Know The Enemy of Liberty: the National Rifle Association

[Texasjack]

Quit feeding the trolls.

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

Shit franz,
dude posted that the bushmaster used had a high capacity mag.

Oh shit. Now I'm suspicious of my Bushmaster. I'm afraid it knows that I'm onto it and it's going to unzip the rifle case, crawl out and make its way across the room and do me in while I'm sleeping. If you guys don't hear from me tomorrow I'm probably dea383ndknnmmkkkkkkkccgk


















This is Bushmaster. PAK is finished and I'm coming for you next

-PAK-

 

[benenglish]

The NRA is not perfect and I have no problem with people picking nits in the present or bitching about past mistakes. However, I like to keep three things in mind.

1. The NRA is bigger, better and more effective than ever before, earning my Lifetime Benefactor support,
2. We own guns today because the NRA exists, and
3. People who resort to hyperbolic headlines tend to have questionable credibility, judgement, or both.

And now, with apologies for my momentary lapse, I'll stop feeding the troll.

 

[OIF2]

I was totally committed to buying a rifle today but put a pencil to it and couldn't make it happen. I believe that we must USE our rights or we will lose them!

On the same topic, we have a special election for state Senator and after I post this, I'll head to the early voting polls. My candidate is "A" rated by the NRA and is an Expert pistol marksman and rifle marksman. I did my research and I'm gonna vote.

The small elections and primaries are where we can make changes. After that, the options are slim pickins. VOTE!

Flash

You win the big ones by winning the small ones first. Well said, Mr Flash.
Bob

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

The NRA is not perfect and I have no problem with people picking nits in the present or bitching about past mistakes. However, I like to keep three things in mind.

1. The NRA is bigger, better and more effective than ever before, earning my Lifetime Benefactor support,
2. We own guns today because the NRA exists, and
3. People who resort to hyperbolic headlines tend to have questionable credibility, judgement, or both.

And now, with apologies for my momentary lapse, I'll stop feeding the troll.

I agree. The NRA has my full support because let's face it, who else is fighting the gun grabbers with as loud a voice? Not many others.

 

[karlac]

With damned few exceptions, anything a liberal is against, I'm for ... the NRA is no exception.

I put up with the NRA's "spam", and barrages of requests for $$, because I'm convinced that kind of tactic is provably one of the few effective weapons against our worst enemy: APATHY

 

[Southpaw]

With damned few exceptions, anything a liberal is against, I'm for ... the NRA is no exception.

I put up with the NRA's "spam", and barrages of requests for $$, because I'm convinced that kind of tactic is provably one of the few effective weapons against our worst enemy: APATHY

You complained about that before, and while I don't question it happening, I have to say, it's never been a problem for me. Of course I took precautions like setting up a dedicated email address and gave them phone number to the Brady Bunch.
As far as mail, I might get 2 to 4 pieces a month, sometimes less but never more. Most of the time it's the free contests which are the only one's I actually pay attention to other then my yearly renewal.
Are you telling me you don't get junk mail from other sources, unsolicited at that? Or is it just the NRA mail the only one that pissed you off more so then the others?

Also, you say you are "against them". Do you mean to say that you believe it should be abolished or restricted in some way, like a liberal might, all over junk mail, some spam you could have easily never seen and phone calls you willingly gave your number out to receive? Or are you saying it's just not for you due to those things but fine if others wish to support them?

 

[karlac]

You complained about that before, and while I don't question it happening, I have to say, it's never been a problem for me. Of course I took precautions like setting up a dedicated email address and gave them phone number to the Brady Bunch.
As far as mail, I might get 2 to 4 pieces a month, sometimes less but never more. Most of the time it's the free contests which are the only one's I actually pay attention to other then my yearly renewal.
Are you telling me you don't get junk mail from other sources, unsolicited at that? Or is it just the NRA mail the only one that pissed you off more so then the others?

Also, you say you are "against them". Do you mean to say that you believe it should be abolished or restricted in some way, like a liberal might, all over junk mail, some spam you could have easily never seen and phone calls you willingly gave your number out to receive? Or are you saying it's just not for you due to those things but fine if others wish to support them?

Say what?? Care to show me exactly where I "... said that before", or "against them" sic?

As far as the rest of your diatribe, I believe you had a decided comprehension malfunction? Might well be my typing on an iPad that caused your confusion, but confused you certainly appear to be? Might want to read that again.

An NRA member, and lifetime supporter .... and sorry for any confusion.

 

[Jeffrey]

Gun Owners of America sends me one piece of mail every couple of months. I usually toss them a 20.

 

[benenglish]

...who else is fighting the gun grabbers with as loud a voice? Not many others.

The Second Amendment Foundation isn't as loud but does a fine job of filing useful lawsuits. I'm a life member there, too.

 

[karlac]

Gun Owners of America sends me one piece of mail every couple of months. I usually toss them a 20.

I get half a dozen/week emails from NRA, and a couple in snail mail. One today from LP himself, yeah right; and another wanting me to buy more "insurance" of some type. I expect that the very reason I get so many is because of my continued support in responding to a plea with $25 here and there for lobbying against some particularly egregious anti 2A bill.

Contrary to the misconstrued interpretation of a post above, don't mind being a sucker for this particular cause at all.

 

[franzas]

The Second Amendment Foundation isn't as loud but does a fine job of filing useful lawsuits. I'm a life member there, too.

I get NAGR's emails. They're close with Rand Paul. I like that.

Already NRA and GOA. Need TSRA, SAF and NAGR when I get the money

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I give to them all. IMO it's good to have multiple organizations that are strong for a number of reasons.

 

[Southpaw]

Say what?? Care to show me exactly where I "... said that before", or "against them" sic?

As far as the rest of your diatribe, I believe you had a decided comprehension malfunction? Might well be my typing on an iPad that caused your confusion, but confused you certainly appear to be? Might want to read that again.

An NRA member, and lifetime supporter .... and sorry for any confusion.

I stand corrected then. Your post didn't read that way to me at first. Looks as if I had you confused with another member.

 

[V-Tach]

No the NRA isn't perfect....but better than it was in the old days pre 1977.....Anyone remember the Cincinnati Revolt ?


Life Endowment Member here...

 

[benenglish]

No the NRA isn't perfect....but better than it was in the old days pre 1977.....Anyone remember the Cincinnati Revolt ?

Lordy, yes! If that hadn't happened, the NRA would be hq'd in New Mexico, USA Shooting would not exist, and the "gun lobby" of today would probably fit inside a moderately large conference room.

We'd be looking at the same situation as in Europe right now. Shooting would be a generally expensive sport, far out of the mainstream, and the gun lobby would, like those few people hq'd in Italy who are working their asses off to change things, be little more than a political footnote.

 

[darrenlobo]

You guys that are so critical of my article don't get a few things. First & foremost, there is such a thing as pro-gun rights criticism of the NRA. Don't be so shocked by it.

When I was with the Libertarian Party we would run A rated candidates against B & C rated Republicans. Guess who the NRA would endorse? Not the LP candidate. If they were truly principled they would endorse the most pro-gun rights candidates. They don't.

Gun owners today can’t stand up to the law enforcement establishment much less the military. People that advocate civilian guns to counter-balance the government’s weapons are engaging in a dangerous fantasy that is rightly ridiculed. In the US since the government can’t disarm us completely they have armed themselves to the hilt. This has a similar effect as disarming us. One only needs look at the militarization of the law enforcement establishment to see this. There is only one answer and that is institutional change shutting down those agencies while building up the private means of defending ourselves. The NRA is advocating continuing to arm the very institutions that will take our guns & the rest of our liberties. This is madness.

 

[Vaquero]

You guys that are so critical of my article don't get a few things. First & foremost, there is such a thing as pro-gun rights criticism of the NRA. Don't be so shocked by it.

When I was with the Libertarian Party we would run A rated candidates against B & C rated Republicans. Guess who the NRA would endorse? Not the LP candidate. If they were truly principled they would endorse the most pro-gun rights candidates. They don't.

Gun owners today can’t stand up to the law enforcement establishment much less the military. People that advocate civilian guns to counter-balance the government’s weapons are engaging in a dangerous fantasy that is rightly ridiculed. In the US since the government can’t disarm us completely they have armed themselves to the hilt. This has a similar effect as disarming us. One only needs look at the militarization of the law enforcement establishment to see this. There is only one answer and that is institutional change shutting down those agencies while building up the private means of defending ourselves. The NRA is advocating continuing to arm the very institutions that will take our guns & the rest of our liberties. This is madness.

Bundy Ranch ring a bell?

 

[darrenlobo]

Bundy Ranch ring a bell?

Yes, thank you. It's not over. The govt can still go after Bundy. The fact that the Bundy incident was exposing Reid's corruption had as much, if not more, to do with their backing off (for now) than the people's guns on the scene. FWIW here's what I wrote about it:

[h=3]Imagine the Bundy Ranch Showdown With Well Regulated Militias[/h] (snip)
The useless constitution seems to be clear about what the federal government can and can't do. Article I, Section 8, clause 15 is the only part of the constitution that mentions how the federal government can enforce its laws. It reads “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions” [emphasis added] That's it, nowhere else does the constitution mention how to enforce federal law. The 10th Amendment limits the federal government's powers to only those listed. Nowhere does the constitution give the US government the power to create law enforcement agencies. This makes the BLM and the rest of the alphabet soup of federal law enforcement agencies unconstitutional.

(snip)

Imagine if the government didn't have the BLM and its thugs to bully Cliven Bundy. Imagine if to go after him congress would have had to meet and then vote to call forth the Nevada militia. Does anyone seriously think that a militia composed of Mr. Bundy's neighbors would have even tried to enforce the federal government's tyranny on him? Of course not. If we don't give the government the power to oppress it won't. The only way to secure our rights is to disarm the government while arming and organizing the people.
(snip)
The International Libertarian: Imagine the Bundy Ranch Showdown With Well Regulated Militias

 

[Captain]

Where is that popcorn, pass me some.



sent from the Gulf of Mexico