A different approach to deal with the ccw politics

Boondock Saint said:

Doesn't look banned to me, at least his user description still says "Junior Member." http://www.mdshooters.com/member.php?u=8739

Click to expand...

well his post #14 got deleted

aquaman said:

well his post #14 got deleted

Click to expand...

Not surprising. A new registrant on the forums, Dead Eye, had an interesting first post about CHP statistics from the MSP. He registered this evening and posted shortly after dreamer logged out. I wonder if they're one and the same?

Norton said:

well damn...it's a shame that none of us ignorant MD yahoos could figure all of this for ourselves.

http://www.marylandshallissue.org/index.php?categoryid=17

Click to expand...

While I appreciate your efforts, those arguments are still based on the word firearms.

Clever word phrasing does more to influence swing supporters than hard line advocate speak. The anti group have been more than successful by phrasing. We should learn from them.

In example are the terms, "assault weapon" and "high capacity magazine." Terms like this sway people. On this forum we know the reality that an "assault weapon" does not mean you will assault someone or "high capacity magazine" is the norm on most handguns designed since the 1950's. The antis knew if they used accurate terms like 'modern rifle' and 'standard capacity handgun' they would have not passed laws. Change the sell, make laws, support your cause.

The antis also like to point to specific cases where a gun killed someone. The facts are usually not on their side, but they can still sell it to the average swing supporter.

IMO the Pro community should use this same tactic because it works. In example: 'Sally Doe wanted to insure her protection, but MD denied her. She was raped and beaten in a Baltimore ally.'

It is almost impossable to argue Sally deserved this or does not have a right to defend herself. It would not be difficult to find a rape, mugging, or car jacking victim that wished they did not have the right to defend themselves.

They also like to point out that many guns deaths are suicides, get rid of the guns, get ride of the suicides. But that's false thinking, get rid of guns, they'll figure another way to do themselves in. I don't have my facts at the ready, but I believe Japan has a higher per person suicide rate than the US yet it has a total gun ban.

bpSchoch said:

The left/anti's are very good at framing an issue to sway people their way. Take the issues of guns and the ccw issue in Maryland. They have made the issue all about guns. Words are important. Notice that they don't talk about firearms but use the term 'guns' and keep the focus on 'those evil things'.

Click to expand...

You make a lot of very valid points.

I've always felt that the one big point that the 2A movement (for lack of a better term) misses on almost EVERY front is that they have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Public Relations works.

We want our arguments to be based on fact, truth, and what's right. We stand on the foundation built by brave, honorable, and intelligent men and women over the centuries who worked hard to secure the core fundamental human rights for ALL people. We often feel that because we have truth and "right" on our side, that those things alone will suffice to sway public opinion. And in a perfect world, full of rational, intelligent, and thoughtful people, it would.

However, nothing could be further from the truth.

We live in a world where the latest basketball scores are more important to most people than deep issues like civil rights. Most people know more about pop stars than they do about their own Mayor. People can tell you more about the detailed inner workings of the latest PS3 game than know who actually owns the Federal Reserve Banks...

Public Relations isn't about "truth" or "whats right". Is has little to do with provable facts, empirical analysis, or hard data. Public Relations is ALL about perception. It's based on identifying the emotional triggers that make people act before they think. It's about identifying the fears of the public (death, poverty, being seen as uncool, etc.) and then developing a message that uses those fears to over-ride critical thinking. It's a dirty, messy, and sometimes duplicitous and downright unsavory operation, this PR business. The art and science of molding public opinion can be used for good or evil. It can be used for society's benefit, or for ransacking and pillaging.

Unfortunately, PR has been most effectively deployed in the hands of the evil in the last hundred years of history. Truly effective PR brought us the Bolshevic revolution, the National Socialists, Pol Pot, and the terrible wars of "ethnic cleansing" in Africa, Asia, and Central Europe.

PR also has been used in the hands of the misguided, the power-hungry, and the petty tyrants. PR brought us Prohibition. PR gave us the Gulf of Tonkin. PR gave us the assault weapons ban. PR destroyed the hemp industry. PR is replacing incandescent light bulbs with mercury-filled environementally-toxic CFLs. The outcomes of PR often don't make any sense, and are often actually counterproductive to the well-being of most of society...

But there have been shining sparkles of hope that PR can be used for good.

Public Relations brought the Colonies their independence. PR brought us the Civil Rights movement. PR gave women the right to vote. And in many states, PR is making great strides with regards to the People's RKBA.

And if the movers and shakers of the 2A movement in states like MD, NY, CA, and IL would think outside the box and read a little Edward Bernays, or Georgina Cavendish, or Harold Lasswell, we could harness this powerful tool to our benefit. Study up on how PR really works. It has NOTHING to do with the unvarnished truth. You can't stand on a pile of facts and statistics and expect the general populace to listen to what you have to say. Public Opinion just doesn't work that way...

This is not to say that we need to lie to the public. No, not at all--in fact, what we need to do is show them the truth of the issue, but like a pill they don't want to take, we need to wrap it in something the general public understands, sympathizes with, and will respond emotionally to. And that wrapping CAN'T be statistics and dry academic studies.

When a company tries to sell you detergent, do they tell you what's in it? Do they tell you how much dirt it actually takes out of your clothes? No. They show you dirty clothes that have been washed in the other guys stuff and it still has stains. They show you shirts with "ring around the collar". They base it on embarrassment, social status, and being concerned with the way you live and look.

When the FBI released its 2009 UCR, and it showed that crime in MD was down 11%, what did O'Malley say? Did he say that violent crime in MD was STILL more than THREE TIMES the national average? No, even though that is a FACT. He said that crime was down, and MD was safer. Did he lie? No. Maryland IS safer--but it's still 3 times more crime-ridden than the national average, so an 11% reduction is cold comfort if you know the whole story. What he DID do was use people's emotions to increase the power, authority, and reach of MD law enforcement, and to further justify decades of civil rights abuses with regards to the right of Marylanders to defend themselves, to exercise a free press, and to communicate freely.

The 2A movement needs to USE the art and science of PR. We need to appeal to the insecurities of people. We need to educate people that the police are NOT there to protect them, and show them with GRAPHIC DETAIL how that works. We need to show them that personal responsibility is a VIRTUE. We need people to think that fending for themselves is DESIRABLE. We need women to believe that they CAN'T depend on the police, or their husbands to keep them safe. We need minorities to think that they CAN make their own communities safe from crime and that depending on the government only makes the problem worse. We need minorities to remember that they got were they are today in America BECAUSE their forefathers stood up and took their destiny in their own hands, and were NOT reliant on any "authority" for their success.

These things are all true. But people will only believe them if there is a direct personal connection--an emotional appeal to their base fears and anxieties.

That is how the "anti" side has gained so much ground. They have brainwashed people to believe that the only way they can be "safe" is to hand over their personal responsibilities and fundamental human rights of self defense to the government.

It's time we start approaching this issue like activists, instead of academics. The general public doesn't read John Lott or Clayton Cramer. They don't read the UCR. They can't be bothered with statistics, and studies, and boring tables.

But they DO respond to fear. They DO respond to social status. They DO respond to threats of racism, classism, and elitism against their communities--by the government or evil organizations. We need to appeal to that. We need to make "gun control" appear to be so socially unacceptable, so racially motivated, so morally repulsive that NOBODY would want to support it.

That is the task we have before us.

This isn't news to some folks, especially pro-2A people with backgrounds in other civil rights arenas, or with backgrounds in advertising or psychology.

I'm sure that some of the "ancient sages" on this forum will yawn at this post, and slam it for being redundant and long-winded.

I think it IS a fact that is lost on a lot of the "legal eagles" in the movement, because their world is so rooted in statutes, interpretations, and the intricacies of language. And I think this concept IS lost on a lot of the "old timers" in the movement, because to them, self-defense is just "common sense". They can't understand why the public can't see that. What they are missing is that "common sense" is no longer common...

But there ARE a lot of new people coming into this issue with a lot of enthusiasm, skills and abilities, and THEY may not have thought of this. They may not have backgrounds in activism, or psychology, or public relations, or advertising. And they need to know that our most POWERFUL tool is NOT facts. It is Public Relations, in all it's weird, wonderful, artful glory...

Because today, it's ALL about perception.

bpSchoch;718 823 said:

All the terms we tend to use are technical in nature (ie CCW, Shall Issue, etc) where the average citizen doesn't have clue about what we are talking about. But when they left says 'gun' they know that.

Click to expand...

bpSchoch, you've made some VERY good points, and your OP was very well-thought-out and creative. You're on the right track, I think, and the 2A movement needs more folks like you in the "trenches".

But please, please, please, we ALL need to stop using the term "CCW".

CCW is an acronym for "carrying a concealed weapon", and it is a description of a CRIME. It is one of those loaded terms that the media and the antis have pounded into the heads of the public for DECADES as meaning something bad, evil, and criminal. There is NO SUCH THING as a "CCW Permit". No state, to my knowledge, issues a permit to commit a crime...

Maryland issues a "Permit to Carry a Handgun", or PTCH. It says so right on the top of the card. If you have one, you are legally INCAPABLE of doing "CCW" if you are carrying within the stipulations of the law.

Different states use different terms. Words have power. And this term, "CCW" has a LOT of power, and it is ALL negative. Using that term with people who are NOT part of the concealed carry world will NOT garner any sympathy or understanding--they have been taught through DECADES of propaganda that "Carrying a Concealed Weapon" is something that criminals get charged with. Law-abiding people don't "CCW". We have specific permits that allow us to carry concealed.

This is NOT semantic nit-picking. It is an issue of DEEP psycho-social programming. The term "CCW" has been intentionally engineered through several decades of media brainwashing in movies, the news, and print to create a visceral reaction of fear in the general populace.

Please don't use it to describe the lawful, responsible act we are trying to secure for ALL law-abiding citizens of MD.

.

Simply put, you will not get the Maryland Legislature to change their minds, nor the people of the state of Maryland, on a wide scale to influence the legislature to pass shall-issue. PERIOD. Stop asking for acceptance from the community and the legislature to "change minds". The majority of Marylanders do not believe in the idea of carrying a firearm and you will not be able to, as an individual or a group.

A federal judge's order to the MSP forcing them to issue licenses for self defense is the only acceptance that you guys really need. 1 federal judge, or possibly a panel of federal appellate judges, or even possibly the SCOTUS. That is your ONLY audience that you really need to even worry about. Stop asking for acceptance from the general public at large. This isn't Pennsylvania or Georgia or even Connecticut (which has a very large acceptance of gun carry). You are in one of the most anti-carry states in the union.

In another post I suggested a commercial showing 2 families(Father,Mother,Daughter) walking down the street and being forced into an alley by a group of thugs.The first one would show that in 42 states both parents would pull their legally concealed firearms and the thugs run off.The second one in MD would show the Father being stabbed repeatedly while his Wife and Daughter are dragged off as he bleeds. When you put things into perspective even hopolophobes can see the light.

I think the issue must be framed as a civil rights issue. It's not whether you are anti-gun, it's whether you are anti civil-rights. The 2A is at the beginning of the document that is the source of everything we consider sacred in our relationship with the government. Who wants to be considered against civil rights?

It never ceases to amaze me that people accept that the "right" to an abortion is found in emanations and penumbras, which is a fancy way of saying "smoke and mirrors" and yet there they have questions about what the 2A means.

Boondock Saint said:

Not surprising. A new registrant on the forums, Dead Eye, had an interesting first post about CHP statistics from the MSP. He registered this evening and posted shortly after dreamer logged out. I wonder if they're one and the same?

Click to expand...

No, I don't know "dreamer".

This thread hasn't been touched in 10 years but I'm new here and looking for ways to talk to my friends and family about this issue. I can talk about motorcycles with a passion and can frame it in ways to make it appealing, but I'm new to this issue and my language on it is limited. I'm kind of a weirdo so they'll nod and understand *my* motivations as they work *for me* but I need better language to meet them where they are.

This thread is very useful. I went looking for it after watching this interview with Killer Mike & Colion Noir. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GFRCx5LJHI