One of the best things about my involvement with the RKBA group here on DailyKos has been the thoughtful, nuanced responses from many who disagree with us. Even folks who don't own a gun, and think they should be banned, engage in spirited but fair-minded debate with us; some even reconsider long-held opinions.
This gives us reason to believe that we are succeeding in our mission, as stated in the blockquote after the jump.
UPDATE: The first "group troll" appears to have been formed, as you can see in the comments below. They are clearly disrupting our diaries. I think part of their motivation is that I quoted the ringleader's intolerant, antifeminist comment in my diary. They are in violation of the DKos TOS, and they are unlikely to shut us down.
RKBA is a DKos group of second amendment supporters who also have progressive and liberal values. We don't think that being a liberal means one has to be anti-gun. Some of us are extreme in our second amendment views (no licensing, no restrictions on small arms) and some of us are more moderate (licensing, restrictions on small arms.) Moderate or extreme, we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections. We don't want a repeat of 1994. We are an inclusive group: if you see the Second Amendment as safeguarding our right to keep and bear arms individually, then come join us in our conversation. If you are against the right to keep and bear arms, come join our conversation. We look forward to seeing you. RKBA stands for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
This diary isn't about those open-minded folks who peacefully agree to disagree with us, though. This is about the minority who pre-judge us, and anyone else with a firearm, assigning attitudes and intentions that don't even exist.
In one diary, when several pro-RKBA commenters disputed the diarist's position, the diarist chose to update his diary:
Update
I guess I am not surprised how quickly a certain fring ahs [sic] tried to hijack the comments. Screaming doom and gloom that their guns are going to be taken away.
As I clearly stated this was not to be about interpretations of the second amendment or how guns should or shouldn't be regulated. For those that so blinded [sic] by their own preconceptions, biases and prejudices, I will spell this out very clearly.
The diary is about how the right has elevated gun rights above all other rights. No where have I said that there should not be gun rights.
So why don't you trolls stick to comments about the diary, not your obsessive love of your guns, fear of the brown man, and unrealistic fear that the government is going to take them away.
(emphasis mine)
I don't link to the diary because the diarist replaced his diatribe with an sincere apology, citing "wingnut derangement syndrome" as the reason for overreacting so. The point of preserving those paragraphs is to illustrate how quickly our attitudes were pre-judged: we were accused of "obsessive love of [our] guns," racism, and "unrealistic fear" merely for disagreeing with the diarist. We see similar overreaction all the time, as in this profane comment from a front-pager which added little to the discourse in her story.
Speaking of overreaction and pre-judgment, our own KVoimakas experienced a bit of both when he exercised his right to carry openly in a fast-food place. He handled it well, though:
I've finished my food and continued our discussion on how our winters were when I get called outside by three police officers.
Apparently, they received an "OMG! A MAN WITH A GUN!" call and were dispatched due to a number of local robberies (according to local LEO 1.) They treated me nicely, asked a whole bunch of questions, and local LEO 1 suggested I carry concealed from now.
At which point I told him no. I carry open for a reason. In Michigan, I can open carry without a concealed carry permit and I find that it not only starts a conversation with multiple people on the benefits of an armed society but it also makes people realize that not everyone with a firearm is a bad guy.
I also think that open carry helps criminals make the right decision. I'd rather not have to ever use my handgun to defend me or mine.
But, getting back to the story: the state LEO took my information, thanked me, and we chatted firearms for a couple minutes. It was interesting to note that they took one tone of voice with me before I informed them that I was an instructor and a more conciliatory tone after.
I went back in to A&W and resumed my conversation with the girls behind the counter. They asked what it was about and I said they received a "man with a gun" call. Two of the women were like, yeah, but you always carry. Who called? Did they leave? (I didn't know the answer to either question.)
The point is that at least one person, seeing a firearm, pre-judged that a criminal was attached to it... and then the initial reaction from the police was that he should "carry concealed" despite the fact that he was obeying the law and exercising his constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Perhaps a person who reports a hate crime should be advised to conceal whatever attribute inspired the hate, and a victim of sexual assault should be admonished that (s)he was "asking for it."
When such advice is given in this day and age, it really pisses us off... can't we see that the advice Kyle got, while not as evil, was just as wrong? People who carry openly are the least likely of anyone to commit a crime: by choosing to display their firearm, they are opening themselves up to misguided "man with a gun!!!" calls, and random ID checks by police officers... so they wouldn't be carrying openly if their conscience, and their background check, wasn't pure as the driven snow.
One more bit of pre-judgment I'd like to mention came in a comment a few weeks ago:
The fact is, in the case of that other commenter [...] she has gotten herself a completely false sense of security about a crazy ex by carrying a gun. She isn't any safer. Not one bit. If he wants to get her, he will.
This person has pre-judged that a victim of domestic violence has no hope of defending herself. At the risk of pre-judging her attitudes, I assume she might also recommend that a rape victim "relax and enjoy it."
The bottom line here, folks, is that there are over 200 million guns in the USA. The vast majority of those -- 99.9% or so -- will never be used in a crime. When you see a firearm, don't pre-judge the person carrying it: they might be just as liberal, progressive and peaceful as you.