Inside the sacred NRA

[whitehall]

The Red Cross had the same problem and so did the Wounded Warrior project. The NRA will work it out just like they did.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Only in the U.S. are there so many guns in private hands and such dumb arguments about guns. There is mad hype that “my guns will be taken away,” when in fact there’s a Constitutional guarantee of the right to bear arms and no possibility of it being removed, nor is there real threat of much more than minor reforms in state gun regulations.

Corruption and conflict in the recent NRA leadership is real, but I don’t really know much about that. Here is a report on it, but there is much more available:The NRA’s big, bad financial mismanagement crisis, explained

I would love to see the NRA crash and be rebuilt on the non-partisan lines of its original leadership, or of its leadership before the mid-1970s. Back in earlier days it was a normal gun sportIng organization. I was a member then. The NRA actually was in favor of reasonable gun regulations in those days.

The “left” was not particularly anti-gun then either. In fact during and before the Civil Rights Movement there were often armed black citizens in the South able and willing to use guns as a last ditch defense against racist terrorists. Of course guns were very correctly not then seen as being a useful part of political struggle, union struggles, demonstrations, etc. There were very rare exceptions, of course, as in certain mining town struggles, or when the Black Panthers took shotguns onto the stairs of the California State Capitol to make a point — and Ronald Reagan, the NRA, the cops and FBI freaked out.

Today the gun question is hyped up in terrible ways. It certainly would be better if — as a society — we got rid of our gun and politics festishism, and took reasonable steps to keep nuts from building up arsenals and to make it harder for criminals to have guns. But politicians (mostly Republicans) will not allow this, as too many in our country are obsessed with fantasies of a “just” political or even “race war,” violence and killing. Liberals often go to the other extreme, not considering rural traditions of gun ownership, and making gun regulations in some cities so severe that only criminals and cops have or can easily afford to have a gun.

Vigilantism and armed political conflicts are crucial things to be avoided at this time, and everybody, including the authorities, should be more vigorous in prosecuting and preventing such activities.

Mind you I have a rifle and a legal carry license and support armed self defense measures when absolutely necessary. But it is not at all appropriate during the coming elections to encourage open carrying of weapons at demonstrations.

 

[Jitss617]

I just sent them money he’ll yea

 

[Shawnee_b]

Only in the U.S. are there so many guns in private hands and such dumb arguments about guns. There is mad hype that “my guns will be taken away,” when in fact there’s a Constitutional guarantee of the right to bear arms and no possibility of it being removed, nor is there real threat of much more than minor reforms in state gun regulations.

Mad hype? 1934 NFA act, 1968 GCA, 1986 ban, 2004 AWB, no ordering parts overseas (there are many more) and they all were not MINOR reforms but entirely UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Many guns are already "banned", many hard to impossible to obtain and own (legally)

To just state "hype" is wrong. You make it sound simple black and white, as if it's all or none. It's not. What has happened is the "slice at a time" act. Take a slice of bread off a mans plate he will grumble, try taking the whole loaf and see what happens.

Let me guess, you don't live in the USA

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Let me guess, you don't live in the USA

You guess wrong.

 

[2aguy]

The Red Cross had the same problem and so did the Wounded Warrior project. The NRA will work it out just like they did.

Don't forget March of Dimes.....

 

[2aguy]

Only in the U.S. are there so many guns in private hands and such dumb arguments about guns. There is mad hype that “my guns will be taken away,” when in fact there’s a Constitutional guarantee of the right to bear arms and no possibility of it being removed, nor is there real threat of much more than minor reforms in state gun regulations.

Corruption and conflict in the recent NRA leadership is real, but I don’t really know much about that. Here is a report on it, but there is much more available:The NRA’s big, bad financial mismanagement crisis, explained

I would love to see the NRA crash and be rebuilt on the non-partisan lines of its original leadership, or of its leadership before the mid-1970s. Back in earlier days it was a normal gun sportIng organization. I was a member then. The NRA actually was in favor of reasonable gun regulations in those days.

The “left” was not particularly anti-gun then either. In fact during and before the Civil Rights Movement there were often armed black citizens in the South able and willing to use guns as a last ditch defense against racist terrorists. Of course guns were very correctly not then seen as being a useful part of political struggle, union struggles, demonstrations, etc. There were very rare exceptions, of course, as in certain mining town struggles, or when the Black Panthers took shotguns onto the stairs of the California State Capitol to make a point — and Ronald Reagan, the NRA, the cops and FBI freaked out.

Today the gun question is hyped up in terrible ways. It certainly would be better if — as a society — we got rid of our gun and politics festishism, and took reasonable steps to keep nuts from building up arsenals and to make it harder for criminals to have guns. But politicians (mostly Republicans) will not allow this, as too many in our country are obsessed with fantasies of a “just” political or even “race war,” violence and killing. Liberals often go to the other extreme, not considering rural traditions of gun ownership, and making gun regulations in some cities so severe that only criminals and cops have or can easily afford to have a gun.

Vigilantism and armed political conflicts are crucial things to be avoided at this time, and everybody, including the authorities, should be more vigorous in prosecuting and preventing such activities.

Mind you I have a rifle and a legal carry license and support armed self defense measures when absolutely necessary. But it is not at all appropriate during the coming elections to encourage open carrying of weapons at demonstrations.

I love you morons who say, "I supported the NRA when they just taught gun safety," when we show you over and over the actual steps the democrat party is taking to ban and confiscate guns one gun, one magazine and one piece of equipment at a time.....

If you believe your crap you really are stupid...if you are lying, then you are a piece of crap.....

 

[Shawnee_b]

Let me guess, you don't live in the USA

You guess wrong.

Then you either don't belong here in the US or are retarded for not seeing the blatant evidence of systematic gun banning. It's not black and white, I saw it, lived it. I retired from the industry, LICENSED. Dealer, gunsmith, manufacturer, class 2 SOT 07FFL (look it up).

Not trying to disarm us? WIPE ALL unconstitutional laws and acts off the books then. 1934 and 1968 act would be a good start. I have a 1968 ATF book on all gun laws,,,,, then. 3/8" thick. Now it's close to double that size. ATF writes CFR's anytime and on anything they wish, no control, no repercussions. Double the unconstitutional laws as they wish, whenever they wish? That's not hype, that's reality.

It's different in subject but look at the 1st amendment. Free speech has been stomped on same as guns. There are people, very unlike you whom see this and see the erosion of rights, constantly.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Then you either don't belong here in the US or are retarded ...

Normally I would not even bother responding to an asshole who starts with childish insults...

It’s fascinating, however, how you continue ...

You ignore most everything I wrote.

You think you impress by referring to “unconstitutional laws” written ... in 1934 [!] and 1968 [!]

You try to impress claiming — wow! — you were .... “LICENSED.”

And you end your stupid little philippic by claiming the First Amendment has been “stomped on” as much the Second supposedly has!

But guess what? We all do have Free Speech to say just about anything we wish, and we can buy — not just a few guns — but whole arsenals of guns.

Now maybe you’re one of those who think we should all be able to buy automatic weapons or Stinger Missiles, or that we have no free speech because we can’t scream “fire!” in a movie theatre. There are lots of regulations I’m sure you object to (and quite a few even I do). But I’m happy criminals generally can’t freely buy guns, nor children, nor the mentally ill.

And even when I lived in NYC I had a registered rifle and a Taurus Beretta 92 knockoff that was ... quite adequate for my needs.

So if things are so bad, name a country where private citizens have more guns, more constitutionally guaranteed rights, or more “free speech”!

Or more gun violence!

.

 

[Shawnee_b]

But guess what? We all do have Free Speech to say just about anything we wish, and we can buy — not just a few guns — but whole arsenals of guns.

Now maybe you’re one of those who think we should all be able to buy automatic weapons or Stinger Missiles, or that we have no free speech because we can’t scream “fire!” in a movie theatre. There are lots of regulations I’m sure you object to (and quite a few even I do). But I’m happy criminals generally can’t freely buy guns, nor children, nor the mentally ill.



.

Just as you ignore the fact gun rights have been stomped for 90 years, I ignore the lib take on "it's OK you can keep your shotgun"

The licensed ref was "I lived the industry, saw the inside, saw the workings, the laws ATF just adds in" I was ready to retire anyway but ATF rulings shut down 60% my work and sales and no one but those in the industry ever even knew about it.

We can't buy "arsenals of guns" anymore, that has been unconstitutionally curtailed. There are states where over a few guns is an arsenal or a certain amount of ammo. Try NY, CA. 40 states are "unrestricted" as laws are now. 10 aren't. How about places like MA where you need s FOID card. How about IL where you need one and they won't issue them now. How does one have an arsenal if they can't buy one single revolver to protect their home, property and selves? Tell me about those NYC laws, it's that what the 2nd says? NO, and you got lucky. Many in NYC will never be able to own and how many can carry? 2nd's not infringed?

Fire in a movie theatre is a lib concoction deflection and that is not free speech by any means.

Free speech is not curtailed? Hate speech? Words?

 

[Shawnee_b]

Legislators are trying to make the already draconian New York SAFE Act even more absurd.
According to this story from thetruthaboutguns.com, lawmakers from Brooklyn announced two proposed amendments to the package of firearms laws would limit how much ammunition New York residents could buy at a time.
The law would only allow gun owners to purchase twice a gun’s capacity every 90 days. Since the SAFE Act already limits magazine capacity to 10 rounds, a gun owner wouldn’t be able to buy more than one 20-round box of ammo every three months. Theoretically, a person who owns a six-shot revolver would be limited to purchasing 12 rounds every 90 days.

NY Lawmakers: Limit Ammo Purchases to 20 Rounds Every 90 Days

Violating the proposed legislation, backed by a Brooklyn lawmaker, could result in four years in prison.

www.range365.com

Heck, if you can't totally ban guns or make them impossible to buy own or carry..... Just ban ammo. Right?

Check out some states ammo and firearm limits. Ohhhh no, that's not an infringement.