Anti-Self Defense lobby has a new web site
- Thread starter davec
- Start date
- Status
Mulliga
Member
"Freedom States Alliance"? What a joke. They even have an antigun blog up. But whatever. Fancy Flash movies and celebrity endorsements are old tactics and they don't seem to be very effective...
Thefabulousfink
Member
From the site's FAQ:
As most websites put up by antis (Brady Bunch), it is full of a tiny bit of fact, lots of inflamitory buzz words, and a few outright lies.
No one will get anything out of this other than the allready entrenched anti-gun foot soldiers.
It might, however, provide us with some good ammunition
As most websites put up by antis (Brady Bunch), it is full of a tiny bit of fact, lots of inflamitory buzz words, and a few outright lies.
No one will get anything out of this other than the allready entrenched anti-gun foot soldiers.
It might, however, provide us with some good ammunition
LeoC
Member
AIIEE MY EYES! MY EYES! 
Anyone else notice the molding seam at the end of that Beretta? And the lack of visible rifling? And the oddly inset smaller barrel? Airsoft
And how DARE the parent organization call themselves the "Freedom States Alliance"?!
Anyone else notice the molding seam at the end of that Beretta? And the lack of visible rifling? And the oddly inset smaller barrel? Airsoft
And how DARE the parent organization call themselves the "Freedom States Alliance"?!
ElTacoGrande
Member
The NRA should not be lobbying for these laws. These are unneeded laws and they make the NRA look bad.
Henry Bowman
Senior Member
Reluctantly, I agree. I'm glad they are sweeping across the heartland, but (contrary to what the antis assert) they have nothing specifically to do with gun or gun-ownership rights. I don't think it's a "gun" issue. It's a self-defense issue.
Thefabulousfink
Member
I think we should be striving to remove the "duty to retreat" laws. Being protected from a civil suit after a self-defense shooting is nice, but the way some of these laws are written does make a few of the dimmer bulbs think they can kill for any reason.
Heaven forbid lawmakers write a law in plain english so that everyone can understand it.
Heaven forbid lawmakers write a law in plain english so that everyone can understand it.
RaggedClaws
Member
Does anyone have any examples of folks in this country (I know of cases in the UK) sued or criminally convicted for using deadly force in self defense? Don't get me wrong, I'm just wondering if there was a problem before this legislation hit the scene.
ElTacoGrande
Member
They're not a gun issue and they're pointless. Ultimately deciding whether it was a "good shoot" will be up to prosecutors judges and juries and their culture, values and perceptions of the actors will make the decision. These laws change little if anything.
And they make the NRA look bad and they're a waste of time and effort and resources.
Come on NRA, please try fighting for our gun rights in some harder battles, like CCW in California and repealing sporting use laws. Stop it with this stuff. It disgusts me.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
Oh, 
them, and all their followers and funders.
them, and all their followers and funders.
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
I love how the FSA has mulitple websites in an attempt to appear bigger than they really are.
I've never heard of them making any sort of public appearance, organizing rallies, or doing even 1/10 of the public screeching that the Brady Campaign does.
I've never heard of them making any sort of public appearance, organizing rallies, or doing even 1/10 of the public screeching that the Brady Campaign does.
rnr4me
Member
We've had a 'make my day' law here in CO for several years now. I haven't heard of any abuses, and I keep pretty good track of the news.
This is the same thing they tried on the CCW states. "oh, it'll be murder in the streets" . "people will be shooting people from their cars" etc. Didn't happen either. Except of course the criminals who did that stuff already.
This is the same thing they tried on the CCW states. "oh, it'll be murder in the streets" . "people will be shooting people from their cars" etc. Didn't happen either. Except of course the criminals who did that stuff already.
V4Vendetta
member
Just looked to see what celebrities they had on their side. I didn't see any & I don't want to look again. I feel dirty. Like I just rolled around in sewage. Excuse me while I go vomit.
wingnutx
Member
"Freedom States Alliance"
Well that's about as Orwellian as you can get.
Well that's about as Orwellian as you can get.
Zundfolge
Member
That clearly fails the "fancy catsup" test.
I can't imagine that the hyperbole and foaming at the mouth works with fence sitters.
These kinds of sites do nothing more than make the radicals feel good ... sort of a "preach to the choir" thing ... I seriously doubt they are getting converts with this kind of "license to murder" and "states where murder is still illegal" tripe.
Which makes me happy because its clearly a sign that "we" are winning
Mongo the Mutterer
Member
Yes we are.
And it makes the elitist gun grabbers of the Left crazy.....
But vigilance is the key. They are not going to go away.
Pafrmu
Member
Come on guys, Its for the children.
El Tejon
Member
Meet the FSA's newest member. If the blissninnies only knew.
1. These statutes are merely restatements of existing law. They are prominent because of Kirk's Second Law of the Internet (if Florida does something it is the first state in the Union to do it as it has 25 electoral votes).
2. The objective/subjective standard of self-defense has not been changed. Before the "stand your ground" laws all one needed to exercise deadly force was "reasonable belief". The antis are lying and attempt to imply that this standard has someone been made lesser.
3. These proposals are not entirely feckless if they contain civil immunity (I believe they should contain many other provisions but the NRA does not let El Tejon anywhere near the model legislation).
If the blissninnies only knew. 1. These statutes are merely restatements of existing law. They are prominent because of Kirk's Second Law of the Internet (if Florida does something it is the first state in the Union to do it as it has 25 electoral votes).
2. The objective/subjective standard of self-defense has not been changed. Before the "stand your ground" laws all one needed to exercise deadly force was "reasonable belief". The antis are lying and attempt to imply that this standard has someone been made lesser.
3. These proposals are not entirely feckless if they contain civil immunity (I believe they should contain many other provisions but the NRA does not let El Tejon anywhere near the model legislation).
Mongo the Mutterer
Member
No El T..
Kind of like the "Children" statistics they use which include 20 year old gang bangers????
They are actually lying???
Kind of like the "Children" statistics they use which include 20 year old gang bangers????
El Tejon
Member
Yeah, O.K., so I was restating the obvious. Sort of like these statutes the blissninnies are bleating about.
We have met the enemy and it is us...Pogo
From the sites FAQ:
We have to be careful that we don't make them sound as if they are right:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2352528#post2352528
I wouldn't be surprised to see links to posts like some of them in the thread I referenced on these anti websites. Sometimes we're our own worst enemy.
:banghead:
Jeff
From the sites FAQ:
We have to be careful that we don't make them sound as if they are right:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2352528#post2352528
I wouldn't be surprised to see links to posts like some of them in the thread I referenced on these anti websites. Sometimes we're our own worst enemy.
:banghead:
Jeff
Ivy Mike
Member
Its an old tactic that always serves people well.
You take something out of context and serve it in soundbyte form and you've got yourself a basis for argument.
Thats all that site does. Perhaps they would like to look at some of these "green states" on that list and read the sections on defense of self and property. A whole lot more of them would be red.
Nevada for one allows me to use force to stop someone in the commission of a felony (breaking and entering, burglary, grand theft auto are all felonies here) no matter where I am.
At any rate, this is just the same old boring tactic they've tried for years and its always easily defeated with sensible arguments and debate. Thats the real trick though...getting them to sit down for debate and use logic. Their argument only lives in the margins, so they want to keep em wide.
You take something out of context and serve it in soundbyte form and you've got yourself a basis for argument.
Thats all that site does. Perhaps they would like to look at some of these "green states" on that list and read the sections on defense of self and property. A whole lot more of them would be red.
Nevada for one allows me to use force to stop someone in the commission of a felony (breaking and entering, burglary, grand theft auto are all felonies here) no matter where I am.
At any rate, this is just the same old boring tactic they've tried for years and its always easily defeated with sensible arguments and debate. Thats the real trick though...getting them to sit down for debate and use logic. Their argument only lives in the margins, so they want to keep em wide.
- Status
