Via SayUncle, Publicola posts Publicola: A Few Things Volume One; in many cases, I was gonna say that, but couldn't find either the words or the time. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it...
For example:
My only objection is the suggestion that criticizing people for being married to counter-productive tactics is, in itself, counter-productive.
On the other hand, this same reasoning also applies to the whole "We lost, so I'll blame the NRA and SAF and GOA and JPFO and..."
For example:
It's Massey's Fault - House Retro Iced Tea Rub A Dub Step MixToo long to be a Quote Of The Day...
If a bill did not pass out of a committee, it is not the fault of someone whose actions you disapprove of. If a law that further imposes upon our Rights gets enacted, it is not the fault of someone whose words you thought did not wax poetic enough. It's the fault of the damn legislators. No one else's. Group punishment is a very old model, and one that gunowners should not fall for. So if Person A, whose goals and methods bear a passing resemblance to Person B, gets negative attention somehow and is used as an excuse to deny Person B his Rights, then why the hell don't ya blame the person that is actually responsible - the legislator! - instead of said politicians scapegoat (Person A)?
Whatever open carrier is used as an excuse for not passing a pro-gunowner law or for passing an anti-gunowner law, it's the legislature to blame, not the open carrier. If you don't like his tactics, then talk with him and try to change his mind. If that fails, then accept that different people approach problems in a different manner. Also accept that we ain't all in this together. I know a lot of gunowners who'd leave me on the side of the road if they got national reciprocity, a guaranteed low permit fee, and maybe sound suppressors being a $5 tax and instant background check away. I know some that would settle for far less. Whereas I want an end to all prior restraint based gunowner control laws. No restrictions on owning or carrying anything. So my goals are different than the goals of other gunowners. I think this same difference is at the heart of the folks blaming other gunowners for this or that. After all, a different method is used to get 5 yards to the 50 yard line than one used to get to the end zone that's 55 yards away. Some folks are happy on the 50. Others want the end zone.
Blame the legislator. Or legislature. That guy with a gun yelling about treason and his Rights being infringed - he didn't do anything to you, other than become used as an excuse by folks who weren't really your friends anyway (that'd be the legislators, btw). If you want to deride him for being "not politically smart" or for "not helping" I can't stop you. Though, I see no reason for one gunowner to turn on another if they both want the same thing, that thing being freedom. But if you just want the army to show up and stand there until you've negotiated like a bunch of Scottish lords from a badly a-historic Mel Gibson flick, then perhaps you shouldn't be so appalled when someone with less politically savvy (and a few more vertebrae) than you have shows up, wanting to pick a fight and maybe, just maybe win back his freedom.
My only objection is the suggestion that criticizing people for being married to counter-productive tactics is, in itself, counter-productive.
On the other hand, this same reasoning also applies to the whole "We lost, so I'll blame the NRA and SAF and GOA and JPFO and..."
No comments:
Post a Comment