People want to live their own lives, not spend time trying to wade through internecine battles that they cannot affect in any case. No surprises there...
I'll agree that some of it is apathy but I will submit as well that a great deal of it is outright rejection. More folks are waking up to the reality that these "advocacy" groups have soaked up those donations without producing actual results. Indeed, they have realized that the NRA,as one example, is akin to the Republican Party - that they say one thing when seeking donations and then do quite the opposite once they get them.
It's not that folks don't care about the issue, they do more now than ever, it's that they have enough of being scammed by charlatan hucksters.
This pattern is going to continue. Just as many said they wouldn't vote for that twit Mitt Romney (because he is just a democrat in republican clothing) and then DIDNT, they are turning their backs on what I'll call the "mini-parties", or "tax free money laundering devices".
Fair enough. There have been some BABY steps the last five to six years BUT the FACT is that people want MEANINGFUL results. And they want them NOW.
NUTSHELLED - there is no more "I promise to do XYZ if you send those donations ". It's turning into "wake me up when you Produce something with all the money we ALREADY gave you"! This attitude is being directed at gubmint as well.
If one looks, one can see. Rather than mindlessly going through the donation motion, folks are spending that cash PREPARING for the crash that is resulting from the - moving the deck chairs around on the titanic". This "merger" is being seen as just that.
See it for what it is and call it for what it is.
People are losing confidence in petitioning for redress and ARE preparing to employ step two.
I've said as much as I can, "shared" where I can, and thrown this up on several message boards.
Not a damned peep. It's a very frustrating thing that pro-RKBA folks can be at their best when directed against a specific bill, yet utterly fall apart when confronted with a situation that'll affect said direction in the future.
Claire Wolfe linked to Bussjager's compromise suggestion, and I like it: http://www.bussjaeger.org/compromise.html
There may be no bigger lesson to be drawn from it than the fact that JPFO swiftly became irrelevant after Zelman died. Granted that good people have put a lot of work into it in the past few months, but how many average non-activist gun owners - and most gun owners are not activists - even know that yet?
For that matter, how many knew about JPFO in its heyday? Look, all the good things that have been said about JPFO are true. But the bad was interred with its bones. It was never one of the bigs. Most people - myself included, I confess - found Aaron Zelman difficult to work with. He was uncompromising, yes, and when dealing with opponents that's a good thing. Not always so much when dealing with people who are trying to contribute. He was quirky, frequently insufferable and not always right, and he was the only one making the decisions. His organization reflected those qualities, and it stayed small. When he died, for a while JPFO just sat there. Is it really any wonder that now, four years after his death, the number of people who care enough about it to sign a petition only number in the hundreds?
David Codrea has been pounding his usual drum about how this shows what a bunch of indifferent boobs gun owners are. Certainly there are fudds among us, but I really question how many of them even knew JPFO ever existed. They probably know just as little about SAF, or its internal ... issues. So why should we be surprised when few get worked up over a merger?
Point is, if you're not getting your message out it's not necessarily the fault of the audience.
"...if you're not getting your message out it's not necessarily the fault of the audience."
That's right, and I'm confident Aaron would agree. Sure, he cared about getting the message out. He just didn't care more about that, than he did about being the person he chose to be. It's a classic example of the distinction between Principle and Pragmatism, with a bit of egoism to boot.
9 comments:
People want to live their own lives, not spend time trying to wade through internecine battles that they cannot affect in any case. No surprises there...
I'll agree that some of it is apathy but I will submit as well that a great deal of it is outright rejection. More folks are waking up to the reality that these "advocacy" groups have soaked up those donations without producing actual results. Indeed, they have realized that the NRA,as one example, is akin to the Republican Party - that they say one thing when seeking donations and then do quite the opposite once they get them.
It's not that folks don't care about the issue, they do more now than ever, it's that they have enough of being scammed by charlatan hucksters.
This pattern is going to continue. Just as many said they wouldn't vote for that twit Mitt Romney (because he is just a democrat in republican clothing) and then DIDNT, they are turning their backs on what I'll call the "mini-parties", or "tax free money laundering devices".
Fair enough. There have been some BABY steps the last five to six years BUT the FACT is that people want MEANINGFUL results. And they want them NOW.
NUTSHELLED - there is no more "I promise to do XYZ if you send those donations ". It's turning into "wake me up when you Produce something with all the money we ALREADY gave you"! This attitude is being directed at gubmint as well.
If one looks, one can see. Rather than mindlessly going through the donation motion, folks are spending that cash PREPARING for the crash that is resulting from the - moving the deck chairs around on the titanic". This "merger" is being seen as just that.
See it for what it is and call it for what it is.
People are losing confidence in petitioning for redress and ARE preparing to employ step two.
I've said as much as I can, "shared" where I can, and thrown this up on several message boards.
Not a damned peep. It's a very frustrating thing that pro-RKBA folks can be at their best when directed against a specific bill, yet utterly fall apart when confronted with a situation that'll affect said direction in the future.
Claire Wolfe linked to Bussjager's compromise suggestion, and I like it: http://www.bussjaeger.org/compromise.html
Too bad there's not more traction here.
Well, that was a good way to get me to sign..LOL...
I signed the petition!
Well, no matter how I feel about the issue, ...
1) I am not a Jew
2) I have never donated to them
... so I don't particularly feel I should have a say in what they do, no matter how much I stand with them philosophically.
There may be no bigger lesson to be drawn from it than the fact that JPFO swiftly became irrelevant after Zelman died. Granted that good people have put a lot of work into it in the past few months, but how many average non-activist gun owners - and most gun owners are not activists - even know that yet?
For that matter, how many knew about JPFO in its heyday? Look, all the good things that have been said about JPFO are true. But the bad was interred with its bones. It was never one of the bigs. Most people - myself included, I confess - found Aaron Zelman difficult to work with. He was uncompromising, yes, and when dealing with opponents that's a good thing. Not always so much when dealing with people who are trying to contribute. He was quirky, frequently insufferable and not always right, and he was the only one making the decisions. His organization reflected those qualities, and it stayed small. When he died, for a while JPFO just sat there. Is it really any wonder that now, four years after his death, the number of people who care enough about it to sign a petition only number in the hundreds?
David Codrea has been pounding his usual drum about how this shows what a bunch of indifferent boobs gun owners are. Certainly there are fudds among us, but I really question how many of them even knew JPFO ever existed. They probably know just as little about SAF, or its internal ... issues. So why should we be surprised when few get worked up over a merger?
Point is, if you're not getting your message out it's not necessarily the fault of the audience.
"...if you're not getting your message out it's not necessarily the fault of the audience."
That's right, and I'm confident Aaron would agree. Sure, he cared about getting the message out. He just didn't care more about that, than he did about being the person he chose to be. It's a classic example of the distinction between Principle and Pragmatism, with a bit of egoism to boot.
Seems to me the writers of these various articles don't like Alan...and don't want him to take over Aaron's work.
Make your case more effectively b/c at this point....apparently most people don't care based on what they know.
Post a Comment