Use the link to bypass the gastric overflow from L.A.
It's not guns or ammo, per se, it's the NRA(101 posts)
Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:35 PM #
And away we go.....Looking forward to 9 pages of fighting.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:50 PM #
You love it.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:51 PM #
Should play a game called guess the tags and who left them. Obviously the first two are you.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:52 PM #
Private Joker: Are those... live rounds?
Private Gomer Pyle: Seven-six-two millimeter. Full metal jacket.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:54 PM #
Private Joker: My thoughts drift back to erect nipple wet dreams about Mary Jane Rottencrotch and the Great Homecoming Fuck Fantasy. I am so happy that I am alive, in one piece and short. I'm in a world of shit... yes. But I am alive. And I am not afraid.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:55 PM #
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Today... is Christmas! There will be a magic show at zero-nine-thirty! Chaplain Charlie will tell you about how the free world will conquer Communism with the aid of God and a few Marines! God has a hard-on for Marines because we kill everything we see! He plays His games, we play ours! To show our appreciation for so much power, we keep heaven packed with fresh souls! God was here before the Marine Corps! So you can give your heart to Jesus, but your ass belongs to the Corps! Do you ladies understand?Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:55 PM #
Private Cowboy: Tough break for Hand Job. He was all set to get shipped out on a medical.
Private Joker: What was the matter with him?
Private Cowboy: He was jerkin' off ten times a day.
Private Eightball: No shit. At least ten times a day.
Private Cowboy: Last week he was sent down to Da Nang to see the Navy head shrinker, and the crazy fucker starts jerking off in the waiting room. Instant Section Eight. He was just waiting for his papers to clear division.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:57 PM #
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Are you quitting on me? Well, are you? Then quit, you slimy fucking walrus-looking piece of shit! Get the fuck off of my obstacle! Get the fuck down off of my obstacle! NOW! MOVE IT! Or I'm going to rip your balls off, so you cannot contaminate the rest of the world! I will motivate you, Private Pyle, IF IT SHORT-DICKS EVERY CANNIBAL ON THE CONGO!Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:59 PM #
BTW, this is the best Christmas movie ever...Posted on December 15, 2012 - 07:59 PM #
Private Cowboy: Don't shit me, man!
Private Joker: I wouldn't shit you. You're my favorite turd!Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:00 PM #
Once an ass, always an ass.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:21 PM #
I don't want to get rid of guns or make the ammo expensive, I just want to get rid of the NRA. They are the kingpins of hypocrisy and they will be brought down because it is the blood on their hands that they can't wipe off that is going to take them out via the best method possible. Money. The citizens of this country are going to stop bankrolling them. Wait. It will take some time, but the momentum for this has been in motion for a while.
"The NRA is nothing but a very successful, very powerful lobby who gives less than two shits about the Constitution or our 2nd amendment rights, it's all about lining their pockets with money. The NRA disallows honest discussion on these issues because they gear up their propaganda machine and scream, "They're taking away our guns!" and people who believe like Charlton Heston did, "I'll give you my gun when you take it from my cold, dead hands," are becoming more prevalent because of their propaganda machine.
Does anyone honestly believe that as American's we need to own weaponry similar to what the military or police use? Is that really necessary when it comes to defending life or property? Does a well-maintained 9mm handgun or a 12-gauge shotgun not do enough damage should we need to defend ourselves? Does the average American citizen need access to grenades and tactical gear? Does the average American citizen need the "right" to purchase a 100-round drum? Common sense tells me no, we don't need to be entitled to purchase these things. However, if you answer yes to any of these questions then, IMO, you're buying into the propaganda of the NRA, helping the CEO's and the President of the NRA that much richer and that much more powerful. If you believe that the 2nd amendment is more important than having a national database and background checks, then you're buying into the propaganda. There is no reason, other than inconvenience, that being able to own a gun should not be as strict a process as necessary. "
"advocate for mandatory background checks, closing the gun show loophole, banning cop-killer bullets and bullet clips that hold 100 shells, making it easier for police to trace guns that are used in a crime and to revoke the licenses of corrupt gun dealers, and making sure people on the terrorist watch list cannot buy guns. These are all common sense steps to protect public safety that can be achieved while not infringing on the right to own a gun that the Supreme Court found in the 2nd Amendment. And large majorities of Americans, even gun owners, support such common sense efforts to protect public safety.
The blocking point on these issues, however, is the NRA, which refuses to accept that with rights come responsibilities. Instead, the organization uses its $200 million per year lobbying budget to defeat even the most benign gun control regulations, and to falsely accuse even the mildest supporters of common sense gun control of being out to take away everyone’s guns. The NRA even goes so far as to use its lobbying power to muzzle efforts by government agencies to fund research into violence and ways to prevent it."
"December 12, 2012
To The National Rifle Association:
My support of the NRA has come to an end. I’m not renewing my membership. I can not relate to your one tracked political agenda and refuse to become a single-issue voter. There is too much at risk. For a number of years, I have received your monthly publication, The American Hunter. It as now become too embarrassing to have this magazine in my house. If any organization, Right or Left Wing, is trying to promote their agenda and recruit membership, THE NAME OF THE GAME IS CREDIBILITY!
Review what you have published and signed your name to in just this past year. (Winter issues Theme) come to the Annual National get together this spring in St. Louis. That was an understandable promotion of the event; but even with all of its resources we have in the United States today, WHO DID THE Nra’s well paid leadership select for the key note speakers? Where they professionals well versed in constitutional law: judges, professors, law enforcement people, psychologist, urban mayors, etc? No, they featured two business buffoons.
The 2012 show started with the ever popular ranting and raving Ted Nugent, whose most memorable prediction that night was “If Obama is elected again, that next year at this time I would be either dead or in jail”! Credibility? My guess is that he will be in a padded room wearing a camouflage straight jacket.
The other NRA mouthpiece was the emotionally stable — Glen “Conspiracy” Beck. Golden Glen’s nightly carnival act could not even keep him on the Nations most successful propaganda machine — “The Fair and Balanced” channel. Credibility? I can’t relate to these showbiz entertainers. They are expert cheerleaders when lecturing to only a selected audience. They will say anything they feel will help them to become more financially sound. No pro and con thoughts, no practical answers and no long term solutions; One sided, uncontested scripted rhetoric.
(Spring Issue Theme) I thought this issue after the Beck/Uncle Ted show was interesting; no mention of the sixty year old Junior Higher and only one small photo of cry baby Beck. Instead, there were nice flattering photos of some of Americas’ Governors that are basically “Tea People” yes men.
Our answer to the gun ownership controversy in this country is in education and Law enforcement. Oddly enough one of the photos was the right wing puppet, Gov. Scott Walker (Wis.) . Walker’s answer to the education and law enforcement challenge is to cut teacher’s and police officer’s wages and cheat them out of their pensions. Credibility??
Are less police on the street the right approach? Or how about Florida’s “Zimmerman’s Solution — The armed citizen approach: Everyone should be packing, if your packen no one will push you around. Right??
(Fall issue) The October 2012 issue was the coup do grace. It was the high light of the year when it came to your brand of “Fair and Balanced” professionalism. It was really very cleaver. On the cover was a picture of President Obama’s face printed on a check being written out to the NRA. The cover story was “Give Obama his walking papers”. The NRA spent months demonizing Obama over every controversy involving gun or hunting laws. Strangely during that same month (Oct) , Outdoor Life summarized both Obama’s and Romney’s views on gun control and came to the conclusion that both candidate’s opinions were very similar. Even with that credibility shaker, the best was yet to come.
(Page 10) “The Armed Citizen”; better known as the monthly “shoot the bad guy feature!” You better buy a gun now and be prepared. They are out to get you. This scare tactic has worked well for Golden Glen for years.
The October issue tactics were working well; create one common enemy and scare potential crime victims. But page 32 was the clincher. Ron Spooners article “Coon Hunting” was one of the best subliminal messages targeting a specific group of voters I have ever seen. That was either a brilliant “get even” tactic or just plain stupid. Who is the NRA aligning with? Are you promoting only political allies that will never say anything until the right wing screwballs approve it? Credibility? There are reasonable moderate GOP people out there that understand cooperation, compromise, and the need for bipartisanship. These invisible people can’t show any signs of individualism or creativity, because if they do the “Fair and Balanced” Media will destroy them politically and personally. How would the NRA rate these modern GOP people on your famous “Voters Guide Grading Scale”?
I am amazed at what you find credible. In the past few weeks the GOP has done a lot of soul searching — no results yet. How about you?
So the next time you call and ask for a $50 donation, maybe we should have some collective bargaining first.
* Note: The difficult part about writing this letter was the editing. The original letter was 2 ½ times longer but it did include some incredible characters such as: Ham Rove, Cheerleader Sara, Switch-A-Roo John, Willy O’Really, St. Sean the Martyr, Alley Cat Newt, Slush the Rut. I thought if the letter was too long you wouldn’t print it in your next issue."
"The NRA, they said, thrives on crisis-driven fundraising appeals that warn about government coming to take away all your guns. What would happen to this fundraising machine if the Supreme Court said the Constitution prevented government from ever doing that? To many gun owners, the NRA seemed more interested in its own finances than in protecting those gun owners’ rights."
"2012 is hardly the first election to prove that the NRA is not the political force it pretends to be. Paul Waldman analyzed NRA influence in federal elections from 2004-2010 and found that "NRA contributions to candidates have virtually no impact on the outcome of Congressional races." Waldman also disproved the widely-repeated claims that the NRA was key to the GOP's takeover of the House in 1994, and to the 2000 presidential race. When one looks at the facts, it is clear that both races turned on partisan politics, not guns.
To those of us who study the facts, it is not surprising that the NRA is so ineffective delivering votes against candidates who support common sense gun laws. After all, the vast majorities of NRA members and other gun owners support the common sense gun laws that the NRA vehemently opposes. So no matter how many millions the NRA spends to tell gun owners that their freedom is at stake in an election, not many are buying it.
As it always does, after the returns came in last Tuesday the NRA spin machine claimed that it did far better in the elections than the evidence showed. Like the Wizard who yelled, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" when Toto revealed him, the gun lobby will keep propagating the myth of their electoral might long after it has been exposed as untrue. But one lesson of 2012 is that facts matter, and that the American people across the political spectrum are serious about addressing real solutions to our national problems.
And now that the reality of what is behind the curtain of the NRA has become so clear, we can only hope that Congress comes to the realization as Dorothy and her friends did -- that it had the courage, heart and brains to do something about this problem the entire time."
Here come the whining righties trying to spin this differently or attack me or try and impeach all of these different sources that are coming to the same conclusion.
Ba bye NRA. Better pack more than a pistol this time.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:21 PM #
Eat your heart out, Trix! Looks like LA's got you beat in the chain-posting department....Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:41 PM #
Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments
united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key
component of gun law reforms.
Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in
rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether
there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.
Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in
firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings.
Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.
Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates
of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per
100 000 population.
Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in
the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the
reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but
not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution
effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm
homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws.
Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass
shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the
same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of
reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides.
Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:48 PM #
Thanks Andy for reminding me that my NRA dues are due.
I'll get a check off to them tomorrow.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:55 PM #
Like you can afford it...You'd be better off to save for retirement so that Social Security isn't your only income. But, I'm sure the wife's union pension will save your ass.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 08:59 PM #
You should have given them much more and way sooner. The NRA lobbied and lost in Australia.
Defeating that lobby resulted in very sane, practical, effective gun policy. Interestingly, it's hard to find citizens of that nation who are unhappy with the current state of things, and where they are they are generally kooks, and if they go to the outback, get to have reasonable guns for hunting and protection. Go figure.
Frankly Skybill, if you NRA guys can't actually have a conversation, and you can't and never have, then defeat is the only option.
The status quo is unacceptable.
On the other hand, should the NRA actually have that conversation and promote sane, effective gun policy, I would register and donate myself.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:10 PM #
For someone that is supposedly an intelligent person you sure show what a dumbass you are on a regular basis.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:11 PM #
Remember that when you get told people are tired of hearing there are no solutions and that we should respond to mass shootings with more guns.
Most of the world laughs their ass off.
And again, if you want to talk solutions, great! Let's have that conversation. See how that works?
The Aussie regulate and buy back legislation is proven effective and well studied, cited globally as a model on how to deal with this kind of shit.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:15 PM #
The NRA is doomed to obsolescence. Count on it.
" I recently attended a Friends of the NRA dinner. There wasn’t a single minority in the building. As we say in these parts, it was OFWGs (Old Fat White Guys) uber alles. With all the excitement that entails.
I make that two “challenges” for the NRA’s future: recruiting minorities and replacing white guys heading for the happy hunting grounds in the sky. Would a Call of Duty player have had a good time at the FOTNRA gig? Not unless they brought their XBox.
The NRA would do well to consider the possibility that their endless “the gun grabbers are coming!” alarms turn-off (or fail to excite) their caucasian core. White Americans growing up without draconian gun control—thanks in large part to the NRA—must wonder WTF the NRA’s on about."
Yup, Bill, you go ahead and keep sending them money while they slowly become as obsolete as the Republican Party.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:19 PM #
Ok. Since the lieberals want to put restrictions and/or bans on the gun owners, are you willing to discuss putting restrictions on an activity that ALWAYS leaves at least 1 dead?
Give and take you know.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:21 PM #
I think Skybill9 probably actually meant to direct that comment at the Village Troll, not you.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:22 PM #
" are you willing to discuss "
Start a thread and see who comes but don't try and hijack this one.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:23 PM #
"Yup, Bill, you go ahead and keep sending them money while they slowly become as obsolete as the Republican Party."
Thanks Andy, I will. Especially since they are responsible for many democrat losses. That makes every dollar worth it.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:25 PM #
Oh, BTW, I also support GOA and JFPO. Google them.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:26 PM #
Go ahead and piss your money away. It's your right. And that's what the NRA counts on. Poor, broke, and obsolete white workers like yourself donating money to an organization that supports murder.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:27 PM #
You're showing your ass again. You have no idea what you are talking about. (As usual)Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:30 PM #
Just reviewing what you've already told us. Truth hurts?Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:31 PM #
was responding to Bill's post above yours. Where he attempts to initiate a hijack of the thread so he doesn't have to address any of the points under discussion.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:45 PM #
I would posit that any Commonwealth country would have a dramatically different response to gun control measures than would the United States. There is just an entirely different view of government and civic duty in Canada versus here. I think that the difference relates to the constitutional monarchy and how citizens view the "Crown" versus the system in the U.S. There is just a willingness to concede personal liberties in exchange for greater security.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 09:47 PM #
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin FranklinPosted on December 15, 2012 - 10:03 PM #
I was responding to Bill's post above yours. Where he attempts to initiate a hijack of the thread so he doesn't have to address any of the points under discussion."
Stupid router latency strikes again! NCurses!
(I blanked my post above.)Posted on December 15, 2012 - 10:07 PM #
Sorry Andy, membership in the NRA is still growing.
They've been around since 1871 and will continue to be around long past the point where we have all expired.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 10:17 PM #
Growth in the NRA and growth in gun deaths? Do you think there's a correlation??Posted on December 15, 2012 - 10:21 PM #
This topic was much better when it was about full metal jacket. Now it's turned into the typical "my penis bigger then your's".Posted on December 15, 2012 - 11:37 PM #
And for the record mine is.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 11:39 PM #
C.H., my little penis more than balances the giant prick in the post above yours.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 11:45 PM #
Here's how I see it:
I am no fan of giving up liberty in trade for security. However, that was written in the contexts of governments, corporations and other entities who would threaten the Constitutional government we have and it's radical assertion that we are in fact free people who agree to self-govern because we are better for it and frankly, nobody else has standing to govern us.
Where we are not better for liberty, we've consistently constrained it in various ways while not undermining the God given rights, or natural rights (depending on one's theology) we all hold dear.
This happens with speech, our first and primary Amendment BTW.
Evan, you are quite right and I'm not suggesting we take the route the Aussies did directly. I am suggesting the basis for both greater control and a reduction in the number of guns will absolutely address the problem, contrary to the "we need more guns" and "nothing can be done" arguments so often heard.
If we can't actually have a conversation about this that is rational and productive, then I also submit we are too fucking stupid to have such an unbridled gun policy, and if those people who treasure that policy can't get their basic priorities in order and help the rest of us resolve this mess, they deserve the regulation they will eventually get.
The current status quo is unacceptable. There are no excuses. Really.Posted on December 15, 2012 - 11:46 PM #
The NRA is also in trouble because it is about to further alienate whom has been for over a hundred years its strongest ally, the business community.
Republican-dominated legislatures in at least four states are planning to consider allowing employees to bring guns to work, turning two of the party’s traditional constituencies against each other: gun-rights supporters and businesses.
The measures, backed by the National Rifle Association, would allow workers in Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina and Pennsylvania to keep the weapons locked and hidden in their cars in employee parking areas. Seventeen states have approved similar measures since 2003, according to a tally by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in San Francisco.
The laws extend gun rights onto property controlled by private employers, prompting opposition from companies such as FedEx Corp. (FDX) and Volkswagen AG. (VOW) The proposals are creating a dilemma for Republicans, said Robert Spitzer, chairman of the political science department at the State University of New York at Cortland.
“The gun rights movement is now colliding against traditional business interests,” Spitzer said. “It’s a direct clash between a values issue and an economic one and both of these competing forces are particularly strong within the Republican Party.”
The conflict has torn allegiances even among legislators who consider themselves strong backers of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to bear arms, as happened this year in Tennessee when the NRA, the Fairfax, Virginia-based pro-gun organization, helped defeat Republican House caucus leader Debra Maggart in a primary. Maggart, who says she is a gun-rights supporter, had opposed a workplace firearms law because of concerns that it violated business and property rights.
“I am the most pro-Second Amendment person you can meet,” Maggart said in an interview. “I had a perfect voting record with the NRA.”
Guns-to-work legislation has failed in 12 states in the past two years, including Alabama, Tennessee, Pennsylvania and South Carolina, where lawmakers say they’ll push the measures as legislatures convene next year.
Darrell Scott, a lobbyist with the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce in Columbia, said the bill is widely opposed by the businesses in his state because it limits their ability to control to set policy on their property.
In Tennessee, FedEx, Volkswagen and the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & Industry worked to defeat or modify the workplace gun law, opposing the NRA and the Tennessee Firearms Association, a group that promotes the right to bear arms.
“We believe that a property owner’s right to provide a safe work environment trumps an individual’s right to possess a firearm on the owner’s property,” said Maury Donahue, a spokeswoman for Memphis, Tennessee-based FedEx, in an e-mail.
Reid Albert, in charge of security for Volkswagen’s Chattanooga operations, told lawmakers the measure could endanger 3,300 workers who park in company lots. Dismissals and parking lot arguments might both become more dangerous if guns are allowed in cars at the workplace, he said.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 12:31 AM #
Yep, and count on seeing the number of incidents of "worker gone postal" increase as a function of that legislation passed.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 01:01 AM #
BTW: I've thought about this some. A great answer to the NRA position of more or less constant vilification of anyone suggesting any kind of solutions is our old friend personification.
It's time to start telling the stories, linking the ugly back to the policy and calling people to action to break down the idea that nothing can be done. There is lots to be done, the question is what and in what order for which reasons?
IMHO, there isn't one single impact point. There are lots of factors contributing to the escalation of gun violence. They range from the number of guns and lack of accountability surrounding them, through people and their generally poor education, and socio-economic factors, such as flat to declining wages, coupled with a pretty solid war on working people and steady increases in most of our personal risk.
As we all know, those things are combining to form quite the ugly pressure cooker and people are cracking right and left for all sorts of reasons. When they act out, which isn't OK but understandable, one of the ways they can choose to act out is gun violence. There is your problem in a nut-shell, expressed in a general way that isn't an easily marginalized "those other people" type argument.
This is about EVERYBODY and the general state of things being shitty enough to be an issue and the guns being there as one of many ugly outlets.
I find it difficult to frame that mess in simple terms. Time for really brutal, ugly, pointed, educational stores with clear calls to action on all fronts, regularly citing the NRA as a primary source of obstruction and our general lack of progress on resolving the matter.
It is pretty easy to toss the usual talking points about, keeping things distant where the core impact is always "somebody else" Quite another to actually have to look people in the eye and deny basic life experiences. This is where we need to go as people.
Just start telling the stories so people can unify around some basic things that can help, whatever they are and take no shit from naysayers. Frankly, the core question there is, "Just how many more people need to be gunned down before we value them above gun related dogma and impractical, harmful ideological positions?"
Ask it. Ask it a lot, and tell your friends to ask it, encouraging that rational conversation. We must have it.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 01:17 AM #
The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
The NRA fully supports the right of every citizen to have motive and opportunity for the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Title 22 of the U.S. Code, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.”
The NRA believes that the 2nd Amendment must be protected even if it leads to premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
In Joint Pub 3-07.2, Antiterrorism, (24 November 2010) the Department of Defense defines it as "the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence to instill fear and coerce governments or societies."
The NRA will fight to the bitter end to ensure everyone has the right to take full advantage of the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence to instill fear and coerce governments or societies.
The Patriot Act defines domestic terrorism activities as "activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S."
In the wake of every tragedy, the NRA dismisses questions and shuts down discussion about activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.
Tamar Meisels is a Professor in the Department of Political Science at Tel Aviv University. She defines terrorism as "the intentional random murder of defenseless non-combatants, with the intent of instilling fear of mortal danger amidst a civilian population as a strategy designed to advance political ends."
Perhaps every loony out there with a gun doesn't have a defined political agenda, but the NRA certainly has one. Fighting against any sort of common sense gun control is the very foundation of their political platform. Passive complicity in the murders of little children does not make one an accomplice to those crimes, but the NRA is dedicated to ensuring that conditions for horrific violence exist in perpetuity.
If a homicidal maniac has access to a gun for a litany of reasons that are entirely politically motivated, how is the NRA not a terrorist organization?Posted on December 16, 2012 - 08:10 AM #
WordPosted on December 16, 2012 - 08:38 AM #
"The biggest gun problem in the United States?
Law-abiding gun owners deserve better than an obstructionist, fear-driven organization that has about as much to do with the 2nd Amendment as I do.
By fueling paranoia, the NRA has convinced even non-members that ANY gun law is really a step toward having federal agents busting down doors to confiscate people's guns.
The NRA has blocked efforts to end what's called "straw sales": Buying handguns in bulk so they can then be turned around and sold to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to pass a background check.
The NRA has stymied attempts to shut down the ability for anyone attending some gun shows to walk out with any weapon their money can buy without so much as having to show a drivers license.
Laws to limit individual handgun sales to one a month: Blocked.
Laws to ban semi-automatic weapons that can be converted to automatic fire: Blocked.
U.S. gun laws are like Swiss cheese, with enough holes to slide a machine gun through.
The NRA has deluded people into believing that the 2nd Amendment means if it has a trigger and a barrel, everyone should be allowed to own one.
Want to stop the gun carnage in this country?
Find a more reasonable gun rights organization to replace the NRA."Posted on December 16, 2012 - 12:58 PM #
Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 02:15 PM #
Eat your heart out, Trix! Looks like LA's got you beat in the chain-posting department....
Nice!Posted on December 16, 2012 - 02:32 PM #
A lung disease caused by the inhalation of very fine silica dust, causing inflammation in the lungs.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 02:34 PM #
LA isn't a bad guy he just has many mental issues he needs to sort out.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 02:35 PM #
"The NRA has blocked efforts to end what's called "straw sales": Buying handguns in bulk so they can then be turned around and sold to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to pass a background check."
Please show proof of this. You won't be able to because it is ALREADY ILLEGAL to do this.
"The NRA has stymied attempts to shut down the ability for anyone attending some gun shows to walk out with any weapon their money can buy without so much as having to show a drivers license."
Wrongo again dude. To buy a gun at a gun show you have to have the EXACT SAME background check done that you would if you walked into ANY guns store to purchase a gun. The ONLY exception is if you are buying from a private party which does not apply either at a gun show or at your house. Don't believe me? Let's go to the gun show at the Expo center and I'll prove it.
"Laws to limit individual handgun sales to one a month: Blocked." Good. As it should be. How about we limit beer to 1 six pack a month or wine and spirits to 1 bottle a month because someone MIGHT drink and drive?
"The NRA has deluded people into believing that the 2nd Amendment means if it has a trigger and a barrel, everyone should be allowed to own one."
BULLSHIT.Posted on December 16, 2012 - 02:40 PM #
You must log in to post.