United Efforts

Matt Landfair

Matt Six Actual
Administrator
#1
We are trying to help protect our inalienable rights from being violated. Our 2nd Amendment rights are the rights that help ensure the whole Bill of Rights and our Nation are functional.

Primary & Secondary LLC Facebook page has 16k followers.

The largest P&S Facebook group is 14k.

P&S Instagram has 11k followers.

P&S YouTube has 11k subscribers.

P&S Forum has 4.6k members.

P&S is tiny compared to others, yet we have been able to help instigate huge positive change within multiple levels of government and huge positive changes to people's lives.

What are those bigger "Pro-Gun" pages and channels doing to help protect our rights? Excessive trolling and memes are a distraction and do not help our efforts. Infighting splits us.

Put pressure on them. We need all of our pro-rights supporters to work together as a functional team.

Spread the word. Share. Tag those people you find to be influential.

Unless we functionally work together, we have lost. This is not one of those posts that you nod after reading it. This is a post that needs your action after you read it. Every single action you do helps determine what direction we are going. Act.

-Matt Landfair
Owner
Primary & Secondary, LLC.

https://www.spreaker.com/episode/14179036
 
T

Titanium Nitride

Guest
#2
So is this thread now the P&S political organization, strategization, and mobilization HQ? Should we post resources, reading material, etc. here?
 
#3
So is this thread now the P&S political organization, strategization, and mobilization HQ? Should we post resources, reading material, etc. here?
I'd definitely like something like that.

It's funny, I was considering making a post similar to that just yesterday. I'm so f*cking bitter about the state of things, and I have no idea what I should be doing.
Nobody gives a damn about us except us.
 
#4
I'd definitely like something like that.

It's funny, I was considering making a post similar to that just yesterday. I'm so f*cking bitter about the state of things, and I have no idea what I should be doing.
Nobody gives a damn about us except us.
I actually went to school for this and worked on capitol hill and was head of student's for concealed carry at IU so Im for once qualified to talk about this.


I figure if you guys got the local/state police associations to have pro gun positions and put pressure on your congressmen that way you can both ratchet up the pressure on your congressmen and also take the wind out of the sails of the anti-gun people.

It's one thing to be Joe Blow calling into a Senator's office, its another thing to have the Sheriff's association, police union etc officially going against gun control.

And if such a organization doesn't exist then you professional guys in P&S should look to make them.

Additionally, we should focus on the party primaries. Most congressmen are not in competitive districts, so primaries are actually how most people are elected. The turnout in primaries is very small so we can make the most of our limited numbers. If we can leverage any kind of organization to donate, volunteer, and endorse pro gun politicians, and to lobby against anti gun republican primary candidates we really can make a difference

@SmElly go and vote in your local primary for the most pro gun guy you can find, and also try to get some other P&S guys to do so. If your in Indiana give me a call as I hav
 
#5
Unless you are politically feared you will not be politically respected.

I understand that the intent of this Thread is to figure out how to get various 2A organizations to work together. In order to do that, you will have to educate yourself and learn why these organizations are working at cross purposes. You want to learn how to run a carbine - you go to a carbine class! Politics is no different.

National organizations like the NRA, NAGR, and GOA are politically effective because they are politically respected (feared). If you wish to become politically effective you have to learn how.

I strongly recommend that those concerned with conservative issues go to https://facl-training.org and fill out the contact sheet. Tell them that you want to attend a 1-day school, what your #1 political issues is, and your city, state, zip code. 1-day classes are less than $50, include lunch, and eight-hours of drinking from a fire hose. FACL classes are what I call "Political Strategy". After your first 1-day, you maybe invited to follow-on classes.

Then go to https://www.americanmajority.org/signup/ for a variety of what I call "Political Tactics" classes. More of a nuts and bolts of how to use the tools available to you. They are both classroom and online for a very nominal cost ($15-25).
 
T

Titanium Nitride

Guest
#6
This thread seems to have come to a standstill, I’ll try to remedy that.

I’m playing armchair political strategist here; those of you who have real experience in these areas, please smack me down if I’m out of line:

1. We absolutely must take advantage of pre-existing organizations. Why build new infrastructure, networks, mailing lists, etc. when you can take advantage of pre-existing ones? To this end, the lads were spot on in ep. 136 when they were of a consensus that we need to max out involvement in NRA, SAF, state and local gun groups, etc. among the gun owning, 2A minded public. Now, NRA has never been perfect, sometimes quite far from it in fact. I think we all acknowledge that here. If you are familiar with some NRA history (which I highly suggest you read about here and here) you’ll know that the main thing that has kept the NRA in line and on task as far as gun rights is concerned is member participation. About every twenty years, starting in the 70s, it seems there’s been some sort of showdown between the entrenched “establishment” leadership and a group of determined members attempting to disrupt the entrenched power structure in order to right the ship. In the 70s, the membership was successful. In the 90s, the leadership won this fight. We’re currently in the third of these showdowns, with people like Adam Kraut trying to get on the board. Member involvement right now is pretty dang critical for this reason, and I’m glad I’ve seen so many folks get involved in the board elections to get candidates they support in there and “drain the swamp”. I myself upgraded to a life membership just so I could vote this year (and I’m kind of pissed that I did this weeks ago and still haven’t gotten my ballot when they’re due in about a week). This is ultimately what proves the abandon-the-NRA “not another inch” types (I very much enjoyed the lads shitting on them in ep. 136) wrong, NRA is at core a member driven organization. The leadership only gets away with their unpopular shenanigans for lack of member involvement. If these purists, especially the ones with sizable media audiences *cough*MAC*cough*, dedicated half as much time, effort, and resources towards fixing the NRA through membership and involvement as they do to bitching about how awful the NRA is and their own little special snowflake groups with nowhere near as much power or influence as NRA, we would probably be in a much better place today. There’s no use in getting up on the high horse if you can’t ride it anywhere. This brings us to finding some means to achieve these desired ends, I think there are two things we should be doing right now. First, bugging NRA members you know who are eligible to vote for the board to actually vote. Let them know who the good candidates are; even if they don’t want to get involved beyond voting it would have a huge cumulative impact if we got enough people to do it. Second, making new members and getting current members to up their membership status to make them eligible to vote for the board. I’ve found the member signup/renewal page from ARFCOM useful for this, for both its straightforward simplicity and because the rates are “discounted”.

2. The lads were absolutely right in ep. 136 about our need to get organized. NRA is great for putting the pressure on politicians (as another poster in this thread pointed out, fear drives politics) but the cultural fight and actually getting people to places to do things at certain times will depend largely on us common folk organizing and working amongst ourselves. This isn’t easy and is something largely alien to us here on “our side”. I think it was Chuck who got in to the history of organizing and just how much of what we may have thought was “spontaneous” in the Civil Rights movement was really the result of the dedication of professional and semi-pro activists and organizers. Google the Highlander Folk School. The “other side” has had institutions like this since the first half of the last century. We have a lot of catching up to do. For a crash course in how it got this way, why “our side” has largely been unsuccessful in its activism endeavors, and what we need to do to be able to mobilize before it’s too late, you need to read (and I mean need, not ask me for a TLDR or whine at me about being asked to read something) this series of articles. They’re incredibly illuminating:

Days of Rage

Radical Book Club: The Decentralized Left

Radical Book Club: The Centralized Left

Radical Book Club: What Righties Can Do

3. This first map here may be the most important map in American politics. Part of me hopes it is, part of me hopes it isn’t. It speaks to the comparison of our country to a political “tinderbox” that was made in ep. 136. What it tells us is that the divide with regards to gun rights is pretty well set with along the partisan divide in this country. If you took a look at some of the other maps in that article, you’ll see it lines up pretty well with some other demographic and political factors as well. What does this all mean? We’ve reached the point where we’ll really get the most mileage out of dedicating the majority of our efforts to mobilizing “our side”. Yes, we need to “convert” people on the other side. That can help us in the long run, but like I said we’ve reached the point where it would probably be a waste to dedicate a lot of resources to it. “Conversions” are a distant second priority to motivating the currently existing “faithful”.

4. What can we do now, short term, following this tragedy in Florida and the ensuing political shit show? This here and this are pretty good write-ups on what we’re facing right now. Yes, they are by that same gentleman who wrote those articles on organizing above. You know how after all of these shootings, people on “our side” say how the “other side” likes to rev up the gun control machine before the blood is dry, before bodies are buried, etc. and how it’s almost become a sort of trope? Well, that’s basically exactly what happens. The day after this shooting in Florida they already had the machine in motion, arranging pre-assembled pieces to meet their goals. You have people and networks in place, ready and waiting, so you can go in to action immediately when a new opportunity arises. This tactic is incredibly successful, for those of you familiar with history it should remind you of the way the Bolsheviks rose to power during the Russian Revolution. We don’t have our own machine in place yet, so what can we do to face this? Basically, what many of you have probably been doing already: fight the meme war. Be engaged on social media. Respond to people calling for gun control, discuss the issue with family members, post studies that support our position, spread/share/retweet clips and articles, and post those dank memes of course. Now, the usual tactic advised on “our side” for this is to engage the enemy in a reasoned, civil discourse backing up your assertions with fact and never stooping to their level no matter how low they go, all in the hopes of swaying fence-sitting observers. This works but only so well, and as stated above there may not be many fence sitters left these days. Do not forget there are more tools in your debate and discussion toolbox than logos: ethos and pathos have their place as well. Some people won’t be receptive to empirical argument at all, and you may have to go at them from an emotional angle. Some people are very receptive to pathos, in our case tradition or history, and you could sway them by showing them some great historical figure endorsing our position and they will be sold. Now, if you encounter someone on the other side who is an egregious sh*tliberal who can only and will only hurl insults and rabid frothing nonsense at you, don’t be afraid to riposte in kind. Ridicule can be a very powerful rhetorical tool, “shows of dominance” in a debate can often be just as or more effective at swaying fence sitters than putting the reasoned empirical argument on display for them. Something I’ve found really works well when dealing with that type that will openly flaunt their ignorance (and even fear) of firearms as if it were a good thing is to accuse them of being proud of their ignorance, it can really short circuit their mental process and makes them look bad to observers.

I wrote most of this with things talked about in ep. 136 in mind, so I hope it follows some sort of semi-coherent progression. I am sorry if a lot of this is preaching to the choir. I have been bouncing a lot of this around in my head and wanted to get it in writing, wanted to keep this thread alive, and IIRC next week’s episode will be about how to fight for our rights so I wanted to get it out before then. I hope at least some of you find this stuff useful. As stated earlier please give comments and criticism, especially if you’re someone who is experienced with this type stuff.
 

Joe _K

Regular Member
WARLORD
#7
... you’ll know that the main thing that has kept the NRA in line and on task as far as gun rights is concerned is member participation. About every twenty years, starting in the 70s, it seems there’s been some sort of showdown between the entrenched “establishment” leadership and a group of determined members attempting to disrupt the entrenched power structure in order to right the ship. In the 70s, the membership was successful. In the 90s, the leadership won this fight. We’re currently in the third of these showdowns, with people like Adam Kraut trying to get on the board. Member involvement right now is pretty dang critical for this reason, and I’m glad I’ve seen so many folks get involved in the board elections to get candidates they support in there and “drain the swamp”. I myself upgraded to a life membership just so I could vote this year (and I’m kind of pissed that I did this weeks ago and still haven’t gotten my ballot when they’re due in about a week). This is ultimately what proves the abandon-the-NRA “not another inch” types (I very much enjoyed the lads shitting on them in ep. 136) wrong, NRA is at core a member driven organization. The leadership only gets away with their unpopular shenanigans for lack of member involvement. If these purists, especially the ones with sizable media audiences *cough*MAC*cough*, dedicated half as much time, effort, and resources towards fixing the NRA through membership and involvement as they do to bitching about how awful the NRA is and their own little special snowflake groups with nowhere near as much power or influence as NRA, we would probably be in a much better place today. There’s no use in getting up on the high horse if you can’t ride it anywhere. This brings us to finding some means to achieve these desired ends, I think there are two things we should be doing right now. First, bugging NRA members you know who are eligible to vote for the board to actually vote. Let them know who the good candidates are; even if they don’t want to get involved beyond voting it would have a huge cumulative impact if we got enough people to do it. Second, making new members and getting current members to up their membership status to make them eligible to vote for the board. I’ve found the member signup/renewal page from ARFCOM useful for this, for both its straightforward simplicity and because the rates are “discounted”.
What MAC and others truthfully and painfully point out is that until LaPeirre and Cox are gone, the NRA will continue to flounder. Unless all 5 million NRA members threatened to stop paying their membership fees, the NRA headaches will continue to not be accountable to its membership, continue to have the for show only voting process and the Board that can’t do anything.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Joe _K

Regular Member
WARLORD
#8
What MAC and others truthfully and painfully point out is that until LaPeirre and Cox are gone, the NRA will continue to flounder. Unless all 5 million NRA members threatened to stop paying their membership fees, the NRA headaches will continue to not be accountable to its membership, continue to have the for show only voting process and the Board that can’t do anything.

Get Pete Brownell, Adam Kraut, or any other 2A Absolutist aka Constitutional Originalist onto the Board and it won’t do diddly from keeping Cox and LaPierre from working back room deals with those that seek to strip all Americans of their rights.

We can be united and still call out the slackers. Good Police, the thin blue line and all still call out and ostracize their fellow officers who don’t keep the standard, Marines and Soldiers rib each other endlessly, and seek to cut off the Sick bay commandos, weed out the weak, and trample the cowards.

No one sticks up for Bergdahl or Manning, Oswald, or Peterson just because the wore the Beret, earned the EGA, or wore the Badge. If the NRA is talking out both sides of their mouth then we should call them out on it, if we don’t who will?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#9
I don't know much about organization or politics, but it seems like as a community we have a problem where we continue to direct our message at the same groups and utilize the same old tactics, i.e. we focus on dudes and we always come across as hostile.

I thought it was the coolest thing in the world to listen to the podcast and hear about Gunterest; Mia Wood is trying something different, getting away from the commando boy's club shtick and changing up how things are done when it comes to firearms training. Mia and Mike Pannone are breaking through and getting us new converts from different walks of life and I think that is the example of how we need to change our message. Women and minorities aren't a side "untapped market", but the future of the firearms community.

We HAVE TO do something to communicate with people outside of our community in a persuasive manner; I can barely keep from rolling my eyes whenever I hear another old white dude (don't flame me, my Dad is an old white dude) talking about how he carries a .45 with ammo that was state of the art 40 years ago. For the longest time, I didn't want to believe that some in our own community can be so stereotypical, but I can't really ignore it anymore. We DO come off as belligerent and ignorant in the eyes of outsiders, especially minorities and women.

I admit that I have gotten angry and confrontational in the face of ignorant attacks on the firearms community, but it has never once helped to persuade anyone to see my point of view. If Mike Pannone, the realest MF-er around can win over new, female shooters with his professionalism, politeness and caring attention, why aren't we all trying that tactic?
 
#10
I have liked this channel for a while, but I want to point out a problem with certain distressing trends when discussions are undertaken. Importantly there needs to acceptance of some political correctness when stating pro 2nd amendment points. People can zone out rational debate due to offensive language that does no need to be used. I am not taking about the need for trigger warning and all that crazy stuff. Instead, proponents need to understand certain language and ideas hinder the ultimate end goal of protecting the constitution.

I will note a recent modcast. One of the moderators equated pro 2nd amendment individuals to Rhodesia. Such equations are just plain stupid and should not be encouraged. Rhodesia was a pathetic country maintained by racist and anti-democratic policies. One can respect the Rhodesian light infantry and note the horrors that happened to Zimbabwe under Mugabe. But to celebrate Rhodesia is a losing fight which buries the important message about protecting the 2nd amendment. It would be like an individual who respects the Fallschirmjager and rightly despises Communism justifying support for certain regimes. The 2nd amendment is not the lesser of two evils.

Furthermore, 2nd amendment individuals should cut all ties to the Confederacy. I will be blunt. The Confederacy were a bunch of treasonous SOBs who fought for one of the worst causes in world history. There was no noble last cause. Such myths need to be aggressively purged from gun rights groups. There is a reason a lot of those same treasonous SOBs help start the gun control movement. 2nd amendment individuals should loudly agree when people call for Confederate statues to come down. And then state how those individuals were responsible for the taking away of important rights from Americans. Moreover, get rid of those treasonous confederate flags from gun rights gatherings. Such symbols effectively block off others from joining due to the underlying hostile message they portray. Throughout American history gun control has been used to target minorities – with California leading the way at times. During the 1960s California instituted certain gun control measures in response to the black panther party. The assault weapons ban was originally partly instituted due to the fear of minority “gang bangers”. I could go on. We will lose our rights if we do not distance ourselves from, and educate, individuals who celebrate racist history.
 

Freedom Forged

Regular Member
WARLORD
#11
I have liked this channel for a while, but I want to point out a problem with certain distressing trends when discussions are undertaken. Importantly there needs to acceptance of some political correctness when stating pro 2nd amendment points. People can zone out rational debate due to offensive language that does no need to be used. I am not taking about the need for trigger warning and all that crazy stuff. Instead, proponents need to understand certain language and ideas hinder the ultimate end goal of protecting the constitution.

I will note a recent modcast. One of the moderators equated pro 2nd amendment individuals to Rhodesia. Such equations are just plain stupid and should not be encouraged. Rhodesia was a pathetic country maintained by racist and anti-democratic policies. One can respect the Rhodesian light infantry and note the horrors that happened to Zimbabwe under Mugabe. But to celebrate Rhodesia is a losing fight which buries the important message about protecting the 2nd amendment. It would be like an individual who respects the Fallschirmjager and rightly despises Communism justifying support for certain regimes. The 2nd amendment is not the lesser of two evils.

Furthermore, 2nd amendment individuals should cut all ties to the Confederacy. I will be blunt. The Confederacy were a bunch of treasonous SOBs who fought for one of the worst causes in world history. There was no noble last cause. Such myths need to be aggressively purged from gun rights groups. There is a reason a lot of those same treasonous SOBs help start the gun control movement. 2nd amendment individuals should loudly agree when people call for Confederate statues to come down. And then state how those individuals were responsible for the taking away of important rights from Americans. Moreover, get rid of those treasonous confederate flags from gun rights gatherings. Such symbols effectively block off others from joining due to the underlying hostile message they portray. Throughout American history gun control has been used to target minorities – with California leading the way at times. During the 1960s California instituted certain gun control measures in response to the black panther party. The assault weapons ban was originally partly instituted due to the fear of minority “gang bangers”. I could go on. We will lose our rights if we do not distance ourselves from, and educate, individuals who celebrate racist history.
I would love to take this up but I won't, as it will derail the thread.
 
#12
I have liked this channel for a while, but I want to point out a problem with certain distressing trends when discussions are undertaken. Importantly there needs to acceptance of some political correctness when stating pro 2nd amendment points. People can zone out rational debate due to offensive language that does no need to be used. I am not taking about the need for trigger warning and all that crazy stuff. Instead, proponents need to understand certain language and ideas hinder the ultimate end goal of protecting the constitution.

I will note a recent modcast. One of the moderators equated pro 2nd amendment individuals to Rhodesia. Such equations are just plain stupid and should not be encouraged. Rhodesia was a pathetic country maintained by racist and anti-democratic policies. One can respect the Rhodesian light infantry and note the horrors that happened to Zimbabwe under Mugabe. But to celebrate Rhodesia is a losing fight which buries the important message about protecting the 2nd amendment. It would be like an individual who respects the Fallschirmjager and rightly despises Communism justifying support for certain regimes. The 2nd amendment is not the lesser of two evils.

Furthermore, 2nd amendment individuals should cut all ties to the Confederacy. I will be blunt. The Confederacy were a bunch of treasonous SOBs who fought for one of the worst causes in world history. There was no noble last cause. Such myths need to be aggressively purged from gun rights groups. There is a reason a lot of those same treasonous SOBs help start the gun control movement. 2nd amendment individuals should loudly agree when people call for Confederate statues to come down. And then state how those individuals were responsible for the taking away of important rights from Americans. Moreover, get rid of those treasonous confederate flags from gun rights gatherings. Such symbols effectively block off others from joining due to the underlying hostile message they portray. Throughout American history gun control has been used to target minorities – with California leading the way at times. During the 1960s California instituted certain gun control measures in response to the black panther party. The assault weapons ban was originally partly instituted due to the fear of minority “gang bangers”. I could go on. We will lose our rights if we do not distance ourselves from, and educate, individuals who celebrate racist history.

Can I say I disagree and like Freedom forged I would like to take this up separately
 

Joe _K

Regular Member
WARLORD
#15
I have liked this channel for a while, but I want to point out a problem with certain distressing trends when discussions are undertaken. Importantly there needs to acceptance of some political correctness when stating pro 2nd amendment points. People can zone out rational debate due to offensive language that does no need to be used. I am not taking about the need for trigger warning and all that crazy stuff. Instead, proponents need to understand certain language and ideas hinder the ultimate end goal of protecting the constitution.

I will note a recent modcast. One of the moderators equated pro 2nd amendment individuals to Rhodesia. Such equations are just plain stupid and should not be encouraged. Rhodesia was a pathetic country maintained by racist and anti-democratic policies. One can respect the Rhodesian light infantry and note the horrors that happened to Zimbabwe under Mugabe. But to celebrate Rhodesia is a losing fight which buries the important message about protecting the 2nd amendment. It would be like an individual who respects the Fallschirmjager and rightly despises Communism justifying support for certain regimes. The 2nd amendment is not the lesser of two evils.

Furthermore, 2nd amendment individuals should cut all ties to the Confederacy. I will be blunt. The Confederacy were a bunch of treasonous SOBs who fought for one of the worst causes in world history. There was no noble last cause. Such myths need to be aggressively purged from gun rights groups. There is a reason a lot of those same treasonous SOBs help start the gun control movement. 2nd amendment individuals should loudly agree when people call for Confederate statues to come down. And then state how those individuals were responsible for the taking away of important rights from Americans. Moreover, get rid of those treasonous confederate flags from gun rights gatherings. Such symbols effectively block off others from joining due to the underlying hostile message they portray. Throughout American history gun control has been used to target minorities – with California leading the way at times. During the 1960s California instituted certain gun control measures in response to the black panther party. The assault weapons ban was originally partly instituted due to the fear of minority “gang bangers”. I could go on. We will lose our rights if we do not distance ourselves from, and educate, individuals who celebrate racist history.
Does anyone sell Confederate flag Rhody shorts?....

Sorry, I had to.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Freedom Forged

Regular Member
WARLORD
#16
Thomas_Jefferson_Quote.jpg

“as a last resort” are the key words in this quote. Their is so much that can be done to secure our rights long before before the gun. Staying quiet and saying I’ll go to guns if it comes to that is like saying I’ll wait to put the fire out once it gets bigger. Write and call your representatives. Write the President. Staying quiet insures your position will NOT be considered. Most of all VOTE.
#ballotboxovercartridebox #standandbecounted #wehavedonenothingwrong
FF
 
#17
View attachment 2119

“as a last resort” are the key words in this quote. Their is so much that can be done to secure our rights long before before the gun. Staying quiet and saying I’ll go to guns if it comes to that is like saying I’ll wait to put the fire out once it gets bigger. Write and call your representatives. Write the President. Staying quiet insures your position will NOT be considered. Most of all VOTE.
#ballotboxovercartridebox #standandbecounted #wehavedonenothingwrong
FF
Quoting Malcolm X probably isnt the best with this crowd

And honestly for most people, unless you live in a swing state and especially unless you live in a competitive congressional district really your vote means little. And even still, unless you are controlling funds going to candidates and being represented in an interest group a citizen actually amounts to precious little.

As uncomfortable as it is, we can have the democratic engagement in the world, but if the Constitution keeps getting shredded, the left continues its system of indoctrination with Academia and of the Media, and the deck keeps getting stacked against us with immigration, Democracy and voting isn't going to do a damn thing to protect our rights and freedoms which is the whole reason why we have this country.

Depressing as it is to say, maybe democracy is not the one size fits all solution to our problems and to protect freedom, and maybe the gun and nationalism might be the road we have to go down.
 
#18
So this is essentially my first post here outside of my introduction, but I wanted to chime in.

Last weekend I attended the local "March for our Lives" rally in my area. I wanted to get a feel for the tone of the event, and see what was being said, and gauge the emotion of the attendees. After hanging around for about half an hour, I found the only other pro-gun guy in the crowd and we decided to post up in a corner with his sign and invite debate.

I spoke to a LOT of people that day. Some of them were unreasonable, many were uninformed, and ALL of them were passionate. But I got a pretty good idea of where most of them were coming from, and, more importantly, how to talk to them in order to reach them.

The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of them just don't know any better, and have never actually held a meaningful dialogue with anyone who disagrees with them. When presented with someone who was informed, calm, rational, and respectful of what they were saying while politely demanding an actual CRITICAL defense of their points of view, most of them folded pretty quickly.

At their heart they're all generally good people and, if I thought things worked the same way they did, I'd be pretty angry too. I think it's far too easy to dismiss what other people say when they're hiding on the internet, or when they're using inflammatory language, but when someone is right there in front of you and being polite while explaining why they disagree, it's hard not to at least pretend to listen to what they're saying.

Which brings me to my point. Over the last few years, gun owners as a community have been pretty successful at defending the 2nd amendment on a federal, legal level. Where we've failed is in the court of public opinion. The only way to change that is to begin actively reaching out to the "other side" and engaging in a sincere dialogue. One of the best suggestions I heard (ironically, from a pro gun-control marcher) was that we should set up some sort of informal town hall where we can talk to each other, and actually explain things. Organizing online is good for getting started, but the internet has become so partisan and so compartmentalized that it's hard to actually reach people that way. We need to be organizing marches the same way "they" do, reaching out to people, educating people about the things they don't know they don't know.

If we create an informed debate on this issue, I have confidence we can win it for years to come. The only way we'll lose it is through ignorance.
 

RustyM92

Amateur
WARLORD
#19
So this is essentially my first post here outside of my introduction, but I wanted to chime in.

Last weekend I attended the local "March for our Lives" rally in my area. I wanted to get a feel for the tone of the event, and see what was being said, and gauge the emotion of the attendees. After hanging around for about half an hour, I found the only other pro-gun guy in the crowd and we decided to post up in a corner with his sign and invite debate.

I spoke to a LOT of people that day. Some of them were unreasonable, many were uninformed, and ALL of them were passionate. But I got a pretty good idea of where most of them were coming from, and, more importantly, how to talk to them in order to reach them.

The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of them just don't know any better, and have never actually held a meaningful dialogue with anyone who disagrees with them. When presented with someone who was informed, calm, rational, and respectful of what they were saying while politely demanding an actual CRITICAL defense of their points of view, most of them folded pretty quickly.

At their heart they're all generally good people and, if I thought things worked the same way they did, I'd be pretty angry too. I think it's far too easy to dismiss what other people say when they're hiding on the internet, or when they're using inflammatory language, but when someone is right there in front of you and being polite while explaining why they disagree, it's hard not to at least pretend to listen to what they're saying.

Which brings me to my point. Over the last few years, gun owners as a community have been pretty successful at defending the 2nd amendment on a federal, legal level. Where we've failed is in the court of public opinion. The only way to change that is to begin actively reaching out to the "other side" and engaging in a sincere dialogue. One of the best suggestions I heard (ironically, from a pro gun-control marcher) was that we should set up some sort of informal town hall where we can talk to each other, and actually explain things. Organizing online is good for getting started, but the internet has become so partisan and so compartmentalized that it's hard to actually reach people that way. We need to be organizing marches the same way "they" do, reaching out to people, educating people about the things they don't know they don't know.

If we create an informed debate on this issue, I have confidence we can win it for years to come. The only way we'll lose it is through ignorance.
Extremely well said, sir.

There is a serious lack of conversation on this issue. Both sides are extremely polarized and entrenched. It's become a fight over the middle, to sway a majority of the uninformed and undecided in favor of one side or the other. By engaging in conversation, presenting a fact-based logical argument, it seems that you, like I, have found that people are at least willing to entertain a different perspective, and at the very least come away more informed.
The opposition is playing a game of smoke and mirrors, a counter-intel campaign of disinformation. As was said on the last Modcast, it's important for us to remember that at this point, we are not losing. P&S is paying attention to the man behind the curtain. That does not mean we have the right to become complacent. This is a fight that if our side is inactive, the momentum can quickly shift, and we can find ourselves outflanked and overrun.
Tocqueville said that the greatest strength of American society was its involvement in associations, and its willingness to stay informed and engage on issues that the people saw as important. Membership to the NRA/GOA/FPC/Joe-Bob's Rod & Gun Club is only the basis. It's not enough to simply pay the monthly dues, but to stay involved, and stay active in the fight. How do we do this? We engage in conversation, we make ourselves be heard, and our position clear. Like I believe Ash said, we get engaged with politics on a local level, because that's where we can most effecttively fight it. We foster conversation and through it, grow an understanding of the issues. Most important, we keep fighting.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Our opposition is playing the long game, so must we.
 
#20
Checkers = forwarding emails, liking Facebook memes , and watching FoxNews; taking part in rallies; voting the party line or holding a party position.

Chess = talking one on one with your neighbors; actively working on a campaign or with an outside group (PAC/SuperPAC); voting only for solid candidates that you've researched and examined their voting history.

Go = working (non-politically) within your neighborhood, community, political district; running/agitating for city council, school board, or county commissioner; voting only for a candidate that is solid 100% inline with your values and not party line.