Jump to content


Photo

What's our purpose here?


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 Ranger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 813 posts
  • Joined: 22-February 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 06:10 AM

I signed up and became a member back when one of the main arguments was whether any of us would live long enough to be able to legally carry firearms in public in Illinois. I signed up to be educated on this issue and to help our effort. Pretty certain I was the one who first advocated filing witness slips electronically.

Lately, it seems like there are fewer second amendment related posts that further our cause and more "venting" / advocacy on totally unrelated issues.

Personally, I'd like to hear more about what we are doing to pursue legal use of suppressors in Illinois, minimize penalties for carrying into posted place (i.e. first asked to leave in), overturn local bans, and to preserve our rights / avoid retrenchment with the very real possibility of getting an antigun governor and legislature. So...

My question. What is our purpose here?

#2 lowhouse5

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 06:28 AM

I'd really like to hear from Todd.


Edited by lowhouse5, 24 August 2017 - 06:29 AM.

"Not throwing my hands up or my dress above my ears don't mean I ain't awestruck." -- Al Swearengen

#3 OldMarineVet

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,694 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 14

Posted 24 August 2017 - 06:56 AM

I signed up and became a member back when one of the main arguments was whether any of us would live long enough to be able to legally carry firearms in public in Illinois. I signed up to be educated on this issue and to help our effort. Pretty certain I was the one who first advocated filing witness slips electronically.

Lately, it seems like there are fewer second amendment related posts that further our cause and more "venting" / advocacy on totally unrelated issues.

Personally, I'd like to hear more about what we are doing to pursue legal use of suppressors in Illinois, minimize penalties for carrying into posted place (i.e. first asked to leave in), overturn local bans, and to preserve our rights / avoid retrenchment with the very real possibility of getting an antigun governor and legislature. So...

My question. What is our purpose here?

If you want to know more about the pursuit of the legal use of suppressors in Illinois why don't you start some threads about it instead of questioning "our purpose.". Only 804 posts in 8 1/2 years? Take the initiative. If this is that initiative, great. I've seen quite a few others here also interested in suppressors...  



#4 solareclipse2

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,920 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 06:56 AM

I need something to do when I'm not on reddit.


I WILL LOSE EVERY ARGUMENT FROM NOW ON, I WILL WALK AWAY FROM EVERY FIGHT OR CONFRONTATION, I WILL TAKE THE HIGH ROAD.

#5 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 7,963 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 07:08 AM

While Illinois Carry, and the other organizations that represent us, continue to do good work on our behalf, we have lost massive amounts of traction because we, the members of the organizations, have lost interest in a common goal(s). Our strength has always been in grass roots organization and depends heavily on involvement and engagement on the individual level.

We can no longer have discussions here about specific goals it seems. Mention OC and get hit by a train of idiotic "but tactical advantage" arguments, mention reduced requirements and crushed under a mountain of "but training is good and proficiency should be proven," or bring up suppressors and get lambasted on how we can't "waste resources" on getting it passed.

I put up a poll a long time ago so members could see that their perspective and their priorities were different than others.' I'm not sure anybody saw beyond pushing the little button. Well, some did. We don't hear from them much anymore.

http://illinoiscarry...ic=59230&page=1

#6 civilone

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Joined: 10-November 16

Posted 24 August 2017 - 07:10 AM

I have gotten involved in the political aspects of 2A at the state level.  This has been in reaction to proposed anti-2A legislation.  I have thought about one or two aspects of the FCCA that seem to have the greatest effect on my ability to conceal carry.  My current thinking is the hodgepodge of private businesses or offices that post the no conceal carry sign.  My thought is that my 2A right to provide self defense is higher on the food chain.  Perhaps pro active legislation that eliminates the ability for private businesses to ban conceal carry and/or the ability of the ban to carry the force of law is legislation that should be introduced.  



#7 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 16,878 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 07:48 AM

I signed up and became a member back when one of the main arguments was whether any of us would live long enough to be able to legally carry firearms in public in Illinois. I signed up to be educated on this issue and to help our effort. Pretty certain I was the one who first advocated filing witness slips electronically.

Lately, it seems like there are fewer second amendment related posts that further our cause and more "venting" / advocacy on totally unrelated issues.

Personally, I'd like to hear more about what we are doing to pursue legal use of suppressors in Illinois, minimize penalties for carrying into posted place (i.e. first asked to leave in), overturn local bans, and to preserve our rights / avoid retrenchment with the very real possibility of getting an antigun governor and legislature. So...

My question. What is our purpose here?


It's pretty common to see discussion wander a bit when the legislature isn't in session (or not in session for gun bills), particularly when outside political events heat up.  This summer is no exception.

IllinoisCarry continues to work on improving our carry law through initiatives like SB1524 Military Carry and SB1038 Due Process, while simultaneously working within the court system to correct some of these same problems.  Other ideas have been discussed.  We'll see where those lead as we continue to fight anti-gun legislation like SB1657 Gun Dealer Licensing.

In regard to suppressors the sponsor hopes to be able to work on that a bit more, but we have to keep his serious health issues in mind and not expect miracles from him.  I'm sure, when  he's ready, the NRA will help him usher that bill through the process.


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#8 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,494 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 24 August 2017 - 08:59 AM

Our purpose is stated in the following 'mission statement' at the top of each forum.  IllinoisCarry is the premier site for all things Second Amendment in Illinois - we provide information on firearm laws, training, lawsuits, and calls to action. We challenge the infringement of our rights in the legislature and in the courts. We encourage members to be on a first name basis with their legislators and other elected officials in order to support good laws/ordinance and fight the bad ones.

 

If it affects Illinois gun owners, I'm pretty sure you will hear about here first.

As mauserme said, topics wane and wander according to the legislative calendar. This is the time to be attending all the functions being hosted by your elected officials and visiting them in their district offices, lobbying for your rights and the changes you want to see made.
 

 

http://illinoiscarry...uncement=42&f=6

 

IllinoisCarry is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to providing educational information about the lawful acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms in Illinois as well as actively preserving, protecting, and advancing the Second Amendment Right to Carry for personal safety of self and others.  
 
Our online discussion forum provides a central location for sharing important information pertaining to the current Firearm Owner Identification Act and the IL Firearm Concealed Carry Act.  The forum also provides a central location for firearm instructors to post listings of the courses they offer.  You will find our team of volunteers are on top of everything firearms related within the state of Illinois and the nation with up to the minute news and information you need to be a knowledgeable and responsible firearm owner.
 
Our leadership team, in partnership with the Illinois State Rifle Association, the NRA, and the Second Amendment Foundation, is on the forefront of forming and implementing policy. We are also very proud to have helped prepare and participate in numerous lawsuits challenging unfair laws, rules, and regulations that deprive honest, law-abiding citizens of their Constitutional rights. IllinoisCarry vows to continue to challenge infringements on behalf of Illinois residents and those who travel in and through our state.
 
So, come on in and make yourself at home, wander through the vast amount of information provided, feel free to ask questions and post your opinions.  Please be aware, we do have a code of conduct we ask visitors to honor when posting, violation of the code will result in a suspension of posting privileges.  With that in mind, all are welcome.

 


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#9 Ranger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 813 posts
  • Joined: 22-February 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 09:45 AM

To clarify... I greatly appreciate all that Molly, Mauserme, Todd, and all of you have done to bolster and protect our second amendment rights.

I have to agree with tkroenlien on many points. There has always been and will always be differing opinions and perspectives. I remember all the discussions about whether "we" would be ahead to cut a deal for carry that excluded Chicago.

My concern is that it seems like we've had a lot of threads unrelated to our core mission that have the real potential to alienate members. That would not benefit and could actually hurt our cause. It became a big issue on another forum I visit and devolved to the point where some of the members became extremely hostile with each other instead of being united in our love of firearms. The website owner ultimately had to step in and ban certain types of posts (mainly non-second amendment related political posts). That helped eliminate all the flaming, but I'm sure some members will never talk to each other again. I would hope that doesn't happen here.

As to only 804 posts in 8.5 years... I'm busy and I'm not sure there is a strong correlation between the number of posts and efforts on behalf of the second amendment.

#10 Glock23

    I am no one.

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,593 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:26 AM

I'm here for the punch and pie. :D Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

** Illinois Carry - Supporting Member

** National Association for Gun Rights - Frontline Defender

** Illinois State Rifle Association - 3 year Member

** National Rifle Association - Patron Life Member

 


#11 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,494 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:32 AM

My concern is that it seems like we've had a lot of threads unrelated to our core mission that have the real potential to alienate members. That would not benefit and could actually hurt our cause. It became a big issue on another forum I visit and devolved to the point where some of the members became extremely hostile with each other instead of being united in our love of firearms. The website owner ultimately had to step in and ban certain types of posts (mainly non-second amendment related political posts). That helped eliminate all the flaming, but I'm sure some members will never talk to each other again. I would hope that doesn't happen here.
 

 

 

The backroom is sometimes like stepping into the local pub . . . sometimes discussions in there can lead to pushing and shoving and before you know it someone gets hurt or offended and stomps off. And there are the folks who live for the bare knuckle discussions - do or die argument competitions, etc.   If I were not an admin or moderator, I personally would not hang out in there very much. 


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#12 Plinkermostly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:41 AM

Gawd -- I would love some clarifications on AW bans and carry reciprocity!  But it looks like the SCOTUS is the only way we will ever get any resolution of those issues.  In IL we just keep drifting along.  

 

In any case, there are some nice folks here.

 

 

 

And what did happen to Tod?  (Awaiting new sessions?).



#13 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 16,878 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 11:05 AM

...
Pretty certain I was the one who first advocated filing witness slips electronically.
...


I forgot to mention earlier that I remember you being the person who first brought witness slips to our attention.
 

Thanks for that!


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#14 spec5

    Nuclear Member

  • Members
  • 4,230 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 11:38 AM

To the OP. There are different forums in the Illinois Carry. Just don't go to where you don't want to participate. Go to Judicial, Illinois politics, national politics. Stay away from the rest. When the legislature is in session the forums are much more focused at other times people just treat it like Facebook.
NRA Member Life Member
ISRA Member
Illinois Carry
Pershing Nuclear Missile 56th Field Artillery Brigade Veteran
1/41 Field Artillary Germany

#15 spec5

    Nuclear Member

  • Members
  • 4,230 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 11:44 AM

It became a big issue on another forum I visit and devolved to the point where some of the members became extremely hostile with each other instead of being united in our love of firearms. The website owner ultimately had to step in and ban certain types of posts (mainly non-second amendment related political posts). That helped eliminate all the flaming, but I'm sure some members will never talk to each other again. I would hope that doesn't happen here.
As to only 804 posts in 8.5 years... I'm busy and I'm not sure there is a strong correlation between the number of posts and efforts on behalf of the second amendment.

Because the administrators run this forum well and by reading the forum rules you will see why this forum will not dissolve in what you stated happened to other forums.

"Come on in and make yourself at home, wander through the vast amount of information provided, feel free to ask questions and post your opinions. Please be aware, we do have a code of conduct we ask visitors to honor when posting. Violation of the code will result in a suspension of posting privileges, with that in mind, all are welcome. We encourage you to register on our forum and join the fight for your 2nd Amendment Rights in Illinois."

Edited by spec5, 24 August 2017 - 11:47 AM.

NRA Member Life Member
ISRA Member
Illinois Carry
Pershing Nuclear Missile 56th Field Artillery Brigade Veteran
1/41 Field Artillary Germany

#16 gangrel

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,760 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 11

Posted 24 August 2017 - 11:50 AM

While Illinois Carry, and the other organizations that represent us, continue to do good work on our behalf, we have lost massive amounts of traction because we, the members of the organizations, have lost interest in a common goal(s). Our strength has always been in grass roots organization and depends heavily on involvement and engagement on the individual level.
We can no longer have discussions here about specific goals it seems. Mention OC and get hit by a train of idiotic "but tactical advantage" arguments, mention reduced requirements and crushed under a mountain of "but training is good and proficiency should be proven," or bring up suppressors and get lambasted on how we can't "waste resources" on getting it passed.
I put up a poll a long time ago so members could see that their perspective and their priorities were different than others.' I'm not sure anybody saw beyond pushing the little button. Well, some did. We don't hear from them much anymore.
http://illinoiscarry...ic=59230&page=1

I can only speak for myself on the open carry issue, but while I would not likely ever do it myself, I have also never begrudged anyone else who wants to do so. In fact, getting open carry in addition to CCW would remove most of the doubt about the meaning of "completely or mostly concealed." What I have personally taken issue with is certain users who want open carry AT THE EXPENSE OF concealed carry. It is this type of argument that drives a wedge through our community, rather than binding us together behind a common cause.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk


NRA Life Member

NRA Certified Range Safety Officer

NRA Certified Instructor - Basic Pistol, PPIH, PPOH, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety
ISP Approved Firearm Concealed Carry Instructor

Utah CCW Instructor


#17 Hazborgufen

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 12:43 PM

To clarify... I greatly appreciate all that Molly, Mauserme, Todd, and all of you have done to bolster and protect our second amendment rights.

I have to agree with tkroenlien on many points. There has always been and will always be differing opinions and perspectives. I remember all the discussions about whether "we" would be ahead to cut a deal for carry that excluded Chicago.

My concern is that it seems like we've had a lot of threads unrelated to our core mission that have the real potential to alienate members. That would not benefit and could actually hurt our cause. It became a big issue on another forum I visit and devolved to the point where some of the members became extremely hostile with each other instead of being united in our love of firearms. The website owner ultimately had to step in and ban certain types of posts (mainly non-second amendment related political posts). That helped eliminate all the flaming, but I'm sure some members will never talk to each other again. I would hope that doesn't happen here.

As to only 804 posts in 8.5 years... I'm busy and I'm not sure there is a strong correlation between the number of posts and efforts on behalf of the second amendment.

 

Sounds like what happened on Something Awful's TFR subforum.

 

 

Molly, as far as your comment about the Backroom subforum, I'd just like to point out that it's a microcosm of gun culture - very conservative and actively hostile to liberals. That mentality actually does bleed out into the other subforums here where comments about "libtards" and whatnot are prevalent. This actively works against out shared interest in 2nd Amendment rights in that it pushes out people who don't follow Conservative orthodoxy and discourages liberals from ever actually getting involved. For example, gun culture at large cheers when conservatives open carry AR-15s to political rallies while wearing ballistic armor. It's seen as a positive example of the use of 2nd Amendment rights. However when leftist groups do literally the exact same thing, suddenly it's a problem and dangerous.

 

If people actually held to their principals, the first post would have pointed out the hypocrisy of this view, but it wasn't until I (a very much admitted liberal) pointed it out that people recognized it. That kind of thing very much turns people off and does very little to help out cause.

 

I'm not advocating any kind of rule change or anything. Rather I'm asking that people be a little more thoughtful about their posts knowing that they are being read by people who might be interested in guns but not in conservative orthodoxy. The pessimist in me has no expectation that people will do that though and we will continue to distill ourselves until we no longer have the ability to build a coalition. 


Edited by Hazborgufen, 24 August 2017 - 12:47 PM.


#18 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 16,878 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 24 August 2017 - 12:53 PM

 

While Illinois Carry, and the other organizations that represent us, continue to do good work on our behalf, we have lost massive amounts of traction because we, the members of the organizations, have lost interest in a common goal(s). Our strength has always been in grass roots organization and depends heavily on involvement and engagement on the individual level.
We can no longer have discussions here about specific goals it seems. Mention OC and get hit by a train of idiotic "but tactical advantage" arguments, mention reduced requirements and crushed under a mountain of "but training is good and proficiency should be proven," or bring up suppressors and get lambasted on how we can't "waste resources" on getting it passed.
I put up a poll a long time ago so members could see that their perspective and their priorities were different than others.' I'm not sure anybody saw beyond pushing the little button. Well, some did. We don't hear from them much anymore.
http://illinoiscarry...ic=59230&page=1

I can only speak for myself on the open carry issue, but while I would not likely ever do it myself, I have also never begrudged anyone else who wants to do so. In fact, getting open carry in addition to CCW would remove most of the doubt about the meaning of "completely or mostly concealed." What I have personally taken issue with is certain users who want open carry AT THE EXPENSE OF concealed carry. It is this type of argument that drives a wedge through our community, rather than binding us together behind a common cause.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

 

I'm confused by people who almost always agree that Constitutional Carry is a desirable goal, but then take a hard stand against open carry instead of your live and let live approach.  By definition, Constitutional Carry includes open carry as a choice.


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#19 Just some guy

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 51 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 16

Posted 24 August 2017 - 01:23 PM

I'm here for the punch and pie. :D Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

I thought there would be cake. :getlost:


Fast is fine, accurate is final.


#20 Ashdump

    Member

  • Moderator
  • 4,660 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 04

Posted 24 August 2017 - 03:46 PM

I've been here for a long time. Im not very active anymore, however, I can tell you that had it not been for this site, we would most assuredly still not have a carry provision. There were some very determined folks who gathered more than a decade ago to see what could be done about the dismal 2A situation here. The result was a determined group of people focused (at that time) on bringing concealed carry to the people of Illinois.

Molly B and her husband, Abolt, Lou, MikeW,'Ol Coach (God rest his soul) Ray (the founder of IC) the Lawsons and a few others got the ball rolling. It took nearly ten years and a court case to get us a carry law. IOW, things roll slow in this state and often require a court decision to right the wrongs. I know Molly B and thd original crew plus the good folks who have come on board more recently are working very hard behind the scenes to keep advancing our 2A here in IL. With the makeup and hostility of a good bit of the legislature, it's a really a wonder we have been able to stave off a lot of nasty things, like a statewide AWB, for instance.

Anyway, my point is, IL is a tough nut. Progress is slow and discouraging. Personally, I thank the Lord that we have people like Molly working on our side. I shudder to think of where we'd be without this site.

#21 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,311 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 24 August 2017 - 06:56 PM

By NO means is Illinois Carry without a mission!

 

As long as we have antis in our state capitol, there will always be a risk of bad gun laws coming out.   So IC must always be vigilant.


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#22 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 24 August 2017 - 07:38 PM

My question. What is our purpose here? 

 

 

I'm kind of waiting to see where the tipping point is for attacking the carry ban on public transportation.  In my opinion, the violent crime on public transportation is increasing in its frequency and severity.  We have a well-documented history of it now but I'm wondering what it takes to get a sponsor lined up to introduce a bill to repeal the ban on public transportation.

 

Even though I believe that the only reason we were able to enact a concealed carry law was because Moore v Madigan overturned the Illinois ban on carrying, and I don't have a lot of hope that we'd overturn the prohibition on carrying on public transportation, I think we're approaching the time when we should at least prepare to make a run at it.


Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#23 GTX63

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,231 posts
  • Joined: 19-June 13

Posted 25 August 2017 - 03:13 AM

What is the VFW for? To foster camaraderie among like veterans of overseas conflicts. Not all of them vote the same.

IC to me is for like minded folks regarding the 2A to gather. To be so intense and single minded as to limit discussion over a small field would either burn many out, frustrate others over general lack of progress and in the end just turn many away.

Having a forum to discuss off topic is akin to the barber shop, tavern, park bench, etc. It entices them to click on the site on a more regular basis and establish deeper bonds.

There was a member here several years ago that many considered to be a radial bomb throwing elitist entitlement loving liberal whom I engaged in many a strong debate with via threads and PMs. We never blocked each other and I rather enjoyed the back and forth. We both shared the same 2A love that brought us to IC. I had no issue with his social views as we were like minded on our right to carry.

Repealing the smothering gun laws in Illinois is the purpose, everything else is just passing time.



#24 Hazborgufen

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 13

Posted 25 August 2017 - 09:10 AM

What is the VFW for? To foster camaraderie among like veterans of overseas conflicts. Not all of them vote the same.

IC to me is for like minded folks regarding the 2A to gather. To be so intense and single minded as to limit discussion over a small field would either burn many out, frustrate others over general lack of progress and in the end just turn many away.

Having a forum to discuss off topic is akin to the barber shop, tavern, park bench, etc. It entices them to click on the site on a more regular basis and establish deeper bonds.

There was a member here several years ago that many considered to be a radial bomb throwing elitist entitlement loving liberal whom I engaged in many a strong debate with via threads and PMs. We never blocked each other and I rather enjoyed the back and forth. We both shared the same 2A love that brought us to IC. I had no issue with his social views as we were like minded on our right to carry.

Repealing the smothering gun laws in Illinois is the purpose, everything else is just passing time.

 

That's all well and good, but not every liberal has a desire to get into debates over various non-gun issues all the time. While the answer may very well be "stay out of the Backroom," the problem is that the Backroom leaks into the other subforums. The invective can be a serious turnoff for people. Besides, if our goal is to secure the 2nd Amendment it seems to me that we should be welcoming more people rather than turning them off, or even worse chasing them away.

 

Even then, a person shouldn't have to stay out of a subforum just because they are liberal. I personally have had people on this very forum post that they didn't believe I owned guns or that I wasn't a "true" supporter of the 2nd Amendment because of my liberal views. Now, anyone who would say such a thing is a fool but it still raises an important issue regarding the demand for members here to adhere to conservative orthodoxy. Saying something like that to someone new to guns or someone not as well integrated into "gun culture" could very well make them reconsider having any part of guns or gun rights advocacy or even push them to turn against our goals. Heck, even a lurker seeing such an exchange could make someone feel unwelcome. 

 

You mentioned a poster that was active several years ago. I suspect I know who you are talking about. If we are thinking about the same person I would like to note that they don't post here anymore.



#25 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,494 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 25 August 2017 - 10:21 AM

No, one shouldn't have to stay out of a forum but if it raises their blood pressure and they can't moderate their comments according the IL code of conduct, then it may be the best choice for them.  Same goes for if all they are interested in is firearm issues.

 

 

raises an important issue regarding the demand for members here to adhere to conservative orthodoxy.

 

 

 

There is no demand here to adhere to conservative orthodoxy - although you will find that happens to be the majority of the members here because the liberal orthodoxy is to infringe on the Second Amendment. It's in their party platforms and the legislation they introduce.  We are glad there are liberals who do support the Second Amendment and IllinoisCarry welcomes them with open arms.

 

We have a few - very few - members who are extremely conservative and they offend others with their broad brush strokes and their narrow views.  You know who they are.  You have the option of putting them in your 'ignore' settings.  The same works the other way as well.

 

The key is to post without violating the code of conduct, walk away from the fools who are hard to suffer, report them to moderators when they violate the code.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#26 DD123

    Freedom Lover

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 7,780 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 14

Posted 25 August 2017 - 10:21 AM

 

What is the VFW for? To foster camaraderie among like veterans of overseas conflicts. Not all of them vote the same.

IC to me is for like minded folks regarding the 2A to gather. To be so intense and single minded as to limit discussion over a small field would either burn many out, frustrate others over general lack of progress and in the end just turn many away.

Having a forum to discuss off topic is akin to the barber shop, tavern, park bench, etc. It entices them to click on the site on a more regular basis and establish deeper bonds.

There was a member here several years ago that many considered to be a radial bomb throwing elitist entitlement loving liberal whom I engaged in many a strong debate with via threads and PMs. We never blocked each other and I rather enjoyed the back and forth. We both shared the same 2A love that brought us to IC. I had no issue with his social views as we were like minded on our right to carry.

Repealing the smothering gun laws in Illinois is the purpose, everything else is just passing time.

 

 

You mentioned a poster that was active several years ago. I suspect I know who you are talking about. If we are thinking about the same person I would like to note that they don't post here anymore.

 

I believe the reason was due to repeated warnings.  He lived to post threads that he knew would troll the ideological right on this board.  At one point he had posted 4-5 threads in one day that were all designed to rattle people.  They weren't designed to engage people, share his views, and start a dialogue, they were intended to troll.  Up to that point, he'd already been warned, not for the threads he started, but for the manner in which he engaged people in those threads.  Shortly after that day where he posted 4-5 troll threads, I believe he received some more stern warnings, and he decided to not post any longer.  

 

He PM'd me about a week after Trump was elected and proceeded to tell me about some fantasy about a FB post of his that he claimed was shared thousands of times.  His profile is public, so I saw that post, and it had one "like" lol.  The post was your stereotypical, hysterical leftist post that was fairly common on FB at that time.  

 

I used to enjoy his troll threads because I'd take a different approach than most everyone else who were taking a combative approach, or in most cases, I ignored those threads.  

 

As others have mentioned, the goal of this forum is to advance our 2A rights.  When troops need to be rallied, everyone steps up.  I don't think I've ever missed a call to file slips, phone my corrupt politicians, etc.  Most others on here can probably say the same.  

 

I get where you're coming from with regard to particular "names" being used for liberals, and while I don't agree with it, I don't think you'll find many 2A forums where that doesn't happen.  Most gun owners tend to be conservative, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that members of such forums would be adversarial, or openly hostile towards people that they disagree with politically.  My personal problem is that people are treating politics as they would religion, and those should not be thought of in the same manner.  

 

When you look at who the anti gun politicians are, as well as the people who are anti gun, they don't tend to be on the right side of the aisle.  To deny that, is denying reality.  So of course you'd find "backroom" type of banter bleeding over into the other sub-forums.  We have anti gun politicians who are basically always democrats trying to infringe on our constitutional rights.  That's going to cause pro gun folks to get hot under the collar.  We do have pro gun democrat politicians in the southern part of this state, and if I lived there, they would get my vote.  I don't see myself ever voting for a politician up in the northern part of the state who calls themselves a democrat because up to this point, I don't think I've ever seen a pro gun democrat politician up in this neck of the woods.  

 

You do have to ask yourself one question though - when you see someone use a disparaging term for a liberal, and knowing that person's posting history or "schtick", does directly replying to their comments contribute, or end the discussion?  In general, there are some folks I don't bother debating here, because they won't allow themselves to see another's viewpoints.  Heck I even fall into that category.  But I believe that the category I fall in is fairly different from most because I legitimately dislike both sides of the political spectrum.  Both have good ideas, but both also have incredibly dumb ideas.  

 

When all is said and done, the goal of this forum is to advance our 2A rights in this state.  I think the staff here do a great job at keeping us focused, and rallying the troops behind the cause.  Everything else on the board is equal amounts of trolling, having interesting discussions, and educating one another on guns, politics, and other social events.  If the debates get too heated, the mods jump in to crack the whip, and/or close the thread.  I generally come here in the morning to see if anything new has come up in gun rights for this state, or nationally.  If there's nothing going on, I make my way into the backroom to see if there's anything of interest there.  I actually find that I have better discussions here than on FB, because FB is full of trolls whereas here there are only a couple.  


Force and intimidation are the tools of tyrants.  - Ron Paul

 

If Democrats quit shooting people, "gun violence" would go down by 80%.......

 

Taxation is theft

 

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson


#27 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 25 August 2017 - 11:54 AM

While Illinois Carry, and the other organizations that represent us, continue to do good work on our behalf, we have lost massive amounts of traction because we, the members of the organizations, have lost interest in a common goal(s). Our strength has always been in grass roots organization and depends heavily on involvement and engagement on the individual level.

We can no longer have discussions here about specific goals it seems. Mention OC and get hit by a train of idiotic "but tactical advantage" arguments, mention reduced requirements and crushed under a mountain of "but training is good and proficiency should be proven," or bring up suppressors and get lambasted on how we can't "waste resources" on getting it passed.

I put up a poll a long time ago so members could see that their perspective and their priorities were different than others.' I'm not sure anybody saw beyond pushing the little button. Well, some did. We don't hear from them much anymore.

http://illinoiscarry...ic=59230&page=1

 

 

Oh ya, I remember that poll.

 

I voted to " Reduce/Eliminate Prohibited Places in CC Law"  which turned out to garner the most votes.


Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#28 Chief Illiniwek

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 595 posts
  • Joined: 22-March 13

Posted 25 August 2017 - 03:02 PM

 

What is the VFW for? To foster camaraderie among like veterans of overseas conflicts. Not all of them vote the same.

IC to me is for like minded folks regarding the 2A to gather. To be so intense and single minded as to limit discussion over a small field would either burn many out, frustrate others over general lack of progress and in the end just turn many away.

Having a forum to discuss off topic is akin to the barber shop, tavern, park bench, etc. It entices them to click on the site on a more regular basis and establish deeper bonds.

There was a member here several years ago that many considered to be a radial bomb throwing elitist entitlement loving liberal whom I engaged in many a strong debate with via threads and PMs. We never blocked each other and I rather enjoyed the back and forth. We both shared the same 2A love that brought us to IC. I had no issue with his social views as we were like minded on our right to carry.

Repealing the smothering gun laws in Illinois is the purpose, everything else is just passing time.

 

That's all well and good, but not every liberal has a desire to get into debates over various non-gun issues all the time. While the answer may very well be "stay out of the Backroom," the problem is that the Backroom leaks into the other subforums. The invective can be a serious turnoff for people. Besides, if our goal is to secure the 2nd Amendment it seems to me that we should be welcoming more people rather than turning them off, or even worse chasing them away.

 

Even then, a person shouldn't have to stay out of a subforum just because they are liberal. I personally have had people on this very forum post that they didn't believe I owned guns or that I wasn't a "true" supporter of the 2nd Amendment because of my liberal views. Now, anyone who would say such a thing is a fool but it still raises an important issue regarding the demand for members here to adhere to conservative orthodoxy. Saying something like that to someone new to guns or someone not as well integrated into "gun culture" could very well make them reconsider having any part of guns or gun rights advocacy or even push them to turn against our goals. Heck, even a lurker seeing such an exchange could make someone feel unwelcome. 

 

You mentioned a poster that was active several years ago. I suspect I know who you are talking about. If we are thinking about the same person I would like to note that they don't post here anymore.

 

 

Then, don't.  if it's a non-2A issue and you don't want to debate it...simply don't respond.  It's hard to debate if there's no one to debate with.  I'm not one to tell you to stay out of any forum for whatever reason.  You're a member here and have the same access and privileges the rest of us do.  My ideology isn't the same as yours, but it's mine, just the same as yours is yours and the other members have theirs, and that's OK.  i agree 100% with Molly in saying that there's no demand to conform to a conservative orthodoxy.  You mention people questioning your ownership of firearms/dedication to the cause.  What does calling them fools accomplish?  Can't that be off-putting to the casual observer, also?  If they don't believe you're a firearm owner, invite them to the range and outshoot them.


Edited by Chief Illiniwek, 27 August 2017 - 09:37 AM.

Liberals:  If the shoe doesn't fit, make everyone wear it.  -  Ann Coulter

 

IllinoisCarry Supporting Member

NRA Life Member

ISRA Member


#29 OldMarineVet

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,694 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 14

Posted 25 August 2017 - 04:01 PM

Hazborgufen, and here's my 2 cents. I don't normally challenge a liberal here about our collective love for firearms. Makes sense to me. Guns are fun for many and great to own. But my recollection from the few liberals who would prioritize their ideology vs guns was they chose ideology.

The Supreme Court 2nd Amendment majority depended on a Trump vote vs a Clinton vote. I think many people here voted for Trump just for that reason...for the 2nd Amendment. Some may have hated Trump. What percentage of the gun-loving liberals on this forum would you guess voted for Trump? As a "true supporter" of the 2nd Amendment, would you mind telling me who you voted for?

That's my point. I don't doubt there's liberals who are gun-lovers. But it takes political action to support the 2nd Amendment. Are those gun-loving liberals supporting the 2nd Amendment? Or was it prioritized under their ideology? If not, did they convince any of their friends to vote for Trump like many of us did?

Also, please put yourself in our shoes. Throughout the years, many of us are a minority in anti-gun meetings and demonstrations. We get mocked...prohibited from speaking...then shouted down...lied to...they call police on us... who treats us like that? Liberals. So please pardon me from not being welcoming even to fellow gun-loving liberals. Can you or any other liberals here join me in the fight to defend the 2nd Amendment? If you or any other liberal told me you voted for Trump to defend the 2nd Amendment (even if you hated him.) you will be my brother or sister in this constant battle to protect the 2nd Amendment.

#30 Prairie Pucker

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,613 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 26 August 2017 - 08:45 AM

What is the VFW for? To foster camaraderie among like veterans of overseas conflicts. Not all of them vote the same.

 

Had to bring up the VFW, didn't you? :pinch:

 

The local VFW has a kitchen and restaurant open to the public.  I visited there for the first time a week ago and to my complete surprise was greeted by the "no guns" sign on the front door.  Total disbelief.  The last place I ever thought I'd see this.  IMO this is completely disrespectful to the entire lineage of those who served from the Revolutionary War to the present.  How dare they?

 

I got my fish dinner, but since I was with friends did not ask to talk with the manager.  Did leave a "no guns/no money" card on the table.  We'll see how this turns out.  It's not over.


- PP

"One State---One Law"

NRA Endowment Life; ISRA





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users