In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
To pickenup
keithmichigan
Member Posts: 311 ✭✭✭
Pickenup
You have your opinion of the NRA and I have mine.
I think that President Obama could not have a better spokes person than you to try to tear down the NRA.
I appreciate other previous posts on this matter and your sincerity but I just don't agree.
I suspect that many do not like to be continually asked for contributions. It is very expensive to fight the legal battles and no other organization is doing that.
You have your opinion of the NRA and I have mine.
I think that President Obama could not have a better spokes person than you to try to tear down the NRA.
I appreciate other previous posts on this matter and your sincerity but I just don't agree.
I suspect that many do not like to be continually asked for contributions. It is very expensive to fight the legal battles and no other organization is doing that.
Comments
I just point out facts that MOST people do/did not know about.
What a person does with those facts...........
Pickenup
You have your opinion of the NRA and I have mine.
I think that President Obama could not have a better spokes person than you to try to tear down the NRA.
I appreciate other previous posts on this matter and your sincerity but I just don't agree.
I suspect that many do not like to be continually asked for contributions. It is very expensive to fight the legal battles and no other organization is doing that.
One man takes the position of Amendment II.
Another takes a position opposite to Amendment II.
One man researches and posts factual information about an insidious organization which facilitates the erosion of fundamental individual liberty.
Another takes a position of supporting that insidious organization which gnaws away at the foundation of the Republic.
pickenup is on the side of liberty.
Keith seems to stand opposite to liberty.
That is how I see it and that is how it stacks up.
Just so you know...
It is not OPINION, Keith, it is fact. Speak to that FACT, please, rather than attempting to marginalize it in an attempt to make your BELIEF and OPINION more defensible.
Slum, is your statement about never hearing anyone at a 'real live gun show' somehow proof that the FACTS posted about 'real live NRA actions' are false.
Speak to the facts, please.
Why do YOU feel that the erosion of Amendment II, the federalizing of 'gun-law enforcement' and the selling, normalizing and promotion among the populace of a false and perverted 2nd Amendment, are our 'best bet'?
I agree that it is among the 'best bets', but it is among the best bets to ensure government abrogation of Amendment II and ensure full-blown tyranny.
...It is very expensive to fight the legal battles and no other organization is doing that.
Keith,
Did you happen to look into the relevant actions of the three organizations pointed out to you in the thread in Politics?
edit:
Apparently not. Keith: Read the website, www.saf.org.
Gun Rights Legal Action
Index
NJ Permit Denial
SAF Sues N.J. Officials For 'Deprivation of Civil Rights' On Permit Denials
DC Misdemeanor
SAF Sues Eric Holder, FBI Over Misdemeanor Gun Rights Denial
Nordyke Lawsuit
SAF Files Amicus Brief in Nordyke Case, Argues For Strict Scrutiny
Chicago Lawsuit #2
SAF Sues Chicago Over Gun Range Prohibition On 1A, 2A Grounds
Maryland Lawsuit
SAF Sues in Maryland Over Handgun Permit Denial
New York Lawsuit
SAF Sues in New York to Void 'Good Cause' Carry Permit Requirement
North Carolina Lawsuit
SAF Sues to Overturn North Carolina's 'Emergency Powers' Gun Bans
DC Handgun Carry Lawsuit
SAF Sues District of Columbia over Carrying of Handguns
Seattle Parks Gun Ban Lawsuit
Gun Rights Organizations Win Lawsuit to Stop Seattle Ban
CA Denial of Right Lawsuit
SAF Challenges Arbitrary Denial of Right to Bear Arms in California
CA Roster Lawsuit
SAF Challenges California Handgun Ban Scheme
DC Expat Lawsuit
SAF Sues Eric Holder Over Gun Rights of Non-resident American Citizens
DC Handgun Roster Lawsuit
SAF Challenges D.C. Handgun Ban Scheme
WA Alien Resident Lawsuit
SAF, NRA Sue Washington State for Discriminating Against Alien Residents
Hayes Lawsuit
SAF Files Amicus Brief in Hayes Case
Chicago Gun Ban
SAF Files Lawsuit Challenging Chicago's Handgun Ban
DC Gun Ban
SAF Files Amici Curiae Brief in Lawsuit; DC Gun Ban Ruled Unconstitutional
San Francisco Gun Ban
SAF Sues to Overturn San Francisco Gun Ban
New Orleans Gun Grab Lawsuit
SAF Stops New Orleans Gun Confiscation
Washington State Library Lawsuit
SAF Sues Library System Over Internet Censorship of Gun Websites
Texas 'Sporting Purposes' Lawsuit
SAF Files Texas Lawsuit Defending the Gun Rights of Citizens Living Abroad, Challenges 'Sporting Purpose' Restriction
Ohio 'Sporting Purposes' Lawsuit
SAF Files Ohio Lawsuit Defending the Gun Rights of Citizens Living Abroad, Challenges 'Sporting Purpose' Restriction
Brad Steele
More power to those of you here who bash the NRA. Never heard anyone at a real live gun show bash the NRA. Many disagree with some of what they do, as I do, but almost to the man they feel that they are our best bet. I will always say that if every gun owner in the country belonged to the NRA and their State Rifle Association, gun control in this country would no longer be a problem. Let the sparks fly.
I have heard and have been involved in a number of discussions of the relative merit of the NRA. While it is true that most folks believe they support the organization, more and more folks are beginning to understand freedom, it seems, and more are beginning to think about what the Constitution actually states as compared to what Politicians and the NRA (OK, redundant) tell them it says.
I must agree with you a bit on the 'If every gun owner belonged...' You are probably correct that Gun Control would no longer be a problem. With that kind of support, the NRA and Congress would have arrived at a rock solid control regimen that protects permitted access to hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense weapons. The proletariat, however, would have no access to weapons with which to defend themselves against this monolithic regulating machine.
Brad Steele
Does that scare you? It should.
The NRA supports a privilege. Do you understand that?
Okay... follow both trains of thought in bold above to their logical conclusion. (singular not plural)
Know what you are supporting.
With the plethora of information available on just this website, you have no excuse. Stop supporting the knife in my 2nd amendement back please, thank you.
Here's a simple way to look at it, if the NRA really did defend a right and were successful, their money maker would disappear, now wouldn't it? So you see, your interest is in conflict with their interest, the almighty $.
This is easy enough to understand, right?
It is a step in the right direction. Something that the child like bickering and name calling that I see here will not accomplish. Those who think we will ever have no restrictions on out activities are being totaly unrealistic. I would love to have no speed limits on the highways but that is not going to happen any more that we will ever have no restrictions on guns or their use.
I knew this would be fun. Easy to get a rise here.
You guys are with the NRS like the Democrats were with Bush. Everything was his fault.
His mission....factually stated.
Not here to learn, discuss, or debate.
Just simply to push buttons to see what kind of rise he can get.....this time.
Just because he sits back laughing his A** off, that's OK. We need his kind, to help us spread the facts. No telling how many are just readers, and never post. MANY have come back to say that they were that kind, and the information they received has given them a different perspective.
So thanks to the NRA supporters, with their help, the facts ARE spreading.
P.S.
He and I must go to different gun shows. I have talked to many MANY like minded people, when it comes to the NRA.
quote:Originally posted by slumlord44
It is a step in the right direction. Something that the child like bickering and name calling that I see here will not accomplish. Those who think we will ever have no restrictions on out activities are being totaly unrealistic. I would love to have no speed limits on the highways but that is not going to happen any more that we will ever have no restrictions on guns or their use.
I knew this would be fun. Easy to get a rise here.
You guys are with the NRS like the Democrats were with Bush. Everything was his fault.
His mission....factually stated.
Not here to learn, discuss, or debate.
Just simply to push buttons to see what kind of rise he can get.....this time.
Just because he sits back laughing his A** off, that's OK. We need his kind, to help us spread the facts. No telling how many are just readers, and never post. MANY have come back to say that they were that kind, and the information they received has given them a different perspective.
So thanks to the NRA supporters, with their help, the facts ARE spreading.
P.S.
He and I must go to different gun shows. I have talked to many MANY like minded people, when it comes to the NRA.
I don't buy his statement that you have highlighted in red, pickenup, not for a minute.
Slumlord44 saw a thread critical of his beloved NRA and he couldn't resist posting 'something' in defense of the organization that he trusts and relies on.
Since the FACTS are against his position, he chose a very generic unsupportable straw-man about mythical 'people' at a 'real live' gun-show not 'bashing' the NRA, therefore those who are posting focused critical fact about them here, are clearly of a devious mindset and wrong in their statements about what the NRA actually does.
Very lame and very predictable.
One cannot defend the indefensible and you have seen the predictable result with slumlord, again.
trfox does the same lame thing for the same lame reasons.
One cannot defend the indefensible, therefore taking a position that the NRA actually supports, believes in and/or promotes Amendment II is impossible on the facts.
When the McDonald case was raised, slumlord44 does not address the fact that the NRA muscled their way into the case, against the will of those litigating it, and introduced and argued a theory not desired, which brought about the NRA's desired outcome, e.g. guns are allowed, but government can regulate them.
How surprising, huh?
Of course, the FACT that this 'decision' is expressly opposite to Amendment II's prohibition on government from infringing on a citizens RKBA, is not of concern to slumlord44.
He goes on to state in another post here, as a rationalization for continued unconstitutional government regulation and control of firearms, that... quote:It is a step in the right direction.And this side reference rationalizing such unconstitutional restrictions and infringements... quote:Those who think we will ever have no restrictions on out activities are being totaly unrealistic.Followed by this predictable and, frankly, embarrassing reference to something totally unrelated to Amendment II and the NRA's actions to erode it and totally unrelated to an absolute prohibition on government infringing upon... quote:I would love to have no speed limits on the highways but that is not going to happen any more that we will ever have no restrictions on guns or their use.No, slumlord wasn't trying to get a rise out of anyone. He stepped in, shot of his mouth and promptly got spanked, then he tried some revisionism to cover it.
*edit for typos and spelling.
I am amused by those who when faced with overwhelming evidence contrary to thier beliefs, continue to hold those beliefs with zero benefit to themselves.
It is difficult to admit being lazy... and wrong.
I am amused by those who when faced with overwhelming evidence contrary to thier beliefs, continue to hold those beliefs with zero benefit to themselves.
People whose self image is not firmly anchored by a clear understanding of who they are and what they stand for are the ones most plagued by the condition you describe. They tend to form an identity based on a loose collection of affiliations which, in this day and age, are encouraged by the MSM and other manipulators whose agendas are furthered by the continuance of such a shallow existence.
When you attack one of their commercially pre-packaged identity cornerstones, such as the NRA, you are attacking the foundation of who they wish to be. Since this fragile framework was not constructed using logic, reason, and conscious choice, they are unable to employ those tools to re-evaluate their position. To do so would remove one of their cornerstones and leave themselves vulnerable. They are then forced to defend their psyche's with all the forebrain activity of a trapped rabid badger. At least until another pre-packaged replacement bandwagon rolls by.
Some examples;
They actively tried to derail the Heller case on several occasions and almost succeeded. And while both sides kissed and made up after it was over, it doesn't change the fact of what they tried to do.
The NRA was not in the lead in the Mcdonald case either. They had a more narrowly il-defined lawsuit filed and a lower court, which by the way ruled in favor of the ban, merged the two. The NRA's help was not requested nor was it wanted.
Anyone with half a brain knows that laws only affect the law abiding. Criminals, by definition, commit crimes as they are not deterred by the law.
The NRA hasn't prevented the various importation ban's from going in effect.
Didn't prevent the 94' AWB from becoming law and had nothing to do with it going away, it simply expired.
Didn't stop the 68 Gun Control Act from becoming law. And it's still with us along the the National Firearms Act.
That's just some, there's a myriad of other failures on their part.
In fairness they have had some moderate successes but in view of their failures it calls into question their motives and what their true goals are.
As much as the McDonald and Heller case's were landmark decisions,they are somewhat hollow victories in that the Heller case brought "reasonable" into the equation and the McDonald case made it stick to all 50 states.
"Reasonable" can be quite a subjective term, how "reasonable" do I have to be to enjoy a right protected under the Constitution.
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with sport shooting, competition, or hunting. But many mailings from the NRA that I have received over the years basically stated just that, my sporting, hunting rights were under assault and to please contact so and so, and BTW send money! Their constant begging was merely annoying, but thequestionable motives and notable failures are not.
The maximum effective range of any weapon is where you can effectively engage the target.
Didn't prevent the 94' AWB from becoming law and had nothing to do with it going away, it simply expired.
Wow, here's a new guy that gets it! Now to give that nano bite of credit where credit is due. As I recall the events, the NRA was a(the?)push to get the sunset provision in the '94 AWB. But on the other hand they were salivating all over themselves to get that background check in there, which as we all know has no sunset.
BTW: Welcome to the forum!!
BTW: Where the heck is Elk, Washington??
quote:Originally posted by wifetrained
Didn't prevent the 94' AWB from becoming law and had nothing to do with it going away, it simply expired.
Wow, here's a new guy that gets it! Now to give that nano bite of credit where credit is due. As I recall the events, the NRA was a(the?)push to get the sunset provision in the '94 AWB. But on the other hand they were salivating all over themselves to get that background check in there, which as we all know has no sunset.
BTW: Welcome to the forum!!
BTW: Where the heck is Elk, Washington??
Elk is about 20-25 miles north of Spokane.
When I finally did my own research on the NRA, the people they've supported, the onerous laws they either supported or helped enact, I have a strong sense of betrayal. Dropped them like a bad habit.
Was your post just a drive-by?
Have you read the book?[:)]
Brad Steele
What else could it be? A challenge on another thread was ignored(am sure you saw it). The position held by keith and alot of others(still) cannot be defended on any logical or intellectual basis.
GB used to be infested with them. There are only a handful left. It is still good. It allows the subject to be brought up from time to time for any folks passing through. They perform a valuable service, getting in the "dunk tank" and accepting the embarrassment, for the enlightenment of others.[^]