Open Letter

[canvasbck]

This open letter is to the leadership/lobbyists from the NRA, TSRA, OCT, CATI, ect.

I want HB195 to turn into law. If it's not politically possible for 195, then I want us to see what we can get. We may never get a legislature in Austin that is more favorable to gun rights than the one that begins next year. It would be a shame if all that opportunity was wasted because of pro-gun organizations engaging in a public feud.

It's time for everyone to stop, take a pause, turn around and throw your grenades at the opposition. One reason why left leaning organizations are so successfull is that they know to keep their infighting private and save their public scorn for the opposition. I understand that each side of the current dustup feels justified in their attacks on the other based on attacks (real or perceived) from other parties, but it's not worth it. Actually, if all of the parties involved will sit back an look, they have something to learn from their perceived adversaries.

OCT, CATI, and specifically CJ: Accept the fact that you are new to the political arena and learn from those with more experience. You are going to make mistakes, learn from them and move on. Understand that every statement that you make publicly and every public action that you take will be scrutinized, twisted, and used against you in the court of public opinion. The LGOC demonstrations were a prime example of this. While perfectly legal and ethical, they provided fodder for the liberal media and MDA to create a negative narrative about the movement. On the OK open carry thing.........you screwed up. Own it and move along, stop with the wishy washy "it may or may not have been a real gun" "I may or may not have a CHL from another state". Those of us who are libertarian leaning want leaders who are upfront, and honest, we despise lawyerly political double talk. While your passion about RKBA is very admirable, learn who your real enemies are! I too have been frustrated by the snails pace at which our freedoms have expanded over the last couple of decades. I do wish that the "in the house" groups were doing more. But they are not the enemy, while the NRA/TSRA may not have gotten the results that we wanted, remember that there are other groups that are trying to reverse the modest gains that have been made. Last point for your groups; stop alienating those who are sympathetic to your cause simply because they aren't as passionate as you! Someone willing to accept OC with a permission slip from the governement is NOT anti 2A. It's OK to accept less than your end game strategy as long as you have a plan going forward to get to your end game.

NRA, TSRA, and specifically Charles: Yes, yall have tons more experience and more accomplishments than any one else on the pro freedom side of things. Please remember that you too were new to the process at one time. I would be willing to wager that there were times you wanted to bang your head against the wall because of the hoops that had to be jumped through just to get legislators to do what they should have been doing anyway. I would also be willing to wager that there was a time when you were frustrated by the insiders who treated you like you had the plague because you weren't doing things "their way". Those of us who are outside of the political arena don't like the fact that we have to ever settle for allowing the government to restrict activities that aren't hurting anyone and are none of the government's business to begin with. Accept the reality that actions which are deemed "extreme" are often times the best way to get a conversation started. While it's OK to distance yourselves from folks on your side who have been branded as the "fringe element", it's not OK to join into the public bomb throwing. Take a step back and see what their tactics did, positive or negative, and adapt your own strategies in reponse without public rebukes.

CJ: Thank you for bringing passion to the firearms debate. It's been needed.

Charles/Alice: Thank you for everything you have done to expand our freedoms when it comes to RKBA. I don't think the two of you receive enough recognition for the things that you have accomplished. We want you to continue to be the voice of reason within the legislature.

[Charlies.Contingency]

Is this a letter you wrote?

[Jumping Frog]

Nice letter.

We didn't lose our rights overnight and we will not magically regain them overnight. I view this as a battle we will fight for the rest of my life. We certainly do not need infighting amongst ourselves when the real enemy is very real and on the completely opposing side.

[canvasbck]

Is this a letter you wrote?

Yes, I wrote this

[Charlies.Contingency]

Is this a letter you wrote?

Yes, I wrote this

I must certainly agree. I know there are terrible relations between the groups, but I am very forgiving, and willing to renegotiate after I cool off and separate from my emotions. Being the better person can really help out sometimes, heck, I just got 33% off of my Internet and TV because I was willing to renegotiate a deal with them after I asked to terminate my services with them. Heck, sometimes you've got to turn around and say, "You know what, I was wrongly opinionated, let start this over friend."

Remember to love one another before yourselves. God bless you all.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I need to point out that there is no infighting between NRA, TSRA or Alice and OCT or CJ Grisham. There are one way attacks by OCT and CJ, but that does not constitute
"infighting." My comments are just that, my comments and do not represent the position of the NRA. NRA Board Members do not represent the NRA unless we are acting as a body. The fact that CJ and OCT attack the NRA, TSRA and Alice does not mean my response is that of NRA, TSRA or Alice.

I realize your letter is intended to help put an end to the banter between CJ and me and I appreciate your efforts. However, I want everyone to realize that my comments should not be attributed to any other person or organization.

Chas.

[canvasbck]

One of the things that I left out of my letter:

The efforts of OCT will be beneficial in the long run. We have seen through other movements in the past that extreme measures help to normalize that which you really want to do. The gay pride parades with their simulated sex acts and outragous and explicit costumes made the site of two gay people in suits standing at an alter more palatable to the average person (not me, but that's immaterial). Walking around in a protest with an AR or AK slung across your back seems extreme to most of us, but in comparison, makes a guy walking around with a G17 in a serpa holster while he's shopping more palatable to the average person. These actions will make passing legislation right now more difficult, but could shift societal norms to make legislation easier to get through in the future.

The folks in OCT need to understand that they are not skilled statesmen, leave the legislative sausage making to the experts. Do what you do best, but learn to turn it off from time to time to help the sausage makers.

Folks in the legislative inner circles, please don't drop a cause because of actions that will affect societal morms in the long run (for the better) made it more difficult for now.

[jimlongley]

I need to point out that there is no infighting between NRA, TSRA or Alice and OCT or CJ Grisham. There are one way attacks by OCT and CJ, but that does not constitute
"infighting." My comments are just that, my comments and do not represent the position of the NRA. NRA Board Members do not represent the NRA unless we are acting as a body. The fact that CJ and OCT attack the NRA, TSRA and Alice does not mean my response is that of NRA, TSRA or Alice.

I realize your letter is intended to help put an end to the banter between CJ and me and I appreciate your efforts. However, I want everyone to realize that my comments should not be attributed to any other person or organization.

Chas.

That's a little disingenuous Charles, we, the members of the NRA, elect the members of the board with the expectation that they will represent the NRA at all times, the media certainly perceive it that way, although one has to consider that it is the media. While not stating or implying that the members of the board cannot have and express their personal opinions, those same members, by virtue of the position that they have been placed in by the general membership, must be somewhat circumspect and recognize that anything they say may be interpreted as the (horrors!) "Official Stance of the NRA" by anyone who disagrees with them or us, and that is a bell that can't be unrung. I hold my personal opinions dear and expect anyone else to do the same, it's just that expression of those opinions "ex-officio" can lead to misinterpretation, and misrepresentation despite any and all prefaces to the contrary.

It is a terrifying age we live in, where one simple word said in an unguarded moment and meant only to express a personal opinion rather than the organization's policy can gain a life of its own and travel the world in split seconds, but I can hardly characterize the rancorous give and take between you and Mr. Grisham as mere banter. I have also heard a (yes, only one) negative comment by a person of my acquaintance who is not (and says he will not be) a member of the NRA or TSRA, and also claims not to be a member or (direct, overt) supporter of OCT, that his perception is that you and CJ are about set to tear each other's throats out from what he has read here and in other places where he trolls. I should point out that I consider this person to be rather a strange duck, a shooter who is FOR licensed POSSESSION, registration, and all that, so his opinion may be pretty much worthless (and there is one of those paradigms sneaking in.)

[Cedar Park Dad]

One of the things that I left out of my letter:

The efforts of OCT will be beneficial in the long run.

I disagree with that about 1,000%. Their activities have been extremely helpful for the antigun side and have resulting in several major retailers at least publicly having a no firearm policy. While not as big a deal in Texas and 30.06 that has force of law in other states.
Frankly I'm one of those who;s VERY on the fence about whether or not OCT is for or against us.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I need to point out that there is no infighting between NRA, TSRA or Alice and OCT or CJ Grisham. There are one way attacks by OCT and CJ, but that does not constitute
"infighting." My comments are just that, my comments and do not represent the position of the NRA. NRA Board Members do not represent the NRA unless we are acting as a body. The fact that CJ and OCT attack the NRA, TSRA and Alice does not mean my response is that of NRA, TSRA or Alice.

I realize your letter is intended to help put an end to the banter between CJ and me and I appreciate your efforts. However, I want everyone to realize that my comments should not be attributed to any other person or organization.

Chas.

That's a little disingenuous Charles, we, the members of the NRA, elect the members of the board with the expectation that they will represent the NRA at all times, the media certainly perceive it that way, although one has to consider that it is the media. While not stating or implying that the members of the board cannot have and express their personal opinions, those same members, by virtue of the position that they have been placed in by the general membership, must be somewhat circumspect and recognize that anything they say may be interpreted as the (horrors!) "Official Stance of the NRA" by anyone who disagrees with them or us, and that is a bell that can't be unrung. I hold my personal opinions dear and expect anyone else to do the same, it's just that expression of those opinions "ex-officio" can lead to misinterpretation, and misrepresentation despite any and all prefaces to the contrary.

It is a terrifying age we live in, where one simple word said in an unguarded moment and meant only to express a personal opinion rather than the organization's policy can gain a life of its own and travel the world in split seconds, but I can hardly characterize the rancorous give and take between you and Mr. Grisham as mere banter. I have also heard a (yes, only one) negative comment by a person of my acquaintance who is not (and says he will not be) a member of the NRA or TSRA, and also claims not to be a member or (direct, overt) supporter of OCT, that his perception is that you and CJ are about set to tear each other's throats out from what he has read here and in other places where he trolls. I should point out that I consider this person to be rather a strange duck, a shooter who is FOR licensed POSSESSION, registration, and all that, so his opinion may be pretty much worthless (and there is one of those paradigms sneaking in.)

It's not disingenuous, it's the law. Members of the Board of Directors of any corporation, other than officers (President, Vice-President, etc.), do not represent the corporation unless they are meeting as a body. If you want to see the official NRA position on open-carry or any other organization, then you must look to the NRA's official pronouncements.

I understand what you are saying about statements by certain persons being attributed to an organization and this is why I do not express my strongly-held positions on social issues. I do not want to alienate people from supporting the Second Amendment because they may disagree with me on those social issues. However, as an NRA member and Second Amendment activist, I will not let false allegations against the NRA, TSRA or Alice Tripp go unanswered.

The only reason I posted on this thread is because Canvasback expressly directed part of his comments to "NRA, TSRA . . ." and as a Board Member it is my duty to make it clear that there is no infighting between NRA, TSRA and OCT.

Chas.

[canvasbck]

One of the things that I left out of my letter:

The efforts of OCT will be beneficial in the long run.

I disagree with that about 1,000%. Their activities have been extremely helpful for the antigun side and have resulting in several major retailers at least publicly having a no firearm policy. While not as big a deal in Texas and 30.06 that has force of law in other states.
Frankly I'm one of those who;s VERY on the fence about whether or not OCT is for or against us.

I REALLY don't like it when quotes are used, but cherry pick the parts of a post that make a point for you. Please include the entire post if you are going to quote, feel free to highlight the parts you dispute.

Your quote misses the point of that post. It was to urge OCT to stay out of trying to engage legislators and let the people skilled in lobbying for legilation handle that part of it.

It was also meant to illustrate where these bizarre tactics, while unpleasant, do shift societal norms in the direction that we want them shifted in. There can be short term consequences, such as increased 30.06 postings, and we have to decide if those consequences make the tactics worth it or not.

[Charlies.Contingency]

One of the things that I left out of my letter:

The efforts of OCT will be beneficial in the long run.

I disagree with that about 1,000%. Their activities have been extremely helpful for the antigun side and have resulting in several major retailers at least publicly having a no firearm policy. While not as big a deal in Texas and 30.06 that has force of law in other states.
Frankly I'm one of those who;s VERY on the fence about whether or not OCT is for or against us.

I REALLY don't like it when quotes are used, but cherry pick the parts of a post that make a point for you. Please include the entire post if you are going to quote, feel free to highlight the parts you dispute.

Your quote misses the point of that post. It was to urge OCT to stay out of trying to engage legislators and let the people skilled in lobbying for legilation handle that part of it.

It was also meant to illustrate where these bizarre tactics, while unpleasant, do shift societal norms in the direction that we want them shifted in. There can be short term consequences, such as increased 30.06 postings, and we have to decide if those consequences make the tactics worth it or not.

I am in support of the ultimate goal, just not the tactics and the approach. As others have said, it makes us, gun owners, look bad. The media's take on guns is that they are a things that execute and massacre innocent children in schools. The take on homosexuality in the media is not so. There seems to me, to be more favor and or acceptance of homosexuality in the media, than gun rights.

I am still neutral to OCT, but I believe they are currently negatively affecting our efforts. Could the end result be positive? I would like to think so, but I do have my reasonable doubts.

[MechAg94]

One of the things that I left out of my letter:

The efforts of OCT will be beneficial in the long run. We have seen through other movements in the past that extreme measures help to normalize that which you really want to do. The gay pride parades with their simulated sex acts and outragous and explicit costumes made the site of two gay people in suits standing at an alter more palatable to the average person (not me, but that's immaterial). Walking around in a protest with an AR or AK slung across your back seems extreme to most of us, but in comparison, makes a guy walking around with a G17 in a serpa holster while he's shopping more palatable to the average person. These actions will make passing legislation right now more difficult, but could shift societal norms to make legislation easier to get through in the future.

The folks in OCT need to understand that they are not skilled statesmen, leave the legislative sausage making to the experts. Do what you do best, but learn to turn it off from time to time to help the sausage makers.

Folks in the legislative inner circles, please don't drop a cause because of actions that will affect societal morms in the long run (for the better) made it more difficult for now.

Okay, here is the entire post. IMO, your examples fall short. Gay pride parades did nothing to make people think gays are normal. If anything they made them look like a bunch of weird people. Like going to a whore house and assuming that represents all women. Fear of guns is not really same as what people are concerned about with gay marriage, but that is another discussion.

As said above, I want OC. I doubt I ever will do it regularly, but I like the idea of being free to OC if needed without being harrassed or thrown in jail. However, Texans in general are stubborn and don't like big changes too fast. Also, there are a large number of liberals in Texas despite it being mostly conservative. You don't want to push Texans who might otherwise agree with you into bed with liberals by pushing too fast, too hard. I don't know if OC will come this session, but it will pass at some point.

[Cedar Park Dad]

One of the things that I left out of my letter:

The efforts of OCT will be beneficial in the long run.

I disagree with that about 1,000%. Their activities have been extremely helpful for the antigun side and have resulting in several major retailers at least publicly having a no firearm policy. While not as big a deal in Texas and 30.06 that has force of law in other states.
Frankly I'm one of those who;s VERY on the fence about whether or not OCT is for or against us.

I REALLY don't like it when quotes are used, but cherry pick the parts of a post that make a point for you. Please include the entire post if you are going to quote, feel free to highlight the parts you dispute.

Your quote misses the point of that post. It was to urge OCT to stay out of trying to engage legislators and let the people skilled in lobbying for legilation handle that part of it.

It was also meant to illustrate where these bizarre tactics, while unpleasant, do shift societal norms in the direction that we want them shifted in. There can be short term consequences, such as increased 30.06 postings, and we have to decide if those consequences make the tactics worth it or not.

SOMETIMES they shift them. Other times, as in California, they just get already existing OC rights banned.

[Cedar Park Dad]

As said above, I want OC. I doubt I ever will do it regularly, but I like the idea of being free to OC if needed without being harrassed or thrown in jail.

Agreed. I just think the tactics of this particular group have been atrocious and designed to get Facebook clicks, not help with the law.
There are much better ways to march/protest without looking like a loon and hurting the cause.