NRA Chief Speaks Out

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by rem338win

Classic. Can you use a few more triggered words?

Have you ever actually investigated the worth, expendatures and where revenue for the NRA is generated? I don't agree with some of their stances but they have are a lobby group amongst other things.

If you have investigated the above please post your findings.

Which stances are those you do not agree with?

[2 Tollers]

While I am a supporter of both the NRA and NFA personally I am not a fan of Wayne LaPierre. He had a choice at about 2:40 in his speech of taking it one of two ways. He chose to defend the 2nd amendment and go after democrats (both old news and getting stale).

I wonder what would have happened if he would have chose to re-confirm the issues with the incident - the school knowing and not doing anything to pass information onto law enforcement, the 39 calls to the local police, the multiple tips to the FBI that were not acted on, the armed school deputy that did not go into the school, the additional deputies that showed up and refused to go into the school. State these as problems and that the NRA would support training for Sherriff Departments as first responders, support changes to information sharing.

He could acknowledge that the kids have a coach with Natalie Ohr (wife of Bruce Ohr) and the ties back to the Clinton's and just leave it at that.

Taking a different tack instead of the same rhetoric may help the NRA to be seen as more to the middle vs being a pariah.

[covey ridge]

Cat
I know that was not your quote. I have also seen a few that I did not say in quotes

[BuckCuller]

[QUOTE=catnthehat;3738254]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

That is not my quote .
Cat

Anyway here is some light reading for everyone to enjoy and to see all the great things the NRA does for the over 5 million memberships.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...le_Association

[BuckCuller]

Here is a little video of my favourite informative firearms instructor.
https://youtu.be/KZ3o7Fr6yV4

[Supergrit]

Originally Posted by Newview01

So you don't see a need. That means it should be law?

No personally I have no use for these guns but I respect some one taking there 5 shot clips and going to gun range and shooting their semi auto rifles. There is no need for average person to have a 20 shot clip in their ar 15. Yes good law abiding people would never do anything wrong with a 100 shot clip but rules have to be made to take the opertunity away from crazy people like the guy that shot up the school

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by Supergrit

No personally I have no use for these guns but I respect some one taking there 5 shot clips and going to gun range and shooting their semi auto rifles. There is no need for average person to have a 20 shot clip in their ar 15. Yes good law abiding people would never do anything wrong with a 100 shot clip but rules have to be made to take the opertunity away from crazy people like the guy that shot up the school

That would be like taking away your mother's pressure cooker so that some ISIS supporter doesn't blow up another marathon.

[wildbill]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

That would be like taking away your mother's pressure cooker so that some ISIS supporter doesn't blow up another marathon.

Let’s ban booze while we’re at it so no one ever gets killed by another drunk driver, maybe knives because we all know that they kill more than guns, let’s restrict the heck outta guns, it works so well.......take Mexico for example, truth be told, people in our society are becoming less and less smart by the minute, blaming guns? Let’s not look at the real problems, let’s fester and, dwell on some freak attack, that didn’t even happen in our own country!! NEXT!

[midgetwaiter]

[QUOTE=catnthehat;3738253]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

Maybe take a look at the numerous adult shooting programs , hunter trading , civilian shooting programs school visit programs, etc .
They do a lot more than just fight the anti gun lobby .
Cat

I think it helps to think of the NRA as a multi headed beast of some sort.

The stuff you’re talking about I think of as “NRA Classic”, they do some great things. Then we have the legislative lobby bit, I don’t always agree with their point of view but they’re doing some good work as well. The last bit, the part that I think is especially odious is the political dirty tricks department that started coming to the forefront in the early 90s.

It’s the political dirty tricks department that lobbies for things like restricting the ATF from being able to use computerized records to track dealer sales. Turns out that a large percentage of the guns that end up in the hands of gangs and such are from a tiny subset of dealers. They are also the ones that pushed to restrict the CDC or NIH from doing any research or studies on gun conrol related subjects.

They’re doing this underhanded stuff as part of a concerted effort to keep a reasonable debate on these issues from even getting off the ground and they’re very good at it.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Supergrit

No personally I have no use for these guns but I respect some one taking there 5 shot clips and going to gun range and shooting their semi auto rifles. There is no need for average person to have a 20 shot clip in their ar 15. Yes good law abiding people would never do anything wrong with a 100 shot clip but rules have to be made to take the opertunity away from crazy people like the guy that shot up the school

I see.

[gman1978]

Originally Posted by wildbill

Let’s ban booze while we’re at it so no one ever gets killed by another drunk driver, maybe knives because we all know that they kill more than guns, let’s restrict the heck outta guns, it works so well.......take Mexico for example, truth be told, people in our society are becoming less and less smart by the minute, blaming guns? Let’s not look at the real problems, let’s fester and, dwell on some freak attack, that didn’t even happen in our own country!! NEXT!

Bingo! It’s very dangerous and will not solve anything to just blame guns or the NRA. There are some major glaring issues that should be addressed, but nobody has the balzz to deal with it because it’s political suicide. Trump might try because he doesn’t give a crap. What makes me sick is how the Democrats and the MSN are using this as a political spectacle. If both sides of the spectrum truly want to solve this issue they will have to get their hands dirty.

[GeoTrekr]

Originally Posted by Supergrit

No personally I have no use for these guns but I respect some one taking there 5 shot clips and going to gun range and shooting their semi auto rifles. There is no need for average person to have a 20 shot clip in their ar 15. Yes good law abiding people would never do anything wrong with a 100 shot clip but rules have to be made to take the opertunity away from crazy people like the guy that shot up the school

No they don't because they were legal until the mid-90s when an AR-15 could be taken into a gopher field without an unobtainable paper permission slip, and the vast majority of us on this forum today managed to survive against these odds unventilated.

Horror of horrors, the last Canadian prairie machine gun shoot (yes, fully automatic) happened in 1996, and many of those guns are still in private hands.

Add to that the lack of blood flowing in the streets following the abolition of the long gun registry in 2012, and what can we conclude? Just like the peer reviewed study says, our gun control measures have had no demonstrable effect on crime.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Supergrit

I have many guns I see no need for public to buy bump stocks semi auto rifles with 20 shot or bigger clips (five is enough). I will take Canadian gun laws over the US any day. Retstricted guns in Canada are for gun range only and that’s a good thing although criminals don’t follow this but that why there criminals.
The US has many things they must do to solve the gun violence restricting what weapons that are on gun shelves is a first big step. Restricting what types of guns probably won’t stop the shootings but it might make them less severe.

I see no need for that stuff either , especially bolt action , pump, and semi auto hunting rifles and shotguns .
I think everybody should be made by law to shoot only what I like - single shot rifles and break action shotguns .
Those are the only guns a person needs .
Make sense?
Not really?
I don't think so either .
Just because s person " sees no need"
Does not mean their ideas are actually a practical and sane solution to an issue .
Cat

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I see no need for that stuff either , especially bolt action , pump, and semi auto hunting rifles and shotguns .
I think everybody should be made by law to shoot only what I like - single shot rifles and break action shotguns .
Those are the only guns a person needs .
Make sense?
Not really?
I don't think so either .
Just because s person " sees no need"
Does not mean their ideas are actually a practical and sane solution to an issue .
Cat

Exactly, when the argument is based on personal needs/preferences, rather than on logic, it loses all credibility. I don't have a use for many types of firearms, but I don't want to see them banned for that reason. If firearms owners only support the types of firearms we own, and we condemn all others, we soon won't own any firearms.

[propliner]

The last three posts are right on the money. Give the grabbers an inch and they'll take a mile.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by traderal

Absolutely amazes me how many on this forum are deep down anti gun. Perhaps you would be happier on some other forum.

Originally Posted by sns2

Warning. This is what will get you a timeout faster than you can say the word. This is an outdoors forum and you are in the General Discussion section. Not everyone has to agree with your view of the world. If you don't like someones view, engage them in a discussion for the purpose of understanding, or move on. Trying to stereotype a law enforcement officer as anti-gun because he doesn't agree with US legislation won't be accepted. Period.

Maybe I missed a "ninja edit", but I don't see where anyone was singled out.
Neither do I see an insult. Maybe in our enlightened age we can take anything as an insult now? And I did scour the rules to see if it would qualify.

Some might label me as anti-abortion, and they would be correct. I don't make excuses for who I am, and what I believe; nor do I feel slighted by the term.

Is it wrong to say that I agree with Traderal?

Not trying to insult anyone, but I was around during a few sweeping changes of firearm restrictions, and I don't see the benefit, but I do see the downsides. So why in the world does anyone support it?

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by BuckCuller

Anyway here is some light reading for everyone to enjoy and to see all the great things the NRA does for the over 5 million memberships.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...le_Association

I believe someone just bracketed the quote that they wanted to address without hitting the reply with quote button and messed up the quote.

When I quoted you, I deleted Cat's handle to properly attribute the quote.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Exactly, when the argument is based on personal needs/preferences, rather than on logic, it loses all credibility. I don't have a use for many types of firearms, but I don't want to see them banned for that reason. If firearms owners only support the types of firearms we own, and we condemn all others, we soon won't own any firearms.

Agreed. How over reaching is the arrogance, and power trip of those who would decide what we "need".

Because someone halfway across the world, surrounded by armed guards "thinks" that all someone "needs" is an 11 pound .375 H&H to fend off big bears, because a strapping young man said that somewhere. Meanwhile, we expect because the "needs" have been ordained that everyone should be fine with that. In reality, something softer, and much faster shooting, with greater capacity works better for an 83 year old lady with arthritis, berry picking North of the Arctic Circle.

[bessiedog]

I think one loses a tonne of credibility when one decides to show sympathy for an attack on kids by attacking other groups within the next 15 seconds. This is sad.

The NRA is trying very hard once again to wag the dog.

Dog wagging lobby groups of any kind disgust me and should be banned.

On this basis, I find the NRA’s actions classless and self serving.

Someone start the clock .... here comes the ‘they started it first’ rebuts.

[rem338win]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

If you have investigated the above please post your findings.

Which stances are those you do not agree with?

Why get my take on it? It might do you some good to become informed on a topic directly for once. Start with "google".

And I believe that their stance of changing the politicians not educating the voter is wrong. They used to be grass roots. Opened large ranges. Held events where inexperienced or under privileged people could attend and learn. Those things are still done but their dollars are spent on what's dear....lobbying.

I also disagree with LaPierre's vilifying of law enforcement for doing their jobs. They need to effect the law makers not the poor folks that are sworn to uphold the law. The same as they are so endeared to the constitution.

There are many other things, but that's a 30000 ft view.

[GeoTrekr]

Originally Posted by GeoTrekr

No they don't because they were legal until the mid-90s when an AR-15 could be taken into a gopher field without an unobtainable paper permission slip, and the vast majority of us on this forum today managed to survive against these odds unventilated.

Horror of horrors, the last Canadian prairie machine gun shoot (yes, fully automatic) happened in 1996, and many of those guns are still in private hands.

Add to that the lack of blood flowing in the streets following the abolition of the long gun registry in 2012, and what can we conclude? Just like the peer reviewed study says, our gun control measures have had no demonstrable effect on crime.

Correction: 1998

Canada's Last Machine Gun Shoot

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by rem338win

Why get my take on it? It might do you some good to become informed on a topic directly for once. Start with "google".

And I believe that their stance of changing the politicians not educating the voter is wrong. They used to be grass roots. Opened large ranges. Held events where inexperienced or under privileged people could attend and learn. Those things are still done but their dollars are spent on what's dear....lobbying.

I also disagree with LaPierre's vilifying of law enforcement for doing their jobs. They need to effect the law makers not the poor folks that are sworn to uphold the law. The same as they are so endeared to the constitution.

There are many other things, but that's a 30000 ft view.

Thanks for answering the most important part of my question.

In my opinion they are a different organization than the one I was a card carrying member of when I bought and paid for my very first firearm.

[HoytCRX32]

Unfortunately people are still focussing on the implement, tool, gun, whatever, as an isolated issue, when in fact societal issues, political issues, health issues, cultural issues all ultimately contribute to tragedies such as this.

Points include: Kids being desensitized too death via gaming, breakdown of family structure, parental rights being degraded by the state, poor funding (or lack of acknowledgement) for mental heath issues, police/protective service stress, poor/lax law enforcement/penalties for violent crimes...I could go on. This is way too complex to simply put all the blame on the weapon, as some in the left media insist on doing (which makes the NRA go sideways in their responses)

If we have learned anything it is that those who want to kill will find a way (e.g. ISIS using regular vehicles to run down targets). There were SO MANY chances to avoid the Florida tragedy, if only people listened.

As long as there are groups demanding TOTAL disarming of the population, you will have groups like the NRA act act their antithesis.
The NRA isn’t stupid, nor should they considered complicit in all gun related incidents. They know that the answer always will lie some where in the middle, but the “middle” can change. If the NRA cedes anything, the “middle” moves left in the next gun debate, and so on will continue....call it “nibbling”, call it “death by a thousand cuts”, whatever.

That, IMHO, is why the NRA maintains their position.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

Thanks for answering the most important part of my question.

In my opinion they are a different organization than the one I was a card carrying member of when I bought and paid for my very first firearm.

So what did you like about the NRA when you purchased your very first firearm?

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I see no need for that stuff either , especially bolt action , pump, and semi auto hunting rifles and shotguns .
I think everybody should be made by law to shoot only what I like - single shot rifles and break action shotguns .
Those are the only guns a person needs .
Make sense?
Not really?
I don't think so either .
Just because s person " sees no need"
Does not mean their ideas are actually a practical and sane solution to an issue .
Cat

So you support bump stocks and automatic rifles for everyone in canada for anyone who wants one?

America is messed up because of their stupid gun beliefs. With your analogy we should give a bump stock to every person who buys a gun because we shouldnt have any reasonable laws.

Why is it if your against certain aspects to guns or want reasonable laws that your automatically asking to take away every gun owners rights? This is the problem with the nra.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by HoytCRX32

Unfortunately people are still focussing on the implement, tool, gun, whatever, as an isolated issue, when in fact societal issues, political issues, health issues, cultural issues all ultimately contribute to tragedies such as this.

Points include: Kids being desensitized too death via gaming, breakdown of family structure, parental rights being degraded by the state, poor funding (or lack of acknowledgement) for mental heath issues, police/protective service stress, poor/lax law enforcement/penalties for violent crimes...I could go on. This is way too complex to simply put all the blame on the weapon, as some in the left media insist on doing (which makes the NRA go sideways in their responses)

If we have learned anything it is that those who want to kill will find a way (e.g. ISIS using regular vehicles to run down targets). There were SO MANY chances to avoid the Florida tragedy, if only people listened.

As long as there are groups demanding TOTAL disarming of the population, you will have groups like the NRA act act their antithesis.
The NRA isn’t stupid, nor should they considered complicit in all gun related incidents. They know that the answer always will lie some where in the middle, but the “middle” can change. If the NRA cedes anything, the “middle” moves left in the next gun debate, and so on will continue....call it “nibbling”, call it “death by a thousand cuts”, whatever.

That, IMHO, is why the NRA maintains their position.

Oh look the old gaming is resonsible for deaths excuse. Where does this excuse originate from? Dont kids in america play as many video games as kids in canada??? Weird how most shootings happen in america.

Yeah.. video games are the issue.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Oh look the old gaming is resonsible for deaths excuse. Where does this excuse originate from? Dont kids in america play as many video games as kids in canada??? Weird how most shootings happen in america.

Yeah.. video games are the issue.

Ok...

So what is the issue?

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Ok...

So what is the issue?

apparently its the video games.. the video games!!!!

[HoytCRX32]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Oh look the old gaming is resonsible for deaths excuse. Where does this excuse originate from? Dont kids in america play as many video games as kids in canada??? Weird how most shootings happen in america.

Yeah.. video games are the issue.

Yes, I think it’s ONE issue...you seem to have a real knack to oversimplify people’s comments, or just ignore all the other points...did you even read my entire post?

[drhu22]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Oh look the old gaming is resonsible for deaths excuse. Where does this excuse originate from? Dont kids in america play as many video games as kids in canada??? Weird how most shootings happen in america. Yeah.. video games are the issue.

Not the soundest logic I've ever heard... regardless of the truth.