Bob Irwin quoted by the NY Times...

[DVC]

Nope, you have it 180 out of phase.

See?

 

[DVC]

As to 'alternate view,' that is 'alternate to the one the anti-parkers present.

So ka.

Fair enough. As I haven't really been following that whole thing, it seemed that you were presenting your own interpretation.

And yes, it Don Turner's response has been posted in the Nevada forums for all to read, I forget which person had that correspondence with him.

If that is the official NVFAC position, then it makes a certain amount of sense. I don't think it makes ENOUGH sense, but it's your club.

 

[wrightme]

So ka.

Fair enough. As I haven't really been following that whole thing, it seemed that you were presenting your own interpretation.

So you were simply arguing against me? Got it.

If that is the official NVFAC position, then it makes a certain amount of sense. I don't think it makes ENOUGH sense, but it's your club.

First off, go to Don Turner's statement to another OCDO'er for the NVFAC position, not me.
Second off, it isn't 'my' club.


This isn't 'us and them,' with you on one side, and NVFAC and me on another. Unless you simply want to keep it that way. Whether you can see it or not, they are 'us.'

 

[DVC]

So you were simply arguing against me?

No, I was arguing against apologetic interpretation.

This isn't 'us and them,' with you on one side, and NVFAC and me on another. Unless you simply want to keep it that way. Whether you can see it or not, they are 'us.'

It's only "us" if NVFAC proves itself to be more than a Quaker cannon.

 

[wrightme]

No, I was arguing against apologetic interpretation.

Then you failed.
The interpretation I presented is equally valid with the interpretations you support.

It's only "us" if NVFAC proves itself to be more than a Quaker cannon.

No, it is 'us' based upon goals. Whether those goals are realized or not, encompasses many variables. Are you 'for' the same stated goals or not?

 

[DVC]

No, it is 'us' based upon goals. Whether those goals are realized or not, encompasses many variables. Are you 'for' the same stated goals or not?

It's only "us" if I believe that NVFAC actually IS working toward those goals.

I take anything associated with the NRA with a block of salt. They've always kept two sets of books, one with their press releases and another with what they actually do.

Irwin being gone gets an obstacle out of the way. Now let's see what you do with the opportunity.

 

[wrightme]

It's only "us" if I believe that NVFAC actually IS working toward those goals.

I take anything associated with the NRA with a block of salt. They've always kept two sets of books, one with their press releases and another with what they actually do.

Irwin being gone gets an obstacle out of the way. Now let's see what you do with the opportunity.

Number is what is still necessary. Are you going to be counted WITH us, or not?


The NVFAC isn't 'the NRA.' They are the NVFAC.

 

[MAC702]

...The NVFAC isn't 'the NRA.' They are the NVFAC.

That's a bit misleading, isn't it? Isn't NRA membership required to join NVFAC as its state-affiliated organization?

 

[wrightme]

That's a bit misleading, isn't it? Isn't NRA membership required to join NVFAC as its state-affiliated organization?

I do not know the answer, but AFAIK, no.

It isn't misleading to state that the NVFAC isn't the NRA. It is the state affiliate organization. Before that it was the NSRPA. Did they require NRA membership?

Found it, easily.

Include a current mailing address, email address, phone number, your NRA membership number, your NSSF membership number (NRA & NSSF membership not required to join. If your email or mailing address changes, please change it within your online profile once registered.

http://www.nvfac.org/Join.aspx

 

[The Big Guy]

That's a bit misleading, isn't it? Isn't NRA membership required to join NVFAC as its state-affiliated organization?

No.

TBG

 

[MAC702]

I do not know the answer, but AFAIK, no.

It isn't misleading to state that the NVFAC isn't the NRA. It is the state affiliate organization. Before that it was the NSRPA. Did they require NRA membership?

Found it, easily.


http://www.nvfac.org/Join.aspx

Thanks! I looked, too, but didn't find it as easily. I did see the space for your NRA number on the membership application, and honestly, I was sure I had remembered that NSRPC required it way back when I was a member during their brief attempt.

 

[DVC]

Number is what is still necessary. Are you going to be counted WITH us, or not?


The NVFAC isn't 'the NRA.' They are the NVFAC.

The question is whether YOU are counted with US.

"US" being myself, the Second Amendment Foundation, and others who have actually GOTTEN THINGS DONE to advance the cause of civil rights.

NVFAC is the "official state affiliate" of the NRA. Dunno what YOU think that means, but to me that means "associated with the NRA."

All you have to do to change my mind is prove my skepticism wrong.

 

[wrightme]

The question is whether YOU are counted with US.

"US" being myself, the Second Amendment Foundation, and others who have actually GOTTEN THINGS DONE to advance the cause of civil rights.

No, that isn't the question. The question is the 'us that are gun owners of Nevada, seeking change in Nevada regulations such as blue card registration, constitutional carry, campus carry, and the other items where the NVFAC are in agreement with you and I.'

NVFAC is the "official state affiliate" of the NRA. Dunno what YOU think that means, but to me that means "associated with the NRA."

All you have to do to change my mind is prove my skepticism wrong.

Given what I have seen from you here so far, I doubt that is possible; no matter how much proof would be presented.


So, given that the NVFAC is geared towards work IN Nevada, you should be able to show what the SAF has 'GOTTEN DONE' in Nevada.

And it isn't 'advance the cause of civil rights' that is the NVFAC goal, is it?

 

[DVC]

So, given that the NVFAC is geared towards work IN Nevada, you should be able to show what the SAF has 'GOTTEN DONE' in Nevada.

Well, lessee, decisions of the United States Supreme court have an effect "IN Nevada," and the SAF got them to recognize the Second Amendment as an individual right -- something that the NRA never even attempted to do.

I believe that will be "Check" and "Mate."

And it isn't 'advance the cause of civil rights' that is the NVFAC goal, is it?

It's what NVFAC CLAIMS to be ONE goal. Idiot-Board Barack CLAIMS to respect the Second Amendment. Whorehouse Harry Reid CLAIMS that income taxes are voluntary.

Instead of CLAIMS, I'm looking for EFFORT from NVFAC.

During the year and a half I've been telling you that, you have always had some excuse: "What do you expect from a brand-new organization?" or "they can't do anything until the Legislature comes back."

Well, guess what . . ? A year and a half is no longer "new," and the Legislature is back. Let's see what you can do. Hiring your lobbyist was a good first move, let's see what he's told to DO, and who he's willing to annoy to make it happen.

 

[wrightme]

Well, lessee, decisions of the United States Supreme court have an effect "IN Nevada," and the SAF got them to recognize the Second Amendment as an individual right -- something that the NRA never even attempted to do.

I believe that will be "Check" and "Mate."

No, that would not be 'check' or 'mate.' It would be 'misdirect.'

It is false to compare an organization that operates nationally with one that operates inside the state. I keep pointing this out, and you keep sidestepping.

It's what NVFAC CLAIMS to be ONE goal. Idiot-Board Barack CLAIMS to respect the Second Amendment. Whorehouse Harry Reid CLAIMS that income taxes are voluntary.

Instead of CLAIMS, I'm looking for EFFORT from NVFAC.

Then you must be keeping track of the emails they send to members, and the facebook page, right?

During the year and a half I've been telling you that, you have always had some excuse: "What do you expect from a brand-new organization?" or "they can't do anything until the Legislature comes back."

My statements were not excuses, they were reality for the new organization, AND their stated intent.

Well, guess what . . ? A year and a half is no longer "new," and the Legislature is back. Let's see what you can do. Hiring your lobbyist was a good first move, let's see what he's told to DO, and who he's willing to annoy to make it happen.

What do you mean, what I can do? I am not the NVFAC. I support what they are doing, including the hiring of the lobbyist, which was one of their intentions from early on.

But, as I (and others) have stated multiple times, for them to be truly successful in the legislative session, they need numbers. It keeps getting pointed out, and, once again, you keep sidestepping it.

 

[CowboyKen]

... I am not the NVFAC. ...

Then why the hell are you always in the middle?

 

[wrightme]

Then why the hell are you always in the middle?

1) Why not?

2) I have been in the legislative process, and understand how important it is to have a strong state organization able and willing to lobby for Nevada gun owners.

3) Given the negative bias presented by some, presenting an alternate viewpoint is quite valid. Would you have me silenced, as opposed to speaking my mind?

 

[DVC]

No, that would not be 'check' or 'mate.' It would be 'misdirect.'

And that would be the last that I'm going to bother with you.

Anyone who would TRY to claim that getting the USSC to recognize the individual right isn't a benefit to Nevadans is too stupid to deserve my time.

Lemme guess . . .you have one of those "I'm the NRA" stickers on your car . . .

 

[DVC]

Then why the hell are you always in the middle?

Because he likes to argue, even when his argument is so inane as to defy description.

 

[varminter22]

Anyone who would TRY to claim that getting the USSC to recognize the individual right isn't a benefit to Nevadans is too stupid to deserve my time.

Lemme guess . . .you have one of those "I'm the NRA" stickers on your car . . .

THAT is absurd.