Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: My defence

  1. #1
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    I would like to clear up my position on the NRA, as I feel a lot of you are under the wrong impression.



    I have taken a hard line against, what I believe the NRA has done in the past, and some do not agree with my assessment, which is as it should be; we all do not share the same beliefs.



    On the issue of Compromises, I feel that the NRA has done too much of this in the past, and others of you do not, but here is my point of view, if you co-operate with the enemy, then you compromise your position, and I take the Anti Gun Group as the enemy to the Constitution, and especially the Second Amendment.



    As the Country takes the position that they will not, deal with Terrorist Demands, because of the obvious reasons, I feel the same way about the Second Amendment, we can not negotiate with the Anti Gun Groups, because it would be, as already demonstrated with the loss of some Rights, and if we continue to negotiate with them, we will loose yet more, and I don’t want to see that happen.



    The NRA made Concessions with the Brady Group some years back and we lost some of the things we had not major but nun the less a loss, there has been efforts to make additional concessions to placate the Anti Gun Groups for the sake of “we will give them this so we don’t have to loose all on this or that”.



    I don’t like giving in to any of their ideas for any reason; to me they are a group of Idiots that are under the misguided belief that if there were no guns there would be no crime, we all know that isn’t so, they are under the impression that by making Gun Free Zones that those with in are safe and out of harms way that too is not true, Our schools are so paranoid about guns that a Student can not even draw a picture of one with out be kicked out of School.



    As I see it he Second Amendment is what it says it is or it isn’t we can not have it both ways and if we and the Groups that are supposed to be there to help protect it from encroachment by the Anti Gun Groups, The Federal Government, or any one else that fancies them selves as the Protectors of the Ignorant and Helpless then we surly will loose the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.



    We can not compromise, negotiate, or simply give in to their demands, it is far too important.



    If I am wrong, and you can point me in another direction, with out attacking then I’m willing to listen.



    I have tried to explain my feelings, and why I don’t like what I perceive as compromises, or negotiations, to get by an issue by the NRA, which weakens our Second Amendment Rights, and I do accept the fact that the NRA has been there for a long time and that they have a strong voice in the lobbying effort, I’m not denying that, nor am I saying that they are not able to help, so long as they do not bend to placate the enemy.

  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    1. Kelly J, are you a member of the NRA?

    2. Do you belong to any other gun rights organizations?

    3. There are 270 million guns in the U.S. today, according to Graduate Institute of International Studies and4.5 million new guns are purchased annually here. Has the NRA compromised "too much ...in the past,"touse your words, to help achieve these numbers? How?

    4. Would there be more than270 million guns in the U.S. today if the NRA did not exist?




  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    1. Kelly J, are you a member of the NRA?

    2. Do you belong to any other gun rights organizations?

    3. There are 270 million guns in the U.S. today, according to Graduate Institute of International Studies and4.5 million new guns are purchased annually here. Has the NRA compromised "too much ...in the past,"touse your words, to help achieve these numbers? How?

    4. Would there be more than270 million guns in the U.S. today if the NRA did not exist?
    5. A segment of the law-abiding adult population is systematically discriminated against by being largely banned from purchasing and carrying handguns: persons aged 18-20.

    6. What are most of those 270 million guns? Hunting guns?

    7. Automatic firearms are artificially made extremely expensive, out of the price range of ordinary citizens, even while street gangs and criminals that happen to work for the government continue to ramp up their ownership and use of automatic weapons.

    8. Gun rights in the US are a giant minefield, with each state, and in many areas, each jurisdiction setting its own gun laws, making it nearly impossible to travel from one area of the country to another carrying a handgun without violating at least a few laws.

    9. New York

    10. District of Columbia

    11. California

    12. Illinois

    13. Hawaii

    14. Maryland

  4. #4
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    1. Kelly J, are you a member of the NRA?

    2. Do you belong to any other gun rights organizations?

    3. There are 270 million guns in the U.S. today, according to Graduate Institute of International Studies and4.5 million new guns are purchased annually here. Has the NRA compromised "too much ...in the past,"touse your words, to help achieve these numbers? How?

    4. Would there be more than270 million guns in the U.S. today if the NRA did not exist?


    One: In answer to your question yes I am an member of the NRA and have supported them since back in the early 60's, but that does not change my view that they are great for Target Shooters, and Hunters but that isn't my point they are always claiming to be supporters of the Second Amendment yet they do not take nearly as active a role in the actual defense of the 2nd, the way they should in my opinion.

    Two: No I do not belong to any other gun groups.

    Three: I agree there are a lot of guns owned in the US but I can not say that the NRA is the reason for that any more than you can, but it is comforting to know that there are that many guns out there, next question "where is the support of those owners for the Gun Rights we are trying to protect".

    Four: See the above response.

    Final observation, if the owners of all those guns were interested in protecting the Right to own, use, carry, and use them in a defensive situation, would the Congress, or any other anti gun group, be able to ban, or restrict anything relating to our weapons? I think not!

    I do respect your defense of the NRA, and do not diminish it in any way!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    205

    Post imported post

    Kelly J wrote:
    I would like to clear up my position on the NRA, as I feel a lot of you are under the wrong impression.

    I have taken a hard line against, what I believe the NRA has done in the past, and some do not agree with my assessment, which is as it should be; we all do not share the same beliefs.

    On the issue of Compromises, I feel that the NRA has done too much of this in the past, and others of you do not, but here is my point of view, if you co-operate with the enemy, then you compromise your position, and I take the Anti Gun Group as the enemy to the Constitution, and especially the Second Amendment.
    I can definately understand your position, andI agree.. Although I don't know that better alternatives exist?

    I joined the NRA only because.. "I had to" -- The gun club I joined requires NRA membership.. And the more I read up it, I became disenchanted with the NRA like you, but it still seems to be a necessary evil.

    My other hobby, Amateur Radio, has a lobbying group to help stop cellular companies and othersfrom stealing our spectrum and promote amateur radio. I don't agree with 75% of what they do.. They make the NRA look like angels.. I support them because there is nobody else with anywhere near the political clout.

    Back to the NRA.

    It should "scare the crap" out of you that an "ever growing" part of the population doesn't know ANYTHING about the Bill of Rights except that it contains the 1st Amendment.. and.. even THAT needs "serious restrictions" to promote "social harmony"

    As a country, we're going to hell-in-a-handbasket, so it doesn't suprise me that the NRA is bending a little bit more than it should.

    It is my opinion that we should financially support the NRA, but that hasn't stopped me from writing a few letters along the lines of: "What the #### are you thinking"?! in the past, and it shouldn't stop us in the future.



  6. #6
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Kelly J wrote:
    Three: I agree there are a lot of guns owned in the US but I can not say that the NRA is the reason for that any more than you can, but it is comforting to know that there are that many guns out there, next question "where is the support of those owners for the Gun Rights we are trying to protect".
    "A lot?" That's your description? There are more guns in the U.S. than ANY other country. The ratio of guns to persons is the highest in any country in history. By far!

    I can easily say that the NRA has been instrumental in this state of affairs. It is not even arguable.


    Kelly J wrote:
    Four: See the above response.
    You didn't answer No. 4. The question is:
    4. Would there be more than270 million guns in the U.S. today if the NRA did not exist?

    The NRA bashers like to focus on superficial, concocted, subordinate and really vague issues in their public condemnations.

    But the truth is that, despite huge political, social and cultural obstacles and trends in this country--there are more guns here in the possession of civilians than any country in the history of the world. And that will continue for the forseeable future.

    The NRA, through a long term strategy and political action has gotten us to this place.Nattering nabobs notwithstanding.




  7. #7
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    1. Kelly J, are you a member of the NRA?

    2. Do you belong to any other gun rights organizations?

    3. There are 270 million guns in the U.S. today, according to Graduate Institute of International Studies and4.5 million new guns are purchased annually here. Has the NRA compromised "too much ...in the past,"touse your words, to help achieve these numbers? How?

    4. Would there be more than270 million guns in the U.S. today if the NRA did not exist?
    5. A segment of the law-abiding adult population is systematically discriminated against by being largely banned from purchasing and carrying handguns: persons aged 18-20.

    6. What are most of those 270 million guns? Hunting guns?

    7. Automatic firearms are artificially made extremely expensive, out of the price range of ordinary citizens, even while street gangs and criminals that happen to work for the government continue to ramp up their ownership and use of automatic weapons.

    8. Gun rights in the US are a giant minefield, with each state, and in many areas, each jurisdiction setting its own gun laws, making it nearly impossible to travel from one area of the country to another carrying a handgun without violating at least a few laws.

    9. New York

    10. District of Columbia

    11. California

    12. Illinois

    13. Hawaii

    14. Maryland


    5: I understand your concern about the age thing but that is something that has been born out of the magical age of responsibility, set by those that think they know, but if you look at the biblical age of responsibility it was 30 years of age so maybe 21 isn't so bad in that respect.

    6: I would have to say that yes the vast majority of guns have been purchased for the purpose of hunting, and that should not come as a surprise to anyone, next would come the Collectors then the Defense use.

    7: I don't really know how to answer this one adequately, Automatic weapons are by nature more expensive to manufacture than a Simi Automatic weapon there by increasing the cost, and the cost has been inflated to discourage the general public from buying them, as to the Gangs having them, they sell enough drugs to people at an even higher price and more often so the price of the weapon is of no consequence to them besides the most part of them are weapons that have been acquired by questionable means in the firs place.

    8: I agree that it is a mess and the major cause is ignorance of a gun and the understanding of it's true nature, then add the artificial fear of guns, the willing misuse of then and the capability of the destruction that has been caused in the past by the use of them then it is not hard to see why people are afraid of then and try to Legislate them to the point of Stupidity. Personally I think we should have a National CCW Law that is uniform throughout the Country so that no mater where you go you are covered, not likely to happen yet but there is a hope.

    9 to 14: Again the fear factor!



  8. #8
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    psmartin wrote:
    Kelly J wrote:
    I would like to clear up my position on the NRA, as I feel a lot of you are under the wrong impression.

    I have taken a hard line against, what I believe the NRA has done in the past, and some do not agree with my assessment, which is as it should be; we all do not share the same beliefs.

    On the issue of Compromises, I feel that the NRA has done too much of this in the past, and others of you do not, but here is my point of view, if you co-operate with the enemy, then you compromise your position, and I take the Anti Gun Group as the enemy to the Constitution, and especially the Second Amendment.
    I can definately understand your position, andI agree.. Although I don't know that better alternatives exist?

    I joined the NRA only because.. "I had to" -- The gun club I joined requires NRA membership.. And the more I read up it, I became disenchanted with the NRA like you, but it still seems to be a necessary evil.

    My other hobby, Amateur Radio, has a lobbying group to help stop cellular companies and othersfrom stealing our spectrum and promote amateur radio. I don't agree with 75% of what they do.. They make the NRA look like angels.. I support them because there is nobody else with anywhere near the political clout.

    Back to the NRA.

    It should "scare the crap" out of you that an "ever growing" part of the population doesn't know ANYTHING about the Bill of Rights except that it contains the 1st Amendment.. and.. even THAT needs "serious restrictions" to promote "social harmony"

    As a country, we're going to hell-in-a-handbasket, so it doesn't suprise me that the NRA is bending a little bit more than it should.

    It is my opinion that we should financially support the NRA, but that hasn't stopped me from writing a few letters along the lines of: "What the #### are you thinking"?! in the past, and it shouldn't stop us in the future.

    I Don’t know either if better alternatives exist, but it is something that must be addressed.

    There are a lot of people in the same situation with NRA Memberships being required just as a Union requires you to be a member, and that is not a good thing, as it gives false numbers to the membership, and support, of an otherwise good Origination, we should not have to join anything, just to be able to utilize the services, with some exceptions.

    That is another reason that a lot of people join organizations like he NRA, GOA, CRTKABA (Citizens Right to Keep and bear Arms), simply to have the clout to fight anti gun people, and it is a necessary thing to do.

    I agree that the Bill of Rights are not well understood, and that is a fault of the educational system in my opinion, but nevertheless as citizens, we should know, and understand the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and your choice of the Religious Doctrine you choose to follow, all are extremely important to the well being, and protection of our Country, our way of life, and the Family Unit, which has gone by the way side.

    I agree with letting the Organizations know about our feelings, and protest the use of our money, if we feel it is being used in a manner contrary, to our thinking of how it should be spent.



  9. #9
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Kelly J wrote:
    Three: I agree there are a lot of guns owned in the US but I can not say that the NRA is the reason for that any more than you can, but it is comforting to know that there are that many guns out there, next question "where is the support of those owners for the Gun Rights we are trying to protect".
    "A lot?" That's your description? There are more guns in the U.S. than ANY other country. The ratio of guns to persons is the highest in any country in history. By far!

    I can easily say that the NRA has been instrumental in this state of affairs. It is not even arguable.


    Kelly J wrote:
    Four: See the above response.
    You didn't answer No. 4. The question is:
    4. Would there be more than270 million guns in the U.S. today if the NRA did not exist?

    The NRA bashers like to focus on superficial, concocted, subordinate and really vague issues in their public condemnations.

    But the truth is that, despite huge political, social and cultural obstacles and trends in this country--there are more guns here in the possession of civilians than any country in the history of the world. And that will continue for the forseeable future.

    The NRA, through a long term strategy and political action has gotten us to this place.Nattering nabobs notwithstanding.




    Hank T, I am in agreement that there are a lot of guns in this Country, and there are more than in other Countries, but to say that the NRA is the only reason for the numbers is just not something I am willing to concede to, there are many factors at play as to why there are as many guns in this Country as there are, and in no way can you or I say that the NRA is the only reason for this.

    And I did answer number 4; you just did not like the answer.

    The truth of the fact is that the NRA has been a Target Shooting, and Hunting Organization for the most part and I could be wrong here as I'm not sure of the exact year but I believe that it was back in 1968 that the NRA became politically active, in the defense of weapons. So I will concede 40 years of Political activism. And I have supported then long before that, but times have changed, and so has the NRA.



  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Oley, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    221

    Post imported post

    First off I applaud you Kelly J. Coming onto any gun forum and stating your feelings about an organization that many feel very strongly about is a brave and nobile thing.

    I have taken a hard line against, what I believe the NRA has done in the past, and some do not agree with my assessment, which is as it should be; we all do not share the same beliefs.
    That is as it should be. Most people who like to sit back and type away allow their emotions to take over that line of rational thought. And I must say that for that statement alone you have gained much respect from me.

    To address your actual topic. I too share many of the same issues with the NRA and some more which you may not. I have found that many oraganization had a noble start and since that time have gone corrupt. The NAACP is a perfect example of a good idea that went afoul. When it was founded it was needed, now? Eh lets not go there. The NRA has taken many stances that I do not care to support. In recent years they have assumed a more sportsmans like role in defending the 2A. That is great for hunters and fowlers however as much as some would turn a blind eye to firearmsalternitive purposesthere is more to firearms than just hunting. I will not dwell on this too long because I feel you covered it. But moving on I also take issue with the NRA"company". I say company because that is what they have become. They produce a magazine and have many paidstaff memebers. The companies directive is to support the 2A and fight for our rights in Washington. So what happens if they would ever win that battle? Well I guess there would be no more company. And that would put many people out of jobs. And also take people out of power.Now maybe I am just looking too deeply into something that isn't there.I just don't see how a company that makes money would destroy itself. Sure I'm not naive enough to believe that we will ever completely win the fight for the 2A I know there will always be a kink or a problem. Andthat is why the NRA will always be around. But what I am getting at is that by having more problems, or just enough the NRA can sustain themselves. The NRA needs politicians who vote to taredown the 2A so that they can fight and sustain the company.

    To clearify my position. I do not think the NRA is a bad company and I do feel we need it. They have had some good key leaders that fought for good reasons. And I could not thank them enough for what they have done. But at this moment I do not aggree with some of their position.

    I am not a member of the NRA.

    Yes I do support many of their policies.

    Yes I have contributed in the past.

    No I do not feel that the number of guns in the US ismainly thanks to them.

  11. #11
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    WhiteFeather wrote:
    No I do not feel that the number of guns [270 million]in the US ismainly thanks to them.
    What is it due to, in your opinion?

    Also, can you pls comment on how the number of guns in the U.S. (for your reasons, whatever they may be) compares to all other countries in the history of the world?

  12. #12
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    WhiteFeather wrote:
    First off I applaud you Kelly J. Coming onto any gun forum and stating your feelings about an organization that many feel very strongly about is a brave and nobile thing.

    I have taken a hard line against, what I believe the NRA has done in the past, and some do not agree with my assessment, which is as it should be; we all do not share the same beliefs.
    That is as it should be. Most people who like to sit back and type away allow their emotions to take over that line of rational thought. And I must say that for that statement alone you have gained much respect from me.

    To address your actual topic. I too share many of the same issues with the NRA and some more which you may not. I have found that many oraganization had a noble start and since that time have gone corrupt. The NAACP is a perfect example of a good idea that went afoul. When it was founded it was needed, now? Eh lets not go there. The NRA has taken many stances that I do not care to support. In recent years they have assumed a more sportsmans like role in defending the 2A. That is great for hunters and fowlers however as much as some would turn a blind eye to firearmsalternitive purposesthere is more to firearms than just hunting. I will not dwell on this too long because I feel you covered it. But moving on I also take issue with the NRA"company". I say company because that is what they have become. They produce a magazine and have many paidstaff memebers. The companies directive is to support the 2A and fight for our rights in Washington. So what happens if they would ever win that battle? Well I guess there would be no more company. And that would put many people out of jobs. And also take people out of power.Now maybe I am just looking too deeply into something that isn't there.I just don't see how a company that makes money would destroy itself. Sure I'm not naive enough to believe that we will ever completely win the fight for the 2A I know there will always be a kink or a problem. Andthat is why the NRA will always be around. But what I am getting at is that by having more problems, or just enough the NRA can sustain themselves. The NRA needs politicians who vote to taredown the 2A so that they can fight and sustain the company.

    To clearify my position. I do not think the NRA is a bad company and I do feel we need it. They have had some good key leaders that fought for good reasons. And I could not thank them enough for what they have done. But at this moment I do not aggree with some of their position.

    I am not a member of the NRA.

    Yes I do support many of their policies.

    Yes I have contributed in the past.

    No I do not feel that the number of guns in the US ismainly thanks to them.
    Thank you for your kind words and opinion, it is well recieved.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Oley, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    221

    Post imported post

    Hank although I admire you political activisism in the fight for the NRA I just do not aggree with all that they stand for.

    I clearly stated mainly. Did they have their part? Of course!! But I am more than positive that there were other benifactors that contributed to this number.

    KABA

    Ought Six

    SACFL,SACPA,SAC insert which state you would like.

    SAF.

    I could go on and on and on with names and organization that fight for the 2A.

    I am very happy for you to believe in something so forcfully. As long as you are happy in your beliefs than so be it. You have your right to your opinion and I would gladly give my life for your to have that ability. But I will not and do not feel that the NRA is the jehovah of the 2A.

    So now I am going to ask you.

    Do YOU Truly believe that we have that number of firearms in America only because of the NRA??

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    326

    Post imported post

    Several good points by all. Here is my 2 cents on the NRA:

    1ST: I too think they should take more of a hard line and not compromise. Having said that......it was stated that there are 270 million guns in the US. Well currently there are about 4 million NRA members. Does that mean that each NRA member owns 67 guns? I don't think so. Obviously it means that there are millions of gun owners who do not belong to or support the NRA. How much more effective would the NRA be with 8 million members? 10 million? 20 million? They would have a much stronger voice and a much larger budget to fight rather than compromise.

    2 ND: While I disagree with many of the things the NRA does or doesn't do, there is not a more powerful lobby in support of our gun rights.

    3 RD: We gun owners are sometimes a very fragmented group. SOME hunters don't fully support private citizens right to carry firearms for protection while SOME who carry for protection do not hunt or support hunting.

    4 TH Good or bad as the NRA may or may not be, can anyone suggest or name one organization that has done as much for gun owners as the NRA?

    5 TH MOST gun owners, including myself, do not do all they can do to fight for our gun rights. Many attend local meetings or actually talk with their legislators but MOST do not. We may send an email or if an NRA member mail the post cards that the NRA sends out to us to be signed an forwarded to our legislators, but MOST of us do nothing. Question for all of us.... How many of us have actually contacted the NRA and told them what we want them to fight for? Keep in mind that it cost money to fight these battles and ALL of them cannot be fought and won without money!!!

    6 TH How many of us who are NRA members ACTIVELY try to sign up other members to the NRA or any other pro gun organizations? The NRA constantly trys to recruit new members which would give them a stronger voice and of course more money.

    7 TH Is the NRA perfect? NO Could the NRA do more? YES (withmore members and more money) Has the NRA compromised on some issues? YES Should they compromise? NO Would they compromise if they had 20 million members instead of 4? NONE OF US KNOWS (but probably it would be less likely)

    Again just my 2 cents worth.



  15. #15
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    You spent your 2 cents wisely.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    425

    Post imported post

    I think crimsontide hit the nail on the head. I'm a member of the NRA (I've only been a member for a little over a year now). I don't agree with everything that they do, but they do more to protect my rights than most any other group, simply because of their size and clout.

    I would much prefer they take a hard line "shall not be infringed" stance on every issue, but it's just not possible, even with their vast resources. They need a lot more members, representing a much larger cross section of the country before they can do anything like that.

    I feel like I'm pretty active in fighting for the Second Amendment. I belong to the NRA. I belong to the CCRKBA. I write my congressmen. I openly carry and try to talk to friends and neighbors about the benefits of owning a firearm. I attend local meetings where guns are going to be an issue. Despite all of this, I could probably do more. And I know for a fact that nobody else I personally know does as much. The average Joe is more concerned with who got kicked off American Idol than he is about his own safety and freedom.

  17. #17
    Regular Member GreatWhiteLlama's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bothell, Washington, USA
    Posts
    287

    Post imported post

    Cue-Ball wrote:
    The average Joe is more concerned with who got kicked off American Idol than he is about his own safety and freedom.
    And that sir, is why our society is failing.
    "...our media are palace eunuchs gazing avidly at the harem of power and stroking their impotent pens in time to the rape of our liberties."
    -Sarah Hoyt

    "America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
    -Claire Wolfe

  18. #18
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    WhiteFeather wrote:
    No I do not feel that the number of guns [270 million]in the US ismainly thanks to them.
    What is it due to, in your opinion?

    Also, can you pls comment on how the number of guns in the U.S. (for your reasons, whatever they may be) compares to all other countries in the history of the world?
    WhiteFeather wrote:
    Hank although I admire you political activisism in the fight for the NRA I just do not aggree with all that they stand for.

    I clearly stated mainly. Did they have their part? Of course!! But I am more than positive that there were other benifactors that contributed to this number.
    I read your statement. And I read it precisely. It wasn't a particularly long or complex statement. It was:

    No I do not feel that the number of guns [270 million]in the US ismainly thanks to them.

    I questioned your statement. In it'sfull context. Entirely. Including the mainlypositioning that you qualified it with. This is trivial. I do not, nor have I ever, suggested that other advocates were at work. I clearly (to use your instructive) acknowledge this in my fundamental statement above in a prior post:

    I can easily say that the NRA has been instrumental in this state of affairs.

    Note, clearly, I did not exclude the fact that other advocates had a part. Youproffer straw man argument No. 1. Called.



    WhiteFeather wrote:
    I am very happy for you to believe in something so forcfully. As long as you are happy in your beliefs than so be it. You have your right to your opinion and I would gladly give my life for your to have that ability. But I will not and do not feel that the NRA is the jehovah of the 2A.
    Straw man No. 2. No one is saying, least of all me, that NRA = Jehovah. Called.





    WhiteFeather wrote:
    Do YOU Truly believe that we have that number of firearms in America only because of the NRA??

    Hmmm, we went from the start of my inquiry, your statement that you "do not feel that the number of guns [270 million]in the US ismainly thanks to them[NRA]."

    to, and here is the sleight of hand in wordsmithing, to your presumption that the fair question back to me is whether I believe "that number of firearms in America only because of the NRA??" How did it shift to only from mainly? LOL. Straw man No. 3.

    Just to humor you, I guess I'll answer the question. No, I do not really believe that we have thatnumber [270 million]of firearms in Americaonly because of the NRA.
    Your question is, however, irrelevant. No one thinks that. That's why yourquestion has a straw man embedded in it.

    The correct question for you to have asked is:

    "Do YOU Truly believe that we have that number of firearms in America mainly because of the NRA??"

    Andof course I would answer: yes. As I did in my prior post.

    I really don't think anyone can argue that the NRA has not been the instrumental (or main) factor as to why there are now 270 million guns in the United States and why there are4.5 million new guns being added annually.


    You can be against any NRA position or action taken in the last 50 years you wish to be against. But you cannot deny what they have mainly accomplished during that time. They have fought society, culture and politics to make them the most effective lobbying group in the history of this country.

    For some reason, it is extremely difficult for NRA bashers and critics to acknowledgethat simple fact. But the irony is, their criticisms would carry more weight if they could just acknowledge it. But they can't, for they've entered the realm of ideological extremism...

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Oley, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    221

    Post imported post

    Cue-Ball wrote:
    The average Joe is more concerned with who got kicked off American Idol than he is about his own safety and freedom.
    T-Rav-
    And that sir, is why our society is failing.

    For that and many more. Politicsare like automobiles for most people. You get in insertkey and expect to be able to drive. You don't take the time to learn what happens when you insert the key. You don't bother learning what to do if the automobile fails to start. You call someone and theytake over and give you the answers and fix you car so thatyou can resume your ignorance.

    Mindyou I have not found statistics to backup my statement. But I would venture to say that at least 50% (if not greater)register or vote one way because they're parents do. I'm not aiming that comment at teens or any age bracket. Doesn't matter about age, if I had a quater for everytime I heard someone say "My parents were blank and so am I" I would be able to buy everyone on this board a Barrett. And that is another reason why I take issues with certain groups like the NRA. The NRA puts its seal of approval on people I wouldn't vote for if they were the only choice. And yetsome people will vote that way just because the NRA said its ok.

    Again I want to point out that I do not think the NRA is a horrible organization. I have in the past and will continue to in the future support issues with and for the NRA. They have done many great things and we do owe a thank you for supporting our 2A rights. But I do not think they are the only way to do so. Nor do I think they alone have acomplished what they have.

    I would not put my trust in one make of automobile.

    I do not put my trust in one US party.

    I would not put my trust in one anything to do everything. It takes a coalition of people and organizations to acomplish these things.
    HankT-

    Also, can you pls comment on how the number of guns in the U.S. (for your reasons, whatever they may be) compares to all other countries in the history of the world?
    I apologize for not answering this question before.

    I believe that has to do with many things. Economic strength, Continent size, and availability.

    How many firearms manufactures are there in the US? How many in South America? How many in Switzerland? I'm sure this plays a role.

    http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/d...5&rss=true

    Switzerland has an estimated 1.2 to 12 million firearms in country. A estimated 46 firearms for every 100. However the statistics for this are fuzzy and are in the process of being corrected. Switzerland is much smaller,this means smaller economy and smaller everything. Where as some people in the US can go out and buy 1 or more gun(s) a monthsome people in Switzerland might not. Switzerland has less natural resources available totrade and gain profit. You have to remember that American is a vastnation full of resources thatsome countries only dream of. We have more jobs and more trade than most countries. More money=more guns. Per capita the Swiss may have a better economy but numbers work in strange ways. Per capita does not mean more justmore evenly distributed. And percapitain America is anything butequal.

    Countries like Iraq, Pakastan, Brazil have many more times the number of firearms. But because they are considered illegal they cannot be trackedand theycannot count. That 270 million I would assume are just the legal kind right? I would bet you would get double that if you counted the illegal ones as well. But regardless you have to take into account the size of the US. And the available resources as well as the ability and knowledge to use and harvest the resources. We are much larger than select countries in the middle east and Europe. And therefore it is only logical that we have more. So again I apologies for my delayed answer.



  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Oley, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    221

    Post imported post

    HankT I don't want this to turn into a contest of wits anymore than you do. I think we have a difference of opinion and in the end will have to agree to disagree.

    I stated,

    You have your right to your opinion and I would gladly give my life for your to have that ability.
    And I meant that. You have a God given right to your opinion and I am not here to but heads and change your view I am here to express my own.
    But you cannot deny what they have mainly accomplished during that time.
    I do therefore I can. I can say whatever I choose it doesn't make it right or wrong it makes it my opinion. That opinion is my right as is anyones.

    Hmmm, we went from the start of my inquiry, your statement that you "do not feel that the number of guns [270 million]in the US ismainly thanks to them[NRA]."

    to, and here is the sleight of hand in wordsmithing, to your presumption that the fair question back to me is whether I believe "that number of firearms in America only because of the NRA??" How did it shift to only from mainly? LOL. Straw man No. 3.
    It was not a fair question back. It was a question based on assumption that althought you feel strongly about the NRA you would not entrap yourself by answering yes. I never for a second thought that you would believe that only the NRA is responsible for the number of firearms in the US. It is not a straw man as you put it. It was a question of self denial. You give off an air that the NRA is blameless and that all who appose are apposed to the very thing they stand for. And no one in this thread has said as much. I as well as others here have stated over and over that we do not feel that the NRA is 100% correct in their decisions and statements and ideals.
    Straw man No. 2. No one is saying, least of all me, that NRA = Jehovah. Called.
    That is picking and choosing words from my quote.

    But I will not and do not feel that the NRA is the jehovah of the 2A.
    I never stated you felt that way. And I never stated that the NRA was Jehovah. I stated that some acted as if they were the jehovah of the 2A(Second Amendment). And they are not. To be THE implies only and that would indeed be incorrect. And although they have done a great deal in aspects of supporting and defending the 2A they have not been the savior. You and I have and that is what many seem to forget. It has never been the NRA it has been members like you and others who have voiced your opinion and made clear your demands. They have only relayed to the appropirate authorities our thoughts. We could have and can do without them. But sticking $20 in a envolope is easier.
    They have fought society, culture and politics to make them the most effective lobbying group in the history of this country.
    Data that suggests that??? I'm sure there are far more powerful lobby'ist out there. But that is irrelevant. I point this out because you have let emotions get in the way of civil discussion. I nor any other person who have mentioned any wrong the NRA has or does do has not condemned it as a whole. I have intoned my like and support for the NRA repeatedly but none of that was quoted and thrown back at me. Kelly J has intoned many of the same thoughts. No one here is out to ruin the NRA or sway anyones opinions. I state what I state as my opinion be it flawed or not it is only my own. I have not personally attacked any member of this board and you will never see me do so.

    You use a"Straw man" term for my thoughts and opinions. I would take that as a lack fo respect for what I said. You do not have to respect my opinions but you don't have to belittle them either.
    For some reason, it is extremely difficult for NRA bashers and critics to acknowledgethat simple fact. But the irony is, their criticisms would carry more weight if they could just acknowledge it. But they can't, for they've entered the realm of ideological extremism...
    If you do not ask questions you will not receive answers. I question everything, I question the motives of everyone around me for the simple reason that I want to know why or what compells anyone for any reason. I will not be bound to blindly follow any one organization with any beliefs on anything. I will criticise any and all who claim to defend me. And all who are against me because I want to see my flaws and compare them with my reason.

    There is no one alive ever, who has not changed their opinion in favor of an idea more in line with their own beliefs. I have strongly believed in things before until I examined that statements against that belief and have found them more conclusive in solving said problem or notion.

    I have expressed qualms with the NRA, I have expressed support. I like and dislike aspects of the NRA I cannot make it any clearer.

    So in ending I want to say again. HankT I respect your opinion and value your thoughts but my own differ and until I find probable cause to change that, we will have come to a empass.






  21. #21
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    WhiteFeather wrote:
    HankT I don't want this to turn into a contest of wits anymore than you do. I think we have a difference of opinion and in the end will have to agree to disagree.

    I stated,

    You have your right to your opinion and I would gladly give my life for your to have that ability.
    And I meant that. You have a God given right to your opinion and I am not here to but heads and change your view I am here to express my own.
    But you cannot deny what they have mainly accomplished during that time.
    I do therefore I can. I can say whatever I choose it doesn't make it right or wrong it makes it my opinion. That opinion is my right as is anyones.

    Hmmm, we went from the start of my inquiry, your statement that you "do not feel that the number of guns [270 million]in the US ismainly thanks to them[NRA]."

    to, and here is the sleight of hand in wordsmithing, to your presumption that the fair question back to me is whether I believe "that number of firearms in America only because of the NRA??" How did it shift to only from mainly? LOL. Straw man No. 3.
    It was not a fair question back. It was a question based on assumption that althought you feel strongly about the NRA you would not entrap yourself by answering yes. I never for a second thought that you would believe that only the NRA is responsible for the number of firearms in the US. It is not a straw man as you put it. It was a question of self denial. You give off an air that the NRA is blameless and that all who appose are apposed to the very thing they stand for. And no one in this thread has said as much. I as well as others here have stated over and over that we do not feel that the NRA is 100% correct in their decisions and statements and ideals.
    Straw man No. 2. No one is saying, least of all me, that NRA = Jehovah. Called.
    That is picking and choosing words from my quote.

    But I will not and do not feel that the NRA is the jehovah of the 2A.
    I never stated you felt that way. And I never stated that the NRA was Jehovah. I stated that some acted as if they were the jehovah of the 2A(Second Amendment). And they are not. To be THE implies only and that would indeed be incorrect. And although they have done a great deal in aspects of supporting and defending the 2A they have not been the savior. You and I have and that is what many seem to forget. It has never been the NRA it has been members like you and others who have voiced your opinion and made clear your demands. They have only relayed to the appropirate authorities our thoughts. We could have and can do without them. But sticking $20 in a envolope is easier.
    They have fought society, culture and politics to make them the most effective lobbying group in the history of this country.
    Data that suggests that??? I'm sure there are far more powerful lobby'ist out there. But that is irrelevant. I point this out because you have let emotions get in the way of civil discussion. I nor any other person who have mentioned any wrong the NRA has or does do has not condemned it as a whole. I have intoned my like and support for the NRA repeatedly but none of that was quoted and thrown back at me. Kelly J has intoned many of the same thoughts. No one here is out to ruin the NRA or sway anyones opinions. I state what I state as my opinion be it flawed or not it is only my own. I have not personally attacked any member of this board and you will never see me do so.

    You use a"Straw man" term for my thoughts and opinions. I would take that as a lack fo respect for what I said. You do not have to respect my opinions but you don't have to belittle them either.
    For some reason, it is extremely difficult for NRA bashers and critics to acknowledgethat simple fact. But the irony is, their criticisms would carry more weight if they could just acknowledge it. But they can't, for they've entered the realm of ideological extremism...
    If you do not ask questions you will not receive answers. I question everything, I question the motives of everyone around me for the simple reason that I want to know why or what compells anyone for any reason. I will not be bound to blindly follow any one organization with any beliefs on anything. I will criticise any and all who claim to defend me. And all who are against me because I want to see my flaws and compare them with my reason.

    There is no one alive ever, who has not changed their opinion in favor of an idea more in line with their own beliefs. I have strongly believed in things before until I examined that statements against that belief and have found them more conclusive in solving said problem or notion.

    I have expressed qualms with the NRA, I have expressed support. I like and dislike aspects of the NRA I cannot make it any clearer.

    So in ending I want to say again. HankT I respect your opinion and value your thoughts but my own differ and until I find probable cause to change that, we will have come to a empass.




    You sir are a better diplomat than I, and I agree totally with you.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    This was posted on another Forum in response to this exact posting.

    I have to agree, you are 100 percent right on target.
    Actually, the NRA compromised on the national Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA34). There were no new federal gun laws until The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA68).
    How does it feel to be ruled by ADOLPH HITLER? If you think I'm joking, I not only am not joking, but deadly serious. The GCA68 that was rammed through the Congress, with only slight word changing was Adolph Hitler's gun control law of IIRC, 1935. Substitute "convicted felon" for "jew" and you get the point. Senator Thomas Dodd, may he burn in hell, was part of the Nuremberg Trials after WW2 ended. Part of his job was to go over Nazi documents and get them translated. One of the documents was Hitler's gun law. Happy now?
    The only ray of light came witht he Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA86) and the NRA compromised on that one when a democrat(I think) senator added the "no new machine guns for civilians" portion to the law, and the NRA more or less caved in. They were afraid that the law might not be brought up for a vote again because it had failed to pass over several tries in as many years.
    What does torque my jaws is the NRA is currently trying to prevent the DC gun law trail reaching the Supreme Court. I wonder why? Well, if the Supremes stats that the Second Amendment is about individual ownership, then NFA34, GCA68 and all the other federal gun laws go down the crapper as being unconstitutional. If the Supremes go against individual ownership, then the antis will feel free to try and ram total confiscation down our throats. However, if we do win, the NRA will be reduced to monitoring shooting matches like Camp Perry and their big cash cow goes down the crapper.
    If one studies the federal laws regarding the militia, then all males 17 to 45 years of age who do not own an M-16 are in violation of federal law. How do you like those apples. I have posted this before and I'll do so again so that no one has to do a search. I think that if everyone took the trouble to copy and paste the following to their representative and demanded that they follow the law, we just might get our point across. If they don't get the point, we run them out of office, preferaly by the ballot box. Also, note my signature at the end. it specifically means the NRA should stop compromising.
    It was in 1976, give or take a year that there was a revolt in the NRA and Harlan Carter became the head honcho. I'm sure you remember him. He was hard core and kept the NRA on the straight and narrow. After he died, the "good old boys" got back in power and you know where they stand. The good old boys don't give a damn about your gun rights. All they care about is dunning the membership for money and giving themselves very fat salaries. Wayne La Pierre's salary is about 2.5 times great than the president of the United States. That does not count his expense account. So where does all the money we send go? I know of one instance in california where the NRA absolutely REFUSED to help when a bad gun law was being pushed on the people. The NRA only tackles battles they are sure they can win. Why? Aw hell, just read the excerpts from federal laws that state we must be armed.
    Paul B.

    OK, lets discuss the 2nd Amendment. Good idea. It is my carefully considered opinion that the KEY WORD is MILITIA.

    1. The Militia Act of 1792. One year after the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, Congress passed a law defining the militia. The Militia Act of 1792 declared that all free male citizens between the ages of 18 and 44 were to be members of the militia. Furthermore, every citizen was to be armed. The act stated:
    "Every citizen...[shall] provide himself with a good musket, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints...."

    The Militia Act of 1792 made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.

    U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982) "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated BY LAW (emphasis mine) to possess a [military style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipmemnt....There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the national Guard."

    Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311. "The militia of the Untied States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and...under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States.....

    Supreme Court: U.S. v. Miller 1939 In this case, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised of all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense...[and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves AND OF THE KIND IN COMMON USE AT THE TIME. (emphasis mine)
    (BTW, Miller lost in court because he did not show up. It was never taken into account that his no show was because he had passed away.)

    More on Title 10 of the U.S. Code

    UNITED STATES CODE
    TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
    Subtitle A - General Military Law
    PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
    CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

    Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

    (a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 302, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

    (b) The classes of the militia are -

    (1) the organized militia which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
    and

    (2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or of the Naval Militia.

    Now it took me all of about ten minutes to find all that information. Just go to the Gun Owners of America's website and look for their firearms fact sheet. There's 24 pages of good information there.

    I plan on making copies of the above and sending each of my representatives their own personal copy. Feel free to do the same. Maybe, if they get flooded with as many letters with the above as Zumbo's sponsers did on his major foot in mouth problem, the idiots just might get a message. Leave our guns alone.
    Paul B.


    COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION!

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran kimbercarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    hampton, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    So according to Hankt, If the NRA has helped us before to get where we are than they can compromise every now and then and it's ok.

    As powerful as the NRA is they could demand what they wanted and push hard and get most of what they want. At times they act like the Republicans, they're afraid to assert themselves even though they have the power to do so.

    And yes I am a member of the NRA.:X

    And I agree with you 100% kellyj. We need to hold their feet to the fire like our reps, they work for us, we hired them.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •