NAGR is the enemy of gun rights in North Carolina

Status
Not open for further replies.
First, just because something is possible in the rules does not mean it is possible in reality. I had the Speaker Pro Tem on my Discharge Petition for the NC Jobs Bill in 2011 *AND* I had the necessary signatures, but in reality, the Speaker runs things and does WTF he wants.

Second, North Carolina does not allow off-topic amendments, and the Bill Sponsor must approve any amendment that changes the title. There is no appeal.
You force the vote anyway and challenge the ruling of the chair or move to suspend the rules. You'll lose but of course but either method will get you the roll call that is needed to see who is for and against Constitutional Carry. It's not rocket science.




The rest of your post isn't even worth reading, much less responding to.



So, are the two legislators you mentioned willing to stick their neck out for the cause of liberty, or not?
 
You force the vote anyway and challenge the ruling of the chair or move to suspend the rules. You'll lose but of course but either method will get you the roll call that is needed to see who is for and against Constitutional Carry. It's not rocket science.




The rest of your post isn't even worth reading, much less responding to.



So, are the two legislators you mentioned willing to stick their neck out for the cause of liberty, or not?

They do. Every day. While you are busy pounding your pud they are risking their necks.

And you still have zero clue how reality works. If the Bill Sponsor says, "No, I am not willing to change the Bill title" then there is no vote to force, because there is no vote, dumbass. Even if your contrived method were even possible in actual, you know, reality; spitting in the faces of your caucus will get you blackballed and back-benched.
 
spitting in the faces of your caucus will get you blackballed and back-benched.
And the truth finally come out... these guys are indeed apparently putting politics ahead of principle and are unilling to stand up against leadership because they care more about what their "Esteemed colleagues" think about them then actually moving the ball towards the goal. They don't want to be on the bad side of the establishment lulz.... I just never thought you of all people would be defending it.


However I always knew I'd get the real answer out of you eventually. And now I know exactly why NAGR is beating them up. Thank you for confirming it for me
 
Last edited:
This thread can be summed up in this one picture:

AofAXqt.png
 
And the truth finally come out... these guys are indeed apparently putting politics ahead of principle and are unilling to stand up against leadership because they care more about what their "Esteemed colleagues" think about them then actually moving the ball towards the goal. They don't want to be on the bad side of the establishment lulz.... I just never thought you of all people would be defending it.


However I always knew I'd get the real answer out of you eventually. And now I know exactly why NAGR is beating them up. Thank you for confirming it for me

aaand that's why the only things you have ever accomplished, are to take credit for the accomplishments of others.
 
aaand that's why the only things you have ever accomplished, are to take credit for the accomplishments of others.

If I remember correctly, he basically single handedly got Rand Paul elected

Collins will deny that of course, but that's just cus hes so humble
 
This thread gets an A+ for debate content but an F with being civil.

IMO, your position comes off best when you stick to facts and logic. Name calling and such weakens the discussion value and can divert attention from your valid points. I find this true even if you are responding to an attack.

Remember, we generally have the same goals but our experiences and values can give us different approaches to a problem. Disagreements in one area should not lead to bad blood.
 
This thread gets an A+ for debate content but an F with being civil.

IMO, your position comes off best when you stick to facts and logic. Name calling and such weakens the discussion value and can divert attention from your valid points. I find this true even if you are responding to an attack.

Remember, we generally have the same goals but our experiences and values can give us different approaches to a problem. Disagreements in one area should not lead to bad blood.

The shit started in post #17. I call it as I seez it....

You have to be able to raise money in order to be consistently effective.

Uh no. They pick very specific targets where they think they have a chance to achieve victory. They are also responsible for stopping the Toomey-Manchin gun control bill (which the NRA supported).

If they are setting up shop in NC it is because they think they have a chance to accomplish something.



It seems to me that you are just jealous someone who is professional is infringing in your fiefdom. You really should be welcoming the help.



There is no way for them to "divert" money from other groups... Seems like you somehow think some groups are entitled to money :rolleyes:

A few points...

- you should be glad you have help if you really care about the issues, but it sounds like you are jealous. Of course I know the real reason, you are still butthurt that Brannon's campaign didn't hire you.

- if a local group has been operating for 20 years and hasn't already passed Constitutional Carry, especially in a state like NC where it is achievable, then that group is obviously ineffective. This is how it normally is across the country, lots of the state level pro-gun groups are not run by full time professionals and dont know how to raise money or cause political pain, gotv, etc.

- just because a legislator is pro-gun doesn't mean that they are a good legislator. If they aren't willing to vote on pro-gun measures then they are not helping the cause. Only leaders are willing to introduce bills AND force recorded floor votes on these bills.




I do agree that his personality lends himself to earning that label sometimes.


LOL, no one is scamming anything from anyone. As someone who has raised money for them and worked for them, I can assure you that they are very frugal and use their money to achieve victories... places like Missouri, Mississippi, West Virginia, and others just to name a few. They are working on getting it passed in SD this year too.


If that is the case, then why haven't they passed Constitutional Carry? :rolleyes:

NAGR can pass it anywhere in less than 10 years (CA, NY, IL, MA, CT, RI excluded) and in most cases they can pass it in 4-6 years.


They are not trying to undo anyone's work. But if a legislator doesn't meet their exceptionally high standards, then yeah, they are going to give them some grief.

Off passing Constitutional Carry in other states. Congrats on your victories though, but you should be excited to have help. Again you are coming off as a whining kid here who doesn't want anyone else playing with his toys. Not to mention that your cussing is exceptionally immature and unprofessional.

As previously mentioned, you really shouldn't drink and post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top