Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Stand down?!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    12

    Post imported post

    What's the stand down on open carry about? Harmful Legislation? Can anyone elaborate?

  2. #2
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bad_ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cupertino, California, USA
    Posts
    328

    Post imported post

    See this post. http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/29118.html

    Apparently the pressure is coming from CalGuns.net
    I for one do not take marching orders from a pro-gun political group. I have my own reasons for carrying, and I'll continue to so until violence is used to stop me.

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    bad_ace wrote:
    and I'll continue to so until violence is used to stop me.
    Don't give them any ideas!

    Seriously though, CalGuns Foundation has been very civil about it. The situation has been muddied by rabble rousers on CalGuns.Net, but the "right people" I think have done nothing but try to convince us to see it their way.

    I've backed off significantly on my open carry activities, but mostly for personal reasons.

    I agree it's a time to be cautious, but I think they exaggerate the risk.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    49

    Post imported post

    As I said over on CalGuns


    I think we can all agree that the RKBA includes open, loaded, carry as well as concealed carry. It is difficult to see how one right can be exercised while the other right is denied when they are two aspects of the same right!

    However, what we seem to disagree on is the means of attaining the end. Some believe open carry will be the catalyst to bring about our goals and others believe the opposite. What we must bear in mind is that open carriers are not the enemy. They are our comrades, literally, in arms. Let's fight the right foe! If we spend too much time fighting amongst ourselves somebody might think we are Irish!

    We are all in this together. We may differ in our means of attaining the goal, but we all share the same goal.

    I can understand the lawyer's hesitancy regarding UOC with so muchlitigation already in play. The last thing they want is for any of us to poison the well.

    On the other hand, as has often been said on these forums, "a right not exercised is a right lost."

    Personally I believe every American should be able to own and carry anygun or other armamenthe/she chooses so long as he/she is not a convicted felon, adjudicated mental defective, or a Democrat (okay, okay, I don't really mean that last part).

    Personally I don't open carry. But I don't have to. I am one of the few who has a California CCW license. However, I support every Americans right under our Constitution, even those I disagree with! I support the right of the liberal left wing media to spread their vomitus. I support the right of cults to preach their heresy. I support the right of every American to own and carry guns. I support the right of every American to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

    The difference I have with so many other people is that they expect me to support their rights (which I do) but they refuse to support mine. You see, I believe they are only rights if they apply to all of us. Otherwise it is a mere privilege. And privileges are subject to being taken away.


  5. #5
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    well said.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Even if all gun owners died, they'd still infringe on the corpses.

    The legislature doesn't need any reason or event to infringe on the 2A and all law-abiding citizens, in favor of criminals. Their sole reason for existing is to support their fellow criminals. Treason.

    The school zones were expanded to 1500 feet BEFORE the first SD UOC meet. They just forgot to add the words "Gun Free" to it.

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=204874

    Government traitors (and racists, in the case of the Mulford Act) are to blame, not law-abiding citizens.

  7. #7
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Well i have been having to stow my weapon alot due to work but hehe that doesnt mean i left it at home or in a vehicle (as i have none) I will go home at the end of my journeys no one will stop me unless they are 11 44 too

  8. #8
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    Even if all gun owners died, they'd still infringe on the corpses.
    I plan on being buried with my loaded Ruger and there's no doubt that would be true. I'd still have the last laugh because if they wanted it...

    wait for it ...

    wait for it ...



    They'd have to pry it from my cold, dead, hands...
    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

  9. #9
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    I had a friend threaten me with a restraing order just because she hate firearms UMmm shes no longer a friend known here for 10 years now that suck f it

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    stuckinchico wrote:
    I had a friend threaten me with a restraing order just because she hate firearms UMmm shes no longer a friend known here for 10 years now that suck f it
    The system is a farce, and everyone knows how to manipulate it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJCRNXUngAM

  11. #11
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    I just read the opening of a thread started by Gene last week. Now he is advising not to UOC until June of 2010, maybe??!!

    First it was, wait until the CA legislature gets out of session and now its wait until June 2010, maybe? I think that is pretty unreasonable!!!!

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=207777

    I honestly do not know where these guys are coming from?!

    If it smells like dirty, rotten, smelly fish...it is!
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  12. #12
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Battlefields changes. You know ebb and flow, flanks advancing, falling back, reserves being sent in etc... We're having to fall back a little legally as Nordyke has been suspendeddue tothe coming9th Circuit en banc hearing.

    As of April 20th there was a 2nd A. Right we all could claim legally and even though it was not defined any new legislation could have likely been tied up with injunctions. Now there isn't any right to legally claim. What the 9th giveth the 9th taketh away .



    I would advise against solo carry and extreme caution with extensive planning for allgroup events. June 2010 is the likely date of a decision from SCOTUS (if they take a 2nd A incorporation case next term - an 87 3/4% chance)


  13. #13
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    I honestly do not know where these guys are coming from?!
    They come from being in the fight for years placing livelihoods, fortunes, and sacred honor on the line. They've saved lawful gun owners (including UOCers) from aggressive DAs and multiple felonies and the loss of Rights. THEY (us) have raised nearly $100,000+ in the lastcouple years for various legal fights. THEY ARE suing the State of CA and the District of Columbia in Federal Court.

    They've financially and legallybacked several UOCers which resulted in NO charges being filed in those cases.

    THEY are individuals here, on calguns.net, and those who started The Calguns Foundation. THEY are Civil Rights litigants Alan Gura (victor of Heller v DC), Don Kilmer and Don Kates of Nordyke v King (who have worked nearly for free for a decade on YOUR behalf). THEY are the Second Amendment Foundation, NRA, CRPA, and the Madison Society.

    THEY ARE US speaking openly about strategies which would be better kept secret. But to keep our coalition united these things must be spoken about openly.

    UOC or LOC will, IMO, play a strategic part in securing our Rights. But we are akin to a specialty or elite unit suited for a selected strategic target at a selected time. The bravery exhibited here with the risks takento personal liberty and personal fortunes tell me that I'm in the best of company. You ALL exhibit the characteristics of what makesour American Republic the best place on Earth. I salute ALL of you for being a part of this.

    I've been here since the beginning when it was only Condition Three carrying and me advising. It is my considered opinion that with the way the political and legal cardsare being dealt that it is not yet the time for our unit to play it's part in this battle.

    What we want to avoid is a Dunkirk. New legislation that can't be stopped by injunctions or suits when there is no legal Right established is just that.

    Waiting (again:X)for incorporation is wise. We've suffered for 70 years with the fall out from Miller and 40 years from the Mulford Act (12031) so lets be wise and pick our battles on the ground of our choosing with conditions favorable to the Self Defense Human Rights Victory we all seek.

  14. #14
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    I just read the opening of a thread started by Gene last week. Now he is advising not to UOC until June of 2010, maybe??!!

    First it was, wait until the CA legislature gets out of session and now its wait until June 2010, maybe? I think that is pretty unreasonable!!!!
    Put yourself in Gene's shoes. You're the head of the main group fighting for gun rights in California. Your goal is to free California citizens from the all restrictions placed on gun owners. Right now you've suffered a temporary setback which means your attack must be delayed for six months. What do you advise people to do?

    I think it's pretty fair to say that Gene is doing a great job trying to accomplish goals that we can all get behind. He could tell people to go out an open carry and if we somehow fail to get shall issue ccw, then no big deal. Except he's trying to win it ALL. Getting everything but shall issue ccw isn't winning to him. That's failing for all Californians. He's just trying to take his time and do everything the right way, in order to maximize our percentages and get all of our rights back.

    Naturally nobody has to listen to Gene, and he knows that. He cannot order anybody to not open carry, but he knows he can't influence those who won't listen to him anyway. He's only trying to influence the ones who will listen to him. So do whatever you'd like to.

  15. #15
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    And for those who missed it:

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...;postcount=125



    I've explained before that there is a reason for the order of operations here.

    We can get shall issue CCW if we attack that first (and say some things in that attack that OC proponents will not like - I'm warning you.) Once we secure shall issue CCW there is a specific way in which we can likely decriminalize LOC as well. I too don't want to be in the Texas situation of being cited for OC when I have a CCW too. That will also mean we'll head after GFSZ's too but those are certainly not the first cases you want to bring.

    If we went in the other order, then I worry simply that LOC will end up being prohibited by every mall and restaurant in California. Just look at what is happening in Arizona and Tenessee for goodness sake. Bars are posting "no guns" signs even after both states started allowing CCW carriers in. Don't for a moment think that if LOC is our only choice, that we will not suffer the effect of having gun haters outnumber us 3:2 and have that make the private sector make it virtually impossible to carry.

    LCAV and Brady would enjoy us attempting to get the equivalent ruling to Pruneyard on guns. Here's a hint - it will not happen. We'll have a mooted right to LOC - basically useless...

    I've open carried before in places where it is legal and the public support ratio is more like 1:1. It is nicer and easier than CCW. Personally I want to walk down Market Street in San Francisco with an AR on my back and a Sig on my hip and a s**t eating grin on my face.

    Do this in reverse, and we'll all hang separately. Remember that it took 100 years after the end of slavery for black people to stop being lynched. The patience we're asking for is very, very short in comparison. Also note that I'm certainly not saying no UOC. I'm saying no lone UOC and that it would be far, far better politically if the group UOC wasn't a bunch of normal white males.

    -Gene
    __________________
    Gene Hoffman
    Chairman, The Calguns Foundation - Member, CRPA Board of Directors
    DONATE NOW
    to support the rights of California gun owners.
    Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.


    "The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
    Ultima Ratio Liberarum

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    12

    Post imported post

    So......just to be clear. The UOC public is being asked, by Calguns to voluntarily waiveour 2A rights until such time that a court either rules for incorporation definitively or a shall issue state occurs. Either of which, might or might not happen.



    What is/was the motto of the Opencarry.org group again?

    Anyone? Anyone?

    Bueller? Bueller?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Red Bluff, California, USA
    Posts
    167

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    I honestly do not know where these guys are coming from?!


    They've financially and legallybacked several UOCers which resulted in NO charges being filed in those cases.
    And now THEY have decided that financially and legally backing UOC is not worth it to them at this time. And then THEY ask us all to stop UOC for the time being because THEY have different views/ideas of achieving results. Not only that put it seems that THEY only want to use UOC to reform CCW laws.

    I for one will continue to UOC or LOC where allowed. No one asked CA_Libertarian to stop when he first posted about UOC, no one asked anyone that began to OC to stop until THEY decided it wasnt worth spending money on UOC cases.

    Dont get me wrong, CGF has done great things for Gun laws in CA....but should we all follow their advice so blindly that we give up the exercising of the right that some of us have chosen to exercise.

    Hows the saying go? " A right unexercised is a right lost"?

    That's right we haven't lost it for good...only until June 2010 :shock:


    Look how far the OC movement has come in this state, how did we get there?? People willing to exercise their right to OC on the streets, officers receiving new training, new memos, new bulletins issued, officers interacting with OC'ers in the real world.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Red Bluff, California, USA
    Posts
    167

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    I just read the opening of a thread started by Gene last week. Now he is advising not to UOC until June of 2010, maybe??!!

    First it was, wait until the CA legislature gets out of session and now its wait until June 2010, maybe? I think that is pretty unreasonable!!!!
    Put yourself in Gene's shoes. You're the head of the main group fighting for gun rights in California. Your goal is to free California citizens from the all restrictions placed on gun owners. Right now you've suffered a temporary setback which means your attack must be delayed for six months. What do you advise people to do?

    I think it's pretty fair to say that Gene is doing a great job trying to accomplish goals that we can all get behind. He could tell people to go out an open carry and if we somehow fail to get shall issue ccw, then no big deal. Except he's trying to win it ALL. Getting everything but shall issue ccw isn't winning to him. That's failing for all Californians. He's just trying to take his time and do everything the right way, in order to maximize our percentages and get all of our rights back.

    Naturally nobody has to listen to Gene, and he knows that. He cannot order anybody to not open carry, but he knows he can't influence those who won't listen to him anyway. He's only trying to influence the ones who will listen to him. So do whatever you'd like to.
    Not all of us OC to try to get Shall issue CCW. Even if this state becomes Shall issue I will not get a CCW. Why should I have to ask for permission, and be given a permit to exercise a right??

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    the best OC in california is loaded OC in unincorporated areas - of course, you have to check to see if the County banned shooting there - the reason is that then there isno police e-check power to seize you for the load checks

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710

    Post imported post

    camsoup wrote:
    it seems that THEY only want to use UOC to reform CCW laws.
    You hit the nail squarely on the head there.

    Not that there is anything necessarily wrong with that. Some want CCW, some want LOC. Some (like me) want both. But many of the OC naysayers are CCW-privilege eletists.


  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    camsoup wrote:
    cato wrote:
    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    I honestly do not know where these guys are coming from?!


    They've financially and legally┬*backed several UOCers which resulted in NO charges being filed in those cases.
    Hows the saying go?┬* " A right unexercised is a right lost"?

    ┬*That's right we haven't lost it for good...only until June 2010 :shock:


    Look how far the OC movement has come in this state, how did we get there?? People willing to exercise their right to OC on the streets, officers receiving new training, new memos, new bulletins issued, officers interacting with OC'ers in the real world.
    To me, stopping open carry in CA until June 2010 at the earliest possible time would be a massive step back. All that training could be forgotten, the memos and bulletins forgotten if not rescinded (due to no more "threat" of lawsuits from people who are no longer putting themselves in a position to be violated in the first place). Veterans will retire, lateral transfers to other departments in the state will occur. LE awareness of OC will not be anywhere close to the level it is now if we hide for the better part of a year, and probably much longer because SCOTUS will not be ruling on loaded open carry unrestricted by permits, school zones, or other fake sensitive zones created by the government.

    The claim has often been made that LEOs deal with so many people they can hardly be expected to know who leaders of the OC movement are even if they've been stopped and illegally IDed multiple times. Well if they don't stop anyone at all, then it's reasonable to expect they would not have OCers fresh in their mind past June 2010 (again, at the earliest possible time).

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    49

    Post imported post

    JC wrote:
    So......just to be clear. The UOC public is being asked, by Calguns to voluntarily waiveour 2A rights . . .
    I think you may have missed the point. What Gene is saying is that you have no 2nd Amendment rights in California. Until incorporation the 2nd Amendment does not apply to us. Therefore if you open carry you will not be able to claim your rights (which you don't have) were violated. He is saying wait until there is some solid case law on record before ocing.

  23. #23
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Old Timer wrote:
    JC wrote:
    So......just to be clear. The UOC public is being asked, by Calguns to voluntarily waiveour 2A rights . . .
    I think you may have missed the point. What Gene is saying is that you have no 2nd Amendment rights in California. Until incorporation the 2nd Amendment does not apply to us. Therefore if you open carry you will not be able to claim your rights (which you don't have) were violated. He is saying wait until there is some solid case law on record before ocing.
    Exactly.

    There are two sides to this argument, and I feel like I can argue them both equally as well, which sadly leaves me in a position where I am confused and afraid of shadows and clowns.

    I know a lot of us have little desire to ask our government permission to do something we see as a right. But I can see times when I'd want to carry concealed (in the winter). There are a lot of people who have no desire to carry openly, for whatever reason. While I think they're not seeing the full picture, and that they will eventually come around to liking OC, I do hope that they can get their CCW if that's their preferred carry method.

    At the same time, I totally see why somebody would want to continue UOCing. I certainly wouldn't want to be caught without a gun when I needed one (and for some reason LUCC wasn't an option). I also wouldn't want to take what I know is a fundamental human right and discard it as if it wasn't one. Every person has the right to defend themselves, and the second and fourteenth amendments couldn't be clearer in their intention. The UOC movement has come so far in this state. Before we had to educate every single police officer about the law, and now a lot of them already know about UOC. Why would we want to take a step back from all this forward progress we've made?

    I hate to say it though, I think Gene's way is the practical way, and the "continue UOCing anyway" way is the idealistic way.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Old Timer wrote:
    JC wrote:
    So......just to be clear. The UOC public is being asked, by Calguns to voluntarily waive┬*our 2A rights . . .
    I think you may have missed the point. What Gene is saying is that you have no 2nd Amendment rights in California. Until incorporation the 2nd Amendment does not apply to us. Therefore if you open carry you will not be able to claim your rights (which you don't have) were violated. He is saying wait until there is some solid case law on record before ocing.
    It's been said on other threads that 4A rights are being violated, even with the 2A totally out of the picture. So 4A claims continue to be valid.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    49

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    There are two sides to this argument, and I feel like I can argue them both equally as well, which sadly leaves me in a position where I am confused and afraid of shadows and clowns.
    I know the feeling! I am on both sides of this issue. I believe in States Rights to the point that I agree with General Robert E. Lee, when asked to be the commanding General of the Army of the Potomac (US Army) he replied, "I am first a Virginian, then an American!" The rest is history.

    But, on the other hand, I believe the US Constitution applies to each and every American regardless of the State in which they reside. So, I tend to be on both sides of the fence on the States Rights issue.

    Regarding OCing, I can see merit in both sides of the argument. As I see the 2nd Amendment as being a fundamental right I can't imagine any state saying that it does not apply without incorporation and therefore, in my opinion, OCing is a fundamental right. However, until I have some case law on my side I am not willing to be the test case, nor would I enjoy seeing some reactionary legislation passed that will require additional litigation to overcome, so I can see merit in the position being taken the CGF, et elii.

    Talk about fence straddling!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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