NFOA narrow mindedness and PC alignment

[Guzzirider]

Tut,

Do the laws need to be changed? Yes!

Is the Felonious Civil Disobediance you advocate the answer? No!

Tell me how it helps "The Cause" or gets laws changed, for members of the NFOA forum or this one for that matter to be convicted of felonies.

Gents, I am afraid that the above my be the only way some of these laws that are outright unconstitutional can be challenged. Not getting convicted under but by being charged under and then takeing the case to a higher state or federal court to get them tossed out. Here in Lincoln there are city mistomeniors that result in loosing ones right to own firearms within the city. This is outragious, the city council of Lincoln has taken it upon themselves to remove ones rights under both the state and federal consitutions for non felony officences. There is getting to be a lot of laws that are like this, they are passed knowing that they are a violation of our rights. And just how long are we going to just go along with this before some type of action is taken? I not advocating or planing on violating any laws but just want to point out that Tut brings up a valid issue. By just going along with what ever is put into law no matter how out of bounds it is we are slowly giving up our freedoms. It should be an open topic to at least have a debate over it and not claim that just bringing it up is an act of felonious civil disobediance.

 

[gunscribe]

You must think you have lots of time, money and luck!

Gents, I am afraid that the above my be the only way some of these laws that are outright unconstitutional can be challenged. Not getting convicted under but by being charged under and then takeing the case to a higher state or federal court to get them tossed out.

Please explain to me how it can be taken to a higher court WITHOUT a conviction.

And what makes you think a higher court will toss it out.

You are charged with a felony gun crime and convicted. You appeal the conviction to a higher court. The higher court may or may NOT decide to hear your appeal.

Good bye Gun Rights for life.

Do you have the tens of thousands of dollars in lawyer fees to engage in that fight? Obviously you have no idea how much it will cost in time and money with absolutely no guarentee that a higher court will find in your favor.

Before inciting the public to willfully commit felonies on a website, it would behoove you to think the entire process through to the bitter end.

The way to make changes is become active in the process and elect people that will repeal the laws you are talking about.

Everytime someone does something stupid, in the name of Gun Rights, and gets arrested for a felony it sets any progress that has been made back years.

If you want to commit a felony and lose your Rights for the rest of your life that is your choice.

Even if you do not shout that your doing it for the SAF, NRA or NFOA as they haul you off in handcuffs the media will associate you with those organizations anyway.

 

[Guzzirider]

Please explain to me how it can be taken to a higher court WITHOUT a conviction.

And what makes you think a higher court will toss it out.

You are charged with a felony gun crime and convicted. You appeal the conviction to a higher court. The higher court may or may NOT decide to hear your appeal.

Good bye Gun Rights for life.

Do you have the tens of thousands of dollars in lawyer fees to engage in that fight? Obviously you have no idea how much it will cost in time and money with absolutely no guarentee that a higher court will find in your favor.

Before inciting the public to willfully commit felonies on a website, it would behoove you to think the entire process through to the bitter end.

The way to make changes is become active in the process and elect people that will repeal the laws you are talking about.

Everytime someone does something stupid, in the name of Gun Rights, and gets arrested for a felony it sets any progress that has been made back years.

If you want to commit a felony and lose your Rights for the rest of your life that is your choice.

Even if you do not shout that your doing it for the SAF, NRA or NFOA as they haul you off in handcuffs the media will associate you with those organizations anyway.

Ok, I am stupid, misinformed and a danger to gun rights advocation. You have certinly put me in my place. I will refrain from asking any more questions or offering any other opinions on this subject.

 

[CitizenClark]

Guzzirider,

You may have missed the posts I'm refering to because an admin deleted them. I made reference to those living in a flood plain as looking a bit silly when they wonder how it could be that the river floods, and an admin decided he'd have to delete it and give me a "warning". Yeah, not kidding. Then, another post elsewhere on a subject of carrying EVERYWHERE versus where you are "allowed" and I ended the post with something like "please, admin, if you find this one offensive and delete it as well then you do need to wonder about not only your support level of the 2nd A. but also the 1st amendment". I'm now banned from posting for a month.

First off, let me clue you in on something: the 1st Amendment (as with the rest of the Bill of Rights) is a bar on _government_ restrictions on speech. A person is not violating your 1st Amendment rights unless they are acting as a government agent. Further, there is no such thing as a 1st Amendment right to "speak" by using someone else's property without their permission. The person who sets up an online forum is and--assuming no contractual obligations to the contrary--should be absolutely free to "censor" any participant he wishes.

If I say I'd recommend carrying everywhere not just where it's "allowed" and if I point out how "silly" a man is for taking a knife to a gathering of hundreds cause "no guns allowed" at a hunting/sports show, and if I point out such sillyness and then inform all that if he deletes a post due to being offended then he needs to think about his 1st A. stance and he then deletes and bans... Well, you do the math.

I have posted messages suggesting that cops are all vile criminals, that the GOP is full of warmongering thugs, etc., and I have never been censored. I have also taken some pretty controversial positions with regard to policy debates on the NFOA forum, and I've never been censored. Occasionally, when things get a little heated, someone will (politely) ask for me to tone things down, and they are typically right.

I think the fact that NFAO is doing well with growing membership and that he has a position at the helm has gone to his head, frankly.

I support with membership the NRA, SAF, GOA, JPFO, USCCA. I support via purchases and donation in addition to membership the SAF and JPFO. (The NRA has compromised way too much for me to want to ever donate to them above membership dues) I also have a number of magazine subscriptions and purchase guns/ammo/supplies from free thinkers. I have taken 9 men and one woman shooting, at an outdoor gun club i belong to, for thier first time shooting! I've taken my wife and both my sons to Front Sight as I have a membership there. I pass out information regarding our Bill of Rights and our Countries wonderful heritage that I purchase at JPFO, and leave material at every waiting room I visit and on many bulliten boards I run accross. I support freedom minded local politicians and the right-wing Tea Party type national ones. I belong to this forum and three others, including NFOA and have never had issues till this guy there.

For a guy at a forum to treat me like I have to watch what I say is not only offensive to me, but should be offensive to anyone who respects freedom.

So you think "freedom" means being able to barge into someone's living room and say things that they don't want to hear, or to access their internet discussion forum against their will and start flame wars? You have funny ideas about freedom. My idea of freedom is being unrestrained by others in my use of _my own_ stuff, not somebody else's.

 

[Punch]

I do not "advocate" people committing felonies, but I have always been armed. If you want to obey laws that put you in danger, I will not tell you otherwise. But it is people who obey these laws that have given me my adversion to being a "sheepdog". If your life is not worth you protecting, it is certainly not worth enough for me to protect, or to go to prison for protecting.