See today's Boy Scout announcement?Chuck wrote:
And if that happens, how do we counter them without being hypocritical ourselves?
This is what the sacrifices on the Altar of Compromise win you...total failure built on a foundation of hypocrisy
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
See today's Boy Scout announcement?Chuck wrote:
And if that happens, how do we counter them without being hypocritical ourselves?
Concentrate the arguments on the other items which aren't subject to popular animosity at the moment. If you keep harping on the bump stocks, you lose credibility on the other stuff.Chuck wrote:And again I ask, how does capitulating on bump stocks delay anything?
From where I sit it encourages the opposition to try even more illogical arguments, and with reason, if after all, it works for them.
And if that happens, how do we counter them without being hypocritical ourselves?
I will agree about being obnoxious. And I certainly hope my friends like you will tell me if I become so.
But that doesn’t change the argument
I have to agree with Schmieg. If our side is intractable on bump stocks, in my opinion we lose any credibility with issues we have a chance at winning. We are not going to win the argument of public opinion not to regulate bump stocks. Yes, I know any law, short of total and complete confiscation, will have zero impact on anything.schmieg wrote:Concentrate the arguments on the other items which aren't subject to popular animosity at the moment. If you keep harping on the bump stocks, you lose credibility on the other stuff.Chuck wrote:And again I ask, how does capitulating on bump stocks delay anything?
From where I sit it encourages the opposition to try even more illogical arguments, and with reason, if after all, it works for them.
And if that happens, how do we counter them without being hypocritical ourselves?
I will agree about being obnoxious. And I certainly hope my friends like you will tell me if I become so.
But that doesn’t change the argument
(a) to make the sheep feel good thinking something has been done and (b) to get the foot in the door to further gun control.Chuck wrote:Very simple question here
What is the reason for banning the bump stock?
I'm getting a little bit frustrated here. Everyone wants me to give it up and no one can tell me why
I KNOW the reason everyone wants it banned
Do you?
Can you articulate it?
Anyone?
Who is saying to help them? I am saying concentrate on what is not a losing argument. Unfortunately, at the moment, "not a losing argument" does not include bump stocks.Chuck wrote:I doubt that is the reason the antis would use, but to use yours,,,, why should I, (meaning, me, you and all of OFCC), help them with that?
What does that gain us?
Where is the strategic move?
Currying favor with the Swamp by surrendering without gaining a thing (not that I agree with Chuck that we should surrender once we're bought off) will not help bolster fund-raising appeals, will it? Power to the People surrendered. Simply begging for the scraps from the Swamp's table.schmieg wrote:Concentrate the arguments on the other items which aren't subject to popular animosity at the moment. If you keep harping on the bump stocks, you lose credibility on the other stuff.
No, just live in reality.bignflnut wrote:Currying favor with the Swamp by surrendering without gaining a thing (not that I agree with Chuck that we should surrender once we're bought off) will not help bolster fund-raising appeals, will it? Power to the People surrendered. Simply begging for the scraps from the Swamp's table.schmieg wrote:Concentrate the arguments on the other items which aren't subject to popular animosity at the moment. If you keep harping on the bump stocks, you lose credibility on the other stuff.
Is this what we desire our orgs to do? White flag today in hopes of gaining something later? And why, because the media decided to report on one rifle accessory or another?
bignflnut wrote: Is this what we desire our orgs to do?
What reality am I in that is false?schmieg wrote: No, just live in reality.
I have asked around these past few days to a wide range of people about the NRA's decision to support bump stock bans. Most hadn't heard about it. Those that are particularly liberal weren't all that interested either way as they want an awb, as discussed over and over on this board. Those that I know that tend to vote conservative but aren't firearm owners had the type of response I was writing about earlier. Paraphrasing, the reaction was along these lines. "wow, I thought they were against all forms of gun control?" This opened the discussion to what the NRA is and isn't, and then them walking away from the conversation with thinking the nra maybe isn't all that crazy.Chuck wrote:I doubt that is the reason the antis would use, but to use yours,,,, why should I, (meaning, me, you and all of OFCC), help them with that?
What does that gain us?
Where is the strategic move?
It has nothing to do with other people.bignflnut wrote:What reality am I in that is false?schmieg wrote: No, just live in reality.
Tell me the lay of the land, Mr. Coordinator.
Why don't you tell me how you really feel about people who espouse my point-of-view?
Part of the reason it’s a losing argument is because the NRA folded like a cheap suit. If they hadn’t, this would’ve been a much tougher fight.schmieg wrote:Who is saying to help them? I am saying concentrate on what is not a losing argument. Unfortunately, at the moment, "not a losing argument" does not include bump stocks.Chuck wrote:I doubt that is the reason the antis would use, but to use yours,,,, why should I, (meaning, me, you and all of OFCC), help them with that?
What does that gain us?
Where is the strategic move?