Contracts with the NRA being severed.

[Weedy1]

Is social media creating havoc for the NRA? Some massive companies severing ties with them. Should be interesting to see where this goes with the political party connections.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ticle38088393/

https://thinkprogress.org/delta-seve...-46cf6401d175/

[Tactical Lever]

What a lame about-face, by fair weather Johnsons. It wasn't the NRA that armed the kid. He had no prior records, and would have been able to buy a gun regardless of whether there is or isn't background checks.

I don't see what has changed about anything to do with ownership, crime, or support of gun owners by the NRA that warrants all the distance that some companies are putting between them.

I don't see an easy solution for such a random problem. The media makes it look like these things happen every day; but in a decade we will still be rehashing this one as if it was yesterday.

[Selkirk]

Originally Posted by Weedy1

Is social media creating havoc for the NRA? Some massive companies severing ties with them. Should be interesting to see where this goes with the political party connections.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ticle38088393/

https://thinkprogress.org/delta-seve...-46cf6401d175/

It was just a matter of time, and I'm sure more will follow.

Sadly, the NRA is stuck back in the 1800's.

Selkirk

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

It was just a matter of time, and I'm sure more will follow.

Sadly, the NRA is stuck back in the 1800's.

Selkirk

What do you mean by stuck in the 1800s?

[propliner]

Is there any doubt America is a corporatocracy? And one that is easily swayed, to boot? The lone individual will need to ante up more dollars for their gun freedoms to survive.

[CNP]

I doubt if NRA members or non members buy into membership so they can get discounts at these places. What does it amount to? Maybe something significant? Don't think so...

[Selkirk]

Originally Posted by Newview01

What do you mean by stuck in the 1800s?

The mindset and firearms technology, back in the years 1800 to 1899.

Nuff said.

Selkirk

[molly]

Originally Posted by Newview01

What do you mean by stuck in the 1800s?

Well, the NRA was founded in 1871... for a reason much different than what it represents now.

http://time.com/4106381/nra-1871-history/

Here is the NRA mission statement now:

The NRA’s mission statement, summarized from its bylaws, is: "To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially with reference to the inalienable right of the individual American citizen guaranteed by such Constitution to acquire, possess, collect, exhibit, transport, carry, transfer ownership of, and enjoy the right to use arms."

Read Full Article Here NRA vs. National Association for Gun Rights: How Do They Differ? | Newsmax.com

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

The mindset and firearms technology, back in the years 1800 to 1899.

Nuff said.

Selkirk

No, you have not said enough.

Are you opposed to the NRA catering to the desires of its members? The NRA believes in the second amendment which is as relevant today as it ever was. Do you have a problem with that?

[Selkirk]

Originally Posted by Newview01

No, you have not said enough ...

Actually, yes I have!

If you want to continue to chew on that old worn-out piece of gristle, your going to have to do it with someone else.

And if you have a problem with that, you can take it up with the Mods.

Once again ... Nuff Said

Selkirk

[dmcbride]

More then just the media.


http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/p...asp?grpid=7121

[Mulehahn]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

The mindset and firearms technology, back in the years 1800 to 1899.

Nuff said.

Selkirk

The second amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Though there no longer regulated militias the amendment was written with the intent that should the American Government itself attempt to destroy peoples freedoms they would fall. In that context the people should actually be better armed then the government.

[vcmm]

Originally Posted by Mulehahn

The second amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Though there no longer regulated militias the amendment was written with the intent that should the American Government itself attempt to destroy peoples freedoms they would fall. In that context the people should actually be better armed then the government.

Exactly.!!

[Carriertxv]

The oh so righteous Canadian never fails to amaze!

[R3illy]

Problem with the NRA is the total whack jobs within the group. Theyve got a major pr problem thanks to their hardcore nut jobs.

Surprisingly shooting 500 people in vegas or 20 grade 1 kids didnt change public perception like the shooting has in florida.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Mulehahn

The second amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Though there no longer regulated militias the amendment was written with the intent that should the American Government itself attempt to destroy peoples freedoms they would fall. In that context the people should actually be better armed then the government.

Yes!! I just don't understand how people can't comprehend this.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

It was just a matter of time, and I'm sure more will follow.

Sadly, the NRA is stuck back in the 1800's.

Selkirk

Actually they're stuck in the late 1700's. 1788 and 1791 to be exact.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Mulehahn

The second amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Though there no longer regulated militias the amendment was written with the intent that should the American Government itself attempt to destroy peoples freedoms they would fall. In that context the people should actually be better armed then the government.

That last line is the scary one. Not that it matters much for all the pretend soldier boys in the militia groups spread across the U.S. They'd cease to exist in 48 hours if the government got serious.

"Ya...we're rising up." Bang. Ok we're not. Waco. Bundy. Finnicum.

"We've got guns. We're powerful." Uh huh. Would change very quickly to "We're average Joe's with rifles. Not trained military with tanks and missles. Run."

[Mulehahn]

Originally Posted by 270person

That last line is the scary one. Not that it matters much for all the pretend soldier boys in the militia groups spread across the U.S. They'd cease to exist in 48 hours if the government got serious.

"Ya...we're rising up." Bang. Ok we're not. Waco. Bundy. Finnicum.

"We've got guns. We're powerful." Uh huh. Would change very quickly to "We're average Joe's with rifles. Not trained military with tanks and missles. Run."

Oh, it is scary. But at the Bundy stand off the BLM were pretty evenly matched, probablyeven out gunned. Take into account how well the other side knows the land are probably ex military they had a choice. Lose the fight, Deploy the us military against its own citizens or take them to courr. They chose option 3 and just last month lost with prejudice. For the record I think Bundy is bats*** crazy who is just manipulating the system and people to line his pockets. But people will he did manage to make the government blink.

As forcthe NRA, they will learn an adapt from this. Out of all of those companies, the only one that people may take notice is the insurance one. But another insurance company will be a long shorrly.

[Jigger]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Problem with the NRA is the total whack jobs within the group. Theyve got a major pr problem thanks to their hardcore nut jobs.

Surprisingly shooting 500 people in vegas or 20 grade 1 kids didnt change public perception like the shooting has in florida.

Umm actually none of these nuts doing the shootings have been NRA memebers, are you suggesting people are hardcore nuts for supporting there second amendment rights? I think your preconceived notions are clouding where to place blame.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by Jigger

Umm actually none of these nuts doing the shootings have been NRA memebers, are you suggesting people are hardcore nuts for supporting there second amendment rights? I think your preconceived notions are clouding where to place blame.

Im suggesting a bit of sensitivity to the shootings would go a long way. Instead we here their non sense on guns dont kill people blah blah blah.....

Their pr problem at the moment is only happening because of their ridiculous statements members keep making in the defense of their second ammendment.

You can defend your rights without being a total whack job.

[bobtodrick]

I think this is actually laughable.
What do these companies expect to achieve?
None of them are monetary supporters of the NRA...they give (gave??) discounts to NRA members.
As someone pointed out, I doubt if there is one NRA member who joined the NRA to get the discount at Avis.
But I can guarantee that there are lot of NRA members that will no longer give their business to Avis.
What's the saying...stupid is as stupid does.

[Gray Wolf]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Im suggesting a bit of sensitivity to the shootings would go a long way. Instead we here their non sense on guns dont kill people blah blah blah.....

Their pr problem at the moment is only happening because of their ridiculous statements members keep making in the defense of their second ammendment.

You can defend your rights without being a total whack job.

But apparently they can't.

The NRA has evolved into it's own worst enemy.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Mulehahn

Oh, it is scary. But at the Bundy stand off the BLM were pretty evenly matched, probablyeven out gunned. Take into account how well the other side knows the land are probably ex military they had a choice. Lose the fight, Deploy the us military against its own citizens or take them to courr. They chose option 3 and just last month lost with prejudice. For the record I think Bundy is bats*** crazy who is just manipulating the system and people to line his pockets. But people will he did manage to make the government blink.

As forcthe NRA, they will learn an adapt from this. Out of all of those companies, the only one that people may take notice is the insurance one. But another insurance company will be a long shorrly.

They might have lost the initial fight. It's the what might have come next that wouldn't have been pretty. Good on the government for not forcing a full scale confrontation and wiping out a bunch of hard line cowboys over some cattle, but they also could have just sat and waited for troops, starved them out, etc. ATF and BLM agents are a long ways from the military as well. A couple of F-16 flyovers and there wouldn't be a cowpoke in sight.

Bundy's were there for the Finicum shooting as well so they sure weren't all innocent by a long stretch.

As I see it the NRA just has to quit being so paranoid. Nobody's threatening to take hunting rifles and shotguns away. Give some and win some or risk losing more when the anti numbers grow. 5,000,000 vs the rest of the country? Polls are showing now that 65% of Americans think the rules need to be rewritten and every time another mass murder occurs it'll grow.

I don't see a big problem with AR's restricted to 21 and over. I also think the gun show purchases to avoid background checks needs to end along with Trump's stupid rescinding of the mental health/firearms purchase bill. None of those screams "No more hunting - No more guns" that I can see.

[270person]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

I think this is actually laughable.
What do these companies expect to achieve?

Public perception and support? It's called marketing and not being willing to PO the vast majority of Americans that think gun laws need to be rewritten.

[R3illy]

i think it will be a wash as there are many online sayimg theyll support the company for dropping the nra.

It is public perception that wont affect either of the parties.

[coastalhunter]

Originally Posted by Newview01

What do you mean by stuck in the 1800s?

1800's people got **** done

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by 270person

Public perception and support? It's called marketing and not being willing to PO the vast majority of Americans that think gun laws need to be rewritten.

According to CNN? Ever been down there?

[pricedo]

The Liberals have been looking for an excuse to restrict or prohibit the ruger mini-xx series, sks and a few other ‘assault rifles’ in Canada.
Wonder if this will be it??

[pricedo]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

It was just a matter of time, and I'm sure more will follow.

Sadly, the NRA is stuck back in the 1800's.

Selkirk

Yeah, we should all give up.
Oh, I forgot most of us Canadians already have.
Gotta get with the times and get ready to turn ‘em in.