Time to take the legislative offensive?

[DesertEagle613]

The anti's have managed to completely set the terms of the gun debate by proposing emotionally charged legislation and then dictating the language used to debate such legislation. We have fallen for it hook, line and sinker. We only play defense: we fight against their attacks, and every so often we manage to get some of their crud repealed, but they are coming out ahead.

We need to change the rules.

For us to have a chance of winning in the long run, we need to start playing their game. We need to propose similarly emotional legislation that promotes gun-rights, framed in a manner that will make opposition difficult, always keeping in mind that the principle of incrementalism can work both ways.

My suggestion for the first salvo: Find an anti-CCW state with a significant rape problem. Propose a shall-issue law for rape victims. Emphasize that this is only for those who WANT to carry. Paint it in all the feminist-empowerment language necessary. Etc.

Even if this particular idea doesn't fly, you get the general idea. We need to put the anti's on the defensive, and start slowly establishing the idea in the "agnostic" mainstream consciousness that self-defense is a legitimate use of firearms, in specific cases that are very difficult to oppose. Once that foundation is set, we move on to bigger game.

To repeat: incrementalism can work both ways.

Any takers?

 

[fjolnirsson]

I think CA would be an excellent test state for this idea.
Lots of rape.
Lots of criminals.
Lots of feminists.
Lots of foaming at the mouth antis who also claim to want to help victims of crime.

 

[La Pistoletta]

I agree completely. This is the game that has to be played.

When was the last time a flower stopped a bullet? Cheat against the cheaters.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Before you can play that game, you have to set the stage for success by putting in legislators who can help you. Right now during the primaries and general election is a good chance to set the stage for success.

At the national level, we can expand our lead in the House. Right now, even when we can get goodlegislation through the House, we lack the votes to get it through the Senate; but there are at least six Senators retiring this year and four of them are antis. All of them come from rural/southern states that are generally pro-gun.

If we pick up all of those seats, it will go a long way to making a legislative offensive possible. Add to that a few closely contested seats like Tom Daschle's and we could come out of the November elections looking very strong.

 

[DesertEagle613]

It wouldn't be a bad thing if the national situation got better, but I think it would be easier to work on the state level. We can focus our resources and really start with the grassroots. Besides, we've been focusing on individual legislators for a long time, and it hasn't got us too far. This approach is valuable, but needs to be supplemented with "issue activism." Just look at the anti's playbook and copy it, look how successful they have been

I like the idea of California. Maybe if someone ran this by Jim March, he'd know how to get it rolling?

 

[Standing Wolf]

That's a good idea, although it's been time for a long, long time. To the extent that we react to the leftist extremists, we lose. To the extent that we act, the nation's civil rights come out ahead.