And so far it seems that few have be able to comprehend what I am saying, nothing but spouting of fears and crap that society has been brainwashing people into as it urges towards socialism. That or some are understanding, but just so scared they can't comprehend allowing someone to be able to make their own choices...to live and let live... to let people make mistakes... that they don't want to see anything else.
People are so afraid to be alone/stand-alone.
I have already established that if done under the flag of NFOA, of course no alcohol, as per consensus. Also, it must be understood that I am talking about reality at large, not specifically this event. I was attacking the ideology that is trying to destroy the Constitution and this country which is found here... alcohol and firearms are two topics that happen share a similar view in society and share similar ridiculous regulations.
According to all comments so far, they are based off of what you fear or what "you can trust" or what makes you feel "uncomfortable"...but another person's rights are
not based and not subject to what someone else or societies fears/whims/wants, can trust, comforts. You have no right and no business to force things. If someone wants to drink a glass of battery acid or arsenic on a daily basis, that is their choice and they have the right to do so, you have no right to stop them. If they go out and rob/burglarize places to be able to fund that, then punish them for the theft/damages done (i.e. defend yourself, your family, and your property per right of self-defense...which may mean putting a bullet in the attackers head), but the drink was not the problem. A person's intention or motives are meaningless. It doesn't matter if someone knew what they were doing, the reason, or intentions... all that matters is the actions they do that infringe on another person's rights (in other words does actual harm, emotional does not count...you should be in control of your emotions, they should not control you).
According this stupid socialistic mentality: anything that makes someone else feel uncomfortable, unsafe, disturbs, annoys, etc. is a problem... which is complete crap. To which, of course, a double standard keeps coming into play.
What happens in your life is your business and should stay your business, not to be made into someone else's business, regardless of numbers/volume/frequency.
Everyone is thinking on the lines of current society.... current society is horrible and should not be followed anywhere let alone adhered to.
If you can't go one evening without alcohol to attend an event with friends and guns, then that is a drinking problem and you don't have the self control you think you do.
You are talking about dependence there, which dependence is a bad thing for anything...especially if it involves society or government.
Did I ever say I "had" to have a drink? No, so don't accuse me of such a thing as I have said nothing of the sort. But the claim that it can't be done or mixed with other activities responsibly is ludicrous. The times it is done responsibly are not reported or heard about, just the same as the times when someone defends themselves or a mass shooting is stopped by an armed citizen is rarely heard about if at all.
Now if you want to know more in detail of my drinking (which there is very little of): Personally, I rarely drink at all, not even at my own house, not because of some law or societal views...but because alcohol has lost most of it's appeal to me, I have no use for it. I drink maybe 1 or 2 beers a month or even in 2 months time (and that I think of it, continues to grow less)...do I take a shot from time to time, sure but that is usually only a couple times a year and is left at 1 or 2 as well. I
NEVER get drunk or allow myself to lose control even in the slightest (and I have had many people try to convince me to drink more and more, but I always refuse even if it means them thinking bad of me)...again that is irresponsible and and serves absolutely no purpose to become drunk or lose control. But that must be taught, it cannot be regulated.
But I know not only from experience but also empirically that it can be mixed responsibly. Sure there are a lot of irresponsible idiots out there and that is the problem.
As far as being an official event- that's total up to whoever is setting it up. If you are going to invite some buddies over that happen to be NFOA members- so be it, but if you are going to invite the NFOA membership, then I say - GO BIG OR GO HOME 
Like I said, I would lave to see more of a family affair- Take over Central Park if need be. OR maybe check out Platte River State Park- cabins, picnic areas, etc and I bet we could talk the folks at the Outdoor Heritage Shooting Park for a group rate . Anyway- gotta go.
What I originally had in mind was an informal event with the NFOA being the beginning of who may attend, not the actual base, not limited to and no intention of the like. To be an open event...you invite some friends, others invite friends....and so on. Not intended for NFOA or any other group insignia to be present on an official bases....but if that is what we want, sure why not.
And yes, it would be nice for a very large party.
Sorry if it seems that we're coming down on you hard and I'm glad that safety and education are your focus when selling firearms. I think, yes, there was a misunderstanding of how "formal" of an event we were talking about. I think one of the big things is that there are a good chunk of folks here that carry near 100% and in following both the letter of the law and voluntarily holding themselves to a high standard will absolutely not carry and use alcohol. If they did have to deploy their firearm and it comes back that they had consumed alcohol right before such incident, not only is that against the law because of the zero tolerance policy written into law, but they would assumed to be lacking judgement should it come down to justification of force.
Don't get me wrong, society has a warped view on so many things and I do recognize that they will come down on harder, twisting and completely lying about things as they desire to completely strip people of all rights (not just firearms). So, yes I do recognize and completely understand what everyone else is saying...the problem I am seeing so much fear/emotion that is not allowing people to see the real problems out there. People need to stop turning to government/society/regulation and rely on themselves...you don't provide it for yourself, you don't get it... seeking legislation is seeking others to provide it for you. If others voluntarily help those in need, that is their choice to make (which I do a lot: so much community service, so many donations made, etc.).
Following an unconstitutional law is not just wrong and appalling, it part of the reason why we are here today struggling to maintain something that should have no laws attached to it at all. It is the duty and right of people to disobey, fight back, and strike down laws that are unconstitutional or just plain appalling.
I would say that if we met at a place and a person wasn't carrying or had any firearm then I would have no problem with that person enjoying a beer or two while grilling out; even with other people around that are carrying. maybe that's where we're getting mixed up. But I would have an issue with a person that I know is carrying choose to drink because that person obviously has disregard for the law and there has been way too much work to be done to openly disregard the zero tolerance policy when it comes to the CHP. Even if it doesn't affect a person individually, the it comes to an image issue and it's those type of news headlines and statistics that we try to avoid.
I understand what everyone is trying to avoid....but also recognizing that by going along with these things is what helps them (those that wish to destroy this country, the Constitution and leave the people powerless) push more and more forward, slowly dragging us with them... either way we are losing because we are going along with things under the guise of "avoiding", "safety", "prevention", and such.
What one person deems safe or acceptable is not what another may deem safe or acceptable...and neither has a right to force their ideal onto someone else...hence why no regulation can be formed. It doesn't even matter if a majority is in agreement, if it infringes on even 1 innocent person's rights negatively, it should and cannot be allowed.
It would be a wonderful and boring world if everything entirely relied on logic instead of emotion but humans are both emotional and logical. We naturally group people, objects, fears, stereotypes, statistics, and risks together. Every animal, every being does this. If I go to handle four snakes and the first three bite me, do you think I'm going to give the 4th snake the benefit of the doubt before it, as an individual snake, does me harm?
Did I say anything against this? But you, me, nor anyone else has any no right to make that decision for another person and creating a regulation not only makes the decision for another person, but forces it down on them.
You can make the decision to avoid the "snakes" on your own (and for your children as they are under your care and are your responsibility, everything they do and choice they make is yours to bear, until they reach adulthood). But you cannot make that decision for another and you don't need a law for you to make that decision.
I never said strip emotion completely away (not possible nor a good thing to do), just don't let it dictate decisions as they will always lead you wrong in the end and are irrational. Emotion is merely a guide/assistant....logic and reasoning should be the final deciders and often they contradict emotion.
While I may agree with some of your points personally.
I made the choice to apply with the State for a CHP permit, and with that chioce I agreed to follow the rules.
I may not agree with all the rules that the Legislature put in the law, however by abiding by them and supporting NFOA I feel the chances of getting the rules changed down the road are improved.
Greg58
And if I don't get a stupid CHP/CCW permit (which does absolutely nothing but registers the person, treats innocent people like a criminal, infringes on the innocent person's rights, etc.), can I still purchase and carry concealed or otherwise as is my right to do so without paperwork or anyone knowing? No, because I am being forced (coercion and requirements are forms of force...under threat of imprisonment or other punishment). You are not doing it voluntarily as you may think you are...if you truly are doing so voluntarily, I'm sorry you are so willing to turn your right into privilege for any reason...but you have no right to make that decision for anyone else. And no, it does not show anyone that you are "taking responsibility" or anything like it...that is nothing but a trick to push for a right to be changed into a privilege so it can be taken away...nor is it anyone's right/business to demand such proof.
A right does NOT require and should never have permission, paperwork, or anything of the such attached to it...that would be called a privilege.
A right is something you are born/created with and has only one condition attached: don't infringe on another person's rights, otherwise they may use their right of self-defense against you which could mean your life. Well, how has you, me or anyone here owning a firearm and using it to defend ourselves ever infringed on another person's rights? No, it doesn't in any way (when someone attacks, they have CHOSEN to forfeit their rights and to be subject on the victim's decision of right to self-defense).
It is also NONE of societies or government business to know what I or anyone else has or whether we are carrying or not...regardless of their fears or location.
Following an unconstitutional law is not just wrong and appalling, it is a large part of the reason we are here today struggling to maintain something that should have no laws at all. It is the duty and right of the people to disobey, fight back, and strike down laws that are unconstitutional or merely appalling.
By obeying laws that are abhorrent to the Constitution, not to mention freedom itself, we give those laws authority/power/legitimacy/etc. and thus gives off the idea that the laws are desired or even acceptable.
One of the most important ways of enforcing the Constitution is by disobeying the laws passed that violate it. Just because the Supreme Court says something is within the bindings of the Constitution does
NOT make it so. SCOTUS
IS NOT the final say or decider...that is the people themselves.
Knowing that you don't mind mixing drinking, carrying a gun and driving makes me glad I live in Lincoln.
The rest of your post, while insulting, will not be responded to by me.
And there is the emotion... It is your choice to be insulted, I cannot control that, only you can...even though I have no idea what you are claiming to be insulting.
And if you are unwilling to read and hear people out, how could you possibly understand even in the slightest of what they are really saying?
And I know someone may come back with "what if it was your child being ran over and killed by a drunk driver"...(this is always the case, but the one who brings it up always seems to fail to think from any other point of view)...well, I would be crushed and mourn greatly, I would seek the maximum punishment for such a crime (which would be murder) for the person (should they live). No, I would not seek new legislation as the only crime committed was that of murder. Alcohol itself did not cause it to happen, the person and their irresponsibility caused it... they failed to drive their vehicle according to conditions (either them, traffic, road, weather, etc.).
Also, if someone wants to play the what-if game: what if a meteor came down and killed your kid, shall we make a law for meteors next? How about what if your kid chokes to death on a gummy bear, shall we make a law (i.e. age limits?) for gummy bears next? How about buying hot coffee and then burning yourself, shall we make a law (oops this one already did, great...lets shelter and cradle such idiots than they already are)?
Making a law to outlaw something we are uncomfortable just so we can have a false sense like we are actually doing something with is completely wrong to do and does not target the actual problem, thus the actual problem continues. Also, laws that "protect" people from themselves are ridiculous as you cannot victimize yourself (i.e. seat belt laws).
Human beings, society have not made any "progress"... we have only regressed in the last 170 years. There was no "freeing of the slaves"...it just changed from being a single group being enslaved to everyone being enslaved.
