HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » How can we drown the NRA ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:25 PM

 

How can we drown the NRA in a bathtub?

If O'Keefe can take down ACORN

We should be able to destroy the NRA

Find a way to bankrupt it, find a way to get them locked up, find some way to make it insolvent...

There has to be a way

68 replies, 3300 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 68 replies Author Time Post
Reply How can we drown the NRA in a bathtub? (Original post)
Taverner Dec 2012 OP
Vox Moi Dec 2012 #1
Teamster Jeff Dec 2012 #2
Hoyt Dec 2012 #32
Waltons_Mtn Dec 2012 #3
Taverner Dec 2012 #12
Waltons_Mtn Dec 2012 #18
former9thward Dec 2012 #34
Liberal Gramma Dec 2012 #36
former9thward Dec 2012 #37
RC Dec 2012 #38
former9thward Dec 2012 #39
RC Dec 2012 #49
former9thward Dec 2012 #54
RC Dec 2012 #55
former9thward Dec 2012 #61
Joe the Revelator Dec 2012 #58
former9thward Dec 2012 #62
Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #52
ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #4
Taverner Dec 2012 #5
ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #6
Taverner Dec 2012 #7
ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #10
Taverner Dec 2012 #11
ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #17
truebluegreen Dec 2012 #53
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #31
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #26
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #40
Lightbulb_on Dec 2012 #45
Kingofalldems Dec 2012 #48
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #51
Kingofalldems Dec 2012 #56
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #47
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #50
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #57
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #59
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #60
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #64
Floyd_Gondolli Dec 2012 #65
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #66
rrneck Dec 2012 #8
Taverner Dec 2012 #9
rrneck Dec 2012 #16
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #21
Taverner Dec 2012 #25
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #27
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #29
Taverner Dec 2012 #30
former9thward Dec 2012 #35
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #44
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #42
cleanhippie Dec 2012 #43
TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #63
Oasis_ Dec 2012 #46
madinmaryland Dec 2012 #13
Taverner Dec 2012 #14
madinmaryland Dec 2012 #15
Hoyt Dec 2012 #33
Comrade_McKenzie Dec 2012 #19
Taverner Dec 2012 #20
RetroLounge Dec 2012 #41
hughee99 Dec 2012 #22
Coyotl Dec 2012 #23
Taverner Dec 2012 #24
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #28
napkinz Dec 2012 #67
99Forever Dec 2012 #68

Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:28 PM

1. There are enough tears to drown more than the NRA.

Enough to drown the culture of guns and violence in this country?
It seems like it today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:40 PM

2. The NRA would like us to believe that they are funded by American gun owners

The truth is that most of their money comes from "Corporate Partners" (gun and ammo manufacturers). They are just a marketing department of the gun industry. More people should know this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Teamster Jeff (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:45 PM

32. And the NRA's board includes those gun profiteers, and Grover Norquist, John Bolton, Ollie North,

Teddy Nugent, and worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:40 PM

3. Force registry of all guns.

With an annual renewal of $100 per gun. As part of the registration, the gun must be inspected by a gunsmith once a year. ($250) The gun owner must prove adequate knowledge and the proper use of the gun annually, such as a shooting test (30 rounds that must score hit on the target with all shots) Use of any weapon not registered would be a felony. One year in jail. If you kill someone with a unregistered gun, that would be a capital crime. (death while commiting a felony) The costs would be high to legally own a gun, but you would still have the right to keep and bear arms. That is how you drown the NRA in a bathtub.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Waltons_Mtn (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:09 PM

12. I like this idea...tell me more...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:54 AM

18. Well the idea is to make guns an expensive hobby.

Now the cry from the "personal protection" nuts will be "I won't be able to afford to protect myself". Well ok, we can lower the fees for pump action shotguns (7 rounds capacity) and revolvers with 5 or less round capacities. If you know what your doing, either one of these is all the more you need for personal protection. If you know what your doing you don't need a 15 round magazine. I was a parole officer and used a revolver. I could reload in less than 10 seconds.

Any other gun, tax, permit, and test the hell out of it.

Also, make the license for the gunsmiths that inspects the guns hard to get. Require absolutely no criminal behavior (not even a speeding ticket). This would cause high demand for their skills raising the costs (and creating jobs). Same requirements for the range officers that would conduct the annual proficiency test.

How many people in this country actually hunt to survive? I submit, not many. So guns are already (mostly) a hobby. So I ask, why can't we make sure that this hobby is a safe one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Waltons_Mtn (Reply #18)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:52 PM

34. A real 1%er solution.

Make it so it is impossible for the poor and working people to own guns. Are you sure you are on the right site?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #34)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:52 PM

36. I think most of the 1% hire their guns rather than buy them.

Why should gun ownership be cheap? We have sin taxes on liquor and cigarettes, with the rationale that they have societal costs that should be supported by their users. How is gun ownership any different?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal Gramma (Reply #36)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 03:16 PM

37. That is absolutely not the reason for cig and alcohol taxes.

The reason we have those taxes is that is where the money is. Government can collect a bunch of money by taxing cigs and alcohol. They are extremely regressive. Do you think any rich person cares what the tax is on a pack of cigarettes or a six-pack? Any liberal who supports regressive taxes should hang their head in shame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #37)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 03:35 PM

38. No, the tax on cigarets and alcohol is a Sin tax. Because both are bad cigarets and alcohol for you.

 

We need do the same with ammunition. A Sin tax on all ammo. Because ammo is bad for those on the open end of the barrel. You think your gun is a tool, like a hammer? Now you can use it as one because hopefully the ammo will be too precious to use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #38)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:33 PM

39. Ohh, its a "sin" now...

How very puritan of you. If they are bad for you why not ban them? They won't ban them because it is all about the money ---NOTHING else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #39)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:04 PM

49. You must be a fairly young.

 

Your ignorance is showing.


Definition of 'Sin Tax'
A state-sponsored tax that is added to products or services that are seen as vices, such as alcohol, tobacco and gambling. These type of taxes are levied by governments to discourage individuals from partaking in such activities without making the use of the products illegal. These taxes also provide a source of government revenue.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sin_tax.asp

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #49)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:35 PM

54. I am probably older than you.

Your naivete is showing. This sentence : These taxes also provide a source of government revenue. is added as almost an afterthought. Again if these are "bad" for you then ban them. They will never ever do that. It is all about the money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #54)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 11:08 PM

55. I'm 68. I grew up in Kansas.

 

I remember when they were debating taxes such as these. Yeah, those taxes do raise government revenue, but that is not why they were put in place. Think the likes of the holy roller Baptist. It was to discourage people from buying the devils temptations. Good church goin' people weren't supposed to smoke or drink. Only those kind of people, you know, on the other side of the tracks? Hence the name, the sin tax.
It was a real scandal when gas stations got to open on Sunday and they sold cigarettes. Oh, the horror.
Liquor stores could not have any kind of outside advertizing. Not even a outside sign on the building. They had to use signs in the windows to identify themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #55)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:50 PM

61. I don't doubt that they had a religious basis when they were put into effect.

But that was then and now is now. We know a lot more about smoking now then we did in the past. (I am a regular cigar smoker and beer drinker). If we really wanted to discourage smoking we would either ban it or put $10 a pack taxes on it. The taxes on beer are probably 25 cents a bottle -- not going to stop anyone. The Sunday laws you speak of have been abolished in most areas. So in 2012 it is a money thing. Smoking taxes fund children's health programs in most states. If everyone stopped smoking tomorrow government would have big, big problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #34)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:36 AM

58. WTF

Your POST is so idiotic that I can't even figure out a way to respond to it.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe the Revelator (Reply #58)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:55 PM

62. You can't respond to it.

Just admit that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Waltons_Mtn (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:16 PM

52. All of this would be thrown out by the supreme court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:42 PM

4. That would be very challanging.

Generally speaking, people have more passion for guns than for registering people to vote. For many people who either love guns or hate guns, the passion they have rivals religious passion. For "both sides," it is a profoundly emotional issue. Strong love and strong hatred for guns is not a religion, but it has many similarities to religion.

If the NRA was brought down through financial doom, I strongly suspect most of its members would join the next big gun-rights group, and turn that group into the new NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 06:40 PM

5. Deny gun permits to anyone who is a member of the NRA

 

Problem solved

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:45 PM

6. Ha! Have fun getting that passed! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:51 PM

7. You don't have to pass that wording - just say

 

That if the individual belongs to any "anti-social organizations"

The NRA would definitely qualify as that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:59 PM

10. You may need to wait for the Supreme Court to shift a bit in our favor. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #10)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:00 PM

11. Perhaps. Perhaps not.

 

Right now, the gun lobby is in an INDEFENSIBLE position

Strike while the iron is hot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:51 PM

17. How long does a proposal have to wait until the SC views it? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #17)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:31 PM

53. Practically speaking it takes several years...

first the law has to go into effect, then a proper case against it has to be filed, then it generally has to wind it's way through the lower courts with rulings for and against and appeals, and then finally it might be accepted for review by the Supreme Court. Once it gets there it can take another 6 to 9 months.

Prop 8 in California happened in 2008; that case is currently in front of the Court and it was a fairly expedited course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:42 PM

31. You missed the point about gun permits.

Before you can get the added wording to the restrictions, you first need to get permits. Extremely few places in the USA require permits to own firearms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:30 PM

26. Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the NRA?

Senator McCarthy wants his talking points back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #26)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:37 PM

40. You keep posting this same thing.

"Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the NRA?"

Answer yes, and that alone should get you banned from DU.

I have no problem with this kind of witch hunt.

RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #40)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:44 PM

45. Saving for my lifetime membership now...

 

Half off for military... And a fine family tradition .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lightbulb_on (Reply #45)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:01 PM

48. NRA board members: birther boy Chuck Norris, Grover Norquist

and Obama threatener Ted Nugent.

Your response was not surprising at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lightbulb_on (Reply #45)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:13 PM

51. Grover Norquist thanks you

as does Ted Nugent and every republican candidate.



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lightbulb_on (Reply #45)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:05 AM

56. How come your NRA bigshot pallies are so silent on this tragedy?

Are they cowards?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #40)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:53 PM

47. That fact that you approve of ANY "witch hunt" fills me with dread...

for if THAT mentality is allowed to fester here and in the Democratic Party, we are truly fucked.



Wow. Just wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #47)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:13 PM

50. Aw, did I upset you?

You want to see fester, he's in the gungeon.



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #50)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:34 AM

57. Thanks. You give the wingnuts that "kernel of truth" from which they distort reality about us.

Well done. You should be proud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:34 PM

59. and you should be gone back to the gungeon

_!_

RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #59)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:43 PM

60. How precious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #60)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:24 PM

64. No, your gun is your precious...



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #64)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:28 PM

65. Ahahahaha!

 



That's a burn!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Floyd_Gondolli (Reply #65)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:32 PM

66. He's a delicate little flower, this one.



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:52 PM

8. Keep Democrats from supporting and enacting useless feel good laws that do nothing. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:56 PM

9. I don't think eliminating all guns from the USA would be a "feel good" law

 

I think that would be major revolution

And thus it must be, if from your cold dead hands, then SO BE IT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:25 PM

16. Well, at last count

people were buying a little over a million guns a month in this country, adding to a total of just over three hundred million guns. And they aren't all being bought by teabaggers. In fact, the last I heard the fastest growing segment of gun buyers by political affiliation was Democrats. There are certainly a whole bunch of moderates and centrists who are gun owners. The political realities simply won't allow banning guns, banning semi automatic guns, assault weapons or anything of the sort. It ain't gonna happen. And any political party that proposes such will be handed a one way bus ticket to the political wilderness. Here's why:

If you put a thousand people in a room and told them that three of them would be assaulted, raped, robbed or murdered in a week, five hundred of them would go out and buy a gun tomorrow. A gun has tremendous symbolic power. It is a last line of defense against any threat, real or imagined. People take their personal safety and the safety of those close to them more seriously than anything, and concerns about close threats (like assault) however unlikely, loom much larger than remote threats (global warming/banking crisis) that are more likely to occur. That's just how people think.

Add to that the symbolic power of guns in politics. Guns symbolize everything that is bad to Democrats and good to Republicans. Liberalism is a nurturing ideology. It is defined by the support of others in cooperation to make society work. Conservative ideology is authoritarian in nature and depends on the concept of self reliance. Now 99.9% of the time, nurturing and cooperation are the best way to organize a society. But if you get assaulted, try nurturing your way out of that. It will be just you and him, and self reliance is the name of the game. That's where the other ideology works best. And that's why Republicans idolize guns the way they do. It is a totem to their ideology. It's also why Democrats hate them so much, because guns are an anti totem.

That's why every time a Democrat cooks up an unworkable firearm regulation, it's just giving strength to conservative ideology and pushing those in the center to the right. Whatever law gets passed has to make sense in the real world, and workable firearms laws have been few and far between lately. That's because firearms laws are about as good as we can make them. We can only support people so much, but sometimes they will be left to their own devices no matter what we do. No matter how well or tightly you build a support net, there will always be a few lunatics who will step right through it and hurt somebody. And when they do, there won't be anybody to help you but you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:14 PM

21. So I take it you're volunteering to be on the front lines of the effort?

To actually do some of the grunt work in bringing about that "major revolution" and personally causing some of those hands to be cold and dead?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #21)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:29 PM

25. If that's what it takes...and from their cold dead hands if necessary

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #25)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:32 PM

27. Well okay then.

Not the answer I expected, and my compliments for being willing to hazard your life for what you believe in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #25)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:33 PM

29. Holy shit. Did you just post that you would kill a person in order to take their gun?

What. The. Fuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #29)


Response to Taverner (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:55 PM

35. Another keyboard commando on the internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #35)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:43 PM

44. Yep. If the fascists actually come for us, he will be cowering in fear...

Unless he is leading the mob. Either way, despicable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:39 PM

42. Like I said above...

...I admire your willingness to put your ass on the line for what you advocate. I sure hope you realize that if such a scenario ever comes to pass, there are going to be a lot of people (some of them very, very good with their weapons) trying to kill you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:41 PM

43. It's like you want everything Gleen Beck has said about us to be true.

You've become a caricature. Congrats.


Oh, and your fascistic, murderous desires should get you banned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:00 PM

63. We gotta stop these shootings no matter how many we have to shoot to do it.

Why is this triaged as the most important thing ever considering the issues and challenges we have as a society?

Some are willing to go to the mat and beyond on this statistical rounding error but not so on climate change, poverty, labor, wars with deaths to innocents in the thousands, a education system closing more minds than it opens, not even the integrity and safety of our food, air, and water.

Folks can watch BP just decimate the gulf, people's livelihoods, massacre wildlife on a staggering scale, and kill a little spree's worth of people directly and God only knows how many indirectly with their poisons and economic destruction and nothing. People by the millions can be made homeless, robbed of present day security, and retirements left empty and barely a wag of the finger.

No matter what fucked up and massive issues we face, some even that threaten the very viability of our species the powder stays more or less dry but for this...for this the entire rest may be traded away for a half a loaf.

It is a fetish or some how symbolizes something well beyond the actual impact on the world. The response is off the meter in the big picture just as much or even more than the other side which they can see so clearly but are blind to their own.
It makes no objective sense. A tenth of this zeal would have long ago ended homelessness.

So, what is this representing in the background? It must be huge to be so visceral but it is also hidden by a proxy, so it is strange or maybe not sense it would seem to at least be shared by the opposite to a degree that I am to close to to fully grasp either.

I do feel the undercurrent of not role of government but more of a deeper form government question that doesn't exactly mesh with the partisan aspect though a lean is built in but is forgotten in the endless role of government battles that is pretty interesting.
What we have that I can see is an authoritarian/libertarian debate but the passion I believe must extend beyond that to a blind spot for me to process what it might be but it is at the same time to obvious not to be simple or fundamental.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:45 PM

46. Who's going to collect the guns for you?

You can pass all the laws you wish. It will never, ever happen. The police are overwhelmingly conservative and RKBA supporters. The same holds true for the military.

Do you honestly believe they'd assist in full confiscation? Nope. Again it would never happen.

What would occur, however, if you attempted to simply nullify a constitutional amendment would be the overthrow of the government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:10 PM

13. I guess we could say the NRA is taxing this country, and Norquist will then drown the

fucking NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:10 PM

14. That's an idea - is there anything we could call the "NRA tax"?

 

If so we might have something!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:22 PM

15. It's a tax that is paid in human blood. The most regressive tax.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #13)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:48 PM

33. Hell, friggin Norquist is on the NRA board of directors -- if anyone doubts how right wing they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:55 AM

19. Thousands of parents should head there and tear it apart like the Berlin Wall. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:06 PM

20. +100

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:38 PM

41. +1000

RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:14 PM

22. Step one, get rid of the 2nd amendment.

Step two, rewrite the first amendment to include something about this not applying to free speech we don't like.
Step three, get control of the WH and both houses for an extended period of time (long enough to put the "right" judges on the SC).

And just hope the ACLU doesn't get involved or you'll have to take them out too.

Sure, you could always just have a huge scandal at the NRA, but there's too many people who support their agenda to think that destroying the NRA makes the movement disappear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:17 PM

23. Enough with the KILL KILL KILL rhetoric already!

Really, think about it! How are you not playing into this violent culture with your murder analogy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #23)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:28 PM

24. Oh, by all means let's hold hands and sing Kumbaya for the NRA

 

I'm sure that act of kindness will be reciprocated...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:32 PM

28. We should all join the NRA and change the charter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:36 PM

67. a new logo (from NoTeaParty)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:38 PM

68. Agreed.

Terrorist organizations cannot be tolerated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread