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.
quote:Originally posted by fideau
Wow. Lot went on while I was gone. Expected it.
Does this make you "The Prognosticator", or just someone who got called on a post he made?
Vitriol attacks are about all some people can do and then smugly think they are defenders of freedom.
"Vitriol" (probably meant "vitriolic") attacks on a misguided point of view AND on a point of view with no meaningful or cogent response from "The Prognosticator".
The "attacks" you refer to were simply direct and harsh information about the NRA's actions in support of gun-control.
Focus on this point sir....It is about the NRA and what they have done and continue to do to ensure government regulation (read infringement) of the RTKBA.
I think ripping the NRA is about all they care about doing. Fact is, the NRA didn't form its Legislative Affairs Division until 1934. It was to INFORM members of attacks on the 2nd Amendment that was going on at the time so that THEY (the MEMBERS) could take action. The NRA did not directly lobby for legislation until 1975 when the Institute for Legislative Action was formed.
Don't recall anyone saying that the NRA lobbied back in the early days.
I do seem to recall postings about historical NRA "support" for gun-control, this goes back to at least the 30's where the organization took a position that imposing government infringements on full-autos was acceptable and I presume Constitutional.
After all, how could the vaunted NRA, the "staunch defenders of "your" Second Amendment Rights", support or accept any government action restricting the RTKBA, unless it was Constitutional?
I am quite sure that with the NRA on-board and supportive of this unconstitutional government infringement, the agreement/support from the NRA inevitably led to increased "citizen acceptance" and an increased confidence from the government that such unconstitutional infringements could be made and would be swallowed, IF the NRA's blessing was obtained.
Thus an unholy marriage was born and there has been no divorce, only a closer and more intimate relationship and increased cooperation.
It works like a well-oiled machine.
The comments on the NRA's escalating and continuing facilitation, support, compromise and relatively recent drafting of legislation, follow the early days of "support".
Whatever has happened since would have been far worse without them.
Really? You can offer some empirical, or other data to support this claim, or at least some direct and believable argument to that effect?
I'll wait with baited breath sir.
Actually I had not even read the respondent's comments and was not directing anything at him personally. I appreciate other's opinions, I see no reason to be obnoxious about it.
But I'm so happy I could bring some folks together by my little opinions so they could hug and snuggle each other in their dark little caves.
Really?
I very much like your slickly crafted and extremely sly inference, that those stepping up and arguing for individual liberty and for adherence to the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights are what....paranoid miscreants who are separate and apart from "civilized" and enlightened society?
Ouch, that really hurt. Particularly when accompanied with such pointed and hard-hitting factual information. All that "refuting" of the information posted about actual NRA actions sure puts me and my message in my place, huh?
quote:Originally posted by fideau
To no one in particular: When someone constantly rips the NRA, and openly declares the NRA is their enemy, have they not become the friend of the anti 2nd Amendment gerbils, who , like it or not, see the NRA as THEIR main enemy?
Oooooh, THAT was profound.
Can you at least step up and have an educated, or at least an opinionated debate on the subject of the NRA's continuing COMPROMISE, SUPPORT, FACILITATION, and actual DRAFTING/ASSISTING in the DRAFTING of UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN-CONTROL?????
Can we just do that, huh? Do you have anything, or is it a situation where your position related to the NRA is indefensible?
Let me ask you a serious question or two, so I can get a grip on where you are coming from.
Does Amendment II of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights restrict and restrain government from infringing on an American Citizens ability to purchase, own, carry and/or use firearms?
Does Amendment II provide for any government regulation/infringement of the above?
If so, what power does the the US Constitution and particularly Amendment II grant the government to regulate firearms, where is that government authority and/or power derived from and how far does that power go?
Most importantly, does Amendment II provide for the Citizens of America to take up arms against a tyrannical government?
If it does, how do you reconcile the NRA's actions and what appear to be your own positions, with Amendment II?
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." And so they aid the Bradys, etc. with their vehement condemnations. Better to support your choice and keep it to yourself than give comfort to the enemy.
SLFN-YOYO
Better to reveal the hidden enemy and to confront and vocalize the threat, than to strut around purporting to be a supporter and defender of the Constitution, all the while bending over for the anti-freedom crowd; all the while facilitating the sell-out of our basic freedoms.
That seems to be more in-line with "giving comfort to the enemy", but hey, what do I know.
Capt'n;
You have taken the jaw of a Philistein and slew a thousand *...ehrrrr..something like that...
In FINE form again tonight. Certainly a pleasure witnessing the straw men going up in flames again and again..but they just never tire of puting them back together.
I cannot understand WHY there is no understanding of what is clear as daylight to a discerning man...or even one that isn't.
WHY in Gods' name do people think that allowing governmental control over Libertys' Teeth is a GOOD thing ??????
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Capt'n;
You have taken the jaw of a Philistein and slew a thousand *...ehrrrr..something like that...
[:D][:D]Highball, THAT was classic!
In FINE form again tonight. Certainly a pleasure witnessing the straw men going up in flames again and again..but they just never tire of puting them back together.
I cannot understand WHY there is no understanding of what is clear as daylight to a discerning man...or even one that isn't.
WHY in Gods' name do people think that allowing governmental control over Libertys' Teeth is a GOOD thing ??????
I wish that we could find the answer to that question.
Is it fear of having to truly be responsible for yourself, without the "safety-net" of government?
Is it the discomfort and/or fear that "someone" may do "something" bad if the government wasn't regulating access to things, behavior and thought?
Is it the though of free people running rampant through society, causing untold mayhem because there is no government restraint on their activity?
Is it the understanding that if an individual fails in life, that there is nobody to blame it on but themselves?
Regardless, such thought is certain to be the ultimate death of the Republic.
I'm sorry, Jabberwocky is a poem of nonsense written by Lewis Carrol. I really admire your dedication to your beliefs. However, ranting at anyone who doesn't think exactly as you is getting a little, well, irrational. I'm worried that so much hate and emotional display may lead to some serious health condition, or heaven forbid that you be HR 2640'd. Damn that NRA. Calm down. I made a real effort to not direct anything at any particular person. I only stated my opinion. I respect other's opinions. I think it presumptuous for someone to bend my words to their own prejudiced opinion. And don't worry, people who read your replies will certainly recognize you for what you are. I sincerely have enjoyed your critiques and your enlightened explanations of what I thought I meant. Thank you for your support of our 2nd. Amendment rights. Sorry for the lateness of getting this done but I do not sit by waiting for a chance to wax philosophic all the time, I just check in now and then. Thanks again for mentioning the NRA so much, it helps to remind people it is GUN BROKER supported also.
Regardless of how you armchair generals feel about how the NRA screwed you or everyone you know; there is STILL an NRA-titled place out there that has ZERO political/financial ties to the NRA and demands your support; the NRA Whittington Center!
It is the largest, most beautiful, well-organized, spacious group of ranges you've ever dreamed about. 33,000 acres of private land with over 25 ranges for all disciplines, housing for competitors, gunsmithing services nearby, an airport 2 miles down the road, and ALL OF IT FUNDED BY REGULAR PEOPLE LIKE ME.
This year's events include the FCSA matches, FAL FEST in May/June, ISSA Regional Schutzenfest, STC Spring Regionals, Rocky Mt. Palma, NRA Creedmore Nationals, Wyoming Schutzen Championships, NRA BPCR Nationals, World Creedmore, Rocky Mt. 3-gun, Spirit of America World Match, and Jeff Cooper's Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Shoot, along with hunting opportunities and camraderie.
They receive ZERO FUNDING from NRA and depend on dedicated shooting enthusiasts to meet their financial obligations.
So please, regardless of how you feel about the NRA, GOA, SAF, or any other organization; pony up some fundage for this fantastic facility now, or let the kids play with the gangbangers tomorrow.
Their web addy is http://www.nrawc.org
quote:Originally posted by fideau
I'm sorry, Jabberwocky is a poem of nonsense written by Lewis Carrol. I really admire your dedication to your beliefs. However, ranting at anyone who doesn't think exactly as you is getting a little, well, irrational. I'm worried that so much hate and emotional display may lead to some serious health condition, or heaven forbid that you be HR 2640'd. Damn that NRA. Calm down. I made a real effort to not direct anything at any particular person. I only stated my opinion. I respect other's opinions. I think it presumptuous for someone to bend my words to their own prejudiced opinion. And don't worry, people who read your replies will certainly recognize you for what you are. I sincerely have enjoyed your critiques and your enlightened explanations of what I thought I meant. Thank you for your support of our 2nd. Amendment rights. Sorry for the lateness of getting this done but I do not sit by waiting for a chance to wax philosophic all the time, I just check in now and then. Thanks again for mentioning the NRA so much, it helps to remind people it is GUN BROKER supported also.
quote:Originally posted by gunnut505
Regardless of how you armchair generals feel about how the NRA screwed you or everyone you know; there is STILL an NRA-titled place out there that has ZERO political/financial ties to the NRA and demands your support; the NRA Whittington Center!
It is the largest, most beautiful, well-organized, spacious group of ranges you've ever dreamed about. 33,000 acres of private land with over 25 ranges for all disciplines, housing for competitors, gunsmithing services nearby, an airport 2 miles down the road, and ALL OF IT FUNDED BY REGULAR PEOPLE LIKE ME.
This year's events include the FCSA matches, FAL FEST in May/June, ISSA Regional Schutzenfest, STC Spring Regionals, Rocky Mt. Palma, NRA Creedmore Nationals, Wyoming Schutzen Championships, NRA BPCR Nationals, World Creedmore, Rocky Mt. 3-gun, Spirit of America World Match, and Jeff Cooper's Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Shoot, along with hunting opportunities and camraderie.
They receive ZERO FUNDING from NRA and depend on dedicated shooting enthusiasts to meet their financial obligations.
So please, regardless of how you feel about the NRA, GOA, SAF, or any other organization; pony up some fundage for this fantastic facility now, or let the kids play with the gangbangers tomorrow.
Their web addy is http://www.nrawc.org
I will address the bold and underlined statement first. You guys just don't get it, or you choose NOT to get it.
This isn't about how the NRA "screwed" me or how the NRA "screwed" everyone I know. It is about their consistent compromise, facilitation, support and sometimes drafting of anti-Constitution firearms laws and legislation. It is ABOUT the erosion of our Constitution and our Individual Freedoms...this includes you too sir.....get it?
Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?
This type range activity is the NRA doing what it does reasonably well, but it doesn't detract from their other, insidious gun-control activities.
I just attended our local "Friends of NRA" Committee banquet/event last weekend. That foundation raises money for range development and youth firearms education programs. None of that money goes to other (legislative) sections of the NRA either. In fact most of it stays in the respective state for its direct use in the above areas.
I was a local committee member for years, but dropped out when I saw that most of the stuff that the national "Friends of NRA" Organization bought for the silent and live auctions and for the various prizes, was cheap crap made in China. Yeah, even stuff representing important American Freedoms....made in China. The Sponsor Statues....made in China.
I still go an have a nice dinner and play the raffles and games for firearms though.
So, now that we acknowledged that the NRA has some functions that are separate from the active gun-control wing and do some "good" things. Does this cancel out their support, facilitation, compromise and other actions that erode Amendment II?
IMO this is the bottom line. The NRA does some good things for gun owners but they also sell us out at times. All in all they do a good job in a world that is getting harder and harder to fight in. We are really going to need them come 2009 after the election cause boys and girls it ain't going to be pretty.
quote:Originally posted by elect1mike
IMO this is the bottom line. The NRA does some good things for gun owners but they also sell us out at times. All in all they do a good job in a world that is getting harder and harder to fight in. We are really going to need them come 2009 after the election cause boys and girls it ain't going to be pretty.
Let me get this right.....as long as the NRA only "sell us out" occasionally and as long as they only support gun-control "sometimes"....if they do some things that are good, all the while eroding the Constitution.....then all-in-all we should support them and all-in-all we need them????
Do I have this correct?
So if you are a "part-time" enemy and a "part-time" gun-control organization, then we should all support you and all promote you as the "foremost" and "biggest" "staunch defender of your Second Amendment Rights??????
Logic and common sense don't allow this to add up for me. Nor can I understand this "logic" if a person believes in Amendment II to the US Constitution....how can you ignore, accept, or otherwise rationalize and justify what you acknowledge that the NRA does, simply because they sometimes do "some good"?
quote:Originally posted by MT357
quote:Originally posted by lt496
Is it fear of having to truly be responsible for yourself, without the "safety-net" of government?
I think you nailed it right here Captain.
I really think that for some, this is a factor, acknowledged or not.
Regardless, it is tough for me to try to figure. It's kinda like trying to get into the mind of a psycho. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Isn't it mind blowing, that some NRA supporters, will admit the NRA is wrong, YET still BACK them?
If I was playing baseball for team "x" and every other game, the coach would come out and bashed EACH player in the face with a ballbat, I WOULDN'T say:
Yeah, sometimes the coach beats us around, BUT HEY we do win games somtimes. I ain't quitting because OUR team is the biggest in the state. OR better yet "How many teams do YOU coach?"
I just find people some strange "beings" sometimes. I know we can comprehend the BOR's. THEY claim that they can. YET the justify infringements with my above comments. Australia has an "NRA" too. Did them a fat lot of good. Would gun owners be happy with those laws/restictions here? Keep supporting the NRA here and you will get the same as Australia.
Isn't it mind blowing, that some NRA supporters, will admit the NRA is wrong, YET still BACK them?
If I was playing baseball for team "x" and every other game, the coach would come out and bashed EACH player in the face with a ballbat, I WOULDN'T say:
Yeah, sometimes the coach beats us around, BUT HEY we do win games somtimes. I ain't quitting because OUR team is the biggest in the state. OR better yet "How many teams do YOU coach?"
I just find people some strange "beings" sometimes. I know we can comprehend the BOR's. THEY claim that they can. YET the justify infringements with my above comments. Australia has an "NRA" too. Did them a fat lot of good. Would gun owners be happy with those laws/restictions here? Keep supporting the NRA here and you will get the same as Australia.
Yeah freemind, I have yet to figure it out.
I can't grasp how, if these are folks who have principals, they can go against those principals, or support an organization that does so and does so consistently.
Doesn't anyone stand for anything anymore? Is there no right or wrong, no absolutes, particularly relating to fundamental freedoms and Constitutional Rights?
It seriously reminds me of the domestic violence cycle and the "victim mentality" that is so consistently seen. These D.V. victims rationalize and justify in just such a manner.
Oh well, it's a free country.
I am certainly free (so far) to point out NRA issues and to call those who attempt to offer a reason/rationalization/justification for what they do. [;)]
quote:Originally posted by dtknowles
The NRA has CLOUT. They don't always use it right but they do have influance. No other pro gun organization even has a voice that can be heard.
If I stand in the wilderness and turn water into wine who cares?
Yep, they do.
They have the CLOUT to get most of America's gun-owners to accept gun-control, or to believe that their brand of gun-control is something other than it really is. They also have the CLOUT and influence to get it passed through the legislature.
Pretty impressive. Works like a well oiled machine.
quote:Originally posted by dtknowles
The NRA has CLOUT. They don't always use it right but they do have influance. No other pro gun organization even has a voice that can be heard.
If I stand in the wilderness and turn water into wine who cares?
And if you stand before a thirsty crowd and turn wine into pi$$ what good have you done?
I can't but take note, that most of the posts here, many angry over the "between the eyes" NRA information/opinions, fail to address the base issue of what the NRA has historically done and continues to do, e.g. support, facilitate, promote or author unconstitutional infringements on the RTKBA.
Mostly it has been something akin to "yeah, but....."
Is there nobody who wants to discuss/debate the base issue?
A number have acknowledged that the NRA promotes, facilitates, supports and drafts some form of gun-control, but the refutation has generally been against the posters, or a rather lame "yeah, but"....followed by some form of rationalization or justification of the actions and of the importance of supporting the NRA despite the unconstitutional activity they engage in.
The NRA has done their job well...acting as a 'feedback' mechanism for the government.
Most of the NRA members current SUPPORT gun control...and don't give a fig about how 'unconstitutional' it is...THEY AGREE WITH IT !!.
They have done their job so well that ANYBODY objecting to unconstitutional laws is considered to be, if not OUTRIGHT criminals ..at least are decidedly subversive.
Read carefully the innuendoes freely tossed about in the thread.and think about other threads where the accusations were made outright.
They will not debate the NRA compromises simply because they view them as somehow `good for us'.
"Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?"
You sir, are an idiot.
If anything has an NRA attached to it, you are against it, don't understand it, and start to denigrate it as though it had offended you and your kind since you crept from the slime millenia ago.
Since you've never been there by your own admission; what do you think of the White House? (not that it matters, because you've never been THERE either).
There's a fundamental step you and your NRA-hating ilk must take prior to being socialized enough to mingle with normal adults in everyday society; pull your swelled head out of your gluteal recesses and see that SOME things are worth supporting and defending.
If the NRA Whittington Center goes away due to the non-largesse of boonie rats and bombasts like you and the rest of the "kill the NRA' faction; there will be no sterling example of life with firearms, there will cease to be young folk growing up around guns, training opportunities for teens and junior shooters will melt away like the snow in Summer, and America will have no need for individually possessed weapons.
Frankly lt, I can't believe you honestly adhere to the venom you spout against NRA and the thousands of programs they sponsor in spite of their somewhat checkered record against gun control laws of any sort. If they truly wanted to "compromise away our rights"; they could just sponsor a bill that bans private ownership of anything that propels a projectile, holds a projectile, or creates a projectile, hand it to some politician and back away. I'm certain your own life would stand such minute scrutiny of every aspect of your existence that nobody could possibly entertain the notion of thinking you had done something you're not absolutely proud of at any given moment.
Whatever, I've got to watch Viva Pinata right now, and don't want to be bothered with all this irrational hatred of an inanimate object.
Gunnut;
Now that you got the rest of your hate-filled message spewed out like vomit...
How about you just answer the mans' questions ? Inquiring minds would like to know.
'Specially since I know an (EX) NRA member that was refused shooting permission on the range a number of years ago...I don't remember all the details...but it was enough to make him cancel his membership over...
quote:Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?"
quote:Originally posted by gunnut505
"Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?"
You sir, are an idiot.
Thanks for the personal slam. Always shows that a nerve has been struck.[;)]
If anything has an NRA attached to it, you are against it, don't understand it, and start to denigrate it as though it had offended you and your kind since you crept from the slime millenia ago.
First, my concern about the NRA is born of their actions. Second, my analysis is that since the NRA is like a tentacled leviathan, that all the good they do in various areas and all the support they get for those good things, merely allows their well-oiled machine to be even more successful due to all you zombies being willing to turn a blind-eye to their gun-control activities. That is how I see it. Don't like the analysis, tough.
As the last underlined comment....What is that babble supposed to mean?
Since you've never been there by your own admission; what do you think of the White House? (not that it matters, because you've never been THERE either).
I think the White House is a pretty impressive place and it carries a tremendous amount of history and an aura of greatness,despite the rats that have infested it in recent past.
As usual, you NRA zombies jump to a lot of conclusions that are baseless. At least when I speculate, I speculate from some degree of an informed opinion.
I have in fact been there, twice. Once long ago when limited tours were availabel, and once a bit more recently, when I was an attendee at the FBI's National Academy and a group of us received a somewhat more private tour.
Thanks for pointing out that I've "never been THERE either". Wrong again.[;)]
There's a fundamental step you and your NRA-hating ilk must take prior to being socialized enough to mingle with normal adults in everyday society; pull your swelled head out of your gluteal recesses and see that SOME things are worth supporting and defending.
You must be high, "out-of-control angry" or have some other mental condition to step into a statement like this one.
First, My head is fine thank you and I can see perfectly clearly. My head is not "swelled" either. Simply because I opine and make direct criticisms of your vaunted NRA is no reason to go spastic sir.....relax.
As to some things being worth supporting, I will give you a small benefit of doubt and first focus on the Whittington Center.
I asked a question about its availability for the use for this simple NRA Life-Member and then added some quasi-sarcastic inferences about it probably being limited to the "pros" and the "higher echelon" of NRA priesthood.
Instead of an answer, you launch into personal attacks as if I called your wife a fat, ugly beast. I feel no need to research Whittington, I merely asked YOU about it since you raised the center as a shininig example of NRA greatness.
I have many times agreed that the NRA does a good job in the range and training area, so what is your issue sir. Answer the questions, or leave off the attacks if the answers to the questions would prove embarrassing to you or tend to lean toward my speculation.
Now to the subject of some things being of worth for "supporting and defending". Yes sir, many things are worthy of "support and defense", friends, family, honor, truth, justice and our form of government and guarantees on our personal liberties found in the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, to name a few.
If the Whittington Center and the NRA are on your list, fine.
By the way, can I just go there and utilize the amenities and hunt due to my membership?
If the NRA Whittington Center goes away due to the non-largesse of boonie rats and bombasts like you and the rest of the "kill the NRA' faction; there will be no sterling example of life with firearms, there will cease to be young folk growing up around guns, training opportunities for teens and junior shooters will melt away like the snow in Summer, and America will have no need for individually possessed weapons.
So, let me try to boil this down to some cogent points.
If the NRA's Whittington Center does not get my financial support, then America's last "sterling example" of life with firearms will cease, young folk will no longer grow up around guns, any hope of training young people and kids to use firearms will "melt" away and America's "need" (I always believed it was a fundamental right) for individual possession of firearms will cease....all if the NRA's Whittington Center ceased to be?
Wow!!! I better go there and see this miracle location. Does God live there too and share a room with Wayne?
Come on sir, this is beyond ridiculous and should cause you some embarrassment for having posted it.
Under your "theory" then, all the shooting, learning and possessing firearms I have done as a child with my Dad and Grandad, and all that I have done in teaching a love of shooting, hunting and of firearms to my children and others...all that was a dream I had, because only at the NRA's Whittington Center can such things occur and then only under the benevolent and watchful eyes of John, Wayne, Chris and others?
Frankly lt, I can't believe you honestly adhere to the venom you spout against NRA and the thousands of programs they sponsor in spite of their somewhat checkered record against gun control laws of any sort.
Well sir, I do in fact adhere to the principals that I espouse.
Your characterization of my posting direct, hard-hitting and critical factual information about the NRA as "venom" is fine as far as it goes.
I think that if one steps back from ones feeling of personal insult, over exposing the actions of an American Institution that one has always believed to be the only defense against "the gun-grabbers", then one will see that venom doesn't enter into it. It is merely ones defense mechanism against what one sees as a transgression against something held dear.
A degree of disdain, yeah....some disgust, sure......some frustration at the ignorance of many, absolutely.
If they truly wanted to "compromise away our rights"; they could just sponsor a bill that bans private ownership of anything that propels a projectile, holds a projectile, or creates a projectile, hand it to some politician and back away.
This statement simply displays a fundamental lack of understanding and a clear and fundamental failure to either grasp a simple concept, or willful ignorance.
How then would the NRA keep millions of the faithful on the hook, sending money and lavishiing adoration on the "Institution" that is the NRA?
If all were done in one fell swoop, would not some Americans rebel against an outright draconian ban of firearms?
Much safer AND much more lucrative, to be incremental. That way the process occurs over generations, American gun-owners are conditioned to accept more and more regulations and restrictions on firearms and it is all done slowly enough that no single or particular gun-control action will spark an outright rebellion against either the Fed, or against the NRA.
It really isn't that hard to puzzle out sir.
I'm certain your own life would stand such minute scrutiny of every aspect of your existence that nobody could possibly entertain the notion of thinking you had done something you're not absolutely proud of at any given moment.
Oh boy, here we go again.
What part of "this isn't about me" are we all having difficulty with?
It IS about NRA actions in support of gun-control.
I am not a national and in some cases international, organization that has self-appointed as the "staunch defender of your Second Amendment Rights".
That claim is made by the NRA. The NRA has garnered, weaseled, grabbed, scared, and otherwise snookered the trust and support of many American gun-owners into believing this crap.
Listen, lets cut to the chase okay?
Do you believe that government has the duty, the power and/or the authority, under the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, to restrict, infringe, regulate and decide which of America's Citizens can purchase, own, carry and use firearms as they see fit?
If you believe this then you are a perfect NRA zombie, because they believe it too AND they actively facilitate getting it done, albeit slowly.
If you do not believe that the government has such authority and is not authorized to impose such infringements, then how do you reconcile that belief with your support of the NRA?
Simple questions, but I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer. Methinks you would be hard pressed to step up and tackle the issue.
Whatever, I've got to watch Viva Pinata right now, and don't want to be bothered with all this irrational hatred of an inanimate object.
No replies from my "opponents" on the base issue of NRA support of unconstitutional government regulation of firearms?
gunnut505....dan55362....fideau....moonshine....you guys still here?
No answers to the simple questions posed?
No "staking out" of the positions and beliefs of you NRA supporters?
No setting aside the personal attacks and simply debating and/or discussing the issues?
No explaining how you NRA supporters reconcile your support for them, in light of clearly established and proven NRA actions, with the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights?
Come on guys, I am trying to cut to the chase for the many "silent readers" on the board here, so they can see through all the "smoke and mirrors".
The give and take...well mostly the give ([:o)]) may well elicit some to examine the reality of the NRA and the reality of government's unconstitutional actions and to how they are able to continue to take such unconstitutional actions with NRA assistance and support.
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Right now the NRA is going to bat for us in Illinois to combat the annual Daley gun grabbing bills. Especially after the N. Illnois university shooting.
quote:Originally posted by MVP
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Exactly. Funny how he attacks anyone that supports the NRA and then want to "set aside personal attacks". I won't bother with him anymore, just feeding his overinflated belief in his self importance.
quote:Originally posted by fideau
quote:Originally posted by MVP
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Exactly. Funny how he attacks anyone that supports the NRA and then want to "set aside personal attacks". I won't bother with him anymore, just feeding his overinflated belief in his self importance.
Although you probably won't reply and/or see this......for the last time and to clarify....It isn't about you or I sir.
It IS about what the NRA has done and continues to do relative to supporting, promoting and facilitating government regulation of firearms.
You simply happened to be one of the ones who stepped up in "defense" of the NRA by offering lame generalities about the "good" they do and how their actions should be ignored, or set aside.
I happened to one of those who called you on your misguided defense and made an attempt to cut to the heart of the matter and get some serious discussion and/or an understanding of your untenable positions.
As all can see, none of the "pro-NRA" crowd stepped up and discussed the substance of the issue. Go figure.
Thus, it became no more that a series of posts where several of us picked apart the series of misguided, wrong and often lame posts in support of NRA actions.
The only positive that may come from it is that there may have been some who read and began to "question" or to "think", e.g. some who may look beyond the rhetoric and seek truth for themselves.
Well, I must also admit, that it sure was fun for me to personally poke holes in what was offered up and it did assist in keeping my "debate" skills honed.[:I][:o)][;)]
Beyond that, you and I had nothing to do with it. It is all about the message.
Those of you supporting the NRA really ought to look at your champions defending it...
Dan55362;
His sole contribution is a rather infantile picture, straight from the 'Great Compromisers' themselves...
DtKnowles; Self admittedly doesn't give a damn about what the Second Amendment says ..and doesn't want to discuss it all
Gunnut505; Unable to string a whole sentence together without spewing out a load of bile bereft of any intelligence or real content
Trfox; A continual advocate of gun laws..While he hasen't addressed this thread, he is the forums longest running NRA advocate..
Then popping in from time to time is a erudite, long-winded type willing to bury us under the minutia of long phrases and longer words ..all designed to shock and awe you into silence over the vast intelligence of the individual mentioned (He takes different names ..depends on how often he gets banned)..
One thing that holds all these characters together.the willingness to turn over to the government the safety of themselves and their family to the government.
The unwillingness to admit that the Second Amendment was DESIGNED to put a choke-hold on Government ..and allowing government to loosen that hold is MADNESS !!
quote:Originally posted by MVP
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Appreciate the sentiment and the thought behind your post MVP.
The reason I don't spend time researching and posting items of interest on things that would benefit gun-owners (neutering the NRA is a good thing by the way), is that it seems many gun-owners are either ignorant of insidious government and NRA action, ambivalent, accepting, or outright supportive of many forms of gun control.
Unless they can be awakened to reality, educated and or at least acknowledge that their positions and views are contrary to Amendment II, then none of the other "beneficial" postings I could make would mean squat.
As long as gun-owners continue to willingly accept, support and/or allow erosions into the RTKBA, we are lost. THAT is the battleground that will determine the war.
Everything else is just fluff and "feel good" information.
Hope that at least clarifies my position and why I do what I do.
I've been watching this for a good bit and have finally decided to put in my 2p.
#1 I am a Life member of the NRA - but I am proud member of the KNOX faction.
That said, the NRA ACTIVELY screwed a large portion if its membership this year. Not in their normal fundraising schemes or minor capitulations on Anti Gun incrementalisim, but by following the "good" old-fashioned rules of Bigotry and "Racial Purity" developed during the 20s & 30s.
When Wayne (Vichy) LaPierre starts talking about "mental defectives" you know there is going to be trouble - because that term was created during a period of world history where there was NO treatment for neurochemical disorders, and countries as diverse as the US and Nazi Germany were BOTH submitting so named people to forced sterilization, involuntary surgery or WORSE.
What is absolutely criminal about the NRAs active support of Carolyn McCarthy's HR2640 - often called the "Veteran's Disarmament Act" is NOT what the GOA or NRA snipe at each other over. (So please do't respond by re-quoting either Org's webpage on the subject.) What the NRA did was to throw each and every NRA MEMBER who happens to have a family member with a neurochemical disorder under the bus.
When the NRA got involved with the McCarthy Bill, I contacted them about a very real and dangerous legal precedent that they were playing with: That of "Constructive Possession". "Constructive Possession" is the rule by which the Government can, and does, say that an item that cannot be "possessed" by a person is, in legal fact, in their possession if they have the simpile ability, through proximity, to possess it.
I.E. if a member of your household has EVER been "adjudicated" you BY LAW CANNOT HAVE EVEN ONE ROUND OF AMMUNITION "ACCESSIBLE" TO THE "PROHIBITED PERSON".
Think about your home. Can you GUARANTEE to an anti-gun AG that ALL of your guns AND AMMUNITION are not "accessible"?
Up until the NRA/McCarthy bill, there was no practical way for the BATFE to know whether or not there was the "potential" for an "adjudicated person" to have access to guns. But now, thanks to the NRA/McCarthy Appeasement, the BATFE will be able to cross-reference the NICS and CCW/.Hunting/4473 records to see which addresses have both "prohibited persons" and guns.
Dear NRA Member with the Post Partum Depression wife: We're coming for your guns. Signed, BATFE.
Think too about the NRA memer who wants to BUY a gun. Call the NICS - Sorry, no can sell. You are clean, but someone in your home is on the NICS. Too bad for you.
Oh, and don't think that despite platitudes to the contrary that you can ever get a family member OFF the NICS.
Section 105 provides a process for some Americans diagnosed with so-called mental disabilities to get their rights restored in the state where they live. But then, in subsection (a)(2), the bill stipulates that such relief may occur only if "the person will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the GRANTING OF THE RELIEF WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST." (Emphasis added.)
This language sounds similar to those state codes (like California's) that have "may issue" concealed carry laws -- where citizens "technically" have the right to carry, but state law only says that sheriffs MAY ISSUE them a permit to carry. When given such leeway, those sheriffs usually don't grant the permits!
As we have predicted before: liberal states -- the same states that took these people's rights away -- will treat almost every person who has been illegitimately denied as a danger to society and claim that granting relief would be "contrary to the public interest."
They Psyciatric profession is notably Anti-Gun. How many PsyDs are going to "remove disability" knowing that the only real reason to do so is to "reinstate" the ability of a FAMILY to keep guns in the house?
No, the NRA refused to listen to my documented, researched and LEGALLY VERIFIED (by 3 seperate attorneys) and went ahead and made it EASIER for the BATFE and an Anti-Gun AG to kick in the doors of NRA MEMBERS.
The NRA flatly screwed its members and the gun-owning public by stamping a big yellow Judenstern on the families of people with treatable neurochemical disorders.
People with treatable diseases are not "defective" - to be discarded by Wayne (Vichy) LaPierre and his pet PR firm. They are people with the same fundamental Right to Life, and the defense thereof through the 2nd Amendment, as everyone else.
The law, as written and approved by the NRA officially sanctions the Stigma attached to neurochemical disorders by the vague and overly broad outdated terminology of the underlying law and adjunct BATFE regulations.
They did so without regard to their membership.
They did so without consulting knowledgable authorities.
They did so without analyzing the "unintended consequenses".
They did so while lying about how this law provides a method to get people off the NICS when the the criteria given by the statute and BATFE is "no longer has disability" - which is a medical absurdity when discussing the kind of chronic neurochemical disorder that gets people "adjudicated" in the first place.
In so doing they disavowed any concern for the RKBA of (tens of?)thousands of their members - who have done no wrong.
People who are not in residential Care/Institutional Custody should NOT have their names put into a government watch list - for any reason. Either they are Safe to be in Public, or not.
They most certainly shouldn't have to shell out $$$$ to take it to whatever as of yet nonexistent and unfunded Federally mandated but State developed and run "program" to TRY to get off.
The simple fact is, this Law codified the government's position that Gun Ownership is only a Privilege granted by the Government and conditional on their definition(s) of "Felony" and "Sanity".
And it leaves it up to the BATFE to prosecute. Joy.
Yeah. At THIS point in history (particulary) the NRA Political Wing = BAD.
To quote a couple of guys, some may have heard of:
quote:There is no issue of States' rights or National rights. There is only the struggle for human rights...
You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered. Lyndon B. Johnson, POTUS (Unfortunately, he couldn't live by his own ideals...)
quote:Judge a law by the worst reading, & in the hands of the worst enemies of the 2nd Amendment Harlon Carter, NRA Pres. 1967 - Somthing the Wayne "Vichy" LaPierre quotes, but in light of how badly HR2640 could be misued obviously doesn't understand.
quote:No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is ALL from which "the Law" ought to restrain him. - Thomas Jefferson POTUS and a man who should know somthing about what the US means as a philosophical construct...
Welcome...and excellent post. We that hold the line are few..and another is always greeted with glad cries of joy.
The rebuttal to your post, of course, is as I have already heard.." But nobody has been affected by the Law you mention"..Stupidity knowing no bounds, apparently...For the effect will be 5 or ten years down the road...as the Beast tools up their newest power grab.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Old Ironsights;
Welcome...and excellent post. We that hold the line are few..and another is always greeted with glad cries of joy.
The rebuttal to your post, of course, is as I have already heard.." But nobody has been affected by the Law you mention"..Stupidity knowing no bounds, apparently...For the effect will be 5 or ten years down the road...as the Beast tools up their newest power grab.
Unfortunately, the NRA has become more infalible than the Pope to many folks. It's not just a Religion, it's a Cult that shall not be impuned whose absoluteists are as dogmatic as Scientologists.
On every forum I am on there is an NRA-ILA shill who does not actually believe in RKBA. Their every post and opinion proves this.
According to them, the Government has the "right" to say who has the privelege to possess firearms.
They believe that the GCA, despite being written in the virtual dark ages of medical science, and the 4473 are appropriate and absolute.
They believe that "Society" gets to decide what is apporpriate... just like "society" decided slavery was OK, just like "society" decided tha "racial hygene", sterilization & euthanasia of "undesirezbles" was OK, just like deciding that if the Govt declares you a "felon" or "mentally defective" (undesireable), the RKBA and the Right to Self Defense... the Right to LIFE can betaken from you.
These types have stated that they do not believe "certain people" should be allowed to possess firearms. That is a a de-facto declaration of their utter disregard of them as humans. No free person may be prevented from Self Defense. A firearm is nothing but a tool - the most effective tool - of Self defense. They want to deny that to a class of people which they unreasonably fear. That is, by definition, bigotry.
OTOH I'm dogmatic about ONE thing, that the RIGHT to KEEP and BEAR arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Period. Not for ANY government definition. If you aren't locked up, you are FREE. If you aren't safe to be around, you should be locked up.
Self-defense is the absolute moral and ethical right of self-preservation from unjustified aggression.
Self-defense is the justified use of necessary force to stop unjustified aggression.
Self-defense requires willingness, ability and above all means.
Regulating "guns" is regulating the means to self-defense.
Self-defense regulated is self defense denied.
Denial of the right to self-defense is the denial of the right to exist, and is absolutely immoral and unethical.
Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?
by L. Neil Smith
lneil@lneilsmith.org
Over the past 30 years, I've been paid to write almost two million words, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I've thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.
People accuse me of being a single-issue writer, a single- issue thinker, and a single- issue voter, but it isn't true. What I've chosen, in a world where there's never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician -- or political philosophy -- is made of, right down to the creamy liquid center.
Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.
If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.
If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.
What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?
If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?
If he makes excuses about obeying a law he's sworn to uphold and defend -- the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights -- do you want to entrust him with anything?
If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil -- like "Constitutionalist" -- when you insist that he account for himself, hasn't he betrayed his oath, isn't he unfit to hold office, and doesn't he really belong in jail?
Sure, these are all leading questions. They're the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician -- or political philosophy -- is really made of.
He may lecture you about the dangerous weirdos out there who shouldn't have a gun -- but what does that have to do with you? Why in the name of John Moses Browning should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn't you lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment when you left public school -- or the military? Isn't it an essentially European notion, anyway -- Prussian, maybe -- and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about?
And if there are dangerous weirdos out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous weirdos, this is about you, and it has been, all along.
Try it yourself: if a politician won't trust you, why should you trust him? If he's a man -- and you're not -- what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If "he" happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she's eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn't want you to have?
On the other hand -- or the other party -- should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries?
Makes voting simpler, doesn't it? You don't have to study every issue -- health care, international trade -- all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it.
And that's why I'm accused of being a single-issue writer, thinker, and voter.
Up to this point, it is safe to say, "You get it". It is a RARE thing these days to see another American that "gets it".
Very happy to have you aboard. In this forum you will find some of the FINEST MEN, I have ever had the privilage to chat with. While I don't post much anymore, I lurk and read anything posted in here daily.
IMO THIS board is where you can locate REAL Americans and not-so-Americans in sheeps clothing.
I share your sediments of the subject of the RTKABA.
I for many years have used one single question to determine the fiber of a mans' soul.
Do you believe that the Second Amendment gives the government power to control firearms..?
One simple question..but as L. Smith points out..it reveals the maggots in a mans' mind.
There are damn few men I respect..Old Ironsights, you are rapidly getting there.
As Freemind pointed out..we have some of the finest men America ever produced right here on this forum..unafraid to beard the Beast with all its black-suited vultures able to be sent anywhere, at any time, to enforce its' will.
Comments
Wow. Lot went on while I was gone. Expected it.
Does this make you "The Prognosticator", or just someone who got called on a post he made?
Vitriol attacks are about all some people can do and then smugly think they are defenders of freedom.
"Vitriol" (probably meant "vitriolic") attacks on a misguided point of view AND on a point of view with no meaningful or cogent response from "The Prognosticator".
The "attacks" you refer to were simply direct and harsh information about the NRA's actions in support of gun-control.
Focus on this point sir....It is about the NRA and what they have done and continue to do to ensure government regulation (read infringement) of the RTKBA.
I think ripping the NRA is about all they care about doing. Fact is, the NRA didn't form its Legislative Affairs Division until 1934. It was to INFORM members of attacks on the 2nd Amendment that was going on at the time so that THEY (the MEMBERS) could take action. The NRA did not directly lobby for legislation until 1975 when the Institute for Legislative Action was formed.
Don't recall anyone saying that the NRA lobbied back in the early days.
I do seem to recall postings about historical NRA "support" for gun-control, this goes back to at least the 30's where the organization took a position that imposing government infringements on full-autos was acceptable and I presume Constitutional.
After all, how could the vaunted NRA, the "staunch defenders of "your" Second Amendment Rights", support or accept any government action restricting the RTKBA, unless it was Constitutional?
I am quite sure that with the NRA on-board and supportive of this unconstitutional government infringement, the agreement/support from the NRA inevitably led to increased "citizen acceptance" and an increased confidence from the government that such unconstitutional infringements could be made and would be swallowed, IF the NRA's blessing was obtained.
Thus an unholy marriage was born and there has been no divorce, only a closer and more intimate relationship and increased cooperation.
It works like a well-oiled machine.
The comments on the NRA's escalating and continuing facilitation, support, compromise and relatively recent drafting of legislation, follow the early days of "support".
Whatever has happened since would have been far worse without them.
Really? You can offer some empirical, or other data to support this claim, or at least some direct and believable argument to that effect?
I'll wait with baited breath sir.
Actually I had not even read the respondent's comments and was not directing anything at him personally. I appreciate other's opinions, I see no reason to be obnoxious about it.
But I'm so happy I could bring some folks together by my little opinions so they could hug and snuggle each other in their dark little caves.
Really?
I very much like your slickly crafted and extremely sly inference, that those stepping up and arguing for individual liberty and for adherence to the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights are what....paranoid miscreants who are separate and apart from "civilized" and enlightened society?
Ouch, that really hurt. Particularly when accompanied with such pointed and hard-hitting factual information. All that "refuting" of the information posted about actual NRA actions sure puts me and my message in my place, huh?
To no one in particular: When someone constantly rips the NRA, and openly declares the NRA is their enemy, have they not become the friend of the anti 2nd Amendment gerbils, who , like it or not, see the NRA as THEIR main enemy?
Oooooh, THAT was profound.
Can you at least step up and have an educated, or at least an opinionated debate on the subject of the NRA's continuing COMPROMISE, SUPPORT, FACILITATION, and actual DRAFTING/ASSISTING in the DRAFTING of UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN-CONTROL?????
Can we just do that, huh? Do you have anything, or is it a situation where your position related to the NRA is indefensible?
Let me ask you a serious question or two, so I can get a grip on where you are coming from.
Does Amendment II of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights restrict and restrain government from infringing on an American Citizens ability to purchase, own, carry and/or use firearms?
Does Amendment II provide for any government regulation/infringement of the above?
If so, what power does the the US Constitution and particularly Amendment II grant the government to regulate firearms, where is that government authority and/or power derived from and how far does that power go?
Most importantly, does Amendment II provide for the Citizens of America to take up arms against a tyrannical government?
If it does, how do you reconcile the NRA's actions and what appear to be your own positions, with Amendment II?
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." And so they aid the Bradys, etc. with their vehement condemnations. Better to support your choice and keep it to yourself than give comfort to the enemy.
SLFN-YOYO
Better to reveal the hidden enemy and to confront and vocalize the threat, than to strut around purporting to be a supporter and defender of the Constitution, all the while bending over for the anti-freedom crowd; all the while facilitating the sell-out of our basic freedoms.
That seems to be more in-line with "giving comfort to the enemy", but hey, what do I know.
You have taken the jaw of a Philistein and slew a thousand *...ehrrrr..something like that...
In FINE form again tonight. Certainly a pleasure witnessing the straw men going up in flames again and again..but they just never tire of puting them back together.
I cannot understand WHY there is no understanding of what is clear as daylight to a discerning man...or even one that isn't.
WHY in Gods' name do people think that allowing governmental control over Libertys' Teeth is a GOOD thing ??????
Capt'n;
You have taken the jaw of a Philistein and slew a thousand *...ehrrrr..something like that...
[:D][:D]Highball, THAT was classic!
In FINE form again tonight. Certainly a pleasure witnessing the straw men going up in flames again and again..but they just never tire of puting them back together.
I cannot understand WHY there is no understanding of what is clear as daylight to a discerning man...or even one that isn't.
WHY in Gods' name do people think that allowing governmental control over Libertys' Teeth is a GOOD thing ??????
I wish that we could find the answer to that question.
Is it fear of having to truly be responsible for yourself, without the "safety-net" of government?
Is it the discomfort and/or fear that "someone" may do "something" bad if the government wasn't regulating access to things, behavior and thought?
Is it the though of free people running rampant through society, causing untold mayhem because there is no government restraint on their activity?
Is it the understanding that if an individual fails in life, that there is nobody to blame it on but themselves?
Regardless, such thought is certain to be the ultimate death of the Republic.
It is the largest, most beautiful, well-organized, spacious group of ranges you've ever dreamed about. 33,000 acres of private land with over 25 ranges for all disciplines, housing for competitors, gunsmithing services nearby, an airport 2 miles down the road, and ALL OF IT FUNDED BY REGULAR PEOPLE LIKE ME.
This year's events include the FCSA matches, FAL FEST in May/June, ISSA Regional Schutzenfest, STC Spring Regionals, Rocky Mt. Palma, NRA Creedmore Nationals, Wyoming Schutzen Championships, NRA BPCR Nationals, World Creedmore, Rocky Mt. 3-gun, Spirit of America World Match, and Jeff Cooper's Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Shoot, along with hunting opportunities and camraderie.
They receive ZERO FUNDING from NRA and depend on dedicated shooting enthusiasts to meet their financial obligations.
So please, regardless of how you feel about the NRA, GOA, SAF, or any other organization; pony up some fundage for this fantastic facility now, or let the kids play with the gangbangers tomorrow.
Their web addy is http://www.nrawc.org
I'm sorry, Jabberwocky is a poem of nonsense written by Lewis Carrol. I really admire your dedication to your beliefs. However, ranting at anyone who doesn't think exactly as you is getting a little, well, irrational. I'm worried that so much hate and emotional display may lead to some serious health condition, or heaven forbid that you be HR 2640'd. Damn that NRA. Calm down. I made a real effort to not direct anything at any particular person. I only stated my opinion. I respect other's opinions. I think it presumptuous for someone to bend my words to their own prejudiced opinion. And don't worry, people who read your replies will certainly recognize you for what you are. I sincerely have enjoyed your critiques and your enlightened explanations of what I thought I meant. Thank you for your support of our 2nd. Amendment rights. Sorry for the lateness of getting this done but I do not sit by waiting for a chance to wax philosophic all the time, I just check in now and then. Thanks again for mentioning the NRA so much, it helps to remind people it is GUN BROKER supported also.
Still no substantive response on the "ISSUE".
Go figure.
Regardless of how you armchair generals feel about how the NRA screwed you or everyone you know; there is STILL an NRA-titled place out there that has ZERO political/financial ties to the NRA and demands your support; the NRA Whittington Center!
It is the largest, most beautiful, well-organized, spacious group of ranges you've ever dreamed about. 33,000 acres of private land with over 25 ranges for all disciplines, housing for competitors, gunsmithing services nearby, an airport 2 miles down the road, and ALL OF IT FUNDED BY REGULAR PEOPLE LIKE ME.
This year's events include the FCSA matches, FAL FEST in May/June, ISSA Regional Schutzenfest, STC Spring Regionals, Rocky Mt. Palma, NRA Creedmore Nationals, Wyoming Schutzen Championships, NRA BPCR Nationals, World Creedmore, Rocky Mt. 3-gun, Spirit of America World Match, and Jeff Cooper's Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Shoot, along with hunting opportunities and camraderie.
They receive ZERO FUNDING from NRA and depend on dedicated shooting enthusiasts to meet their financial obligations.
So please, regardless of how you feel about the NRA, GOA, SAF, or any other organization; pony up some fundage for this fantastic facility now, or let the kids play with the gangbangers tomorrow.
Their web addy is http://www.nrawc.org
I will address the bold and underlined statement first. You guys just don't get it, or you choose NOT to get it.
This isn't about how the NRA "screwed" me or how the NRA "screwed" everyone I know. It is about their consistent compromise, facilitation, support and sometimes drafting of anti-Constitution firearms laws and legislation. It is ABOUT the erosion of our Constitution and our Individual Freedoms...this includes you too sir.....get it?
Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?
This type range activity is the NRA doing what it does reasonably well, but it doesn't detract from their other, insidious gun-control activities.
I just attended our local "Friends of NRA" Committee banquet/event last weekend. That foundation raises money for range development and youth firearms education programs. None of that money goes to other (legislative) sections of the NRA either. In fact most of it stays in the respective state for its direct use in the above areas.
I was a local committee member for years, but dropped out when I saw that most of the stuff that the national "Friends of NRA" Organization bought for the silent and live auctions and for the various prizes, was cheap crap made in China. Yeah, even stuff representing important American Freedoms....made in China. The Sponsor Statues....made in China.
I still go an have a nice dinner and play the raffles and games for firearms though.
So, now that we acknowledged that the NRA has some functions that are separate from the active gun-control wing and do some "good" things. Does this cancel out their support, facilitation, compromise and other actions that erode Amendment II?
What now?
Is it fear of having to truly be responsible for yourself, without the "safety-net" of government?
I think you nailed it right here Captain.
quote:Originally posted by mrseatle
They supported Guilianni's presidential bid[8]
evil NRA logo ^ (fake phone call)
How did they support Guilianni's bid?
They invited all canadates to come speak...
IMO this is the bottom line. The NRA does some good things for gun owners but they also sell us out at times. All in all they do a good job in a world that is getting harder and harder to fight in. We are really going to need them come 2009 after the election cause boys and girls it ain't going to be pretty.
Let me get this right.....as long as the NRA only "sell us out" occasionally and as long as they only support gun-control "sometimes"....if they do some things that are good, all the while eroding the Constitution.....then all-in-all we should support them and all-in-all we need them????
Do I have this correct?
So if you are a "part-time" enemy and a "part-time" gun-control organization, then we should all support you and all promote you as the "foremost" and "biggest" "staunch defender of your Second Amendment Rights??????
Logic and common sense don't allow this to add up for me. Nor can I understand this "logic" if a person believes in Amendment II to the US Constitution....how can you ignore, accept, or otherwise rationalize and justify what you acknowledge that the NRA does, simply because they sometimes do "some good"?
quote:Originally posted by lt496
Is it fear of having to truly be responsible for yourself, without the "safety-net" of government?
I think you nailed it right here Captain.
I really think that for some, this is a factor, acknowledged or not.
Regardless, it is tough for me to try to figure. It's kinda like trying to get into the mind of a psycho. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Isn't it mind blowing, that some NRA supporters, will admit the NRA is wrong, YET still BACK them?
If I was playing baseball for team "x" and every other game, the coach would come out and bashed EACH player in the face with a ballbat, I WOULDN'T say:
Yeah, sometimes the coach beats us around, BUT HEY we do win games somtimes. I ain't quitting because OUR team is the biggest in the state. OR better yet "How many teams do YOU coach?"
I just find people some strange "beings" sometimes. I know we can comprehend the BOR's. THEY claim that they can. YET the justify infringements with my above comments. Australia has an "NRA" too. Did them a fat lot of good. Would gun owners be happy with those laws/restictions here? Keep supporting the NRA here and you will get the same as Australia.
Lt,
Isn't it mind blowing, that some NRA supporters, will admit the NRA is wrong, YET still BACK them?
If I was playing baseball for team "x" and every other game, the coach would come out and bashed EACH player in the face with a ballbat, I WOULDN'T say:
Yeah, sometimes the coach beats us around, BUT HEY we do win games somtimes. I ain't quitting because OUR team is the biggest in the state. OR better yet "How many teams do YOU coach?"
I just find people some strange "beings" sometimes. I know we can comprehend the BOR's. THEY claim that they can. YET the justify infringements with my above comments. Australia has an "NRA" too. Did them a fat lot of good. Would gun owners be happy with those laws/restictions here? Keep supporting the NRA here and you will get the same as Australia.
Yeah freemind, I have yet to figure it out.
I can't grasp how, if these are folks who have principals, they can go against those principals, or support an organization that does so and does so consistently.
Doesn't anyone stand for anything anymore? Is there no right or wrong, no absolutes, particularly relating to fundamental freedoms and Constitutional Rights?
It seriously reminds me of the domestic violence cycle and the "victim mentality" that is so consistently seen. These D.V. victims rationalize and justify in just such a manner.
Oh well, it's a free country.
I am certainly free (so far) to point out NRA issues and to call those who attempt to offer a reason/rationalization/justification for what they do. [;)]
If I stand in the wilderness and turn water into wine who cares?
The NRA has CLOUT. They don't always use it right but they do have influance. No other pro gun organization even has a voice that can be heard.
If I stand in the wilderness and turn water into wine who cares?
Yep, they do.
They have the CLOUT to get most of America's gun-owners to accept gun-control, or to believe that their brand of gun-control is something other than it really is. They also have the CLOUT and influence to get it passed through the legislature.
Pretty impressive. Works like a well oiled machine.
The NRA has CLOUT. They don't always use it right but they do have influance. No other pro gun organization even has a voice that can be heard.
If I stand in the wilderness and turn water into wine who cares?
And if you stand before a thirsty crowd and turn wine into pi$$ what good have you done?
Mostly it has been something akin to "yeah, but....."
Is there nobody who wants to discuss/debate the base issue?
A number have acknowledged that the NRA promotes, facilitates, supports and drafts some form of gun-control, but the refutation has generally been against the posters, or a rather lame "yeah, but"....followed by some form of rationalization or justification of the actions and of the importance of supporting the NRA despite the unconstitutional activity they engage in.
Curious....
The NRA has done their job well...acting as a 'feedback' mechanism for the government.
Most of the NRA members current SUPPORT gun control...and don't give a fig about how 'unconstitutional' it is...THEY AGREE WITH IT !!.
They have done their job so well that ANYBODY objecting to unconstitutional laws is considered to be, if not OUTRIGHT criminals ..at least are decidedly subversive.
Read carefully the innuendoes freely tossed about in the thread.and think about other threads where the accusations were made outright.
They will not debate the NRA compromises simply because they view them as somehow `good for us'.
Read carefully the inuindoes
You sir, are an idiot.
If anything has an NRA attached to it, you are against it, don't understand it, and start to denigrate it as though it had offended you and your kind since you crept from the slime millenia ago.
Since you've never been there by your own admission; what do you think of the White House? (not that it matters, because you've never been THERE either).
There's a fundamental step you and your NRA-hating ilk must take prior to being socialized enough to mingle with normal adults in everyday society; pull your swelled head out of your gluteal recesses and see that SOME things are worth supporting and defending.
If the NRA Whittington Center goes away due to the non-largesse of boonie rats and bombasts like you and the rest of the "kill the NRA' faction; there will be no sterling example of life with firearms, there will cease to be young folk growing up around guns, training opportunities for teens and junior shooters will melt away like the snow in Summer, and America will have no need for individually possessed weapons.
Frankly lt, I can't believe you honestly adhere to the venom you spout against NRA and the thousands of programs they sponsor in spite of their somewhat checkered record against gun control laws of any sort. If they truly wanted to "compromise away our rights"; they could just sponsor a bill that bans private ownership of anything that propels a projectile, holds a projectile, or creates a projectile, hand it to some politician and back away. I'm certain your own life would stand such minute scrutiny of every aspect of your existence that nobody could possibly entertain the notion of thinking you had done something you're not absolutely proud of at any given moment.
Whatever, I've got to watch Viva Pinata right now, and don't want to be bothered with all this irrational hatred of an inanimate object.
Now that you got the rest of your hate-filled message spewed out like vomit...
How about you just answer the mans' questions ? Inquiring minds would like to know.
'Specially since I know an (EX) NRA member that was refused shooting permission on the range a number of years ago...I don't remember all the details...but it was enough to make him cancel his membership over...
quote:Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?"
"Now, off to the Whittington Center. I've never been there. As a member, can I just go and enjoy the amenities and/or hunt on it, or is it reserved for fancy shooting professionals and shooting-teams and for Chris, Wayne, John and their big-money chums to use and hunt on?"
You sir, are an idiot.
Thanks for the personal slam. Always shows that a nerve has been struck.[;)]
If anything has an NRA attached to it, you are against it, don't understand it, and start to denigrate it as though it had offended you and your kind since you crept from the slime millenia ago.
First, my concern about the NRA is born of their actions. Second, my analysis is that since the NRA is like a tentacled leviathan, that all the good they do in various areas and all the support they get for those good things, merely allows their well-oiled machine to be even more successful due to all you zombies being willing to turn a blind-eye to their gun-control activities. That is how I see it. Don't like the analysis, tough.
As the last underlined comment....What is that babble supposed to mean?
Since you've never been there by your own admission; what do you think of the White House? (not that it matters, because you've never been THERE either).
I think the White House is a pretty impressive place and it carries a tremendous amount of history and an aura of greatness,despite the rats that have infested it in recent past.
As usual, you NRA zombies jump to a lot of conclusions that are baseless. At least when I speculate, I speculate from some degree of an informed opinion.
I have in fact been there, twice. Once long ago when limited tours were availabel, and once a bit more recently, when I was an attendee at the FBI's National Academy and a group of us received a somewhat more private tour.
Thanks for pointing out that I've "never been THERE either". Wrong again.[;)]
There's a fundamental step you and your NRA-hating ilk must take prior to being socialized enough to mingle with normal adults in everyday society; pull your swelled head out of your gluteal recesses and see that SOME things are worth supporting and defending.
You must be high, "out-of-control angry" or have some other mental condition to step into a statement like this one.
First, My head is fine thank you and I can see perfectly clearly. My head is not "swelled" either. Simply because I opine and make direct criticisms of your vaunted NRA is no reason to go spastic sir.....relax.
As to some things being worth supporting, I will give you a small benefit of doubt and first focus on the Whittington Center.
I asked a question about its availability for the use for this simple NRA Life-Member and then added some quasi-sarcastic inferences about it probably being limited to the "pros" and the "higher echelon" of NRA priesthood.
Instead of an answer, you launch into personal attacks as if I called your wife a fat, ugly beast. I feel no need to research Whittington, I merely asked YOU about it since you raised the center as a shininig example of NRA greatness.
I have many times agreed that the NRA does a good job in the range and training area, so what is your issue sir. Answer the questions, or leave off the attacks if the answers to the questions would prove embarrassing to you or tend to lean toward my speculation.
Now to the subject of some things being of worth for "supporting and defending". Yes sir, many things are worthy of "support and defense", friends, family, honor, truth, justice and our form of government and guarantees on our personal liberties found in the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, to name a few.
If the Whittington Center and the NRA are on your list, fine.
By the way, can I just go there and utilize the amenities and hunt due to my membership?
If the NRA Whittington Center goes away due to the non-largesse of boonie rats and bombasts like you and the rest of the "kill the NRA' faction; there will be no sterling example of life with firearms, there will cease to be young folk growing up around guns, training opportunities for teens and junior shooters will melt away like the snow in Summer, and America will have no need for individually possessed weapons.
So, let me try to boil this down to some cogent points.
If the NRA's Whittington Center does not get my financial support, then America's last "sterling example" of life with firearms will cease, young folk will no longer grow up around guns, any hope of training young people and kids to use firearms will "melt" away and America's "need" (I always believed it was a fundamental right) for individual possession of firearms will cease....all if the NRA's Whittington Center ceased to be?
Wow!!! I better go there and see this miracle location. Does God live there too and share a room with Wayne?
Come on sir, this is beyond ridiculous and should cause you some embarrassment for having posted it.
Under your "theory" then, all the shooting, learning and possessing firearms I have done as a child with my Dad and Grandad, and all that I have done in teaching a love of shooting, hunting and of firearms to my children and others...all that was a dream I had, because only at the NRA's Whittington Center can such things occur and then only under the benevolent and watchful eyes of John, Wayne, Chris and others?
Frankly lt, I can't believe you honestly adhere to the venom you spout against NRA and the thousands of programs they sponsor in spite of their somewhat checkered record against gun control laws of any sort.
Well sir, I do in fact adhere to the principals that I espouse.
Your characterization of my posting direct, hard-hitting and critical factual information about the NRA as "venom" is fine as far as it goes.
I think that if one steps back from ones feeling of personal insult, over exposing the actions of an American Institution that one has always believed to be the only defense against "the gun-grabbers", then one will see that venom doesn't enter into it. It is merely ones defense mechanism against what one sees as a transgression against something held dear.
A degree of disdain, yeah....some disgust, sure......some frustration at the ignorance of many, absolutely.
If they truly wanted to "compromise away our rights"; they could just sponsor a bill that bans private ownership of anything that propels a projectile, holds a projectile, or creates a projectile, hand it to some politician and back away.
This statement simply displays a fundamental lack of understanding and a clear and fundamental failure to either grasp a simple concept, or willful ignorance.
How then would the NRA keep millions of the faithful on the hook, sending money and lavishiing adoration on the "Institution" that is the NRA?
If all were done in one fell swoop, would not some Americans rebel against an outright draconian ban of firearms?
Much safer AND much more lucrative, to be incremental. That way the process occurs over generations, American gun-owners are conditioned to accept more and more regulations and restrictions on firearms and it is all done slowly enough that no single or particular gun-control action will spark an outright rebellion against either the Fed, or against the NRA.
It really isn't that hard to puzzle out sir.
I'm certain your own life would stand such minute scrutiny of every aspect of your existence that nobody could possibly entertain the notion of thinking you had done something you're not absolutely proud of at any given moment.
Oh boy, here we go again.
What part of "this isn't about me" are we all having difficulty with?
It IS about NRA actions in support of gun-control.
I am not a national and in some cases international, organization that has self-appointed as the "staunch defender of your Second Amendment Rights".
That claim is made by the NRA. The NRA has garnered, weaseled, grabbed, scared, and otherwise snookered the trust and support of many American gun-owners into believing this crap.
Listen, lets cut to the chase okay?
Do you believe that government has the duty, the power and/or the authority, under the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, to restrict, infringe, regulate and decide which of America's Citizens can purchase, own, carry and use firearms as they see fit?
If you believe this then you are a perfect NRA zombie, because they believe it too AND they actively facilitate getting it done, albeit slowly.
If you do not believe that the government has such authority and is not authorized to impose such infringements, then how do you reconcile that belief with your support of the NRA?
Simple questions, but I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer. Methinks you would be hard pressed to step up and tackle the issue.
Whatever, I've got to watch Viva Pinata right now, and don't want to be bothered with all this irrational hatred of an inanimate object.
gunnut505....dan55362....fideau....moonshine....you guys still here?
No answers to the simple questions posed?
No "staking out" of the positions and beliefs of you NRA supporters?
No setting aside the personal attacks and simply debating and/or discussing the issues?
No explaining how you NRA supporters reconcile your support for them, in light of clearly established and proven NRA actions, with the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights?
Come on guys, I am trying to cut to the chase for the many "silent readers" on the board here, so they can see through all the "smoke and mirrors".
The give and take...well mostly the give ([:o)]) may well elicit some to examine the reality of the NRA and the reality of government's unconstitutional actions and to how they are able to continue to take such unconstitutional actions with NRA assistance and support.
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Exactly. Funny how he attacks anyone that supports the NRA and then want to "set aside personal attacks". I won't bother with him anymore, just feeding his overinflated belief in his self importance.
quote:Originally posted by MVP
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Exactly. Funny how he attacks anyone that supports the NRA and then want to "set aside personal attacks". I won't bother with him anymore, just feeding his overinflated belief in his self importance.
Although you probably won't reply and/or see this......for the last time and to clarify....It isn't about you or I sir.
It IS about what the NRA has done and continues to do relative to supporting, promoting and facilitating government regulation of firearms.
You simply happened to be one of the ones who stepped up in "defense" of the NRA by offering lame generalities about the "good" they do and how their actions should be ignored, or set aside.
I happened to one of those who called you on your misguided defense and made an attempt to cut to the heart of the matter and get some serious discussion and/or an understanding of your untenable positions.
As all can see, none of the "pro-NRA" crowd stepped up and discussed the substance of the issue. Go figure.
Thus, it became no more that a series of posts where several of us picked apart the series of misguided, wrong and often lame posts in support of NRA actions.
The only positive that may come from it is that there may have been some who read and began to "question" or to "think", e.g. some who may look beyond the rhetoric and seek truth for themselves.
Well, I must also admit, that it sure was fun for me to personally poke holes in what was offered up and it did assist in keeping my "debate" skills honed.[:I][:o)][;)]
Beyond that, you and I had nothing to do with it. It is all about the message.
Nothing more, nothing less.
RELAX! i'm kidding......
I didn't realize this would be such a touchy subject for you guys, but again, thanks for the help
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp
Dan55362;
His sole contribution is a rather infantile picture, straight from the 'Great Compromisers' themselves...
DtKnowles; Self admittedly doesn't give a damn about what the Second Amendment says ..and doesn't want to discuss it all
Gunnut505; Unable to string a whole sentence together without spewing out a load of bile bereft of any intelligence or real content
Trfox; A continual advocate of gun laws..While he hasen't addressed this thread, he is the forums longest running NRA advocate..
Then popping in from time to time is a erudite, long-winded type willing to bury us under the minutia of long phrases and longer words ..all designed to shock and awe you into silence over the vast intelligence of the individual mentioned (He takes different names ..depends on how often he gets banned)..
One thing that holds all these characters together.the willingness to turn over to the government the safety of themselves and their family to the government.
The unwillingness to admit that the Second Amendment was DESIGNED to put a choke-hold on Government ..and allowing government to loosen that hold is MADNESS !!
lt496
you seem like the leader of the anti NRA crowd here on GB and I really don't have a problem with any of you guys beliefs in the second amendment, and your 100% stand against any and all firearms laws, so I have nothing to attack on a personal level and don't want to.
My only thing to say is that if you would spend as much energy as you do in attacking a pro gun organization that you disagree with, and spend the same or more amounts of your energy posting things you believe would benifit all firearm owners and working towards solutions to advance your cause.
Your anti NRA posts really are a turn off to what you really are trying to accomplish.
I know you are pro GOA so maybe some threads that would point to and explain the advances being made by GOA and their membership.
I would be interested in and would read that kind of post but I don't read the anti stuff past the first page of responses because it is just repeating the same old anti NRA stuff.
Appreciate the sentiment and the thought behind your post MVP.
The reason I don't spend time researching and posting items of interest on things that would benefit gun-owners (neutering the NRA is a good thing by the way), is that it seems many gun-owners are either ignorant of insidious government and NRA action, ambivalent, accepting, or outright supportive of many forms of gun control.
Unless they can be awakened to reality, educated and or at least acknowledge that their positions and views are contrary to Amendment II, then none of the other "beneficial" postings I could make would mean squat.
As long as gun-owners continue to willingly accept, support and/or allow erosions into the RTKBA, we are lost. THAT is the battleground that will determine the war.
Everything else is just fluff and "feel good" information.
Hope that at least clarifies my position and why I do what I do.
#1 I am a Life member of the NRA - but I am proud member of the KNOX faction.
That said, the NRA ACTIVELY screwed a large portion if its membership this year. Not in their normal fundraising schemes or minor capitulations on Anti Gun incrementalisim, but by following the "good" old-fashioned rules of Bigotry and "Racial Purity" developed during the 20s & 30s.
When Wayne (Vichy) LaPierre starts talking about "mental defectives" you know there is going to be trouble - because that term was created during a period of world history where there was NO treatment for neurochemical disorders, and countries as diverse as the US and Nazi Germany were BOTH submitting so named people to forced sterilization, involuntary surgery or WORSE.
What is absolutely criminal about the NRAs active support of Carolyn McCarthy's HR2640 - often called the "Veteran's Disarmament Act" is NOT what the GOA or NRA snipe at each other over. (So please do't respond by re-quoting either Org's webpage on the subject.) What the NRA did was to throw each and every NRA MEMBER who happens to have a family member with a neurochemical disorder under the bus.
When the NRA got involved with the McCarthy Bill, I contacted them about a very real and dangerous legal precedent that they were playing with: That of "Constructive Possession". "Constructive Possession" is the rule by which the Government can, and does, say that an item that cannot be "possessed" by a person is, in legal fact, in their possession if they have the simpile ability, through proximity, to possess it.
I.E. if a member of your household has EVER been "adjudicated" you BY LAW CANNOT HAVE EVEN ONE ROUND OF AMMUNITION "ACCESSIBLE" TO THE "PROHIBITED PERSON".
Think about your home. Can you GUARANTEE to an anti-gun AG that ALL of your guns AND AMMUNITION are not "accessible"?
Up until the NRA/McCarthy bill, there was no practical way for the BATFE to know whether or not there was the "potential" for an "adjudicated person" to have access to guns. But now, thanks to the NRA/McCarthy Appeasement, the BATFE will be able to cross-reference the NICS and CCW/.Hunting/4473 records to see which addresses have both "prohibited persons" and guns.
Dear NRA Member with the Post Partum Depression wife: We're coming for your guns. Signed, BATFE.
Think too about the NRA memer who wants to BUY a gun. Call the NICS - Sorry, no can sell. You are clean, but someone in your home is on the NICS. Too bad for you.
Oh, and don't think that despite platitudes to the contrary that you can ever get a family member OFF the NICS.
Section 105 provides a process for some Americans diagnosed with so-called mental disabilities to get their rights restored in the state where they live. But then, in subsection (a)(2), the bill stipulates that such relief may occur only if "the person will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the GRANTING OF THE RELIEF WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST." (Emphasis added.)
This language sounds similar to those state codes (like California's) that have "may issue" concealed carry laws -- where citizens "technically" have the right to carry, but state law only says that sheriffs MAY ISSUE them a permit to carry. When given such leeway, those sheriffs usually don't grant the permits!
As we have predicted before: liberal states -- the same states that took these people's rights away -- will treat almost every person who has been illegitimately denied as a danger to society and claim that granting relief would be "contrary to the public interest."
They Psyciatric profession is notably Anti-Gun. How many PsyDs are going to "remove disability" knowing that the only real reason to do so is to "reinstate" the ability of a FAMILY to keep guns in the house?
No, the NRA refused to listen to my documented, researched and LEGALLY VERIFIED (by 3 seperate attorneys) and went ahead and made it EASIER for the BATFE and an Anti-Gun AG to kick in the doors of NRA MEMBERS.
The NRA flatly screwed its members and the gun-owning public by stamping a big yellow Judenstern on the families of people with treatable neurochemical disorders.
People with treatable diseases are not "defective" - to be discarded by Wayne (Vichy) LaPierre and his pet PR firm. They are people with the same fundamental Right to Life, and the defense thereof through the 2nd Amendment, as everyone else.
The law, as written and approved by the NRA officially sanctions the Stigma attached to neurochemical disorders by the vague and overly broad outdated terminology of the underlying law and adjunct BATFE regulations.
They did so without regard to their membership.
They did so without consulting knowledgable authorities.
They did so without analyzing the "unintended consequenses".
They did so while lying about how this law provides a method to get people off the NICS when the the criteria given by the statute and BATFE is "no longer has disability" - which is a medical absurdity when discussing the kind of chronic neurochemical disorder that gets people "adjudicated" in the first place.
In so doing they disavowed any concern for the RKBA of (tens of?)thousands of their members - who have done no wrong.
People who are not in residential Care/Institutional Custody should NOT have their names put into a government watch list - for any reason. Either they are Safe to be in Public, or not.
They most certainly shouldn't have to shell out $$$$ to take it to whatever as of yet nonexistent and unfunded Federally mandated but State developed and run "program" to TRY to get off.
The simple fact is, this Law codified the government's position that Gun Ownership is only a Privilege granted by the Government and conditional on their definition(s) of "Felony" and "Sanity".
And it leaves it up to the BATFE to prosecute. Joy.
Yeah. At THIS point in history (particulary) the NRA Political Wing = BAD.
quote:There is no issue of States' rights or National rights. There is only the struggle for human rights...
You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered. Lyndon B. Johnson, POTUS (Unfortunately, he couldn't live by his own ideals...)
quote:Judge a law by the worst reading, & in the hands of the worst enemies of the 2nd Amendment Harlon Carter, NRA Pres. 1967 - Somthing the Wayne "Vichy" LaPierre quotes, but in light of how badly HR2640 could be misued obviously doesn't understand.
quote:No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is ALL from which "the Law" ought to restrain him. - Thomas Jefferson POTUS and a man who should know somthing about what the US means as a philosophical construct...
Welcome...and excellent post. We that hold the line are few..and another is always greeted with glad cries of joy.
The rebuttal to your post, of course, is as I have already heard.." But nobody has been affected by the Law you mention"..Stupidity knowing no bounds, apparently...For the effect will be 5 or ten years down the road...as the Beast tools up their newest power grab.
Old Ironsights;
Welcome...and excellent post. We that hold the line are few..and another is always greeted with glad cries of joy.
The rebuttal to your post, of course, is as I have already heard.." But nobody has been affected by the Law you mention"..Stupidity knowing no bounds, apparently...For the effect will be 5 or ten years down the road...as the Beast tools up their newest power grab.
Unfortunately, the NRA has become more infalible than the Pope to many folks. It's not just a Religion, it's a Cult that shall not be impuned whose absoluteists are as dogmatic as Scientologists.
On every forum I am on there is an NRA-ILA shill who does not actually believe in RKBA. Their every post and opinion proves this.
According to them, the Government has the "right" to say who has the privelege to possess firearms.
They believe that the GCA, despite being written in the virtual dark ages of medical science, and the 4473 are appropriate and absolute.
They believe that "Society" gets to decide what is apporpriate... just like "society" decided slavery was OK, just like "society" decided tha "racial hygene", sterilization & euthanasia of "undesirezbles" was OK, just like deciding that if the Govt declares you a "felon" or "mentally defective" (undesireable), the RKBA and the Right to Self Defense... the Right to LIFE can betaken from you.
These types have stated that they do not believe "certain people" should be allowed to possess firearms. That is a a de-facto declaration of their utter disregard of them as humans. No free person may be prevented from Self Defense. A firearm is nothing but a tool - the most effective tool - of Self defense. They want to deny that to a class of people which they unreasonably fear. That is, by definition, bigotry.
OTOH I'm dogmatic about ONE thing, that the RIGHT to KEEP and BEAR arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Period. Not for ANY government definition. If you aren't locked up, you are FREE. If you aren't safe to be around, you should be locked up.
Self-defense is the absolute moral and ethical right of self-preservation from unjustified aggression.
Self-defense is the justified use of necessary force to stop unjustified aggression.
Self-defense requires willingness, ability and above all means.
Regulating "guns" is regulating the means to self-defense.
Self-defense regulated is self defense denied.
Denial of the right to self-defense is the denial of the right to exist, and is absolutely immoral and unethical.
... oh, hello. I'm philosophising again... [;)]
Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?
by L. Neil Smith
lneil@lneilsmith.org
Over the past 30 years, I've been paid to write almost two million words, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I've thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.
People accuse me of being a single-issue writer, a single- issue thinker, and a single- issue voter, but it isn't true. What I've chosen, in a world where there's never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician -- or political philosophy -- is made of, right down to the creamy liquid center.
Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.
If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.
If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.
What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?
If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?
If he makes excuses about obeying a law he's sworn to uphold and defend -- the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights -- do you want to entrust him with anything?
If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil -- like "Constitutionalist" -- when you insist that he account for himself, hasn't he betrayed his oath, isn't he unfit to hold office, and doesn't he really belong in jail?
Sure, these are all leading questions. They're the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician -- or political philosophy -- is really made of.
He may lecture you about the dangerous weirdos out there who shouldn't have a gun -- but what does that have to do with you? Why in the name of John Moses Browning should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn't you lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment when you left public school -- or the military? Isn't it an essentially European notion, anyway -- Prussian, maybe -- and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about?
And if there are dangerous weirdos out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous weirdos, this is about you, and it has been, all along.
Try it yourself: if a politician won't trust you, why should you trust him? If he's a man -- and you're not -- what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If "he" happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she's eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn't want you to have?
On the other hand -- or the other party -- should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries?
Makes voting simpler, doesn't it? You don't have to study every issue -- health care, international trade -- all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it.
And that's why I'm accused of being a single-issue writer, thinker, and voter.
But it isn't true, is it?
Welcome to the forum, brother.
Up to this point, it is safe to say, "You get it". It is a RARE thing these days to see another American that "gets it".
Very happy to have you aboard. In this forum you will find some of the FINEST MEN, I have ever had the privilage to chat with. While I don't post much anymore, I lurk and read anything posted in here daily.
IMO THIS board is where you can locate REAL Americans and not-so-Americans in sheeps clothing.
I share your sediments of the subject of the RTKABA.
Hope to see you more often.
Do you believe that the Second Amendment gives the government power to control firearms..?
One simple question..but as L. Smith points out..it reveals the maggots in a mans' mind.
There are damn few men I respect..Old Ironsights, you are rapidly getting there.
As Freemind pointed out..we have some of the finest men America ever produced right here on this forum..unafraid to beard the Beast with all its black-suited vultures able to be sent anywhere, at any time, to enforce its' will.