straw man: Be careful -- you'll hurt yourself with all those contortions of logic. BTW, the NRA does not "obtain profits" from any gun sales. It is not in the retail firearms business.
straw man previously: thought the NRA was supposed to be in the pocket of the gun industry. Every private sale of a used gun is a new gun sale lost. You'd think an "industry shill" {nra} would be doing everything in its power to inhibit such sales. Wouldn't you?
As you can see, it was you who first suggested nra was losing money/profits by favoring 'no bg checks';
.. might wanna try to uncontort yourself.
straw man: BTW, the NRA does not "obtain profits" from any gun sales. It is not in the retail firearms business
I guess you need some schooling in nra tactics 101; for most, if not most all new firearms sold, the nra, with the gun makers permission, puts in a little packet explaining to the new gun owner some things & congratulating him on his new purchase & how it's so important to protect his/her 2nd pretendment rights that a one year membership in the nra would be so desirable for him/her, that he/she would have a progun orgasm on the spot. An nra one year membership goes from $25 - $35, a lifetime membership about 200 or more. So the nra does indeed profit by gun sales, not directly that I'm so aware of, but indirectly by getting new members or donors, as well by intertwining with the gun makers.
straw man: "As late as 1999"? Why not just say "fifteen years ago"? And then try to pretend that it's current information.
You have no point, they have FLIP FLOPPED 180 degrees on background checks in the past 15 years, now opposing something which nearly 90% of americans have supported.
= new reply since forum marked as read
