What does the "Three Percenter Movement" have to do with us at OCDO?

ocholsteroc said:

And I have never heard of the 3% before this video.

Click to expand...

To be honest, that speaks well of you!

45acpForMe said:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RTAmerica#p/u/21/c-gNrmCjSfc

Click to expand...

Ben Cohen appeared to be drunk, and mindlessly repeated speaking points. Dave could have given sharper retorts, but he handled himself well.

Russia Today, before it became RT, was an excellent source for insightful investigative reporting about American issues. As it's grown, it's hired traditional J-school grads (like this host who just wants to give equal time without seeking any truth).

I fear RT is heading down the trail blazed by CNN in 1980, and Fox News in 1996.

Grapeshot said:

The posted rule is quite clear on this matter:

"WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts

Click to expand...

So if private ownership of guns was suddenly banned, per OCDO policy we should all meekly hand them in to be destroyed while waiting for our court challenges to be heard?

There has to be a line. Active confiscation is the line the Threepers have chosen.

We will not disarm.

You cannot convince us.

You cannot intimidate us.

You can try to kill us, if you think you can.

But remember, we’ll shoot back .

We are not going away.

We are not backing up another inch.

And there are THREE MILLION OF US.

Click to expand...

3% of gun owners. So obviously a fringe group. But I can't imagine people who open carry numbering 3% of gun owners either. That said, there is still some overlap. Since the Threepers open-carry at rallys (including carry of the OCDO-verboten long arms), people are going to lump them together with those just carrying a sidearm while grocery shopping.

Both groups stand for personal freedoms. I don't see how a little cross-contamination is a bad thing.

Elkad said:

So if private ownership of guns was suddenly banned, per OCDO policy we should all meekly hand them in to be destroyed while waiting for our court challenges to be heard?

Click to expand...

What ifs and "meekly" aside - this is NOT a forum designed and managed for all aspects of RKBA - most pointedly and particularly not aimed at doomsday scenarios and armed resistance to government confiscation. That is the point.

OCDO is about protecting and furthering the right to OC within the law for personal self-defense - changing the law where necessary.

There is no need to push the bounds of OCDO into that arena. It is not welcome here.

Elkad said:

3% of gun owners. So obviously a fringe group. But I can't imagine people who open carry numbering 3% of gun owners either. That said, there is still some overlap. Since the Threepers open-carry at rallys (including carry of the OCDO-verboten long arms), people are going to lump them together with those just carrying a sidearm while grocery shopping.

Both groups stand for personal freedoms. I don't see how a little cross-contamination is a bad thing.

Click to expand...

Elkad, Grapeshot is entirely right. It isn't a topic for this site. Not thit isn't a topic, just that it's not appropriate for this forum.

Granted I frequently stray into the badlands...but when I'm reminded of the purpose and scope of OCDO, I try to drop it no matter how near and dear the subject may be.

As you pointed out, the three percenters carry at their events just as we do. The difference between OCDO and them is that the focus here is the lawful carry and the lawful change to gun laws.

Trying to mix the two is like having a forum that discusses growing and marketing Pot and Carrots. Both grow in the soil, both are harvested and both are sold but the carrot growers gain very little that's useful from the discussion and the media has a field day with both.

Nothing says.....

That we would necessarily disarm and go along meekly, just that we would not offer any difference of opinion in THIS forum. HEH HEH HEH

I'm not a conspiracy nut or anything, but I do believe part of the government has their own agenda.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't thomas jefferson have a quote along the lines of "There must be an armed rebellion against the government every 20 years to control their power"?

Patriot2A said:

...but didn't thomas jefferson have a quote along the lines of "There must be an armed rebellion against the government every 20 years to control their power"?

Click to expand...

If he did, Grapeshot was there to remind him not to post about it on this forum!

:lol:

BTW:
Some of you that helped out that day may recognize the people in this video...the owner of the Thunderbird, D.R. Middlebrooks, and his wife, Deb, who was our waitress that day. I guess it's true that you should never judge a book by it's cover. Just watch her shoot in this video!

I had no idea that D.R. was the owner until he introduced himself to me as we were walking out the door. We should give these nice people our support with another OC dinner, once I return, sometime in mid-May.

Craig

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOPOu8EL1mE&feature=related

Where is the Thunderbird? Ill be home late May,its sounds like a good idea to me.

1000ydshooter said:

Where is the Thunderbird? Ill be home late May,its sounds like a good idea to me.

Click to expand...

http://thunderbirdgrill.forextrainfo.com/tbg/

Ok got it. Cant remember the name of the place it was the past few times before this. Sits right behind the Farmers Bank though. Havent been through there in while,been gone alot and i avoid the north end of the county as much as I can.

Grapeshot said:

OCDO is about protecting and furthering the right to OC within the law for personal self-defense - changing the law where necessary.

There is no need to push the bounds of OCDO into that arena. It is not welcome here.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying it should be a topic of discussion here. But back on page 1 people are upset about the media making an association between open carriers and threepers. It's just another organization. Just like NRA, Oathkeepers, JPFO, the state organizations (VCDL, WVCDL, etc), and every other advocacy group for our constitutional rights and/or individual freedoms. Overlap is natural. And it's natural for outsiders to get them mixed up.

Calmly correct someone when they make the wrong assumption? Sure. But everyone on OCDO probably considers themselves a member of at least one other group. Bashing Threepers is no different than bashing NRA members.

Elkad said:

I'm not saying it should be a topic of discussion here. But back on page 1 people are upset about the media making an association between open carriers and threepers. It's just another organization. Just like NRA, Oathkeepers, JPFO, the state organizations (VCDL, WVCDL, etc), and every other advocacy group for our constitutional rights and/or individual freedoms. Overlap is natural. And it's natural for outsiders to get them mixed up.

Calmly correct someone when they make the wrong assumption? Sure. But everyone on OCDO probably considers themselves a member of at least one other group. Bashing Threepers is no different than bashing NRA members.

Click to expand...

You Failed to include the first sentences of my post - thereby completely changing texture and meaning of the posting. That constitutes a direct violation of the rules.


What I said was:

What ifs and "meekly" aside - this is NOT a forum designed and managed for all aspects of RKBA - most pointedly and particularly not aimed at doomsday scenarios and armed resistance to government confiscation. That is the point.

OCDO is about protecting and furthering the right to OC within the law for personal self-defense - changing the law where necessary.

There is no need to push the bounds of OCDO into that arena. It is not welcome here

Click to expand...

.

Grapeshot said:

You Failed to include the first sentences of my post - thereby completely changing texture and meaning of the posting. That constitutes a direct violation of the rules.

Click to expand...

Unintentional. I habitually quote just enough of a post so people can tell who I'm replying to. If they want the whole thing in context, that's why the forum software gives the link back to the direct post.

It's an attempt to avoid whole unwieldy pages of nested quotes in long conversations.

Grapeshot said:

You Failed to include the first sentences of my post - thereby completely changing texture and meaning of the posting. That constitutes a direct violation of the rules.

What I said was:

Click to expand...

Elkad said:

Unintentional. I habitually quote just enough of a post so people can tell who I'm replying to. If they want the whole thing in context, that's why the forum software gives the link back to the direct post.

It's an attempt to avoid whole unwieldy pages of nested quotes in long conversations.

Click to expand...

I understand the desire to be brief and to the point. Understand also that not all readers will jump around to get the facts straight.

It is noteworthy here though in that your response to my post only had merit after the deletion/omission. This serves as a good example of the "why" of that rule.

That and I fail to see any "unwieldy pages of nested quotes in long conversations".

Not trying to be hard nosed about this, but the rules stands us all in good stead.

I've got no problem with the rule limiting the forum to OC issues. (though I wouldn't mind if we had an off-topic board)

The only thing I had a problem with was the people complaining that we got associated with another pro-liberty group. Apparently because they didn't like part of the other group's message. (Edit, and a violation of rule 12)

Anyway, I'm done replying to this thread. PMs are fine if you feel the need.

It was not (at least to me) that we were associated with the 3pers. It was the way the 3pers were portrayed and then we were associated with them. There is very little they say that I disagree with but there is some, and it is that "some" I do not want pinned to my hide. There is much in most pro-gun groups I agree with. But I am careful where I put my money and my efforts.

The 3% and OCDO do have quite a lot of issues that are in sync. OCDO seems to be taking the stance that we have our rights and the 3% are doing it as well just in a more of a serious way. OCDO focuses on just the carrying of firearms openly which is the way the founders envisioned it. The 3% focus on constitutional laws in general with the elephant in the room being 2A rights. The piece in question seemed fine until the ending statement. Even the grief with the NRA and Open carry still has a common purpose in general. Its the fine details that are different. In general the NRA seems to be a permit type group and OCDO says hell no we have the right to not have a permit and carry. The 3% are another group who is tired of our rights being negotiating points for a bill.

Right now every thorn in the administrations arse helps IMO. The important part is to not sacrifice our rights to cater to one group. By keeping this in the media and continuing to fight we work to achieve our end. The difference in our groups appears to be what the finish line is. Some want to be able to carry long guns in public which according to out rights should be allowed which IMO is not practical for self defense (barring red dawn scenario) but even here is a forbidden subject.

We are all fighting the same fight just to different levels. Follow the constitution and I bet a lot of our problems work themselves out

I NEVER want to be in any way associated with Mike Vanderboegh or this group, I consider him a loon, and from previous discussions and posts others here also want nothing to do with him. It seems these video productions always have alot of risk when the producers have an agenda that is anti-gun.