Centralized Non-Profit

imported post

Is OCDO a nonprofit? Have there been any efforts to get nonprofit recognition?

Is there any interest in having a centralized CA non-profit open carry group?

Would you think support of sheriffs and local business that support open carry would be not in line with the general schema of NPOs?


The reason for proposing such a thing is to run a more effective campaign of awareness.

Media coverage can be skewed, and only a very few people directly encounter and are available to be pamphleted by open carriers at events.

Having an NPO and being able to solicit donations and support would go some distance in the PR campaign, yes?

imported post

Running a nonprofit is no simple endeavor. You need accountants, attorneys, and lots of volunteers and donations.

I think a better tactic is to wait until open carry is fully lined up in the sights of NPOs like CGF and Madison Society. Then donate like crazy to them.

imported post

Who the hell told you that? You don't need lawyers, accountants, etc. etc. unless you want to have them.

The railroad club I am a member of was a corp. and I aided them to complete the IRS paperwork and get their 501(c)(3) status. We've been operating fine for nearly 2 years now as such.

Maybe if you are a 501(c)(3) with a few hundred million dollars you might need all that stuff, but for a small NPO it isn't needed. Unless you have over $30,000 (or something like that, I forget the amount) annual income in the NPO, it's pretty simple with minimum paperwork to file each year. Now there's a lot of attorneys and accountants out there that will tell you otherwise, but they are also willing to do the work for you for a fee!

You do need DONATIONS, but I'm sure there's a few gun shops and pro-gun businesses as well as private people like members here who would make a donation to a NPO for the tax exemption, especially if we were to implement a "sponsors" page with their logo and contact info.

You would need officers, and a board of directors, but that's no big deal. We manage to accomplish all that with a dozen members and a monthly meeting.

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

Running a nonprofit is no simple endeavor. You need accountants, attorneys, and lots of volunteers and donations.

I think a better tactic is to wait until open carry is fully lined up in the sights of NPOs like CGF and Madison Society. Then donate like crazy to them.

Click to expand...

It may actually end up being a more efficient tactic, but we are not all members of CGF or the Madison Society, and we will not always agree on the most effective use of funds or case endorsements or promotional material.

Autonomy has its great advantages and disadvantages, and we are all united by our respect and love of both this country and the Constitution.

I have created and operated with a self-founded youth outreach NPO for the past several months, and even a young numbskull like me was able to get the 501(c) done right.

I mean, theres a reason we have our own website and forum, seperate from CGF.

imported post

CA Libertarian is correct; just procuring (c)3 status is a challenge and time-consuming task. Then try to maintain it (without breaking any number of laws). Further, you have to offer a product the market wants and will pay for - do you have one? In case you're wondering, I am truly asking this question.

Is it that you just outright disagree with CGF's strategy or prefer your own sandbox?

I'll be curious to note the reactions of many here in the very near future. Those you consider as against you may end up more a friend than you could have imagined...

imported post

wildhawker wrote:

CA Libertarian is correct; just procuring (c)3 status is a challenge and time-consuming task. Then try to maintain it (without breaking any number of laws). Further, you have to offer a product the market wants and will pay for - do you have one? In case you're wondering, I am truly asking this question.

Is it that you just outright disagree with CGF's strategy or prefer your own sandbox?

I'll be curious to note the reactions of many here in the very near future. Those you consider as against you may end up more a friend than you could have imagined...

Click to expand...

Let me be frank, there is no animosity on my behalf. That much is certain.

imported post

Fair enough, and if OCDO desires a (c)3 for some specific purpose(s) helpful to RKBA I, personally, would not be opposed; however, I would see the practical value of one as limited to defending OC participants from prosecution unless it were to create a parallel track of litigation, which is something I'd both prefer not to occur and strongly caution against. Outside of that it might be an instance of splitting the baby. YMMV.

imported post

Parallel litigation should be avoided! One of the worst impressions to have forced on us would be one of (legal)forum shopping, and if such an instance were to inflict FNC on a pending case, we might be stuck a bit of a quandry with a displeased court.

Honestly, the intitial use of funds would be better suited to awareness and education. Billboards, booths, pamphlets, and the air of legitimacy that comes with the completely meaningless tap on the shoulder from the state.