Jump to content
TheOldBarn

Change The Gun Laws And Gut The Nra

Recommended Posts

I know I'm new here, but I've been a guest for awhile and this is the LO room.

 

Liberal is a broad spectrum. I consider myself a neo-classical liberal. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Once upon a time, as a single person....I felt as you did. I was very skilled in martial arts and felt that gun owners were scared because they couldn't fight fair. Being from Hawaii, I was a Democrat. I was very anti-gun. I moved to Sacramento (met my gorgeous wife on-line and was plucked from the tropical islands). Together we had a family, three beautiful children. I'm sure those of you who have kids know that you develop a much stronger position on being protective. You think more about the safety of the family (including yourself). I used to be an adrenaline junkie (still am sort of). However, I use more caution in life.

 

One evening someone started pounding our door. It wasn't a knock. They were trying to break it down. My adrenaline started kicking and I told my family to run upstairs and told my wife to call 911. She did. I grabbed an aluminum bat and readied myself in one of my fighting stances. The door hinges at that point felt like it was going to give and I could hear the cracking of wood. I started to shout, "Leave now....I've called the police." The pounding was more hurried (like he...I assume it was a guy...wanted to get this over quicker). My wife whispered, "OMG..he's coming in!" I calmed her down and stated, "Trust me....I can take him."

 

She tugged on my shirt and said, "What if he has a gun?" It sunk into me then.....that as a skilled as I was I wasn't going to be faster than a bullet out of a gun. I panicked. I thought about how unfair that would be. I then realized how crazy the idea of fairness was...criminals aren't fighting for honor. And then it just came out...in my bluff I proclaimed, "I have a gun and I am not afraid to use it."

 

The pounding immediately stopped.

 

I stayed on the phone with the authorities and I told them that it stopped. We didn't feel safe so we asked them to come. It was at least15 minutes before they arrived. It felt like a very long time. In fact, if they were hell bent in coming in and hurting me....the police would have been too late.

 

I decided then....I would have a gun. I hated getting it at first. I was told I should train hard for it so I was safe with it and so I would be skilled with it. It needed to be muscle memory....very much like my martial arts training. I did. I would go every month (sometimes every week). As I increased my skill, my accuracy, I realized that I enjoyed target shooting. I realized I no longer feared guns. I started trying my accuracy in all kinds of scenarios. From moving and shooting to long distance (rifle shooting). I started even doing moving rifle shooting with pistol combination. Now I've including rifles, shotguns and pistols into my training. You can say at this point, I train more than most law enforcement does. When I train, I don't take it lightly.

 

Fast forward to today, many of your attitudes is what pushed me out of the Democrat party.....but I couldn't find myself to plant firmly in the Republican party. I believe in live and let live. So I am in the politics I am in now.

 

It's weird being on both sides of the issue because I can look back at it now and see my blind hate to the opposition which I'm sitting in now. People who want a total gun ban, who are afraid of guns, will be taking it away from ME.

 

I can argue more with those wanting reasonable restrictions. A total gun ban....I think then that people in this mindset aren't thinking of the good people with guns who are strong protectors in our society. Bad people will not turn over their guns. Criminals are not law abiding.....just by definition. More laws don't apply to them.

 

 

I think most gun owners feel that this is being responsible.

 

 

My problem with this is again, this only affects the law abiding. If a criminal did get access to a gun (limited to 10 rounds), you know that one that is trained to tactical reload and speed reload will be skilled enough that no unarmed person could stop them. I've trained to speed reload like below:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJDp6x3FHsQ

 

 

 

You do know that the NICS background check system can run in minutes. I've been to a gun store and it completes before I even leave. California law uses it as an excuse for a cooling off period. Most gun owners will tell you that's fine for a first gun. If you have 10 guns, they still want to argue for a cooling off period. Does that sound logical?

 

 

I'm with you on this one. Us Libertarians are very anti-war. We are because war is expensive and to pay for that war a government must get revenue for it (raise taxes). Taxes are personal property and taking of it to fund something that I am against is well.....taking your liberty/property. That and corrupt agendas result in blowback for our nation and a cyclical engagement in wars. If U.S. government puts up a "selected" dictator in country X, and that country X is our friend for a decade....and their politics change...and we are attacked by X (or individuals that hated our involvement in X). We get more involved.

 

World politics....we can help those that truly need it. Go to the places where people are starving....not where the oil fields are. Liberate human beings....not wallets.

I understand being threatened and the possibility of an intruder with a gun getting the best of you... I'm just saying we need to have a sensible discussion as a country that is built around the rule of law. Crime itself is a repercussion economic inequality/social injustice/ poor education/neglectful parenting, etc... If you have a gun you need to be responsible about it - you wouldn't want a young child getting a hold of it - you wouldn't want to show off with it when you are drunk - you'd want to report it if it were stolen, so that you wouldn't be implicated later if someone were to commit a crime with it.

Rule of law - a society needs to discuss these issues - neighbors need to be aware of what's going down in their neighborhoods.

Now, these proposed gun laws aren't going to stop all the gun violence, nobody believes that. Nor will they immediately reduce all the guns that are in the wrong hands in this nation today. My problem is the NRA impedes the discussion in a big way.

It's like technology used in war - we have the best, no doubt about it - but others will one day get it too.

End game - we want to stop war, stop crime as much as possible. I've lived in Detroit, visited Chicago and live near Oakland - and I can tell you - street gangs are out of control. Every day kids - innocent kids are getting shot. These kids live in constant fear. That's no way to live. It's just not fair. We can do much better.

That's my whole point.

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes because the government is going to use their weapons of mass destruction on us. That ought to go over well with anyone on the sidelines in a hypothetical civil war. I think the 2nd Amendment has more to do with the government knowing they have the world's largest militia in their backyard and they had better listen to them if they want to keep their heads. If the American people got together and revolted now, it would be longer than the American Civil War because if you think it would just be a couple of red-necks, you're wrong. They would have powerful backing by many and some of the US army would join the fight. Even if it was "just" a couple of million or thousand people with guns who revolted,it would still send a pretty clear message that the gov't needs to shape-up. I'm not saying the current government warrants having a civil war, they are over-stepping their boundaries but that can be fixed if America wakes up and votes decent folks into office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes because the government is going to use their weapons of mass destruction on us. That ought to go over well with anyone on the sidelines in a hypothetical civil war. I think the 2nd Amendment has more to do with the government knowing they have the world's largest militia in their backyard and they had better listen to them if they want to keep their heads. If the American people got together and revolted now, it would be longer than the American Civil War because if you think it would just be a couple of red-necks, you're wrong. They would have powerful backing by many and some of the US army would join the fight. Even if it was "just" a couple of million or thousand people with guns who revolted,it would still send a pretty clear message that the gov't needs to shape-up. I'm not saying the current government warrants having a civil war, they are over-stepping their boundaries but that can be fixed if America wakes up and votes decent folks into office.

open armed revolt is not a good idea

this would cause many people to die...children and mothers dead!

how is this a good thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is true that our corrupt government has weapons that could easily kill all of us, whether we have guns or not, but what you're forgetting is that their goal isn't to kill us; their goal is to thoroughly control us.

They would prefer a situation in which they can 'peacefully' round-up any number of citizens without having to use lethal force.

That's one of the reasons they want us disarmed, but it's not the primary reason.
The primary reason is psychological.
When citizens are armed and they feel like they have the ability to fight back against their government, they become more bold and less submissive.
Our corrupt government doesn't want that.
They want citizens who are submissive and afraid of their government, and they know that taking away the guns is the next big step in reaching that goal.

I don't own a gun (yet) and I'm far left.

I believe that the current anti-gun stance was implanted as a leftist agenda using mainstream media, the same way the current anti-abortionist stance was implanted as a rightist agenda.

It makes sense that the left would be against guns because the left is against pain, suffering and killing and the left knows that guns are a major contributor to pain, suffering and killing.

However it does not make sense that the left would want the citizens to be disarmed while the military, police, CIA, FBI (and all kinds of other corrupt violent right-wing government organizations) remain fully armed.

The left is smart enough to know that you have to disarm the citizens and the government at the same time, unless you have some magical way of keeping your government from becoming corrupt (ours is already corrupt so we're kinda SOL there).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you even understand how the Government is supposed to work? Do you realize how the Military operates? For what reason would the Government use weapons of mass destruction on us? They have families all over the country, friends in different states, so your idea of gun control is dropping a Nuke on innocent law abiding citizens? What would that accomplish? You preach about "gun control" but it has absolutely nothing to do with any tragedies that have occurred like Sandy hook, Columbine, Virginia tech, etc the fact of the matter is the young confused men that carried out these shootings were Shut ins with unstable behavior. THEIR parents need to secure their firearms, THEIR friends should have told the Police about their activities and their poor actions. Their extreme behaviors should have been reported and investigated. "Semi Automatics" have nothing to do with it. Lives were lost in Aurora to a pump action shotgun.

If that was about needing a weapon to protect against government tyranny, I won't go there. I just don't think it's even a worthy subject.

You think a buy back is going to convince gangsters to turn in their guns? You actually believe somebody is going to give up their firearms when they plan on using them for crimes? are you seriously that naive? The NRA has nothing to do with any of those shootings. None of the mass shooters were affiliated with the NRA anyways but somehow it is their fault? How about the mothers of the demented sons that show obvious signs of insanity and violence. Why didn't they do anything. If I knew my son was mentally unstable I WOULD NOT allow firearms ANYWHERE near him and I would get him mental help ASAP.

Buy back program is not efficient, but is better than nothing. Many gun deaths in the home are from kids getting ahold of them or when people have thoughts of suicide. Many of the guns turned in on buy back programs are on unwanted guns to get them out of the house. I'll get back to the NRA

Have you forgot that some people actually NEED firearms?

Police that have arrested criminals...

Wives with restraining orders from violent husbands...

People in Witness protection...

The everyday respectful, law abiding citizen..

I won't argue this, I agree with this.

If gun control is the answer then why are 18 of the top 20 most dangerous cities in the world "Gun Free". There are an estimated 240 MILLION firearms in the US. (80%) and you don't see crime rates of 80%. So it is obvious that Guns are not the issue. The problems always happen to be in Democratic states. Maybe it is the fact the Democratic population tends to be extremest and violent?

There is no such thing as a "gun free" city. I don't know what movies you watch, but Tombstone does not forbid people to have guns within the city limits anymore. If you mean these cities have strong gun laws and assault weapons bans, a large majority of the gun death is caused by guns brought in from other areas without strong gun laws. It really isn't complicated. No, it is not "obvious that guns are not the issue". Kinda hard to have a gun death without a gun. And violence has nothing to do with the Democratic party. I love that stupid point. Gang members are usually minority, but violence is not on our party platform like it is on the Republican party platform

Most gun spree violence is in CA (Democratic), IL (Democratic), CO (Democratic), CT (Democratic), NY (Democratic), MI (Democratic), VA (Democratic)

"Most" is inaccurate. Here's a list from a couple of years ago.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/VPCshootinglist.pdf

This has nothing to do with WMD's in which you know nothing about.

I am for expanding backgound checks to include all gun sales in this country. Friend to friend, father to son, mother to friend, internet, gun shows, etc..... The NRA is not. Why aren't they?

 

I am for strengthening gun laws. It is not a felony to gun traffic or sell to a straw man. It should be.

 

ATF is handcuffed by the Tiarht Amendment and other laws supported and championed by the NRA to protect gun dealers and gun manufacturers from civil suits. The legislation also forbids the use of gun tracking information to be used to write studies, and do comprehensive investigations regarding what dealers sell the most guns used in violence, the gun manufacturers who might be selling guns to a questionable dealer, etc... I say again. The NRA has supported and championed the legislation blocking the ATF. The ATF isn't even allowed to make a gun dealer do a yearly inventory to determine the levels of theft or possible unlawful practices of the gun dealers. The NRA helped do this.

 

The NRA used to be for universal background checks and used to be a responsible bastion of responsible gun ownership and stewardship. They used to have a line on their website that said that they were not affiliated with any gun manufacturers or gun companies.

 

They took that statement down. Since 2005, the NRA gets up to 40% of their yearly income from gun dealers and gun manufacturers. They are now in the business to scare and lie to the American people to sell more guns. Too harsh? How many legislators are threatening to take any guns away from anyone? None, but Wayne LaPierre continuously warns that Obama's going to take your guns away. Lie! He also threatens that UBC will result in a country wide registration. It will? The current background check does not accomplish this, why would widening the system accomplish this. Lie! The NRA put out a poll for just it's members and 4 out of 10 of the questions were related to policy issues that are not on anyone's agenda. Misleading!

 

The NRA's top priority is not to protect anyone's 2nd amendment rights. They are about money and they do not deserve American's respect. See them for what they are. Paid shills for the gun industry.

Edited by bingster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say keep the 2nd. You might see it as a useless law that cant stand up to a WMD or a billion dollars worth of bribe money, but I see it as the closest thing to protection from dictatorship as I can get, other than having the hand of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may or may not be like all the other Big Corps, but theh still have the best chance at keeping the rights. I tend to stay away from groups until I have all the facts. I dont rely on numbers because any guy at a desk getting paid to can put down numbers, but they cant make up first person accounts when they are right infront of me. Do you guys understand that? I hope so because I dont want to look like an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gut the NRA?

 

So we can put you down as being against unions?

apples and oranges...both grow on trees, but are completely different

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apples and oranges...both grow on trees, but are completely different

 

Both are groups of people joining together for a larger voice, nothing more nothing less. The only difference being that the NRA isn't compulsory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Both are groups of people joining together for a larger voice, nothing more nothing less. The only difference being that the NRA isn't compulsory.

and how many "simple groups of people" have probably half of congress wetting themselves every time they put out a statement?

 

the NRA is not a simple anything anymore...they are a paid lobby group who represent the gun MANUFACTURERS first and its members second.

 

that is the major difference between a labor union (most of them anyways) and the NRA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and how many "simple groups of people" have probably half of congress wetting themselves every time they put out a statement?

 

the AFL-CIO is not a simple anything anymore...they are a paid lobby group who represent union leadership (both foreign and domestic) first and its members second.

 

My minor edit, doesn't make the statement any less true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFL-CIO is a federation of most of them, a unions union.

UH HUH...so if 8 people working at a forge decide to unionize they are automatically considered the pariahs you label the afl-cio?

 

please

 

to most of these guys all they are is 6 letters that do absolutely nothing for them... other than provide letterhead that is.

the last remnant of a organization ran by men with italian last names

 

BUT most importantly... if the afl-cio were enabling the slaughter of thousands of Americans per year (including little kids in their classroom!) I would call for their head too...but they are not.

 

so argue your semantics and attempt to place your imposed double standard if you wish, but the NRA is no different than the KKK in my opinion...and should be treated as such

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NRA goes, might as well go on a spending spree. Buy EVERYTHING on the store shelves and all the ammo I can get, than hunker down, and wait. So far my arsenal consists of an M2 browning, 3 20mm AT rifles, an M82A1, an DShK, M40, MG34, 75mm PaK 40, 3 Ar-15's, 2 m16's, a 81mm german mortar, an m1919 tompson, mp40, type 95, a SCAR-H and -L, a mosin-nagant, K98k, G43, a Garand, 3 Kalashes, a Krinkov, and a m1919 browning air-cooled medium MG. Oh and a select fire 12 gauge Saiga 12 tactical shotgun with 5 20 shell drums.

Edited by Scott.K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NRA goes, might as well go on a spending spree. Buy EVERYTHING on the store shelves and all the ammo I can get, than hunker down, and wait. So far my arsenal consists of an M2 browning, 3 20mm AT rifles, an M82A1, an DShK, M40, MG34, 75mm PaK 40, 3 Ar-15's, 2 m16's, a 81mm german mortar, an m1919 tompson, mp40, type 95, a SCAR-H and -L, a mosin-nagant, K98k, G43, a Garand, 3 Kalashes, a Krinkov, and a m1919 browning air-cooled medium MG. Oh and a select fire 12 gauge Saiga 12 tactical shotgun with 5 20 shell drums.

all those but you only have one "trigger finger" ....interesting

 

LOL!!

 

I can claim that the NRA invented chocolate chip cookies too...doesn't make it RELEVANT to what they are now.

 

Adolph Hitler proposed and funded the autobahn in Germany...though I doubt you will find any monuments to him there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NRA goes, might as well go on a spending spree. Buy EVERYTHING on the store shelves and all the ammo I can get, than hunker down, and wait. So far my arsenal consists of an M2 browning, 3 20mm AT rifles, an M82A1, an DShK, M40, MG34, 75mm PaK 40, 3 Ar-15's, 2 m16's, a 81mm german mortar, an m1919 tompson, mp40, type 95, a SCAR-H and -L, a mosin-nagant, K98k, G43, a Garand, 3 Kalashes, a Krinkov, and a m1919 browning air-cooled medium MG. Oh and a select fire 12 gauge Saiga 12 tactical shotgun with 5 20 shell drums.

I'd love to go to the range with you holly f**k!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are people so ignorant? How could any logical person support disarming law abiding citizens? The 2nd amendment protect the private citizens right to have and carry ordinary military weapons (US v Miller & Heller v DC). Stop whining because you're too irresponsible to protect yourselves and your families and you'd rather everyone else be helpless and dependent like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NRA goes, might as well go on a spending spree. Buy EVERYTHING on the store shelves and all the ammo I can get, than hunker down, and wait. So far my arsenal consists of an M2 browning, 3 20mm AT rifles, an M82A1, an DShK, M40, MG34, 75mm PaK 40, 3 Ar-15's, 2 m16's, a 81mm german mortar, an m1919 tompson, mp40, type 95, a SCAR-H and -L, a mosin-nagant, K98k, G43, a Garand, 3 Kalashes, a Krinkov, and a m1919 browning air-cooled medium MG. Oh and a select fire 12 gauge Saiga 12 tactical shotgun with 5 20 shell drums.

 

Do you have a Class 3 FFL and multiple SOT letters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of my guns were made before 1989 automatic weapon ban, so I do not need one. All I need is the sheriff's blessing and I got that by the 3rd gun so im in the clear. I would know if I was doing some thing ileagal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


No holds barred chat

  • By Imgreatagain

    Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • By deezer shoove

    grgle


  • By rippy38

  • By Str8tEdge

    Where’s at @slideman?


  • By Robot88

    Hola


  • By teacher

    I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • By impartialobserver

    What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • By kfools

    Where does it say 2?


  • By kfools

    So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • By teacher

    How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • By Duck615

    Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • By kfools

    Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • By Imgreatagain

    Mine too. 


  • By Imgreatagain

    I thought it was my location.. 


  • By kfools

    Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • By Duck615

    OK thanks

     


  • By king of the county

    Test


  • By Blue Devil

    Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...