Infighting threatens imminent avalanche of gun control in PA

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by Sebastian

So my question is, what is your agenda by bringing Andy Barniskis personally up for discussion on a site where he doesn’t participate, is not a member and is relatively unknown to the membership? What is your purpose for creating the illusions that infighting, as specific to this one particular person alone is responsible for an imminent avalanche of gun control in Pennsylvania?

I would suspect because there's nothing quite as frustrating as feeling undermined by people on your own side of the issue. We all may disagree about methods and strategies to get there, but if we actively start pooh poohing, or even sabotaging the efforts of others, we're not going to win this. That kind of behavior tires activists, and makes them give up. If you get more grief from your own side than you get from the anti-gun people, it can be enough to make someone just want to give up.

I know a few people who got burnt out on the RKBA. They still care deeply about it, but have decided to leave a lot of the grunt work to fresher blood.

Those on the other side of the issue feel the same way; there's nothing quite as frustrating as feeling undermined by people on your own side of the issue. No one gave one side of the argument a monopoly on the truth except maybe in their own minds. That doesn't explain the agenda though. Had someone come on this site and started saying, Greg Murphy this, Harry Schneider this or Kim Stolfer that, well, that would be one thing, this is entirely different.

This doesn't exist on one side alone, you don't know what you don't know I guess.

And it's a pretty loose thread to claim outright sabotage.

[Rifleman 7.62 NATO]

This Andy character sounds like a cross between Wayne laPierre and Jim Zumbo.


All this hoohah about cant we all just get along is BS. Some of the greatest enemies to our RKBA are within and they must be purged if we are to ever be successful.

Why is it that those in the RKBA "leadership" (regardless of org it is), emplore their membership to hold their elected officals feet to the fire when it comes to RKBA, but then seem offended and often mislabel members of the membership as anti's, when the members attempt to hold their(the "leadership") feet to the fire and demand accountability??? Sounds like hyprocrisy to me.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by Rifleman 7.62 NATO

This Andy character sounds like a cross between Wayne laPierre and Jim Zumbo.


All this hoohah about cant we all just get along is BS. Some of the greatest enemies to our RKBA are within and they must be purged if we are to ever be successful.

Why is it that those in the RKBA "leadership" (regardless of org it is), emplore their membership to hold their elected officals feet to the fire when it comes to RKBA, but then seem offended and often mislabel members of the membership as anti's, when the members attempt to hold their(the "leadership") feet to the fire and demand accountability??? Sounds like hyprocrisy to me.

I think you've misunderstood, that's partially what the person you labeled as Lapierre-Zumbo has been saying...

[Murf_The_Surf]

NineseveN asks:

“what is your agenda by bringing Andy Barniskis personally up for discussion on a site where he doesn’t participate, is not a member and is relatively unknown to the membership?”

Perhaps the membership should become more familiar with Andy Barniskis. After all, he hates PAFOA, just as he hates the rest of the effective grass roots gun groups in PA. Here is a typical Barniskis comment concerning PAFOA: “I don't know how you stomach that PAFOA crowd. What a bunch of jerks…”

In addition, Barniskis has apostles who actively attempt to enlighten the people here at PAFOA. Here is how one such apostle describes his mission:

“I'm a pretty regular poster on PAFOA.org, my goal in posting there has been to try and reach those that only know what our anointed chiefs tell them… and also trying to force everyone with an opinion on Constitutional or PA/Federal Law matters to actually do the unthinkable and cite their sources (half the time they cannot, because it doesn't exist). Anyway, I've made some headway with some folks new to the game, but that's my excuse for being so vocal there. The members are a pretty decent bunch of folks, even if they're not the most politically vicious or attuned”.

Oh, gee, that was none other than NineseveN, giving his report to Andy on his progress in reaching those lost souls at PAFOA that only know what their anointed chiefs tell them. How specially nice of him to condescend to us folks who are less politically attuned.

If Barniskis is attacking PAFOA just like every other coalition organization (he does on a regular basis), and his True Believers are actively proselytizing here, then he and his operation deserve discussion here.

More importantly, PAFOA is about our civil rights, particularly our right to keep and bear arms. Barniskis has been waging a long term campaign to discredit the most effective PA pro-gun leaders, organizations, and legislators. The more effective someone becomes, the more viciously Barniskis attacks them. PAFOA, Rep Metcalfe, Kim Stolfer, and Harry Schneider are prime examples of the sort of targets Barniskis loves to fire at.

NineseveN’s disdain for Rep. Metcalfe, his constant refrain that “law is meaningless”, his constant fear mongering that our best RKBA groups and leaders are working behind closed doors to sell us out any day now; all these themes are copycatted from Andy Barniskis. NineseveN truly is a faithful apostle and True Believe for Andy Barniskis and his special brand of anarchy.

Considering HIS agenda here, I don’t believe NineseveN has the moral authority to be questioning my reasons for discussing Andyland, an important subject that affects everyone who is concerned about gun rights in Pennsylvania.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by Murf_The_Surf

NineseveN asks:

“what is your agenda by bringing Andy Barniskis personally up for discussion on a site where he doesn’t participate, is not a member and is relatively unknown to the membership?”

Perhaps the membership should become more familiar with Andy Barniskis. After all, he hates PAFOA, just as he hates the rest of the effective grass roots gun groups in PA. Here is a typical Barniskis comment concerning PAFOA: “I don't know how you stomach that PAFOA crowd. What a bunch of jerks…”

Context buddy, learn it, live it, love it, use it. That was a response to something I wrote, ironically enough, about how Harry Schneider and some other people similar to yourself attacked me for posting something about our newfound reciprocity with West Virginia. Even though, as I stated, Harry's PM to me was polite, I was still threatened with blame if the deal fell through because I hi-lited an inequity in the changes to the WV code. This was not the first time that Mr. Schneider and some people that affiliate themselves with PSA/FOAC/ACSL etc.. have done such things. I don't want to air dirty laundry, but you brought this one up by taking something Andy said out of context in order to try and make him look bad to the current audience...enjoy the read (again):

Andy, thus far, both reciprocity agreements have been published on the respective AG websites, and there has not been any additional requirements added to PA like mandatory training. I do find this a little conspicuous with the PICS system "upgrade" and downtime scheduled for 9/2 through 9/6, but it's probably premature to go on the war path. I suspect the PICS upgrade could be the addition of more or more accurate mental health records in light of the Virginia Tech shooting or even something completely unrelated.

I have already been chided by a few people for pointing out what I said in my original e-mail to you. I was told not to illuminate the fact that the reciprocity agreement doesn't strictly comply with West Virginia law or their previously stated policy (hell, I posted the law and I got some flak from people and a small note of concern from an activist that I won't name for that too). Personally, I don't get that. Anyone that wants to read that section of the WV code can clearly see the words. The agreements seem to comply with PA policy and law perfectly however.

It's true that their could be ulterior motives in this. What happens when someone figures out that there's a slight inequity to the agreement as it jives with WV law? Do they threaten to drop reciprocity unless PA adds that requirement to the permit process? Will the sportsmen coalitions and gun owners go for that or will we simply allow the agreement to drop and hold to how good we have it compared to some other states?

Personally, I don't see a problem with not matching training requirements as the more practical sticking point between states should be whether or not one state has 24/7 access to check on an out of state permit to ensure that it is valid, which Pennsylvania supplies via a toll-free number (we've had this for years). The training requirement is functionally useless, as problems have not manifested in states that are shall issue sans training requirement versus states without CCW or those with CCW and a training requirement.

Here's a similar discussion from PAFOA about the mandatory training issue, some good points were raised if anyone cares to check it out. http://www.pafoa.org/forum/showthrea...eferrerid=2258

Aside from that, it shouldn't be all that problematic as Florida, Virginia and North Carolina each have solid reciprocity agreements with PA and they too have training requirements and other standards above and beyond what PA has.


Having said all of that, in my opinion reciprocity with West Virginia is a good thing for a number of PA residents, and I applaud it, but only so long as it doesn't come with further restrictions, fees, standards or requirements, which thus far appears to be the case. IF this is a Trojan Horse for someone, there should be hell to pay indeed. For now, I'm giving credit where it is due, which is to the West Virginia Civil Defense League on the WV side and to Kim Stolfer and Harry Schneider on the PA side according to messages and posts on PAFOA and a couple of PA RBKA lists. There were likely others involved, I just don't know who (so they can take their own fair share of credit as they please).

However, as the above people deserve kudos now, if this turns out to be something other than what it is currently being presented as, I have no doubt that the blame will be focused on them whether or not they truly had anything to do with the sinister undertow at all.



Here's what I found perplexing though. If I am reading the code and the bills right, the language of WV law USED to say "The GOVERNOR may execute reciprocity agreements on behalf of the state of West Virginia with states or political subdivisions which have SIMILAR gun permitting laws and which recognize and honor West Virginia licenses issued pursuant to section four of this article;" (CAPS emphasis mine). Prior to what was in effect earlier this year, even though the language said "similar", the Governor and PTB felt that PA laws were not similar enough, due mostly to the lack of a training requirement (which is what they told me some time ago when I inquired about reciprocity).

This is how the law read at that time (and seemingly still does on the WV statutes page (http://www.legis.state.wv.us/WVCODE/61/masterfrmFrm.htm )

>>>>>>>
§61-7-6. Exceptions as to prohibitions against carrying concealed deadly weapons.

The licensure provisions set forth in this article do not apply to:
(1) Any person carrying a deadly weapon upon his or her own premises; nor shall anything herein prevent a person from carrying any firearm, unloaded, from the place of purchase to his or her home, residence or place of business or to a place of repair and back to his or her home, residence or place of business, nor shall anything herein prohibit a person from possessing a firearm while hunting in a lawful manner or while traveling from his or her home, residence or place of business to a hunting site and returning to his or her home, residence or place of business;
(2) Any person who is a member of a properly organized target-shooting club authorized by law to obtain firearms by purchase or requisition from this state or from the United States for the purpose of target practice from carrying any pistol, as defined in this article, unloaded, from his or her home, residence or place of business to a place of target practice and from any place of target practice back to his or her home, residence or place of business, for using any such weapon at a place of target practice in training and improving his or her skill in the use of the weapons;
(3) Any law-enforcement officer or law-enforcement official as defined in section one, article twenty-nine, chapter thirty of this code;
(4) Any employee of the West Virginia division of corrections duly appointed pursuant to the provisions of section five, article five, chapter twenty-eight of this code while the employee is on duty;
(5) Any member of the armed forces of the United States or the militia of this state while the member is on duty;
(6) Any circuit judge, including any retired circuit judge designated senior status by the supreme court of appeals of West Virginia, prosecuting attorney, assistant prosecuting attorney or a duly appointed investigator employed by a prosecuting attorney;
(7) Any resident of another state who has been issued a license to carry a concealed weapon by a state or a political subdivision which has entered into a reciprocity agreement with this state. The GOVERNOR may execute reciprocity agreements on behalf of the state of West Virginia with states or political subdivisions which have SIMILAR gun permitting laws and which recognize and honor West Virginia licenses issued pursuant to section four of this article;
(8) Any federal law-enforcement officer or federal police officer authorized to carry a weapon in the performance of the officer's duty; and
(9) Any Hatfield-McCoy regional recreation authority ranger while the ranger is on duty.

<<<<<<<


Enter HB 3074 from this year, effective June 7th, 2007.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_St...=RS&btype=bill
>>>>>>>
N ACT to amend and reenact §61-7-4 and §61-7-6 of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended; and to amend said code by adding thereto a new section, designated §61-7-6a, all relating to the carrying of concealed weapons; clarifying the scope of a concealed weapons permit; amending reciprocity requirements; authorizing the Attorney General to investigate and execute reciprocity agreements with other states pertaining to the mutual recognition of permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns; setting forth minimum standards which must be met before such reciprocity agreements may be executed; clarifying the scope of valid out-of-state permits that may be recognized in West Virginia; establishing a registry of states with which West Virginia has entered into reciprocal agreements; and requiring the State Police to provide the public with a list of the states which have entered into reciprocity agreements.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
That §61-7-4 and §61-7-6 of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended and reenacted; and that said code be amended by adding thereto a new section, designated §61-7-6a, all to read as follows:
ARTICLE 7. DANGEROUS WEAPONS.
§61-7-4. License to carry deadly weapons; how obtained.

[removed 61-7-4 text as unnecessary to this discussion] - NineseveN

§61-7-6. Exceptions as to prohibitions against carrying concealed deadly weapons.

The licensure provisions set forth in this article do not apply to:
(1) Any person carrying a deadly weapon upon his or her own premises; nor shall anything herein prevent a person from carrying any firearm, unloaded, from the place of purchase to his or her home, residence or place of business or to a place of repair and back to his or her home, residence or place of business, nor shall anything herein prohibit a person from possessing a firearm while hunting in a lawful manner or while traveling from his or her home, residence or place of business to a hunting site and returning to his or her home, residence or place of business;
(2) Any person who is a member of a properly organized target-shooting club authorized by law to obtain firearms by purchase or requisition from this state or from the United States for the purpose of target practice from carrying any pistol, as defined in this article, unloaded, from his or her home, residence or place of business to a place of target practice and from any place of target practice back to his or her home, residence or place of business, for using any such weapon at a place of target practice in training and improving his or her skill in the use of the weapons;
(3) Any law-enforcement officer or law-enforcement official as defined in section one, article twenty-nine, chapter thirty of this code;
(4) Any employee of the West Virginia Division of Corrections duly appointed pursuant to the provisions of section five, article five, chapter twenty-eight of this code while the employee is on duty;
(5) Any member of the Armed Forces of the United States or the militia of this state while the member is on duty;
(6) Any circuit judge, including any retired circuit judge designated senior status by the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, Prosecuting Attorney, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney or a duly appointed investigator employed by a Prosecuting Attorney;
(7) Any resident of another state who holds a valid license to carry a concealed weapon by a state or a political subdivision which has entered into a reciprocity agreement with this state, subject to the provisions and limitations set forth in section six- a of this article;
(8) Any federal law-enforcement officer or federal police officer authorized to carry a weapon in the performance of the officer's duty; and
(9) Any Hatfield-McCoy regional recreation authority ranger while the ranger is on duty.

§61-7-6a. Reciprocity; out-of-state concealed handgun permits.
(a) A holder of a valid out-of-state permit or license to carry a concealed handgun, as issued by another state with which the State of West Virginia has executed a reciprocity agreement, shall be recognized as valid in this state, if the following conditions are met:
(1) The permit or license holder is a resident of the issuing state;
(2) The permit or license holder is 21 years or older;
(3) The permit or license is in his or her immediate possession;
(4) The permit or license holder is not a resident of the state of West Virginia; and,
(5) The State of West Virginia has executed a valid and effective reciprocity agreement with the issuing state pertaining to the carrying and verification of concealed handgun licenses and permits issued in the respective states.
(b) A holder of a valid permit or license from another state who is authorized to carry a concealed handgun in this state pursuant to provisions of this section is subject to the same laws and restrictions with respect to carrying a concealed handgun as a resident of West Virginia who is so permitted, and must carry the concealed handgun in compliance with the laws of this state.
(c) No license or permit from another state is valid in this state if the holder is or becomes prohibited by law from possessing a firearm.
(d) The West Virginia ATTORNEY GENERAL shall seek to enter into and may execute reciprocity agreements on behalf of the state of West Virginia with states which meet the following standards and requirements:
(1) The standards applied by the other state before issuing a concealed handgun license or permit must be EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN the standards imposed by this article;
(2) This state's law enforcement officers have continuous access to data bases on the criminal information network, twenty- four hours per day, seven days per week, to verify the continued validity of any license or permit to carry a concealed handgun that has been granted by the issuing state;
(3) The other state agrees to grant the right to carry a concealed handgun to residents of West Virginia who have valid concealed handgun permits issued pursuant to this article in their possession while carrying concealed weapons in that state; and,
(4) The states agree to apprise one another of changes in permitting standards and requirements, to provide for a prompt reexamination of whether any adopted change in licensing or permitting standards negates the states' ability to continue with the reciprocity agreement.
(e) The West Virginia State Police shall maintain a registry of states with which the state of West Virginia has entered into reciprocity agreements on the criminal information network and make the registry available to law-enforcement officers for investigative purposes.
(f) Every twelve months after the effective date of this section, the West Virginia Attorney General shall make written inquiry of the concealed handgun permitting authorities in each other state as to: (i)Whether a West Virginia resident may carry a concealed handgun in their state based upon having a valid West Virginia concealed handgun permit; and (ii) whether a West Virginia resident may carry a concealed handgun in that state based upon having a valid West Virginia concealed handgun permit, pursuant to the laws of that state or by the execution of a valid reciprocity agreement between the states.
(g) The West Virginia State Police shall make available to the public a list of states which have entered into reciprocity agreements with the State of West Virginia.
<<<<<<<



So HB 3074 took the reigns from the Governor and gave them to the Attorney General in regards to reciprocity agreements, but it ALSO removed the language that said standards had to be SIMILAR for reciprocity and replaced it with " EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN the standards imposed by this article".

In fact, the WVCDL was opposed to it for that very reason (and others apparently) and requested a veto of it in a letter to the Governor (http://www.wvcdl.org/HB_3074_VetoRequestLetter.pdf ):
http://www.wvcdl.org/HB3074_VetoRequest.html

To quote them from their web page (http://www.wvcdl.org/HB3074.html ):
"Proposed W.Va. Code §61-7-6a(d) requires states to pass a 4-part test before they may establish reciprocity with West Virginia. We believe that this test is so strict that either the strict standards set in HB 3074 will not be followed or these standards will be followed and not one state will qualify. In other words, not only will HB 3074 not expand our reciprocity with other states, it will likely cause West Virginia to lose its existing reciprocity with Kentucky and Virginia. To be fair, the effect of this will be merely to leave Kentucky and Virginia residents unable to legally carry concealed handguns in West Virginia, as both states would recognize West Virginia licenses regardless of whether we recognize their licenses. "


So here's what I say to that. After getting a few messages telling me to shut up, stop quoting the law and don't illuminate the fact that we might not meet the standards of WV law or else I'll be to blame for PA losing WV reciprocity, let me just go on record as saying if that happens, it's not my fault, someone took an acceptable standard (similar) and replaced it with (equal to or greater than) and it 'twas not I. That I pointed it is of no real consequence, I didn't create the problem if there is one. I get so tired of being in the middle of this shit. I might post this on PAFOA since most of the messages giving me a hard time came as a result of my posting there. Only one request was polite out of all of them, and that was from Harry Schneider of the PSA. I disagreed with his position and request, but at least he wasn't a total jerk about it.

To which, Andy commented,

Andy comments:

From what you are describing, I don't know how you stomach that PAFOA crowd. What a bunch of jerks you describe. Does anyone really BELIEVE our opponents (i.e., everyone in government) are so unsophisticated that YOU (or I, if I was in your place) would be handing them an epiphany by (e.g.) pointing out inconsistencies between PA and WV law? I can never help wondering where such monstrous egos come from!

Seriously, I don't mind disagreement, but you're blatantly misquoting people (like we claim the MSM does to us all the time) to serve your own agenda. That's bullshit and it's not what I would expect from anyone on this site. Personally, that's about as low as you can get in a debate or discussion, it amounts to an outright lie when you twist and conceal the truth with liberally wordsmithing someone else's statements to smear or impugn their character and make that the focus of the debate. Not only is it, again, ad hominem, it's dishonest and disgusting. I would ask that you try not to do that in the future, I find it highly offensive, even if I'm not the person of interest (which, as others will see when they read further, I actually am).



.....continued.....

[NineseveN]

In addition, Barniskis has apostles who actively attempt to enlighten the people here at PAFOA. Here is how one such apostle describes his mission:

[i]“I'm a pretty regular poster on PAFOA.org, my goal in posting there has been to try and reach those that only know what our anointed chiefs tell them… and also trying to force everyone with an opinion on Constitutional or PA/Federal Law matters to actually do the unthinkable and cite their sources (half the time they cannot, because it doesn't exist). Anyway, I've made some headway with some folks new to the game, but that's my excuse for being so vocal there. The members are a pretty decent bunch of folks, even if they're not the most politically vicious or attuned”.

Oh, gee, that was none other than NineseveN, giving his report to Andy on his progress in reaching those lost souls at PAFOA that only know what their anointed chiefs tell them. How specially nice of him to condescend to us folks who are less politically attuned.

If you're going to quote me, don't deliberately butcher what I said. That's underhanded, and quite frankly, it's bullshit. I save those e-mails too, so for what I truly said, see below:

I'm a pretty regular poster on PAFOA.org, my goal in posting there has been to try and reach those that only know what our anointed chiefs tell them (i.e. we need this gun control law, the Republicans are our friends, the ACLU is the devil, Gun Rights are linked to keeping the brown people out of this country) and also trying to force everyone with an opinion on Constitutional or PA/Federal Law matters to actually do the unthinkable and cite their sources (half the time they cannot, because it doesn't exist). Anyway, I've made some headway with some folks new to the game, but that's my excuse for being so vocal there. The members are a pretty decent bunch of folks, even if they're not the most politically vicious or attuned, it's nice to talk to shooters without getting too deep into politics or law all the time. Though, I have a hard time staying away from the political and legal topics...being a glutton for punishment and all.

I then went on to say,

I guess my hot button in regards to PAFOA.org and other such purely public forums is that cheerleading there reaches people who arent even members. On a private list, it doesn't bother me so much (I wouldn't have bothered to say anything on a private list of Harry's aside from maybe disagreeing with him). There are so many people that just read what others with high post counts or a given title say and then take it as gospel. I don't care if someone disagrees with me, I just ask that they at least have the courtesy to be honest with themselves and not simply parrot the same,
tired old myths that have no heft to them (and that goes for those that I agree with as well). Opinion is one thing, but a misrepresentation of the facts just rubs me the wrong way, ESPECIALLY when it happens to me (which it does, like everyone else).

That was in response to a rather long discussion the last time one of you guys tried this smear crap (Whitefeather posting only a portion of a discussion in order to represent only one side of the issue). And I stand by what I said. I've said it here before, I think people know my aim here. We have had some amazingly wonderful discussions, some misconceptions have been reversed, a lot of misinformation has been taken out of circulation and a lot of semi-RKBA stances have shifted towards more rigid views...that is all a good thing. We have had many people here cite opinions that Open Carry is illegal, that you can be cited for doing it under the cover of many different charges, none of which apply (and some that don't even exist in this state such as "brandishing"). We've had discussions on mandatory training requirements, Vermont/Alaska-styled carry, assault weapons bans, where you can and cannot legally carry and the actual US and PA constitutions - all of those discussions included explanation and debate on some things that simply aren't true. People provide their sources and eventually, the truth wins out. This is a good thing, and for it to be my goal for being so vocal is not a terrible thing I would think, so I certainly won't back away from what I said. Maybe 100 or so people on this site are seemingly dedicated to the same thing, and oddly enough, those are the people on this site with the highest reputations and seem to be the most well-received. All of us don't agree on some aspects of the discussions here, but we can all generally agree on the facts of each matter...it's the little details in between that really ignites the discussions. None of this is bad, underhanded, dishonest or anything less than an admirable goal. We have attorneys, law enforcement officers, experts or people knowledgeable in a variety of fields and situations and people with amazing life experiences that all contribute to the same goal; to educate, to learn, to inspire and to become more effective politically without solely relying on so-called advocate groups to do all the work for us.

Again, if you're going to quote me, try not to be like the liberal media scum and butcher the quote to try and make it say what you want it to...also, context usually helps. Anything less is simply dishonest.

If Barniskis is attacking PAFOA just like every other coalition organization (he does on a regular basis), and his True Believers are actively proselytizing here, then he and his operation deserve discussion here.

Then have it be an honest discussion, you've engaged in nothing more than a less-than-honest smear campaign, again, something I wouldn't expect from this site. No one is attacking PAFOA, and to be fair, you guys have your own lists (and no, I won't be quoting from them in order to make you look bad, I don't do that, but you know exactly what I'm talking about, no one else needs to).

More importantly, PAFOA is about our civil rights, particularly our right to keep and bear arms. Barniskis has been waging a long term campaign to discredit the most effective PA pro-gun leaders, organizations, and legislators. The more effective someone becomes, the more viciously Barniskis attacks them. PAFOA, Rep Metcalfe, Kim Stolfer, and Harry Schneider are prime examples of the sort of targets Barniskis loves to fire at.

NineseveN’s disdain for Rep. Metcalfe, his constant refrain that “law is meaningless”, his constant fear mongering that our best RKBA groups and leaders are working behind closed doors to sell us out any day now; all these themes are copycatted from Andy Barniskis. NineseveN truly is a faithful apostle and True Believe for Andy Barniskis and his special brand of anarchy.

Considering HIS agenda here, I don’t believe NineseveN has the moral authority to be questioning my reasons for discussing Andyland, an important subject that affects everyone who is concerned about gun rights in Pennsylvania.[/size]

And yet you talk about discussion, but none of what you posted above is exactly true. I'm not here to specifically defend Andy Barniskis, but I don't recall ever offering up the thoughts that any particular RKBA groups are intentionally trying to sell us out (at least, on their terms), I have criticized some of the movements and dealings with a number of RKBA groups, PA-specific groups included. Criticism is one of the pitfalls of taking on a public face. Sometimes you step in it, sometimes it steps on you. That's the life of activists, lobbyists, politicians and public figures. People make mistakes, people have different ideas and different concerns, both sides unfortunately sling mud when and as it suits them. But you're making it out to be a sinister plot to destroy gun rights in this state when that's simply not accurate. What I suspect is that you guys like to control what gets discussed and how information comes out (wholly admitted to by Harry Schneider and many people just like yourself) and PAFOA.org represents a true grass roots movement that you cannot control, which dents the image of power that some groups hold, and that's a scary proposition for those people (which is why some of us here have been told not to post certain things unless we check with certain anointed chiefs first). That I didn't bow down to and kiss the ring with a promise to not post anything that wouldn't be approved of is cause to question my motives it seems. And now, the impression I get from some of your discussions is that you're worried that Andy is starting some sort of activism group, and so you must race to discredit him before that happens. It's sad, paranoid and delusional in my opinion, but you know, some people...

As for the apparent attempt to try and smear my character, I have news for you; while most of what Andy has said may be a mystery to the people here, I have nearly 2000 posts, and anyone is free to search them and see what I'm about. If they can find evidence that I have a particular disdain for Rep Metcalf (instead of a general mistrust for ALL politicians) or that I've fear-mongered anyone into anything, good for them...but I don't recall any of that and I'm not about to go deleting anything I've posted, so it's up to them to decide. But you go ahead and enjoy your crusade anyway.


As an aside, concerning the “apostle” stuff, for the record, Andy invited me to join his list based on a blog I used to write some time ago, his thoughts haven't really changed my overall viewpoints any more than some of the compelling arguments I've enjoyed on this site.


I'm very disappointed in you personally, I was given the impression that you were better than this. Go figure.

[Emptymag]

Wow. I just tried to read this thread...
Are your typing fingers bleeding as badly as my eyeballs are? (all of you)

[phillyd2]

For the love of God..somebody please stop this....

[Brick]

OKAY, personalities and organizational biases aside, I just want to point out one thing.

Grassroots organizations and communications are important. If you want to see how and why, take a look at the results of the 2006 U. S. House of Representatives election results. Especially for districts that tend to be more rural. Here's a few for consideration:

PA Dist. 10
Carney 108,832 Winner by a 6% margin (12,369)
Sherwood 96,463
(This is my district Bradford, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Lycoming, Montour and part of Susquehanna)

PA Dist.4
Altmire 130,480 Winner by 4% (9598)
Hart 120,882

PA Dist 8
Murphy 125,667 Winner by (1521)
Fitzpatrick 124,146
surpisingly Bucks, Mongomery and Philadelphia

The successful candidates won by only a few thousand votes in their districts, how much more important are those votes in races for seats in the Commonwealth's General Assembly, where winning or losing could be decided on a few hundred votes (or maybe the membership of a couple three gun clubs)?

So keep your head in the game, the idea is to defeat those who oppose our rights and we do that best by communicating with our fellows. You don't have to like each other, you don't have to have continuous agreement, Just remember, your opponents are the Cruzes, Frankels, & Evanses.

[Murf_The_Surf]

NineseveN, it’s obvious that your tactic is, if you can’t dazzle them with facts, baffle them with volume.

Posting this information has not been pleasant; however, over quite some time now, I’ve watched bricks thrown continuously at the firemen. The antis monitor Andy for anything they can use. Activists have had some of Andy’s more specious attacks, printed from his list, shoved in their faces in Harrisburg. Andy Barniskis is widely viewed as one of the most destructive individuals in PA RKBA.

In the past, Barniskis offered himself as the leader-spokesman of all Pennsylvania gun groups and he was rejected because of his underhanded scheming.

The agenda of Barniskis is to use whatever means are available to destroy the credibility of the grass roots leaders and legislators who have been blocking passage of ALL of Rendell's flagship gun control bills. Whatever Barniskis is scheming, he undoubtedly needs the passage of major gun control to panic the gun owners into accepting something that he is planning. Barniskis needs a Reichstag fire to panic the gun owners into accepting something he is planning.

I agree with everybody; this topic’s gone on too far. I’m done with it.