Columbia University Libertarians would like to put on a Machine gun Shoot/BBQ

[Holden23]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=481785
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47259
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=233546


This post in particular concerns me:

Originally Posted by Ajax22

Pennsylvania was up in the top of the possibilities, they seem to have some very pro freedom guys out there.

The class 3 aspects of the shoot are mostly intended to maximize the appeal/backlash/media attention... (look at how well the duracoat guys did after bloomberg hassled them)... it COULD be done with just .22 rifles... but I think having machine guns and suppressors would go a long way.

I've got midterms tomorrow, but I'll be making phone calls/emails on Thursday to see what can happen.

As does this one:

Originally Posted by Ajax22

Thanks for the input so far guys,

I just want to be very clear on one point, this is NOT going to take place in NYC... so no worries on that front (thanks to those who have expressed concern).

As far as crossing state lines with NFA items, that was one of the reasons for trying to involve an 07FFL/02SOT as they have considerable freedom with such things (it also would be nice to shoot post sample guns to save the wear on privately held FA firearms)

As far as the appropriateness of NFA items for this shoot, I had similar reservations when we were conceiving this project. However the politically controversial nature of them could be extremely useful in trying to maximize the exposure of the event and ensuring it goes off successfully.

By having NFA items present it serves to state in no uncertain terms that this is NOT about hunting.

It also increases the chance of national media coverage, as well as increasing the chance of a backlash against the project from both the school and activist groups.

With a high enough level of supervision it should be manageable, and participation would be completely revocable at the discretion of the supervisory staff.

Even if FA use was limited to a few short bursts from a 1919A4 it would increase the success of the project and make it much more marketable.

It sounds like you're not just going for attention, you're trying to deliberately piss off the anti-gun crowd. FYI - there are a lot of anti-gunners in positions to enact both federal and local laws. What you want to do is very irresponsible and short-sighted - to put it very gently. You're actually trying to put something together that could screw every gun owner out there. And worse, you don't even see that. As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Some friendly advice:

Originally Posted by Ajax22

The dialogue becomes purely about the RIGHT to keep and bear arms... It becomes a pure expression of freedom, unencumbered by any 'well this one is ok, but that one is not, and this one looks like it is sporting, and that one is scary'

link

You can say that we should have guns because it's our "right" - which is fine, but it's a lousy reason and will never win an argument. Ever. Guns are just one form of self defense, but one of the best forms because it equalizes force. An 80 year old woman isn't going to fight off a group of attackers with a knife or mace. But a gun sure evens the odds. The 2nd Amendment protects our pre-existing right to self defense. It's not about hunting, collecting, or sport shooting. It's about 80 year old women fighting off a group of attackers or the King of England. It shouldn't be up to the government to decide if, when, and how we're allowed to protect ourselves. This is how we should be fighting for our gun rights - not saying that it's a right and therefore we're entitled to have guns. That's not an argument, it's a capitulation.

[Yellowfin]

The anti gun groups are in hiding because the gun owning community and the public at large showed them that they're on VERY thin ice. They need to be made to stick their necks out so they can get the head chopping that's due them. Bloombastard isn't in as good a position as he thinks he is.

[Ajax22]

I’d like to start by apologizing if I haven’t been clear or I’ve come off as combative or antagonistic, I had four midterms today as well as two club events and a seminar last night, so I’ve been a little tired.

I’ll try to address some of the concerns that have been raised.

One of the major goals at a club level is to create solidarity within the various conservative groups/individuals in the NYC college communities (i.e. Columbia University Libertarians, NYU republicans, etc.) And no matter what the outcome of this event, I believe that will be accomplished.

As far as the larger game plan (and why I feel that it is important to use the media to our own ends)… well here is a rough idea of what we’ve been thinking:

Even in an ideal scenario with ample resources, time, equipment, logistical coordinators etc, the actual number of individuals who could be brought out to shoot is minimal… you might break triple did gets if you did multiple group outings over the course of the year, which would be a good start, but it is really not enough in and of itself to form a self sustaining movement.

If however we focused on doing one event that had media appeal we have a higher chance of other RKBA supportive organizations actually hearing about this in the media, seeing a strong response, and there is a good likelihood that the other groups will try to arrange similar outings (probably not NFA outings, but rather the type of basic instruction/familiarization that we would like to see occur on a large scale.) And yes, I do agree that basic instruction of large numbers of individuals is one of the long term goals… Keeping that in mind, With limited resources we need to act strategically. Realistically we have the opportunity to arrange for ONE larger event or a small handful of other events (ultimately resulting in the same number of participants either way). The smaller outings will likely fly under the radar… which is not ideal… Our opponents are better funded, and know how to play the media like a fiddle. Unless a school institution cracks down on a non NFA trip there is no chance that it will gain any real momentum outside of the organizations already participating. (Please keep in mind, If any well known school, or a state institution actually tries to squelch the meet, it then becomes both a 1st and 2nd amendment issue which is MUCH more likely to succeed in the long term.)

if we use the media’s own bias against itself we can take what resources we can scrape together to give a tiny prod to them and they will broadcast from the rooftops in overblown exaggerated terms illustrating what we have done. This in turn can cause other groups to lend their efforts, draws in a wider pool of human and financial capital and ultimately can effect a more meaningful change. With enough manpower and capital I would love to see regular 2nd amendment road trips to free states from NYC… there is NO gun culture to speak of here in the city and that needs to change. NYC is a rather unique situation wherein there is a large population who is liberal primarily because there are no opposing viewpoints, and anti gun because they’ve never had the opportunity to use one, and as such they are strange mysterious fear inspiring objects. Educating and training the populace is a very worthwhile goal, but it cannot be accomplished to any significant degree by one or two small university clubs. It takes mass mobilization to get that sort of change, which requires media coverage… and since they won’t give favorable coverage, we need to trick them into thinking they have some sensationalist story, when in fact they are broadcasting and popularizing ideal representatives who can keep an on point message with regard to firearms and freedom.

With regard to CU libertarians inadvertently promoting the ‘gun nut’ stereotype I firmly believe that we are ideally suited to challenging those pre-conceived notions. While we are a relatively small, our group has a high percentage of women, minorities, and disabled individuals, and every member has experience in high pressure debate settings and can hold their own calmly and intelligently while looking good and wearing a tailored suit. They can scream ‘GUN NUTS’ all they want, but when a well dressed, articulate, beautiful woman sits down for the interview, it makes them look bad and us look good. The same goes for our other members.

People attending the event would be wearing business formal, or very nice business casual (depending on the weather) and every member would be conducting themselves impeccably. This would not be a work boots and blaze orange event. Many of our members are older students, some with military backgrounds, others with experience in the corporate world. These are NOT a bunch of whiny freshmen who drag themselves from the bar to the art hum department everyday at noon... these are some of the Top students at the school in economics, business, higher math, biology, chemistry, political science etc. and these are NOT stereotypical 'gun nuts'.
These participants will, if anything, significantly better our impression in the national media... I can't stress this point enough, this group of individuals is absolutely the best possible candidate for a 2A representative.


Essentially the tactic I am suggesting is not to give a man a fish, or teach a man to fish, but to try to hold an event with the intention of starting a movement which will inspire large numbers of those who know how to fish to teach those who don’t… thereby actually making a measurable impact.
We have to understand not only our opponents but ourselves. As gun owners NOTHING motivates us like being told that something is ‘bad’ and that we shouldn’t do it ‘for the children’. There are a lot of firearms owners who would spend every weekend for a year teaching new shooters if Bloomberg told they couldn’t /shouldn’t teach NYC residents how to safely handle a firearm or promote 2nd amendment awareness. I guess this would be the ‘Tell a man he can’t fish and he’ll spend the rest of the week catching a fish just to slap you in the face with it’ theory.

As far as the appropriateness of doing this NOW, as opposed to later… My answer to that is that the right time to do ANYTHING is NOW… can you think of a time in the last 30 years when we had a truly 2A friendly executive office and legislature? We won Heller, we have made huge inroads in reclaiming gun culture. If we give our opposition an inch, I guarantee you they'll take it. we need to keep the pressure on.

If you wait for tomorrow, all you’ll wind up with is a bunch of wasted yesterdays.

[Holden23]

Originally Posted by Ajax22

With regard to CU libertarians inadvertently promoting the ‘gun nut’ stereotype I firmly believe that we are ideally suited to challenging those pre-conceived notions. While we are a relatively small, our group has a high percentage of women, minorities, and disabled individuals, and every member has experience in high pressure debate settings and can hold their own calmly and intelligently while looking good and wearing a tailored suit. They can scream ‘GUN NUTS’ all they want, but when a well dressed, articulate, beautiful woman sits down for the interview, it makes them look bad and us look good. The same goes for our other members.

People attending the event would be wearing business formal, or very nice business casual (depending on the weather) and every member would be conducting themselves impeccably. This would not be a work boots and blaze orange event. Many of our members are older students, some with military backgrounds, others with experience in the corporate world. These are NOT a bunch of whiny freshmen who drag themselves from the bar to the art hum department everyday at noon... these are some of the Top students at the school in economics, business, higher math, biology, chemistry, political science etc. and these are NOT stereotypical 'gun nuts'.
These participants will, if anything, significantly better our impression in the national media... I can't stress this point enough, this group of individuals is absolutely the best possible candidate for a 2A representative.

While trying to explain how your group is the "best possible candidate" to take on this fight, you've demonstrated quite the opposite. This description of your group paints you and them as arrogant and pretentious. How many insults did you just hurl at gun owners? And you think the best people to represent gun owners is a group that has little if any actual gun experience?

But it's nice to know that folks who look good in tailored suits and are Top students in various departments at Ivy League schools can calmly have intelligent conversations about gun issues for us. That'll give us loudmouthed slobs more time to sit around in our work boots and scream obscenities at the TV like the uneducated idiots we are. Hey man, thanks!

Originally Posted by Ajax22

if we use the media’s own bias against itself we can take what resources we can scrape together to give a tiny prod to them and they will broadcast from the rooftops in overblown exaggerated terms illustrating what we have done. This in turn can cause other groups to lend their efforts, draws in a wider pool of human and financial capital and ultimately can effect a more meaningful change.

So let me see if I have this right. You want lots of negative media attention so you can expose media hypocrisy and also so that pro-2A folks will contribute money to the cause - just as the economy is in shambles and lots of folks are out of work. And how exactly would you expose media hypocrisy? Using the media?

It really doesn't seem like you thought this all the way through. In fact, it seems like you saw some videos of conservative activists taking down ACORN and thought you'd try doing the same thing with something even more controversial - machine guns. That's exactly what it looks like to me. And it would explain why you're so gung-ho about it despite its overwhelming potential to backfire.

We've been winning in the courts. We should keep supporting those fights, because ultimately the law is on our side. But even the law is open to interpretation. Do you really want to give someone pause when it's their turn to interpret the law as it relates to 2A? Again, what you intend to do can greatly harm our efforts, despite your insistence to the contrary. But it might get your name out there - which seems to be what you're really after.

[Ajax22]

Originally Posted by Holden23

While trying to explain how your group is the "best possible candidate" to take on this fight, you've demonstrated quite the opposite. This description of your group paints you and them as arrogant and pretentious. How many insults did you just hurl at gun owners? And you think the best people to represent gun owners is a group that has little if any actual gun experience?

You stated that you did not want the 'gun nut' stereotype to be propagated, my description of our group was in direct response to that. You read into it what you want, but that's your prerogative. If you want someone who can shoot sub MOA free standing then go for a group with a lot of gun experience, if you want people who are well versed in debate and media relations... well then you might want to select for other traits.

Originally Posted by Holden23

But it's nice to know that folks who look good in tailored suits and are Top students in various departments at Ivy League schools can calmly have intelligent conversations about gun issues for us. That'll give us loudmouthed slobs more time to sit around in our work boots and scream obscenities at the TV like the uneducated idiots we are. Hey man, thanks!

Look, sometimes its a good idea to actually pick and choose who you put out front to speak for your group. If you are fighting the 'gun nut' image and stereotype, then perhaps its not a bad idea to put on a suit and get some well spoken people to do the talking. Again, you raised the issue of stereotyping and negative media image.

Originally Posted by Holden23

So let me see if I have this right. You want get lots of negative media attention so you can expose media hypocrisy and also so that pro-2A folks will contribute money to the cause - just as the economy is in shambles and lots of folks are out of work. And how exactly would you expose media hypocrisy? Using the media?

exposing media hypocrisy is not part of this (not sure where you got that). Utilizing media bias to advance a pro rkba agenda would be a more appropriate phrasing.


anyway, I haven't slept for the last 48 hours so I'm going to go to bed.

If you want to help, help. If you don't want to help, don't help. If you have constructive criticism I'm appreciative of it, if you have criticism which is not constructive then perhaps that would be best shifted to PM.

[Holden23]

Originally Posted by Ajax22

If you want to help, help. If you don't want to help, don't help. If you have constructive criticism I'm appreciative of it, if you have criticism which is not constructive then perhaps that would be best shifted to PM.

I've given you plenty of constructive criticism. Here's some more:

If you want to be the next James O'Keefe, I'm all for it. We need more people like him to take down all the ACORNs of the world. But he didn't just pick something controversial and dive in - he had a well-thought out plan (and even used his own money). Your plan is based on pissing off the [powerful] anti-gun crowd, and getting lots of negative media attention. That's the opposite of what gun owners need.

I hope you realize that if you do get something going and get that negative media attention you want, you're leaving a nice trail of breadcrumbs talking about how you're doing it for.. well.. the negative media attention you want. Again, it seems like it hasn't been fully thought out.

You know who would probably want to help you? Your mayor Bloomberg, the Brady Bunch, etc. Everything you've said you want to do fits perfectly into their agendas.

[Yellowfin]

Bloombastard and his crowd of flunkies need to be shut down, and AJAX does have the right idea in that the NYC people do need to have some 2nd Amendment tourism to do it. That probably is in fact the right method to dismantle the anti gun deadlock on the people there. We can all agree on that. As to exactly how to do that, whether or not to do it all out balls to the wall in your face with lots of MG's and invite the press along for a full ride, or to keep it hush hush and make it a non-public event at the start is something for fine tuning.

The anti gun crowd needs to have its power broken and the broken pieces crammed right up their overly tight ***es. A big help to that would be for PA to kick out Rendell, Nutter, and any other Bloomberg wannabes. See to it that they're thrown out of office and out of the state. I don't see what the hell is giving you people so much trouble on that, but whatever it is, get it fixed.

[Holden23]

A news story from yesterday found in another thread:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/bre...y_man_imp.html

It talks about the recent alleged terror plot where the suspects wanted to use "automatic weapons" to shoot up a mall. Luckily for everyone, they had a hard time finding automatic weapons.

And yet here we are talking about organizing a publicity stunt to show how anyone can go out and get a machine gun. Or, rather, how anyone can just drive from NY to PA to get a machine gun. What could possibly go wrong..

And I'm surprised that a group who feels so strongly about this cause doesn't even want to use their own money. Columbia's tuition is what, $20k/year? But nobody can scrape together enough money for ammo and range time? Seriously?

From earlier:

Originally Posted by Ajax22

If you want someone who can shoot sub MOA free standing then go for a group with a lot of gun experience, if you want people who are well versed in debate and media relations... well then you might want to select for other traits.

The implication being that they're up to the task of dealing with the full force of the liberal anti-gun media machine because of all the prior experience they have. But all I could find on google was this:
http://columbialibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=135592615553
http://www.macalester.edu/admissions...l/hottman.html

Again, I'm not opposed to what they're trying to do as it relates to fighting for the 2A. But trying to do it in the most controversial manner to get your name out there like James O'Keefe did - that I think is a very bad idea. If O'Keefe screwed up, what would they do? Take his pretend brothels away? The stakes are much higher for us. The media is determined to demonize guns. We don't need people making that easier for them - we need media wins not huge PR disasters involving machine guns.

[Ajax22]

Originally Posted by Holden23

A news story from yesterday found in another thread:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/bre...y_man_imp.html

It talks about the recent alleged terror plot where the suspects wanted to use "automatic weapons" to shoot up a mall. Luckily for everyone, they had a hard time finding automatic weapons.

And yet here we are talking about organizing a publicity stunt to show how anyone can go out and get a machine gun. Or, rather, how anyone can just drive from NY to PA to get a machine gun. What could possibly go wrong..

If we wanted to show how anyone can go out and buy an illegal machine gun, we wouldn't have to drive to PA to do it... Columbia is two blocks from the projects and believe it or not illegal guns are not all that hard to come by... even in NYC or CA, and as you have pointed out the media LOVES to focus on anything involving an automatic firearm. we have the opportunity to bait them into following a (rather bland) story about students advocating for 2nd amendment rights by dangling fully automatic cheese in front of them... Clearly story about machine guns are going to be in the news, they are ALWAYS going to be in the news, that is a factor of the media bias. What we have a chance to do is put a positive spin on one of those stories. Which in my opinion is better than leaving the media to run unchecked. You're welcome to differ in your opinion.

Originally Posted by Holden23

And I'm surprised that a group who feels so strongly about this cause doesn't even want to use their own money. Columbia's tuition is what, $20k/year? But nobody can scrape together enough money for ammo and range time? Seriously?

Ok, this doesn't really fall under constructive criticism.... We are full time students most of whom are funding school through student loans. The organization itself is considered a 501c3 under Columbia university (I believe, I'll have to double check at the next meeting, I know we are considered a non profit and can issue receipts for donation... so We're not trying to hit up people/companies for their own money, just the money they would otherwise be contributing to the state).

If you're surprised that students who shell out $50+K per year are looking for funding and support in order to be able to fight for rights, well... I don't know what I can say to that... Libertarians tend to come from working class backgrounds and by and large we pay our own way through school... there doesn't tend to be a lot of extras lying around to fund student movements and political action... In a couple of years we'll be graduated and employed, and then it will fall on us to do what we can to fund/assist other students in continuing the fight.

Originally Posted by Holden23

From earlier:

The implication being that they're up to the task of dealing with the full force of the liberal anti-gun media machine because of all the prior experience they have. But all I could find on google was this:
http://columbialibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=135592615553
http://www.macalester.edu/admissions...l/hottman.html

Again, I'm not opposed to what they're trying to do as it relates to fighting for the 2A. But trying to do it in the most controversial manner to get your name out there like James O'Keefe did - that I think is a very bad idea. If O'Keefe screwed up, what would they do? Take his pretend brothels away? The stakes are much higher for us. The media is determined to demonize guns. We don't need people making that easier for them - we need media wins not huge PR disasters involving machine guns.

Thank you for proving that we are NOT out to just make a name for ourselves... clearly if that was the goal we'd have done a better job of it. What we're trying to do is to get NYC reopened as a front for the RKBA, its a tough job, but we're trying. The CU libertarians tend to be the people who do the organizing and behind the scenes, in the past when we've done speaking/debate events we've done it in collaboration with other organizations and we haven't been all that concerned about getting our name thrust out there. I guess it probably wouldn't have been a bad idea in hindsight to take a bit more credit... as it would have gone a long way in making future projects easier to coordinate.

We are not trying to pull an O'Keefe, and frankly I'm not sure why you seem obsessed with trying to drag him into it. You disagree with what we are doing, ok, I get that. What is your proposed plan of action. what are YOU going to do? offering alternatives would be constructive criticism. what you are doing now is simply criticism.

If you have an idea for a different/better way to proceed, or some other way which we can fight for the 2A, please let me know and If it seems viable I'll pass it along. there are a number of other things in the works on the 2A front, but I can't discuss what they are, what groups are involved or what the game plan is. All I can say is that a lot of pro 2A student groups in NYC are coming together and getting more organized.

[Holden23]

Originally Posted by Ajax22

we have the opportunity to bait them into following a (rather bland) story about students advocating for 2nd amendment rights by dangling fully automatic cheese in front of them... Clearly story about machine guns are going to be in the news, they are ALWAYS going to be in the news, that is a factor of the media bias. What we have a chance to do is put a positive spin on one of those stories.

How? You've made the part about getting lots of negative media attention pretty clear, but you haven't explained how you intend to spin it into something positive. I can think of plenty of ways it can be spun against us. If anyone reading this knows how to spin a machine gun publicity stunt into something positive, please chime in.

Originally Posted by Ajax22

We are not trying to pull an O'Keefe, and frankly I'm not sure why you seem obsessed with trying to drag him into it.

It sure seems like you are. And realize that if you do get this going, the media will also make this connection - even if it actually isn't true.

Originally Posted by Ajax22

You disagree with what we are doing, ok, I get that. What is your proposed plan of action. what are YOU going to do? offering alternatives would be constructive criticism. what you are doing now is simply criticism.

I'm critical because you have a really bad plan. As you described it:

1. Get machine guns
2. Maximize negative national media attention
3. Spin all that negative attention into something positive

#1 and #2 are potentially doable. But #3 is impossible. Impossible. So where will that leave the rest of us?

Read, rinse, repeat:
We will not win any 2nd Amendment fights by throwing machine guns in peoples' faces.

Why you refuse to accept this is beyond me, unless as I've stated, you're just doing it to make a name for yourself, regardless of the outcome.