Instead of moving away from gun control states, should we move into them?

Status
Not open for further replies.

goon

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
7,368
Here's the thing...

Any time we discuss states like CT or NY, several of us make a statement along the lines of "you guys in NY should move away. There's room in Texas."

As danez71 has pointed out a few times, it's hard to win rights back when you don't stay and try to win them back. Logic would also suggest that it would be easier to win rights back if you have more angry, howling gun owners in a state writing more letters, spending more money, and casting more votes to remove anti-gun politicians from office.

So are we doing this wrong?
If we want to start and win rights back, should we start moving to areas with harsh gun control and using that as a form of activism to convert them back?

Is this idea even the slightest bit practical?
How many people would it take?
Would you do it, even just for a year or two?
I'm thinking that given Colorado voters' irritation and their willingness to unseat anti-gun legislators, it may be the best state to start with... if we could somehow organize enough people to try this.
 
i moved from ct and have no plans on going back other than attending a wedding or funeral! who would go back to make a political statement? i bought a house in south carolina that i couldn't duplicate at twice the price, my taxes are 80% lower, utilities 50-70% lower and the weather allows for year round outdoor activities without freezing my nads off.

is sc utopia? it's not 100% but no place is 100%. from my perspective--it rates at least 90% of what i consider ideal.

ct is really 2 states in one--fairfield county and the rest. ct liberals have created a dependent underclass, taxed the productive and alienated the educated. it's the next rust belt.
 
In Colorado, gun control became a legislative issue because a bunch of Californians transplanted themselves there, and started voting the same way. The reason pot is legal and magazines are restricted is not because patriots left, but because antis moved in.
 
Dumb phone....

Anyway, at this point, I don't think enough people are willing to go behind enemy lines to fight as part of the entrenched resistance. I'm not. We can fight the good fight by donating to pro 2A orgs and companies. I'm not willing to give up freedoms in an attempt to help others regain theirs. Money, yes. Freedoms, no. Sounds selfish, but its honest.
 
If I would move to say NJ. A house there would cost me 3 times of what it cost here. Plus property taxes are $10,000 to $15,000 there. I would have to sell my firearms and get a second job or two just to afford just to live there....no thanks...
 
One of the basic tenants of the idea of a "United States" was fostering competition between states and citizens would vote with their feet by moving to states with better opportunity, more freedom, and less intrusion on rights. I see no point in purposely moving to a state that is underperforming in any of those areas solely to take up a fight that is probably generational in duration and most likely un-winnable. You would be a single voice crying out in the wilderness amidst millions diametrically opposed to you and just as fervent in their beliefs as you are in yours.
 
Good luck moving to Connecticut, should you desire to do so! I spent my childhood in that state, received an undergraduate degree that was subsidized by the taxpayers of Connecticut and, when it was all said and done, a little more than 20 yrs ago, it was worth the whopping sum of $7.00 an hour (minimum wage at that time, I think, was $6.50 an hr). Despite being a 'wealthy' state, it does nothing to encourage job growth and to encourage industries to locate in, or even stay, in Connecticut. Governor Malloy even stated that, despite the money and jobs that Colt Firearms brings to Connecticut, Connecticut would be far better off without Colt Firearms (if he did not state it outright, it certainly was implied). Taxes are really high up there, and it seems to me that taxes are getting ever higher (e.g., taxing of the individual) to subsidize a class of people who move to that state because they do not want to work. Of course, if industries leave, it creates less employment opportunities there, less corporate revenue for the state coffers, and, therefore, increased taxation at the individual level.

Obviously, once I had job opportunities elsewhere, I left. That was not the original intent. Of my graduating high school class of 143, only a handful are left up there, most barely scraping by.
 
You guys really know how to make someone hate their life. Stupid connecticut. Please move back. Help us! Lol.

You guys speak the truth. I've been trying to get out of CT for a few years now but it's one obstacle after another. Mainly money. The union I was in tanked and now I make 300 ucks a week working my ass off at good ol FedEx.

I'm getting to the point where I'm about to leave the significant other and pack up and leave. 90% of the people I know are all graduates of schools like UCONN and Johnston and whales and the majority of them still work at the mall or serve my food.
 
When the elected elite rule the people instead of representing them, adding more people to their rule will not dictate their policies.

Or... when the house is on fire, you evacuate, not invite people inside in hopes that the bodies smother the flames.
 
I you want to fight slavery, do you sell yourself into it? If addiction is an evil, start shooting up?

The idea is to get away from the source of the problem, which usually stems from the attitudes of the masses around you. They copy each other to climb the ladder of social rank. Standing independently is no longer considered "being nice" or politically correct.

Bail. It's what you would do if meth labs and gangstas or the Cartel moved into your hood. It's the #1 solution the refugees from Katrina exercised, and it's the institutional answer imposed on the poor from New Orleans. Houston hasn't gotten better, now people are bailing from there.

The problem is the Metro Mindset, and since that is the core issue, the answer is get out of the Metro. Or, get used to being one. :evil:
 
the whole proposition of this post is absurd. Example: New York:

Democratic: 5,507,928 (59.1%)
Republican: 3,130,122 (33.6%)


I guess if you could get 2.5 million voting pro-gun Republicans to move from rural America (it does no good to pull folks from other liberal cities... which most are) to New York state, you would have a chance. Folks moving en masse from low-cost states with jobs to high-cost states with no jobs? Dream on...
 
Last edited:
I don't see many people giving up their rights, and moving to states where cost of living is twice, or more what it is in gun friendly states in order to try to turn the tables on the antis. The key is education of the remaining populace, and reversal of our educational system, and the media constantly promoting statism (the nanny state).
 
It may take another 20 years but States like New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois, Rhode Island, & Maryland will fail totally. Their anti-business policies, high taxes, and encouragement of the entitlement class guarantees it. Fewer and fewer hard-working middle class people are currently supporting this and they are trapped with falling home prices and family networks. Pulling up roots and moving to a successful State is financially and socially painful. This is not just about gun rights, but these seem to be closely connected to economic freedom. Roughly quoting Jefferson: it is tyranny to tax a man to support things that are abhorrent to him.

Another consideration is that lib-**** socialists are moving to successful States as they follow the jobs. This is what happened to Colorado and is happening now in the Carolinas and Florida. We need people who value ALL their civil rights and freedoms to prevent them from coming here and voting away our civil liberties in an attempt to regain their government provided privileges.
 
I'm largely in agreement.

When this conversation comes up, I completely understand why people leave. I'm looking for a job in a "good" state right now and some states aren't even on the radar. CT, NY, NJ, CA, MD... I haven't even looked for jobs in those states. They could have a million jobs in my field and I wouldn't know it... they don't exist to me.

And since I haven't been willing to move to one of those states, I'd feel like a hypocrite telling anyone else to stay and try to hold out for a reversal.

Anyone who thinks that's the right path shouldn't just tell others to do that... he should get on a bus tomorrow and relocate to CT to join the people he's been advising to stay put. And since I'm not willing to do that I'm also not willing to tell someone else to do it.

But I also wonder if this strategy of running like hell and just hoping it doesn't follow us isn't going to bite us in the end.

Curator said:
Another consideration is that lib-**** socialists are moving to successful States as they follow the jobs. This is what happened to Colorado and is happening now in the Carolinas and Florida. We need people who value ALL their civil rights and freedoms to prevent them from coming here and voting away our civil liberties in an attempt to regain their government provided privileges.

I can understand why you'd want to keep those people out, but how do you do that?
It's not like you can meet them at the border and turn away anyone with an unacceptable license plate.
 
Moving is a giant PITA, and what would I do with my prohibited guns?

I would move OUT of a state because of bad gun laws, but I lack the energy to move INTO one and sacrifice the freedom I have in my home state in an uncertain effort to turn the tide. Besides, if we all leave our home states then the remaining antis will just turn them while we're gone.

I'm staying put.
 
It probably will. People in CT are leaving in droves to go south. The yuppy New Yorkers who aren't quite in the wealthy bracket are moving to CT cuz it's cheaper. The demographic in CT has changed light years in the 26 years I've spent here. Massachuesettes is next and I'm sure New Hampshire won't be long after that. The influence from NY is going to kill New England.

Eventually they will call the whole northeast "the other California". It will be just one big state.
 
If you need employment, you are very likely 'middle class'. There is increasingly no middle class in Connecticut. An anti-firearm wealthy elite, who inherited their money, or relocated to Connecticut prior to the early '90's, from New York, because, at that time, Connecticut did not have a state income tax, or a class of individuals who are unemployed/don't want to work/working poor. No in-between middle-class anymore! And the state does nothing to encourage growth of the middle class. In this regard, the state is on a path to nothing short of bankruptcy.

It amazes me that the wealthy in Connecticut are so anti-firearm. Especially since many of them inherited vast sums of wealth that were related, directly or indirectly, to the firearms industry.

Kind of seems like an oxymoron to toss around the term industry when discussing Connecticut anymore.

Connecticut benefited greatly during the expansive years of this country during the post-Civil War period (maybe even earlier) during the Gilded Age. Lots of industry in that state, located on the coast, between New York and Boston. Now, crumbling cities, no industry, high taxes. Not a good environment to relocate to, in my opinion.
 
Many years ago, I moved to a control-freakish NE state to take a great job. I lasted there less than two years, even though the job was very good. Came back to the southwest and here I'll stay.

If a mob of you younger guys want to go to the cold, dreary, overcrowded, expensive police states to try to make a statement of some sort, you still have plenty of time left in your lifespans to correct that move.

I'll watch from the comfort of the sunny southwest. ;)
 
Instead of moving away from gun control states, should we move into them?
And what exactly happens to my firearms and magazines when I do?

I'm from Apartheid Chicago. The asinine gun laws are just ONE reason not to be there, those including:
  • insane cost of living
  • lack of jobs
  • cravenly corrupt government and police
  • high rates of violent crime
  • racial attitudes aptly reflected by Frank Collin AND Louis Farrakhan

I would no more move to Chicago or New York City than I'd move to Teheran or Pyongyang. Gun laws are a major reason among literally DOZENS.
 
rdhood already quoted the Republican / Democrat ratio in NY. Gov Cuomo has been criss-crossing the state handing out (our) tax money like he's throwing candy off a parade float. As long as this is a welfare state for NY City the Dems will have control.
But - there's a lot of people upstate that are against the SAFE act. Maybe it will make a difference.
Move to NY? I can't wait until I retire so I can leave NY.
 
An interesting idea, but not really practical. The deck is stacked against us in those areas. And we shouldn't blame the politicians, because like politicians everywhere they simply respond to what their consituents want.

I think the answer for antigun states, ultimately, is strong pro-gun federal preemption, either legislatively or through the courts. The people of the country, in general, are not antigun. As long as this is one country, the laws everywhere should reflect that.

National standards have been imposed many times before. When Utah wanted to become a state, it had to give up polygamy. And of course we had the "national standard" of not having slavery, which had to be imposed by force.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top