Another responsible NRA member

“If the NRA was more constructive in it's approach then you might see the right legislation created in Illinois - for example legistaltion that would give lawful gun owners more rights while helping to keep guns out of the hands of teens.”

“The Illinois Bill to ban certain firearms does not grandfather in previously owned guns but gives those hunters a certain number of days to surrender their hunting weapons or else become felons.

Illinois voters want laws to keep firearms out of the hands of the gangbangers, but not the hunters. The devil is in the details. The Chicago Democrats keep re-introducing the Bill that has such a wide definition of firearm that would be banned that it would take away more than 99 guns from hunters and collectors than for every one gun from a gangbanger. Only honest citizens like me would comply with the law. Gangbanger would just keep their firearms. The Chicago Police seize over 10,000 illegal firearms ever year from criminals who do not obey their strict gun conrol laws. Yet Chicago more often than not has leads the nation in murders per capita of all large cities since their gun ban went into effect.”

““If the NRA was more constructive in it's approach then you might see the right legislation created in Illinois - for example legistaltion that would give lawful gun owners more rights while helping to keep guns out of the hands of teens.”
Y2
5:57:20 PM
3/29/06



What law would that be? In my home state, a teen cannot purchase or possess a handgun. What law other than a total ban would prevent them from getting one?”

“Hey Violin, not only does that baby have nicer handguns than I do, he apparently also makes more money. Nice troll though.”

““They could well be obsessed with their hobby and toys as many seem to be, not yourself admittedly, but look over at the how many guns you got thread.
Y2
5:54:41 PM
3/29/06


It's a hobby for me too, but I wouldn't call it an obsession. I wouldn't even call it an obsession with those on the "How Many" thread. I have several guns and even possessed a Federal Firearm License at one time which allowed me to buy and sell guns most anywhere. It's only legal through licensed dealers and/or through law enforcement offices if it's a sale between private citizens. (for handguns in my state)

Legal. Once you add illegal to the equation you have problems. That said, the overwhelming majority of gun owners in this country are law-abiding.


Check out the NRA website to see exactly what they support and stand for. (BTW, I am not a member myself.)”

“Oh I have checked out their site. They are exceptionally active - and post midleading and often frankly wrong information in support of a hugely bias agenda. They also seek to apply enormous political and financial pressure to any legislater who even tries to look at tackling problem of gun violence.”

“Non - I posted a suggestion earlier in the thread, but everyone seems to think there's not even a basis for discussion there on the issue, and in a matter of weeks a dictator's troops will be goose-stepping down the national mall.

Sure laws need to be enforced, part of the problem is a 'liberal' attitude towards guns that the NRA promotes.”

“Tell that to Yugoslavia.”

“"Rocket launchers are "arms", no?”
Actually they're classified as destructive devices in most legislation, and no, you can't own one.

"I think the makers of that particular gun even market it as being able to bring down an aircraft with a couple of well-placed shots?"
Um, no they don't. That's a Barrett M82, made right here in Tennessee.
And the rifle the Beltway Sniper used was a .223 caliber, a far cry from a .50 caliber.”

“WWJBP?

(What Would Jesus Be Packing?)”

“Well what the hell is an "arm"?

Jesus didn't need heat, he was too smooth a talker to need anything.












wait for it
















He was way cool.”

“Good Question

Rocket launchers are "arms", no?”
bearmagnet
4:40:12 PM
3/29/06”

“NRA

1. The National Rifle Association, one of the most powerful political organizations in the United States with millions of members, which proclaims that the right to bear arms is the most sacred, as it protects all other rights. This belief is best demonstrated by the NRA's continued support of President Bush and his policies of allowing secret searches of library records, unwarranted searches and seizures of private property, and imprisonment of foreigners and American citizens without trial, access to counsel, or any due process whatsoever.

http://www.republicandictionary.com/rd_n.shtml”

“NRA does good things...............

Tactical Nuclear Weapons Approved for American Consumers


By Ion Zwitter, Avant News Editor
Washington, D.C., October 9, 2021

Marking what may be the final passage in a series of groundbreaking weapons bills, Congress yesterday signed into law the Homeowners Fission Liberty Bill (H.R. 9985: To totally actualize the second amendment rights of all Americans), permitting the legal possession and use of tactical nuclear weapons for hunting and personal protection.

"We've been waiting for this one a long time," said Sally Ack-Ack, spokesman for the NWMDA (National Weapons of Mass Destruction Association, formerly known as the NRA). "The steps have been slow and incremental, but now, thanks to this judicious and far-sighted law, we can finally take full advantage of the Second Amendment rights guaranteed us under the United States Constitution.

The Second Amendment referred to by Ms. Ack-Ack reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The amendment was intended by its drafters to ensure states the right to raise an armed force to protect against popular insurrection in the absence of a standing army such as the National Guard.

Given the continued presence of standing armies at both the state and national level, the amendment, which even the most cursory historical analysis proves was never intended to provide individuals with the right to own weapons outside of the context of a government-regulated militia, is justly considered largely irrelevant today.

http://www.democrats.com/node/8237
last edited: 3/29/06 10:50:58 PM”

“Finally!”

“That's the problem with the conservative states like Montana... they don't recognize irresponsible gun behavior.”
USA
10:01:03 PM
3/27/06


Yeah, Montana.......that cesspool of rampant gun violence, lol. Asssclown.”

“http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=mt

Earlier this year, New York state's strict gun control laws earned a solid B+ from The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The same report by the nation's best-known gun control advocacy group, billed as a tool to educate Americans "about how their state's leaders are doing on laws and policies that promote a reduction in gun violence," gave Montana an F.

But does it mean citizens of the Big Sky State are more at risk of gun violence?

According to a University at Albany publication of 2001 FBI statistics, the most recent available, the percentage of violent crimes committed with guns in New York state was virtually the same as in Montana -- 17.7 percent in New York and 17.4 percent in Montana.

Firearms

According the the Montana Board of Crime Control, in Montana in 2001, 12% of crime involved a firearm: 57% of homicides , <1% of rapes, 22% of robberies, and 12% of aggravated assaults were committed with a firearm.

A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member or friend than it is to be used in self-defense. Using a gun is the easiest and fastest way to kill someone. Guns are five times more deadly than knives. A person does not need to be intent on homicide or even particularly angry to kill with a gun. A person with a gun does not have to struggle with the victim, or even touch or get near the victim, to kill him or her. (Firearm Facts, Children’s Safety Network)
Between 1979-1997, gunfire killed nearly 80,000 children and teens in the United States; an additional 320,000 children were wounded. Children under fifteen are twelve times more likely to die from gunfire than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.


http://www.co.missoula.mt.us/measures/ViolentC.htm
last edited: 3/30/06 12:24:46 AM”

“In the year 2000 Montana had an estimated population of 902,195 which ranked the state as having the 44th in population. For that year the State of Montana had a total Crime Index of 3,533.4 reported incidents per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 31st highest total Crime Index.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mtcrimn.htm


Montana... breeding ground for violent criminals such as Huff and Ted Kaczynski the Unabomber”

“LMAO! Nice stats! Thanks for posting them.


Hey USA, weren't you reared in Montana (that cesspool of rampant gun violence) too? Or are you reared in Washington state nowadays?”

“And on average, states that have a right-to-carry concealed weapons laws have 21% lower total violent crime, 28% lower murder, 43% lower robbery, and 13% lower aggravated assault than states that do not allow its citizens the right to carry.”

“Keep trotting out the simplistic and misleading stats prosecutor. Couldn't possibly be the states with concealed carry laws don't have the biggest cities with the worse crime and social problems huh? But you're not really interested in looking at the matter rationally. You just stay on message and want to keep your own gun collection.”

“Yeah prosecutor! You're biased unless you believe just like Y2. Everyone else has an agenda, but not Y2, he's the only one capable of rational thought - and everyone else who agrees with his non-agenda.

I'd like to encourage everyone to look at Y2's posts on the various fuego threads. His main argument, used over and over, is that the people who disagree with him has a biased agenda and they are incapable of seeing past their own bias. Not him though! LOL”

“I mean you inlcude New York in those states right, not just Wisconsin, Illinois and Nebraska?

Wouldn't including NYC and LA and Chicago in this warp the stats slightly?
last edited: 3/30/06 8:00:44 AM”

“I was a 60-gunner for a couple of years.

Man, I sure miss "the gun"................ha ha!!...not really, it was a real pain in the ass.”

“Oh, and DC for that matter I guess?”

“D.C. is a wonderful town!”

“Montana does have some skeery cities.”

“I think I asked on here, not long ago of course, who here has had to defend themselves with an "arm". I think I got two affirmatives.

Who here has a lightening rod on their house?”

“It's pretty obvious now that some on here are not as interested in making guns safer, as they are questioning the usefulness in the first place.

So much for the Constitution folks.”

“A safer gun would be one that doesn't shoot. The usefulness of guns would be indirectly proportional to their safty.
LOOK OUT!!!!!”

“A safer gun would be one that doesn't shoot.

Tell that to Yugoslavia.”

“I stated a fact and you want to paint me as causing history . I don't want to take your guns. I do not like the NRA it's like the Sierra club it steps too far from it's original purpose.”

“VENTURA, California (AP) -- A teacher who kept a 40 mm shell on his desk as a paperweight blew off part of his hand when he apparently used the object to try to squash a bug, authorities say.

The 5-inch-long shell exploded Monday while Robert Colla was teaching 20 to 25 students at an adult education class.

Part of Colla's right hand was severed and he suffered severe burns and minor shrapnel wounds to his forearms and torso, fire Capt. Tom Weinell said. No one else was injured. He was reported in stable condition at a hospital.

The teacher slammed the shell down in an attempt to kill something that was buzzing or crawling across the desk, said Fire Marshal Glen Albright.

Colla found the 40 mm round while hunting years ago and "obviously he didn't think the round was live," said Dennis Huston, who teaches computer design alongside Colla.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/04/paperweight.explosion.ap/index.html”

“Not the brightest bulb. How stupid to assume it wasn't live.”

“Yet another Darwin Award winner want-a-be.”

“NRA member or Teacher? I am thinking since it reported a TEACHER and he was hunting "years ago".”

“Not to mention not all hunters are NRA members, in fact most of the hunters I know (myself included) aren't NRA members.”

“Oh come on USA! That's a stretch (albeit a funny one) even for a troll like you! LOL!”

“The first time I read this I thought it said 'head' not 'hand' ... dang, he missed!”

“Maybe a better title for the thread would be gun owners are irresponsible regardless of their NRA affiliation.”

“Nah, I like the NRA one. Start a new one!”

“The parents of the 18-year-old who fatally shot a Fairfax County police detective and wounded another officer Monday are not responding to police efforts to question them about why the young man targeted police officers and how he obtained the weapons used in the ambush, authorities said yesterday.

......

Police said Kennedy was armed with an AK-47-style assault rifle, a high-powered hunting rifle and five handguns during the attack.

Hours after the shooting, police found nine more guns in the Kennedy house, as well as ammunition, hunting knives, a bayonet and a locked gun safe.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101885.html
last edited: 5/24/06 5:26:38 PM”

“interesting section of the book "freakonmics" regarding guns and childhood deaths. Your home swimming pool is statistically about 10,000 times more likely to kill a child than your firearm. BTW most stats that relate to "children" being killed by firearms include through the age of 19. So that is including 2 years of legal adulthood. Not that there is any less trgedy but the perception is certainly skewed with those numbers.”

“I'm sure they are terrified of lawsuits, Y2. The medical facility he was at before the killings screwed up big time. I'm sure they're gonna get nailed. And rightly so.”

“I didn't see anything about the NRA in there. Honesty in reporting isn't the left's strong suite.”

“Our liberty is under attack from those people whose faith in God tells them how to think and those people who have faith that they are their own God. The erosion of our right to bear arms seems similar to the erosion of our ability to choose abortion. However, abortion is not a right specifically guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

As with most beliefs espoused by the left, there appears to be no consistent logic to “gun control.” It appears to be a purely emotional response. It appears to be a visceral, angry reaction. There is no similarly consistent reaction against mothers who abort their babies or cars (more people die in car accidents each year than by accidental gun deaths).

As in most leftists’ positions, “gun control” appears to be an issue of control. Their emotional discomfort causes these people to want to control the safety of others. In this case by rewriting the U.S. Constitution at the expense of Liberty. That is, the constitutionally guaranteed right of citizens to protect themselves from violent crime.

I choose to carry for the same reason I have homeowners and automobile insurance. Chances are very high that I will not need to use these things. But if I need them, and don’t have them, the cost is unacceptably high to me. That is a choice I’ve made as a responsible citizen.

This doesn’t matter to the typical leftist: “Guns are bad so don’t do ‘em…mmmmokay” is their mantra. They use their emotional resentments to control the lives of others in the name of safety for all. Safety belts, motorcycle helmets, warning labels, FDA, Federal Flood Insurance… their list, and the loss of liberty it brings, is endless. All this in the name of protecting us from ourselves.

Do these nearsighted people believe that the police will always be there to protect them? Do these people believe that they will always be able to avoid violent criminals? If so, why don’t they make a decision not to arm themselves while trusting the actions of responsible individuals who wish to protect themselves? Trust has no place in their minds; it’s all about control with leftists. Faith in their beliefs tells them when something is in society’s best interest; no discussion, mind made up, and they will control our choices. I am sure that these folks believe deeply that they know the answer to society’s problems and how best to fix them.

It has never surprised me that EVERY police officer, with whom I have ever talked, favors the law abiding individual citizen’s right to arm himself. That doesn’t stop the mindset of the typical leftist, because they just know best what is good for us all.

It was sick resentments that enabled many leftists to spit on soldiers returning from Vietnam, and to label them as “baby killers.” It is sick resentments that enable many leftists to dislike the people they look to for protection against violent criminals, the police. And it feeds their resentment towards any responsible citizen who decides to carry a weapon for defense, even if that person decides never to use it. That doesn’t seem to matter. “You carry a weapon, and you are wrong.”

There were people like this who were against the Revolutionary War. There were people like this who were against WWII. There were people like this who were against the Vietnam War. There will always be people like this and they don’t seem to be able to discern the difference between these conflicts. There is no cause for violence in their minds. Maybe in their world of sugar plum fairies, theaters, and art museums, leftists just believe that everyone can be behaviorally modified to act in a way that reflects the greater good of society.

In the name of Liberty and personal responsibility come certain risks. Take away all risk, and you take away all Liberty. If we could prevent people from engaging in any behavior that has the potential to be harmful, we would lose our freedom. This is something about which the totalitarian leftists never seem to realize or care.

I am not a control freak. I am unwilling to prevent leftists from driving their cars in order to prevent the chance that they will kill humans or animals. But I’d be willing to strike a deal with these folks. I won’t carry weapons in their presence (where legally allowed by The State) if they won’t bring their cars into mine.”

“Review of Jerry Lembcke's book
A Los Angeles Times book reviewer wrote:

"The image is ingrained: A Vietnam veteran, arriving home from the war, gets off a plane only to be greeted by an angry mob of antiwar protesters yelling, 'Murderer!' and 'Baby killer!' Then out of the crowd comes someone who spits in the veteran's face. The only problem, according to Jerry Lembcke, is that no such incident has ever has been documented. It is instead, says Lembcke, a kind of urban myth that reflects our lingering national confusion over the war." [2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spitting_on_soldiers_during_the_Vietnam_War

Although Nexis overflows with references to protesters gobbing on Vietnam vets, and Bob Greene's 1989 book Homecoming: When the Soldiers Returned From Vietnam counts 63 examples of protester spitting, Jerry Lembcke argues that the story is bunk in his 1998 book The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam (click here to buy it). Lembcke, a professor of sociology at Holy Cross and a Vietnam vet, investigated hundreds of news accounts of antiwar activists spitting on vets. But every time he pushed for more evidence or corroboration from a witness, the story collapsed--the actual person who was spat on turned out to be a friend of a friend. Or somebody's uncle. He writes that he never met anybody who convinced him that any such clash took place.

While Lembcke doesn't prove that nobody ever expectorated on a serviceman--you can't prove a negative, after all--he reduces the claim to an urban myth. In most urban myths, the details morph slightly from telling to telling, but at least one element survives unchanged. In the tale of the spitting protester, the signature element is the location: The protester almost always ambushes the serviceman at the airport--not in a park, or at a bar, or on Main Street. Also, it's not uncommon for the insulted serviceman to have flown directly in from Vietnam.

http://www.slate.com/id/1005224/”