VPC... Sue them? Why not?

[Ironbarr]

For those who haven't read the thread "The VPC has stolen a picture of Oleg" http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42691 please do.

Now - as to the "Why not" in my title... there appears no reason not to do so, but suits require money, among other things. But here's an idea:

One of the "other things" is organization - which we, as offended as we are, are not organized. But, I wonder, are we CLASS ACTION material? Or if we, as a group, were to join with other "groups" of like mind, would we then be class action material?

One of the hoped for TFL goals when it endorsed THR (I believe) is that THR would grow in its objectives and become, as a group, Pro-Active in the fight for BOR - particularly 2nd Amendment rights - freedom. This requires organization.

We know there is now, and will be until it is stopped, a barrage of anti efforts, legal and otherwise in government hoppers at every level awaiting approval. We also know that laws already passed, but not yet affecting most of us can be thrust at us by other administrations - and as early as a year or two from now.

I pose to THR-ers: Can we organize? Will we??

Or will we continue to preach to the choir - that being ourselves?

Replies and ideas appreciated.

-Andy

 

[Mark Tyson]

I think the most Oleg could get them for is copyright infringement. To sue them you have to prove damages, denial of civil rights, that sort of thing. I doubt they're making money off of the movie, and they're non-profit anyway. If there had been a personal attack against Oleg of some sort defaming him, that would be different.

 

[Combat-wombat]

I saw several other gun advertisements in their flash movie. I also saw a Beretta CX-4 Storm flashed on the screen. The CX-4 is a unique gun, and there is no way to make it look like a generic design. I'm pretty sure Beretta did not approve that.

And seriously, what the hell is an "assault weapon" nowadays??? I always thought as the CX-4 as being a politically correct civilian rifle!

 

[Drjones]

If such a suit were to come to fruition, I would donate money and time to such an endeavour.

 

[Bigjake]

start a fund and i'll do my best to help out

 

[Standing Wolf]

I'll chip in.

 

[Monkeyleg]

If Oleg just did the usual "copyright 2003" statement next to his images, the best he'll get is a usual and customary value for the use of those images.

On the other hand, if he filed the images with the Copyright Office, then he can also sue for punitive damages. Given the contrary purposes of the use of his images, that damage amount could be significant.

Sort of like suing Larry Flynt for using copyrighted images of the Pope in porno movies.

Good luck, Oleg! If you need help, just ask.

 

[DigitalWarrior]

I thought that Oleg had betrayed the gun rights cause and turned anti by giving the pictures to the VPC.

As such I canceled the $15,000 check I was going to send him. I still don't trust him (he is a dirty-anti for selling out).

Does that mean that the VPC is defaming him and causing him financial damages?

 

[WvaBill]

I have often wondered about where do we learn about the defensive uses of firearms by citizens.
Gun publications.

1. If you know of or hear of an incident locally get the facts.

2. Contact reporters with the facts.

3. Submit your own articles with proper sourcing w/o asking for reimbursement.

4. Write op-ed peices or letters to the editor about how citizens stop crimes. Not reduction of crime rates. It is great to have the stats behind your argument, but it can't beat anecdotal heartsring material. Especially when you don't massage stats to fit your world view. Does the number 43 jingle any bells?

5. Make it timely. Don't put it off. Contact as many as you can to submit their own reporting of events. If one letter to the editor is a crank, fifty might cause an editor (LA and NY Times excluded) take note and assign someone to begin looking.

6. Treat antis with respect. PETA come off as eco-insane, but harmless because of the image they portray--not the eco-terrorists many are. Even have discussions with those who agree so that if any opportunity for a public forum comes up, there will be a credible debator available.

No, its not glamorous, flashy, or high profile. It won't change the minds of anti's. It can, at a grass roots level, demonstrate the value of an armed citizenry through demostrated incidents. The more the undecided lean our way, the more we can expect from the elected. I believe it is a pipedream to think that any politician is going to "come to his senses" because NRA, SAS, or any other group turned the tide in an election. They will pay attention to focus groups, scientific polling which the "undecided" will comprise the majority.

Why did Gore lose TN, WV, and AR in 2000? To deny that his stand on guns was not a factor would, IMHO, be wrong. What lesson have the Democratic candidates, announced or other, taken from 2000.

Organize in your area, on BBs, and help the Word get out to undecided. The recent Links to local newspaper polls are also good. Of course they are unscientific in the numbers, but the lopsidedness can show the depth of commitment.

Above all, be sure of the facts and never use them loosely. You only have one chance to lose your credibility, but will always have the need to demonstrate it.



Sorry for the rambling around but that is the longest thing I have written since 1993.

 

[Colt46]

With our total membership we should have enough...

talent, money, time, dedication and knowlege to do something. Count me in!

 

[Drjones]

The runners are getting into place, but there's no one to coach them and pull the trigger on the starting gun....

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

 

[Ironbarr]

I see we've made Page Two...

Thanks, Drjones, for bringing it back to Page One. I suppose the California recall is the hot topic of the day.

I thank the nine of you who replied, and also thank four who have expressed support for a potential organization effort.

So - now that we have a quorum - shall we toss around some ideas about what, where, when, why, and how this effort will gel.

First, we have no idea as to whether Oleg would want THR itself to be involved in any pro-active effort; there may be reasons to remain as is.

But, up front, I'd suggest formulating a mission statement on which a framework may be built - perhaps along the lines of pursuing a new understanding of, and respect for the entire BOR as originally written, and to play an overt, positive role in protecting the inalienable right of "WE the People" to keep and bear arms personally.

What say you?

-Andy