Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: New ‘pro-gun’ group backs gun show 'gun control', ending WOD. Codrea scare quotes H/T

  1. #1
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest

    New ‘pro-gun’ group backs gun show 'gun control', ending WOD. Codrea scare quotes H/T

    https://www.examiner.com/article/new...ow-gun-control
    Quote Originally Posted by Codrea
    “Does that mean you would support a federal law ending private sales and requiring all firearms transfers to go through an FFL/NICS?” Gun Rights Examiner asked via their contact form. President Feldman responded personally, by email: "Thanks for asking the question. ... At gunshows we support NRA's position as outlined by Wayne LaPierre as he stated before Congress; ... We believe that sellers at gunshows should enjoy the same protection from liability that that the firearm industry enjoys under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act giving further encouragement to and additional protection for gun shows, buyers and sellers." In other words, yes, they would.

    [ ... ]

    Gun owners who believe the war on drugs and the war on guns provide common areas of concern/opportunities for strategic alliances share much incentive to join together to promote mutual interests. The concern here is whether a leadership, with a history of gaining no real benefit by ceding ground to an insatiable foe, is the right one to follow.[my emphasis]
    Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly with an implacable foe - gun control. Divide and conquer.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    This post is a violation of Forum Rule #12.


    • (12) NO BASHING OF OTHER GUN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS: Regardless of how convinced you are that another gun rights organization is not doing their job, this is not the place to air those concerns unless they are specifically related to an anti-open carry position taken by that organization. All other rants against other gun rights groups will be deleted or the thread locked.



    Moderators, PLEASE apply this rule equally to ALL posters, on ALL threads. Either legitimate criticism of other "gun rights organizations" is OK, or it is NOT.

    How about a little "equal protection" here folks...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lancaster County, PA
    Posts
    1
    So bringing a subject up for discussion = bashing?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    It is in some state-specific threads, if you specifically name a pro-2A organization by name, and then criticize their tactics.

    And also, it appears that the PERSON making the post seems to be some sort of determining factor in whether such posts are censored or not.

    I'm just saying that if the moderators are going to apply "Rule 12" in SOME instances, they need to apply it in ALL instances of similar context.

    I don't agree with "Rule 12" and I think it should be removed from the "Forum Rules" because it stifles creative discussion and legitimate critique of the tactics and policies of national and local gun-rights groups.

    But if were going to apply this rule in SOME instances, we should be applying it EQUALLY to ALL instances of "criticism of pro-2A organizations".

    It's only fair, after all...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 05-13-2012 at 09:21 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    It is in some state-specific threads, if you specifically name a pro-2A organization by name, and then criticize their tactics.

    And also, it appears that the PERSON making the post seems to be some sort of determining factor in whether such posts are censored or not.

    I'm just saying that if the moderators are going to apply "Rule 12" in SOME instances, they need to apply it in ALL instances of similar context.

    I don't agree with "Rule 12" and I think it should be removed from the "Forum Rules" because it stifles creative discussion and legitimate critique of the tactics and policies of national and local gun-rights groups.

    But if were going to apply this rule in SOME instances, we should be applying it EQUALLY to ALL instances of "criticism of pro-2A organizations".

    It's only fair, after all...
    I have not seen other posts/threads that have been locked/deleted but part of it could have to do with how "Rule 12" states that it is alright to discuss/criticize such things only when they have taken a specific stance against OCing. As for this specific thread, it seems to be more informative about a new group claiming to support the Second Amendment and as such it doesn't violate rule 12 imo.

    Now if Rule 12 has been unfairly applied to other threads/posts that's a different issue. But if that is the case that also doesn't mean that we need a tit-for-tat and locking of other legitimate threads just because it happened before.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •