Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Using Incrementalism to Advance Our Goals.

  1. #1
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    Anti-gun legislators have eroded the second with the persistance of rain. Some of the ground that they have taken has been as ifa flood washed it away. In most instances however, it has been the steady patter of incrementalism that has done the most damage to our sacred right.

    This incrementalism was permitted, perhaps because too few people heeded the alarm or that those who protested were not sufficiently loud enough to impede the usurpations imposed on us. But I would say that the lack of excersize of that right prepared the people for it to slowly disappear.

    By carrying a firearm exposed, being a worthyambassador for the right of armed self defense, I believeour ownform of incrementalism can erode the efforts of those who would disarm the people.

    I am guilty of pride when I tell you that this does work.

    In the past year, there have been no less than seven departmental or organzational memos regarding the practice of open carry in the State of California. Each time such a memo is released, it is something of a backhanded endorsement of unloaded open carry as a lawful practice.

    Early in 2006, pretty much everyone in the gun communityI asked about the possibility of open carry in California told me that it was an impossibility and would certainly result in criminal gun charges. It seems now- after a number of police encounters (that did not result in the expected charges) and the release of these memos, there are some that are warming up to the practice not only as a form of activism, but as a practical alternative to obtaining a license to carry concealed.

    The surprising factor to this sucess, is that I would estimate that there are fewer than 80 people in the State that have taken part in the movement, and fewer than a quarter of those are active on a regular basis. Open carry incrementalism is taking California one community (or jurisdiction) at a time, and the best part is, California law enforcement is responsible for spreading the word.

    I anticipate there will be a marked surge inactivism after Nordyke - we should have an interesting summer.


    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Yakima County, ,
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Up on Washington there's been quite a few cities that have been forced to change firearms ordinances one way or another. Mostly to do with state preemtion and carry in parks, or the occasional anti-mace law. In fact there is a thread in the Washington section on laws we've changed.

    I definitely agree, the more we push our right, the more of it we can hang on to.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    You've got that one right on. :celebrate


    Nordyke?

    Edit: This? http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...ordyke_v._King
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  4. #4
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    You've got that one right on. :celebrate


    Nordyke?

    Edit: This? http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...ordyke_v._King
    Or here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bi...mp;no=9917551o

    In a way, this proves my point too- while it has taken nearly ten years to advance this case to the point where it will bear fruit, the efforts of those dedicated and brave enough to excersize their right to the fullest lawful extent has fostered measurable victories and changed the environment towards gun owners in ways never thought to be possible. With these two events intersecting, the gun rights movement is on the verge of exploding in California.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  5. #5
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    You are definitely on to something, ConditionThree. However, I prefer to call the anti-gun legislator's tactics using the Marxist Dialectic toinfringe onour rights rather than using incrementalism toinfringe onour rights.



  6. #6
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    shad0wfax wrote:
    You are definitely on to something, ConditionThree. However, I prefer to call the anti-gun legislator's tactics using the Marxist Dialectic toinfringe onour rights rather than using incrementalism toinfringe onour rights.

    By repeatedly and sucessfully carrying an exposed handgun, I am calling the anti-gunners tactics. 1) It defeats their assertions that blood would run in the streets, 2) it dispells the myth that only police can or should carry a weapon. 3) It does not create great stampedes, riots, or widespread social discord. 4) It disproves their theory that the presence ofa gun increases the incidence of crime. And the really great part about this demonstration is, I dont even have to respond to their rhetoric.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592

    Post imported post

    ConditionThree wrote:
    shad0wfax wrote:
    You are definitely on to something, ConditionThree. However, I prefer to call the anti-gun legislator's tactics using the Marxist Dialectic toinfringe onour rights rather than using incrementalism toinfringe onour rights.

    By repeatedly and sucessfully carrying an exposed handgun, I am calling the anti-gunners tactics. 1) It defeats their assertions that blood would run in the streets, 2) it dispells the myth that only police can or should carry a weapon. 3) It does not create great stampedes, riots, or widespread social discord. 4) It disproves their theory that the presence ofa gun increases the incidence of crime. And the really great part about this demonstration is, I dont even have to respond to their rhetoric.
    I love how you stated that.

  8. #8
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    ConditionThree wrote:
    shad0wfax wrote:
    You are definitely on to something, ConditionThree. However, I prefer to call the anti-gun legislator's tactics using the Marxist Dialectic toinfringe onour rights rather than using incrementalism toinfringe onour rights.

    By repeatedly and sucessfully carrying an exposed handgun, I am calling the anti-gunners tactics. 1) It defeats their assertions that blood would run in the streets, 2) it dispells the myth that only police can or should carry a weapon. 3) It does not create great stampedes, riots, or widespread social discord. 4) It disproves their theory that the presence ofa gun increases the incidence of crime. And the really great part about this demonstration is, I dont even have to respond to their rhetoric.

    I agree with you 100%. What I meant was that I don't call what the anti-gun crowd does incrementalism, I call it like I see it: I call it the Marxist Dialectic at work by the Marxists.I was just making a distinction of semantics, that's all.

    I Open-Carry for the exact same reason you do. I could legally conceal-carry in my state to defend my own life. I simply choose to carry openly to make a political statement. I should have been more clear that I was making a distinction between "incrementalism" and the "Marxist Dialectic" and not disagreeing with your Open-Carry rationale at all.


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Hammond, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    54

    Post imported post

    I agree with C3. In truth, incrementalism is probably the ONLY way we'll perpetuate and advance this concept.

    Likewise, if you think of how it was, say 200 years ago when everyone basically toted a weapon how they wanted, it was incrementalism that eroded it to the point of say, the 80's, when the outcry was "NO one except Police should even OWN a weapon!". There was never any big "mass-roundup" of firearms, in any city.

    But this incrementalism really started well before the 1900's. Even after the Civil War there was a push to disarm the "common citizen". Laws began to appear prohibiting firearms in the town / city limits, and so forth. Of course, we can go back to the Revolutionary War, but that was an "outside agency", beyond the scope of this conversation about American citizens beginning to call for ever more restrictive laws.

    Kinda like losing those extra pounds that many of us put on. Quick diets don't work, for long. A sensible approach does. It didn't take ya 2 week to put on that extra 30 pounds, so you're not gonna get it off in 30 days, either. Incrementalism.

    That's why I think it more important to seek out and incorporate the cooperation of the general, non-armed public rather than be hostile and confrontational in demanding the right. There IS a RKBA guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, but there is NO guarantee of OC. It's just not in there. So, the right to carry is a right we can assert (if that's how you want to do it), but the right to OC will need to be earned.

    Incrementally.

  10. #10
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    JB-Indiana wrote:
    Even after the Civil War there was a push to disarm the "common citizen". Laws began to appear prohibiting firearms in the town / city limits, and so forth. Of course, we can go back to the Revolutionary War, but that was an "outside agency", beyond the scope of this conversation about American citizens beginning to call for ever more restrictive laws.
    A minor correction if I may-

    It was not the 'common citizens' during the Civil War era that were being disarmed, but free 'African Americanes'. Many of the prohibitions and regulation of concealed weapons came about to disarm blacks. The licensing and other regulation of 'CCW' is something of a vestige of those times.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    L.A. County, California, USA
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    IMHO...

    Incrementalism is an extremely effective tool for affecting changes that someone wants. It works because sane humans don't get too worked up over little things that only affect some item "over there". "Doesn't affect me, not that big of a deal".

    One of the things that allow humans to survive is our adaptability. We are very good at accommodating minor changes. Only when something "big" comes along do we really feel the need to sit up and take notice. This is particularly true about our busy American "society" as a whole. We've got lots to do and don't have time to "sweat the small stuff". Only a few, who can be labeled as "extremists" will get worked up over some proposed change, so the rest of the citizens blissfully go along.
    [line]
    Antis have been using incrementalism, to great effect for years. It is definitely time that we added this technique to our RTKBA tool belt. OpenCarry.org is a very good example of incrementalism working for our goals - both as a whole - and in the case of all the tiny, daily occurences which show that open carriers, gun owners and firearms are not the evil entities they have been made out to be.

    One of my incremental activities is to NEVER to be afraid to talk guns/carrying in any setting I am in. This slowly breaks down the idea that only "gun nuts" have guns. The somewhat surprising thing to me is how receptive people are for someone to "break the ice" on the subject.

    Another "baby step" is to take all my nieces and nephews(and friends) out for shooting and firearms safety/handling sessions. If every gun owner in America encouraged just 5 additional people to become more comfortable with or around firearms, we'd make a lot of progress.
    [line]
    Very few of us can, individually, make giant strides in this battle... but together, we can defeat the antis... death by a thousand cuts! - Incrementalism



Posting Permissions

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