Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 69

Thread: UOC Without Calguns

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    As some here in California know, Calguns has been on the forefront in regaining our "Right to keep and bear arms".

    Many of us are members of both groups and have seen the divisiveness, disdain and what low regard they seem to hold for us.

    I recently tried to see if we could reach some agreement that would benefit both our groups. It seems that a fair majority of them seem extremely disinterested in working with us.

    Tell me what you think. Can a compromise be made?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    edit!
    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    A consideration though.

    If we are to do anything about it, we need to apply for CCW's in the respective areas we live.

    I say once we get organized that this, along with requesting permission from school districts, are some of the first things we do.

    Let us get the next area meeting planned and try to make it a big one. I would like to see if we can't kind of nominate leadership. Without point men it is difficult to organize.

  4. #4
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    I think there is a disconnect between the people at calguns.net and the people behind the calguns foundation. The members over at calguns.net cover the range of all types of Californian gun owners, and they're no different from the breakdown of non-gun people in terms of how they feel about open carry. Most non-gun people don't like OCing, most calguns.net members don't like OCing. Whatever. I think if/when Gene and his cohorts win shall issue for California, then we'll start having more of the population start to think about OCing, and our numbers will swell.

    There are probably a few different anti-UOC types at calguns.net:

    Those that think carrying an unloaded gun is dumb. That's fair, I think it's fairly ridiculous, but it's better than not carrying, and I think it's better than LUCC too. If shall issue permits are released, we can bet that LOC is just a hop, skip, and a jump away. These people then have no reason to hate on OCing.

    Those that think OCing in general is a bad idea because of whatever reason (criminals will get the drop on you, the population will run screaming, etc.). These people just want a CCW and that's it. At least, they think that's all they want. They've never carried before. Give them a CCW and 90+ degree weather and they'll be thinking about OCing, I guarantee it. I suspect we'll win over small percentages of these people during the first heat wave after shall issue is passed. I can't imagine there being too many people wearing a jacket that won't print along with flip-flops and shorts.

    Those that are just plain opposed to people carrying guns at all. These people we won't win until a significant percentage of the population is carrying and the crime rates have fallen. This will only come shortly after shall issue or 5-10 years after LOC is passed.

    I don't think the calguns foundation is anti-oc. Gene has said he wants to OC down Market street in SF. He's also hinted that he considers OCing handguns to the range (not in a holster, just throwing it on the dashboard). The foundation is trying to win cases. The majority of supporters of the foundation want ccw. Gene and company think if they go after LOC first, they'll never get shall issue ccw. It makes perfect sense for the foundation to be doing what they are doing.

    We'll see the OC movement grow, I'm absolutely confident in that. We need more people carrying, and certain things have to happen before more people are carrying. Then our numbers will grow significantly.

  5. #5
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    I don't like the "slight-of-hand" political nature of the group. I don't like being portrayed as the scapegoat for every bad bill that comes along. (I really believe that Gene is stepping up bad PR on us.) I doubt that I will re-up on my NRA membership if they don't do something to temper theirhandling of OC'ers.

    I have the feeling that we are going to be the "pawn" sacrificed in their chess match. Once they get "shall issue" CC (if they ever get it), I don't think we will ever hear from them again.

    It's a matter of trust...and I don't trust them.

    I say we go off on our own for now. Work on educating people and increase our numbers. We don't getCal-Gun support now.
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

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

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    Can a compromise be made?
    Can a compromise be made between two immovable objects?

    No. Only distance and time can create 'compromise' between them.

    As advocates of a pure right, in a time and place where rights are not recognized, we are not in a position of power or influence. At least, not yet. As has been evidenced in the exchange at Calguns, many over there do not feel compelled to work with anyone from the open carry community.

    We have come too early to the party, and offered too little for them to endure our protests. This will change once we have a favorable ruling from the Nordyke en banc.

    Our compromise should be to remain patient until the court announces its ruling to incorporate the 2nd against the states. Calguns doesnt have any obligation to us, but their compromise would be to engender support, cooperation and offer advice in advocating the 2nd amendment in joint efforts with open carry.

    I am of the understanding that a ruling could run as far off as June 2010- but according to one of Gene's posts, they have already selected the panel and they have decided to allow video. I really don't think it will take 10 months to deliberate over Nordyke. I would predict that we will have a decision much sooner than that.

    Lets get to that hurdle and reassess our strategy once we are there.
    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
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    My basic proposal is that we will still organize, have events, and recruit, but that we will do so in a low-key manner long enough for them to get the cases they want taken care of.

    When they get CCW we will let loose the dogs of war and get our LOC. . .

    It seems to me a fair way for us to both get what we want, but apparently they don't want that.

    What I wonder, is if they are willing to stop the bashing on Calguns and leave us relatively alone, could we get an agreement here that we will not be so "in your face" about our events?

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    My basic proposal is that we will still organize, have events, and recruit, but that we will do so in a low-key manner long enough for them to get the cases they want taken care of.

    When they get CCW we will let loose the dogs of war and get our LOC. . .

    It seems to me a fair way for us to both get what we want, but apparently they don't want that.

    What I wonder, is if they are willing to stop the bashing on Calguns and leave us relatively alone, could we get an agreement here that we will not be so "in your face" about our events?
    Apparently any threads whatsoever about our events are too "in your face" for CGN - as they cannot help themselves from invading our threads and turning them into massive bash-fests. I think the bashing can only be stopped through force from the top. Bans against ALL bashers were NOT handed out even after multiple warnings that they were coming. The force is weak with this one.

    The status quo in regards to the 2A in CA is that it is NOT a right, it is a privilege, paid for with bribes. Either "legal" bribes in the form of infringing fees, or illegal bribes in the form of campaign contributions, quid pro quo, to gain the license to keep and bear arms everywhere reasonable.

    Say we get "shall-issue". Great. The status quo is only slightly changed; illegal bribes are no longer necessary to gain the license, but legal ones still are - and those legal ones have no limit on how high they can be set. $2,000 CCW fee? I would not be surprised - if you can't block the gun owners, at least block the poor masses who can barely afford cheap 1911 clones, let alone high-end custom 1911s. And make heaps of cash for your department which would be pushed further and further into irrelevancy, the more law-abiding gun carriers out there!

    So, the infringement of the 2A continues, the RKBA is still not a right at all, and criminals in and out of government rejoice.

    Shall-issue to me means every non-prohibited person in the state automatically gets a hard plastic card in the mail on a yearly basis reminding them they can carry guns everywhere with SCOTUS-limited exceptions. Whether they own guns, hate guns, or are indifferent.

    That is not what it means to the powers that be. Not even close; not even in the same universe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Legend_AB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Redlands, California, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    I agree with Theseus. We can still have our meets and events, but just organize them quietly and not announce them all over the place.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    And apparently because I used the words "take action" and "getting louder" I am propositioning violence against someone. . .

    Amazing.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    And apparently because I used the words "take action" and "getting louder" I am propositioning violence against someone. . .

    Amazing.
    What happened?

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote: Typical.



  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    I know I am not your leader. I am no more a leader here than any other person.

    I have talked about what I don't like about Calguns, and even here in this thread expressed my tire over the attitudes. . . But let us step back a second.

    I want you to ask yourselves these questions and answer honestly.
    1. Other than the cause of "right", what do we have to offer the cause. And I don't mean Calguns, I mean the cause of OC?
    2. Is what we have to offer today enough to meet the full challenge that we face in California?
    3. Can we, in the next 10 months, work hard enough to change enough peoples minds to make LOC a reality in California? 24 Months? 46 Months?
    4. Can we, as we are, actually achieve anything if the very 2A supporting lawyers that have the skill, power and influence to actually change something don't consider us "team players".
    Consider what Calguns is really asking of us and think for a moment. Taking away the rhetoric and the loudmouths on Calguns that are against us. . . Would you rather have Calguns an allie or not at all?

    They have resources, skill, and numbers at their disposal.

    I also propose that we can still accomplish much of the same goals over the next 10 months than we would otherwise have been able to, and perhaps even better.

    We can still have public events. Just not carrying. Until we get better media contacts and better spin control it is actually a dis-service to us anyway, right?

    Take a mall for example. If we event OC to a mall, what would likely happen? We get kicked out.

    What if we have a table at 2 entrances of the mall with literature and information? Will we get kicked out? No. 1st Amendment speech! It is protected.

    We would be able to reach more people with 30 minutes of handing out pamphlets and information than all day of walking around the mall. Dont' believe me? Lets try it!

    And since we are still working on building OUR organization we don't have to worry so much if Calguns doesn't stick around because we will have amassed an army to fight for our own rights.

    Working together is better for us all. . . believe it.

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    Two things to remember about CalGuns.net:

    1. It is an open forum, and most of the discussion there is NOT the official position (or even the un-official positoin) of The CalGuns Foundation.
    2. Out of thousands of members, there are a dozen or two that think we're idiots. From what I've seen, about twice that number like what we're doing. Then there's the vast majority that are indifferent.
    My point is that there is a very small number of anti-OC people there, and to compensate for lack of numbers, they post a lot and are very "loud" about their opinion. Then they try to drag us into silly arguments so they can make us look as petty as them. (And, unfortunately, we often fall for it.)

    IMO, we can continue being high-profile. Just cross-post your event there, then IGNORE the trolls. Simply do not respond to them. Then when your event goes smoothly, simply post how it went, and again resist the urge to respond to trolls.

    I still believe that some day CGF will morally and financially support OC, and the reason they will is because most of their moral/financial supporters want that. I think most of the board members also want this. However, I think it's pretty obvious that OC takes a back seat to both CCW reform and OLL/AW reform. So, I think we're in for a long wait before we see them get around to our cause.

    While we would greatly benefit from such support, I believe we can still get a lot done until then. I think we are already making great progress. I remember just a short 14 months ago police were guffawing at the idea of OC. Several memos and training sessions later, most the PDs are becoming desensitized to the idea. They know what to expect, and what is expected of them.

    Anybody who says we've accomplished nothing is a fool.

    Carry on.
    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.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    As some here in California know, Calguns has been on the forefront in regaining our "Right to keep and bear arms".

    Many of us are members of both groups and have seen the divisiveness, disdain and what low regard they seem to hold for us.

    I recently tried to see if we could reach some agreement that would benefit both our groups. It seems that a fair majority of them seem extremely disinterested in working with us.

    Tell me what you think. Can a compromise be made?
    Compromise cannot be reached with those who refuse to compromise.

    Concessions must be made from both sides for a compromise to be reached.

    If only one side makes concessions, you wind up in the end embracing the oppositions viewpoint without having the opposisiton ever even recognizing your viewpoint.

    This is a form of incremental dialectic where two sides start with opposing viewpoints and one is willing to make concessions and the other demands a shift to the middle ground while in reality not making any concessions. This ends with one side shifting, and the other holding ground, and then the next demand for a shift to middle ground is made, and another shift is made, and the two sides are closer, but only closer to the side that did not compromise. Each shift is smaller, and thus less painful, and less objectionable, and finally you end up at UNCONDTIONAL SURRENDER.

    UOC|--------------------------------|----------------|--------|----|--|-|CalGuns

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Buffalo Gap, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    193

    Post imported post

    I am supportive of anyone who is lawfully exercising their RKBA under the 2A and Heller and en banc Nordyke to come - I share the view that the 2A will be incorporated to the states - hopefully by June 2010 if not earlier -

    IMHO, we should be planning for the post-incorporation reality now rather than getting into trivial and often petty debates which are like debates over whether God exists - they get heated and no one changes anyone else's mind -

    In a post-incorporation reality, most of CA's gun laws will fail to pass constitutional muster. Also, we need to realize that unlike CCW, OCing is a form of 1st Amendment exercise when coupled with CA's oppressive gun laws and the expression of political dissatisfaction with it - I believe there was a reference to this in the now-stayed Nordyke decision -

    For me, the value of OCing has to do with reconditioning the public to be comfortable with lawfully armed citizens again. Currently, the public is conditioned to have some form of comfortable discomfort with only cops and criminals being armed.

    The public is also pretty bought into the PR sound bites of Brady and the VPC and their propaganda - so breaking them out of that mindset is hard and responsible OCing can help with that -

    But OCing can easily lead to terrible results in the legislature before (and even after) the 2A is incorporated to CA and the states - so we're playing with fire if we OC in too loud a fashion publicly -

    And yet, it is not realistic to think that lawfully armed citizens aware of their RKBA will simply not exercise their rights, especially when there are convoluted laws that can be navigated to allow some form of public exercise of the right via UOC -

    I have made a personal choice to UOC only when necessary for my self-defense and family defense and to publicly carry empty holsters and literature when making the point of how oppressed CA gun owners are. Where possible I prefer LOC and CC on private property and where necessary I will engage in LUCC -

    Every time I leave CA and get back to a place that respects my RKBA (and my permits), I am relieved and feel more free than when I'm in CA - ironically, CA is one of the least 'free' most highly regulated states I've ever been in despite what popular myths might say about California Living.

    As for Calguns, they have made major strides of progress that help every CA gun owner, and I don't see how anyone benefits from intentionally frustrating what Calguns is trying to do -

    And it must be noted that OC was affirmed by the White House as not being a problem despite all the panties that got wadded up over the 2 incidents at the health care forums - and those two events got huge press and injected the issue into the debate forcefully -

    The question to my mind is how well the responsible OC people will rise to the challenge of keeping the debate framed and focused on the RKBA pre-existing the US Const. and the 2A and even reminding the public that the British restrictions on the (then) Englishman's common law RKBA was, equal with the taxation/representation issues, as the complaints of the American Revolutionaries that gave rise to the American Revolution -

    While I have the floor, I also echo the comments made elsewhere that only since Heller have lawful gun owners been able to 'come out of the closet' as gun owners and only by interacting as responsible gun owners, IMHO, will people who are dangerous gun owners be revealed and subject to gentle community intervention by their peers - this is the real way to reduce mental health related gun violence -

    OC is definitely 'coming out of the closet' as a responsible gun owner, having the two-fold positive impact of deterring crime (and related gun violence) and encouraging better conditions for peer intervention that reduces mental health gun violence.

    So, Calgun's political agendas aside, the real positive societal impacts, IMHO, come from responsible OCing - therefore, the 'game IS worth the candle."


  18. #18
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    I want you to ask yourselves these questions and answer honestly.
    Other than the cause of "right", what do we have to offer the cause. And I don't mean Calguns, I mean the cause of OC? Not much. Sure we have a few brochures, we have a few who are willing to attend an event. But we aren't organized, we don't have a formal organization, we don't have a board to run the organization,we don't havefunding, we don't have a political/LEA liason, we don't have a voice. Hell we don't even have t-shirts, even the Escondido group has t-shirts (not that we need t-shirts but you get my drift.)

    Is what we have to offer today enough to meet the full challenge that we face in California? NO, not even close.

    Can we, in the next 10 months, work hard enough to change enough peoples minds to make LOC a reality in California? 24 Months? 46 Months? I think we're looking at a minimum of 24 months AFTER 2A incorporation. What we can do right now before incorporation (between 2-9months)is get organized.

    Can we, as we are, actually achieve anything if the very 2A supporting lawyers that have the skill, power and influence to actually change something don't consider us "team players". Sure we can makeprogress, the SD group has proven that.But whether or not they consider us team players is a moot point. Until we areorganized and/or they are ready to tackle LOC on their time table, they'll never "negotiate" with us. And why should they, we are the "wrench" being thrown into their perfectly laid out plans. The harder we try to work "with" them, the harder they'll push back trying to shut us down.

    Consider what Calguns is really asking of us and think for a moment. Taking away the rhetoric and the loudmouths on Calguns that are against us. . . Would you rather have Calguns an allie or not at all? Ultimately we'll need them as an allie, but for now it is exceedingly clear we'll have to go it alone.

    We can still have public events. Just not carrying. Until we get better media contacts and better spin control it is actually a dis-service to us anyway, right? Why not carry? We can still carry, we just need to get a more organized. We may not need to carry at all events, but I see no need to stop carrying cold turkey at all events. Your mall idea for example would be an example where we don't carry, but other venues that aren't full of FUD why not?


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

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Theseus wrote:
    I want you to ask yourselves these questions and answer honestly.
    Other than the cause of "right", what do we have to offer the cause. And I don't mean Calguns, I mean the cause of OC? Not much. Sure we have a few brochures, we have a few who are willing to attend an event. But we aren't organized, we don't have a formal organization, we don't have a board to run the organization,we don't havefunding, we don't have a political/LEA liason, we don't have a voice. Hell we don't even have t-shirts, even the Escondido group has t-shirts (not that we need t-shirts but you get my drift.)

    Is what we have to offer today enough to meet the full challenge that we face in California? NO, not even close.

    Can we, in the next 10 months, work hard enough to change enough peoples minds to make LOC a reality in California? 24 Months? 46 Months? I think we're looking at a minimum of 24 months AFTER 2A incorporation. What we can do right now before incorporation (between 2-9months)is get organized.

    Can we, as we are, actually achieve anything if the very 2A supporting lawyers that have the skill, power and influence to actually change something don't consider us "team players". Sure we can makeprogress, the SD group has proven that.But whether or not they consider us team players is a moot point. Until we areorganized and/or they are ready to tackle LOC on their time table, they'll never "negotiate" with us. And why should they, we are the "wrench" being thrown into their perfectly laid out plans. The harder we try to work "with" them, the harder they'll push back trying to shut us down.

    Consider what Calguns is really asking of us and think for a moment. Taking away the rhetoric and the loudmouths on Calguns that are against us. . . Would you rather have Calguns an allie or not at all? Ultimately we'll need them as an allie, but for now it is exceedingly clear we'll have to go it alone.

    We can still have public events. Just not carrying. Until we get better media contacts and better spin control it is actually a dis-service to us anyway, right? Why not carry? We can still carry, we just need to get a more organized. We may not need to carry at all events, but I see no need to stop carrying cold turkey at all events. Your mall idea for example would be an example where we don't carry, but other venues that aren't full of FUD why not?

    Therein may be the compromose. . . We may be able to OC at some events. I consider that we can have many more private events where we can introduce new OC'ers to the cause. . . educate them and prepare them.

    It has been said before, I think that if we just ignore the nay-sayers and coordinate our events and efforts we will be OK.

    At the same time, I was pretty pissed when Kestryll came in thumping his chest at me when I was the one trying to keep it civil and merely responded to the negative. I had to step away for a second.

    Now, thre is a small branch of people that are being less vocal against us and that are branching off of Calguns because of the heavy handedness of the moderation.

    I have been offered a forum on that groups board where OC can get its own little home, and I have accepted.

    Now, about getting organized, we should decide if we want one larger chapter that included LA, OC, Riverside and SB or each county has a chapter.

    I have a website that I have been trying to build to assist us in our quest. Although OCDO is, as discussed, the main method of communication and it does a pretty good job of providing information, it is diluted with all the posts and such.

    I propose that we construct that site as a portal for information. A quick, concise site that allows us to collaborate better as a group, inform the public, and provide a singular place where out chapter can spread its own word.

    Take a look. If you have any ideas, let me know. If you think you can help build the site, or have the interest, then PM me. I will work with getting each person a login and admin rights so that we can begin to build.

    ocrights.org We can use the one site for all chapters or each chapter can have its own custom site. . .that is to be determined at a later date.

  20. #20
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979

    Post imported post

    As others have already mentioned, I would recommend not confusing the standing of the CalGuns Foundation with that of the Calguns.net discussion forum.

    I believe they have made it clear that the Foundation supports OC, but that they feel they must use a methodology for overall 2a progress in CA which OC currently complicates.

    In other words, they do indeed want to embrace OC in CA. But according to the path they have found for extending 2a rights to the most people possible; some forms of OC can cause unneccesary hurdles to their strategy.

    When the time is right I think you will see the Foundation wholeheartedly endorse OC.

    In the meantime, the CalGuns Foundation will continue to be an effective aspect of the furtherance of gun rights in this state. Just as importantly, so will we here at OCDO.

  21. #21
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    I have been offered a forum on that groups board where OC can get its own little home, and I have accepted.

    I have a website that I have been trying to build to assist us in our quest. Although OCDO is, as discussed, the main method of communication and it does a pretty good job of providing information, it is diluted with all the posts and such.

    I propose that we construct that site as a portal for information. A quick, concise site that allows us to collaborate better as a group, inform the public, and provide a singular place where out chapter can spread its own word.

    ocrights.org We can use the one site for all chapters or each chapter can have its own custom site. . .that is to be determined at a later date.
    My personal take is that we already have all the information resources we need at our fingertips.

    CA sub forum at OCDO = non hostile environment to discuss OC in CA

    A new OC subforum at CalGuns.net would be nice, but at this time I don't see any added benefit due to the overwhelming hostility of many posters there. In time, as the CalGuns Foundation endoreses OC, I think the tenor of post at CalGuns.net will change very quickly and I think our numbers will swell dramaticly.

    I like the idea of a concise information portal with regard to CA specific OC information. I think that is currently satisfiedby http://www.californiaopencarry.org/Is there a deficiencey there which needs to be addressed?

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    At the same time, I was pretty pissed when Kestryll came in thumping his chest at me when I was the one trying to keep it civil and merely responded to the negative. I had to step away for a second.
    SOP. Don't ban the rude, blast those who attempt to counter them.

    The official or unofficial position on OC means nothing if the SOP is to favor antis over pros 99.9% of the time and throw the rules of the forum re: civility out the window.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    At the same time, I was pretty pissed when Kestryll came in thumping his chest at me when I was the one trying to keep it civil and merely responded to the negative. I had to step away for a second.
    'Chest thumping'? No.

    Chest thumping implies bluster and posturing.
    I meant what I said and I will not put up with ultimatums and threats to harm or undo all the efforts and gains that have been made over the last four years plus in my 'house'.

    I also made it clear that discussion and discourse was welcome for all as long as the posturing and blustering was left at the door.

    That is why this was clearly stated in my post:

    These are basic criteria designed to allow real discussion and not just posturing and blustering and they apply to ALL involved in a discussion.
    You will also note that although I've been online all morning I've not responded to that thread.
    Why?
    Because the interaction has been topical, civil and if not productive at times at least not destructive.

    You are complaining about feeling 'cut out' but at the same time decrying that which you feel cut out of as 'bad' or 'the enemy' and addressing it as such.
    How much cooperation can you expect with an approach like that?

    I don't expect anyone to come in hat in hand playing Oliver Twist but I can tell you for certain that coming in on the other end of the spectrum is not going to end well, it never does.

    The choice is simple and it applies across the board, not just to proponents of 'OC', 'AWs', CCWs or what have you, but to all.

    Come in swinging and looking for a fight, and probably get one.
    Or come in talking and LISTENING and probably achieve something.

    There's not much to it other than that.


  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    mjones wrote:
    A new OC subforum at CalGuns.net would be nice, but at this time I don't see any added benefit due to the overwhelming hostility of many posters there.
    Just to clarify on this.

    If there were to be an OC subforum on Calguns it would be in the same Category as the CCW, Ladies, Military and LEO forums. That being the Specialty Forums.

    Each of those has it's own special rules over and above the regular rules of the Forum to prevent them from being turned in to a bashfest.

    DISCUSSION of OC would be allowed, if it went beyond that warnings would be issued and if the same person became problematic a second time they would simply lose access to that forum.
    Just like cop bashing in the LEO forum will cost you access to the LEO forum.

    The rules are stricter in that Category and the penalties swifter and more severe but the discussion is more targeted and the debate more civil.

  25. #25
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Theseus wrote:
    I have been offered a forum on that groups board where OC can get its own little home, and I have accepted.
    I'm perfectly happy continuing to use OCDO for all of our open carry communications. I don't see the need for the OC forum on calguns, but if they want it, that's their prerogative.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •