GUNTALK.CLUB

News Related => LOCAL in CT News / Politics and Events. => Topic started by: Rockers809 on September 09, 2020, 07:57:57 PM

Title: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Rockers809 on September 09, 2020, 07:57:57 PM
Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post targeting state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest

By Daniela Altimari, Hartford Courant  3 hrs ago

A Connecticut gun rights group is condemning an “offensive and highly inappropriate” Facebook post shared by one of its executive board members that targeted state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest.

In the Facebook meme posted on the personal account of an official with the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, Gilchrest’s face is photoshopped on a woman’s body and she is surrounded by four Black men in their underwear and Gov. Ned Lamont holding a plastic fist labeled “socialism, do not lube.”

"The CCDL has become aware of an offensive and highly inappropriate meme forwarded by one of our committee members on his personal social media account,'' said Holly Sullivan, the president of the Connecticut Citizen’s Defense League. “The meme was not solicited by or associated with CCDL in any way, shape or manner, and we repudiate its content and offensive nature.”

The person who posted the meme, identified on Facebook as Jonathan Hardy, did not respond to a call seeking comment.

“As a woman, I am personally appalled by the implicit racial and sexual content of the meme directed at Rep. Jillian Gilchrest,'' Sullivan said. "Our organization is dedicated to protecting the respect and civil rights of all people regardless of sex, race, age, or other human characteristics. CCDL rejects and condemns the post as being in direct conflict with the views and values of our organization. We regret any offense this incident has caused Rep. Gilchrest and others, and will work to avoid any future such occurrences.”

Gilchrest, who routinely uses Facebook to communicate with her constituents and others interested in public policy, said a barrage of offensive, sexist and violent attacks have led her to reevaluate the benefits of social media.

"It’s getting uglier,'' Gilchrest said. The West Hartford Democrat said she viewed the social media platform as an effective tool to engage with constitutents and “have a respectful back and forth dialogue.” But, she added, "that has all gone out the window.''

Gilchrest lodged a complaint with Facebook to have the post removed, but was told it does not violate the platform’s community standards, she said.

A spokeswoman for Facebook told the Courant she is looking into the matter.

The political arena in 2020 is a rough place in general but for female elected officials, the attacks are often infused with sexism. While social media, with its promise of anonymity, has become an especially toxic place, the ugliness also spills into real life: at a recent rally in Fairfield to support local police, a member of the crowd yelled “shut up [c-word]” at Rep. Laura Devlin and Mayor Brenda Kupchick, according to several people at the event.

“We are living in dangerous times when political discourse is increasingly being replaced by hate and violence,” said Matthew Ritter, the House Majority Leader. “A difference of opinion does not give someone the right to harass and intimidate.”

House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz said that “running for office and serving our community is a responsibility each of us take very seriously.”

“We know that we will face opposition and are open to criticism. But, the sexist, disgusting attacks against one of our members is unacceptable.”

Gilchrest has been a target of trolls and critics since she introduced a bill to levy a 35% tax on ammunition, with the proceeds used to offset the cost of gun violence.

News stories about her proposal went viral and she received a barrage of angry emails and social media posts from across the nation.

“They’ve targeted me because of my gun violence prevention stance,'' she said. “That’s when these men--and its almost all men--first started commenting and they just haven’t left my page.”

Last month, a different Facebook user posted a doctored photo of Gilchrest in traditional kente cloth to criticize her support for a bill setting new accountability standards for police.

It is unclear what the current post was criticizing.

Gilchrest said she consulted with legal experts about pictures and comments posted directly to her official state representative page but was told that because the page is public, she cannot remove them
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: imahangtia on September 09, 2020, 09:24:47 PM
Pics or it didn't happen.

Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: SJK2 on September 09, 2020, 11:44:59 PM
Link to the post:

https://www.courant.com/politics/hc-pol-offensive-posts-jillian-gilchrest-20200909-su4zhhhxdffobnfb4e5tdpc4wy-story.html
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: imahangtia on September 10, 2020, 08:11:55 AM
Where is the damn pic?  I wanna see what the pearl clutching hysteria is about.

Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: WoodBurner on September 10, 2020, 08:38:27 AM
It's all fun and games when they are raping us but turn the tables and oh you can't do that. F them. Until we vote these tyrants out they will continue to put their jackboots on our throats.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: markmiela on September 10, 2020, 08:50:45 AM
Poor Jillian I bet she thought that people would welcome her with open arms and just allow her to attempt to restrict our rights and stomp on the constitution. Couldn’t happen to a nicer communist.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Rockers809 on September 10, 2020, 02:12:57 PM
Here's the image.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: sbhaven on September 10, 2020, 02:34:50 PM
Here's the image.
Pretty much what I figured the meme image would be. The underlying image meme has been used for many other memes.

It is though a sign of the times. And an indication of where we are currently. People post unflattering pictures of politicians all the time. Hell go back in history and look at what was posted about Lincoln and others even farther back. Bet the politicians outraged over this meme have no issues with the many unflattering ones posted about Trump or other Republicans.

While I can see why she'd be offended, fact is, she's a politician. She CHOSE to put her self into public, and should have thicker skin. People post stupid stuff all the time now. Stupid stuff like this stupid meme is no exception. Offensive stuff is posted all the time about Trump and his family, does she denounce any of it?

Like it or not there is an optics war being waged and currently the media is on the Democrats side. They will jump on any stupid meme (like this one) and use it as a club to batter all gun owners not just CCDL leadership or membership. Like it or not its the game Democrats play and which the media supports them on. They enact their oppressive anti rights, anti freedom policies, then cry victim status when the actual victims of the policy post memes or other things about them.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: imahangtia on September 10, 2020, 02:43:30 PM
Here's the image.


That's it?  All they hysteria over this?

If she was bent over with one guy with a huge d!ck banging her, and a line of others waiting for their turn then maybe she would have something to whine about.

The CCDL is apologizing?  What a bunch of pvssies.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: MrNuke on September 10, 2020, 04:06:15 PM
Funny how the article has to go explaining what the image is about.
Then it goes on to vilify the poster and what they 'think' the image stands for. Such utter BULLSHT.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Acesneights1 on September 10, 2020, 10:19:28 PM

That's it?  All they hysteria over this?

If she was bent over with one guy with a huge d!ck banging her, and a line of others waiting for their turn then maybe she would have something to whine about.

The CCDL is apologizing?  What a bunch of pvssies.
They are a joke. I took my stickers off and will never give them another dime. They have BLM supporters running thier FB page.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: MrNuke on September 10, 2020, 10:36:22 PM
They are a joke. I took my stickers off and will never give them another dime. They have BLM supporters running thier FB page.


Seriously?? CCDL?
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: sbhaven on September 11, 2020, 06:44:06 AM
Seriously?? CCDL?
It would appear the admin, or one of the admins, of their Facebook account (and their private account group) has a BLM image as their profile image.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Flatulence on September 11, 2020, 08:32:11 AM
It would appear the admin, or one of the admins, of their Facebook account (and their private account group) has a BLM image as their profile image.

Unfortunately, like many other organizations, they are not very good at a having a social media policy. This is not the first time a representative of the organization has posted stupid shit, but the first time I have seen it as an admin.

Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: sbhaven on September 11, 2020, 08:53:03 AM
The problem with saying you support BLM is that the actual organization, https://blacklivesmatter.com/ (https://blacklivesmatter.com/), is a straight up marxist organization. Its laughable that someone at a pro rights/pro 2A organization would want to support a group who has as one of their stated goals (https://blacklivesmatter.com/blms-whatmatters2020-goals-and-focus/ (https://blacklivesmatter.com/blms-whatmatters2020-goals-and-focus/)); "Commonsense Gun Laws". Which is hilarious since many gun laws were and still are intentionally racist and designed to limit minorities access to guns. If you donate to that website you are donating through ActBlue who funds Democrats. One of the people who claim's to be a co-founder of BLM flat out states she is a trained marxist (https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder-describes-herself-as-trained-marxist/ (https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder-describes-herself-as-trained-marxist/)). How many people who support BLM actually have read their "What We Belive" statment? (https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/)

I do wonder how many who put BLM signs in their yard, use it as a profile icon, fly the flag, or hang the signs on schools/businesses really understand what they are telling others they support? Do they even know the background or are they just supporting a slogan?
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Rockers809 on September 11, 2020, 11:08:50 AM
The focus should be on the big picture and supporting 2nd amendment rights.  I don't care if someone from CCDL supports BLM.  Are we going to apply a purity test, so if someone strays from the path, that organization and everyone involved is ostracized?  I think not.  That said, there was no need for CCDL to comment on the facebook post.  It was silly political satire that was not racist in any regard.  The facebook post is protected by the 1st amendment!

Rep Gilchrest (and State Senator Doug McCory) proposal to impose an excessive tax on ammunition would have no effect on crime.  It was a lazy idea that has been advocated by Bloomberg's Moms group.  Politicians like her sought out media attention with the ammo tax to score favors with the gun control antis.  If she was really interested in reducing criminals use of guns, she can go take a ride-a-long with the Hartford Police Department in the North End of the city.  Go take a walk and talk to people on the street on Albany Ave or Park Street.  NO, she would never do this, she would be terrified and afraid to interact with people in low income/crime ridden areas of Hartford.  She takes the easy route with zoom meetings with gun control groups from her ivory tower in West Hartford, who tell her want she wants to hear.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: sbhaven on September 11, 2020, 12:00:54 PM
I don't care if someone from CCDL supports BLM.  Are we going to apply a purity test, so if someone strays from the path, that organization and everyone involved is ostracized?
....
The facebook post is protected by the 1st amendment!
No we shouldn't apply a purity test, however we should sit up and take notice when someone supports a group who stated goals include "common sense gun control". We all know what that is code word for. I hope that person is just ignorant of who the BLM organization actually is. Otherwise you have a person who is administering social media platform for a pro gun rights organization, who also professes supports a group who seeks limit gun rights.

LOL that a private citizens Facebook post is protected by the 1st Amendment. Uh no. The 1st Amendment just like most of the rest apply to, and are restrictions on, the government not private companies. Where Facebook and others run into trouble is with Section 230 when it comes to when they censor content on their platforms.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: BishopofBling on September 11, 2020, 12:04:50 PM
The focus should be on the big picture and supporting 2nd amendment rights.  I don't care if someone from CCDL supports BLM.  Are we going to apply a purity test, so if someone strays from the path, that organization and everyone involved is ostracized?  I think not.  That said, there was no need for CCDL to comment on the facebook post.  It was silly political satire that was not racist in any regard.  The facebook post is protected by the 1st amendment!

Yep, gun rights really shouldn't be a partisan issue. I could care less about someone's political background if it means we can pass more legislation that gives people more gun rights.

Granted, IMO, that meme was pretty poor taste. I don't think it's racist but posting memes that suggests sex is pretty unprofessional if you're in that sort of position. If I were in any sort of respectable organization I'd refrain from those types of jokes.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: BishopofBling on September 11, 2020, 12:09:05 PM
No we shouldn't apply a purity test, however we should sit up and take notice when someone supports a group who stated goals include "common sense gun control". We all know what that is code word for. I hope that person is just ignorant of who the BLM organization actually is. Otherwise you have a person who is administering social media platform for a pro gun rights organization, who also professes supports a group who seeks limit gun rights.

Isn't it possible that that person supports BLM but disagrees with the 'common sense' gun laws approach? I don't think it's that big of a platform that BLM stands behind I'm pretty sure they just say that to win over liberals. Actual hardcore leftists like anarchists and communists which make up a bunch of the BLM rioters are pro-gun when it pertains to arming the working class. It's just once they take power they'll start restricting who can have guns.

I mean I'm pretty sure you'll find Republicans that are pro-abortion. For example, I typically vote Republican but I'm fine with universal healthcare for poor people. People got nuanced views you know?
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: NiCKZ on September 11, 2020, 12:24:52 PM
Anarchists are not leftists, anarchy by definition means lack of government, which no leftist wants. Anarchists are much closer to libertarians than the right.

You're thinking about the crust punks from the 80s that wore Anarchy "A's" on their denim jackets to be edgy.

Universal healthcare for the poor already exists, Medicare and Social Security. All socialist programs championed by the Republicans for years. By the way, if there was no government intervention in the healthcare system and taxing us to death, healthcare would be affordable for all.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: imahangtia on September 11, 2020, 01:51:06 PM
....By the way, if there was no government intervention in the healthcare system and taxing us to death, healthcare would be affordable for all.


Lawyers suck!  They are lower than pond scum.  They have destroyed this country over the past 50 years.

Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: BishopofBling on September 11, 2020, 02:01:25 PM
Anarchists are not leftists, anarchy by definition means lack of government, which no leftist wants. Anarchists are much closer to libertarians than the right.

You're thinking about the crust punks from the 80s that wore Anarchy "A's" on their denim jackets to be edgy.

Universal healthcare for the poor already exists, Medicare and Social Security. All socialist programs championed by the Republicans for years. By the way, if there was no government intervention in the healthcare system and taxing us to death, healthcare would be affordable for all.

Anarchists don't believe in hierarchy and believe in mutual cooperation and are leftists to the tee. All the old founders of anarchy were leftists like Proudhon and Kropotkin. Proudhon literally wrote a whole written piece called, "Property is theft!". Anarchists believe communism can be achieved without the state while Marxist-Leninists believe that you can use the state as a tool to suppress the bourgeoisie and achieve communism by using socialism as a stepping stone. Lenin thought that the state would simply wither away and become obsolete after socialism was built and capitalism was removed. You can read about it in his work titled, State and Revolution. Their end goals are the same which is a stateless, moneyless and classless society. So yes, Anarchists are leftists. The difference between anarchists and communists are the means of achieving that goal and their reasoning. I can go into more detail but I don't want to bore you.

The anarcho-capitalism that has surfaced recently is an oxymoron. Capitalism and state intervention run hand in hand because capitalists run the state. And hierarchy is inherit in capitalism because you have a boss and employee relationship.

As for medicare and SS, I think it's pretty inadequate and no I don't think no government intervention would mean cheaper healthcare as you are assuming that health insurance companies wouldn't run an oligarchy. Ironically enough, if you want proof that capitalists meddle in government to support their business practices look none other then at the healthcare and insurance industry which takes the spot of first and second industries that spend the most in lobbying.

https://www.investopedia.com/investing/which-industry-spends-most-lobbying-antm-so/#:~:text=Including%20health%2C%20property%2C%20and%20car%20insurance%20companies%2C%20along,their%20interests.%20In%202019%2C%20spending%20was%20%24155.3%20million.

I don't really side with either anarchists, communists, libertarians or anarcho-capitalists. They typically have a really skewed view of economics.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: NiCKZ on September 11, 2020, 03:53:07 PM

The anarcho-capitalism that has surfaced recently is an oxymoron. Capitalism and state intervention run hand in hand because capitalists run the state. And hierarchy is inherit in capitalism because you have a boss and employee relationship.

As for medicare and SS, I think it's pretty inadequate and no I don't think no government intervention would mean cheaper healthcare as you are assuming that health insurance companies wouldn't run an oligarchy. Ironically enough, if you want proof that capitalists meddle in government to support their business practices look none other then at the healthcare and insurance industry which takes the spot of first and second industries that spend the most in lobbying.

https://www.investopedia.com/investing/which-industry-spends-most-lobbying-antm-so/#:~:text=Including%20health%2C%20property%2C%20and%20car%20insurance%20companies%2C%20along,their%20interests.%20In%202019%2C%20spending%20was%20%24155.3%20million.

I don't really side with either anarchists, communists, libertarians or anarcho-capitalists. They typically have a really skewed view of economics.

Anarchy by definition means no government, there's no way of cutting it differently.

Capitalism is a system of voluntary transactions. For example, I want to buy your gun that you have for sale, you agree on a price, we trade the gun for the agree-upon price. The state is not voluntary, capitalism and the state do not run hand and hand. The state interjects itself in that transaction and says, you need to perform a background check and also withhold a sales tax and then remit the sales tax to the state by a date otherwise the Dept. of Revenue Services or ATF turns your life upside down because you didn't give them $100 from that gun sale or do a background check. This is where Statists lose every time, there is ABSOLUTELY no need for the state in that VOLUNTARY and mutually agreed upon transaction. Why do people agree to allow that to happen? I bought a gun from you, why is the state's hand in OUR pocket.

Capitalism isn't the practice of buying out politicians to gain the status of state-sanctioned monopoly; That's the definition of crony-capitalism. The issue arises when the state forces the little guys, that aren't friends with the politicians, to jump through hoops otherwise someone no-knock raids your home/business and shoots your dog. Without state enforcement, crony-capitalism is no different than a networking group or a vertically/horizontally integrated business, there will ALWAYS be another option to choose from. Crony-capitalism means nothing without state enforcement.

Anarcho Capitalism is the belief that there is no need for state coercion in a voluntary transaction, a system based on if you're okay with getting paid this much and I'm okay paying you this much, then we are square. The state doesn't need to be a part of it, the state doesn't need to be a part of anything. I bet the next line is going to be 'muh roads', 'without the state, what about the roads?' For that, a photo of New York City, circa 1905, before the Federal, state, SS, Med, etc. taxes we pay today. If there's a need, a capitalist will fill it.
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Zefzv_nkiy8/VUdXOXxvuEI/AAAAAAABe_w/CQZ7XOTA1G0/s1600/New%2BYork%2C%2B1900s%2B(2).jpg)
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: BishopofBling on September 11, 2020, 05:23:33 PM
Anarchy by definition means no government, there's no way of cutting it differently.

Yes, and what I'm saying is that the end goal of both communists and anarchists is no government. I really recommend reading the ABC of Communism, it's available for free and it is probably the best work to give the basics on what Marxism-Leninism is about. For Anarchism, Conquest of Bread is pretty good and also free.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1920/abc/index.htm

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-conquest-of-bread.pdf

I'll just list some of my qualms with libertarianism/anarcho-capitalism and this will address your points.

1) Transactions aren't done in a vacuum and are not all voluntary

2) Free markets are impossible

3) Crony Capitalism is what happens when you have unfettered capitalism

The state should be able to interject in certain transactions because not all transactions are voluntary. For example, I get worried when people think prostitution should be legal because it's voluntary but, then you look at who become prostitutes in legal countries in Europe and the vast majority of them are women from poorer countries and even though it is 'legal' they have limited options and are exploited. Also the worker and boss role is not voluntary, people work because they need to eat it's why people are more scared of losing their jobs than bosses are of hiring workers. A worker is very replaceable the only exception being if you're highly specialized and skilled but those people are exceptions to the rule. The unemployment rate is a dagger over a worker's mind and I know of many people who would love to switch careers but cannot because the job market is so bleak.

Also, you're making it seem like that transaction taking place is the same thing as two neighbors trading peaches for cash. You're selling a gun; there needs to be some sort of background check system in place so I know I'm not selling it to some convicted felon and those things cost money so we give the state some money to run those services. Second, taxes are fine, people will whine and complain about taxes but some are needed to pay for certain things that a free market cannot provide such as roads or public transit. Certain costs are way too high for any company to start so the government is able to finance these things. Or if the company does start it, you run the risk of them being a monopoly and charging crazy high fees for tolls for public roads or rail. Taxes become a problem when the government uses them for corrupt purposes or they are extremely inefficient with them. And trust me, a local monopoly isn't any better; have you tried canceling cable?

The paragraph above relates to what I'm going to say now, free markets are impossible, there can never ever be a free market. There are only two industries that are close to a free market. Agriculture and stocks, that's about it and no it's not because of government intervention, it's actually because it's physically impossible. To have a free market you need thousands of sellers and millions of buyers and the transaction have to be easy. Also, the marginal cost to produce a good has to be the same as it's price. I'll use an example, odds are you only have one option for an electric company in your area, it's not because the government says you can only have one electric company, it's because you cannot cover the whole sky with electric wires from countless electric companies. It's impossible to have a bunch of electric companies competing in your area filling up the streets with their own company poles and wires. So you have one electric company locally and the government puts regulations on them to prevent them from overcharging you.

Crony capitalism is the natural progression of unfettered capitalism. This is why I have a problem with libertarians, because free markets are impossible then naturally you'll have some companies rise to the top, think Standard Oil. Those guys at the top will stomp out any competition which screws over consumers. That's not caused by the government. Now it CAN be caused by the governments if the government is incredibly corrupt and accepts bribes from monopolies but naturally, a government should encourage competition that's where anti-trust laws come into play. Just because you eliminate government doesn't mean all the problems of 'crony capitalism' will go away. They won't. Depending on the industry there may not be another option to choose from.

As for the whole, the state isn't voluntary, it most certainly is, it's why we have elected officials. We vote for representatives and they should in theory vote for legislation that we support on our behalf. Just because YOU don't want to pay taxes or fees doesn't mean you shouldn't. I see this all the time with groups like sovereign citizens, apparently traffic laws don't apply to them but they should still be allowed to use public roads lmao. Or how conservatives love to support Bundy who owed the federal government over a $1 million in fees for trespassing and overgrazing. How come this guy can exploit resources that we support with our tax dollars? Oh yeah I forgot, the law shouldn't apply to him because it's unfair well boo hoo. That's like me using public roads to operate my business but refusing to pay my fair share of taxes so instead I let other tax payers foot the bill. Or if I opened up a private range on public lands and charged people to shoot then let the government clean up all the trash and brass left behind by my patrons.

Maybe they had private roads in NYC, but guess what? They got rid of them because they made no money. The dividends paid to investors were low. Private investors later gave the road to the government once they recoup their investments because they were more concerned about increased traffic flow which boosted commerce in the area.

Now generally speaking, if an industry has lots of competition then a hands off approach is a great thing for the government as the market will regulate itself. But, most industries don't lend themselves to that so there needs to be varying degrees of government regulation depending on industry. For example, you don't really need to prevent restaurants from overcharging as there are so many restaurants and the barrier of entry into the market is low.

I can also go into why taxes and social services are necessary as well but I think I've written enough.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Acesneights1 on September 11, 2020, 07:15:26 PM

Seriously?? CCDL?
Yup.
And SB nailed it. If you go to the admins personal FB page they are 100% BLM. Even thinks music theory is racist. Funny, was a musician for many years, played with many different people and always found it to be unifying not racist. This person is not just a member, they are an admin. If that person had a KKK instead of BLM would they still be on that page and as an admin no less ? I peeled my stickers off and they won’t get another dime from me and I joined up when they were small and unheard of. Was standing in line to testify at SB1160  behind Scott Wilson and he told me about it. Signed up on my phone. Too bad.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Wrongthink on September 11, 2020, 11:33:02 PM
I can't think of a single thing the CCDL has accomplished. Their admin being a BLM (the organization) supporter is just icing on the cake. The unfortunate truth is we have no real gun group with any power in this State, so I just direct any contributions I make to the GOA.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: sbhaven on September 12, 2020, 08:41:40 AM
I can't think of a single thing the CCDL has accomplished. Their admin being a BLM (the organization) supporter is just icing on the cake. The unfortunate truth is we have no real gun group with any power in this State, so I just direct any contributions I make to the GOA.
It should be noted they have had a win recently by getting a court to issue a restraining order against Red Ned's block on processing fingerprints for pistol permits.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202.70.0.pdf (https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202.70.0.pdf)

And they are keeping the challenge to CT's AWB alive.

CCDL Files Suit in the US District Court
https://www.ccdl.us/ccdl-files-suit-in-the-us-district-court/ (https://www.ccdl.us/ccdl-files-suit-in-the-us-district-court/)

I do not know that admin nor see much about their views other than a very limited Facebook profile that includes the BLM profile pic and with one entry that will raise some people's eyebrows; Music Theory's White Racial Frame (https://musictheoryswhiteracialframe.wordpress.com/). Everyone's entitled to their own views. However, if they support BLM's position on "common sense gun laws" while at the same time are the admin of a pro 2A state level gun group social media account. That raises some questions.
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: WoodBurner on September 12, 2020, 04:04:48 PM
So CCDL is the local version of the NRA?
Title: Re: Gun group condemns 'offensive and highly inappropriate’ Facebook post
Post by: Acesneights1 on September 13, 2020, 08:36:49 PM
It should be noted they have had a win recently by getting a court to issue a restraining order against Red Ned's block on processing fingerprints for pistol permits.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202.70.0.pdf (https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202/gov.uscourts.ctd.139202.70.0.pdf)

And they are keeping the challenge to CT's AWB alive.

CCDL Files Suit in the US District Court
https://www.ccdl.us/ccdl-files-suit-in-the-us-district-court/ (https://www.ccdl.us/ccdl-files-suit-in-the-us-district-court/)
100%


I do not know that admin nor see much about their views other than a very limited Facebook profile that includes the BLM profile pic and with one entry that will raise some people's eyebrows; Music Theory's White Racial Frame (https://musictheoryswhiteracialframe.wordpress.com/). Everyone's entitled to their own views. However, if they support BLM's position on "common sense gun laws" while at the same time are the admin of a pro 2A state level gun group social media account. That raises some questions.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2020, SimplePortal