| Author | Post |
|---|
cato
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 1607 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 17th, 2009 12:40 am |
|
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=163216
There is a jury trial coming so lets help Theseus and get that war chest built! Please show your support!
Support UOC? A simple challenge
There has been a bit of grief on this forum from those that support UOC right now and those of us counseling that it is premature to do it too often on one's own at this time.
Here is my challenge. One of the UOC communities' own is about to face a jury trial for supposedly violating the school zone restriction. CGF has signed up to facilitate donations earmarked to Theseus for use in his defense. I also happen to know that donations through CGF to Theseus's defense have been pretty anemic.
I want those of you who support UOC at this time to post in this thread if you've donated $20 or more.
If you haven't donated I want to know why you are willing to UOC at this time, place other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation, but yet aren't willing or able to donate $20 or more to make sure that Theseus' case doesn't become more bad precedent in the courts for everyone.
You can donate here. Paypal at that link automatically marks the donation (via Paypal or Credit Card) as for Theseus. If you choose to instead mail a check/billpay/postal money order to the address, just put a note on it or in the envelope that it is for Theseus' defense.
-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation
DONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon 
Ultima Ratio Liberarum
|
cato
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 1607 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20th, 2009 05:22 pm |
|
btt
artwork by oleg volk:
Attached Image (viewed 271 times):
 Last edited on Fri Mar 20th, 2009 05:32 pm by cato
|
fighting_for_freedom
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20th, 2009 05:51 pm |
|
By the way, Cato.... I don't think I've seen anywhere - it's possible I just missed it.... when IS Theseus' trial? I'd like to keep my eye on the news outlets to see if anybody prints anything. And do you know if it's open to the public and if anybody is being allowed to show up and support him?
Just wondering, obviously I'm a little far a way to be there, but hey, if it's going to be a couple of months down the road before his trial, I may actually be in Cali by then.
P.S. Just sent a modest donation, I'm sorry it couldn't be more. If work picks up again and I get a couple of jobs to drywall, I'll be sure to send whatever I can.
P.S.S. In regards to Mr. Hoffman's request that people post if they've donated more than 20 dollars - (I take it this has something to do with seeing how much support UOC has within its own community?) -yes, my donation was more than twenty bucks.
Last edited on Fri Mar 20th, 2009 06:03 pm by fighting_for_freedom
|
flintlock tom
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20th, 2009 06:28 pm |
|
If you haven't donated I want to know why you are willing to UOC at this time, place other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation, but yet aren't willing or able to donate $20 or more to make sure that Theseus' case doesn't become more bad precedent in the courts for everyone.
Gene, since you ask:
I am willing to UOC at this time because I disagree with your risk/benefit assessment of UOC.
I have donated to Theseus' defense fund because the successful defense of his case benefits us all.
Oh, and by the way, every step CGF takes puts "other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation", because it won't always go the way you hope.
|
demnogis
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20th, 2009 07:37 pm |
|
I just sent a donation of $25. I know it's not a lot, but it's all I can spare at this time.
Best of luck to you Theseus. If possible, maybe he could post a date/time/location so a few of us could make an appearance in support.
Last edited on Fri Mar 20th, 2009 07:45 pm by demnogis
|
Sons of Liberty
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 06:26 am |
|
| If it was me having to defend myself, I know I would be putting out a lot more money. I donated $100. I hope Theseus gets a favorable outcome.
|
AlanR
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 06:58 am |
|
I donated a little more than $20 a few days ago. (Not posted in the CalGuns thread 'cause I can't remember my login there.)
|
hoffmang
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 15 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 07:04 am |
|
flintlock tom wrote: If you haven't donated I want to know why you are willing to UOC at this time, place other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation, but yet aren't willing or able to donate $20 or more to make sure that Theseus' case doesn't become more bad precedent in the courts for everyone.
Gene, since you ask:
I am willing to UOC at this time because I disagree with your risk/benefit assessment of UOC.
I have donated to Theseus' defense fund because the successful defense of his case benefits us all.
Oh, and by the way, every step CGF takes puts "other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation", because it won't always go the way you hope.
CGF makes moves that have a very low risk of bad legislation and we don't rely upon hope to stop bad legislation from occuring. UOC requires quite a lot of hope.
You'll note that CGN and CGF's moves have actually created good legislation. UOC?
-Gene
|
MudCamper
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 07:09 am |
|
hoffmang wrote: flintlock tom wrote: If you haven't donated I want to know why you are willing to UOC at this time, place other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation, but yet aren't willing or able to donate $20 or more to make sure that Theseus' case doesn't become more bad precedent in the courts for everyone.
Gene, since you ask:
I am willing to UOC at this time because I disagree with your risk/benefit assessment of UOC.
I have donated to Theseus' defense fund because the successful defense of his case benefits us all.
Oh, and by the way, every step CGF takes puts "other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation", because it won't always go the way you hope.
CGF makes moves that have a very low risk of bad legislation and we don't rely upon hope to stop bad legislation from occuring. UOC requires quite a lot of hope.
You'll note that CGN and CGF's moves have actually created good legislation. UOC?
-Gene
We're all on the same side. Please please play nice.
|
hoffmang
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 15 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 07:12 am |
|
MudCamper wrote:
We're all on the same side. Please please play nice.
Mud,
I fully realize that we're on the same side, but It's not clear to me that Flintlock Tom is on either of our sides.
-Gene
|
pullnshoot25
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 07:33 am |
|
hoffmang wrote: flintlock tom wrote: If you haven't donated I want to know why you are willing to UOC at this time, place other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation, but yet aren't willing or able to donate $20 or more to make sure that Theseus' case doesn't become more bad precedent in the courts for everyone.
Gene, since you ask:
I am willing to UOC at this time because I disagree with your risk/benefit assessment of UOC.
I have donated to Theseus' defense fund because the successful defense of his case benefits us all.
Oh, and by the way, every step CGF takes puts "other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation", because it won't always go the way you hope.
CGF makes moves that have a very low risk of bad legislation and we don't rely upon hope to stop bad legislation from occuring. UOC requires quite a lot of hope.
You'll note that CGN and CGF's moves have actually created good legislation. UOC?
-Gene
Hey fellow OCers, there are definitely two sides to this issue and each side requires a lot of thought and preparation.
I know that the OC movement has been good for getting the word out to gun owners and enthusiasts everywhere but seriously, we are still very much in enemy territory. Gene is right about all of the legal proceedings that are happening and there is a master plan with a great deal more finesse in play. OCing, on the other hand, is beneficial but still in a brute force stage. There is no OC fund here in California and the OC movement isn't really state-specific. We need to look to the interests of Californians, by Californians in order for our rights to get put back together. The interest of and by Californians can be seen in that of the CGF on CGN.
Do not take this as me tryng to get you guys down or anything, as we have not yet even begun to fight, so to speak. The OC movement has been really good in my eyes, especially in San Diego (not to be conceited or anything  ). BUT, without good case law, which is the direct goal of CGN and CGF, we can really go nowhere.
Don't let the bad guys get the upper hand. Let's get Theseus off the hook and we will all work towards getting our rights back.
United we stand, divided we fail. GIVE THEM NOTHING!
CARRY ON!
-N8
|
pullnshoot25
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 07:34 am |
|
Sorry, dupe post.
Last edited on Sat Mar 21st, 2009 07:35 am by pullnshoot25
|
flintlock tom
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21st, 2009 11:02 pm |
|
hoffmang wrote: MudCamper wrote:
We're all on the same side. Please please play nice.
Mud,
I fully realize that we're on the same side, but It's not clear to me that Flintlock Tom is on either of our sides.
-Gene
flintlock tom wrote:Demnogis,
It is not just about the money. The folks at CalGuns.net have a philosophical and strategic objection to what we are doing. Check out their postings over there and behold the contempt in which they hold us and the vehemence with which they express it.
If it were just about the money they would have simply said "the focus of our efforts at this time is limited to cases which, in our view, will have the greatest effect on legislative reform."
And just because they are not supporting our efforts, does not mean we cannot support theirs. I sent a donation to support the case for Theseus and again when the D.C. lawsuit was filed.
Gene,
If it's truly not clear to you then you're just not paying attention, or you're being intentionally insulting.
|
hoffmang
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 15 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22nd, 2009 04:48 am |
|
flintlock tom wrote:
Gene,
If it's truly not clear to you then you're just not paying attention, or you're being intentionally insulting.
flintlock tom wrote
Oh, and by the way, every step CGF takes puts "other pro-gunners at risk of bad legislation", because it won't always go the way you hope.
Tom,
What looks clear to me that you are close minded and want the strategy to be your way or no way. This thread is not my only evidence of that.
Can you explain to me what CGF has done that has put other pro-gunners at the risk of bad legislation? Don't forget that the Attorney General has told the BoF that it will not be supporting new legislation.
Do you think the image that we want the non gun owners to have of pro gunners should be angry and impulsive or calm and cool?
-Gene
|
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22nd, 2009 08:28 am |
|
I think in this case Gene you might be a slight bit off.
I have seen nothing in Flint's comments that dictates he is enemy to either cause. If Flints comments suggest he is not supportive of either than it seems to me as if you would be saying that the goals of OCDO and CalGuns are in disagreement with each other.
I believe from even the briefest of conversations with you this is not to be the case. Let's not try and make it a CalGuns vs OCDO fight. . . Although OCDO may want XX change now, it doesn't mean that we don't appreciate the help of CalGuns.
We do however dislike the treatment that some select people give us and I believe that is what Flint was talking about.
|
hoffmang
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 15 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22nd, 2009 08:41 am |
|
I am a bit off. I reviewed a thread where I had remembered Tom handling something differently and it was my memory, not Tom's posts, that were incorrect. My apologies Tom.
However, I do want to not back away from my point that CGF works very hard to make sure the cases and challenges we bring, as well as the lines we push are likely to either not create legislation, or create good legislation.
We also don't ask folks to take risks we will not back. That's one thing that troubles me about open carry.
-Gene
|
cato
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 1607 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 22nd, 2009 07:19 am |
|
| btt
|
stuckinchico
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 01:48 am |
|
Honestly I support legally carrying a firearm. It doesn't make a difference to me as long as it is done legally. Im Against illegally carrying. Criminals comes to mind. I dont really like eating pavement, But as long as it is the only way that i can legally carry So be it. I will continue to support anyway I can to the public.
Honestly I wish that the people on Calgun that run their soup coolers against open carry. would step out and actually do it. Then they have the right to run there mouth. OC IS NOT EASY!!! I had an officer injure my arm during a take down. ANY ONE WITH A CCW can you say that? I complied!!!
I have a good feeling that I know ow Susan B Anthony must have felt
Last edited on Tue Jun 30th, 2009 12:56 am by stuckinchico
|
stuckinchico
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 30th, 2009 01:00 am |
|
My apoligizes to those who read my unedited version SOmetime my MArine corps programmed brain takes over
|
stephenruckle
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 18 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 01:41 am |
|
Donated $20
|
Current time is 01:54 am | Page: 1 2   |
|
