Michael Guzman says "I hope their [open carry] bill dies quickly"

imported post

tito887 wrote:

Scott Lewis (Austin, TX) wrote
at 1:40pm on January 10th, 2009

"Open carry is a different issue in Texas than in many states. Texas hasn't had legal open carry since the Civil War, so there are a lot of public perception issues that must be overcome for open carry to have any chance of becoming legal in Texas. The group pushing for open carry in Texas is not following the recommended channels or working with established gun rights organizations and lobbying groups (like the NRA and the Texas State Rifle Association), and they're taking a lot of actions that contradict what people with extensive experience in Texas gun politics suggest they should be doing. Many of those actions reflect poorly on not only open carry but on the issue of gun rights as a whole. The way things are being handled now, it looks like the open carry bill is probably going to be laughed out of the Texas Legislature, so the last thing SCCC wants to do is attach the two bills or see the two bills connected in the minds of the public.
Report"

Click to expand...

Scott Lewis's comment is vary naive - apparently they are not teaching grass roots organization in college politics very well these days, but you would thnk that folks would catch on given Obama's greass roots come from behind win over Hillary Clinton. Further, it's pretty well known that independent state gun rights groups often lead the charge for major shifts in state gun policy - the NRA affiliates like TSRA tend to be moved into the background once a viable independent state group emerges, e.g., VCDL.

Now, another problem with Lewis is that he ignores the needs of his own "constituents," college students, who would benifit greatly from open carry reform in Texas. In most states, college students aged 18 and up can open carry handguns without any license off campus - and frankly, many most college students these days live off campus.

imported post

Trying to get support from the NRA is a waste of time. If Open Carry or CC in colleges was important to them it would have already been fought for by them. It's up to grassroots groups like those of us here on OCDO to get the word out and get the ball rolling. Of course, after all the hard work is done and the laws are passed to allow OC or CC carry the NRA will hold a big press confrence and claim to have had a hand in these battles.

imported post

OK, time for a little humor: Take a look at this "Who are those guy's clip" from the movie Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIie9OosnEM

From the recent articles and Internet chatter, one would think that the guys on horseback are Ian McCarthy and the Texas Open Carry Working Group while Paul Newman is playing the part of the TSRA's Alice Tripp and Robert Redford is playing the part of SCCC's Michael Guzman.

imported post

Tess wrote:

Guzman made a point at the Gun Rights Policy Conference back in September that he thought the open-carry movement was hurting the SCCC movement. This doesn't surprise me.

Click to expand...

Wow - did you go to that? That really is poor form on the part of Guzman. It's too bad Guzman does not realize that we are not delaing with a zero sum game on gun rights.

imported post

That was a funny video Mike. I don't know if the guy who made that video was inspired by this other guy or not. But at thatguywiththeglasses.com there are over 40 videos of 5 second movies. If your interested you'll get a kick out of those videos.

imported post

Mike wrote:

Now, another problem with Lewis is that he ignores the needs of his own "constituents," college students, who would benifit greatly from open carry reform in Texas. In most states, college students aged 18 and up can open carry handguns without any license off campus - and frankly, many most college students these days live off campus.

Click to expand...

Perhaps it's as simple as Guzman (25 years old) wants to be among the select few who will be allowed to carry on campus under his bill. If the 18-21 year old crowd were able to OC then the older college students wouldn't be special and revered by the kids who are too young to carry. OC may well be a threat to him.

imported post

And I thought Guzman was deployed. I guess maybe he mentioned February (09). He is a Marine, and when I met him in Phoenix, was preparing for deployment.

So as much as you may hate his stance on this (and I do, and I noted it in September), please keep him in your thoughts during his deployment.

imported post

Mike wrote:

Scott Lewis's comment is vary naive - apparently they are not teaching grass roots organization in college politics very well these days, but you would thnk that folks would catch on given Obama's greass roots come from behind win over Hillary Clinton. Further, it's pretty well known that independent state gun rights groups often lead the charge for major shifts in state gun policy - the NRA affiliates like TSRA tend to be moved into the background once a viable independent state group emerges, e.g., VCDL.

Now, another problem with Lewis is that he ignores the needs of his own "constituents," college students, who would benifit greatly from open carry reform in Texas. In most states, college students aged 18 and up can open carry handguns without any license off campus - and frankly, many most college students these days live off campus.

Click to expand...

+1

imported post

cccook wrote:

Mike wrote:

Now, another problem with Lewis is that he ignores the needs of his own "constituents," college students, who would benifit greatly from open carry reform in Texas.  In most states, college students aged 18 and up can open carry handguns without any license off campus - and frankly, many most college students these days live off campus.

 

Click to expand...

Perhaps it's as simple as Guzman (25 years old) wants to be among the select few who will be allowed to carry on campus under his bill.  If the 18-21 year old crowd were able to OC then the older college students wouldn't be special and revered by the kids who are too young to carry.  OC may well be a threat to him.

Click to expand...

What other reason is there to demand CC and reject OC? This way the hypocrisy is rationalized, although it remains unjustified.

imported post

A lot of people with concealed permits think they are special and want to keep it that way: a privilege for the elites.... They miss the whole point: a Constitutionally protected right should not be rendered to the level of a mere privilege subject toapproval by government bureaucrats.

imported post

+1

Hence, "Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth."

imported post

Hey all,

I am a former campus leader for SCCC from the University of Missouri. I recently came to Texas for law school, in large part because of the faith I had in Guzman's tremendous lobbying efforts. I also support OC. I think it would do us all some good to look for some understanding and keep the peace between groups whose goals are based in common values.

I can't speak for Guzman, nor do I contend to. I do hope I can offer some insight to SCCC.

First off, I think that a fair evaluation of Mr. Guzman should start with a more thorough review of his work. He's a good looking articulate man. He's appeared on national television and a smattering of local news. When people across the country see an advocate like Guzman they think, "Gee, this former military man who is clean, rational, and well dressed certainly breaks the negative stereotypes I have about gun rights advocates." He and his team do extensive research. Every appearance they have in the media thus far has been a slam dunk for gun rights. Go to concealedcampus.com or google video him. You'll see lots of good stuff.

I think it detracts from both groups to toss reporters a reason to cover Guzman and OC.org in light of confrontation and infighting instead of a focus on the facts. It reflects especially poorly on OC.org to have references to another gun rights advocate as a "douche bag" linked to a top and center front page forum topic. I think the only productive resolution to this matter is a well-combed open letter from a ranking OC.org representative challenging the basis for Guzman's comments on a rational and factual basis; perhaps OC.org should say:

"Anti-gun groups have used the slippery slope against gun owners for years. Our group believes that forcing handguns into the shadows only allows anti-gun sentiment to fester throughout our society, including collegiate learning environments. With open carry, open minds could gain valuable exposure to the common assertion of fact between our two organizations: when law-abiding citizens have guns in public, the public isn't in danger. It's time we came out of the shadows and turned the tables on those who meet our agendas with open contempt by demanding recognition that guns are no more dangerous in the grocery store than the classroom, and they're no more dangerous on the hip than under the shirt. We realize that you may not personally support open carry, but we believe it is to our groups' mutual benefit to refrain from openly criticizing each other."

Doesn't that seem more productive than name calling?

As organizations go, I think SCCC deserves a big pat on the back. The group sprung forward from nothing to 35,000. It's made of a broad coalition: republicans, democrats, women, men, etc. Moreover, it's run by college students! I think it's too much to expect calculated perfection from very young people with no political or media experience as soon as the organization gets on its feet.

I'm not saying that OC.org should take whatever it's given, but I am saying that it should have a little thicker skin and be better prepared to deal with bumps in the road between it and other pro-gun organizations. If the media can turn these groups against each other with one quote, we're just as easy to manipulate, and no better than the sheeple who think guns are to blame for shootings.

Thanks for reading.

imported post

Nuff said. Can we just end this thread. It serves no useful purpose whatsoever to take Mr. Guzman to task. Let us support him, and while doing so change his mind about open carry!

Now that would be the LAST thing theanti-gun groups would want to happen, so let it be!

imported post

tito887 wrote:

Unfortunately this is the sediment of many of the people at SCCC. Half the time someone is either saying that open carry is a poor tactical advantage. Or that SCCC takes no "official" stance on open carry. I feel that is a weak position. If you cannot fully support the right completely then your opposition will exploit your own position. They don't want to say anything positive about open carry because then someone would ask the question, "well if you can open carry on college campuses would you advocate?" They don't want to support anything that they perceive would be a danger to any of their legislative action or scare the sheeple. A bit childish don't you think. Here is what Scott Lewis said when I made a casual remark that there should be a pool to see which bill is signed into law first.

Found on the comments section on the SCCC facebook page.


Scott Lewis (Austin, TX) wrote
at 1:40pm on January 10th, 2009

"Open carry is a different issue in Texas than in many states. Texas hasn't had legal open carry since the Civil War, so there are a lot of public perception issues that must be overcome for open carry to have any chance of becoming legal in Texas. The group pushing for open carry in Texas is not following the recommended channels or working with established gun rights organizations and lobbying groups (like the NRA and the Texas State Rifle Association), and they're taking a lot of actions that contradict what people with extensive experience in Texas gun politics suggest they should be doing. Many of those actions reflect poorly on not only open carry but on the issue of gun rights as a whole. The way things are being handled now, it looks like the open carry bill is probably going to be laughed out of the Texas Legislature, so the last thing SCCC wants to do is attach the two bills or see the two bills connected in the minds of the public.
Report"

I guess because Texans didn't beg for the blessing of the mighty NRA and the TSRA, the opinion of 50,000+ people on a petition mean jack @#$%.

Click to expand...

Actually, Mr. Garcia, your comment went beyond casually remarking that there should be a pool to see which bill is signed into law first. Here is the full text of your remarks (emphasis added):

imported post

parb66 wrote:

First off, I think that a fair evaluation of Mr. Guzman should start with a more thorough review of his work. He's a good looking articulate man. He's appeared on national television and a smattering of local news. When people across the country see an advocate like Guzman they think, "Gee, this former military man who is clean, rational, and well dressed certainly breaks the negative stereotypes I have about gun rights advocates." He and his team do extensive research. Every appearance they have in the media thus far has been a slam dunk for gun rights. . . . I think the only productive resolution to this matter is a well-combed open letter from a ranking OC.org representative challenging the basis for Guzman's comments on a rational and factual basis;

Click to expand...

How does one comment rationally on this Guzman fellow's remark to a reporter that "I hope their [open carry] bill dies quickly."

That was such a well researched and polished press comment - such a slam dunk for gun rights. Shucks, wow, I don't think me or Ian or John could do better.

Except of course to just say, "Wehope TX SCCC's bill passes quickly."

imported post

You may be able to do better. My point in that paragraph was that he's generally a credit to the pro-gun position, not that he's perfect. Indeed, later in my comment I said outright that it's unreasonable to expect someone so young and inexperienced to never make a mistake. I continued to enumerate exactly how this presents an opportunity for the leadership of this group to rise above and "do better." You don't have to agree, but I do urge you to consider the benefits of approaching this debacle with more constructive ends in mind than a mudslinging match between two groups that should naturally be on the same side of the fence.

imported post

I (as well as, I believe, most, if not all, of us here) FULLY support SCCC!
I am deeply saddened that Mr. Guzman feels that all of our efforts are hurting his while every time I (and many others here) have been questioned about our stand on SCCC we have showed and voiced our support! Many of us go in on polls for campus carry whenever one pops up even though campus carry really doesn't affect most of us in any way whatsoever!

I would like to see Mr. Guzman explain his comments honestly and openly (here in this forum?) before passing judgment.
Furthermore, maybe Ian and Mr. Guzman could possibly have a strategical planning meeting to discuss how we can best overcome this issue and provide a strong united front! Maybe even a joint press conference?

imported post

Michael Gusman is only a college student-where does he get the idea that he can deny my Constitutional Rights. Here in north west Texas there are more people that are worried about the problem across the border than they are about anything else and the closer you get to the border the more it is magnified. The Druggies have already crossed the border three times and caused trouble. The "FENCE" will only slow them down when Mexico finally "comes apart" which can happen at any time. We cannot rely on the military or Law Enforcewment for protection any more, once again we need the right to protect ourselves and property.

imported post

Gator5713 wrote:

I (as well as, I believe, most, if not all, of us here) FULLY support SCCC!
I am deeply saddened that Mr. Guzman feels that all of our efforts are hurting his while every time I (and many others here) have been questioned about our stand on SCCC we have showed and voiced our support! Many of us go in on polls for campus carry whenever one pops up even though campus carry really doesn't affect most of us in any way whatsoever!

I would like to see Mr. Guzman explain his comments honestly and openly (here in this forum?) before passing judgment.
Furthermore, maybe Ian and Mr. Guzman could possibly have a strategical planning meeting to discuss how we can best overcome this issue and provide a strong united front! Maybe even a joint press conference.

Click to expand...

I see no reason for a meeting to overcome a chimerical issue invented by Guzman - funny that Rep. Riddle's office never warned us, "hey, ya better quash those SCCC types before they crowd out your bill."

But sure, a general meeting to talk about making sure all gun bills get a good shot? Sure.

imported post

Mike, I fully agree, Thanks!