The NRA called last night

[House]

Who can tell me what the scoop is?

First off I generaly support what the NRA is trying to do to protect our gun ownership rights but sometimes feel they are a bit extreme in their efforts. I realize they are the best chance we have to retain our right to own a firearm.

The phone call was a recording of the NRA vice president telling of a bill that may become law that will pretty much silence the ability of the NRA to publish political candidates stand on gun issues. The call ended with a membership plea.

Is this true? Can anyone offer more details? I was angered more by the possibility of a law the would suppress an organizations freedom of speach than the loss of my gun rights. Is it time to become a member? I don't give telemarketers business, but, I will go to the NRA website and join if the NRA was being straight.

Thanks

House

[Don__SD]

Yes, by all means join. I have been a life member for 7 years. Yes they are extreme in some cases but so is the other side. Is this justified, I don't know, but they are the biggest voice that we have. PERIOD.

They did call me but I elected not to hear the message, it would not suprise me on this, the people that want to take it from us simply want to hide as they do it. VOTES COUNT.

[Phil T.]

Yup, the campaign finance reform bill, in it's present form, would allow only the media to comment on political campaigns during the last 30 days (I think) of the campaign.
This would rule out any labor unions, Chamber of Commerce or other business organizations, NRA, PETA, etc. Only the major media would be allowed to present the "truth" about the candidates.

[MK]

It has already happened. It was called Campaign Finance Reform" and it was signed earlier this year. It restricts certain groups or individuals from placing ads within 60 days of a federal election.

It is on the way to the Supreme Court now.

[JohnF]

I second it. By all means join.

Also a Life Member...

John

[Steve W.]

In response to Phil, I think that the unions are exempt.

[NRA Logic]

I am often amazed at the NRA logic. They have a point and I support the right to hunt but some logic they use needs a review. It goes something like this. To make life safe we need to have guns available for anyone and every one so no one will dare to use theirs. If this logic is true then it should apply at other levels of life. Like, To make the world save from nuts and freeks everyone should be armed at an equal level. If this applies then we need not worry about that guy from Iraq. After all as he increases in arms he is actually making the world safer.

It seems the NRA is using reasoning, that only works when applied to their cause. When the same line is used in other settings the weakness is exposed.

[BlackSilver]

I am not an NRA member, but I will become one IMMEDIATELY when they take a stand against private ownership of 'assualt style' rapid-fire weapons (ie., AK-47 and UZI knockoffs). Pierre and Charleton are the two biggest liabilities of that organization with their extremist rhetoric.

Walk softly and carry a big fish.

Hans/MN

[GJN]

Unfortunately it's not that simple. We had a long battle here in NJ regarding the passing of an assualt rifle ban. A number of people like yourself thought it was a great idea and we would outlaw Uzi's and Ak-47's. What we ended up with was a bill that outlawed a whole host of weapons and made felon's out of a number of well intentioned people. Here it's a 4th degree felony to possess a magazine that holds more than 15 rounds even if you don't own a firearm. Among our "assault weapons" are Marlin Model 60 22 LR and M1 carbines possession of which are 3rd degree felonies which carries a sentence of 3-5 years. The NRA might not do everything the way you want it done or reflect all your views but they are the most effective voice we have. If you wait to join don't bother, it will be to late.

[Marble Eyes]

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animated contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your council or Arms. Crouch down and lick the hands that feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countryman."

Samual Adams, 1776

[JohnF]

Hans,

Assault rifle isn’t that easy to define. What is it that you don’t like? The semi-auto action? They just look “wicked”? If I hang a 100 round magazine off of my bolt action rifle and shoot up a nunnery, was my rifle an assault rifle? If so, what size magazine is not an assault rifle? Perhaps we should define assault rifle as a weapon that does not provide that person could overtake the assailant from 50 feet after the first round fired and before the second. How fast is that person? A Revolutionary War musketeer could fire 3 times in a minute with a muzzle-loading rifle. I can easily double that with a single shot contender.

Have you ever heard the phrase, “If you aren’t for us then you are against us?” Hans, I assure you that there are many NRA members that do not like the idea of shooting people with any gun; even single shot guns.

John

[Eddie the Eagle]

The logic does work.

Terrorist target unarmed innocent people. For every terrorists with a gun targeting an innocent we need an innocent ready to pull the trigger on them. Laws that keep innocent people unarmed do not keep terrorists unarmed, no balance of power. Like anything in nature, the strong feed on the weak.

Terrorists open up on a bus and we open up on them. One less terrorist to open up on another bus. Sooner than latter all the terrorists are gone or thinking twice about killing people.

Can't help but agree with the argument that it is people who kill people. I do not advocate violence. I do agree with self defence. How does an unarmed citizen defend himself against an armed terrorist? Pass a law making it difficult to get a weapon. I feel safer already.

Eddie

[BlackSilver]

Dear anonymous Marble Eyes,

Cool quote, but a non sequitur relative to the topic. And before you presume to lecture me on patriotism, I served 21 years in uniform (4 drawing combat pay), earned a bronze star (with V) and two purple hearts.

With all kind wishes,

Hans/MN

[SUPERTROLLER]

Hans, Marble Eyes is a frequent poster here. He probably just wasn't logged in at the time of his post and came up as a guest user. He is not an anonymous fictious name. He is from Mi. and wasn't taking you personally to task, I didn't think, just posting a quote. I sort of agree with you on the NRA. Their stance on many issues is too rigid for me. Their stance on assualt rifles though is correct. The way the assualt rifle legislation reads, makes most Semi-automatic rifles/shotguns illegal since almost every one of them can be claimed as a "Rapid Fire" weapon. I like my semi-auto's and can't see any reason to limit a hunters' use of them just because some lunatic might get his hands on one. Throw him away for life or sentence them to death, just enforce the laws already on the books and we'll be okay. If they have proven they can not live by soceity's rules, why should we be burdened with feeding them until they die of old-age in prison? Yes, I'll gladly throw the switch on them.

[Marble Eyes]

Hans,

I am not anonymous. I am a registered poster. Been for a couple of years.

I too served. United States Navy. If in doubt I will send you
copy of the DD-214.

Now that we are done pissing on the scent post. Perhaps you wish to
wear the chains of a master. I don't. You have your opinion and I have mine.

I personally think you don't have a clue about the Assault Weapons...

Hans, a little known fact on the Assault weapons ban.

When Billy Jeff Buttafuco (Clinton) Signed the Assault Weapon ban, buried deep in that bill was a Waiver for an affiliate of the Chinese Army to DUMP 500,000 "Assault weapons" on the US Market. Imagine only for a second the Outcry you'd hear screatching from TOM,PETER,DAN and the Sara Bradys of this country Had that little stunt been tryed by Another Political Party other than the Demonrats.

While the Clinton's were making political Points with the Sheeple that wimper when they sleep, they were also getting their pockets lined with thousands of Dollars in Campaign Cash from these SAME Assault Weapon Importers. One such group happened to be run by the Spouse to Diane Finestine.

Funny isn't it. These so called Killing Machines are so bad that we need to outlaw the import of them... But Only AFTER the Demoncritters line their pockets with cash from the Manufacturers first, and allow the flooding of the US market first.

A whole gaggle of Hypocrites....Shows you just what Exactly was the most important part of that Legislation. CASH BABY, cold untraceable CASH!

And a whole lot of "extremist rhetoric".

And you point the Finger at Charlton Heston. You slay me, dude.
Chuck was actually a big advocate of the 68 Gun laws. Check the tape.

[Tennessee Jed]

AK-47's and Uzi's are no more rapid fire than Remington 742's and 9mm auto pistols, if "rapid fire" is your primary objection to the weapons you mentioned.

In a rare moment of acquiesence, the NRA did not vigorously oppose the Assault Weapon Ban when it was enacted. Those in the know discovered that the ban did not reduce the lethality of those weapons that were produced in a post-ban configuration: no flash hiders, no bayonet lugs, no collapsible stocks, reducing magazine capacities for detachable magazines.

The assault weapon ban did nothing to reduce crimes committed with assault weapons, because in spite of a 2% presence among gun owners, assault weapons accounted for .5% of crimes committed (1996 statistics) with a firearm, unchanged from pre-ban years.

Now the NRA is seeking ways to overturn the ban when it comes up for renewal in 2004. This is because some states have individually taken the ban a step further, outlawing any and all self-loading longarms, which affects some hunting rifles; a sticking point with the majority of NRA membership. Also, NRA members who favored the ban have now realized that the agenda to eliminate all firearms still exists to an uncomfortable degree, in spite of their appeasing gesture to gun control advocates. And, bottom line, the ban did not reduce crime committed with assault weapons.

Whether it's a screwdriver, which is the third-most commonly used weapon in a crime, or an AK-47, if you are assaulting me with it, it is an assault weapon, in my book! So ban screwdrivers before banning semi-automatic rifles.

You cannot legally obtain fully automatic (i.e., machine guns, M-16's, etc.) in America without paying for a Class III license, and a transfer fee that stays with that weapon no matter how many times it is resold.

Thanks for being a patriot! I didn't like the NRA until I realized that gun control was not about reducing crime. It was about advancing political fortunes of some very insincere people.

[rock2me]

"Assault" rifle is a media sponosored term. It will be "Sniper" rifles next, I guarantee it.

The play on words is ridiculous. Defining what is meant, by the above two words, is very broad.

Some more little ditty(s) that gets me going are "Big Business", "Big Oil", "Big Pharmacutical", "Big HMO's".... What do they mean?

What about "Big Gov't"? Aren't they back for more money EVERY year? More mismanagement than 10 Enron's every year. For example, look how they've plundered everyone's retirement. "Big Education" (not just k-12 but higher learning as well)? "Big Welfare?" ........ let's start using these terms too. Who's the biggest single employer in your state? County?

Sorry, didn't mean to change the thread. I'm going to take my meds, that I get from a big drug company, now.

[The Great Guide]

Sounds like some of you don't like campaign reform. Or do you? Unless the reform affects your personal intrest.

The reform act was proposed bi-partisan, passed by congress and signed by none other than George W. so we here more from the candidates running for office rather than the special intrests groups.

I don't belong to the NRA, but somehow get thier mailings on a regular basis. They are not shy about notifying their membership and others on how they should vote. I don't think the NRA or any other group will miss a step even with the limitations of the new law.

TGG

[sevenmmm]

Don't be selfish brother, your great grandkids may need those weapons...

[GOODSIE]

Check me if I'm wrong, but isn't this current "sniper" taking one shot per incident? I also have heard that the most accurate of guns is the single shot. Could this loser be shooting a single shot, and could someone please explain to me how the gun could be to blame??

[Kodiak]

Another quote for ya:
Those who beat their weapons into plowshares end up plowing for those who didn't.

[ZingZang]

>I am often amazed at the NRA logic. They have a point and I
>support the right to hunt but some logic they use needs a
>review. It goes something like this. To make life safe we
>need to have guns available for anyone and every one so no
>one will dare to use theirs. If this logic is true then it
>should apply at other levels of life. Like, To make the
>world save from nuts and freeks everyone should be armed at
>an equal level. If this applies then we need not worry
>about that guy from Iraq. After all as he increases in arms
>he is actually making the world safer.
>
>It seems the NRA is using reasoning, that only works when
>applied to their cause. When the same line is used in other
>settings the weakness is exposed.

Its worked for years. The policy was called MAD. Its principles are the same. A deterent :)

[Posted earlier here...]

You my friend are in denial.
History, England and Austrailia have proven you wrong. Canada is about to learn the same thing. First it is one class of weapon that is banned. Then a caliber or two. Then all handguns. Then all guns that hold more than one shot. Total gun confiscation is the goal of the anti gun crowd. They say so themselves. Don't fool yourself.

As to the term "Assault Rifle", what do you suppose that means? To the lawmaker types and activists that want guns banned, that is any rifle or shotgun that can hold more than a specified number of bullets in the gun or a clip and can be fired as fast as you pull the trigger. That is every semi auto everything, no matter what it is.

The lowly pump action rifles and shotguns get lumped into that group as they hold bullets in a magazine or chamber in the gun.

"Sniper Rifle" Just what would that be? The way they are being described by the media and anti gun crowd right now, would mean any rifle that has a scope and is capable of hitting it's mark at 100 yards or more. If you own a deer rifle, you my friend have a "Sniper Rifle" This current outrage in the eastern US is going to be a huge excuse to BAN ALL GUNS! You are lying toyourself and have your head up your a.... er backend if you do not think so.

"Assault Rifle" and "Sniper Rifle" are buzzwords used by the media and the anti gun crowd to stir up hype and fear to allow TOTAL GUN CONFISCATION!

That is the goal behind balistics fingerprinting and registration. When the poitical climate gets to the point the antis want, they WILL know who has guns and who does not. If you don't turn in your guns, you become a criminal. And, they know where you live. I am not making this up, ask ANYONE in Britan or Australia.

An apethetic gun owner is as bad as 10 anti gun types. If you think they won't come after you, you are sorely mistaken.

There was even a push by a political group in Germany, I think, to make the laws for total gun confiscation, and to round up all the gun owners and their families and have them exterminated. This was supposed to be to exterminate the violence gene that made people want to own guns. Ya it was a fringe movement, BUT SO WAS THE NAZI PARTY!

[gaspergoo]

Algore served also, doesn't make him a patriot.

[gaspergoo]

How about this quote?
"Those willing to exchange essential liberties for temporary security, deserve neither."