Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by bignflnut »

If you have a gun — constitutionally protected private property — and you aren’t doing anything inherently wrong, that should never be a crime. There is no victim. No one is harmed. No actual crime is committed. The idea that you need a wallet card to be somewhere you have a legal right to be is preposterous.

Too many gun owners, including some leaders of the gun-rights movement, sincere but totally misinformed and misdirected, are salivating for our permit-carrying president elect to issue some sort of national carry plan.
It cannot, must not, better not be a national permit in any way shape or form.

The best solution

The best plan to resolve the travesty of national gun-rights denial Americans have suffered under for generations — worse than racism — is to repeal the restrictions that deny your rights. You don’t need no stinkin’ permits to be black and we don’t need no stinkin’ permits to be peacefully in possession of property.

Repeal restrictions on the right to bear arms.

The next logical step would be to arrest and charge officials who under color of law deny a peaceful person’s civil right to possess arms. Denial of rights is a federal felony under 18 USC §241 et seq. You can’t just deny a person’s constitutional, civil and human rights because you don’t like those rights. That’s got a name. It’s gunism, like racism. This law 18-241 and the ones that follow it were written to prevent haters from denying blacks their rights. Everyone has fundamental rights that need the same protection.
Hallelujah!
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by JustaShooter »

For perspective, *none* of the bills that have been submitted to date would establish a national permit in any way shape or form, nor do they contain any restrictions or requirements on those that carry under this act (other than carrying valid photo ID and valid license or permit, if required by their state of residence). They simply require any state that issues a license or permit to carry (or does not require a license or permit), to honor any license or permit issued by any state (and to recognize the right to carry of a resident of a state that does not require a license or permit). In the case of the "Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017", it also provides remedies for anyone denied that right by any state.

The text of the "Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017" that will be submitted when the new congress convenes can be found here.

Yes, you still have to abide by the laws of the state you are in, but that is no different than today, so you still have to do your due diligence and research the laws before you travel, just like you do today.

Is it ideal? No, the ideal would be true constitutional carry in all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, and removal of restrictions on that right (like statutory CPZs) by various levels of government. But in the mean time, as we work toward that goal, this act is a reasonable step to preventing some of the tragedies we've seen in the news and to allow those with licenses or permits (and those not required to have licenses or permits) to legally travel armed through states that they cannot today, even if following the guidelines of FOPA.

Frankly, I'm not sure what the author of this article thinks is wrong with this step, except that it doesn't achieve everything he wants in one fell swoop so he has set up a straw man of "National Permit" to knock down. It appears he is taking an "all or nothing" approach, and would like the Federal Government to impose constitutional carry on all 50 states. Considering how difficult it is to achieve that on a state level, I'm not sure why he believes it would be possible at a national scale today. So, what would he rather have? This act, which appears to have a chance at being passed and signed into law, or the current status quo?
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
Javelin Man
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 7481
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Sandusky County

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by Javelin Man »

Baby steps are fine, I think we can take larger jumps while the atmosphere permits it. This "National Constitutional Carry" movement is a leap off a cliff with probably predictable results.
Famous last words: "I just drank What?!-Socrates

bruh bruh is slang for "complete and total moron" -sodbuster95

The following is a list of children's books that didn't quite make it to the printing press...
1. What Is That Dog Doing to That Other Dog?
2. Daddy Drinks Because You Cry
3. You Were An Accident
4. Bi-Curious George
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by Mr. Glock »

It feels a bit like "Santa, can you bring me a pony for Christmas?"
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by bignflnut »

Let me see if I've got this straight.
The vaunted GOP is stronger than it's been in a long time and we gun owners are so accustomed to being squatted on by politicians that the best we can ask for is unlocking CPZ daycares in Ohio, campus carry in Kansas, a nickel here and a dime plus a penny there...? Look at these "2016 wins"
Are we very pleased with ourselves about all of this? It's like saving a few dozen lives when thousands continue to be taken on a daily basis (another issue for another single issue group...)

When do we go "whole hog"?
Exactly when is the opportunity going to be better? Show me the point on the chart when we can make our trench run, Masters McConnell & Ryan?

When shall we not be satisfied with the table scraps?
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
Morne
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 10631
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: Wayne County

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by Morne »

Didn't read the OP (ignore list), but have some general thoughts:

As already stated, no one is talking about a federal "license". We all agree that such a thing is a bad idea - what the feds can give they can take away. Our goal has always been, and continues to be, "constitutional carry" like Vermont or Alaska.

The "national carry movement" is all about reciprocity. See, there's this pesky "full faith and credit" clause in the constitution. One could argue that a state recognizing my driver's license but not my concealed carry license is an example of cherry picking what "full faith and credit" means.

Whether or not the individual states need to, or even should, license concealed carry is a separate topic. It's also harder to address. Here in Ohio the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled (rightly or wrongly, I say the latter) that we do NOT have a right to concealed carry. Thus, we have gone the licensure route in the legislature since the judiciary didn't give us the desired result.

But however "things ought to be" there is the "way things are". Right now, most states still license concealed carry. My license should be given full faith and credit when temporarily visiting other states (engaging in interstate commerce). The proposed "national carry" bills have to do with forcing the states to fulfill their constitutionally demanded role of "full faith and credit" by recognizing other state's carry licenses. That is an appropriate role for the federal government to work in.

If you want true permitless carry across all 50 states I am right with you as a goal. But just as it took decades for the anti-gun forces to infringe on our 2A rights (starting just after the Civil War, I might add) it will take decades for us to get them all back. The trouble with Hail Mary passes is, "A Hail Mary pass was intercepted on 19% of all attempts, which is nearly 8 times more frequent than a Hail Mary touchdown."
Hail Mary improbability
In fact, reading the above link shows that the only range category where a Hail Mary has ALMOST an equal chance of a Touchdown to an Interception is in the shortest range (30-39 yards). This is analogous to our own struggle - the closer we can get to the goal the more likely a big heave will be successful. Incrementalism is like football - a game of inches.

Lastly, I will reiterate what I've said elsewhere. Most politicians are NEITHER pro-gun NOR anti-gun. They have other agenda items occupying higher priorities for them than guns. Thus, while they might vote one way or the other WHEN THE VOTE GETS CALLED they generally want to avoid the issue altogether. When they can't avoid the issue they try to find some uncontroversial "compromise" that keeps the most people from hating them. By making your position "give me everything or give me nothing" you have just set-up Amazon Echo for biennial shipments of "nothing". Why? Because it is easier to totally depress the small percentage of people who demand "everything" than the huge percentage of people who are comfortable with incremental change.

Do what you will. Call your congresscritter to support or oppose whatever bill you like. But there is NO BILL that creates a "national carry permit" to oppose. If you oppose the federal government telling states to do their constitutionally mandated job of giving "full faith and credit" then I guess you don't love the constitution as much as you think. :idea:
Thus spoke Zarathustra.

Footsoldier in the Conservative Insurrection of the GOP.

Remember, only you can prevent big government!
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by JustaShooter »

bignflnut wrote:Let me see if I've got this straight.
The vaunted GOP is stronger than it's been in a long time and we gun owners are so accustomed to being squatted on by politicians that the best we can ask for is unlocking CPZ daycares in Ohio, campus carry in Kansas, a nickel here and a dime plus a penny there...? Look at these "2016 wins"
Are we very pleased with ourselves about all of this? It's like saving a few dozen lives when thousands continue to be taken on a daily basis (another issue for another single issue group...)

When do we go "whole hog"?
Exactly when is the opportunity going to be better? Show me the point on the chart when we can make our trench run, Masters McConnell & Ryan?

When shall we not be satisfied with the table scraps?
I can't speak to any state other than Ohio, and of course, to a lesser degree, the national picture.

Let's start with the national picture - I don't know how much you know about how the US Congress, specifically, the US Senate, works but I assume that you know that for all the hype about how strong the GOP is today, the GOP holds 52 seats in the US Senate. That is 8 short of the 60 votes needed for cloture - to end debate and actually vote on a bill. Democrats have vowed to use the filibuster to prevent cloture to stop progress on pro-gun bills, and have promised to continue to use high-profile tactics like the sit-in to build public sentiment against them (possible since they mis-characterize the nature and likely effects of such bills). I just don't see how to get more than incremental improvements in such an environment, and even that will require recruiting a minimum of 8 Senators to jump party lines and allow cloture.

As to Ohio, what can I say - we pro-gun Ohioans just don't hold enough sway in the OGA. I believe there are several reasons for this, but the three biggest are that:

First, we are fragmented. Just look at how many separate pro-gun organizations we have here in Ohio: OFCC, BFA, Ohio Carry, Ohio Gun Owners, etc. If we were to somehow present a unified voice that encompasses the majority, if not the entirety, of Ohio gun owners, I think we could get a lot more done. But, I think that is a pipe dream given the history and personalities involved. *But*, and this is YUGE, when it comes to so-called constitutional carry (the bills so far proposed are more accurately called "unlicensed carry" - if anyone is interested in the distinction, let me know), we don't even have unity among OFCC members, much less all Ohio gun owners on the subject. How do you present a unified voice in the OGA under those circumstances?

Second, we don't have the ability to spread, in the late Tweed Ring's words, real green money. Green money is the grease for the skids of politics and we just don't wield enough. In part, this is because of our fragmentation (see above) but also because by and large, we aren't individually well enough off to contribute any significant amount of money, and just as importantly, most of us aren't inclined to devote what discretionary income we do have toward political issues. Sure, many pay lip service to the desire to see such changes, even figuratively pounding their fists on the table as they type out commentary in forums like this and on social media, but when it comes time to pry open their wallets and contribute money toward the cause they literally aren't willing to put their money where their mouth is.

Third, we are apathetic. I can't put it any more succinctly than that. All you have to do is look at the lack of response to requests for volunteers here at OFCC to see how pervasive the lassitude is. As the Gun Show Coordinator I see it perhaps more than most - you would think it would be easy to get people to volunteer to help out at gun shows to hand out OFCC literature and advocate for our organization to like-minded individuals, but you'd be wrong. We offer free admission to the shows, and among other things even tried offering an entry in a drawing for a firearm for each day you volunteer, but no matter what we have tried we can't get volunteers. I can't tell you how many days I and others have sat an OFCC table alone all day because we couldn't get volunteers, and that's for the shows we can even manage *one* person. Right now, I'm happy I can cover two shows a month here in the NE, and we have *no* OFCC presence at any of the other shows across Ohio. You see similar indifference when OFCC calls for a legislative action day. Compare what we send to Columbus to what the Virginia Citizens Defense League is able to gather when they call for volunteers.

So, you'll pardon me for taking a more realistic approach when I see you and others expressing outrage at the lack of progress here in Ohio and nationally.

And finally, I'll just put this out there: Other than play the role of keyboard commando, what have *you* done to further the cause and move the ball forward?
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by bignflnut »

JustaShooter wrote:
Let's start with the national picture - I don't know how much you know about how the US Congress, specifically, the US Senate, works but I assume that you know that for all the hype about how strong the GOP is today, the GOP holds 52 seats in the US Senate. That is 8 short of the 60 votes needed for cloture - to end debate and actually vote on a bill. Democrats have vowed to use the filibuster to prevent cloture to stop progress on pro-gun bills, and have promised to continue to use high-profile tactics like the sit-in to build public sentiment against them (possible since they mis-characterize the nature and likely effects of such bills). I just don't see how to get more than incremental improvements in such an environment, and even that will require recruiting a minimum of 8 Senators to jump party lines and allow cloture.


I've pointed out as much, in order to temper Trump-ist hopes. We have turncoats within the 52, however, we also have a number of younger Dems who see the writing on the wall and are going to vote pro-gun in order to stay in office. They're seeing their party decimated nationally and want to turn that tide. 2A is a glaring battlefield loser for them in a majority of the nation. And now there are reports that liberal rank-and-file types are becoming gun owners...
JustaShooter wrote: As to Ohio, what can I say - we pro-gun Ohioans just don't hold enough sway in the OGA. I believe there are several reasons for this, but the three biggest are that:

First, we are fragmented. Just look at how many separate pro-gun organizations we have here in Ohio: OFCC, BFA, Ohio Carry, Ohio Gun Owners, etc. If we were to somehow present a unified voice that encompasses the majority, if not the entirety, of Ohio gun owners, I think we could get a lot more done. But, I think that is a pipe dream given the history and personalities involved. *But*, and this is YUGE, when it comes to so-called constitutional carry (the bills so far proposed are more accurately called "unlicensed carry" - if anyone is interested in the distinction, let me know), we don't even have unity among OFCC members, much less all Ohio gun owners on the subject. How do you present a unified voice in the OGA under those circumstances?
Agreed. We're fragmented because there are various visions on how to achieve the end goal, or get to the endzone if we want to use Morne's analogy. That's what much of this boils down to. My argument is that we're not willing to be bold enough and vote the turncoats out (even if that means a Dem in the seat). Pro-2A groups always capitulated to the lesser of two evils in any electoral race, as long as this continues, and we're not willing to throw a bum out, we get more bums. See Kasich.
JustaShooter wrote: Second, we don't have the ability to spread, in the late Tweed Ring's words, real green money. Green money is the grease for the skids of politics and we just don't wield enough. In part, this is because of our fragmentation (see above) but also because by and large, we aren't individually well enough off to contribute any significant amount of money, and just as importantly, most of us aren't inclined to devote what discretionary income we do have toward political issues. Sure, many pay lip service to the desire to see such changes, even figuratively pounding their fists on the table as they type out commentary in forums like this and on social media, but when it comes time to pry open their wallets and contribute money toward the cause they literally aren't willing to put their money where their mouth is.
A)People don't care to have other people waste their resources (govt does that enough, don'tcha find?) Back to the first point, I'm not spending a dime to help Battleship Destroyer McCain lose. Why contribute if we're going to throw a party for begging and pleading for a daycare bill? When we accept the fundamental premise that our rights start and stop at the property lines of certain entities and not others, and I have to beg to pay a renewal fee, have myself printed and photographed at the sheriff's office like a criminal, etc...why am I paying extra money for the pleasure of being treated this way? You want me to pony up, I'd better believe that I'm buying bullets to shoot holes in the opposition, not fund it.
B) Drain the Swamp, which runs on these damned contributions
C) Much as you may dislike Social Media platforms (like this one), they're inexpensive, accessible, and people get to voice their unvarnished opinions and at least believe someone reads them with some level of interest (as opposed to supporting fundraising organizations that hold closed door meetings with people they don't trust). Also, more and more people are using them for commerce compared to, say, going to gun shows.
JustaShooter wrote: Third, we are apathetic. I can't put it any more succinctly than that. All you have to do is look at the lack of response to requests for volunteers here at OFCC to see how pervasive the lassitude is. As the Gun Show Coordinator I see it perhaps more than most - you would think it would be easy to get people to volunteer to help out at gun shows to hand out OFCC literature and advocate for our organization to like-minded individuals, but you'd be wrong. We offer free admission to the shows, and among other things even tried offering an entry in a drawing for a firearm for each day you volunteer, but no matter what we have tried we can't get volunteers. I can't tell you how many days I and others have sat an OFCC table alone all day because we couldn't get volunteers, and that's for the shows we can even manage *one* person. Right now, I'm happy I can cover two shows a month here in the NE, and we have *no* OFCC presence at any of the other shows across Ohio. You see similar indifference when OFCC calls for a legislative action day. Compare what we send to Columbus to what the Virginia Citizens Defense League is able to gather when they call for volunteers.
You're mistaking attendance at an outdated concept to apathy.

JustaShooter wrote: So, you'll pardon me for taking a more realistic approach when I see you and others expressing outrage at the lack of progress here in Ohio and nationally.

And finally, I'll just put this out there: Other than play the role of keyboard commando, what have *you* done to further the cause and move the ball forward?
Funny, This challenge must be an annual December tradition:

Tweed Ring wrote: Re: Wayne LaPierre | How to Stop Violent Crime

Postby Tweed Ring » Fri Dec 11, 2015 6:51 pm

bignflnut wrote:
Frenchie being forceful and naming statistics!

Enforce the tens of thousands of terrible and unconstitutional laws we already have!
That's a rallying cry, Frenchie!




I tend to view most of your postings as but a very minor annoyance. Please compare what you have done to enhance gun rights for Americans as opposed to what the NRA's Wayne LaPierre has done for us. Thank you.

Tweed Ring
bignflnut wrote: Re: Wayne LaPierre | How to Stop Violent Crime

Postby bignflnut » Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:33 pm
I certainly didn't advocate FOR NICS in front of the US Congress...

Didn't call for a database of the mentally ill...presumably to indulge the antis lust for control over the populace, as though agreeing with them would help NRA members.

Didn't endorse Romney or ISIS Intimate Fanboy McCain for POTUS....didn't help elect Welterweight champ Harry Reid

And in this OP, I didn't generically give credibility to thousands of null and void laws, calling for them to be inforced.

What's the saying, "First, do no harm."?

On a federal level, since Frenhcie's tenure began in 1991, I don't see how gun rights have been expanded. More laws on the books than ever before, and who shall abide them, if not NRA members? SCOTUS recently relegated RKBA to second class status...

State level RKBA has increased (ignoring the CPZs), if you want to give that to Frenchie and the "big boy" voice he used in the OP link.

But enough about me and how I didn't hurt RKBA, what about the validity of the argument I made?

I'm content to be as but a very minor annoyance. You're welcome.
Oh, and if you'd like people to pony up/volunteer, maybe you ought not annually challenge their commitment when they make a valid point about your weak approach to the problem.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by M-Quigley »

Forgive me if this question has been answered already about any national reciprocity bill, but how does that work in "May Issue" states or cities, like NYC? "May Issue" is for many of those states merely a convenient way to deny ordinary people the ability to carry at all. If NYC or one of those states had to accept an Ohio license, for example, you would have a situation where visitors would have more ability than the people who actually live there. While the correct answer of course should be is that those states should change from "May Issue" to "Shall issue", I doubt that will happen. Instead those states will try to use that as an excuse to fight reciprocity.
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by Mr. Glock »

I contribute financially to various pro-gun organizations, not because they meet all my personal opinions, but they are all generally pushing forward in some way. Not perfectly, of course, nothing is perfect. But the trend is good.

If you believe, even slightly, in the 2A, you should be a member of the NRA at minimum. No excuses.
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
User avatar
djthomas
Posts: 5961
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by djthomas »

M-Quigley wrote:Forgive me if this question has been answered already about any national reciprocity bill, but how does that work in "May Issue" states or cities, like NYC? "May Issue" is for many of those states merely a convenient way to deny ordinary people the ability to carry at all. If NYC or one of those states had to accept an Ohio license, for example, you would have a situation where visitors would have more ability than the people who actually live there.
Yep. A similar situation arose when concealed carry was legalized in Illinois. There was a period of like six months from the date the law became effective until the first license could be issued. However, as part of the law unlicensed non-residents gained the ability to carry a concealed handgun in their vehicle on day one. There was definitely grumbling amongst the Illini over that.
M-Quigley wrote:While the correct answer of course should be is that those states should change from "May Issue" to "Shall issue", I doubt that will happen. Instead those states will try to use that as an excuse to fight reciprocity.
They're free to fight all they want but LEOSA is going on 13 years old and it has been upheld every time it has been challenged. In fact there has been no split in the federal circuits so it has never reached the Supreme Court. Other than the documentation requirements this proposed bill is substantially the same as LEOSA in terms of what it preempts and what it allows states to retain control over. Assuming this becomes law as is I don't see how it could be struck down without also striking down LEOSA. Either Congress has the authority to decide when a firearm that has been transported in interstate commerce can be carried concealed in any other state by its owner or it doesn't. That could lead to some very interesting political alliances.

But still, I don't see this bill getting a filibuster proof majority in the Senate on its own. I strongly suspect the Democrats in the Senate are going to oppose every single bill they can so options for tacking this bill on to something else are going to be limited and must compete with other Republican "couldn't pass otherwise" priorities.
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by JustaShooter »

bignflnut wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:
Let's start with the national picture - I don't know how much you know about how the US Congress, specifically, the US Senate, works but I assume that you know that for all the hype about how strong the GOP is today, the GOP holds 52 seats in the US Senate. That is 8 short of the 60 votes needed for cloture - to end debate and actually vote on a bill. Democrats have vowed to use the filibuster to prevent cloture to stop progress on pro-gun bills, and have promised to continue to use high-profile tactics like the sit-in to build public sentiment against them (possible since they mis-characterize the nature and likely effects of such bills). I just don't see how to get more than incremental improvements in such an environment, and even that will require recruiting a minimum of 8 Senators to jump party lines and allow cloture.


I've pointed out as much, in order to temper Trump-ist hopes. We have turncoats within the 52, however, we also have a number of younger Dems who see the writing on the wall and are going to vote pro-gun in order to stay in office. They're seeing their party decimated nationally and want to turn that tide. 2A is a glaring battlefield loser for them in a majority of the nation. And now there are reports that liberal rank-and-file types are becoming gun owners...


Well then, that kind of takes all of the wind out of the sails of the original post, now doesn't it? You've just as much as admitted it is likely impossible to achieve the "big win" at the national level with the current division of power in the US Senate. What, then, was the point of your post?
bignflnut wrote:
JustaShooter wrote: As to Ohio, what can I say - we pro-gun Ohioans just don't hold enough sway in the OGA. I believe there are several reasons for this, but the three biggest are that:

First, we are fragmented. Just look at how many separate pro-gun organizations we have here in Ohio: OFCC, BFA, Ohio Carry, Ohio Gun Owners, etc. If we were to somehow present a unified voice that encompasses the majority, if not the entirety, of Ohio gun owners, I think we could get a lot more done. But, I think that is a pipe dream given the history and personalities involved. *But*, and this is YUGE, when it comes to so-called constitutional carry (the bills so far proposed are more accurately called "unlicensed carry" - if anyone is interested in the distinction, let me know), we don't even have unity among OFCC members, much less all Ohio gun owners on the subject. How do you present a unified voice in the OGA under those circumstances?
Agreed. We're fragmented because there are various visions on how to achieve the end goal, or get to the endzone if we want to use Morne's analogy. That's what much of this boils down to. My argument is that we're not willing to be bold enough and vote the turncoats out (even if that means a Dem in the seat). Pro-2A groups always capitulated to the lesser of two evils in any electoral race, as long as this continues, and we're not willing to throw a bum out, we get more bums. See Kasich.


And that's a fundamental difference, indeed. Although I am willing to (and do) support the most pro-rights candidate I can find during the primaries, I am *not* willing to replace a Republican with a Democrat in the general election simply because the Republican hasn't moved the ball forward as much as I'd like. In large part, this is because I'm not willing to voluntarily allow the Dems sufficient power to not only move the ball *backward* when it comes to our rights, but in every other aspect of our lives. You see the Republican as the lesser of two evils - I see them as the greater candidate that matches my views more closely than the Dem, and has moved (and hopefully will continue to move) the ball some, and has prevented it from moving backward.
bignflnut wrote:
JustaShooter wrote: Second, we don't have the ability to spread, in the late Tweed Ring's words, real green money. Green money is the grease for the skids of politics and we just don't wield enough. In part, this is because of our fragmentation (see above) but also because by and large, we aren't individually well enough off to contribute any significant amount of money, and just as importantly, most of us aren't inclined to devote what discretionary income we do have toward political issues. Sure, many pay lip service to the desire to see such changes, even figuratively pounding their fists on the table as they type out commentary in forums like this and on social media, but when it comes time to pry open their wallets and contribute money toward the cause they literally aren't willing to put their money where their mouth is.
A)People don't care to have other people waste their resources (govt does that enough, don'tcha find?) Back to the first point, I'm not spending a dime to help Battleship Destroyer McCain lose. Why contribute if we're going to throw a party for begging and pleading for a daycare bill? When we accept the fundamental premise that our rights start and stop at the property lines of certain entities and not others, and I have to beg to pay a renewal fee, have myself printed and photographed at the sheriff's office like a criminal, etc...why am I paying extra money for the pleasure of being treated this way? You want me to pony up, I'd better believe that I'm buying bullets to shoot holes in the opposition, not fund it.
B) Drain the Swamp, which runs on these damned contributions
C) Much as you may dislike Social Media platforms (like this one), they're inexpensive, accessible, and people get to voice their unvarnished opinions and at least believe someone reads them with some level of interest (as opposed to supporting fundraising organizations that hold closed door meetings with people they don't trust). Also, more and more people are using them for commerce compared to, say, going to gun shows.


A) Well then, you are part of the problem. You'll note that OFCC was *not* throwing a party "for begging and pleading for a daycare bill" as you put it. We had some very good provisions in the bills when they came out of the Senate, but because we don't wield enough influence we could do nothing but watch in dismay as the bills were gutted and replaced with flawed, weakened provisions in the House. Had we sufficient influence in the form of green money, our voice may have been heard. No guarantees of course, but without it, we *won't* be heard.

B) Nice slogan, but again, I'm not willing to give Dems control of the OGA simply to get rid of Repubs that aren't as strong on our rights as I'd like. They have at least moved the ball forward some, and have prevented the ball from being moved backward. I will continue to support candidates in the primaries that are stronger but when the time comes to vote in the general election I will *not* vote for the candidate that I *know* will try to move the ball backward.

C) I never said I dislike social media. My point was that simply shouting into the echo chamber of social media and forums like this one has little effect in influencing the people that need influenced - the members of the OGA for example. And sorry, I'm not following your point about commerce moving to those venues and away from gun shows.
bignflnut wrote:
JustaShooter wrote: Third, we are apathetic. I can't put it any more succinctly than that. All you have to do is look at the lack of response to requests for volunteers here at OFCC to see how pervasive the lassitude is. As the Gun Show Coordinator I see it perhaps more than most - you would think it would be easy to get people to volunteer to help out at gun shows to hand out OFCC literature and advocate for our organization to like-minded individuals, but you'd be wrong. We offer free admission to the shows, and among other things even tried offering an entry in a drawing for a firearm for each day you volunteer, but no matter what we have tried we can't get volunteers. I can't tell you how many days I and others have sat an OFCC table alone all day because we couldn't get volunteers, and that's for the shows we can even manage *one* person. Right now, I'm happy I can cover two shows a month here in the NE, and we have *no* OFCC presence at any of the other shows across Ohio. You see similar indifference when OFCC calls for a legislative action day. Compare what we send to Columbus to what the Virginia Citizens Defense League is able to gather when they call for volunteers.
You're mistaking attendance at an outdated concept to apathy. for begging and pleading for a daycare bill?
I'm sorry, what? I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Perhaps you could try again.

bignflnut wrote:
JustaShooter wrote: So, you'll pardon me for taking a more realistic approach when I see you and others expressing outrage at the lack of progress here in Ohio and nationally.

And finally, I'll just put this out there: Other than play the role of keyboard commando, what have *you* done to further the cause and move the ball forward?
Funny, This challenge must be an annual December tradition:

<snip>

Oh, and if you'd like people to pony up/volunteer, maybe you ought not annually challenge their commitment when they make a valid point about your weak approach to the problem.
First, I don't speak for any other member nor do they speak for me, but if you find your commitment being challenged regularly, it may be because you are viewed as deserving to be challenged. Simply put, other than advocating for replacing Republicans that aren't moving as quickly as you like with Democrats who are guaranteed to try to reverse what gains we have achieved, I don't see you proposing anything to fix the problem. On the other hand, there are some here at OFCC that devote time, energy, and money to trying to make a difference. If you believe our approach is weak, please, propose something constructive to strengthen our approach. We are all ears.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by bignflnut »

The point of the original post, which I agree with, but did not author, is that there are some in the pro-2A community who, while being sincere and stout RKBA advocates, would happily agree to a federal CCW license scheme.

The point, if it can be followed, is NOT to pass a new law, but to scrub out/repeal bad laws. It's a new dynamic, a paradigm shift, if you will, an offensive one, away from the idea that another brick in the wall is helpful in some way. That we are adding confusion and difficulty to the citizenry in passing a law or two every year since 1999 in our patchwork of states which makes armed travel increasingly difficult. (BTW, this approach doesn't allow for the monkey-business you lament in our most recent Ohio "win")

We should dispense with the notion that possession of private property is legal in my home and other places in the state, but not the Statehouse, schools, my car, etc...

The OPs authors point at the end of the excerpt, which nobody has addressed, is that the laws already exist to arrest people who would deny our RKBA. This demonstrates the approach we're using is fatally flawed because we ultimately don't care to enforce the laws that are on the books, but we give politicians some platform on which to say that they caused some good to occur, or to your point, made some advancement / prevented regression. We're happy with some win, any win...and we lull ourselves into this comfortable position of decade after decade admitting defeat in the war as we satisfy ourselves with minor battle victories.

We're simply not serious about the topic. We're willing to accept and we in fact cheer for half measures, half-hearted politicians who are all too happy to secure their base by speaking positively at park rallies, and we are always left scrambling for the crumbs at the table. So much so that when Scalia and Thomas say that we're relegating RKBA to second class status, Pro-2Aers will actually say that we're "making progress". Why? Because we're not willing to allow an R to be defeated by a D (I wouldn't / haven't said vote for the D, I would stand aside). The half hearted wimps have got us in their pocket as much as Dems have relied on minority groups in the recent past (although those minorities may be wising up, or Hillary was just that bad).

I've made proposals in many elections / instances over the years, you simply reject them for the warmth of your current complacency. You'd rather cozy up to the police unions, the lawyers, the candidates and let them know that you'll help secure their base for them instead of calling them out and demanding a higher standard. We're nearly 20 years into this in Ohio, and we're still on our knees, begging. On a national level, we're flat out losing.

And as you reject them, you attempt to discredit me personally, though you know nothing at all about me. You'd rather shoot the messenger than grapple with the proposals that have kept us in this position.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by M-Quigley »

Morne wrote: Whether or not the individual states need to, or even should, license concealed carry is a separate topic. It's also harder to address. Here in Ohio the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled (rightly or wrongly, I say the latter) that we do NOT have a right to concealed carry. Thus, we have gone the licensure route in the legislature since the judiciary didn't give us the desired result.
In the case of Ohio however one has the right to carry openly in most places as an option. Many of the "may issue" states, and some with "shall issue" don't have that.

Although I'm not confident a lot of (or maybe any) pro gun federal legislation will get passed in the next 2 years, what harm is there in trying? When the anti gunners ask for the moon and only make slight progress, you don't hear them complaining. They're perfectly fine with chipping away at gun rights. If we don't get everything we want, it's still progress. Even if there's no progress, let the anti gunners play defense for a change.





"Time and time again it's the same pattern over and over again. Until such time as they're held accountable we could make a billion gun arrests a year and it's not going to make a difference." Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy
Last edited by M-Quigley on Fri Dec 30, 2016 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

Post by Mr. Glock »

I think we all agree that 100% constitutional carry everywhere is the ideal goal, as outlined in the 2A.

This is what would be called a BHAG in corporate world...a Big Hairy Audacious Goal. Not every citizen in the country is a Constitutional Originalist, and they vote and send money to their pet political organizations too. Right there, that is why this is a BHAG and not something that is going materialize in one fell swoop, even if President Trump made this his only goal from Day One.

Now, the real question here is how do we get there.

I'd suggest that creating a strong community of pro-gunners who donate time and money to the cause is the long-term solution. An ever-greater and ever-increasing positive pro-gun trend is the way political viewpoints get adopted in this country. Bringing the undecided middle over to the pro-gun side is the answer, as the fervent anti-gunners like Bloomberg or Soros will never stop infringing on individual rights. But a strong, steady commitment across the spectrum of voters will counter this, and expand out rights.

In my world, a step forward is a step forward. Even a half-step. Get what you can when you can get it, to stay on trend.
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
Post Reply