The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 7, 2019, 02:03 PM   #26
Glenn E. Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,066
The use of metaphors escapes some.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 02:05 PM   #27
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,146
Is this guy serious!?!?!?

Quote:
I decide what is snark, & I'll mock you for 101-level crap
Quote:
I decide what is disrespectful
Quote:
I decide what hater notes to keep...
Quote:
I decide if you're a bot or troll
I understand he runs the FB page and can set the rules... but at the same time it's a FB page that appears to be an outlet to directly address the NRA board of directors. His "rules" are not what I would call tasteful decorum for such a venue. Duly noted Baby Col. Lee.
__________________
Support the NRA-ILA Auction, ends 03/09/2018

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=593946
5whiskey is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 02:19 PM   #28
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 20,089
Quote:
FB page that appears to be an outlet to directly address the NRA board of directors.
I can see where it might seem so, given the position he holds, but, consider its his personal site, and his personal quirks MIGHT NOT be official NRA policy, and possibly even don't represent the way he does his job.

People need to realize that being a rude, snarky person, and possibly offending someone on social media is NOT an automatic condemnation of their ability to do their job.

Example, call me during office hours, and no matter how rude you are (as I perceive it) you get my professional response. Call me at home while I'm eating dinner, or something else important to me, and be snarky, you get ubersnarked back, and maybe hung up on...

I'm not trying to defend this guy, personally, just want to point out that there ought to be a bit more consideration of things before we demand his head for being rude on FACEBOOK... (or anything similar)
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 02:22 PM   #29
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by AB
Mr. Lee said "My page, my rules." So, for his purposes, he decides who is and who isn't a good member. It would appear that, to him, a "good member" is anyone who agrees with him (or keeps quiet if they disagree), and an "ungood member" is anyone who doesn't agree with Mr. Lee and has the temerity to say so in public.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5whiskey
I understand he runs the FB page and can set the rules... but at the same time it's a FB page that appears to be an outlet to directly address the NRA board of directors. His "rules" are not what I would call tasteful decorum for such a venue. Duly noted Baby Col. Lee.
You would hope someone on the board of an important organization would understand that the issue isn't him personally, but not in this case.

It does seem odd to me that grown men communicate in this medium. Why does a question about NRA strategy need to be addressed in mere moments?The short and instant response traps momentary errors in amber (just metaphorically, Glenn). Nearly everyone would seem more reflective if they had to type out a response, put it in an envelope, lick a stamp and drop it into the mail.

Clearly a board member can freelance, but what is the benefit?
zukiphile is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 02:33 PM   #30
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,146
Quote:
It does seem odd to me that grown men communicate in this medium. Why does a question about NRA strategy need to be addressed in mere moments?The short and instant response traps momentary errors in amber (just metaphorically, Glenn). Nearly everyone would seem more reflective if they had to type out a response, put it in an envelope, lick a stamp and drop it into the mail.
In general, I agree. However, here is where I wax on about how Social Media is the way of the world whether we like it or not. Want to run any kind of political campaign these days? Better have twitter followers and a FB page. It doesn't take very long, however, to actually think about any kind of post or response on social media and make an effort to sound adult and polite.

What I believe social media has done is take away polite society. Growing up I was taught that you didn't necessarily blurt out everything that pops in your mind. You first run those thoughts through a filter of sort, think to yourself "is this in the overall best interest," and then form a reasoned response if you decide that saying something is necessary. I would hope that a retired LtCol in the military would have learned some of this along the way. Sure, the military teaches superiors to be blunt with subordinates. But an NRA Board Member is not a superior... he's a representative. He best learn that lesson. I find some things, such as the frequent use of "haters," to be juvenile in big boy adult conversations. Not what I would expect from a retired Field Grade Officer or an NRA Board Member.
__________________
Support the NRA-ILA Auction, ends 03/09/2018

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=593946
5whiskey is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 02:54 PM   #31
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5whiskey
In general, I agree. However, here is where I wax on about how Social Media is the way of the world whether we like it or not.
I'm conscious that my gripe sounds like an old man's complaint about change and that social media are present and real. That doesn't mean that everyone needs it or should use it. I don't carry a cellular telephone. When people ask for a cell number and I say I don't have one, I routinely get a disbelieving stare in response. Yet, I believe it improves the quality of communication I do have with people.

It isn't hard to imagine an orientation for new board members in which someone says "Here is our media consultant. He is going to brief you on how to handle media, and refrain from doing damage to your own reputation and ours".

Last edited by zukiphile; June 7, 2019 at 05:06 PM.
zukiphile is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 03:03 PM   #32
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,146
Quote:
I don't carry a cellular telephone.
I envy you sir. I frequently want to throw mine out of a car window.

Quote:
I believe it improves the quality of communication I do have with people.
I believe you are correct.

Quote:
It isn't hard to imagine an orientation for new board members in which someone says "Here is our media consultant. He is going to brief you on how to handle media, and refrain from doing damage to your own reputation and ours".
Not hard to imagine at all. Despite the fact that I have been a fairly large supporter and defender of the NRA, mostly as I believe they typically do "the greater good," I think they have enough issues to deal with without board members further complicating matters.

Instead of "your snark doesn't deserve a reply. Try again." It would be a simple matter to say that "I don't really appreciate that you believe that we will roll over, however the board is discussing our response at this time. I can affirm that we oppose any further restrictions on suppressors."
__________________
Support the NRA-ILA Auction, ends 03/09/2018

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=593946
5whiskey is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 04:56 PM   #33
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,289
Seems like the NRA’s function lately is to act as a liaison for the gun control crowd... just to soften the blows, so to speak. Same can be said for political leaders that are supposed to be on our side.
rickyrick is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 06:19 PM   #34
Nathan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 4,778
Quote:
What specifically do you have in mind that the NRA can win without repubs?

The exec is going to be a repub or a dem. Which plausible dem is better on the issue?
This is the kind of thinking that causes failure. When we give up on the idea of multi-party government, we give up on representative government.

30% of us population at mínimum are gun owners. If the nra can deliver our vote with a relatively normal, not extreme, candidate, I feel they could deliver a lot of that 30%. Then, being normal could appeal to some Democrats, Independents and whatever is called Republican now!

That is a SOLID win!
Nathan is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 06:43 PM   #35
2wheelwander
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2018
Posts: 288
More evidence, to me, the NRA is not what it was and why I still have not renewed membership.
2wheelwander is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 08:04 PM   #36
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
Quote:
What specifically do you have in mind that the NRA can win without repubs?

The exec is going to be a repub or a dem. Which plausible dem is better on the issue?
This is the kind of thinking that causes failure.
The kind of thinking that asks you what you mean causes failure? What are the odds that a political movement would have no questions at all posed to it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
When we give up on the idea of multi-party government, we give up on representative government.
We have multi-party government with our two party system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
30% of us population at mínimum are gun owners.
I agree. Note that being a gun owner doesn't transform a person into a defender of the right described in the 2d Am. any more than having a book transforms a person into a free speech advocate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
If the nra can deliver our vote with a relatively normal, not extreme, candidate, I feel they could deliver a lot of that 30%. Then, being normal could appeal to some Democrats, Independents and whatever is called Republican now!

That is a SOLID win!
The current alignment existed before DJT's presidency. I don't see any real harm in jokes at the expense of public figures, but reference with names like an "orange candidate" or "President Entertainment" were once prohibited here as invective ("Posting invectives will not be tolerated.").

If you can't even describe a plausible path to NRA victory without members of the party that won the last election for the presidency and senate majority, and you can't name a likely candidate from the other party, it seems unlikely that you have something realistic in mind that could be executed. That 30%, even if you got every last one of them, may not do the trick if none of the other 70% have a reason to join them.

Last edited by zukiphile; June 8, 2019 at 05:55 AM.
zukiphile is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 08:53 PM   #37
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP
I can see where it might seem so, given the position he holds, but, consider its his personal site, and his personal quirks MIGHT NOT be official NRA policy, and possibly even don't represent the way he does his job.
My late wife had a Facebook page. She used her name -- nothing else. My daughter has a Facebook page. She uses her name -- nothing else. If he wants to have a personal Facebook page, it should be personal -- "Willes Lee."

The problem is, the name of the Facebook page is "Willes Lee NRA Board of Directors." That isn't (IMHO) a proper name for a "personal" Facebook page. To me, that just screams out "This is the page to contact me about NRA business."
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 7, 2019, 10:41 PM   #38
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,146
Quote:
My late wife had a Facebook page. She used her name -- nothing else. My daughter has a Facebook page. She uses her name -- nothing else. If he wants to have a personal Facebook page, it should be personal -- "Willes Lee."

The problem is, the name of the Facebook page is "Willes Lee NRA Board of Directors." That isn't (IMHO) a proper name for a "personal" Facebook page. To me, that just screams out "This is the page to contact me about NRA business."
That’s exactly how I saw it. I would be much less put off if the page vanity name was just Willes Lee. It’s not. By sheer virtue of the name of his FB page it’s not as simple as chalking it up to being his personal page. It gives the appearance of an official nra connection. And he looks tone deaf and too eager to copy language used by the president that even many of his supporters don’t ... well... support coming from a president.
__________________
Support the NRA-ILA Auction, ends 03/09/2018

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=593946
5whiskey is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 10:38 AM   #39
Mike38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2009
Location: North Central Illinois
Posts: 2,137
Quote:
Tom Servo wrote:
I'd like to think someone could primary against him in 2020, but the Democratic party has gone more extreme than they've ever been on the issue, so we're stuck with the only-so-slightly lesser evil on the issue.
You honestly think the likes of Hillary Clinton is a "only-so-slightly lesser evil" than Donald Trump? Imagine if you will two years of her in the White House, and the damage she could do to the second amendment. Much more than a ban on bump stocks, I guaranty you. Have gun owners already forgotten 1994?
Mike38 is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 10:59 AM   #40
punkinhead
Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2014
Posts: 23
The 1994 ban supported by Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush Sr? Yes, I remember that.
punkinhead is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 11:50 AM   #41
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
You honestly think the likes of Hillary Clinton is a "only-so-slightly lesser evil" than Donald Trump? Imagine if you will two years of her in the White House, and the damage she could do to the second amendment. Much more than a ban on bump stocks, I guaranty you. Have gun owners already forgotten 1994?
Quote:
The 1994 ban supported by Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush Sr? Yes, I remember that.
Unrelated to Willes Lee and his response to the NRA member who commented on his Facebook page.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 01:10 PM   #42
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,499
Quote:
The problem is, the name of the Facebook page is "Willes Lee NRA Board of Directors." That isn't (IMHO) a proper name for a "personal" Facebook page. To me, that just screams out "This is the page to contact me about NRA business."
He wants to have it both ways. He represents the NRA only if you agree with him.

Are there any good directors left that we know of? I kinda think all of them should be fired just to remind the board that they work for us. But I think they've changed the rules so that's impossible; and they don't work for us anymore, we just pay the bills.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth
zxcvbob is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 01:51 PM   #43
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by zxcvbob
Are there any good directors left that we know of? I kinda think all of them should be fired just to remind the board that they work for us. But I think they've changed the rules so that's impossible; and they don't work for us anymore, we just pay the bills.
The by-laws were revised two (I think) years ago. The changes effectively made it impossible for the members to exercise any control over "their" organization.

Jeff Knox wrote about it fairly extensively in his blog at the time.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 04:15 PM   #44
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 8,747
Back to the "snarkiness" of the post(s), everyone should get in the habit of writing or typing a snarky or controversial post without sending it. Chill out a few minutes or longer. Then re-read it and maybe have someone you trust also read it. Only then should you post it. I've done this many times and have been glad I didn't go off half-cocked. Having said that, I realize that's not the way the online world normally works, but maybe it should be.
KyJim is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 04:39 PM   #45
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,289
KyJim, great advice. I’ve posted stuff that I should have re-read beforehand.
rickyrick is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 05:02 PM   #46
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyJim
Back to the "snarkiness" of the post(s), everyone should get in the habit of writing or typing a snarky or controversial post without sending it. Chill out a few minutes or longer. Then re-read it and maybe have someone you trust also read it. Only then should you post it. I've done this many times and have been glad I didn't go off half-cocked. Having said that, I realize that's not the way the online world normally works, but maybe it should be.
KyJim, are you referring to Mr. Willes' post, or the NRA member's post to which Willes was responding? Willes characterized the member's post as "snark," but I didn't see it that way at all. I saw it as a sincere statement/question. The snark was Willes's reply.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 05:55 PM   #47
Thomas Clarke
Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2012
Posts: 26
I read at 46 posts in this thread. The OP is I think correctly understood by all. What he represents is what no one tolerates at either work or in our own homes. I call it My House My Rules. I win. You Lose. I would like to think that all of us as Americans recognize that this level exemplified by the OP is not what we are all about. It is why the Second Amendment must be protected at all costs by all of us. The OP is dangerous and a threat to all of us. He is much worse than the Democrats. There can be no compromise on out rights to Keep and Bear Arms. The alternative is not acceptable.
Thomas Clarke is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 07:03 PM   #48
ATN082268
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by zxcvbob View Post
and they don't work for us anymore, we just pay the bills.
Kind of like the government...
ATN082268 is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 08:05 PM   #49
ATN082268
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca View Post
The by-laws were revised two (I think) years ago. The changes effectively made it impossible for the members to exercise any control over "their" organization.

Jeff Knox wrote about it fairly extensively in his blog at the time.
That is a deal breaker for me.
ATN082268 is offline  
Old June 8, 2019, 11:00 PM   #50
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,664
Please don't take my word on it. Read up on it and make your own decision based on more complete information than my fuzzy memory.

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/01/vot...#axzz5qJtc2cAO

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...rules-changes/

https://www.wnd.com/2017/01/dont-be-...-reforms-push/
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10849 seconds with 8 queries