NRA sounds like Russian Trolls

[sealchan]

Given the sort of language that the president of the NRA has been using recently and the deep bleeding of its corporate sponsorship, it sounds like that organization needs a new president or another organization, that believes in the America people's ability to make reasonable decisions without being branding unpatriotic, needs to be created. Right now, and for all I know in the past, it sounds like the NRA might be doing Putin's work of polarizing Americans who are looking for reasonable adjustments in gun regulations. Those changes in gun regulation may or may not work but they will not result in the second amendment being taken away and it will not result in free Americans freely choosing to live by certain rules and laws and regulations...freely.

What say you?

 

[metis]

What the NRA does is to take anyone who dares to disagree with any position that they take and portray them as being anti-2nd Amendment and against "gun rights". It's utter dishonesty on their part as very few people have said that they wish to do away with the 2nd Amendment, and I have not heard a single person in Congress advocate that.

The reality is that there are really only two major issues, with one being which guns should be legal, and the other is whom should have access to certain guns? In each case, the SCOTUS has, since its founding, been consistent in that certain guns/weapons may constitutionally be outlawed and that certain people may be prohibited from owning guns. Even Scalia fully agreed with these two points.

 

[bobhikes]

Given the sort of language that the president of the NRA has been using recently and the deep bleeding of its corporate sponsorship, it sounds like that organization needs a new president or another organization, that believes in the America people's ability to make reasonable decisions without being branding unpatriotic, needs to be created. Right now, and for all I know in the past, it sounds like the NRA might be doing Putin's work of polarizing Americans who are looking for reasonable adjustments in gun regulations. Those changes in gun regulation may or may not work but they will not result in the second amendment being taken away and it will not result in free Americans freely choosing to live by certain rules and laws and regulations...freely.

What say you?

Here's what snope's says, IMO pretty condemning and it makes sense if the Russian's are actively trying to influence our elections.

Did the Kremlin Give Money to the National Rifle Association to Help Trump?

 

[`mud]

hey Sealchan,
I thought the same thing....a cross between fascist and commie.
I think they want a dictator like what Mussolini was !
Sounds crazy, but it fits !!
Maybe Ach-Tung would fit closer !

 

[Stanyon]

Given the sort of language that the president of the NRA has been using recently and the deep bleeding of its corporate sponsorship, it sounds like that organization needs a new president or another organization, that believes in the America people's ability to make reasonable decisions without being branding unpatriotic, needs to be created.

There are numerous gun rights organizations out there, most are all inclusive but some created for particular groups of people.

Right now, and for all I know in the past, it sounds like the NRA might be doing Putin's work of polarizing Americans who are looking for reasonable adjustments in gun regulations.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Here's what snope's says, IMO pretty condemning and it makes sense if the Russian's are actively trying to influence our elections.

Did the Kremlin Give Money to the National Rifle Association to Help Trump?

Shouldn't it matter to American conservatives that support Trump and the NRA that Putin, a man who would like to see harm come to America, supports both as well?

If you consider yourself a patriotic American, why do you want the same things for America that Putin wants?

 

[bobhikes]

Shouldn't it matter to American conservatives that support Trump and the NRA that Putin, a man who would like to see harm come to America, supports both as well?

If you consider yourself a patriotic American, why do you want the same things for America does that Putin wants?

I don't know but I can guess. Certain conservatives don't believe it or they don't care, not all Americans consider Russia and Putin a negative. I think Trumps election show's that.

 

[Stanyon]

If you consider yourself a patriotic American, why do you want the same things for America that Putin wants?

The NRA was founded on November 17, 1871, New York City, NY

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin was born Oct.7, 1952 Leningrad, Russian SFSR Soviet Union

The NRA was created 81 years before Putin was born so your question makes no logical sense.

 

[Polymath257]

The NRA was founded on November 17, 1871, New York City, NY

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin was born Oct.7, 1952 Leningrad, Russian SFSR Soviet Union

The NRA was created 81 years before Putin was born so your question makes no logical sense.

And the NRA has significantly shifted its emphasis since its founding. Instead of being an advocate for hunter's rights, it has supported the distribution of weapons of war.

 

[Stanyon]

And the NRA has significantly shifted its emphasis since its founding. Instead of being an advocate for hunter's rights, it has supported the distribution of weapons of war.

"Today and for the last fifty years or so, the National Rifle Association has been a powerful political group best known for its staunch defense of Americans’ rights to bear arms. When it was granted a charter by New York State on this day—Nov. 17—in 1871, it had a very particular reason for coming into being.As TIME’s Richard Lacayo explained in a 1990 feature about the group, “The N.R.A. was founded in 1871 by a group of former Union Army officers dismayed that so many Northern soldiers, often poorly trained, had been scarcely capable of using their weapons.”
National Rifle Association History: How It Was Founded | Time
It seems the term "weapons of war" is the new word to describe semi-automatic rifles, heard it several times recently.

 

[Father Heathen]

The NRA was founded on November 17, 1871, New York City, NY

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin was born Oct.7, 1952 Leningrad, Russian SFSR Soviet Union

The NRA was created 81 years before Putin was born so your question makes no logical sense.

But is the NRA's current leadership as old as the organization itself?

 

[Curious George]

Given the sort of language that the president of the NRA has been using recently and the deep bleeding of its corporate sponsorship, it sounds like that organization needs a new president or another organization, that believes in the America people's ability to make reasonable decisions without being branding unpatriotic, needs to be created. Right now, and for all I know in the past, it sounds like the NRA might be doing Putin's work of polarizing Americans who are looking for reasonable adjustments in gun regulations. Those changes in gun regulation may or may not work but they will not result in the second amendment being taken away and it will not result in free Americans freely choosing to live by certain rules and laws and regulations...freely.

What say you?

I say:

The United States has always had different ideas. Some of those ideas are very much devisive in the way they are presented.

From my perspective there is division created, perpetuated, and exacerbated by both sides. The equating of this to Russian trolls is dismissive of the fact that other Americans have different opinions. While I know that it would make life so much easier if the other side would just agree you, such thinking misses the value of having competing ideas.

I do not believe in federal regulation of gun ownership. Still, I am not dismissive of people based on their want for such.

I certainly agree that calling people "unpatriotic" is as much an instance of emotion laden rhetoric as suggesting people do not care about the deaths of children because they do not agree with national gun control. The question is: are people who use this method actually akin to Russian trolls? Or, is this another instance of emotional rhetoric.

It is ironic that in an attempt to call out the NRA, you would engage in the very behavior you are critiquing.

 

[Revoltingest]

And the NRA has significantly shifted its emphasis since its founding. Instead of being an advocate for hunter's rights, it has supported the distribution of weapons of war.

This is good.
Hunting is less threatened.

 

[sun rise]

There are numerous gun rights organizations out there, most are all inclusive but some created for particular groups of people.

The NRA used to be an inclusive group organized around the needs of people involved with shooting sports. They have now become part of the gun-worshiping lunatic fringe. It's not surprising that Putin would want to support them to undermine our system of government.

I've posted in other threads a link or two to very much pro-2nd amendment people who disagree with the NRA's position that there is no reason to try to stop people with mental problems or even terrorists from buying guns and rifles, especially of the AR-15 class.

 

[Revoltingest]

The NRA used to be an inclusive group organized around the needs of people involved with shooting sports.

They still do.

It's not surprising that Putin would want to support them to undermine our system of government.

Evidence for this fantasy?

I've posted in other threads a link or two to very much pro-2nd amendment people who disagree with the NRA's position that there is no reason to try to stop people with mental problems or even terrorists from buying guns and rifles, especially of the AR-15 class.

That's not the NRA's position.

Given such vitriol & misinformation directed at the NRA, they must be doing something right.

 

[joe1776]

Any cooperative endeavor will involve the trading of some individual rights for greater benefits.

The Mountain Man, alone in the wilderness, has the right to poop anywhere he likes because his act harms no one. But when the Mountain Man goes to town, he's entering a cooperative endeavor where pooping anywhere he likes would degrade the quality of life for other citizens. He has no moral right to do that.

A nation is a essentially a cooperative endeavor. When the inevitable conflicts between the individual rights of citizens conflict with the welfare of a cooperating group, the group's interest must prevail.

If the Mountain Man argues that the law gives him the right to poop anywhere he likes, and if he is right in his interpretation of the law, then the law needs to be edited because the men who wrote those laws were not perfect beings whose differing opinions should triumph over the common sense of future generations.

 

[Revoltingest]

The Mountain Man, alone in the wilderness, has the right to poop anywhere he likes because his act harms no one. But when the Mountain Man goes to town, he's entering a cooperative endeavor where pooping anywhere he likes would degrade the quality of life for other citizens. He has no moral right to do that.

A nation is a essentially a cooperative endeavor. When the inevitable conflicts between the individual rights of citizens conflict with the welfare of a cooperating group, the group's interest must prevail.

If the Mountain Man argues that the law gives him the right to poop anywhere he likes, and if he is right in his interpretation of the law, then the law needs to be edited because the men who wrote those laws were not perfect beings whose differing opinions should triumph over the common sense of future generations.

Of course, exigent circumstances sometimes demand pooping in less than perfect locations.
I think this is codifed in the 32nd Amendment.

 

[Nakosis]

Given the sort of language that the president of the NRA has been using recently and the deep bleeding of its corporate sponsorship, it sounds like that organization needs a new president or another organization, that believes in the America people's ability to make reasonable decisions without being branding unpatriotic, needs to be created. Right now, and for all I know in the past, it sounds like the NRA might be doing Putin's work of polarizing Americans who are looking for reasonable adjustments in gun regulations. Those changes in gun regulation may or may not work but they will not result in the second amendment being taken away and it will not result in free Americans freely choosing to live by certain rules and laws and regulations...freely.

What say you?

I suspect he's got to make a living like everyone else. He is just playing to the polarization that already exists to line his own coffers.

Kind of ugly but what does he care as long as he keeps his audience happy.

 

[Stanyon]

The NRA used to be an inclusive group organized around the needs of people involved with shooting sports. They have now become part of the gun-worshiping lunatic fringe. It's not surprising that Putin would want to support them to undermine our system of government.

I've posted in other threads a link or two to very much pro-2nd amendment people who disagree with the NRA's position that there is no reason to try to stop people with mental problems or even terrorists from buying guns and rifles, especially of the AR-15 class.

The NRA's position has always been for the government to enforce existing laws and have no problem with people who have been adjudicated as mentally defective being barred from obtaining firearms (see BATF form 4473 box 11f Firearms Transaction Record) What you are referring to and what many others have referred to is the NRA opposing the F.B.I. flagging an individual for collecting social security benefits while claiming mental disability- funny thing is that the ACLU agreed with the NRA on this so I guess using the logic of the day one could reasonably make make the argument that the ACLU are accomplices to murder but for some reason I'm pretty sure you won't see anyone parading around with a sign like that but you never know.

NRA: The mentally ill have gun rights, too | TheHill

Congratulations, your donation to the ACLU just helped arm the mentally ill (no, not really)

No person shall be ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

 

[sealchan]

I say:

The United States has always had different ideas. Some of those ideas are very much devisive in the way they are presented.

From my perspective there is division created, perpetuated, and exacerbated by both sides. The equating of this to Russian trolls is dismissive of the fact that other Americans have different opinions. While I know that it would make life so much easier if the other side would just agree you, such thinking misses the value of having competing ideas.

I do not believe in federal regulation of gun ownership. Still, I am not dismissive of people based on their want for such.

I certainly agree that calling people "unpatriotic" is as much an instance of emotion laden rhetoric as suggesting people do not care about the deaths of children because they do not agree with national gun control. The question is: are people who use this method actually akin to Russian trolls? Or, is this another instance of emotional rhetoric.

It is ironic that in an attempt to call out the NRA, you would engage in the very behavior you are critiquing.

I am wanting dialog, compromise, rational discussion...saying people are unpatriotic for having such discussions is itself unpatriotic as it indicates it is not for an American to even consider.

The big difference between what I said and what leadership in the NRA is saying is that I am against name calling to attack those on the other side of a debate. My attack was against that attack.

Here's an analogy...if calling someone unpatriotic is like firing a gun at someone, the NRA is firing at unarmed people. I am firing at those who are firing at unarmed people.