Every activist goes through ups and downs. As I noted on Twitter earlier today, simply the act of posting information relevant to sportsmen and hunters while encouraging people to meet with their lawmakers on Second Amendment issues got me called a Fudd. Because, you know, even mentioning the word hunting and guns apparently makes one a Fudd. Seriously, who needs enemies when we have our own people willing to scream traitor for even acknowledging the existence of other areas of interest in the shooting sports & gun movement?
But, then, things turned around. I started scoping out which MAIG mayors are up for election this year in our county. It turns out all of them are. Unfortunately, many haven’t been challenged in previous years, so that’s not great. But, when you find out one was not only challenged in his last election, but he also only won by 68 votes, that’s a pick-up opportunity! That’s like a happy dance because just a little bit of activism by a handful of gun owners could turn those numbers around if he has a good challenger again.
Anyone else have MAIG mayors who are on the ballot this year?
I was truly shocked to find out that the mayors of Phoenix, Tempe and Paradise Valley are on their list.
Time to change that!
Maybe one of us gun owners could vote six times just like that guy in Ohio did for Obama, then it would only take seven of us to achieve victory.
Keep up the good work and activism. The same people calling you a fudd probably aren’t writing letters and fighting for the 2nd amendment. Yet they’ll be the first ones to b$tch about any new regulations passed on them by their local or fed legislators. Ignore those people and keep up the good fight.
Mayor Glover of Shreveport LA isn’t up til 2014. He’s touchy about gun issues- certainly doesn’t want to look anti-gun, even while being a member of MAIG. He’s also defying the voters and city council about spending publicly raised donations for a city dog park (he wants to buy votes with those funds instead).
If someone will challenge him, I can’t imagine that a guy who’s demonstrably against guns and dogs will win in northwest Louisiana.
I would never call anyone who is actually doing something in the fight a Fudd, but I can appreciate where the disdain for the type comes from. In years past I’ve had hunter or competitor types in organizations I’ve belonged to, argue with me that we have to give a little ground and be reasonable on issues like magazine capacity, for the sake of our “good image.” It is frustrating enough to have the antis to fight, without getting resistance from the people you think you’re fighting for.
I’ve also had people of that type complain that our legislative reports went on too long, and vote to limit the reports to five minutes, regardless of what was going on in the legislative world. No such limits were ever proposed for reports on how much fun everyone had at last month’s cookie shoot, which truth be told, was exactly like every other month’s cookie shoot.
I am in the process of demonstrating for academic purposes how easy it is to get worked up over such things, but yeah, I can at least relate to people who become callers of “Fudd,” even though at the intellectual level I know we shouldn’t. :-)
That a mayor ran unopposed she be ENcouraging, because you should be able to rally support for and CHOOSE anyone you want to run against them. You will at least send a clear message that they will be held accountable for the stance they take, if not actually get them out of office.
Making concessions? If someone wants to maim, rape and kill you, but you don’t want them to do any of the above, which one of the three do you compromise on?
“Shall not be infringed”, “Shall NOT be infringed”, “SHALL NOT be INFRINGED!”!
If “shall not be infringed” were to be as vigorously defended as “abridging the freedom of speech”, then Eddie Eagle would be in every gub’ment preschool curriculum, ACLU would demand foodstamps be used to buy ammo, and every citizen issued a rifle long with his social security number!