NRA vs. Free State Project

The National Rifle Association has one of its members arrested for tresspassing as he handed out Free State Project literature at an NRA convention in Orlando.

Comments

[scott]

How could he be trespassing on public property? It's not the NRA's property...I am confused

[fyodor]

Maybe renting property can be treated as temporary ownership for trespassing purposes?

The article doesn't give the NRA side. Maybe they have strict rules about handing out literature in general?

It would be pretty loopy for the NRA to single out the Free State Project for exclusion, as loopy as the Free State Project idea is.

Having said that, I'm betting on Wyoming!

[Lonewacko]

FWIW, a couple of my experiences:
1. On a few occasions, I passed out a flyer for my software in front of the Moscone Center in S.F. The people who were putting on the convention told me I couldn't do it; I told them since I was on the public sidewalk, I had every right to do it, and that they should check with their boss. They didn't bother me again. The cops who were directing traffic also told me that since I was on the sidewalk it was OK, however that it wouldn't be OK if I was passing out flyers on the grounds of the Center, which as far as I know is owned by the city and county of S.F.

2. I asked a Ralph's (supermarket) manager in L.A. whether the LaRouchians who had set up a table in their parking lot right outside the entrance to the market had asked his permission first. He said that they didn't need his permission, and that there was nothing he could do about it unless someone complained. (I wasn't narcing on the LaRouchians, I was just thinking ahead).

[Ari]

P.S. Substitute "Republican" for any other political persuasion (other than libertarian) and the logic still applies.

[Anonymous]

Now I wanna move from western Massachussetts to Alabama.

[Jim N]

Seeing this story reminded me of our last gubernatorial (cool word) election in IL. The Republican candidate did not have a strong stance on gun rights, and the NRA, rather than endorse the Libertarian candidate, chose to issue no endorsement. I wonder, does the NRA dis the Libertarian party out of a desire to kiss up to the Republicans? If anyone knows of a pattern, I'd like to hear about it.

[joe]

Ari,

Gotta disagree with #2. Lots of freedom lovers run screaming from the black helicopter/Christian reconstructionist rantings of the NRA and its mileau. They're not exactly vigilant about keeping out the crackpots, and people have noticed.

Change that to "Some freedom lovers are NRA members."

[Jim]

Seems to me that the NRA has trouble with the fact that a large chunk of its constituency is right wing and in some cases extreme right wing (i.e. the militia and crackpot types aforementioned). It strives not to piss off those people by associating with libertarian types who advocate legalizing drugs and being nice to homosexuals, among other things.

One of the problems with this is when asked the question of why America has so much violence, if it's not due to guns, they're hard pressed to find an answer. Instead of saying something honest (IT'S THE DRUG LAWS, STUPID!) they have to waffle on about the problems of living in such a 'diverse' culture. Whatever the truth to that last statement, politically it translates as 'all crime is committed by Brown people'. Not exactly a position that will win much support on the other side of the aisle in Congress.

Sadly, they are still the best hope of keeping our gun rights. We just have to share them with a bunch of other idiots who aren't as concerned with freedoms outside of the second amendment.

[Croesus]

Jim N.,

Libertarians don't control the levers of power in government generally, so yeah.

Don Siegleman, an ardent member of the NRA, former Alabama Governor, Democrat, and all around pork barrel politician (what Southern politician isn't?), didn't get the endorsement of the endorsement of the NRA at the national level of that organization in the 2002 gubenatorial election, but he did strangely enough get the endorsement of the NRA's Alabama chapter. All of which led to some odd moments when the national leadership's representatives showed up and tried to bad mouth Siegleman as a "gun-snatching liberal" at the state chapter meetings and at campaign stops for Siegelman's Republican opponent. Siegelman, as you might remember, lost the 2002 election, after some bizarre vote counts in Baldwin county.

[Croesus]

BTW, as you can imagine, any time someone wants to sling political mud in an election in Alabama, they use the word "liberal" to do so. "Too Liberal For Alabama" is a common phrase in political commercials for example.

Of course this is the same state whose Supreme Court CJ thinks the 1901 constitution (the "Jim Crow" constitution) is ordained by GOD! and cannot be done away with for a new one (the old Alabama constitution has a slew of problems) for fear of hellfire!

[Ari S. Totle]

A little syllogism here:

* All Libertarians are freedom lovers.
* Most freedom lovers are NRA members.
* Some NRA members are Republicans.
* Some Republicans are NOT freedom lovers.

Get the picture?

[Ari]

Jim, by that logic, you can also say that the left-wing media is still the best hope of keeping our freedom-of-speech rights. We just have to share them with a bunch of other idiots who aren't as concerned with freedoms outside of the first amendment.

Or . . . that the ACLU is still the best hope of keeping our civil-liberties rights. We just have to share them with a bunch of other idiots who aren't as concerned with freedoms outside of the fourth amendment.

C'mon!

The best hope of defending ALL the rights enumerated in the first 10 amendmnents are genuine, principled LIBERTARIANS. There may be a few idiots among us (who claim to be libertarian) but libertarians are still the primary movers concerned with the defense of ALL the freedoms specified in the first 10 amendmnents. Parceling out their defense is not usually very effective.

So stick to your own guns. (Excuse the pun.)

[joe]

Ari,

I'm pretty sure the ACLU has been involved in one or cases involving the First and Fifth amendments, and a few others as well. Just a hunch.

[Ari]

I'm sure they have, Joe . . . cherry picking as they would, when it's in their (ideological) interest or favor.

[Pitarys Katherine]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 212.253.2.204
URL: http://preteen-sex.info
DATE: 05/21/2004 07:01:51
A good friend can tell you what is the matter with you in a minute. He may not seem such a good friend after telling.