Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Keep the rifle but ditch the 100 shot clips. How can that hurt?
Keep the rifle but ditch the 100 shot clips. How can that hurt?
Well look who's back. Still waiting for a snappy come back in post #27...
Until then, it can "hurt" because no matter what you seek to ban or restrict, it will not keep crazy motherfuckers and criminals from having those items. Now why in the world would you actively seek to put law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against law breakers? That makes no sense.
p.s. It's a magazine, not a clip.
Keep the rifle but ditch the 100 shot clips. How can that hurt?
Well look who's back. Still waiting for a snappy come back in post #27...
Until then, it can "hurt" because no matter what you seek to ban or restrict, it will not keep crazy motherfuckers and criminals from having those items. Now why in the world would you actively seek to put law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against law breakers? That makes no sense.
p.s. It's a magazine, not a clip.
Get a Life....
I was thinking that millions of Americans might support a call for patriotic arms and ammunition manufacturers to pay the cost of keeping American schools safe from the excesses of their products.True enough...4.3 million NRA members out of 311 million Americans.
~1.38%.
We would need a ratio of member-contributed revenues vs corporate-contributed dollars in order to get a better picture of who exactly funds the NRA.
You think the millions of Americans that support the 2nd amendment (NRA and non NRA members) are concerned if companies in the firearm industry also lend their financial support to the cause?
Wake up.
Keep the rifle but ditch the 100 shot clips. How can that hurt?
Well look who's back. Still waiting for a snappy come back in post #27...
Until then, it can "hurt" because no matter what you seek to ban or restrict, it will not keep crazy motherfuckers and criminals from having those items. Now why in the world would you actively seek to put law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against law breakers? That makes no sense.
p.s. It's a magazine, not a clip.
I was thinking that millions of Americans might support a call for patriotic arms and ammunition manufacturers to pay the cost of keeping American schools safe from the excesses of their products.True enough...4.3 million NRA members out of 311 million Americans.
~1.38%.
We would need a ratio of member-contributed revenues vs corporate-contributed dollars in order to get a better picture of who exactly funds the NRA.
You think the millions of Americans that support the 2nd amendment (NRA and non NRA members) are concerned if companies in the firearm industry also lend their financial support to the cause?
Wake up.
Keep the rifle but ditch the 100 shot clips. How can that hurt?
Well look who's back. Still waiting for a snappy come back in post #27...
Until then, it can "hurt" because no matter what you seek to ban or restrict, it will not keep crazy motherfuckers and criminals from having those items. Now why in the world would you actively seek to put law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against law breakers? That makes no sense.
p.s. It's a magazine, not a clip.
The National Enquirer is a magazine.
The detachable ammo holder for a weapon is either a magazine or clip.
sheesh...
Let me guess...corporations will continue to rely on taxpayers to pad their bottom lines.
This Radical believes the NRA is a front for multi-million dollar for profit corporations whose products are misused regularly in this country. If there's no reason why US taxpayers should have bailed out Wall Street banks, I don't see why taxpayers should pay to protect children from the externalities of gun and ammunition manufacturers.Let me guess...corporations will continue to rely on taxpayers to pad their bottom lines.
Only if they engage in crony capitalism, which this libertarian stands firmly against.
If the NRA is getting grants from the federal government or is otherwise receiving taxpayer money, I am not aware of it.
This Radical believes the NRA is a front for multi-million dollar for profit corporations whose products are misused regularly in this country.Let me guess...corporations will continue to rely on taxpayers to pad their bottom lines.
Only if they engage in crony capitalism, which this libertarian stands firmly against.
If the NRA is getting grants from the federal government or is otherwise receiving taxpayer money, I am not aware of it.
If there's no reason why US taxpayers should have bailed out Wall Street banks, I don't see why taxpayers should pay to protect children from the externalities of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
By your reasoning multi-million dollar corporations funding the NRA have a right to expect the US taxpayers to pay for externalities generated by private pro-profit gun and ammunition makers. It seems likely those corporations funding the NRA do receive favorable tax treatment compared to the families of their numerous victims.This Radical believes the NRA is a front for multi-million dollar for profit corporations whose products are misused regularly in this country.Only if they engage in crony capitalism, which this libertarian stands firmly against.
If the NRA is getting grants from the federal government or is otherwise receiving taxpayer money, I am not aware of it.
So, you have nothing. No link, no evidence that the NRA gets federal funds or taxpayer dollars. So, you change your tune...now, they're just a 'front' for business. Again, the millions of supporters would disagree, but please, prove your statement.
If there's no reason why US taxpayers should have bailed out Wall Street banks, I don't see why taxpayers should pay to protect children from the externalities of gun and ammunition manufacturers.
By your reasoning, spoon manufacturers should be made to pay for the healthcare of obese people.
When a firearm gets up and kills someone, you let us know and we'll talk about those evil manufacturers.
I was thinking that millions of Americans might support a call for patriotic arms and ammunition manufacturers to pay the cost of keeping American schools safe from the excesses of their products.True enough...4.3 million NRA members out of 311 million Americans.
~1.38%.
We would need a ratio of member-contributed revenues vs corporate-contributed dollars in order to get a better picture of who exactly funds the NRA.
You think the millions of Americans that support the 2nd amendment (NRA and non NRA members) are concerned if companies in the firearm industry also lend their financial support to the cause?
Wake up.
What a sad, sad reflection of American society if armed guards are roaming public school hallways.
Yep, and what's even sadder is they are there to protect teachers and students form other students. We have a social problem alright, we're not teaching our children proper values.
So who is supposed to teach "proper values"? I thought the parents of the children were supposed to take care of that, not the teachers.
As far as arming teachers in schools? Really? Because many of you conservatives have stated REPEATEDLY that teachers get too much money, and have put in many cuts to education.
Think about it...............you go ahead and arm the teachers, but what happens when the conservatives start going after teachers pay and union rights? Do you REALLY want to see a hostage situation where it's not the union that negotiates for the teachers, but rather someone with a weapon who has a whole classroom hostage?
Oh................and as far as small government goes, putting armed guards in the schools sure ain't the way to go. Besides, who's gonna pay for it? The NRA?
Again, those "million of supporters" represent less than 2% of all Americans.
When the corporate externalities of 300 million guns trump the popular sovereignty of 300 million Americans, what will we have left to talk about?