Threads like these are very useful for identification purposes. All organizations have moles in them that pop up from time to time in order to cause confusion and misdirect folks from the real problem.
Wikipedia--Groupthink
Wikipedia; Groupthink said:
...Type III: Pressures toward uniformity
1.Self-censorship of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus.
2.Illusions of unanimity among group members, silence is viewed as agreement.
3.Direct pressure to conform placed on any member who questions the group, couched in terms of "disloyalty"
For the record, I posted a few respectful and civil opinions on that page; they disappeared very quickly, and I must now be 'facebook blocked' as I can no longer make comments.
Wikipedia said:
4.Mind guards— self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting information.
Wikipedia--Cognitive Dissonance
Apparently they don't really want a 'non-partisan conversation', but simply cheering from the uninformed masses.
The operation of these groups makes a lot more sense if you frame it by the idea we're supposed to still be screeching at each other in the treetops
"All organizations have moles in them that pop up from time to time in order to cause confusion and misdirect folks from the real problem."
The real problem is there are more uninformed or apathetic people in urban areas susceptible to emotive arguments of the Anti's than rational, motivated gun owners. They could care less about guns, and want crime reduced. Crime comes at the point of a gun in many cases, so that becomes an easy target to waste energy on. And that wasted energy is enough to trounce us if we aren't on our game,
all the time.
We can have the best arguments in the world, the greatest legal protections money and court rulings can offer. But the fact is, so long as there are more of them than us, it's all borrowed time. They
will find a way to make the majority dictate on this issue, because money, court rulings, and the Constitution are ultimately paper, and have a finite protective power without
people to enforce them. The only defense is to take the majority
from them to save our rights.
Show the folks on the fence that there are better ways to combat the problems
they care about, while also not trampling on
our sacred rights, and we can find common ground. Show them results, and we'll get them on our side. I believe this can be done. I believe our idea(l)s can be marketed effectively, but we've been too closed-minded until recently to try and reach out to uninterested urban dwellers. Too many gunnies are content to rail against the city slickers from afar as their numbers inevitably grow and their influence becomes ever greater, until there's nothing that can be done to counter them.
The cities are where this battle is waged; always has been. Until very recently gunowners have not only been on the defensive, but on the retreat; fleeing the northeast, then the west coast, next large mid-western cities, and now large southern cities. Cities would inevitably become more and more restrictive, driving off more and more liberty-minded people and accelerating the trend. All because it's easier to move (nowadays) to an area more accommodating of our individual preferences. Well, we've just about run out of them, and beach heads are opening all around us. Every state now has a large city that threatens to dominate governance (or does) and no place is safe for passive gun owners anymore. Our logic is sound, our ideals just, and our resources formidable. If we actually bother to rise to the challenge in these areas, we
will prevail and protect our existence. But we have to be constant and unending in our pestering of officials to endorse our freedoms; just as the antis are in demanding their restriction.
In my humble estimation, we have been "awake" since the '94 AWB, and "wide awake" since its expiration. Favorable court rulings renewed faith in our cause and re-opened formerly cold battlefields (Detroit). Gun rights are much less a fringe than they were, no one has illusions about hunting rights being worth new infringement, and more and more people than ever are taking their lives into their own hands by carrying daily. We show no signs of slowing down, but forever is a long time, especially considering our goal isn't as simple as forcing those who oppose us to do what we want at the point of a gun, like the anti's ironically do. Several devastating court losses or national elections could very easily drive us back into the woodwork, probably never to be seen again.
I'll feel better when we have our own unassailable city-state fortresses that the Anti's would not
dream of spewing their garbage in (even Arizona would be at risk if the big cities got big enough). To do that, we need to get cities on our team, instead of trying to defeat them.
TCB
*you know, the store on 3rd and main
(I'm referring to all the various gun advocacy groups here, lest anyone claim this as evidence that I am an "infiltrator"
)