NRA Senator Selling out?
- Thread starter Michigander
- Start date
- Status
No boats, everyone knows who you're talking about. That's pretty much everyone who disagrees with your self important perspective on anything. 1911's, HK's, NRA, you name it. If it's not your perspective, it must be the wrong perspective. You antagonize people to feed your ego and then crow about it when they get banned for defending themselves.
And don't worry TheBluesMan. Every time that boats has hurled invectives and insults, he wasn't referring to the membership at large, he was referring specifically to Angel and Nicki. A point that has obviously been overlooked by every moderator on this board. And I can only assume that his not referring to them by name, is the only reason he hasn't been banned for directly insulting another member. Because, as I stated earlier, it's painfully obvious who he is targeting and I for one am rather disgusted with the moderators for allowing him to remain on this thin technicality.
Nicki got banned for having the courage for telling boats what he is to his face. Courage boats obviously lacks.
To be perfectly honest, I know both Nicki and Angel personally and both have demonstrated character and integrity in their dealings with me and I count them both among my friends and I got tired of hearing boats slander them a long time ago. Both are far better people than Eric could ever hope to be.
And don't worry TheBluesMan. Every time that boats has hurled invectives and insults, he wasn't referring to the membership at large, he was referring specifically to Angel and Nicki. A point that has obviously been overlooked by every moderator on this board. And I can only assume that his not referring to them by name, is the only reason he hasn't been banned for directly insulting another member. Because, as I stated earlier, it's painfully obvious who he is targeting and I for one am rather disgusted with the moderators for allowing him to remain on this thin technicality.
Nicki got banned for having the courage for telling boats what he is to his face. Courage boats obviously lacks.
To be perfectly honest, I know both Nicki and Angel personally and both have demonstrated character and integrity in their dealings with me and I count them both among my friends and I got tired of hearing boats slander them a long time ago. Both are far better people than Eric could ever hope to be.
TheBluesMan
Senior Member
Boats,
Your deer-poaching analogy is interesting, I'll give you that. The only problem is that you have it backward.
We're the deer - the politicians are the poachers... They have all the firepower and they're trying to make it so all we can do is run away from their "spray and pray" legislation.
You bet your sweet bippy that when someone yells, "CAR!" I'm a-runnin'.
-Dave
A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them. -- P.J. O'Rourke
Your deer-poaching analogy is interesting, I'll give you that. The only problem is that you have it backward.
We're the deer - the politicians are the poachers... They have all the firepower and they're trying to make it so all we can do is run away from their "spray and pray" legislation.
You bet your sweet bippy that when someone yells, "CAR!" I'm a-runnin'.
-Dave
A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them. -- P.J. O'Rourke
Nicki got banned? If so, that's unfortunate and certainly nothing I wished or called for. As for you, Mr. Keller, "courage" on the internet? Surely you jest.
Here is a tidbit for you that I sent to Mr. Shamaya before ever seeing your latest post:
His original e-mail was a CC of one he sent to [email protected], Obviously, I am meant to be the "attacker and name-caller" referenced. Well you know what? Mea Culpa. My explanation speaks for itself, except for that I owe Nicki an apology as well, but now that she is banned I don't exactly know where to start on that one. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to give me a lead?
I am not looking for an ego stroke here, just doing the right thing. I suspect I have not been banned because I actually express remorse when I am in the wrong and don't compound it by quickly returning to bad practices.
Nevertheless, I do not think I was ever going to be banned for ridiculing HK USPs, where you and I got off to such an excellent start, but FWIW, I now apologize to you too for any bruised feelings those many moons ago.
Peace. Let's save the ire for the antis. I am as tired of infighting as anyone.
Check your PM for info on Nicki's apology. And for the record boats, I've never had an issue with you ridiculing HKs. Rarely did you do that. Rather you focused your ire and ridicule on HK owners. That I took issue with as it was just another form of bigotry. Something you well know.
Apology accepted and appreciated, provided it's for the continuous attacks on the persons, not the things.
And as for the courage, Nicki and Angel put their butts out there every day, every way they can for you and me and every other gun owner. Angel has sunk everything he is and has into this effort. I understand if he's sensitive to a potential sellout and don't fault him for raising an alarm. Frankly, that probably had more to do with bringing this to peoples attention and getting them on the phone with their congressmen than anything else.
Apology accepted and appreciated, provided it's for the continuous attacks on the persons, not the things.
And as for the courage, Nicki and Angel put their butts out there every day, every way they can for you and me and every other gun owner. Angel has sunk everything he is and has into this effort. I understand if he's sensitive to a potential sellout and don't fault him for raising an alarm. Frankly, that probably had more to do with bringing this to peoples attention and getting them on the phone with their congressmen than anything else.
I have to agree with Boats on the original KABA statement. KABA should not have published a critique on such a short and relatively clear amendment without seeing how the changes affect current law.
It took only a few minutes for me to go look up the US code and compare. I would think it would have been worth 3 minutes of KABA's time to make a similar effort, regardless of what opinions you get from which people on what the new amendment will do and how it will just *kill* their business. Because if you haven't read and checked the amendment, why do you think those people have? The truth is, you may have been on the end of a long email chain started by some anti-rkba goon. Unless you check legislation yourself, you can never be sure.
However, Boats, your style is not appreciated by myself nor apparently by several others. You might want to tone down your KABA-directed negativism. Everyone makes mistakes, and KABA's principals are merely human (as much as they might like to deny it on occasion). There's no doubt that in terms of political power, the NRA is better at getting things done. Getting things done, though, tends to mean a steady erosion of 2A rights. Not the best claim to fame for a political entity with membership in the millions.
It took only a few minutes for me to go look up the US code and compare. I would think it would have been worth 3 minutes of KABA's time to make a similar effort, regardless of what opinions you get from which people on what the new amendment will do and how it will just *kill* their business. Because if you haven't read and checked the amendment, why do you think those people have? The truth is, you may have been on the end of a long email chain started by some anti-rkba goon. Unless you check legislation yourself, you can never be sure.
However, Boats, your style is not appreciated by myself nor apparently by several others. You might want to tone down your KABA-directed negativism. Everyone makes mistakes, and KABA's principals are merely human (as much as they might like to deny it on occasion). There's no doubt that in terms of political power, the NRA is better at getting things done. Getting things done, though, tends to mean a steady erosion of 2A rights. Not the best claim to fame for a political entity with membership in the millions.
Shooter 2.5
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 476
Basically, what we had here is an anti-NRA website that allowed it's dislike to rule over their better judgement. I had e mailed over a year ago that the website
should concentrate on the hear and now instead of bringing up thirty year old grievances.
This is one of the most important times in our Second Amendment history. We could lose it all within a few months and we don't need a website that was already questioned if they were some sort of steath anti-gunners. I know more than a few people who spent more time on this than calling and writing their representatives.
We should all learn to work together with all the gun groups. Take more than a moment to report the news and keep the personal vendettas to ourselves.
should concentrate on the hear and now instead of bringing up thirty year old grievances.
This is one of the most important times in our Second Amendment history. We could lose it all within a few months and we don't need a website that was already questioned if they were some sort of steath anti-gunners. I know more than a few people who spent more time on this than calling and writing their representatives.
We should all learn to work together with all the gun groups. Take more than a moment to report the news and keep the personal vendettas to ourselves.
I bet I'm not the only one that see the hipocrisy in these grossly conflicting statements. I'll stand by the fact that the NRA has never demanded a retraction nor has Angel had to print one until yesterday. Most of what I've seen coming from KABA was in defense of themselves when people like the above start slandering them with these ludicrous accusations on a public board. KABA is attacked at every opportunity on this board for articles written by others. KABA publishes as much gun new as they can, both good and bad. Those who don't appreciate what they have done for the cause are plain ignorant.
Tyme and everyone else:
Look, if I didn't think it was OT and likely to be locked or something, I'd start a thread in L&P right now and apologize TO EVERYONE for the tone and content, but not the spirit, of my KABA related posts of the past week. Therefore, I'll just do so here.
Emotions have been running high during the Senate battle, and I have gotten caught up in that, as apparently my targets had. I have since had a very pleasant correspondence with Angel Shamaya and we have essentially buried the hatchet and agreed, that when we disagree, we will strive to so a good measure more politely.
I never take anything personally on the internet. That is undoubtedly part of my flaws regarding civility from time to time. It is far too easy for me, and apparently others, to view that they are savaging a "persona" rather than an actual person.
Over the years I have evolved as an internet poster. I have long since let go of my petty angsts over spelling, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, use of paragraphs, misuse of logic, and on and on. What I have never let slide is the widespread dissemination of obviously false material, especially when such negatively affects a cause I wholeheartedly believe in. That is the principle by which I have attacked KABA in both the distant and immediate past.
Search my posts: Other than a snippy battle with KMKeller over my heartless stereotypification of HK owners, (which I still think was funny, but could never characterize as "fair"), I have never seriously mixed it up with anyone here other than Tempest and Angel, both directly and indirectly. There is no mystery here on my part. The three of us are apparently very stubborn and highly opinionated people. I can actually respect that, even in my "internet enemies." For whatever reason, both have apparently been banned. I don't ever advocate that punishment be applied to anyone on any board other than to relentless trolls. I never want to see any place I frequent become an incestuous echo chamber like Democraticunderground is. However it is not my decision as to who should be banned. I would hope that were I banned, someone would speak up that they didn't like the move, even if they disliked me as a poster. If it were up to me, and again it is not, I wouldn't mind seeing Nicki and Angel restored to active status.
My position remains thus: Even if we all sometimes fail to act like adults, (and we nearly all do whether we think so or not--I have seen it out of almost everyone here with more than 500 posts) we should be emotionally mature enough to do at least one of two things when tempers have flared: Either we should let things go, or failing that, at least offer a grudging apology when the line is crossed. Angel Shamaya and I aren't there yet on the first aspect, but we are on the second.
If you've made it this far, thank you. If you have been personally offended by anything I have written since the S. 1805 battle began, you have my humble and sincere apology. I will redouble my efforts to not go off on the slightest provocation. After all, we still have two dates with the AWB coming up--next Tuesday's push in the Senate and then a media-wide pressuring of the House either over the Senate's passage of an AWB renewal or to bring it to a floor vote in the House before the fall recess.
Look, if I didn't think it was OT and likely to be locked or something, I'd start a thread in L&P right now and apologize TO EVERYONE for the tone and content, but not the spirit, of my KABA related posts of the past week. Therefore, I'll just do so here.
Emotions have been running high during the Senate battle, and I have gotten caught up in that, as apparently my targets had. I have since had a very pleasant correspondence with Angel Shamaya and we have essentially buried the hatchet and agreed, that when we disagree, we will strive to so a good measure more politely.
I never take anything personally on the internet. That is undoubtedly part of my flaws regarding civility from time to time. It is far too easy for me, and apparently others, to view that they are savaging a "persona" rather than an actual person.
Over the years I have evolved as an internet poster. I have long since let go of my petty angsts over spelling, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, use of paragraphs, misuse of logic, and on and on. What I have never let slide is the widespread dissemination of obviously false material, especially when such negatively affects a cause I wholeheartedly believe in. That is the principle by which I have attacked KABA in both the distant and immediate past.
Search my posts: Other than a snippy battle with KMKeller over my heartless stereotypification of HK owners, (which I still think was funny, but could never characterize as "fair"), I have never seriously mixed it up with anyone here other than Tempest and Angel, both directly and indirectly. There is no mystery here on my part. The three of us are apparently very stubborn and highly opinionated people. I can actually respect that, even in my "internet enemies." For whatever reason, both have apparently been banned. I don't ever advocate that punishment be applied to anyone on any board other than to relentless trolls. I never want to see any place I frequent become an incestuous echo chamber like Democraticunderground is. However it is not my decision as to who should be banned. I would hope that were I banned, someone would speak up that they didn't like the move, even if they disliked me as a poster. If it were up to me, and again it is not, I wouldn't mind seeing Nicki and Angel restored to active status.
My position remains thus: Even if we all sometimes fail to act like adults, (and we nearly all do whether we think so or not--I have seen it out of almost everyone here with more than 500 posts) we should be emotionally mature enough to do at least one of two things when tempers have flared: Either we should let things go, or failing that, at least offer a grudging apology when the line is crossed. Angel Shamaya and I aren't there yet on the first aspect, but we are on the second.
If you've made it this far, thank you. If you have been personally offended by anything I have written since the S. 1805 battle began, you have my humble and sincere apology. I will redouble my efforts to not go off on the slightest provocation. After all, we still have two dates with the AWB coming up--next Tuesday's push in the Senate and then a media-wide pressuring of the House either over the Senate's passage of an AWB renewal or to bring it to a floor vote in the House before the fall recess.
Shooter 2.5
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 476
KMKeller,
I wrote that we don't need a website that "was already questioned if they were some sort of steath anti-gunners". My hope is the webmaster cleans up their act and starts working together so we can improve our numbers among the gun owners sitting on the sidelines. I am not going to go into any comments as to why I feel this way. Anyone who has been active understands what I mean and the history behind it.
People make mistakes, they learn from it and we can move on. The business now is to pass 1805 without the anti amendments.
[Apologies for being a poor writer and not being clear. I hope everyone understands my meaning.]
I wrote that we don't need a website that "was already questioned if they were some sort of steath anti-gunners". My hope is the webmaster cleans up their act and starts working together so we can improve our numbers among the gun owners sitting on the sidelines. I am not going to go into any comments as to why I feel this way. Anyone who has been active understands what I mean and the history behind it.
People make mistakes, they learn from it and we can move on. The business now is to pass 1805 without the anti amendments.
[Apologies for being a poor writer and not being clear. I hope everyone understands my meaning.]
I posted a sincere query some months ago requesting input on how to get the groups working together. That post was in direct response to Shooter 2.5 stating that we really needed to get moving in that direction. My request went unanswered at that time, but it seems that the gist of my request is being brought out here at this time.
Frankly, it seems to me that the greatest casualties of these disagreements has been the frustration and eventual ouster of Angel and Nicki. Both were attacked and goaded until they had no alternative but to respond, and respond they did, and were banned for it.
You people want to fix the damage and bring the minds back to the table? Let Angel and Nicki come back and debate them fairly and without the venom that's been shown in the past. Unfortunately, that would involve convincing a couple of certain moderators, who conspired, threw tantrums and threatened people with certain actions if Angel wasn't banned outright to change their minds. Good luck.
Frankly, it seems to me that the greatest casualties of these disagreements has been the frustration and eventual ouster of Angel and Nicki. Both were attacked and goaded until they had no alternative but to respond, and respond they did, and were banned for it.
You people want to fix the damage and bring the minds back to the table? Let Angel and Nicki come back and debate them fairly and without the venom that's been shown in the past. Unfortunately, that would involve convincing a couple of certain moderators, who conspired, threw tantrums and threatened people with certain actions if Angel wasn't banned outright to change their minds. Good luck.
There are no victims here KMK. Angel got banned for a very public tiff with Jim March when the latter wasn't free to fully respond due to the confidential nature of the information he supposedly held. Nicki apparently got banned for her own comments. No one is "goaded" into uttering certain types of responses on their keyboards. In any event, I would welcome them both back, but manners are the ultimate two way street, and if there is an expectation that they be observed by one party, they of course then need to be observed by all.
That was part of it, that's true boats, but that's not the whole story. You don't know the whole of what transpired both in public and behind the scenes. I do, and it wasn't so simple as you may think.
I do agree with you though, that decorum must be observed by all parties and transgressions against that decorum punished evenly as well.
Larry Craig
Larry Craig is my senator. He is an honorable man, very pro-gun, conservative and is above all HIGHLY intelligent. He is also very experienced in political wrangling. If I can't be there to argue my own case, I am comfortable having him do it for me. You may not be, but that is your freedom of choice.
I go back to what I said on another thread... being "pro-gun" doesn't automatically make you smart, good or handsome. Being smart and good makes you smart and good. I am "pro-gun" but I don't agree with everything all "pro-gunners" do and say. Last time I checked Old Glory was flying outside of the courthouse (and my house), so we are all free to have different opinions. What the "antis" don't understand or acknowledge is that we have that freedom because of firearms and the men and women that use them in protection of our rights and freedoms.
So it looks like KABA overreacted. It happens sometimes when you are on top of something, covering it blow-by-blow. Why do you think they instituted instant replay calls in the NFL? They appear to still oppose the Craig/Frist amendment. The original misconception was corrected through OPEN AND PUBLIC DEBATE! YEEEHAAA! The First Amendment in action...
Now go run through a box of ammo and calm down.
Larry Craig is my senator. He is an honorable man, very pro-gun, conservative and is above all HIGHLY intelligent. He is also very experienced in political wrangling. If I can't be there to argue my own case, I am comfortable having him do it for me. You may not be, but that is your freedom of choice.
I go back to what I said on another thread... being "pro-gun" doesn't automatically make you smart, good or handsome. Being smart and good makes you smart and good. I am "pro-gun" but I don't agree with everything all "pro-gunners" do and say. Last time I checked Old Glory was flying outside of the courthouse (and my house), so we are all free to have different opinions. What the "antis" don't understand or acknowledge is that we have that freedom because of firearms and the men and women that use them in protection of our rights and freedoms.
So it looks like KABA overreacted. It happens sometimes when you are on top of something, covering it blow-by-blow. Why do you think they instituted instant replay calls in the NFL? They appear to still oppose the Craig/Frist amendment. The original misconception was corrected through OPEN AND PUBLIC DEBATE! YEEEHAAA! The First Amendment in action...
Now go run through a box of ammo and calm down.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
This thread reminds me of a limerick I'll sanitize a bit:
"There were two idjits from Khartoum,
Who spent the whole night in a room.
They argued all night,
As to who had the right:
To do what and with what, to whom."
Behind the scenes? Well, if discussion about who done what to whom and the issue of who started what is of importance, that's a regular event when some idjit goes beyond the pale.
"His face was flushed, but his broad shoulders couldn't save him."
The End
"There were two idjits from Khartoum,
Who spent the whole night in a room.
They argued all night,
As to who had the right:
To do what and with what, to whom."
Behind the scenes? Well, if discussion about who done what to whom and the issue of who started what is of importance, that's a regular event when some idjit goes beyond the pale.
"His face was flushed, but his broad shoulders couldn't save him."
The End
- Status
