The NRA: Damned if you do, damned if you don't [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : The NRA: Damned if you do, damned if you don't


Hamguy
12-23-2012, 07:23
This organization can't buy a break.

They RESPECTFULLY remain silent immediately after Sandy Hook and were widely criticized for it, while the media and the left jumped on the tragedy to push their extremist agendas.

Then when they did have something to say, something that was actionable and cut right to the core of the problem (unsecured public school buildings and imaginary "gun free zones"), they are widely criticized as insensitive and counterproductive.

I'm not saying we should weep for the NRA, but I don't think the anti-gunners (media included) would have accepted any statement short of "We give up. You can have all the guns. We won't try to stop you from trampling on the Constitution."

HerrGlock
12-23-2012, 07:30
That anyone expected any different reaction to the NRA's decisions is the actual news item here.

In order to beat someone or an organization, one of the techniques that has worked is demonizing anything and anyone who holds a different opinion. Assassinate the character and you minimize the argument.

Jonesee
12-23-2012, 07:43
The common factor in high profile gun attacks has not been "schools".

It has been the ability of mentally unstable people to get possession of guns. That is where the NRA needs to concentrate.

Newtown, Colorado theatre and Gabby Giffords were accomplished by a mentally ill person with a gun.

Spiffums
12-23-2012, 07:44
Oh well look on the bright side, Tomorrow on Fox and Friends we get to see Geraldo rip up his NRA membership card because they didn't come out screaming for a ban on "Assault Weapons".

wvtarheel
12-23-2012, 07:46
I agree with Herrglock that anything the NRA said or did would be widely criticized by the anti-second amendment mainstream media.

BUT I think the NRA could have handled it better. They needed to suggest some alternatives and although personally I think armed guards in schools is a good idea, you knew that idea wasn't going to make the anti-2nd am. crowd happy. I mean the president takes five or six guys with so-called "assault rifles" and high capacity semi-automatic handguns with him everywhere he goes, but putting ONE in each school is terrible and dangerous? A bunch of BS, but you knew that would be the anti-2nd Am. crowd's reaction.

The NRA should have put forward a couple of responsible regulations that could be looked at. Require anything that is semi-automatic and has a clip of larger than ten rounds be kept in a secured container when not in transport for use or on someone's person. That is pretty reasonable and is something responsible gun owners do anyway. A regulation like that would undoubtedly save MORE lives than reinstating the assault weapons ban, since it would prevent accidental shootings, and would probably reduce stolen guns falling into the wrong hands.

NRA could suggest requiring background checks for sales at gun shows, with an exception for CCW permit holders. Again, a pain in the ass regulation but the politicians could claim they are closing a "loophole" while not infringing on anyone's rights.

Personally I'm against increasing any gun control, but if a compromise is to be reached that includes retaining access to firearms we currently have, the pro-second amendment side of the argument MUST have some alternatives to suggest, and "more guns in schools" was probably not the smartest call.

Fear Night
12-23-2012, 07:50
I've heard the mentally ill database idea mentioned in favor from Liberal groups.
I've heard the violent video game and movie idea mentioned in favor from Liberal groups.
I've heard the armed police officer in schools idea mentioned in favor from Liberal groups.

So we would think that would be some common ground, right?

Well, apparently, the Liberal groups have all changed their tune after the NRA agrees with them on those points. Now they are saying blaming violent video games is crazy, and putting armed guards in schools is the most asinine thing they have ever heard. It's only about the GUNS now to them. What gives? :dunno:

ojabog
12-23-2012, 07:55
I thought the NRA's response was unconscionable. Moronic tirade they made every gun owner look like militant, unfeeling monsters. I don't support restriction on guns owned by honest law abiding citizens, but tact was called for in that moment.

Gallium
12-23-2012, 08:06
I've heard the mentally ill database idea mentioned in favor from Liberal groups.
I've heard the violent video game and movie idea mentioned in favor from Liberal groups.
...


I always wonder, where is the volumunous amounts of research and scientific study on the effects of violent video games on teens and /or the mentally suspect?

Where is the broad body of research on how saturating the airwaves about these killings affect and effect those who are mentally ill?

Where are the proposed changes to the law to likewise constrain the 1st amendment to protect the kids as they are planning to gut the essence of the 2nd?

Why and how did we come to be governed by idiots?

Gallium
12-23-2012, 08:07
I thought the NRA's response was unconscionable. Moronic tirade they made every gun owner look like militant, unfeeling monsters. I don't support restriction on guns owned by honest law abiding citizens, but tact was called for in that moment.

I disagree with you. If you wish I can send you $35 for a refund on this year's membership, and you can leave the organization.

HerrGlock
12-23-2012, 08:10
I thought the NRA's response was unconscionable. Moronic tirade they made every gun owner look like militant, unfeeling monsters. I don't support restriction on guns owned by honest law abiding citizens, but tact was called for in that moment.

So start your own group, grow it to over 4 million members and make your own statement.

sjfrellc
12-23-2012, 08:33
The NRA should have put forward a couple of responsible regulations that could be looked at. Require anything that is semi-automatic and has a clip of larger than ten rounds be kept loaded and within easy reach for self defense . That is pretty reasonable and is something responsible gun owners should do anyway. A regulation like that would undoubtedly save MORE lives than reinstating the assault weapons ban, since it would prevent law abiding citizens from being attacked by criminals.

Fixed it for you. These guns should be renamed HD-15's and be called home defense weapons. It is beyond me why there isn't more talk of these being defensive weapons.

HerrGlock
12-23-2012, 11:58
The NRA should have put forward a couple of responsible regulations that could be looked at.

No. Gun owners have been compromising since 1934. No more.

I am tired of the NRA having to play nice and the gun banners get to chip away with an end result going to be guns are illegal.

Why the hell should we punish 80 million people who have NOT committed any crime for the actions of a few?

RYT 2BER
12-23-2012, 15:33
I thought the NRA's response was unconscionable. Moronic tirade they made every gun owner look like militant, unfeeling monsters. I don't support restriction on guns owned by honest law abiding citizens, but tact was called for in that moment.

I find your post unconscionable and with no tact but I was forced to read it before I knew what was coming.

Now I'm sorry I did.. Very sorry..

And as far as "moronic tirades" go... That's how I would describe your post as well. :wavey:

Kentucky Shooter
12-23-2012, 15:51
A question the anti-second amendment crowd and all of America needs to be asking is this. Why is there a disproportionate number of people today so disenfranchised and so angry that they are killing mass numbers of innocent people before taking their own lives?

Even if the anti-gun crowd got their way and all guns were gone overnight, we would still be left with a bunch of nut jobs who will be left still angry and looking to inflict misery. They would then have to resort to other means to carry out their evil, which there is no shortage of other ways.


Society is producing these nut jobs--- why? It is damn hard to reason with anyone who does not value their own life. And virtually all of these shootings have ended with the death of the perpetrator.


Getting rid of guns will not make these people any safer to be around nor any more well adjusted.

Kentucky Shooter
12-23-2012, 15:53
no. Gun owners have been compromising since 1934. No more.

I am tired of the nra having to play nice and the gun banners get to chip away with an end result going to be guns are illegal.

Why the hell should we punish 80 million people who have not committed any crime for the actions of a few?

amen!!!!!!!

RWBlue
12-23-2012, 15:54
Support and fully endorse the National Rifle Association's "National School Shield" Program.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/support-and-fully-endorse-national-rifle-associations-national-school-shield-program/zDkJjQ12

cowboywannabe
12-23-2012, 15:55
nothing short of a ban will please the media and the leftists. all you can do is fight them tooth and nail every step of the way.

btw, geraldo was never a friend to the 2nd amendment of the constitution....his NRA card is window dressing at best.

nosuchagency
12-23-2012, 16:05
I thought the NRA's response was unconscionable. Moronic tirade they made every gun owner look like militant, unfeeling monsters. I don't support restriction on guns owned by honest law abiding citizens, but tact was called for in that moment.

lord... at least you have the common sense to keep your post to join date ratio in check.