Indiana Constitutional Carry-Summer Study thread (2017)

[2A_Tom]

Still workin' on that 20K you need, I see.

 

[KellyinAvon]

The other side has a well defined set of goals in all of this. To disarm the general public by what ever means is at hand.

I'm never sure if I should reply to post 1 or 2 We (the pro-2A side) are up front concerning what we want. We don't use focus-grouped lines that contain phrases like "common sense" to mask the real goal. We don't change the name of our groups to hide our intent or where the money comes from. We continuously fight up-hill against a complicit media (the "what does remove hurdles mean?" crowd) and against general misinformation.

Tomorrow starts the 1500 and the Bosma envelopes are stamped and addressed. I'll put the over/under at 6 on the number of gun show attendees who will tell us Constitutional Carry means felons can buy a gun.

 

[chipbennett]

I'm never sure if I should reply to post 1 or 2 We (the pro-2A side) are up front concerning what we want. We don't use focus-grouped lines that contain phrases like "common sense" to mask the real goal. We don't change the name of our groups to hide our intent or where the money comes from. We continuously fight up-hill against a complicit media (the "what does remove hurdles mean?" crowd) and against general misinformation.

Tomorrow starts the 1500 and the Bosma envelopes are stamped and addressed. I'll put the over/under at 6 on the number of gun show attendees who will tell us Constitutional Carry means felons can buy a gun.

Do you mean that in the sense of get, or acquire?

 

[KellyinAvon]

Do you mean that in the sense of get, or acquire?

Not again!!! I should've posted LEGALLY buy (or get, acquire, obtain, procure, requisition, etc.)

 

[actaeon277]

When someone tells me "common sense gun laws", I confuse them by saying, "I agree".
They look confused.
Then I tell them, "Get rid of EVERY gun law on the books. That's COMMON SENSE."

 

[Bill of Rights]

The other side has a well defined set of goals in all of this. To disarm the general public by what ever means is at hand.

I'm never sure if I should reply to post 1 or 2 We (the pro-2A side) are up front concerning what we want. We don't use focus-grouped lines that contain phrases like "common sense" to mask the real goal. We don't change the name of our groups to hide our intent or where the money comes from. We continuously fight up-hill against a complicit media (the "what does remove hurdles mean?" crowd) and against general misinformation.

Tomorrow starts the 1500 and the Bosma envelopes are stamped and addressed. I'll put the over/under at 6 on the number of gun show attendees who will tell us Constitutional Carry means felons can buy a gun.

When someone tells me "common sense gun laws", I confuse them by saying, "I agree".
They look confused.
Then I tell them, "Get rid of EVERY gun law on the books. That's COMMON SENSE."

As just these few quoted posts indicate, CM is as usual, correct. The other side DOES have a clearly defined set of goals. One goal, really: Subjugation by disarmament.

It's much like what we are told is in the Koran, that Islam teaches that those who are not Muslim must be converted, enslaved, or killed, and perhaps that's why the Left seems so "tolerant" of Islam: They believe similarly w/r/t their enemies. We, on the Right, must in their belief be converted to believe the same, "guns R bad, mmkay?" and if this is not possible, we must be subjugated, controlled by them. If neither is possible.... that's where Antifa and others like them come from. Remember that groups like the KKK arose from the Left. (trying to avoid Godwinning this)

OTOH, we have no clear, unified set of goals. Oh sure, each of us does, but some don't want Constitutional Carry for one wrong reason or another. Some don't believe that "those guns" are necessary and as such, should be forbidden, and they fail to see the camel lifting the tent flap with his nose. I had a discussion with two co-workers recently, both former military, one very pro gun. Sadly, the one is not exactly anti-gun, but believes the rule of law is necessary to "control" (my word) society, and fails, as I see it, to make the leap and realize that laws and regulations do not control any that don't agree to follow them. The other, the pro-gun gent, is what is known as a "butter"... I believe in gun rights, BUT..... and in this case, "but" means there's no need for ARs, etc. (I will acknowledge that he might simply have very convincingly taken the side of a debate that he knew I would not. Put in simplest terms, I allowed myself to be painted into a corner with a reductio ad absurdum, and this illustrates to me why I am far better at debates when the pace is a bit slower, as happens online. It illustrates to me that when one stops and thinks about answers, in a way that is more difficult to do in verbal conversation, the logic flaws make themselves apparent. The second gent and I conversed a few days later, and we were much more "on the same side" at that time. He still came across to me as a "butter", however he seemed less so to me. (does that make him a margerine?)

We will never get to a point where the laws are fully to "our" side's liking. They will never be totally repealed, as Act suggested. In the absence of that situation, the laws will always go too far for some and not far enough for others, both in what is lawful and in what is punishable under the law. This makes it very difficult for "our side", and easier for the other, in that laws can be written that outlaw everything. They would not be in keeping with our current Constitution, nor with the laws of our Creator, but that has never stopped the Left before, and I see no reason it would now. It is true, as is said, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."

Blessings,
Bill

 

[KellyinAvon]

The over/under 6 came in at under today. Had some good discussions with some folks who asked some good questions. If I'm citing State v Pinter and US v Black I'm a bit out of my area, but I think we have a few more ConC supporters.

Thanks to everyone who signed a letter to Bosma today. I didn't count but I think it was close to 25.

 

[HKUSP]

Admittedly dumb question here: Has ConC been issued a resolution or bill number yet to reference during correspondence? Is there a link to a letter we may sign and mail?

Thanks,
Chris

 

[HKUSP]

Admittedly dumb question here: Has ConC been issued a resolution or bill number yet to reference during correspondence? Is there a link to a letter we may sign and mail?

Thanks,
Chris

Mods please delete. Accidental duplicate post.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Admittedly dumb question here: Has ConC been issued a resolution or bill number yet to reference during correspondence? Is there a link to a letter we may sign and mail?

Thanks,
Chris

Chris, the session does not begin until January 2018. Indiana has a part time General Assembly and this year it is a short session.

 

[Hawkeye]

Chris, the session does not begin until January 2018. Indiana has a part time General Assembly and this year it is a short session.

So there is no resolution or bill # to reference, but I think Kirk would say write Bosma, write Bosma, and then write Bosma again. I'm sure the phrase "Constitutional Carry" will be understood.

 

[KellyinAvon]

So there is no resolution or bill # to reference, but I think Kirk would say write Bosma, write Bosma, and then write Bosma again. I'm sure the phrase "Constitutional Carry" will be understood.

I think he'll be very familiar with ConC whether he wants to or not. A big pile of letters followed by 2-3/day.

 

[Jacke]

I’ve Never seen such a sloppy mess as this. And the Republicans are in charge of everything and they’re just blowing this golden opportunity to make a big difference for gun owners in America. If they don’t get their act together real quick the Democrats are going to come back with a vengeance and were all going to be sorry. And as far as this forum goes, I don’t care if I get banned I just have to say so many of you are a bunch of whining hypocrites...you’re pathetic.

 

[Jacke]

I’ve Never seen such a sloppy mess as this. And the Republicans are in charge of everything and they’re just blowing this golden opportunity to make a big difference for gun owners in America. If they don’t get their act together real quick the Democrats are going to come back with a vengeance and were all going to be sorry. And as far as this forum goes, I don’t care if I get banned I just have to say so many of you are a bunch of whining hypocrites...you’re pathetic.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I’ve Never seen such a sloppy mess as this. And the Republicans are in charge of everything and they’re just blowing this golden opportunity to make a big difference for gun owners in America. If they don’t get their act together real quick the Democrats are going to come back with a vengeance and were all going to be sorry. And as far as this forum goes, I don’t care if I get banned I just have to say so many of you are a bunch of whining hypocrites...you’re pathetic.

Perhaps you'd like to come up with some possible solutions or actions instead of being an Internet troll. As far as whining hypocrites, it takes one to know one, and you're both of them. I looked up "the pot calling the kettle black" and your picture was there. Oh yeah, your Mom said you better have the basement cleaned up before she gets home.

 

[jamil]

I’ve Never seen such a sloppy mess as this. And the Republicans are in charge of everything and they’re just blowing this golden opportunity to make a big difference for gun owners in America. If they don’t get their act together real quick the Democrats are going to come back with a vengeance and were all going to be sorry. And as far as this forum goes, I don’t care if I get banned I just have to say so many of you are a bunch of whining hypocrites...you’re pathetic.

You were doing okay before that last line. That was un-called for. And maybe a bit whiny.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

He gone!

 

[White Squirrel]

Darn, only 14 posts since he joined. What's the record?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Darn, only 14 posts since he joined. What's the record?

I seem to recall that there have been a couple who got shot down on their first post.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Darn, only 14 posts since he joined. What's the record?

14 posts, as noted, and several months of time-out from trolling during the last legislative session. Some people learn by listening, some by watching, and a few just have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.

I didn't ban him this time, nor have I looked to verify this to be fact or not, but I'm betting this was a permaban.

If it was not, I am pretty sure it will be, because he was previously warned.

The record is pretty low, but it's not something to strive for.