Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > NRA or another grass roots organization to carry the banner?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-28-2010, 11:54 PM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South-central,PA
Posts: 16
Default NRA or another grass roots organization to carry the banner?

I'm a Life Member of the NRA. That said, on the one hand I fear that the organization has compromised their ethics by wading into the deep end of the political arena. They chose this route long ago as the best way to influence the politicians at their own game. The CRKBA, Second Amendment Task Force and such organizations have chosen the grass roots education route to put pressure on the individual reps in government. What are your thoughts?

__________________
ironhat is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 11-29-2010, 12:11 AM   #2
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 16,240
Liked 4481 Times on 2363 Posts
Likes Given: 255

Default

the nra here in wisconsin was all in with the democrats to limit free speech for groups like the tea party folks as soon as the dems gave them a free pass limiting the right to speak about politicians on broadcast and print media. the move to restrict free speech ultimately failed but its just more proof the nra isnt into supporting anything but what they think they have to to keep donations rolling.

__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...

JonM is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 09:51 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saint Louis,Missouri
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ironhat View Post
I'm a Life Member of the NRA. That said, on the one hand I fear that the organization has compromised their ethics by wading into the deep end of the political arena. They chose this route long ago as the best way to influence the politicians at their own game. The CRKBA, Second Amendment Task Force and such organizations have chosen the grass roots education route to put pressure on the individual reps in government. What are your thoughts?
Can you clarify what you mean by "comprimised their ethics"? Specifically, what have they done to make you believe they have done so? As far as I've ever had contact with them, they've always been there actively fighting against any and all measures to restrict gun ownership, but I also don't follow them to terribly closely, either.
__________________
corrinavatan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 10:26 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Desert Hills,Arizony
Posts: 774
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

So you didn't hear that Reagan's post-86 NFA machine gun ban was done with the NRA's OK? I'm two steps above Life in the NRA but they won't be seeing any more of my money and that is based on much newer things I don't approve of them having done. NRA sides with the police first, citizens second. Unfortunately no other organization has has anywhere near the numbers the NRA does. Therefore as Neal Knox believed it would be better to change the NRA from within. This is done through every life member voting for a better guide. The only place I know to find out about that is through the survivors of Neal Knox, his sons...
can be found on google tho...

__________________

Last edited by billdeserthills; 11-29-2010 at 10:50 PM.
billdeserthills is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 11:09 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saint Louis,Missouri
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billdeserthills View Post
So you didn't hear that Reagan's post-86 NFA machine gun ban was done with the NRA's OK? I'm two steps above Life in the NRA but they won't be seeing any more of my money and that is based on much newer things I don't approve of them having done. NRA sides with the police first, citizens second. Unfortunately no other organization has has anywhere near the numbers the NRA does. Therefore as Neal Knox believed it would be better to change the NRA from within. This is done through every life member voting for a better guide. The only place I know to find out about that is through the survivors of Neal Knox, his sons...
can be found on google tho...
Actually, I wasn't aware that the 1986 ban on machine guns was done with the NRA's approval. Which is understandable, as I was two years old at the time, and even when I came of age, I found no need to have a fully automatic machine gun.

I don't think that the law accomplished anything (criminals don't buy their machine guns legally in the first place), but nobody has ever been able to give me a reason why I need to have the right to buy an machine gun.

And correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the NRA under different leadership than what it was in 1986? Or are you citing an old grievance that just dug into your skin back in the day?
__________________

There are two types of idiocy: Believing everything one is told without question, and never listening to what others have to say.

corrinavatan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 11:39 PM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 73
Liked 6 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

" nobody has ever been able to give me a reason why I need to have the right to buy a machine gun."

If thats the case, then do you have the right to buy any other type of gun?
Shall not be infringed means exactly what it sounds like.

__________________
dewey is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 12:05 AM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saint Louis,Missouri
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dewey View Post
" nobody has ever been able to give me a reason why I need to have the right to buy a machine gun."

If thats the case, then do you have the right to buy any other type of gun?
Shall not be infringed means exactly what it sounds like.
"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."

By your rationale, there should be no legal reason why I shouldn't be able to go out and buy a nuclear weapon.

It is an armament. By your "literal" interpretation, I should be able to store a nuke in my basement. Any law that limits me in that right is unconstitutional.

Also, by your own "literal" interpretation, it should be illegal for the USA to ban those convicted of felonies from owning a firearm. Are you making the case that pedophiles, rapists, murderers, etc. should be allowed to have guns when they get out of prison? By your rationale, it is unconstitutional.

Think about your argument. I don't think you realize what you were saying when you said it.

The Supreme Court has upheld, many times, that the Federal and State governments have the power and authority to take rational measures to limit access to weaponry in the interests of preventing crime and promoting safety. And most rational people understand that; there is no reason, for example, that I need a freaking tank in my driveway, or a missile battery in my back yard (assuming I can afford them).

And, unfortunately, the state has a point about banning automatic arms to civilians. More violent crimes that end in death have an automatic weapon involved than any other type of firearm; this was true both before, during, and after all regulations/laws banning machine guns from civilian use.

And tell me, what traditional use of a firearm am I going to use a machine gun for? My 25 round clip in my 10/22 is more than enough to take care of any home defense situation, (and if it isn't, it only takes about 2 seconds to get a second clip in it) and I don't need that many rounds to go hunting. To answer your question, Dewey, it's because a semi-automatic weapon is more than sufficient for protection purposes.

Please, try again. Why do I need the right to own a machine gun? And please don't give me an answer that allows me to have a nuclear weapon, or that allows convicted rapists to own a gun.

Unless, of course, that is actually what you believe in. I hope it isn't.

I will admit I am biased on this: I don't believe that there is any reason for anyone to have a handgun. Handguns are, by and large, designed and used solely for aiming at, shooting, and killing people. Outside a few people who only own handguns for target practice for for pistol hunting, a large majority of people own a handgun so that they can shoot and kill someone. Most hope they don't have to use it, but, hey, it happens.

But then, I'm also a guy whose ideal world is where everyone over the age of 18 should have the right to open carry semi-automatic weapons, and where every police officer has an M-16 or an AK-47. But that's another thread.
__________________

There are two types of idiocy: Believing everything one is told without question, and never listening to what others have to say.


Last edited by corrinavatan; 11-30-2010 at 12:16 AM.
corrinavatan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 12:28 AM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Desert Hills,Arizony
Posts: 774
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Well ordinarilly corrinavaton,
I'd be inside the first page of people crapping all over that post. However I have seen too often (this week) the error of my ways. So instead please forward your newsletter before I crap all over this

__________________
billdeserthills is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 12:32 AM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Desert Hills,Arizony
Posts: 774
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dewey View Post
" nobody has ever been able to give me a reason why I need to have the right to buy a machine gun."

If thats the case, then do you have the right to buy any other type of gun?
Shall not be infringed means exactly what it sounds like.

Do you have any Machine guns??
__________________
billdeserthills is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 01:22 AM   #10
JTJ
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JTJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lake Havasu,Arizona
Posts: 5,280
Liked 1255 Times on 709 Posts
Likes Given: 442

Default

Actually you can buy a machine gun provided your state allows it. I personally know a number of people that legally own fully automatic weapons. I can rent one at the local indoor range. Suppressors are prevelent too. It all depends on how much money you are willing to spend. It would cost me close to $2k to buy a suppressed 10/22.

__________________

Patron Member NRA
"I would not be an old man if I had not been an armed young man." JTJ
If things get better with age, I am approaching magnificent.
You are either pro gun or pro crime.

JTJ is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone heard of the National Gun Rights Organization? dgray64 Legal and Activism 6 07-22-2010 12:40 PM
World Health Organization Moving Ahead on Billions in Internet and Other Taxes opaww Politics, Religion and Controversy 13 05-12-2010 02:55 AM
FirearmsTalk.com Banner notdku The Club House 0 05-25-2007 07:39 PM
Can anyone design a banner ad? notdku The Club House 2 05-02-2007 12:39 AM