"Bickering?" Oh, my. Somebody might not like it if we resist I-594. Whatever shall we do?
Let's not bicker. Yeah, we lost on I-594, but if you send me more money I can lose again, but this time I'll do it gracefully and our enemies will respect us more.
From Dave Workman (who, it should be noted, works for Alan Gottlieb): Are 2A activists defeating themselves while anti-gunners take control?
On the other side of this, as best illustrated by a discussion now sizzling on the Northwest Firearms forum, rights activists are locked in an argument over strategies. Some favor confrontation and argue against anything remotely resembling — in their eyes, anyway — compromise. Others are challenging these folks to explain their plan for success. All seem to be various degrees of glad that the Second Amendment Foundation filed a lawsuit last week against I-594.
Into the equation come reactions to the story about I-594 that included this remark from a reader identifying himself as “Charlie John Darwin.” He states, “My only problem with I-594 is that it didn’t go far enough in keeping guns out of the hands of the tinfoil hat wearing stable of anti-American wackjobs who show up to support people like that grifter in Nevada who didn’t want to pay his range fees, Bundy something or other.”
These people vote, and while rights activists seem to bicker, the anti-gun movement grows stronger by not arguing. Can anyone deny the effectiveness of a Gabby Giffords showing up at some event to visibly remind people and the press about her personal tragedy? Can anyone deny that big money puts the firearms community at a strategic disadvantage? Whose strategy to protect and restore gun rights is the correct one, or are they all right, and headed in the same direction, just by different routes?
Here’s another question, maybe one that nobody wants to answer. Who’s going to prevail?
Well, Dave, that depends upon what "reasonable compromises" to our liberty and property rights on background checks, etc., that your boss -- that Neville Chamberlain in a bow tie -- is willing to make.
Indeed, Gottlieb can lose as many times as he likes. He can "compromise" as many times as he likes. The fact is that there is NO infringement, however crafted and marketed -- by anybody -- that we cannot nullify with armed civil disobedience. The paradigm is shifting. That is not mere "bickering." Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.
LATER: A Washington state activist comments:
Yeah, I did pick that up. Same as it ever was really. Workman is using the GOP tactic of attacking, those who are tired of the same tactics that have brought us to this to begin with. Shame on us for not sitting down, shutting up and doing what we are told.
10 comments:
I cannot compromise on my God-given rights.
-Blake
I knew nothing about this Gottlieb until all the posts about him. The more I see and hear, the less I like. If the day comes when these traitors can be rounded up, and if a firing squad is needed, count me in..
Gottlieb may actually make I594 "less bad" with his lawsuit. Bully for him. There will always be plenty of infringements left to flout.
Personally, I don't think it is all that important to get everybody on the same page. Rebellions have many flavors.
I liken Gottleib to a modern snake oil salesman. Someone needs to replace that bow tie with a nice piece of hemp. If he would have gotten off his ass and actually did some fighting for our rights, 594 might not have passed. His weak kneed response with that 591 foolishness was what got it passed.
There is also plenty of blame for the NRA. They did nothing. I believe they wanted it to pass so they could beg for more money from the membership. Gotta keep those donations rolling in.
Dave is Alan's boy, bought and paid for! He was a key promoter of 591 which assure the passage of 594 by taking resources from the No on 594 campaign, I heard a lot of ads for 591 but none against 594, Dave and Alan are traitors, I have always wonder if Bloomberg is the one really behind both of them!
May they both rot in hell with Bloomberg!
"The 'morality of compromise' sounds contradictory. Compromise is usually a sign of weakness, or an admission of defeat. Strong men don't compromise, it is said, and principles should never be compromised." — Andrew Carnegie
Comrade X
Rights cannot be taken - they can only be compromised away ...
III
My reply to Gottlieb's little snide remark, "We're not trying to stop background checks" was WELL WHY NOT!? They're nothing but an infringement, and won't stop criminals from getting guns anyway, and even if it did, it won't stop so-called "gun crime".
http://www.backwoodsengineer.com/2015/01/why-arent-you-trying-to-stop-background.html
http://www.spinningbowties.com/aboutthebowtie2.html
The new recognition signal
among the power elite.
Gottlieb has taken his tactics from the NRA playboook - compromise our rights away, piecemeal. The more our rights are threatened, the more money he can beg from those who receive the blizzard of mailings from SAF.
Which is another thing he learned from the NRA - inundate the membership with constant threats against our rights - threats which (again like the NRA) you don't even hear about until they are a done deal, just like when the NRA refused to warn us members (I resigned my membership back in '97) about the Lautenberg Amendment.
That is when I called it quits. The NRA has helped write every major (and many minor) pieces of gun control legislation since 1934. They have compromised our rights away for the privilege of playing the Game with the big boys in D.C., and for the money they can scare out of their members in dues and donations. They are a fraud, and so is SAF and Gottlieb.
Don't get me started on the hidden, deceptive, betrayal that happened when Gottlieb took over JPFO. Aaron Zelman would never have agreed to selling out to Gottlieb and SAF. Gottlieb knew most members of JPFO (like myself) wouldn't approve either, which is why he tried to do it in the backroom, instead of out in the open. Claire Wolfe has him pegged.
As a resident in Washington State I-591 was not a total waste . It won 34 out of 39 counties, some by huge margins . And in 4 more of those counties it lost by less than 10,000 votes combined . So where did the real loss come from? King County , it went down 70% no votes . Of course Seattle dominates King County and it's far left media machine works overtime to spew their pinko liberal drift.
One thing politicians can do really well is read polling results and unless that politician represents parts of King county , he/she will be unlikely to support I-594.
Post a Comment