Found your mark? If by that you mean needlessly continuing the gun group infighting, then I'd say so.
I don't see how you could think the Col. is having his cake and eating it too.
While he admitted that he has the "authority" to make the change he also intimated that he lacks the "authority" to make the change permanent.
Bullhuckey. This is simple--its up to him who gets permits. When pressured on why more of us don't get them, he hides behind a statute that, in the end, says its up to him.
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.
The fact is that he's a political appointee. If he does something outside of current "political-conventional" wisdom he's out of a job.
He works for Ehrlich. I thought Bobby E. was on our side?
He was absolutely telling you the truth, his opinion doesn't matter. If he needs an opinion it will be given to him. If you could read between the lines you would have recognized that was what he was telling you.
Don't patronize me, I get that very well--the point is that he's telling you one of two things--either Ehrlich isn't really for us, or he doesn't care or doesn't want to make any real motion on the issue and the Col. sees no real reason to move toward will issue.
MSI is what? Never read your own press. MSI is a noisy fringe group
.
Were you at any of the Gun Bill Days in either the House or Senate this year? MSI had more representatives than any other organization. People like you resent MSI because we get off our asses and actually do the leg work. Not making noise certainly won't get us anywhere, but we do just a bit more than that. But thanks for passing on a meaningless ad hominem.
They think that confrontation and agitation are good things.
No, we think being politically active instead of being keyboard warriors are a good thing. We're hardly confrontational, but we do call it like we see it.
Keep on with the unfounded, unsupportable ad hominem BS. It's really doing wonders for your case.
So let me get this straight, if I was a politician I would give confrontational people firearms?
Politicians don't give anyone firearms, we have to defend our rights to keep and bear them. Politicians certainly don't respect the rights of people they don't hear from or think represent a substantial voting bloc. Glad to see you making more excuses for inactivity. I think you should adjust your user name.
And I'd do this because why,they speak harshly to me? Man that's just a blank campaign check from the anti-gunners, bring it on!
Who exactly are we "speaking harshly" too, anyway?
Henry H. at MSI sent members of the House committee a threatening letter demanding a vote on a CCW bill in 2005 even if it meant getting an AWB. It alienated committee members AND almost sold the farm.
Really? I'd like to see a copy. Smells like bull@#$% here pal.
MSI brags about getting bills submitted. As noted in another entry, there's a few thousand of those every year so that's no mean fete. How many have they gotten PASSED.
How many have YOU gotten passed? I've got Dels. Smigiel and Dwyer on record as supporting MSI and pointing out that their continued support for getting CCW bills on the table each year is the tool they need to keep quashing Quinter's idiotic bills.
MSI seems to be so poorly organized that their members don’t even know who their own officers are.
BS ad hominem. We know exactly who they are.
Progunprogressive claimed that no blue hats (MSI) were called on. Don Hoffman who was sitting in a front row reserved seat was called on and he claimed to be the VP of MSI.
And I was right (in case you can't tell, I'm PGP...I should probably change my user name here). Don wasn't wearing his blue hat when he was called upon. He identified himself after he was called upon.
The light haired heavy set guy in the center of the room (identified himself as a retired army officer) is also an MSI member and he was called on too.
Wasn't wearing his hat either.
MSI doesn't come to the table with anything (no votes, no money, ergo no carrots). MSI threatens to go get a stick they don't have. Why would the AGC invite MSI?
AGC has votes? Baloney, as Spot already pointed out. AGC didn't take Cas's head, so quit giving them credit for something they didn't do.
If AGC has so many people in it's pocket, where were they on gun bill day?
AGC actually gets more out of not alligning with MSI. By letting MSI do their thing AGC comes off looking as the most reasonable and moderated of the groups.
Baloney again. I've talked regularly with our best friends on the Judiciary committee in the house and Senate. Believe me, it's the blue hats they're noticing. Moderated? Try "we don't even see 'em".
When MSI comes to Annapolis for the hearings they've got a couple of people passing out leaflets to the folks around them. Most of which are AGC.
Another ad hominem! You obviously weren't there this year. Admit it, because if you were you'd have seen that that's simply not the case. We were the largest group there, and we don't rely on AGC for lit or leaflets.
We're willing to work with AGC, I can assure you. The fact is, our door is open to them but not vice versa.
The army doesn't join people, people join the army. If you don't know what's going on then you should join the folks who do. AGC works across a wide spectrum and gets results, MSI is a single-issue cause that hasn't produced.
Single issue? You're batting 0 for 10 here. MSI supports just about every gun rights initiative you can think of. Don't be offput by the name. As for the "army", remind me again which group had the most representatives on Gun Bill Day? Oh yeah! It was MSI!
If you'd square your arguments with the facts, we'd respect you in the morning.
Who are the players?
Whether anyone likes it or not the administration doesn't want to talk to a crowd of people with varying agendas. It wants to work with a consolidated front. That front has already been recognized by the administration; it's the AGC.
• Who’s better able to represent the gun-community as a whole?
Moot point, waste of time and energy to argue. The administration recognizes the AGC. The AGC has been around for quite a few decades and had a presence in Annapolis for 12-13 years. MSI has been around for 2 years.
Don't rest on your laurels with these two points: both things that will change with time if AGC remains complacent and more folks realize that the dynamic, growing group is MSI. More reason for us to work in concert, not compete.
The reality is also that even though Henry didn't get his response, the room got filled. About 3-5% of the room was MSI. In effect, for the purposes of a body-count MSI was "statistically insignificant". I still have my doubts that Henry showed John any respect when he sent his email. Don't know, just have my doubts.
At some point it's not about counting numbers. By your own admission it's about winning in the legislature, not with Col. Hutchings. That's where the numbers count, and if you're gonna count numbers we're ahead there, if not at an informational seminar. I've seen Henry's correspondence with John, and it's not disrespectful. So you're simply engaged in proctological verbalization here.