HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Let's create an anti-NRA ...

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:21 AM

Let's create an anti-NRA lobby and give the same amount of money they give - to anti-gun candidates.

Last edited Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:42 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/nra-congress/

EDIT TO ADD: That I am not talking about "repeal the Second Amendment people" I am talking about people who want to have real reform in our country with regards to gun legislation. So we won't have another assault weapons ban bill fail. It failed because of the NRA and everyone knows it.

The charts here show how much money was given to what Senate or House member. We all know that the better rating the NRA gives to a member the more money that member will get from them for their next race.

All we have to do is exceed the amount of money they give and we can have the same influence. I know we don't want to give money to republicans but what about the democrats that got money from them? And find out exactly how much they gave to a republican candidate and give the same amount to their democratic challenger.

They only gave a total of $421,000 to Democrats in the 2012 election. Someone here knows how to start a lobby and raise money. We can do that! And they gave 3,849,000 to Republicans. If our sole aim is to get these gun whores out we can raise that too.

I sign so many petitions and what does it matter if people are ruled by the money God. We have to fight fire with fire in this case I believe.

40 replies, 4313 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 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply Let's create an anti-NRA lobby and give the same amount of money they give - to anti-gun candidates. (Original post)
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 OP
spanone Mar 2013 #1
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 #18
graham4anything Mar 2013 #2
ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2013 #4
graham4anything Mar 2013 #5
ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2013 #9
graham4anything Mar 2013 #10
ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2013 #11
dkf Mar 2013 #17
AnotherMcIntosh Mar 2013 #28
dkf Mar 2013 #30
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2013 #31
AnotherMcIntosh Mar 2013 #32
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2013 #38
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 #15
ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2013 #34
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 #13
ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2013 #3
Honeycombe8 Mar 2013 #6
Duckhunter935 Mar 2013 #7
Honeycombe8 Mar 2013 #21
Scuba Mar 2013 #26
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 #14
AnotherMcIntosh Mar 2013 #33
Progressive dog Mar 2013 #39
bluedigger Mar 2013 #8
Lurks Often Mar 2013 #12
XRubicon Mar 2013 #16
marions ghost Mar 2013 #19
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 #24
marions ghost Mar 2013 #29
oneshooter Mar 2013 #40
patrice Mar 2013 #20
patrice Mar 2013 #22
Maraya1969 Mar 2013 #23
patrice Mar 2013 #27
patrice Mar 2013 #25
Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2013 #35
krispos42 Mar 2013 #36
spin Mar 2013 #37

Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:22 AM

1. the worse congress money can buy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #1)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:44 PM

18. I just love black and white thinking. Carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:24 AM

2. Meek Mike, the Great Equalizer has done just that. Support the 800 Mayors against Guns.

 

EVERY candidate, primary them to elect the anti-gun one.
District by district, state by state.

and anyone who starts in against Meek Mike, The Great Equalizer, is someone who wants nothing done about the insanity of bullets and guns in the street.

There is no more playing nice to the NRA and pro-gun people.
They had their chance at compromise, now, no retreat, no surrender

Stop the authoritarian pro-gun and NRA lobbies and their bully pulpit they use to blackmail
candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #2)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:38 AM

4. Thats great, support one of the worst 1%ers out there to the hilt

Yes he is against guns, but he does not support much else in the way of civil rights either. Look at how he handled Occupy.

As for MAIG, it keeps losing members to criminal indictments...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:45 AM

5. the NRA and the people with guns are the authoritarians and the bullies

 

and read my post.

Time for being nice to gun lovers who want to bully their way to no change is long past over.

As the Dixie Chicks sang " I am not ready to make nice", nor shall I ever again be.

The NRA is dead. Shame that it will take thousands and thousands more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #5)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 11:01 AM

9. 1%ers are the bullies...and they do it everywhere, just like Bloomie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #9)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 11:06 AM

10. Joe Biden is against guns/bullets.

 

Anyone that tries to do something about the insanity of bullets and guns is the enemy to the NRA and gun lovers.

Vice President Joe Biden likes the idea of doing away with the gun/bullets.

So being against Joe Biden is what the NRA/gunnies are.

It's always good to know who is on the side of the administration, and who isn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #10)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 02:02 PM

11. This is about 1%ers and the worshiping of them

Not the VP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #10)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:43 PM

17. Didn't Biden say people should get a shotgun or something to that effect?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #17)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:21 PM

28. And didn't Biden support the Iraq War Resolution?

 

When is he going to be in favor of withdrawing our firearms from the Middle-Eastern countries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #28)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:35 PM

30. What are we doing in Syria I wonder?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #17)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:37 PM

31. Get a shotgun and fire it through the door at noises on the other side if I remember correctly.

 

Not to mention just walking outside and firing it randomly into the air.

F&S: What about the other uses, for self-defense and target practice?

BIDEN: Well, the way in which we measure it is—I think most scholars would say—is that as long as you have a weapon sufficient to be able to provide your self-defense. I did one of these town-hall meetings on the Internet and one guy said, “Well, what happens when the end days come? What happens when there’s the earthquake? I live in California, and I have to protect myself.”

I said, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semi-automatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that’s true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you. Now, granted, you can come back and say, “Well, a machine gun could do a better job of protecting me.” No one’s arguing we should make machine guns legal."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #31)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 06:03 PM

32. Wow. I wonder what his wife thinks about his cavalier attitude towards doors.

 

Has he ever practiced doing this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #32)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 07:24 PM

38. All's I know is that he hates doors. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #4)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:35 PM

15. Their numbers "skyrocket" after Newtown.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/mayors-against-illegal-guns_n_2451697.html

More than 400,000 new members have joined the Mayors Against Illegal Guns group since last month's tragic shooting in Newtown, Conn., the coalition's communications director told Politico on Thursday.

Politico also reports that over 900,000 individuals have signed the group's 'Demand A Plan' petition, which calls on President Obama and Congress to outline a specific course of action to end gun violence.

The group, which grew out of an initial meeting of 15 municipal leaders organized by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, claims more than 800 mayors from across the country as members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Reply #15)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 06:31 PM

34. I was referring to the mayors

And their numbers have not increased...and they might have had another indicted since then

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #2)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:31 PM

13. I did not know this. Thanks for the information!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:37 AM

3. You might want to cross post this in the new Gun Control Reform Activism

Its in the Justice & Public Safety group

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:49 AM

6. Do you know of any anti-gun candidates? Or a lot of anti-gun citizens?

I don't. I know of candidates who are anti-assault weapons, pro-100% background checks, but none that are anti-gun.

I don't know any ordinary citizens, either, who are anti-gun. They are like the candidates: in favor of banning assault weapons, in favor of expanding background checks, in favor of banning high count mags. But none that are against all guns of any type.

So you first have to clarify the organization's position. I suggest making it a moderate position, so that you get a lot of contributors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #6)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:52 AM

7. anti-gun citizens, yes

 

Quite a few here, all you have to do is read some of the posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #7)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:53 PM

21. I said I don't "know" any. I see some posters in blogs say they are, but I don't know them.

I honestly don't know anyone who is against any and every kind of gun. I'm not, either. That's not saying I would be against a gun ban entirely. That's not gonna happen, in the first place. But I just don't know anyone personally who is against the idea of guns.

I can see where in urban areas, there might be more people against guns. Guns there - the people may see them as tools of crime. But in much of the U.S., that's not what guns are to the people. That's not how they are seen, and that's not how they're used. So....I don't know of anyone who sees guns merely as tools of crime and that need banning entirely. Most people, I think, think that assault weapons and high count mags should be banned, and that guns should be kept out of the hands of criminals to the extent possible (that's not entirely possible).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #7)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:06 PM

26. Actually is just a handful, some of who post with great frequency ...

 

... so great it makes one suspect they are only advocating that extreme position so the pro-gunners can say "see".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #6)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:32 PM

14. It was just an idea that popped into my head. Your point is valid. But I see that there is

a group, (the 100 governors against guns) who have already done this so I am going to donate to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #6)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 06:09 PM

33. Would Dianne Feinstein, according to her own words, qualify?

 

From Youtube

Dianne Feinstein: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up [every gun]… Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.”


&feature=player_detailpage

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #33)

Sun Mar 24, 2013, 01:24 PM

39. Deceptive editing?

Can't find anything more recent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 10:57 AM

8. Good idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 03:25 PM

12. There are numerous such organizations

 

Two of the more notable are the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence and the Violence Prevention Center. Both are considered mostly ineffectual, they are rarely successful in their fund raising and not considered especially influential in Washington DC.

Despite what many here on DU want to believe, the anti-gun movement is not a majority in this country. It is a loud, vocal minority concentrated in the Northeast, parts of the Mid-Atlantic, parts of the West Coast and Chicago, in other words, the suburbs and major cities of the liberal states.

The NRA is effective, not because of their money, but because they can get gun owners to the voting booth. And there are a LOT of gun owners who may not be part of the NRA, but vote the same way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:42 PM

16. I like it, nra power is money not votes imho

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:45 PM

19. Maybe gabby Giffords PAC can do something? Not sure

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #19)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:03 PM

24. See we are scatered. If all these groups got together and pooled their money they could

buy us a great congress and senate! Maybe I am wrong in that we don't need another group but a central clearing house type of organization for all our organizations!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Reply #24)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:30 PM

29. Groups could network

Start one and link up with others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Reply #24)

Sun Mar 24, 2013, 01:31 PM

40. So you believe that"buy us a great congress and senate!" is the way to run the country?

You are sounding like a 1%er.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:46 PM

20. It would be a VERY good idea to have our authentic position on the 2nd Amendment represented for

what it actually is, rather than all of the lies being told about us and what we want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 04:56 PM

22. It'd be fun to try to co-opt the N, R, A & smart to use the word NATIONAL in the name, so . . .

National Responsible Arms association

National Rifle Accountability association

National R_____________? A________________?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #22)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:01 PM

23. National Responsible Arms Authority

I like the word "authority".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Reply #23)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:10 PM

27. I like the way that word parallels the NRA's own de facto claims of absolute authority. I also

like how that word in one's name also would create pressure to BE an actual authority, by collating ALL of the research on the question possible into ONE fully searchable resource and, then, promoting and propagating that resource through inclusive discussions such as that which we see here at DU, but modified appropriately for the groups mission and goals, of course.

I also do think the word has a bit of a turn off for some people, but that auto-provocation could in fact work in favor of the group if those kinds of reactions are appropriately and constructively managed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 05:05 PM

25. Something like this could be used as a central set of standards to assess the extent to which

specific Representatives and Senators support the spread of weapons around this world with actions such as these:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12621068

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 06:52 PM

35. I don't think much short of repealing the 2nd would make much difference, to be honest.

If you get rid of 100% of the guns, you'll get rid of 100% of the shootings, tautologically. But if you get rid of 50% of the guns, you won't cut shootings by anywhere near 50%, because people who actually want to shoot people will be the last to give up their guns, and if you have lots of legally-owned guns then I suspect it's very difficult indeed to make it hard to get hold of guns illegally.

I think full-on, UK-style gun control would be a very good thing indeed for the USA. I don't see any chance whatsoever of that happening in the forseeable future.

I'm not convinced that any kind of gun control that might possibly pass a 2nd-amendment challenge in court would result in a significant reduction in the number of shootings per year, and I'm not convinced it's a good use of campaigning effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 06:52 PM

36. Fundamental problem with your idea.

People that own guns nowadays, almost by default, find themselves involved in politics simply because they own a gun and a large swath of the country considers that act to be at the least worrisome and at the most a dangerous public heath hazard on part with, say heroin. They get involved because they are aware that they are the targets of legislation.

People that don't own guns literally have to do nothing to keep on doing so, and as such are not as involved. They certainly don't feel like they have to join an organization to protect them from mandatory gun-ownership laws or something.


And the assault weapons ban was a dumb idea. It doesn't ban guns, it bans cosmetic or ergonomic features that are present on some guns.

Under the Feinstein 2013 proposal, I can own this AR-15...


But not this one:



Same mechanicals, same magazines, same ammuntion... hell, I should be able to swap every single mechanical part between the two rifles without affecting function or accuracy or reliability.

But one has a protruding pistol grip, and one doesn't. So one would be outlawed, and one wouldn't.



I know her proposal also included a magazine-capacity limit, but that is independent of the definition of "assault weapon".


There are things we can do to reduce violence in our society. Some of it has to do with social policy, some of it has to do with economic policy, and some of it has to do with gun policy. But waging a war against protruding pistol grips (or telescoping stocks, or heat shields for the barrel) isn't one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Sat Mar 23, 2013, 06:59 PM

37. Your problem is not just the NRA. ...

Estimates vary but there are somewhere between 80 to 100 million gun owners in our nation. Only 4.5 to 5 million belong to the NRA.

Obviously gun owners are just as distressed as non gun owners over the recent tragedies that have recently occurred and by criminal gun violence. However, it is hard to convince an honest, responsible and sane gun owner that he is in any way responsible for these incidents.

While some gun owners will agree that there is no reason for anyone to own an assault style rifle or a pistol with a magazine capacity of over ten rounds, many do not.

Gun owners will point out that rifles such as the AR-15 are used for hunting in many states and target shooters use them in national competitions. While not the best firearm to use for self defense in an urban environment they might be a good weapon for those who live in a rural area. They are accurate, reliable and have a very low recoil which makes them a pleasure to shoot. A shotgun is possibly the best choice for a self defense weapon at close range but unlike what you see in the movies it has to be aimed and the recoil is intimidating for those not used to handling a powerful weapon.

(I should stop to point out that most states that allow an AR-15 for hunting game such as deer place a limit on the number of rounds a hunter has in a magazine. However hunters often use AR style rifles to hunt feral hogs while using 20 or 30 round magazines. Wild hogs are a significant problem in states like Florida and Texas as these pests are not native to our nation and cause considerable damage to the environment and to crops on farms.

Also while a 12 gauge shotgun has a nasty recoil, a 410 or 20 gauge shotgun has far less and with proper loads should be adequate for self defense.)


Right or wrong, gun owners often believe that passing another assault weapons ban will do little to reduce the level of gun violence and the number of massacres carried out by deranged individuals. They believe that if it passes and fails, the next ban will be for all semi-automatic firearms and then all handguns. Therefore they oppose any and all bans.

Gun owners vote. They do not often vote for politicians who wish to impose strong gun control such as bans on certain weapons. This is largely because they have a fair to considerable amount of money invested in their shooting hobby and own several firearms or even a large collection. People who do not own firearms also vote but they have no money in the game and are largely driven by emotion. Demand for gun control increases dramatically after a terrible tragedy but rapidly drops as time passes.

Another factor rarely considered is that each state only gets two Senators. Gun control may have strong support in a liberal state with a large population but be very unpopular in a less populated state where firearm ownership is common. Therefore gun control may be supported by the majority of citizens in our nation but will be unable to pass in the Senate because the voters from the smaller states effectively have more power than the voters from the big states.

The media paints the NRA and its donations as the reason gun control efforts are stymied. The NRA is indeed a strong organization with good lobbyists. However, the real reason legislation such as the AWB fails is because an enormous block of voters oppose it and the politicians fear the ballot box.

If there is anything positive in this situation, it's that gun owners do wish to see current laws improved and better enforced. They will also support new legislation that has a good chance of decreasing gun violence.

Is the end objective to disarm all Americans or to decrease gun violence and tragic massacres? If your goal is the first then assault weapons ban is a good first step but you face a long and difficult road. If you wish to reduce criminal gun violence and tragedies caused by those with severe mental issue, you can improve and better enforce existing laws and work to pass new legislation that will prove effective and you will find the path easier.

One fact rarely mentioned by both sides of the gun control debate is that gun violence in our nation has fallen to levels last seen in the late 1960s. We seem to be heading in the right direction but we can still do far better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread