Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Logical

(22,457 posts)
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 05:21 PM Jan 2012

December NRA "Freedom" magazine proves the NRA is a right wing bunch of nuts

I am not a NRA member and would never be. But I borrowed a copy from a friend.

On the cover the headline is "This Card Will Beat Obama" showing a NRA membership card.

Cover story is "Obama's Secret Plan to Destroy the Second Amendment by 2016"

Some quotes from the story, written by the nutty Wayne Lapierre.....

"If you want a glimpse of a genuine nightmare for America, just look at what's headed our way. But unlike a nightmare, this isn't some fantasy. It's a very real, very dangerous conspiracy of public deception intended to destroy your Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It's targeted directly at you."

There is more lies and bullshit in the whole article. Including arrogant ugly looking caricatures of Holder, Hillary, Kagan and Sotomayor.

Other paragraphs are titled "Prelude to War on Second Amendment Freedom" and "The Cost and Consequences of Obama's Re-Election".

Of course there is the typical request for money and renewing your membership. Typical NRA tactics.

Obama has done nothing the NRA predicted he would do in 2008 so now they are lying about 2012.

They know that most of their membership is GOP and they can scare them easily and thus raise more money. And the typical NRA GOP member is too stupid to to know the NRA is lying to them about Obama.

Remember, in the 2010 Midterm elections the National Rifle Association spent $6.7 million, with 98 percent benefiting Republican candidates. They are a GOP group. They would never embrace or try to embrace democratic voters because they would piss off most of their right wing members who ate liberals.

Sure they support some dem elections because if they did not they would look even more biased. But look a the speakers at their yearly conventions. Most of them are they typical right wing idiots that the average DEM could not stomach listening to.

I personally think any member of the DU posting pro-NRA posts consistently should be banned from the DU. And pro-NRA posts should be locked. The NRA wants nothing more than to defeat Obama in 2016 and any other posts that want Obama defeated are immediately locked. The pro-NRA posts are no different. Promoting an organization who supports the defeat of Obama should be locked.

I am pro gun ownership. Pro concealed carry. But not an NRA fan. Too bad there is not a pro-gun organization that is not a GOP front group.











101 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
December NRA "Freedom" magazine proves the NRA is a right wing bunch of nuts (Original Post) Logical Jan 2012 OP
They aren't doing anything that isn't mirrored (or initiated) by their opponents. PavePusher Jan 2012 #1
LOL.....but you HATE their opponents. But not the NRA! Why?? Logical Jan 2012 #2
Actually, I do hate those tactics when they use them... And I'm an NRA member. PavePusher Jan 2012 #5
That's such a phony argument. ellisonz Jan 2012 #3
I haven't seen the Brady's run any safety training classes... ever. n/t PavePusher Jan 2012 #6
That's not their mission. ellisonz Jan 2012 #7
So, why don't you explain their mission burf Jan 2012 #8
Don't hold your breath DonP Jan 2012 #9
Why don't you explain why the NRA... ellisonz Jan 2012 #14
Be happy to........ burf Jan 2012 #16
lol ellisonz Jan 2012 #18
LOL wut? beevul Jan 2012 #46
lol YOU ellisonz Jan 2012 #47
The questionnaire determines a candidate's grade (along with previous votes / actions / statements.) X_Digger Jan 2012 #49
No one objective who reads that questionnaire doesn't already know... ellisonz Jan 2012 #50
Do you understand the concept of grades? X_Digger Jan 2012 #57
Do you understand the concepts of grades? ellisonz Jan 2012 #63
No, you're being intentionally obtuse. X_Digger Jan 2012 #67
I don't like what they stand for... ellisonz Jan 2012 #69
Are you seriously not getting this?!? X_Digger Jan 2012 #79
"Are you seriously not getting this?!?" ellisonz Jan 2012 #82
9 different grades is not binary. Are you seriously this dense? X_Digger Jan 2012 #84
So there's a clear cut off... ellisonz Jan 2012 #87
Of course. What, you expect everyone to be endorsed regardless of grade?!? n/t X_Digger Jan 2012 #89
Oh please. beevul Jan 2012 #51
So then, how would you change the questions to fit your idea of a oneshooter Jan 2012 #83
He doesn't want to change them, he just wants to be the only one allowed to grade them DonP Jan 2012 #85
I wouldn't have a questionnaire. ellisonz Jan 2012 #88
People make a binary choice- either they send money and join the NRA, or they don't. X_Digger Jan 2012 #90
Out of 80 million gun owners... ellisonz Jan 2012 #91
And which group do they support? X_Digger Jan 2012 #92
Not the NRA... ellisonz Jan 2012 #93
*snort* nice weasel. X_Digger Jan 2012 #94
Do you have any evidence they do? n/t ellisonz Jan 2012 #95
They don't join the brady bunch, lol.. X_Digger Jan 2012 #96
They also want enforcement of the current laws... ellisonz Jan 2012 #97
Well said Bevull rl6214 Jan 2012 #48
Really? We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #60
Ironic isn't it? DonP Jan 2012 #64
"an organization which is explicitly opposed to gun control" ellisonz Jan 2012 #66
Why? We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #68
Haha...you can't because they don't. ellisonz Jan 2012 #70
Look for yourself - the NRA website is open to the public DonP Jan 2012 #71
Oh I did... ellisonz Jan 2012 #72
First off... We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #73
In other words... ellisonz Jan 2012 #74
I'm not the one who made the We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #75
It's political arm sure as heck does from endorsement... ellisonz Jan 2012 #76
It appears you didn't look very hard burf Jan 2012 #77
The NRA is like an octopus. ellisonz Jan 2012 #78
That wouldn't be like the Brady Campaign burf Jan 2012 #81
From their own web site. PavePusher Jan 2012 #10
Doesn't say they themselves offer such classes. ellisonz Jan 2012 #13
But I thought they were about gun safety. burf Jan 2012 #17
Deliberate distortion of the meaning of those words. n/t ellisonz Jan 2012 #19
How am I distorting the words? burf Jan 2012 #22
Brady is not about offering such courses. A statement of principle is not a statement of purpose. nt ellisonz Jan 2012 #23
If one claims a principle, then does nothing to promote that principle.... PavePusher Jan 2012 #24
How are they subverting gun safety? ellisonz Jan 2012 #27
They have been known to oppose gun safety training in schools. n/t PavePusher Jan 2012 #35
You mean in public schools? ellisonz Jan 2012 #42
But drivers training is? beevul Jan 2012 #52
Wasn't at my school... ellisonz Jan 2012 #53
Was at mine. beevul Jan 2012 #54
You must have gone to a nicer public school... ellisonz Jan 2012 #55
Ok, so what do they do to promote these "highest standards of safety"? burf Jan 2012 #15
Nothing. They didn't support President Obama's proposals back in March: friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #59
Didn't the legislation passed four years ago require the states burf Jan 2012 #62
Good points, but I believe opening the NICS would be good for starters. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #80
I wanna make sure I got your proposal straight. burf Jan 2012 #98
Yes. If a seller checks a potential buyer out via NICS, and they pass... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #99
Thanks n/t burf Jan 2012 #100
If the Brady Campaign ever offers a firearm safety course... spin Jan 2012 #32
Al Gore's Pink Slip E6-B Jan 2012 #21
That was Al Gore's warrent to end his career. E6-B Jan 2012 #101
The NRA is... ellisonz Jan 2012 #4
You mean the Talibornagain? krispos42 Jan 2012 #25
Yessir. ellisonz Jan 2012 #26
God, Guns, and Gold krispos42 Jan 2012 #28
I oughta go ahead and join. BiggJawn Jan 2012 #11
Not a bad idea. They would try to sue you I am sure. Logical Jan 2012 #30
On what grounds? BiggJawn Jan 2012 #33
Because you were annoying them. They whine a lot. Logical Jan 2012 #34
You're right that the NRA is dominated by rightwingers, but they are usually correct about gun laws aikoaiko Jan 2012 #12
Anyone who joins and supports the NRA is helping the defeat of Obama. So yes. Logical Jan 2012 #31
I don't think that's true. It complicated, though. aikoaiko Jan 2012 #37
And 6 million dollars spent against him is making him more unelectable. Wow, nice try. Logical Jan 2012 #38
If he responds well, then yes, possibly. aikoaiko Jan 2012 #45
I think your post is realistic and honest but not pro-NRA. spin Jan 2012 #36
Gun owners are not buying what your selling E6-B Jan 2012 #20
Really, you believe Obama is waiting to win the election to overthrow the 2nd? Really???? Logical Jan 2012 #29
If he did try in his 2nd term he would give the next Presidential election to the Republicans... spin Jan 2012 #39
I honestly do not think he gives a shot about gun control. It is not just that he is hiding it..... Logical Jan 2012 #40
The NRA is just trying to raise money... spin Jan 2012 #41
To fight against the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. n/t ellisonz Jan 2012 #43
True. I am an NRA member but... spin Jan 2012 #65
We agree there. Logical Jan 2012 #44
You'll never hear any decent on safeinOhio Jan 2012 #56
And you'll never see any dissent on the Brady Camapign website, either... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #58
You're not going to see.... We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #61
All I care about is the NRA supports my RKBA Upton Jan 2012 #86
 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
1. They aren't doing anything that isn't mirrored (or initiated) by their opponents.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 05:43 PM
Jan 2012


The NRA does do some good things as well. Completely discounting that is just as dishonest as saying they are all saints, all the time.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
5. Actually, I do hate those tactics when they use them... And I'm an NRA member.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 05:56 PM
Jan 2012

I let them know about it when they are egregiously fear-mongering.

When I get voting priviledges in the org, my position will be felt more. I doubt I'll change much unless more folks do what I'm doing, i.e. try to inject sanity from within. But I'm just quixotic enough to think it might work.

It is certain that wailing about them in a vacuum won't.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
3. That's such a phony argument.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 05:48 PM
Jan 2012

That's like saying while the John Birch Society is 98% bad, but I like how they've backed Ron Paul all along, so I guess the John Birch Society "does do some good things as well." The NRA is on a political mission that has little to nothing to do with encouraging responsible gun ownership. They simply wish to use an expansive argument about the Second Amendment, one favored almost entirely by right-wing conservative jurists that elevates an absurd interpretation of the Second Amendment above almost all else, and this despite a litany of evidence to the contrary that their interpretation is in no way what the Founders intended the Second Amendment to do. In the words of the "Big Dog" Bill Clinton, this ideology is "madness."

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
7. That's not their mission.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 06:14 PM
Jan 2012

There are plenty of other groups and organizations that offer such courses too. Doesn't excuse the blatant pro-Republican political campaigns of the NRA.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
9. Don't hold your breath
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 06:46 PM
Jan 2012

It will take him some time to go to their web site cut and paste their mission statement.

I have yet to see anyone be honest about what the Brady's want based on their actual actions and proposals as opposed to the generic claptrap they post. A telling thing to me is that they never allow comments on any of their websites.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
14. Why don't you explain why the NRA...
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 07:07 PM
Jan 2012

...is going to spend $200 million attacking Democrats this election season, "to those of us are not so informed?"

burf

(1,164 posts)
16. Be happy to........
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:11 PM
Jan 2012

The NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) is NRA's political action committee. The NRA-PVF ranks political candidates - irrespective of party affiliation - based on voting records, public statements and their responses to an NRA-PVF questionnaire

Now, could you answer my previous question?

TIA

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
18. lol
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:22 PM
Jan 2012

The NRA questionnaire is designed to exclude proponents of most gun control: http://www.patricialightner.com/nraanswers.html

It's not an open and fair-minded organization - it's an extremist front for the firearms industry. Offering safety classes doesn't negate it's deleterious effect on debate.

We are devoted to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in our communities.

The Brady Campaign works to pass and enforce sensible federal and state gun laws, regulations, and public policies through grassroots activism, electing public officials who support common sense gun laws, and increasing public awareness of gun violence. Through our Million Mom March and Brady Chapters, we work locally to educate people about the dangers of guns, honor victims of gun violence, and pass sensible gun laws, believing that all Americans, especially children, have the right to live free from the threat of gun violence.

The Brady Center works to reform the gun industry by enacting and enforcing sensible regulations to reduce gun violence, including regulations governing the gun industry. In addition, we represent victims of gun violence in the courts. We educate the public about gun violence through litigation, grassroots mobilization, and outreach to affected communities.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/about/


Seriously, do some reading and come to your senses, sir. The NRA has sold-out the responsible gun owners of America, the Brady Campaign just wants to reduce the "madness."

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
46. LOL wut?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 01:30 AM
Jan 2012

Last edited Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:04 AM - Edit history (1)

"The NRA questionnaire is designed to exclude proponents of most gun control"

Asking someone to go on the record, by answering a series of question, is somehow by design, a conspiracy to exclude gun control proponents?

And some people here claim gun owners are pananoid. That market would appear, cornered by the other half, within the debate.


As to the brady bunch, its pretty simple to lay the trump card on them - as I said in another post:

The brady bunch hitches their wagon to "gun violence" sure, I don't deny that, but thats NOT really what they're about.

Witness the lies:

"Glock handguns are "not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10collins.html?_r=3&hp


"We're not a gun ban organization. We don't push for gun bans" - Helmke - 2008.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/nra-gun-licensing-and-reg_b_110778.html

Did I mention the brady nunch submitted an amicus in favor of the DC handgun ban, and have pushed the assault weapon ban at every turn?

Did I mention their original name was "handgun control inc"?, and that their mission was the banning of handguns?


And then there are these facts:

This is a group that has deliberately included adults in thier "child statistics" to inflate them. No organization that has a legitimate intent to reduce gun violence would do such a thing.


This is a group that claims to want to prevent gun violence, yet gives grades on a per state basis based on how much they restrict guns rather than how high or low the level of gun crime/gun violence is in that state. Again, no organization that has a legitimate intent to reduce gun violence would do such a thing.


This is a group that claimed that civilian owned 50 caliber rifles which are esentially never used in crime could shoot down aircraft, which is a huge lie, and used that false rationale for stamping thier feet and screaming ban at the tops of thier lungs.

Again, no organization that has a legitimate intent to reduce gun violence would do such a thing.


This is a group that opposes concealed carry, even though police as a group are convicted of a larger number of crimes than CCW holders.

Once again, no organization that has a legitimate intent to reduce gun violence would do such a thing.


This is a group that claimed that "assault weapons" were the choice of criminals, in spite of the fact that ALL rifles - which 99 percent of so called "assault weapons" are - are used in less than 3 percent of all firearm homicides, and used that false rationale for stamping thier feet and screaming ban at the tops of thier lungs.

Once again, no organization that has a legitimate intent to reduce gun violence would do such a thing.




They may as well be "the brady campain to reduce guns", because 90 plus percent of the things they stump for are aimed squarely at doing just that.


And did I mention that they thought a republican would be a good fit as president of thier org?


I have said it many times in this post:

No organization that has a legitimate intent to reduce gun violence would go after legally owned guns, unless thats what they want gone. They aren't interested in reducing gun violence unless its through restrictive gun laws aimed at people who by and large aren't a problem in the first place.

Do they look at root causes of gun violence? No. They go after guns.

Do they bother investigating how much the "war on some drugs" effects gun violence? Of course not. Like good little gun haters they never bring that up, and go after guns instead.

As far as they're concerned, its the guns.


Though their words (if you accept their lies as true) and their name might indicate their intention is to reduce gun violence, their their actions paint a completely different picture.


ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
47. lol YOU
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 01:38 AM
Jan 2012

The NRA questionnaire demands agreement with the positions of the NRA - it leaves no room for disagreement. Just acknowledge it, the NRA isn't interested in anyone who disagrees with them the slightest.

I wouldn't expect a political organization dedicated to gun control to try and fix the world entirely from all sides. Just as I don't expect the NRA at this point to advocate for anything other than the most right-wing positions they can try to foist upon the rest of us.

You must really love your guns...

"And did I mention that they thought a republican would be a good fit as president of thier org?"

You're also really desperate if you're going to throw that one out there...gun control can and should be a bipartisan cause.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
49. The questionnaire determines a candidate's grade (along with previous votes / actions / statements.)
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 01:52 AM
Jan 2012

How a candidate answers helps determine the level of support the NRA gives to a particular candidate. It's a grade, A+ to F.

'no room for disagreement', eh? It's not pass/fail, dear.

What, you think they should give to all candidates equally, regardless of how they feel about guns / gun control?

They are a single-issue advocacy group. Why the fuck should they support someone who disagrees with them over someone who doesn't?!?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
50. No one objective who reads that questionnaire doesn't already know...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 02:00 AM
Jan 2012

...that the NRA has a right-wing policy agenda already that has very little to do with actual support of the 2nd Amendment, hunting, competition shooting, or self-defense.

"It's not pass/fail, dear." - "It's a grade, A+ to F." - That's a contradiction.



X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
57. Do you understand the concept of grades?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 10:01 AM
Jan 2012

Here, let me give you an example:

Johnny and Suzie are in the same class (election). Johnny gets a grade of C+, Suzie gets a grade of B-.

Suzie gets the gold star (NRA endorsement) as the better student (candidate).

Is it really so hard for you to wrap your head around?!?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
63. Do you understand the concepts of grades?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 02:18 PM
Jan 2012

They are determined in no small part by what is in the curriculum. I take issue with how the NRA is defining it's policy as We_Have_A_Problem describes as "an organization which is explicitly opposed to gun control."

Get my drift?

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
67. No, you're being intentionally obtuse.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:48 PM
Jan 2012

You don't like what they stand for, so any grades in your mind are suspect.

The end points of the grades don't cover the end points of all perspectives on this issue.

Imagine instead a numerical grading system. 100 = A+, 70=D, >70=F. Below a certain point, the NRA doesn't care what their positions are.

And why the fuck should they? They are a single-issue advocacy group.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
69. I don't like what they stand for...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:56 PM
Jan 2012

...that is expressly directly unrelated to their supposed purpose. I'm not saying that at one time the NRA wasn't a respectable organization, but now it's pretty much just a pawn in the political game. I don't think it's unfair to say that they exclude firearms owners, who are otherwise responsible and respectable, because they oppose their extreme positions. If you can't respect that analysis, then I'm not sure what the smoke Wayne LaPierre is blowing your ass. Seriously, you might want to reconsider your position on this whole debate - you're contradicting your own arguments - "It's not pass/fail, dear." - "It's a grade, A+ to F."

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
79. Are you seriously not getting this?!?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 05:11 PM
Jan 2012

Last edited Tue Jan 3, 2012, 06:59 PM - Edit history (1)

A pass / fail would be an A or an F .. binary.. X OR Y. On the other hand, their current system has a multitide of grades- A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, D, and F.

A+ through C are passing. D, F is fail. The NRA will endorse the higher graded candidate in any particular race- A+ over B-, B+ over C-, etc.

Seriously, do you not understand this?!?

eta: Changed D to C.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
82. "Are you seriously not getting this?!?"
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 05:54 PM
Jan 2012

That's still a binary system at the end of the day. Either you pass their standards or you don't - or does the NRA support candidates with D ratings?

Why must you be so patronizing? Shall I patronize you?

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
84. 9 different grades is not binary. Are you seriously this dense?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 06:46 PM
Jan 2012

They don't endorse less than C- candidates, but there were a lot of B's and C's with endorsements such as:

California 34th district
Lou Correa (D) Grade: C+

Arkansas District 32
Allen Kerr (R) Grade: B+

Ohio District 43
Stephen Dyer (D) Grade: C+

Florida District 10
C.W. "Bill" Young (R) Grade: B+

District 6
Bill Montford (D) Grade: B+

Indiana District 10
Charles Chuck Moseley (D) Grade: B+

District 77
Gail Riecken (D) Grade: B-

Oklahoma District 5
Doug Cox (R) Grade: B

District 15
Ed Cannaday (D) Grade: B+

Iowa District 31
Ray Zirkelbach (D) Grade: C+

Utah District 10
Dixon Pitcher (R) Grade: C+

Wisconsin District 19
Krista Burns (R) Grade: B


 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
51. Oh please.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 02:40 AM
Jan 2012

"The NRA questionnaire demands agreement with the positions of the NRA - it leaves no room for disagreement. Just acknowledge it, the NRA isn't interested in anyone who disagrees with them the slightest."

I looked over the questionaire. It had three choices for each answer, with some of them being "fill in the blank yourself" option for answers.

So your claim that "The NRA questionnaire demands agreement" is factually and patently false. And I should think the NRA is VERY interested in people who disagree with them, hence your objection to light being shined on such disagreement by things like the questionaire you're so "righteously indignant" over.

"I wouldn't expect a political organization dedicated to gun control to try and fix the world entirely from all sides."

Yeah, you're right, steering clear of the people who are NOT the problem is just completely nonsensical. The ONLY way to attack gun violence is the path of greatest resistance - attacking a constitutionally protected fundamental right. Even if you have to lie about it to get your way.



"You must really love your guns..."

Yeah especially the bolt action rimfire rifle that shoots a round the sidze of a BB, or the old winchester with the octagon barrel, or the old sears "ted williams" semi auto 22 rimfire that was given to my father for his birthday when he was a boy, and now inherited by me...or my basic beretta sidearm...or...oh wait...thats all I have.

I bet you thought I lived in a "compound" too.

"You're also really desperate if you're going to throw that one out there..."

Well, looks as if you, like your predecessors, got nothing on what I wrote about the brady bunch.

I mean, I knew that would be the case, facts being facts and all, but it warms the heart just the same.

I'll leave you with a quote from one of my favority fictional characters:

"Tell me minister, if I were to strike you, which would you be angry at, the hand that struck you, or the heart that commanded the hand to strike?"

"The hand has no choice but to do as it is told, it is the heart that carries the burden."

"Besides, everyone knows that the true source of pain is neither the hand nor the heart, it is the mouth, is it not, minister?




oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
83. So then, how would you change the questions to fit your idea of a
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 06:35 PM
Jan 2012

non judgemental questionaire?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
85. He doesn't want to change them, he just wants to be the only one allowed to grade them
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 06:55 PM
Jan 2012

In "Bizzaro world" everything is backwards and the more political candidates complain and support random gun laws and registration the more the NRA should support them.

That's why NARAL will be supporting Santorum tonight and the ACLU is going to ask Dick Cheney to sit on their board of directors.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
88. I wouldn't have a questionnaire.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:11 PM
Jan 2012

I would have an open statement, either written or made in person, and then a member vote. Let the average NRA member decide whats relevant instead of a pre-formulated questionnaire. Power to the People.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
90. People make a binary choice- either they send money and join the NRA, or they don't.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:22 PM
Jan 2012

So far, over 4 million have.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
92. And which group do they support?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:37 PM
Jan 2012

Oh that's right, none.

But by your logic, most seniors don't think that the AARP represents their views, right? (7m members out of 98m people over 50, the minimum age to join).

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
93. Not the NRA...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:42 PM
Jan 2012

I think most people have heard of the NRA by now, so it's not out of ignorance of its positions. Likewise, many seniors had disagreement with the AARP over their acceptance of Medicare Part-D as it was written.

I'm just pointing out that the NRA represents a very narrow view in the political arena.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
94. *snort* nice weasel.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:49 PM
Jan 2012

What percentage of gun owners disagree with the NRA? Got anything concrete to back up your assertion, or is it just your false dichotomy?

Do people who don't vote not agree with either party? Do the people who don't support the ACLU disagree with them?

My that's a very pretty black and white world you have there.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
96. They don't join the brady bunch, lol..
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:54 PM
Jan 2012

And of course in a more general sense, there's the gallup poll..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150341/Record-Low-Favor-Handgun-Ban.aspx





60% of those polled want no more new laws. Of course that's not restricted to just gun owners, but a majority want no new laws.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
97. They also want enforcement of the current laws...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:58 PM
Jan 2012

I'm not sure those polled understand some of the issues that are debated very well. I'd also note that the trend line doesn't mean there aren't 50%+ of gun owners that don't agree that we need more laws or better enforcement. Statistics is a messy business.

We'll just have to agree to disagree and acknowledge there are arguments on both sides that perhaps have merit.

 

We_Have_A_Problem

(2,112 posts)
60. Really?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 12:26 PM
Jan 2012
The NRA questionnaire is designed to exclude proponents of most gun control: http://www.patricialightner.com/nraanswers.html

And you think this is unusual for an organization which is explicitly opposed to gun control?

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
64. Ironic isn't it?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 02:23 PM
Jan 2012

Complaining about an organization that screens some people opposed to it's principles from support.

All done on a board that screens out all but liberal progressives from discussions.

Funny how he has no problem with DU policies but the NRA is evil incarnate for doing the same thing with it's support?

Another case of conditional ethics I guess.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
66. "an organization which is explicitly opposed to gun control"
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:41 PM
Jan 2012

Show me a link where the NRA says in a "mission statement" that it's "opposed to gun control."

 

We_Have_A_Problem

(2,112 posts)
68. Why?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:51 PM
Jan 2012

Not like you'd read it anyway. Besides, whether it is in their mission statement (which is nothing more than craptastic word-salad having zero real world weight) or not is irrelevant.

Do you stupidly believe an organization's mission statement is an explicit exhaustive list of what they do?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
70. Haha...you can't because they don't.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:05 PM
Jan 2012

"Do you stupidly believe an organization's mission statement is an explicit exhaustive list of what they do?"

I think if the NRA was opposed to gun control it would sure as hell be up front.

Talking out of your ass...Just admit it, I caught you in a lie.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
71. Look for yourself - the NRA website is open to the public
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:09 PM
Jan 2012

Unlike most gun control sites it's wide open.

No membership, secret code words or handshakes to access everything they have available.

You can even download gun safety information and share it with the Brady people so they will actually know something about the subject they pontificate on.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
72. Oh I did...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:10 PM
Jan 2012

...and it doesn't say anything like that as far as I can find.

Just admit it, homeboy made that part about the NRA being opposed to gun control up.

Unlike most gun control sites it's wide open.

No membership, secret code words or handshakes to access everything they have available.

You can even download gun safety information and share it with the Brady people so they will actually know something about the subject they pontificate on.


I'm not even going to broach this rambling.
 

We_Have_A_Problem

(2,112 posts)
73. First off...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:19 PM
Jan 2012

Do not refer to me as "homeboy".

Second, it is pretty damned obvious to anyone with a functioning brain the NRA opposes gun control. In point of fact, you complained that they rigged their questionnaires so as not to support gun control.

Third, I see your arguments have become no more intelligent with the new year.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
74. In other words...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:26 PM
Jan 2012

...you've got nothing.

I'm pointing out that how the political arm of the NRA operates is inconsistent with the purpose of the NRA.

"Do not refer to me as "homeboy".

Don't question my intelligence.

 

We_Have_A_Problem

(2,112 posts)
75. I'm not the one who made the
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:37 PM
Jan 2012

ridiculous claim that the NRA somehow excludes those who are pro-gun-control.

As far as questioning your intelligence, you've answered that question well enough.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
76. It's political arm sure as heck does from endorsement...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:42 PM
Jan 2012

...to my knowledge unless shown otherwise. How the left hand doesn't know why the right hand does is beyond me...it's

"As far as questioning your intelligence, you've answered that question well enough."

Aww...thanks homeboy.

burf

(1,164 posts)
77. It appears you didn't look very hard
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:43 PM
Jan 2012

From the NRA-ILA about page:

ILA’s ability to fight successfully for the rights of America’s law-abiding gun owners directly reflects the support of NRA’s nearly 4 million members—a number that has more than tripled since 1978. When restrictive “gun control” legislation is proposed at the local, state or federal level, NRA members and supporters are alerted and respond with individual letters, faxes, e-mails and calls to their elected representatives to make their views known.

http://www.nraila.org/About/

The search took all of 30 seconds.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
78. The NRA is like an octopus.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 05:04 PM
Jan 2012

So the legislative arm is only against "restrictive “gun control” legislation" - what the heck is non-restrictive gun control?

They're hedging because they're afraid to say what We_Have_A_Problem said. Just admit it...the NRA is afraid to say what most of their members really tend to think; that they oppose any aggressive restriction practice even against the mentally ill.

burf

(1,164 posts)
81. That wouldn't be like the Brady Campaign
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 05:53 PM
Jan 2012

and some of their statements along the "blood in the streets" shootouts over parking spaces and such, now would it?

At least you have gotta give the NRA credit. When they alert their members: "NRA members and supporters are alerted and respond with individual letters, faxes, e-mails and calls to their elected representatives to make their views known." You can tell your reps whatever you want. So, those who were talking about joining up and giving Wayne LaPierre a piece of their mind, can now get alerts on gun legislation and then can contact their representatives too boot! Either pro or con. Whatta deal, ehh?

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
10. From their own web site.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 06:53 PM
Jan 2012

"Third, we believe that those who do own guns ought to be held to the highest standards of safety. They should be well trained in the use of their weapons..."

http://www.bradycampaign.org/about/

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
13. Doesn't say they themselves offer such classes.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 07:06 PM
Jan 2012

There are firearms safety courses besides those offered by the NRA.

burf

(1,164 posts)
17. But I thought they were about gun safety.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:20 PM
Jan 2012

That's what they say they are for, isn't it? Or maybe their old name of Hand Gun Control is more appropriate. Or maybe they should just drop the Hand part.

burf

(1,164 posts)
22. How am I distorting the words?
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:46 PM
Jan 2012

Is it that simply touting yourself as an advocate for safety while actually only talking about it and lobbying for gun measures that criminals ignore safety?

BTW, how does Brady get to present themselves as a mainstream organization? What are their membership numbers? Last thing I could find was for May 2010. They were

50,581 DONORS/MEMBERS (TOTAL FILE)
40,765 DONORS/MEMBERS (24 MOS)
28,417 DONORS/MEMBERS (12 MOS)
9,590 CATHOLIC DONORS/MEMBERS (36 MOS)
5,368 JEWISH DONORS/MEMBERS (36 MOS)

Pretty pathetic considering they joined forces with the million mom march a while back. I wonder what happened to the other 950,000 of the million moms.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
23. Brady is not about offering such courses. A statement of principle is not a statement of purpose. nt
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:54 PM
Jan 2012
 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
24. If one claims a principle, then does nothing to promote that principle....
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 09:36 PM
Jan 2012

and often does things to subvert it, one is either a liar or a hypocrite.

Their choice.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
42. You mean in public schools?
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:45 PM
Jan 2012

I could see why, it's not exactly reading, writing, math, science, history.

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
52. But drivers training is?
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:10 AM
Jan 2012

Surely you can do better than that.

Do we need to make a list of all the things that are taught in schools that aren't "reading, writing, math, science, history", to get the point across?

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
53. Wasn't at my school...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:17 AM
Jan 2012

...we were grateful to have textbooks that didn't fall apart at the bindings. I don't know how common that is, but IMHO it should be an elective for no credit and not part of the school day.

"Do we need to make a list of all the things that are taught in schools that aren't "reading, writing, math, science, history", to get the point across?"

As you wish, btw who do you think should pay for these classes?

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
54. Was at mine.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:28 AM
Jan 2012

"As you wish, btw who do you think should pay for these classes?"

Perhaps the same people that pay for "auto shop" and "horticulture"?

/shrug

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
55. You must have gone to a nicer public school...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:35 AM
Jan 2012

We didn't have those either. We were fortunate to have an "art academy," "health class," ROTC, music, and theater.

When did you graduate high school?

I know some of the wealthier schools maybe have them...but I think those types of courses are largely a thing of the past.

burf

(1,164 posts)
15. Ok, so what do they do to promote these "highest standards of safety"?
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 07:11 PM
Jan 2012

Where do I sign up for the gun or hunter safety course sponsored by Brady? How do I contact their "Eddie Eagle" to visit a local school telling youngster what to safely do when they encounter a gun? How about support for those who choose to visit ranges and compete in shooting sports. I'll wager they don't do a thing in support of Civilian Marksmanship Program, Hunter Safety Program, or God forbid, the Scholastic Clay Target Program, where high schoolers compete in target shooting.

My guess it I'm not gonna find a lot of support to those who own guns with Brady. But if I'm looking for somebody to piss and moan about how we need another law that criminals ignore, the Brady Bunch will be the group I go to.

Yes, there are things I don't like about the NRA, but when it comes to safety programs I would rather hang my hat with the NRA, NSSF, SCTP, and numerous other such groups than the fearmongering of the Brady Campaign.



 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
59. Nothing. They didn't support President Obama's proposals back in March:
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 12:06 PM
Jan 2012
http://azstarnet.com/article_011e7118-8951-5206-a878-39bfbc9dc89d.html#ixzz1hwyfqhO7

That's why our focus right now should be on sound and effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place.

• First, we should begin by enforcing laws that are already on the books. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System is the filter that's supposed to stop the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun. Bipartisan legislation four years ago was supposed to strengthen this system, but it hasn't been properly implemented. It relies on data supplied by states - but that data is often incomplete and inadequate. We must do better.

• Second, we should in fact reward the states that provide the best data - and therefore do the most to protect our citizens.

• Third, we should make the system faster and nimbler. We should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can't escape it....



Then again, I don't recall seeing any expression of support for these from those that usually piss all over the NRA...


burf

(1,164 posts)
62. Didn't the legislation passed four years ago require the states
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 01:52 PM
Jan 2012

to update the information that was used to determine if the buyer was "allowed" to make a purchase? IIRC this was another unfunded mandate by the Feds and the states, with declining tax revenues don't have the resources to hire the people to do the job. If the program is gonna work, its needs the resources, not just another unfunded mandate to comply with. Has Obama called for any revenues in his budget to address the problem? I dunno, but with the continuing resolution methodology we are currently using, it would seem highly improbable.

Second, beats the hell outta me what he means with that statement. Rewards?

Third, yes the system could be improved. This requires the input data that I wrote about earlier.

If you know of any plan to fund the update program, I'd be interested in hearing about it. If there is no plan than the editorial doesn't amount to much.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
80. Good points, but I believe opening the NICS would be good for starters.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 05:45 PM
Jan 2012

With a "safe harbor" provision in place for sellers that choose to use it.

burf

(1,164 posts)
98. I wanna make sure I got your proposal straight.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 08:09 PM
Jan 2012

By "safe harbor" do you mean the seller has the option of doing the check? Then this would, I assume relieve him of all responsibility if the gun is used for crime in the future?

I wasn't sure so thought I'd ask.

TIA

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
99. Yes. If a seller checks a potential buyer out via NICS, and they pass...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 10:15 PM
Jan 2012

...it should be considered an affirmative defense against any civil or criminal action resulting from future misuse of that firearm.

spin

(17,493 posts)
32. If the Brady Campaign ever offers a firearm safety course...
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:18 PM
Jan 2012

I definitely wouldn't take it. The organization has little understanding or appreciation of firearms. A summary of the course would probably be:

a) All firearms are evil and bad.
b) If you see a firearm DO NOT touch it. Leave the area immediately.
c) Avoid friendships with people who own firearms. They might corrupt and convert you into becoming a gun owner.
d) Send money to the Brady Campaign so that we can ban high capacity assault clips, plastic terrorist assault weapons, assault rifles, assault pistols, assault shotguns, assault Saturday Nite Specials, assault toys and assault video games.
e) Vote for politicians who advocate draconian gun laws and will vote for national gun registration so we know who owns firearms when we finally get to confiscate them.
f) Support Major Bloomberg in his efforts to insure that only rich, influential people can own firearms just like in his fabulous New York City.

The highlight would probably be a video of Plaxico Burress on how to safely handle a handgun.



 

E6-B

(153 posts)
21. Al Gore's Pink Slip
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:28 PM
Jan 2012

What President Clint really signed was Al Gore's death sentence for his political career.

 

E6-B

(153 posts)
101. That was Al Gore's warrent to end his career.
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 02:37 AM
Jan 2012

That was not a bill signing ceremony. That was a warrent to kill Al Gore's political career.

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
4. The NRA is...
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 05:51 PM
Jan 2012

...one of the three branches of the modern Republican Party, the others being the Christotaliban and the Money-Changers.

BiggJawn

(23,051 posts)
11. I oughta go ahead and join.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 06:57 PM
Jan 2012

Seriously, I should join. Then I would spend time every month emailing and phoning as a total Liberal Pain In The Ass to Wayne LaPierre.

"Hey, Wayne! My card (NRA Membership) is gonna be used to RE-ELECT Obama!"

"Dear NRA. I'm a Liberal. You're damn tootin' I want your guns. Whatd'yahave and how much ya want for it? I'm building a collection".

Eh, they'd probably decline to renew my membership, lest I make the magic 3-year cutoff and get voting privileges...

BiggJawn

(23,051 posts)
33. On what grounds?
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:20 PM
Jan 2012

They have to put something at the top of the suit that won't make the judge laugh.

aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
12. You're right that the NRA is dominated by rightwingers, but they are usually correct about gun laws
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 07:00 PM
Jan 2012

And that is why I choose to support the NRA even though I hate their rhetorical style and ring winger dominated membership. I chose to join, get voting rights, and vote for directors who support less hyperbolic, exaggerated, deceptive rhetoric.

I can't explain why Obama hasn't kept his promises to increase gun control, but I'm pretty sure it has to do with political pressure.

Do you consider this a pro-NRA post?


aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
37. I don't think that's true. It complicated, though.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:35 PM
Jan 2012

NRA pressure may be making Obama more electable.











aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
45. If he responds well, then yes, possibly.
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 12:12 AM
Jan 2012

The NRA is a one issue org and President Obama's pro-gun control rhetoric is in retreat. I too think the NRA should give him credit, I can also understand why they press on.

I understand why many Democrats are unhappy with the NRA. I am too On the other hand, I can't deny that I enjoy a certain amount of liberty because of their efforts.

spin

(17,493 posts)
36. I think your post is realistic and honest but not pro-NRA.
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:31 PM
Jan 2012

In my opinion the NRA should recognize that Obama hasn't proven to be as anti-gun as they predicted and has actually helped gun owners.

The problem is that if they did so many of their members would desert the NRA and join the Gun Owners of America which is a even more right wing organization than the NRA.


Gun Owners of America

Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a gun rights organization in the United States with over 300,000 members.[1] They make efforts to differentiate themselves from the larger National Rifle Association (NRA), and have publicly criticized the NRA on multiple occasions for what the GOA considers to be the selling out of the gun rights movement.

The organization has often been in opposition to the NRA in their respective endorsements and ratings of politicians and candidates. For instance, the GOA was outspoken in its opposition to John McCain's 2008 presidential bid, describing his gun-rights voting record as "abysmal, wretched, and pathetic"[2] and rating him with an F- on Second Amendment issues since 2004 as opposed to the NRA's (through its PAC, the NRA-PVF) C+ rating of McCain.[3] The GOA took issue with the NRA over the 2007 NICS Improvement Act.[4]

They have been described by Congressman Ron Paul as "The only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington." This quote from Paul has long been displayed front and center on the homepage of the Gun Owners of America website, and Paul was the only 2008 Presidential candidate to gain an A+ rating from Gun Owners of America.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Owners_of_America
 

E6-B

(153 posts)
20. Gun owners are not buying what your selling
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 08:24 PM
Jan 2012

Vice president: I wrote the assault weapon ban.
Hillary: Bill signed the assault weapon ban and was proud of it.
President: Supports bringing back expired assault weapon ban.

He is not moving on gun control because he going to get slam dunked if he tries.

Frankly I find your post not very genuine or completely honest.

spin

(17,493 posts)
39. If he did try in his 2nd term he would give the next Presidential election to the Republicans...
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:37 PM
Jan 2012

and they would also gain full control of both houses of Congress.

Not going to happen. Obama is far too shrewd to play that game.

 

Logical

(22,457 posts)
40. I honestly do not think he gives a shot about gun control. It is not just that he is hiding it.....
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 11:38 PM
Jan 2012

The NRA is lying and knows it.

spin

(17,493 posts)
65. True. I am an NRA member but...
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 02:41 PM
Jan 2012

I do not contribute to the political wing of the NRA which is the NRA-ILA.


NRA, ILA And The NRA Political Victory Fund

The Institute receives some funding from NRA member dues, but its main source of revenue is derived from member contributions designated for legislative activity. ILA is not associated with any firearms or ammunition manufacturers.

***snip***

The fund-raising that sustains NRA’s legislative activities is conducted by ILA. Federal and many state election laws dictate that funds used to assist candidates for office must be raised separately, and that is the task of NRA’s political action committee—the NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF). Neither NRA member dues nor contributions to ILA can be used directly for the election or defeat of candidates....emphasis added

Because of these clearly defined parameters, and because only a small fraction of ILA’s operating budget comes from regular NRA membership dues, both ILA and NRA-PVF must continuously raise the funds needed to sustain NRA’s legislative and political activities. The resources expended in these arenas come from the generous contributions of NRA members—above and beyond their regular dues.
http://www.nraila.org/About/PoliticalVictoryFund/


Therefore my dues support the worthwhile programs of the NRA and are not used to promote any political activities. If interested you can review those programs at: http://www.nra.org/programs.aspx


safeinOhio

(32,527 posts)
56. You'll never hear any decent on
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 03:51 AM
Jan 2012

NRA policies in any NRA publication. Those that post on liberal web sites that defend the NRA are given a platform to agree or disagree with the NRA that will never be heard(any complaints) on any right wing site. Yet those same people that defend the NRA on liberal web sites, still send their money to the NRA, then spend all day on liberal web sites that they don't support with contributions to support their ideas that the NRA would not tolerate, even thought they pay dues there. It's like supporting democracy as long as no one can vote.

 

We_Have_A_Problem

(2,112 posts)
61. You're not going to see....
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 12:33 PM
Jan 2012

...anything promoting Ford in a Chevy publication either.

Do you really think anyone is going to promote their competition?

Upton

(9,709 posts)
86. All I care about is the NRA supports my RKBA
Tue Jan 3, 2012, 06:57 PM
Jan 2012

There very simply is no alternative progressive organization looking out for my 2nd Amendment rights. Mostly because much of the Democratic party has been in bed with gun control advocacy groups for years. You want to huff and puff....save it for them.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»December NRA "Freedo...