Where the hell is the NRA and RMGO?

[Adawg38]

Maybe I've missed it in this chaos but where the hell is the NRA and RMGO? We are donating them money to fight for our rights and it seems like they are hiding and keeping quite. Scared like these gun shops that are pulling inventory? I know not everyone likes these 2 or they like 1 and not the other or whatever. WTF? [Rant1] I heard the NRA deactivated their FB page and hasn't Tweeted anything since Dec 18th. I know FB and Twitter. [gohome]I'm not on twitter fyi.

Maybe they are being respectful for the recent shooting in Conn and waiting to strike later idk.

[alxone]

the nra is taking their time for a change and i could give to sh*ts where the dud is

[sniper7]

They are always pretty quiet after events like this.

[motorep]

NRA website says they'll make a statement on 12/21. They're being "respectfully silent" unlike the Bradyists who've taken the opportunity to preach from atop the bodies of dead children.

[Aloha_Shooter]

They're being smart. The incident is fresh and the media will twist anything the NRA says into being some insensitive knee-jerk defense. The one thing I wish they'd say is "shame on President Obama and the Brady Council on making political hay over the dead bodies of those poor kids -- let the parents grieve without politics and we can talk about this next month."

[Goodburbon]

NRA has released a statment, and stated that further statments will be stated when the state of things calms down.

Friday

[Bailey Guns]

What are they supposed to be fighting against at this point? Just a bunch of emotional talk from the usual fools. How about we wait until actual proposals in the form of legislation are offered up? If you see no action by the NRA then, start bitching.

[sellersm]

They're being smart. The incident is fresh and the media will twist anything the NRA says into being some insensitive knee-jerk defense. The one thing I wish they'd say is "shame on President Obama and the Brady Council on making political hay over the dead bodies of those poor kids -- let the parents grieve without politics and we can talk about this next month."

^This! Imagine the outcry if a Repubic did that... Can't win for losing, or so it seems.

[asmo]

This is the normal tact. Its the right one. Let things die down before getting getting panties in a wad.

[ColoWyo]

They're being smart. The incident is fresh and the media will twist anything the NRA says into being some insensitive knee-jerk defense. The one thing I wish they'd say is "shame on President Obama and the Brady Council on making political hay over the dead bodies of those poor kids -- let the parents grieve without politics and we can talk about this next month."

Yeah, I was kinda ticked at first when all I heard was silence from them. But you are absolutely correct. I really think they are playing it smart. I can't imagine what their facebook page alone would have looked like.

[Ronin13]

NRA has released a statment, and stated that further statments will be stated when the state of things calms down.

Friday
LOL... that's a unique way of putting it...
Motorep, that's a great point... the Brady Bunch IS spouting their rhetoric before the parents have even had a chance to begin to grieve.

[exxonv]

What are they supposed to be fighting against at this point? Just a bunch of emotional talk from the usual fools. How about we wait until actual proposals in the form of legislation are offered up? If you see no action by the NRA then, start bitching.

AMEN

[Zundfolge]

We need to see what move the antis are going to make in the legislature (both nationally and here in CO) before either organization can make a counter-move.

[spqrzilla]

It was very smart of the NRA to pull down their facebook page during the initial media frenzy. It prevented their own page from becoming a billboard for the gun control activists to flood with nonsense.

Good crisis management strategy, I'm going to remember that move.

[Monky]

Do you people not watch the news? Not read a paper? You know there is more to the interwebs beyond this forum and porn. [facepalm]

[PugnacAutMortem]

Do you people not watch the news? Not read a paper? You know there is more to the interwebs beyond this forum and porn. [facepalm]

Yeah that might be true...but one must ask oneself...do you really NEED anything more than that from the internet? [LOL]

[brokenscout]

LOL
Do you people not watch the news? Not read a paper? You know there is more to the interwebs beyond this forum and porn. [facepalm]

[colorider]

What is this porn you talk about? lol

[Kraven251]

I figure the folks at the NRA are trying to track down a supply of "Mass Murder Clips" before they all disappear. Only Pelosi and McCarthy know where to get these apparently [Flower]

[RMGOdirector]

The first phone call I received after Sandy Hook was from a Colorado State Senator (probably the most pro-gun in the State Capitol) who asked if he could carry an "Arm Teachers" bill. I was, of course, supportive (though passing something this year is going to take a miracle).

But if you're asking what my days consist of, I'm busy counting votes (which I did election night), and mapping out a battle plan, to beat the imminent passage of an assault weapons ban (and other sundry gun controls) in the Colorado Legislature.

However, I did 14 media appearances in 3 days after Connecticut shooting. And that's all I really have time for. Being on TV isn't going to beat these bans.

Yes, the NRA turtles right after a shooting. They did it after Columbine, even pulling all of their "pro-gun" legislation.

We, on the other hand, don't think gun owners are to blame for Sandy Hook.

[JM Ver. 2.0]

Mr. Dudley, I am a man of few funds... Can you tell my why I should join your group as opposed to say... The NRA?

[Great-Kazoo]

Mr. Dudley, I am a man of few funds... Can you tell my why I should join your group as opposed to say... The NRA?

Give 2 both.

[henpecked]

The White House would be pleased with there divide and conquer plan......
whether you agree with the NRA or RMGO it really doesnt matter.
All of us need to stand united

[JM Ver. 2.0]

Mr. Dudley, I am a man of few funds... Can you tell my why I should join your group as opposed to say... The NRA?

Give 2 both.

The White House would be pleased with there divide and conquer plan......
whether you agree with the NRA or RMGO it really doesnt matter.
All of us need to stand united

K... let's try this again...

I can only afford one!

[10mm-man]

K... let's try this again...

I can only afford one!

I think we have a big battle coming up here in Colorado, I would say RMGO for now! Then dig deep and give to the NRA...........

[MrPrena]

I will probably go with NRA thanks to basspro gift cards.
http://www.ar-15.co/threads/77751-quot-Free-quot-NRA-membership

[BPTactical]

35.00 to either is certainly affordable. So is 35.00 to GOA and SAF.
The more tentacles we have, the better grasp of the situation.

[Sharpienads]

35.00 to either is certainly affordable. So is 35.00 to GOA and SAF.
The more tentacles we have, the better grasp of the situation.

Hey Bert, that was pretty clever! I'm impressed!

[10mm-man]

I will probably go with NRA thanks to basspro gift cards.
http://www.ar-15.co/threads/77751-quot-Free-quot-NRA-membership


Now you can afford BOTH!! Cheap skate!

[Great-Kazoo]

K... let's try this again...

I can only afford one!


I will lend you the cash. %^& i'm not working and i'll crack off for the Cause.

[RMGOdirector]

I'd love to be united.

Unfortunately, the NRA -- and their state-level groups -- are often cutting deals behind the scene. And, no, I'm not going to be "united" behind that. Ever.

To Colorado residents, it's pretty stinking important to pay attention to a legislative session that is VERY brief, and bills move fast.

So, if that's a concern to you, you really don't have a choice but to be a member of RMGO, as we're the only real group in Colorado.

[JM Ver. 2.0]

I'd love to be united.

Unfortunately, the NRA -- and their state-level groups -- are often cutting deals behind the scene. And, no, I'm not going to be "united" behind that. Ever.

To Colorado residents, it's pretty stinking important to pay attention to a legislative session that is VERY brief, and bills move fast.

So, if that's a concern to you, you really don't have a choice but to be a member of RMGO, as we're the only real group in Colorado.
Do you promise not to send me any silly emails asking me for more money I don't have?

[palepainter]

I sent money to both groups this past week in hopes that my 30 bucks can help make a difference.

[PugnacAutMortem]

IIRC...more than 60% of the funds RMGO collects goes to operating/printing costs? So RMGO uses more than half of the funds it collects to ask for more funds? That sounds highly inefficient.

[Pancho Villa]

I support NRA and RMGO, but if I was giving advice to someone with very limited funds, I would say push all the money you can to RMGO.

The reason is simple: I believe that nationally, due to a variety of factors, major gun control legislation is a long shot. Your dollar makes less of a difference on the national scale as well.

However, in Colorado, our political situation is different, and RMGO needs all the dollars (which also happen to go further) and public support it can get.

I hope Dudley keeps us apace of how we can help. It's gonna be a slog, I think.

[RMGOdirector]

I'd love to be united.

Unfortunately, the NRA -- and their state-level groups -- are often cutting deals behind the scene. And, no, I'm not going to be "united" behind that. Ever.

To Colorado residents, it's pretty stinking important to pay attention to a legislative session that is VERY brief, and bills move fast.

So, if that's a concern to you, you really don't have a choice but to be a member of RMGO, as we're the only real group in Colorado.

[Sharpienads]

Is there an echo in here?

[RMGOdirector]

To answer PugnacAutMortem (http://www.ar-15.co/members/10041-PugnacAutMortem) post -- since we're an actually LOBBY, what would you want our money to go to? Postage, printing, paper, etc, etc..... That's PRECISELY what you use to beat bad legislation....or push good legislation.

[Aloha_Shooter]

From where I'm standing, RMGO does more harm than help. Thanks to Dudley (and -- to be fair -- others) distorting and exaggerating Jane Norton's record, we got neither their pick nor the establishment pick in the Senate, Michael Bennet. Bennet enabled Reid to overcome the filibuster against Obamacare, pass Obama's spending bills and the rest of the rigmarole. However, we need every voice we can muster against the Denver and DC anti-gunners so I'm happy for those of you that support RMGO and hope they succeed in their efforts. I'll support other organizations like the NRA and you can hope THEY are successful as well.

[SenHolbert]

Hi, I’m State Representative Chris Holbert. I was the sponsor of the 2011 "Constitutional Carry" bill, which passed the House on a vote of 40-25. All 33 Republicans, plus 7 Democrats voted for the bill. Three Senate Democrats then killed it in a five-member Senate Committee. In 2012, I sponsored "Make My Day Better" (Castle Doctrine in the workplace), which also passed the House with bipartisan support... only to have those same three Senate Dems kill it in Committee. While other legislators had previously sponsored bills on both of those topics, I'm proud to have carried the first bills on those subjects to actually pass through the Colorado House of Representatives. Not intending to brag here, but I do want to establish that I am a gun guy and I know these topics well.

In 2012, another legislator carried the same "Constitutional Carry" legislation, but the Dems were successful in planting a "poison pill" in that bill, which required it to be killed in a House Committee. I mention that because it's telling as to how the NRA rates legislators. If you check, I have an "A" rating with the NRA. Why not an "A+"? Well, the answer to that is simple. My bill in 2011 was seen as an RMGO bill, which the local NRA folks supported with testimony in the House Committee hearing. The 2012 bill, which, when introduced was identical to the 2011 version, was seen as an NRA bill, which RMGO supported. The NRA rates the legislator who sponsored THEIR attempt at the SAME BILL, which had to be killed by a friendly committee in order to deal with the anti-gunners poison pill amendment as... wait for it... an "A+." However, since my bill, which actually PASSED the State House, was seen as an RMGO bill and not an NRA bill, they rate me as an "A."

No ranting or whining here, but I do ask that you folks consider this example of the politics involved. Is it about doing what is right or is it about the organization? I left the NRA years ago because I grew tired of the marketing and, frankly, their compromising. I think that the NRA has done better in recent years by supporting the right of law-abiding citizens to carry concealed without first obtaining permission from government to go out into public and doing nothing wrong (Constitutional Carry). But, the NRA remains a distant second choice for me when it comes to NOT COMPROMISING ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT. I'm a gun guy, and an RMGO member. That was true before I was elected, is true today, and will remain true so long as the Good Lord allows me to breathe His air.

I’ve been where you are. I know how frustrating it is to read about pending legislation and to consider what will happen to limit freedom and liberty for law-abiding citizens. I'm neither a victim or a murderer, but the antis seem to want to label us as one or both. I say, No!

Please consider that no state legislation can or will be introduced prior to the start of the general assembly, which is scheduled for Wednesday, January 9, 2013. Until then, those legislators who are drafting "anti" legislation enjoy attorney-client privilege with the bill drafter(s) who are writing the legislation for them. At the state level, there really isn't anything to be for or against until such legislation is introduced, which would occur on or after 1/9/13. In the interim, people like you can do something very important. That is, ASK your ONE State Representative and your ONE State Senator how he/she plans to vote on Second Amendment legislation. Almost zero people ever bother to ASK us how we'll vote. Find out who is with you, who is against you, and who is undecided. The latter is where your constituent-based advocacy would be best applied.

If you live in Colorado and want to find your State Representative and your State Senator, then find your "Zip + 4" zip code and enter it at this web page: http://votesmart.org

Once you find the names of your state legislators, go here to find their phone numbers and email address: http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2012B/csl.nsf/Directory?openFrameset

Again, I would encourage you to ASK your two state legislators how each will vote on legislation to infringe on the Second Amendment - or any other topics about which you are interested. Find out whether or not YOUR two state legislators support YOUR views. That's a better place to start than asking for a vote that you already have or arguing for that which you won't get.

If you align with the NRA, then OK. Let's work together to advocate for the rights of law-abiding citizens - I'm not here to slam you. However, if you're not sure about where to apply your resources, especially if those resources are limited, then please give RMGO a try. The NRA lobbyist has called me for my input, but there's only one place that I turn when I need advice or input on a Second Amendment issue: http://www.rmgo.org

God bless you, your family, our state, and our nation.

Respectfully yours,

- Chris

PS - Please... call me, "Chris" I work so hard at just being me.

[buffalobo]

Chris, please name those 3 Senators who killed CC bill and MMDB bills. We need to bury them in mail(snail and E) and phone calls.

[Sharpienads]

Thanks for chiming in, Chris. Sounds like some good advice.

[ChunkyMonkey]

Chris, thank you for stopping by. Keep up the great work!

[palepainter]

Thank you for the links!

[10mm-man]

Chris, glad you stopped in here to give us some valuable info. I hope you become part of this forum and didn't just stop in here to push RMGO. Please keep us abreast of an issues and let us know were we can assist you!

[Singlestack]

THANKs for the info Chris! This helps a LOT.

[SenHolbert]

The three members of the Senate Committee on State, Veteran and Military Affairs WERE:

Senator Rollie Heath, D-Boulder, Chairman
Senator Betty Boyd, D-Lakewood, Vice-Chairman (Term limited, won't be back in 2013)
Senator Bob Bacon, D-Fort Collins (Term limited, won't be back in 2013)

It was completely within the rules, but it WAS frustrating to have 40 Representatives vote YES and then have the bill die at the hands of three Senators.

I voted for term limits way back in 1992, but have since learned the harsh reality of dealing with a legislator who can't run again. With the four-year terms in the State Senate, we lose the accountability of re-election once a member is in his/her second, four-year term. In Colorado, we can serve up to eight consecutive years in each chamber (four terms of two years in the House, two terms of four years in the Senate).

Watch the General Assembly web site for listings of the 2013-14 committee members. That information will populate the web site after the first of the year to correspond with the swearing-in ceremony scheduled for the first day of session, 1/9/2013.

- Chris

[BPTactical]

Thank you for dropping in Chris. It is refreshing to see honest speech from a Pollytickian[Tooth] regarding such a devisive issue.
Thank you for your support to the rights of the citizens of our great state.
Welcome to COAR15.[Beer][Beer]

One thing to be assured of kids: every dollar you don't spend will not go to the fight................

[Great-Kazoo]

Watch the General Assembly web site for listings of the 2013-14 committee members. That information will populate the web site after the first of the year to correspond with the swearing-in ceremony scheduled for the first day of session, 1/9/2013.

Are these committee members not picked by the majority party? if so look for pearlmutter to have a seat on it.

[SenHolbert]

Jim,

US Representative Ed Perlmutter is one of the 435 members of the US House of Representatives, which meets in Washington, DC. There are seven US Representatives elected from Colorado: DeGette (D, CD1); Polis (D, CD2); Tipton (R, CD3); Gardner (R-CD4); Lamborn (R, CD5); Coffman (R, CD6); Perlmutter (D, CD7). There are also 100 members elected to the US Senate, two from each of the 50 participating states. Udall (D) and Bennet (D) are the two US Senators from Colorado. Together, the 435 members of the US House and the 100 members of the US Senate are the 535 members of "Congress," which is a term that is appropriate to the two legislative bodies that meet in Washington, DC.

The Colorado legislature meets in Denver, Colorado. I am one of 65 State Representatives who serve in the Colorado House of Representatives. There are also 35 people elected to the State Senate. Those who are elected from their respective districts then meet in Denver from January through May each year. The committee members listed above were the three majority party members (Democrats) who were appointed by Senate President Brandon Shaffer (D, Longmont) to the State Senate Committee on State, Veterans and Military Affairs for the 2011 and 2012 sessions of the 68th General Assembly (aka state legislature).

As a side note, the 100 of us who serve in the state legislature are members of the "Colorado General Assembly." While you did not use the term "Congress," people often refer to me/us as members of the "state congress," but there is no such thing. In the US, "Congress" is a federal term. I equate it to calling John Hickenlooper the "President of Colorado" or Barack Obama the "Governor of the United States." While both terms refer to a chief executive within the Executive Branch of government, one refers to a federal office and the other refers to a state office.

Hope this helps.

- Chris

[Singlestack]

Sent my emails to Rep Matt Jones (12) and Senator Brandon Shaffer (17). Forgot that Shaffer is term limited and won't be in the 2013 senate; Jones is taking that seat, with Mike Foote now the rep for 12. Will contact Foote after 1/1/12 when his contact info is on the site.

[buffalobo]

Chris, thanks for the info. I appreciate the direct conversation. As already stated, stop in and participate as a gun owner and enthusiast. Don't forget your waders and a thick skin.

[robertcolorado2009]

Thanks Chris, this info you have supplied all of us is golden and gives all the right people to contact. This is a very divisive issue as stated before. We have no excuse to not contact those who represent us to let them know where we stand so they might truly represent us and our views, or not keep their job.

[sniper7]

Thanks for the info Chris. It definitely helps having someone know is in the system explain it so we can work together

[newracer]

Chris - First of all I want to thank you for taking time to come on the board and personally respond to questions, give advice, and some insight to how the system works. I think you are in the minority as far as representative go. My only comment, and this probably does not pertain to you, is you stated that we should be asking our representatives how they stand on a particular subject when really they should be asking us how we want them to vote. I think that is a big problem in politics, the representative do not know what their constituents want or they do not care.

Again thank you for the time and I hope you frequent the board often.

[TFOGGER]

Well, I won't waste my breath talking to Mary Hodge. I'll have to contact Jenise May and see if she's amenable to logic. Thanks for the info, Chris, and welcome to the forum. [Beer]

[RMGOdirector]

Mary Hodge isn't a lost cause. Don't write her off that quickly.

And though using logic is certainly smart, politicians are much more concerned about numbers (as in election numbers). Yes, Hodge is termed, but she wants to run for other things.

[TFOGGER]

Mary Hodge isn't a lost cause. Don't write her off that quickly.



Seeing her with an "F" rating from the NRA and a "0%" from RMGO, along with her voting record, I feel it's safe to assume she's not gonna have an epiphany any time soon.

[RMGOdirector]

Hodge lives in a blue collar district (both legislatively, and county commission, which is often the path for someone like her).

She will have at least one other female Dem voting against much of the gun control insanity. Long shot, I know.

[Ronin13]

Chris, I would surely like to buy you lunch sometime! [Beer]
And Dudley- sorry it took me so long, but I just joined RMGO... I figure who better than you guys to do your damnedest to keep Hick in check, if that's possible.

[SenHolbert]

Newracer,

I disagree with the premise that an elected official should he asking constituents how he/she should vote. Gathering input from constituents is certainly a good thing, but I don't want our elected policy makers to be 'human polling machines,' nor would I lower myself to such an unaccountable standard. The measure of democracy that we incorporate in our Representative Republic is to honor the will of the majority of voters in elections. From that point on, those who are elected to policy making positions (specifically to the legislative branch) must vote based on what he/she believes to be right - and for that which he/she is willing to be accountable. President Clinton exemplified a 'human polling machine' who adjusted his positions based on the will of the majority. For sure, he was very popular, but not an example of what I would consider a principled leader.

Again, gathering input - listening to constituents - is a good thing. However, the elected official must always be accountable for his/her votes and would never be justified in reminding his/her constituents that he/she voted a certain way because the majority of those who expressed an opinion wanted him/her to vote that way. Please consider that we do not benefit by mob rule even if there is a 'human polling machine' standing in the gap.

A former chief of staff for a US Senator once taught me a valuable lesson in effective advocacy. That is, when the elected does something right, go tell your sphere of influence. The reason is that we humans are SO very good at spreading the word about what we don't like, but we'll rarely lift a finger to praise someone when they do something right. We who are elected respond to the same two stimuli as did Pavlov's dog: pleasure and pain. You won't get very far by training a dog with only one of those stimuli, you need to use both appropriately. Likewise, constituents can work with effectively with their elected officials by using the same two tools.

To my point about asking, that's simply a better starting point than weighing in with 5, 10, or more reasons why I should vote a certain way on a given piece of legislation. Professional lobbyists ask first, then respond according to the answer. Constituents almost never do that, which is ineffective. If a legislator confirms that he/she is going to vote the way that you want him/her to vote, then "Thank you" might be more effective than explaining why they should do what they've already committed to do. In sales, people are taught, "When you close the deal, stop talking." Spreading word to your sphere of influence about the elected doing the right thing - public praise among likeminded citizens - is very pleasurable for an elected official... and guess what... he/she might remember that the next time the issue comes up.

If a legislator is uncertain or won't commit to how he/she will vote, then providing information, encouragement, and a firm promise to hold them accountable in the next election is certainly in order. A balance of the two stimuli would be in order and you might actually win over some of those folks.

Those who commit to vote against your desired position are where you would want to allocate the least amount of time, energy, and resources leading up to the vote. You MAY want to devote more time, energy, and resources to those folks in the next election, but frankly some are in such politically safe districts that you would be wise to ignore some and allocate resources where they can actually make a difference. Dudley Brown and RMGO are VERY GOOD at making such determinations. Those decisions are NOT subjective, but based on hard data. Frankly, I don't know anyone in the country who is better at making such determinations than Dudley... which is why some people passionately dislike like him. And yes, it requires money to hold people accountable in elections, which is why he (and all the other gun groups) are constantly asking for money.

Another reason why I encourage gunnies to start by asking is that every once in a while you'll find that the legislator actually knows his/her stuff when it comes to the Second Amendment and guns. Nobody needs to explain to me (and several others in the Colorado General Assembly) how the Second Amendment is our defense against tyranny. Several of us already understand that clearly. Want me to tear down, clean, and reassemble an AR or 45? No problem, I rather enjoy it.

Smile, not everyone is against you. :-)

- Chris

[Dave_L]

Chris,

You're a breath of fresh air, sir.

Thank you.

[SuperiorDG]

Thinks Chris for your input. Like hiring an employee you try and find someone that uses facts, logic and experience to make go decisions and then let them do their job. You do help them along the way with your experience, but ultimately you let them do the job they were hired to do. I just wish more would use this approach when it comes to electing their representatives.

[lowbeyond]

Newracer,
Want me to tear down, clean, and reassemble an AR or 45? No problem, I rather enjoy it.

- Chris

When can i get a free gun cleaning ?

[67rschev]

Another big thank you for your inner-circle understanding , and provided guidance . Have linked all my friend and family to this thread . Keep up the good work and the spreading of true meaning of our forefathed given 2nd amendment rights .

[buckeye4rnr]

Chris,

Thank you for the input and thank you for understanding us.

[buckeye4rnr]

Well I doubt my emails will do much... Joe Miklosi and Pat Steadman are my employees.

[SenHolbert]

Well I doubt my emails will do much... Joe Miklosi and Pat Steadman are my employees.

bogman2121, FYI, Miklosi is term-limited and won't be back.

- Chris

[Teufelhund]

Well I doubt my emails will do much... Joe Miklosi and Pat Steadman are my employees.

ALL of our elected officials are our employees. Some of them need to be micro-managed.

[josh7328]

Really? A state rep participating on the forum? That's so sick! Welcome to the madnes, Chris! I've already learned a few things from your posts.

[centrarchidae]

Hooray! Mine are Peniston and Steadman and Perlmutter! I can talk to a couple of brick walls!

Letters sent. We'll see.

[SuperiorDG]

ALL of our elected officials are our employees. Some of them need to be micro-managed.

If so they need to be fired.

[SenHolbert]

Wow, I received my FIRST pro-Second Amendment advocacy email that actually ASKED a question.

How will you vote on Second Amendment legislation?
Will you vote to defend the Second Amendment?
How will you vote on [specific issue]?


EFFECTIVE advocacy starts with a question, not all the reasons why an elected should vote Yes or No. The first step in EFFECTIVE advocacy is to find out who is with you, who is undecided, and who is against you.

Ineffective advocacy starts and ends with all the reasons why you want a Yes or No vote. Ineffective advocacy reinforces the false premise that no one is with you, which isolates you from your friends and empowers your enemies.

Warning a legislator that you'll hold him/her accountable if he/she votes wrong works against you if that person was/is/will/does vote with you. Find out who your friends are, who is undecided, and who is against you. From there, treat the three groups differently: Thank you, education, and caution.

[alxone]

Wow, I received my FIRST pro-Second Amendment advocacy email that actually ASKED a question.

How will you vote on Second Amendment legislation?
Will you vote to defend the Second Amendment?
How will you vote on [specific issue]?


EFFECTIVE advocacy starts with a question, not all the reasons why an elected should vote Yes or No. The first step in EFFECTIVE advocacy is to find out who is with you, who is undecided, and who is against you.

Ineffective advocacy starts and ends with all the reasons why you want a Yes or No vote. Ineffective advocacy reinforces the false premise that no one is with you, which isolates your from your friends and empowers your enemies.

Warning a legislator that you'll hold him/her accountable if he/she votes wrong works against you if that person was/is/will/does vote with you. Find out who your friends are, who is undecided, and who is against you. From there, treat the three groups differently: Thank you, education, and caution.

18829