Wisconsin's Candace Dainty makes the call: June 22 Madison OPEN CARRY RALLY is on!

[J.Gleason]

imported post

My view as a Former U.S. Army Ranger, a Bail Enforcement Agent and a Correctional Sergeant is that a suppressor is a tool normally used in covert operations or situations to hide the sound of the report of the fire arm.

Lets all look at reality here. These tools are used by snipers and during as I said before covert situations such as assassinations plain and simple. You can preach about the hunting and the hearing protection all you want the facts remain the same.

In the face of the general public....those very same people we are trying to impress upon that we are safe "LAW ABIDING" citizens, seeing a suppressor or what the general name is a Silencer in public leads to doubt of our intentions in the public's eye.

Personally, I do not care why Mr. Greg has a suppressor that is his business. Would I pay the price he has paid for one? .....No definitely not. They wear out and it is not worth the expense. A 20 dollar pair of ear phones works just as well.

During these rallys and picnics we need to keep one thing in mind. This is not about me or you or what we like and think looks cool. This is about US. What the general public thinks is very important here and whether or not we agree or not that something such as a suppressor is a freedom of choice, we all need to agree on one thing; and that is, that we need to open carry as often as possible and we need to carry a fire arm that looks acceptable to the general public and not something that will lead the general public into thinking that if we go on open carrying fire arms things may go out of control.

I don't think any of you here do not understand the point I am trying to make. This is more than just about guns. It is about principle. The founders of this site and the people who have been involved in this entire movement over the years have worked endlessly to get us where we are today. This self centered, self righteous attitude we are taking here is ridiculous. Let us not side track this movement with our egos.

This is about all of our right to carry a "FIRE ARM." I could care less about what ever unnecessary attachment you want to put on your fire arm. That is I careless until it starts to disrupt this movement and interfere or possibly interfere with my right to carry.

If you don't think it will interfere than just wait until Joe and Jane Public start complaining that they believe carrying a silencer is a cover up for committing some crime. If you don't think poop rolls down hill you will find out in a hurry.

Plain and simple we need no distractions from our goal and no obstacles placed in our paths. We are all supposed to be level headed adults here lets act like it and leave your unnecessary toys at home.

 

[ScottM]

imported post

I would be up for a visit to Madison for a capitol sight seeing trip and touristy stuff while open carrying my pistol. Heck I was planning to be there that day anyway for a rally.

 

[ScottM]

imported post

And apparently we have gone back to tip toeing.

 

[Pointman]

imported post

*

 

[Nutczak]

imported post

Pointman wrote:

We just got the ability to open carry from border to border back. If nothing bad comes of it over time there won't be a "blood in the streets" mentality and it will be easier to convince representatives changes need to be made.

I kinda got to disagree with you on the part of your quote thatI put in "Boldface"

We have always had the ability to open-carry, I see the AG's memo as a way of letting every branch of police know thatthey do not make the laws, and are putting themselves in a highly actionable postion by continuing to arrest citizens for exercising a constitutional right.

 

[Lammie]

imported post

Candy;

You and I have traded emailon this subject in the past. For what it's worth I totally support your interest in organizing a demonstration. I think it is very important to the cause of open carry and the expression of our firearm rights. It is especially important in that it is intended to represent women. Lets face it. It is the women we have to win over if the RKBA movement is going to suceed. An event demonstrating women carrying firearms for personalprotection will go a long way toward that goal. An influx of men at the rally will only deminish the effect. There are some members of this forum that want the whole loaf of bread or none. It won't work that way. We have to assemble the loaf "one slice at a time". The event you had planned is a very important slice. As the organizer of the event and the person that will be answering to the media and law enforcement and the person that has to take it on the chin if things go wrong, you have every right to establish the "rules of the game". Even to go as far as to request that we males don't attend and destroy the message you are trying to convey. And yes, as the organizer you do have the right to restrict the styles and types of firearms that shall be present. (I can hear the howls of some members already, bring it on). The bottom line is you had intended your event todraw attention to the fact that carry of firearms by women for personal protection is becomming more and more important each day. Some members of this forum let that escape them as they drifted off into the never ending land of controversy. I for one hope you will ignore the cynics and reconsider your decision to cancel the event.

In regards to the capitol police:

941.235 (1) Any person who goes armed with a firearm in any building owned or leased by the state or any political subdivision is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

The grounds are not included as a prohibited location. Send a copy of the statute to the capitol police.

 

[pvtschultz]

imported post

I have disagreed with a lot of Pointman's posts in the past, but I am going to agree with him on principle this time. It was because of a pair of opportune arrests by whom I'll call the "pointmen" (sorry) in the SE corner of WI that the AG wrote that advisory memo. As a result of the media attention following Brad's case and the memo, people began to flock to OCDO (myself included). Like the democrats like to say, "Never waste a good crisis", we need to take advantage of the current political frenzy to push forward. The picnics have been good momentum builders, the "Adopt-a-Highway" work will keep it moving (from time to time), but we need to drive the nail home by organizing on the capital grounds. I cannot, unfortunately, spearhead this event from Milwaukee.

A new permit should be applied for with the emphesis on the WSSC opinion in State v Hamdan making OC more legal, SS 941.235 only applying to gov't buildings, 66.0409 applying to the Cap Police, and 42 USC 1983 being the way to enforce our right to organize. I haven't heard back from the ACLU people in WI, I'll be pleasently surprised if they ever respond.

 

[DanM]

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

My view as a Former U.S. Army Ranger, a Bail Enforcement Agent and a Correctional Sergeant is that a suppressor is a tool normally used in covert operations or situations to hide the sound of the report of the fire arm.

Lets all look at reality here. These tools are used by snipers and during as I said before covert situations such as assassinations plain and simple. You can preach about the hunting and the hearing protection all you want the facts remain the same.

With this personal view of yours, it seems you have explained well why you personally wouldn't opt for this feature on your handgun. Great! Don't carry it.

In the face of the general public...seeing a suppressor or what the general name is a Silencer in public leads to doubt of our intentions in the public's eye.

Cite your evidence, or statethis isjust your speculation.

we need to carry a fire arm that looks acceptable to the general public and not something that will lead the general public into thinking that if we go on open carrying fire arms things may go out of control.

Please provide a list of handguns, handgun features, or handgun attachments which do not "look acceptable" to the general public and would lead the GP to believe "things may go out of control" andcite your evidencefor each. Or state this is justyour speculation.

just wait until Joe and Jane Public start complaining that they believe carrying a silencer is a cover up for committing some crime.

A handgun with flash/sound suppressor was distinctly shown in the broadcast of the Greenfield picnic. What has been the public response so farto that?

We are all supposed to be level headed adults here lets act like it and leave your unnecessary toys at home.

Funny how that soundslike a statement that anti-gunners woulduse against people who want to carry concealed or openly in general. You know why? It's a SUBJECTIVE statement, as has been a lot of your statements in your post.

 

[J.Gleason]

imported post

As I stated before in another post, this entire movement will end up failing here in Wisconsin because of tunnel vision from people such as yourself.

After all this is all about you isn't it?

 

[Brass Magnet]

imported post

Dan M,

You'recorrect that someone with the privilege can choose to carry a suppressor but don't get that confused with a right. Your wrong on many other counts.

Candys's only mistakeswere using words that some people, especially on an internet forum; overreact to, and not declaring her intentions up front. She's an "in your face" type of gal and that rubs people the wrong way sometimes. Butthat's exactly what she needs to be to get things done as a woman and an activist. How wouldyou have reacted when a bunch of people you don't know, who may not even be fromWisconsin, start talking about bringing or doing thingsthat are unneccessary and possibly detrimentalto the movement at YOUR rally, that YOU'RE responsible for? Please, get off your high horse.

I agree with the others that public perception is very important at this stage. The rest will come later. The plan from the beginning should have been sticking to defensible position, not running up the hill and yelling "charge!" IMO, that means sticking to what the courts have said and sticking to the point. Our rights, not our privliges. Our rights are moredefendable than privleges. Next time the rules should be stated up front, in a format that's not open to debate.

Simply:

1. No long guns, bring only"Handguns that arein common use by the people."

2. No suppressors, they aren't a firearm and aren't constitutionaly protected.

3. No being an asshat, you have a right to bear arms, not to be an asshat while your doing it

4. If you don't like it, don't come.

There, that would have fixed the whole issue.Of course, if YOU are planning the event you can insert your own rules.

 

[J.Gleason]

imported post

Extremely well said!

 

[J.Gleason]

imported post

DanM wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

My view as a Former U.S. Army Ranger, a Bail Enforcement Agent and a Correctional Sergeant is that a suppressor is a tool normally used in covert operations or situations to hide the sound of the report of the fire arm.

Lets all look at reality here. These tools are used by snipers and during as I said before covert situations such as assassinations plain and simple. You can preach about the hunting and the hearing protection all you want the facts remain the same.

With this personal view of yours, it seems you have explained well why you personally wouldn't opt for this feature on your handgun. Great! Don't carry it.

In the face of the general public...seeing a suppressor or what the general name is a Silencer in public leads to doubt of our intentions in the public's eye.

Cite your evidence, or statethis isjust your speculation.

we need to carry a fire arm that looks acceptable to the general public and not something that will lead the general public into thinking that if we go on open carrying fire arms things may go out of control.

Please provide a list of handguns, handgun features, or handgun attachments which do not "look acceptable" to the general public and would lead the GP to believe "things may go out of control" andcite your evidencefor each. Or state this is justyour speculation.

just wait until Joe and Jane Public start complaining that they believe carrying a silencer is a cover up for committing some crime.

A handgun with flash/sound suppressor was distinctly shown in the broadcast of the Greenfield picnic. What has been the public response so farto that?

We are all supposed to be level headed adults here lets act like it and leave your unnecessary toys at home.

Funny how that soundslike a statement that anti-gunners woulduse against people who want to carry concealed or openly in general. You know why? It's a SUBJECTIVE statement, as has been a lot of your statements in your post.

Well Dan let me just address your remarks,

First of all the reasons I wouldn't carry a suppressor is not just my personal view. Those reason are the facts as I stated in my earlier post. Since I have been in the position to use a suppressor in professional circumstances I know exactly what they are for so all BS aside, lets not try to change the facts.

Secondly, as far as public perception goes, just step back and look how some of us reacted to seeing a suppressor at a picnic. In all honesty many of us agree that is not the place for one. So therefore, if we ourselves have such a reaction then it is evident that the general public would have the same or possibly worse.

Henceforth, the term "what is acceptable to the general public." Don't blame me. blame the TV and Movie Producers who have projected that image on the tube and have instilled in the minds of the people that a suppressor is a "Bad Boy Toy."

As far as any of my comments being subjective, You are correct sir! You win the booby prize! We need subjective comments and we also need people in these forums to play the devil's advocate so we can become stronger on these issues.

I am not sure of your age or how much time you spent in the military. But I will say this; this movement is not about you or what you like or what you think is cool or what gun ho, hoorah point of view you may have because you spent a little time in service. It is about all of us! Our rights! And people like yourself with your egotistical ideals will only bring to light all of the bad ideologies that the anti-gun hypocrits will thrive on to try to defeat our cause.

I could careless what you carry to the range or on your own property. But I do care what you carry in the general public "IF" it may create a negative image on this movement. I have open carried for the past 20 years and done so with out issue, so you can surely understand why I take issue when someone may do something to interfere with that right.

Lets be real here, years down the road after we have won this war and not just this battle, things such as suppressors will not even be an issue. Until then we must create a positive image and stand behind our cause that we are law abiding citizens and neighbors simply exercising our rights and defending the rights of everyone, even the nay Sayers.

 

[DanM]

imported post

Brass Magnet wrote:

Dan M,
<snip>

Could you please justtake direct quotes of mine andand directly address what I've written? You seem to be responding to things I've not expressed. I am only answerable to direct criticism of my direct writings. Other than that, if you feel an urge to assume something about me based onmy writings, please ask if such an assumption would be true or not. I will answer truthfully if you are right or wrong.

 

[J.Gleason]

imported post

I think your comments might be better suited in the Michigan forum.

Other than that I have nothing else to say to you.

 

[Brass Magnet]

imported post

DanM wrote:

Brass Magnet wrote:

Dan M,
<snip>

Could you please justtake direct quotes of mine andand directly address what I've written? You seem to be responding to things I've not expressed. I am only answerable to direct criticism of my direct writings. Other than that, if you feel an urge to assume something about me based onmy writings, please ask if such an assumption would be true or not. I will answer truthfully if you are right or wrong.

I wrongly directed that at just you Dan M and for that I apologize. Itshould have been directed at a few people. However; I assumed that you seem to think it doesn't matter what peoples perception of us is and that is dangerous.

 

[DanM]

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Well Dan let me just address your remarks,

First of all the reasons I wouldn't carry a suppressor is not just my personal view. Those reason are the facts as I stated in my earlier post. Since I have been in the position to use a suppressor in professional circumstances I know exactly what they are for so all BS aside, lets not try to change the facts.

It is a fact, each of those itemsyou presentabout who uses suppressors and for what applications. However, it isyourpersonal viewthatthosefacts are all-inclusive about who uses suppressors and for what applications. Manypeople who legitimatelyown and legitimatelyhave a use forsuppressors are not covert operators or assassins and use them inlegitimate applications outside of the applications you mention. You are free to continue holding yourpersonal view to guide your personal choiceabout equipping yourself with a suppressor, but realize that if you attempt to broaden your personalview to a general statement about what is "fact" aboutwhouses suppressors and for what applications,that personal view ishardly unassailable.


I'm going to have to continue addressing the rest later,when I can get to it. . .

 

[DanM]

imported post

Brass Magnet wrote:

I wrongly directed that at just you Dan M and for that I apologize. Itshould have been directed at a few people. However; I assumed that you seem to think it doesn't matter what peoples perception of us is and that is dangerous.

It matters to me what is true about the general public's perception of us.

However, I'm seeing a lot of high speculation about how the general public may perceive some things, and that mere speculation is driving irrational (meaning, lack of a rational basis) thinking.

 

[Pointman]

imported post

*

 

[smooth]

imported post

Excellent work guys!!

Once again our side proves that the only group in America that cannot get it's shit together and organize is the right!!

Every one of the groups that are taking away our rights, laugh at us and our bickering. I moved here 6 weeks ago from Arizona and I look around on these threads and I am amazed at how many arm chair quarterbacks there are. Get off your ass and do something or lay down by your food dish and be quiet. This lady was working her ass off on getting this stuff set up and all you guys have done is criticize her efforts.

Nice work!!

 

[Lammie]

imported post

Ditto.

"We have met the enemy, and he is us": Pogo