Ryan Busse. Anyone?

[Gerald Martin]

It’s also entirely possible for a persons views to change drastically over the course of a career. I’ve certainly experienced this.

To say someone can’t be trusted because of the field they work in is simply disingenuous. Some of us have walked a tightrope for years of advocating change within our scope of employment.

@JLS, I agree with this.^^^^^
A thoughtful person often sees patterns of harmful behavior, practices, or attitudes among personnel within their field of profession or vocational calling.

Attempts to call attention to those areas are often not appreciated by those who engage in the behavior. Attempts to ignore criticism, marginalize the one criticizing, ostracism, character slander and untrue accusations often follow.
In the rare cases that introspection and growth are welcomed as part of the culture of an organization, criticism can produce positive change and a well intentioned person who criticizes is appreciated.

Far too often the criticism touches on areas of insecurity or behavior so deeply entrenched within the community that it’s easier to destroy the one pointing out the problems than it is to work towards solving the problems.

The problems don’t go away even if the person pointing them out is destroyed and silenced.

When contention reaches critical mass the ones who chose to ignore criticism and refuse change are usually on the receiving end of having “solutions” dictated to them by their adversaries. The solutions might not actually solve the problem, but because the ones who ignored criticism refused to participate in bringing solutions or be seen as willing to work to solve contention, they are refused a seat at the table.

Like it or not, gun violence is a a major factor that will affect everyone’s 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.

@Sytes referenced a traumatic event as being probable in influencing @RyanBusse to move in the direction he did. If so, that doesn’t negate the validity of his criticism.

My wife and I have made life altering changes and associations for the sake of our kids because of traumatic events in our former community. In our own lives,I know a bit of the resolve and determination and the length of sacrifice a parent will undergo to never willingly expose their children to avoidable trauma.

I watched the horror and anguish of a co-worker as he took the call that his son was dead as a result of a series of poor choices in association and actions and tragic consequences. I saw the hell that they have endured in the past several years since those events.

Seeing that woke me up to some of the challenges my family faced and gave me courage and determination to make changes I knew were necessary and overdue.

I can only imagine how parents of children killed in school shootings or street violence feel about the weapons and people who make them available and use them. I can guarantee you some of those parents are at least if not more invested in doing whatever they can to bring change in the way they think will help solve gun violence, as 2nd Amendment advocates are about protecting their rights.

It doesn’t matter whether you think their solutions will work or not. They, and organizations they form are going to bring change to the laws that regulate gun ownership in America.

If criticism about the attitudes, actions, and business practices of gun manufacturers and owners from a gun owning former “industry insider” is uncomfortable and inconvenient, then by all means ignore that criticism and the one who brings it. That won’t change problems in our society that are way bigger than @RyanBusse and will continue to fester long after he’s faded from the public eye.

 

[Sytes]

Be cautious of #1, it sounds great, but in reality it doesn't pan out the way you might wish it would. WA attempted to "close the loop" and the result is that I can no longer lend a gun to a anyone, be them a close friend, coworker, or family member to go hunting without going down and dropping $40-60 on a background check and transfer paperwork. It severely hinders mentoring.

That's interesting! I never knew. I've always opposed the, "loophole" though your comment sheds new light - Makes me question whether it's a loophole or not, from your experience.

***********

As for experiences - life. Social media soapboxes are a dime a dozen. More power to a person who's perspectives shared via experiences has the platform to express his point of view. The challenge are the blind sheep that follow along. Example: Gun Show "Loop Hole". Sheesh, thanks Neffa! Now I'm off to better understand what I basically gathered from the tree rounds (sub: soap box) of camp fire chatter and a bit of LEO banter though never really personally dug into it.

Life is full of experiences for everyone. The pulpit or soap box is the bull's horn of the past.

 

[Irrelevant]

That's interesting! I never knew. I've always opposed the, "loophole" though your comment sheds new light - Makes me question whether it's a loophole or not, from your experience.

***********

As for experiences - life. Social media soapboxes are a dime a dozen. More power to a person who's perspectives shared via experiences has the platform to express his point of view. The challenge are the blind sheep that follow along. Example: Gun Show "Loop Hole". Sheesh, thanks Neffa! Now I'm off to better understand what I basically gathered from the tree rounds (sub: soap box) of camp fire chatter and a bit of LEO banter though never really personally dug into it.

Life is full of experiences for everyone. The pulpit or soap box is the bull's horn of the past.

JLS pointed out that the WA loop hole to the loop hole is actually bigger than I thought... as in it's not quite a difficult to loan a gun to a friend for a hunt. It's still not as easy as it used to be be, but it doesn't have to require an FFL in every case.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Be cautious of #1, it sounds great, but in reality it doesn't pan out the way you might wish it would. WA attempted to "close the loop" and the result is that I can no longer lend a gun to a anyone, be them a close friend, coworker, or family member to go hunting without going down and dropping $40-60 on a background check and transfer paperwork. It severely hinders mentoring.

Yep, that's Washington State Legislature for you. Good intentions regarding the gun show loophole resulted in building a Chinese wall to close a little loophole.
That does not mean other states would come up with such radical solutions. Moderation is the key to gain listeners' attention from the "soapbox".

Currently we can count on Montana to pass some laws to create less accountability and to encourage unsafe firearms practices.

 

[hossblur]

@JLS, I agree with this.^^^^^
A thoughtful person often sees patterns of harmful behavior, practices, or attitudes among personnel within their field of profession or vocational calling.

Attempts to call attention to those areas are often not appreciated by those who engage in the behavior. Attempts to ignore criticism, marginalize the one criticizing, ostracism, character slander and untrue accusations often follow.
In the rare cases that introspection and growth are welcomed as part of the culture of an organization, criticism can produce positive change and a well intentioned person who criticizes is appreciated.

Far too often the criticism touches on areas of insecurity or behavior so deeply entrenched within the community that it’s easier to destroy the one pointing out the problems than it is to work towards solving the problems.

The problems don’t go away even if the person pointing them out is destroyed and silenced.

When contention reaches critical mass the ones who chose to ignore criticism and refuse change are usually on the receiving end of having “solutions” dictated to them by their adversaries. The solutions might not actually solve the problem, but because the ones who ignored criticism refused to participate in bringing solutions or be seen as willing to work to solve contention, they are refused a seat at the table.

Like it or not, gun violence is a a major factor that will affect everyone’s 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.

@Sytes referenced a traumatic event as being probable in influencing @RyanBusse to move in the direction he did. If so, that doesn’t negate the validity of his criticism.

My wife and I have made life altering changes and associations for the sake of our kids because of traumatic events in our former community. In our own lives,I know a bit of the resolve and determination and the length of sacrifice a parent will undergo to never willingly expose their children to avoidable trauma.

I watched the horror and anguish of a co-worker as he took the call that his son was dead as a result of a series of poor choices in association and actions and tragic consequences. I saw the hell that they have endured in the past several years since those events.

Seeing that woke me up to some of the challenges my family faced and gave me courage and determination to make changes I knew were necessary and overdue.

I can only imagine how parents of children killed in school shootings or street violence feel about the weapons and people who make them available and use them. I can guarantee you some of those parents are at least if not more invested in doing whatever they can to bring change in the way they think will help solve gun violence, as 2nd Amendment advocates are about protecting their rights.

It doesn’t matter whether you think their solutions will work or not. They, and organizations they form are going to bring change to the laws that regulate gun ownership in America.

If criticism about the attitudes, actions, and business practices of gun manufacturers and owners from a gun owning former “industry insider” is uncomfortable and inconvenient, then by all means ignore that criticism and the one who brings it. That won’t change problems in our society that are way bigger than @RyanBusse and will continue to fester long after he’s faded from the public eye.

And their it is.

Guys like myself who look at the nonsense groups like Gifford's put out, just aren't sympathetic, or lack in empathy.

Why, if we just weren't so hard hearted we would go along with whatever is dictated to
us.

It's "for the children" after all, that I should give up my right to protect my children in my home.

But more directly. Buzz words.

I keep going back to it, no one can define it.

GUN CULTURE.

A guy like Busse who apparently wants to play on both sides, hasn't defined it.

If it's for Gifford's it means all us wacko gun nuts wanting Sherman Tanks and full auto 50 cal.

But on Hunt Talk, it's "I have more guns than I can count".

Even further. Which guns are we banning?

My DPMS because it's an assault rifle? Or my British .303, which was actually used to assault Germans?

Are we going after the detachable mags? And where do we draw the line? If 10 is acceptable, is that because we didn't care about the 9 people shot?

And who gets to decide? The FBI, who had no problem putting a bullet in Randy weavers son and wife? The ATF that torched the Branch Dividians? Perhaps the Department of Justice that gave sniper rifles to El Chapo? Maybe the fellas reading all this at Camp Williams here in Utah collecting all of our meta data?

Ya. The conversation became more militant. But the NRA, needed only read the newspaper out loud, they didn't need fiction writers.

I don't believe for one second, that someone who is capable of walking into a school and mowing down innocent kids, will suddenly not be a pyscho if I don't have an AR.

If that could be true, you can have both of mine

 

[BigHornRam]

This nut used a 9 mil glock. Thankfully he was a poor shot. Too much crap getting stuffed in young minds.

Rising star honoured by Obama arrested for attempted murder of town mayor

Suspect disappeared for two weeks after which his family said they need to look into his mental needs

www.independent.co.uk

 

[dannyb278]

This nut used a 9 mil glock. Thankfully he was a poor shot. Too much crap getting stuffed in young minds.

Rising star honoured by Obama arrested for attempted murder of town mayor

Suspect disappeared for two weeks after which his family said they need to look into his mental needs

www.independent.co.uk

Yup, young people becoming radicalized and having easy access to (i assume, based off of similar tragedies) legally obtained firearms is something we really need to get a handle on.

 

[Beignet]

Yep, that's Washington State Legislature for you. Good intentions regarding the gun show loophole resulted in building a Chinese wall to close a little loophole.
That does not mean other states would come up with such radical solutions. Moderation is the key to gain listeners' attention from the "soapbox".

Currently we can count on Montana to pass some laws to create less accountability and to encourage unsafe firearms practices.

I’m generally skeptical of people who don’t know a thing about firearms passing laws related to them, good intentions or not. Problem is, getting folks who do know about firearms to contribute to the process.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I’m generally skeptical of people who don’t know a thing about firearms passing laws related to them, good intentions or not. Problem is, getting folks who do know about firearms to contribute to the process.

I share that skepticism and concern. However, my perception of the current state of Montana's legislative attitude relates to the strong influence of radical Montana Shooting Sports organization, which seems to advocate for open carry everywhere by everyone.

 

[EKYHunter]

And their it is.

Guys like myself who look at the nonsense groups like Gifford's put out, just aren't sympathetic, or lack in empathy.

Why, if we just weren't so hard hearted we would go along with whatever is dictated to
us.

It's "for the children" after all, that I should give up my right to protect my children in my home.

But more directly. Buzz words.

I keep going back to it, no one can define it.

GUN CULTURE.

A guy like Busse who apparently wants to play on both sides, hasn't defined it.

If it's for Gifford's it means all us wacko gun nuts wanting Sherman Tanks and full auto 50 cal.

But on Hunt Talk, it's "I have more guns than I can count".

Even further. Which guns are we banning?

My DPMS because it's an assault rifle? Or my British .303, which was actually used to assault Germans?

Are we going after the detachable mags? And where do we draw the line? If 10 is acceptable, is that because we didn't care about the 9 people shot?

And who gets to decide? The FBI, who had no problem putting a bullet in Randy weavers son and wife? The ATF that torched the Branch Dividians? Perhaps the Department of Justice that gave sniper rifles to El Chapo? Maybe the fellas reading all this at Camp Williams here in Utah collecting all of our meta data?

Ya. The conversation became more militant. But the NRA, needed only read the newspaper out loud, they didn't need fiction writers.

I don't believe for one second, that someone who is capable of walking into a school and mowing down innocent kids, will suddenly not be a pyscho if I don't have an AR.

If that could be true, you can have both of mine

Well said sir, and not just this post, but throughout the thread. Seems that a lot of folks here support the 2A....BUT. They always throw in that BUT. Either literally or implied. They don’t like open carry, they don’t like AR style rifles, they don’t like folks carrying at a protest even though that’s their right to do so. Our 2A rights aren’t defined by whether or not someone likes them or whether or not someone’s feelings might get hurt. Maybe I’m just not enough of those “Buzz words” and soft hearted feelings that you correctly identify. Either you support the 2A or you don’t. It’s really that simple no matter how nuanced some want it to be. Like you, I’d love to hear the definition of Gun Culture.

 

[dannyb278]

Well said sir, and not just this post, but throughout the thread. Seems that a lot of folks here support the 2A....BUT. They always throw in that BUT. Either literally or implied. They don’t like open carry, they don’t like AR style rifles, they don’t like folks carrying at a protest even though that’s their right to do so. Our 2A rights aren’t defined by whether or not someone likes them or whether or not someone’s feelings might get hurt. Maybe I’m just not enough of those “Buzz words” and soft hearted feelings that you correctly identify. Either you support the 2A or you don’t. It’s really that simple no matter how nuanced some want it to be. Like you, I’d love to hear the definition of Gun Culture.

Honest question. Why would a civilian and their friends carry AR style rifles at a otherwise peaceful protest for any reason other than intimidation? They are not law enforcement nor military, no matter how much their Walmart tactical gear makes them feel like it.

Would it be better for us gun owners to just say screw it and in no way consider other fellow citizens feeling or beliefs? That way we can simply continue to complain and act surprised when our perceived rights get taken away.

 

[FI460]

Well said sir, and not just this post, but throughout the thread. Seems that a lot of folks here support the 2A....BUT. They always throw in that BUT. Either literally or implied. They don’t like open carry, they don’t like AR style rifles, they don’t like folks carrying at a protest even though that’s their right to do so. Our 2A rights aren’t defined by whether or not someone likes them or whether or not someone’s feelings might get hurt. Maybe I’m just not enough of those “Buzz words” and soft hearted feelings that you correctly identify. Either you support the 2A or you don’t. It’s really that simple no matter how nuanced some want it to be. Like you, I’d love to hear the definition of Gun Culture.

The Second Amendment is absolutely not absolute, and if someone were in favor of moderate firearm restrictions legislation it wouldn't mean they don't support the second amendment.

Absolutism is a false dichotomy.

 

[EKYHunter]

Honest question. Why would a civilian and their friends carry AR style rifles at a otherwise peaceful protest for any reason other than intimidation? They are not law enforcement nor military, no matter how much their Walmart tactical gear makes them feel like it.

Would it be better for us gun owners to just say screw it and in no way consider other fellow citizens feeling or beliefs? That way we can simply continue to complain and act surprised when our perceived rights get taken away.

I didn’t say I agreed with it and don’t. But it is their right to do so and to deny them that right chips away at the 2A. My feelings have nothing to do with your rights.

 

[EKYHunter]

The Second Amendment is absolutely not absolute, and if someone were in favor of moderate firearm restrictions legislation it wouldn't mean they don't support the second amendment.

Absolutism is a false dichotomy.

We can agree to disagree. What “moderate restrictions” do you have in mind?

 

[FI460]

We can agree to disagree. What “moderate restrictions” do you have in mind?

I'm not here advocating for any restrictions. My point is that supporting some restrictions doesn't make someone an enemy of the Second Amendment. Scalia said that there could obviously be limitations on the amendment. Reagan was against open carry. Neither was anti-2A.

 

[hossblur]

Honest question. Why would a civilian and their friends carry AR style rifles at a otherwise peaceful protest for any reason other than intimidation? They are not law enforcement nor military, no matter how much their Walmart tactical gear makes them feel like it.

Would it be better for us gun owners to just say screw it and in no way consider other fellow citizens feeling or beliefs? That way we can simply continue to complain and act surprised when our perceived rights get taken away.

Honest answer. They did it to intimidate. 100%.

I watched a video years ago of Cliven Bundy giving a speech. Dislike everything Cliven stands for. But a younger, louder, Ryan Busse showed up having no problem pointing out all those who supported him.

Was he trying to intimidate Cliven? Yup.


But yes, to answer your question, they were trying to intimidate.

I'm no fan of violent porn(I won't lie and say I've not seen mild porn). I'm no fan of CNN, I'm no fan of Alex Jones.

Do my FEELINGS matter in the freedom of the press? Should they?

Still waiting for a gun culture definition

 

[hossblur]

I'm not here advocating for any restrictions. My point is that supporting some restrictions doesn't make someone an enemy of the Second Amendment. Scalia said that there could obviously be limitations on the amendment. Reagan was against open carry. Neither was anti-2A.

Define some. Specifically.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Honest answer. They did it to intimidate. 100%.

I watched a video years ago of Cliven Bundy giving a speech. Dislike everything Cliven stands for. But a younger, louder, Ryan Busse showed up having no problem pointing out all those who supported him.

Was he trying to intimidate Cliven? Yup.


But yes, to answer your question, they were trying to intimidate

Guys with guns at rallies intentionally intimidating people who disagree with them= guys with megaphones and signs at rallies attempting to persuade people to change their minds?

Your comparisons are stellar.

 

[Beignet]

I share that skepticism and concern. However, my perception of the current state of Montana's legislative attitude relates to the strong influence of radical Montana Shooting Sports organization, which seems to advocate for open carry everywhere by everyone.

Oh yeah, Montana’s legislature seems to be trying to prove some kind of point with HB 102, et al. Shows how far the pendulum can swing on intentions.

 

[hossblur]

Guys with guns at rallies intentionally intimidating people who disagree with them= guys with megaphones and signs at rallies attempting to persuade people to change their minds?

Your comparisons are stellar.

Yup. You better come get my AR, some dude I don't know, intimidated Ryan Busse.

But then, I'll need your truck, I had a friend get killed by a truck T boning him.

Sounds logical