Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Let's Occupy Shooting Ranges!!

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 14, 2011, 1:45 p.m. EST by Kevabe (81)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Let's get our message out there. Let's Occupy the most conservative hangouts aka shooting ranges. We can stand right in front of their targets to really give a good protest.

Then we can keep standing there when they all open fire and shoot all of us OWS protesters, then we won't have to worry about how bad we hate the system or ever have to worry about getting a job or moving out of grandma's basement again!!

18 Comments

18 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

not a bad idea, if by this you mean to go there and train like mad.

[-] 3 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

I have no problem with occupying the shooting ranges, but it would be far better if we did so from the shooter's position. If you can get OWS and the NRA to agree on gun laws then you can probably pull a whole chunk of poor Republicans in rural areas into the fold.

[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

Gun laws are the one area where right-wingers have it right...

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

Not completely, but they do have a number of valid points. I'm from NYC, which is de facto no-issue, so the first time I actually saw a gun (aside from in a cop's thigh holster) was when I got up to MIT and took an introductory shooting class. I got interested in the firearms issue then, and I looked up the rules from MA and if you live in the right town they're not that bad. Boston and Cambridge don't generally issue conceal-and-carry licenses unless you're either a crime victim or regularly making large cash deposits, but otherwise it tends to be a fairly reasonable process. The whole process takes a few weeks and costs some money but it's not that big a deal. Then a kid in my political science class mentioned that it was too damn hard to get a gun in Massachusetts, and when I asked him what he meant he replied "Dude, I'm from New Hampshire."

I think that kind of disparity in regulations is ridiculous; there should be a national process for obtaining and registering firearms that allows the government to perform due diligence without imposing an undue burden or restriction on the citizen attempting to apply. I was thinking about something like what MA (not Boston/Cambridge) has, only expedited and cheaper. Go to your local police precinct or sheriff's office, pay a $20-$30 issuance fee, get fingerprinted, get a background check done, and come back in a couple of weeks.

If you're cleared, then take and pass a firearms safety and responsibility practical exam with a police department loaner (or take a free class first if you have no clue what you're doing) and walk out of the class or the test with a dual-carry permit if you pass. If you fail, come back another time and try to pass again until you get there. I do want the test provision because a firearm is just as capable of killing people in the wrong hands as a car, and I don't want idiots treating it like a toy or pointing it all over the place any more than I want idiots trying to do wheelies and swerving all over the place on the highway when the rest of us are trying to get somewhere safely.

[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

That's actually what I was talking about. The idea of mandatory registration of the fact that you own a gun, and even worse mandatory finger printing, is where the NRA crack-pots have a point. It's a terrible Orwellian idea. Fuck everything about that.

The real purpose of a "Well regulated Militia" is to serve as a buffer against a tyrant who attempts a military coup and takes over the government.

The State should have less control over the process of firearm ownership--not more.

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

I would handle gun licenses almost like driver's licenses in that pretty much any reasonable person should be able to have one but criminals and idiots are (and need to remain) off limits. The reason I want the background check should be fairly obvious, but other than that it shouldn't be a big deal. The other thing is that if we want to have a "well-regulated militia" then that should also mean that instead of a professional standing army in which a small group of people is deployed as many times as brass can get away with it we should move toward Israeli-style universal military service, with public or community service available for the physically ineligible and the conscientious objectors.

[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

<<<I would handle gun licenses almost like driver's licenses in that pretty much any reasonable person should be able to have one but criminals and idiots are (and need to remain) off limits. The reason I want the background check should be fairly obvious, but other than that it shouldn't be a big deal.>>>

That is pretty much what we have in places like Arizona or Texas. They run your name through a "nix check" to make sure you aren't a felon or have had an extended stay in the looney bin. What I strongly object to is the finger-printing and similar measures.

<<<The other thing is that if we want to have a "well-regulated militia" then that should also mean that instead of a professional standing army in which a small group of people is deployed as many times as brass can get away with it we should move toward Israeli-style universal military service, with public or community service available for the physically ineligible and the conscientious objectors.>>>

You're confusing the concepts of a "militia" and a "standing army". The whole point of the militia is that it is NOT a standing army, and it is run by citizen volunteers.

Furthermore, conscription violates the 13th amendment (in addition to being completely morally bankrupt.)

I served in the US military. It's awful. No one has the right to impose that on ANYONE.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13174) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

back when the nimrods were showing up at protests with their weapons I invited them all up this way.

. . . . and it's clickable . .

. . . .

I said, hey

firearms do not belong

on the picket line

but if they wanna

common up

they can bring theirs

I'll bring mine

and around the corner

some silent friends

with M-80s

BANG

When the smoke clears

we'll see who's left standing

none of them took me up on it though

not one.

that's right muther fucker

I just might be that crazy.

wanna try me?

.

[-] 1 points by brettdecker (68) 2 years ago

Great idea,this is creative thinking.

How about also an Occupy of the nation wide sewer system? They could camp out there for as long as they wanted. How about Occupying drug tunnels down on the border? Occupy the canyons and trails that illegals frequent?

If OWS really wants to affect change,go and do a full on occupy of North Korea.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Lulz.

[-] 0 points by Karl101 (-6) 2 years ago

watch out the occupiers might miss the sarcasm and show up (they are not the brightest folks).

[-] 1 points by Longshoreman (34) 2 years ago

I'm a democrat and a member of the NRA. The horror, the horror! LMAO

[-] 0 points by Karl101 (-6) 2 years ago

mr Longshoreman, that goes to show that not all democrats are bad! jk