Civility

[gtodave]

We have to find a way to say "the problem ain't us" in one line, and in a memorable way.

Better yet, put in on the General Assembly for refusing to pass common sense laws like making it a felony to steal a gun.

How about a Haiku?

Illegal guns amok
Maryland gives not one fu(k
Would rather jail me

 

[teratos]

How about a Haiku?

Illegal guns amok
Maryland gives not one fu(k
Would rather jail me

Hell, even the Moms can appreciate a good Haiku. Spot on, too.

 

[Malleovic]

Other people have said this but it bears repeating:

The vast majority of the membership of the MGA does not think or care about guns. They are happy to use the issue as a way to score political points if they think it will be easy and without political risk.

Additionally are a small few politicians who have made it their business to "own" the issue of "gun safety" because they see it as a way to bolster their political brand. If they play nice with the first group, they generally get what they want. If they don't (see reports of Del. Atterbeary crassly attempting to exploit the late Speaker's name to garner support for her version of HB786), they will not.

Our job is twofold:

-Fight the notion that it will be easy and politically safe to support 2A infringement
-Be less obnoxious than people in that second, concentrated group. This aligns with what Mark states in the OP of the thread.

MGA is just a bunch of people at the end of the day who happen to make law. They get distracted, tired, rushed, bored, lazy, and grumpy same as everyone else. They can also be focused, energetic, organized, enthusiastic, hardworking, and friendly as well, depending on the day, what's on their plate, or who they're dealing with.

Principles aside, the D next to someone's name doesn't have to make them automatically the enemy.

 

[MigraineMan]

i sat in front of a few in the overflow rooms in Annapolis and they seemed to not know what they were talking. They appeared to be reading from scripts.

They likely were reading from scripts. Emo Jen's organization provides them to participants. Here's one example that was distributed as part of a church-fundraiser-slash-recruiting event:

 

[Uncle Duke]

There is room for multiple approaches. While I don't think the 2 finger salute is helpful, it is an expression of the frustration felt by many in our camp. Mopar had right to express that.

We need some people to take the "voice of reason" approach. We have that. MSI, MSRPA, NRA to name a few. They are the expert panels, they deliver an excellent message in a measured way and engage with the Moms pretty well. Not much criticism is levied at them, and with good reason.

We have the "We Will Not Comply" camp. PP being the shining example. Personally, I think this year the approach made a lot of people stand up and take notice. In the past I used to not be such a fan of this thinking "hey, we can reason with these people". We may be able to with a some. Not many. This wing of the 2A community expertly used WWNC to get the attention of legislators, Moms, and the broader (nationwide) 2A community. The approach is being used successfully in several other States. There is no such thing as bad publicity. Some members have gone out of their way to take a dump on these efforts because they don't like this approach. They see it as unlawful. It isn't. Non-compliance with Unconstitutional laws is a duty.

There are numerous videos of PP members engaging Moms in civil conversation on the sidewalks. Rational, well thought out dialogue. This is invaluable. We even had an airplane with a banner. Some people took a dump on this. Does it change the mind of the other side? No. It is, however, publicity. It boosts the morale of the troops. THAT is huge. Funny the people crapping on this deed were NOT the people out on the sidewalks doing the heavy lifting.

People have to understand that there is no one right way of doing things. They have to see the merit of different approaches. Different prongs of attack. We need more people to think outside the box.

I don't think it can be overstated just how important it was for the several Maryland Sheriffs to state that they themselves won't comply either. The anti's don't generally see LEO's as yahoos, like many of them see us.

IF some of the grabbers are more uninformed than anything, as one camp suggests, and can be open to persuasion and reason? That suggests strongly against the Mopar approach, much as i genuinely understand it. On the other hand, there might in fact be very little if anything left to talk about. And these constant annual infringement efforts are a wbole lot more than merely inconvenient. They are a threat to individual liberty, and additionally present very real life choices that cause citizens to choose between the ability to defend ones self and incarceration. As such, these are the actions of a genuinely threatening enemy.

Which school of thought regarding the grabbers is correct? To me, this remains the 64,000 dollar question.

 

[j_h_smith]

There is room for multiple approaches. While I don't think the 2 finger salute is helpful, it is an expression of the frustration felt by many in our camp. Mopar had right to express that.

We need some people to take the "voice of reason" approach. We have that. MSI, MSRPA, NRA to name a few. They are the expert panels, they deliver an excellent message in a measured way and engage with the Moms pretty well. Not much criticism is levied at them, and with good reason.

We have the "We Will Not Comply" camp. PP being the shining example. Personally, I think this year the approach made a lot of people stand up and take notice. In the past I used to not be such a fan of this thinking "hey, we can reason with these people". We may be able to with a some. Not many. This wing of the 2A community expertly used WWNC to get the attention of legislators, Moms, and the broader (nationwide) 2A community. The approach is being used successfully in several other States. There is no such thing as bad publicity. Some members have gone out of their way to take a dump on these efforts because they don't like this approach. They see it as unlawful. It isn't. Non-compliance with Unconstitutional laws is a duty.

There are numerous videos of PP members engaging Moms in civil conversation on the sidewalks. Rational, well thought out dialogue. This is invaluable. We even had an airplane with a banner. Some people took a dump on this. Does it change the mind of the other side? No. It is, however, publicity. It boosts the morale of the troops. THAT is huge. Funny the people crapping on this deed were NOT the people out on the sidewalks doing the heavy lifting.

People have to understand that there is no one right way of doing things. They have to see the merit of different approaches. Different prongs of attack. We need more people to think outside the box.

There is another option we must look at. Help those who want to run for office and those who are in office that support the 2A Money is always a good way to show your support, but they will also ask you to make phone calls (which is one of the things I do), hand out info at outings, and other things.

Don't think that those who are not in your district won't listen to you. I talk to members of the MGA and their staff from all over the state. We talk about matters that affect all Marylanders. I also send each of them a small donation after we talk and I get a good feeling for their 2A support.

We need to turn around the make up of the MGA. This is the only way we can assure this state doesn't fall any further Left. This has been my approach for the last few years.

But we all have our places in this fight. No one is better than the other and as long as you're doing something, you're an asset to the cause.

 

[outrider58]

I can admit I draw hard lines. I can't imagine anyone who actually has principles to be any other way. Giving more ground to antis will never benefit us. The antis just keep taking more and more.

I won't be welcoming to anyone who wishes to take more of what little 2A rights we have left. Someone sides with Antigunners or wants to pay advocate then I'm done conversing with them. I'll take my issues directly to legislators. I don't need to associate with them.

Principle does not infer rigidity.

I do not associated with anyone who is anti 1A/2A (the two go hand in hand).

I consider my self a somewhat flexible person. I won't put up with bulshit, but I don't need to ex someone out of my life over a disagreement either(I am not speaking of the 1st or 2nd amendments here).

 

[clandestine]

Principle does not infer rigidity.

They do for me and my Family.

I do not associated with anyone who is anti 1A/2A (the two go hand in hand).

Yes you do, you and a few other refuse to see it. His name is Fabsroman. You may have missed some of it, but it's plain as day if you dig through his posts.

When your associates efforts are successful in disarming you, you may form a different view.

I consider my self a somewhat flexible person. I won't put up with bulshit, but I don't need to ex someone out of my life over a disagreement either(I am not speaking of the 1st or 2nd amendments here).

Do as you wish. I won't be friends or associate with those who would sell my rights down the river. Nor will I be friendly with someone who threatened to sue me for putting him in his place on an internet board.

 

[outrider58]

They do for me and my Family.







Yes you do, you and a few other refuse to see it. His name is Fabsroman. You may have missed some of it, but it's plain as day if you dig through his posts.



When your associates efforts are successful in disarming you, you may form a different view.







Do as you wish. I won't be friends or associate with those who would sell my rights down the river. Nor will I be friendly with someone who threatened to sue me for putting him in his place on an internet board.

My associates? Ha! Thats rich!

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[clandestine]

My associates? Ha! Thats rich!

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

You are being just as rigid as you are accusing me of being.

 

[PowPow]

Marriage between a pro-2A guy and a Mom Demanding Action can't be easy, being so politically out of sync with one's spouse. I know it can be done. Look at James Carville and Mary Matalin - they did it and wrote an excellent book about it. BUT, in practice, I can see it causing a lot of unnecessary disharmony.

I was actually the guy who didn't want guns in the house when I first met my wife. She came with a gun. I told her that I didn't want to know where it was, and that she had to take care of it herself. I was never anti-2A. In fact, my politics haven't changed much. I just didn't like guns because of a poorly managed first time experience with my father and brother and a certain 12 gauge (that I wish was mine today). But, my wife married me anyway. The gun issue got all got worked out in our first 2 years, and now she buys me guns!

I could see the flip side with a pro-2A guy marrying an Mom Demanding Action. Slightly different case, because my situation did not involve politics. So, how does one reconcile drastic political differences in a marriage? Perhaps civility plays a role too?

 

[dblas]

Nicely said. I do believe Mopar's salute was a net positive, only because he was the ONLY one to do it. He got there attention in a way that no one else did; that some of us have had it with them. If more people took that approach it would not be a positive thing.

I came really close earlier in the day to doing this when I went bombastic on them during the felony law update for stealing a firearm and using a firearm in a violent crime for repeat offenders.

 

[PJDiesel]

That's a very insightful post there PowPow. The truth about pretty much this WHOLE thing boils down to dealing with different people who maybe came from different upbringings that now differ from the way they raise their own. I know plenty of people who aren't necessarily "anti" but aren't gun owners and really don't care much either way. I don't consider them a threat to me.

 

[dblas]

We have to find a way to say "the problem ain't us" in one line, and in a memorable way.

Better yet, put in on the General Assembly for refusing to pass common sense laws like making it a felony to steal a gun.

For those members of the House Judiciary Committee, we need to look out for their community meetings where they tell their constituents how successful they were, and bring this bill up and ask them why they didn't work to move it out of committee.

 

[welder516]

When you draw lines in the sand and exclude a whole population of maybe's we will never get there in Maryland , we must be civil and explain the facts it is the only way to win in the long run . Gun rights are based on facts no touchy feely stuff and words like "common sense"

 

[teratos]

For those members of the House Judiciary Committee, we need to look out for their community meetings where they tell their constituents how successful they were, and bring this bill up and ask them why they didn't work to move it out of committee.

This. We also need to find some common sense points like this and have one of our friendlies introduce a bill to see how the Dems vote. We can call it the “If you really wanted to do something about gun violence you would have voted for this bill” Bill.

 

[Art3]

This. We also need to find some common sense points like this and have one of our friendlies introduce a bill to see how the Dems vote. We can call it the “If you really wanted to do something about gun violence you would have voted for this bill” Bill.

I thought it was called, "HB0236 (The Repeat Firearms Offender Act of 2019)." We saw how they voted

 

[PowPow]

I thought it was called, "HB0236 (The Repeat Firearms Offender Act of 2019)." We saw how they voted

The thing that most stuck with me about that particular bill was Del. Conaway's question about the reading grade level in Baltimore. I understand his point, yet I feel there has to be a way we can better overcome his argument.

 

[teratos]

I thought it was called, "HB0236 (The Repeat Firearms Offender Act of 2019)." We saw how they voted

We can do better. Let’s brainstorm. We need to get it done early, and need to get support of Sheriffs, and get publicity. The public at large wants something done about gun violence, because they keep hearing about it. They are largely ignorant of the shenanigans in Annapolis. Hammer this for 6 months on social media and we have their attention.

 

[Art3]

The thing that most stuck with me about that particular bill was Del. Conaway's question about the reading grade level in Baltimore. I understand his point, yet I feel there has to be a way we can better overcome his argument.

I know

I really wish I had been able to respond to that. I'd remind him that this is about REPEAT offenders. That means, they've already been in the system, where they should have had the opportunity to learn how to read more gooder. Even if they didn't get hooked on phonics, the process of arrest, trial, prison? () and release should have explained to them the rules, in small words if necessary.

Quite frankly, if their lack of education keeps them in such a "challenged" state, it probably isn't safe for us or them to have them out on the street. We would all be better off if they were kept in a facility that could better accommodate their special needs, for as long as their needs were special (or they got elected...whichever came first).