• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Have you seen this post on CGN

stuckinchico

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
506
Location
Stevenson, Alabama, United States
imported post

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=71
"
As a science advisory, the following new disorder is planned for DSM-V when it is released in 2012.

-----

Diagnostic criteria for 357+P Open-Carry Disorder

A. Either obsessions or compulsions:

Obsessions as defined by (1), (2), (3), and (4):

(1) recurrent and persistent thoughts, impulses, or images of carrying an exposed firearm that are experienced, at some time during the disturbance, as intrusive and inappropriate and that cause marked anxiety or distress
(2) the thoughts, impulses, or images are not simply excessive worries about real-life practical firearm carry problems
(3) the person attempts to ignore or suppress such thoughts, impulses, or images of open carrying or to neutralize them with some other thought or action
(4) the person recognizes that the obsessional thoughts, impulses, or images of open carrying are a product of his or her own mind (not imposed from without as in thought insertion)

Compulsions as defined by (1) and (2):

(1) repetitive behaviors (e.g., load and fire drills, retention checking, dry firing) or mental acts (e.g., memorizing the penal code, rehearsing loaded check rules, repeating police interactions silently) that the person feels driven to perform in response to a police encounter, or according to rules that must be applied rigidly to avoid committing a felony
(2) the behaviors or mental acts are aimed at preventing or reducing gun control legislation due to anti-gun legislators or preventing some dreaded loss of civil rights, or a dreaded event such as arrest and conviction; however, these behaviors or mental acts either are not connected in a realistic way with the gun rights program they are designed to promote or prevent or are clearly excessive

B. At some point during the course of the disorder, the person has recognized that the obsessions or compulsions to open carry are excessive or unreasonable. Note: This does not apply to children or those behaving like children.

C. The obsessions or compulsions cause marked distress among other gun owners, are time consuming (take more than 1 hour a day), or significantly interfere with the person's normal routine, occupational (or academic) functioning, or usual social activities or relationships.

D. If another gun-related disorder is present, the content of the obsessions or compulsions is not restricted to it (e.g., preoccupation with open carrying Evil Black Rifles in the presence of Evil Black Rifle Disease, or gaining attention in the presence of 69, attention-whoring).

E. The disturbance is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication, excessive attention) or a general medical condition.

Specify if:
With Poor Insight: if, for most of the time during the current episode of open carrying the person does not recognize that the obsessions and compulsions with open carrying are excessive or unreasonable __________________

Ummm Im kinda seeing red at CGN right about now

Ummm edited to say yeah just got banned from calguns
You have been banned for the following reason:
A)"Your mouth is does no good except to pleasure your loved one or some random stranger.." The language and locker room mouth is not welcome here. B) "Obama: Just another Black man in government housing" I have deleted this twice,
Date the ban will be lifted: 07-29-2009, 10:00 PM

So In support of Second amendment I have to give up my first????? wow CGN youve sunk to a new low
 

Sons of Liberty

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Riverside, California, USA
imported post

Some of the folks over there are down right mean-spirited! :cuss:

But they are a "political" organization, who wantonly a certain image of gun-owners being put forth.

I think that's just sad. :(

In many ways,their attempts to stereotype gunowners into their image does not further their cause.

Certain "stepchildren" must be kept in the closet where others will not see them. :cry:

Maybe they'll change. :what:
 

MudCamper

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
709
Location
Sebastopol, California, USA
imported post

I just today decided that I've finally had it with CalGuns. I'm finished there. And I didn't even see this post. The last straw for me was the recent deletion of my posts in another Open Carry discussion, or should I say, Open Carrier bash fest. I am really sick and tired of Kestryl deleting my posts but not the other guy's when he disagrees with me. I was an avid CalGuns supporter for a couple years, despite the divisiveness and censorship. I've given way too much money to the CGF. Too bad. These idiots really know how to divide the RKBA community.
 

stuckinchico

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
506
Location
Stevenson, Alabama, United States
imported post

I been wondering what the NRA would say about open carry?? I would rather support them than CGN.

So what Obama is just another black man in government housing.... He proved it as soon as he pulled the race card.... When I heard Obama say that, I was floored and severely disappointed:banghead: Our president pulling the race card I knew it would come someday from Obama I didnt think that it would happen this fast


BTW stricter legislation on open carry would take alot of effort on the representatives personally I dont think that have the stones to take it on.. seems they have better things to do with the economy
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

stuckinchico wrote:
I been wondering what the NRA would say about open carry??
There was a bit of a spat a while back when the NRA-ILA put out an e-mail alert about VA's ban on CCing in restaurants licensed to serve alcohol.

The initial e-mail alert made it sound like the only option was for a CCer to leave his gun in the car or at home if he wanted to eat in a restaurant licensed to serve alcohol.

The NRA-ILA took some heat from OCers and finally re-worded the alert, if I recall.

I don't have any info that NRA supports OC. Certainly, I haven't heard of any major programs or pushes promoting it.

My guess is they will come out in full support of it after John and Mike and the rest of us get it solidly accepted by enough people in the gun world. Until then, I'm thinking we will getsimple acknowledgment and the occasional support when such support doesn't buck the status quo too much.

I'm happy to be wrong on this, though. If anyone has different info about NRA supportingOC more than what I'm thinking, please don't keep quiet.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

The 2nd Amendment is OC.

The right to bear arms is a right requiring nothing other than to do so responsibly. All this othernonsense is just brain clutterpromulgated by those who've been educated beyond reasonable usefulness,then parroted by thoseincapableof critical thinking.
 

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
stuckinchico wrote:
I been wondering what the NRA would say about open carry??
There was a bit of a spat a while back when the NRA-ILA put out an e-mail alert about VA's ban on CCing in restaurants licensed to serve alcohol.

The initial e-mail alert made it sound like the only option was for a CCer to leave his gun in the car or at home if he wanted to eat in a restaurant licensed to serve alcohol.

The NRA-ILA took some heat from OCers and finally re-worded the alert, if I recall.

I don't have any info that NRA supports OC. Certainly, I haven't heard of any major programs or pushes promoting it.

My guess is they will come out in full support of it after John and Mike and the rest of us get it solidly accepted by enough people in the gun world. Until then, I'm thinking we will getsimple acknowledgment and the occasional support when such support doesn't buck the status quo too much.

I'm happy to be wrong on this, though. If anyone has different info about NRA supportingOC more than what I'm thinking, please don't keep quiet.
AFAIK, they are not OC advocates, at least not yet. They are big time CC advocates though.
 

stuckinchico

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
506
Location
Stevenson, Alabama, United States
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
The 2nd Amendment is OC.

The right to bear arms is a right requiring nothing other than to do so responsibly. All this othernonsense is just brain clutterpromulgated by those who've been educated beyond reasonable usefulness,then parroted by thoseincapableof critical thinking.
Love where your brain is at
 

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
imported post

I've been following the actions of Calguns. I'm pleased with the progress that CGN/CGF is making in the courts.

However, I feel from the imagery provided by the forum members there that they are far happier being a supporter of 2nd Amendment rights when it means donating a dime but not lifting a finger. Read through some of the topics and the emotional responses of some. There are a few posters there that are intelligent enough to word responses that can articulate some facts, but still the pedestal they're preaching from is that if we OC we'll lose shall-issue CCW.

:banghead:

I've almost had enough of many of the community members there. Maybe after they're able to get their coveted privilege permit they'll be more inclined to support LOC and strike down 626.9. ... In "two weeks".
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

I'm torn on CalGuns. On one hand, they're doing good stuff. They stepped up and aided Bobbarker when he was arrested last year, and they've provided some logistical support to Thesues.

It's clear that the board members don't want to support Open Carry (especially financially), but it seems to me that they aren't opposed to it. If they were, why would they be helping us even in minor ways?

On the other hand, I'm annoyed by their focus on CCW reform. As a liberty-minded person, I can't understand why anybody would willing pay a tax and take a test in return for a basic human right.

Also, I got tired of their selective censorship. It's blasphemy to criticize the actions of LEOs, yet mindless belittling open carry civil rights activists is the status quo.

I think there are two important things to remember:

1. We're all on the same team, even if we disagree on one issue among the plethora of 2A issues.

2. CalGuns Foundation is not one and the same as CalGuns.net. CalGuns.net is owned by Kestryll. So don't hold the opinions of the moderators of CGN against the board of CGF. I have found that CGF is far less anti-OC than CGN's members & moderators.
 

Army

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
289
Location
San Luis Obispo, California, USA
imported post

stuckinchico wrote:
So In support of Second amendment I have to give up my first????? wow CGN youve sunk to a new low
It's a private site, 1stA does not apply. They can allow or delete anything at will.

Don't like it? Make your own site for your beliefs....but be ready for opinions that you don't like.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

I'm not a big fan of censorship, but I respect the property owner's right to do it.

For example, I stopped reading/posting to many of the forums here because I got tired of the censorship. I like that the mods don't pay us much mind in the state forums.
 

MudCamper

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
709
Location
Sebastopol, California, USA
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
1. We're all on the same team, even if we disagree on one issue among the plethora of 2A issues.

When I posted my RKBA version of the Franklin "Join or Die" image the other day in an OC bash thread, it was deleted by Kestryl. It's OK to insult and belittle us, but it's not OK to point out that we all should stick together.


CA_Libertarian wrote:
2. CalGuns Foundation is not one and the same as CalGuns.net. CalGuns.net is owned by Kestryll. So don't hold the opinions of the moderators of CGN against the board of CGF.
Yes. CalGuns.net is owned by Kestryl, and it is his personal sandbox. He censors views he does not like and members he does not like.

The CalGuns Foundation is an org started by a bunch of CalGuns members, including a few very smart pro-2A activists. However, Kestryl is on the Board, and as long as that is the case, I will no longer donate to them.
 

Kestryll

New member
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
8
Location
, ,
imported post

MudCamper wrote
When I posted my RKBA version of the Franklin "Join or Die" image the other day in an OC bash thread, it was deleted by Kestryl. It's OK to insult and belittle us, but it's not OK to point out that we all should stick together.

Yes. CalGuns.net is owned by Kestryl, and it is his personal sandbox. He censors views he does not like and members he does not like.
I will post this here since it becoming a public matter.

Yes, I deleted two of your posts, much the same as I deleted posts from oaklander and others.

Of the two posts of your that were deleted one was not addressing the topic but instead attacking the individual.
This is the same rules violation that has lead to deleted posts on both sides of the current conflict.
I do not recall you presenting this outrage when I deleted the posts denigrating PNS and other UOC'ers.
Nope, not a word then.
Or was that 'censorship' acceptable as it fell in line with your personal beliefs?

Neither did I receive anything from you protesting oaklander's ban for trolling and antagonizing the UOC proponents.
Again, no outrage over censorship or bias then, perhaps there is a touch of bias in your outrage?

The second post was perhaps a bit overly PC in it's deletion but both sides of this debate are becoming VERY antagonistic and defensive and the 'join or die' concept at this point is very 'ultimatumish'.
When you draw a line in the sand the other guy isn't the only one bound by it, so are you.

If my intent was to censor your views why are there ten other posts of yours in that same thread, still there and untouched? Perhaps it is because they were posts that presented you points and views and nothing more.

You accuse me of bias and censorship yet you don't complain about the deletion and banning of those you disagree with.
You make no comment nor acknowledgment of the punitive actions taken on those other than you and act as though everyone else has gotten a pass but you.
While I am far from perfect, I try to NEVER ban or delete capriciously, only when I feel not doing so will result in larger problems in the future.
 
Top