Just the levels of silliness that the old school PuSH'ers are delving to truly explains why their organizations are relying exclusively on funding from groups like the Joyce Foundation and Bloomie.
29 percent were persuaded by NGVAC last night--more than those persuaded by pro gun messages. Reason prevailsHere's the real info:
Even more people changed their viewpoints after the debate, almost equally in either direction. An anonymous vote showed that the number of people that said homes are safer with a gun went up by 27 percent. Those who say homes are not safer went up 29 percent. Although these numbers were slightly affected by a few latecomers to the debate who missed the initial poll.29 to 27 percent. What a huge difference. Now take a look at this screen cap of the 'crowd'.
The speakers were a local SA, a local judge, a law professor, and a guy from ICHV. Overall like dodgeboy said it was a very fair and balanced presentation, mostly fact based, with the SA waxing eloquent on some quotes from the founders and history for a few minutes at one point. The law professor was first and the longest, and walked through the law point by point. I got the impression he might be an anti, but to his credit, his presentation was completely fact based, and he did a fine job overall. The SA was clearly a proponent of CCW, though he was also fair, bringing up both supporting statistical studies, and non-supporting statistical studies in his speech. The judge asked several questions to the other three which to me it seemed he should already know, so I think they were rhetorical for the sake of presentation.And the reason for the ISRA Alert?
The guy from ICHV didn't have much to say. He clearly had his tail between his legs.I'm sure in a canned event, he would have had a lot more to say regarding how CCW holders are just killers in waiting. Instead he faced this:
I think the crowd was mostly pro-2A people. At least a half dozen NRA hats including myself, and I saw a few igold shirts too, among other 2A clothing.The only time gun control can survive is in areas where they are the only ones speaking. When it comes to open debate/discussion, they lose.
The Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence (ICHV) will be holding a panel
discussion against concealed carry on Monday evening in Rockford, IL. The
ICHV is a rabidly anti-gun organization that is working hard to take your
guns away from you.
WHAT: Anti-CCW Panel Discussion
WHEN: Monday, 18 November 2013, 6:30 PM
WHERE: YWCA, 4990 East State Street, Rockford, IL
“We’re not in it to stockpile. We’re in it to take what you have and there’s nothing you can do to stop us,” Tyler Smith says. “We are your worst nightmare, and we are coming.”
Smith keeps some of his supplies on his farm. On Friday, he and the other members hauled out dozens of sealed containers of beans, rice, sugar and pancake mix. He also displayed some of their dozens of 25-pound bags of rice and beans. The group has buried caches of food in the region, the locations of which they keep secret.
Most preppers, Smith says, are concerned with marauders taking their supplies. It’s not an unfounded fear, he says.
“We are those people,” he says. “We’ll kick your door in and take your supplies. … We are the marauders.”
“It will also make me the apex predator in my area, and that’s all that matters,” he says.
Spartan Survival is not a political group, Smith says. Contrary to expectations, he says he is pro-government and a supporter of President Barack Obama.
The reason that the moms in Dallas were so intimidated by the counter-protest outside, she told me, was that Open Carry Texas is “like the Taliban” and could feasibly have planned to open fire. “You don’t honestly believe they were going to shoot you?” I asked.“I have no idea why you would actually assume that,” Watts replied. “You never know with these mass shootings. I don’t know who these people are. I don’t know if these people have had background checks. Or if they have had any training.” Watts also suggested that Open Carry Texas was full of people who might rape the women involved in Moms Demand Action.Seriously? She assumes that a bunch of people protesting her unconstitutional beliefs are going to shoot and rape her in front of their wives and kids? What does she think it was, an Occupy rally?
“What I learned… was that they basically see the issue as a freedom of speech, censorship, freedom of the press issue, it’s not really about guns for them anymore,” he insisted.No you dipsh!t, it's about you playing right into the hands of the anti-gun groups by supporting their calls for 'compromise' and 'discussion' in order to pass more gun restrictions. Had you ever actually read anything they've said or done over the last decade or so, you might have realized there is no 'compromise' except what they want us to give up. You may notice that they're pretty much the only ones backing you during this.
“I do not believe,” he said, “I cannot personally or philosophically believe that refusing or forbidding discussion of significant issues of any kind because of fear that somebody else might take advantage of it or hold it up as a matter of political weakness should ever close peoples’ minds or close the door to reasoned discourse.”Again, had you paid ANY attention, EVERY law that the anti's get passed is followed up immediately by another, even stricter law. When we do try to 'discuss' w/ them, they immediately start demanding we give something up and then end up blocking/banning us when we don't roll over and give them what they want.
"Nobody anticipated the massive, overwhelmingly negative outcry" (12:15)Just more evidence that Metcalf et al not only don't understand how communication works today but also haven't been interacting but haven't been keeping up w/ the active world of firearm activism outside of their dead tree media.
Selectman Barry Greenfield would like to give police the authority to inspect gun safety at people's homes.The irony is that this is occurring in MA, the very state where the American Revolution started for just these same reasons. The very reason that the 4th Amendment was written into the Constitution.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.So according to Barry Greenfield, owning a firearm is 'probable cause' for a home search. I guarantee this won't be the last anti-gun fanatic politician proposing such a measure.