A different approach to deal with the ccw politics

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'.

Now because they attack, we naively end up defending the issue using their intential 'gun' focused frame of reference.

Now let's change the frame of reference. As an example of this, see how this fits:

Maryland, the non-free state, that is one of the few remaining states that continues to insist in not allowing it's citizerns the natural right of being able to defend one's self, family and property by promoting the 'myth' that the police are there to protect you so you don't to defend yourselves.

Notice how this refocuses the issue, also notice how it is worded to make it look like MD is one of the last holdouts, how it's not allowing people to do something (which makes MD look bad), and that's implying that it misleads.

So, Mr candidate, do you support the natural right of being able to defend one's self? Now Mr. candidate faces trap (if he recognizes the trap). If he says no, it will used against him (as in the statement above). If he says yes, then Mr. candidate, your voting record on the following bills demonstrate that you are in fact against that right. If Mr. candidate try's to refocus on the leftist agenda and start to use the word 'gun', we stick to our frame of reference and refocus back to our right to defend.

We shouldn't be the gun lobby, we should be the Right to defend ourselve's lobby or organization. We should very intentially absolutely refuse to use the term 'gun' but if we have to, use the more 'friendly' term of 'firearm'.

Instead of talking about CCW (which most people don't know what we are talking about, but the left is very changing the issue to guns), we should be placing the emphasis on the right to defend.

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.

So bottom line, change our tactic from using technical terms, and don't use the leftists negative term 'gun'. Instead let's focus on the right to defend and it just happens to be that one of the best ways to defend is with a firearm (-didn't use 'gun')

What do you think?

My sign for today says "You have no right to life without the means to protect it"

I wonder how many people know there is a lot of legal precedent that the police have no obligation to protect them. I think you bring up an excellent approach. It is better for swaying those on the other side of the fence than saying "the 2A is a fundamental right.......". They have heard that before and are clearly not impressed. This would get them thinking. Next OH rally (hopefully I can be there), there should be a flier explaining this and detailing some of the cases that Minuteman posted this morning.

My next empty holster shirt will say; Because of Maryland's laws your right to protect the lives of yourself and your loved ones is as empty as my holster.

Very good point. If only a very public debate could be framed in this way...

Why not.

Politics are all about the wording. Specialists at talking and saying nothing!

Was talking to a young lady once about self defense. Asked her if she had a grandmother, she did. Ask her if she thought her grandmother could take on a large asalent in her house hand to hand. She said probably not. I said the only hope her grandmother had was the use of a firearm. The girl saw my point and started thinking guns may not be so bad.

If the left want to demonize guns, maybe we should reframe guns being the only way for certain people have a chance to defend themselves.

We all know that God didn't make people equal, but Colonel Sam Colt did. If we show that the old and infirm have no other choice people might understand.

Vic

I hate to disagree with you vic but it was Mr. Browning who made everyone equal. Everyone should have a M2HB on their gas guzzling humvees.

teratos said:

I wonder how many people know there is a lot of legal precedent that the police have no obligation to protect them.

Click to expand...

Eveyone should read this thread.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=40067

My whole point is to leave out the term 'Gun' out of the discussion because it's poison. We want to be talking about the problem (self defence) and and then our ability to 'solve' the problem which MD prevents us from solving. When it gets to the point about talking on the tool to use, we say 'Firearm' because it's not the evil word 'Gun'.

Right now our discussion is more about the tool 'Gun' and less on why we need the tool.

Our focus needs to change to why a tool is needed (police don't protect us, we have the right to self defense, we need to be more self reliant), with the tool being almost an after thought and not the primary focus.

So questions to ask:
How do we protect ourselves? ->wrong answer is via the police
well at your house, you can use your firearm, true, but how do we protect ourself say from rape or robbery when we approach our car at night? or when we leave the ATM?

The other question that should be asked is, 'If criminals know that they are dealing with an armed citizenry, will that then discourage crimes against people?" - deterrent effect.

We like our guns and feel that we should be able to 'face-off' the public/legislature with our positions. But sometimes in order to get what you want, you need to be smart about it, and play a game that gets the job done. ie, not using the evil term 'gun' and but focusing on the need (self defense) in general which then follows that some sort of firearm is the best solution.

I would leave every reference to firearms out. You are trying to appeal to people who are neutral on guns at best. All the pro-gun people are likely already on board. For a lot of folks, the term "gun" or "firearm" will immediately close the door on what you are saying. Put out the fact the we are all basically "on our own" in terms of defending our families and ourselves. Let people come to their own conclusion.....the best defense against what is out there is a firearm in the home.

I like the defense angle. Some people automatically go into tune out mode as soon as they hear a certain "trigger word" (no pun intended). Im guilty of it, as Im sure many of you are also.

Ex. When my wife brings up anything related to vegetarian food, I go into immediate tune out mode. I wont hear the rest of her sentence even if she was about to mention that I get a big old ribeye to go with her tofu.

I think the same thing happens when the word "gun" or "firearm" is heard by some people. They think they know how bad they are and once they hear it, thats it. If you can bring up the underlying issue in a way that they will/can hear you out, they might see outside of their box.

The only reason why Marylanders are FORCED to frame this debate within the context of concealed carry is because there is NO RKBA in MD law. MD is one of only 8 states that does not have a Right To Keep and Bear Arms in it's state Constitution.

In over 20 other states, if you can legally purchase a handgun, you may carry it openly without a "permission slip". Nearly all the "Shall Issue" states allow Open Carry. If MD allowed lawful OC, then the whole CC debate would not be needed. That isnt going to happen anytime soon though, so we need to approach it with fresh eyes, and think "outside the box".

The difficulty with enacting pro-CC legislation is that the public has been brainwashed for decades that "carrying a concealed weapon" is something that only criminals do. Every time you hear a news story about a mugging or armed robbery, you hear that the perp was charged with CCW. The people have come to understand that the ONLY people who carry a concealed firearm are criminals, and so they simply can't fathom why any law-abiding person would want to do that.

The entire argument needs to be re-framed. It's not about being "allowed" to carry concealed by some arbitrary decision process that is regulated by an agency that has no legal obligation to protect the people.

It's about Civil Rights, people...

If you go to MD gun rights events, or testimonies in the GA supporting pro-gun legislation, you will see a group of people who are essentially white, male, middle-class professionals. This demographic isn't going to garner much sympathy with the minority populations of MD when they start talking about "oppression" or civil rights violations".

There needs to be a MASSIVE push to recruit minority members into MD gun rights groups. There needs to be a MASSIVE program of civil and human rights education in the minority communities. When 1/3 of the population of MD starts to realize that "gun control" is not designed to protect them, but rather is SPECIFICALY DESIGNED to allow the State to put them "back on the plantation", things will start to shift in our favor.

"Gun Control" is simply a modernized attempt to enforce a form of serfdom. MD has never really been a "state". It has ALWAYS been seen by it's political rulers as a serfdom of sorts--it is the only state in the union that was created out of a Land Grant to a single person. Ld. Calvert, and nearly EVERY administration in Annapolis ever since, have believed in their heart of hearts that MD is their personal property, and have acted accordingly with their legislations.

Without a Constitutional RKBA, the People have an incomplete set of civil rights. Without open carry or "Constitutional Carry" like they have in NH, the fundamental human right of self defense is going to be dispensed at the whim of the rulers. As MD's demographics shift to include a larger "minority" population, the efforts toward absolute "gun control" will intensify.

The "ruling class" of MD are scared to death of the idea of an armed populace, because they have seen--in the 1960s and early 1970's what happens when you let a severely oppressed and abused population have guns. It was the response to institutionalized racism, oppression, and abuse in the "civil rights era" that led the State to ban OC and carrying long guns in MD.

The ruling class in MD honestly believes that the public cannot be trusted with firearms, and are all potential criminals, hell-bent on overthrowing the government. And given the way that Annapolis and Pikesville view and treat their constituents, the ruling class in MD may very well be correct. The plantation masters in the South didn't think their slaves could be trusted with arms either...

Focusing on the "human/civil rights" angle of self defense is the main angle that I think needs to be hammered home now.

Self defense--having the ability to protect one's self, and loved ones--is a fundamental human right. It is just as fundamental as the ability to speak, print, or worship as one sees fit.

Perhaps if we can turn the official discussion away from issues like states rights, the "militia", and "tyrannical government", and frame "gun control" as the racist, classist agenda of enforced helplessness and egregious violation of civil rights that it REALLY is, the public might re-examine the myths of the "anti's" a little closer.

When the anti-leaning public realizes that firearms prohibitions are nothing more than a hateful attempt to violate their civil rights, and are targeted specifically to prevent certain races, classes, and ages of people from exercising a FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT, things will turn in our favor.

Every single "gun control" law enacted in the US was driven by racism. When people start to realize what the phrase "the wrong kinds of people" REALLY means when spoken by politicians, the public will start to change their attitudes.

Fundamental human rights are NOT supposed to be predicated on race, economic position, age, education level, or political affiliation. And THAT is the point that needs to be driven home.

Maryland ratified the 13th Amendment on 3 Feb. 1865.

Md's "gun control" laws have effectively repealed that...

"Gun Control" is Jim Crow, plain and simple.

It has nothing to do with "guns"--it's all about "control"...

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

and

2. MSI Booth at BowieFest June 6th
As part of our continued efforts to reach out to the community at large, MSI will have a booth at BowieFest 2009 on June 6th. This event draws around 6000 people in the course of a single day and a prime opportunity for us to bring our message of firearms safety and self-defense into the heart of Prince George's County.

The event goes from 11:00am to 6:00pm with setup starting at 8:30am. We need to have a good showing for this day and your help is required in order to make it a success. This is the single best chance that we have to educate other Maryland citizens on the 2nd amendment and our right to defend ourselves.

You don't need to be an expert on everything....just friendly and willing to help your fellow Maryland residents to see what you already know.

If you can help out on June 6th, please email us at info@marylandshallissue.org.

Click to expand...

and

3. Help Needed for the Prince George's County Fair

MSI will be hosting a booth at the Prince George's County Fair September 9-12. With this being a 4 day event, we're going to need a lot of help pulling this off. If you are able to help out on any of those days, especially the 9th and 10th, please send an email to info@marylandshallissue.org and we'll get you signed up.

Working events such as these are crucial for the success of our efforts and this is an easy way for you to contribute to the cause.

Click to expand...

and

6. The Ugly Racial History of Gun Control

Many thanks to the several members who gave us the head's up on this excellent article from the Richmond Times-Dispatch discussing the racially motivated roots of gun control.

MSI also has a good bit of information on the website that discusses the dirty little secret surrounding the origin of many of the gun control laws in the United States.

Click to expand...

dreamer said:

...

It has nothing to do with "guns"--it's all about "control"...

Click to expand...

Very nice and howdy!

hvymax said:

My next empty holster shirt will say; Because of Maryland's laws your right to protect the lives of yourself and your loved ones is as empty as my holster.

Click to expand...

Haha I really loved that the first time you mentioned it. I'd definitely buy a shirt


And I do agree with this topic. It's a better way to approach things.

Norton said:

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

Click to expand...

No worries Norton, we have another one who just found the light who will keep us informed and up to date. That's probably the reason he just now found the site because he's been too busy researching all this stuff for the past few years.

dreamer said:

The only reason why Marylanders are FORCED to frame this debate within the context of concealed carry is because there is NO RKBA in MD law. MD is one of only 8 states that does not have a Right To Keep and Bear Arms in it's state Constitution

Click to expand...

Well looks like he got banned. Never mind that reply.

aquaman said:

Well looks like he got banned. Never mind that reply.

Click to expand...

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