NRA: good or bad?
my father just paid for a membership for me to the NRA as a gift. i've seen some negative comments on here about the NRA, can anyone tell me what they're about or post links to some info so i can see what they've been up to that seems to be so negative. thanks in advance.
Moved to preserve thread...
Moved to preserve thread...
0
-
quote:Originally posted by dan55362
quote:Originally posted by lt496
quote:Originally posted by dan55362
I cant believe the the Anti NRA crowd isn't all over this thread.
Allow me to simply state this....
Please do some research here on the forums for large volumes of past postings and information and also elsewhere as ECC suggested.
There are numerous verifiable references and other sources of information about historic, recent and current NRA duplicity and support of gun-control, which are cited by the "anti-NRA crowd", which I am counted as one by the GB populace.
From where I sit and from a factual basis, the NRA simply supports a different Amendment II that that enumerated in the US Constitution's Bill of Rights.
The NRA's Second Amendment is all about ensuring some degree of access to firearms for self-defense, shooting sports, shooting competition, hunting and target shooting. The caveat is that all this be with government regulation (infringement).
They also strongly support CCW laws, which have turned what was meant to be an inviolate, God-given right, into a government "must approve", thus government revocable, "privilege".
Lots more could be said about the issue and NRA actions that go back to the 1920's/30's which clearly show them supporting, facilitating and in some cases assisting in the drafting of gun-control legislation.
Do the research and make your own decision, just be informed about the provable facts, not what you are told by many blindly obedient NRA Zombies.[;)]
Oh, and before anyone gets their panties in a wad, note that I am a NRA Life-Member and GOA Life-Member. I just wouldn't join the NRA now if I had known then what I now know.
AAAAAA there they come
I have done my research like you said on the forums and all I could find are anti NRA whiners hell bent on destroying the credibility of the NRA. Like it or not the NRA has done a hell of lot more than you and your anti NRA cronies at preserving your gun rights. Tell me sir what laws have you stopped or overturned with your Anti NRA agenda? Now you can have your opinion and I will have mine but before you go off on your usual reply and call me arrogant for not hating the NRA with you answer that one question for me.
Blah, blah, blah....
If you had done your "research" as you claim, you would know that what I stated is not refutable.
And before you try to turn this into a "yeah, well they have done more than you" smoke-screen, lets stay focused on the issue shall we. It isn't about me, it is about the NRA. I'm not a massive lobbying and hunters/shooters "rights" organization, claiming to be the "staunch defenders" of "YOUR Second Amendment Rights".
I could give a rats ass whether you "hate" the NRA or love the NRA. I am merely pointing out factual information, NOT regurgitating what the NRA spews to its members and what those members subsequently blindly spew to anyone who will listen.
You want to refute the fact of NRA complicity, facilitation and support of gun-control going back to at least the 20's/30's?
Give it your best shot cupcake, but superfluous rhetoric ain't going to cut it.[;)]0 -
lt496
might you want to add this to the end of that novel???
"Go fuffle up a gum-tree, if you can find one"
seems to work really good for BR
[:o)]0 -
Just something I read.
quote:Instead of trying to claim all the limelight and milking members for more contributions ...... if the NRA was truly representing their members and attempting to defend them from further infringements on their rights they would combine forces with KABA, JPFO, LSAS and others to present a united front to combat the anti-gun lobby? They don't because of money, pure and simple. Wayne LaPierre was heard to say the NRA was the best "fund raising" organization around.
Is that the NRA purpose, fund raising?
Wayne says it is one of the best. [;)]
The story
The president of the United States gets around $400,000 to run this country.
Does LaPierre REALLY need almost $1,000,000 to run the NRA?0 -
quote:
If you had done your "research" as you claim, you would know that what I stated is not refutable.
I agree. The whining you state is not refutable, but your your topics are.
quote:And before you try to turn this into a "yeah, well they have done more than you" smoke-screen, lets stay focused on the issue shall we. It isn't about me, it is about the NRA. I'm not a massive lobbying and hunters/shooters "rights" organization, claiming to be the "staunch defenders" of "YOUR Second Amendment Rights".
This one confuses me. If you don't consider yourself as a defender of the 2nd Amendment than why the hell do you care what the NRA does?
quote:I could give a rats ass whether you "hate" the NRA or love the NRA. I am merely pointing out factual information, NOT regurgitating what the NRA spews to its members and what those members subsequently blindly spew to anyone who will listen.
If your merely pointing out factual information than why don't you point out the great things the NRA has done? It seems that you only point out the negative things about the NRA and put so much time and effort and go on and on about how evil the NRA is.0 -
quote:Originally posted by pickenup
Just something I read.
quote:Instead of trying to claim all the limelight and milking members for more contributions ...... if the NRA was truly representing their members and attempting to defend them from further infringements on their rights they would combine forces with KABA, JPFO, LSAS and others to present a united front to combat the anti-gun lobby? They don't because of money, pure and simple. Wayne LaPierre was heard to say the NRA was the best "fund raising" organization around.
Is that the NRA purpose, fund raising?
Wayne says it is one of the best. [;)]
The story
The president of the United States gets around $400,000 to run this country.
Does LaPierre REALLY need almost $1,000,000 to run the NRA?
HA HA HA that link you provided really seemed like a believable site. I was almost scared to be there. I was scared I might pick up a virus just being there. It had (trojanhorse) in their address.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dan55362
quote:Originally posted by pickenup
Just something I read.
quote:Instead of trying to claim all the limelight and milking members for more contributions ...... if the NRA was truly representing their members and attempting to defend them from further infringements on their rights they would combine forces with KABA, JPFO, LSAS and others to present a united front to combat the anti-gun lobby? They don't because of money, pure and simple. Wayne LaPierre was heard to say the NRA was the best "fund raising" organization around.
Is that the NRA purpose, fund raising?
Wayne says it is one of the best. [;)]
The story
The president of the United States gets around $400,000 to run this country.
Does LaPierre REALLY need almost $1,000,000 to run the NRA?
HA HA HA that link you provided really seemed like a believable site. I was almost scared to be there. I was scared I might pick up a virus just being there. It had (trojanhorse) in their address.
The INFORMATION presented, could come from a myriad of sources.
Where the info comes from, is important.........WHY?
No comment on the issue?0 -
I've been a Life Member of the NRA since 1966. I don't like the compromises in recent years, but if there were no NRA there wouldn't be anything left to compromise. The NRA members should take the NRA back. We've done it before.
A compromise is when you have $100.00 in your pocket and a thief tells you he is taking all your money. You say "Hell NO, you can only have $50.00, I'll fight you for the other $50.00." Then the next thief comes along and tells you he is taking all your money. You say "Hell NO, you can only have $25.00, I'll fight you for the other $25.00" See where compromise is taking us? I hate compromise.0 -
quote:The INFORMATION presented, could come from a myriad of sources.
Where the info comes from, is important.........WHY?
No comment on the issue?
I hope your smart enough to know that just because its on the Internet it doesnt make it all true facts. I am sure the folks at these sites complied their information from a myriad of sources.
http://www.bradycenter.org/ http://www.millionmommarch.org/ http://www.peta.org/ but I haven't, didn't, and wont believe anything they have to say.0 -
Some people say, if you don't like it, change it, or start your own organization. The "idea" of changing from within, or starting your own group, is nothing new, as seen below. These people spent YEARS trying for change from within, and for various reasons, they COULD NOT!
Now, some think a few lowly PEON members, will be able to walk in off the street, and effect change? Do we even have the time remaining, to re-invent the wheel?
Lets look at H. L. Richardson. He was a board member of the NRA for 10 years. Did he see a problem with their policies? When he found he could NOT change it from within, he left and started the Gun Owners Of America.
What is now, the second largest gun rights activist organization in the country. Which is also known by MOST as the "NO COMPROMISE" gun lobby. How many here have said they DO belong to this organization?
Now lets turn out attention to Neal Knox, a career gun rights activist. A board member, as well as serving four years for the NRA, as the Executive Director of the Institute For Legislative Action. Which is the lobbying arm of the NRA.
He too must have had a problem with the policies of the NRA, found it impossible to change from within, as he went on to found the Firearms Coalition. Another well known "NO COMPROMISE" organization.
When Neal Knox was on the board, there was a vote to see if Executive Vice President (LaPierre) should be suspended or removed from office. It was supported by a solid 39-30 majority, but short of the two-thirds which was required for passage.
At that time, what the Board majority didn't know, was that the previous week LaPierre and his supporters had secretly ordered the placement of a full page ad in the ballot issue of the NRA magazines-six weeks after the published deadline for election ads. The ad worked. five of the nine were defeated, tipping the balance of power on the Board back into LaPierre`s favor.0 -
Well, Dan, it really disappoints you that you and your compromising buddies don't control the news any more, eh ?
Before the internet. one had to dig really hard to understand what was going on with the NRA...unless you looked at how we were steadily losing gun rights in this country.
Once again..the topic IS the NRA...the poster wanted to know the good/bad about the organization.
You may well wish to turn this discussion into an attack on individual members..that may well distract the simpler minded from the MAIN topic.
Whinning, Dan, is what YOU are doing..instead of refuting the fact that since 1935 the NRA has either agreed with or helped write most of the gun control laws we have existing in America today.
The NRA, Dan...the NRA.
THAT is the subject.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dan55362 Tell me sir what laws have you stopped or overturned with your Anti NRA agenda? Tell me, what laws have the NRA stopped or overturned?0 -
quote:Originally posted by dan55362
quote:
If you had done your "research" as you claim, you would know that what I stated is not refutable.
I agree. The whining you state is not refutable, but your your topics are.
Have at it sir....refute away. Nothing you have said thus far has done it though.[;)] In fact, you aren't going to come out of the argument in good shape if you choose to go there. You may rationalize and justify, but refute......not.
quote:And before you try to turn this into a "yeah, well they have done more than you" smoke-screen, lets stay focused on the issue shall we. It isn't about me, it is about the NRA. I'm not a massive lobbying and hunters/shooters "rights" organization, claiming to be the "staunch defenders" of "YOUR Second Amendment Rights".
This one confuses me. If you don't consider yourself as a defender of the 2nd Amendment than why the hell do you care what the NRA does?
Somehow I am not surprised at your confusion. It is likely based on a reading comprehension problem and failure to focus on the issue and on what was actually said, rather than what you "thought" was said.
quote:I could give a rats ass whether you "hate" the NRA or love the NRA. I am merely pointing out factual information, NOT regurgitating what the NRA spews to its members and what those members subsequently blindly spew to anyone who will listen.
If your merely pointing out factual information than why don't you point out the great things the NRA has done? It seems that you only point out the negative things about the NRA and put so much time and effort and go on and on about how evil the NRA is.
Oh boy.....I thought you said that you did research here on the forum and found only anti-NRA whiners. Perhaps you didn't "actually" research at all, but are merely stepping up to defend a group you believe in strongly, but that has had you fooled for a long time.
Facing the facts is kind of like finding out that your wife of many years has been secretly and regularly cheating on you since before you were married. That analogy fits the NRA and their actions pretty well actually.
Well sir, I have in fact pointed out that the NRA is a good organization in the areas of range development, firearms safety, youth firearms education, hunting defense etc...They simply suck as the self-appointed "staunch defender" of the 2A.
Since they have a clear history of deliberately facilitating the increasing government regulation and control into the RTKBA, the danger lays in the organization itself, as a whole.
Promoting any "good" things they may do only means that more unwitting people will support the organization, thus giving them more numbers, more credibility and more ability to do the absolute wrong things in the realm of gun-control that they consistently do.
Gonna be too late soon, but you go ahead and do as you see fit. By the way, how is the weather in the State of Denial?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Well, Dan, it really disappoints you that you and your compromising buddies don't control the news any more, eh ?
Before the internet. one had to dig really hard to understand what was going on with the NRA...unless you looked at how we were steadily losing gun rights in this country.
Once again..the topic IS the NRA...the poster wanted to know the good/bad about the organization.
You may well wish to turn this discussion into an attack on individual members..that may well distract the simpler minded from the MAIN topic.
Whinning, Dan, is what YOU are doing..instead of refuting the fact that since 1935 the NRA has either agreed with or helped write most of the gun control laws we have existing in America today.
The NRA, Dan...the NRA.
THAT is the subject.
I agree the NRA has helped write most of the gun control laws on the books today, but If you think we would be less restricted today if the NRA didn't help write the laws you would be mistaken. I also agree that I think the NRA could have done more and should have done more. Now tell me if the NRA wasn't there helping write the laws where do you think the laws be today?
There are a few of what I would call extreme Anti NRA bashers (and they are easly spotted) on this forum and that's fine they are entitled to their opinions. They claim to only be posting the facts about the NRA, but why only the negative things. Why cant you guys post anything good about the NRA?0 -
Want the good things about the NRA ?
Fine.
Pick up the American Rifleman, then go to the NRA website and wallow in all the good things being said.
This is the other side of the story ..brought to you by a very few with the balls to actually stand up to the endless attacks on their personal character by the NRA faithful ..which sometimes appears to be almost Messianic.
As far as your statement that
quote:Now tell me if the NRA wasn't there helping write the laws where do you think the laws be today?I think that we might well be back to the spirit and meaning of the Second Amendment as written ..WITHOUT government interference in out daily lives.had the NRA not compromised us away.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dan55362
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Well, Dan, it really disappoints you that you and your compromising buddies don't control the news any more, eh ?
Before the internet. one had to dig really hard to understand what was going on with the NRA...unless you looked at how we were steadily losing gun rights in this country.
Once again..the topic IS the NRA...the poster wanted to know the good/bad about the organization.
You may well wish to turn this discussion into an attack on individual members..that may well distract the simpler minded from the MAIN topic.
Whinning, Dan, is what YOU are doing..instead of refuting the fact that since 1935 the NRA has either agreed with or helped write most of the gun control laws we have existing in America today.
The NRA, Dan...the NRA.
THAT is the subject.
I agree the NRA has helped write most of the gun control laws on the books today, but If you think we would be less restricted today if the NRA didn't help write the laws you would be mistaken. I also agree that I think the NRA could have done more and should have done more. Now tell me if the NRA wasn't there helping write the laws where do you think the laws be today?
This is the rationalizing and justifying that is always the end result when some of the facts are finally accepted.
The illogic in this admitted understanding is astounding. Kind of like..."Well I know my husband beats me really badly and pretty often, but I love him and I am sure he doesn't really mean it, after all, where would I be if it wasn't for him. How would I survive if I left him?".
There are a few of what I would call extreme Anti NRA bashers (and they are easly spotted) on this forum and that's fine they are entitled to their opinions. They claim to only be posting the facts about the NRA, but why only the negative things. Why cant you guys post anything good about the NRA?
I have answered the "why" in my above response to you.
Regardless, even though I have now been promoted to "extreme Anti NRA basher" (wow, I feel honored and do I get a pay raise?), this General in the "anti-NRA legion" HAS made mention of the good they do in a number of past posts.
That good is simply outweighed by the horrible damage they have done and will continue to do to Amendment II. Therefore, supporting them for the "good" they do, gives them the power and ability to continue to do bad. Nothing more, nothing less.0 -
I just can't understand the idea of condemning the NRA for not doing enough when it has been the only organization that has continuously held the line against those that would kill the 2nd Amendment for the past 40+ yrs. For a hundred years has supported, trained and informed millions of gun owners and police and military. And this with only a fraction of gun owners as members. If only half of the gun owners in the US would join, you could vote in any leader, make any change and run any organized program the majority wanted. The NRA is about the only power that has kept you from being like England and Australia already. This "what have you done for me lately?" attitude is childish, ignorant and narrow minded, and I can't believe that people cannot see that they are helping the gun banners by this foolishness. So don't support the NRA, what are you doing that's better? I suspect that regardless of what anyone says or does we may have one more generation of private gun ownership in this country. Then we will not longer have a NRA or a country. You'll be happy then, right? 0 -
I did not join the NRA for more than twenty years simply because of the idiots that represented it at the local gun clubs. They are rheir own worst enemy and drove a lot of people away from joining. You just can't call people communists because they have questions about the organizatiuon or do not immediately sign and shell out the bucks to join.
I continue to see this same type of attitude by NRA recruiters at various public venues and I still question why I should belong having more than once been called a communist for not immediately joinging. How many others have not joined and left with a negative impression of the organization.
I am a member now and have been for the past 15 years except for a 2 year stretch when the NRA was bombarding me with telemarketers and junk mail...........so I cancelled my membership for some peace and quiet during the dinner hour.0 -
I've been a member for a while. My feeling in mixed ... I think the NRA has done some good, maybe even a lot of good for gun owners. But I think they are also a bit paranoid! I don't think that we need to be able to purchase ANYthing just because it is a gun.
Could it be for the overall good that some things just are not accessible to anyone ... whether they are law abiding or not?
It is for the food of society that kids do not play with matches ... that you have to have a license to drive a car ... that they don't let me try to pilot jet planes or throw bricks off of tall buildings.0 -
I just wish I would stop getting 3-4 phone calls a day making me out to be a bad guy because I won't send more money. 0 -
It is all about the MONEY. Money is the bottom line. Those top dogs in the NRA need to keep their fancy mansions and big cars and take 30 day paid (Business) vacations to Hawaii..Ask the NRA if you are a member for a financial statement.. I got one. what a freakin Joke that was..[:0] They bury everything under the guise of "General Operating fund" I ask for their financial report on saleries, Yep! got that one in a hurry, buried in a pile of crap crunched numbers that their accountant couldnt understand..
Some one ask what others that didnt belong to the NRA did, Well I can tell you here in Florida the
Gun owners have passed more favorable gun legislation than the NRA will ever attempt.. All without the Help of the NRA GOD..0 -
They supported Guilianni's presidential bid[8] 
evil NRA logo ^ (fake phone call)0 -
Gun owners are going to lose serious ground regardless of who wins the election. The NRA holds politicians in awe because of it's large membership and vocal leadership. Regardless of your differences, they should have your support.
Long ago when studying how government works, we learned it was lobbyists and pressure groups that got things done or undone.
The NRA is our lobbyist.
Not long ago the only legitimate reason for gun ownership was for formal target shooting or hunting. We have since gained ground that will soon again be threatened.
Years back, I was faced with confiscation of my guns after dropping out of a target shooting club. The NRA refused to support my case so I dropped out for years.
Like many of you, I have issues with the NRA but I realize the Antis
need to be faced with a solid front so I now keep up a membership.
They may be far from what we'd like them to be but they are the only game in town and we need them.0 -
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 speak0 -
quote:Originally posted by huntergarret
I just wish I would stop getting 3-4 phone calls a day making me out to be a bad guy because I won't send more money.
???
Never once have I receive a phone call????
I get some junk mail every now and then, It makes for good fire starter
so what??
We have done a lot of good things here at the range, threw NRA grants we have made shooting opportunities more accessible in this area. I don't see the GOA shelling out money to local ranges
NRA is good for small local ranges
GOA is good for fighting the anit's
join both
get the best of both
JMO0 -
Originally posted by fideau
I just can't understand the idea of condemning the NRA for not doing enough when it has been the only organization that has continuously held the line against those that would kill the 2nd Amendment for the past 40+ yrs.
I call Bullsnit on the above statement as to their actions. Held what line?
How about facilitated, compromised, supported and/or assisted in drafting gun-control legislation since the 30's?
How about being complicit in turning a God-given, fundamental right into a government granted, thus government revocable privilege?
For a hundred years has supported, trained and informed millions of gun owners and police and military.
Informed them of what?
They should have stuck to the training function, as they were formed to do. They are pretty good at that.
Instead, the NRA decided that they would self-appoint as the "staunch defender of your Second Amendment Rights" (as they like to trumpet). The problem is that they fail to recognize the basic and true meaning of Amendment II to the US Constitution.
The Second Amendment that the NRA "supports and defends" is one where it is perfectly okay for the government to regulate what, how, when, where and who can exercise the "privilege" to bear arms.
They support a different Amendment than the one in the Bill of Rights ladies and gentlemen. It is what it is.
And this with only a fraction of gun owners as members. If only half of the gun owners in the US would join, you could vote in any leader, make any change and run any organized program the majority wanted.
Bullsnit again. The organization has staked out the position as the "behind the scenes" facilitator for increased government regulation of all things firearm. This has been their pattern, except for a short period when the leadership was taken over by Knox and the "no-compromise" faction. They were quickly dispelled and it was business as usual and as it has been since the 30's.
The NRA is about the only power that has kept you from being like England and Australia already.
This "what have you done for me lately?" attitude is childish, ignorant and narrow minded, and I can't believe that people cannot see that they are helping the gun banners by this foolishness.
Gotta comment on this abortion. None of what I posted is about "me", got it? The issue is the NRA and the US Constitution, particularly and in this case, Amendment II.
What is foolish is that so many purported gun-owners and those who think they are supporting the Second Amendment, are the very group that consistently either willfully fails to abide by the provisions of the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights and/or are so abjectly stupid or ignorant that they have no understanding of its clear and simple meaning.
You folks are a danger to American Freedom with your consistent willingness to compromise away our basic and fundamental rights, whether in the name of "reasonable regulation", "public safety", "common sense regulation", the "public good" or some other such garbage.
It angers and sickens me that your ilk has the unmitigated gall to then attempt to hammer those of us who understand the basic meaning of freedom and the clear meaning and intent of our founding documents and who have the balls to step up and call a spade a spade, all the while getting attacked for doing so.
So don't support the NRA, what are you doing that's better?
Trying to get people like you to quit f**king up America's Constitution and our RTKBA, thats what I am doing that is better.
Much better than blind obedience to an organization that is slowly facilitating the destruction of our last and final hope of remaining a free people.
Much better than the NRA's continuing duplicity and their assisting in the erosion of Amendment II.
Much better than those of you who continue to throw support to an organization that supports gun-control.
I suspect that regardless of what anyone says or does we may have one more generation of private gun ownership in this country. Then we will not longer have a NRA or a country. You'll be happy then, right?[/b]
As to the NRA's existence, if it stays as it is and how it has historically been, we'd be better off without it. Then the former membership could join a group that actually supports Amendment II and give it the numbers needed to do some real good.
As to my being happy if America is gone, that is a ridiculous statement. That eventuality will only happen if those like yourself continue to do what you are doing, particularly, by allowing the NRA to take the insidious actions that it does.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496 Originally posted by fideau
I just can't understand the idea of condemning the NRA for not doing enough when it has been the only organization that has continuously held the line against those that would kill the 2nd Amendment for the past 40+ yrs.
I call Bullsnit on the above statement as to their actions. Held what line?
How about facilitated, compromised, supported and/or assisted in drafting gun-control legislation since the 30's?
How about being complicit in turning a God-given, fundamental right into a government granted, thus gevernment revokable privilege?
For a hundred years has supported, trained and informed millions of gun owners and police and military.
Informed them of what?
They should have stuck to the training function, as they were formed to do. They are pretty good at that.
Instead, the NRA decided that they would self-appoint as the "staunch defender of your Second Amendment Rights" (as they like to trumpet). The problem is that they fail to recognize the basic and true meaning of Amendment II to the US Constitution.
The Second Amendment that the NRA "supports and defends" is one where it is perfectly okay for the government to regulate what, how, when, where and who can exercise the "privilege" to bear arms.
They support a different Amendment than the one in the Bill of Rights ladies and gentlemen. It is what it is.
And this with only a fraction of gun owners as members. If only half of the gun owners in the US would join, you could vote in any leader, make any change and run any organized program the majority wanted.
Bullsnit again. The organization has staked out the position as the "behind the scenes" facilitator for increased government regulation of all things firearm. This has been their pattern, except for a short period when the leadership was taken over by Knox and the "no-compromise" faction. They were quickly dispelled and it was business as usual and as it has been since the 30's.
The NRA is about the only power that has kept you from being like England and Australia already.
This "what have you done for me lately?" attitude is childish, ignorant and narrow minded, and I can't believe that people cannot see that they are helping the gun banners by this foolishness.
Gotta comment on this abortion. None of what I posted is about "me", got it? The issue is the NRA and the US Constitution, particularly and in this case, Amendment II.
What is foolish is that so many purported gun-owners and those who think they are supporting the Second Amendment, are the very group that consistently either wilfully fails to abide by the provisions of the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights and/or are so abjectly stupid or ignorant that they have no understanding of its clear and simple meaning.
You folks are a danger to American Freedom with your consistent willingness to compromise away our basic and fundemental rights, whether in the name of "reasonable regulation", "public safety", "common sense regulation", the "public good" or some other such garbage.
It angers and sickens me that your ilk has the unmitigated gall to then attempt to hammer those of us who understand the basic meaning of freedom and the clear meaning and intent of our founding documents and who have the balls to step up and call a spade a spade, all the while getting attacked for doing so.
So don't support the NRA, what are you doing that's better?
Trying to get people like you to quit f**king up America's Constitution and our RTKBA, thats what I am doing that is better.
Much better than blind obedience to an organization that is slowly facilitating the destruction of our last and final hope of remaining a free people.
Much better than the NRA's continuing duplicity and their assisting in the erosion of Amendment II.
Much better than those of you who continue to throw support to an organization that supports gun-control.
I suspect that regardless of what anyone says or does we may have one more generation of private gun ownership in this country. Then we will not longer have a NRA or a country. You'll be happy then, right?[/b]
As to the NRA's existance, if it stays as it is and how it has historically been, we'd be better off without it. Then the former membership could join a group that actually supports Amendment II and give it the numbers needed to do some real good.
As to my being happy if America is gone, that is a ridiculous statement. That eventuality will only happen if those like yourself continue to do what you are doing, particularly, by allowing the NRA to take the insidious actions that it does.
+100
You are not going to be able to reason with these folks until they get their heads out of the sand and actually research the issue for themselves. They have absolutely NO idea of what is actually going on and they are content in existing in their ignorant blissful state. Apathy is what it is...and Apathy is what will destroy this nation.0 -
Did you know that the NRA is also very much alive in the United Kingdom. They were so good in england that Handguns were banned 1n 1997.. Hurray for the NRA..[:(]
http://www.nra.org.uk/0 -
quote:How about being complicit in turning a God-given, fundamental right into a government granted, thus gevernment revokable privilege?
and just where do you find that statement.0 -
Look I am new to the fourm so I don't want to start crap with the pro or con NRA crowd but there is only a few org. that are standing up for gun owners and gun rights. The NRA is the largest, so I am and have been a member for about 9 years, so do I agree with everything the NRA does, no but they are still making compromises that allows me to own my firearms so until that changes I will pay my dues. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Flowtom
but they are still making compromises that allows me to own my firearms so until that changes I will pay my dues.
LMAO!!!!
Really?
Let me 'splain something about "comprimise" as it relates to the Second Amendment.
Pro(NRA) and Anti(Brady bunch) go to the table. Anti tells Pro "We want the banning of ALL arms". Pro tells Anti"No, we have rights. Just take a little. Here is what WE will give away."
End of conversation. Pro (NRA) "comprimises" or gives up what we allready have. The Anti gains all and GIVES UP NOTHING. See why that view you have is foolish? As long as the NRA or ANYONE else GIVES AWAY rights, WE are the ONLY ones loosing.
Why is this so hard for people to understand?0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
131 comments