Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:15 AM
SecularMotion (3,147 posts)
NRA represents gun manufacturers — periodIt is easy to ignore the issue of gun control, given the perfect leaderlessness it enjoys in Congress. Then again, it becomes harder to ignore when your relatives or friends are murdered in the company of someone you idolize, which describes thousands of us in Tucson.
I have owned guns, continuously, since I was 6. I still own my grandfather’s pump-action Winchester, carried for decades in a scabbard behind his saddle as he rode the range where he ranched in Wikieup, Ariz. All the guns I’ve owned have been what are quaintly called long guns. I began my brief assault on local fauna at age 12, and I had “taken” four white-tailed deer, a couple of javelina and innumerable quail and dove by the time I got my driver’s license at 16. A driver’s license is a far greater liberator than a hunting license, and thereafter, trekking around in the wilderness killing things lost its luster. It has been decades since I engaged in those adventures. There are, today, few who hunt with handguns or assault rifles equipped with 100-clip magazines. There are even fewer reasons to do so. But the National Rifle Association’s principal focus has evolved mostly to those. It is news to no one that the NRA has abandoned the sportsman in every practical sense; if the group were honest, it would change its name. Speaking as a rifleman, I think it’s an embarrassment. The NRA not only dependably opposes limits on assault-rifle sales but even opposes reporting bulk sales of assault rifles. Last year, the NRA went to the mat to prevent anyone from cross-checking the names of those on the terrorist watch list against the names of those buying guns. These two actions clarify beyond argument that the safety and welfare of you and yours have simply dropped from the NRA’s list of priorities. The NRA represents gun manufacturers, end of story. http://host.madison.com/news/opinion/column/michael-f-mcnulty-nra-represents-gun-manufacturers-period/article_041bec8a-dc18-11e1-9381-0019bb2963f4.html#ixzz233gKVtPg
|
89 replies, 5501 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| SecularMotion | Aug 2012 | OP | |
| slackmaster | Aug 2012 | #1 | |
| aikoaiko | Aug 2012 | #2 | |
| friendly_iconoclast | Aug 2012 | #10 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #63 | |
| aikoaiko | Aug 2012 | #75 | |
| GreenStormCloud | Aug 2012 | #3 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #6 | |
| GreenStormCloud | Aug 2012 | #8 | |
| OneTenthofOnePercent | Aug 2012 | #17 | |
| virginia mountainman | Aug 2012 | #21 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #30 | |
| rl6214 | Aug 2012 | #37 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #38 | |
| rl6214 | Aug 2012 | #46 | |
| GreenStormCloud | Aug 2012 | #39 | |
| rDigital | Aug 2012 | #35 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #9 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #13 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #14 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #18 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #20 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #22 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #24 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #25 | |
| oneshooter | Aug 2012 | #43 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #47 | |
| oneshooter | Aug 2012 | #84 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Aug 2012 | #86 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #66 | |
| Jenoch | Aug 2012 | #69 | |
| Trunk Monkey | Aug 2012 | #81 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #88 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #89 | |
| oneshooter | Aug 2012 | #87 | |
| spin | Aug 2012 | #28 | |
| Reasonable_Argument | Aug 2012 | #32 | |
| Travis_0004 | Aug 2012 | #42 | |
| holdencaufield | Aug 2012 | #64 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #65 | |
| holdencaufield | Aug 2012 | #67 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #71 | |
| Jenoch | Aug 2012 | #74 | |
| holdencaufield | Aug 2012 | #72 | |
| Hoyt | Aug 2012 | #80 | |
| Trunk Monkey | Aug 2012 | #82 | |
| holdencaufield | Aug 2012 | #85 | |
| cadmium | Aug 2012 | #4 | |
| Jenoch | Aug 2012 | #5 | |
| Oneka | Aug 2012 | #7 | |
| Missycim | Aug 2012 | #11 | |
| rrneck | Aug 2012 | #12 | |
| pipoman | Aug 2012 | #73 | |
| 4th law of robotics | Aug 2012 | #15 | |
| benEzra | Aug 2012 | #16 | |
| HALO141 | Aug 2012 | #19 | |
| virginia mountainman | Aug 2012 | #23 | |
| spin | Aug 2012 | #26 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #27 | |
| spin | Aug 2012 | #31 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #48 | |
| spin | Aug 2012 | #49 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #53 | |
| spin | Aug 2012 | #54 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #55 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #56 | |
| GreenStormCloud | Aug 2012 | #57 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #58 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #59 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #60 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #61 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #70 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #76 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #77 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #78 | |
| villager | Aug 2012 | #79 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #83 | |
| GreenStormCloud | Aug 2012 | #68 | |
| Thinkingabout | Aug 2012 | #29 | |
| gejohnston | Aug 2012 | #33 | |
| Travis_0004 | Aug 2012 | #41 | |
| virginia mountainman | Aug 2012 | #45 | |
| Lint Head | Aug 2012 | #34 | |
| rl6214 | Aug 2012 | #36 | |
| oneshooter | Aug 2012 | #44 | |
| Atypical Liberal | Aug 2012 | #40 | |
| SecularMotion | Aug 2012 | #50 | |
| Atypical Liberal | Aug 2012 | #52 | |
| Tuesday Afternoon | Aug 2012 | #51 | |
| Dr_Scholl | Aug 2012 | #62 |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:16 AM
slackmaster (60,567 posts)
1. That's obvious to anyone who has ever flipped through a copy of American Rifleman or American Hunter
|
This is newsworthy?
|
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:18 AM
aikoaiko (16,574 posts)
2. Typical Fudd.
|
He is OK with banning the firearms he doesn't use for hunting and doesn't understand why others might want to protect their access to other firearms. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on. |
Response to aikoaiko (Reply #2)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:23 AM
friendly_iconoclast (8,860 posts)
10. Remember, *his* deadly weapons are somehow 'nicer' than "*those* peoples" deadly weapons...
|
They never do quite explain why this is so, do they?
|
Response to aikoaiko (Reply #2)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:41 PM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
63. Problem is -- we do understand why you want access to "other firearms. " That's main reason for
|
Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:42 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) supporting restrictions.
|
Response to Hoyt (Reply #63)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:12 AM
aikoaiko (16,574 posts)
75. Yes, and why you and people like you are failing at the legislative process.
|
Fewer people are buying what you're selling. There are so many rifles, pistols, and shotguns in certain configurations currently owned by law abiding folks that you are slapping them in the face when you propose restrictions that essentially say that they cannot be trusted to own any more such things (or own such things with onerous restrictions). Only the ignorant are motivated by the "assault weapons" scare tactics of those who support weapons bans. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:46 AM
GreenStormCloud (10,179 posts)
3. The 4.3 million member are fairly happy with the NRA's representation of them.
|
Of course there is linkage between the NRA and firearms manufacturers. If the NRA allowed the prohibitions to stop the manufacture of guns then where would we ber able to buy guns from? The NRA membership wants the organization to support freedom for the gun makers.
|
Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #3)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:56 AM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
6. Does anyone admit to belonging to the NRA?
|
Most of what I see here are ex-members, or those that want no part of LaPierre and his bullshit.
Some fools still swallow their line, I suppose. |
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #6)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:09 AM
GreenStormCloud (10,179 posts)
8. Several, including myself, have posted that we are members.
|
Sadly, there are no left-of-center guns-rights organizations that are also effective. In the fight for gun-rights the NRA is the 500-lbs gorilla.
|
Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:01 PM
OneTenthofOnePercent (6,268 posts)
17. +1
Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:08 PM
virginia mountainman (4,128 posts)
21. +2 nt
Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:53 PM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
30. So you support an organization intent on defeating Obama and advancing right wing causes not even
|
related to guns? I'm sorry, I do not understand how guns can be that important to anyone on DU. |
Response to Hoyt (Reply #30)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 04:29 PM
rl6214 (7,434 posts)
37. You still haven't been able to prove this statement.
|
So you support an organization intent on ... advancing right wing causes not even related to guns?
I for one would like to see ANY sort of proof of this. |
Response to rl6214 (Reply #37)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 05:14 PM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
38. Exercise you mind by looking at NRA leadership, then look up money they give to buy support.
|
You'll never accept the truth as long as you exercise your trigger finger more than your brain.
|
Response to Hoyt (Reply #38)
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 01:44 AM
rl6214 (7,434 posts)
46. You are the one making the statement and, by your own words should be the one providing proof
|
or is that wrong now since the shoe is on the other foot?
|
Response to Hoyt (Reply #30)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 05:22 PM
GreenStormCloud (10,179 posts)
39. The NRA takes no stance on those other issues.
|
Individuals, even board members, still have their personal freedoms and may express their personal opinions on any issue. When doing so they are not speaking for the NRA.
|
Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 03:02 PM
rDigital (2,239 posts)
35. +3
|
Last edited Thu Aug 9, 2012, 03:04 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) NRA member, personal protection and pistol instructor.
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #6)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:14 AM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
9. more admit to being NRA members than
|
admit to being Brady supporters.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #9)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:42 AM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
13. Are you an NRA member?
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #13)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:46 AM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
14. No, but I'm not a member of AAA either.
|
I did join the Liberal Gun Club.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #14)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:02 PM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
18. AAA?
|
That's an auto club. They don't have anything to do with promoting guns. Why bring that up?
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #18)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:06 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
20. not much of a joiner
|
and cars kill more people. Plus AAA lobbies against rail and other mass transit, but for roads to nowhere that encourage sprawl.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #20)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:10 PM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
22. Yeah, cars, and bathub falls and pool drownings..............
|
How could we ever forget those strawmen?
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #22)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:15 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
24. not strawmen nor red herrings when your side rants about accidents but
|
but complaining about target shooters and hunters are red herrings when talking about gang violence in urban areas like Chicago and DC.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #24)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:18 PM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
25. Right. it's not.
|
Thanks for admitting that.
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #13)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 09:33 PM
oneshooter (5,907 posts)
43. Yes I am. Certified Rifle instructor,Certified pistol instructor, Range officer,
|
Certified range Safety officer, Advanced rifle instructor, CHL instructor. All but the last through the NRA instructor program.
Before you say a word Hoyt, Tell me where else I can get a nationally, and internationally, accepted certification. You can't. Till you can, then you have nothing of interest to say about the programs. Oneshooter Armed and Livin in Texas |
Response to oneshooter (Reply #43)
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 08:25 AM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
47. Um,
|
why are you addressing this Hoyt person in your answer to me?
It's better to address them directly. |
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #47)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:31 PM
oneshooter (5,907 posts)
84. I am addressing you. Hoyt just likes to butt in.
Response to oneshooter (Reply #84)
Sat Aug 18, 2012, 07:49 AM
TheCowsCameHome (27,709 posts)
86. Butt in?
|
It's a discussion forum, in case you haven't noticed.
|
Response to oneshooter (Reply #43)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:51 PM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
66. Oneshooter, fact folks who view guns like you are instructing is another reason to oppose toting.
|
Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:52 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) I mean, what good is it to have instructors who are cool with shooting unarmed teenagers over property or encourage people to "collect" assault/tactical weapons.
I think agencies who regulate toting,etc., need to reconsider the background and basic philosophy of those who are supposed to protect society through what they teach with respect to guns. Might as well have homeschooling for required training. |
Response to Hoyt (Reply #66)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 12:01 AM
Jenoch (1,655 posts)
69. You are being disingenuous
|
when you post something like this:
"...cool with shooting unarmed teenagers over property..." You are on record as opposing shooting unarmed teenagers while they are in the process of beating to death senior citizens. |
Response to Jenoch (Reply #69)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:52 PM
Trunk Monkey (950 posts)
81. He's also on record as being all for shooting teenagers in the back while they're running
|
away from men with machine guns who just killed their dog
|
Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #81)
Sat Aug 18, 2012, 12:01 PM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
88. You talking about ARMED sammy weaver, who his dad hid behind while evading federal marshals?
|
You remember, daddy weaver was a member of Ayran Nation and was trafficking in guns to help them intimidate miniroities. You also remember that randy had a warrant issued, and marshals were camped out on the perimeter of his racist compound. Daddy weaver sent sammy out to investigate a strange noise. Sammy and/or a racist friend fired and killed federal marshal. Oh, dang.
Nothing like shooting someone in back at 40 yards because they stole a few belts and buckles. You guys have a real problem with "facts" when it comes to gun lovers -- even when they are racist pigs, traffic in illegal guns, frequent right wing hate groups like Ayran Nation, hide in a compound behind family members, and worse. |
Response to Hoyt (Reply #88)
Sat Aug 18, 2012, 12:09 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
89. none of that is relevant
|
point is the marshal open fire after Sammy was fleeing
Sammy returned fire only after the marshal opened fire on him and the dog. Sorry, you are the one with a problem with the facts. Trial transcripts are public records, go read it for yourself. |
Response to Hoyt (Reply #66)
Sat Aug 18, 2012, 10:09 AM
oneshooter (5,907 posts)
87. Once again you have failed to answer a question posed to you.
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #6)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:39 PM
spin (14,739 posts)
28. I've belonged to the NRA for probably 40 years. ...
|
I feel the organization does a lot of good for the shooting sports and offers excellent training courses on safety for beginning shooters and hunters as well as training programs for our police.
I also support the organizations efforts to pass victim rights laws such as Castle Doctrine and "Shall Issue" concealed carry. While the NRA does support pro-gun Democrats it also uses its political wing the NRA-ILA to unfairly attack some Democrats such as President Obama. Obama has overall been very favorable to Second Amendment rights and has received an "F" rating from the Brady Campaign. The NRA-ILA is supported by donations and only a very small portion of my yearly NRA dues goes to support this organization. Therefore I simply refuse to donate any of my money to the NRA-ILA and all their literature goes into my waste basket unopened. |
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #6)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 01:09 PM
Reasonable_Argument (881 posts)
32. Raises Hand
|
I haven't been a member of the NRA for many years but after all the anti-gun threads here I decided to renew my membership the other day. I particularly like the free insurance that comes with being a member.
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #6)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 08:32 PM
Travis_0004 (940 posts)
42. Lifetime member
|
Do realize that by law, NRA dues can not go to the NRA-ILA(Institute for legislative action), or the PVF (political Victory fund). Dues go to shooting education, training, and the magazine subscription.
I don't agree with a lot of what the NRA does, but they do help fight for gun rights which I believe in. If you are pro gun, and don't want to join the NRA, the Second Amendment foundation is a great membership to join. |
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #6)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:44 PM
holdencaufield (2,927 posts)
64. I am a Member of the NRA
|
Also -- because I shoot in another country -- a member of Sporting Shooters Association Australia and Single Action Shooters Australia
|
Response to holdencaufield (Reply #64)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:49 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
65. how big of a hassle is it to have a
|
revolver in Australia?
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #65)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:00 PM
holdencaufield (2,927 posts)
67. Paperwork takes almost a year
|
But, belonging to SASA makes it easier because they know the process and help you work through it. In Australia, you must have a valid reason to possess any firearm (including a Daisy BB Gun). Self-defence isn't a valid reason -- only hunting, competitive shooting or job-related. By competing in a handgun shooting sport, I was able to get a handgun permit.
|
Response to holdencaufield (Reply #67)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 06:17 AM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
71. We should aspire to Australia's laws - of course, many gun cultists couldn't handle it.
Response to Hoyt (Reply #71)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 10:59 AM
Jenoch (1,655 posts)
74. Who should lead the fight
|
in the U.S. so that our gun laws are similar to Australia's? Do you believe that is a challenge that should be taken up by Democrats? If you do believe that, why would you 'aspire' to hand over control of Washington to the republicans for the foreseeable future?
|
Response to holdencaufield (Reply #67)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 07:18 AM
holdencaufield (2,927 posts)
72. What it doesn't realize is...
|
... there are at LEAST as many illegal weapons (unregistered, imported and homemade full autos) in Australia as there are legal ones. Our rate of shooting incidents and deaths dropped significantly in the years after the gun laws were passed, the have been steadily rising as illegal guns make their way into wider usage.
1% Bike gangs in Australia manufacture and sell Sten, Sterling, and Owen Gun knockoffs in wholesale quantities. While ordinary citizens are made to jump through hoops to acquire any weapons. Mandatory police safety courses are booked sometimes a year in advance. Hence the popularity of gun clubs in Australia There have been a number of high profile shooting of police and public prosecutors in recent years -- all with illegal handguns. Victorian Police officers only recently had to upgrade their duty weapons to semi-automatics as they are more and more often outgunned by the criminals they attempt to arrest (all other states moved to more tactical weapons years ago). |
Response to holdencaufield (Reply #72)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:40 PM
Hoyt (12,144 posts)
80. Other than you and a few others, sounds like vast majority of citizens are satisfied with laws.
Response to Hoyt (Reply #80)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:54 PM
Trunk Monkey (950 posts)
82. How do you draw THAT conclusion? NT
Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #82)
Sat Aug 18, 2012, 06:38 AM
holdencaufield (2,927 posts)
85. It sees what it wants to see. NT
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:48 AM
cadmium (1,501 posts)
4. The retailers like Walmart as well
|
Just like the US Chamber of Commerce is not anything like the local civic minded Chambers of Commerce, the NRA is nothing like your father's local safety minded NRA
|
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:56 AM
Jenoch (1,655 posts)
5. Why do
|
anti-gunners always bring up hunting? What does hunting have to do with the 2nd Amendment?
|
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:08 AM
Oneka (606 posts)
7. While i don't
|
Financially support the, NRA, i sure was happy to see them, or anyone,advocating against this fascist bullshit.
Last year, the NRA went to the mat to prevent anyone from cross-checking the names of those on the terrorist watch list against the names of those buying guns . |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:25 AM
Missycim (950 posts)
11. Why do gun grabbers
|
always bring up gun makers? its not like their profits are all that high. I doubt its high enough to buy all that many congress critters
|
Response to Missycim (Reply #11)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:41 AM
rrneck (13,771 posts)
12. Congrescritters sre pretty cheap.
|
Bring four million votes with you and its a fire sale.
|
Response to Missycim (Reply #11)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 08:11 AM
pipoman (10,400 posts)
73. A year or so ago there was a chart roaming around with
|
the revenues of all US gun makers listed. The combined total of all US makers wasn't/isn't enough to make the Fortune 500.
|
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 11:55 AM
4th law of robotics (6,801 posts)
15. Ever notice how gun sales and the NRA's popularity all go up whenever some politician even hints
|
at banning some kind of gun?
Maybe if you don't like either of those things work on eliminating the common force driving both. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:00 PM
benEzra (11,449 posts)
16. It's funny, and sad, how some hunters think they are somehow a majority of gun owners
|
rather than <20% of the total. I don't think most feel that way, but I've know a handful that do.
I fully support this guy's right to hunt, but four or five times as many Americans own handguns and so-called "assault weapons" as hunt, and most of the hunters I know personally also own nonhunting guns. I'm not an NRA member, but the way I see it, opposing bans on by far the most popular lawfully owned guns in the United States is simply representing the interests of 80%+ of its members, and of gun owners in general. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:04 PM
HALO141 (833 posts)
19. Oh, well, if Michael F. McNulty said it then it MUST be fact!!!!
|
As if anyone gives a flying fuck what Michael F. McNulty thinks.
Moving on... |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:13 PM
virginia mountainman (4,128 posts)
23. Nope, your simply wrong...again...
|
That is what the NSSF is .....
About the National Shooting Sports Foundation
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 7,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. http://www.nssf.org/industry/aboutNSSF.cfm But with all the pro-gun rights groups, blogs, forums, publications, legislators, and people around I can see how an anti-gun person could get overwhelmed and miss a few..... Should tell you something about the depth of support and willingness to open wallets. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:24 PM
spin (14,739 posts)
26. Most states that allow semiautomatic rifles to be used for hunting game such a deer ...
|
limit the size of the magazine to five rounds. I believe that in some states you can use a higher capacity magazine while hunting pests such as feral hogs.
I'm not a hunter but I have listened to many discuss their sport. Obviously the first shot is the most important but if a hunter does not drop his game with his first shot there may be some value to to rapid follow up shot or possibly two. I understand NRA opposition to using the Terrorist Watch List to determine if a person should be allowed to buy a firearm. If it were an accurate list the NRA might have a different view. However even the New York Times has problems with the list. Editorial |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:25 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
27. Quite obvious, but expect its wind-up doll defenders on this site to claim otherwise...
|
n/t
|
Response to villager (Reply #27)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:57 PM
spin (14,739 posts)
31. That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. ...
|
But you have to realize that others have a far different view.
You may feel that those who support gun rights are simply "wind-up dolls" but most of us are as interested or even more interested in reducing firearm violence than many of those who support the opposite side. We often have a considerable amount of money invested in our hobby and have spent many hours enjoying the shooting sports. Since the misuse of firearms endangers our sport we definitely would like to reduce it as much as possible. Unfortunately most of the ideas to accomplish this from those who oppose firearm ownership are merely useless "feel good" laws that will accomplish little except make the enjoyment of the shooting sports more difficult for honest responsible and sane individuals. There are possible ideas that both sides might be able to agree on. None involve banning or greatly restricting all or some classes of firearms or their federal registration. None involve hair brained schemes like micro stamping ammo or installing devices on firearms that would only allow the owner to use them. The ideas that might work best involve better enforcement of existing gun laws and stricter penalties for those who are convicted of the straw purchase or smuggling of these weapons. Since 80% of all gun violence in our nation is caused by criminal activity or gang warfare between drug gangs we need to consider improving our police efforts to combat crime and eliminate drug gangs. We also might reconsider the value and the effects of our failed War on Drugs and possibly legalize some drugs. |
Response to spin (Reply #31)
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 12:03 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
48. Except, repeating this mantra is part of that "wind-up doll" rhetoric I was talking about
|
You were talking in a respectful tone, which I appreciate (and which is usually rare in these gun debates here), so that's not what I mean.
But the idea of "enforcing existing laws" is NRA sleight-of-hand, because, in fact, they are working relentlessly to dismantle any "existing law" with even the faintest whiff of "gun regulation" about it, anywhere they can. So being on that side of the debate isn't about "enforcing existing laws" at all, but getting rid of all them. |
Response to villager (Reply #48)
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 01:21 PM
spin (14,739 posts)
49. Here's what many NRA members feel ...
Note: The entire article is a worthwhile read. After long consideration, I personally am not fond of national reciprocity for concealed carry permits as I feel that should be up to the individual states. Allowing the Federal government to have any control might lead to draconian regulations. I should note that as a Florida resident with a Concealed Weapons Permit I can legally carry a concealed firearm in 35 states as long as I abide with certain restrictions. For example in Florida, I can carry a concealed stun gun, knife, or billy club but that would be against the law for me in some states. (source: http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/news/concealed_carry.html) I don't seriously believe that the NRA wants to do away with all gun laws. The organization does definitely oppose some existing laws in some states and hopes to change them, but it also favors better enforcement of many existing laws. I believe that both sides of the gun control issue might find common ground and the ability to compromise. First we both need to stop hating each other. That's why I always do my best to be polite when discussing gun control with those who disagree with my views. We often squabble and bicker like unsupervised children in a playground and that accomplishes absolutely nothing. |
Response to spin (Reply #49)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:32 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
53. It's like being a "sensible" Republican. The "party apparatus" you're in will never allow policies
|
...you claim to believe in, as a clearer-eyed, less ideologically-driven person.
So, then, if money goes where mouths do, it's time to leave the NRA. |
Response to villager (Reply #53)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:21 PM
spin (14,739 posts)
54. I support many of the training programs that the NRA offers ...
|
and feel the organization does a lot of good for the shooting sports.
I disagree with with NRA-ILA which is the political wing of the NRA. Since the NRA-ILA is dependent on donations and since only a very small percentage of my NRA yearly dues goes to support the NRA-ILA, I chose to pay my yearly dues and throw all the solicitations from the NRA-ILA in the trash can unopened. However if the NRA endorses Romney I will cancel my membership. |
Response to spin (Reply #54)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 03:53 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
55. So the NRA blocking funding of studies on gun violence wasn't enough?
|
Well, you're at least to be credited with the first step of realizing there's a scenario under which you might divest yourself of that particularly toxic group.
So -- congrats! |
Response to villager (Reply #55)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:15 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
56. actually they don't
|
they block funding for advocacy. There is a difference. By the way, the NRA doesn't seem to have a problem with independent research done by criminologists or even one done by the Institute of Justice for the Carter administration. They even use those studies for their propaganda. See where I'm going with this?
|
Response to villager (Reply #55)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:30 PM
GreenStormCloud (10,179 posts)
57. The CDC studies have been strongly biased against guns.
|
They are so strongly biased that they don't even have a category for "justifiable homicides". They call such homicides "undetermined intent". It becomes obvious that they begin with a conclusion and do the study in such a manner as to arrive at the conclusion they already want. Your tax dollars were funding what was little more than propaganda pronouncements.
|
Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #57)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 05:53 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
58. Yes, only the NRA -- not the CDC! -- can be trusted to talk "honestly" about guns!
|
Craven apologies, much?
|
Response to villager (Reply #58)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 06:04 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
59. false choice
|
there are other works out there. The NRA doesn't fund research, shill or legitimate. It does use independent and shill research it likes. Brady Campaign does the same.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #59)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 07:55 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
60. false post
Response to villager (Reply #60)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:18 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
61. op eds don't count
|
that does not mean my information is 100 percent accurate, only to the best of my knowledge.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #61)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:31 AM
villager (18,986 posts)
70. Indeed. Neither does "to the best of your knowledge"
|
Automatic apologies for the NRA notwithstanding.
Yet there seems to be the merest glimmer of daylight there. |
Response to villager (Reply #70)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:27 AM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
76. there are no automatic apologies
|
but the block is on advocacy, not research.
|
Response to gejohnston (Reply #76)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 12:42 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
77. And of course, to the NRA, all research contradicting their world views is "advocacy"
|
n/t
|
Response to villager (Reply #77)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 01:25 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
78. research or results?
|
any fact, statistic, research results contradicting Brady's world view is "NRA talking points".
In real science, you start with a question, do the research, accept what ever conclusion you find advocacy starts with a conclusion, then create data to fit the conclusion. |
Response to gejohnston (Reply #78)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 01:33 PM
villager (18,986 posts)
79. So you agree then the NRA should quit trying to block other studies and let the results
|
...speak for themselves, rather than interpreting unfavorable statistics as "advocacy?"
|
Response to villager (Reply #79)
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:21 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
83. not what the law says
|
research continues, just not advocacy. This is what actually pissed the NRA off:
Dr. Mark Rosenberg, who was then director of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC, explained his aim was to make the public see firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (Quoted in William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” The Washington Post, Oct. 19, 1994.)
Dr. Katherine Christoffel and Dr. Robert Tanz of the Children’s Hospital in Chicago, explained their “plan to do to handguns what their profession has done to cigarettes … turn gun ownership from a personal-choice issue to a repulsive, anti-social health hazard.” (Harold Henderson, “Policy: Guns ‘n Poses,” Chicago Reader, Dec. 16, 1994.) |
Response to villager (Reply #60)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:17 PM
GreenStormCloud (10,179 posts)
68. What is false about his post?
|
Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:19 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) The NRA not funding research is one thing. Blocking the funding of CDC research is another.
|
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:46 PM
Thinkingabout (1,782 posts)
29. We love our vehicles and speed but we live with roads with speed limits.
|
NRA and it's members should
figure a fix to keeping guns out of the hands of irresponsible owers |
Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #29)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 01:20 PM
gejohnston (12,595 posts)
33. these irresponsible owners are mostly gangsters
|
and not even the UK is doing a great job of keeping guns out of their hands, let alone Jamaica and Mexico.
|
Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #29)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 08:25 PM
Travis_0004 (940 posts)
41. Speed kills a lot of people in this country
|
I vote we limit vehicles to 80hp so people are less likely to speed.
Afterall, nobody needs a car with 300hp. |
Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #29)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:24 PM
virginia mountainman (4,128 posts)
45. I own two modified cars, a 85.5 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, and a 01 Mustang GT
|
Last edited Thu Aug 9, 2012, 10:29 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) The Turbo Coupe is far, FAR from stock, and is a very fast, great handling car....The GT is close to stock, but still with a potent V8
Their is NO, law against having a fast car... Only laws against their misuse...Cars are NOT banned "because the ARE fast, or banned because they LOOK fast (like kids and their mom's Honda with huge wing and graphics) I am allowed to drive these fast cars, when ever I want too....I AM ONLY PUNISHED if I break the law... This is the way that it should be.. If the logic on the Gun Controller was used in an automotive context, we would ALL be riding scooters..Because WHO needs a Turbocharger, or for that matter, a V8? They would ban Assault cars right off the bat, because they have the scary "fart cannon muffler" and "gaudy paint" But knowing the logic of the gun control movement, they would not care to actually look under the hood and see if it really IS a fast car, or mom's grocery getter in flashy paint. They would want to ban good handing cars by calling them "snipers" would want to ban fast ones, call them "road rockets" ban truck by calling them "high capacity vehicals" Why would you NEED such a car??? Yea, we live with speed limits, and we are only punished if we break them.... We don't restrict folks because THEY MIGHT break the speed limit. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 01:21 PM
Lint Head (10,442 posts)
34. It's no different than ALEC. When it began it was geared toward gun safety. Now it's just
|
a lobbying group for fascist corporations to cram conservative ideology down peoples throats.
I think there should be a new organization formed to counter them. They are a dictatorial monopoly. I was a member years ago until I realized the truth. Creeping theocratic corporate fascism is taking hold in too many aspects of our lives. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 04:25 PM
rl6214 (7,434 posts)
36. I disagree with your opinion of this article
|
Oh, wait, you didn't post an opinion.
"100-clip magazines." Oh the stupidity of it all. "Speaking as a rifleman" "A driver’s license is a far greater liberator than a hunting license, and thereafter, trekking around in the wilderness killing things lost its luster. It has been decades since I engaged in those adventures. " I think he lost the label of a "rifleman" "decades" ago. "The NRA not only dependably opposes limits on assault-rifle sales" I haven't seen where the NRA has opposed limits on assault rifles. They have opposed the AWB which has nothing to do with assault rifles. "The NRA represents gun manufacturers, end of story. " All credibility lost. |
Response to rl6214 (Reply #36)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 09:39 PM
oneshooter (5,907 posts)
44. "rifleman" I doubt he was ever a Marine.
|
Last edited Thu Aug 9, 2012, 09:41 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 06:24 PM
Atypical Liberal (5,412 posts)
40. This is false, and I can prove it.
|
I am (usually) a member of the NRA. My membership is currently lapsed but I will be fixing that shortly.
I am not a firearm manufacturer. Millions of people just like me are regular Americans who own firearms and believe in collective organized action to protect our interests. Do businesses in the firearms industry support the NRA? No doubt they do. But to suggest that the NRA is really just a front for businesses and not the 4 million individuals who pay dues to belong and collectively fight gun control is just plain false. |
Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #40)
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 01:55 PM
SecularMotion (3,147 posts)
50. Does the NRA speak for you when they call for the defeat of President Obama?
Response to SecularMotion (Reply #50)
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 08:07 PM
Atypical Liberal (5,412 posts)
52. Nope.
|
I voted for President Obama in the last election, and I will in this upcoming election.
I am doing so because, as in the last election, the consequences of more Republican policies are too devastating to ignore. More war, more tax cuts for the 1%. I am also doing so because I believe that the President is afraid to touch the gun issue. However, if he pushes gun control after winning the election I may have to rethink my position for the next election. |
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 02:03 PM
Tuesday Afternoon (43,914 posts)
51. Isn't that what ALL Lobbyists do? period.
Response to SecularMotion (Original post)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:36 PM
Dr_Scholl (212 posts)
62. With "friends" like that, who needs enemies?
|
Fudds are a dying breed, but the media still takes any comments those idiots make and then try and say that they're speaking for the majority of gun owners.
|

