The San Francisco BOS Declares The NRA a "Domestic Terrorist Group"

[iceberg]

We are also a population of 325 million people. Also since half of our deaths are suicides and people do use guns for that reason, or course we are going to have more deaths. Only a liberal would think that suicide victims choosing another way of dying is a success of some sort.

Well, yeah, it would be, because you have a better chance of surviving other methods of suicide.

The reality- we have 15,000 gun homicides, and only half of those are committed by minorities. So even if you factor out minorities for whatever racist reasons you think that's a good idea, we still have 7000 gun homicides committed by white folks.

While the UK has about 50.

And Japan has about 10

damn - you just cherry pick don't you?

how about we just compare violence with violence? the lefts fascination with just having a different form of violence amazes me. how about we focus on why people are so angry these days as a way to lessen the # of violent acts?

U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder - iGeek

• If you look at the (the blue line): Each time the UK enacted or stiffened their gun control laws, they saw an increase in murder rates. Each new law, had no positive (and some negative) impact or an increase in murder rates. (Crime trends are even worse). (In the 1950’s they outlawed conceal and carry, in the 80’s it was shotguns, and in the late 90’s it was all pistols). So regardless of whether the UK has fewer murders than the US for cultural reasons, we know that gun control didn’t help the UK’s murder rate.
• Next if you look at the (the red line): I overlaid (and adjusted) the U.S. murder rates with major gun control events. After JFK was shot, states and eventually the Fed (1968) passed all sorts of gun control laws — and what happened to our murder rates? They doubled from around 5 to 10 per 100K over the next decade, and they hovered there, despite all sorts of state and federal revisions, or more laws (30,000 different state/local/federal gun control laws were passed in total). There was no significant positive effects, and some observable negative ones in the U.S. due to our gun control laws.
• Then in the late 80’s Florida passed “Must Issue” conceal and carry and castle doctrine laws were passed, and their crime/murder rates started falling noticeably. Many other states (in the South and Midwest) followed suit, with the same effects in their state murder rates, and eventually enough of those added up to start impacting the federal murder rates noticeably. Then the federal assault weapon ban expired — and if gun control worked, you’d expect an upward spike in murders, but murders trended down. Adding gun control had no positive effects, and removing them had no significant negative effects, in the U.S.!. So if you have the choice of tyranny or liberty, and there's no benefit to tyranny: opt for liberty.

 

[Soupnazi630]

I am not a member of The NRA. Though I may or may not own firearms, I have no intention of ever joining The NRA. Furthermore, I'm not particularly fond of Wayne LaPierre, though I can't really put a finger on why...

I fully support the 2nd Amendment...

All that being said, I have to think that, given all that is wrong within the City of San Francisco, the Board of Supervisors must have better things to do than pass idiotic, misinformed, and toothless resolutions that are full of blatant lies...

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on Tuesday declaring that the National Rifle Association is a domestic terrorist organization. The officials also urged other cities, states and the federal government to follow suit.


District 2 Supervisor Catherine Stefani wrote the resolution and shared her thoughts on the NRA with KTVU. "The NRA has it coming to them," she said. "And I will do everything I possibly can to call them out on what they are, which is a domestic terrorist organization..."

SF Board of Supervisors declare National Rifle Association a domestic terrorist organization

Treat yourselves to the "Comments", some may surprise you...

The Resolution:

https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ash...amp;GUID=DF64490F-D8BC-4BF7-A43D-287F02BECCCA

View attachment 277457
View attachment 277458
View attachment 277459

The NRA is the largest marketing concern for gun manufacturers.

The NRA magazines are read by large number of gun buyers. Why wouldn't they be a "concern"?

The way the NRA does it is by intimidating or coercing a civilian population and influencing the policy of the government by intimidation or coercion through lobbing efforts.

I'm part of the civilian population, and have never been intimidated by the NRA in any way. All they do is communicate the interests of their dues paying membership to the politicians. And the politicians make their own decisions. There are two dozen radical leftist presidential candidates promising gun confiscation against the wishes of the NRA. They don't sound that "intimidated" to me.

The NRA communicates the interest of whom they market for which is gun manufacturers. The membership keeps them tax free.

Wrong.

They serve the interests of those who provide them with finding.

Most of their finding comes from members

The members do keep them tax free but also pays most of their revenue and income

 

[yidnar]

I am not a member of The NRA. Though I may or may not own firearms, I have no intention of ever joining The NRA. Furthermore, I'm not particularly fond of Wayne LaPierre, though I can't really put a finger on why...

I fully support the 2nd Amendment...

All that being said, I have to think that, given all that is wrong within the City of San Francisco, the Board of Supervisors must have better things to do than pass idiotic, misinformed, and toothless resolutions that are full of blatant lies...

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on Tuesday declaring that the National Rifle Association is a domestic terrorist organization. The officials also urged other cities, states and the federal government to follow suit.


District 2 Supervisor Catherine Stefani wrote the resolution and shared her thoughts on the NRA with KTVU. "The NRA has it coming to them," she said. "And I will do everything I possibly can to call them out on what they are, which is a domestic terrorist organization..."

SF Board of Supervisors declare National Rifle Association a domestic terrorist organization

Treat yourselves to the "Comments", some may surprise you...

The Resolution:

https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ash...amp;GUID=DF64490F-D8BC-4BF7-A43D-287F02BECCCA

View attachment 277457
View attachment 277458
View attachment 277459

The NRA is the largest marketing concern for gun manufacturers.

The NRA magazines are read by large number of gun buyers. Why wouldn't they be a "concern"?

The way the NRA does it is by intimidating or coercing a civilian population and influencing the policy of the government by intimidation or coercion through lobbing efforts.

i thought the NRA membership was voluntary .did they force you to buy into a membership against your will like the individual mandate did ??

 

[yidnar]

more government control of the privates sector and business[socialism] and gun confiscation ,sounds like the NAZI's have taken over the left !

 

[The Original Tree]

We are also a population of 325 million people. Also since half of our deaths are suicides and people do use guns for that reason, or course we are going to have more deaths. Only a liberal would think that suicide victims choosing another way of dying is a success of some sort.

Well, yeah, it would be, because you have a better chance of surviving other methods of suicide.

The reality- we have 15,000 gun homicides, and only half of those are committed by minorities. So even if you factor out minorities for whatever racist reasons you think that's a good idea, we still have 7000 gun homicides committed by white folks.

While the UK has about 50.

And Japan has about 10

damn - you just cherry pick don't you?

how about we just compare violence with violence? the lefts fascination with just having a different form of violence amazes me. how about we focus on why people are so angry these days as a way to lessen the # of violent acts?

U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder - iGeek

• If you look at the (the blue line): Each time the UK enacted or stiffened their gun control laws, they saw an increase in murder rates. Each new law, had no positive (and some negative) impact or an increase in murder rates. (Crime trends are even worse). (In the 1950’s they outlawed conceal and carry, in the 80’s it was shotguns, and in the late 90’s it was all pistols). So regardless of whether the UK has fewer murders than the US for cultural reasons, we know that gun control didn’t help the UK’s murder rate.
• Next if you look at the (the red line): I overlaid (and adjusted) the U.S. murder rates with major gun control events. After JFK was shot, states and eventually the Fed (1968) passed all sorts of gun control laws — and what happened to our murder rates? They doubled from around 5 to 10 per 100K over the next decade, and they hovered there, despite all sorts of state and federal revisions, or more laws (30,000 different state/local/federal gun control laws were passed in total). There was no significant positive effects, and some observable negative ones in the U.S. due to our gun control laws.
• Then in the late 80’s Florida passed “Must Issue” conceal and carry and castle doctrine laws were passed, and their crime/murder rates started falling noticeably. Many other states (in the South and Midwest) followed suit, with the same effects in their state murder rates, and eventually enough of those added up to start impacting the federal murder rates noticeably. Then the federal assault weapon ban expired — and if gun control worked, you’d expect an upward spike in murders, but murders trended down. Adding gun control had no positive effects, and removing them had no significant negative effects, in the U.S.!. So if you have the choice of tyranny or liberty, and there's no benefit to tyranny: opt for liberty.

There are about 250,000 Gun Control Laws and cities like Chicago and Baltimore are more dangerous to live in than Afghanistan.

 

[Brain357]

It proves our police are killed at an unacceptable rate thanks to guns.

No it does not as that is strictly a subjective opinion

You must really hate the police.

The police are not stupid like you think. Even they know that disarming the society will not disarm criminals. In fact it will make the guns they carry even more valuable worth killing a cop over.

Then why are so few law enforcement killed in countries with strong gun control? Why does law enforcement also shoot so fewer people?

Just not true. Mexico, Congo, El Salvador all have extremely strong gun control laws. And also very high murder rates.

What I find really interesting how libs complain that Trump is Literally Hitler, or even "worse than Hitler"-- yet they are really hot to trot for the idea of Trump and his minions and cronies in the government should have a monopoly on gun ownership.

No those countries don’t have strong gun control. They have laws and no way to enforce them. Mexico law enforcement is corrupt and have themselves been disarmed.

 

[Brain357]

We are also a population of 325 million people. Also since half of our deaths are suicides and people do use guns for that reason, or course we are going to have more deaths. Only a liberal would think that suicide victims choosing another way of dying is a success of some sort.

Well, yeah, it would be, because you have a better chance of surviving other methods of suicide.

The reality- we have 15,000 gun homicides, and only half of those are committed by minorities. So even if you factor out minorities for whatever racist reasons you think that's a good idea, we still have 7000 gun homicides committed by white folks.

While the UK has about 50.

And Japan has about 10

damn - you just cherry pick don't you?

how about we just compare violence with violence? the lefts fascination with just having a different form of violence amazes me. how about we focus on why people are so angry these days as a way to lessen the # of violent acts?

U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder - iGeek

• If you look at the (the blue line): Each time the UK enacted or stiffened their gun control laws, they saw an increase in murder rates. Each new law, had no positive (and some negative) impact or an increase in murder rates. (Crime trends are even worse). (In the 1950’s they outlawed conceal and carry, in the 80’s it was shotguns, and in the late 90’s it was all pistols). So regardless of whether the UK has fewer murders than the US for cultural reasons, we know that gun control didn’t help the UK’s murder rate.
• Next if you look at the (the red line): I overlaid (and adjusted) the U.S. murder rates with major gun control events. After JFK was shot, states and eventually the Fed (1968) passed all sorts of gun control laws — and what happened to our murder rates? They doubled from around 5 to 10 per 100K over the next decade, and they hovered there, despite all sorts of state and federal revisions, or more laws (30,000 different state/local/federal gun control laws were passed in total). There was no significant positive effects, and some observable negative ones in the U.S. due to our gun control laws.
• Then in the late 80’s Florida passed “Must Issue” conceal and carry and castle doctrine laws were passed, and their crime/murder rates started falling noticeably. Many other states (in the South and Midwest) followed suit, with the same effects in their state murder rates, and eventually enough of those added up to start impacting the federal murder rates noticeably. Then the federal assault weapon ban expired — and if gun control worked, you’d expect an upward spike in murders, but murders trended down. Adding gun control had no positive effects, and removing them had no significant negative effects, in the U.S.!. So if you have the choice of tyranny or liberty, and there's no benefit to tyranny: opt for liberty.

There are about 250,000 Gun Control Laws and cities like Chicago and Baltimore are more dangerous to live in than Afghanistan.

And most illegal guns in Chicago come from out of state.

 

[Polishprince]

We are also a population of 325 million people. Also since half of our deaths are suicides and people do use guns for that reason, or course we are going to have more deaths. Only a liberal would think that suicide victims choosing another way of dying is a success of some sort.

Well, yeah, it would be, because you have a better chance of surviving other methods of suicide.

The reality- we have 15,000 gun homicides, and only half of those are committed by minorities. So even if you factor out minorities for whatever racist reasons you think that's a good idea, we still have 7000 gun homicides committed by white folks.

While the UK has about 50.

And Japan has about 10

damn - you just cherry pick don't you?

how about we just compare violence with violence? the lefts fascination with just having a different form of violence amazes me. how about we focus on why people are so angry these days as a way to lessen the # of violent acts?

U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder - iGeek

• If you look at the (the blue line): Each time the UK enacted or stiffened their gun control laws, they saw an increase in murder rates. Each new law, had no positive (and some negative) impact or an increase in murder rates. (Crime trends are even worse). (In the 1950’s they outlawed conceal and carry, in the 80’s it was shotguns, and in the late 90’s it was all pistols). So regardless of whether the UK has fewer murders than the US for cultural reasons, we know that gun control didn’t help the UK’s murder rate.
• Next if you look at the (the red line): I overlaid (and adjusted) the U.S. murder rates with major gun control events. After JFK was shot, states and eventually the Fed (1968) passed all sorts of gun control laws — and what happened to our murder rates? They doubled from around 5 to 10 per 100K over the next decade, and they hovered there, despite all sorts of state and federal revisions, or more laws (30,000 different state/local/federal gun control laws were passed in total). There was no significant positive effects, and some observable negative ones in the U.S. due to our gun control laws.
• Then in the late 80’s Florida passed “Must Issue” conceal and carry and castle doctrine laws were passed, and their crime/murder rates started falling noticeably. Many other states (in the South and Midwest) followed suit, with the same effects in their state murder rates, and eventually enough of those added up to start impacting the federal murder rates noticeably. Then the federal assault weapon ban expired — and if gun control worked, you’d expect an upward spike in murders, but murders trended down. Adding gun control had no positive effects, and removing them had no significant negative effects, in the U.S.!. So if you have the choice of tyranny or liberty, and there's no benefit to tyranny: opt for liberty.

There are about 250,000 Gun Control Laws and cities like Chicago and Baltimore are more dangerous to live in than Afghanistan.

And most illegal guns in Chicago come from out of state.

So what? Why isn't Chicago out there enforcing their Draconian Gun Code?

 

[Polishprince]

No it does not as that is strictly a subjective opinion

You must really hate the police.

The police are not stupid like you think. Even they know that disarming the society will not disarm criminals. In fact it will make the guns they carry even more valuable worth killing a cop over.

Then why are so few law enforcement killed in countries with strong gun control? Why does law enforcement also shoot so fewer people?

Just not true. Mexico, Congo, El Salvador all have extremely strong gun control laws. And also very high murder rates.

What I find really interesting how libs complain that Trump is Literally Hitler, or even "worse than Hitler"-- yet they are really hot to trot for the idea of Trump and his minions and cronies in the government should have a monopoly on gun ownership.

No those countries don’t have strong gun control. They have laws and no way to enforce them. Mexico law enforcement is corrupt and have themselves been disarmed.

Same with America. We passed Prohibition of booze and had no way to enforce it.

Why pass another law we can't enforce.

The 4th Amendment among others, makes enforcement of this questionable at best

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We are also a population of 325 million people. Also since half of our deaths are suicides and people do use guns for that reason, or course we are going to have more deaths. Only a liberal would think that suicide victims choosing another way of dying is a success of some sort.

Well, yeah, it would be, because you have a better chance of surviving other methods of suicide.

The reality- we have 15,000 gun homicides, and only half of those are committed by minorities. So even if you factor out minorities for whatever racist reasons you think that's a good idea, we still have 7000 gun homicides committed by white folks.

While the UK has about 50.

And Japan has about 10

Wrong. You are just dividing the murders out evenly among all. Whites are close to 2/3 of the countries population. But even doing it that way, if minorities are only 1/3 of the population, and they are committing half of the homicides, it's pretty un-proportional from the get go.

 

[iceberg]

We are also a population of 325 million people. Also since half of our deaths are suicides and people do use guns for that reason, or course we are going to have more deaths. Only a liberal would think that suicide victims choosing another way of dying is a success of some sort.

Well, yeah, it would be, because you have a better chance of surviving other methods of suicide.

The reality- we have 15,000 gun homicides, and only half of those are committed by minorities. So even if you factor out minorities for whatever racist reasons you think that's a good idea, we still have 7000 gun homicides committed by white folks.

While the UK has about 50.

And Japan has about 10

damn - you just cherry pick don't you?

how about we just compare violence with violence? the lefts fascination with just having a different form of violence amazes me. how about we focus on why people are so angry these days as a way to lessen the # of violent acts?

U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder - iGeek

• If you look at the (the blue line): Each time the UK enacted or stiffened their gun control laws, they saw an increase in murder rates. Each new law, had no positive (and some negative) impact or an increase in murder rates. (Crime trends are even worse). (In the 1950’s they outlawed conceal and carry, in the 80’s it was shotguns, and in the late 90’s it was all pistols). So regardless of whether the UK has fewer murders than the US for cultural reasons, we know that gun control didn’t help the UK’s murder rate.
• Next if you look at the (the red line): I overlaid (and adjusted) the U.S. murder rates with major gun control events. After JFK was shot, states and eventually the Fed (1968) passed all sorts of gun control laws — and what happened to our murder rates? They doubled from around 5 to 10 per 100K over the next decade, and they hovered there, despite all sorts of state and federal revisions, or more laws (30,000 different state/local/federal gun control laws were passed in total). There was no significant positive effects, and some observable negative ones in the U.S. due to our gun control laws.
• Then in the late 80’s Florida passed “Must Issue” conceal and carry and castle doctrine laws were passed, and their crime/murder rates started falling noticeably. Many other states (in the South and Midwest) followed suit, with the same effects in their state murder rates, and eventually enough of those added up to start impacting the federal murder rates noticeably. Then the federal assault weapon ban expired — and if gun control worked, you’d expect an upward spike in murders, but murders trended down. Adding gun control had no positive effects, and removing them had no significant negative effects, in the U.S.!. So if you have the choice of tyranny or liberty, and there's no benefit to tyranny: opt for liberty.

There are about 250,000 Gun Control Laws and cities like Chicago and Baltimore are more dangerous to live in than Afghanistan.

And most illegal guns in Chicago come from out of state.

Wah fucking wah. California also? Baltimore? If only every city were just like those we'd all be fine.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong. You are just dividing the murders out evenly among all. Whites are close to 2/3 of the countries population. But even doing it that way, if minorities are only 1/3 of the population, and they are committing half of the homicides, it's pretty un-proportional from the get go.

Yes, being a minority in a racist society SUCKS! We'll be around to collect your share of reparations later.

Point is, 7000 homicides by white people in the US with guns vs. 48 homicides with guns in the UK.

This isn't complicated.

 

[WillMunny]

Like I always say, the one reason why muslim terrorists will never attack my literal TOILET of a birth town is because even creatures as inbred as muslims know that wiping out San Franshitscans would be doing America a favor.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong. You are just dividing the murders out evenly among all. Whites are close to 2/3 of the countries population. But even doing it that way, if minorities are only 1/3 of the population, and they are committing half of the homicides, it's pretty un-proportional from the get go.

Yes, being a minority in a racist society SUCKS! We'll be around to collect your share of reparations later.

Point is, 7000 homicides by white people in the US with guns vs. 48 homicides with guns in the UK.

This isn't complicated.

They are about a fifth of our population.

Police believe that firearms crimes in some areas are linked to "county lines", where gangs move drug-dealing operations outside big cities to smaller towns.

The figures, released on Thursday, come alongside statistics showing fatal stabbings at their highest level since records began in 1946.

The ONS analysis for individual police forces covers the year to the end of March 2018 and showed 6,521 firearms offences, a 2% rise and the fourth increase in a row.

West Yorkshire Police dealt with 481 incidents of firearms offences, a rise of 10% on the previous year and more than double the figure recorded four years earlier.

Bedfordshire Police handled 106 incidents and Cambridgeshire recorded 84.

Cheshire recorded 81 offences, a rise of 14% on the previous year.

West Yorkshire Police Assistant Chief Constable Tim Kingsman said: "We've seen a rise in the availability of firearms for use by criminals."

Decade-high gun crime for four counties

 

[mikegriffith1]

Good grief. This is not only crazy, it is anti-American.

 

[JoeB131]

Good grief. This is not only crazy, it is anti-American.

The Nazi-onal Rampage Association thinks we should have crazy people with machine guns to fight the government if they pass laws they don't like. That's about as anti-American as it gets.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Good grief. This is not only crazy, it is anti-American.

The Nazi-onal Rampage Association thinks we should have crazy people with machine guns to fight the government if they pass laws they don't like. That's about as anti-American as it gets.

Well actually no the national rifle association advocates nothing close to that

And you would make up such things being a well established liar and coward

The fact is however this nation started by people taking up arms against the government for laws they did not like therefore it is indeed an American tradition

You are also a well known uneducated fool

Btw there will never be reparations and this society is not racist

Those are facts

 

[JoeB131]

Well actually no the national rifle association advocates nothing close to that

The NRA opposes background checks, red flag laws and any other common sense gun law that would keep guns out of the hands of crazies before they shoot something up.

The fact is however this nation started by people taking up arms against the government for laws they did not like therefore it is indeed an American tradition

Actually, you might be onto something there. The rich slave rapists didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes, and they got a bunch of dumb people to fight a war for them. Dumb people have been coming home in body bags ever since for wars that really don't benefit them personally.

Btw there will never be reparations and this society is not racist

This society is racist as all get out... but reparations probably won't happen.

 

[2aguy]

Wrong. You are just dividing the murders out evenly among all. Whites are close to 2/3 of the countries population. But even doing it that way, if minorities are only 1/3 of the population, and they are committing half of the homicides, it's pretty un-proportional from the get go.

Yes, being a minority in a racist society SUCKS! We'll be around to collect your share of reparations later.

Point is, 7000 homicides by white people in the US with guns vs. 48 homicides with guns in the UK.

This isn't complicated.

No...but you still fail to understand the issue. The culture of British criminals is different, for now, than the culture of American criminals, the same way the Yakuza are different from British criminals......gun murder in Britain was low before they banned guns, and didn't change after they banned guns....there was no effect for banning guns...which means guns in the hands of normal people did not drive their gun murder rate, you doofus...

Britain...

More Guns = More Gun Crime
Britain had access to guns before they banned them.....they had low gun crime, low gun murder.
They banned guns, the gun murder rate spiked for 10 years then returned to the same level...
Your Theory again....
More guns = More Gun Crime
Guns Banned creates no change? That means banning guns for law abiding gun owners had no effect on gun crime.
When your theory states one thing, and you implement your theory, and nothing changes....in science, that means your theory is wrong...

 

[2aguy]

Well actually no the national rifle association advocates nothing close to that

The NRA opposes background checks, red flag laws and any other common sense gun law that would keep guns out of the hands of crazies before they shoot something up.

The fact is however this nation started by people taking up arms against the government for laws they did not like therefore it is indeed an American tradition

Actually, you might be onto something there. The rich slave rapists didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes, and they got a bunch of dumb people to fight a war for them. Dumb people have been coming home in body bags ever since for wars that really don't benefit them personally.

Btw there will never be reparations and this society is not racist

This society is racist as all get out... but reparations probably won't happen.

No, moron, they oppose unConstitutional infringements on the Rights of Citizens...you asshat.

We have background checks, criminals and mass shooters still get guns easily since they either use straw buyers, who can pass any and all background checks...or they steal the guns.......you dope....