• 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.

California Logo Run-off

Which logo do you like best?

  • Logo A

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Logo B

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Sons of Liberty

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

There is not a decisive winner in the initial logo vote. So let's do a run off vote between the two designs that got the most votes.

Hopefully, we'll see a greater separation. If not, we probably need to find an amicable solution.

Here are the run-off designs:

A:

07.jpg


B:

12.jpg
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

sorry but A seems way to wreckless to me.

You have to think, this image will be seen by people who have NO IDEA what open carry is or the legality. If they see that "logo" and realize its legal they will just picture EXACTLY the image the brady campaign is trying to portray. People flashing their weapons grabbing them and holding them recklessly in the air. Sorry but doesn't fly with me. Might be a great video game picture, but you guy's have to think of it as if you were someone with no idea about guns, trying to be convinced of the pros of open carry.

edit: plus the whole "wild west shootout" stereotype of the revolver isn't helping much. The other gun MUCH better represents an image of self defense, since all police carry that type of weapon; and most people think only cops have the right to defend themselves. When I look at image A, I get the image of "some old man holding his gun till he dies, after he dies society doesn't have to deal with gun owners any more."
 

demnogis

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

So treetbikerr6, what's the symbology there?

Streetbikerr6 wrote:
sorry but A seems way to wreckless to me.

You have to think, this image will be seen by people who have NO IDEA what open carry is or the legality. If they see that "logo" and realize its legal they will just picture EXACTLY the image the brady campaign is trying to portray. People flashing their weapons grabbing them and holding them recklessly in the air. Sorry but doesn't fly with me. Might be a great video game picture, but you guy's have to think of it as if you were someone with no idea about guns, trying to be convinced of the pros of open carry.

edit: plus the whole "wild west shootout" stereotype of the revolver isn't helping much. The other gun MUCH better represents an image of self defense, since all police carry that type of weapon; and most people think only cops have the right to defend themselves. When I look at image A, I get the image of "some old man holding his gun till he dies, after he dies society doesn't have to deal with gun owners any more."
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

demnogis wrote:
So treetbikerr6, what's the symbology there?

Streetbikerr6 wrote:
sorry but A seems way to wreckless to me.

You have to think, this image will be seen by people who have NO IDEA what open carry is or the legality. If they see that "logo" and realize its legal they will just picture EXACTLY the image the brady campaign is trying to portray. People flashing their weapons grabbing them and holding them recklessly in the air. Sorry but doesn't fly with me. Might be a great video game picture, but you guy's have to think of it as if you were someone with no idea about guns, trying to be convinced of the pros of open carry.

edit: plus the whole "wild west shootout" stereotype of the revolver isn't helping much. The other gun MUCH better represents an image of self defense, since all police carry that type of weapon; and most people think only cops have the right to defend themselves. When I look at image A, I get the image of "some old man holding his gun till he dies, after he dies society doesn't have to deal with gun owners any more."


The symbology of picture A represents to the ignorant public the image of "Oh just a group of old men clamoring to keep their weapons, once they die off we wont have to deal with them"

Symbology of B represents the image of "looks like an organization of law abiding citizenswho want to protect themselves from the dangerous criminals who inhabit California"

Is that the answer you wanted or were you asking something else.



edit: here is a better idea of the symbology of the 2 logo's concepts, now this is a bit extreme, but sois the general public's imagination when they know nothing about howguns are used to DEFEND against other's with guns...

open.jpg
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

I probably shouldn't get involved seeing as howB is mine, butwhile I think A looks really good, and works for me/us, but i feel itsays "fight for your right", or "from my cold dead hands", something that mightbe unsettling to potential open carriers.I tried to design B to be non-aggressive, simple,and professional.

just my bias opinion...
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
I probably shouldn't get involved seeing as howB is mine, butwhile I think A looks really good, and works for me/us, but i feel itsays "fight for your right", or "from my cold dead hands", something that mightbe unsettling to potential open carriers.I tried to design B to be non-aggressive, simple,and professional.

just my bias opinion...
I agree, and sorry, have not watched boondock in quite a long time! Great movie though.
 

Captain_Awesome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
60
Location
Fresno, California, USA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
I probably shouldn't get involved seeing as howB is mine, butwhile I think A looks really good, and works for me/us, but i feel itsays "fight for your right", or "from my cold dead hands", something that mightbe unsettling to potential open carriers.I tried to design B to be non-aggressive, simple,and professional.

just my bias opinion...
I have to agree here also. The fist in the air is a little bit too aggressive. I do think that it does have a more finished look to it (no offense dirtykoala), but in terms of concept - which is what we're voting on at this stage - B represents us better.
I'm sure with a little work we can make B look just as good as A. And, as discussed before, we can change the line underneath "a right not ..." to whatever we want; even change it for each application(sticker, shirt, patch, etc.).
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

MudCamper wrote:
I vote no on both. If anyone wants a shirt with a logo on it, go to cafepress.com and make one for yourself. I do it all the time.
Thanks for the constructive criticism. Wait, you left none.Why don't either appeal to you?
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

I am not in the voting since I am not from CA but the first one with the clenched fist looks very violent to me. Is that the message you are trying to get across? When I saw it I immediately remembered the athletes being stripped of their medals at the Olympics for raising their fists on the medal stand.
 

Captain_Awesome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
60
Location
Fresno, California, USA
imported post

I think the idea is to have one logo we can all use. That way we're a bit more cohesive as a group, even if we don't have any real central organization. What the logo is doesn't matter as much as the fact that we have one. We look more like a group of people with a common goal, as opposed to a bunch of crazies with guns who want to change some law that noone cares about.

I would also think it may help with police encounters. We've already seen that they're much less willing to detain and harass open carriers in groups(reasons for this can be discussed in another thread.). This is strictly theoretical - but by seeing a logo that they know on a shirt, in their minds the person wearing the shirt is now not an individual open carrying, but a member of a group who open carries, knows their laws, carry voice recorders, etc. Am I making sense, or just rambling?
 

MudCamper

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

Streetbikerr6 wrote:
MudCamper wrote:
I vote no on both. If anyone wants a shirt with a logo on it, go to cafepress.com and make one for yourself. I do it all the time.
Thanks for the constructive criticism. Wait, you left none.Why don't either appeal to you?
I just don't like them. Sorry. Just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions...

And we are not a membership organization. We don't have dues. We don't have a platform or set of plans or goals that we all agree on. What is the purpose of this logo? Just to put on a t-shirt? OK. I did offer some constructive criticism about that: If you like a particular logo, or your own logo for that matter, go to cafepress and make yourself a t-shrit. What's not constructive about that suggestion?

Let me try to articulate how I feel about this a little more. If you want your own symbol, that's fine. But it feels like there is an effort to create one single symbol that somebody (who I don't know) is then going to say, "This symbol represents all of us. Use no other symbols." I don't want representation. I may not agree with your symbol or your ideas. I'm finding it difficult to articulate well, but I just know i don't like this whole logo thing.
 

MudCamper

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

Captain_Awesome wrote:
I think the idea is to have one logo we can all use. That way we're a bit more cohesive as a group, even if we don't have any real central organization. What the logo is doesn't matter as much as the fact that we have one. We look more like a group of people with a common goal, as opposed to a bunch of crazies with guns who want to change some law that noone cares about.

I would also think it may help with police encounters. We've already seen that they're much less willing to detain and harass open carriers in groups(reasons for this can be discussed in another thread.). This is strictly theoretical - but by seeing a logo that they know on a shirt, in their minds the person wearing the shirt is now not an individual open carrying, but a member of a group who open carries, knows their laws, carry voice recorders, etc. Am I making sense, or just rambling?
You are making sense. It's quite apropos given what I just posted. But again, I don't like either logo.

I think the police are confused and are always asking, "Are you a member of Open Carry?" because they don't get us. We are a bunch of "crazies with guns", or put another way, libertarian-minded individuals. The police are used to dealing with gangs or other group-identity-minded people.
 
Top