28 replies to this topic

[Tim the Beek]

...I've never much cared for the NRA.

 

Having read this this morning, I care for it even less:

 

 

A video released by the National Rifle Association on Tuesday sharply criticizes President Obama for his skepticism about placing armed guards in schools, calling the president an "elitist hypocrite" for allowing the Secret Service to protect his daughters.

 

"Are the president's kids more important than yours?" the ad asks. "Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school?"

 

http://www.huffingto..._n_2483118.html

 

It's the Secret Service, you dipshits! They're there because the President of the United States and his family would be at great risk without them.  As awful as the school shootings we've seen are, they're very, very rare.

 

 

 

 

 

[TEO]

I am appalled that the NRA would suggest armed guards at schools.  Makes me think the NRA is on the list of potential contractors for the FEMA camps.

[Spidergawd]

1.  I think there is a problem in this country re: guns.

2.  I don't think there is much we can realistically do, and don't believe that some of the control measures will accomplish much (with a few exceptions, like closing the gun show loophole)

3.  I actually enjoy shooting, and am not half bad at it.

4.  I do not own any firearms.

5.  I respect sane, responsible gun owners for the most part, and have no issue with legal hunting.

6.  Having said all that, I also believe the NRA is a despicable, out of control organization, and I will NEVER back their insanity, regardless of my personal opinions.

 

 

Yeah, the gun genie is WAY out of the bottle, but the NRA is the devil and still sucks out loud.  Gives responsible, legal owners a BIG bad name. 

 

Gun owners, I suggest you consider carefully whether you want to be associated with NRA lunacy.  Perhaps the time is right for a competitive organization to the NRA, that advocates a more rational, sane position?

[Joker]

...I've never much cared for the NRA.

 

Having read this this morning, I care for it even less:

 

 

 

http://www.huffingto..._n_2483118.html

 

It's the Secret Service, you dipshits! They're there because the President of the United States and his family would be at great risk without them.  As awful as the school shootings we've seen are, they're very, very rare.

I read somewhere that that school has it's own armed guards that were there even before the Obama kids

[Roasted and Toasted]

I read somewhere that that school has it's own armed guards that were there even before the Obama kids

True, armed and trained security provided by the school. Secret service is a separate detail.

Personally, not a fan of the current NRA myself, but can't discount everything they stand for. Certainly would not want to align myself that way right now.

[little frog]

Gun owners, I suggest you consider carefully whether you want to be associated with NRA lunacy.  Perhaps the time is right for a competitive organization to the NRA, that advocates a more rational, sane position?

 

I think this is a great idea! I don't own guns but I do believe in the rights of sane citizens to protect themselves, to legally hunt, etc. To suggest that it's elitist for the first family to have security is pure idiocy and definitely undermines any rational argument the NRA could have come up with. They're swinging way way right just like the GOP, which in the long run will limit their members to fanatics only.  Having armed guards at a school that many children of political leaders attend seems like an unfortunate necessity, not elitist.

 

I'm all for a rational Gun Association, seems the time is ripe.

[Lazy Lightning]

The NRA is there to sell guns, not to protect anyone's "rights"

They are a lobby group - they have little interest in actually protecting amendments, unless those amendments allow them to push the sale of guns.

[MeOmYo]

Unfortunately:

 

The NRA has NEVER taken the moral high road.

 

Fortunately:

 

Without them, gun control regulations would be much different.

 

 

 

The NRA is there to sell guns, not to protect anyone's "rights"

They are a lobby group - they have little interest in actually protecting amendments, unless those amendments allow them to push the sale of guns.

 

 

The NRA does not sell guns.  Unless what you're saying is their livelihood depends on the sale of guns, then I somewhat agree.

[Lazy Lightning]

They are a lobby group who is there to protect and promote the firearms industry, hence the "The NRA is there to sell guns"

 

I am aware the NRA is not selling guns themselves.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

And inso, protecting the second amendment is in their best interest. Because the NRA is made up of members of the population. It is their business to protect amendment 2 from LOLberal "do-gooder" psychopaths. So it is about protecting rights. And "rights" is not the correct way of putting it. it is RIGHTS. As in, not up for someones interpretation.

[little frog]

"do-gooder psychopaths" is the oddist phrase i've ever heard. what exactly psychopathic about doing good?

[Jim]

1. I think there is a problem in this country re: guns.
2. I don't think there is much we can realistically do, and don't believe that some of the control measures will accomplish much (with a few exceptions, like closing the gun show loophole)
3. I actually enjoy shooting, and am not half bad at it.
4. I do not own any firearms.
5. I respect sane, responsible gun owners for the most part, and have no issue with legal hunting.
6. Having said all that, I also believe the NRA is a despicable, out of control organization, and I will NEVER back their insanity, regardless of my personal opinions.


Yeah, the gun genie is WAY out of the bottle, but the NRA is the devil and still sucks out loud. Gives responsible, legal owners a BIG bad name.

Gun owners, I suggest you consider carefully whether you want to be associated with NRA lunacy. Perhaps the time is right for a competitive organization to the NRA, that advocates a more rational, sane position?

Exactly my position, JP.
...and in fact I was also once a member if the NRA, and spent many weekends in my early teens at the range in shooting competitions.

While the NRA claims to only be supporting our 2nd amendment rights, it's really just thinly veiled very well funded support for gun and ammunition manufacturers.
Ironicly, and as usual, all of this recent publicity has only added to those companies profits in panic sales.


Just another example of BIG business, that has a big say in controlling our goverment.

[TakeAStepBack]

Nothing, if the motive is to actually get results from a problem. it's another story entirely when the motive is personal gain at teh expense of others and passing it off as something it is not. See Andrew Coumo. Politicians are mostly, MOSTLY professional psychopaths. They lack empathy, manipulate and live parasitically at the expense of others.

[Lazy Lightning]

. And "rights" is not the correct way of putting it. it is RIGHTS. As in, not up for someones interpretation.

 

Actually, if that's your point, "rights" may very well be the best way to put it!

[Spidergawd]

LF - I'm completely serious with that proposal.  Why shouldn't there be an organization that lobbies for gun rights sanely and thoughtfully, and proposes rational solutions, as opposed to the NRA's mindless fervor. 

 

Lola & Jim - you're absolutely right.  They are a political lobbying organization.  Their mission is to promote sales of guns and their paraphernalia.  The whole "rights" thing is just a means to that end, IMHO.

 

TASB - "'do-gooder' psychopaths"?  That's what you think of anyone who disagrees with you, eh?  I find that troubling.  I would expect more from you.  And kindly elaborate on what "personal gain" these proposals bring the President in your opinion.

 

 

From what I've been able to find, it appears that there are somewhere between 50 and 80 million gun owners in the US, depending on what you read.  And the NRA's membership is between 3 and 4.2 million, again depending on source.  That means that the NRA "represents" only between 0.6-0.9% of all gun owners.  So it's utter bullshit that they have some kind of mandate, or even that the really represent many, let alone most, gun owners.  This fact, along with their ridiculous, militant positions, leads me to believe that those they actually represent are mostly the extreme fringe - the crazies, if you will, for the most part.  So that gives them even LESS credibility in my eyes.

 

Plus, they apparently are a bit dubious with their published membership numbers.  Recent articles indicate that they don't remove you from the list when you lapse your membership, and simply subscribing to certain magazines get you on the member list.  All to keep the numbers as inflated as possible, so they can appear to have more "power" than they actually do. 

 

All of this tells me they are as shitty as I may have thought.  If someone starts a rational gun rights organization, as I suggested above, I would seriously consider joining even though I don't own guns!  I would just like to support a more thoughtful, realistic conversation.  Who knows, such a group might even have some good, productive ideas to contribute, and could help soften some of the admittedly more knee jerk proposals that have come out of the opposition.  It would certainly temper the NRA's steadfast crazy paranoia.

[TEO]

I think ALL professional lobbing activities should cease to be allowed for any groups.

 

Legislators/Politicians are elected to represent their constituents, in theory.

[TakeAStepBack]

TASB - "'do-gooder' psychopaths"?  That's what you think of anyone who disagrees with you, eh?  I find that troubling.  I would expect more from you.  And kindly elaborate on what "personal gain" these proposals bring the President in your opinion.

 

From the president? This was about the NRA. And I exampled Coumo's laws and how he's a professional psychopath and why. No one said anything about the presidents debatable, yet useless EO decrees.

And as i've explained, it's not about disagreement. It's about results. Actual results. Not feel good "we did something" so it is a result, results. I never said anything about those who disagree. Plenty can be disagreed upon, but when we're no longer even having a conversation about a problem that is based on a solution, there is nothing to agree or disagree about.

[Lazy Lightning]

I think ALL professional lobbing activities should cease to be allowed for any groups.

 

Legislators/Politicians are elected to represent their constituents, in theory.

 

Hear, hear!

[Spidergawd]

I think ALL professional lobbing activities should cease to be allowed for any groups.

 

Legislators/Politicians are elected to represent their constituents, in theory.

 

 

I amend my statements to include this.  I agree completely.  I'd like to see direct access to congresspeople prohibited in the "lobbying" context.  Groups can organize rallies, media campaigns, etc, but I agree that direct lobbying should be eliminated.

[Spidergawd]

From the president? This was about the NRA. And I exampled Coumo's laws and how he's a professional psychopath and why. No one said anything about the presidents debatable, yet useless EO decrees.

And as i've explained, it's not about disagreement. It's about results. Actual results. Not feel good "we did something" so it is a result, results. I never said anything about those who disagree. Plenty can be disagreed upon, but when we're no longer even having a conversation about a problem that is based on a solution, there is nothing to agree or disagree about.

 

Sorry, you're right, I should have written Cuomo, not the President.  And I'm not buying "to get reelected", since anything they do is aimed at that.  Is someone paying him to hold these positions or something?

 

Plus, kinda hard to get ANY results when ANY proposal is vilified and rejected offhand.

[MeOmYo]

As sad as it is, I think the complete opposite spectrum of what the government wants is often needed to bring balance.  As crazy as that is, the NRA is good at it.

[TakeAStepBack]

Sorry, you're right, I should have written Cuomo, not the President.  And I'm not buying "to get reelected", since anything they do is aimed at that.  Is someone paying him to hold these positions or something?

 

Plus, kinda hard to get ANY results when ANY proposal is vilified and rejected offhand.

'

Cuomo is looking at the presidency. And his ideas were legislated bipartisan. They know full well that these measures in NY will NOT curb gun violence, adn yet they went ahead and did it anyway. The point being, yet again, one more time, it's not about results. It's about acting to make whiners and yellers feel like something has been done, even if it accomplishes nothing except hurting law abiding citizens.

 

Professional psychopaths and their sycophants.

[TEO]

As sad as it is, I think the complete opposite spectrum of what the government wants is often needed to bring balance.  As crazy as that is, the NRA is good at it.

 

 

Seems that is sometimes the only thing that keeps us landing somewhere in the middle.

[TakeAStepBack]

Professional psychopath and the sycophants

 

Pretty decent hardcore band name.

[Spidergawd]

Pretty decent hardcore band name.

 

  Totally!

[MeOmYo]

If someone starts a rational gun rights organization, as I suggested above, I would seriously consider joining even though I don't own guns!  I would just like to support a more thoughtful, realistic conversation.  Who knows, such a group might even have some good, productive ideas to contribute, and could help soften some of the admittedly more knee jerk proposals that have come out of the opposition.  It would certainly temper the NRA's steadfast crazy paranoia.

 

 

http://www.scopeny.org

[Spidergawd]

http://www.scopeny.org

 

Thanks.  I'm interested to learn about this.

[MeOmYo]

Thanks.  I'm interested to learn about this.

 

It may be quite dry in there.  They don't get into pissing matches.  They observe legislation, formulate a position and use legal action to combat that which they do not feel is legal.

[Spidergawd]

It may be quite dry in there.  They don't get into pissing matches.  They observe legislation, formulate a position and use legal action to combat that which they do not feel is legal.

 

So they do what they need to and shut the fuck up about it?  They already have a bonus point then.  I'll have to read for a bit before assigning or deducting any other points.