Can we have a frank discussion here?

[dustymedic]

This forum may be slowing down, but it is High volume 10 lane Interstate Highway compared to the BFA forums. No new posts yet for August, some forum sections have not had new posts this calendar year....

[Chuck]

One of the things we coords tell each other is that we have a good forum, if nothing else.

I'm going to try to have a decent response to everybody's posts this weekend
I have one question for most of you: What can we do to win you back?

[JediSkipdogg]

I have one question for most of you: What can we do to win you back?

My thoughts are communication and give the membership a benefit.

Communication comes in many forms. E-mail blasts, the website, and the forums. I believe most major events that we do behind the scenes we need to communicate about and post in all three sections. Right now many times we simply do an email blast and ignore the other two.

We also need to give the membership a benefit. This could be discounts to our events (fun n gun, picnic, speakers, etc.) Right now it is simply give us money and we will give you the same benefit as non-members.

Those are my two ideas.

[Brian D.]

I haven't brought this up in a long time: How about doing away with that forum rule that requires all local meet and greets to be pre-approved by "management" before posting them on here? A form has to be filled out with several questions answered. And my experience was that there wasn't always a timely response.

For crying out loud, most people who want to throw a shindig have been members here for years. Do you really think such folks are going to organize an event that trashes OFCC's vaunted reputation? Heck, a little bad press is better than (nearly) no press at all.

That pre-approval rule has always struck me as pedantic and untrusting of grown men and women.

[Ole_grizzly]

Thank you chuck for creating this topic, it's been a very interesting read.

Tweed Ring's passing I think has had a large affect on board participation in my opinion. I didn't care for what he said half the time, but boy did I follow his threads and appreciated all the news articles he posted. I also learned so much from him, and he's hard to replace.

I have been a patron member because the information I have learned from all the members has been so valuable, that I am thankful for all the current and past efforts and will continue to support that by remaining a member. I also belong to honor the contributions of this organization that I am now the beneficiary of.

That being said, my interest has dwindled. I work in the medical profession, traveling mainly to large cities and work at academic medical centers. In other words, I am around educated liberals almost exclusively, and have to keep my views on firearm ownership, healthcare, etc. mainly private. I do listen to what they say though, and I'm guessing these are views that many new to firearm ownership come in thinking after they graduate from college.

1. The all or nothing attitude of 2nd amendment supporters is so extreme, many younger people can't ramp up to the level of ferocity by those that are loudest.

2. The advocation against training requirements and background checks, to those that haven't taken the time to learn anything below surface level, seems crazy. (I think the gun rights community would do itself many favors by advocating for thorough, ongoing training, but people have their hearts so hardened on what they believe is the correct approach, I.e. Constitutional carry, that their immediate dismassal and insult of opposing or uneducated viewpoints immediately turns that type of person off forever. Just remember, you had to think it through the first time too.)

As far as my own personal issues with ofcc that has me now having a dual membership with BFA, are as follows.

1. Legislative priorities, such as removing notification requirements, seem superfluous, when if you know the law, follow it, you won't have a problem. As I stated in a previous thread in the Ohio politics section, the wars you went through many years ago with police departments not following the laws are still raw wounds, that newer members like me don't share. Would I like notification removed? Sure, it's dumb and unnecessary. However, if you joined forces with BFA to sponsor teachers receiving training to possibly provide protection and response to a school shooting think about what we could do together. This is why I joined BFA, because having two kids less than 5, I worry greatly about their safety at school. Arming and training teachers could make a real world difference rather than spending time and money repealing a dumb law that is easily avoided.

2.Another legislative priority that I think would do our organization some good is to create an education campaign to show both legislators and the public that the way the criminal justice system plea bargains actual violent felons causes an enormous amount of the violence that all firearm owners are lumped into by the liberal media. In other words, instead of fighting for incremental rights like removing notification rights, what if we pushed for legislation that removed plea bargains for repeat violent offenders? Longer mandatory minimum sentences for those committing violent crimes? Legitimate punishments for straw purchasers? I'd go to the statehouse for that, and would actually be an issue people on many sides could unite around.

3. Lastly, I know someone in a high position at the Plain dealer/cleveland.com. I know a few years ago the immature, arrogant, go to hell response the PD got when he reached out for comment from ofcc at my recommendation caused them to never consider our viewpoint again, as they continued to further rail against any legislation, viewpoints, or anything a gun rights group supposedly stands for. Notice any gun article now always includes a quote from Jim Irvine. The past is the past, it's time to grow awareness, not hold onto old grudges. Chuck, it would probably be beneficial to try to reopen a line of communication with the editorial board so that the next time they write an article proclaiming blood in the streets, perhaps they'd put an opposing viewpoint in.

I do think ofcc is a great organization, I will continue to be a member as long as it's around, and I know that no organization will ever match up with any one person's political or personal views. I think the best thing ofcc could do is drop grudges, positions, and assumptions from 10 years ago and reinvent themselves focused on more relevant issues today.

[keepitsimple]

My thoughts are communication and give the membership a benefit.

Communication comes in many forms. E-mail blasts, the website, and the forums. I believe most major events that we do behind the scenes we need to communicate about and post in all three sections. Right now many times we simply do an email blast and ignore the other two.

We also need to give the membership a benefit. This could be discounts to our events (fun n gun, picnic, speakers, etc.) Right now it is simply give us money and we will give you the same benefit as non-members.

These are 2 really good ideas. I only recently became a member but have been visiting/using the forums for about 2 years (lurking even longer than that). Aside from finding a post, a sticky, or a reply about events, I never knew they were occurring. Particularly the gun shows and such as I always seem to be behind the ball on when/where they occur. For instance, before yesterday I didn't know about the Fun n Gun event(s) at all. There are many more people registered to the forum than there are organization members, so that's probably where the bulk of the communications should be aimed if exposure is the goal.

Don't get me wrong, the benefit of the collective knowledge here and the resources, particularly in the legal arena, and the support that is provided to the sum total of all Ohio CHLs is a big benefit of the organization, but there's no incentive to actually join the organization when access to the knowledge base/forums is free. It's very easy for a forumite to be able to say, "The forums are great and informative and I can get a good majority of the help and advice that I need from them without spending anything or volunteering, what's the benefit of joining? They'll be writing state reps. and parading in front of the state house and pushing for legislative change whether I donate or not." The organization becomes mostly about the forums, at which point you're competing with the convenience of Reddit, which encompasses a multitude of sub-forums for all interests, guns and not, in one place. I'm not sure what if anything could be offered, but the forum banners, patron coin, and free "no gunz no money" cards don't seem to be enough. The attorney directory is great, but when a lot of Concealed Carry insurance companies out there already offer legal services even that loses appeal.

I eventually purchased a membership out of guilt because I realized I had used the forums so much and benefited from the collective efforts for legislative action/change that I couldn't morally or ethically continue freeloading. But not everyone has as finely tuned moral compass such as that of myself.

[schmieg]

I haven't brought this up in a long time: How about doing away with that forum rule that requires all local meet and greets to be pre-approved by "management" before posting them on here? A form has to be filled out with several questions answered. And my experience was that there wasn't always a timely response.

For crying out loud, most people who want to throw a shindig have been members here for years. Do you really think such folks are going to organize an event that trashes OFCC's vaunted reputation? Heck, a little bad press is better than (nearly) no press at all.

That pre-approval rule has always struck me as pedantic and untrusting of grown men and women.

That rule originally arose because of events that were being advertised on the forum that OFCC did not want to even closely be associated with. Somehow, it got carried over to include Meet 'n" Greets and other local things that originally weren't intended or considered in making the rule. I will add my voice to yours at least for the Meet 'n" Greets.

[schmieg]

1. The all or nothing attitude of 2nd amendment supporters is so extreme, many younger people can't ramp up to the level of ferocity by those that are loudest.

Not everyone here is an all or nothing type, but you are correct that that type seems to be the most vocal at times. We have to live in the real world and absolutism generally doesn't work there and accomplishes even less.

2. The advocation against training requirements and background checks, to those that haven't taken the time to learn anything below surface level, seems crazy. (I think the gun rights community would do itself many favors by advocating for thorough, ongoing training, but people have their hearts so hardened on what they believe is the correct approach, I.e. Constitutional carry, that their immediate dismassal and insult of opposing or uneducated viewpoints immediately turns that type of person off forever. Just remember, you had to think it through the first time too.)

Most of us do advocate training. What we have a problem with is mandated training which (a) often isn't relevant to the issues faced by self defense carriers and (b) is often legislated with the intent of making obtaining or renewing a license inordinately expensive and difficult.

Constitutional carry is a different beast entirely. Vermont has had it for years and has not yet arisen as a hotbed of gun violence. The real legal issue in my opinion is that we have devolved to a situation where we have to get a license to exercise a Constitutional right. The situation is better here in Ohio than in many places (despite what some here may say), but there is a real question there as to what "infringed" means and what constitutes infringement. Again, absolutism doesn't play well in the real world.

As far as my own personal issues with ofcc that has me now having a dual membership with BFA, are as follows.

1. Legislative priorities, such as removing notification requirements, seem superfluous, when if you know the law, follow it, you won't have a problem. As I stated in a previous thread in the Ohio politics section, the wars you went through many years ago with police departments not following the laws are still raw wounds, that newer members like me don't share. Would I like notification removed? Sure, it's dumb and unnecessary. However, if you joined forces with BFA to sponsor teachers receiving training to possibly provide protection and response to a school shooting think about what we could do together. This is why I joined BFA, because having two kids less than 5, I worry greatly about their safety at school. Arming and training teachers could make a real world difference rather than spending time and money repealing a dumb law that is easily avoided.

The wars are still ongoing and notification is still used by some officers to harass and intimidate. Many officers will still insist that you notify even when you are not armed and will push the envelope. Whether this is to harass or see if they can push you into consenting for a search or other waivers, it still is wrong. Almost no one here has a problem with informing the officer that you are armed if asked, only that notification be the first thing out of your mouth with the requirement of interrupting the officer to notify. Many of the failure to notify cases that have gone to trial over minor delays have been thrown out, but how willing are you to pay $5,000 or more for a defense in a criminal trial because an officer thought that letting him say, "Good morning, sir," before notifying is not prompt enough.

Again, most of us here applaud BFA's school training program and support its efforts to have armed security of one type or another in the schools. Working with BFA though is a two way street and I won't say anything more about that here.

2.Another legislative priority that I think would do our organization some good is to create an education campaign to show both legislators and the public that the way the criminal justice system plea bargains actual violent felons causes an enormous amount of the violence that all firearm owners are lumped into by the liberal media. In other words, instead of fighting for incremental rights like removing notification rights, what if we pushed for legislation that removed plea bargains for repeat violent offenders? Longer mandatory minimum sentences for those committing violent crimes? Legitimate punishments for straw purchasers? I'd go to the statehouse for that, and would actually be an issue people on many sides could unite around.

Education campaigns cost money and money is part of the reason for this thread. The legislature recently did revamp a lot of the criminal justice system, but that is not completely in the legislature's purview. The courts have a lot to say in how that works and if the legislature goes too far over into the courts' domain, the Ohio Supreme Court has a history of stomping on them quickly. Prosecutors would also react badly to eliminating plea bargains as they (a) often overcharge to get a plea deal to what they think the offense really is and (b) sometimes find part way into a case that they can't really prove what they thought they could prove at the start of a case. Eliminating plea bargains would also result in clogging court dockets far beyond what they already face as defendants would lose nothing by going to trial. These are all issues beyond OFCC's purpose and expertise.

3. Lastly, I know someone in a high position at the Plain dealer/cleveland.com. I know a few years ago the immature, arrogant, go to hell response the PD got when he reached out for comment from ofcc at my recommendation caused them to never consider our viewpoint again, as they continued to further rail against any legislation, viewpoints, or anything a gun rights group supposedly stands for. Notice any gun article now always includes a quote from Jim Irvine. The past is the past, it's time to grow awareness, not hold onto old grudges. Chuck, it would probably be beneficial to try to reopen a line of communication with the editorial board so that the next time they write an article proclaiming blood in the streets, perhaps they'd put an opposing viewpoint in.

I am unaware of any coordinator or director giving the press such a response. We generally want to provide the press with our position on various issues and events and my personal experience has been that the press is often arrogant and immature and often intentionally or recklessly misrepresents what we say.

I do think ofcc is a great organization, I will continue to be a member as long as it's around, and I know that no organization will ever match up with any one person's political or personal views. I think the best thing ofcc could do is drop grudges, positions, and assumptions from 10 years ago and reinvent themselves focused on more relevant issues today.

Most of the newer coordinators and directors aren't holding grudges, positions and assumptions from ten years ago, but there are many ongoing issues of which you are not aware. However, I think your post is well thought out and states things that everyone involved here must keep in mind.

[BEAR!]

1. The all or nothing attitude of 2nd amendment supporters is so extreme, many younger people can't ramp up to the level of ferocity by those that are loudest.

Ole Grizzly, What solution do you have that the moderators could do through the TOS or deletion?

I ask because I am one of the "all or nothing supporters of the 2nd amendment", but I don't consider myself fierce or loud.

[WestonDon]

Thank you chuck for creating this topic, it's been a very interesting read.

Tweed Ring's passing I think has had a large affect on board participation in my opinion. I didn't care for what he said half the time, but boy did I follow his threads and appreciated all the news articles he posted. I also learned so much from him, and he's hard to replace.

I have been a patron member because the information I have learned from all the members has been so valuable, that I am thankful for all the current and past efforts and will continue to support that by remaining a member. I also belong to honor the contributions of this organization that I am now the beneficiary of.

That being said, my interest has dwindled. I work in the medical profession, traveling mainly to large cities and work at academic medical centers. In other words, I am around educated liberals almost exclusively, and have to keep my views on firearm ownership, healthcare, etc. mainly private. I do listen to what they say though, and I'm guessing these are views that many new to firearm ownership come in thinking after they graduate from college.

1. The all or nothing attitude of 2nd amendment supporters is so extreme, many younger people can't ramp up to the level of ferocity by those that are loudest.

I guess I'm one of those with an extreme attitude. I wasn't always this way. I got like this by paying attention to the anti gun people who exhibit exactly the same attitude. Throughout my adult life they have presented one "common sense" proposal after another beginning with GCA '68 and it is never enough. Past efforts at "reasonable concessions" have only resulted in further erosion of 2A rights. Enough. I have concluded that the anti crowd will never be satisfied until even the memory of citizen ownership of firearms is eliminated. My experience has been that they are just as hard headed as I am.

2. The advocation against training requirements and background checks, to those that haven't taken the time to learn anything below surface level, seems crazy. (I think the gun rights community would do itself many favors by advocating for thorough, ongoing training, but people have their hearts so hardened on what they believe is the correct approach, I.e. Constitutional carry, that their immediate dismassal and insult of opposing or uneducated viewpoints immediately turns that type of person off forever. Just remember, you had to think it through the first time too.)

I don't know of anyone who is against training, I am certainly not. My problem with training requirements is the requirements part. I would, however, be willing to entertain the notion of a compromise on the subject of training. My compromise would be to impose an equal amount of training on the right to vote as to RKBA. I'd say both are of equal importance and require the same level of responsibility. I also expect the arguments both pro and con for either would be similar. Anybody think the other side would even consider that?

We already have background checks to buy guns from a FFL and it's usually only a minor inconvenience. It accomplishes nothing as far as making the world a safer, kinder, gentler place. Which is why the push is on for so called universal background checks. Of course background checks require registration to be effective. Which will inevitably lead to confiscation.

I understand your assertion about alienating newcomers and fence sitters but one can grab one's ankles and say "thank you sir may I have another" just so much.

As far as my own personal issues with ofcc that has me now having a dual membership with BFA, are as follows.

1. Legislative priorities, such as removing notification requirements, seem superfluous, when if you know the law, follow it, you won't have a problem. As I stated in a previous thread in the Ohio politics section, the wars you went through many years ago with police departments not following the laws are still raw wounds, that newer members like me don't share. Would I like notification removed? Sure, it's dumb and unnecessary. However, if you joined forces with BFA to sponsor teachers receiving training to possibly provide protection and response to a school shooting think about what we could do together. This is why I joined BFA, because having two kids less than 5, I worry greatly about their safety at school. Arming and training teachers could make a real world difference rather than spending time and money repealing a dumb law that is easily avoided.

2.Another legislative priority that I think would do our organization some good is to create an education campaign to show both legislators and the public that the way the criminal justice system plea bargains actual violent felons causes an enormous amount of the violence that all firearm owners are lumped into by the liberal media. In other words, instead of fighting for incremental rights like removing notification rights, what if we pushed for legislation that removed plea bargains for repeat violent offenders? Longer mandatory minimum sentences for those committing violent crimes? Legitimate punishments for straw purchasers? I'd go to the statehouse for that, and would actually be an issue people on many sides could unite around.

3. Lastly, I know someone in a high position at the Plain dealer/cleveland.com. I know a few years ago the immature, arrogant, go to hell response the PD got when he reached out for comment from ofcc at my recommendation caused them to never consider our viewpoint again, as they continued to further rail against any legislation, viewpoints, or anything a gun rights group supposedly stands for. Notice any gun article now always includes a quote from Jim Irvine. The past is the past, it's time to grow awareness, not hold onto old grudges. Chuck, it would probably be beneficial to try to reopen a line of communication with the editorial board so that the next time they write an article proclaiming blood in the streets, perhaps they'd put an opposing viewpoint in.

I do think ofcc is a great organization, I will continue to be a member as long as it's around, and I know that no organization will ever match up with any one person's political or personal views. I think the best thing ofcc could do is drop grudges, positions, and assumptions from 10 years ago and reinvent themselves focused on more relevant issues today.

[dustymedic]

One of the things we coords tell each other is that we have a good forum, if nothing else.

That it is Chuck. I've belonged to several public safety related forums down thru the years (was even an admin at one). In my brief time here, There seems to be mostly adults on this forum, with very little "Inmates running the asylum"...

[MyWifeSaidYes]

... There seems to be mostly adults on this forum, with very little "Inmates running the asylum"...

I wouldn't go that far.

[Ole_grizzly]

1. The all or nothing attitude of 2nd amendment supporters is so extreme, many younger people can't ramp up to the level of ferocity by those that are loudest.

Ole Grizzly, What solution do you have that the moderators could do through the TOS or deletion?

I ask because I am one of the "all or nothing supporters of the 2nd amendment", but I don't consider myself fierce or loud.

One type of response I have seen since I've been a member of someone new to the forum says something that has already been hashed out before, whether months or years earlier, often results in a harshly worded response.

An example that comes to mind was if someone asks whether they should call a business to see if they're posted. If you are new to concealed carry, and grew up in a liberal household where Time and Newsweek were considered normal balanced publications, you would have no idea about the ideological war being fought on both sides of cpz's. If mods see people piling on, I do not recommend censoring or shutting down conversation, but instead post something acknowledging the legitimacy of the question and answering politely and factually why that would be a terrible idea. Then maybe pm the person inviting them to a meet n greet or fun n gun.

Basically once you make up your mind so firmly on something that you are unwilling to listen to another point of view, or take questions as attacks, or answer an innocent question with years of venom from prior experiences, you have become part of the problem rather than the solution. The mods could balance things out, by addressing questions politely and pm'ing both the OP and the aggressive posters to work the problem from both sides.

Over the past few years, we'd get a new poster, who asks a few questions, gets flamed once and you don't see that person again. I think as mods there needs to be better understanding of the "need to be heard" mentality of millennials, rather than letting a seemingly dumb question go unanswered. Also potentially a one time reminder email is sent to new users who haven't posted for a few months.

There are no easy answers, but if someone is new to an argument, ethos, or lifestyle, and they actually ask about it, I think responses could be a lot more polite.

[Chuck]

One type of response I have seen since I've been a member of someone new to the forum says something that has already been hashed out before, whether months or years earlier, often results in a harshly worded response.

An example that comes to mind was if someone asks whether they should call a business to see if they're posted. If you are new to concealed carry, and grew up in a liberal household where Time and Newsweek were considered normal balanced publications, you would have no idea about the ideological war being fought on both sides of cpz's. If mods see people piling on, I do not recommend censoring or shutting down conversation, but instead post something acknowledging the legitimacy of the question and answering politely and factually why that would be a terrible idea. Then maybe pm the person inviting them to a meet n greet or fun n gun.

Basically once you make up your mind so firmly on something that you are unwilling to listen to another point of view, or take questions as attacks, or answer an innocent question with years of venom from prior experiences, you have become part of the problem rather than the solution. The mods could balance things out, by addressing questions politely and pm'ing both the OP and the aggressive posters to work the problem from both sides.

Over the past few years, we'd get a new poster, who asks a few questions, gets flamed once and you don't see that person again. I think as mods there needs to be better understanding of the "need to be heard" mentality of millennials, rather than letting a seemingly dumb question go unanswered. Also potentially a one time reminder email is sent to new users who haven't posted for a few months.

There are no easy answers, but if someone is new to an argument, ethos, or lifestyle, and they actually ask about it, I think responses could be a lot more polite.

Do you see this STILL going on?
I'll admit some years back it happened quite a bit, but I thought that sort of thing had mostly gone away by now.
You are correct in that it WAS a problem, one that was in my "fixed" column
If you see it happening again, please either report it or send me a PM about it

[Chuck]

That's true. Several forums that I was very active on 3-5 years ago I seldom visit anymore. I think part of it is the migration from computers to smart phones. It's very hard for me to read online forums on my phone...

Site admin (Jeff?) may want to consider installing the Tapatalk plugin for phpBB. Makes posting and reading forums from smartphones much easier.


https://www.tapatalk.com/download_phpbb.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I can pass this along, but as I'm sure many of you are aware, things tend to backlog up around Jeff, and I can't do a darn thing about it