I do not value it myself.".

    I do not value beef liver, but that doesn't mean that folk shouldn't be able to eat it.

    To 'solve a problem', one must first be able to point to a statistically significant number of occurances of some perceived negative behavior/occurrance, quantify the cost of the perceived problem, and THEN AND ONLY THEN present a solution (i.e. restriction) along with provide a cost estimate for remediating the problem and other possible alternatives.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  19. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Here is the final post from the previous AHSA thread - which was mostly about whether or not the AHSA was a "front" for anti's:

    This thread is focused on how to persuade the AHSA to change their policy vis-a-vis 50 BMG weapons.

    Mike
     
  20. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    55,529
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    RPCVYemen,

    It looks like there are numerous ideas presented to get the AHSA to change their position on .50BMG. One thing that hasn't been suggested is to write the position you'd like to see them take for them and send it in as a member.

    You could refute each claim of the old position line by line in an argument against .50 bans, patterning it after their current published position supporting .50 bans.

    Put up a draft for comment here and then submit it to them to see if they adopt it.
     
  21. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    I did that for him, he says the things I bring up "are not relevant to the thread":rolleyes: (post #127)
     
  22. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Good idea, thanks.

    I don't have enough info yet to complete the draft, but here's the rough outline.

    It's pretty rough right now, and I need more data to back up several of the assertions, but here is a quick sketch:

    Mike
     
  23. JImbothefiveth

    JImbothefiveth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,710
    Location:
    Oklahio
    That's a bad thing, they will just push for .50 bans, AWBs, and bans on private sales.

    Actually, any anti-gun group having influence is a bad thing. A good way to tell whether or not it's anti-gun is whether or not the NRA attacks it. FOr instance, the NRA doesn't attack the GOA, because they are pro-gun. However, they do attack this organization, becuase it's anti-gun.
     
  24. Justin

    Justin Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,369
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    Even if AHSA changes their public stance on .50 BMG rifles and so-called "assault weapons" it will only be so much lip-service so long as they support the likes of Obama.


    Actions.

    Not words.
     
  25. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,404
    Location:
    Michiana
    This is dangerous ground to stand on. What happens if criminals start to use such a weapon? Then what will your argument be? We use the same logic when discussing "assault weapons."

    As mentioned by JImbothefiveth, this could be good and/or bad. We would have to discuss the different avenues.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice