One great thing about the AWB...

[chasfm11]

... is that it's made us much more politically-sophisticated as a group.

For example:

1. We can argue a lot more coherently - as in we're getting better at KNOWING our facts and how to refute arguments and spot red herrings.
2. We understand the opposition a lot better - not just that they want to grab guns, but a better understanding of the psychology which drives many antis eg the "projection" issue and can call them on it.
3. We're no longer calmed/seduced by the "compromise" falsehood; we're now very aware that it's not actually a compromise, it's a CONCESSION.
4. We're taking on the antis on their own ground and winning - for example, I see many pro-gun supporters hammering antis with facts at Huffington Post and other places.
5. We're attending rallies and gun "buybacks", we're writing to our politicians and media-outlets, we're joining pro-rights groups.
6. We have been forced to really think worst-case scenarios and have drawn our own respective lines-in-the-sand; some point at which we are prepared to "spit on our hands, hoist the black flag and start to slit throats", to quote HL Mencken.

If we can keep this momentum up, there's nothing we can't accomplish

But we still have a long ways to go.

To add to your list:

7. We have a Texas Senator is willing to put himself out there on 2nd Amendment issues and take them directly to "the other camp". How long has it been since we had that kind of firepower in the public space?
8. We have significant growth in the NRA and plans to do even more. I'm sorry that I don't know the membership history better but I'm guessing that the recent gains, as a percentage, dwarf any others in the past decade.j

I've been thinking a lot about the polarization that is occurring. I've decided that it is a good thing. What it means is that one side isn't steamrolling the other side, as seems to have been the case for too many years. I hope that push back continues and that it continues to spread to other topics. If it does, the media pretty much looses control of the message that that would be the best thing of all.

[77346]

I agree... and I see the glass half full now...

[DEB]

... is that it's made us much more politically-sophisticated as a group.

For example:

1. We can argue a lot more coherently - as in we're getting better at KNOWING our facts and how to refute arguments and spot red herrings.
2. We understand the opposition a lot better - not just that they want to grab guns, but a better understanding of the psychology which drives many antis eg the "projection" issue and can call them on it.
3. We're no longer calmed/seduced by the "compromise" falsehood; we're now very aware that it's not actually a compromise, it's a CONCESSION.
4. We're taking on the antis on their own ground and winning - for example, I see many pro-gun supporters hammering antis with facts at Huffington Post and other places.
5. We're attending rallies and gun "buybacks", we're writing to our politicians and media-outlets, we're joining pro-rights groups.
6. We have been forced to really think worst-case scenarios and have drawn our own respective lines-in-the-sand; some point at which we are prepared to "spit on our hands, hoist the black flag and start to slit throats", to quote HL Mencken.

If we can keep this momentum up, there's nothing we can't accomplish

But we still have a long ways to go.

To add to your list:

7. We have a Texas Senator is willing to put himself out there on 2nd Amendment issues and take them directly to "the other camp". How long has it been since we had that kind of firepower in the public space?
8. We have significant growth in the NRA and plans to do even more. I'm sorry that I don't know the membership history better but I'm guessing that the recent gains, as a percentage, dwarf any others in the past decade.j

I've been thinking a lot about the polarization that is occurring. I've decided that it is a good thing. What it means is that one side isn't steamrolling the other side, as seems to have been the case for too many years. I hope that push back continues and that it continues to spread to other topics. If it does, the media pretty much looses control of the message that that would be the best thing of all.

You are absolutely right. I have never posted so much on several blogs as now. As you can probably see by my amount of posts, LOL. I usually just like to read and move on. But I see this time as the most dangerous times of my life. This includes the several times I deployed while in the Military for 21 plus years. I believe this is because it isn't my life they are seeking, at least not yet. It is my very core beliefs, both religious/personal that are being attacked by this current group of Statists/Marxists Politicians. I believe I might start using the pejorative Robert E. Lee used when talking about his enemies, as "Those People". This clearly makes a separation between them and me/mine.

[baldeagle]

I see something else, Andy. I have been mentally preparing myself for some time now for what I was certain would happen - a shooting civil war. I was convinced that I was going to be forced to take a stand and put my life on the line for the Constitution once again. But a funny thing happened on the way to that civil war. State legislatures started standing up. Sheriffs went on record stating that they would die in defense of freedom and they would defend the 2nd Amendment and uphold their Constitutional oaths. Teachers began talking about carrying at school. Some school districts actually approved it. Others are considering it. A conversation began about doing sensible things to stop the violence rather than useless gun control laws.

I feel more positive about the future now than I have in a long time. I'm no longer convinced a shooting war is coming. I get the feeling that America is waking up from a long sleep. I know we have a long, long way to go and much hard times ahead, but I have hope again. I may actually live to see my grandchildren have children.

The one thing we must never forget is that freedom requires eternal vigilance. We MUST teach this to our children and grandchildren so they never forget how far we went before we pulled back from the brink. When Chuck Schumer says we must pursue common sense reforms and rejects an assault weapons ban, something dramatic has happened. The sleeping giant has awoken from its slumber.

[GeekwithaGun]

---

I see something else, Andy. I have been mentally preparing myself for some time now for what I was certain would happen - a shooting civil war. I was convinced that I was going to be forced to take a stand and put my life on the line for the Constitution once again. But a funny thing happened on the way to that civil war. State legislatures started standing up. Sheriffs went on record stating that they would die in defense of freedom and they would defend the 2nd Amendment and uphold their Constitutional oaths. Teachers began talking about carrying at school. Some school districts actually approved it. Others are considering it. A conversation began about doing sensible things to stop the violence rather than useless gun control laws.

I feel more positive about the future now than I have in a long time. I'm no longer convinced a shooting war is coming. I get the feeling that America is waking up from a long sleep. I know we have a long, long way to go and much hard times ahead, but I have hope again. I may actually live to see my grandchildren have children.

The one thing we must never forget is that freedom requires eternal vigilance. We MUST teach this to our children and grandchildren so they never forget how far we went before we pulled back from the brink. When Chuck Schumer says we must pursue common sense reforms and rejects an assault weapons ban, something dramatic has happened. The sleeping giant has awoken from its slumber.

You beat me to that thought

[Carry-a-Kimber]

What AWB?

[chasfm11]

What AWB?

Don't ever doubt that DiFi and her minions have tenacity on this issue. She has waited a long time and is determined to prevail.

Perhaps I'm just naive but it appears that the rule of law is being bent more now than ever before. If the Congressional gate is closed, there are dozens of other paths to the gun ban objectives. There is high level arm twisting against the gun makers, among others. I'm still expecting a tight squeeze on ammo, much greater than what we've seen in the panic buying over the last couple of months. The push to turn the public opinion is still on in earnest.

If Sandy Hook doesn't prove to be a catalyst for gun ban results the way the mass shooting in Australia was, they will simply bide their time until the next opportunity comes along. Opportunists are like thieves - there is always another "mark" down the road.

I'm still not convinced that this fight wasn't partially staged. Notice how there is very little discussion about the National debt. The ceiling was raised with hardly a raised eyebrow to go with it. Public attention has been diverted from the rising unemployment and other substantive issues that could hurt the White House to the AWB discussion. Perhaps I'm just too cynical.

[MadMonkey]

Another good thing is that true colors are starting to show, on both sides. People I never expected to be pro-gun are now vocal about it and vice versa. In times like this it's much easier to see who to support and who is trying to undermine our rights.

[rwg3]

I second Andy's thoughts about the tactics we use in the responses we are now making to the public at large. We are starting to recognize that this is as much about presentation as it is about content. We are fighting in the court of public opinion and frankly we have not done a very good job of it until recently.

It has been far too easy for the anti gun crowd to pick out our "more flamboyant" gun owners and help them become spectacles in and of themselves. It plays into the fear mongering and frankly it is a pretty successful tactic. We must take control of the messages we send and how we send them if we are going to prevail in the long term. We are not engaged in a rational fact based discussion with the anti crowd. This is a battle of public perception and feelings. We should learn from the successful PR and political campaigns in recent times and adopt and adapt tactics from them. As Andy has pointed out we are learning, lets hope that we are learning fast enough.

[grumble]

Another good thing is that true colors are starting to show, on both sides. People I never expected to be pro-gun are now vocal about it and vice versa. In times like this it's much easier to see who to support and who is trying to undermine our rights.

[Wodathunkit]

It has been far too easy for the anti gun crowd to pick out our "more flamboyant" gun owners and help them become spectacles in and of themselves. It plays into the fear mongering and frankly it is a pretty successful tactic. We must take control of the messages we send and how we send them if we are going to prevail in the long term. We are not engaged in a rational fact based discussion with the anti crowd. This is a battle of public perception and feelings. We should learn from the successful PR and political campaigns in recent times and adopt and adapt tactics from them. As Andy has pointed out we are learning, lets hope that we are learning fast enough.

Fortunately IMO the ratio is running 9:1 (DF, PM, Schumer, Durbin......)

[K.Mooneyham]

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.---President Ronald Reagan

[chasfm11]

More good news

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucerogers ... n-control/

We found that the NRA and the pro-gun rights voices are winning the influence battle and will continue to be strong and more influential if the pro gun control voice remains fragmented. On the flip side, the pro gun control voice could certainly gain influence if they establish a more united voice.

It seems the NRA has the stamina to out-run the pro-gun control movement. They are persistent, un-yielding and gaining influence

As most of us have noticed:

Republican politicians are missing from the debate. The debate is an influence battle between President Barack Obama’s Democrats and Wayne LaPierre’s NRA. Of the top 25 stakeholders in the debate, there is only 1 prominent Republican politician (Chris Christie – who is pro-gun control). Barack Obama leads the pro-gun control voice with a net influence score of 268. LaPierre leads the anti-gun control side with a net influence score of 240

I'm not sure why Cruz isn't counted. I tried to find the basis for the information but couldn't. Maybe I need more coffee this morning.

[The Annoyed Man]

I second Andy's thoughts about the tactics we use in the responses we are now making to the public at large. We are starting to recognize that this is as much about presentation as it is about content. We are fighting in the court of public opinion and frankly we have not done a very good job of it until recently.

It has been far too easy for the anti gun crowd to pick out our "more flamboyant" gun owners and help them become spectacles in and of themselves. It plays into the fear mongering and frankly it is a pretty successful tactic. We must take control of the messages we send and how we send them if we are going to prevail in the long term. We are not engaged in a rational fact based discussion with the anti crowd. This is a battle of public perception and feelings. We should learn from the successful PR and political campaigns in recent times and adopt and adapt tactics from them. As Andy has pointed out we are learning, lets hope that we are learning fast enough.

That's absolutely correct. And part of the way we do that is by recapturing control of the language and definitions used in the debate. For instance, anywhere the word "assault" is used in the naming conventions for firearms, we must substitute the word "defense." So "assault weapons" becomes "defense weapons." Wherever the words "high-capacity" are used, we must insist on substituting "standard-capacity." Where references are made to "limited-capacity magazines," we should substitute "diminished-capacity magazines." Etc., etc., etc.

Ever since the Miller decision, we have permitted the left (and by definition, the media, and by extension from the media to liberal politicians) to frame the terms of the debate. We can no longer afford to do that. Actually, we couldn't afford to that back then either, because that is a large part of why we are in the position we're in today.

We need to remind the left that many of their own political and social icons were either very pro-gun, or very much against encroaching on ANY of our civil liberties:

"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia,' 'the security of the nation,' and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy... The Second Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important."y

"When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state".

Love your country, but never trust its government."

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficient... The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding."

The president has made a great show of being a student of Abraham Lincoln, and imagines that he is modeling his presidency after Lincoln's........a big fat lie on one hand because Lincoln had more character in his pinky toe than Obama has in his whole body......but on the other hand, Lincoln did seize power to the federal government which had until then belonged to the states. Nevertheless, in 1861, even Lincoln said during his presidency:

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."

"Every Communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."

-- "Beyond This Horizon", 1942

Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. [...] the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.

If I were to select a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today, I would pick BATF [the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms].

To make inexpensive guns impossible to get is to say that you're putting a money test on getting a gun. It's racism in its worst form.

[quote=""Jill Fieldstein (CBS producer, Street Stories: Women and Guns"]"As a card-carrying member of the liberal media, producing this piece was an eye opening experience. I have to admit that I saw guns as inherently evil, violence begets violence, and so on. I have learned, however, that in trained hands, just the presence of a gun can be a real "man stopper." I am sorry that women have had to resort to this, but wishing it wasn't so won't make it any safer out there."[/quote]

"If you've got to resist, you're chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah."

[...and an AR15 is much more lethal than a .38 Special....TAM

"The great body of our citizens shoot less as times goes on. We should encourage rifle practice among schoolboys, and indeed among all classes, as well as in the military services by every means in our power. Thus, and not otherwise, may we be able to assist in preserving peace in the world... The first step – in the direction of preparation to avert war if possible, and to be fit for war if it should come – is to teach men to shoot!"

"A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie."

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed -- where the government refuses to stand for re-election and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake free people get to make only once."

Get that? From the mouth of a leftist judge on a leftist appellate court, being UNPREPARED to face the admittedly rare and unlikely possibility that The People would have to sieze back control from an unaccountable and tyrannical government is a mistake free people get to make only once.