General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCongress Cowers to Terrorist-Enabling NRA
That, of course, is how any terrorist group worth its assault plies its trade: Scare the hell out of those who might oppose them. Let them know there will be serious consequences to those who even try, to those who even discuss it. So that anyone even thinking of it becomes crippled with fear to the point they won't do a thing to even appear to threaten the terrorists' agenda in any way.
In this case, of course, it's mostly just political terrorism. But in the real world, given the carnage they continue to enable year after year and tear after tear, it's difficult to say whether the NRA should best be described as terrorist enablers, or just plain terrorists, for the all of the indescribable violence they help perpetuate and, arguably, even help to fund.
Without the help of the NRA and those who fund them, James Holmes, the alleged gunman of Colorado's latest massacre, might not have been able to shoot nearly 70 Americans in a matter of minutes, killing 12 of them, in a sold-out movie theater just after midnight last Friday night. Neither would it have been so simple for Jared Loughner to shoot 19 Americans and kill 6 of them, including nearly murdering Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, AZ just over a year ago, leading to her eventual resignation from Congress.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Congress-Cowers-to-Terrori-by-Brad-Friedman-120723-547.html
sinkingfeeling
(51,275 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)Does that mean that I am a terrorist or a member of a terrorist organization?
It is entirely fair to oppose the NRA views on gun control and the fact that the organization has largely been responsible for many pro-gun laws such as "shall issue" concealed carry and "stand your ground" laws just as it reasonable for Democrats to disagree with Republicans on many issues. I have no problem with that as in nation we all have the right to disagree.
However I feel it is unfair, factually incorrect and insulting to call the NRA a terrorist organization.
I may be a member but I will admit that often I disagree with the propaganda the NRA's political wing, the NRA-ILA, publishes. Consequently I simply pay my yearly dues and do not donate to the organization as my yearly membership fee supports the training programs and promotes shooting sports but only a tiny percentage goes for the political activities of the NRA-ILA.
Our nation is being torn apart by hatred between groups that have different opinions and one reason we make little progress in solving the problems we face is that any compromise is impossible. A little more politeness and respect between those who differ on issues might prove beneficial. That goes for both sides of the gun control issue.
ileus
(15,396 posts)did I leave any out?
Are you a Progressive, progressive, Democrat, or democrat?
99Forever
(14,524 posts)YOUR dollars helped the Aurora Massacre happen. You support a terrorist organization and not just indirectly.
permatex
(1,299 posts)and I'm calling you on it. The NRA had absolutely nothing to do with the massacre, and neither did any of their members. Thats a pretty vile thing to accuse people of without any evidence of it.
Your pretty much calling Spin a terrorist because he belongs to a perfectly legal private org.
You really should be ashamed of yourself.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I am not and never have been a member, but if your logic takes over, we are all lost.
I defend the First Amendment everywhere, at all times, regardless of whether I agree with the positions of those speaking/organizing/engaging in political advocacy and speech. Why don't you read it, and ask yourself why the population back then considered this stuff important?
I'll think it over - maybe I'll join today. People like you must be opposed.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Means diddly squat to me. Be part of the problem, after all "you gots a right, baby!"
permatex
(1,299 posts)NRA doesn't even come close to the definition of a terrorist org. nor do they enable terrorists.
The govt would have already shut them down if this were true.
ileus
(15,396 posts)If each congressperson would just vote their conscience and ignore the people that put them into office imagine the greatness they could accomplish on firearm control.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Does that make the electorate a terrorist group?
I've rarely read a more whacky OP on DU.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Maybe there's more opposition to stricter gun laws than just the NRA.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)The NRA didn't become as powerful as it is today until the 1970s when Gun Prohibition Advocates started advocating the Prohibition of Handguns, then Semi-Automatics, and for some Gun Prohibition Advocates, all guns.
Mark Borinsky founded the National Council to Control Handguns in 1974
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Campaign
Also involved was Nelson T. (Pete) Shields III whose son, Nelson 4th, was shot and killed in San Francisco in 1975, a victim in a series of racially motivated killings of whites by four blacks that came to be known as the Zebra killings.
Then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_to_Stop_Gun_Violence
Another factor contributing to the change in the NRA was the realization that the "Fudds" (those who believe the only purpose of owning guns was to hunt) would be perfectly willing to sell out other guns owners as long as they were allowed to keep their hunting guns. And since fewer gun owners hunt these days, the non-hunters were not about to let themselves be sold out.
As a non-hunting gun owner I personally dont give a damn about hunting. I have never hunted, and dont want to. Im not opposed to it philosophically. But I think the prime purpose of the RKBA is self and home defense, not hunting, target shooting or gun collecting.
Gun Prohibition Advocates sowed the wind, and reaped the whirlwind. Gun Prohibition Advocates have no one to blame but themselves. You do not attempt to take people rights and freedoms away, and then claim it's their fault when they react in what you believe is a negative manner.