What are your thoughts on the NRA?

[sealybobo]

I'm debating a life membership at the moment and was curious as to everyone's thoughts on the NRA. Any life members here? Anyone completely against the NRA but recommends another gun rights association?
They just came out with a flex payment method for membership and I'm debating it now because its affordable both short and long term.
What are your thoughts?

You're dumb if you give them one dime.

 

[Flash]

"I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands"

"For the next six months,Al Gore is going to smear you as the enemy. He will slander you as gun-toting, knuckle-dragging, bloodthirsty maniacs who stand in the way of a safer America. Will you remain silent? I will not remain silent. If we are going to stop this, then it is vital to every law-abiding gun owner in America to register to vote and show up at the polls on Election Day.

"So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands"

A phrase used by the president of the NRA in 2000, and clearly a thinly veiled threat, to every legislator, law enforcement officer and citizen that gun control was off the table, and any effort to control gun ownership in America would be met with armed resistance.

Of course every gun control thread brings forth the same mentality, and their anger is palatable. Yes gun nuts, the NRA is a terrorist organization, and those of you so angry with any discussion of gun control are terrorists.

They were right. Al Gore was the shithead that broke the Senate tie to stop the repeal of the 1994 Assault Weapon's ban. The repeal passed the House and was a tie in the Senate. That idiot Gore came in as VP (head of the Senate) and broke the tie in favor of the anti gun nuts.

Al Gore didn't even win his home state of Tennessee in 2000 because the NRA reminded the people of the state what a douche bag he was. That was a good thing.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands"

"For the next six months,Al Gore is going to smear you as the enemy. He will slander you as gun-toting, knuckle-dragging, bloodthirsty maniacs who stand in the way of a safer America. Will you remain silent? I will not remain silent. If we are going to stop this, then it is vital to every law-abiding gun owner in America to register to vote and show up at the polls on Election Day.

"So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands"

A phrase used by the president of the NRA in 2000, and clearly a thinly veiled threat, to every legislator, law enforcement officer and citizen that gun control was off the table, and any effort to control gun ownership in America would be met with armed resistance.

Of course every gun control thread brings forth the same mentality, and their anger is palatable. Yes gun nuts, the NRA is a terrorist organization, and those of you so angry with any discussion of gun control are terrorists.

They were right. Al Gore was the shithead that broke the Senate tie to stop the repeal of the 1994 Assault Weapon's ban. The repeal passed the House and was a tie in the Senate. That idiot Gore came in as VP (head of the Senate) and broke the tie in favor of the anti gun nuts.

Al Gore didn't even win his home state of Tennessee in 2000 because the NRA reminded the people of the state what a douche bag he was. That was a good thing.

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

 

[Flash]

[


Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Bush did OK until that 2006 Democrat elected Congress with Barney Queerboy, Nancy Peloski and Harry Reid took over. Al Gore would have been an Obama like disaster years earlier.

At least with Bush we didn't lose the right to keep and bear arms that we would have lost with a nutcase like Gore.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Really good. Business was great until obama took over and scared the **** out of anyone with loose change in their pockets.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Really good. Business was great until obama took over and scared the **** out of anyone with loose change in their pockets.

Yeah, grave diggers had job security under your boy Bush. On his watch, 3.000 dead at the WTC, 4,500 dead in a war of choice, 100,000 + or - Iraqi civilians dead, and countless others wounded, widowed or orphaned. What a legacy.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Really good. Business was great until obama took over and scared the **** out of anyone with loose change in their pockets.

Really, the Great Recession commenced when Obama took office? LOL, you're a fool.

 

[westwall]

They used to be an organization that promoted the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear firearms for self protection, recreation and military readiness.

Nowadays they promote sansculottism in the streets.

"no man having a natural right to be the judge between himself and another, it is his natural duty to submit to the umpirage of an impartial third."
-- Thomas Jefferson; from letter to Francis Gilmer (June 7, 1816)

Sansculottism......Interesting word. Methinks you don't understand what it means.

It refers to the ignorant rabble killing their fellow citizens in the street without trial, as with the aftermath of the French Revolution, or present day Florida.

The rabble, who were led by those who considered themselves the elite progressive thinkers of the day you mean. Don't you? The rabble would have done nothing without the direction of that well known Jacobite, Robespierre (a government official, of course) who dominated the Committee of Public Safety till the "rabble" figured out just what a POS he was and killed him.

Why oh why did you leave that little tidbit out of your diatribe?

 

[2aguy]

I'm debating a life membership at the moment and was curious as to everyone's thoughts on the NRA. Any life members here? Anyone completely against the NRA but recommends another gun rights association?
They just came out with a flex payment method for membership and I'm debating it now because its affordable both short and long term.
What are your thoughts?

You're dumb if you give them one dime.

Yes...when I signed up it was 500 dollars...you will need more than one dime...and those will be well spent dimes....if you like to keep your guns.....

 

[2aguy]

"I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands"

"For the next six months,Al Gore is going to smear you as the enemy. He will slander you as gun-toting, knuckle-dragging, bloodthirsty maniacs who stand in the way of a safer America. Will you remain silent? I will not remain silent. If we are going to stop this, then it is vital to every law-abiding gun owner in America to register to vote and show up at the polls on Election Day.

"So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands"

A phrase used by the president of the NRA in 2000, and clearly a thinly veiled threat, to every legislator, law enforcement officer and citizen that gun control was off the table, and any effort to control gun ownership in America would be met with armed resistance.

Of course every gun control thread brings forth the same mentality, and their anger is palatable. Yes gun nuts, the NRA is a terrorist organization, and those of you so angry with any discussion of gun control are terrorists.

They were right. Al Gore was the shithead that broke the Senate tie to stop the repeal of the 1994 Assault Weapon's ban. The repeal passed the House and was a tie in the Senate. That idiot Gore came in as VP (head of the Senate) and broke the tie in favor of the anti gun nuts.

Al Gore didn't even win his home state of Tennessee in 2000 because the NRA reminded the people of the state what a douche bag he was. That was a good thing.

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Really well...we got rid of hussein and turned Iraq around, we had control of Afghanistan, libya gave up it's weapons and iran was docile....then obama came in and f*****d it all up......

 

[2aguy]

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Really good. Business was great until obama took over and scared the **** out of anyone with loose change in their pockets.

Yeah, grave diggers had job security under your boy Bush. On his watch, 3.000 dead at the WTC, 4,500 dead in a war of choice, 100,000 + or - Iraqi civilians dead, and countless others wounded, widowed or orphaned. What a legacy.

No...those 3,000 died because clinton didn't want to make muslims mad....and obama is following his play book....look for a repeat sometime soon....and we have lost more men under obama than under Bush.....and those numbers in iraq.....try again...this time don't use a lefty source......

 

[sealybobo]

I'm debating a life membership at the moment and was curious as to everyone's thoughts on the NRA. Any life members here? Anyone completely against the NRA but recommends another gun rights association?
They just came out with a flex payment method for membership and I'm debating it now because its affordable both short and long term.
What are your thoughts?

You're dumb if you give them one dime.

Yes...when I signed up it was 500 dollars...you will need more than one dime...and those will be well spent dimes....if you like to keep your guns.....

Oh pahleez. Thank you for paying $500 so I can keep my guns sucker. Pay me $500 for the NFA. National Fox Association. If you dont they'll take Fox News away. Lol

 

[sealybobo]

Yep, and then we got George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

Really good. Business was great until obama took over and scared the **** out of anyone with loose change in their pockets.

Yeah, grave diggers had job security under your boy Bush. On his watch, 3.000 dead at the WTC, 4,500 dead in a war of choice, 100,000 + or - Iraqi civilians dead, and countless others wounded, widowed or orphaned. What a legacy.

No...those 3,000 died because clinton didn't want to make muslims mad....and obama is following his play book....look for a repeat sometime soon....and we have lost more men under obama than under Bush.....and those numbers in iraq.....try again...this time don't use a lefty source......

Its not easy getting us out of the jihad bush got us in. Shut up and led statesmen lead you right wing tool.

 

[BULLDOG]

So that was an example of confiscation? You need to look up what the word means.

You keep thinking confiscation is the only thing we have to worry about.

I can't get a CCW in NYC without the NYPD approving my "need" for one. THAT is the real problem, and that is why a group like the NRA is needed.

By all means we need to make sure every thug and mental patient can easily be armed, unless you have some better idea how to prevent that.

What the **** are you talking about? Felons and mentally adjudicated people cannot get a CCW or even a home permit ANYWHERE.

I have a clean record, and no history of mental issues. But unless I prove to NYPD that I have a "need" for a CCW they can deny me out of hand.

How is stopping me from getting a CCW "just because" preventing thugs and mental patients from getting guns?

So you aren't opposed to common sense limits to who can get a gun, just that you have to be subject to the same rules.......Got it.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" says anything about "common sense limits"?

If you are a government, preventing one or more people or groups of people from having the means to defend themselves might be common sense...but if you are a free citizen, not so much.

Blanket statements like that would allow prisoners to h

Ammo manufacturers take advantage of perceived shortages the same way that oil companies boost their prices every time there is an incident at any one of the refineries. Johnny Carson made a joke about a toilet paper shortage, and crazy people started hoarding toilet paper and caused a shortage. Same thing with crazy gun nuts hoarding shells.
You don't even know what the NRA's original goal was. You've been played by the gun manufacturers like the excitable rube that you are.

Sorry but you simply have it wrong. Stop making things up. It makes you look like a fool.

Ammo suppliers make their money selling as much ammo as they can.

The ammo shortages are caused by the people stocking up because they perceive the filthy government will cause shortages through restrictions or banning..

The perception is caused by the idiots in the filthy government taking about banning firearms and ammo and restricting the right to keep and bear arms, not the ammo suppliers.

This last month's run on .223 was not the result of an ammo manufacturer or the NRA. It was the fault of the ATF that put out a proposed rule that would ban about half of the .223 in the US.

If the filthy gun nuts didn't childishly hoard the ammo, there wouldn't be a shortage. The filthy idiots need to either get a clue or keep throwing their money away over self

So you aren't opposed to common sense limits to who can get a gun, just that you have to be subject to the same rules.......Got it.

You haven't answered my question.

I'm certainly not an expert in NY gun laws, and from what you have presented, I don't know what your particular problem might be. However, New York's laws, be they good or bad, in no way proves that reasonable gun regulation is not a good thing for our country. Bad laws? Fine, fix them, but allowing every reactionary idiot wit a gun to prance around our streets and malls waving their guns around in some sort of macho display is just stupid, and will get people killed. Don't say I'm exaggerating. I've seen them.

Still not answering the question.

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

When will you figure out the simple fact that the only people who "should never own guns" are those who forfeit right through their actions...not what the could, might, maybe do someday if the wind is right and the moon is full.

If you want to piss away your freedom, go right ahead, but you shall not drag the rest of us down into your hovel of slavery.

When will you figure out that those who already forfeited their rights through their actions will not be prevented for getting guns if nobody checks to see who is buying guns.

 

[BULLDOG]

[

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

The problem is defining "people who should never own guns".

If the Libtards were reasonable then we could probably agree on a reasonable law restricting convicted violent felons and people in insane asylums. However, as we have found out the Libtards are not reasonable. For instance, in California the bureaucrats think it is unreasonable for a law abiding person to own a standard AR-15. That is as unreasonable as it comes.

A couple of months ago in NY a veteran had his firearms taken away from him because under NY's SAFE Act it was found reasonable to take his firearms because he told a doctor he had insomnia.

Prior to the Heller and McDonald cases DC and Chicago felt it was reasonable to prevent someone from having a handgun.

The list goes on and on.

When the Libtards pull their heads out of their asses then we can talk about what reasonable really means but in the meantime they are not capable of being reasonable.

I don't want the government telling me how to comply with my Constitutional rights. I don't want to get permission from the filthy ass government before being allowed to enjoy my Constitutional rights. What part of those statements do you not understand?

So you are willing to let obviously dangerous people have guns until all the things you see as a problem are worked out? That's pretty stupid.

 

[BULLDOG]

Ammo manufacturers take advantage of perceived shortages the same way that oil companies boost their prices every time there is an incident at any one of the refineries. Johnny Carson made a joke about a toilet paper shortage, and crazy people started hoarding toilet paper and caused a shortage. Same thing with crazy gun nuts hoarding shells.
You don't even know what the NRA's original goal was. You've been played by the gun manufacturers like the excitable rube that you are.

Sorry but you simply have it wrong. Stop making things up. It makes you look like a fool.

Ammo suppliers make their money selling as much ammo as they can.

The ammo shortages are caused by the people stocking up because they perceive the filthy government will cause shortages through restrictions or banning..

The perception is caused by the idiots in the filthy government taking about banning firearms and ammo and restricting the right to keep and bear arms, not the ammo suppliers.

This last month's run on .223 was not the result of an ammo manufacturer or the NRA. It was the fault of the ATF that put out a proposed rule that would ban about half of the .223 in the US.

If the filthy gun nuts didn't childishly hoard the ammo, there wouldn't be a shortage. The filthy idiots need to either get a clue or keep throwing their money away over self

So you aren't opposed to common sense limits to who can get a gun, just that you have to be subject to the same rules.......Got it.

You haven't answered my question.

I'm certainly not an expert in NY gun laws, and from what you have presented, I don't know what your particular problem might be. However, New York's laws, be they good or bad, in no way proves that reasonable gun regulation is not a good thing for our country. Bad laws? Fine, fix them, but allowing every reactionary idiot wit a gun to prance around our streets and malls waving their guns around in some sort of macho display is just stupid, and will get people killed. Don't say I'm exaggerating. I've seen them.

Still not answering the question.

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

Okay, I'll play...what do you consider commone sense gun laws.........?

#1 universal background checks. No, it won't stop all crooks from buying a gun, but I believe most gun owners are honorable, and wouldn't sell to someone who can't pass a background check, but if they aren't required, nobody ever knows.

 

[westwall]

[

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

The problem is defining "people who should never own guns".

If the Libtards were reasonable then we could probably agree on a reasonable law restricting convicted violent felons and people in insane asylums. However, as we have found out the Libtards are not reasonable. For instance, in California the bureaucrats think it is unreasonable for a law abiding person to own a standard AR-15. That is as unreasonable as it comes.

A couple of months ago in NY a veteran had his firearms taken away from him because under NY's SAFE Act it was found reasonable to take his firearms because he told a doctor he had insomnia.

Prior to the Heller and McDonald cases DC and Chicago felt it was reasonable to prevent someone from having a handgun.

The list goes on and on.

When the Libtards pull their heads out of their asses then we can talk about what reasonable really means but in the meantime they are not capable of being reasonable.

I don't want the government telling me how to comply with my Constitutional rights. I don't want to get permission from the filthy ass government before being allowed to enjoy my Constitutional rights. What part of those statements do you not understand?

So you are willing to let obviously dangerous people have guns until all the things you see as a problem are worked out? That's pretty stupid.

Progressives let obviously dangerous people out of prison all the time. Here you have people who have been CONVICTED of violent crimes, and you all fight to let them out. Why is that?

 

[westwall]

Sorry but you simply have it wrong. Stop making things up. It makes you look like a fool.

Ammo suppliers make their money selling as much ammo as they can.

The ammo shortages are caused by the people stocking up because they perceive the filthy government will cause shortages through restrictions or banning..

The perception is caused by the idiots in the filthy government taking about banning firearms and ammo and restricting the right to keep and bear arms, not the ammo suppliers.

This last month's run on .223 was not the result of an ammo manufacturer or the NRA. It was the fault of the ATF that put out a proposed rule that would ban about half of the .223 in the US.

If the filthy gun nuts didn't childishly hoard the ammo, there wouldn't be a shortage. The filthy idiots need to either get a clue or keep throwing their money away over self

You haven't answered my question.

I'm certainly not an expert in NY gun laws, and from what you have presented, I don't know what your particular problem might be. However, New York's laws, be they good or bad, in no way proves that reasonable gun regulation is not a good thing for our country. Bad laws? Fine, fix them, but allowing every reactionary idiot wit a gun to prance around our streets and malls waving their guns around in some sort of macho display is just stupid, and will get people killed. Don't say I'm exaggerating. I've seen them.

Still not answering the question.

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

Okay, I'll play...what do you consider commone sense gun laws.........?

#1 universal background checks. No, it won't stop all crooks from buying a gun, but I believe most gun owners are honorable, and wouldn't sell to someone who can't pass a background check, but if they aren't required, nobody ever knows.

So long as there is no gun registry scheme with the check I have no problem with it. Nor do most gun owners I know. The problem arises with that pesky registration BS.

 

[BULLDOG]

If the filthy gun nuts didn't childishly hoard the ammo, there wouldn't be a shortage. The filthy idiots need to either get a clue or keep throwing their money away over self
I'm certainly not an expert in NY gun laws, and from what you have presented, I don't know what your particular problem might be. However, New York's laws, be they good or bad, in no way proves that reasonable gun regulation is not a good thing for our country. Bad laws? Fine, fix them, but allowing every reactionary idiot wit a gun to prance around our streets and malls waving their guns around in some sort of macho display is just stupid, and will get people killed. Don't say I'm exaggerating. I've seen them.

Still not answering the question.

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

Okay, I'll play...what do you consider commone sense gun laws.........?

#1 universal background checks. No, it won't stop all crooks from buying a gun, but I believe most gun owners are honorable, and wouldn't sell to someone who can't pass a background check, but if they aren't required, nobody ever knows.

So long as there is no gun registry scheme with the check I have no problem with it. Nor do most gun owners I know. The problem arises with that pesky registration BS.

Damn you are dense. There is no record kept of any potential background check. Didn't you listen to any of the discussion of this before?

 

[westwall]

Still not answering the question.

If you can't figure out that restrictions are an effort to limit gun ownership by people who should never own guns, you have a problem I can't help. I don't know anything about NY gun laws, or your particular situation, and it seems childish for you to oppose all gun regulation on the basis of that one situation. For all I know, you could be right as far as your individual disagreement with NY. That still doesn't matter when you are talking about common sense regulation across the country.

Okay, I'll play...what do you consider commone sense gun laws.........?

#1 universal background checks. No, it won't stop all crooks from buying a gun, but I believe most gun owners are honorable, and wouldn't sell to someone who can't pass a background check, but if they aren't required, nobody ever knows.

So long as there is no gun registry scheme with the check I have no problem with it. Nor do most gun owners I know. The problem arises with that pesky registration BS.

Damn you are dense. There is no record kept of any potential background check. Didn't you listen to any of the discussion of this before?

Damn, you are an ass. The scheme that the Bloomberg people are pushing here in Nevada has a gun registry as part of the Bill.