TexasCHLforum.com

Posted: **Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:01 pm**

According to his Facebook page, Mr. Vogt is formerly of Stamford, Connecticut, now of Austin, Texas. (Howdy neighbor!) Blame Keep it Weirdville’s tech sector for the anti-gun virus; the dog lover with a love for gun control works for Austin’s BTO Group.
Nope, not Bachman Turner Overdrive, a “highly advanced Cloud Solutions Provider, providing end-to-end Web 3.0 IT transformation solutions & services to the Fortune-1000, Energy and Healthcare.” B-b-b-b-baby you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Although I have seen that stock shot on their website about a billion times.

Hmmmm So the company he works for is in IT services for the energy sector... Time to talk to a few CIO and CTO friends in the Fortune 500 energy firms. Maybe this will influence some outsourcing decisions. Actions have consequences...

Posted: **Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:19 am**

PArrow wrote:Is there something wrong with the air in and around Austin? There must be a lack of oxygen or something, maybe too much mercury in the water..

Enough dope smoke can displace a lot of oxygen.

Posted: **Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:54 pm**

Haha. They are getting shredded to pieces on their FB page.

Posted: **Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:20 pm**

Syntyr wrote: Time to talk to a few CIO and CTO friends in the Fortune 500 energy firms. .

Curious, you're willing to cut off his employment options, so obviously they're doing something seriously wrong..
I've gone though the groups page, they only "smart" gun control legislation they really allude for limitations around those with mental issues... Which, yes, is more gun legislation and restriction.
What is it that they've directly posted that you object to? Educate me, I guess I'm just missing it... Perhaps they are posting details elsewhere.

Posted: **Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:24 am**

cb1000rider wrote: What is it that they've directly posted that you object to? Educate me, I guess I'm just missing it... Perhaps they are posting details elsewhere.

You are completely missing the point of "astroturfing" organizations. Don't read the words on their site, which are deliberately designed to mollify and placate. Look at the _people_, follow the _money_.

Quick question: Have ANY of the people that formed this group been to an IDPA or USPSA match? Do they have a CHL? What has been their past published thoughts about gun control? Who have they politically backed in the past? Who do they appear to be aligned with? Are any of them experienced with the handling and use of firearms such that they are recognized among their peers as thought leaders?

When you did into the background of the creators and the backing of the site, you will find their true colors.

Posted: **Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:23 am**

alvins wrote:yea well anyone who starts using those buzz words such as "best practices" i will start ignoring you.whats next they are going to come up with a game changer?lol

Best practices is a business term. It should be left in business. This is about the law and rights under the Constitution.
Somehow I'm thinking if "best practices" means that the local SWAt get SCARs and body armor, thats not going to be recommended for Joe Blow.

Posted: **Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:32 pm**

In their “core values” they state”:

“Community : Firearms are best enjoyed safely in collaboration with fellow enthusiasts – whether that be in the form of hunting, marksmanship, competition, skills training, or in a community of online exchange of information, expertise, experiences, achievements and ideas.”

There are those that “enjoy” firearms. I have no problem with that.

Personally, I just want to be able to carry firearms for protection, go to the range enough to be able to shoot well, and be left alone. I don’t need any group using “best practices” to decide what I should be allowed to carry.

Posted: **Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:50 pm**

Note the argument it uses for State's Rights as well. While I am normally in favor of that, not so much when it comes to human rights under the US Constitution.

Under this view, NY is just fine in its laws as its state's rights trump the Second Amendment:

R+P believes that it is each state’s right to determine for benefit of its citizens any prerequisites, qualifications, documentation, training, and levels of demonstrated proficiency, if any, deemed necessary for lawful use of differing types of weapon systems.

Posted: **Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:00 pm**

OldCannon wrote: You are completely missing the point of "astroturfing" organizations. Don't read the words on their site, which are deliberately designed to mollify and placate. Look at the _people_, follow the _money_.

I've never heard of an astroturfing organization.

Sorry, I'm not very good at 3rd party calls on good/bad guy without some references. I like to make up my own mind. I'm not very placated by this organization, but if you're going to make that "bad guy" call, I want specifics of why. I want to read and understand for myself. I already think there are far too many sheep out there on both sides of the political spectrum that just read a headline and decide that it fits their mindset.

OldCannon wrote:Quick question: Have ANY of the people that formed this group been to an IDPA or USPSA match? Do they have a CHL? What has been their past published thoughts about gun control? Who have they politically backed in the past? Who do they appear to be aligned with? Are any of them experienced with the handling and use of firearms such that they are recognized among their peers as thought leaders?

Those are all good questions... And I think they are worth answering if they're wanting support or $$ of the public.

OldCannon wrote: When you did into the background of the creators and the backing of the site, you will find their true colors.

And what are those exactly? We've got a tech guy that's good at social media. He has some sort of passion for "sane" firearms control. There's a reference to an Obama posting on Facebook, but it's no longer up, so I can't see who put it there...

Again, just not willing to jump into one camp or the other without some 1st hand information. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm simply asking for the data!

Posted: **Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:07 pm**

cb1000rider wrote:I've never heard of an astroturfing organization.

One that pretends to be grass roots but isn't.

Posted: **Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:37 pm**

Found this on their website:
http://amriflepistol.com/confessions-of ... supporter/

It is allegedly an interview with their Chairman, but it feels pretty slick to me. The wording seems very carefully crafted to portray NRA members (or anyone who might question this new group's legitimacy) as paranoid, dim-witted, fringe-types. Hey, wait, isn't that exactly how a lot of anti-gun folks see us? A couple examples from the "interview:"

Q: So do I understand you correctly in saying that you want people to actually believe that you are a legitimate Texas-based company, and not some Astroturf, anti-gun lobbying group? And don’t try and deny it. I read that in an online blog somewhere, so it must be true.

PV: Not even close. We are absolutely a legitimate, legal corporation, as can be easily verified with the office of the Secretary of State of Texas. We’re not an Astroturf group either, which you might surmise when you realize that our focus isn’t politics and legislation. It’s social networking and education. Now in the future, should the cumulative voice of our members carry sufficient weight to help shape public policy, that will be great. But if that ever did happen, it would happen very publicly and not behind closed doors, via our publicly published polls, surveys, trending topics, and open forum.

Q: Okay fine, Peter! But isn’t it true that you are secretly a member of the infamous anti-gun organization called Mayors Against Illegal Guns, or MAIG, headed up by the chief anti-gun proponent in the world, one Mayor Michael Bloomberg?

PV: I might have one or two secrets, but sorry, that’s not one of them. Actually, I was never a member, but I am most definitely against illegal guns though, is that a bad thing?

Q: What? But I’ve got a picture of you right here, a screenshot I scraped from your Facebook page that proves you are one of those anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment, gun-grabbing, anti-Americans! Ha!

PV: Wow. Take a breath. It’ll be okay. Better? Okay, good. Look, if you really want to know the context of those posts, I happened to be back in Connecticut in a nearby town to Sandy Hook on that horrible day. My family members happen to have an active business in Sandy Hook and were very close to one of the children who lost her life on that day. I recognized then, as a citizen, and one who by-the-way carries a firearm at all times, where legal, that more constructive dialog needs to occur, what I call root cause analysis, this really needs to take place. I think everyone realizes we can do a better job managing our firearms—society that is. Is this a bad position? Is this even debatable? Oh, and just for the record, I am against illegal guns. There, I said it, the secret is out.

Definitely feels like astroturf/false flag to me.

Posted: **Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:46 pm**

I'm still wait-and-see.
Legal corporation means absolutely nothing. They filed paperwork to do some sort of business, that's it.
Wait and see means if they were asking me for money, I'd want to see behind the curtain.
It also means that I wouldn't try and shut down this guy in terms of legal employment options either... I just don't understand why we've got to be so polar on everything.

There are advantages, especially with younger voters to being technology and social media savvy.... Again I'd want to see what's really going on first hand before making up my mind or jumping on the bandwagon.

Posted: **Tue Jul 16, 2013 10:32 pm**

http://www.kltv.com/story/22857983/new- ... gun-owners" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Tue Jul 16, 2013 10:38 pm**

http://amriflepistol.com/frequently-asked-questions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posting both of these links FYI...no agenda and not a member/donor. I saw the link to the KLTV story and immediately remembered reading this thread.

Posted: **Tue Jul 16, 2013 10:43 pm**

It's interesting.

On their Facebook page, some people posted comments calling the group, "pretty slick," then accusing them of trying to strip citizens of their rights to own weapons.

VS

"We're definitely a pro-gun organization. We're all fellow gun owners. I mean, I myself am a concealed handgun carrier here in the state of Texas. We absolutely want our gun rights protected. We are not a pro-gun control organization," Gelinas says.

Anyone have actual facts?

TexasCHLforum.com

American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE

Re: American Rifle and Pistol Association: BEWARE