NRA message

Status
Not open for further replies.
JeffDG said:
But if it saves just one life. Why do you support carnage on the roads? You're a monster!!!
Click to expand...


Again, why make crap up?

Address what I have said, don't make **** up.


(And, for the record, I would support seat belts on school busses if it saved 1 little kids life.)
 
JoseCuervo said:
Again, why make crap up?

Address what I have said, don't make **** up.


(And, for the record, I would support seat belts on school busses if it saved 1 little kids life.)
Click to expand...


Why should I address what you say when you won't address me.

Bambi g cars would undoubtedly save lives, but you refuse to advocate it. You're obviously an unfeeling monster
 
I often wonder, watching how public discourse goes, if people understand just how big the US actually is both geographically and in terms of population. I also wonder if people are fully aware that just because they're seeing a lot of something on TV, it doesn't mean there's an "epidemic" or "serious threat" necessarily.

I know we're all used to seeing misleading, cherry picked, and outright BS on this issue but here's a report from the DOJ, probably the closest thing to an unbiased and reputable source I know of. I know it's long but at least read the highlights page if you care about this issue.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf

Here are two me the most significant two highlights from all that...
„ Firearm-related homicides declined 39%, from 18,253 in
1993 to 11,101 in 2011.
Click to expand...

So, gun violence is down. That doesn't sell newspapers(or should that be get clicks now?) though so... you never hear this.

But hey, we always want to do better, especially talking about people's lives right?
About 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of
nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a
handgun from 1993 to 2011.
Click to expand...
Soooo..... why are we always talking about AR-15s? Why not go after handguns?


Here's a thought for some common sense legislation that I just know everyone will hate because it isn't a ban and is regulation but I'll throw it out here anyway. How about to purchase/carry/possess a handgun we require you to get a federal concealed carry permit, requiring the type of training and extra background checks typical for a concealed carry permit. This permit is a single 50-state concealed carry. If you have a valid one, you can carry throughout the entire US and not worry about being arrested on some technicality. On the flipside, someone not holding this card and carrying can go direct to jail.
 
It's pretty clear that of the citizens that make up this country, there seem to be two kinds.

Americans and aspiring Europeans.

I still can't for the life of me understand how it is that the USA got to be the most important country in the world (although that is quickly becoming China) when we have done everything wrong? The aspiring Europeans always tell how we have failed and we do everything wrong and yet... :confused::dunno:

I give thanks to the NRA. It is the only thing that has maintained the 2nd Amendment over the last 144 years. If not for them, we would have had a "collective" right a long time ago and registering to legally own BB guns.

Back to the OP and Wayne's message- Why don't we strictly enforce the laws we have now? Because the jails are already stuffed full with those that have already demonstrated black lives, or any lives don't matter. In addition, the aspiring Europeans are super embarrassed that we have more people locked up than any other country in the world, so they want more let go.

So the concept is, not to punish criminals very much, but rather try to make them less lethal. If it's just back to stabbing and bludgeoning people, there is a better chance you will survive and so will the criminal. Remember, criminal lives matter.

The solution to this mess is, not more gun laws, but legalizing marijuana. This will free up a lot of jail space, make us not so "embarrassing" and allow us to properly lock up those that commit violent crime.

As to the mass shootings, there are two types, terrorist attacks and the loose nut job. The solution to both is the same. Vigilance by the general public. You see something really suspicious and a little too "kill America" in their speech and views, you report it. You suspect a guy is about to lose it and maybe kill some people, you take it seriously and report it.

So much of the time, after the fact when we read about it in the news all the clues are there. All the red flags are up and nobody does anything because we don't want to be involved. We need to get involved. A new stack of gun laws isn't going to do a damn thing to stop this.
 
Last edited:
JoseCuervo said:
Again, why make crap up?

Address what I have said, don't make **** up.


(And, for the record, I would support seat belts on school busses if it saved 1 little kids life.)
Click to expand...

Some minds here are like a one rail railroad, they can't stay on track.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Speaking of misinformed, I can go buy all the AR15's and High Capcity magazines I want without passing a background check.

Just have to head down to the local fairgrounds gun show and look for the big bellied guy with the NRA hat, and he will hook me up without any sort of background check, assuming he is ok with a Hispanic screen name.
Click to expand...

Have you been to a gun show? Have you bought guns at a gun show? BTW, if you had attend any gun shows, you would at least know that there are lots of people there of all ethnicities, hispanics included. At least there are in California.
 
Dav8or said:
You see something really suspicious and a little too "kill America" in their speech and views, you report it. You suspect a guy is about to lose it and maybe kill some people, you take it seriously and report it.
Click to expand...



Seriously?

You want people reported to the government for "speech"?

And what would you like the government to do with those who's speech doesn't match whatever the government wanting their subjects to speak?

Talk about a "little too European".
 
Dav8or said:
Have you been to a gun show? Have you bought guns at a gun show? BTW, if you had attend any gun shows, you would at least know that there are lots of people there of all ethnicities, hispanics included. At least there are in California.
Click to expand...


Yep, I have been to gun shows.

And, if you would like to make a wager, I will bet you $500 I can go to,a gun show and buy a gun without any background check.

Is that a wager you would care to make?
 
JeffDG said:
Why should I address what you say when you won't address me.

Bambi g cars would undoubtedly save lives, but you refuse to advocate it. You're obviously an unfeeling monster
Click to expand...


Why would I address false positions you fabricate?

You can play games with what you make up, I didn't make that nonsense up.
 
I've been to gun shows and I have purchased guns both with a background check and without one. The one I purchased without a background check was recently used to kill.... a deer. She is delicious. The horror.

Dealers are required to do background checks for a sale. Private parties are not, I don't really have a problem with that either to be honest.

Most of the guns I own are ones handed to me by my father that he'd owned for god knows how long... also without background checks. I know many people with closets full. This is btw why any attempt to create a registry of guns is ridiculous. Few will bother and there are too many in the backs of closets and whatnot all around for anyone to ever create an effective registry. Any effective gun control has to actually be a people control, you're never going to get a handle on all the guns. It's just not a realistic thing.
 
cowman said:
I often wonder, watching how public discourse goes, if people understand just how big the US actually is both geographically and in terms of population. I also wonder if people are fully aware that just because they're seeing a lot of something on TV, it doesn't mean there's an "epidemic" or "serious threat" necessarily.
Click to expand...

So few people don't understand that fear sells and can't take the news into perspective. People that are chronic news junkies tend to really believe their lives are in serious danger all the time from a wide range of threats. If anything needs better regulation, it's probably the news and advertising.

So, gun violence is down. That doesn't sell newspapers(or should that be get clicks now?) though so... you never hear this.
Click to expand...

Yep. That's one of those "inconvenient truths" that gets buried and ignored. :yes:

Soooo..... why are we always talking about AR-15s? Why not go after handguns?
Click to expand...

Been there, done that. That was all the rage in the 1970s and '80s. Before there was the "assault weapon" there was the "Saturday Night Special" That was the rallying cry for the gun banning folks for decades. They just didn't get that far thanks to the NRA and level heads and then something new came along...

BTW, the gun banning folks have a whole list of headline grabbing names to rally behind-

Any handgun- Saturday night special.
Any hunting or target rifle- High powered sniper rifle.
Any shotgun- Destructive device, or if it's black and scary looking see below-
Any automatic loading gun- Assault Weapon. It used to be they would just call these guns "machine guns", but this is way better. It can also include any gun that looks scary and military like.
Any bullet other than plain lead ball- Cop killer bullets.

Here's a thought for some common sense legislation that I just know everyone will hate because it isn't a ban and is regulation but I'll throw it out here anyway. How about to purchase/carry/possess a handgun we require you to get a federal concealed carry permit, requiring the type of training and extra background checks typical for a concealed carry permit. This permit is a single 50-state concealed carry. If you have a valid one, you can carry throughout the entire US and not worry about being arrested on some technicality. On the flipside, someone not holding this card and carrying can go direct to jail.
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea. I could support that, but my concerns would be about the issuing party. Who hands out the permits and what criteria do they use for pass/fail? How much do the permits cost? As long as it could be worked out to be fair, not biased, affordable to anyone, has checks and balances and does not require a weapons registry, I say go for it. :yes:
 
no one is discussing the bad pipe bombs and pressure cooker bombs.....and why are they not outlawed?
 
Last edited:
JoseCuervo said:
Seriously?

You want people reported to the government for "speech"?

And what would you like the government to do with those who's speech doesn't match whatever the government wanting their subjects to speak?

Talk about a "little too European".
Click to expand...

Watch them, check them out. You know, a background check. The added scrutiny may well lead them to scrub their plans. The difference between a true killer and just some guy that shoots off his mouth is likely very obvious. It is the only real solution to mass killings if you really want them prevented.

Stay status quo, that's OK with me too. I really don't fear for my life that much. It's really not the dangerous here. I'm OK with the odds and it is not worth compromising my rights for.
 
Dav8or said:
So few people don't understand that fear sells and can't take the news into perspective. People that are chronic news junkies tend to really believe their lives are in serious danger all the time from a wide range of threats.
Click to expand...

Yup, fear is selling big time, and both sides are equally guilty.
 
cowman said:
I've been to gun shows and I have purchased guns both with a background check and without one. The one I purchased without a background check was recently used to kill.... a deer. She is delicious. The horror.

Dealers are required to do background checks for a sale. Private parties are not, I don't really have a problem with that either to be honest.

Most of the guns I own are ones handed to me by my father that he'd owned for god knows how long... also without background checks. I know many people with closets full. This is btw why any attempt to create a registry of guns is ridiculous. Few will bother and there are too many in the backs of closets and whatnot all around for anyone to ever create an effective registry. Any effective gun control has to actually be a people control, you're never going to get a handle on all the guns. It's just not a realistic thing.
Click to expand...

In California they are required. All sales and transfers are required to go through a licensed gun dealer. Both federally licensed and licensed with the state of California. If you sell a gun directly to somebody, or give a gun to somebody, you are in violation of the law and if caught will likely do jail time and have all your guns confiscated.

Yes there are people violating the law here and will sell you a gun in the parking lot, but there are also under cover cops looking for these people. The vast majority of people that aren't criminals know this and won't risk it here.

Agreed. Registries serve only two purposes and that is to be able to find the guns and take them away and to keep you from getting them in the first place by attaching high registration fees. That really is it. They don't prevent crimes and they rarely solve crimes.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
no one is discussing the bad pipe bombs and pressure cooker bombs.....and why are they not outlawed?
Click to expand...

Oh yeah... what did Timothy McVeigh use again? Now was that terrorism, or a mass killing, or work place violence, or... ? He actually had a target and a reasoning. Imagine if a person like him just wanted kill a bunch of random people with the same bomb. The possibilities are endless.
 
Dav8or said:
Oh yeah... what did Timothy McVeigh use again? Now was that terrorism, or a mass killing, or work place violence, or... ? He actually had a target and a reasoning. Imagine if a person like him just wanted kill a bunch of random people with the same bomb. The possibilities are endless.
Click to expand...
yeah....who needs guns anyways? :yikes::dunno:
 
Dav8or said:
Watch them, check them out. You know, a background check. The added scrutiny may well lead them to scrub their plans. The difference between a true killer and just some guy that shoots off his mouth is likely very obvious. It is the only real solution to mass killings if you really want them prevented.



Stay status quo, that's OK with me too. I really don't fear for my life that much. It's really not the dangerous here. I'm OK with the odds and it is not worth compromising my rights for.
Click to expand...


Who decides what "kill America" speech needs investigated?

What damage to the First Amendment is acceptable in order to avoid addressing the Second Amendment?
 
So I just saw a clip of Obama saying background checks should include looking at the no-fly list and that anyone on the no-fly list shouldn't be able to buy a gun....

I don't hate the idea...

However, if I'm going to be deprived of my rights then there needs to be something like a speedy and public trial. A hearing that I'm allowed to show up at and contest it before I can get put on this list. Or at a bare minimum some kind of way to contest it that a person who can't afford a lawyer can reasonably manage.

Really that should have already been in place regardless of whether we use it as a part of firearm background checks.
 
Tom-D said:
Try to stop a gangbanger with out one.
Click to expand...

And when was the last time you were anywhere near a gangbanger? :rofl:

Dude, don't use "gunshow" rationale...it's unbecoming.
 
Last edited:
RV10flyer said:
My wife and I both were taught about gun safety, proper use and cleaning starting at age 5 and our children are being taught the same.
Click to expand...

Gun safety is like sex education. The more you know about it, the better off you are. Even still, that doesn't account for a five year old having the ability to "defend" himself with a firearm. If the choice is everybody armed or nobody armed in a public building, I'm opting for nobody.
 
Last edited:
mikeinbama said:
Let's face it, sooner or later there will be laws to restrict gun sales/ownership. I don't know when that will be, but it will happen. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, but little else. At some point after that, there will be calls for confiscation. That is when it will get rough. I still struggle to understand people's willingness to give up freedom for safety, it's as if they can't follow the logic and see where that thinking eventually leads. I don't want to be safe, I want to be free.
Click to expand...

P R O P A G A N D A :nono:

Stop inciting fear. No one's coming for your guns. There's a small insignificant percentage of the population that thinks that would address the problem and an even smaller percentage of the population that thinks that's possible.
 
High wing! So much better than low wing. Oh wait, I thought this was an aviation forum. My bad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
haskell99 said:
High wing! So much better than low wing. Oh wait, I thought this was an aviation forum. My bad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

High wing, Tailwheel, and Radial.... no better combo than that! :drool:

Think we can thread-jack this back to aviation?
 
Mtns2Skies said:
High wing, Tailwheel, and Radial.... no better combo than that! :drool:

Think we can thread-jack this back to aviation?
Click to expand...

I say we give it a shot...

I'm a low wing guy myself. The Globe Swift is where I fell in love with tailwheel planes.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Yep, I have been to gun shows.

And, if you would like to make a wager, I will bet you $500 I can go to,a gun show and buy a gun without any background check.

Is that a wager you would care to make?
Click to expand...

Sure you could probably do it. More laws won't make it any harder, it is already illegal to do so.

Although that isn't how a criminal buy's a gun, they know there is a fair chance of the person they are buying from will be an undercover law enforcement agent.
Law enforcement and even gun show organizers are on an active lookout for people trying to bypass the law.


Brian
 
ktup-flyer said:
High wing, Tailwheel, and Turboprop :drool:
Click to expand...

What types are there that satisfy that?

Pilatus Porter (are those still built?)

Converted Beavers/Otters (Poor planes)

Helio Couriers?

what else?

EDIT: Turbine Maules too I guess... though clearly overkill
 
brcase said:
Sure you could probably do it. More laws won't make it any harder, it is already illegal to do so.



Although that isn't how a criminal buy's a gun, they know there is a fair chance of the person they are buying from will be an undercover law enforcement agent.

Law enforcement and even gun show organizers are on an active lookout for people trying to bypass the law.





Brian
Click to expand...


I could do it without breaking a single law.

Like I said, go find some big bellied NRA jay wearing dude, some crisp $100 bills, and I could walk out with a gun in minutes.

It ain't difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JoseCuervo said:
I could do it without breaking a single law.

Like I said, go find some big bellied NRA jay wearing dude, some crisp $100 bills, and I could walk out with a gun in minutes.

It ain't difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Depends on what state you're in.
 
JoseCuervo said:
I could do it without breaking a single law.

Like I said, go find some big bellied NRA jay wearing dude, some crisp $100 bills, and I could walk out with a gun in minutes.

It ain't difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If obtaining the guns was the problem I would see your point. I think the issue is that some gun advocates seem to want to separate the burden of responsibility from gun ownership as though accountability is somehow an infringement on their freedoms. Mass shootings(what we REALLY care about) have been committed by legal gun owners well within their rights. The lack of oversight after the purchase is the issue. That's not about taking everybody's guns. That's about making sure you're still fit to own them. Easier said than done.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
What types are there that satisfy that?

Pilatus Porter (are those still built?)

Converted Beavers/Otters (Poor planes)

Helio Couriers?

what else?

EDIT: Turbine Maules too I guess... though clearly overkill
Click to expand...

overkill is good
 
JoseCuervo said:
I could do it without breaking a single law.

Like I said, go find some big bellied NRA jay wearing dude, some crisp $100 bills, and I could walk out with a gun in minutes.

It ain't difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
wow....talk about stereotyping....:yikes:
 
Perhaps you liberal anti-gun folks haven't heard about those who want to restrict political speech on the internet. You willing to give up that right too? If you are, you're headed down the road to a totalitarian society. They ask that you cede a bit this week, and next week they ask for more.
 
JoseCuervo said:
And, let's remember, the NRA has successfully lobbied congress to prevent any sort of data collection on gun deaths.
Click to expand...

False. It is not illegal to collect data on gun deaths.

(e.g., - you can look at FBI statistics)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top